Anonymous #2 8w

It’s not religious, it’s having a relationship with Jesus Christ, genuinely please take time to look at the historical evidence and take time to think

-7

Anonymous OP 8w

There’s no historical evidence that any of the spiritual claims happened factually. Present the proof or stop crying

18

Anonymous #2 8w

Zeus has temples and statues, but he isn’t real and he didn’t perform miracles

8

Anonymous #4 8w

the miracles arent evidence lol any evidence has to come from an outside source other than a relegions own texts also like acording to the aichent romans zeus did too its the same thing 😂

7

Anonymous #5 8w

Let’s make the country more religious. I’m all for making it a satanist ruled country!

8

Anonymous #3 8w

This is such a stupid answer, it’s like saying “prove to me math is real without using math”. Genuinely the Gospels are very historical and reliable. The Dead Sea scrolls, the architecture the cities and buildings that are discussed in the Bible. The reality of the nature of the universe, logic and reason itself would not be possible under an atheistic worldview

-2

Anonymous #5 8w

The gospels don’t validate the spiritual claims of the bible, how do you determine their accuracy? What logical process or empirical methods did you use? “would not be possible” according to what? What science? What objective informafion?

9

Anonymous #2 8w

They validate the prophecies presented in Isaiah 55 and Psalm 22, which were proven to be written before Jesus was born via the Dead Sea Scrolls and Ancient Judea texts pointing to its attribution to King David (specially Psalm 22). Those claims of a Messiah that is indicative of Jesus Christ. Empirical processes are for Scientific experiments not Historical facts. You can’t use repeatable data to prove that George Washington sailed the Delaware but eye witness testimony, dating, manuscripts..

-2

Anonymous #5 8w

Yes you can, we can prove with archaeological or geological/ anthropological data that certain events happened. Not hard to do that actually. So the bible is verified because of what’s written in the bible?

6

Anonymous #2 8w

The gospels are well documented accounts, most historians agree they are reliable sources. They are written in the first century decades after Jesus walked the earth. They discuss miracles, but that doesn’t mean they didn’t happen. The architecture of the region, and even outside sources prove the characters and people in the gospels exist. The Pilate stone, the pool of Bethasaba. Not to mention the spread of Christianity, the radical conversions of Paul and James. Corroborating sources, etc

-2

Anonymous #5 8w

Historical accuracy does not necessarily mean spiritual accuracy. How did you logically deduce that Jesus performed these miracles? What evidence do we have? Obviously you know that not all testimonies are factual just because they’re written down.

6

Anonymous #2 8w

And for the final thing I was talking about. On atheism/agnosticism you can’t ultimately justify the existence of the laws of logic. The laws of logic are immaterial, universal, invariant, and necessary. They aren’t physical objects, yet we all recognize they’re objectively true. On what basis, in a worldview where only matter and energy exist, do these laws exist? As a Christian, I believe they reflect the rational nature of an eternal, unchanging God, who created us in His image to reason.

-3

Anonymous #5 8w

Atheism is 1 position. You’re arguing against materialism. You’re grossly mis-characterizing a term because it’s easier than acknowledging that all atheists don’t share the same worldviews as each other

4

Anonymous #2 8w

We’re both appealing to logic, all humans do. My question isn’t whether you use logic, you obviously do. My question is what, in your worldview, justifies trusting it as objective and universally true.

-2

Anonymous #2 8w

You’re right. I would not conclude Jesus did miracles because they were written down. I conclude it based on many factors: eye witness claims, the willingness of the apostles to suffer for what they claimed to have seen, the conversions of skeptics like James and Paul, the empty tomb, the early proclamation of the resurrection in Jerusalem, and the remarkable historical reliability of the New Testament as a whole. Like all historical things, we way all the evidence to see what outcome best answe

-2

Anonymous #2 8w

Answers it as a whole. My question for you is what kind of evidence are you searching to accept for a miracle? If eyewitness testimony, multiple independent sources, and historical corroboration can never count, then it seems you’ve ruled miracles out before looking at the evidence.

0

Anonymous #5 8w

I didn’t ask you if you used logic. Once you answer what I asked, I’ll answer everything you asked that followed.

2

Anonymous #5 8w

Eye witness claims are testimony of being a witness. People die for beliefs that aren’t true all of the time. How did you conclude they were factually accurate?

2

Anonymous #2 8w

It’s very unlikely for mass numbers of people to die for beliefs that aren’t true. Thousands of Christians were persecuted under Emperor Nero, for being Christian. Decades later in AD 112 thousands more were killed under Emperor Trajan and all they had to do was curse Jesus name and bow to Roman Gods. This is a very strong case. The truly believed it, people die for beliefs all the time, but in this situation there was few reason to be loyal to Jesus, unless he was the truth.

0

Anonymous #5 8w

Unlikely according to what? How did you deduce the likelihood? People die for things they believe are true all of the time. There are thousands of religions, people die believing those religious beliefs are accurate. That doesn’t verify the claims of the religion.

2

Anonymous #2 8w

Honestly it seems like you’re very just turned away from the idea of Christianity, and I’m sorry to hear that. I can sit here and answer questions all day, but ultimately I can change your heart. Also Yik yak comments just ain’t the place for this. Jesus is the truth, and I pray you can find Him someday. God bless brother, take care

0

Anonymous #5 8w

Don’t assume. I didn’t do the same thing to you, keep going. I’m happy to be proven wrong you just aren’t answering

1

Anonymous #5 8w

Oh I see, you’re ending the conversation because you couldn’t substantiate the claims. Sad that this happens so often

2

Anonymous #2 8w

No, I ended the conversation because you came into it with a motion that no amount of evidence is enough to convince you. I’m not gonna sit here, in yik yak comments, and have a massive theological worldview debate. There’s plenty of resources out there if you’re really curious to learn more. Mike winger evidence for the Bible series is a great one.

0

Anonymous #5 8w

Not true. You’d rather dismiss my character than actually discuss using logic and using critical reasoning based arguments. You spoke to me fully knowing that you didn’t intend on being good faith.

2