On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 02:53:06 GMT, Will <someone@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>Al Klein <rukbat@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>news:jdl7i3tlocrinn11mjvcca7ge792og37b2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 19:45:49 GMT, Will <someone@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Al Klein <rukbat@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>>>news:q527i3pmb02aagbk1f7f4i1ci6h7802m98@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 16:37:33 GMT, Will <someone@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>"Bill M" <wmech@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in news:re3Ui.6130$b9.4174
>>>>>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>
>>>>>> There are many hundreds of religious and god beliefs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How do you know your belief is the correct belief and all the
>others
>>>>>> are fakes?
>>>>>
>>>>>By the daily miracles, signs, and wonders. By the prophecies that
>>>>>have been fulfilled, and are still being fulfilled today? By the
>>>>>grace that He has extended me. By the answered prayers. By the
>>>>>unanswered prayers. By faith and love.
>>>>
>>>> IOW, you don't have a clue.
>>>
>>>I'm not the one asking the questions here, you are. Try reading my
>>>answer, however, instead of writing your own IOW answer.
>>
>> Not a single one of your assertions is objective, so you have no
>> objective evidence, you have only your belief - as evidence that your
>> belief is correct? The illogic is astounding.
>>
>>>>>> Why would any real God permit his creations to be so deceived?
>>>>
>>>>>Why don't you ask Him with an open mind and an open heart?
>>>>
>>>> Why don't you post objective evidence that "he" objectively exists?
>>>
>>>Because I'm not the one asking the loaded question
>>
>> No, you're the one claiming that your god objectively exists.
>
>I never claimed them to be.
You claimed that your god produced "miracles, signs, and wonders",
that it fulfilled prophecies, that it extended grace to you. These
are objective acts that require something that objectively exists to
accomplish.
> In fact, within this thread, I have claimed
>just the opposite, that I am not here to prove
Sorry, but claiming that your god objectively exists (which, if you
have any intelligence at all, you'll see from the above that you did)
is a claim that you have objective evidence of this existence. (Words
have meanings, unfortunately for those who use them without thinking
about the meaning of what they're saying.) I'm not asking you to
prove anything, I'm merely asking you to post the objective evidence
you've already claimed (without realizing it, probably) to have.
> to close-minded non-
>believers the existing of my God, but if you want to know the truth,
>simply ask Him whom I serve.
No, I go to the source - and, in this case, YOU'RE the source of the
claim.
>
>[snip]
>>>Why don't you ask yourself if He exists the next time you come within a
>>>fraction of a second of sure death
>> I did when I came many minutes AFTER dying. There's no god after
>> death either. I didn't find one, and neither did any of the other
>> people posting here who have died.
>You've died, and yet your still alive? Than you didn't die, your heart
>just stopped beating and you went unconsciouss from the lack of oxygen to
>your brain.
And my brain ceased all function for quite a while, which is the
definition of death.
>>> just to be saved by some infinitesimal
>>>improbability (we call those miracles where I'm from
>> SANE people call them coincidences.
>Blind people call them cioncidences.
No, blind people call them miracles. "Blind" meaning people who can't
see past the 15th century. Most of the gaps your god used to live in
are now occupied by science.
But prove me wrong - post A SINGLE objective miracle.
>> Sane people also don't believe in make-believe friends without
>> objective evidence that they objectively exist.
>Within the congregation I regularly attend, there was an infant in ICU.
>Two months ago, she had somehow crawled over to a second story window and
>fell out. She stayed in ICU for about a week, with the doctors trying to
>prepare the family for what they thought was the inevitable. But,
>through the power of prayer and the mercy and grace that our Lord has
>brought, even the doctors, trained scientists who see and have to deliver
>bad news daily, were astounded at what they professed could only have
>been a miracle, as this baby not only regained consciousness, but
>appeared to have no cognitive impairment as a result of her tragedy.
Or medical science doesn't know everything. We have objective
evidence of medical science, we have NO Objective evidence of any god.
>Now, if you want to tell the family that this wasn't a miracle, or the
>doctors, than that's fine. I doubt you'll convince any of them, though,
>as the FACT remains that their baby is still alive to this day.
All I'm asking you for is objective evidence, not fairy tales. And
all you can come up with is fairy tales. Just like every other
Christian in the past 2,000 years, and all the other theists for tens
of thousands of years before that.
ONE PIECE of OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE. That's all we ask. And you can't do
that little, even though you claim a god that can perform miracles. Is
objective evidence of something that objectively exists a miracle? No,
but it's beyond your ability.
--
Al at Webdingers dot com
"To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to
claim that Jesus
was not born of a virgin."
- Cardinal Bellarmine,[1615, during the trial of Galileo]
|
