Is that supposed to be a response? Your Bible says? Yes, every religion sys there will be people who don't buy it because they know they are writing a fabricated story. That is non-sequitur.
For you it may be. For me, the words that are written are spirit and life.
This however, is. It's also incorrect. Your position has been shown evidence against it.
1) Mystical experiences happen to people in all religions and cults. One happened to Sam Harris, atheist writer and neuroscientist when he studies Hinduism and meditation.
So the religion the person is in will be the position they relate the experience with.
This doesn't do a thing for you but rather supports my position. Who said these religions and cults didn't tap into the spiritual realm?
Thank you for the support
Controlled laboratory studies show that under double-blind conditions that provide significant controls for expectancy bias, psilocybin can occasion complete mystical experiences in the majority of people studied. These effects are dose-dependent, specific to psilocybin compared to placebo or a psychoactive control substance, and have enduring impact on the moods, attitudes, and behaviors of participants as assessed by self-report of participants and ratings by community observers.
Again, how does this support your position? The very word "witchcraft" has the root word where we get "pharmaceutical" from. Though Christianity's position is to avoid that because there are evil spirits, it still can be spiritual.
And again, thank you for the supportive documentation
Definitely a red herring. Science doesn't know everything, therefore God. Hilarious. And red. And a herring.
The more science learns doesn't mean it's going to find Lord Krishna is real. Or any typical Near Eastern deity. Or any deity.
Now your link. That was predictable. So a biochemist reads Acts and finds he was "sure this was nothing anyone made up". A biochemist.
Yet EVERY historical scholar in the field who is an expert at literary analysis, intertextuality and so on says Acts is the most fictive and borrows the most from literary models and works of anything.
LOL... Is that what you understood? You need to reread what I said. I didn't say that.
The Mystery of Acts: Unraveling Its Story
by
Richard I. Pervo
In February 2001, Pervo was arrested after investigators found thousands of images of child pornography on his work computer at the
University of Minnesota.
[12] In May he pleaded guilty to five counts of possession and one count of distribution of child pornography. He was sentenced to one year in a state workhouse and eight years
probation.
[13][14] He formally resigned from the University of Minnesota as of June 2001, having been suspended since his arrest.
[15] After serving his sentence he continued to publish theological works as an
independent scholar and Fellow of the
Westar Institute,
[2] and was recognized as an authority on the canonical and non-canonical books of
Acts.
[16]
It has already been established that the information (boat names, distances, location et al) are correct by innumerable scholars. - you can't just pick the ones that agree with you.
Your author leaves much to be desired both in character and in substance
This cannot get you to Zeus, Krishna or Yahweh. But I don't see a convincing argument for a deism.
It isn't in question that people can work together. The question is can you make any sense out of the idea.
Billions of people do make sense out of the idea... you are in a small group that don't
Are you actually going to suggest that these 10,000 children who die from starvation are not victims?
The victims mentality is buying into a narrative about life after death, with no evidence, clearly syncretic from older religions, also made up, and blocking out clear evidence it isn't true because you already put blocks up and will not see evidence against it and will employ irrational apologetics to defend it.
But now I'm curious, every time someone points out a tragic case of immense human suffering do you tell them they have the victim mentality?
This is a theological argument about the problem of evil and suffering which goes way back. The answer is not to tell your opponent they have a "victim mentality", that much is for sure.
Please demonstrate this isn't a perfect example of natural probabilities playing out because nature is not conscious and nothing watching over life is nor can it help out. If it could and it isn't then it's evil. That is the question, not am I having a "mentality"?
Again, I'm not sure how your mind twists what I said. If children are starving, look to mankind and not God. God has provided
Jesus came and healed, delivered, fed, saved et al. He is the perfect will of God. Now, that mankind does nothing to alleviate things and instead, for personal gain, causes wars, famine and suffering... the Genesis is their lack of union with God
Who I'm helping or not doesn't advance this argument forward or backward in any way. weird that you are even asking me and you believe in a theistic God? You c
Just wanting to make sure that you don't complain and do nothing
