Posted on 05/01/2011 7:24:18 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode
It's called common Free Republic courtesy. When you mention a poster, it is proper to ping them to the post. Something you apparently have never learned properly.
I don't think may people say that nowadays. And back in the day when such things were said, no one knew Christ, or of Him.
Again, I will not, because I cannot, "prove that God exists." To subject Him to a "proof" is to misunderstand Who He Is a priori. Such a proof would then be worthless.
oooh... and you crib about personal attacks? Why not see the log in your eye first?
Ravi ROCKS.
That is so right that if you take humans out of the equation, there is no basis for determining good and evil. Everything then, just is.
Well, actually, there is still Satan, but morals ARE for man.
Everything else just is.
You can cherry pick the literature to your heart's content, tearing items out of context as it suits you.
Cherry pick? Read Thomas Paines The Age of Reason. Or would you like me to post hundreds of more quotes like I just posted? I can even start with the First Amendment to the Constitution.
But what you cannot do is rewrite American history to fit your reimagined, "culturally-updated" version of it. America is what it is, unique among nations. And what it is, is a Christian nation philosophically, i.e., without taking the doctrines of sectarian religious belief into effect.
Tell you what Betty, can you list a few things that the Founding Fathers put in the Constitution that makes us a Christian Nation Philosophically?
I'll be willing to bet that neither you nor your fellow Born Againers Apologists will make a better case for that than they did the Bibles predictive ability.
Betty-Boop - I don't think may people say that nowadays. And back in the day when such things were said, no one knew Christ, or of Him.
Pecisely Betty, because Christ didn't exist back then.
oooh... and you crib about personal attacks? Why not see the log in your eye first?
Perhaps some “proof” that will overwhelm the Pharisee-like disbelief and accusation of fraud, demonism, and ignorance?
and what “proof” would that be?
“Pull those nails out your hands and feet and come down here! Save yourself!”?
But the atheists won't accept even the proofs they demand so the demand is in it's self false.
One of the most compelling proofs was offered on one these threads, perhaps this one, that of fulfilled prophecy concerning the release of the Israelites from Babylon and Jesus’ own prophecy about Jerusalem be laid waste.
But, ‘who cares’, says the atheist, ‘it's not MY proofs so it means nothing at all.’
“Then prove that God exists”
That was done a long time ago and it was ignored.
You are quite correct. Since the atheist thinks that belief in God is delusional, then by default, any *evidence* the believer uses to *prove* God is meaningless; mere delusion, not founded in fact. ,P> Therefore, there is no proof that the atheist would accept as valid. So they are demanding that someone prove God's existence using something that they have determined a priori, to be invalid.
19"There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. 20And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man’s table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores. 22The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried, 23and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side. 24And he called out, 'Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.'
25But Abraham said, 'Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. 26And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.' 27And he said, 'Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father’s house— 28for I have five brothers—so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.' 29But Abraham said, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them hear them.' 30And he said, 'No, father Abraham, but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.' 31He said to him, 'If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead.'"
Yes I do kosta - it is the empty tomb and the testimonies of the eyewitnesses. I know already you reject that evidence from the start, but nothing else explains the phenomena of the Church. Secondly kosta, you of all people know that two opposing truths cannot coexist.
Which is why extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. When the evidence is not produced with the PRESUMPTION that such evidence will be rejected before it is allowed to be examined, the entire train of logic is derailed.
They are caught in the web of superstition, and trapped by circular reasoning to justify the lies they’ve swallowed whole.
They all set the facade up so that they can have their fake cake, and eat it too.
Every time some brilliant Atheist says “I don't know” about any given cosmological, biological or other scientific concept or discipline they have found God for me...
That is what is so sad about the Born Againers, they give up the most precious thing they have, their life, in exchange for death.
It is no wonder that Christianity is a death cult.
...the intellectual tool of science is designed only to make sure that one's measurements be as accurate as one's technology permits, that one's measurements use the appropriate tool for the quantity to be measured, and that one's conclusions follow logically from one's premises.
If one works very diligently, then one may be able to separate what one hopes or believes is out there from what actually is out there. That is, one may be able to systematically eliminate one's misconceptions about what is out there in the world by the practice of science and, as a result, be able to exercise control over it and then use it for one's ends. This is the power of science.
The choice of both premises and ends, though, lies outside the field of science because science is limited to reasoning and experimentation based on measurable quantities. The biggest error of the past three centuries has been the assumption that, since everything that can be measured exists, nothing exists if it cannot be measured. The belief is that since measurement is but the extension of our senses by technical means, there is nothing that exists apart from that which is open, at least in principle, to our senses; ie, "seeing is believing" or, ostrich-like, "If I can't see it, it doesn't exist." Accordingly, personality, thought, love, and free will are just smiley faces we put on biochemical processes that are irrevocably part of a chain of cause and effect that we only think we control.
The funny thing is that there are some people who feel comforted in believing this who at the same time ridicule people who believe Jesus rose from the dead because of the testimony of others who witnessed it. They claim that their witness cannot be trusted because1. something like that cannot happen,The answer to the above is, of course,
2. it cannot happen since they've never observed it,* and
3. if it doesn't happen more than once and they haven't witnessed it themselves, then anyone else claiming to have done so must either be insane or a liar. And then they abuse the word "science" by claiming 1-3 to be scientific.1. that the most they can say is that, given the usual nature of things, it doesn't happen, not that it cannot happen if given sufficient cause, and that if it did happen, that would be, in and of itself, evidence that the cause was outside the usual nature of things. Stating categorically that there can be no sufficient cause "because biology teaches us..." is just naked arrogance trying to use science as a fig leaf;The retort to 3, because they cannot argue with the first two, would be that 'history' or 'one's life' are not truly 'things,' but simply labels slapped arbitrarily somewhere along the chain of natural events that exist on their own without rhyme or reason and that sticking on these labels is just an attempt by weak people who lack the bravery to see things the way they really are to provide a feeling of meaning where is none--yeah, sort of like the people who use the label of "science" to claim to have the only true way of separating fact from fiction as well as the only means by which to define 'fact' and 'fiction' ?
2. that plenty of things happen that one has never witnessed or had any idea that they could happen,
3. that there are plenty of things that happen only once--the history of one's life, for instance, beginning with one's conception--that are nonetheless real.
* or observed by anyone they trust, meaning 'by anyone who believes what they believe', meaning 'if you've claimed to have witnessed this, you're no longer someone I can trust,' meaning, 'only that which I believe is true or can possibly be true,' meaning, 'I, and those like me, are the sole arbiters of truth,' meaning, 'if you don't fit in with the program, then you're an enemy,' meaning, 'if you don't accept the tenets of _____, then you're the enemy of truth and since we accept the tenets of _____ and we are human, then you are also the enemy of mankind." And how is this any different from any other form of tribalism?
The Supreme Being of the Universe is God and he is all evil. One day the all evil God was bored so he decided to have some fun by creating the universe and all that exists including man. He is so evil he created the Scriptures and the story of Jesus just so he could trick you and people like you into believing God is a good God. This evil God created EVERYTHING. He created the universe, birds, flowers, puppies, kittens, gorgeous sunsets, all the people on Earth (including you) and all that is beautiful in this world just to fool you.
Then he created a fake Holy Spirit to go whisper in certain people's ears. He instructed this fake Holy Spirit to give you knowledge of a good God that simply doesn't exist, and never did exist just to fool you. The evil God wants you to believe in his fake Scriptures and his illusion of a good God just to see the look on your face after you die and go directly to hell. There you will be forced to slide down razor blades for eternity. The harder you cry, the harder the evil God laughs at you for being so stupid you fell for his illusion of a good God. You will slide and be cut forever with evil God laughing and laughing at you.
Prove me wrong, but you can't use the Scriptures, because they were created by the evil God in order to trick you. If you use Scripture, you only proof the supreme God IS all evil. You will be proving how bad he tricked you.
Now, please... prove me wrong.
Okay, G, thanks for sharing that. Here is how I see this proof: (1) empty tomb only means that a body was removed. How was it removed, I don't know; you don;t know either. (2) the eyewitness account are notoriously unreliable. In 1917 thousands of people in Fatima, Portugal, "witness" the Sun falling on earth.
Luckily (or not), the cameras of various reporters at the scene failed to confirm, that. Without the photographic evidence showing that no solar activity occurred, the mass hysteria, for the lack of a better word and not trying to insult anyone, would have been taken as "fact". How wrong would that have been? This is how myths and legends are created, G. In less than a century it can become a dogma.
My third objection to your proof is that Jesus eyewitnesses did not include the people who condemned him, such as the Sanhedrin or Pilate. Their eyewitness would have carried a lot more weight, I think. Converting your enemies always does.
As for "nothing else explains the phenomena of the Church", G, it was Emperor Constantine, not Jesus and not Paul, who is responsible for the phenomenon of the Church. He not only allowed Christianity, based on a superstitious dream he had, but made it a state religion, prohibiting all pagan religions with the penalty of death for those who did not convert.
The number of Christians, contrary to popular opinions, appear not to have been really very high before that.
Again, neither of us are eyewitnesses, nor do we have any definitive evidence one way or another that God exists. You choose to believe the evidence that you offer, and others choose to disbelieve based on the evidence they have. Others, like myself, chose to live with doubt without condemning either.
Remember your sermon to me about "NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts"? Will you be reminding your friends too?
Kosta, your thoughts on the matter are neither new nor uncommon. Quite the contrary they have always been as so since Jesus first taught the truth....and since He arose.
I find it interesting that human nature, apart from Christ, mimics itslef over centuries. Truly there is “nothing new under the sun”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.