Then study from all angles the Book of Mormon. Not just your slant to prove only it is false. That includes proper study and prayer as well. With real intent, with faith, without a double mind. See, I already know your side of this debate.
If really knew my side of this debate you'd realize that prayer and faith are non-starters for me. I'm not interested in proving it false, that is an impossibility, I only want to see evidence that it is true.
If you are taught to reject prayer and faith to the point you won't take a different approach to prove that there is evidence of prayer and faith, then you have a real problem. You are controlled and have no free will. So, I will propose this again. Then study from all angles the Book of Mormon. Not just your slant to prove only it is false. That includes proper study and prayer as well. With real intent, with faith, without a double mind. See, I already know your side of this debate.
Why is faith necessary to find truth? Seems to me that it would only get in the way.
It's not but faith leads to peace and peace leads to objectivity or truth. Unless of course you believe that agitation, stress and drama lead to clear thinking that is.
Many paths lead to peace.
Just because he's a scientist, doesn't mean he doesn't want a fantasy world to live in.On this Easter Sunday, when we celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ, I thought it would be interesting to hear a scientist explain why he believes in the resurrection.
A Scientist Looks at the Resurrection
EXCERPT:
A Scientist Looks at the Resurrection
A physicist confesses that the electron is round and that Jesus rose from the dead. My own faith is informed by the evidence, but it is much more.peacefulscience.org
When asked to believe in something, scientists often ask questions about evidence. There certainly is evidence for the Resurrection, which can be summarized around three historical claims: 1) Jesus was crucified and died, 2) his body was buried in a tomb that was found empty a few days later, and 3) his disciples experienced encounters with who they believed to be the newly resurrected body. I will show that these three claims, backed by historical evidence and scholarly consensus, together constitute a compelling case for the Resurrection.
The first claim is the least controversial. Almost no historian disputes that Jesus lived in the first century AD, carried out a ministry for a few years and was crucified to death by the Romans. Even a skeptical scholar such as Bart Ehrman argues vigorously for the historical veracity of these basic facts, based on both Christian and non-Christian sources. . . .
More comprehensive examinations of Roman crucifixion and Jewish burial practices by specialist scholars show us that the gospel account of Jesus’ burial in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea is historically credible.<a href="A Scientist Looks at the Resurrection">3</a> Similarly, there are strong arguments to support the claim that the tomb was found empty a few days later.<a href="A Scientist Looks at the Resurrection">4</a> A commonly cited reason is that the gospel accounts are rendered more credible by their agreement that women were the first witnesses to the empty tomb. More recently, John Granger Cook has argued that based on linguistic, historical, and cultural reasons, it is unlikely Paul mentions a burial and resurrection ( 1 Corinthians 15:3-7 ) without presupposing an empty tomb.
Certainly in a world with so many people, almost all things are possible but I can only write from my own experience. It seems to me that faith, the belief in something without significant evidence, is an impediment to seeking truth.
Faith can be more accurately seen as a first step, not stumbling blocks along the way. One can start with the First Commandment and decide/have faith to give God and His ways priority . Or, study the Beatitudes and have faith that even one can improve daily life.
I gave up on religion before I read the Bible, I used only my own logic, knowledge, and experience. Years later I read and studied the Bible but that did not change my original assessment of all religions.Faith can be more accurately seen as a first step, not stumbling blocks along the way. One can start with the First Commandment and decide/have faith to give God and His ways priority . Or, study the Beatitudes and have faith that even one can improve daily life.
In your own life already: You had faith that if you read the Bible you would find some good reasons to give up religion.
And how many religions did you join and stick with for more than a year?
The answer, hardly surprising, is one. The religion of my parents. But one was too many for me.
Yet here you are on a religion forum. That befuddles me. Some aspect of religion must interest you?
Sure and notional faith isn't the same thing as manifested faith. Peace through the storm - for many - is an acquired taste. I'm not saying it can't be stumbled upon but in my opinion it is better to have a manifested worldview that is predisposed for it. It's a stronger foundation.
Because God has established this as the way. The lessons in the OT and NT teach that empirical evidence isn’t enough nor is it needed. All the times the people of Israel were shown empirical evidence and refused it.
People, history, and societies interest me and religion is a big part of all of them.
Different strokes.
