The Truth of Christianity vs. All Other Belief Systems

[Gate2501]

For example, the world wide flood in Noah’s time has supernatural aspects to it, but it can be supported that it actually happened as the Bible describes with objective evidence.

Cool, go for it.

I'm waiting.

 

[JetLeg]

My opening post contains my starting statement and definition to create a framework for us to discuss the facts and evidence of our topic. I will be presenting the facts of my case as we discuss things.

A good thread cannot focus on many things.

Do you want a specific claim? Then make it, and present your case now, and not as we discuss things.

Are you interested in answers to a specific question? Then ask it.


----

There is no problem that the OP was about providing a framework, but it is not enough. After the framework, a specific claim/question/anything else specific should have been made.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

There are a lot of things that can be said about this, for example, "here are two apples, here are two more apples, how many apples do we have?"

I would enjoy talking to the person who says there aren't 4. It's absurd because it's easy to demonstrate, show proof. None of your claims are like that.

Your spiritual mathematics are of the form X # Y @ Z. Then I ask what the variables and symbols represent and you say, "open your heart and it will become clear."

Well said!

 

[Cainkane1]

But the early Xtians agreed that Gentiles did not have to follow the rules of the Jews (cf Acts for instance).

Did God change his mind or do xians have a special place that jews don't?

 

[The Atheist]

The Truth of Christianity vs. All Other Belief Systems.

Yes. It doesn't appear much more exciting on reprise, but I'm sure you'll find plenty of arguers.

Nice avatar.

 

[Blackadder]

Dear Christian Dude.

Run for the hills, run! Run for the hills and keep your dignity.

 

[JetLeg]

Dear Christian Dude.

Run for the hills, run! Run for the hills and keep your dignity.

Frankly, there is nothing in what he said so far that even hints of losing it.

 

[Lanzy]

I will unfold over some time in this topic how solid objective material facts and evidence support Christian faith, not esoteric and subjective feelings. Experiences in and of themselves do not validate anything. But facts and truth can validate an experience.

Nope, I really don't think you will. At least you haven't in any of your posts so far.

 

[Christian Dude]

i have a question regarding the OP: do you state that you have proof that christianity (whatever your specific faith is) is true and that other faiths are not?

or is it that you are comparitively examining the truth values of faiths other than yours?

proudnonbbeliever

Judaism and Christianity have archeological evidence and facts that demonstrate history as described in the Bible is true and correct. Other religions that have historical aspects to their writings dealing with people and places have no support in many cases. Mormonism for example, describes many people and places that have never verified by archeology or anthropology. Whereas the Bible has been used, and continues to be used, as a guide to find the ruins of cities and civilizations because it has been demonstrated over and over to be correct in its accounts and descriptions of history.

The Bible has demonstrated a correct knowledge of the universe and the earth thousands of years before modern science began to unravel the mysteries of the nature of material things. While other religions state grossly incorrect understandings of the physical universe, the Bible always gives a correct and insightful understanding of our universe. Hinduism says the earth rests on the back of elephants that stand on turtles or other variations of the like. Islam says a man traveled so far to the west and saw that the sun sets in a murky pond. Other religions are filled with stuff like this. The Bible is not. For example the Bible says that God hung the earth on nothing, and that the sun runs its circuit through the heavens. Many of you would say the creation account in scripture is one of these myths just like other religions have, but the truth is that there are many facts that can be interpreted differently than the secular scientific community has told us they must be interpreted.

We have been told that the stratification of the sedimentary layer takes millions of years to form. That is simply not correct because we have ample evidence to the contrary. Natural disasters can lay down thousands of layers in an extremely short period of time. If a people were not around to see and experience the natural disaster, someone would come along later and say this took millions of years to form, when in fact, it did not.

In the area of cosmetology, physicists have built mathematical models of the universe that show the universe to be young. Their math is equally as valid and offers an equally valid but differing interpretation of the facts we can discern. Cosmology openly admits it has no answers to the question of what was there before the big bang. They have to come up with wild speculations and theories to deal with the fine tuning of the physical laws of the universe that permit life, and how something could come from nothing. This is where we get the explanations of the multiverse and spontaneous generation and then almost immediate disappearance of matter from quantum physics. They have to invent stuff to deal with the brick wall they run up against.

We are told evolution is a fact when continuing discoveries in molecular biology and chemistry wipe out any chance evolution, as defined by a completely mechanical process of natural selection and mutation over great periods of time, is impossible. They also have no viable mechanism for abiogenesis.

Then to fall back on radiometric dating as proof for an old universe is not anything to put ones stock in. This field has huge problems and to ignore them is disingenuous.

These are the types of things, and more, we can discuss factually and objectively in this thread as they relate to our topic of the truth of the world’s belief systems.

 

[MG1962]

Judaism and Christianity have archeological evidence and facts that demonstrate history as described in the Bible is true and correct. Other religions that have historical aspects to their writings dealing with people and places have no support in many cases.

Gee wiz, as a Catholic I am not going to let that pass without comment. Most of the history in the Bible is simply not verifiable. Yes some things are as the Bible has said, others are simply not true. Example the walls of Jericho. There is no doubt that the Hebrews destroyed this small settlement, but there is no evidence this destruction coincided with the collapse of the walls.

 

[JetLeg]

A good thread cannot focus on many things.

Do you want a specific claim? Then make it, and present your case now, and not as we discuss things.

Are you interested in answers to a specific question? Then ask it.


----

There is no problem that the OP was about providing a framework, but it is not enough. After the framework, a specific claim/question/anything else specific should have been made.

-----

Your claim seems to be "The bible is true". That's too big a claim for a thread. Start with a smaller one "The flood story is true", or "The exodus story is true", or "The genesis story is true". Then provide the evidence.

 

[hgc]

Second, there are three kinds of law given in the Bible. The moral law, which is eternal and unchanging and applies to all people of all time. The civil law, given to the brand new nation of Israel to govern its self. And the ceremonial law, given specifically to the Jews and no one else, to depict and foreshadow and symbolize the work, nature and person of Jesus Christ the Messiah and our relationship to Him.

Hello Christian Dude!

Point of discussion: How does a Christian know which law is of which type?

This is the problem I notice with many sacred texts -- the inevitable requirement for interpretation. Thus the revealed word of the deity is filtered through human emotion, corruption, expediency, avarice and every other possible corroding influence, and passed along to adherents in its interpreted form (theology) as if it were still strictly God's word. Thus someone made up this 3-types-of-law construct as an overlay, and many Christians think that the interpretation is also divine revelation.

Which area do you think this falls into, and does it apply to anyone but the nation of Israel? There definitely is a moral aspect to it as the parents of the child are the direct representation of God to their child, and rebellion against God carries the penalty of death, but, God does not desire to carry out that penalty and offers a way out. It is also something to note that although the letter of the law might require a death penalty for a particular offense, the vast majority of the time the rulers of the nation of Israel did not carry the penalty out.
...

To keep unenforced laws on the books is a really bad idea. If the punishment for the crime is normally a few lashes, and that becomes the community custom and expectation, and the some prosecutor or judge decides one day, for corrupt or moral reasons, that goshdarnit the law says death, so death it is, it's an outrageous abuse of power.

So it goes with the multiple kinds of laws within the Bible, all of which is said to be divine revelation. Religious authority (always seeking concomitant civil authority) will shift the ground under what was meant for the nation of Israel and what was meant for all of us.

It's a disaster waiting to happen ... again and again and again.

 

[godless dave]

But the early Xtians agreed that Gentiles did not have to follow the rules of the Jews (cf Acts for instance).

So then why keep the Sabbath, albeit on the wrong day?

 

[godless dave]

Something supernatural is outside the natural laws of our material space time universe. Therefore it cannot be verified by the natural and physical laws of our universe and thus cannot substantiated by what we would consider as normal facts and evidence.

And therefore, for all practical purposes it does not exist.

 

[Malkuth]

I'm perfectly willing to allow for the possibility of some kind of supernatural phenomena, since there's still a good lot that science must admit it doesn't or can't know. It must follow that there are things it also cannot disprove or it would have already loudly done so. The very fact that there is still a creation/evolution debate attests to this.

I would take issue with your particular version of what form that supernatural phenomena must take. I don't see any reason to believe that any religion has the name of god right, or knows what he/she likes. The whole 'revelation' thing smacks of a con job to me. There's nothing to suggest to me that christian dogma is any more valid than muslim dogma, or eastern karma, or any other rigid, defined religion. As far as I'm concerned, they're just different colored ticks on the same dog. ie: they all suck to one degree or another.

I personally like some of the philosophy behind hinduism, buddhism and taoism, amongst others, as a means to live a healthy and happy life, but I don't subscribe to their dogmatic beliefs. I think that it's in your personality and willpower alone that you find your spirituality, if you even choose to explore it and many choose not to, not any outside manifestation of a supposedly divine 'other'.

Seems to me like the majority of what is said about Jesus make it sound like he was a pretty decent bloke. I wouldn't mind if a lot more people around the world acted like he suggested, y'know love thy neighbor, non-violence and all that stuff. Pity most folks into those religions don't keep it simple like he apparently wanted to. I'm pretty sure he was a grow-your-own, smoke-your-own kinda guy and I can well respect that.

 

[hgc]

I'm perfectly willing to allow for the possibility of some kind of supernatural phenomena, since there's still a good lot that science must admit it doesn't or can't know. It must follow that there are things it also cannot disprove or it would have already loudly done so. The very fact that there is still a creation/evolution debate attests to this.

...

Sorry, but the creation/evolution debate, such as it is, is not a good example of what science doesn't know. Science knows plenty about evolution, since evolution is a scientific theory. In as much as creationism is something that says that evolution isn't so, scientific knowledge is a very effective antidote.

Admittedly, creationism that is purely scriptural and theological, without contradiction of actual knowledge about nature, is outside the purview of empiricism.

 

[kedo1981]

Oh boy somebooby dropped crystal meth in the seminary Kool-Aid again ( and I do mean, booby)

No religion, not Christianity, not Islam, not Hinduism bases their philosophy on a simple observable premise like “2+2=4” so don’t you be so arrogant to as to think yours is any different.

If anything the Christian equation would be “4+banana-grunt*{nipple/cos}+{your tax dollars at work}/ burn baby burn*2= whats that smell”

 

[Shalamar]

Ah. I see. the faith of 'I only have to obey the parts of the bible I like', and 'Science is a fraud, the bible is the ultimate truth.'



yeah.. Uh... Not so much, hmmm? In any case, there is really no point arguing against someone who believes you have the Ultimate Truth, and says that anyone who disagrees is wrong.

 

[temporalillusion]

Judaism and Christianity have archeological evidence and facts that demonstrate history as described in the Bible is true and correct.

There are many things in the Bible which are historically inaccurate. the exodus and the flood being two examples of which there is no evidence, at least not in the way they are written. Others I'm sure will provide many more.

Besides, being accurate historically does not mean a book is divinely inspired.

Whereas the Bible has been used, and continues to be used, as a guide to find the ruins of cities and civilizations because it has been demonstrated over and over to be correct in its accounts and descriptions of history.

Untrue.

The Bible has demonstrated a correct knowledge of the universe and the earth thousands of years before modern science began to unravel the mysteries of the nature of material things.

We have been told that the stratification of the sedimentary layer takes millions of years to form. That is simply not correct because we have ample evidence to the contrary. Natural disasters can lay down thousands of layers in an extremely short period of time. If a people were not around to see and experience the natural disaster, someone would come along later and say this took millions of years to form, when in fact, it did not.

How about some evidence of this.

In the area of cosmetology, physicists have built mathematical models of the universe that show the universe to be young. Their math is equally as valid and offers an equally valid but differing interpretation of the facts we can discern.

Again evidence? I've never seen any model of a young universe where the math is remotely valid.

Cosmology openly admits it has no answers to the question of what was there before the big bang. They have to come up with wild speculations and theories to deal with the fine tuning of the physical laws of the universe that permit life, and how something could come from nothing. This is where we get the explanations of the multiverse and spontaneous generation and then almost immediate disappearance of matter from quantum physics. They have to invent stuff to deal with the brick wall they run up against.

Um, that's what science IS, you know, finding a question where there's no answer, and then trying to come up with answers, until you find one that explains things. That science is willing to say "I don't know" is a strength, not a weakness.

And just because you choose to plug God into a gap where science has no answer isn't a strength either, that's an even bigger weakness. It shows how small you have to make God, and you have to constantly change your definition of God to fit science.

What if science discovers the origin of this universe, and the origin is a large manifold of infinite universes? You'll simply move God to the creation of the manifold of universes. Seems weak to me.

If God wanted people to know he created the universe 6000 years ago, he could have EASILY created it in such a way that it was clear that it was. He instead chose to create it so that it appears old. How you resolve that (either God is being deceptive, or your view of God is incorrect) is up to you.

Incidentally most Christians don't have a problem with a 13.7 billion year old universe, why do you?

We are told evolution is a fact when continuing discoveries in molecular biology and chemistry wipe out any chance evolution, as defined by a completely mechanical process of natural selection and mutation over great periods of time, is impossible.

Incorrect, evolution is the foundation of modern biology, nothing makes sense in biology without evolution.

Molecular biology is at the point that even if we had not a single fossil, had no other lines of evidence, descent with modification would be beyond doubt.

In reality multiple lines of evidence completely unrelated to each other from very different scientific disciplines all support each other and confirm evolution.

They also have no viable mechanism for abiogenesis.

Also untrue, there are many exciting lines of research, however this isn't my area of knowledge.

Then to fall back on radiometric dating as proof for an old universe is not anything to put ones stock in. This field has huge problems and to ignore them is disingenuous.

To claim they exist is an outright falsehood. You are being lied to by your sources of information unfortunately, or at best they are grossly ignorant.

With regards to evolution, again most Christians don't have a problem accepting it, why do you?

Have you ever read Finding Darwin's God by Ken Miller?

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

Judaism and Christianity have archeological evidence and facts that demonstrate history as described in the Bible is true and correct.

Really? Well, go for it. You're the one making that claim, you get to support it.

But since I'm a charitable dude, I'll even give you a few pointers as to where you could start:

1. Tower of Babel. Such a big structure surely would be easy to find by now. The foundations to support that kind of thing alone, would be kinda hard to destroy. So, exactl location and archaeological evidence for it?

2. Exodus. Surely so many people going through the desert for 40 years would leave a lot of traces? Which archaeologist has found them?

3. Moses parting the sea and at least one division of Egypt's army being drowned. Surely someone would find chariot wheels, bronze khopeshes, armours, arrow heads, horse skeletons and the like, right? Exactly where have they been found and by what archaeologist?

4. Why beat around the bush, let's pick on Jesus. Exactly which unbiased historical document documents those events? Surely stuff like performing resurrections, pulling endless food out of a basket, raising from a grave, and the like, would have gotten some attention from other people than just his apostles, no? (Who, according to at least Paul saw no problem with lying if it helps proselytise.)

There must be some soldier there who wrote home something like "man, we had this dude called Lazarus who was stone dead, and some guy drops by and tells him to raise and he does" or "dude, you won't believe it, but some guy just cured the lepers in town. I sure feel safer without that disease around, lemme tell you."

Where are all those documents? We have documents and reports about more minor stuff in that era, but nobody wrote about major miracles? WTH?

Etc.