Evidence for God from Science

This is a question more for mods really. Ive seen it written in the rules that this is not a place for debate or for those who have strongly made up their mind that god doesnt exist. What is the purpose of such rules? It seems to be an admission that its very difficult to defend your beliefs so instead of being forced to do so, you would rather have this shelter where you are barricaded from tenacious doubters. While the name of the website is God and Science, it seems that the forum was not made with the intention of defending the Christian faith. That seems pretty ridiculous to me. So was this forum made for the purpose of Christians to just sit around and pat each other on the back over your beliefs?

MAGSolo,

Here's the Board Purpose that you claim to have read:http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... f=3&t=2517

Ive seen it written in the rules that this is not a place for debate or for those who have strongly made up their mind that god doesnt exist.

You misread the board purpose. It says:

This board is not for those who have strongly made up their mind that Christ is "not" for them; who merely wish to put down, debate, and argue against essential Christian beliefs.

And:

This means non-Christians can now debate Christian beliefs, however such members must keep discussions civil, show the utmost respect, sensitivity and grace, and be willing to walking away from an issue if it gets too heated.

This is not a board where one can debate, and argue against essential Christian beliefs. This IS a board where debate is encouraged within the rules.

What is the purpose of such rules?

Did you even read the Board Purpose?
If you did, you would have seen this:

This board is a Christian home, and so while very open to sincere questions and sensitive debate and dialogue, it is "not" a place where others of differing beliefs can promote their opinions while throwing any argument and complaint they can find against Christianity. If you think this is still unfair, then you are quite welcome to find and join some of the many other message boards suitable to this on the Internet.

While the name of the website is God and Science, it seems that the forum was not made with the intention of defending the Christian faith. That seems pretty ridiculous to me. So was this forum made for the purpose of Christians to just sit around and pat each other on the back over your beliefs?

MAGSolo, Why are you here? What do you hope to accomplish by being on this board?

If a person has decided that Christ is NOT for them and that they are NOT interested in Christianity, why debate and discuss things with Christians ABOUT Christ and Christianity?

Here two examples:
What makes you think Christ existed?
*believer then goes into detail as to why*
Well, I don't think the bible is a valid source because I think it is bias...
*believer goes into detail about the mentioning of Christ outside the NT*
Well, I see your view, not sure I agree 100%, but I understand.

Example 2:

What makes you think Christ existed?
*believer then goes into detail as to why*
The bible is a load of BS, bunch of fairy tales and horrible to boot ( notice attack on bible not on argument)
*believer goes into detail about the mentioning of Christ outside the NT*
Nah, that stuff is all BS, now way to know that info was actually about Christ or just some other guy, besides that, that is old stuff that was probably made up or forged anyways, so I don't accept any of that info either.

See what I mean?

MAGSolo wrote:This is a question more for mods really. Ive seen it written in the rules that this is not a place for debate or for those who have strongly made up their mind that god doesnt exist. What is the purpose of such rules? It seems to be an admission that its very difficult to defend your beliefs so instead of being forced to do so, you would rather have this shelter where you are barricaded from tenacious doubters. While the name of the website is God and Science, it seems that the forum was not made with the intention of defending the Christian faith. That seems pretty ridiculous to me. So was this forum made for the purpose of Christians to just sit around and pat each other on the back over your beliefs?

Go on some atheist forum and tell me what you see there. I've seen myself such atheistic forum and it would really be a disaster to allow all to post here.

Furthermore, there are non-Christians on this forum freely discussing their issues keeping their posts civil. They are more civil than you.

We do not need shelter. And we also do not need uncivil posters.

PaulSacramento wrote:Here two examples:
What makes you think Christ existed?
*believer then goes into detail as to why*
Well, I don't think the bible is a valid source because I think it is bias...
*believer goes into detail about the mentioning of Christ outside the NT*
Well, I see your view, not sure I agree 100%, but I understand.

Example 2:

What makes you think Christ existed?
*believer then goes into detail as to why*
The bible is a load of BS, bunch of fairy tales and horrible to boot ( notice attack on bible not on argument)
*believer goes into detail about the mentioning of Christ outside the NT*
Nah, that stuff is all BS, now way to know that info was actually about Christ or just some other guy, besides that, that is old stuff that was probably made up or forged anyways, so I don't accept any of that info either.

See what I mean?

Well I would say that in a lot of cases where old testament scripture is called prophesy that is fulfilled when jesus is born, it does seem pretty clear that the old testament scripture was not actually referring to Jesus. Also why is Jesus never spoken of using the actual name Jesus anywhere in the OT?

1over137 wrote:

MAGSolo wrote:This is a question more for mods really. Ive seen it written in the rules that this is not a place for debate or for those who have strongly made up their mind that god doesnt exist. What is the purpose of such rules? It seems to be an admission that its very difficult to defend your beliefs so instead of being forced to do so, you would rather have this shelter where you are barricaded from tenacious doubters. While the name of the website is God and Science, it seems that the forum was not made with the intention of defending the Christian faith. That seems pretty ridiculous to me. So was this forum made for the purpose of Christians to just sit around and pat each other on the back over your beliefs?

Go on some atheist forum and tell me what you see there. I've seen myself such atheistic forum and it would really be a disaster to allow all to post here.

Furthermore, there are non-Christians on this forum freely discussing their issues keeping their posts civil. They are more civil than you.

We do not need shelter. And we also do not need uncivil posters.

If I have been uncivil then I apologize

MAGSolo wrote:

Well I would say that in a lot of cases where old testament scripture is called prophesy that is fulfilled when jesus is born, it does seem pretty clear that the old testament scripture was not actually referring to Jesus. Also why is Jesus never spoken of using the actual name Jesus anywhere in the OT?

You have proven time and again that you are unable to understand even simple explanations, MAGSolo. Do you not remember your own inability to understand the very simple answers we gave you in Facebook Atheists are at it again?

FL

MAGSolo wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:Here two examples:
What makes you think Christ existed?
*believer then goes into detail as to why*
Well, I don't think the bible is a valid source because I think it is bias...
*believer goes into detail about the mentioning of Christ outside the NT*
Well, I see your view, not sure I agree 100%, but I understand.

Example 2:

What makes you think Christ existed?
*believer then goes into detail as to why*
The bible is a load of BS, bunch of fairy tales and horrible to boot ( notice attack on bible not on argument)
*believer goes into detail about the mentioning of Christ outside the NT*
Nah, that stuff is all BS, now way to know that info was actually about Christ or just some other guy, besides that, that is old stuff that was probably made up or forged anyways, so I don't accept any of that info either.

See what I mean?

Well I would say that in a lot of cases where old testament scripture is called prophesy that is fulfilled when jesus is born, it does seem pretty clear that the old testament scripture was not actually referring to Jesus. Also why is Jesus never spoken of using the actual name Jesus anywhere in the OT?

So, NO, you didn't get it.

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

MAGSolo wrote:

Well I would say that in a lot of cases where old testament scripture is called prophesy that is fulfilled when jesus is born, it does seem pretty clear that the old testament scripture was not actually referring to Jesus. Also why is Jesus never spoken of using the actual name Jesus anywhere in the OT?

You have proven time and again that you are unable to understand even simple explanations, MAGSolo. Do you not remember your own inability to understand the very simple answers we gave you in Facebook Atheists are at it again?

FL

It wasnt a simple explanation though. First you said something to the effect of it alluding to hardships that we must endure or something like that, then you said it meant exactly what it said which was that beatings and blows purge evil. So you never clarified if it was talking about literal physical beatings or trials and tribulations. Which one is it?

MAGSolo wrote:It wasnt a simple explanation though. First you said something to the effect of it alluding to hardships that we must endure or something like that, then you said it meant exactly what it said which was that beatings and blows purge evil. So you never clarified if it was talking about literal physical beatings or trials and tribulations. Which one is it?

To forgive is to understand. -De Stael

I've already told you that your mind is undisciplined so, sadly, I don't believe that it is possible for you to understand even simple things about the Scriptures. The anger you manifest towards God and the Bible will continue blinding you. Accept this about yourself and - maybe - you will make progress.

FL

FL I am going to do a recap of that discussion to precisely detail why you are wrong.
Me:

Why does the verse say that beating purge the inmost being? Why use the words blows, wounds, and beatings if thats not the message God was actually trying to get across?

You:

I've already explained that. That is the message God is getting accross.

Me:

So the first point made that violence (beatings) cleanses evil is correct then? That is indeed what the bible is saying? I just want to make sure we are clear on that before we move on.

Daniel:

Have you ever heard the word hyperbole?

What it is saying is that God will correct us, sometimes these will be painful lessons and not necessarily physical punishment.

It is saying that those painful processes, whatever they may be will refine us into the people who we are meant to be.

Here Daniel says it is hyperbole which means exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally. This clearly means that Daniel does not think the bible is talking about literal physical beatings.

Later you say this:

No one is talking about mystical interpretation except you. I gave you a simple explanation on Pr 20:30 - it means exactly what it says - and you still do not understand!

Hear you say that the verse means exactly what it says. Which is the opposite of what Daniel just said when he said it was hyperbole. The verse says that "Blows and wounds scrub away evil, and beatings purge the inmost being" and you said it means exactly that which means that it means that physical blows and wounds purge evil. So you say that it means exactly that, Daniel says it is hyperbole and doesnt necessarily mean physical punishment. I say that you two have said two different things and then everyone is talking about how you both said the same thing and I dont understand. Now id be very happy if youd clear up what Im missing. Is the verse talking about physical punishment purging evil? Either its literally talking about physical punishment or its not. You said it means exactly what it says so I take that to mean that it literally means physical punishment purges evil. My problem is that when Daniel said it didnt mean that and I said you two were contradicting each other, you said you both said the same thing and I didnt understand. Do you understand that the verse cant both mean literally what it said (what you said) and be hyperbole (what Daniel said) at the same time?

Here Daniel says it is hyperbole which means exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally. This clearly means that Daniel does not think the bible is talking about literal physical beatings.

Wrong, hyperbole means
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole
"Hyperboles are exaggerations to create emphasis or effect. As a literary device, hyperbole is often used in poetry, and is frequently encountered in casual speech. An example of hyperbole is: "The bag weighed a ton."Hyperbole makes the point that the bag was very heavy, though it probably doesn't actually weigh a ton."

Look at the above quote, is the bag really a ton of weight or is the literal meaning it is just really heavy.

So the meaning is still literal but the text is exaggerated to make a point to the reader.

Hear you say that the verse means exactly what it says. Which is the opposite of what Daniel just said when he said it was hyperbole. The verse says that "Blows and wounds scrub away evil, and beatings purge the inmost being" and you said it means exactly that which means that it means that physical blows and wounds purge evil. So you say that it means exactly that, Daniel says it is hyperbole and doesnt necessarily mean physical punishment. I say that you two have said two different things and then everyone is talking about how you both said the same thing and I dont understand. Now id be very happy if youd clear up what Im missing. Is the verse talking about physical punishment purging evil? Either its literally talking about physical punishment or its not. You said it means exactly what it says so I take that to mean that it literally means physical punishment purges evil. My problem is that when Daniel said it didnt mean that and I said you two were contradicting each other, you said you both said the same thing and I didnt understand. Do you understand that the verse cant both mean literally what it said (what you said) and be hyperbole (what Daniel said) at the same time?

Wrong again, we both said it's meaning was literal and the same, hyperbole is used to emphasize the point the writer was making, both me and FL agreed on the point it was making ergo we have the same conclusion. I call it hyperbole, FL calls it reading the text and understanding it literal intent.


Dan

Daniel please dont tell me im wrong if you dont know what you are talking about. Do you know what literal and figurative means? Literal means that something means exactly what it says, figurative means something is metaphorical or a figure of speech. If a sentence says "the bag weighed a ton" and its hyperbole then it doesnt literally weigh a ton. You seem to be using words that you dont understand clearly but dont do this and then have the nerve to tell me I am wrong when you are the one that is wrong. Here is what hyperbole means:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hyperbole
A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in I could sleep for a year or This book weighs a ton.
a deliberate exaggeration used for effect-he embraced her a thousand times
an obvious and intentional exaggeration.
an extravagant statement or figure of speech not intended to be taken literally, as “She’s as big as a house

Now it would be nice if you would acknowledge that you were the one that was wrong and apologize for telling me I was wrong.

You and FL did not say the exact same thing. If a sentence says "this book weighs a ton" and FL says it means exactly what it says, that means that the book literally weighs a ton. If you say its hyperbole then that means it doesnt literally weigh a ton but was a figure of speech used to convey a message.

FL said the verse means exactly what it says which means it literally means physical wounds and blows purge evil. You said it was hyperbole which means it was a figure of speech used to convey a message. THAT IS NOT THE SAME THING!

Getting back to my original post Id like to ask this. Lets just say hypothetically that God for sure does not exist. Would you rather know this for sure or would you prefer to just live with the belief that he did? Like say 100 years from now they were somehow able to prove that God didnt exist and it became a scientific fact, would you like to know this or just prefer to go on believing in him?