Serenity7855
Lambaster of the Angry Anti-Theists
216 pages. Still no proof.
Then you do not recognise proof.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
216 pages. Still no proof.
Oh wow, exit stage right!! I didn't even realize this was a debate thread, sorry. I'm not into debating what I deem foolishness. Bye.
Then you do not recognise proof.
I do. I am scientifically trained. All I see from you is the god of therefore. That isn't proof.
I do. I am scientifically trained. All I see from you is the god of therefore. That isn't proof.
God doesn't respect our free will? Wouldn't your statement also mean that no one can know whether they are truly converted or not while they are still alive? I mean, there is always some chance that a person who believes that they are truly converted could fall away in the future. That being the case, how can one know if they are truly converted and not simply believe that they are truly conveted?If you were converted by the Holy Ghost you would still be a Christian right now. Once you have been truly converted you can never go back, even if you wanted to. It is impossible.
How do you become scientifically trained? Can only scientists recognise proof or are they just better at it then anybody else? Someone being scientifically biased really does not impress me as those people can be terribly bigoted and close minded.
I do not know what you mean by the God of "therefore", do you?
How do you become scientifically trained? Can only scientists recognise proof or are they just better at it then anybody else? Someone being scientifically biased really does not impress me as those people can be terribly bigoted and close minded.
I do not know what you mean by the God of "therefore", do you?
Someone claiming that they hear the holy ghost in their head does not impress me; as those people believe that they couldn't possibly be hallucinating. Likewise schizophrenics do not impress me with their tales.
Scientists are trained to look at evidence, run experiments, record the results, get someone else to reproduce and verify the results with a similar experiment and make conclusions based on information only.
What we don't do is go
Well a rhino has four legs and a horn. So does the mythical unicorn. Therefore rhinos must be the unicorns behind the myth!
Which is where you and your god exist: within the therefore of things.
And someone claiming to hear voices in their head does not usually constitution evidence or proof of the existence of anything.
God doesn't respect our free will? Wouldn't your statement also mean that no one can know whether they are truly converted or not while they are still alive? I mean, there is always some chance that a person who believes that they are truly converted could fall away in the future. That being the case, how can one know if they are truly converted and not simply believe that they are truly conveted?
wow.
The bull **** level in this thread is reaching record heights...
How can one know if the assurance felt in their heart comes from the Holy Ghost or not? I mean, there are definitely people who felt a sureness in their hearts that they were saved at one point but ended up falling away later.In order for you to denounce the Holy Ghost you must first be converted by him. Only you can answer that question. You would know for a surety and you would know that once converted you can never go back. Unto those that much is given, much is expected. Once the eyes of your understanding have been opened they can never be closed again. You can never deny that which you have received.
wow.
The bull **** level in this thread is reaching record heights...
Next thing you know, Casper is going to be giving sermons in colleges for his brand of Christian theology
No, that is very true. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink. There has to be a point where there is a desire to go deeper. It is at that point that you must allow the reasonable man to reason it out for himself.
Maybe then he will bring out some of the evidence he has but keeps forgetting to bring out
Right. If you put it in terms of reason then there is only one way to go. Christianity is a rip off of pagan mythology. This has been proven beyond a doubt. No one had been able to debunk the research of D. M. Murdock and her source material that all Christian doctrine existed in Greek and Egyptian mythology. There are 46 parallels between Moses and Dionisis alone.
Christianity has admitted this since the 2nd century because early critics were saying "What's so special about Jesus? Horus also died and resurrected for our sins, had 12 disciples etc.. "
The Christian answer was that the devil planted all those similarities ahead of time.
Anyone can accept that answer but to call it reasonable is simply untrue.
You can't have faith and reasonable together. Otherwise why need faith?
Again, deism can't be pinned down one way or the other. It's very possible. But Osirus giving virgin birth to Horus on Dec 25 or any mythology that came before or after is not a literal story about God.