Decline of religious in USA: "Nones" now more than evangelicals (miracles, woman)
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.
And yet we looked at you Templeton link and ALL said the same thing.
So NO, we do not auto-reject. Why do you invent BS all the time? And then you ask why you get no respect.
And when we explain why you are wrong, you just auto-reject, making up stupid arguments about what we would do, or that our explanations are just assertions.
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!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
And? You have no evidence there is.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
But wait! We have the fact that NDEs differ according to the cultural beliefs of the person having them*. Which suggests they are products of the brain instead of genuine supernatural experiences. So we DO appear to have evidence.
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.
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.
We already know this isn't true. I remember telling about an atheist I knew at work that threatened to come back and haunt his children if the had a religious funeral for him. He must have believed in some kind of an afterlife. Ghosts, spirits, hauntings, poltergeists, orbs, reincarnation, etc., are all possibilities for an afterlife that do not in any way accept the possibility that your belief is true, not to mention all of the other religions that have beliefs different from yours.
Of course you would reject my statements about auto-rejecting because that's what atheists do. They auto-reject.
And yet we have told you why we have rejected your claims, even quoting them. So clearly we have checked your claims, only for you to auto-reject those explanations. But then your mythomania is all you have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
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!"
Another invention (AFJBI for short). I have agreed with many Christians. I even gave one today a reputation point.
Just because no one goes "wow you know that Christian made a really great point!" to you does not mean we do not do so for other Christians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
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.
It strongly shows there are a lot of gullible people buying from a lot of snake oil salesmen.
Even if there is another realm, the evidence for it is buried under all the Moderator cut: bleep.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Nothing more than a suggestion, not based on any real tangible evidence.
Their cultural background IS tangible evidence. Your auto-reject is stuck on Moderator cut: bleep mode.
Where as you have people making claims in books ($, hint, hint) that when investigated are shown to be different to the doctors who were there at the time.
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.
No, the shear weight of evidence does not...except in your echo chamber.
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.
Jeff I read two articles about this prize winner. I take issue with only one thing and that is he weird definition of atheism. For the second or third time Jeff, if this new here of yours used the more common definition of atheism he might came himself an agnostic atheist of Jewish descent which is EXACTLY what I am and far from what you are.
The onus is on the one making the claim. We claim that there is no evidence of an afterlife. We claim that there 8s not sufficient evidence for a God.
You have no problem calling evolution a lie even though you show a very limited and false understanding of the subject. You call other religions false but have you bothered to study them to determine that? The only way that myself and others can refute this scientists claim was by acyually reading it, so yet one more false accusation on your part.
In summary you claim we are anti Christian because we dont agree with a definition used by a non theist Jew. Explain how that makes sense even to you.
And as far as evidence why are you making a hero out of someone who doesn't think there is evidence for God? The only difference between him and most of the other atheists you lie about is we don't agree with his definition. The only reason you support him is you think he 8s attacking us. Not really, he is attacking a weird definition. As most of us are agnostic atheist his assertion actually means he thinks we are correct. He chooses to use an uncommon definition for one word. I cannot understand how you fail to be able to understand all the explanations about this given to you.
We know you are not a stupid person. You must be so bias as to not see this or you are being dishonest. Did you actually read the text of the articles and our posts?
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 your large volume of evidence does not support Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, annimalism, Wicca etc? Are you claiming that the other religions are imposters? Do you have actual evidence showing them false?
Your belief is no more backed by evidence or sacred then all those other religions? You feel insulted when someone states they do not believe in your religion however you feel free to call other religions false and lies. Unless you show respect for others we are not obliged to respect you. And you posts so many untrue things about atheism and atheists, are you not willing for us to stand up to your lies?
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.
What evidence? Please share! (Hint: The Bible is not evidence, nor is the fact that "millions believe")
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
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.
No, it's not anything like that. Ignoring the unintentional double-negative ("...it could be wrong that my parents are not my parents..."), we have solid reasons to think your parents are your parents, little reason to think they are not, and easy ways to verify they are human and not aliens. Many lines of verifiable evidence support your claims that they are, indeed, your parents. Christian claims aren't even in the same ballpark.
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.
What evidence, Jeff. You keep saying you have all this overwhelming evidence, yet show none or very, very irrelevant stuff.
Most of us atheists are quite willing to be convinced, but it's got to real, verifiable stuff that we can test for ourselves. None of us accept another's say so.
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.
Correction; the sheer weight of evidence, as well as numbers may favour Christianity, but the evidence is all short of good enough when examined.
The sheer weight of sound evidence in fact favours atheism. If you have looked at the debates all the time you have been here, you ought to know that.
But of course, you don't. As we saw here, what the evidence actually indicates doesn't interest you. It has to favour Christianity whether in fact, it does, or not. You did it over slavery where you ignored or denied what the bible actually says. You ignored and denied what atheists say atheism actually says, and prefer the atheist -bashing pronouncement of someone who is in fact, not an atheist.
When I claim that theist apologetics uses evidence to prop up the faith, not to get at the facts, and whether it is actually true or not doesn't seem to matter, I am telling it how it is.
Correction; the sheer weight of evidence, as well as numbers may favour Christianity, but the evidence is all short of good enough when examined.
The sheer weight of sound evidence in fact favours atheism. If you have looked at the debates all the time you have been here, you ought to know that.
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?
Quote:
Soon after, Misty went to the hospital for her next PET scan. But where the readings once lit up like a Christmas tree, they now showed no signs of cancer! The doctor looked over the results again and again—and even called in a colleague to confirm what he was seeing.
The only thing the scan showed was a small scar on Misty's right lung—but no cancer. Even her bones were healing. The doctors, of course, were amazed at what God did. When they asked Misty what she was doing differently to result in her healing, she simply told them she had faith in God.
"[The doctor] told me, 'Yes you were right,'" she says. "'I totally believe this [result] is from a higher power. ... I believe Jesus healed you.'"
But of course, you don't. As we saw here, what the evidence actually indicates doesn't interest you. It has to favour Christianity whether in fact, it does, or not. You did it over slavery where you ignored or denied what the bible actually says. You ignored and denied what atheists say atheism actually says, and prefer the atheist -bashing pronouncement of someone who is in fact, not an atheist.
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.
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.
Your auto-reject is stuck on Moderator cut: bleep mode.
