I am an orthodox Christian, ask me a question!

[Jon Paul]

There is no special kind of evidence. Evidence is something that is detectable and study-able material that separates reality from fantasy.

No. Evidence is, in it's broadest sense, that which makes another thing evident, that which testifies to the truth of a given thing. But what exactly does do so (testify/make evident the truth of a thing) differs subjectively. And there are many kinds of evidence and knowledge, not just one kind.

It works rather well but not when it comes to religion. Evidence does not reside in books or scriptures. Your so called "god" is supposedly outside all known detection methods that also include our natural senses like sight, sound and touch. Which spark of doubts because there is nothing to confirm he/it's existence and so is reasonably rejected. God is only supported by an unreliable source that is superstition. Faith alone is all you have for this being. People also doubt and reject because it's easy to imagine an all powerful being. You cannot disprove it just as you cannot disprove the flying spaghetti monster. Evidence is vital for progress in establishing a beings existence. Something we can detect and study and not just from some book or strange feelings.

Sure, God in himself is outside our direct detection ability, like if I see some footprints in the snow and no animal, the animal is outside my direct detection ability. That doesn't mean there are no ways to know that the animal exists. You can still evaluate the aposteriori evidence that the animal was here, like you can evaluate the aposteriori evidence that God created the universe.

---

So this Bible, inspired word of God meant for the salvation of all mankind cannot be understood correctly save for those who even know what the fuk patristics is and some long dead catholic dudes?

It can certainly be understood, but not if errorneous interpretations are being forwarded. That is why we have priests who are at the disposal of the people to provide hermeneutically and exegetically correct understanding of the bible.

Chatpilot's and my interpretations of "God's Word" are just as valid as yours and those long dead catholic dude's.

This is a protestant notion. Your interpretations are certainly not as valid as the interpretations of the fathers. Just like mine isn't as valid. You have not spent your life studying the texts in their original translations, and understanding them in the light of proper exegesis and hermeneutics. And I haven't either, which is why I turn to those who have. For one, you only have access to English versions, translated a thousand times, for another, you don't have any engagement to spend your life studying the bible and understanding it.

I think Jon equates 'correct interpretation' with 'Jon's interpretation'.

I'd like to know why is it Jon deems the interpretations of long dead catholics the only 'correct' one.

My interpretations are irrelevant and certainly not as valid as those of the Church Fathers.

You think a personal God would inspire his words to be written to/for his special creation only to be correctly understood by a few catholics and then many years later only by those who research the writings of those dudes? If the bible were inspired to be written for the salvation of all mankind should it not be easily understood by all mankind?

Just "a few people"? The Catholic Church together with the Orthodox is the biggest religion in the world, representing 1.6 billion people.

---

Jon it seems that no matter what you are shown you seem to ignore what is in the scriptures and try to interpret it to fit your worldview (apologetics).So I will graciously bow out of this discussion.

No, it seems that you are expecting me to accept your (straw man) interpretation of the scriptures, rather than accepting the interpretations of the Church Fathers of the very religion I have said I am a member of since the start.

And you also expect me to accept your view of the Bible as a "scientific text", a notion I have rejected from the beginning. It is a book concerned with the relationship between God and Man, and so it's focus is inherently spiritual.