• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Shoe is on the other foot: Prove there is not God.

AxisMundi

E Pluribus Unum!!!
Actually i can prove this by the scriptures. And no the burden of proof is on you because you started the argument that Jesus is just a parable and not a real person. Bible translations are fallible and any one who thinks otherwise is a fool. So you will not hear me claim this. So prove that He didnt exist. Prove that any historical person ever recorded can have ever existed beyond what has been written down about him/her.

Now according to the scriptures you have over 66 books, 66 possible witnesses [i know there was more, Ezra comes to mind] not counting secular writings, that are witnesses to Jesus. [Note Jesus is the God of the OT so yes it counts too]

First you would have to prove the scriptures as self-supporting evidence before you can use it AS self-supporting evidence.

Should warn you though, considering that the majority of the first book can be disproved quite easily, you will have a hard up-hill battle.

And of your 66 "witnesses"? Not one set pen to paper themselves. All were written down well after the alleged "fact", stories passed by word of mouth.

And there are no secular writings contemporary to when the christ figure is said to have lived. Tacitus and other historians date from nearly a century later and beyond, and most mention only the central figure of the Christian religion, not the christ figure himself.

The portion of Josephus'' histories that claim to mention Christ and his brother Paul are clear forgeries from a much later date. The forger didn't even bother attempting to match Josephus'' writing style, the syntax and grammar used during that time, and indeed misuses words and military titles used in much later writings.
 

McBell

Admiral Obvious
My convincing is by using the scriptures to those who actually believe what they are supposed to say. i.e. the eternal thing for one. The consensus out there in christianity and judaism is eternal/eternity/everlasting/for ever and ever are scriptural when throughout the bible there are numerous proofs to the contrary. Judaism definitely need everlasting to be scriptural for their religion to be. Without it well...never mind. Christianity needs it for their all important scare tactic of hell and the money from tithing. The convincing would come from showing scripture upon scripture to those who have an open mind and believe that the scripture means what it means. Heres a good one for you, the bible doesnt mean what it says, it means what it means. Think about that
You have not resolved any part of the problem I presented.
You are merely attempting to move from what the Bible says to what it means, but when one stops and actually thinks about it (like you suggest) we are right back to square one. All you needs do is replace 'says' with 'means'. see, the exact same problem.
 

AK4

Well-Known Member
So you disagree that the reasoning mind is at enmity with God and connot know God or be subject to his laws

Agree and disagree. It can be. Besides it doesnt say the reasoning mind it says the carnal mind and there can be a big difference between them.


or you disagree that God is moved and pleased by faith?
Why would He be not pleased with faith? Of course He is pleased with it
 

Walkntune

Well-Known Member
Agree and disagree. It can be. Besides it doesnt say the reasoning mind it says the carnal mind and there can be a big difference between them.



Why would He be not pleased with faith? Of course He is pleased with it
I'm not trying to debate with you.You have enough on your plate. I'm trying to understand where you are coming from.
What bible you read or what religion you are?
 

AK4

Well-Known Member
I was speaking about death not in the sense of Adam but death began when Cain killed his brother, this was the first death......
God didn't create Satan as an evil being.....He was created or existed as an angel who rebelled and was cast out of Heaven....So why did Satan "Lucifer" or whatever you wish to call him, Rebel against God, I thought there was no sin in Heaven, and now we have rebellion which the Bible says "rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft".

You say that Jesus is the only one who ascended to Heaven, what do you do with the scripture that says two prophets were taken to Heaven? Do we just throw that scripture out?
You tell me to think deeper....I've been thinking about all this probably far longer than you, I don't mean this in a derogarotory sense....But my whole life has revolved around God, Jesus, Bible and many years of study and teaching......

You say the Lucifer story is a hoax, then how do you decide what is true and what isn't? I mean it's either there in written word or it isn't.....God said this, but we can throw that out because He didn't say what he means.....
Remember this rule of thumb in scripture....God said what He meant and meant what He said..............;)


I can show you some stuff on this lucifer thing and how that whole story of him being a fallen angel is a hoax. I could show you that those two didnt go to heaven [Someone went to Elijah and he wrote a letter to someone after his alledged taking to heaven]

How do you decide what is true? By seeing if in any way something you was taught contradicts anything in scripture or any precept in scripture. The written is true, translations and man made doctrines is what doesnt usually stand.


God said what He meant and meant what He said..............;)

Even that saying doesnt stand up to scripture because if it was literal then we all should at least have only one eye and hand
 

AK4

Well-Known Member
Your welcome I guess, It really wasn't written as a complement. It was pointing out the fact that you have some different and somewhat twisted ideas on some of the scriptures. Now though I do understand where you are coming from since I know where you got them.....:foot:
I do complement you on standing for what you believe to be true......;)
Us arguing who's right and who's wrong would only prove to be fruitless in this thread. As I stated in an earlier post, drawing a line in the dirt and have a spitting contest would prove as frugal....;)

Not twisted ideas compared to the scriptures. Only twisted to the doctrines of the church because it can prove them wrong. Im not being derogatory either its just i also believed all that stuff too for like 95% of my life until God opened my eyes. If you are interested i can let you know some of "my" "twisted" "ideas";)
 
Last edited:

AK4

Well-Known Member
Do you mean what you are saying or what you mean????
I dont most of the time speak in parables the way Jesus was said to always speak in parables to the multitudes.

In that statement i made i meant exactly what it said.
 

cottage

Well-Known Member
Don’t quite follow here. Please explain

I said there is apparently a necessary God who is dependent upon a non-necessary feature of the universe (causation). You replied that God caused everything, just like DNA. I explained that while God isn’t logically obliged to create DNA he is logically defined by causation. There is no contradiction in conceiving God to have created humans without DNA, since an omnipotent God could achieve the same result in a different way. But we if we speak of the universe and mankind being brought into existence by God uncaused we have then uttered a contradiction. God is absolutely dependent upon cause and effect, which happens to be a feature of the physical world. ‘God cannot not be God’ is a necessarily true statement, and yet God cannot be intelligible without the concept of causation. But there is no logical necessity in cause and effect, as Hume explains: ‘Let anyone define a cause, without comprehending, as part of the definition, a necessary connection with its effect; and let him show distinctly the origin of the idea, expressed by the definition; and I shall readily give up the whole controversy.’ So God, a necessary being, depends absolutely upon a non-necessary feature of the universe for his existence, which is an absurdity.

A person cant have a burning desire for the welfare of their possible future kids he/she are planning to have, to make sure that they kids will have a better life than what they had, and they cant prepare all this, out of love of the possible kids they will have in the future? In this a new concept?
A burning desire or hope to have children is simply presupposing an actual existence, when nothing exists but the desire. The desire is a biological and/or psychological need that is focussed entirely on the self, since the object of the desire has no existence.


I wonder who thought up that God doesn’t have desires? I agree with the needs thing, but desires and wants? This is directly contradictory to the scriptures. Picture this, if you were an all powerful being with all the power to do everything, would you want to just sit on that power and never use it? Now if you use it, would that mean you wanted/desired to use even if you just used it for the h*ll of it? Would that make you less than what you were when you just sat on your power?
If God is omnipotent and all-sufficient then he doesn’t have needs, wants or desires because by definition he already has, and is, everything.
 

AxisMundi

E Pluribus Unum!!!
.....His opening statement to us is that in the beginning He created the heavens (universe) which include the earth and other celestial bodies. [Genesis 1:1].....

I only need to address the above, since the rest of your post falls apart afterwords.

Genesis 1 states that your god created the earth and heavens on the first day, and the stars on the third.

We know this sequence, no matter how one defines "heavens", to be categorically incorrect. The stars are some ten BILLION years older than the earth, as is the universe itself.

Genesis 1 also states that the earth was covered in water first, and that life began on the land.

Again, out-of-sequence with reality. Firstly, there simply isn't enough water on the planet to completely inundate the surface (no "Great Flood" either, BTW), never has been. Secondly, we know that water came to the Earth long after it's development. It was simply too hot when it first formed. Thirdly, we know that life began in the oceans, not on land.

Genesis 1 also states that "livestock" came before man. Livestock is a human invention. This, of course, ignores Genesis 2 which states man came first and the animals after. The rest of Genesis is just as easily debunked.
 

Charity

Let's go racing boys !
The rebellion of Satan and the casting from heaven is not contained in the Bible.;)

Luke 10:18 Jesus speaking "I saw Satan fall like lightning from Heaven.
OT passages Isaiah 14:12-15
Ezek 28:11-19 Bible scholars believe this refers to Satan
Also Revelation

There are many other scriptures referring to Satan, Lucifer, Prince of Darkness, the Deceiver, many other names that are associated with Satan.....
There is one scripture that says Lucifer took 1/3 of the angels with him when he was cast out......
I'm not one to list 5000 scriptures for people to just pass over and not read, I think that is an effort in futility...
The scriptures are there, if anyone is interested they can find it, it not it doesn't matter anyway.....
 

McBell

Admiral Obvious
Luke 10:18 Jesus speaking "I saw Satan fall like lightning from Heaven.
OT passages Isaiah 14:12-15
Ezek 28:11-19 Bible scholars believe this refers to Satan
Also Revelation

There are many other scriptures referring to Satan, Lucifer, Prince of Darkness, the Deceiver, many other names that are associated with Satan.....
There is one scripture that says Lucifer took 1/3 of the angels with him when he was cast out......
I'm not one to list 5000 scriptures for people to just pass over and not read, I think that is an effort in futility...
The scriptures are there, if anyone is interested they can find it, it not it doesn't matter anyway.....
Fair enough.

Got a link to a website who has them listed?
 

Stephen5

New Member
"Genesis 1 states that your god created the earth and heavens on the first day, and the stars on the third."

Tell me about your god and his origin, position, and creative acts

Where did the material universe come from, who are you, and why are you on the earth .... is there any purpose to your life?

You have the wrong interpretation of the Genesis account by the way

He tells us that in the beginning He created the heavens and the earth. We are not told when or exactly how this was done. We know by observation that these things exist because we can detect them with our senses.

There has been much controversy about when and how He created the material universe and observable life forms, particularly humans of our kind who have been created in His image.

This is primarily because of the credibility factor and questions arising from the apparent inconsistencies of what the Bible says and what humans think they observe by discoveries and evaluations of the material world.

Several positions have developed over time for the purpose of either proving or disproving the validity of the Bible as an accurate record of the past, present, and future in regard to the material universe and related life forms.

The positions range from a total rejection of the Bible as truth choosing to rely upon scientific discovery and observation to total reliance on the Bible as the Word of God and authority on creation.

I will address the apparent disparity between the Biblical account of creation, genealogical time inconsistencies, and related observations of the material world.

There are a number of approaches that deal with these issues and at least three significant ones.

The first is that the heavens and earth are very old and the Lord has used an evolutionary process of creation which has taken a very long time to reach the level of human kind.

The attempt here is to extend the six creation days in Genesis into long immeasurable lengths of time.

Creation and evolution continue during each of the six periods. Human evolution then becomes the end result which occurred about 6,000 years ago.

Proponents blend evolutionary processes to account for a very old earth and the recent appearance of humans of our kind to fit the biblical genealogical time frame of about 6,000 years for human existence.

A second theory proposes that the heavens and the earth are in fact very young and only about 6,000 to 10,000 years old. Much is done to refute modern scientific methods and evaluations in order to prove this.

If true, then there is no need to make reconciliation for the time differences between the observed apparent age of the universe and the human genealogical record in the Bible.

I would suggest that neither of these theories give adequate understanding of the Biblical account of creation and related observations made through discovery and analysis.

They are both self limiting and do not provide the best presentations for supporting the Genesis record of creation.

The first theory ignores the literal 24 hour day indicated by the rotation of the earth and the life form "kind after kind" process.

There is also a tendency to support or compromise with the pure theory of evolution which does not include a creator.

There is no need for compromise on this issue in order to support the Bible's picture of creation. Genesis clearly tells us that the Lord used six 24 hour days to do His work.

There is also clear explanation that distinct life forms were created separately and that they reproduce in kind, not by evolution from one species to another.

The second theory limits His creative time frame to only a few thousand years with no indication of any previous knowledge of His existence or actions.

Attempts are also made to prove scientifically that the earth and universe are very young and this is an exercise in futility.

What was the Lord doing before 6,000 years ago ? Did He sit around for billions of years doing nothing and then start His process of creating the universe ?

In the beginning He created the heavens and the earth "together".... at the same time. Genesis 1:1 states this fact.

Our solar system's components were created in the beginning and were not later additions to the universe. Neither was the earth created first with the other components like our sun and moon added later.

We know today that the earth's orbit is dependent upon the existence of the sun's gravitational attraction, not the other way around.

The earth was obviously present in Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. To say that the Lord then created and added the sun and moon next is absurd.

One must use common sense and allow for guidance of His Holy Spirit in the process of interpreting His Word.

Those who manipulate scriptures in order to support their unique interpretations of the Bible cause one to question their credibility.

The heavens and earth are in fact very old by observation and by evaluation through at least a few proven physical laws like the speed of light. Even our own solar system has the visible markings of age, degeneration, and judgment.

We have evidence today that planets close to the earth once had environments like the earth. Now they are desolate and uninhabitable. What happened to them and when ?

There is a third view of these issues which I consider to be much more correct and convincing with no need to compromise, twist, or deceive. The Lord's Word is totally true, complete, and reliable when understood properly.

There is not a great deal of scriptural information addressing this subject, but there is enough to grasp an understanding that makes sense.

Not everything in the Bible can be proven by human intellect and observation and must be accepted on faith.

Genesis chapter 1:1 indicates that the Lord created the heavens and the earth in the beginning. This opening statement tells us that He exists and that He created the heavens and the earth in the beginning.

There is a summary of His creating and forming activities in Genesis that includes the beginning, reconditioning of the earth, creation of replacement life forms, and creation of humans in His own image. [Genesis 2:1-8]

This summary is a recap of how the heavens and the earth came into existence and the generations or phases of His actions.

The "day" (time) in which the Lord "created" is not just one day, but the times and generations of His creative and forming acts. [Genesis 2:4]

These included those in the beginning and those about 6,000 years ago. Humans were His final act of creation for this present generation.

He will renovate and create again after this present age of man's rule of the earth comes to an end. [2Peter 3:10; Revelation 20, 21]

We are not told when the beginning of His creative acts took place. There is substantial evidence in scripture that satan and the fallen angels rebelled against Him sometime between the beginning of creation and Genesis 1:2.

We can only speculate as to what was going on during the time from the beginning and Genesis 1:2.
 
Last edited:

Stephen5

New Member
The Genesis account continued .................

The Lord created the angels first and then the material universe and other life forms. We know this because all things were created by Him and the angels observed His creative acts. [Job 38:4-7]

One third of the angels followed satan in rebellion against the Lord sometime between the beginning of creation and 6,000 years ago. Satan and his angels will be cast and confined to the earth at the end of this present age. [Revelation 12:4-9]

Satan's rebellion, sin, and the presence of evil were all operative before the reconditioning of the earth and subsequent creation of humans.

Sin entered the human race through Adam as a result of the choice to disobey the Lord's advice and that we must reject the idea of separating from His providence, direction, and trusting relationship. [Genesis 2:6-17]

There are significant references available to us in scripture and the physical observation of the material world regarding these issues which can enhance our understanding of Biblical truths about creation.

The earth is the only inhabitable planet in our solar system for life forms that we know of from recent observation. Environments for life support do not exist on any of the other planets.

We find that there is much evidence of death, decay, and destruction of very old life forms buried beneath the earth's surface.

Large reptilian creatures have been found that existed before humans of our kind were created. There is no record of the existence of these creatures in scripture.

Their huge size and the impact they would have had on humanity would be there for sure. One should conclude that these creatures existed before Genesis 1:2.

We can also observe an apparent long term decadent entropic decline of life forms from the fossil remains of these creatures and many others.

This decline was part of their life cycle and this is different than what one would expect of the Lord's original creation. Something motivated Him to cause this process of entropy and death to operate in His universe.

There is also an apparent desire by the Lord to create new heavens and an earth in the future which will be eternally perfect. This change will involve a return to the conditions of His original and perfect creation. [Romans 8:18-22; Revelation 21]

The original creation was balanced, stable, and perfected. For example we are told that satan was created perfect in every way. [Ezekiel 28:12-19]

One can then conclude from this that the rebellion of satan and one third of the angels resulted in the Lord's judgment and subsequent decline of the original creation.

It does appear to us that the other planets and moons in our solar system had environments similar to the earth in the distant past.

If the earth is the same age as the others and all were created in the beginning before Genesis 1:2, then one could speculate that satan's fall resulted in the Lord's widespread judgment of the material universe.

This would bring us to Genesis 1:2 and the following reconditioning of the earth for the habitation of living life forms, with no similar adjustments to any of the other planets and moons.

Genesis 1:2 opens with an earth that is void of all living life forms and has experienced significant upheaval and destruction. One should ponder this and view the Lord's actions from the perspective of being located on the earth.

We could speculate that the Lord's initial phase of the judgment process was to freeze the earth and cover it with ice. This would explain the "ice age" that we have observed. All life forms on the earth were destroyed in the process.

A warming of the earth would then produce the water cover [waters below] and the water vapor [waters above] as described in Genesis. The earth is described as being desolated and totally covered with surface waters.

The space immediately above the waters is saturated with thick water vapors (dense clouds). There is no visibility, everything was in total darkness on the earth.

The sun, moon, earth's solar system, and universe were present, but these could not be seen from the earth. They were created in the beginning long before Genesis 1:2 and were made visible again from the earth by the Lord's reconditioning actions.

The time is about 6,000 years ago and He moved rapidly to prepare the desolated earth for the habitation of life forms including the initial introduction of humans of our kind. [Genesis 1:2]

His actions begin in Genesis 1:3. He dissipates enough of the cloud mass (waters above) above the surface waters so that a faint glow of light coming from the sun can be seen.

The statement "let there be light" is not a creative act, but the result of the dissipation process.

Light was created in the beginning when He created the heavens and the earth, but obscured by the conditions of judgment.

The dissipation process allowed for one to observe day and night because of the rotation of the earth and enough light from the sun.

He then separated the waters above from the waters below and formed the atmosphere between them. This was necessary for the support of the new life forms that were to come.

Next He caused the surface waters on the earth to recede to the extent that dry land appeared in various areas.

Natural vegetation seed that already existed in the earth began to grow and reproduce at an accelerated rate.

Further dissipation of the atmospheric cloud mass allowed for observation of the sun, moon, and stars from the earth. He made these to be lights appearing in the atmosphere by observation from the earth's surface and for distinct purposes.

He created them in the beginning long before 6,000 years ago, but made them appear and function for the reconditioned earth.

Next He created new life forms to replace those destroyed by His former judgment of the earth. These were distinctly different creatures who multiply only in kind and in distinct habitations. They are very much like the ones living on the earth today.

Earlier life forms that existed prior to the Lord's judgment of the earth were similar but also included creatures that He did not replace.
 

AxisMundi

E Pluribus Unum!!!
Stephen, I'll begin repling to your posts as soon as you knock them down from novel length to short story.

I'm a busy guy and don't have time for it.
 

AK4

Well-Known Member
First you would have to prove the scriptures as self-supporting evidence before you can use it AS self-supporting evidence.

I get what your saying, but what would be satisfactory to show that the scriptures can be self-supporting?

Should warn you though, considering that the majority of the first book can be disproved quite easily, you will have a hard up-hill battle.

Genesis? Only if you go by the nonsense that those young earthers teach. Unless you had something else in mind.
And of your 66 "witnesses"? Not one set pen to paper themselves. All were written down well after the alleged "fact", stories passed by word of mouth.

There were people who copied the originals no doubt and some editing was done by Ezra no doubt, but that doesnt mean the original person who got the revelation from God didnt pen it or that he didnt dictate it to someone. You cannot say for a fact that they never penned anything

And there are no secular writings contemporary to when the christ figure is said to have lived. Tacitus and other historians date from nearly a century later and beyond, and most mention only the central figure of the Christian religion, not the christ figure himself.

Have you not read some of the jewish writings in Midrash and mishnrah-- i think thats what there called and there a third one i cant remember the name.

The portion of Josephus'' histories that claim to mention Christ and his brother Paul are clear forgeries from a much later date. The forger didn't even bother attempting to match Josephus'' writing style, the syntax and grammar used during that time, and indeed misuses words and military titles used in much later writings.

Some say a forgery some say the other. Its all on the person who wants to believe which way or the other. The same could be said with almost everything written in history
 

AK4

Well-Known Member
You have not resolved any part of the problem I presented.
You are merely attempting to move from what the Bible says to what it means, but when one stops and actually thinks about it (like you suggest) we are right back to square one. All you needs do is replace 'says' with 'means'. see, the exact same problem.

Am i? Okay i guess it really meant what it says when it tells ya to gouge out your eye and cut off your hand. Even if its something literal it still has a spiritual higher meaning behind it. Thats the problem with christianity, they think its all literal and if you think that then you will be just as confused as them
 
Top