10 votes

The Will of God in Christ Jesus Concerning You!

Good morning Friends of Liberty. I am addressing Believers, so as not to offend anyone. But you, if you are not a Believer, are welcomed to take a look and comment as well if you like. Peace.

In everything give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you! I Thessalonians 5:18

What a rich chapter 1 Thessalonians 5 is!

Look what else it says:

verse 15:

See that non render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men.

It is not just our Christian brothers and sisters to whom goodness is due. We are to do good among ourselves and ALSO TO ALL!

Chapter 5 starts with these words:

But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with childe; and they shall not escape. But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness.

continue reading: http://www.biblestudytools.com/kjv/1-thessalonians/5.html

or listen: http://www.biblestudytools.com/kjv/1-thessalonians/5-audio.html

I was just overwhelmed at the words this morning while preparing to teach that I wanted to share with my Friends of Liberty here at the Daily Paul.

I leave you with vs. 14: Now we exhort you, brethren, warn them that are unruly, comfort the feebleminded, support the weak, be patient toward all men. See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men. (I couldn't help but add vs. 15 again.)

Those sound like marching orders to me. What a wonderful Lord we serve. We are bound but by 2 laws. The first to love God and the 2nd to love people. (read about it in Matt 22:35-40) What is so hard about that? It is pretty simple language isn't it.

What if all Christians -those who have placed their trust in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sin- had forgotten everything else and just followed those 2 rules? What would the world be like today?

What if we started now?



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Regarding the lines:

Regarding the lines:
godsfavson: "I am quite well read"
bear: "I am not well read."

I find it notable that most of the atheists and anti-christians I come across seem to like to think of themselves as highly informed and smarter than the average person, and like to point it out, often asserting that they know more about the Bible than Christians, when in my experience, they usually only regurgitate quotes removed from their context which they've found on atheist web sites, and don't really know much more about the Bible than what they've seen critics point out. I'm not saying that this is the case with godsfavson, but I would like to mention that Bear's humble approach is a good example for Christians and atheists alike.

Haha, this really tickled me

Haha, this really tickled me =)

I'm sorry, I don't mean to make fun of you but are you referring to the humility of christians in believing that they have the grasp of ultimate truth and all the ignorant masses who don't agree with them are going to hell =D

Sorry I'm not responding to your posts, it is simply because I'm hoping some people will read our exchange and too many diverging branches make that difficult.

I don't see why it should.

RE: "are you referring to the humility of christians in believing that they have the grasp of ultimate truth and all the ignorant masses who don't agree with them are going to hell"

When Atheists just as easily promote the idea that they are the ones closest to truth and that religion is full of not just ignorant, but delusional people, then I'm a little surprised you would bring it up. The fact 'that people believe they know the truth', is inescapable. Everyone believes that their beliefs are true, so I don't know where you think it gets you when you point out that Christians believe they are correct. Even if one thinks that they do not know the truth, they still think that they are correct and think they grasp the truth that they do not know the truth. I don't know any Christians who think they know everything. In Christianity, what Christians grasp about truth is not credited to themselves, but to God's unmerited favor towards them. A prerequisite to becoming a Christian is that you acknowledge your own depravity, sinfulness, and inability to save yourself, whereas atheists tend to think of themselves as good people who wouldn't need to be saved even if they thought there was a hell. Christians do not think that they escape hell of their own goodness or merit, but rather they humbly trust in the mercy and grace of God through the atonement of Jesus paying for their sins and dismissing the case against them which would have sent them to hell. Christians did not originate the concept of Hell, that is a teaching of Jesus that they have to humbly live with and acknowledge that it's what they deserved if not for the grace of God.

The claims of believers are impossible.

For those of us who have decided to use our own intelligence to determine if a virgin can give birth and remain a virgin and to face the fact that no man could die, be buried for 3 days and then magically come back to life, it’s truly amazing how often we have to constantly defend our position. It’s as if WE are the ones who are making outrageous and illogical claims. I know it’s uncomfortable after being a believer for many years to accept that you have been lied to yet again by yet another powerful organization with an agenda but until you are on this side of these conversations you have NO IDEA how incredibly ridiculous it is to continue to promote and believe such utter nonsense.

Go, I don't understand what this means nd I am hoping you can

explain it:

You said: "if a virgin can give birth and remain a virgin"

I feel a bit school girlish asking, but what exactly does that mean?

I am asking because I want to understand what teaching you are talking about. THanks :)

..

"It’s as if WE are the ones who are making outrageous and illogical claims."

To say that everything came from nothing is what one might call an 'outrageous and illogical' claim. It doesn't account for the uniformity of nature or immaterial transcendent things like the laws of logic. Your worldview is a package deal, but atheists tend to borrow from a christian worldview when their own worldview can't account for things. Have you considered the circumstances involved in the miracles in question? Christians don't argue that miracles are natural processes that just happened to take place. You should take their claims in the context of their worldview and then look at evidence that their accounts correspond to reality. Does your own intelligence take into account what was purported to have caused those things? Also, have you considered that the evidence that supports the resurrection of Jesus is not in itself miraculous. It is not unreasonable that someone died, or that someone was seen, but when the accounts of what people have seen are compared, then resurrection is the only option, yet its a conclusion arrived at through normal understanding and using intelligence. Volumes of intelligent works have been written on this stuff, have you read any of them?

The last thing I want to do is to bring reproach upon Christ

or other Believers by my actions, tone and attitude. I am not perfect and alot of times I have to rewrite things to remove that which might tarnish the message. I always try to keep the purpose in the forefront of my thoughts.

2 Timothy 4:2 KJV
Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

longsuffering is Makrothumia in the Greek http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/kjv/makrothumi... meaning:

patience, endurance, constancy, steadfastness, perseverance
patience, forbearance, longsuffering, slowness in avenging wrongs

May seeds find fertile soil, tho I am not a preacher :)

I appreciated seeing you here today. I have taken note of your comments in the past. I have seen one who call himself an atheist speak highly of interacting with you here at the DP. It seems you to, do not want to bring reproach. May His Name be praised!

...

yeah

Regarding that particular atheist, if it is what I think you are referring to, I think their words may have had more to do with their own graciousness than how I communicated. Or at least part of me likes to think so after reading this: Luke 6:26 "Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets." ;)

But seriously, The following passage is similar to the one you quoted and is one of my favorites in regards to how to communicate about the Bible. I like to remind myself of it to at least 'try' to keep myself in check:

2Timothy 2:24-26 "And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will."

So bear can we say that we

So bear can we say that we have established that the way in which answers come to you from the bible is similar to how answers come to people who have spent a lot of time reading other books, including me?

What is the most important factor in your belief that the bible was written by god and not man.

You are not allowed to assume the bible as true for the purpose of reasonable debate and falsifiability.

No, I did not say that.

I say this:

Hebrews 4:12 KJV
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

That word quick, is the Greek word Zao, which means alive. You cannot know what it means to interact with it unless you do.

If you would like to begin to understand that the Bible is a supernatural book, you might begin by looking into fulfilled prophecies.
http://www.100prophecies.org/bible-prophecies.htm

...

Bear, again this is circular

Bear, again this is circular reasoning.

It does not matter what the bible claims it is, because you cannot start with the assumption that it is TRUE. Its the very point we are debating.

You say the bible is supernatural. So my question now is what supernatural acts can you perform using the bible?

If you can do even one, I will abandon science and join a monastery to study the bible till the end of my days. Science, by definition cannot perform supernatural acts.

To a...

...theist, Person, Love, Reason is the fundamental reality from which everything, and everyone emanates. In that sense, every human being is constantly engaged in what you call 'supernatural', because they are truly Persons, truly supernatural or 'spiritual' beings, not just illusions within chain reactions of non-personal stuff. This is true whether reading the Bible or not -- the Bible is just a means of studying what has been revealed about this fundamental, personal reality.

I would say the very fact that you or I can really, truly KNOW things through reason points to something deeper than mere cause and effect reactions within a deterministic or random flow of the non-personal.

1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

I do not believe I provided circular reasoning.

You asked me this: "So bear can we say that we have established that the way in which answers come to you from the bible is similar to how answers come to people who have spent a lot of time reading other books, including me?"

I said No, "I say this: Hebrews 4:12 KJV
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

That word quick, is the Greek word Zao, which means alive. You cannot know what it means to interact with it unless you do."
-----------------
You asked me this: "What is the most important factor in your belief that the bible was written by god and not man."

You gave me this stipulation: "You are not allowed to assume the bible as true for the purpose of reasonable debate and falsifiability."

I answered with this: "If you would like to begin to understand that the Bible is a supernatural book, you might begin by looking into fulfilled prophecies.
http://www.100prophecies.org/bible-prophecies.htm "
------------------
To your reply that I am using circular reasoning I will now clarify: It is not circular reasoning to take a prophecy (supernatural prediction) from the words of the Bible and point to the fulfillment of that pre-told event in history.

I gave you a link that has 100 prophecies to reseach. You asked me to keep my answers short. If you would like a more detailed answer, I've given you the information in writing:

I can also point you to a Peter Stoner & Robert Newman http://sciencespeaks.dstoner.net/index.html#PWS :

PETER W. STONER, M.S.
Chairman of the Departments of Mathematics and Astronomy at Pasadena City College until 1953; Chairman of the science division, Westmont College, 1953-57; Professor Emeritus of Science, Westmont College; Professor Emeritus of Mathematics and Astronomy, Pasadena City College.

ROBERT C. NEWMAN, S.T.M., Ph.D.
Ph.D. in Astrophysics, Cornell University, 1967; S.T.M., Biblical School of Theology, 1972; Associate Professor of Physics and Mathematics, Shelton College, 19689-71; Associate professor of New Testament, Biblical School of Theology, 1971-

In their work "Science Speaks" http://sciencespeaks.dstoner.net/Christ_of_Prophecy.html:
documentation for the odds of on man [the Messiah] being born in Bethleham is represented as 7,150/2,000,000,000 or one man in 2.8 x 105.

Their work details 8 fulfilled Messianic prophecies all fulfilled by the single man Jesus Christ at these odds:

"If these estimates are considered fair, one man in how many men, the world over, will fulfill all eight prophecies? This question can be answered by applying our principles of probability. In other words, by multiplying all of our estimates together, or 1 in 2.8 x 105 x 103 x 102 x 103 x 105 x 103 x 104. This gives 1 in 2.8 x 1028, where 28 means that we have 28 ciphers following the 2.8. Let us simplify and reduce the number by calling it 1 in 1028. Written out this number is 1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. "

...

Here you go bear

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.in/2007/09/100-challen...

To further make the point. People claim Nostradamus has made hundreds of correct prophecies.

Does that mean we should consider his book of prophecies a supernatural text too and him at least a demigod?

The fact that these predictions have no set date and can be interpreted in many ways allow many modern events to be rationalized as the events predicted by them.

Nostradamus professed to be some sort of Christian.

Nostradamus professed to be some sort of Christian, so if his prophecies were accurate it would only add more weight to Christianity. But if I recall, his prophecies were vague and unprecise (eg. Hisler instead of Hitler.) So I don't really think they amount to anything. They are not comparable to the messianic prophecies of the Bible where multiple specific prophecies pointed to one person at one time. http://www.messiahrevealed.org/top-10.html#daniel%209:25

Imprecise

Is exactly the nature of all prophecies.

I do not see the value in a prophecy unless it can lead to a prediction of the timne and sequence of events.

The after the fact rationalization and 'fitting' can be done for many more prophecies.

I prophecy that in winter when a great power has lapsed, there will arise from the seas of turmoil a man who will lead men to glory.

'great power'- I do not specify.
'lapsed'- collapsed completely? Become corrupt? become weak?
'turmoil'- what kind of turmoil? spiritual? physical? mental?
'glory'- Victory in war? new knowledge?

Indeed, for many people this prophecy would already have come true because so many scenarios can be used to fill in the blanks.

well...

You are doing a great job of showing why the prophecies of Nostradamus aren't impressive, and I would agree with that as it is the argument I already presented in mentioning 'Hisler'. But to apply that sort of vague open ended prophecy to Jesus is sort of a straw man argument. With Jesus there are so many threads of prophecy pointing to one individual, many of which are very 'specific', so that your criticism of open ended vagueness doesn't relate. The Messiah would have to fit into the prophetic criteria which pointed to him, and the criteria is not of a nature that someone could just decide that they want to fulfill all of the prophecies. In the link I gave earlier, a precise time frame was specified for when the messiah would come, to which hundreds of prophecies apply, some relating to location, some to what would happen to him and what he would do etc. comparing Nostradamus to Bible prophecy is like comparing apples and oranges.

I hold to this:

http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition...

The fact that none of Jesus Christ's bones as was the custom to hasten death is in accordance with the command that the passover lamb's bones were not to be broken.

The Messiah is the lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world.

The Old Testament Passover lamb was a foreshadowing of the coming of the Messiah. Jesus Christ was crucified at the time in which the High Priest slaughtered the reciprical passover lamb.

The words from the website you linked: "This is certainly an inspiring verse of Scripture, but you would have to be a fool to take it as a prophecy of the Messiah."

A foolish words.

Are the prophecies of Nostradamus 100% accurate? The Bible is 100% accurate. The fact that no date is given is not important to the fact that a single man fulfilled 8 prophecies as well as all of the Suffering Servant Messianic prophecies. The fullfillment of just 8 prophecies alone is stated in the terms of 1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 .

Your link further debunks Matthew 2:23. However, I hold to this:

http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/gills-exposition...

It is the failing of the "Pastor" who is debunking Bible prophecies to be well studied and to understand that the stating that the Messiah would come thru the line of Jesse pointed to Nazareth.

I can go thru the site systematically and refute each of the points with references, but before I do that I would ask that you go thru the site I gave you and personally debunk with references each prophecy. I have provided the information requested of me to tell you the single thing (outside of my own experience) which tells me the Bible is the divinely inspired Word of God.

...

See, you have one opinion,

See, you have one opinion, another guy who may have studied the bible as deeply as you has another.

Yes, for those who believe, the prophecies of Nostradamus have already come to pass or will come to pass in the future, just like the prophecies of the bible or any other religious text for that matter.

Bear, I don't know how you believe probability works but no method is known for calculating the probability of such complex human events.

If such a mathematics exists, please share it with us, it will revolutionize the field of risk management. This is your worst argument so far.

Risk Management?

You said: "See, you have one opinion, another guy who may have studied the bible as deeply as you has another."

The world is full of opinions. You have asked me to tell you why I think the Bible is true. What does it matter to me that some one else's opinion is that the earth is flat?

I have already shared the link with the mathematic calculations and how they were arrived. I am thinking that you really are not interested at all in understanding the information I am providing, but are more interested in proving me or the information wrong. Please make your primary goal to understand the information. It speaks for itself. Whether you prove me or the information wrong, is secondary as far as I am concerned. The most important thing to me is that you digest the information and understand for yourself. That is not something I can do for you. When you continue to ask me questions over and over again that are answered in the text I provided, then I have to conclude you are not looking at the text.
-------------------
You say: "Bear, I don't know how you believe probability works but no method is known for calculating the probability of such complex human events."

I had the opportunity to work as a NASA contracter in Safety and Risk Management. Mathematics were used to determine probability of all risks that were associated with the space shuttle...even outside risks such as collision with space debri.

Here is the information regarding how the prophetic probabilities were determined by PETER W. STONER, M.S.
Chairman of the Departments of Mathematics and Astronomy at Pasadena City College until 1953; Chairman of the science division, Westmont College, 1953-57; Professor Emeritus of Science, Westmont College; Professor Emeritus of Mathematics and Astronomy, Pasadena City College. http://sciencespeaks.dstoner.net/Prophetic_Accuracy.html#c8 :

"I am making use of the well-known principle of probability. If the chance of one thing happening is one in M, and the chance of another independent thing happening is one in N, then the chance that they shall both happen is one in M times N. The proof of this theory will be found in any college algebra text. I shall only illustrate the truth of the principle. Suppose one man in every ten is bald, and one man in 100 has lost a finger, then one man in every 1,000 (the product of 10 and 100) is both bald and has lost a finger. To show the truth of this conclusion, suppose you take 1,000 men at random and sort out all that are bald. Since one in ten is bald you will have just 100 bald men in the 1,000. The other 900 are not bald, therefore cannot both be bald and have lost a finger. f Now go through these 100 bald men and look for men who have lost a finger. Since only one man in 100 has lost a finger, you will find only one in this group. This man then is both bald and has lost a finger, and he is the only man who fills the two conditions. In other words, we could say that the chance of a boy becoming bald is one in ten, and the chance of a boy losing a finger is one in 100. Therefore, the chance that a particular boy shall become bald and lose a finger is one in ten times 100, or one in 1,000. Thus the theory is seen to be true.

If the events are not entirely independent, a somewhat different theory of probability must be used.

If the chance of one thing happening is one in M, and after it happens the chance that a second and related event will happen is one in N, then the chance that both will happen is one in M times N.

Let me illustrate. What is the chance that a young man will eventually lose both his first and second fingers? We cannot find the answer by asking the questions: One man in how many men has lost his second finger? and then multiplying the two results. The loss of the first and second finger is often related. The same accident that takes the second finger is very apt to take the first finger also. We must ask the questions: One man in how many men loses one of his first two fingers? And one man in how many men after losing one of his first two fingers also loses the other? Then we may multiply these results.

This principle will be carefully adhered to throughout this treatment of probability in the following pages. "
------------------
You said: "If such a mathematics exists, please share it with us, it will revolutionize the field of risk management. This is your worst argument so far."

I am not trying to argue. You have asked me for information and I am trying to providing it the best I can.

...

:(

That is NOT mathematics bear. It doesn't matter if a mathematician wrote it. I know you are trying to be sincere but come on!

Can't you tell it is not mathematics? He is randomly allocating probabilities depending on his own opinion.

I'll give you an example of the kind of(pseudo)math he is using.

What is the probability of my seeing a cat in the morning when I step outside?

There are 10 million cats in India.
My field of vision encompasses around 100 sq m=10^-4 km sq. The surface area of India is 3 M Sq km. That means there are 3 cats every km. What are the odds one of them is in my field of vision?

Just 3/10000

What are the odds of me seeing a dog and a cat? Take similar calcs for dogs

9 in 100000000

What are the odds of me seeing a cat a dog AND a bike with the number KA 20 V 5387

9 in 100000000000000000

Yet all of these things happened.

Bear, this is EXACTLY the kind of pseudoscience you have to be wary of. Probability theory does not work very well with historical events. You are walking a dangerous path if you're willing to agree with anything as long as it validates your belief...

There is a huge difference my Dear Friend in India,

"Yet all of these things happened. "

and you wrote about those things after they happened to you. Millions of things will happen to you today that you can write about.

The difference between what you wrote and what is provided by the prophets is that different people wrote about criteria that a certain single person, The Messiah, must meet several hundred years before the arrival of The Messiah and years apart from each other's writings and the criteria was fulfilled by a single person including prophecies of a death that he would endure called crucificion before that manner of death was even invented. But he is not dead, he rose from the dead as was prophecied and was seen by hundreds and he will return and every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that He is the Son of God.

I am very busy this morning and would like to give a more detailed statement filled with the facts and will be happy to do so later tody.

My Friend, don't be sad, this is the most wonderful news!

...

Bear my point is to

Bear my point is to demonstrate that what you consider mathematical proof is not actually mathematics.

Do you concede that the link you provided contains of specifically mathematical value?

No, my friend, I do not concede, but I do leave you in the hands

of this man, born in India, who offers you a personal challenge:

http://youtu.be/j_dt9_iAhJI

hmm.

RE:"It does not matter what the bible claims it is,"

When someone is on trial for some sort of crime, their own testimony is still considered evidence. They don't just prevent the accused from testifying on their own behalf, but rather they let them speak and then they weigh all of the evidence. You might do well to look into Simon Greenleaf's legal examination of the Gospels, because the Bible does carry some weight for it's reliability within itself: http://archive.org/details/examinationoftes00greerich
Greenleaf was a legal authority who wrote the books that were used by courts on how to determine evidence: http://www.amazon.com/Treatise-Law-Evidence-Simon-Greenleaf/...
It's notable that he was not a Christian when he began to apply his legal rules to the Bible, but became one as a result of his examination of the evidence.

RE:"you cannot start with the assumption that it is TRUE"

In presuppositional apologetics, it's thought that everyone starts with the presupposition of their own worldview, that there is no neutrality, and that the way to determine which view is correct or incorrect is to show which worldviews are internally consistent or inconsistent with reality. So they would argue that everyone starts out with their own assumptions.

I know of mathematical proof

I know of mathematical proof by induction and contradiction but I see no merit in prior assumptions as it is the very point we are debating.

If you can post at the top of the page, the reasoning step by step to prove the bible by such a method without involving faith, I would be happy to address it.

If I stated that the events of Lord of the Rings were true, then can you not by the same methods prove it is true? It claims the events happened in its text, so can we trust it?

The point is it is not up to you to disprove it but for me to offer positive proof of my statement.

Addressing your earlier post about atheists. The term is a misnomer, and the actual belief system of most atheist in my experience is agnostic. We do not state categorically that there cannot be a supernatural god, only that there is no positive evidence yet for such a being. Hope that clears things up.

....

RE:"I know of mathematical proof by induction and contradiction"

I'm not sure what you are talking about here. You know of proof of what?

RE:"but I see no merit in prior assumptions as it is the very point we are debating."

The point was not that there was merit in prior assumptions, the point was that everyone has prior assumptions even when they don't think they do. It's sort of pointing out a double standard at a worldview level, where atheists assume their worldview is correct by default and think theists are the only ones with worldview presuppositions. To let the Bible speak for itself is not necessarily a prior assumption, just as letting the accused testify on their own behalf does not presume that they are innocent.

RE: "If you can post at the top of the page, the reasoning step by step to prove the bible by such a method without involving faith, I would be happy to address it."

Which method are you talking about? I think you are fooling yourself if you think you don't use faith everyday. Even an understanding of mathematics involves faith that it will not deviate, otherwise every possible calculation would have to have been made and proven, and there will never be enough time to make every possible calculation let alone prove them.

RE: "If I stated that the events of Lord of the Rings were true, then can you not by the same methods prove it is true? It claims the events happened in its text, so can we trust it?"

If you are talking about the presuppositional apologetics approach, I would say you've missed the point. I made two unrelated points. The presuppositional thing points out the myth of neutrality, while the point about letting the text speak for itself is merely a matter of charity and weighing the evidence in an impartial manner: http://philosophy.lander.edu/oriental/charity.html
In your scenario, I would notice that you calling the events of "Lord of the rings" true would contradict the testimony and evidence of Tolkien, then I would have to weigh the evidence on both sides, which might include looking at the text itself to see if it is consistent with reality. But "Lord of the Rings" is in no way comparable to the Bible which purports to be eyewitness accounts corresponding to verifiable events in history. Read Greenleafs assessment I linked earlier. Even though Greenleafs book is like 500 pages, most of that is just charts, and the actual text is very brief. He explains why something like the book of Mormon on golden plates isn't comparable to the Bible as legal evidence, and you may learn more about why Tolkiens novels wouldn't compare either(eg. the fact the the Bible contains multiple sources/books testifying of the same events which are also referenced in other sources).

RE:"The point is it is not up to you to disprove it but for me to offer positive proof of my statement."

It depends on who is making claims. If you make the claim that there is no evidence for God, it's up to you to show that there is no evidence for God. If you are calling yourself agnostic, you might as well be an agnostic all the way and say you don't know if evidence for God exists, or that you personally haven't seen something that would persuade you, rather than claiming that no evidence or proof for God exists.

RE:" Addressing your earlier post about atheists. The term is a misnomer, and the actual belief system of most atheist in my experience is agnostic. We do not state categorically that there cannot be a supernatural god, only that there is no positive evidence yet for such a being. Hope that clears things up."

I think some people have sort of redefined the term from its classical use because they realize that it's unsupportable. But typically people who call themselves atheists do not act like agnostics. They make claims like "There is no God, it's just your imagination, People who believe in God are delusional", I never hear them say "There might be a God, People who believe in God might be delusional, but we just can't know for certain". Typically it's only when they are challenged that they fall back on agnosticism.

Are you an agnostic or

Are you an agnostic or atheist when it comes to Thor?

Simple

The Bible says there is only one God(Isaiah 43:10), and the Bible explains who that God is, and it says that all of the gods of the nations are idols(Psalms 96:5). If one is persuaded that the Bible is true, then the truth of the Bible which contradicts the existence polytheism would rule out the possibility of being open to the existence of Thor. The fact that the Bible has gained my trust through various evidences affects my view of the world and leads me to reject all polytheism, and that would include a rejection of a belief in Thor as well. It's not a matter of agnosticism, but atheism towards Thor based on a logical argument that if the antithesis of polytheism is true, then polytheism is false. Anyone who believes that monotheism is true is an atheist towards all polytheism, it's just a simple entailment.

Cyril's picture

Jesus rocks!

Jesus rocks!

My favorite rock'n'roll moment of my Lord:

Mark 11:15-19.

Yup. That's how he rolls. :)

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.

http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty

"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius