Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would hear him at least instead of just auto-reject which is what atheists do immediately if there is any evidence to threaten their disbelief.
The reality is that atheists do not have a single piece of evidence to prove that there is no life after death. And if you accept the possibility of life after death then you have to accept the possibility that our beliefs are true.
Correct. We have no evidence. We do not know. Hence, we decline to believe. Now you are catching on.
Of course that's is your right. And I have the right to speak up when people post untrue things about our faith. The sheer weight of evidence strongly favors Christianity. Yes, it is still possible that we are wrong. But that's like saying it could be wrong that my parents are not really my parents and are alien impostors.
So you claim. Yet, when asked, you choose to not provide this strong evidence.
Of course you would reject my statements about auto-rejecting because that's what atheists do. They auto-reject. Three things you can count on in life, death, taxes and an atheist never saying "wow you know that Christian made a really great point!"
Actually there is truck loads of evidence. You would be hard pressed to find a crowd of people where no one has had an encounter with the supernatural. Go join a paranormal group and you'll get your evidence.
All of it strongly shows that there is more than just the physical realm.
Nothing more than a suggestion, not based on any real tangible evidence. It's possible that just like everyone's life journey here is unique and death then our journey in the afterlife will also be unique to each person. What is really interesting is how the people are often in such bliss that they don't want to return back to their physical form and life.
Suppose there is...which belief system regarding the non-physical realm is the correct one?
Unfortunately, your ilk is just too biased to accept evidence. If I put it out there, it is rejected immediately. Look what happened with Andrew Wommack. Your side didn't even bother to look at the videos. No, the MO was to immediately go to work to discredit the source. The problem here is your side employs such an extreme filter of what is considered "sound evidence" that it would be impossible to prove anything with such filters. They are nothing more than escape routes. For every cancer healing, you will say, so what, cancer has been known to go into remission. So what? That's not even a logical argument.
If science can't explain why cancer would suddenly disappear when all the evidence says the patient should only get worse then how do you know it wasn't a miracle? If it is completely normal then why would doctors even say miracles are happening? Why can't atheists just accept what the doctors are saying?
No, you ignored the evidence regarding slavery, stubbornly refusing to examine the culture context, language and other verses that were clearly anti-slavery. Incredibly arrogant for atheists to judge God without knowing all the facts. Atheists can't even agree what atheism is. You trot out that it is simply lack of belief due to no evidence yet time and time again, I see atheists boldly claim as FACT that there is no God and the Bible is myth.
Good science has an incredibly high standard. You don't.
Do you know what good science is? When any reasonable, competent person can come to the same result...that's good science. It doesn't matter if the person is religious or not, it doesn't matter what country they come from. Good science is when idential experiments have the same result every time.
But it doesn't matter to you that half the world disagrees with your version of "life". It doesn't even matter to you if millions of christians have different viewpoints of christianity.
The word miracle has a lot of meanings.
No, we used bible passages about slavery. You tried to pretend they had a different meaning. I guess you're saying that god isn't capable of communicating clearly.
Unfortunately, your ilk is just too biased to accept evidence. If I put it out there, it is rejected immediately. Look what happened with Andrew Wommack. Your side didn't even bother to look at the videos. No, the MO was to immediately go to work to discredit the source. The problem here is your side employs such an extreme filter of what is considered "sound evidence" that it would be impossible to prove anything with such filters. They are nothing more than escape routes. For every cancer healing, you will say, so what, cancer has been known to go into remission. So what? That's not even a logical argument.
If science can't explain why cancer would suddenly disappear when all the evidence says the patient should only get worse then how do you know it wasn't a miracle? If it is completely normal then why would doctors even say miracles are happening? Why can't atheists just accept what the doctors are saying?
No, you ignored the evidence regarding slavery, stubbornly refusing to examine the culture context, language and other verses that were clearly anti-slavery. Incredibly arrogant for atheists to judge God without knowing all the facts. Atheists can't even agree what atheism is. You trot out that it is simply lack of belief due to no evidence yet time and time again, I see atheists boldly claim as FACT that there is no God and the Bible is myth.
So much very wrong, it is hard to know what to address. Let me just say this:
I absolutely believe the God of the Bible does not exist. This does not mean I believe no god or gods exist. You err when you assume that "God" is the only possible god.
Unfortunately, your ilk is just too biased to accept evidence. If I put it out there, it is rejected immediately. Look what happened with Andrew Wommack. Your side didn't even bother to look at the videos. No, the MO was to immediately go to work to discredit the source. The problem here is your side employs such an extreme filter of what is considered "sound evidence" that it would be impossible to prove anything with such filters. They are nothing more than escape routes. For every cancer healing, you will say, so what, cancer has been known to go into remission. So what? That's not even a logical argument.
If science can't explain why cancer would suddenly disappear when all the evidence says the patient should only get worse then how do you know it wasn't a miracle? If it is completely normal then why would doctors even say miracles are happening? Why can't atheists just accept what the doctors are saying?
I can only speak for myself, but, if you think that i didn't look at Andrew Wommack, it is you who is not looking. It was a claim of granted prayers and cures. That's it. As to the record of medicine and prayer on cancer, medicine is doing better than relying on the aoocasional inexplicable remission. The cause of which is 'Unknown'. Not "undeniably God".
Sorry. But unchecked an unvalidated claims of miracle cures (quite apart from a source with a tumescent agenda) does not cut it.
Even if true, it is no more than one of those inexplicable healings that apparently do happen, and the people in this case were only too ready so say that it was Jesus doing it.
No, you ignored the evidence regarding slavery, stubbornly refusing to examine the culture context, language and other verses that were clearly anti-slavery. Incredibly arrogant for atheists to judge God without knowing all the facts. Atheists can't even agree what atheism is. You trot out that it is simply lack of belief due to no evidence yet time and time again, I see atheists boldly claim as FACT that there is no God and the Bible is myth.[/quote]
No YOU ignored the evidence regarding slavery. Which was either denying that it was slavery at all (with a carefully selected and edited quote about Hebrew slaves who elect to stay otherwise they'll have to leave behind their wife and kids) or by arguing that it was all about the mores, customs of views of the men of the time, which apparently still insisting that the bible is somehow relevant for today, never minds reliably telling us about God.
As usual, the smoked glass of religion distorts your view so you can't even see what you are doing.
p.s looking at the Misty Burdette case, it was hard to find anything but Praise Jesus articles, but it seems that her brain tunor had already gone into remission once already. Then it came back. Treatment was given and it disappeared again. Apparrently with such speed that it shocked the doctors (whom we are told had to ascribe the miracle to Jesus. Whether eagerly or grudgingly isn't clear.
The thing to do - like NDE research - is to find out how this happens and what is going on. But the religious already know, or so they claim.
P.p. s cancer remission has happened dor a long time and in all places. Consider the case of Anita Moorjani remission and an NDE to boot. So far as I can tell, no prayers to Jesus, but she talks rather of in depth meditation.
Remission happens, but Believers are too over eager to claim it as proof of their religious beliefs.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 04-08-2019 at 04:17 PM..
I can only speak for myself, but, if you think that i didn't look at Andrew Wommack, it is you who is not looking. It was a claim of granted prayers and cures. That's it. As to the record of medicine and prayer on cancer, medicine is doing better than relying on the aoocasional inexplicable remission. The cause of which is 'Unknown'. Not "undeniably God".
Sorry. But unchecked an unvalidated claims of miracle cures (quite apart from a source with a tumescent agenda) does not cut it.
Even if true, it is no more than one of those inexplicable healings that apparently do happen, and the people in this case were only too ready so say that it was Jesus doing it.
No, you ignored the evidence regarding slavery, stubbornly refusing to examine the culture context, language and other verses that were clearly anti-slavery. Incredibly arrogant for atheists to judge God without knowing all the facts. Atheists can't even agree what atheism is. You trot out that it is simply lack of belief due to no evidence yet time and time again, I see atheists boldly claim as FACT that there is no God and the Bible is myth.
No YOU ignored the evidence regarding slavery. Which was either denying that it was slavery at all (with a carefully selected and edited quote about Hebrew slaves who elect to stay otherwise they'll have to leave behind their wife and kids) or by arguing that it was all about the mores, customs of views of the men of the time, which apparently still insisting that the bible is somehow relevant for today, never minds reliably telling us about God.
As usual, the smoked glass of religion distorts your view so you can't even see what you are doing.[/quote]
Also if a man sold his daughter to slavery or even indentured servant the daughter never gains her freedom. If I am wrong please correct me
Jeff, juse lIke us, beleven that sLavery is wring aND immoral. What he cannot do is beleven that the Bible got a single thung wrong. Bease of this is distorts, lit's , atracks and every thing else rat her than face that the Bible might not be inerrant. HE just can not accept that God, the Bible and probably his sup port of them can possibly be incorrect..
Last edited by badlander; 04-08-2019 at 04:10 PM..
Reason: Some ting went wrong and my post got mixed into the one I was quoting
No YOU ignored the evidence regarding slavery. Which was either denying that it was slavery at all (with a carefully selected and edited quote about Hebrew slaves who elect to stay otherwise they'll have to leave behind their wife and kids) or by arguing that it was all about the mores, customs of views of the men of the time, which apparently still insisting that the bible is somehow relevant for today, never minds reliably telling us about God.
As usual, the smoked glass of religion distorts your view so you can't even see what you are doing.
Also if a man sold his daughter to slavery or even indentured servant the daughter never gains her freedom. If I am wrong please correct me
Jeff, just lIke us, believes that slavery is wrong aND immoral. What he cannot do is believe that the Bible got a single thung wrong. Because of this is distorts, lit's , atracks and every thing else rather than face that the Bible might not be inerrant. HE just can not accept that God, the Bible and probably his support of them can possibly be incorrect..[/quote] (spellcheck let loose without prejudice or extra expense. "Thung" is considered culturally permissible)
Yes. And there' are some passages that would shock the Pro Life types in the OT if they read them - or listened to them if they were read to them.
Also if a man sold his daughter to slavery or even indentured servant the daughter never gains her freedom. If I am wrong please correct me
Jeff, just lIke us, believes that slavery is wrong aND immoral. What he cannot do is believe that the Bible got a single thung wrong. Because of this is distorts, lit's , atracks and every thing else rather than face that the Bible might not be inerrant. HE just can not accept that God, the Bible and probably his support of them can possibly be incorrect.. (spellcheck let loose without prejudice or extra expense. "Thung" is considered culturally permissible)
Yes. And there' are some passages that would shock the Pro Life types in the OT if they read them - or listened to them if they were read to them.
Times change. I remember seeing a documentary on Rome..I mean reconstructed, they didn't have a time machine...though of course I Wasn't There so I can't be sure 100% I think there was a bit about disposal of unwanted children. The girl -sprat was sadly and reverently laid in the cloaka maxima to be washed out to wherever. The boy was dumped in like the contents of a doggy - litter bag.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No YOU ignored the evidence regarding slavery. Which was either denying that it was slavery at all (with a carefully selected and edited quote about Hebrew slaves who elect to stay otherwise they'll have to leave behind their wife and kids) or by arguing that it was all about the mores, customs of views of the men of the time, which apparently still insisting that the bible is somehow relevant for today, never minds reliably telling us about God. 
Times change. I remember seeing a documentary on Rome..I mean reconstructed, they didn't have a time machine...though of course I Wasn't There so I can't be sure 100% 
I think there was a bit about disposal of unwanted children. The girl -sprat was sadly and reverently laid in the cloaka maxima to be washed out to wherever. The boy was dumped in like the contents of a doggy - litter bag.