What BAD analogy? Light (GOD) definetely is the same thing, this is why we have used it as an example!

John, chapter 1
6: There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
7: The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
8: He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9: GOD was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
10: He (the Light) was in the world, and the world was made by him (the Light), and the world knew him not.


"For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. "

Correction. There is absolutely no proof of the non-existence of God.

True there is none to support God either. That's why, either way, there is faith...

Until next time,

So, basically what you're saying is that if you don't believe in God, you're ignorant or blind.

No!

Basically what I am saying is that it doesn't matter if you don't believe in God or if you believe in God, because either way you're ignorant and blind!

Correct but to make it fair you should have put it this way:
There is absolutely no proof of the existence of God.



Welcome Ausaria!

But, there is an absolute proof of the existence of the Apple!

This logic would only make sense to a believer. Unfortunately, the remainder of the educated world looks at things differently.



Agreed.

The burden of proof ALWAYS lies with the claimant. Einstein had to prove his theories. It wasn’t up to everyone else to refute them. He didn’t stand up and state, “Here is the Theory of Relativity. If you don’t believe it, prove me wrong”. Sorry, not the way it works.

And, I don’t necessarily think that it is only the lack of evidence that leads to atheism. When one considers the incredible claims by the authors of the bible, the “truth” is not only unreasonable, but highly improbable (impossible?).

And as science progresses, the list only grows !!!

the great fault of those professing the bible is the claim of infallibility.

if they admited that it was written by men, and translated by men, that are prone to making errors in either recording or translating it would hold more ground. they could admit that the stories are not to be taken literally: for ex there was no global flood. they could at least stand on the parts not inconsistant with knowledge. when they take a 100% correct approach though, they doom themselves because all it takes then is 1 proof of error to toss the whole thing out as anything more than a fairytale. Something simple like rabbits chewing their cud is enough to discredit the book when you take an all or nothing approach.

there are many useful things in the torah (OT) that still stand today that should not be thrown out just becuase of the NT (even if you don't believe in magical mystery men, like myself)

The only "proof" is the Bible. However, this can hardley be classified as proof of any kind.

What?!? Aethiests not excepting a religion as real!? why, thats totally unheard of!

then if we all agree that the only proof of god is the bible, and the bible obviously cant be used to back up its own claims, then I guess the only question left is “where faith comes from and what is its purpose”. I purposely left religion out of the equation because I believe that Hyper, et al has some convincing thoughts on that one can read elsewhere.

theories?

Why wouldn't the Bible be used to back up its claims?

The bible is hearsay, at best. It is not actual PROOF that anything claimed occurred, including the existence of god.

Where does it say this?

Yes I know, but this is a Christian's only tool. Without that they have no scriptures to back their thoughts. And while that doesn't prove anything, its the only way they can attempt to prove anything.

I was replying specifically to the statement that science has disproved God, thus the need to say non existence of God

But you are also correct. I guess it depends which way you want to look at it...

But by the same token, we can't take literally the whole Bible (please don't go into arguments about how to interpret; there are heaps of other threads debating this same point).

Anyway, the highlighted example - the Flood - may or may not literally be a world-wide event. I make no claim either way.

The "whole world" in ancient Biblical times does not necessarily mean the Earth, rather the "known world" - the geographical region covered by the Bible. To them, the whole world was flooded. This also helps to explain why many other cultures all have their own flood story. It was based on an actual event within their history.

Does this negate the Bible? To skeptics, maybe. To believers, then no. Faith is, and always will be, the driving force behind anyone's belief system.

Until next time all,

Believers mistake Faith for Fear.

Fear and not Faith is, and always will be, the driving force behind anyone's belief system.

Genuine faith is born within the human being when tasting, seeing, touching, smelling and hearing other dimensions from time and space!

Let those who have Clairvoyance and Clairaudience see and hear what true faith is!

you are a wise person, loge.

Great pic too....!!!!

is dizzy now after reading all the posts

Oh, heart, if the ignorant say to you that the soul perishes like the body, answer that the flower perishes, but the seeds remain. This is the law of God...

Kahlil Gibran