[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by Megan1

I never even said “scientific evidence”, I just said “evidence”. I specifically said circumstantial evidence so that people didn’t think I meant scientific evidence. I know there is also some scientific evidence of Jesus being God, but I don't know it well enough to get into that.

I'm afraid you did say scientific evidence: "I mean, there is scientific evidence that Jesus is God.... So for those of you who don't believe in God because there isn't enough scientific evidence,". It's in your first reply to this thread. You never said circumstantial evidence. Read your first post. If you still doubt that, then why did other users quote and comment you on that very same thing? Answer: because you posted it.

Originally Posted by Megan1

Actually, that’s called circumstantial evidence. I know that isn’t for sure or even great evidence, but….I never said it was. I don’t really pay a lot of attention to evidence of God to know a lot about it, because I believe by faith rather than by sight.

You've been saying your "evidence" and arguments are solid throughout this entire thread. Specifically, you said: "if He wasn’t God, these things would be the biggest coincidences ever". That implies the evidence is quite strong and you can read the surrounding text of yours for some context verifying what I said.

But now you're saying your arguments and evidence, at least for this issue, are weak.

Faith is believing in something when there are no strong reasons to support believing in it. I consider you to use more blind faith than anything else because you believe what the bible says, most of it at least, but don't bother to think about it, don't bother to have enough knowledge to back up your beliefs. So far, your only additional knowledge was recommending that I read a book because you don't know enough of the book to give some examples from it.

Further evidence of "blind faith" is your disbelief in evolution. I don't mind if people don't accept it, that's fine but I think it'd be good if people could look into something first before automatically refusing it. I don't know if it was you or another Christian user who said they took science in high-school. If it was you who said it, that's bullshit or you learned nothing because you don't know the basic idea of what science is nor do you seem to know anything about evolution. You're disbelieving it on sight and blind faith.

Originally Posted by Megan1

I haven’t read the whole book; I’ve just been told parts from it, read a little bit of it, and know that the whole book is about evidence of Jesus being God. I could find specific evidence from the book if you really want me to, but it’s been a while so I’m going to have to do some searching. That’s why I just recommended the book instead of quoting it, but I can find some examples if you want. I’ll have to get back to you in a few days though.

If someone told it to you and you've read very little, how do you know the entire book is indeed about evidence of jesus being god. Might I add, you claim both in this very response and in others that the book contains scientific evidence, not circumstantial evidence, not word-of-mouth evidence, not made-up theory evidence but actual scientific evidence.

Originally Posted by Megan1

What I’m trying to say is that there is nothing on Earth that goes against the bible’s teachings; there is nothing in the bible that has been proven wrong. No the bible doesn’t show us how everything was made, but that’s not what I meant. I was just trying to say that there is nothing on Earth that disproves the bible in any way. The bible can’t all be proven by evidence, but it also can’t be disproven.

It can be proven nor disproven, so it has no credibility then and is about topics that cannot be assessed in any way. If you want an example of what does "disprove", is the commonly-referred flood. If such a flood occurred, fossilized creatures and plant-life would be at about the same depths underground. However, they are not and researchers have indicated they are millions of years apart. More evidence would be the fossilized creatures that trace back human development. Biblically that shouldn't exist because god made humans on the spot, there should be no ancestral fossilized humans. Even more evidence, Noah released countless animals onto the Earth and many are still here but there are many others that were not released by him because they are evolutionarily distinct from their ancestors (some of which were released by Noah). Lastly, in Leviticus, it says sprinkling blood of a decapitated dove can be able to cure someone's ailment. There's no reason as to why that would be effective. I doubt it's been scientifically examined because it's so ridiculous, researchers wouldn't get any funding nor approval from ethical boards to carry out such an experiment.

Originally Posted by Megan1

I guess I should have said “most gods” then. Sorry, I know nothing about satanism. But point being, that wasn't referring just to my God.

But you ended up at that conclusion because of the supposed qualities of your god and being unable to previously think other gods would be different.

Originally Posted by Megan1

It’s basically saying “Feel free to search for answers when you need them and God will grant wisdom when you need to know something. But even when you don’t have answers, you need to keep trusting in God by faith.”

God granting you wisdom or knowledge to know something means you're not seeking it out.

Originally Posted by Megan1

I don’t know EVERYTHING about it, no. But I’ve studied it (evolution, for example) enough to know that there is a possibility that it isn’t real; therefore knowing that the bible could be real. That's what I know by evidence. And from there, knowing there is a possibility that the bible is true, I went by faith from there to believe the bible 100%.

I'll take back some of what I said in this post and in other posts in this thread and other threads if you answer this question: what have you learned from studying evolution? I may not change my view, it depends on your answer.

While you're answering it, also say the scientific reasons why bacteria evolving to a harmful substance is not real. If you don't know much about bacteria, pick some animal you know more about but your answer has to have some scientific and biological sense.

Originally Posted by Megan1

That’s actually opposite of what I said. I said some of it can be proven (meaning there is for sure proof of SOME things in the bible, but not all)…...but none if it can be disproven (meaning that while science suggests the chance that the bible isn’t accurate, there is none of the bible that they can disprove for sure).

This is why I doubt you know anything about evolution. One basic premise of science, as said before is falsifiability, hence NOTHING can be proven nor disproven. Using that as an argument shows you really don't know what science is about despite apparently studying it.

Originally Posted by Megan1

Evolution can't be proven though. That's why it's called the theory of evolution.

Again, no knowledge of science. I thought you studied evolution, didn't you know it was part of the scientific field and what science is? At this point I doubt you know a single thing of evolution. You can say otherwise but from this statement alone, I don't think you took a single science course. But go ahead, dazzle me with what you think evolution is. I could say what it is but I've done that for you so many times in the past, and with this result, you ignore it all or none of it enters that tiny brain of yours.

Originally Posted by Megan1

I'm trying to figure out how to word what I'm trying to say. God is more powerful than anything, including science. He can make Himself known when He wants to and leave some things mystery for us to choose Him by faith if He wants to.

I'm not understanding how this particular quote of yours shows god is above science. Essentially, he can give knowledge if he feels like it. Science can lead to knowledge as well but not static, it's dynamic.