• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Evidence for the Bible / God[W:14]

Ben K. said:
Blame the OP then. Where can this discussion possibly go given the posed question?
Click to expand...

What's wrong with the OP?


Evidence for the Bible / God

Critics claim there is no evidence for God or the Bible / New Testament. Many scholars have been refuting that idea for centuries, noting archaeological evidence, fulfilled Messianic prophecies, and so on.

This thread is for debate on those issues.
Click to expand...

That it invites intelligent discussion/debate between us is evident, after all those in academia are still discussing it.

Obviously, what this thread doesn't need are knee-jerk ignorant comments that state nothing else but one's own personal opinion. Heck, if that could pass as a debate material, I could simply state that, "all who don't believe in the Bible are morons", and leave it at that.

Personal opinion are worth squat in a debate or serious discussion unless you can support or prove your point with credible supporting materials from credible sources.
 
Cable said:
The Bible IS evidence.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't evidence. Are you serisouly telling me "And God said let there be light" is ACTUAL evidence? Gimme a break.

If I write a fictional story and it takes place in New York City, the fact my FICTIONAL story took place in a REAL city does not make it evidence nor does it make it non-fiction.

It is archeological evidence in itself. So that one was easy to pick off.
Click to expand...

Read my remark above. Something fictional written in a book that took place in a real place does not automatically make it factual.

What is it evidence of? Gods interactions with humanity over time. Two down.
Click to expand...

Sorry, not two down. If I write in a book factual places and put non-fiction items in there, that isn't evidence. Which is what you are doing now. You are automatically assuming the bible is factual because it has (possibly) factual places. I just showed you an example of a book having fictional items in a factual place doesn't make it non-fiction.

The Bible is archeological evidence of Gods interaction with humanity. These are easily observable facts.
Click to expand...

No, they aren't FACTS, they are opinions. Can you honestly prove (without using the bible) that it wasn't mutliple Gods or a different God? No, you cannot. You are first making the ASSUMPTION the bible is complete 100% fact and then trying to use that as your evidence.

That would be like me claiming Lord of the Rings is a factual book and orcs and hobbits exist because I cite the Lord of The Rings as my evidence. You are talking yourself into circles.
 
TheNextEra said:
There are hundreds of people that think Elvis Presley is still alive as well. Does that mean that Elvis is alive then? Afterall Hundreds have seen him.
Click to expand...

There's rumours too that Jesus Christ continued to live for a longer period of time, and had settled in America to teach a new Gospel.


I gave you one serious investigative report by Simon Greenleaf, a credible co-founder of Harvard Law School, concerning the Resurrection of Christ.

That's just one investigative quest regarding Jesus. Another one would be by journalist, Lee Strobel who wrote "A Case for Christ" and ended up becoming a believer!

Strobel received a journalism degree from University of Missouri and a Master of Studies in Law degree from Yale Law School,[5] becoming a journalist for The Chicago Tribune and other newspapers for 14 years. He states that he was an atheist and then began investigating the Biblical claims about Christ after his wife's conversion. As a result of his investigation, he became a Christian.[6][7]
Click to expand...
Lee Strobel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Has anyone done any serious investigative finding regarding Elvis?
Can you cite your source.


Really? So that's your excuse? Technology? Um before we had techonology we had witnesses of events come up with different accounts.
Click to expand...

I'm not using technology as an excuse! What are you one about? Read and understand. I'm stating a simple fact

I'm saying you can't compare the people then - who'd had their oral tradition as part of their everyday lives - to the current generation who rely so much on hi-tech for one thing. Ancient people had used memorization as a way of life. It was essential since it's a major part of their culture! Therefore, that part of their brain was highly used and exercised!

That last statement is corroborated by science, btw. Thus we are urged to exercise our brains!

Yet you compare them to today's generation who can't even do simple multiplication by memory (like I was taught) without consulting their calculators, or can't even be relied upon to do some simple spelling correctly (without the aid of any gadgets)!
 
TheNextEra said:
No, it isn't evidence. Are you serisouly telling me "And God said let there be light" is ACTUAL evidence? Gimme a break.

If I write a fictional story and it takes place in New York City, the fact my FICTIONAL story took place in a REAL city does not make it evidence nor does it make it non-fiction.
Read my remark above. Something fictional written in a book that took place in a real place does not automatically make it factual.
Sorry, not two down. If I write in a book factual places and put non-fiction items in there, that isn't evidence. Which is what you are doing now. You are automatically assuming the bible is factual because it has (possibly) factual places. I just showed you an example of a book having fictional items in a factual place doesn't make it non-fiction.
No, they aren't FACTS, they are opinions. Can you honestly prove (without using the bible) that it wasn't mutliple Gods or a different God? No, you cannot. You are first making the ASSUMPTION the bible is complete 100% fact and then trying to use that as your evidence.
That would be like me claiming Lord of the Rings is a factual book and orcs and hobbits exist because I cite the Lord of The Rings as my evidence. You are talking yourself into circles.
Click to expand...

You have made the assumption that I am using the Bible to prove itselft and God. I did not.
The OP statement was: "Critics claim there is no evidence for God or the Bible"

My statements remain factual evidence. The Bible itself is actual archeological evidence and it attests to Gods relationship with humanity over time. Whether you believe the words to be true or not is a secondary matter. That fact that it exists is indisputable, and the fact that it tells the story of God and his relationship to man over time is indisputable. It's that simple.
 
Cable said:
You have made the assumption that I am using the Bible to prove itselft and God. I did not.
The OP statement was: "Critics claim there is no evidence for God or the Bible"

My statements remain factual evidence. The Bible itself is actual archeological evidence and it attests to Gods relationship with humanity over time. Whether you believe the words to be true or not is a secondary matter. That fact that it exists is indisputable, and the fact that it tells the story of God and his relationship to man over time is indisputable. It's that simple.
Click to expand...

I do not think you udnerstand what FACT means. You have FAITH that it attests to Gods relationship with man, but the FACT is that the stories in the bible were written by MAN. Yes, the COULD have been written with divine influence, however, that is not able to be proven as FACT. You have FAITH that the stories are all true. Yes, the bible exists and that is FACT. What is in the bible is not proven to be FACT. There are places in the bible that possibly have been found which would mean they were real places, but the stories themselves have not been proven as FACT.

Please learn the difference between FACT and FAITH.
 
TheNextEra said:
I do not think you udnerstand what FACT means. You have FAITH that it attests to Gods relationship with man, but the FACT is that the stories in the bible were written by MAN. Yes, the COULD have been written with divine influence, however, that is not able to be proven as FACT. Yes, the bible exists and that is FACT. What is in the bible is not proven to be FACT. There are places in the bible that possibly have been found which would mean they were real places, but the stories themselves have not been proven as FACT.

Please learn the difference between FACT and FAITH.
Click to expand...

You seem to be misunderstanding what I am saying. It is a FACT that the Bible describes the relationship of God with humanity over time. This is a fact, in that this is what the content of the Bible conveys. I think the part you trip over is whether one believes the contents to be true or not. This is a matter of faith and up to the individual based on their own personal understanding of the information there. You can believe it to be true or not, but you can't say it isn't the written story of God's relationship with humanity. The Bible and it's contents are materially a matter of fact. They do exist.

To give an example, an atheist would dismiss the information contained in the Bible as fiction out of hand because they don't believe in a God. But they can't dismiss the bible as an archeological record, which tells the story it tells. It is a verifiable old document written by many authors over time, dating back thousands of years. This is simple fact, and is established as well as we can establish any historical fact. ....Better than most actually.
 
Cable said:
But they can't dismiss the bible as an archeological record, which tells the story it tells. It is a verifiable old document written by many authors over time, dating back thousands of years. This is simple fact, and is established as well as we can establish any historical fact. ....Better than most actually.
Click to expand...

Not EVERY story in the bible can be traced to an archeological record AS FACT and that is my point. Does the bible exist? of course we see it. Is it proof of God? No, it isn't.
 
The only necessary proof of God is a simple proof from philosophy. Every contingent thing needs a cause to be in existence, and that uncaused cause is that what we call God.
 
phattonez said:
The only necessary proof of God is a simple proof from philosophy. Every contingent thing needs a cause to be in existence, and that uncaused cause is that what we call God.
Click to expand...

Who or what created God?
 
TheNextEra said:
Not EVERY story in the bible can be traced to an archeological record AS FACT and that is my point. Does the bible exist? of course we see it. Is it proof of God? No, it isn't.
Click to expand...

If you're going to argue that not EVERY story in the Bible can be traced to archeological fact.....of course you'd be partly right.
You think they'd ever find the whale that swallowed Jonah? :mrgreen:


What other ancient religious book ever existed, or still exists that hold as many confirmed archeological facts as the Bible?
 
TheNextEra said:
That would be like me claiming Lord of the Rings is a factual book and orcs and hobbits exist because I cite the Lord of The Rings as my evidence. You are talking yourself into circles.
Click to expand...


Even if you claim it to be factual, you'd be laughed at. That's only your word. And what's your credential to make us take your word into consideration?

The Lord of the Rings is a book of fiction. Period.

The author would've said otherwise if it's not....and who's the one who should know that it's fiction if it's not the one who created it?
 
TheNextEra said:
Not EVERY story in the bible can be traced to an archeological record AS FACT and that is my point. Does the bible exist? of course we see it. Is it proof of God? No, it isn't.
Click to expand...

Btw, it's not only archeology that props up the Bible, you know.

What about the prophecies by numerous prophets that came true decades or even centuries after they've been prophesied?
 
But everything that is, must have a cause, or the universe could have just popped into existence in a big "Bang!" What caused God?
 
tosca1 said:
Btw, it's not only archeology that props up the Bible, you know.

What about the prophecies by numerous prophets that came true decades or even centuries after they've been prophesied?
Click to expand...

The bible was edited to fit.
 
Logicman said:
Evidence for the Bible / God

Critics claim there is no evidence for God or the Bible / New Testament. Many scholars have been refuting that idea for centuries, noting archaeological evidence, fulfilled Messianic prophecies, and so on.

This thread is for debate on those issues.
Click to expand...
I like the Bible and tend to read it without the supernatural context. For me, it's a really good guide to understanding the beginnings of Middle Eastern/European civilization.
 
tosca1 said:
Btw, it's not only archeology that props up the Bible, you know.

What about the prophecies by numerous prophets that came true decades or even centuries after they've been prophesied?
Click to expand...
which ones? what prophecy was made when was it made and when did it come true and how do you know it was made when it was said it was made or that it couldn't of been a generic prophecy that could cover a lot of different things that may or may not have happened.
 
phattonez said:
The only necessary proof of God is a simple proof from philosophy. Every contingent thing needs a cause to be in existence, and that uncaused cause is that what we call God.
Click to expand...

Ok can you prove it's the Christian god or disprove that multiple Gods are at work? No, you can't.
 
I believe in a higher power but to say I will burn in Hell because I disagree with your God or say he is petty it's pretty dumb and is not very godlike
 
Logicman said:
Evidence for the Bible / God

Critics claim there is no evidence for God or the Bible / New Testament. Many scholars have been refuting that idea for centuries, noting archaeological evidence, fulfilled Messianic prophecies, and so on.

This thread is for debate on those issues.
Click to expand...

Name one reputable scholar that says there is evidence for the Christian god. To be reputable, he has to at least teach at a university. If you find someone, then link me to their publications that are 'evidence' that a god exists.
 
Manc Skipper said:
But everything that is, must have a cause, or the universe could have just popped into existence in a big "Bang!" What caused God?
Click to expand...

No, everything that is contingent has a cause. By definition God is not contingent. He is the uncaused cause.
 
Slyhunter said:
Prove it.
Nothing can be is unless it was created by something else.
Click to expand...

Thus there must be an original cause, that original cause is God.
 
TheNextEra said:
Ok can you prove it's the Christian god or disprove that multiple Gods are at work? No, you can't.
Click to expand...

Multiple gods is inconsistent with the idea of an uncaused cause.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom