Evidence for God from Science

PaulSacramento wrote:

B. W. wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:As an example, on another website a fundamentalist answered the issue of what God allowed Satan to do with Job as "God's right" and that, in the end, God rewarded Job anyway.

The atheist rightly point out that was of small consolation to the dead children of Job and that allowing a being to terrorize another, just to make a point, is quite horrific and immoral.
The fundamentalist answered that we can't judge God.

Now, I don't agree with the fundamentalist in HOW we put his answer, BUT it was AN answer.

There is so much in the book of Job in the first three chapters from chapters 33-42 - Look at Job 3:1,8 for example and then Job 41:34 - this answers a lot.

Only one who can draw out draw out Leviathan and hook him (Job 41:1-2) is the Lord - not Job. So you might see what was really going on, instead of the Adversary hooking, ensnaring God (Job 2:3), God entrapped the adversary by his treatment of Job.

There is also God declaring Job righteous (Job 1:8) and his ability to carry it out and fulfill it as well.

The militant agnostic and atheists insert their personal presuppositions into the text in an attempt to prove God a moral evil monster for allowing killing of Job’s adult children by the adversary. Bible does not mention their eternal state but since Job made an offering continually for his children Job 1:5 one can assume they made it to paradise under the Old Testament covenant ways of atonement. So, mortal life cut short, but eternal life in paradise forever –hmmm who was really unjust? Not God, nor Job, but the Adversary proven unjust – he was uncovered.

God was exposing the Adversary and all the sons of pride in this book, even so today evidenced by the militant agnostic and atheists attempts to indict God as a moral monster, or doesn’t exist, or have others follow their lead to curse God.

We ALL insert our personal presuppisitions, we just have to be aware of them.

Look at Augustine for example, to him, all the bible pointed to a loving God and to loving thy neighbor, that is the presupposition he went in with when he read and interpreted the bible.
He based that on being a Christian first ( NT) and a "jew" (OT) second, so when he interpreted the OT texts, he did it through the eyes of a "Christian".

When he got to parts that, in the literal sense, went a against that view, he had to interpret them to SUIT that view, the case of the Psalms where those that dash the infants of Babylon against the rocks are blessed ( or however it goes) Psalms 137:9, He interpreted that as an analogy of dashing our sins in their "infantile" stage and destroying them.

To Augustine, there was no LITERAL and CONCRETE way to reconcile that Psalm with the Message of Christ.

I went back and read some of Augustine’s City of God writing a few months ago and was struck by what you just said back then. He may well have come in with presuppositions brought in from his paganized past and Christianized them, such as the Gnostic allegorical methods of study for attainment of wisdom. There was also his legal mind at work too which took doctrine and spoke in what we would call today as Lawyerease (Lawyer speak) to justify his rendering of the scriptures.

Often, a very well trained militant agnostic / atheist will use Augustinian doctrine to combat Christian theology by pounding on the inconsistencies of Augustinian predestination, and allegorical interpretations such as the one you mentioned from Psalms 137:9 concerning dashing babies…

Many Christians have been trained under what I call the Augustinian model and such agnostic and atheist know this and use that model in their arguments to point out inconsistencies, and contradictions with the goal to make a Christian stumble.
-
-
-

As for the Psalm about smashing babies (it's rather infamous), I always took that to simply be a lamentation of hopelessness when looked at in context. Doesn't that make a lot more sense than treating it as a literal command to smash children?

Augustine, like many other early church fathers, struggled to reconcile the OT with the NT.
Allegory was one of the methods that used, as was accommodation and I believe that a combination of BOTH coupled with practical realism and "believing biblical criticism" can help us in dealing with those same issues that are still around today.
We can't have perfect knowledge of God's word, we are only human, BUT we can have adequate knowledge of it.
We will make mistakes of course, but we will be honest enough to admit and correct them.
Do deny what historical criticism and biblical criticism brings up is the worse possible thing.
To deny that Christianity already HAS various interpretations of doctrines is to play the ostrich.

I always had issues with some OT texts and agreed with many skeptics when the typical christian response was "lacking".
Why? because IF ALL the bible is to be take Literal AND concrete then it is full of issues that cal into question its authority.
Of course the various books of the bible were NOT written to be take as such, and history has shown us that from the very beginning, the interpreters of the bible ( in its various forms) did NOT do that.
They understood, perhaps better than Us, what was literal, what was literal AND concrete, what was parable, analogy, metaphore, tc, etc.

Here is an agnostic at work. Hope you don't mind me saying something that I already said on another topic.

Even here on this forum some people pointed out to me that one of the things that proves that the Bible is God inspired is the fact that the prophecies in the bible came true.

My simple logic and common sense refuting: there is no prophecy that was actually fulfilled and also WRITTEN BEFORE IT HAPPENED.

BryanH wrote:Here is an agnostic at work. Hope you don't mind me saying something that I already said on another topic.

Even here on this forum some people pointed out to me that one of the things that proves that the Bible is God inspired is the fact that the prophecies in the bible came true.

My simple logic and common sense refuting: there is no prophecy that was actually fulfilled and also WRITTEN BEFORE IT HAPPENED.

Not gonna get into the debate of dating Daniel's various prophecies or Isaiahs.
But lets look at the one by Christ.
Christ predicted the fall of the temple of Jerusalem and that it would be witnessed by the generation that was listening to him (around 30-33 AD), it fell in 70AD, when many of those were still alive.
The Gospel of Mark is dated to BEFORE the fall of Jerusalem.

BryanH wrote:My simple logic and common sense refuting: there is no prophecy that was actually fulfilled and also WRITTEN BEFORE IT HAPPENED.

We've been over this a few times already. You keep making this false claim over and over thinking perhaps repeating it often enough will some day make it come true. Keep praying for a self-fulfilling prophecy Bryan.

For the benefit of the reader, the following link details OT prophecies (clearly written BEFORE the birth of Christ) that were fulfilled by Christ.

Psalms 137:1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 is a Lament. It is a person venting their feelings to the Lord over Israel’s fall and the 70 year Babylonian captivity.

Again, a holistic contextual approach reveals this. This is an example of someone venting in prayer, nothing more and nothing less.

Next,as for bible prophecy, Isaiah 11:11, 12 is a good place to start. Why - answer - dead Sea scroll date to the BC era and not after. The second time finalized May 1948 for Israel.... Never in BCE time frame when the earliest known (Dead Sea Scroll) was dated too
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:Psalms 137:1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 is a Lament. It is a person venting their feelings to the Lord over Israel’s fall and the 70 year Babylonian captivity.

Again, a holistic contextual approach reveals this. This is an example of someone venting in prayer, nothing more and nothing less.

Next,as for bible prophecy, Isaiah 11:11, 12 is a good place to start. Why - answer - dead Sea scroll date to the BC era and not after. The second time finalized May 1948 for Israel.... Never in BCE time frame when the earliest known (Dead Sea Scroll) was dated too
-
-
-

I agree, yet one must always be aware that bible prophecies are interpretive.
In your example, there is no reason to believe that Isaiah believed that was going to happen more than 2000 years after Him.

@B.W.

Next,as for bible prophecy, Isaiah 11:11, 12 is a good place to start. Why - answer - dead Sea scroll date to the BC era and not after. The second time finalized May 1948 for Israel.... Never in BCE time frame when the earliest known (Dead Sea Scroll) was dated too

B.W. I answered your prophecy last time as well on the other topic.

If you actually read all of it, you will see that the prophecy also mentions two cities. Moab is not in Israel if I am not mistaking. Anyways, don't think that the prophecy has anything to do with present times. Even if you try to interpret it for present times there is no actual fulfilled prophecy.


@Byblos

Byblos last time we had a discussion about the prophecies in the Bible you told me that the bible is an authentic historical document which is backed up by other historical sources and and archeological discoveries. All of that is very true.

Let me point out one simple fact: if you write about the future after the future happened, it's called history. That's what the bible is: history, it doesn't predict the future.

Maybe you actually want to provide an example about a prophecy that was written before time. That would be nice.

Keep praying for a self-fulfilling prophecy Bryan.

Are you familiar with the Rosenthal experiment that took place in 1968?

BryanH wrote:@B.W.

Next,as for bible prophecy, Isaiah 11:11, 12 is a good place to start. Why - answer - dead Sea scroll date to the BC era and not after. The second time finalized May 1948 for Israel.... Never in BCE time frame when the earliest known (Dead Sea Scroll) was dated too

B.W. I answered your prophecy last time as well on the other topic.

If you actually read all of it, you will see that the prophecy also mentions two cities. Moab is not in Israel if I am not mistaking. Anyways, don't think that the prophecy has anything to do with present times. Even if you try to interpret it for present times there is no actual fulfilled prophecy.

So you are using a literal approach?

Moab refers to the people who dwell in a geographic area. For instance, a prophetic word uses people in the then known world to describe geographic locations for the future. Very simple to understand, trace, and prove thru the historical records.

Where you appear to err is not tracing names to current geographic locations.

Here is an experiment: take a group of people who never saw a tank, car, airplane, machine gun, cannon, modern uniformed soldiers, rifles and show these to them recording what these appears to them. Some may say of tanks, amour cars – horses with snouts that spit fire and brimstone…

In prophecy, one must remember the era and the person whom saw a prophetic vision and how they record it. Does this invalidate a prophecy because John the revelator did not use the word Tank or T-82 vs M1A2 Abrams? No, it does not.

Again, keep in mind what we call ancient people names indentify a geographic area – in the future. Understand this, trace form historical records, and you’ll do well gaining better insight. Often people make the literal word mistake and presupposes that for the bible to be perfect in prophecy God would had made the recorders uses proper names known in the future but unknown back then such as T-82, Striker, F-22 Raptor, TOW, M1A2 Abrams, Russia, France, Norway, China, Japan, North Korea, and record these future names. Not so… not how things work. Please avoid making the errors in this regeards and you will do well.
-
-
-

So you are using a literal approach?

Moab refers to the people who dwell in a geographic area. For instance, a prophetic word uses people in the then known world to describe geographic locations for the future. Very simple to understand, trace, and prove thru the historical records.

Where you appear to err is not tracing names to current geographic locations.

Here is an experiment: take a group of people who never saw a tank, car, airplane, machine gun, cannon, modern uniformed soldiers, rifles and show these to them recording what these appears to them. Some may say of tanks, amour cars – horses with snouts that spit fire and brimstone…

In prophecy, one must remember the era and the person whom saw a prophetic vision and how they record it. Does this invalidate a prophecy because John the revelator did not use the word Tank or T-82 vs M1A2 Abrams? No, it does not.

Again, keep in mind what we call ancient people names indentify a geographic area – in the future. Understand this, trace form historical records, and you’ll do well gaining better insight. Often people make the literal word mistake and presupposes that for the bible to be perfect in prophecy God would had made the recorders uses proper names known in the future but unknown back then such as T-82, Striker, F-22 Raptor, TOW, M1A2 Abrams, Russia, France, Norway, China, Japan, North Korea, and record these future names. Not so… not how things work. Please avoid making the errors in this regeards and you will do well.

I think you should read the prophecy again. No matter how you interpret that, Israel still doesn't have any domination over those people. You do understand that right?

And another fact is that the prophecy doesn't have a time frame. Just taking something from history and saying that the bible predicted it, well, then Jules Verne is a very interesting prophet.

BryanH wrote:

So you are using a literal approach?

Moab refers to the people who dwell in a geographic area. For instance, a prophetic word uses people in the then known world to describe geographic locations for the future. Very simple to understand, trace, and prove thru the historical records.

Where you appear to err is not tracing names to current geographic locations.

Here is an experiment: take a group of people who never saw a tank, car, airplane, machine gun, cannon, modern uniformed soldiers, rifles and show these to them recording what these appears to them. Some may say of tanks, amour cars – horses with snouts that spit fire and brimstone…

In prophecy, one must remember the era and the person whom saw a prophetic vision and how they record it. Does this invalidate a prophecy because John the revelator did not use the word Tank or T-82 vs M1A2 Abrams? No, it does not.

Again, keep in mind what we call ancient people names indentify a geographic area – in the future. Understand this, trace form historical records, and you’ll do well gaining better insight. Often people make the literal word mistake and presupposes that for the bible to be perfect in prophecy God would had made the recorders uses proper names known in the future but unknown back then such as T-82, Striker, F-22 Raptor, TOW, M1A2 Abrams, Russia, France, Norway, China, Japan, North Korea, and record these future names. Not so… not how things work. Please avoid making the errors in this regeards and you will do well.

I think you should read the prophecy again. No matter how you interpret that, Israel still doesn't have any domination over those people. You do understand that right?

And another fact is that the prophecy doesn't have a time frame. Just taking something from history and saying that the bible predicted it, well, then Jules Verne is a very interesting prophet.

A prophecy begins and moves along a time frame - it would be up to you to prove that the Jewish people did not return and become a nation twice - the last beginning time frame was 1948.

Isaiah 11:11-12 stands and marks a beginning of a new era (time frame) - prove that Israel does not exist, or were scattered and regathered twice...

Hope you don't mind me using your comments as an objective lesson under this thread:

One form of argument posed to Christians is the question of prophecy. It does not matter the truth based on observable historical records (which scientific method is founded on) of fulfilled prophecy agnostic and atheist refuse to accept such evidence, yet tout the role of scientific method to uncover truth.

There are more prophecies out there, proven by the dated Dead Sea scrolls, to have been written in the BCE era that were not interloped into text by medieval scholars or lying Christians. One objection of theirs goes into the dust. Next, a failure to actually look at the empirical historical record of Isaiah 11:11 as –a- news worthy event that did historically happen is eschewed at all cost in exchange for their presumptions.

Bible prophecy begins at a point in time that time is marked by a specific even, and then later follows a time line. This time line is often ignored to prove their presumptions that bible prophecy can’t be true at all cost.

So, as believers in Christ when confront by such, have them do their own research in privet and ask, were the Jewish people scatter twice as a Nation and re-gathered twice to become a Nation in the historical record? During each time, there were those ancient Jews who chose to remain in foreign countries and that does not negate fulfilled event of either regathering/becoming a Nation again twice in a specific geographic location.

Of all the ancient nation’s people, which one survived culturally and religiously? Assyrian Babylonian? Inca? Myan? Aztec? Gomer? Mobites?

No, the descendants did not retain the same religious heritage, yet the Jewish people have for over 5000+ years. That in and of itself is amazing. To say such people do not exist and the nation of Israel does not is well – not scientific – is it?
-
-
-
-

A prophecy begins and moves along a time frame - it would be up to you to prove that the Jewish people did not return and become a nation twice - the last beginning time frame was 1948.

Isaiah 11:11-12 stands and marks a beginning of a new era (time frame) - prove that Israel does not exist, or were scattered and regathered twice...

Hope you don't mind me using your comments as an objective lesson under this thread:

One form of argument posed to Christians is the question of prophecy. It does not matter the truth based on observable historical records (which scientific method is founded on) of fulfilled prophecy agnostic and atheist refuse to accept such evidence, yet tout the role of scientific method to uncover truth.

There are more prophecies out there, proven by the dated Dead Sea scrolls, to have been written in the BCE era that were not interloped into text by medieval scholars or lying Christians. One objection of theirs goes into the dust. Next, a failure to actually look at the empirical historical record of Isaiah 11:11 as –a- news worthy event that did historically happen is eschewed at all cost in exchange for their presumptions.

Bible prophecy begins at a point in time that time is marked by a specific even, and then later follows a time line. This time line is often ignored to prove their presumptions that bible prophecy can’t be true at all cost.

So, as believers in Christ when confront by such, have them do their own research in privet and ask, were the Jewish people scatter twice as a Nation and re-gathered twice to become a Nation in the historical record? During each time, there were those ancient Jews who chose to remain in foreign countries and that does not negate fulfilled event of either regathering/becoming a Nation again twice in a specific geographic location.

Of all the ancient nation’s people, which one survived culturally and religiously? Assyrian Babylonian? Inca? Myan? Aztec? Gomer? Mobites?

No, the descendants did not retain the same religious heritage, yet the Jewish people have for over 5000+ years. That in and of itself is amazing. To say such people do not exist and the nation of Israel does not is well – not scientific – is it?

I did not say that the nation of Israel doesn't exist: I simply pointed out that the prophecy you are talking about is open to a lot of interpretation and the MARKS of the prophecy didn't all happen.

You are taking part of a prophecy and applying to a more general frame although the prophecy is quite specific.

No, the descendants did not retain the same religious heritage, yet the Jewish people have for over 5000+ years

Your point is? There are other religions in the world that fit the same criteria.

Your point is? There are other religions in the world that fit the same criteria.

Such as.../

Such as.../

Hinduism (5000+ years old)
Buddhism (2500 years old)
Shamanism (no idea how old is that but anyways 5000 years at least)


Enough examples for you?