Zero Probability of Evolution. Atheism wrong?

[Subduction Zone]

Huh? You asked whether the verses in question were regarding the Holocaust. They were not. All the people who in the future say the imminent restoration of David's ruins cannot be restored by God will die. NEWS FLASH: Everyone dies.

So then the prophecy fails, Thanks.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You can demonstrate why your morals are superior? Of necessity, you'd have to show everyone using falsifiable, testable facts what "better" and "worse" morals are.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry over your post. I got it! I'll pray.

Nope, logic is enough. Once again, you need to learn how and when to use the scientific method.

 

[Phantasman]

If I present to you ten Bible prophecie been fulfilled, do you think you can prove:

1. They were figured in hindsight
2. They are substantively the same as vague prophecies of Nostradamus
3. They do not predict exact times and days

And do you misunderstand that many Bible prophecies are NOT about end times, but about times in history we can review, to see God's prescience?

Prophesies and end times mean nothing to me. I don't need prophesies to see the existence of God the Father, and whether I die alone or with all mankind at one time, doesn't matter to me either. End times are for the fearful, not the spiritually knowledgeable. Revelations, whether from a man named John or Peter, is not a gospel message. Gospel means "good news". A Christian embraces death, knowing that that is where life truly is.

 

[ChristineM]

To answer your question, I will show you objective evidence that Jesus Christ is alive now, if you will show me:

* objective evidence that rape is wrong
* objective evidence that anything in this universe besides rape is "wrong" or "right"
* explain how you know based on FACTS, without it being FEELINGS or merely SELF-EVIDENT, that anything is "right" or "wrong"

You claim above the law proves rape is wrong, yet I'm sure you've said earlier that the Bible law regarding rape, itself is wrong, so how do you prove which laws are "right" and which are "wrong".

I think you must admit your beliefs are subjective. Of course, I'd be happy if you'd say anything is objectively true or false, since if absolute morals exist...

That is childishly sad. You show me yours but by my rules
and ill show you mine if im satisfied yours conforms to my beliefs. What sort of honest christian would set such a challenge.

You claim jc is self evident. Prove it's

* Depending on the jurisdiction, rape may be characterized as a sexual offence[note 1] or an offence against the person.[note 2] Rape may also be characterized as a form of aggravated assault or battery, or both, indecent assault[note 3] or sexual assault[note 4] or battery, or both.

Note the objective use of wording by justification.

* Unlawfully means without lawful justification or excuse.
Lawful conforming to, permitted by, or recognized by law or rules

* Example, exceeding the speed limit is wrong, your brain may tell you its fun and enjoyable. The law, defined by the majority of people says otherwise

Your turn

No, we know rape is wrong, the rule of law tells us so and at least 50% of the worlds population agree. It uses another persons body without their consent, it infringes ownership rights of that body. In your view is theft wrong? Rape is theft of a person's rights.
The ot is littered with stories condoning rape and the whole nt is about a man born of at the least, illicit action, at most, rape.

Once again you are misrepresenting me while imposing your beliefs on me.

Why are you so obcessed with rape. This is not the 1st or 2nd time you have fixated on rape in our discussions. It must really excite you. I would really be interested to know from the male perspective, what is so fascinating about violently
forcing penetration on an unwilling female knowing that it is immoral and humanely heinous act that in all probability will end with you being branded a pariah with a prison record. Is it a christian fantasy or just a particular christian?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

the actual conclusion they began with

If you began with it, it is a premise, not a conclusion. As the word implies, conclusions come at the conclusion of an argument, not its beginning.

Maybe you are one of those with multiple accounts. One for each personality.

I've always considered it unfair that some people have multiple personalities when there are so many that didn't even get the one.

 

[ChristineM]

If you began with it, it is a premise, not a conclusion. As the word implies, conclusions come at the conclusion of an argument, not its beginning.



I've always considered it unfair that some people have multiple personalities when there are so many that didn't even get the one.

Pity i cant give multiple frubals, this should have been a usefull, funny, winner that i like

 

[Phantasman]

I



I've always considered it unfair that some people have multiple personalities when there are so many that didn't even get the one.

lol............yep.,

There isn't much I hear on here, or the Internet, that I haven't already experienced first hand in life. If you don't have a friend to back up rhetoric, on the Internet you can just create your own. One person can appear as many to the ignorant. As a former moderator I saw that many times, and just left it up to the individual to believe as they liked.

Without a good mental filter, and wisdom attained through hard sought knowledge, the Internet can have it's way with you. As well as sneaky people with agendas.

2000 year old words still ring true today for me:
(39) Jesus said, "The pharisees and the scribes have taken the keys of knowledge (gnosis) and hidden them. They themselves have not entered, nor have they allowed to enter those who wish to. You, however, be as wise as serpents and as innocent as doves."

 

[viole]

From lifeless only lifeless comes - scientifically proved by Dr. Pasteur.

Did he try with all lifeless possibilities?

Ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

2) Dr. Pasteur has found following law, in his formulation: "life can only be produced by life" (to my memory).

So, that from-dust scenario is impossible, right?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Altfish]

What is the measure you are using to decide who should not go to Heaven and who should not go to Hell? Because if you tell me, "I just feel this kind of justice is correct," I must reply, "I just feel like God exists and Jesus Christ is real."

I am quoting what I understand is the Bible's criteria for getting into heaven, I find the justice handed out by god is selfish and unjust.

 

[BilliardsBall]

You are still evading Jonathan’s question, of where you getting this imaginary number “1948” from the bible.

Where are the relevant passage(s) that indicates the year “1948”?

Here are the relevant passages again, I believe I've posted them over a dozen times on multiple threads including this one recently: Prophecy Fulfilled: Israel Becomes A Nation In 1948

 

[BilliardsBall]

And again you are misquoting me. I have never said i accept my feelings as true. Feelings are subject to manipulation by events, past and present.

Yes there are facts that theft and murder and rape and slavery are wrong, its called he law.

Show me objective evidence of JC

Stolen from much older civilisations, far older than the Bible so so dont pretend the bible invented morality

So you avoid the question. Fair enough if you are too embarrassed to answer

Okay, you've changed your question now from "show me evidence of JC" to show my "objective evidence of JC". In other words, you know well that several dozens detailed writings by varied authors about Jesus, but you just don't like what they have to say.

 

[BilliardsBall]

That is childishly sad. You show me yours but by my rules
and ill show you mine if im satisfied yours conforms to my beliefs. What sort of honest christian would set such a challenge.

You claim jc is self evident. Prove it's

* Depending on the jurisdiction, rape may be characterized as a sexual offence[note 1] or an offence against the person.[note 2] Rape may also be characterized as a form of aggravated assault or battery, or both, indecent assault[note 3] or sexual assault[note 4] or battery, or both.

Note the objective use of wording by justification.

* Unlawfully means without lawful justification or excuse.
Lawful conforming to, permitted by, or recognized by law or rules

* Example, exceeding the speed limit is wrong, your brain may tell you its fun and enjoyable. The law, defined by the majority of people says otherwise

Your turn

No, we know rape is wrong, the rule of law tells us so and at least 50% of the worlds population agree. It uses another persons body without their consent, it infringes ownership rights of that body. In your view is theft wrong? Rape is theft of a person's rights.
The ot is littered with stories condoning rape and the whole nt is about a man born of at the least, illicit action, at most, rape.

Once again you are misrepresenting me while imposing your beliefs on me.

Why are you so obcessed with rape. This is not the 1st or 2nd time you have fixated on rape in our discussions. It must really excite you. I would really be interested to know from the male perspective, what is so fascinating about violently
forcing penetration on an unwilling female knowing that it is immoral and humanely heinous act that in all probability will end with you being branded a pariah with a prison record. Is it a christian fantasy or just a particular christian?

So, you do not have any "objective" evidence that rape is wrong, other than an ad populum argument.

I think there is excellent subjective evidence rape is wrong. I think there is excellent subjective evidence that Jesus Christ is the Savior.

And I'm not stuck on rape. I asked if you can prove anything is objectively true, so I can show how we can apply the same standards of evidence for Jesus Christ.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Prophesies and end times mean nothing to me. I don't need prophesies to see the existence of God the Father, and whether I die alone or with all mankind at one time, doesn't matter to me either. End times are for the fearful, not the spiritually knowledgeable. Revelations, whether from a man named John or Peter, is not a gospel message. Gospel means "good news". A Christian embraces death, knowing that that is where life truly is.

But you aware that Paul teaches in 1 Corinthians 15 that the gospel is proved by OT prophecy? Or that Peter says in 1 Peter that OT prophecy is a more reliable source used to verify Jesus's truth than walking with Jesus for years as an eyewitness?

 

[BilliardsBall]

If you began with it, it is a premise, not a conclusion. As the word implies, conclusions come at the conclusion of an argument, not its beginning.



I've always considered it unfair that some people have multiple personalities when there are so many that didn't even get the one.

You are definitely correct and true here, however, I most often use the hypothesis method when testing what I or others believe. Jesus advocated the same method, interestingly, in testing.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I am quoting what I understand is the Bible's criteria for getting into heaven, I find the justice handed out by god is selfish and unjust.

My understanding is the Bible requirement for Heaven is simple: Trust Jesus.

To miss Heaven for Hell is to: Distrust Jesus.

You wrote, "God's justice is selfish, unjust." I find His mercy is unfair instead. He'd let a mass murderer in for trusting Jesus! You, however, feel clearly that a "bad enough" person should miss Heaven and spend eternity in perdition. My guess is your double standard includes the idea that you personally should get into Heaven because you're "good enough".

Please tell me what good you or I should do to earn eternal, blessed life!

 

[Audie]

I am quoting what I understand is the Bible's criteria for getting into heaven, I find the justice handed out by god is selfish and unjust.

Weird,

I, on the other hand, feel it is capricious and arbitrary.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Do you love him based on facts, feelings or both? You seem to think religionists should deal with facts only and not feelings, yet religionists speak of their love for god(s).

I think you need to read the post again. The question had to do with whether or not I can know if someone feels love towards me. (Your exact words were, “That's okay, all people have certain feelings they rely upon, and you never tell your husband, "Prove you love me with facts. Enough about my feelings and your feelings!").

We love with feelings, obviously. When questioning the feelings of another person toward me, there are facts I can gather to ascertain that those feelings are actually genuine. As noted, I can see that my husband does nice things for me, tells me he loves me and treats me with respect and dignity. If he told me he loved me but hit me everyday and told me I’m worthless, I’d have good reason to doubt that he actually loves me, wouldn’t you say? Or should I just pretend he loves me anyway because it makes me feel good to think that somebody loves me?

How would you feel if I wrote you 2 to 4 messages per day explaining that your husband doesn't love you, and your love for him is a delusion, since he does not exist.

I can demonstrate to you that my husband exists. You have yet to demonstrate the existence of any god(s) on this thread.

 

[ChristineM]

Okay, you've changed your question now from "show me evidence of JC" to show my "objective evidence of JC". In other words, you know well that several dozens detailed writings by varied authors about Jesus, but you just don't like what they have to say.

And the difference between evidence and evidence is what?

And i know well that at least some is fraudulent, some is impossible, some is hearsay which is not evidence hence the qualification of objective.

I also know there is evidence that jesus was the illegitimate child of a Roman soldier and that he didn't meet the criteria of massiah

 

[ChristineM]

So, you do not have any "objective" evidence that rape is wrong, other than an ad populum argument.

I think there is excellent subjective evidence rape is wrong. I think there is excellent subjective evidence that Jesus Christ is the Savior.

And I'm not stuck on rape. I asked if you can prove anything is objectively true, so I can show how we can apply the same standards of evidence for Jesus Christ.

So still fixated on rape? Prison is objective, get over your wet dream

And you have used the rape hooey more than than a Jesus argument with me on rf and another forum. I can only consider facts