A classic: From creator god ==> Specific God

Author: ludofl3x

Posts

Total: 1,007
#721
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@ludofl3x

So then the only place you can prove that your god is the one who created the universe is in the document that claims he created the universe.
Where does the revelation of the specific God of Christianity and Judaism come from? It comes from a people who claim to have recorded what He revealed and through their relationship with that God. Thus, to discuss this specific God we must look into that revelation. Does it make sense? Does it conform to what is? I claim it does. 

This makes the document more important than the being: without the document there's no way to know the being.
True, there is a way of knowing about this Being, but no way of personal or intimate knowledge of Him. 

It also only puts your god on equal footing with any one that appears in any holy text or any text at all (unless you can provide a discernment between 'holy text' and 'run of the mill mythological fiction).
No, by comparing and contrasting holy texts we find that the biblical text has a better foundation and more proofs/evidence of its truth claims in history. Many have taken on such claims.  

It's less than a compelling position from a neutral perspective. More than one religion claims their texts or founding tenets are holy, and this position also doesn't address why a religion without holy texts, like a native American religion, must be incorrect, or is at least inferior to those with writings.   
One thing is sure, they can't all be true since they state contrary things. The question is what kind of evidence these native religions have for their belief systems and do they correspond with what is in a reasonable manner?

#722
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
the Bible claims

Claims are not evidence they require evidence. Hopefully this clears up why some of is do not accept your claim.
#723
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
Would you agree that there are two logical views of existence, either we are created or we are here by chance happenstance? 
No I would not.

#724
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
If I asked you to demonstrate that 2+2=4 and do not use any mathematical concept do you think that would be reasonable? 
I don't know if it's reasonable but I would hold up two fingers and two fingers and let you do the rest. That is what a demonstration is. If you could kindly just have your god(s) hold up some fingers we could clear all this up in short order I'm sure unless of course the god(s) in question are unobservable in which case we at be at an impasee.

#725
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
If I asked you to demonstrate that 2+2=4 and do not use any mathematical concept do you think that would be reasonable? 
I don't know if it's reasonable but I would hold up two fingers and two fingers and let you do the rest. That is what a demonstration is. If you could kindly just have your god(s) hold up some fingers we could clear all this up in short order I'm sure unless of course the god(s) in question are unobservable in which case we at be at an impasee.

#726
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
The Holy Spirit being received by man signifies that Jesus Christ is Lord.  If the holy spirit exists then there can only be 1 God who is above all Gods. And it does exist, I can say that because i received it.
#727
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Yassine
-Ahem, 'Quran' in Arabic literally means 'The Recitation'...
You have a very limited education. The quran is a book, the fact that you are incapable of recognising a book puts you in the brainstem only class of arab.
Only humans write books, your book was written by humans who claim your god exists. Nothing claimed the existence of gods before the existence of humans, ergo gods are the creration of humans.


#728
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
God when the Bible claims it is His revelation of Himself and of creation?
Where does this god claim that?


#729
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Melcharaz
How many gods do you have?
#730
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
I have 1 God, that's it. But there are many Gods that God is chief over.  They aren't equal with him or share any of his glory though.  Satan is quoted in the bible as the "God of this world" by Paul in the new testament.
#731
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@disgusted
I have a very limited education.
- Don't feel bad. 


The quran is a book, the fact that you are incapable of recognising a book puts you in the brainstem only class of arab.
- You seem under the impression that the nonsense you spout can magically turn into truth if you assert it enough.


Only humans write books, your book was written by humans who claim your god exists. Nothing claimed the existence of gods before the existence of humans, ergo gods are the creration of humans.
- What an illogical mess. Are you capable of constructing an argument or formulating an objection?

#732
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@secularmerlin
the Bible claims

Claims are not evidence they require evidence. Hopefully this clears up why some of is do not accept your claim.

This just goes to prove you skimmed past the rest of my post in which I said that the claims are backed up by historical EVIDENCE. Historical evidence collaborates with biblical claims. 
#733
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@secularmerlin
Okay then, what do you think explains why we are here if neither God nor chance happenstance is responsible? I say God because gods get narrowed down to a supreme being eventually for the very reason that gods are contradictory thus only one is logically justified and gods do not have the qualities of the biblical God thus they too were created beings. 
#734
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@secularmerlin
If I asked you to demonstrate that 2+2=4 and do not use any mathematical concept do you think that would be reasonable? 
I don't know if it's reasonable but I would hold up two fingers and two fingers and let you do the rest. That is what a demonstration is. If you could kindly just have your god(s) hold up some fingers we could clear all this up in short order I'm sure unless of course the god(s) in question are unobservable in which case we at be at an impasee.

What makes you think that holding up two plus two fingers is not expressing a mathematical concept?
#735
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@disgusted
God when the Bible claims it is His revelation of Himself and of creation?
Where does this god claim that?

The biblical revelation claims it is from Him.
#736
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
The bible (a book written by ignorant savages) claims that the bible claims it is god's revelation of Himself and of creation?
So you place your trust in the words of ignorant, primitive, superstitious savages.
Good for you.
#737
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
History refutes most biblical claims.
#738
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Melcharaz
Paul? Who died and put him in charge of which gods are which?
#739
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Yassine
I see you never graduated kindergarten playground argumentation. Run along child.
#740
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@disgusted
I see you never graduated kindergarten playground argumentation. Run along child.
- It that an echo I'm hearing? I see you talking to yourself. Child, indeed.

#741
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
the Bible claims

Claims are not evidence they require evidence. Hopefully this clears up why some of is do not accept your claim.

This just goes to prove you skimmed past the rest of my post in which I said that the claims are backed up by historical EVIDENCE. Historical evidence collaborates with biblical claims. 
I went back and reread your post just to be certain. I do not actually see any citation of any kind that would support your claims. Also history is riddled with exaggerations and apocryphal tales so I would very much prefer archeological or geological evidence to historical evidence.

#742
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
Okay then, what do you think explains why we are here if neither God nor chance happenstance is responsible?
I do not think we have an explanation. There is not enough evidence to support any given hypothesis. This in no way obligated me to accept either of the explanations you have presented.

#743
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
What makes you think that holding up two plus two fingers is not expressing a mathematical concept?
If I hold up two fingers and two fingers and you cime to the conclusion that 2 + 2 = 4 then I am not the one using mathematical concepts you are. If you are using mathematical concepts yourself then hopefully youbwould see the logic of conceding that math exists at least intellectually. Of course if you do not understand mathematical concepts I may be unable to prove it to you with or without mathematical concepts. 

The bottom line is I don't care what it says in your book I want to see god(s') fingers.

#744
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
gods are contradictory thus only one is logically justified
Please explain your logic.

Topic's author
#745
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@secularmerlin
It seems a false equivalence, too: math is independently verifiable without the use of numbers. The bible is not independently verifiable, at all. Even the use of this prophesy requires someone else to add some level of conversion chart to it wherein in weeks means years. There's tons of holy texts, there's literally only one result for 2 +2 and anyone who disputes the result is provably wrong. The bible is the claim, I'm not sure why it's so difficult. 
#746
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@ludofl3x
Even if we do not dispute the efficacy of the prophecy this tells us literally nothing about the source of the prophesy and until we determine that some god(s) were necessarily the source the existence of some god(s) would still need to be verified independently of said prophecy. The prophecy's efficacy acy or lack thereof is not evidence of anything but the efficacy of that single prophecy and nothing more.
Topic's author
#747
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@secularmerlin
True indeed, even if the prophesy were 1000% accurate, the argument then seems to be "so then God is real." There's a lot of real estate between the two. 
#748
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@ludofl3x
True indeed, even if the prophesy were 1000% accurate, the argument then seems to be "so then God is real." There's a lot of real estate between the two. 

Yes and "therefore some god(s) exist" still leaves us far short of "the Yahweh specifically exists".
#749
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
Paul was anointed by the holy spirit to write what God would reveal to us. He isn't a person more important than anyone else if thats what you are asking!
#750
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@secularmerlin
the Bible claims

Claims are not evidence they require evidence. Hopefully this clears up why some of is do not accept your claim.

This just goes to prove you skimmed past the rest of my post in which I said that the claims are backed up by historical EVIDENCE. Historical evidence collaborates with biblical claims. 
I went back and reread your post just to be certain. I do not actually see any citation of any kind that would support your claims. Also history is riddled with exaggerations and apocryphal tales so I would very much prefer archeological or geological evidence to historical evidence.

Which post? I've covered historical evidence in many posts. Did the Bible claim Jerusalem and the temple would be destroyed again? Was it destroyed again? Did the Bible claim a new covenant would be initiated with the people of Israel? Is that not what the NT is all about? Can the Jews under the Mosaic Covenant still follow that covenant after AD 70? What does history tell us?

Do/did the tribes and nations spoken of in the Bible exist?

What about the archeological evidence? Does it confirm people, places, events that are stated in the Bible?