Evidence please

Originally posted by @divegeester
As I’ve said probably dozens of times; anything you like, anything, you have, any “sign” any “indication” anything you think constitues evidence, anything at all, anything you have the balls to post, anything. Anything. Anything.

So would you regards my post on Biblical prophecy as invisible or non existent?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
So would you regards my post on Biblical prophecy as invisible or non existent?

If it was a link to a website where I would have to go and read someone else’s ideas about this topic because you are either too ill informed or too lazy or to scared to make it yourself, than yes it was probably ignored as your reputation of copy/paste dumping stuff from the internet goes before you and is a large contributory factor in your lack of credibility with many posters here.

However if you have something you wish to share which you believe supports your claim that the bible is in itself evidence of the existence of god, and which you feel has been overlooked, then please feel free to post it and we can discuss it.

Originally posted by @divegeester

In other words you ignored my request and sought instead to put the other party on the defensive.

Big deal. Shift all burden to the other person.
Am I suppose to be impressed?

Jesus said things you don't like.
Jesus said things we all don't like.

Luke 4,5 doesn't seem at all incongruous to His message of the absolute authority of God. It doesn't stick out as outlandish among His other sayings.

The lesson from verse 2 through 12 is closely reflected in Mark 10:26-33;
Mark has "And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul." (4:28)

Mark is considered the earliest of the four gospels.
We can assume the co-worker and companion of the Apostle Peter faithfully recorded what Peter preached.
Peter was one of the twelve original disciples.

Mark 12:32 also agrees with Luke 12:10
about an eternal sin never forgiven:

Mark -

And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come."

Luke

"And every one who speaks a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven."

Pretty close.

The Mark version is meaningful to me because it implies that in the next age, there could also be forgiveness.
My opinion is that this is good news though we may not be given all such details.

" ... will not be forgiven either in this age or in the age to come."

That sounds to me like in the age to come, the millennial kingdom age with some there will be forgiveness. Matters await the next age for some to be forgiven. That is how I take it though it is a warning.

Mark 4:22 virtually equals Luke 8:17

There are finer points to go over about the many manuscripts of the Greek NT. I am not an expert. The discussions can be lengthy. I am reviewing some information from "The Gospel Parallels - A Synopsis of the First Three Gospels - With alternative readings from the Manuscripts and Noncanonical Parallels." (1952) - following Huck - Lietzmann Synopsis, the 9th edition, 1936

I think Jesus uttered the words of Luke 12.
Absolute Proof as in mathematical certainty? Maybe not. Good evidence I'm on the right track to believe it? I think so.

Originally posted by @sonship
In other words you ignored my request and sought instead to put the other party on the defensive.

Big deal. Shift all burden to the other person.
Am I suppose to be impressed?

Jesus said things you don't like.
Jesus said things we all don't like.

[b]Luke 4,5 doesn't seem at all incongruous to His message of the absolute authority of ...[text shortened]... thematical certainty? Maybe not. Good evidence I'm on the right track to believe it? I think so.[/b]

Which of my posts are you ranting in reply to please?

Originally posted by @divegeester
If it was a link to a website where I would have to go and read someone else’s ideas about this topic because you are either too ill informed or too lazy or to scared to make it yourself, than yes it was probably ignored as your reputation of copy/paste dumping stuff from the internet goes before you and is a large contributory factor in your lack of cr ...[text shortened]... and which you feel has been overlooked, then please feel free to post it and we can discuss it.

As a Christian you are not aware of any prophecies made about the messiah in the old testament?

Originally posted by @dj2becker
As a Christian you are not aware of any prophecies made about the messiah in the old testament?

I’ve answered your question and now you are just asking another one. I’m really not interested in talking to you dj2becker, unless you want to present your rational, “signs”, “indications”, whatever it is you have that leads you to believe that the bible is itself, evidence of the existence of god.

Originally posted by @divegeester
I’ve answered your question and now you are just asking another one. I’m really not interested in talking to you dj2becker, unless you want to present your rational, “signs”, “indications”, whatever it is you have that leads you to believe that the bible is itself, evidence of the existence of god.

You have dodged my previous question just like you are dodging this one. In fact it's been quite a while since you gave me a straight answer. This is your conundrum:

As a Christian, you believe the Bible is God's revelation to humanity. You believe Jesus is the Messiah. You believe His coming was predicted many years before He came in the Old Testament in multiple places. Yet you will not admit this because then you have to admit to the accuracy of prophecy in the Bible. And then you have to admit that this could well be evidence of the supernatural. So if anyone is being intellectually dishonest it is you. If anything I said above is false feel free to point out exactly what it is.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
You have dodged my previous question just like you are dodging this one. In fact it's been quite a while since you gave me a straight answer. This is your conundrum:

As a Christian, you believe the Bible is God's revelation to humanity. You believe Jesus is the Messiah. You believe His coming was predicted many years before He came in the Old Testamen ...[text shortened]... ishonest it is you. If anything I said above is false feel free to point out exactly what it is.

I have never said that there is no valid prophecy in the Bible in fact I think there is. But you are missing the point; what I, as a confessed Christian and believer in God, the supernatural and what-not, is not evidence of anything to anyone, except to me. And as I am a believer already then I’m aware that to a non-believer my ”evidence” is just confirmation bias at best as far as they are concerned.
You are barking up the wrong tree with this dj2becker.

Originally posted by @divegeester
I have never said that there is no valid prophecy in the Bible in fact I think there is. But you are missing the point; what I, as a confessed Christian and believer in God, the supernatural and what-not, is not evidence of anything to anyone, except to me. And as I am a believer already then I’m aware that to a non-believer my ”evidence” is just ...[text shortened]... s at best as far as they are concerned.
You are barking up the wrong tree with this dj2becker.

But you are missing the point; what I, as a confessed Christian and believer in God, the supernatural and what-not, is not evidence of anything to anyone, except to me.

Nonsense. Two or more people can agree on the same thing (.eg prophecy) as evidence for God's existence. In fact millions if not billions of people do. Obviously non believers who believe in conspiracy theories may doubt it, but many sceptics who have put in the effort and studied it have become convinced by it. If you are really interested I would suggest you read the testimony of Josh McDowell for one, the author of "New evidence that demands a verdict" and Lee Strobel who has written many books on the topic including "The case for Christ".

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Obviously non believers who believe in conspiracy theories may doubt it...

I note that you simply labelled what I put to you as a "conspiracy theory" and then just hid behind that dismissive term whilst ignoring what I'd actually suggested about human nature and the very plausible consequences of religious zeal and corporate religion. You just spammed me with a copy paste - a tactic of yours I was not interested in, and certainly not one I wanted to mimic - and you bailed out of the conversation.

Originally posted by @fmf
I note that you simply labelled what I put to you as a "conspiracy theory" and then just hid behind that dismissive term whilst ignoring what I'd actually suggested about human nature and the very plausible consequences of religious zeal and corporate religion. You just spammed me with a copy paste - a tactic of yours I was not interested in, and certainly not one I wanted to mimic - and you bailed out of the conversation.

You are the one who bailed when I asked you whether you had actual evidence of your conspiracy theory. If that is not the case and you have actual evidence feel free to present it.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
[b]But you are missing the point; what I, as a confessed Christian and believer in God, the supernatural and what-not, is not evidence of anything to anyone, except to me.

Nonsense. Two or more people can agree on the same thing (.eg prophecy) as evidence for God's existence. In fact millions if not billions of people do. Obviously non believers w ...[text shortened]... erdict" and Lee Strobel who has written many books on the topic including "The case for Christ".[/b]

I have never met anyone, not one person, ever, who became a Christian because they througt the Bible was evidence of God’s existence. I certainly didn’t, and I still don’t. If the only evidence you have for unbelievers is the testimony of Christians who claim that the words of the bible are evidence for unbelievers of God’s existence then it is you who are taking nonesense.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
You are the one who bailed when I asked you whether you had actual evidence of your conspiracy theory. If that is not the case and you have actual evidence feel free to present it.

You're hiding behind that term "conspiracy theory" in order avoid talking about the content of my post. On page 18 you claimed you'd searched the net for the kind of thing I have been talking about. You are either not telling the truth about having searched the net, or you are not telling the truth about having not found anything.

Originally posted by @divegeester
I have never met anyone, not one person, ever, who became a Christian because they througt the Bible was evidence of God’s existence. I certainly didn’t, and I still don’t. If the only evidence you have for unbelievers is the testimony of Christians who claim that the words of the bible are evidence for unbelievers of God’s existence then it is you who are taking nonesense.

I probably should have come in here to weigh in on this topic before now, before the thread hit page 22. Not that it would have mattered to anybody, but even to me, I seem conspicuous by my absence in this thread, and I have said the same on this as divegeester many times before in this forum, much to the consternation of other Christians here. The fact that I was roundly criticized by the unbeliever crowd at the time is really neither here nor there.

My angle on this discussion is that proof of God is impossible. If there was a bulletproof, believable proof of God, then this would eliminate man's free will concerning belief of God. Similarly, proof of "not God" is impossible as well. If either was proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, the free will of man, in the decision to believe in God or not, is destroyed. Only the mentally ill believe in Santa Claus, because his non-existence has been proven beyond all doubt. The same would be said of God, if his non-existence were to be provable. And only fools (or the chronically stubborn) would refuse to believe in a God that was proven to exist. Either way, free will is destroyed.

The entire point of the Bible, both the OT and the NT in their own ways, is that it is up to each one of us to make a choice between God and not-God. This choice is dependent on our free will, so that no one can say they were forced, or that they had no choice but to choose as they did.

All this said, I still believe that those of us who post in this forum have made our choices. None of us will change anyone else's choice, and it is sheer folly to believe otherwise. Any "evidence" for or against God is only evidence for our own selves, and not for anyone else. For those of us with experiences that they believe remove all doubt for them, this is still only enough evidence for the one with the experience, and for that person alone.

The Bible is no more proof of God than the Qur'an, or the Vedas, or the Guru Granth Sahib, or any other holy book. Because there can be no proof of God.