Why do Christians refuse to accept their burden of proof?

Because I haven't got to prove anything to you sunshine.

Why don't you accept the burden of proof about your own faith statements? You've been proven to be little more than a troll with no evidence at all to back up your views. Here is my evidence of that:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Aouil...

I've given the evidence of God to the posters on this site but they were either too blinded by their own mindset to evaluate it or they just didn't bother with it in the first place because they were not seeking the truth and were simply trying to pretend they had, like, deep thoughts and stuff.

Now, if you want to re-invent the term "atheist", "evolution", "gnostic" or any other term that has a real definition to suit whatever ideas are bouncing around your brain, then consult your shrink--you're bordering on sociopathic, unless of course you are just making it all up because you are a pathetic little troll. You seem to think that your view is the only one that has any value, and you not only offer no proof of your views, you don't even define what your views are until changing the terms your question becomes convenient to helping you prove a point you never made. If you are not interested in finding answers, quit asking questions.

this is a really good question; in advance, thanks for reading.

The book of Daniel is said to be the "Revelation" of the Old Testament.

I've been studying Daniel for a while now and I've come to realize that the events foretold in Daniel have happened in History exactly like the book of Daniel stated they would.

Now there are many who say that Daniel must have been written after the fact for it to be so detailed and precise. There are two things that help me with this.

1. Much of Daniel was written in a language that was dead not more than 1 hundred years later [like Latin].

2. we have the Dead Sea Scrolls

The scrolls were written in a carbon-based ink on animal skins and papyrus.

The scrolls don't contain any secular material, they are religious in nature. When we consider the scrolls we can see an hint of the deliberate and purposeful nature in which they were gathered and hidden in the caves. Not a random collection of material. The biblical texts are copies of the Hebrew Bible [Christian Old Testament] forming about 25% of the total number of the scrolls collection. when found it was discovered that they contained a copy of every one of the books of the Jewish Bible - including the book of Daniel.

The "Dead Sea Bible" is the oldest group of Old Testament manuscripts ever found dating at least a thousand years older than the TRADITIONAL Hebrew texts from the early Medieval period which has been the basis for all of our modern Bible translations. There is some support for the traditional translations; however there is much in the DSS in support of the non-traditional Septuagint [this is the ancient translation of the Old Testament into Greek. Sometimes the scrolls preserve readings that we never knew existed, but which fit like a puzzle piece into the existing traditional contexts.

There are large portions of the book of Daniel, found amongst the dead sea scrolls, which is empirical evidence of the existence of this book around and over 100 yrs before Christ; the period in which Daniel would have lived. Carbon dated of course.

When you put Daniel's prophetic details together side by side with the Historical facts which occurred during the 1300 years after the crucifixion of Christ, there is a remarkable coherence and corroboration that takes place. The are speaking of the same events from different time periods.

This to me is more proof than I need that the Bible isn't just some book.

You'll need:

1. a bible

2. A Scholars explanation Daniel [at least one which has many scholar in agreement over the context]

3. Some history books

4 and a comfortable chair.

If you want proof, if you want to see ancient text speak of things to come with historical accuracy, then this is it. After you do an intense study, then come back to Yahoo Answers and let everyone know what you think....i'll be you'll change your mind.

PS - I used to be an Atheist.

hope this helps.

God bless.

1) Why do Christians refuse to accept their burden of proof?

In logic, debate and in almost all real world situations, there is no burden of proof.

The answer to your question is this: "Because the burden is not ours. In fact: the burden does not exist."

2) One of the stupidest things I see is when theists (they tend to be Christians) say "well, you can't prove God doesn't exist."

In other words, when someone employs **the very same** unreasonable unilateral assigning of a burden of proof on the opposition that you use, you consider it stupid.

.................................................

3) Now, it's not true that you can't prove a negative, but YOU have the burden of proof. You are making a positive claim about reality, atheists are rejecting it.

OK - I'll play.

You are making this positive claim about reality:

"You Christians have the burden of proof."

Prove it. Prove that positive claim about reality that you have just made. (Hint: you can't prove it, and you can't because it is illogical. The statement "The burden of proof is on the claimant" is logically self-defeating.)

4) In a similar sense, if I claimed to have an invisible dragon in my garage, it wouldn't be up to you to disprove it, it would be up to me to prove it.

No it wouldn't. In that situation there would be no burden of proof except that you have assigned such a burden to yourself (which is, of course, neither logical nor illogical but a matter of your personal preference).

5) This is not meant to be a rant, it's a question. Because we bring this up all the time and you never actually listen or understand. Is it a hard concept?

Ironic...

Conclusion: clearly you are not familiar with logic or with the circumstances under which a burden of proof actually does exist. Your entire complaint is based upon a *thoroughly* illogical claim - one that you, yourself, *certainly* cannot prove even though you assert that you have the burden of proof.

- Jim, Bach Sci Physics 1989

That's where you are wrong, I'm not "making a claim" that I am trying to convince you. I don't "believe" I know. God is truth. But there is no burden of proof especially on a faith based religion. Your decision to not accept God is on you.

No Christian is obligated to prove the existence of a supernatural God by natural

means.

The word of God says, "If you seek me, you will find me." God is available to those

that diligently seek him. I've seen and heard testimony's all of the time, including

today on TV, where two Muslim men who were raised to hate and kill Americans;

were sent to America to recruit Americans to Islam and do acts of destruction,they had

occasion to doubt what they had been taught about Americans and Christianity and

when they cried out to God to show himself to them; if he was real, and he did. Two

different men on two different occasions. Also a Muslim woman with a similar

testimony of how she asked God to prove himself to her also.

So, if you are sincere about wanting proof of God, do as these people did and ask Him

yourself. If you aren't sincere, don't waste your time or His. He may not show up to you

immediately but he will show.

Jude 17-19 and Jude 8

But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts. These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.

Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

From these turn away.

Consider your (well, actually Carl Sagans) dragon, or my undetectable third arm.

They seem to be completely unaware that:

A) unfalsifiable claims are pointless

B) being unable to prove something does not exist, does not make it rational to believe it does

C) they're making the initial claim, so any burden is entirely theirs

Because the think their book written by a bunch of bronze age goat herders IS proof.

The universal laws in nature show a Law Giver must exist. period.

Yes, I understand what you are saying, but you don't realize your claim states that our universe was formed by nothing. I believe it is impossible for something to happen without a reason, so thus we look at God, who created the universe, not in 7 days, but over billions of years. And evolution is the process in which God created animals and eventually humans, who domesticated themselves through the discovery of farming, and created sin as a result of God's slow process of evolution, which has left us with the instincts that we had millions of years ago.