By the way -- if you claim to be a Christian...

[Kenny]

Nope. Logic. But you appear to lack that at times too.


And you shift the burden of proof again. No, it is your claim, you need to support it. I did look and could not find any support. Unsupported positive assertions can be treated as if they are false.


No, the subject is Paul's Canadian girlfriend claim. That there were 500 witnesses to the risen And no, it is improper to say "they did travel". Very few people traveled in those days. Yes, some did. Government officials would travel in the empire. Soldiers might travel to war. And traders would travel from port to port. But that was about it. When you know that your crowd is not going to travel it is easy to lie and say "Oh, 500 people saw him, yeah. That's the ticket!"

View attachment 87046


No, fact once again. This is an observation. You cannot show that he is reliable. That means that he is not. Once again you try to shift the burden of proof.

Oh my! Epic fail.


No, once again logic. Instead of posting falsehoods about "opinion" where you are effectively admitting that you are wrong you should ask questions when you do not understand something.


No, your own posts condemn you. You are my support.


I know. But it demonstrated that you do not understand the burden of proof.


Yes, exactly. So you do understand how you failed. You are trying to treat magical events as if they were historical.


Thank you for admitting that you are wrong again. My observation is correct because you cannot properly support Paul. Once again, you really should be working on those logic skills.

No, the myth is that Jesus was raised from the dead. And you seem to have forgotten your own mythology. Jesus ascended to heave long before Paul began his anti Christian crusade. According to the mythos Paul only saw "visions of Jesus" aka hallucinations. He never saw Jesus himself he was long gone according to the stories.

Do you not even know the Paul stories? Wow!

LOL… you are just way to out there to have a understandable debate.

 

[ElishaElijah]

The verse Matthew 1:23 refers to verse Isaiah 7:14. But the latter verse is clearly NOT about Jesus since the young woman (not a virgin) is supposed to give birth and the son is supposed to still be young (before he knows to refuse evil and choose the good) when the two kings threatening Ahaz are gone (the land they occupy will be deserted).

So, the 'prophesy' referred to in Matthew has NOTHING to do with Jesus at all.

Now, if you think this was the wrong verse, which verse do YOU think Mt 1:23 is referring to?

For sure Isaiah 7:14 is talking about Jesus Christ (Immanuel) God with us. The king failed to ask for a sign so God gave him a sign and a promise. It’s interesting that after Israel and Judah were judged, taken into captivity, brought to nothing because of their rebellion, then 400 years of silence and then comes Immanuel, fulfills this prophecy and many others.
The prophecy in Isaiah 7:14 doesn’t fit anyone else except Jesus Christ and the Jewish believers could see that, testified and wrote them down for the family record of believers coming after them like myself.
You’re correct in that at the time of that prophecy wasn’t clear until it was fulfilled and that is like a lot of them even the end times prophecy. That is really funny to me as well because it’s like God says it plainly and we still can’t see the obvious until it happens, after the fact it’s like how did I not see that?
This happens while reading the Bible a lot, you see new things all the time because God is a rewarded of those who diligently seek Him. It’s also the glory of God to hide a matter and kings to search them out.
This one they knew and clear:
”Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem, saying, “Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we have seen His star in the East and have come to worship Him.” So they said to him, “In Bethlehem of Judea, for thus it is written by the prophet: ‘But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, Are not the least among the rulers of Judah; For out of you shall come a Ruler Who will shepherd My people Israel.’ ”“
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭2‬:‭1‬-‭2‬, ‭5‬-‭6‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

 

[YoursTrue]

You don’t need to be there if the evidence is there.

Science disregards the supernatural only because it fails as a testable hypothesis.

If someone died and started to rot and then is alive after, that would be evidence that death isn’t a permanent state. Doctors regularly save people who would have died before.

There is a point at which a person cannot "come back" with medical means. There was a time when that person was not in any case. That is what I believe. I'm sure others believe other things. OK. (Have a good evening.) When a person is dead they don't think about the universe any more. They are not conscious. Actually, they're dead. That is what I believe as the truth from the Bible. More so, God is always and forever with no beginning and no end.

They don’t’ come from’ since they are not physical things. Causality doesn’t apply.

So your first phrase it’s incorrect.

I look around me. Everything virtually in my apartment was made by someone. Nothing just appeared from nothing. Someone made it.

 

[YoursTrue]

Define "nothing'. Do you even know what the total energy of the universe is? If we took all of the energy from matter (remember E = mc^2), from dark matter, from dark energy. etc. and added them altogether do you have any idea of the value one would get?

Now you want me to define nothing?
Who's talking about the total energy of the universe? (not me...) And by the way, I don't know that, and I doubt whether you do either.
According to some (scientists and others, I suppose) -- the universe could have come about from -- nothing. OK. If that's what you believe, as some might say, so be your belief. I don't believe that. I believe that there is a Creator, an Originator, who has no beginning and no end.

 

[F1fan]

I'm pretty sure you do not agree with me, but the universe could not come from nothing, because guess who I think is consciously existing without beginning or end. Guess...(not Adam)

Energy is known to exist. There are no Gods known to exist. It's more likely that energy has always existed in one form or another than to assume some non-factual being caused it all. If a God could have always existed without a cause, then so can energy.

So get busy showing us that a God exists in reality. And that it caused anything to exist. And how it did it. Facts only, no theology.

 

[F1fan]

There is a point at which a person cannot "come back" with medical means. There was a time when that person was not in any case. That is what I believe. I'm sure others believe other things. OK. (Have a good evening.) When a person is dead they don't think about the universe any more. They are not conscious. Actually, they're dead. That is what I believe as the truth from the Bible. More so, God is always and forever with no beginning and no end.

I look around me. Everything virtually in my apartment was made by someone. Nothing just appeared from nothing. Someone made it.

No wonder our economy is doing so well. I suggest you fill your apartment with rocks and flowers, they are part of nature, which is atoms behaving according to the laws of physics.

 

[YoursTrue]

You don’t need to be there if the evidence is there.

Science disregards the supernatural only because it fails as a testable hypothesis.

If someone died and started to rot and then is alive after, that would be evidence that death isn’t a permanent state. Doctors regularly save people who would have died before.

There is a point at which a person cannot "come back" with medical means. They go the other way -- from life to non-life. There was a time when that person was not in any case. That is what I believe. I'm sure others believe other things. OK. When a person is dead they don't think about the universe any more. At least I don't think so. But then there are people who really think and believe they can speak with the dead. I do not think or believe that they can or do, but I guess that's another subject.

 

[McBell]

Now you want me to define nothing?
Who's talking about the total energy of the universe? (not me...) And by the way, I don't know that, and I doubt whether you do either.
According to some (scientists and others, I suppose) -- the universe could have come about from -- nothing. OK. If that's what you believe, as some might say, so be your belief. I don't believe that. I believe that there is a Creator, an Originator, who has no beginning and no end.

Do you believe that life can only come from life?

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes, I have read the Bible. Those prophecies are, at best, vaguely worded and misinterpreted. Those Old Testament prophets didn’t predict Jesus. Christians rewrote the story of Jesus to fit their interpretation of the prophecy.

They may be misinterpreted by some, that's for sure. Just like the account of Jesus in the Bible showed there were those who believed him, and those who didn't believe him. Among other things.

 

[YoursTrue]

Do you believe that life can only come from life?

I believe that God is the ultimate life-giver. He is alive.
"Before the mountains were born or you brought forth the whole world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God." Psalm 90:2. I believe that; it makes sense to me. He is from everlasting to everlasting -- no beginning and no end. He created the heavens and the earth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

LOL… you are just way to out there to have a understandable debate.

If you do not understand something you can always ask.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Now you want me to define nothing?
Who's talking about the total energy of the universe? (not me...) And by the way, I don't know that, and I doubt whether you do either.
According to some (scientists and others, I suppose) -- the universe could have come about from -- nothing. OK. If that's what you believe, as some might say, so be your belief. I don't believe that. I believe that there is a Creator, an Originator, who has no beginning and no end.

Yes, when you use a term in a debate or discussion you need to be ready to define it as you are using the term. Scientists are probably using a different definition than you are when they say that the universe can come from nothing.

By the way, I asked you if you knew the total energy of the universe.

 

[McBell]

I believe that God is the ultimate life-giver. He is alive.
"Before the mountains were born or you brought forth the whole world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God." Psalm 90:2. I believe that; it makes sense to me. He is from everlasting to everlasting -- no beginning and no end. He created the heavens and the earth.

So then you do not believe that life can only come from life.
Cause if you do, you just created a most interesting dilemma for yourself.

If life can only come from life, that means that god has to be a life since he created all life on earth.
But it also means that since life can only come from life, god could not have always existed.
He had to come from life as per the declaration life only comes from life.

That being the case, what life did god come from?

Cue the mental gymnastics

 

[ElishaElijah]

Energy is known to exist. There are no Gods known to exist. It's more likely that energy has always existed in one form or another than to assume some non-factual being caused it all. If a God could have always existed without a cause, then so can energy.

So get bust showing us that a God exists in reality. And that it caused anything to exist. And how it did it. Facts only, no theology.

Well, a lot of people say they don’t believe God exists in reality yet curse Him, use His name in vain , so there’s that.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes, when you use a term in a debate or discussion you need to be ready to define it as you are using the term. Scientists are probably using a different definition than you are when they say that the universe can come from nothing.

By the way, I asked you if you knew the total energy of the universe.

Yes, when you use a term in a debate or discussion you need to be ready to define it as you are using the term. Scientists are probably using a different definition than you are when they say that the universe can come from nothing.

By the way, I asked you if you knew the total energy of the universe.

I do not know the total energy of the universe. Do you?
Also, in reference to nothing, since you mentioned that scientists are probably using a different definition that what I am, do you know what scientists mean by nothing?

 

[YoursTrue]

So then you do not believe that life can only come from life.

I did not say that. Why do you say I do not believe that life can only come from life.

 

[McBell]

By the way, I asked you if you knew the total energy of the universe.

To be fair, they did state they do not know.
Then followed that up with doubt that you know.

And by the way, I don't know that, and I doubt whether you do either. Post#1164​

 

[McBell]

Well, a lot of people say they don’t believe God exists in reality yet curse Him, use His name in vain , so there’s that.

um...
So what?

 

[McBell]

I did not say that. Why do you say I do not believe that life can only come from life.

I explained that in the rest of the post you replied to.

Try reading the rest of that post.

 

[F1fan]

Well, a lot of people say they don’t believe God exists in reality yet curse Him, use His name in vain , so there’s that.

God dammit!!! Seriously???