Religion Ask a Christian - Continued in Part 2

[Chief]

Continued in Part Two:

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/ask-a-christian-part-2.1295001/unread

 

[Judd2Sewell]

It’s not so much about the infanticide so much, but the way they went about it and celebrate it!
Psalm 137:9
******* glory be

You know it's all just a big misunderstanding, we just don't understand the "context"

 

[chelseacarlton]

You know it's all just a big misunderstanding, we just don't understand the "context"

“So much” x 2
lol

 

[Evolved1]

Presbyterian

Is your faith falsifiable?

Look at it this way. There are at least 4000 gods in existence (whether real or fictional), so your odds of picking the one true god at random is less than 1%. Your odds only get worse when you take into consideration the number of Christian denominations that have different versions of biblegod.

It seems to me that there is a great need for an objective scientific process in order to separate real god(s) from the fakes, yet most believers choose to have faith in a particular style of belief with no analytical thought into testing its validity. That lack of skepticism is reinforced by a large proportion of religious leaders and groups, so it's fair to conclude they value your loyalty more than than their desire for you to have the truth.

If you have no means of falsifying your belief and thereby testing the validity of your religion, statistically you have a minute chance of being right.

 

[mikey127]

Is your faith falsifiable?

Look at it this way. There are at least 4000 gods in existence (whether real or fictional), so your odds of picking the one true god at random is less than 1%. Your odds only get worse when you take into consideration the number of Christian denominations that have different versions of biblegod.

It seems to me that there is a great need for an objective scientific process in order to separate real god(s) from the fakes, yet most believers choose to have faith in a particular style of belief with no analytical thought into testing its validity. That lack of skepticism is reinforced by a large proportion of religious leaders and groups, so it's fair to conclude they value your loyalty more than than their desire for you to have the truth.

If you have no means of falsifying your belief and thereby testing the validity of your religion, statistically you have a minute chance of being right.

Show me the bones of Jesus and I walk away immediately.

As for Science as Stephen J Could said who I believe was agnostic. 'Science neither affirms or dont's God, we simply can't comment'

 

[Evolved1]

Show me the bones of Jesus and I walk away immediately.

As for Science as Stephen J Could said who I believe was agnostic. 'Science neither affirms or dont's God, we simply can't comment'

Thanks for the honest response.

My problem with that is twofold.
1) Producing the bones of a man and verifying them as belonging to biblical Jesus sets an impossible standard.
2) Science neither proves or disproves the existence of the Invisible Pink Unicorn or Flying Spaghetti Monster either. It's not a compelling argument.

Science makes god unnecessary. There's no need for magical explanations when naturalistic explanations are available.

 

[Jibroni]

Thanks for the honest response.

My problem with that is twofold.
1) Producing the bones of a man and verifying them as belonging to biblical Jesus sets an impossible standard.
2) Science neither proves or disproves the existence of the Invisible Pink Unicorn or Flying Spaghetti Monster either. It's not a compelling argument.

Science makes god unnecessary. There's no need for magical explanations when naturalistic explanations are available.

About the same odds as a Big Bang thus creating and expanding universe and the laws of nature for life to exist?

 

[Evolved1]

About the same odds as a Big Bang thus creating and expanding universe and the laws of nature for life to exist?

The evidence for the big bang is overwhelming. Look it up.

The evidence for goddidit is nonexistent/faith.

 

[Boston tiger]

Thanks for the honest response.

My problem with that is twofold.
1) Producing the bones of a man and verifying them as belonging to biblical Jesus sets an impossible standard.
2) Science neither proves or disproves the existence of the Invisible Pink Unicorn or Flying Spaghetti Monster either. It's not a compelling argument.

Science makes god unnecessary. There's no need for magical explanations when naturalistic explanations are available.

There is stuff( existence) and it’s in motion. This is the God question. We have known this for 40,000 years and yet we are no closer to solving this creator conundrum.

But please give me any available scientific naturalistic explanation of how there is matter and how it all started moving?

 

[Evolved1]

There is stuff( existence) and it’s in motion. This is the God question. We have known this for 40,000 years and yet we are no closer to solving this creator conundrum.

But please give me any available scientific naturalistic explanation of how there is matter and how it all started moving?

There is no evidence for god or need for a personal creator. Occam's razor.

What explanatory power does god provide? How do you test for the existence of or measure god?

If god interferes with the natural laws on occasion (miracles), why has nobody been able to produce scientifically verified evidence of a miracle?

 

[Rusty Brookes]

Presbyterian

Can I ask how you arrived at Presbyterian rather than another branch?

 

[Boston tiger]

There is no evidence for god or need for a personal creator. Occam's razor.

What explanatory power does god provide? How do you test for the existence of or measure god?

If god interferes with the natural laws on occasion (miracles), why has nobody been able to produce scientifically verified evidence of a miracle?

You know the Big Bang is asking itself how it went bang ?

 

[mikey127]

Can I ask how you arrived at Presbyterian rather than another branch?

I should clarify that I don't consider myself a due hard Pressy but I am a member of a Presbyterian church. If I was too move I wouldn't nescerally go to a Presbyterian church. I would chose a church with great Bible teaching and that was welcoming.

 

[Rusty Brookes]

I should clarify that I don't consider myself a due hard Pressy but I am a member of a Presbyterian church. If I was too move I wouldn't nescerally go to a Presbyterian church. I would chose a church with great Bible teaching and that was welcoming.

Most churches are pretty welcoming and I would have thought most if not all, Christian churches use the Bible as their basis for teaching. I suppose what I'm trying to understand is how did you end up in the Presbyterian church? Is it a family thing? Was there something particular about the teachings, etc that appeals to you?

 

[Rusty Brookes]

You know the Big Bang is asking itself how it went bang ?

The Big Bang proposes a model of how the Universe came to be. That model makes certain predictions (eg the presence of background radiation,universal expansion etc). It is based on observation - the fact that universe continues to expand. By extrapolating backwards (if the universe was bigger today, then it must have been smaller yesterday), one arrives at a point where all matter was condensed into a singularity.

Now what caused singularity to "explode" is not known because it can't be measured but the predictions the model makes have been confirmed by science. As such it remains the best explanation for the birth of the universe.

It could be that our current universe is just one of an infinite number of universes that have been created (but existed at different times) as the cosmos cycles through inflation and deflation (which by the way makes abiogenesis even more likely to occur).

 

[mikey127]

Most churches are pretty welcoming and I would have thought most if not all, Christian churches use the Bible as their basis for teaching. I suppose what I'm trying to understand is how did you end up in the Presbyterian church? Is it a family thing? Was there something particular about the teachings, etc that appeals to you?

It's not a family thing. I'm not from a Christian family. The teaching is the main thing. Also I.like tgat my Pastors empowers us to be part if thing and take initiative towards activities and events within the Church rather than run everything himself.

I have def come across some Churches that aren't friendly. I believe in the Christian faith you see the very best and worst of society.

 

[Pessimistic]

Is your faith falsifiable?

Look at it this way. There are at least 4000 gods in existence (whether real or fictional), so your odds of picking the one true god at random is less than 1%. Your odds only get worse when you take into consideration the number of Christian denominations that have different versions of biblegod.

It seems to me that there is a great need for an objective scientific process in order to separate real god(s) from the fakes, yet most believers choose to have faith in a particular style of belief with no analytical thought into testing its validity. That lack of skepticism is reinforced by a large proportion of religious leaders and groups, so it's fair to conclude they value your loyalty more than than their desire for you to have the truth.

If you have no means of falsifying your belief and thereby testing the validity of your religion, statistically you have a minute chance of being right.

This
I’d religions were serious about logically arguing their claims, they’d explain the paradox that they reject other god concepts

no they just use snake oil con approaches. That’s all very well. But don’t expect changes to the laws so society has to tolerate your intolerance

 

[Pessimistic]

The Big Bang proposes a model of how the Universe came to be. That model makes certain predictions (eg the presence of background radiation,universal expansion etc). It is based on observation - the fact that universe continues to expand. By extrapolating backwards (if the universe was bigger today, then it must have been smaller yesterday), one arrives at a point where all matter was condensed into a singularity.

Now what caused singularity to "explode" is not known because it can't be measured but the predictions the model makes have been confirmed by science. As such it remains the best explanation for the birth of the universe.

It could be that our current universe is just one of an infinite number of universes that have been created (but existed at different times) as the cosmos cycles through inflation and deflation (which by the way makes abiogenesis even more likely to occur).

im not religious arguing, but howcould the Big Bang expansion exceed the speed of light, which we theorise is a maximum

 

[Rusty Brookes]

im not religious arguing, but howcould the Big Bang expansion exceed the speed of light, which we theorise is a maximum

I'm no expert (other than reading and half understanding some mainstream cosmology books) but this link explains how

How Can the Universe Expand Faster Than the Speed of Light?

If the iron law of the universe is that nothing can go faster than the speed of light, how can astronomers observe galaxies breaking that speed limit as they move away from us?

www.space.com

 

[Roylion]

Show me the bones of Jesus and I walk away immediately.

I find it interesting that you require physical proof to refute a claim of a supernatural event you believe in by faith alone. It's not as if there is any compelling evidence to support a physical resurrection of a dead body, other than the claim made by the Biblical writers.

Stories of 'resurrection' abound in the Old Testament

• The prophet Elijah prays and God raises a young boy from death (1 Kings 17:17–24)
• Elisha raises the son of the Shunammite woman (2 Kings 4:32–37);
• A dead man's body that was thrown into the dead Elisha's tomb is resurrected when the body touches Elisha's bones (2 Kings 13:21)

and in the New Testament

• the daughter of Jairus shortly after death,
• a young man in the midst of his own funeral procession
• Lazarus of Bethany, who had been buried for four days.
• Dorcas (also called Tabitha),
• Eutychus who had fallen asleep and fell from a window to his death.

and in other religions...

Alcestis, Asclepius, Achilles, Memnon, Alcmene, Castor, Heracles, and Melicertes are all resurrected in Greek mythology.

According to Herodotus the seventh century BC writer, Aristeas of Proconnesus was first found dead, after which his body disappeared from a locked room. Later he found not only to have been resurrected but to have gained immortality. St Columbia is supposedly raised a boy from the dead in the land of Picts.

 

[Scotland]

I find it interesting that you require physical proof to refute a claim of a supernatural event you believe in by faith alone. It's not as if there is any compelling evidence to support a physical resurrection of a dead body, other than the claim made by the Biblical writers.

Isn't that the point? There is no compelling evidence that supports a supposed resurrection 2,000 odd years ago (nor will there be, not unless Jesus comes back and starts verifying bible passages) so you either have faith that it happened or you don't. 'Prove it didn't' isn't an argument.

According to Herodotus the seventh century BC writer, Aristeas of Proconnesus was first found dead, after which his body disappeared from a locked room. Later he found not only to have been resurrected but to have gained immortality. St Coloumbius is supposedly raised a boy from the dead in the land of Picts.

There are stories from the 17th century CE about witchcraft. Do they support the existence of witches?

 

[Pessimistic]

There’s enough documentation to suggest the general gist of the story is true, but actual events and minutiae might have been embellished or mistranslated or both.
Taking it literally as a code to follow? Foolish

 

[Evolved1]

You know the Big Bang is asking itself how it went bang ?

If you're using that as evidence in favor of the existence of god, it's an argument from ignorance which is a logical fallacy.

There are things we know and things we don't currently know. Among our vast scientific understanding of the Universe, no objective evidence has been found for the existence of biblegod (or any other deity). There is no logical reason to think that any of the natural phenomena we currently don't have a strong scientific understanding of will be found to point towards the existence of biblegod either.

The only logical religious worldview is atheism.

 

[Evolved1]

There’s enough documentation to suggest the general gist of the story is true, but actual events and minutiae might have been embellished or mistranslated or both.
Taking it literally as a code to follow? Foolish

Many of the people, places, and events mentioned in the bible were real (or at least based on reality), yet none of that proves any of the magic mentioned in the bible.

It's a massive leap in reasoning that Christian apologists often make, which is why apologist arguments are usually only convincing to those who already believe.

 

[Roylion]

Isn't that the point? There is no compelling evidence that supports a supposed resurrection 2,000 odd years ago (nor will there be, not unless Jesus comes back and starts verifying bible passages) so you either have faith that it happened or you don't.

Correct. One does try not to blindly believe that extraordinary claims are actually true without at least some compelling evidence that such a belief might have some factual basis.

There are stories from the 17th century CE about witchcraft. Do they support the existence of witches?

Of course they don't. Which is my point. Belief in witches who can perform actual magic is based entirely on faith.

 

[Scotland]

Correct. One does try not to blindly believe that extraordinary claims are actually true without at least some compelling evidence that such a belief might havr some factual basis.

There is no compelling evidence for anything 'extraordinary' that happened in the Bible yet people believe it. So why do they believe it?

Of course they don't. Which is my point. Belief in witches who can perform actual magic is based entirely on faith.

Is belief in witches performing magic any more or less valid than belief in Jesus' resurrection, Noah, Moses etc? Society validates one and not the other.