Answering Atheists

[nPeace]

It was a question.

My mistake.
In science, explanations are given which may or may not be correct. Unless an actually test can be carried out, which produces direct observable evidence, which do not require interpreting.
The Bible is writen history. Some accounts - not every account, can be tested to determine validity.
Of course, like science, some are subject to interpretation.

If your question is, do I believe everything told by the writers, it's not like that at all.
As in the case of someone telling us something, and our having the option to believe or not, important factors are involved.
Can we trust the writings? Is there any clear evidence of truthfulness, trustworthiness, reliability? Can any of it be verified?

If we can answer yes, then there is basis for acceptance.
In the case of the scriptures and God, strong conviction, faith.
So I would say it's more than believing what we are told.
Which is different to most of science. We cannot even examine most of what scientists give us... or am I wrong about that?
There are so many people that don't even believe half of what we are given about the universe. Most just accept it... with or without question.

We can examine the Bible for ourselves, individually.
We can examine archaeological discoveries. True, we may not be able to read some languages, but someone we know, or are in association with might be.
Is this the same with the universe?

I hope I answered your question.

 

[Sheldon]

My mistake.
In science, explanations are given which may or may not be correct. Unless an actually test can be carried out, which produces direct observable evidence, which do not require interpreting.
The Bible is writen history. Some accounts - not every account, can be tested to determine validity.
Of course, like science, some are subject to interpretation.

If your question is, do I believe everything told by the writers, it's not like that at all.
As in the case of someone telling us something, and our having the option to believe or not, important factors are involved.
Can we trust the writings? Is there any clear evidence of truthfulness, trustworthiness, reliability? Can any of it be verified?

If we can answer yes, then there is basis for acceptance.
In the case of the scriptures and God, strong conviction, faith.
So I would say it's more than believing what we are told.
Which is different to most of science. We cannot even examine most of what scientists give us... or am I wrong about that?
There are so many people that don't even believe half of what we are given about the universe. Most just accept it... with or without question.

We can examine the Bible for ourselves, individually.
We can examine archaeological discoveries. True, we may not be able to read some languages, but someone we know, or are in association with might be.
Is this the same with the universe?

I hope I answered your question.

I'm not sure what relevance your claims about science have, it's not a choice between accepting scientific ideas, or religious ones, well not always anyway. If science didn't exist at all, this would lend no objective credence to theistic belief.

However since you compare them it is fair to say that 45000 Christian denominations globally does not suggest the bible contains a cohesive well evidenced message. If all of science and all of religions were somehow eradicated, and humans had to start again from scratch, the scientific facts would gradually emerge exactly as they did before, it is beyond fanciful to imagine that the religions would.