If God doesnt exist then who wrote the bible ?

[DaRev]

Jay520 said:

DaRev said:

1. Honestly, yes, there is no difference,...well almost none, because I, like many religious people, believe that it takes much more 'belief' or 'faith', what you guys seem to happily call UNKNOWS or POSSIBILITIES, to believe that there is no God and that this Universe is a result of some random event.

2. While science is able to prove things as it goes along century by century, during its journey of finding things out it MUST apply some form of unscientific belief, which is no different than a person reading the bible and believing in the events recorded therein.

3. So you trying to tell me that it's easier to belief in some inexplainable Dark Matter than it is to believe that Jesus lived? Answer this as well, How did the human race begin, was there a single person from which all people came from, or where there two original persons, or however you would like to explain it?

4. that about two thousand years ago a man named Jesus lived and did tthings, things so profound that made people believe he was God, even to the point that two thousand years later people still believe.

1: What? Science doesn't say why the universe exists. It says how it came to exist. You're asking a philosophical belief. Also, I never said there was no God.

2: No it doesn't. Science only claims things as true only when proven. If there's something which cannot currently be proven, then scientists just admit they don't have the answers at the moment, which is a lot better than pretending you have the answers by making assumptions.

3. What? I never said Jesus didn't live. Where are you getting this stuff? As for how the human race began, what does that have to do with anything?

4. That's your reasoning for believing in every single detail in the Bible? Because it includes  a man that made people believe he was a God? From that you conclude that everything in the Bible is true?

The biggest difference between science and religion is the fact that science basis its facts and theories based off of predictability. And as human knowledge grows, some theories are tossed out in favor of better theories. For that science is able to become more and more accurate of the world we live in. The facts in religion are assumed to be irrefutably true and can never be challenged or amended even when new knowledge comes along; all based solely on faith.

1) ….? OK, I’m not going to argue for argument sake. My advice to you is that God is not found in a science book.

2) Pal, science BELIEVES in unknowns and possibilities clearly, as if it didn’t, there wouldn’t be any reason to go out and prove anything since everything would already be known. Science must believe in UNKOWNS to drive it forward in its pursuit of understanding how things work or how they came to be. Therefore you must believe in an unknown, the Universe expanding, to eventually prove it as a true or not.

3) It has everything to do with what we are discussing, because the Bible says where the human race came from, unscientifically I might add, which ultimately is connected to whether what’s written therein is from man or from God, as man cannot write evidence of creation when he himself was created. In essence, my question is then, does Science have a better our more plausible explanation? All you science geeks seem to claim that it does, well, let’s hear it. Is a monkey your ancient grandmother, or did your ancestor crawl out of a cesspit, or were they wonderfully created in the image of God?  

4) Sorry, I forgot to delete that bit before I posted it. In any event, since you posted some questions, I would say that Jesus, so far as Christianity is concerned, is out Higgs Particle o_O  Anyways, if you’re able to discount Jesus, then the whole of Christianity falls apart. So forget all the 66 books all the teaching principles and all that, Jesus is from Genesis to Revelation, the beginning and the end of the Bible, if Jesus is not true then the Bible is not!