Mind Of The Skeptic

Evidence For Creation and the Mind Of The Skeptic.

The speaker ask some atheists and evolutionists if it could be proven that creation was true and God was real, would they worship Him. They all said NO. So the issue really is not lack of evidence to prove creation.

YouTube

Originally posted by RJHinds
Evidence For Creation and the Mind Of The Skeptic.

The speaker ask some atheists and evolutionists if it could be proven that creation was true and God was real, would they worship Him. They all said NO. So the issue really is not lack of evidence to prove creation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kb-tLk34AVI

worship and belief are completely different. both are issues.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Evidence For Creation and the Mind Of The Skeptic.

The speaker ask some atheists and evolutionists if it could be proven that creation was true and God was real, would they worship Him. They all said NO. So the issue really is not lack of evidence to prove creation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kb-tLk34AVI

There are two questions here.

Would you believe?

and

Would you worship?

Now obviously people are not likely to worship something they don't
believe in... But just because you believe in a god or gods does not
mean that you would [or should] worship them.

I for example would believe in a god's existence if that god was sufficiently
well demonstrated to exist with sufficient evidence.

I will not however worship that god [or gods].


If you are trying to get me to worship then don't bother, it's never going to
happen and there is nothing you can do or say to change me mind.

If you are simply trying to get me to believe then you can change my mind
as long as you can provide sufficient justification for believing that the god
or gods exist.


And I suspect that many [although by no means all] atheists would be similar.

And again, there is no such thing as an evolutionist.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Evidence For Creation and the Mind Of The Skeptic.

The speaker ask some atheists and evolutionists if it could be proven that creation was true and God was real, would they worship Him. They all said NO. So the issue really is not lack of evidence to prove creation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kb-tLk34AVI

Oh... The other thing you [and other creationists] don't understand...

Disproving Evolution [which is no longer possible] would not prove creationism.

You have to prove creationism to prove creationism, disproving Evolution
doesn't get you anywhere.

Originally posted by googlefudge
There are two questions here.

Would you believe?

and

Would you worship?

Now obviously people are not likely to worship something they don't
believe in... But just because you believe in a god or gods does not
mean that you would [or should] worship them.

I for example would believe in a god's existence if that god was sufficiently
w ...[text shortened]... o means all] atheists would be similar.

And again, there is no such thing as an evolutionist.

Well said.

The mind of the skeptic is someone who doesn't just follow the next human in line. The skeptic says 'prove it'. You can't, Hinds. You can only cite passages in the bible which means absolutely zero as far as proof goes.

You are the one lacking critical thinking skills. You gave that up long ago.

So now, people who actually think for themselves are the enemy, and not worth actually debating with. You want to go after weak minded people who do not possess critical thinking skills, the ones who say, wait a minute, I want to see something besides your bible verses. Those weak minded people are the ones who will become disciples and they will be totally sincere and spread their falsehoods with a straight face.

Originally posted by RJHinds
The speaker ask some atheists and evolutionists if it could be proven that creation was true and God was real, would they worship Him. They all said NO. So the issue really is not lack of evidence to prove creation.

They'd be right. A god whose existence can be proven is merely another part of the physical universe; he would therefore merely be a godlet and not God, and would not deserve worship.

Now, if you want to worship Galactus, Devourer of Worlds, feel free. I'd rather worship the God who created the universe and whose existence can therefore not be scientifically proven within it.

Originally posted by Shallow Blue
They'd be right. A god whose existence can be proven is merely another part of the physical universe; he would therefore merely be a godlet and not God, and would not deserve worship.

Now, if you want to worship Galactus, Devourer of Worlds, feel free. I'd rather worship the God who created the universe and whose existence can therefore not be scientifically proven within it.

So prove it. Prove your so-called god created the universe. It's all in your mind, the minds of a few billion duped individuals who still fall for the original scam from thousands of years ago. AND that scam wasn't even Jewish, it was originally Egyptian. I saw that for myself in the Cairo Museum. There are cartouches 4000 years old showing the 6 day creation myth. So early Jews just stole it and modified the story for their people.

That story has no more validity than the Aborigine's in Australia, who have their own version of creation, as do ALL cultures.

You are so bible besotted you cannot think critically anymore, just swallowing the bible line like so many millions of others.

It must be nice to be able to just hand over your critical thinking to other people so you don't have to personally fret about such things since now you KNOW what is true, in your own mind that is.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Well said.

The mind of the skeptic is someone who doesn't just follow the next human in line. The skeptic says 'prove it'. You can't, Hinds. You can only cite passages in the bible which means absolutely zero as far as proof goes.

You are the one lacking critical thinking skills. You gave that up long ago.

So now, people who actually think for th ...[text shortened]... ome disciples and they will be totally sincere and spread their falsehoods with a straight face.

I cite passages in the Holy Bible as devine support for evidence from science and religion, like the empty tomb in Jerusalem and the Shroud of Turin.

Originally posted by Shallow Blue
They'd be right. A god whose existence can be proven is merely another part of the physical universe; he would therefore merely be a godlet and not God, and would not deserve worship.

Now, if you want to worship Galactus, Devourer of Worlds, feel free. I'd rather worship the God who created the universe and whose existence can therefore not be scientifically proven within it.

That is Jesus the Son of God that you should worship.

HalleluYah !!! Praise the LORD! Holy! Holy! Holy!

Originally posted by RJHinds
I cite passages in the Holy Bible as devine support for evidence from science and religion, like the empty tomb in Jerusalem and the Shroud of Turin.

You missed the step [among many other mistakes] where you prove that the
bible IS the word of god AND that you correctly understand what it means
BEFORE we give a damn what [you say] it says.

Originally posted by googlefudge
You missed the step [among many other mistakes] where you prove that the
bible IS the word of god AND that you correctly understand what it means
BEFORE we give a damn what [you say] it says.

The Holy Bible proves itself. But you wouldn't know that because you do not study it. One can learn Calculus or other things from a text book alone, but you are like a baby and are so used to being spoon fed, you can not accept real food.

Originally posted by RJHinds
The Holy Bible proves itself. But you wouldn't know that because you do not study it. One can learn Calculus or other things from a text book alone, but you are like a baby and are so used to being spoon fed, you can not accept real food.

What IS that term I am looking for. Let's see. Hmm. Wait wait don't tell me.

Oh yes. Circular Reasoning. "The bible proves itself" Good one.

You should be on Letterman as a comedy act. You might even find recruits there.

Originally posted by RJHinds
The Holy Bible proves itself. But you wouldn't know that because you do not study it. One can learn Calculus or other things from a text book alone, but you are like a baby and are so used to being spoon fed, you can not accept real food.

No, you are the one who gets 'spoon fed' [wrong] 'answers' so you can go around
thinking you know stuff, instead of actually getting down to checking things and
finding stuff out yourself.

The question before you is how to prove that the bible was written [inspired by] by
god?

To do this requires both that you prove a gods existence, and that you then prove that
that god wrote/inspired the bible.

You cannot do this by saying the bible proves itself as that is a circular argument and
a logical fallacy.

You have to assume that the bible is true before you can take it's word that it is true.

This especially falls down when it's proven to be false.

Until you can prove that the bible is the word of an actually existent god to the satisfaction
of people who don't already believe it's true. Citing passages from the bible as 'evidence'
is utterly and completely pointless.

You have to prove it's true FIRST.


And any claim that the bible 'proves' itself true is a logical fallacy.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Evidence For Creation and the Mind Of The Skeptic.

The speaker ask some atheists and evolutionists if it could be proven that creation was true and God was real, would they worship Him. They all said NO. So the issue really is not lack of evidence to prove creation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kb-tLk34AVI

"Worship" is the wrong word to use when asking this question, because you should always remember who your audience is.

Satan knows what actually happened, and he knows who God is, so from this example alone it seems evident that knowing is not the same as worshiping. Most atheists can understand this distinction, but at the same time many of them will now think I'm comparing them to Satan... so no matter how careful you are, they will manage to find something wrong with what you say.

Originally posted by lemon lime
"Worship" is the wrong word to use when asking this question, because you should always remember who your audience is.

Satan knows what actually happened, and he knows who God is, so from this example alone it seems evident that knowing is not the same as worshiping. Most atheists can understand this distinction, but at the same ti ...[text shortened]... o matter how careful you are, they [b]will manage to find something wrong with what you say.[/b]

Yes you are right. There is probably no perfect word for that audience. Would saying they are influence by Satan be better?