Free Republic

I am certainly not going to publish my DD 214 to some anonymous poster any more than you’re going to publish your record of live birth or what cult you belong to.

No, you won't even disclose your personal denomination because you feel it's too personal. Metmom's request is a violation of privacy.

Prove that you are a mom.

Prove that you are a mom.

Not only that, but they demand proof under their own qualifications for proof

No, boatbums. real things are provable for all. I don't have to device my own special method to prove that you will sink if you try to walk on water. I will sink just the same. That's realty. Either God exists or doesn't. IF you say he doe,s then you should be able to prove it without special "qualifications of proof". reality doens't recognize believers and nonbelievers. It affects all equally.

No, boatbums. rea,l things are provable for all. I don;t have to device my own special emthod to prove that you will sink if you try to wlak on water. I will sink just the same. That's relaity. Either God exists or doesn't. IF you say he doe,s then you should be able to prove it whtout special "qulificaitons of proof". reality doens;t recongize believers and nonbeievers. It affects all equally.

You have yet to prove that you are a Christian.

Prove that you are mother. I don't' believe the likes of you could conceive.

Of course, if we were to divulge our identities that would be no problem, so your request and my request are not doable here but they are provable. Betty Boop said God's existence is not provable.

U never demanded proof of God's love form God or from anyone. You are making things up (again).

By the same standard you use, I can declare your love towards another as not real and not valid because you cannot convey to me the emotions you experience yourself

God's existence is not an emotion. It's either a hypothesis or a fact. if it is a fact then it should be provable.

Again, how could mistranslation occur when John was writing under "inspiration"? The fact is that John 3:3-4 cannot be retrotranslated into Aramaic and make any sense. Thus, either John mistranslated under "inspiration" or he made it up.

That is absolutely correct. That's why chest-thumping individuals who want the whole world to know how they love their spouses and children are no different than the Pharisees who made pained faces during fasts in order to come across as pious and observant. That's all hollow show.

You prove how you feel towards someone by your deeds. Words are cheap.

I don't deny the possibility of it, altough I don't think it;s very likely, but that's just my opinion based on the fatc that there are notlaking donkeys and that dead people don't get up and go abaout their day as if nothing happened—after being dead for days!

And yet kosta presents himself as singularly "all-knowing" — in his purported ignorance (i.e., lack of ability to prove anything)

No, I just admit that I don't know something, which is more than some people can do. They must know, or at least pretend to know THE Truth, but they can't prove it!

Now, it seems to me that claiming ignorance and not being able to prove something is more logical than claiming to KNOW something and not being able to prove it.

I'm sorry; but such a method makes no sense to me whatsoever

I know, what make sense to you, apparently, is to imagine something and then proceed to "prove" that it exists by means of "vertical transcendence".

So, you are saying all of these are wrong...yet the Bible is inerrant. Brilliant/s.

Sorry, it was late. You are right.

Cronos to boatbums: It's amazing how contradictory your posts are -- not only on religion but also on mundane matters. On the one hand "crib, crub, ENOUGH, no personal remarks" and one the other hand your posts do the same (Kosta's got a nice list of these too). Aren't those posts hypocritical?...

I see that even with my absence, when there are no agnostics or atheists to badger, Christians—left to their own devices—just smother each other with the love of Christ. Aaaah, that wonderful agape at work...2,000 years, bonefires, daggers and counting... :)

What does that Bible verse say "For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.” [Matthew 18:20]? Musthave meant someone else...

It is you who isnists the translation, written under "inspiration", is in error.

Incorruptible. Can't you read?

I can read, I just wasn't aware that anything divine "procreated" or had "seed".

To the contrary, boatbums, on all accounts.

An honest, sincere study of the accuracy of the Bible and the beginnings of the Christian faith will reward the honest seeker with the undeniable truth he is searching for. I know it is true and I am not alone. That leap that you fear is not such a huge chasm as you imagine.

A Muslim would have said nothing different. Maybe he or she would be willing to strap some dynamite and become "martyred" for that faith. What does that "prove"? That their faith is "true"? Hardly! Dying for one's beliefs does no such thing.

Nor does personal testimony. Just because you believe something doesn't mean it's true. How do we know if something is "true" or "real"? For real things you don't need a leap of faith. It affects everyone, and not just the "elect" few: if you jump you will fall, if you try to walk on water you will sink, if you touch a hot stove top you will be hurt, etc.

Reality does not distinguish between believers and nonbelievers, nor does it require—never mind demand!—that you believe in it a priori in order to effect you!

We have difficulty, it seems, accepting the world as it appears (to us) without adding to it our own "explanation" as to why it is the way it is. The world looks, smells and sounds a lot different to different species then it does to us, and their reality is quite different from ours.

We just have difficulty saying "As of this moment, we don't know." We succumb to our fancy and create answers. Dawkins obviously succumbed to his, at least for a moment.

Well, Josephus' calling Jesus the Messiah is no more than 20-30 years after the fact, yet it is an unreliable forgery because a Pharisee would not call Jesus the Anointed One. The reason the Bible is so scrutinized is because it makes fantastic claims! When we read the Odyssey, we don't have to believe that Hydra really existed! But when you claim that people who have been dead for days get up and walk away as if nothing happened...that is a slightly different ball of wax.

Well then, Acts of Pilate/Gospel of Nicodemus. should be right up your alley.

Why should I believe them? Mid second century, Medieval forgery? LOL. Does that meet "corroborated" evidence?

Also, the wekaness of Ben’s argument (if I can call it that) is that he uses the argument from ignorance — if science can’t answer it, that “proves” the religious explanation. Wrong.