Inexplicable and unexplained possession phenomenon

[Aibao]

On 4/9/2022 at 4:57 AM, Moonobserver said:

If the Christian Bible says that one sin is enough to send someone to hell, then it's fair to assume that one discrepancy is enough to invalidate the Christian Bible. And the Christian Bible is riddled with discrepancies.

Wow, it calmed me somehow to say that it only takes 1 sin. This means that there is no need to even try to find out the truth, I have been deleted for a long time.
The Bible is full of discrepancies - that's the problem, because what if the discrepancies can be explained ?:

Gerasa or Gadara? Clarification of the contradiction:

https://apologeticspress.org/did-jesus-go-to-gerasa-or-gadara-1434/

 

Here is how apologists explain contradictions in the Bible:

https://apologeticspress.org/bible-contradictionsare-they-real-5249/

 

Explanation of Mark's erroneously cited prophecy:

https://defendinginerrancy.com/bible-solutions/Mark_1.2.php

Jesus' error explained:

https://defendinginerrancy.com/bible-solutions/Mark_2.26.php

 

A  page that explains the contradictions by not understanding the text:

http://www.ovrlnd.com/Apologetics/101contradictions.html

 

These are just some of the many explanations I have come across on the Internet.
I am still wondering if if we understood the Bible, everything would be clear and consistent for us? If we could read in the original languages? There are people who say that the Bible read in Greek is drastically different than the Bible in English (and Polish in my case).

[Aibao]

On 4/9/2022 at 1:00 PM, walterpthefirst said:

Aibao,

 

You say that you need to be 100% certain, meaning that you want to have no doubts about hell, god, salvation and the Bible.

 

But what does the Bible itself say about having no doubts and being 100% certain?   Well, I'll tell you.

 

When the prophet Elijah was in the wilderness he doubted god and claimed that he was the only Israelite who didn't worship Baal.  

God told the prophet Moses to speak to a rock so that water for the Israelites would gush out of it, but Moses doubted what god said and instead struck the rock.

John the Baptist, the greatest prophet ever born of a woman had doubts that Jesus was the one sent by god and so he sent his followers to ask Jesus, 'Are you the one?'

The apostle Peter, the rock chosen by Jesus to build the church, had doubts when Jesus told him to walk on the waters of the Sea of Galilee.

Jesus himself, god incarnated in the flesh of a man, had doubts in the garden of Gethsemane, as recorded in the Gospels.

And how many instances of doubt among the disciples do we read in the Gospels? 

How many other characters in the Bible struggled with doubt?

Who, if anyone, had perfect faith and no doubts at all? 

 

 

So, are you trying to do what all these people could not do, Aibao? 

 

To be 100% certain and to have no doubts whatsoever?

 

Given what the Bible says about doubt, are you trying to have NO doubts?

 

 

 

Please answer the three questions above and get back to me.

 

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, that's right - Moses, Elijah, and others had their doubts. The problem is that sooner or later their doubts were dispelled because God either spoke or fulfilled what He had promised. And in my case it is not so - I do not hear God's voice telling me: Here I - I exist! or: Why are you persecuting me? as he appeared to Paul. Unless I can take the dreams of hell as warnings from God, or that he talks to me through YouTube videos, or because religious sites that were only in languages I do not understand are suddenly available in my language too - but what I have certainty that it is God who speaks to me through this and that it is not an effect of synchronicity or some coincidence?

 

 

I don't want to try to do the impossible, I want to learn enough not to go to bed fearing God and hell or get up in the morning with the same fear.

 

Ok, I already know that 100% certainty is impossible. I want to have the correct belief, the correct worldview, anyway. Just as you have some certainty that Christianity is false - that's what I mean - why is that certain?

 

Yes, I try not to have any doubts - but I already know that it is impossible. So I try to gain knowledge of the arguments of Christians and the arguments of atheists or others with opposing views.I left the church because of the people and the horror and hypocrisy I learned from the sermons. But I never looked at the evidence for Christianity. I want someone who has already done all of this to point out to me the errors in this evidence, if any. That's why I previously published arguments from this pastor's or preacher's book, I'm just afraid that it may be true, that this eligia with its hell and God may be true. Even an apologist Frank Turek claims that the fact that you do not see any arguments for the existence of God because you have withdrawn from religion does not mean that God does not exist - you did not want to believe that God gave you what you wanted (so it seems to you that God did not exist. ma, because he left you according to your wishes), but if you wanted to come back, God will come to you again and you will see the evidence ... I can't seem to be able to distinguish absurdity from the logic of reality, the truth of the falsehood of fantasy - I don't know. And my answer to everything today is: I don't know.

[walterpthefirst]

Yes, that's right - Moses, Elijah, and others had their doubts. The problem is that sooner or later their doubts were dispelled because God either spoke or fulfilled what He had promised. And in my case it is not so - I do not hear God's voice telling me: Here I - I exist! or: Why are you persecuting me? as he appeared to Paul. Unless I can take the dreams of hell as warnings from God, or that he talks to me through YouTube videos, or because religious sites that were only in languages I do not understand are suddenly available in my language too - but what I have certainty that it is God who speaks to me through this and that it is not an effect of synchronicity or some coincidence?

 

 

I don't want to try to do the impossible, I want to learn enough not to go to bed fearing God and hell or get up in the morning with the same fear.

 

Ok, I already know that 100% certainty is impossible. I want to have the correct belief, the correct worldview, anyway. Just as you have some certainty that Christianity is false - that's what I mean - why is that certain?

 

I do not claim anything much with 100% certainty, Aibiao.  For those other members who are certain, you'll have to ask them.  I cannot speak for them.  But I am persuaded by the available evidence that Christianity is false.  (more about that below.)

 

 

Yes, I try not to have any doubts - but I already know that it is impossible. So I try to gain knowledge of the arguments of Christians and the arguments of atheists or others with opposing views.I left the church because of the people and the horror and hypocrisy I learned from the sermons. But I never looked at the evidence for Christianity. I want someone who has already done all of this to point out to me the errors in this evidence, if any. That's why I previously published arguments from this pastor's or preacher's book, I'm just afraid that it may be true, that this eligia with its hell and God may be true. Even an apologist Frank Turek claims that the fact that you do not see any arguments for the existence of God because you have withdrawn from religion does not mean that God does not exist - you did not want to believe that God gave you what you wanted (so it seems to you that God did not exist. ma, because he left you according to your wishes), but if you wanted to come back, God will come to you again and you will see the evidence ... I can't seem to be able to distinguish absurdity from the logic of reality, the truth of the falsehood of fantasy - I don't know. And my answer to everything today is: I don't know.

 

 

Ok then Aibao, if you want to be more certain by knowledge, how do you propose to do that when much of the Bible must be believed by faith?

 

Faith and knowledge are two irreconcilable opposites.

 

If you know something by evidence then you do not need to have faith about it.

 

Hebrews 11 : 1 - 3

 

1 Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. 

2 This is what the ancients were commended for.

3 By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.

 

 

I cannot reconcile what I know through evidence (that humans evolved) with what the Bible tells me to accept by faith (that we all descended from Adam and Eve).

I cannot reconcile what I know through evidence (that the universe is 13.7 billion years old) with what I must accept by faith (that the universe was created in 6 days).

I cannot reconcile what I know through evidence (that there was no global flood) with what I must accept through faith (that a global flood left only 8 survivors).

 

These are just three reasons why I am persuaded that Christianity is false.  Because what I know through evidence cannot be reconciled with what I am expected to believe by faith.

 

Can you reconcile these things without resorting to faith?

 

If so, why are you using faith when you said you want to be more certain by using knowledge?

 

You can't have it both ways.

 

Which is it?

 

Faith or knowledge?

 

 

Walter.

[Wertbag]

11 hours ago, Aibao said:

Just as you have some certainty that Christianity is false - that's what I mean - why is that certain?

Personally the glaring hole in Christianity is divine hiddenness.  Its one of the most simple points, if Christians wish to claim God wants a relationship with everyone, and is all-powerful, then He would have it.  He doesn't, so either He can't or won't, either way is a direct conflict with the claim being made.

The bible tries to claim that God showed Himself in many ways (burning bush, column of fire, voice from the sky or as an old man), gave direct communication (Paul's roadside visitation) or sent angels to communicate on His behalf.  It is claimed Elijah could call fire from the sky to prove God and yet for thousands of years since the bible was written we have seen nothing like that.  He simply is not here and makes no attempt to show Himself or communicate to us.  How do you have a relationship with someone you can't see, touch, feel or even talk to?

Tens of thousands of ex-Christians have searched with open heart for God, devoting their lives to the church and loving God completely.  If God wanted people to believe and follow Him, all of those people would have given anything to know Him.

All of the philosophy and apologetics are valueless if you can't get over the first hurdle of actually showing God exists.  Its all just empty sophistry until the most fundamental claims can be shown to have a basis in reality.

[Astreja]

Aibao, stop reading Christian apologetics, at least for a couple of months.  The authors are biased towards Christianity and have no reason to be accurate.  They are probably the cause of the pain you are feeling, and until you push them aside the pain will continue.

[walterpthefirst]

Yes, that's right - Moses, Elijah, and others had their doubts. The problem is that sooner or later their doubts were dispelled because God either spoke or fulfilled what He had promised. And in my case it is not so - I do not hear God's voice telling me: Here I - I exist! or: Why are you persecuting me? as he appeared to Paul. Unless I can take the dreams of hell as warnings from God, or that he talks to me through YouTube videos, or because religious sites that were only in languages I do not understand are suddenly available in my language too - but what I have certainty that it is God who speaks to me through this and that it is not an effect of synchronicity or some coincidence?

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Here you are missing the point, Aibao.

 

You clearly said that you wanted to be 100% certain.

 

But even if Moses and the others had their doubts dispelled by god, none of these people ever attained 100% certainty.

 

Their doubts over specific things and events and issues may have been dispelled, but that's not the same as achieving a state of 100% certainty.

 

My point still stands and I still reckon that you are setting an impossible task for yourself. 

 

It's my hope that you will come to realize that you cannot be 100% certain about the things that trouble you.

 

When that happens you will be able to ask yourself, 'Why am I looking for something that can never be found?'

 

 

Walter.

 

[Aibao]

Thanks to everyone for the answers.

On 11.04.2022 at 09:53, walterpthefirst said:

 

 

Czy możesz pogodzić te rzeczy bez uciekania się do wiary?

 

Jeśli tak, to dlaczego używasz wiary, kiedy powiedziałeś, że chcesz być bardziej pewny, korzystając z wiedzy?

 

Nie możesz mieć tego w obie strony.

 

Który to jest?

 

Wiara czy wiedza?

 

 

Waltera.

It is true that faith and knowledge are different things, but it seems that according to Christianity faith = knowledge, referring to Hebrews where Paul says that even unbelievers observe evidence of God's existence in the world around them .... I wonder why in this religion a person can get so lost...

[Aibao]

W dniu 4/11/2022 o 11:32 Wertbag powiedział:

Osobiście rażącą dziurą w chrześcijaństwie jest boska skrytość. To jeden z najprostszych punktów, jeśli chrześcijanie chcą twierdzić, że Bóg chce relacji ze wszystkimi i jest wszechmocny, to On by to miał. On tego nie robi, więc albo nie może, albo nie chce, tak czy inaczej jest to bezpośredni konflikt z wysuwanym twierdzeniem.

Biblia stara się twierdzić, że Bóg objawiał się na wiele sposobów (palący się krzak, kolumna ognia, głos z nieba lub jako starzec), dawał bezpośrednią komunikację (nawiedzenie przydrożne Pawła) lub wysyłał anioły, aby porozumiewały się w Jego imieniu. Twierdzi się, że Eliasz mógł przywołać ogień z nieba, aby udowodnić Boga, a jednak przez tysiące lat od napisania Biblii nie widzieliśmy niczego takiego. Po prostu nie ma Go tutaj i nie próbuje się nam pokazać ani się z nami komunikować. Jak nawiązać relację z kimś, kogo nie możesz zobaczyć, dotknąć, poczuć, a nawet z kim nie porozmawiać?

Dziesiątki tysięcy byłych chrześcijan z otwartym sercem szukało Boga, poświęcając swoje życie kościołowi i całkowicie kochając Boga. Gdyby Bóg chciał, aby ludzie wierzyli w Niego i podążali za Nim, wszyscy ci ludzie daliby wszystko, aby Go poznać.

Cała filozofia i apologetyka są bezwartościowe, jeśli nie możesz pokonać pierwszej przeszkody polegającej na wykazaniu, że Bóg istnieje. To wszystko jest tylko pustą sofistyką, dopóki nie zostanie wykazane, że najbardziej fundamentalne twierdzenia mają podstawę w rzeczywistości.

yes, it is strange, because it actually looks like that God is hiding, but in my church they said that God works through circumstances and various situations and through other people ... then, if so, it must mean that man is like a puppet that is used by God, which is contrary to free will - but okay, apologists probably have an explanation ... and so on and on and on....

[Aibao]

On 11.04.2022 at 16:20, Astreja said:

Aibao,  przestań czytać chrześcijańską apologetykę , przynajmniej na kilka miesięcy.   Autorzy są stronniczy w stosunku do chrześcijaństwa i nie mają powodu, by być dokładnym. Prawdopodobnie są  przyczyną  bólu, który odczuwasz, i dopóki nie odepchniesz ich na bok, ból będzie trwał.

thank you for this remark - just, sometimes I wonder if Christians consider atheism at all? although they refer to scientific research, e.g. for proof of prayer, healing ...
But yes, solving all of this contributes to my pain, I would like to take a break from it soon, but I still have topics to post on the forum here, however I want to explore the other side more, which is the arguments against religion. Hope to finally do it soon

[walterpthefirst]

6 hours ago, Aibao said:

Thanks to everyone for the answers.

It is true that faith and knowledge are different things, but it seems that according to Christianity faith = knowledge, referring to Hebrews where Paul says that even unbelievers observe evidence of God's existence in the world around them .... I wonder why in this religion a person can get so lost...

 

Aibao,

 

Please consider this. 

 

According to Islam faith = knowledge and Muslims claim that even unbelievers observe evidence of god's existence in the world around them.  Hindus also know things by faith and they also proclaim that unbelievers see the evidence of the Hindu gods in the world around them.  Sikhs also know things by faith.  Many, many people from all kinds of religions know things by faith.

 

But how can they all be true, seeing as they all contradict each other?  How can Jesus have created all things if Allah created all things?  And so on.  The only sensible conclusion is that ALL religions are as unreliable as each other.  Instead, we must look at what non-religious knowledge is true for everyone, regardless of what they believe.

 

So, here is the question I would like you to answer please.

 

What secular, agnostic body of knowledge is fundamentally true for everyone, regardless of their religion?

 

When you have the answer you will see that it applies to everyone, everywhere and to all things, not just on Earth, but everywhere in the universe.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

[walterpthefirst]

6 hours ago, Aibao said:

yes, it is strange, because it actually looks like that God is hiding, but in my church they said that God works through circumstances and various situations and through other people ... then, if so, it must mean that man is like a puppet that is used by God, which is contrary to free will - but okay, apologists probably have an explanation ... and so on and on and on....

 

Or, there's a simpler explanation.

 

God isn't working through circumstances, various situations and other people.

 

It's just that people of faith want to believe that he is.

 

It's that simple.

 

No need to read complex apologetic arguments.

 

People will see what they want to see, even if it's not actually there.

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

6 hours ago, Aibao said:

thank you for this remark - just, sometimes I wonder if Christians consider atheism at all? although they refer to scientific research, e.g. for proof of prayer, healing ...
But yes, solving all of this contributes to my pain, I would like to take a break from it soon, but I still have topics to post on the forum here, however I want to explore the other side more, which is the arguments against religion. Hope to finally do it soon

 

Aibao,

 

Science is a secular and agnostic method of understanding the physical world.  It's not within the remit of science to say anything about matters of religion, faith or theology.  Therefore, people who claim that it proves something about god are doing so by using their faith.  But faith has no place in science.  So, they are wrongfully misusing science to satisfy what they feel must be true.

 

Furthermore, it's not just Christians who misuse science in this way.  Muslims do it and so do Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and others.  Which prompts the searching question, 'How can people of different and contradicting religions all see science as confirming and proving their particular beliefs?'  The answer is, of course, that each person sees what they want through the eyes of their faith and not what's actually there.

 

Religious faith originates in the feelings and emotions of believers.  It causes them to see what they want, but science tells us what's actually there.  What's real.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

[◊ Krowb ◊]

16 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

People will see what they want to see, even if it's not actually there.

Paging @alreadyGone - this is one of your oft-repeated and well made points.

[Aibao]

On 4/17/2022 at 11:31 PM, walterpthefirst said:

 

 

According to Islam faith = knowledge and Muslims claim that even unbelievers observe evidence of god's existence in the world around them.  Hindus also know things by faith and they also proclaim that unbelievers see the evidence of the Hindu gods in the world around them.  Sikhs also know things by faith.  Many, many people from all kinds of religions know things by faith.

 

But how can they all be true, seeing as they all contradict each other?  How can Jesus have created all things if Allah created all things?  And so on.  The only sensible conclusion is that ALL religions are as unreliable as each other.  Instead, we must look at what non-religious knowledge is true for everyone, regardless of what they believe.

 

 

 

Exactly, how do you know which religion is correct? And since religions claim such rights, I began to look for answers on a religious website with curiosity about how the author had come out of such a doubt. The author answers the question about the certainty of the existence of the biblical God. He deals only briefly with the problems of prophecies and scientific absurdities in other religions, which, in his opinion, proves their falsehood. Please, if someone has read the Bible carefully and knows science (I have little knowledge of scientific topics), let him give scientific absurdities in the Bible and unfulfilled or false prophecies, because I want to check if the author is right here sometimes:

 

 

 

"If God exists, how can we know what religion properly describes Him?
If God is so mysterious, how can we know anything about him? Through the Bible? How do we know that the Bible and not the Koran or the Vedha books, for example, are the words of God? (or the Bible if you believe in any of the other two books). Considering the cruelties that have been made in the name of God, how do we know that not all religions are made by Satan?

The God of the Koran and Hindu Vedas are Gods restricted to the time and space dimensions of this universe and, therefore, are logically impossible (check out some of your own proofs). In addition, most of these books contain scientific absurdities. All the so-called holy books base their claim of authority on the basis of fulfilled prophecy. Most of these prophecies are either vague or conditional, making them essentially untestable. The highest percentage of prophecy fulfillment, other than the Bible is 50%, with many other prophecies proven to be false. In contrast, the Bible names people, places and dates in remarkable detail, with 2,000 of the nearly 2,500 prophecies already fulfilled, and none provably false. The remaining prophecies are reserved for the end-times, which have yet to have happened.

I absolutely agree with atheists who say that many atrocious things have been done in the name of God, even in the name of Christianity. However, these atrocities were not perpetrated by God, but by evil human beings. Remember the words of Jesus:

"Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'" (Matthew 7:22-23)

Not all who claim the name of Jesus are actually His disciples. My guess is that in even the best of Christian churches only about half of the people truly are Christians. Christianity should be judged on the basis of what Jesus said and did, not on the basis of what people do who merely claim to be Christians."

 

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/nogod.html#contact

 

 

 

On 4/17/2022 at 11:31 PM, walterpthefirst said:

 

 

So, here is the question I would like you to answer please.

 

What secular, agnostic body of knowledge is fundamentally true for everyone, regardless of their religion?

 

When you have the answer you will see that it applies to everyone, everywhere and to all things, not just on Earth, but everywhere in the universe.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

Answering your question (it will only be my opinion, because everyone may have a different answer, their own opinion on this subject), I would answer that it may be the conviction that some things are good and some are bad, that evil exists. I think religious people, non-believers, and agnostics would agree with that. And religion gives an answer to this question: it is evil, because people are evil and Satan rules the world, and lay people give the answer to this question: evil is because people are brought up differently, have traumas or damaged brains, and agnostics also have their own answer: it is evil, because maybe people are evil and selfish, maybe there is some invisible force that prompts them to evil, maybe people suffer trauma that leads them to revenge against others or other evil, maybe they have brain diseases, maybe there is some a god who has a purpose in this. But which answer is true?

 

 

 

[Aibao]

On 4/17/2022 at 11:44 PM, walterpthefirst said:

 

Aibao,

 

Science is a secular and agnostic method of understanding the physical world.  It's not within the remit of science to say anything about matters of religion, faith or theology.  Therefore, people who claim that it proves something about god are doing so by using their faith.  But faith has no place in science.  So, they are wrongfully misusing science to satisfy what they feel must be true.

 

Furthermore, it's not just Christians who misuse science in this way.  Muslims do it and so do Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and others.  Which prompts the searching question, 'How can people of different and contradicting religions all see science as confirming and proving their particular beliefs?'  The answer is, of course, that each person sees what they want through the eyes of their faith and not what's actually there.

 

Religious faith originates in the feelings and emotions of believers.  It causes them to see what they want, but science tells us what's actually there.  What's real.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

Actually, religious people say that science responds to the existence of God - I will post a quote again Here is a quote from the author who thinks that atheists actually have to believe in miracles because physics itself proves the existence of God ...:

"Nobody really believes in God
Love Your God With All Your Mind: The Role of Reason in the Life of the SoulMany atheists tend to stereotype Christians as stupid, uneducated people. However, I personally know dozens of scientists who are Christians, and not only believe in God, but can rationally present evidence for His existence. In our department at the Research Institute of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center we have no atheists - although we have one agnostic. All the other people - 4 M.D.'s, 2 Ph.D.'s, 3 R.N.'s, and the others, with B.S.'s or M.S.'s - are theistic. Christianity specifically calls people to use their brains. As Robert Griffiths (Heinemann prize in mathematical physics) stated:

"If we need an atheist for a debate, I go to the philosophy department. The physics department isn't much use." (17)

It is the atheist who now denies the implications of modern cosmology and physics because they imply the existence of a Creator. Those who believe the Big Bang correctly describes the origin of the universe, must admit that the universe had a beginning in finite time and space. Did it just pop into existence on its own? Did it just happen to have exactly the right physical laws and constants required for life? It is the atheist who must believe in miracles to explain our existence. Therefore, John Gribbin, an atheist physicist has stated:

"The biggest problem with the Big Bang theory of the origin of the universe is philosophical - perhaps even theological - what was there before the bang?" (18)

The primary objection to the Big Bang and its implications is this "God problem," not because of a lack of scientific evidence. Geoffrey Burbidge, astronomer from U.C. San Diego has recognized the implications of the 1992 COBE satellite discoveries, when he complained that his fellow astronomers were rushing off to join, "the First Church of Christ of the Big Bang." (19)

The fact that the evidence in support of the existence of God has increased in recent years is also a problem. According to atheists, science is supposed to get rid of the gaps, so that there is no longer any room for a "god of the gaps." This evidence has convinced some famous atheists to become deists (e.g., Antony Flew) or even Christians (e.g., Frank Tipler)."

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/nogod.html#contact

 

 

I have no idea how to deal with such apologetic answers that I find ..

[Wertbag]

3 minutes ago, Aibao said:

The fact that the evidence in support of the existence of God has increased in recent years is also a problem. According to atheists, science is supposed to get rid of the gaps, so that there is no longer any room for a "god of the gaps."

Good ol' apologetic claims with no support.  What we actually see is God now regulated to the most distant and hard to answer questions (where did life come from and where did the universe come from?).  It is absolutely God of the gaps, the gaps are now so small that it takes astrophysicists to discuss the subject!  Look back a few centuries and we had people claiming God made diseases, plagues, drought...  in the past pregnancy was described as two souls joining, until we got microscopes.

Lightning is no longer Zeus throwing a tantrum.  We no longer pray for good crops, instead taking soil samples and add the required nutrients to make a good harvest.

 

The two questions being claimed as impossible to answer; the big bang (a one time event that happened billions of years ago and billions of light years away) and abiogenesis (an event that happened billions of years ago in an unknown location and environment) are right at the edge of what it is possible to understand.  The correct answer is "we don't know", and due to how incredibly hard these ideas are to test an research, we may never know.  The trick is "I don't know" doesn't equal "God did it".

 

At the end of the day we shouldn't even be arguing over finding vague signs of God in these edges of our knowledge.  God should be readily apparent and willing to communicate, and doing so would make all of these questions irrelevant.

 

17 minutes ago, Aibao said:

must admit that the universe had a beginning in finite time and space

This is a favourite apologetic strawman, the "you believe everything came from nothing" line.  The only ones who actually claim that are theists who say God popped the universe into existance from nothing.  Science says we don't know what was before the big bang, and an infinite universe cannot be ruled out.  Again this is them saying "I don't know" must equal "God did it".

 

27 minutes ago, Aibao said:

In contrast, the Bible names people, places and dates in remarkable detail, with 2,000 of the nearly 2,500 prophecies already fulfilled, and none provably false

Bible prophecy...  I'd love for them to show any prophecy that includes names and dates.  Most are exactly as vague as the other books they are complaining about and Christians have argued amongst themselves for thousands of years as to the meanings of these things.  A great example is Daniel's prophecy of a statue of many metals which was meant to represent different Empires.  What, when, who and why are all pure guesswork.  There is also no agreement on how many prophecies there even are.  Some give lists of 50, 200 or 500, but I don't think I've seen one try to push it as high as 2000 before.  When you start looking at any list of that size, they are really scrapping to find things that can be shoe horned to fit.

 

There are three things to remember with prophecy; did the later author have access to the original so they could make their story fit (for example Mary of Nazareth having to travel multiple weeks to get to Bethlehem, while 8.5 months pregnant, all to tick the prophecy box), does the prophecy actually give specific details that cannot be confused (dates, names, places etc) and is the event one that couldn't have been guessed (if a city is attacked a dozen times and you write that it will be attacked again, its statistics not prophecy).

[walterpthefirst]

 

Answering your question (it will only be my opinion, because everyone may have a different answer, their own opinion on this subject), I would answer that it may be the conviction that some things are good and some are bad, that evil exists. I think religious people, non-believers, and agnostics would agree with that. And religion gives an answer to this question: it is evil, because people are evil and Satan rules the world, and lay people give the answer to this question: evil is because people are brought up differently, have traumas or damaged brains, and agnostics also have their own answer: it is evil, because maybe people are evil and selfish, maybe there is some invisible force that prompts them to evil, maybe people suffer trauma that leads them to revenge against others or other evil, maybe they have brain diseases, maybe there is some a god who has a purpose in this. But which answer is true?

 

You've misunderstood my question, Aibao.

 

I asked you what what secular, agnostic body of knowledge is fundamentally true for everyone regardless of their religion?

 

So, my question has nothing to do with evil, nothing to do with Satan and nothing to do with religion.

 

The answer lies outside of religion.

 

I gave you a clue in my third post on Sunday.

 

Please try again and this time try to exclude religion and think only in secular terms.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

[walterpthefirst]

Aibao,

 

Can you understand what you did when you replied to me?

 

In answer to my post about different religions you wrote... Exactly, how do you know which religion is correct?

 

Then you selected this Christian apologetics site, http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/nogod.html#contact and quoted from it.

 

If you are asking how do we know which religion is correct, why did you go straight to a Christian site for answers?

 

Why not a Muslim site or a Sikh or Hindu or Buddhist one?

 

Why did you believe that a Christian site had the right answers if you don't know which religion is correct?

 

I know exactly why you did that, by the way.

 

But I would like you to understand why you chose Christianity over those other religions.

 

This is my next question for you, Aibao.

 

Do you understand why you always go to Christianity for answers?

 

 

Walter.

[walterpthefirst]

Your choice of the GodandScience.org website is a very bad one, Aibao.

 

There are a number of reasons why this is.  Here are two.

 

1. 

The people running that site wrongly believe that science confirms ONLY Christianity.  This is false.  There are Muslim, Sikh and other religious websites that use exactly the scientific data to claim that their ONLY their religion is true and all others are false.  But science is an agnostic system of thought with no allegiance or linkage to any religion.  That is why there are Buddhist, Muslim and Atheist scientists.  If Science ONLY confirmed Christianity, then how could these scientists from other religions do their scientific work?  Every day they would see ONLY evidence for Christianity and no evidence for Islam or Buddhism.  

 

Here is an example of what I mean.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electroweak_interaction

 

Sheldon Glashow, Abdus Salam, and Steven Weinberg were awarded the 1979 Nobel Prize in Physics for their contributions to the unification of the weak and electromagnetic interaction between elementary particles, known as the Weinberg–Salam theory.

 

Glashow came from an orthodox Jewish background, Salaam was a Muslim and Weinberg was an Atheist.  The discipline of science placed no religious or theological burden upon them.  They were free to believe whatever they wanted.  That's because science is non-religious and has nothing to say about anything supernatural at all.

 

 

2.

The people running your Christian apologetic site do not understand how science works.   Look at these quotes from that site, please.

 

Atheists have Proven God Does Not Exist. Right?

Proof #2: Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.  

Proof #9: If God created time and space, he must live outside of time and space. Thus he is non-existent.

Proof #11: God cannot be involved in our universe if He stands above our time dimension.

 

But proofs only exist in mathematics and logic.  Nowhere else.  The empirical science of physics that studies space, time, the universe and Heisenberg's uncertainty principle do not use proofs.  Please go to these links to read and understand why science doesn't use proofs.

 

http://ds-wordpress.haverford.edu/psych2015/projects/chapter/scientific-proof/

https://theconversation.com/wheres-the-proof-in-science-there-is-none-30570

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/200811/common-misconceptions-about-science-i-scientific-proof

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/11/22/scientific-proof-is-a-myth/?sh=2dcc837e2fb1

 

So, proofs 2, 9 and 11 are false.  The science of physics does not use proofs.

 

 

But more important than any example Aibao, is the reason why you chose a Christian site to get answers, when you also said that you didn't know which religion was true.

 

Even if you don't accept or understand what I've written above, it is MORE important that you answer the question I asked in my previous post.

 

Do you understand why you always go to Christianity for answers?

 

Please answer that question.

 

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

[Aibao]

On 4/21/2022 at 1:53 PM, walterpthefirst said:

Aibao,

 

Can you understand what you did when you replied to me?

 

In answer to my post about different religions you wrote... Exactly, how do you know which religion is correct?

 

Then you selected this Christian apologetics site, http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/nogod.html#contact and quoted from it.

 

If you are asking how do we know which religion is correct, why did you go straight to a Christian site for answers?

 

Why not a Muslim site or a Sikh or Hindu or Buddhist one?

 

Why did you believe that a Christian site had the right answers if you don't know which religion is correct?

 

I know exactly why you did that, by the way.

 

But I would like you to understand why you chose Christianity over those other religions.

 

This is my next question for you, Aibao.

 

Do you understand why you always go to Christianity for answers?

 

 

Walter.

Okay, I didn't really understand your question. But why Christianity? Because there I found friendships and support at the beginning. Yes, Catholicism prevails in Poland, but I converted to the green-greek religion, and before that I was interested in Eastern religions and a bit of Buddhism, until I found a website where it was written that meditation was wrong and caused one man to have a knee surgery. I felt (before reading this) faint during meditation (I was in junior high at the time), and that God showed this man that meditation is a sin. My knee pain and a strange sense of weakness made me think that God exists and is telling the truth. Then I found out that my cousin belongs to a Pentecostal church - I decided to join, especially because I was in a crisis and needed friends. There I got to know Christianity more closely. These are the main reasons why I'm only interested in this religion - because I left it traumatized.

[Aibao]

On 4/21/2022 at 2:25 PM, walterpthefirst said:

Your choice of the GodandScience.org website is a very bad one, Aibao.

 

There are a number of reasons why this is.  Here are two.

 

1. 

The people running that site wrongly believe that science confirms ONLY Christianity.  This is false.  There are Muslim, Sikh and other religious websites that use exactly the scientific data to claim that their ONLY their religion is true and all others are false.  But science is an agnostic system of thought with no allegiance or linkage to any religion.  That is why there are Buddhist, Muslim and Atheist scientists.  If Science ONLY confirmed Christianity, then how could these scientists from other religions do their scientific work?  Every day they would see ONLY evidence for Christianity and no evidence for Islam or Buddhism.  

 

Here is an example of what I mean.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electroweak_interaction

 

Sheldon Glashow, Abdus Salam, and Steven Weinberg were awarded the 1979 Nobel Prize in Physics for their contributions to the unification of the weak and electromagnetic interaction between elementary particles, known as the Weinberg–Salam theory.

 

Glashow came from an orthodox Jewish background, Salaam was a Muslim and Weinberg was an Atheist.  The discipline of science placed no religious or theological burden upon them.  They were free to believe whatever they wanted.  That's because science is non-religious and has nothing to say about anything supernatural at all.

 

 

2.

The people running your Christian apologetic site do not understand how science works.   Look at these quotes from that site, please.

 

Atheists have Proven God Does Not Exist. Right?

Proof #2: Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.  

Proof #9: If God created time and space, he must live outside of time and space. Thus he is non-existent.

Proof #11: God cannot be involved in our universe if He stands above our time dimension.

 

But proofs only exist in mathematics and logic.  Nowhere else.  The empirical science of physics that studies space, time, the universe and Heisenberg's uncertainty principle do not use proofs.  Please go to these links to read and understand why science doesn't use proofs.

 

http://ds-wordpress.haverford.edu/psych2015/projects/chapter/scientific-proof/

https://theconversation.com/wheres-the-proof-in-science-there-is-none-30570

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/200811/common-misconceptions-about-science-i-scientific-proof

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/11/22/scientific-proof-is-a-myth/?sh=2dcc837e2fb1

 

So, proofs 2, 9 and 11 are false.  The science of physics does not use proofs.

 

 

But more important than any example Aibao, is the reason why you chose a Christian site to get answers, when you also said that you didn't know which religion was true.

 

Even if you don't accept or understand what I've written above, it is MORE important that you answer the question I asked in my previous post.

 

Do you understand why you always go to Christianity for answers?

 

Please answer that question.

 

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

On this page, the author has posted an atheist response section, where he describes a strange case of a woman's near death, and his case where, in a time when bowel disease (Crohn's? I don't remember what) was incurable, he prayed and healed immediately, the disease never cured. she returned, and many patients were treated and without results. This is what scares me - because it seems to be proof of my Christianity. How to explain such a hearing of prayer? By chance? Sudden recovery? Then why hasn't it happened to others? It is so tiring because I have no answer and the only answer then is Christianity ...

[Wertbag]

1 hour ago, Aibao said:

On this page, the author has posted an atheist response section, where he describes a strange case of a woman's near death, and his case where, in a time when bowel disease (Crohn's? I don't remember what) was incurable, he prayed and healed immediately, the disease never cured. she returned, and many patients were treated and without results. This is what scares me - because it seems to be proof of my Christianity. How to explain such a hearing of prayer? By chance? Sudden recovery? Then why hasn't it happened to others? It is so tiring because I have no answer and the only answer then is Christianity ...

Miraculous healing seems to fall into three categories; complete lie, naturally recovered or mis-understood/reported.  I've seen reports of people claiming their cancer was cured, only to die of that very cancer a few months later.  Others have doctors working with them, giving drugs and medical support, but when the illness passes they claim a miracle rather than applauding the medical professionals that helped them.  Even cancer patients undergoing chemo, will claim it was prayer that worked rather than the daily treatments being received.

Some people are actors, some are paid, some fake it for attention, while others have mental issues.  Time after time the miracle claimed doesn't stand up to investigation.

[◊ Krowb ◊]

11 hours ago, Aibao said:

Then why hasn't it happened to others? It is so tiring because I have no answer and the only answer then is Christianity ...

 

This is not a rational thought process.  It happens to Muslims (who credit Allah, but should conceal it as a karamah), it happens to Hindus (who credit their preferred deity), it happens to Tibetan Buddhists and unexplained healings/recoveries happen all over the globe, regardless of religious affiliation.  Curiously enough, body parts never regrow, and neither the amount nor intensity of prayer have any discernable effect on exactly who is to be the lucky "miracle".

 

Jumping to Christianity simply does not follow.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

4 hours ago, Aibao said:

By chance? Sudden recovery? Then why hasn't it happened to others? 

The same could be asked of those who were "healed" through prayer.  Why them and not the others who were also prayed for?

[walterpthefirst]

9 hours ago, Aibao said:

Okay, I didn't really understand your question. But why Christianity? Because there I found friendships and support at the beginning. Yes, Catholicism prevails in Poland, but I converted to the green-greek religion, and before that I was interested in Eastern religions and a bit of Buddhism, until I found a website where it was written that meditation was wrong and caused one man to have a knee surgery. I felt (before reading this) faint during meditation (I was in junior high at the time), and that God showed this man that meditation is a sin. My knee pain and a strange sense of weakness made me think that God exists and is telling the truth. Then I found out that my cousin belongs to a Pentecostal church - I decided to join, especially because I was in a crisis and needed friends. There I got to know Christianity more closely. These are the main reasons why I'm only interested in this religion - because I left it traumatized.

 

Aibao,

 

In answer to the question, 'Why Christianity?' you replied that it's because of your friendships, the support you found and the trauma it gave you.

 

Are these really good reasons to always believe that only Christianity is true?

 

Because of the friends and the support it gave you and how it traumatized you?

 

Can't you think of a better reason to believe in something?