Evidence for God from Science

Questioner,

When you were hoodwinked by Satan the father of lies and lost your faith did you ignore or forget about the dead sea scrolls? Because they prove Thomas Paine wrong!

questioner22 wrote:

EssentialSacrifice wrote:

Anyway, condemn away young man, i read the first 12 or so paragraphs... I'm sorry, but I am, apparently, one of those bullet proof Christians. It doesn't matter what they say or why, I know and have experienced my God in heart and will never give Him away. I'm sorry you have, but there is Hope and Mercy available and will be for you and all until the end.

You look for experience that denies, I look for experience that enriches. We're on two very different paths. You won't care for this, but i hope for your return.

EssentialSacrifice - I fear when you say that you're a 'bullet proof Christian', you say it with a certain measure of pride. I hope to never be so dogmatic as to know I cannot possibly be wrong about something - anything. Socrates (heretic!) said something along the lines that true knowledge exists in knowing that you know nothing. I've long thought that with age, and wisdom, comes a weakening of dogma. Issues that when you're young seem SO black and white, become far less so as we get older IF we're open to the idea that we could be wrong. Understand that when you say "I know and have experienced God in my heart" that the Mormon, the Muslim, the Jehovah's Witness....all can say the same thing. I doubt you think they're all right, and yet if there's just one God, how is he sending such mixed messages. (Note: default answer is 'Satan')

I would never agree that I look for experience that denies - what I would say, and have said since the beginning of this journey, is that I pursue truth. It's of the utmost importance to me. If I'm wrong about anything at all, I want to know it. And when I find I'm wrong about something, I celebrate the fact that I just shed some untruth.

And what about if you are wrong about this? Would you celebrate that?

RickD wrote:Questioner,

Are you going to get back on topic and address the question I asked you?

I explained that I believe Isaiah 1:4 is about Jesus. I wouldn't say it's solely related to his incarnation, If that's what you're getting at. Is someone promoting Isaiah 1:4 as something that you believe is wrong? If that's the case, post a link to it, and we can look at it.
As far as finding something that could make me think the bible is wrong, I've always been open to that possibility. I just haven't found anything that has made me think that yet. I'm always open to testing scripture, to see if it's reliable. I have no problem putting scripture up to scrutiny.
Do you have a specific issue in scripture that you want to discuss?

RickD - I'm sitting here looking around for the camera...you're kidding right? Not only did I start this thread with an essay which dealt with MULTIPLE points of scripture that I wanted to discuss (clearly nobody read it, at least not cover to cover), but knowing they wouldn't, I even called out 2 specific scriptures from the essay to discuss, then even went further to provide a HYPOTHETICAL one of my own (Isaiah 1:4) as an extension to the point. The fact that you continue to ask "is someone promoting Isaiah 1:4" is absolutely mind boggling. Please - please go back and re-read my posts slowly, and carefully.

I fear when you say that you're a 'bullet proof Christian', you say it with a certain measure of pride.

Fear not Q22, there is absolutely no pride involved, any more than there is when you receive a gift from a best friend.

I hope to never be so dogmatic as to know I cannot possibly be wrong about something - anything

Then i hope this for you too.

Socrates (heretic!) said something along the lines that true knowledge exists in knowing that you know nothing.

It is certainly true the older I become the more i realize just how little I have learned and have so much more to , but that has nothing to do with faith, only faith's observations.

I've long thought that with age, and wisdom, comes a weakening of dogma.

what we think is important, but what is reality is so much more so, and I have found no weakening of dogma with age, in fact, have found strength in maturity of wisdom

Understand that when you say "I know and have experienced God in my heart" that the Mormon, the Muslim, the Jehovah's Witness....all can say the same thing..

If they have in their hearts what has been, through a transubstantiation and miraculous process in mine... they can be of whatever faith they profess. This simply does not happen to any one faith, but is available to all... the body of Christ. Their path to God is much different than mine, but possibly none the less for potential by God's Will.

what I would say, and have said since the beginning of this journey, is that I pursue truth.

What I would say is the Truth has been in front of you all along, if you reject it, you just shed some truth that may possibly effect your eternity.

John 7:14-18

About the middle of the feast Jesus went up into the temple and began teaching. The Jews therefore marveled, saying, “How is it that this man has learning, when he has never studied?” So Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me. If anyone's will is to do God's will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority. The one who speaks on his own authority seeks his own glory; but the one who seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and in him there is no falsehood.

questioner22 wrote:

RickD wrote:Questioner,

Are you going to get back on topic and address the question I asked you?

I explained that I believe Isaiah 1:4 is about Jesus. I wouldn't say it's solely related to his incarnation, If that's what you're getting at. Is someone promoting Isaiah 1:4 as something that you believe is wrong? If that's the case, post a link to it, and we can look at it.
As far as finding something that could make me think the bible is wrong, I've always been open to that possibility. I just haven't found anything that has made me think that yet. I'm always open to testing scripture, to see if it's reliable. I have no problem putting scripture up to scrutiny.
Do you have a specific issue in scripture that you want to discuss?

RickD - I'm sitting here looking around for the camera...you're kidding right? Not only did I start this thread with an essay which dealt with MULTIPLE points of scripture that I wanted to discuss (clearly nobody read it, at least not cover to cover), but knowing they wouldn't, I even called out 2 specific scriptures from the essay to discuss, then even went further to provide a HYPOTHETICAL one of my own (Isaiah 1:4) as an extension to the point. The fact that you continue to ask "is someone promoting Isaiah 1:4" is absolutely mind boggling. Please - please go back and re-read my posts slowly, and carefully.

You are ignoring the dead sea scrolls that proved conclusively that the Hebrew text the KJV translators used to translate the bible has not changed like Thomas Paine said in the 1700' s.

Storyteller wrote:

questioner22 wrote:

EssentialSacrifice wrote:

And what about if you are wrong about this? Would you celebrate that?

Absolutely. Remember, I was a believer for over 30 years. I went the first 15 years of my career being known at work as the crazy born again who never swore, went to church/cell group every week, who rarely drank, and who used to tell people that evolution was laughable - that there was NO EVIDENCE for it, and that it was a theory that would likely be abandoned by scientists in our lifetime. Talk about eating crow! But you know what - with each co-worker or friend that I chose to sit down with and explain my 'de-conversion', I was never met with "Ha! See moron? You were wrong the whole time!!" It was more, "good for you for figuring it out and growing as a human being".

Much like if I were to find I was wrong and went back to my Christian friends (of whom I have many), they wouldn't mock me for being misguided in my unbelief - they'd embrace me like a prodigal son and say "welcome back - we missed you!"

questioner22 wrote:

Storyteller wrote:

questioner22 wrote:

EssentialSacrifice wrote:

And what about if you are wrong about this? Would you celebrate that?

Absolutely. Remember, I was a believer for over 30 years. I went the first 15 years of my career being known at work as the crazy born again who never swore, went to church/cell group every week, who rarely drank, and who used to tell people that evolution was laughable - that there was NO EVIDENCE for it, and that it was a theory that would likely be abandoned by scientists in our lifetime. Talk about eating crow! But you know what - with each co-worker or friend that I chose to sit down with and explain my 'de-conversion', I was never met with "Ha! See moron? You were wrong the whole time!!" It was more, "good for you for figuring it out and growing as a human being".

Much like if I were to find I was wrong and went back to my Christian friends (of whom I have many), they wouldn't mock me for being misguided in my unbelief - they'd embrace me like a prodigal son and say "welcome back - we missed you!"

You were deceived,you let your guard down and did not use your sword as there are believers who accept evolution,that is no excuse.

questioner22 wrote:

Storyteller wrote:

questioner22 wrote:

EssentialSacrifice wrote:

And what about if you are wrong about this? Would you celebrate that?

Absolutely. Remember, I was a believer for over 30 years. I went the first 15 years of my career being known at work as the crazy born again who never swore, went to church/cell group every week, who rarely drank, and who used to tell people that evolution was laughable - that there was NO EVIDENCE for it, and that it was a theory that would likely be abandoned by scientists in our lifetime. Talk about eating crow! But you know what - with each co-worker or friend that I chose to sit down with and explain my 'de-conversion', I was never met with "Ha! See moron? You were wrong the whole time!!" It was more, "good for you for figuring it out and growing as a human being".

Much like if I were to find I was wrong and went back to my Christian friends (of whom I have many), they wouldn't mock me for being misguided in my unbelief - they'd embrace me like a prodigal son and say "welcome back - we missed you!"

So what made you re-evaluate what you believe?
I have no problem with your pov even if I disagree with it, I just cannot fathom how, if you were once so sure, you have changed your mind. As far I see (and I admit I may be wrong) nothing that has been put forward by science disproves God.
I have only recently come to Christ yet my life has changed so much since then, for the better. How can that be wrong? I can`t see anything, ever, shaking my faith so what shook yours so? To the point of saying you no longer believe? Doubts I can understand but a total change of mind?

abelcainsbrother wrote:

questioner22 wrote:

RickD wrote:
You are ignoring the dead sea scrolls that proved conclusively that the Hebrew text the KJV translators used to translate the bible has not changed like Thomas Paine said in the 1700' s.

I don't know too much about the dead sea scrolls, but what I do know (and I hope you do as well) is what all Biblical scholars know and agree on - that we have no original texts of any book of the Bible. I'm going to include a quote by Bart Ehrman below - and this is NOT CONTROVERSIAL, though you may think it is.

It is one thing to say that the originals were inspired, but the reality is that we don't have the originals—so saying they were inspired doesn't help me much, unless I can reconstruct the originals. Moreover, the vast majority of Christians for the entire history of the church have not had access to the originals, making their inspiration something of a moot point. Not only do we not have the originals, we don't have the first copies of the originals. We don't even have copies of the copies of the originals, or copies of the copies of the copies of the originals. What we have are copies made later—much later. In most instances, they are copies made many centuries later. And these copies all differ from one another, in many thousands of places. As we will see later in this book, these copies differ from one another in so many places that we don't even know how many differences there are. Possibly it is easiest to put it in comparative terms: there are more differences among our manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament.

If you don't know much about Bart Erhman, I'd encourage you to look into his background and work, and maybe even listen to one or two of his debates on YouTube.

questioner22 wrote:

abelcainsbrother wrote:

questioner22 wrote:

RickD wrote:
You are ignoring the dead sea scrolls that proved conclusively that the Hebrew text the KJV translators used to translate the bible has not changed like Thomas Paine said in the 1700' s.

I don't know too much about the dead sea scrolls, but what I do know (and I hope you do as well) is what all Biblical scholars know and agree on - that we have no original texts of any book of the Bible. I'm going to include a quote by Bart Ehrman below - and this is NOT CONTROVERSIAL, though you may think it is.

It is one thing to say that the originals were inspired, but the reality is that we don't have the originals—so saying they were inspired doesn't help me much, unless I can reconstruct the originals. Moreover, the vast majority of Christians for the entire history of the church have not had access to the originals, making their inspiration something of a moot point. Not only do we not have the originals, we don't have the first copies of the originals. We don't even have copies of the copies of the originals, or copies of the copies of the copies of the originals. What we have are copies made later—much later. In most instances, they are copies made many centuries later. And these copies all differ from one another, in many thousands of places. As we will see later in this book, these copies differ from one another in so many places that we don't even know how many differences there are. Possibly it is easiest to put it in comparative terms: there are more differences among our manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament.

If you don't know much about Bart Erhman, I'd encourage you to look into his background and work, and maybe even listen to one or two of his debates on YouTube.

Hold up now,you brought up the OT and said it was changed,and now your jumping to the NT? Have you ever watched debates with Erhman against other NT bible scholars like he is?Do you know how he did against them? Or did you only read and listen to Erhman? You should consider different views from men who know what they are talking about before you make an informed decision.

questioner22 wrote:

RickD wrote:Questioner,

Are you going to get back on topic and address the question I asked you?

I explained that I believe Isaiah 1:4 is about Jesus. I wouldn't say it's solely related to his incarnation, If that's what you're getting at. Is someone promoting Isaiah 1:4 as something that you believe is wrong? If that's the case, post a link to it, and we can look at it.
As far as finding something that could make me think the bible is wrong, I've always been open to that possibility. I just haven't found anything that has made me think that yet. I'm always open to testing scripture, to see if it's reliable. I have no problem putting scripture up to scrutiny.
Do you have a specific issue in scripture that you want to discuss?

RickD - I'm sitting here looking around for the camera...you're kidding right? Not only did I start this thread with an essay which dealt with MULTIPLE points of scripture that I wanted to discuss (clearly nobody read it, at least not cover to cover), but knowing they wouldn't, I even called out 2 specific scriptures from the essay to discuss, then even went further to provide a HYPOTHETICAL one of my own (Isaiah 1:4) as an extension to the point. The fact that you continue to ask "is someone promoting Isaiah 1:4" is absolutely mind boggling. Please - please go back and re-read my posts slowly, and carefully.

Questioner,

If you want to discuss a specific issue, we can. I haven't continued to ask after you explained that you made up a hypothetical. It wasn't clear from your posts before, that it was a hypothetical. I thought you had issues about specific scripture, not hypothetical issues.

Again, if you have a specific issue you want to discuss, maybe a specific bible verse, then post it please. I generally don't make it a habit of locking topics, but this is going nowhere fast. And If I get a sense that you are here only to attack, then you will be banned.

The ball is in your court.

Storyteller wrote:So what made you re-evaluate what you believe?
I have no problem with your pov even if I disagree with it, I just cannot fathom how, if you were once so sure, you have changed your mind. As far I see (and I admit I may be wrong) nothing that has been put forward by science disproves God.
I have only recently come to Christ yet my life has changed so much since then, for the better. How can that be wrong? I can`t see anything, ever, shaking my faith so what shook yours so? To the point of saying you no longer believe? Doubts I can understand but a total change of mind?

Long story, but it started with a lull in my faith where I just couldn't hear God anymore, and reading the Bible had no impact on me whatsoever (this was never the case before). I was praying, begging God to reveal himself to me. Not for a sign, or a miracle...just that I'd feel his presence again. After a couple years of this, I decided to open myself up to exploring Christianity from a secular viewpoint - something I'd never done. As I stated before, if all you ever do is read Christian apologetics, you'll never know the arguments against your position. Much like if you were witnessing to a Mormon and wanted him to see the error of Mormon doctrine, you wouldn't recommend he pick up an apologetic work written by a Mormon author. But that's what Christians do, and then because they read a book by Lee Strobel, they think the case for Jesus Christ is absolutely bulletproof. They read a book by Ken Ham, and think that evolution is laughable - only a theory (I encourage you to read up on what it takes to be considered a 'theory' in science).

It took very little time after reading books by Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, and actually a great book called 'Why I Believed' by Kenneth Daniels, a former Wycliff Bible Translator missionary that, like me, decided to question, and found his faith didn't stand up to logic, reason, and evidence.

You can always tell how open someone is to contrary view points when they follow this train of thought:
I read this article and it makes sense to me and I agree with it, if you read the same one and DON'T agree that means you simply have NOT read it because, if you did, you obviously would have agreed with it, just like me.

Oivay indeed.

questioner22 wrote:

Storyteller wrote:So what made you re-evaluate what you believe?
I have no problem with your pov even if I disagree with it, I just cannot fathom how, if you were once so sure, you have changed your mind. As far I see (and I admit I may be wrong) nothing that has been put forward by science disproves God.
I have only recently come to Christ yet my life has changed so much since then, for the better. How can that be wrong? I can`t see anything, ever, shaking my faith so what shook yours so? To the point of saying you no longer believe? Doubts I can understand but a total change of mind?

Long story, but it started with a lull in my faith where I just couldn't hear God anymore, and reading the Bible had no impact on me whatsoever (this was never the case before). I was praying, begging God to reveal himself to me. Not for a sign, or a miracle...just that I'd feel his presence again. After a couple years of this, I decided to open myself up to exploring Christianity from a secular viewpoint - something I'd never done. As I stated before, if all you ever do is read Christian apologetics, you'll never know the arguments against your position. Much like if you were witnessing to a Mormon and wanted him to see the error of Mormon doctrine, you wouldn't recommend he pick up an apologetic work written by a Mormon author. But that's what Christians do, and then because they read a book by Lee Strobel, they think the case for Jesus Christ is absolutely bulletproof. They read a book by Ken Ham, and think that evolution is laughable - only a theory (I encourage you to read up on what it takes to be considered a 'theory' in science).

It took very little time after reading books by Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, and actually a great book called 'Why I Believed' by Kenneth Daniels, a former Wycliff Bible Translator missionary that, like me, decided to question, and found his faith didn't stand up to logic, reason, and evidence.

Not to be the one to say "I told you so", but...

RickD wrote:

questioner22 wrote:

RickD wrote: Again, if you have a specific issue you want to discuss, maybe a specific bible verse, then post it please. I generally don't make it a habit of locking topics, but this is going nowhere fast. And If I get a sense that you are here only to attack, then you will be banned.

The ball is in your court.

Isaiah 7. Please read the entire chapter and answer the following questions:
1. What was Ahaz worried about?
2. What did the Lord promise Ahaz?
3. What sign was the Lord going to give Ahaz?
4. What was this sign supposed to signify to Ahaz?
5. How could Ahaz know that the prophecy was in fact fulfilled (with respect to what he was worried about)?

After you answer these questions in your reply, I want you to then go on and explain to me how Isaiah 7 has anything whatsoever to do with Jesus Christ. No smoke - no mirrors - no laughing this challenge off and telling me how scholars hundreds of years ago put this issue to bed. Please answer the 5 questions above, then the ensuing question about Jesus. There. That's my very specific issue.