Another irrefutable proof that God created all things using mathematical induction. And a proof that The Bible is the word of God.

[SavedByTheLord]

You mean "read the Bible"?

So it's true, your argument is "it's true because a book says so"?

No. I proved that God exists, created all things and that the Bible is true.

 

[Esteban X]

No. I proved that God exists, created all things and that the Bible is true.

And yet here we are.
Constantly and consistently refuting your "proofs". Simply repeating a claim is not proof.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

And yet here we are.
Constantly and consistently refuting your "proofs". Simply repeating a claim is not proof.

And when you think you can refute any of my claims, just post it.

 

[Esteban X]

And when you think you can refute any of my claims, just post it.

Biblical Contradictions

It is a central dogma of all fundamental Christians that the Bible is without error. They teach this conclusion by “reasoning” that god cannot be the author of false meaning and he cannot lie. Is this true? If written by a perfect being, then it must not contradict itself, as a collection of...

www.atheists.org

Some Reasons Why Humanists Reject The Bible - American Humanist Association

By Joseph C. Sommer Introduction Humanists reject the claim that the Bible is the word of God. They are convinced the book was written solely by humans in an ignorant, superstitious, and cruel age. They believe that because the writers of the Bible lived in an unenlightened era, the book...

americanhumanist.org

The five best reasons not to believe in God

Most religions, at best, have some kernels of morality that come with a lot of baggage that make people do appalling things. The world can do without religion. Here are five reasons why.

www.dailymaverick.co.za

 

[Subduction Zone]

And when you think you can refute any of my claims, just post it.

Once again I need to remind you how i refuted your "induction proof". Remember how you ran away from the discussion when it was obvious to even you that it was refuted. The Ostrich Defense does not work on the internet. It does not work hardly anywhere.

 

[Twilight Hue]

And when you think you can refute any of my claims, just post it.

I'll just go back to your op and the argument of complexity.

First of all we know what cell phones are, and how they're made and we also know the biology of complex biological systems and how they are made.


The question is where is God in all this?

You have no undisputable proof because you can't even find and point out one single proof involving God. You have the complete inability to even point out anywhere along the process where it's happening.

I guess this ends the thread.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'll just go back to your op and the argument of complexity.

First of all we know what cell phones are, and how they're made and we also know the biology of complex biological systems and how they are made.


The question is where is God in all this?

You have no undisputable proof because you can't even find and point out one single proof involving God. You have the complete inability to even point out anywhere along the process where it's happening.

I guess this ends the thread.

You have it backwards. The burden of proof to show that there was a god involved lies upon the people that are making that claim. Think of it this way, they did not prove that fairies did not do it either.

As to your "argument of complexity" that is just an argument from ignorance where you once again try to shift the burden of proof.

 

[joelr]

No. I proved that God exists, created all things and that the Bible is true.

Where did you do that? I didn't see any such thing? You failed to respond to my posts of Ehrman's work on the NT. Your only answer was a frankenstein gospel that is completely different than all others?

 

[SavedByTheLord]

Where did you do that? I didn't see any such thing? You failed to respond to my posts of Ehrman's work on the NT. Your only answer was a frankenstein gospel that is completely different than all others?

I proved it many times.
But if you want to try to refute it please do,
And TNE gospel of Christ is the only gospel that saves.

 

[joelr]

I proved it many times.

Again, where? All I see is you asserting a book is true because "you say so". That isn't proof.

But if you want to try to refute it please do,

Wait, why are you moving the goalpost? You said you will prove the Bible? Refuting myths isn't something that matters, I cannot refute the stories about Zeus or Romulus either. Doesn't make them true.

I can show evidence the Bible is using older stories and theology from cultures that occupied their land.

And TNE gospel of Christ is the only gospel that saves.

Saves what? Your soul? Please demonstrate proof you have a soul.

But speaking of older nations, here is a great example. Salvation is a Greek invention, especially salvation for the soul of an individual. Meaning getting it. to heaven. Nothing about that in the OT. Yet the Hellenistic Greeks invade and a few centuries later we get a new sect of Judaism that uses all the popular Hellenistic mythology. What a coincidence. I guess your god was a fan of Greek religion.

Or was it just syncretism, like in the other 10,000 cases. I think it was.



ttps://www.britannica.com/topic/Hellenistic-religion


Changes that religions began taking from Hellenistic religions (this describes Judaism to Christianity exactly) - how many times is salvation mentioned.


-the seasonal drama was homologized to a soteriology (salvation concept) concerning the destiny, fortune, and salvation of the individual after death.


-his led to a change from concern for a religion of national prosperity to one for individual salvation, from focus on a particular ethnic group to concern for every human. The prophet or saviour replaced the priest and king as the chief religious figure.


-his process was carried further through the identification of the experiences of the soul that was to be saved with the vicissitudes of a divine but fallen soul, which had to be redeemed by cultic activity and divine intervention. This view is illustrated in the concept of the paradoxical figure of the saved saviour, salvator salvandus.


-Other deities, who had previously been associated with national destiny (e.g., Zeus, Yahweh, and Isis), were raised to the status of transcendent, supreme


-The temples and cult institutions of the various Hellenistic religions were repositories of the knowledge and techniques necessary for salvation and were the agents of the public worship of a particular deity. In addition, they served an important sociological role. In the new, cosmopolitan ideology that followed Alexander’s conquests, the old nationalistic and ethnic boundaries had broken down and the problem of religious and social identity had become acute.


-Most of these groups had regular meetings for a communal meal that served the dual role of sacramental participation (referring to the use of material elements believed to convey spiritual benefits among the members and with their deity)


-Hellenistic philosophy (Stoicism, Cynicism, Neo-Aristotelianism, Neo-Pythagoreanism, and Neoplatonism) provided key formulations for Jewish, Christian, and Muslim philosophy, theology, and mysticism through the 18th century


- The basic forms of worship of both the Jewish and Christian communities were heavily influenced in their formative period by Hellenistic practices, and this remains fundamentally unchanged to the present time. Finally, the central religious literature of both traditions—the Jewish Talmud (an authoritative compendium of law, lore, and interpretation), the New Testament, and the later patristic literature of the early Church Fathers—are characteristic Hellenistic documents both in form and content.


-Other traditions even more radically reinterpreted the ancient figures. The cosmic or seasonal drama was interiorized to refer to the divine soul within man that must be liberated.


-Each persisted in its native land with little perceptible change save for its becoming linked to nationalistic or messianic movements (centring on a deliverer figure)


-and apocalyptic traditions (referring to a belief in the dramatic intervention of a god in human and natural events)


- Particularly noticeable was the success of a variety of prophets, magicians, and healers—e.g., John the Baptist, Jesus, Simon Magus, Apollonius of Tyana, Alexander the Paphlagonian, and the cult of the healer Asclepius—whose preaching corresponded to the activities of various Greek and Roman philosophic missionaries


Hellenistic religion - Beliefs, practices, and institutions

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

We know evolution and billions of years are true (conclusion is the assumption) and since we know evolution and billions of years are true (conclusion is the assumption) and such and such exists, it must have evolved because we know evolution and billions of years are true (restating the assumption as the conclusion). Furthermore, any evidence that contradicts evolution and billions of years must be false because we know evolution and billions of years are true.

You've described how a creationist reads his Bible. He begins with the assumption that its words are correct and never sees anything else ever again. Science approaches these matters very differently, which is why the two produce contradictory belief sets.

the Bible says that Satan deceives the whole world

And here's a nice example of that kind of thinking. You've chosen to believe that, and so now, that's what you see. And that changes your thinking forever. It determines what conclusions you are allowed to come to when evaluating both science and scripture. The scientific community is not interested in that output. It doesn't look like science on paper and it can't be used for anything except to manipulate those that trust people who think like that.

if there is any organization or person that shows evolution and billions of years are false, they are labeled as unscientific and even have their integrity questioned

So what? Creationists don't need the approval of the scientific community. They've got their own community.

Those organization and people that have shown evolution and billions are false are not counted as reputable scientific organizations.

They're not reputable scientific organizations. Like the creationists on RF, they do religion, not science. It's enough that these organizations are considered reputable with creationists.

What do you need with scientific journals? The scientists don't need or seek the approval of the creationists. Be like them.

Creationist papers are published frequently in their "creation science journals" where anybody interested is free to read them. Perhaps this is where you should go with your arguments if you want a receptive audience. Here are a few now. Maybe you can get some of your arguments published there:

Answers Research Journal: Cutting-edge Creation Research (Answers Research Journal)
Creation/Evolution Journal | National Center for Science Education (Creation/Evolution Journal)

These people might be interested in your work:

Home (Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry)
The Institute for Creation Research | The Institute for Creation Research (The Institute for Creation Research)

Evolution of course is not true and the word of God proves that also

Make sure that you put that in your articles. Maybe that could be the title of one of them.

I proved that God exists, created all things and that the Bible is true.

You need to get that published.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

You've described how a creationist reads his Bible. He begins with the assumption that its words are correct and never sees anything else ever again. Science approaches these matters very differently, which is why the two produce contradictory belief sets.

And here's a nice example of that kind of thinking. You've chosen to believe that, and so now, that's what you see. And that changes your thinking forever. It determines what conclusions you are allowed to come to when evaluating both science and scripture. The scientific community is not interested in that output. It doesn't look like science on paper and it can't be used for anything except to manipulate those that trust people who think like that.

So what? Creationists don't need the approval of the scientific community. They've got their own community.

They're not reputable scientific organizations. Like the creationists on RF, they do religion, not science. It's enough that these organizations are considered reputable with creationists.

What do you need with scientific journals? The scientists don't need or seek the approval of the creationists. Be like them.

Creationist papers are published frequently in their "creation science journals" where anybody interested is free to read them. Perhaps this is where you should go with your arguments if you want a receptive audience. Here are a few now. Maybe you can get some of your arguments published there:

Answers Research Journal: Cutting-edge Creation Research (Answers Research Journal)
Creation/Evolution Journal | National Center for Science Education (Creation/Evolution Journal)

These people might be interested in your work:

Home (Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry)
The Institute for Creation Research | The Institute for Creation Research (The Institute for Creation Research)

Make sure that you put that in your articles. Maybe that could be the title of one of them.

You need to get that published.

I have proved that God exists and created all things. I also proved the Bible is the true word of God.
Evolution is false science.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

And your point?

People say that lava is older on top and younger on bottom and that should be impossible, but there is the whole eruption thing. The old rock below the surface gets put on top.

 

[joelr]

I proved it many times.
But if you want to try to refute it please do,
And TNE gospel of Christ is the only gospel that saves.

AND, Please link me to a peer-reviewed paper that suggests dating refutes evolution. An actual peer-review, not the made up creationist one.

 

[SavedByTheLord]

AND, Please link me to a peer-reviewed paper that suggests dating refutes evolution. An actual peer-review, not the made up creationist one.

I have peer reviewed and fact checked all papers that claim evolution and billions of years are true and they have been dismissed.

 

[Eddi]

I have peer reviewed and fact checked all papers that claim evolution and billions of years are true and they have been dismissed.

LOL you are by no means the peer of any credible scientist

 

[SavedByTheLord]

LOL you are by no means the peer of any credible scientist

And you get a 100 score for circular reasoning.
One small fact can refute all of evolution and billions of years.
And there are very many facts which do so.
But you obviously are not being scientific in this area of knowledge.

 

[Eddi]

And you get a 100 score for circular reasoning.

That's not circular reasoning!

You obviously don't know what circular reasoning is

You use it as an insult whilst being obviously unaware of what it means

You're funny

You make me laugh, you brighten my day, thanks for doing what you do

But you obviously are not being scientific in this area of knowledge.

Oh the irony!

 

[Sargonski]

No. I proved that God exists, created all things and that the Bible is true.

You did no such thing .. and the third claim is especially giglish and demonstrably false. .. 1) Should we kill the Adulterous whore ? and 2) what about the parts taken out .. were they true also .. the Epistle of Barnabus for example .. or 3) the edits intentionally removing parts mentioning other Gods .. a relic of the Israelites Pagan Religious Beliefs ... and 4) don't forget to tell us whether or not we should kill the child for the sins of the Father .. along with the Adulterous whore .. Tell us the Truth from the Bible .. and your free pass through judgement ideology and how we are Saved by Lord Martin - the false idol worshiped by many .. known them by their Fruits sayeth the Lord Jesus .. Marty for his most famous treatise .. "On the Jews and Their Lies" Do feel free to find the title way over the top Ironic .. but more important - demonstrable Prophecy on the part of Our Lord Jesus .. a blast from the Past from Jesus and Brother James .. calling out some fanatical Christian Groups of his day for their "Faith Alone" doctrine.. calling such doctrine "Foolish" .. the quotations marks as that term is the harshest of Harsh.

but nevermind the Truth of Jesus and James .. which don't think much of Brother Marty .. its time for SBTLM to join the party .. and answer the 4 simple questions put to you time to prove something for a change !

You obviously don't know what circular reasoning is

Oh the irony!

Think he does actually .. the problem being doing it anyway .. Intentional subversion is the way of the Decepticon .. .. my question being .. if Sataniel is Lord of the Earth .. as told us on the first page of NT .. and messed with the Bible .. are the parts that Satan put in there "The Truth" .. 100% inspired by the Spirit of the Lord .. as Fundamentalists like to claim "God Breathed" .. Which at one point may well have been the case .. but later .. after Ha Satan made changes - edits - deletion and the sin of omission - interpolation and addition .. and of course with Pious Fraud and Artistic License.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I have proved that God exists and created all things. I also proved the Bible is the true word of God.
Evolution is false science.

No, you have only claimed that and displayed massive ignorance in the process.