A classic: From creator god ==> Specific God

Author: ludofl3x

Posts

Total: 1,007
#211
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 the answer to the yes or no question, which again is:

can you prove that your religion is true and every other one is false, that your god is real and all others fiction, without referring to the bible as it is the claim not evidence? It's a yes or no question. 

...is no, right?
Can you prove yours is?

What evidence would you accept? You want me to conform to your standards. 

Can I give you reasonable and logical evidence for my faith - yes! 

Can I make sense of my worldview - yes!

Because again you didn't attempt it, even after saying "been there done that". I'm not asking you to disprove every religion. I'm asking you to prove you're right, without using the claim as the evidence.
This is incredibly unreasonable. Why would I not use the claims to show the strength of the evidence?

For instance, the Bible does predict the rise again and fall of Jerusalem after its demise by the Babylonians. Does what is said take place? I believe history backs the claim. 

Another scenario, what would be necessary for morality? Why does your relative view or any relative view that can be shown to shift and change make something "good" or "right?"



Or debunk any other religion, your choice, without referring to your own.
Summarize your worldview and I will attempt to debunk it without making specific reference to the Bible, although I will be using its thought system.

I will also try to establish what would be necessary to make sense of a system of thought. 


This is the topic at hand. The rest of your distractions, I'd suggest starting other threads about if you like, and I'll participate as warranted. 



Topic's author
#212
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@PGA2.0
Can you prove yours is? 

What evidence would you accept? You want me to conform to your standards. 

Can I prove my what is? I don't have any gods. As you've presented no evidence that does not treat the claim as evidence, I've yet to see any independent evidence at all. The question is can you prove that the creator of the universe is in fact your god. Are you saying you believe it even though there is no evidence? Present your evidence (not your claim, which is THE BIBLE, as doing so is you saying "The bible god is real because the bible says he is"), and we'll examine it. Present your argument that your god is real, or even better, why Zeus isn't, without referring to the bible. Not can you make sense of your own worldview (obviously you can retrofit the bible onto any worldview if you work at it enough), not is morality objective or subjective, these are all DIFFERENT TOPICS. I invite you again to start your own topics on those and I'll participate as warranted. 

 Why would I not use the claims to show the strength of the evidence?
Because this is backwards. You use EVIDENCE to support your CLAIM. Not your CLAIM to support your EVIDENCE. Or, alternatively, you can simply say no, I can't, I believe it anyway, and there's literally no way I can ever change my mind, but I'm going to stop saying I used logic and reason to objectively arrive at my outcome. It's simply the outcome I like best. 

To that, I have no argument. Just stop talking about logic and reason like they apply in any way to your claim and we'll get along just fine! :)


#213
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
[1] What of these two positions is more logical to believe, 1) that logic derives its source from a necessary and sufficient logical being or 2) through a random process of chance happenstance?
[2] There is a rational reason. What do you witness every day? You witness logical, sentient, conscious being giving birth to other logical, sentient, conscious beings. Where do you ever witness chance happenstance doing this? So, if you are using your sense of sight, per underlined above, you are inconsistent with what you see and witness.  
I think 1 and 2 are essentially the same.   As I understand it, your position is that even logic is not neccessarily true; that is you require there to be a reason why 1+1=2, or put another way there must be something that enforces the rules of logic and arithmetic and without that enforcer logic and arithmetic would not exist, or not exist as the consistent and reliable things they clearly are.

I have no idea how to persuade you that logic is necessarily true!  Lewis Carol addressed this in a 1985 parable

I don't know if it is upto me to prove logic is necessarily true or for you to prove it isn't.  I submit that as neither of can prove what we claim (we can only endleslly swap demands for a counter-proof from each other) we call it draw and move on!





#214
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@PGA2.0
Let's refocus for a second.

Try to disprove the existence of Vishnu without mentioning the "YHWH" or the holy scriptures.
#215
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@keithprosser
I don't know if it is upto me to prove logic is necessarily true or for you to prove it isn't.
Efficacy.
#216
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@ludofl3x
Again, I start my proof of God with prophecy. Are you willing to engage?

Prophecy presupposes he's there already. Start your proof of god with proving he's there, to the exclusion of all others.
The Bible, throughout, claims to be His word, His revelation, His interaction with humanity so what is said should conform to what we discover from history and it should be philosophical reasonable and logical. 

I would take you on in two levels of evidence, prophecy and morality. I will even have a formal debate on each or both of these issues with you if you like? One uses the prophetic evidence contained in the Bible to establish the fulfillment is reasonable and logical to believe has happened. Thus, this aspect of the Bible is reasonable to believe. The other, morality, is a discussion on how you make sense of morality without an ultimate, unchanging, objective, eternal, absolute source of reference point. 

Do you want me to set up a thread concerning these two topics, keep going on this thread, or are you not interested in why I believe what I do and are convinced there is nothing worth discussing? IOW's, you just want to attack for the sake of attack?

I presume you've already done this and DECIDED to be a Christian, so this should be rather easy for you. Unless, of course, you're mistaking the claim for the evidence.
This brings up an interesting question. How do you define evidence? Please give me your understanding. 


Yes, or no? Can your version of god be proven to exist, without referring to the bible, which is what claims he exists in the first place? The rest of your questions are different topics.
The biblical God can be proven reasonable and logical to believe in. I do not believe any other worldview can. The question is how do you prove something to someone who does not want to believe something because their bias gets in the way. You will always raise additional questions, roadblocks, and buts to anything I say (which you have continually done).


I grant {1} because if I don't there isn't a topic.
I'm not sure what the points 1-3 refer to. Are you granting the Christian God His existence for the purpose of hearing the evidence?

(I sense your exit strategy)

I find you guys never engage in the proofs Christianity offers. You always make up some excuse to avoid the topic.  


{2} is immaterial because again, it is granted. Your leap to {3} is what's completely unearned. You've made no case for any monotheistic entity at all, you've not eliminated any pantheistic gods, or any deistic traditions at all, you've just jumped to "must be one deity" for some reason.
Again, point two, is that in relation to granting God is immaterial for the sake of listening to the proofs/evidence?

With point three, I have made a case for the Christian God who is monotheistic. I make that case with prophecy or with morality. I could make that case with many other topics but those are two I like and consider my best arguments. 

Although I have not refuted other religious views her,e it is not my aim to enter into these discussions unless you want to reveal your worldview. I would be delighted to compare and contrast your worldview belief with mine to its reasonableness. I am also willing to demonstrate the evidence contained in the Bible and how it compliments history regarding prophecy. 



Everything else is off topic. 


#217
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@PGA2.0
I find you guys never engage in the proofs Christianity offers. 
In the same way that you don't accept "proofs" from other religions.

Historical facts from the Vedas do not convince you that the Hindu beliefs are true.

Therefore, historical facts are moot.

Accurate predictions in the Epic of Gilgamesh do not convince you that the ancient Sumerian gods are real.

Therefore, accurate predictions are moot.
#218
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
The biblical God can be proven reasonable and logical to believe in. I do not believe any other worldview can.
As I understand it, you don't accept the atheists' world view because it is inconsistent with (a) an ordered, logical and moral universe and (b) with the accuracy of biblical prophecy.  (a) is more to with a god in general terms and (b) with the Christian god in particular.

Given I'm using broad strokes, is that something like your actual position?




#219
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@ludofl3x
Can you prove yours is? 

What evidence would you accept? You want me to conform to your standards. 

Can I prove my what is?
Your belief system. 


I don't have any gods.
So that would classify you as an atheist or agnostic, right? That would mean that you take the place of God or gods in determining anything. 


As you've presented no evidence that does not treat the claim as evidence, I've yet to see any independent evidence at all.
Define what you mean be evidence for I have presented some via the internal biblical prophecy and the external historical fulfillment (unless you doubt that Jerusalem was destroyed in AD 70?


The question is can you prove that the creator of the universe is in fact your god.
Again, it revolves around what would you consider proof? The evidence is most reasonable but even facts can be disputed. 

Are you saying you believe it even though there is no evidence?
Atheists seem all alike in claiming no evidence. It is a most ridiculous claim on your behalf. 

Present your evidence (not your claim, which is THE BIBLE, as doing so is you saying "The bible god is real because the bible says he is"), and we'll examine it.
Again, the evidence can be most reasonable and you can still deny Him. 

My evidence is that what is stated in the Bible, regarding prophecy, can be confirmed in many instances as having happened. If you understand the covenant God made with Israel (the Mosaic Covenant) AD 70 is a crucial fulfillment in the prophetic word. AD 70 is the destruction of the city and temple. Do you understand the importance of that in relation to that covenant? 

Again, do you believe the temple was destroyed in AD 70? 

Do you believe it is reasonable to believe the OT was written before this destruction or do you want me to demonstrate the reasonableness of such a belief as factual? 

Do you believe the NT was written before this destruction or do you want me to demonstrate the reasonableness of this belief as the most reasonable explanation? 



Present your argument that your god is real, or even better, why Zeus isn't, without referring to the bible.
My evidence would be in the logic of if the biblical God is real then Zeus is unreasonable, as simple as that. The Laws of
Logic
state that two contrary things cannot both be valid at the same time and in the same manner. If God is the biblical God then He is not Zeus. So all I have to do is show the biblical God is reasonable to believe and Zeus is not. 

Not can you make sense of your own worldview (obviously you can retrofit the bible onto any worldview if you work at it enough), not is morality objective or subjective, these are all DIFFERENT TOPICS. I invite you again to start your own topics on those and I'll participate as warranted. 
When you say that morality is not objective, is that in its own right an objective statement? Just because there are relative standards that
differ
does not necessarily mean that there is not a necessary objective standard. The question with two opposing relative standards is which one is the true standard? The Law of Identity is breached if you claim both. Either abortion for the sake of convenience is wrong or it is not. It cant be both right and wrong at the same time. 

So, do you want me to start a thread on the two pieces of evidence - prophecy, and morality?


 Why would I not use the claims to show the strength of the evidence?
Because this is backwards. You use EVIDENCE to support your CLAIM.
The claim is already there. I show that it conforms to what happened later via history as to its truth claim. 


Not your CLAIM to support your EVIDENCE.
But it is. The claim was made and the event happened later as prescribed.

Or, alternatively, you can simply say no, I can't, I believe it anyway, and there's literally no way I can ever change my mind, but I'm going to stop saying I used logic and reason to objectively arrive at my outcome. It's simply the outcome I like best. 
It is the most reasonable outcome. If you don't think so then argue against it and provide your EVIDENCE for your belief that this is not so instead of a big song and dance production. 


To that, I have no argument. Just stop talking about logic and reason like they apply in any way to your claim and we'll get along just fine! :)


Only if you can convince me in a logical and reasonable manner that they do not. (^8
#220
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@3RU7AL
Let's refocus for a second.

Try to disprove the existence of Vishnu without mentioning the "YHWH" or the holy scriptures.
Logically, if X (biblical God) is true, then X does not equal Vishnu.

Establish the reasonableness for Vishnu as creator and sustainer of the universe from your scriptural sources that I may discuss the reasonableness of your claims. 

For me, I choose prophecy as the vehicle to use in establishing the biblical claims are most reasonable and logical because I can demonstrate to such a degree that they actually happened in history. Do that with Vishnu. What are the earliest extant writings regarding Vishnu and how do they guard against corruption? 

I.e., when is the earliest source available? How many copies of that source, or do you claim it is the original revelation from Vishnu? 

#221
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
I think the vedas and bible are roughly tied on the 'ancientness' front.

But fulfilment of prophecy plays no part in Hinduism so they aren't easily compared.

There are multiple accounts of creation in hindu scipture. My favourite says the gods were part of creation so even they do not know how creation happened!

[verse 6]But, after all, who knows, and who can say
Whence it all came, and how creation happened?
the gods themselves are later than creation,
so who knows truly whence it has arisen?


#222
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@PGA2.0
For me, I choose prophecy as the vehicle to use in establishing the biblical claims are most reasonable and logical because I can demonstrate to such a degree that they actually happened in history.
Baha'is have pointed to the prophecies in the Hindu scriptures and stated that all of these have been fulfilled in this age. There are many passages in the Hindu writings which describe the condition of the world at the end of the Kalki Yuga. Baha'is would say that what is described in the Hindu books is exactly what we are seeing in the world today. Among the most striking of these passages from the Hindu holy books are the following:

"In the Kali Yuga, wealth alone will be the deciding factor of nobility [in place of birth, righteous behavior or merit]. And brute force will be the only standard or deciding what is righteous or just."

"Mutual liking [and not family pedigree, social status, etc.] will be the deciding factor in choosing a partner in marriage; cheating will be the order of the day in business relations; satisfaction of sexual pleasure will be the only consideration of male or female excellence and worthiness; and the wearing of the sacred thread (Yajnopavita) [and not pious behavior or Vedic or Shastric learning] will be the outward index of being a Brahmin.

In the Kali Yuga, only one quarter of each of the four feet of Dharma [panance, truthfulness, compassion and charity] remains. And that too goes on decreasing day by day while the feet of Adharma [unrighteousness] increase greatly. So that in the end Dharma becomes extinct."

"In that [Kali] age, people will be greedy. They will take to wicked behavior. They will be merciless, indulge in hostilities without any cause, unfortunate, extremely covetous for wealth and women. High social status will be attained by Sudras, fisherman and such other classes..."

"When deceit, falsehood, lethargy, sleepiness, violence, despondency. grief, delusion, fear, and poverty prevail, that is the Kali Yuga..."
"...mortal beings will become dull-wittwd, unlucky, voracious, destitute of wealth yet voloptuous, and women, wanton and unchaste.

Countries will be laid waste by robbers and vagabonds; the Vedas will be condemned heretics; kings will exploit their subjects, and twice-borns like Brahmanas will only think of the gratification of their sexual desires and other appetites.

"Celibates [of the Brahma Carya ashrama] will cease to observe their vows of study, purity and celibacy; householders will take to begging [instead of giving alms]; hermits [of the vanaprastha ashrama] will resort to villages [leaving their retreats in the forests]; and Sannyasins will be extremely greedy for money.[in short, the whole system of the Varnashrama Dharma will have broken down.]"

"Petty - minded people will conduct business transactions and merchants will be dishonest."

In the Kali Yuga, men will abandon their parents, brothers, friends, and relatives. They will occupy high seats [and pulpits] and will [pretend to] preach religion.

People will have their minds weighed down with constant anxiety and fear. This will be due to devastating famines and heavy taxation. The land will not grow food-crops, and the people will always be in fear of impending droughts.

There are similar prophecies in many other passages of the Hindu scriptures such as the Ramayana, the Mahabharata and the Vishnu Purana. Baha is believe that all of the conditions described in these books have come about today.

Swami Vivekananda, a prominent writer wrote: But greater than the present deep dismal night...no pall of darkness had ever before enveloped this holy land of ours. And compared with the depth of this fall, all previous falls appear like little hoof-marks.

There are also prophecies that we are seeing today of the breakdown of the caste system and the abandonment of religion: "The observance of caste, order and institutes will not prevail in the Kali Yuga; nor will that of the ceremonials and rituals enjoined by the Sama, Rig, and Yajur Vedas. Marriages, in this age, will not conform to the ritual; nor will the rules that connect the guru and his disciple be in force. The laws that regulate the conduct of husband and wife will be disregarded; and oblations to the gods with fire will no longer be offered..."

The doctrines of false teachers will be held to be scripture... In the Kali Yuga, those who practice fasting, austerity and liberality will do so in whatever way they please [and not according to the law]. And men will call this righteousness...

Men of all degrees, filled with conceit, will consider themselves to be equal with Brahmins...

In the Kali Yuga, men, corrupted by unbelievers, will refrain from adoring Vishnu, the Lord of sacrifice, the creator and lord of all. They will say: Of what authority are the Vedas? What are gods, or Brahmins? What need is there for purification with water?

"When the practices taught by the Vedas and the institutes of law shall nearly have ceased, and the close of the Kali age shall be nigh, a portion of that divine being who exists of his own spiritual nature in the character of Brahma, and who is the beginning and the end, and who comprehends all things, shall descend upon the earth. He will be born as Kalki in the family of an eminent brahmin of Sambhala village, endowed with the eight superhuman faculties. By his irresistible might he will destroy all the barbarians and thieves, and all whose minds are devoted to iniquity. He will then re-establish righteousness upon earth; and the minds of those who live at the end of the Kali age shall be awakened, and shall be as pellucid as crystal. The men who are thus changed by virtue of that peculiar time shall be as the seeds of human beings, and shall give birth to a race who shall follow the laws of the Krita age, the Age of Purity." --- Hinduism- Vishnu Purana 4.24 [LINK]


#223
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@PGA2.0
Logically, if X (biblical God) is true, then X does not equal Vishnu.
Logically, if X (Vishnu) is true, then X does not equal the "YHWH".
#224
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@3RU7AL
I think that description could apply to every age!

#225
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@PGA2.0
Establish the reasonableness for Vishnu as creator and sustainer of the universe from your scriptural sources that I may discuss the reasonableness of your claims. 
Vishnu is merely an aspect of Brahman.

Brahman, in the Upanishads (Indian sacred writings), the supreme existence or absolute reality. The etymology of the word, which is derived from Sanskrit, is uncertain. Though a variety of views are expressed in the Upanishads, they concur in the definition of brahman as eternal, conscious, irreducible, infinite, omnipresent, and the spiritual core of the universe of finiteness and change. Marked differences in interpretation of brahman characterize the various schools of Vedanta, the system of Hindu philosophy based on the writings of the Upanishads.

According to the Advaita (Nondualist) school of Vedanta, brahman is categorically different from anything phenomenal, and human perceptions of differentiation are illusively projected on this reality. The Bhedabheda (Dualist-Nondualist) school maintains that brahman is nondifferent from the world, which is its product, but different in that phenomenality imposes certain adventitious conditions (upadhis) on brahman. The Vishishtadvaita (Qualified Nondualist) school maintains that a relation exists between brahman and the world of soul and matter that is comparable to the relation between soul and body; the school identifies brahman with a personal god, Brahma, who is both transcendent and immanent. The Dvaita (Dualist) school refuses to accept the identity of brahman and world, maintaining the ontological separateness of the supreme, which it also identifies with a personal god. [LINK]
#226
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
Logically, if X (biblical God) is true, then X does not equal Vishnu.
Obviously a hitherto unknown and obscure version of logic and notation...

I think the idea is that if something is the biblical god then it isn't vishnu.

Maybe god appeared to the Jews as yhwh and to the Indians as vishnu.

#227
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@PGA2.0
What are the earliest extant writings regarding Vishnu and how do they guard against corruption? 

I.e., when is the earliest source available? How many copies of that source, or do you claim it is the original revelation from Vishnu? 
The Vedas – these texts date back to about 800 BCE. They originate from ancient India. The Vedas are the oldest Hindu texts and even the oldest texts in Sanskrit Literature. These sacred texts are very important for followers of Hinduism. The Hindus consider The Vedas “apaurusheya”. Which means “not of a man” or not of human origin. These texts also have no authors. Hindus believing that these texts are eternal. And they were created nor by human neither by gods. Although, The Mahabharata describes The Vedas to be created by Brahma.

There are 4 Vedas, each containing specific types of texts: Rigveda, Yajurveda, Samaveda and Atharvaveda.

The Upanishads – they are an important collection of ancient Hindu texts. Also, they contain fundamental philosophical concepts of Hinduism. This collection is often called Vedanta. Which can be translated in many ways. But basically describing the fact that the Upanishads are part of the Vedas. And it explains the Vedas.

The Upanishads are mostly philosophical texts describing and defining Hindu religious concepts. Therefore, concepts such as Brahman and Atman represent the central ideas of these texts. Some parts of the collection are believed to date back to about 600 BCE. [LINK]

The earliest extant reference to Brahmanism appears to be the Major Rock Edicts from about 260 BCE. [LINK]
#228
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@keithprosser
Maybe god appeared to the Jews as yhwh and to the Indians as vishnu.
Merry Krishnas!!!
#229
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@3RU7AL
I find you guys never engage in the proofs Christianity offers. 
In the same way that you don't accept "proofs" from other religions.
Convince me they are reasonable. 


Historical facts from the Vedas do not convince you that the Hindu beliefs are true.
What historical facts in relation to prophecy are you speaking of?


Therefore, historical facts are moot.
I never said that; you did.


Accurate predictions in the Epic of Gilgamesh do not convince you that the ancient Sumerian gods are real.
Such as what?


Therefore, accurate predictions are moot.

Accurate predictions are one confirmation the belief is reasonable. The more accurate and detailed predictions there are the better. 

#230
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
Accurate predictions are one confirmation the belief is reasonable. The more accurate and detailed predictions there are the better. 
I agree - accurate foretellings of the future would undermine a major objection to theism.  They wouldn't prove all the minutiae of a religion were correct but they would show that the supernatural has to be taken seriously.

But I don't accept there are supernaturally accurate foretellings in the Bible! 



#231
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
Regarding prophecy, did the OT predict another building and destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the Jewish system of worship before it happened (i.e., Daniel 9:24-27 as one such passage)? Is that reasonable to believe? If you think not then provide evidence as to why. 
This is your quote.
Below are those passages.

24 Seventy weeks are decreed upon thy people and upon thy holy city, [j]to finish [k]transgression, and [l]to make an end of sins, and to [m]make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and [n]prophecy, and to anoint [o]the most holy. 25 Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto [p]the anointed one, the prince, shall be [q]seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: it shall be built again, with street and moat, even in troublous times. 26 And after the threescore and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and [r]shall have nothing: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and even unto the end shall be war; desolations are determined. 27 And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the [s]oblation to cease; and [t]upon the wing of abominations shall come one that maketh desolate; and even unto the full end, and that determined, shall wrath be poured out upon the desolate.
Show me where in the prophesy you quote, Daniel 9:24-27, 490yrs is mentioned.


#232
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@disgusted
I get where you are coming from, but I don't mind cutting pga a bit of slack on interpreting week as '7 years' if only to give him a fighting chance! 

I think the evidence is good that Daniel is 'fake-prophecy' and it's more interesting to winkle out what the writer was really trying to do with the text.
Topic's author
#233
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@PGA2.0
The Bible, throughout, claims to be His word, His revelation, His interaction with humanity so what is said should conform to what we discover from history and it should be philosophical reasonable and logical

Right, my point exactly! The claim cannot be evidence. It has to be the claim. Being accused of something is not evidence for whatever you're accused of. 


The question is can you prove that the creator of the universe is in fact your god. 
Again, it revolves around what would you consider proof? The evidence is most reasonable but even facts can be disputed. 
So no, you cannot prove it this way. 

My evidence would be in the logic of if the biblical God is real then Zeus is unreasonable, as simple as that. The Laws of 
Logic
state that two contrary things cannot both be valid at the same time and in the same manner. If God is the biblical God then He is not Zeus. So all I have to do is show the biblical God is reasonable to believe and Zeus is not. 
No, you'd have to show that the bible god is real, and Zeus isn't, or the bible god is reasonable and Zeus isn't. Don't conflate reasonable with real. You're starting from a position of "it's reasonable to assume there's something that created the universe" which I grant. You do not and have not, now in ten pages, made any advance towards 'and here's why it's the same character this one book claims it is.' I continue to wait, but you continue to point to the claim (The bible says he's real, it's his word, it claims to be his revelation) as the evidence. I've even offered you a way out of using your god or the bible: demonstrate any other deity conclusively false, without referencing your faith to do so. Their falsity should not be dependent on your faith at all, it's either true or it isn't, right? In other words, if Roman pantheism is false, it doesn't make Christianity true, they are independent of each other. 

It is the most reasonable outcome.
Great! Now please show the following work: from creator of the universe, to the god of the bible being the most reasonably responsible party. Don't use the bible because that's the claim not the evidence. 
#234
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@PGA2.0
What historical facts in relation to prophecy are you speaking of?

Any historical facts that confirm the fulfillment of any prophesy.

#235
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@keithprosser
The prophesy ONLY mentions 70 weeks, the prophesy does not allow for any other time frame, the prophesy quoted by the golfer is an abject failure.
Topic's author
#236
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@PGA2.0
I find you guys never engage in the proofs Christianity offers. 
In the same way that you don't accept "proofs" from other religions.
Convince me they are reasonable. 

Loathe as I am to give any oxygen to this distraction...

I feel like the most reasonable supernatural explanation would have to be a pantheistic version. For example, Roman gods are reasonable because they seem to have "departments," areas of expertise (eventually this would be co-opted by CHristianity in the form of saints). They don't really care too much about humans and what they do (which makes sense, I mean how much time do you spend worrying if ants or frogs are treating each other fairly?). Humans are really afterthoughts that are often collaterally affected by the disputes these gods have with each other. Under the pantheon model, if your husband's boat is sunk at sea in a terrible storm, it's not because part of some plan put your otherwise innocent husband on a boat with a guy a monotheistic god was really mad at and had to kill all on board to get him. It's simply that Jupiter, the god of thunder and lightning and storms or whatever, and Neptune, the god of the sea, were having it out and you were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Oh, a fine lady caught your eye that isn't your wife and you two want to fuck for fun? Sounds like the influence of Eros or Aphrodite is in the air, and you're just caught in the crossfire! Better decide if it's them or one of the trickster gods like Pan the half goat, who often lured folks into bad situations like that only to reveal it to the wife or husband later. Trickster gods, mischief gods, gods for all manner of natural phenomena, none of them omnipotent or ominscient but with their own agendas, never really concerned with humanity in general, that helps explain things like "problem of evil," or why morality is so different from one person to another, with much more reason than "Well, your son's leukemia is something you should be thankful to Jesus for because he planned it." 

 
Topic's author
#237
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@keithprosser
@disgusted
I get what gus is saying here: if you're going to use the biblical prophesy argument, you have to use ONLY the bible, or some biblically spelled out conversion chart for time periods that's IN the bible. Otherwise you are polluting the prophesy by using extrabiblical sources that potentially have a reason to want to have the prophesy work out just right. I don't see why an all powerful god wouldn't either correct the math or typo in the bible on its own. IF you're arguing for prophesy accurately in the bible, it seems like you give too much ground by saying "In this case, I'll allow some scholar 600 years from when this was supposed to be written originally inform why it was not in fact 70 weeks, but instead it MEANT to say 490 years." It's either in the book or it isn't. You know, the book with talking animals and a worldwide flood that left no evidence after having covered the earth for 40 days (which maybe meant 280 weeks?) and pairs of every single species of creature on earth were stored together on a single boat for that long. 

Besides, predicting that a Roman occupied city would have its temples destroyed is not exactly the wildest prediction of all time, especially if you leave it open ended. It's how they expanded their empire to cover as much of the world as it did for so long: destroy a culture and make it basically Roman. Their architecture is everywhere in the ancient world for a reason.
#238
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@3RU7AL
For me, I choose prophecy as the vehicle to use in establishing the biblical claims are most reasonable and logical because I can demonstrate to such a degree that they actually happened in history.

"In the Kali Yuga, wealth alone will be the deciding factor of nobility [in place of birth, righteous behavior or merit]. And brute force will be the only standard or deciding what is righteous or just."

"Mutual liking [and not family pedigree, social status, etc.] will be the deciding factor in choosing a partner in marriage; cheating will be the order of the day in business relations; satisfaction of sexual pleasure will be the only consideration of male or female excellence and worthiness; and the wearing of the sacred thread (Yajnopavita) [and not pious behavior or Vedic or Shastric learning] will be the outward index of being a Brahmin.

In the Kali Yuga, only one quarter of each of the four feet of Dharma [panance, truthfulness, compassion and charity] remains. And that too goes on decreasing day by day while the feet of Adharma [unrighteousness] increase greatly. So that in the end Dharma becomes extinct."

"In that [Kali] age, people will be greedy. They will take to wicked behavior. They will be merciless, indulge in hostilities without any cause, unfortunate, extremely covetous for wealth and women. High social status will be attained by Sudras, fisherman and such other classes..."

"When deceit, falsehood, lethargy, sleepiness, violence, despondency. grief, delusion, fear, and poverty prevail, that is the Kali Yuga..."
"...mortal beings will become dull-wittwd, unlucky, voracious, destitute of wealth yet voloptuous, and women, wanton and unchaste.

Countries will be laid waste by robbers and vagabonds; the Vedas will be condemned heretics; kings will exploit their subjects, and twice-borns like Brahmanas will only think of the gratification of their sexual desires and other appetites.

There are also prophecies that we are seeing today of the breakdown of the caste system and the abandonment of religion: "The observance of caste, order and institutes will not prevail in the Kali Yuga; nor will that of the ceremonials and rituals enjoined by the Sama, Rig, and Yajur Vedas. Marriages, in this age, will not conform to the ritual; nor will the rules that connect the guru and his disciple be in force. The laws that regulate the conduct of husband and wife will be disregarded; and oblations to the gods with fire will no longer be offered..."

"When the practices taught by the Vedas and the institutes of law shall nearly have ceased, and the close of the Kali age shall be nigh, a portion of that divine being who exists of his own spiritual nature in the character of Brahma, and who is the beginning and the end, and who comprehends all things, shall descend upon the earth. He will be born as Kalki in the family of an eminent brahmin of Sambhala village, endowed with the eight superhuman faculties. By his irresistible might he will destroy all the barbarians and thieves, and all whose minds are devoted to iniquity. He will then re-establish righteousness upon earth; and the minds of those who live at the end of the Kali age shall be awakened, and shall be as pellucid as crystal. The men who are thus changed by virtue of that peculiar time shall be as the seeds of human beings, and shall give birth to a race who shall follow the laws of the Krita age, the Age of Purity." --- Hinduism- Vishnu Purana 4.24 

I see no indication of any specific time of this "new age," just generalized and vague language that could be applied to any time. What is more, take a look at the last passage in which the village of Sambhala (ah, yes, the road to Shambhala) is mention. Where is this place? 

In Hinduism and Tibetan Buddhist tradition, Shambhala (Sanskrit: Sambhalaḥ, also spelled Shambala or Shamballa; Tibetan: Wylie: bde 'byung; Chinese: pinyin: xiāngbālā) is a mythical kingdom. The kingdom is said to be laid out in precisely the same form as an eight-petalled lotus blossom surrounded by a chain of snow mountains. At the centre lies the palace of the King of Shambala who governed from the city called Kalapa. Shambhala is also often called Shangri-la in some texts.


A mythical kingdom...

Now, take a look at a biblical prophecy and the specifics of it:


 

#239
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@3RU7AL
Luke 21:20-24
20 “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is near. 21 Then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains, and those who are in the midst of the city must leave, and those who are in the country must not enter the city; 22 because these are days of vengeance, so that all things which are written will be fulfilled. 23 Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days; for there will be great distress upon the land and wrath to this people; 24 and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled under foot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

This prophecy is very specific. It names a historical city and specific people (the pronouns "you" and "your" plus "they" and "those" applies to the disciples and the Jewish people under the Mosaic Covenant during the 1st-century), a specific region(Judea)  and a specific time frame (when Jerusalem is surrounded by armies once again) and things that do not apply to us today (they will fall by the edge of the sword). The sword is not used in modern warfare today. Not only this, everything written would incorporate the OT scriptures and quite possibly some NT scriptures (what was written at the time of this author writing - i.e., the OT).

The same can be said of Daniel 9:24-27. It is a very specific prophecy concerning very specific people (Daniel's people who are in a covenant relationship with God) plus a very specific time frame in which specific events will happen.

#240
PGA2.0
PGA2.0's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,179
3
5
8
PGA2.0's avatar
PGA2.0
3
5
8
-->
@3RU7AL
Logically, if X (biblical God) is true, then X does not equal Vishnu.
Logically, if X (Vishnu) is true, then X does not equal the "YHWH".
And the prophetic writings you referenced list Sambhala as a mythical kingdom. It lists various things that will take place that could point to any time frame. It lists the new age yet it could be any time in the future since so many of the descriptions could be argued to occur in any age or timeline. Thus, the evidence is more reasonable for the biblical God in the one aspect we are examining here - prophecy.