100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Can the Resurrection of Christ be proven scientifically | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
cowboy- don't get me wrong here, i'm not knocking you or your faith, but it was your type of thinking that held back science for so long. if you wanna have faith in god, i don't think anyone has a problem with that. but that age old attitude that if it doesn't glorify god, then it must be the devil is not the way to think. Science is not a bad thing, and neither is the truth of anything... wouldn't you like to know the truth of everything? or are people like you scared of the truth? personally, i think that what the bible says cannot be proven either way, but what is the harm in trying to prove or disprove it? wouldn't you wanna know the real truth if presented to you? i would. Science may be the only way to prove while we are alive. don't look at science as a bad thing, science has done wonders for our lives and keeps us alive to boot. I'm sorry, you seem to have gotten me wrong. I never said science was bad and or we shouldn't be messing with that. I'm all for science. It has brought forth many good things. My entire point again was that one has to put faith in the findings of science, unless that one repeats the experiments to find the results themselves. They are faithfully trusting that the scientist was telling the truth. That's all. You have put faith in that the world is round. Do you have any plausible exact facts about this that can prove the world is round without a doubt? Cause I can show you pictures of the world being square. That's what the entire purpose was of this. Not specifically to renounce science, cause I don't. Just to show that even with science people are putting faith in it that it is correct, unless of course for minor science where the experiment can be done at home to find the truth for themselves. ok, my bad...any photo from space shows the earth is round, google earth does to... and how would that be faith? faith is a religious term, does not apply to science. i guess we can agree to disagree, because i just seem to not grasp what your saying.... so your not sure the earth is round? are you not sure we need oxygen to live? i can understand about evolution, some people do not believe in it, but i do and i can see it every day. Prove to me the earth is round without a shadow of doubt, prove to me we need OXYGEN to breath without a shadow of doubt. thats the difference between faith and fact... if you have a doubt about something as common as that, then you need faith in your life... if you need that kind of proof over something like that, then how can you believe in god? My point is you believe by faith that the world is round, you can not PROVE the world is round, nor can you PROVE it's oxygen that we need. It's all taken by faith that these scientists know what they are talking about. Nor can I PROVE to you God. NOTHING in this world can be proven to anyone except what that one proves to them self. Heck you can't even prove the sky is blue unless that person is willing to accept it as such, eg., proving it to them self. i do not need certian FACTS proven to me... millions of people have already proved these things, there absolutely no need for me to prove it again...redundant is redundant... it is not faith it is a certian fact... So you're saying since millions of people have accepted it as truth, it's gotta be? Well heck millions of people have accepted Christianity as fact, why is that so different? quote: millions of people have already proved these things, not one of your millions have proven anything... Not one of your millions have proven anything either. Less you are willing to put faith in what they are saying.    That was my entire point this entire time lol. I don't renounce science or anything, just was proving a point about what exactly faith was. Things are only "facts" cause people have put faith in it as being true. NOTHING in this world is compact exact complete for sure, less you are willing to put faith in it. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
mightymoe
on
Sun 03/27/11 10:16 AM
|
|
That was my entire point this entire time lol. I don't renounce science or anything, just was proving a point about what exactly faith was. Things are only "facts" cause people have put faith in it as being true. NOTHING in this world is compact exact complete for sure, less you are willing to put faith in it. you still don't seem to understand what a fact is, so i'll leave it at that.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That was my entire point this entire time lol. I don't renounce science or anything, just was proving a point about what exactly faith was. Things are only "facts" cause people have put faith in it as being true. NOTHING in this world is compact exact complete for sure, less you are willing to put faith in it. you still don't seem to understand what a fact is, so i'll leave it at that.... I know exactly what a fact is. A fact is something that occurs time after time and doesn't just happen in a fluke. Things start out as a theory and if they withstand many times repeated and the results remain the same, they become fact. Nothing has shown evidence that the scriptures is false, so therefore it has withstood the different "experiments". So guess what that makes the scriptures in the long run? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That was my entire point this entire time lol. I don't renounce science or anything, just was proving a point about what exactly faith was. Things are only "facts" cause people have put faith in it as being true. NOTHING in this world is compact exact complete for sure, less you are willing to put faith in it. you still don't seem to understand what a fact is, so i'll leave it at that.... I know exactly what a fact is. A fact is something that occurs time after time and doesn't just happen in a fluke. Things start out as a theory and if they withstand many times repeated and the results remain the same, they become fact. Nothing has shown evidence that the scriptures is false, so therefore it has withstood the different "experiments". So guess what that makes the scriptures in the long run? look the word "fact" in the dictionary, then come back and ask me that... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That was my entire point this entire time lol. I don't renounce science or anything, just was proving a point about what exactly faith was. Things are only "facts" cause people have put faith in it as being true. NOTHING in this world is compact exact complete for sure, less you are willing to put faith in it. you still don't seem to understand what a fact is, so i'll leave it at that.... I know exactly what a fact is. A fact is something that occurs time after time and doesn't just happen in a fluke. Things start out as a theory and if they withstand many times repeated and the results remain the same, they become fact. Nothing has shown evidence that the scriptures is false, so therefore it has withstood the different "experiments". So guess what that makes the scriptures in the long run? look the word "fact" in the dictionary, then come back and ask me that... 1. Knowledge or information based on real occurrences ----------------------- We have scriptures after scriptures of the occurences ========================= 2. a. Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed b. A real occurrence; an event c. Something believed to be true or real ------------------------ I have seen it demonstrated to exist everyday, I know it to exist. And gain we have multiple scriptures of previous events. I have seen some events myself. Again, it is where you wish to put your faith into how/why such and such happened. ========================== |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That was my entire point this entire time lol. I don't renounce science or anything, just was proving a point about what exactly faith was. Things are only "facts" cause people have put faith in it as being true. NOTHING in this world is compact exact complete for sure, less you are willing to put faith in it. you still don't seem to understand what a fact is, so i'll leave it at that.... I know exactly what a fact is. A fact is something that occurs time after time and doesn't just happen in a fluke. Things start out as a theory and if they withstand many times repeated and the results remain the same, they become fact. Nothing has shown evidence that the scriptures is false, so therefore it has withstood the different "experiments". So guess what that makes the scriptures in the long run? look the word "fact" in the dictionary, then come back and ask me that... 1. Knowledge or information based on real occurrences ----------------------- We have scriptures after scriptures of the occurences ========================= 2. a. Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed b. A real occurrence; an event c. Something believed to be true or real ------------------------ I have seen it demonstrated to exist everyday, I know it to exist. And gain we have multiple scriptures of previous events. I have seen some events myself. Again, it is where you wish to put your faith into how/why such and such happened. ========================== what was demonstrated to exist? c is wrong, just because you believe something does not make it a fact... what events can you prove to be real in the bible? dictionary.com says –noun 1. something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact. 2. something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact. 3. a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth. 4. something said to be true or supposed to have happened: The facts given by the witness are highly questionable. 5. Law . Often, facts. an actual or alleged event or circumstance, as distinguished from its legal effect or consequence. Compare question of fact, question of law. —Idioms 6. after the fact, Law . after the commission of a crime: an accessory after the fact. 7. before the fact, Law . prior to the commission of a crime: an accessory before the fact. 8. in fact, actually; really; indeed: In fact, it was a wonder that anyone survived. Use fact in a Sentence See images of fact Search fact on the Web Origin: 1530–40; < Latin factum something done, deed, noun use of neuter of factus done, past participle of facere to do1 —Related forms fact·ful, adjective —Can be confused: facts, FAQs, fa |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That was my entire point this entire time lol. I don't renounce science or anything, just was proving a point about what exactly faith was. Things are only "facts" cause people have put faith in it as being true. NOTHING in this world is compact exact complete for sure, less you are willing to put faith in it. you still don't seem to understand what a fact is, so i'll leave it at that.... I know exactly what a fact is. A fact is something that occurs time after time and doesn't just happen in a fluke. Things start out as a theory and if they withstand many times repeated and the results remain the same, they become fact. Nothing has shown evidence that the scriptures is false, so therefore it has withstood the different "experiments". So guess what that makes the scriptures in the long run? look the word "fact" in the dictionary, then come back and ask me that... 1. Knowledge or information based on real occurrences ----------------------- We have scriptures after scriptures of the occurences ========================= 2. a. Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed b. A real occurrence; an event c. Something believed to be true or real ------------------------ I have seen it demonstrated to exist everyday, I know it to exist. And gain we have multiple scriptures of previous events. I have seen some events myself. Again, it is where you wish to put your faith into how/why such and such happened. ========================== what was demonstrated to exist? c is wrong, just because you believe something does not make it a fact... what events can you prove to be real in the bible? dictionary.com says –noun 1. something that actually exists; reality; truth: Your fears have no basis in fact. 2. something known to exist or to have happened: Space travel is now a fact. 3. a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth. 4. something said to be true or supposed to have happened: The facts given by the witness are highly questionable. 5. Law . Often, facts. an actual or alleged event or circumstance, as distinguished from its legal effect or consequence. Compare question of fact, question of law. —Idioms 6. after the fact, Law . after the commission of a crime: an accessory after the fact. 7. before the fact, Law . prior to the commission of a crime: an accessory before the fact. 8. in fact, actually; really; indeed: In fact, it was a wonder that anyone survived. Use fact in a Sentence See images of fact Search fact on the Web Origin: 1530–40; < Latin factum something done, deed, noun use of neuter of factus done, past participle of facere to do1 —Related forms fact·ful, adjective —Can be confused: facts, FAQs, fa The scriptures are documented history events, it's proof in it's own. History books are evidence of certain events, they are documented proof. The scriptures are documented proof of certain events that happened and things that will happen. With your way of thinking, there is a trial for a murder. Someone shows evidence of the person doing the murder. In defense they say show evidence that your evidence is correct. That just doesn't make any sense. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cowboy- don't get me wrong here, i'm not knocking you or your faith, but it was your type of thinking that held back science for so long. if you wanna have faith in god, i don't think anyone has a problem with that. but that age old attitude that if it doesn't glorify god, then it must be the devil is not the way to think. Science is not a bad thing, and neither is the truth of anything... wouldn't you like to know the truth of everything? or are people like you scared of the truth? personally, i think that what the bible says cannot be proven either way, but what is the harm in trying to prove or disprove it? wouldn't you wanna know the real truth if presented to you? i would. Science may be the only way to prove while we are alive. don't look at science as a bad thing, science has done wonders for our lives and keeps us alive to boot. I'm sorry, you seem to have gotten me wrong. I never said science was bad and or we shouldn't be messing with that. I'm all for science. It has brought forth many good things. My entire point again was that one has to put faith in the findings of science, unless that one repeats the experiments to find the results themselves. They are faithfully trusting that the scientist was telling the truth. That's all. You have put faith in that the world is round. Do you have any plausible exact facts about this that can prove the world is round without a doubt? Cause I can show you pictures of the world being square. That's what the entire purpose was of this. Not specifically to renounce science, cause I don't. Just to show that even with science people are putting faith in it that it is correct, unless of course for minor science where the experiment can be done at home to find the truth for themselves. ok, my bad...any photo from space shows the earth is round, google earth does to... and how would that be faith? faith is a religious term, does not apply to science. i guess we can agree to disagree, because i just seem to not grasp what your saying.... so your not sure the earth is round? are you not sure we need oxygen to live? i can understand about evolution, some people do not believe in it, but i do and i can see it every day. Prove to me the earth is round without a shadow of doubt, prove to me we need OXYGEN to breath without a shadow of doubt. thats the difference between faith and fact... if you have a doubt about something as common as that, then you need faith in your life... if you need that kind of proof over something like that, then how can you believe in god? My point is you believe by faith that the world is round, you can not PROVE the world is round, nor can you PROVE it's oxygen that we need. It's all taken by faith that these scientists know what they are talking about. Nor can I PROVE to you God. NOTHING in this world can be proven to anyone except what that one proves to them self. Heck you can't even prove the sky is blue unless that person is willing to accept it as such, eg., proving it to them self. i do not need certian FACTS proven to me... millions of people have already proved these things, there absolutely no need for me to prove it again...redundant is redundant... it is not faith it is a certian fact... So you're saying since millions of people have accepted it as truth, it's gotta be? Well heck millions of people have accepted Christianity as fact, why is that so different? quote: millions of people have already proved these things, not one of your millions have proven anything... Not one of your millions have proven anything either. Less you are willing to put faith in what they are saying. Mo - haven't you heard that the federal budget cuts defunded the "Futility Police" - so you will have to police your own efforts in futility in the future. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cowboy- don't get me wrong here, i'm not knocking you or your faith, but it was your type of thinking that held back science for so long. if you wanna have faith in god, i don't think anyone has a problem with that. but that age old attitude that if it doesn't glorify god, then it must be the devil is not the way to think. Science is not a bad thing, and neither is the truth of anything... wouldn't you like to know the truth of everything? or are people like you scared of the truth? personally, i think that what the bible says cannot be proven either way, but what is the harm in trying to prove or disprove it? wouldn't you wanna know the real truth if presented to you? i would. Science may be the only way to prove while we are alive. don't look at science as a bad thing, science has done wonders for our lives and keeps us alive to boot. I'm sorry, you seem to have gotten me wrong. I never said science was bad and or we shouldn't be messing with that. I'm all for science. It has brought forth many good things. My entire point again was that one has to put faith in the findings of science, unless that one repeats the experiments to find the results themselves. They are faithfully trusting that the scientist was telling the truth. That's all. You have put faith in that the world is round. Do you have any plausible exact facts about this that can prove the world is round without a doubt? Cause I can show you pictures of the world being square. That's what the entire purpose was of this. Not specifically to renounce science, cause I don't. Just to show that even with science people are putting faith in it that it is correct, unless of course for minor science where the experiment can be done at home to find the truth for themselves. ok, my bad...any photo from space shows the earth is round, google earth does to... and how would that be faith? faith is a religious term, does not apply to science. i guess we can agree to disagree, because i just seem to not grasp what your saying.... so your not sure the earth is round? are you not sure we need oxygen to live? i can understand about evolution, some people do not believe in it, but i do and i can see it every day. Prove to me the earth is round without a shadow of doubt, prove to me we need OXYGEN to breath without a shadow of doubt. thats the difference between faith and fact... if you have a doubt about something as common as that, then you need faith in your life... if you need that kind of proof over something like that, then how can you believe in god? My point is you believe by faith that the world is round, you can not PROVE the world is round, nor can you PROVE it's oxygen that we need. It's all taken by faith that these scientists know what they are talking about. Nor can I PROVE to you God. NOTHING in this world can be proven to anyone except what that one proves to them self. Heck you can't even prove the sky is blue unless that person is willing to accept it as such, eg., proving it to them self. i do not need certian FACTS proven to me... millions of people have already proved these things, there absolutely no need for me to prove it again...redundant is redundant... it is not faith it is a certian fact... So you're saying since millions of people have accepted it as truth, it's gotta be? Well heck millions of people have accepted Christianity as fact, why is that so different? quote: millions of people have already proved these things, not one of your millions have proven anything... Not one of your millions have proven anything either. Less you are willing to put faith in what they are saying. Mo - haven't you heard that the federal budget cuts defunded the "Futility Police" - so you will have to police your own efforts in futility in the future. i guess... seems like i'm not very good at it either...oh well 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Point #1: Nobody Disputed It
Read the Bible. What is interesting here is that nowhere in the Bible is the resurrection disputed by anybody. People were upset, enraged, and perhaps a little scared. But, nobody disputed the resurrection. It was accepted as historical fact. Now, you may say, "It's the Bible." Other writings at the time, including writings from Prius and Josephus mention the Resurrection. They never dispute it, and if anything, write it as one would a news event. Here is my question to you doubters. If Jesus did not rise from dead, and did not walk among us, wouldn't someone have reported this? We have many writings from people of that era, and we even have writings from those who contradict Christ. In NO writings is there ANYTHING that refutes Christ's resurrection. Even those who were against Christ did not write about the "absurdity" of Christ's resurrection. Think about it. If Christ's resurrection were a hoax, there would be thousands of writings that stated this "falsity." We have none. I reiterate, we have the Bible, and third-party sources who support His resurrection. And yet, we have not one document that contradicts it. What say you? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Redykeulous
on
Mon 03/28/11 09:11 AM
|
|
Point #1: Nobody Disputed It Read the Bible. What is interesting here is that nowhere in the Bible is the resurrection disputed by anybody. People were upset, enraged, and perhaps a little scared. But, nobody disputed the resurrection. It was accepted as historical fact. Now, you may say, "It's the Bible." Other writings at the time, including writings from Prius and Josephus mention the Resurrection. They never dispute it, and if anything, write it as one would a news event. Shiki, how many people in the whole wide world do you suppose owned or had ever read a Bible before the mid 1400s???? Here is my question to you doubters. If Jesus did not rise from dead, and did not walk among us, wouldn't someone have reported this? We have many writings from people of that era, and we even have writings from those who contradict Christ. Those who refuted it, did not believe – so let me ask you in return – how may people existed between Jesus death and say 1450, how may were exposed to the Christian beliefs and how many DID NOT BELIEVE? I certainly consider that a refute as equal in power to the opinions of those who claimed it was true. In NO writings is there ANYTHING that refutes Christ's resurrection. Even those who were against Christ did not write about the "absurdity" of Christ's resurrection. Then you have not searched far enough – there are dozens of historical references that make this refute – AND – they are all AT LEAST as reputable as the references who claim otherwise. Think about it. If Christ's resurrection were a hoax, there would be thousands of writings that stated this "falsity." We have none. If I have never seen a pink elephant and you tell me one exists – it is not up to me to prove it is a false claim, it is up to you to provide the validity of your claim. I reiterate, we have the Bible, and third-party sources who support His resurrection. And yet, we have not one document that contradicts it. What say you I say that you have fallen into the pit that swallows up all those who QUESTION their beliefs – it is the pit of agnosticism. Ye of little faith, why must you continue to find objective prove to substantiate your faith? Admit it – you question the terms of your beliefs as much as scientist question the theories in quantum physics. What say YOU? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redy writes:
"Then you have not searched far enough – there are dozens of historical references that make this refute – AND – they are all AT LEAST as reputable as the references who claim otherwise." Name one source from the times. I'm not talking about writings of today. Show me ONE document, ONE paper, ONE anything from the time that refutes Christ's resurrection. Shiki is waiting! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think it can be proven scientifically, because FAITH is required. If there was no room for doubt how could you have faith? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
poppop33
on
Mon 03/28/11 11:59 AM
|
|
if he was not then y r all thses things taken place that he said would in the last day's in matthew 24:1-8 as u can see it is starting to happen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew 24:1-8 if Jesus is not living then y do u see all thses thing starting to happen all over the world like he said it would
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Mon 03/28/11 12:05 PM
|
|
If I have never seen a pink elephant and you tell me one exists – it is not up to me to prove it is a false claim, it is up to you to provide the validity of your claim.
not necessarily,, the problem is the absolute statements in the conversation for instance, there is a belief that some people can SEE spirits I do not see them, but I cant PROVE they havent seen them or that they dont exist, nor do I impose upon them to PROVE to me they see them (how could they do such a thing anyhow, how can they describe to me that which I dont see?) If they state, THERE IS A SPIRIT IN THE ROOM, I can use logic to infer that THEY SEE a spirit, without requring them to prove they see it and without being offended that they imply they can see something I cant,,,,, it just depends upon where one wishes the conversaton to go,,,forward or backward,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
freakyshiki2009
on
Mon 03/28/11 12:33 PM
|
|
I do find it interesting that evolutionists cannot come up with a single document written at the time disproving the veracity of Christ's resurrection.
Redy writes: "Then you have not searched far enough – there are dozens of historical references that make this refute – AND – they are all AT LEAST as reputable as the references who claim otherwise." I can't find ONE document. Can anyone find ANY such document? People state all of these documents exist, and I am asking someone out there to name one. For three days, I read from the evolutionists that it would be ridiculous to try to prove Christ's resurrection. Where are they now? All of a sudden, they are quiet. All of a sudden, I can hear a pindrop. poppup33 writes: "I don't think it can be proven scientifically, because FAITH is required. If there was no room for doubt how could you have faith?" But, what is faith? Faith is us answering God's call. I have no doubt that God exists. Does that mean I do not have faith? On the contrary, it means my faith is stronger, because it has been tested, and has withstood the questioning. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redy writes: "Then you have not searched far enough – there are dozens of historical references that make this refute – AND – they are all AT LEAST as reputable as the references who claim otherwise." Name one source from the times. I'm not talking about writings of today. Show me ONE document, ONE paper, ONE anything from the time that refutes Christ's resurrection. Shiki is waiting! Shiki, I have no reason to believe in Jesus' resurrection and any evidence that I have ever read has been supported and refuted equally, meaning there has been no concrete evidence. But if you need that concrete evidence to make your belief valid than you will not see the refutes nor will you be equally open to both sides of the arguments. So either way you are going to believe what suits your need. That's fine, I was actually curious about your original claims (see the OP) and now I see that you have nothing remotely akin to a scientific basis for study or even consideration. Thanks for responding. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
there is a belief that some people can SEE spirits I do not see them, but I cant PROVE they havent seen them or that they dont exist, nor do I impose upon them to PROVE to me they see them (how could they do such a thing anyhow, how can they describe to me that which I dont see?) I'm sure that whatevery you see you can find some words to describe- jellyfish, for example, must have been a very difficult thing to describe, but it was done. Water - another difficult thing to describe, but we do it. If someone tells me they see a spirit, I want to have a description or how would I know if I have ever seen one or how to tell if I ever do? If people can describe god why can't describe a spirit? If they state, THERE IS A SPIRIT IN THE ROOM, I can use logic to infer that THEY SEE a spirit, without requring them to prove they see it Then you have something to teach me - what would your logic be in that situation? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But, what is faith? Faith is us answering God's call. I have no doubt that God exists. Does that mean I do not have faith? On the contrary, it means my faith is stronger, because it has been tested, and has withstood the questioning. Oh, then can you explain to me why god needs a bible on Earth at all? If god calls you can't he tell you directly what he wants you to do and how he wants you to behave? There seems to be no real purpose for the bible unless it is the physical proof that people need in order to have a belief in god. And if that were the case, then why wouldn't everyone who ever even saw the bible, believe in god? |
|
|
|
|
