Question for Theists

[Danmac]

Depends on what version of the bible one uses, but like I said, this is essentially irrelevant.

I am not talking about translations, I am talking about original text wording.

And how, exactly, do you justify that one mythological creature is considered real, while another is not?
Show me the evidence to support your case please.

Fossil evidence

Really? And what is the logic behind that notion?

A study of Jewish history reveals the authenticity of the bible

Ah. The True Scotsman fallacy again.
Amazing how often we run into that on these forums...

So I suppose you think Christianity is the only sect that doesn't have phoinies

Oh, I've studied about as much as I can be bothered.
Problem is, there is, in fact, no evidence to support the existence of a god.
And therefore there is no reason to think one exists.

My faith is in a man that did exist, that claimed equality with God.

 

[jarofthoughts]

I am not talking about translations, I am talking about original text wording.

So the dragon mentioned in Revelations is in fact an alligator?
Will wonders never seize...
Still. Irrelevant to the point I was making.

Fossil evidence

You have fossil evidence of god?
Do share!

A study of Jewish history reveals the authenticity of the bible

Really?
You have archaeological evidence of Jewish slaves in Egypt, Jewish settlements near Mount Sinai, and of course, my personal favourite, all the miracles?

So I suppose you think Christianity is the only sect that doesn't have phoinies

Oh no. I think there are phonies everywhere, but it's amazing how often when pressed for an answer theists will claim that "oh no, but you see he wasn't DOING IT RIGHT" without ever presenting a clear definition of what "right" is or actually explaining their position. This is sometimes followed by some statement that equals "you have to believe first".

My faith is in a man that did exist, that claimed equality with God.

Let's for a moment accept, for the sake of argument, that Jesus did in fact exist.
What makes you think his claim is correct?

 

[Danmac]

So the dragon mentioned in Revelations is in fact an alligator?
Will wonders never seize...
Still. Irrelevant to the point I was making.

That is the general consensus among theologians

You have fossil evidence of god?
Do share!

We were talking about animals

Really?
You have archaeological evidence of Jewish slaves in Egypt, Jewish settlements near Mount Sinai, and of course, my personal favourite, all the miracles?

Archeological finds have only strengthened biblical claims across the board.

Oh no. I think there are phonies everywhere, but it's amazing how often when pressed for an answer theists will claim that "oh no, but you see he wasn't DOING IT RIGHT" without ever presenting a clear definition of what "right" is or actually explaining their position. This is sometimes followed by some statement that equals "you have to believe first".

Religions need to be investigated individually for accuracy. You are dismissing all of them because some are nut job works.

Let's for a moment accept, for the sake of argument, that Jesus did in fact exist.
What makes you think his claim is correct?

There is simply too much to cover in one reply.

[youtube]80TyYivFsVA[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80TyYivFsVA

 

[waitasec]

There is simply too much to cover in one reply.

[youtube]80TyYivFsVA[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80TyYivFsVA

reliable records...no
supported his claim...no
credible credentials...no

you're not serious are you?

hey i have a book about jack and the bean stalk
is that a reliable record of his existence? ah no.

it claims the existence of a goose that lays golden eggs
is that supported? ah no.

"it was an oral story. No one knows who started it or where it was originated from. Then, it was written in print by J. White of Newcastle in 1711."
is that a credible credential? ah, no.

tell me how the bible is any different...

 

[Danmac]

reliable records...no
supported his claim...no
credible credentials...no

you're not serious are you?

The no true scotsman fallacy heh?

 

[waitasec]

The no true scotsman fallacy heh?

i guess you believe the goose that lays golden eggs exists then...
for it is written.

 

[asketikos]

to the original question:

what would be the point?

 

[Danmac]

i guess you believe the goose that lays golden eggs exists then...
for it is written.

I suppose one has to be an atheist to use atheist cliches

 

[waitasec]

I suppose one has to be an atheist to use atheist cliches

what's the point danamc?

what makes you think his claim is correct?

 

[jarofthoughts]

That is the general consensus among theologians

Satan is an alligator... Who knew?

We were talking about animals

No, we were talking about mythological creatures, of which god is one.
Now, what makes you think this particular mythological creature is real whereas thousands of others are not?

Archeological finds have only strengthened biblical claims across the board.

Sources to back up this claim? :sarcastic

Religions need to be investigated individually for accuracy. You are dismissing all of them because some are nut job works.

No, I am dismissing all of them because none of them have been able to qualify their central claim; that there is such a thing as god.

There is simply too much to cover in one reply.

[youtube]80TyYivFsVA[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80TyYivFsVA

Like you, he does not qualify any of his claims.
His speech is in other words, worthless.

 

[jarofthoughts]

to the original question:

what would be the point?

That is a question that people need to answer for themselves, but for me there would obviously be no point.
The question was asked to explore whether people have a wish to believe that there is a god regardless of whether that is true or not.
As evolved creatures we are prone to confirmation bias which is something one has to be vary of in all circumstances, which is why the process of peer review is so important in science.
If there is a "trap" to this question, as some theists have suggested, that would be the one.

 

[waitasec]

Archeological finds have only strengthened biblical claims across the board.

which are...?
you need to back this up.
or are you claiming i'm using another ad hominem

 

[Danmac]

which are...?
you need to back this up.
or are you claiming i'm using another ad hominem

Here are just a few.........

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...sg=AFQjCNE7kboDwJOirr1KbdHoLRdRU-p-1A&cad=rja


http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...sg=AFQjCNETmwq-v3RKwE8BsExBovr42si2uQ&cad=rja

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...sg=AFQjCNHpBVmZ08fSh-kl1Jo7ESz_oHw9Yg&cad=rja

 

[AntEmpire]

Here are just a few.........

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...sg=AFQjCNE7kboDwJOirr1KbdHoLRdRU-p-1A&cad=rja


http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...sg=AFQjCNETmwq-v3RKwE8BsExBovr42si2uQ&cad=rja

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...sg=AFQjCNHpBVmZ08fSh-kl1Jo7ESz_oHw9Yg&cad=rja

So what. Same thing happened with the city of Troy, does this mean the events of the Iliad actually happened as the book said? I think not.

Also for future reference, sources that support only the bible (or any agenda for that matter) are generally biased. I'd have to review those sources which would take some time, but from what i saw they didn't look like they had third parties involved, and if they had the money to buy or lease those domain names they're either making money or supporting an archealogical dig who employs people whose job it is to find religious artifacts.

What about archaelogical finds that counter biblical claims? Then the bible interpretation is simply changed, then it appears to support the bible's historical side.

Don't get me wrong, i believe the bible is a decent source of events, places and people that happened, I just believe the events and stories were taken to the extreme as a way to glorify the god of the bible, before these stories were written down... its just like grandpa's fishing story, the fish gets alittle bigger every time its told, until eventually its a whale and he lives inside it for three days.