You didn’t ask for an argument. You asked for a reason, and that’s what you got.
claim the Bible as their main authority, and if I ask how do we know it’s correct, they will either cite faith, or because the Bible says so
You are making an argument “for” someone else then shooting it down. That’s called a “straw man,” because there is no substance to it but straw. If you don’t think the Bible accurately portrays what God commands of us, the onus is on you to prove that claim, not on someone else to falsify it for you. So… what is your evidence it is false?
It’s not my fault that examples of holiness and prayer seem to indicate that certain people do indeed get what they want, …especially in recent times such as Padre Pio who was claimed to have done extraordinary things for others, by their request, so I strongly suggest you make sure you know what you’re talking about.
I do know what I’m talking about. What Padre Pio and those God performed miraculous things for through him had was FAITH. I emphasized this in my previous post. God grants these miracles so that others - who do not have faith - might believe. Jesus even says that; John 11:15 and 40.
What evidence can you grant me for this eternal happiness and heaven? No, the Bible isn’t evidence, I can’t walk into the Royal Institute of Physics and claim extraodinary things without evidence.
This is an argument from a Scientism perspective; that is, we can only know something is true if we can submit it to the tests of the scientific method. But that is baloney; the very claim that we can ONLY know truth via the scientific method is self-refuting, because you cannot verify or falsify that claim using the scientific method.
Can you read a fictional novel, say, a Tom Clancy novel, and learn some truth about submarines or sonar? Yet Clancy’s story is not real. Can you define what beauty is using the scientific method? I’m sure someone in your life loves you; can you prove that via the scientific method? Science is not the ONLY way we can come to truth. Philosophers use logic and reason to discover truth, in fact they used it to discover the scientific method, so it’s ironic that “science” sees no value in discovering any truth via that method.
Arguments for God from reason abound. You exist, I assume. So IF you exist, there are only two possible ways you got here: either there is an uninterupted reproductive chain extending back infinitely, or somewhere along the line a Being who did not Himself need to “be created” created the beginning of the reproductive process. St. Thomas Aquinas called this the argument from first cause. It’s not the only argument, just one of many.
Before I accept the Bible as proof of anything, I need other kinds of proof, of course none of which you are able to provide. …learn your debating skills.
Then why ask? I just gave you one above. But you are narrowing your search by defining the only evidence you will accept in such a way you make it impossible to give you what you ask. You are like a man who doesn’t believe glass exists and demands someone prove it to him
without using glass as evidence. Sorry, if you’re going to paint yourself into a corner like that, you might as well not ask the question.
The method of debate I learned in school was one where you presented an argument then backed up your claim with evidence. You are making a sweeping dismissal of religious faiths without a shred of evidence to support your own claim, and demanding someone else prove a negative for you. That’s not debate.
Code:
Then why should I bother praying If I can do the legwork regardless of prayer,
Well as I told you in the last post prayer is not JUST FOR getting something, it’s for building a relationship with God where that “something” is in harmony with it. What happens to you when your life on Earth comes to an end? Nothing? Something? If you say nothing, then cite me your evidence for this claim. That’s how debate works, so let’s hear your evidence.
I don’t want deductive reasoning… you might want to brush up on some basic philosophy if you have trouble coming to grips with scientific arguments.
Is your purpose to inquire or to insult? You tell me to “brush up” on something you will not even consider. Why? I’m wondering if you apply this same standard to science? Do you disbelieve astronomy when they deductively reason a planet too dim to see visually is orbiting a distant star based solely on the periodic wobble of that star? Half of the Big Bang theory works on deductive reasoning, otherwise there is no point in searching for dark matter. Nothing except deductive reasoning tells us it exists.
This coming from the same person who bungled two different types of reasoning above when it came to the proof of gravity and the proof of God?
You know, I’m a bit irritated with your criticism, your idea of “bungling.” I cited gravity as an example to show that truth exists whether one chooses to believe in it or not. It can certainly be proven, but if I, despite ALL evidence you show me, reject it, it does not change the truth of gravity. Likewise, a person who chooses to disbelieve in God does not alter His existence. That is all I was trying to say. I nowhere said God can be proven LIKE gravity.
It’s really pointless to present any argument to you, even limited as they are by this format. You seem to want anxiously to reject everything presented because it can’t be put under a microscope. Well, not everything in reality can be, as illustrated by beauty and love, yet they exist. So unless you have a specific question or want to present some evidence that we can only know something via science, I’m content to leave the topic alone.
FOREVER!