Evidence for God from Science

Audie wrote:

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:Sorry, Audie, but you are simply wrong.

Archaeology in Isarel & Jordan has consistently proven various biblical narratives as factual and historical.

I used to be an atheist so I understand quite well the distaste - the revulsion - this must elicit in you. You will continue to disparage the evidence - as I once did - because the alternative is unacceptable.

I understand that and don't fault you for it. as they say, Been there, done that.

FL

Archaeology has of course of course uncovered remains of some of the sites mentioned in the bible. Not by any means all, but some.

For some places and events, there is no trace of evidence. Tower of Babel, red sea crossing, garden of eden,
S and G, No evidence. Egypt, lots of evidence. The "flood", as an historic world wide event is found supported only by pseudo-science woo woo. To say archaeology supports the bible is to make an overly broad statement ignoring the exceptions and opposites.

Whatever you say you are or used to be does not qualify you in the least to any claim of knowing anything about me.
I find your making up insulting nonsense about me no more charming than I did with jac. You've not "been there and done
that", regarding specific education, ways of thinking, attitudes and belief. You dont know a thing about me.

If you want to discuss archaeology / bible, fine. If you are going to continue projecting your fantasies onto me, conversation
is over.

Audie, while you do have a point, I think FL can say he has been there, done that. He used to be an atheist, didn`t believe in God, now he does. Why?

I get that you don`t want to make a blind leap, why would you? But.... it does appear that anything that is said, you won`t accept.

What proof would you need?

No one on here, in my opinion, has a go at you but they may disagree with what you say. You know we all love you here but you do tend to take things too personally.

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Audie wrote:you dont understand a flippin' thing about me

No, I don't. I understand atheism and its utter horror at having to admit that the Bible can be a valid historical record about anything at all.

So, you will denigrate the Bible just because you are an atheist, and for no other reason. I understand because I used to be where you are.

You are not yet able to understand this, but your position is anything but objective. Sorry...

FL

Here is something I really dont understand. Perhaps as a practitioner you can explain it.

Here in your post you have attested to a number of supposedly factual statements about me.

None of them are correct nor can be traced to any reasonable interpretation of anything I have ever said.
They are all simply baseless, and rather demeaning statements of facts not in evidence; false testimony, opinions stated as fact.

There are more direct words to describe saying things that are not true.

My question for you is, how do you as a professing Christian justify this to yourself?
Your book makes mention of bearing false witness. The golden rule suggests it may not be cool.

Why are you doing it?

If she were to die today, she'd go to Purgatory. hhmmmm

Actually Lazarus, if the concept of Purgatory is Catholic then the actual definition is it's a place to go for those who die and do not have mortal sin on the conscience
( requiem for confession ) to expiate those minor sins so heaven becomes available. Sin is not capable of entry in to heaven, so neither is anyone with it on their conscience.

Am truly hoping this is true for all that I have amassed in my many years of humanity.

Audie wrote:

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Audie wrote:you dont understand a flippin' thing about me

No, I don't. I understand atheism and its utter horror at having to admit that the Bible can be a valid historical record about anything at all.

So, you will denigrate the Bible just because you are an atheist, and for no other reason. I understand because I used to be where you are.

You are not yet able to understand this, but your position is anything but objective. Sorry...

FL

Here is something I really dont understand. Perhaps as a practitioner you can explain it.

Here in your post you have attested to a number of supposedly factual statements about me.

None of them are correct nor can be traced to any reasonable interpretation of anything I have ever said.
They are all simply baseless, and rather demeaning statements of facts not in evidence; false testimony, opinions stated as fact.

There are more direct words to describe saying things that are not true.

My question for you is, how do you as a professing Christian justify this to yourself?
Your book makes mention of bearing false witness. The golden rule suggests it may not be cool.

Why are you doing it?

So tell us what is true then?

Several people have put forward why we believe what we do and tried to back it up with evidence, it seems your response is always "What evidence?"

What would you need to believe?

Storyteller wrote:

Audie wrote:

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Audie wrote:you dont understand a flippin' thing about me

No, I don't. I understand atheism and its utter horror at having to admit that the Bible can be a valid historical record about anything at all.

So, you will denigrate the Bible just because you are an atheist, and for no other reason. I understand because I used to be where you are.

You are not yet able to understand this, but your position is anything but objective. Sorry...

FL

Here is something I really dont understand. Perhaps as a practitioner you can explain it.

Here in your post you have attested to a number of supposedly factual statements about me.

None of them are correct nor can be traced to any reasonable interpretation of anything I have ever said.
They are all simply baseless, and rather demeaning statements of facts not in evidence; false testimony, opinions stated as fact.

There are more direct words to describe saying things that are not true.

My question for you is, how do you as a professing Christian justify this to yourself?
Your book makes mention of bearing false witness. The golden rule suggests it may not be cool.

Why are you doing it?

So tell us what is true then?

Several people have put forward why we believe what we do and tried to back it up with evidence, it seems your response is always "What evidence?"

What would you need to believe?

My post was not about you, nor was your post here about what I said.

Okay, let me put it another way then.

You say that some people here are saying stuff about you that isn`t true yet you never say why.

Storyteller wrote:Okay, let me put it another way then.

You say that some people here are saying stuff about you that isn`t true yet you never say why.

I guess I dont feel up to it. Defend myself against a bunch of stereotypes, attitudes, assumptions and imagination.

If I said that you are a groupie of worships pop singers, thinks trees arr holy abodes of
spirits, that you are afraid of witches and of anything that might challenge anything you believe,
would you care to do a detailed refutation? I can toss them out faster than you can defend, and who says
I have to believe you? FL ot jac are fine with denying that I speak truthfully of myself.

My earlier q had to do with conscience and christianity of people who feel so free to
bear false witness.

What is your take on that?

Storyteller wrote:

Audie wrote:

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Audie wrote:you dont understand a flippin' thing about me

No, I don't. I understand atheism and its utter horror at having to admit that the Bible can be a valid historical record about anything at all.

So, you will denigrate the Bible just because you are an atheist, and for no other reason. I understand because I used to be where you are.

You are not yet able to understand this, but your position is anything but objective. Sorry...

FL

Here is something I really dont understand. Perhaps as a practitioner you can explain it.

Here in your post you have attested to a number of supposedly factual statements about me.

None of them are correct nor can be traced to any reasonable interpretation of anything I have ever said.
They are all simply baseless, and rather demeaning statements of facts not in evidence; false testimony, opinions stated as fact.

There are more direct words to describe saying things that are not true.

My question for you is, how do you as a professing Christian justify this to yourself?
Your book makes mention of bearing false witness. The golden rule suggests it may not be cool.

Why are you doing it?

So tell us what is true then?

Several people have put forward why we believe what we do and tried to back it up with evidence, it seems your response is always "What evidence?"

What would you need to believe?

If you mean the S and G thing, no evidence for such a discovery has been put foreward. I've no trouble with legit archaeology,
same as some of our heroes have no hesitation about accepting Ron Wyatt
or similar bogus crap that matches their bible readin'.

Rigorous thinking may be teachable, common sense not so much

Audie wrote:

Storyteller wrote:Okay, let me put it another way then.

You say that some people here are saying stuff about you that isn`t true yet you never say why.

I guess I dont feel up to it. Defend myself against a bunch of stereotypes, attitudes, assumptions and imagination.

If I said that you are a groupie of worships pop singers, thinks trees arr holy abodes of
spirits, that you are afraid of witches and of anything that might challenge anything you believe,
would you care to do a detailed refutation? I can toss them out faster than you can defend, and who says
I have to believe you? FL ot jac are fine with denying that I speak truthfully of myself.

My earlier q had to do with conscience and christianity of people who feel so free to
bear false witness.

What is your take on that?

Now you`re making assumptions, banding us all together as a bunch of sterotypes. I certainly don`t consider myself a stereotypical Christian. In fact, I rebelled against it for ages, now I just accept that I believe Christ is my salvation so that makes me a Christian.

You can challenge my belief in any way you like to Audie. I would, and will, defend what I believe and I would try and explain why.
I certainly wouldn`t say you have to believe me, it`s what I believe that is important, the same as what you believe is important to you.

Who, where, and why are some bearing false witness?

I cannot speak for others Audie but personally I would hate to to do it. It goes against everything I believe in. But, surely, if you are going to accuse someone of doing that, you should explain how and why?

Storyteller wrote:

Audie wrote:

Storyteller wrote:Okay, let me put it another way then.

You say that some people here are saying stuff about you that isn`t true yet you never say why.

I guess I dont feel up to it. Defend myself against a bunch of stereotypes, attitudes, assumptions and imagination.

If I said that you are a groupie of worships pop singers, thinks trees arr holy abodes of
spirits, that you are afraid of witches and of anything that might challenge anything you believe,
would you care to do a detailed refutation? I can toss them out faster than you can defend, and who says
I have to believe you? FL ot jac are fine with denying that I speak truthfully of myself.

My earlier q had to do with conscience and christianity of people who feel so free to
bear false witness.

What is your take on that?

Now you`re making assumptions, banding us all together as a bunch of sterotypes. I certainly don`t consider myself a stereotypical Christian. In fact, I rebelled against it for ages, now I just accept that I believe Christ is my salvation so that makes me a Christian.

You can challenge my belief in any way you like to Audie. I would, and will, defend what I believe and I would try and explain why.
I certainly wouldn`t say you have to believe me, it`s what I believe that is important, the same as what you believe is important to you.

Who, where, and why are some bearing false witness?

I cannot speak for others Audie but personally I would hate to to do it. It goes against everything I believe in. But, surely, if you are going to accuse someone of doing that, you should explain how and why?

Im doing no grouping or assumptions,but good that you see how stereotyping would work.
I was giving made up examples of false charges to be defended against.

Would you care to do a detailed defense or why you are not a groupie? See why I dont care to defend at length against false
witnessing against me, considering especially that, far from accepting my word or asking for clarification, I just get back that I am wrong, and more made up nonsense and belittling. From fl, it wasnt even questioning why I dont accept that anyone found s and g, no,just personal remarks about my intellectual integrity.
From the heights of "been there".

As with what you said of behaviour that would be against all you stand for, so is fl's
invidious claims against my integrity. Perhaps he did once behave as badly as he claims I now do.
Thats his problem, not mine.

WHY he feels its acceptable to bear false witness, that was my question for him.
As for examples, all of his posts to me in this thread are composed almost entirely
of same.

Audie wrote:Here is something I really dont understand. Perhaps as a practitioner you can explain it.Here in your post you have attested to a number of supposedly factual statements about me.None of them are correct nor can be traced to any reasonable interpretation of anything I have ever said.They are all simply baseless, and rather demeaning statements of facts not in evidence; false testimony, opinions stated as fact. There are more direct words to describe saying things that are not true.My question for you is, how do you as a professing Christian justify this to yourself?Your book makes mention of bearing false witness. The golden rule suggests it may not be cool.

Sorry, but I get the distinct impression that you lack focus. Let me take each sentence above and comment on it:

Audie wrote:Here is something I really dont understand.

That makes two of us!

Audie wrote:Perhaps as a practitioner you can explain it.

A "practitioner" of what? I assume you mean Christianity from the context but I'm not sure. If it is a "practitioner" of Christianity, the question is of no relevance.

Audie wrote:Here in your post you have attested to a number of supposedly factual statements about me.

Huh? my statements are not factual! They are IMPRESSIONS! The statements are based on my impressions of you which come from my interpretation of the words you use. As you've already stated and I've agreed to, I know diddly-squat about you. I do know that you have a distinct tendency to jump to conclusions and to easily feel attacked. I've seen this tendency in your exchanges with others here. Frankly, it doesn't bother me. That's just who you are and I accept you as who you are.

Audie wrote:None of them are correct nor can be traced to any reasonable interpretation of anything I have ever said.

Join the club! I know the feeling! People think I'm mean & nasty but the reality is that I'm very loveable.

Audie wrote:they are all simply baseless, and rather demeaning statements of facts not in evidence; false testimony, opinions stated as fact.

Demeaning?! well...perhaps you should consider that communication is about 5% words and 95% other stuff, like gestures, tone, elocution, facial expressions, body language & what not. You may want to look at the emoticons I put at the end of my posts. These give an accurate - if limited - indication of my state of mind during the post. Perhaps you could start using emoticons as well so that people wouldn't misunderstand you...?

Audie wrote:My question for you is, how do you as a professing Christian justify this to yourself?

uh...since when are "professing Christians" - or anyone else - immune to misunderstanding by their interlocutors?

Audie wrote:Your book makes mention of bearing false witness. The golden rule suggests it may not be cool.

Frankly, I think you are just funny! Not in a bad way...but you seem to take yourself sooooo seriously! Life would be so much easier if you would just take the lid off your pressure cooker.

Audie wrote:Why are you doing it?

Hmmm... You may want to lay off the Starbucks for a while. Have a glass of wine & relax!

FL

Audie wrote:

Storyteller wrote:

Audie wrote:

Storyteller wrote:Okay, let me put it another way then.

You say that some people here are saying stuff about you that isn`t true yet you never say why.

I guess I dont feel up to it. Defend myself against a bunch of stereotypes, attitudes, assumptions and imagination.

If I said that you are a groupie of worships pop singers, thinks trees arr holy abodes of
spirits, that you are afraid of witches and of anything that might challenge anything you believe,
would you care to do a detailed refutation? I can toss them out faster than you can defend, and who says
I have to believe you? FL ot jac are fine with denying that I speak truthfully of myself.

My earlier q had to do with conscience and christianity of people who feel so free to
bear false witness.

What is your take on that?

Now you`re making assumptions, banding us all together as a bunch of sterotypes. I certainly don`t consider myself a stereotypical Christian. In fact, I rebelled against it for ages, now I just accept that I believe Christ is my salvation so that makes me a Christian.

You can challenge my belief in any way you like to Audie. I would, and will, defend what I believe and I would try and explain why.
I certainly wouldn`t say you have to believe me, it`s what I believe that is important, the same as what you believe is important to you.

Who, where, and why are some bearing false witness?

I cannot speak for others Audie but personally I would hate to to do it. It goes against everything I believe in. But, surely, if you are going to accuse someone of doing that, you should explain how and why?

Im doing no grouping or assumptions,but good that you see how stereotyping would work.
I was giving made up examples of false charges to be defended against.

Would you care to do a detailed defense or why you are not a groupie? See why I dont care to defend at length against false
witnessing against me, considering especially that, far from accepting my word or asking for clarification, I just get back that I am wrong, and more made up nonsense and belittling. From fl, it wasnt even questioning why I dont accept that anyone found s and g, no,just personal remarks about my intellectual integrity.
From the heights of "been there".

As with what you said of behaviour that would be against all you stand for, so is fl's
invidious claims against my integrity. Perhaps he did once behave as badly as he claims I now do.
Thats his problem, not mine.

WHY he feels its acceptable to bear false witness, that was my question for him.
As for examples, all of his posts to me in this thread are composed almost entirely
of same.

You think we are stereotyping you?

Yes audie, I would do a detailed defense, especially if people were misunderstanding me.

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Audie wrote:Here is something I really dont understand. Perhaps as a practitioner you can explain it.Here in your post you have attested to a number of supposedly factual statements about me.None of them are correct nor can be traced to any reasonable interpretation of anything I have ever said.They are all simply baseless, and rather demeaning statements of facts not in evidence; false testimony, opinions stated as fact. There are more direct words to describe saying things that are not true.My question for you is, how do you as a professing Christian justify this to yourself?Your book makes mention of bearing false witness. The golden rule suggests it may not be cool.

Sorry, but I get the distinct impression that you lack focus. Let me take each sentence above and comment on it:

Audie wrote:Here is something I really dont understand.

That makes two of us!

Audie wrote:Perhaps as a practitioner you can explain it.

A "practitioner" of what? I assume you mean Christianity from the context but I'm not sure. If it is a "practitioner" of Christianity, the question is of no relevance.

Audie wrote:Here in your post you have attested to a number of supposedly factual statements about me.

Huh? my statements are not factual! They are IMPRESSIONS! The statements are based on my impressions of you which come from my interpretation of the words you use. As you've already stated and I've agreed to, I know diddly-squat about you. I do know that you have a distinct tendency to jump to conclusions and to easily feel attacked. I've seen this tendency in your exchanges with others here. Frankly, it doesn't bother me. That's just who you are and I accept you as who you are.

Audie wrote:None of them are correct nor can be traced to any reasonable interpretation of anything I have ever said.

Join the club! I know the feeling! People think I'm mean & nasty but the reality is that I'm very loveable.

Audie wrote:they are all simply baseless, and rather demeaning statements of facts not in evidence; false testimony, opinions stated as fact.

Demeaning?! well...perhaps you should consider that communication is about 5% words and 95% other stuff, like gestures, tone, elocution, facial expressions, body language & what not. You may want to look at the emoticons I put at the end of my posts. These give an accurate - if limited - indication of my state of mind during the post. Perhaps you could start using emoticons as well so that people wouldn't misunderstand you...?

Audie wrote:My question for you is, how do you as a professing Christian justify this to yourself?

uh...since when are "professing Christians" - or anyone else - immune to misunderstanding by their interlocutors?

Audie wrote:Your book makes mention of bearing false witness. The golden rule suggests it may not be cool.

Frankly, I think you are just funny! Not in a bad way...but you seem to take yourself sooooo seriously! Life would be so much easier if you would just take the lid off your pressure cooker.

Audie wrote:Why are you doing it?

Hmmm... You may want to lay off the Starbucks for a while. Have a glass of wine & relax!

FL

Avoid stating opinions as facts, and I wont complain. Your impressions
of me are generally way off. You got one tho; I dont do light touch, and yes wound very tight.
Its a Hong Kong disease, you catch it at birth.

As to your impression of yourself, im sure you are lovable, who could stay annoyed with you?

Sorry about getting excitable but thats as me as lovable is you.

Audie wrote:Avoid stating opinions as facts, and I wont complain. Your impressionsof me are generally way off.

I think you are a wonderful Chinadoll. Am I way off? ... Nooooooooooooooooooooo!

Audie wrote: I dont do light touch, and yes wound very tight.Its a Hong Kong disease, you catch it at birth.

OK...if you like things rough, get yourself a BMW Z4 or a Corvette Stingray as soon as you start earning Big Money suing people out of house & home Leave the Porsches & Jaguars to the squeeky-voiced, sissy male lawyers.

Audie wrote:As to your impression of yourself, im sure you are lovable, who could stay annoyed with you?

I think Proinsias hates me...

Audie wrote:Sorry about getting excitable but thats as me as lovable is you.

Cut the Starbucks! Relax & have some wine! There are some excellent wines out of California. Aussie wines are great as well, especially the whites because they have a slight eucalyptus nuance...very refreshing.

FL

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

Audie wrote:Avoid stating opinions as facts, and I wont complain. Your impressionsof me are generally way off.

I think you are a wonderful Chinadoll. Am I way off? ... Nooooooooooooooooooooo!

Audie wrote: I dont do light touch, and yes wound very tight.Its a Hong Kong disease, you catch it at birth.

OK...if you like things rough, get yourself a BMW Z4 or a Corvette Stingray as soon as you start earning Big Money suing people out of house & home Leave the Porsches & Jaguars to the squeeky-voiced, sissy male lawyers.

Audie wrote:As to your impression of yourself, im sure you are lovable, who could stay annoyed with you?

I think Proinsias hates me...

Audie wrote:Sorry about getting excitable but thats as me as lovable is you.

Cut the Starbucks! Relax & have some wine! There are some excellent wines out of California. Aussie wines are great as well, especially the whites because they have a slight eucalyptus nuance...very refreshing.

FL

I was thinking of a Vincent Black Shadow, and a quart of Wild Turkey.