i will surely question the validity very much of all historical accounts were the first fragments is from over a hundred years after the event. so yes...... historical documents are very unsure to say the least.... and many of thise does not even have supranatural events in them, still i would really take it whit a grain of salt what they are saying.

But the point is more that the 25000 is an obviously dishonest nummer....most of thise are over a 1000 years after the time they are describing and are clearly copy´s.... to give them any wheight at all is bonkers.... really giving even 200 years after decibstions is bonkers.

jjust because something has many copies does not make the claim in them any more true i hope you know that?

Edited 2/7/2020 16:32:50

the scientific method CANNOT and SHOULD NOT be used to prove anything

You think that all science has been doing this whole time is jerking off when they use this?

The scientific method is a tool used to constrain. It's designed such that it forces us to ask very specific, concrete, questions that can be shown experimentally to be true or false.

As a pretty simple example: Will spheres A and B, with same size and shape but separate masses, dropped simultaneously from height x from Earth surface, reach the ground at the same time?

This is straightforward. It's easy for mankind to get extremely close to the constraints of this problem. If I were to, persay run an experiment with a nearly ideal ball A and ball B, and drop them at nearly 10.00 m off the ground, say 100 times, could I not give you, with high confidence, what the result of said experiment is?

Sure, I can never get 100% proof because there will always be some imperfections and approximations in what we do, but sure as hell we can get really really really really really really damn close.

Also, a good scientist never assumed evolution was true. They look skeptically at reputable sources to come to this conclusion.

And yes, 1000s of studies have looked at biological evolution as their SUBJECT.

@Aura, I am not a scientist and do not plan to become one.

@Marcus, I cant do that. God doesn't just give his powers off to a random person like me

Of course more copies doesn't make something true. I'll just reply with some verses, since there's no real point in arguing with you.
John 7:17 - "If anyone is willing to do His will, he will know of the teaching, whether it is of God or whether I speak from Myself." - Jesus
Acts 5:34-39 - But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the Law, respected by all the people, stood up in the Council and gave orders to put the men outside for a short time. And he said to them, "Men of Israel, take care what you propose to do with these men. For some time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody, and a group of about four hundred men joined up with him. But he was killed, and all who followed him were dispersed and came to nothing. After this man, Judas of Galilee rose up in the days of the census and drew away some people after him; he too perished, and all those who followed him were scattered. So in the present case, I say to you, stay away from these men and let them alone, for if this plan or action is of men, it will be overthrown; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them; or else you may even be found fighting against God."

Consider the time period Christianity was founded... what profit was there for the apostles and the rest of the disciples for inventing such a story? Just to be killed for their faith? Why would so many people convert in a short period of time to an illegal religion which defied Roman authority and Jewish tradition? I believe it was a mistake to make Christianity the state religion of Rome (and any other nation for that matter), because real Christianity thrives best in persecution.

Edited 2/8/2020 04:54:53

[REDACTED]

Edited 2/9/2020 01:49:34

@ganymedes What's your definition of a flawless religion?

Flawless religion: A religion that doesn't have a single criticism against it or at least gives satisfactory answers to criticisms. And the religion should not have undergone any reformation.

every religion has incomplete answers. there is no flawless religion

every religion has incomplete answers. there is no flawless religion

There, that's what I'm trying to say. There is no religion that gives any complete or satisfactory answer.

If there was a god and he really made a religion then it would be totally flawless, cause this hypothetical god would know what is gonna happen in the future. And he would make a religion that no one will be able to question.

Edited 2/8/2020 15:40:34

"every religion has incomplete answers. there is no flawless religion"

I think this is evidence that religion is a human creation.

Edited 2/8/2020 18:55:38

I think this evidence that religion is a human creation.

Exactly! God would be capable enough to make an irrefutable religion.

Edited 2/8/2020 15:14:45

[REDACTED]

Edited 2/9/2020 01:49:51

I think it's best people just agree to disagree on religion and science.

@Aura That comment was directed at Njord in reference to the number of biblical manuscripts.

@ganymedes "Flawless religion: A religion that doesn't have a single criticism against it or at least gives satisfactory answers to criticisms. And the religion should not have undergone any reformation."
Every ideological or philosophical belief, and even many scientific facts have criticisms. I guess the earth isn't round then, since flat earthers exist. I guess no economic system is preferable, since they're all criticized by different people. If God wanted robots, He would've created robots who never choose or criticize anything. Instead, He created humanity to be His children. Hypothetically, if Christianity were true, the bible blatantly says that the way to God is narrow and few find it.
The historical reformations that Christianity underwent weren't to bring new ideas, but to restore old beliefs that those in the early church held, eg. salvation by faith alone.

Thank you for the clarification. My bad.

many scientific facts have criticisms

Scientists appreciate criticisms and try to find and give an appropriate answer. Religious texts don't.

I guess the earth isn't round then, since flat earthers exist.

With scientific discoveries, it's proved that earth is a sphere not round or flat. Religions are different than science and aren't proved yet to be true.

I guess no economic system is preferable, since they're all criticized by different people.

Again, you can't compare religion with economic systems. Economic systems are considered by how good they are, you can't do the same thing with religion.

If God wanted robots, He would've created robots who never choose or criticize anything. Instead, He created humanity to be His children.

Then, why does he want all of us to do what he says? I wouldn't do this to my children.

Hypothetically, if Christianity were true, the bible blatantly says that the way to God is narrow and few find it.

Sounds predetermined. So unfair, negative and elitist from this lawful god.

why would the Bible question criticism. There is a word for this: Heresy. science and religion are not the same, science explain rules of earth and religion explain rules of after death. trying to compare science to religion is plain wrong. people believe they are different planes of existence. although there is no proof it is something people are allowed to believe in it is their right. if I think adolf hitler was a hero it is my right. (Disclaimer: he was not he killed over 6 million Jewish people alone. 10s of millions total)

comparing science to religion is dumb and hypothetical, and wrong.

this thread was nice and non threatening and here are all these people spewing hate. this just makes Pepe and the rest look right

Edited 2/9/2020 22:11:58

@Marcus, nice to see we both have the same thoughts about how Hitler was not a hero!

@ganymedes "Scientists appreciate criticisms and try to find and give an appropriate answer. Religious texts don't." There's this thing called Christian apologetics, which examines criticisms and gives answers to them.
With regard to the flat earth and economic system comment, I was pointing out that your standard of religion needing to have no criticism to be true is absurd.
God wants us to do what He says because He wants our lives to prosper (not in the material sense)... the same way a father has the best intentions for his children. The difference is, this Father is all knowing, so it would be stupid to not do what He says. He also gives us the Holy Spirit to enable us to do what He says... it's like you taking a test with the teacher sitting right beside you, helping you with the answers.
"Sounds predetermined. So unfair, negative and elitist from this lawful god." What's unfair is the fact that we're even alive in the first place. It's unfair that Jesus had to suffer so that my sins could be forgiven. It's unfair that He took our place on the cross. It also says that those who seek God with all their heart WILL find Him... the problem is, most people don't want to.

Division 1 has moved back from the frontline for a rest, Division 2 moves forward! Thanks Pepe! I'm a bit busy at the moment for big responses.