• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why I CANNOT Believe in The Resurrection

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Never said it was ok, Never said it was ok what the cop did. I’m not convinced that he would’ve died if he didn’t have all the drugs in his system. Simple as that
That’s because you refuse to trust authorities outside yourself. You don’t know as much, nor do you have the level of access to the facts that the coroner had. You may not be convinced, but the experts were. Same with the Bible.
 
That’s because you refuse to trust authorities outside yourself. You don’t know as much, nor do you have the level of access to the facts that the coroner had. You may not be convinced, but the experts were. Same with the Bible.
Wrong brother, with the Scriptures I do have access to the expert. Nice try though
 
When the people who train police about how to treat a person in custody who is face down said that an officer needs to turn the person in custody on their side to avoid causing distress, harm, or death, did you accept their testimony, and their condemnation of Chauvin for violating this training?
Of course, not disputing that, the drugs were the main problem that caused the whole incident. If Floyd wasn’t high on drugs he would’ve never been put in that position in the first place. Seems you’re looking at the whole situation in a vacuum.
 
Do you acknowledge that the USA suffers from cultural and institutional racism?



Has you considered the possibility that Chauvin actually WAS and IS guilty? Would you expect a not guilty verdict if a prosecution showed overwhelming evidence and testimony that an accused was guilty?
If you have that then repent of it, but no we aren’t a racist nation. I see Democrats pushing that and for sure the party of racism. Seems like all they see is skin color, obsessed with it and all they see. You hear it all the time, look how diverse we are meaning skin color etc.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
“For this reason we also thank God without ceasing, because when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you welcomed it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which also effectively works in you who believe.”
‭‭I Thessalonians‬ ‭2:13‬ ‭NKJV‬‬
Still doesn’t address the biblical texts
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
If you have that then repent of it, but no we aren’t a racist nation.
So you're saying the experiences of discrimination by many black people has some other explanation. What is the reason black people are reporting experiences of discrimination if not cultural and institutional racism?


I see Democrats pushing that and for sure the party of racism.
'
If you look at democrats you'll see a highly diverse set of people. Republicans are largely white people. What does this pattern suggest to you?

Seems like all they see is skin color, obsessed with it and all they see. You hear it all the time, look how diverse we are meaning skin color etc.
o you have a problem with democrats pointing out experiencing racism, and acknowledging the diversity within the democratic party. Why does this bother you? Could it be that conservatives are indifferent to the racism that exists, and have little interest in solving these social problems that citizens experience?
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
Of course, not disputing that, the drugs were the main problem that caused the whole incident.
Once again your belief is different than the expert testimony, so we throw out your judgment as flawed and indifferent to expertise.


If Floyd wasn’t high on drugs he would’ve never been put in that position in the first place. Seems you’re looking at the whole situation in a vacuum.
Irrelevant since Chauvin failed to follow his training. Had Chauvin followed his training it was highly likely he would be alive today. This is according to medical experts.

I'll add that your indifference to the opiate addiction suffered by many Americans, including Rush Limbaugh, is indicative of conservatism these days. There's an unrealistic ideal set against people of color that isn't applied to whites.
 
Last edited:
So you're saying the experiences of discrimination by many black people has some other explanation. What is the reason black people are reporting experiences of discrimination if not cultural and institutional racism

'
If you look at democrats you'll see a highly diverse set of people. Republicans are largely white people. What does this pattern suggest to you?


o you have a problem with democrats pointing out experiencing racism, and acknowledging the diversity within the democratic party. Why does this bother you? Could it be that conservatives are indifferent to the racism that exists, and have little interest in solving these social problems that citizens experience?
I have a problem with Democrats putting the label of racism on things that aren’t racism. Promoting the lie, Republicans don’t seem to have a problem with racism, people aren’t judged by skin color. When I watch a team play for example, Democrats look at skin color, why not enjoy the game and the team play. No man I really didn’t notice the quarterback was black or white but enjoyed how he played the game.
Once again your belief is different than the expert testimony, so we throw out your judgment as flawed and indifferent to expertise.



Irrelevant since Chauvin failed to follow his training. Had Chauvin followed his training it was highly likely he would be alive today. This is according to medical experts.

I'll add that your indifference to the opiate addiction suffered by many Americans, including Rush Limbaugh, is indicative of conservatism these days. There's an unrealistic ideal set against people of color that isn't applied to whites.
What’s unrealistic? If Floyd was white and the cop black, what would you have said? He was on drugs and shouldn’t have resisted? Yup a non story.
 
Last edited:

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
The kingdom was a present tense reality. John announced it, Jesus inaugurated it, its within spirit born believers here and now.
In the model prayer we are instructed to pray ' thy kingdom come..... ' Not came.
Daniel 2:44 is still future. That government like any other government is Not within a person.
I see No 'present tense' used at John announcing at John 3:3-6; John 3:5; John 18:36.
Jesus reigns for one-thousand years and that is: future - 1 Corinthians 15:24-26.
I suppose you don't like what Jesus taught at Luke 19:11-15 _______
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
"Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days."
“No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father."
...............................
John 2:19-22 is figurative speech in comparing his coming death and resurrection to a demolition and reconstruction of a building.
Yes, Jesus is the foretold Messiah the figurative ' chief cornerstone ' but Not a literal cornerstone.
Surely the Jews thought he was speaking of Herod's temple (Mark 14:58) Not the temple of his body - John 2:21
Jesus was resurrected Not in a body made or built with hands like the temple was, but a spirit body (his pre-human heavenly spirit body) which was ' built ' by his Creator, his Father. - Acts of the Apostles 2:24; 1 Peter 3:18 ( spirit ).
Scripture shows who resurrected dead Jesus (Acts 2:27) - Acts of the Apostles 10:40; Romans 8:11; Hebrews 13:20
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Yes it is, and show me where it’s written that the Scriptures are just man’s writing instead of the word of God.


So backwards as usual. Claims are not believed until they are well supported by evidence. You need to support that the Bible is the word of God, not the other way around. If I told you that the Quan was the "word of God" you would rightfully demand evidence. The same applies to your claims.
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
The topic resurrection.

A science topic.

Humans own life not science.

A human is a human as a human inferring science topics.

Life was alive healthy.
Life survived change of O God conditions. By scientists. Temple pyramid use.

The subject.

Do I believe science. No.

Reasons as you don't own creation.

Resurrection happened as you don't need to be a scientist to experience life attack by phenomena.

Human first.
Human natural first.

Science does not exist.

Controls machines by human man's thoughts. Yet man built machine. Uses machine to force change to earth products.

Caused artificial one of event.

Said he did. The day the light day went dark like night time

Huge earthquake owned by planet.

Said reason my life was sacrificed as anti of Christ.

Christ cannot be anti is first lie.

If Christ was removed we all would be dead as CH gas spirit evaluation.

Christ. Just Christ only.

Remember science began from humans lying about safety. By practice of science.

Change to gases occurred the science topic has nothing to do with life.

Resurrection status. Topic mainly science.

Life harmed. Life survived harm.

Matter of fact.

Statement volcanoes fake mountain man penis erection ejection thesis. First gases. Science never owned natural history.

Released earth gases. From stone mass as cause fake theory.

The tombs cold gases deceased by topic definition as they owned no light life as definition alive in science......got removed out of body mass stone.

God's tomb. Holy spirit's highest state not alight. Stone. The sleeping body.

So alight spirits as hot gases removed stone.

Notice huge mass gone. Stone itself. Spirit of stone gone.

Radiation effect the release. Sin holes.

Water changed the radiation effect at ground.

Water holy spirit is humans bio life continuance. Subject change now speaking about human life. Harmed by science.

Water as ice melt newly born end year cycle saved life. Water life was put back. It returned. Not science resurrection thesis.

Life survived
Life continued.
Radiation effect cooling you see images. Had the experience.

Microbes burn leave imaged impression. In water. Depends on radiation mass as to what image you see.

The spirit of a human owning life is telling the story given back was water oxygen state. For the human being.

Life was already living.
Life lost water to radiation effect.
Life was returned not resurrected as human life NOT science by water replacement.

Most of the topic is human discussion science cause and effect.

Reason to reason correctly. Knowing science is the artificial effect cause.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
I have a problem with Democrats putting the label of racism on things that aren’t racism.
Give us some examples so we know what you mean.

Promoting the lie,
Are you referring to trump's continual claim that there was rampant voter fraud and that he won?


Republicans don’t seem to have a problem with racism,
That is what we observe, and it's part of the problem.


people aren’t judged by skin color.
Unless you're a person of color. I assume you aren't a person of color, yes?

Democrats look at skin color, why not enjoy the game and the team play. No man I really didn’t notice the quarterback was black or white but enjoyed how he played the game.
What makes you think democrats do this, exactly? Cite facts.

BTW I noticed you avoided the fact that Democrats are diverse while Republicans are mostly white people. No explanation for why that is?

What’s unrealistic? If Floyd was white and the cop black, what would you have said? He was on drugs and shouldn’t have resisted? Yup a non story.
Floyd was a citizen who had rights guaranteed by the Constitution. And the officer was a trained person who has an obligation to follow our Constitution while performing his duty. He failed to honor his duty. This applies to all people.
 
Top