There is no evidence for God, so why do you believe?

[SkepticThinker]

The biblical God is revealed as Spirit, not a gender. The reference to Himself, He or Father are to demonstrate qualities of care, provision, protection, etc., not gender.

He/him denotes a particular gender.
So you're telling me that referring to god as he/him denotes qualities of care, provision and protection? What does a particular gender pronoun have to do with those particular qualities?



I'm with that other poster. I think we should refer to God(s) as "it."

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

He/him denotes a particular gender.
So you're telling me that referring to god as he/him denotes qualities of care, provision and protection? What does a particular gender pronoun have to do with those particular qualities?



I'm with that other poster. I think we should refer to God(s) as "it."

Or if it is about giving life, She.

 

[SkepticThinker]

That’s true because even when Jesus rose from the dead, skeptics said all kinds of things like maybe He wasn’t really dead, or let’s bribe the soldier’s, say they came and stole His body. So yes skeptics have been known for explaining things away. I’ve even heard some say it wasn’t really Jesus in the cross, he was switched somehow.
This is one of the definitions of evidence:
Law. data presented to a court or jury in proof of the facts in issue and which may include the testimony of witnesses, records, documents, or objects.

Notice records and testimony of witnesses which has been presented many times.

And it's been pointed out to you countless times that those were not eyewitness testimonies, and that even if they were, eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. Also, we have no way to investigate such claims thousands of years after they supposedly took place.

 

[ElishaElijah]

And it's been pointed out to you countless times that those were not eyewitness testimonies, and that even if they were, eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. Also, we have no way to investigate such claims thousands of years after they supposedly took place.

The resurrection of Jesus Christ was a fact when He rose from the dead, was verified and recorded and just because 2000 years has passed doesn’t make it any less of a fact today. People are still receiving eternal life and healing in the name of Jesus Christ. I am one of those people and a witness to the truth.

 

[ElishaElijah]

eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.

Eye witness testimony is very reliable when you live with a person for 3 years every day, participate in the miracles, casting out demons, walk with Him for 40 Days after He rose and watch Him go into
Heaven.
The eye witness testimony you’re talking about that is unreliable is a lot different then that.

 

[SkepticThinker]

The resurrection of Jesus Christ was a fact when He rose from the dead, was verified and recorded and just because 2000 years has passed doesn’t make it any less of a fact today. People are still receiving eternal life and healing in the name of Jesus Christ. I am one of those people and a witness to the truth.

Yeah, you've said this before several times. And several times, I've pointed out to you that those aren't verifiable facts. You just keep claiming that they are anyway..
You also keep ignoring the actual fact that what you are claiming as "eyewitness testimony" are not actually that. And you ignore the point that even if they were, eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable, especially thousands of years after the supposed events took place.
Every time you just come back stating they are facts.
They aren't.

"The resurrection of Jesus Christ was a fact ... " Not a verifiable fact.
... "when he rose from the dead ... " Not a verifiable fact.
"Was verified and recorded ... " Not a verifiable fact.
"People are still receiving eternal life and healing in the name of Jesus Christ" Not a verifiable fact.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Eye witness testimony is very reliable when you live with a person for 3 years every day, participate in the miracles, casting out demons, walk with Him for 40 Days after He rose and watch Him go into
Heaven.
The eye witness testimony you’re talking about that is unreliable is a lot different then that.

No, it isn't. Especially not for extraordinary claims like somebody came back from the dead or casting out demons or whatever. Hell, people today can't even demonstrate that demons exist and\or can be casted out.

And AGAIN, you don't even have eyewitness testimony in this case. So this is moot anyway.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Yeah, you've said this before several times. And several times, I've pointed out to you that those aren't verifiable facts. You just keep claiming that they are anyway..

They’ve been verified since the beginning so just because you’re skeptical of those sources from the Bible and historians doesn’t make it so. I keep saying this because skeptics seem to overlook the obvious and place more credence in the current skeptic historians of this century.

 

[ElishaElijah]

No, it isn't. Especially not for extraordinary claims like somebody came back from the dead or casting out demons or whatever. Hell, people today can't even demonstrate that demons exist and\or can be casted out.

And AGAIN, you don't even have eyewitness tes

No, it isn't. Especially not for extraordinary claims like somebody came back from the dead or casting out demons or whatever. Hell, people today can't even demonstrate that demons exist and\or can be casted out.

And AGAIN, you don't even have eyewitness testimony in this case. So this is moot anyway.

timony in this case. So this is moot anyway.

Maybe get out a little more or see the news, or maybe you just don’t recognize the demonic activity around you even how people are being influenced to think certain way.
“And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins, in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience, among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others. But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.”
‭‭Ephesians‬ ‭2:1-9‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

 

[Wildswanderer]

And all those humans disagree with each other. And none have good evidence for god(s).

Only according to your 4 percent of the population. So we can just ignore you.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Really? I can't remember anyone agreeing with you. They insist that their deity transcends nature and is its author - supernatural.

Exactly. But he makes the laws of nature function.

 

[ElishaElijah]

The resurrection of Jesus Christ was a fact ... " Not a verifiable fact.
... "when he rose from the dead ... " Not a verifiable fact.
"Was verified and recorded ... " Not a verifiable fact.
"People are still receiving eternal life and healing in the name of Jesus Christ" Not a verifiable fact.

So when Jesus returns is that when you are saying it becomes a verifiable fact that He rose from the dead 2000 years ago, the Bible then becomes a fact, the witnesses then are reliable? Or what would you say then?

 

[Sheldon]

Notice records and testimony of witnesses which has been presented many times.

Not remotely true, the claims are unsubstantiated, the claims for eyewitnesses likewise are pure hearsay. The gospel claims are not contemporary, and are pure hearsay, with even the earliest written record dating decades after the alleged events, and the names Mathew Mark Luke and John are fictional.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Not remotely true, the claims are unsubstantiated, the claims for eyewitnesses likewise are pure hearsay. The gospel claims are not contemporary, and are pure hearsay, with even the earliest written record dating decades after the alleged events, and the names Mathew Mark Luke and John are fictional.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion…

 

[Sheldon]

Although they may appear the same as in your example, they are much different.

No they are not, I have read theists cite identical anecdotal claims as your, and assign the cause to their belief in a totally different deity and religion, and make the identical claim you do, that this somehow evidences that deity.

I have yet to find anyone except believers that have had the same testimony as mine.

So what? Many make the same claim and use the same argument, and arrive at a different conclusions and deity. So the argument is demonstrably unreliable.

It’s similar to comparing a legitimate dollar bill to a counterfeit.

No it's not, that's just your subjective bias, because you are so heavily emotionally invested in your belief.

 

[Sheldon]

You are certainly entitled to your opinion…

It is not just my opinion, so that's disingenuous.

“None of the synoptic gospels name their author or authors. In each case authorial attribution dates from the second century CE.“
Dr. Ian Bond, Pastor, Missionary, Evangelical

 

[ElishaElijah]

No they are not, I have read theists cite identical anecdotal claims as your, and assign the cause to their belief in a totally different deity and religion, and make the identical claim you do, that this somehow evidences that deity.



So what? Many make the same claim and use the same argument, and arrive at a different conclusions and deity. So the argument is demonstrably unreliable.


No it's not, that's just your subjective bias, because you are so heavily emotionally invested in your belief.

You do sound a little emotional, So will the Bible and Jesus rising from the dead all the sudden become a reality when He returns? Is that the point when in your view fiction becomes non-fiction?

 

[Sheldon]

The resurrection of Jesus Christ was a fact when He rose from the dead, was verified and recorded

It was not, none of the texts are contemporary. Nothing in the gospels has been verified, they are hearsay, by definition. The only independent verification if for a crucifixion, of someone named Jesus.

People are still receiving eternal life and healing in the name of Jesus Christ.

There is no objective evidence to support either of these claims.

I am one of those people and a witness to the truth.

You have eternal life? I am pretty dubious, I'd bet my house you will die one day, just as all other Christians have.

 

[ElishaElijah]

It is not just my opinion, so that's disingenuous.

“None of the synoptic gospels name their author or authors. In each case authorial attribution dates from the second century CE.“
Dr. Ian Bond, Pastor, Missionary, Evangelical

That’s his opinion and yours, some scholars say different, my Bible shows the traditional views and timelines as well as the other views, reasons for both.

 

[Sheldon]

You do sound a little emotional,

Nope, you would just like to pretend that is the case, but this is just ad hominem.

So will the Bible and Jesus rising from the dead all the sudden become a reality when He returns?

The bible already is a reality, I have a copy? That doesn't of course make it's claims true. I don't believe Jesus, if he existed, will return, since if he lived it was 2000 years ago.

Is that the point when in your view fiction becomes non-fiction?

I can only deal with what you have offered, and the gospels are of unknown authorship, written long after the events, and are simply unevidenced hearsay, beyond an historical Jesus and a crucifixion, none of it can be independently verified.