Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire A though on the religious threads

I'm not trying to convince you, I know that's not going to happen by my efforts. Just stating that the survival of the Jewish people and the retaking of Israel after almost 2000 years along with them becoming a military and economic superpower is enough circumstantial evidence for me. God bless you.

I like to keep, "It", simple.

It ‘is’ simple. It’s people that make it complicated. Apostle John, “the disciple whom Jesus loved”, said that “the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus.” It’s clear that Jesus had a very special and close relationship with Apostle John; Jesus even entrusted His mother’s care to John after His death. Grace comes through Jesus, and it’s only through Him that we can be saved. I believe that Jesus died for my sin and rose from the dead. But I don’t believe it because the Bible says so. I believe it because Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, James (the brother of Jesus), and Paul said so. And I have subjective evidence for my beliefs; I have no doubts whatsoever. If some others accept it, great. If some others reject it, fine.

NO - what is evidence to one is not necessarily evidence to another, and there could be no way for me to validate yours, or you you to validate mine. Faith, and its actuation in humans, is not cut and dried by a dictionary definition. So, yes.

It depends if your eyes are open and your mind is clear and without bias but also what you have been encouraged to hate.

I have plenty of doubt when it comes to the human heart. I’ve met and known some truly despicable people that claimed to be a “believer”. I’ve had a lot of disagreements, fundamental differences in beliefs, with “believers”. Of course I believe that I’m correct but because of those disagreements I’ve sought answers for understanding. My search for truth and understanding takes many forms, none of which are up for debate. What I do know for absolute certain is that mankind is predisposed to sin and that applies to everyone of us, believers and non believers alike. Just because a man is a deacon or pastor or parishioner does not necessarily speak to his character, it should but it doesn’t because he is human and subject to the temptations that accompany our mortal flesh. My respect and trust for someone else lies in their behavior and character not in their title. I’ve quit going to certain churches because I didn’t feel God’s presence there and in a couple of cases I felt a darkness when entering what should’ve been the enlightening illumination of the Lord’s house. One “church” in particular personified everything that non believers complain and believe about Christians. The ones I knew from that “church” were lying, scheming, greedy charlatans. They thought that lying and tricking people into their “circle” was justifiable since they were doing it for god but I came to realize that was another of their lies. They turned more people away from the Word and gave non believers affirmation, they were doing more work for satan than they’d ever done for God.

There are a lot of “churches” out there and I don’t believe that they’re all good. I do believe that most of them are good and allowing 1 bad “church” to tarnish your view of all churches would be small-minded. If one is intellectually honest they’d realize that a church is merely an accumulation of mortals learning and worshiping God together. Because it’s an accumulation of mortals it’s subject to being destroyed or perverted for the indulgence of the sins of its parishioners.

All Christians aren’t necessarily so nor are they the same just as all atheists or agnostics aren’t the same, neither are their motivations the same. “Judging everyone by the worst examples of the group is unwise and inaccurate.

Good post AcesNeights.

At least we can confirm your approach to faith
is evidence based.
However sufficient Evidence and analyzing may
reveal reasonable and rational explanation for
how Israelis were victorious in war and able to
to establish the nation of Israel...we don't really
know how far down that path you have explored
before resorting to supernatural explanation.

Did Hitler survived all those assassination
attempts through divine intervention or are
there acceptable rational explanations for such ?

What about Rome's great rise to Power from
the humble beginnings of a couple Latin tribes ,
were the gods they worshipped favoring them?

Evidence is a body of information that supports a certain conclusion regardless of who examines it. Evidence cannot support contradictory or opposing conclusions. You cannot have a dream or vision and claim this as proof that the things you dreamt are literally true and factual.

Evidence is a body of information that supports a certain conclusion regardless of who examines it. Evidence cannot support contradictory or opposing conclusions. You cannot have a dream or vision and claim this as proof that the things you dreamt are literally true and factual.

If two people look at something and draw opposite conclusions, who is right, and why?

Law courts require a certain standard
of objective evidence to prove something,
unlike faith which is subjective and can
fluctuate wildly from one individual to
another.

I'm rather confident you would not want
to be convicted of a crime based on the
personal faith of law enforcement, judge
and jury...lest of course you be one to buy
into witchhunts and burning heretics.

+1

Jesus came not to save the righteous , but as physician
to the sick and weak and embraced those that society
shunned or rejected..
Q./ Would Jesus embrace those from church groups
you say you found no presence of God? ..I mean is there
a std. of sickness so chronic that even Jesus would
reject them/turn them away?

Jesus even went to the extent of personally choosing
disciples which would betray him ,deny him, repeatedly
fail him in his time of need...If that's the best he could
realistically hope for (from hand selected people), then
those church groups which you reject may be nothing
at all surprising in the one big broad church of Jesus.

Are you requiring proof (of the supernatural) beyond any doubt? Do you think there is an intelligent creative force at the center of things? How do you believe the universe came into being? I do understand how someone like you could look at the world and say "if there is a God he must be a perverse entity to create this". There is a lot that cannot be explained but I don't believe something can come from nothing and before you say it I remember my mother stammering and not able to come up with an answer when I was maybe 5 years old. I asked her "well where did God come from". I am going to ask that you keep thinking on this and keep your mind open to the fact that any of us can be wrong in our assumptions. You are obviously not stupid. God bless.

Correct to an extent, but only in part. One does not get to create his/her own tight little definitions simply to prove one's point. Evidence can simply be that, and it does not have to be in a "body" and it does not have to support any specific conclusion in order to be evidence. It may be helpful in proving a point, or it may clarify toward some end, or it may be additive to an eventual conclusion, and other such things. We often hear the official report "so far, the evidence is inconclusive". A person may possess a bunch of evidence about something while it still is not a body that supports a specific conclusion - and very well have faith in that conclusion. Faith and evidence are not mutually exclusive.

Surely you noticed I referenced Law courts which require
evidence of varying degree without the requirement of
meeting the std. of your 'beyond any doubt'.

Let's begin with;
Beyond a reasonable doubt , which is the legal burden
of proof required to affirm a conviction...meaning one must
convince a jury that there is no other reasonable explanation
that can come from the evidence presented.
Then we have the lower standard of proof called;
Preponderance of Evidence.

Like I said earlier , we don't know how far down
the path of rational explanations you have explored
for Israelis winning the war and establishing Israel,
before adopting your supernatural belief.

Put it this way , if you were on a jury where
the defendant was claiming ,the 'hand of God'
forced them to kill someone , what would it take
you to buy their story? .Would you believe it as
easily as you do supernatural intervention on
behalf of Israel?

Tight definition? Science cannot function if each researcher has their own definition or idea of what evidence is. The Law does not work on the principle of what is considered evidence one day but not the next.

Evidence is not something that works one moment but not the next.

The laws of physics don't alter for the benefit of a believer, this one moment, that the next.

The world is what it is regardless of who believes what.

If someone has evidence for the existence of their version of God, anyone should be able to examine that evidence. What the believer feels is evidence may be mistaken. What it says in our holy books is not evidence for the truth of their claims.

DBT, again we have the evidence based faith
types in CCCC raising their heads...they dont
seem to have any consistent std. of evidence
they go by with the aim of constituting proof.

If there was clear evidence to support the existence of God, whatever the version may be, there would be little or no dispute. As it is, the believer goes on what is written in their bible, Quran, Gita, etc, in the assumption that this is evidence of truth.