RE: The Bible is the claim, not the evidence
December 11, 2013 at 4:54 pm
(This post was last modified: December 11, 2013 at 5:09 pm by Simon Moon.)
(December 11, 2013 at 2:19 pm)orangebox21 Wrote: Biblical Christians believe the Bible to be truth. So when asked what the truth is, as you have stated, we use scripture.
How do you know the Bible is the truth?
Quote: The other reason (speaking for myself) I do this is because when I quote the Bible I am speaking upon the authority of His Word. If I were to give you my own thoughts and perspectives I come upon my own authority. If you are looking for something outside of scripture to prove the inherrancy of scripture (or a proof that God exists) one still has to look to scripture to discuss it.
How do you know the Bible is 'his word'?
It is provably errant.
Quote:That being said from a non-biblical theist perspective (and not using scripture) I would say that creation (namely the earth and all the plants, animals, people, etc) is my evidence for the existence of God.
Existence is evidence for existence. If you want to claim there was a creator involved, you have to provide demonstrable evidence.
Quote:I realize atheists reject creation because it speaks to a creator and they don't believe in one.
Atheists reject creation because there is insufficient evidence, reasoned argument and valid/sound logic to support the claim. The same reason we don't believe in the existence of gods.
Quote:So the natural question then arises: Where did we come from?
We as humans came from more ancient lifeforms. This can be demonstrated by mountains of evidence.
But even if we did not have an answer, that does not offer a shred of evidence that a god was involved.
You are appealing to fallacy of argument from ignorance. In effect what you are doing is putting your own ignorance on a pedestal and labeling it 'God'.
Quote:If we were created then we believe in a creator. If we don't believe in a creator we look for another explanation.
Please provide evidence that we were created.
You seem a little confused with the scientific method in general. Scientists do not start from the position that a god does not exist, then try to come up with an explanation to explain the existence of humans or the universe without a creator. They go where the evidence takes them.
Quote:My evidence through creation is that God has given the creation as an evidence/witness for Himself.
Some of us care whether our beliefs are true, or at least likely to be true. The single best way to test whether a claim is true or not is by using demonstrable evidence, reasoned argument and valid/sound argument.
How would you go about testing to see of your claims are true or not? How would your methods be different or be the same as testing whether Hinduism, Islam, Sikhism, Zoroastrianism are true?
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.


