Last time – and I’m only doing this because this has been a high-volume thread:
That includes discussions of the existence of Jesus, the Bible, and everything else unless it is offered as direct evidence of the existence of any deity.
I wouldn’t go quite that far, since there’s no a priori reason to think that any group will necessarily “win.” I would say it’s more like a guy who claims to be a great stock-picker who does indeed make a fortune as a day-trader simply by analyzing patterns in stock charts. It’s very likely that he’s either just lucky or cheating. On the other hand, his success is weak evidence that he can indeed pick stocks on a short term basis.
So Catholics aren’t Christians then?
As to ‘married in paganism’, are we to believe you reject the virgin birth? The early Jews considered that a very pagan idea that was inserted into a faith that sprung from Judaism.
I don’t think you get it - when I make claims about those topics, I’m deferring to the experts (I posted some stuff from experts in those fields - ie, the link refuting the global flood). You on the other hand are trying to assess the mental state of someone you’ve never met, based on nothing more than your own intuition it appears.
Also, I’m not pretending to be infallible here, I welcome an counter arguments that are valid. “Your an atheist so you can’t see reason”, which is essentially your position is not a valid argument.
Your inability to deal with counter arguments is noted.
The inference being that anything you believe is Christian and anything outside of that is not Christian.
Do you have any idea who Mike Licona is?
Yet they can defend their claims as well as you can.
What does that tell you?
My bad, I’ll relent.
I have evidence for my deity, he speaks to us frequently, he chooses the Luminous Ones for our instruction and correction, that they might moderate our sins. Let us keep the First Calypso as the guide to our lives: Never go in against a Cecilian when death is on the line. Amen.
You’re welcome to PM me Meatros if you want a less restrictive conversation.
As far as I know it’s only restricted to the topic itself, and you are more than welcome to start your own thread on any topic you choose.
Nope, I’m not saying any of that. It’s just that everything you’ve said so far in this thread has been indefensible crap, so when you say:
I’ll be glad to hold you to your word. Christ.
I do not think this is a restricted forum, it’s just as Czarcasm said, this thread has a narrower focus than what we’ve been going back and forth about.
If you want to open up another thread on the trustworthiness of the Bible (or just the New Testament) I will probably participate (I’ve opened up a similar thread in the past).
So it is indefensible to say that both extreme sides of this debate actually have anything substantial to offer? It is indefensible to propose that you do not hold the answers to the every mystery there exists in our universe. I’ve been playing “Devil’s Advocate” for lack of a better term, to keep minds open to other possibilities. I find some of the comments arrogant and narrow sighted is all. A view I can readily defend, and do.
Take this discussion to another thread.
We’re being told to take it outside. LOL. Very well. I apologize. Here’s a link I would consider relevant to this thread however. Someone besides Dr. Goswami. His name is Michael Persinger.
This link is relevant to the thread topic if you think it provides evidence to the existence of a deity you believe in. Does it?
The LOCH Ness Monster has no relationship to the universe. God does so your point fails. Next.
Just making a blanket statement with no basis is not evidence, sure. But there is quite a good basis for suggesting God communicates to people. I’ve seen God send the same communication to two different people like go see this person and pray for them. Can two people have the exact same hallucination at the same time? How did a complete stranger know exactly what problems I was having when he prayed for me that time at the singles group? If you have many many people claiming the same thing, the yes, it is an evidence worth exploring.
No, but if many people, thousands are claiming the same experience, that would be evidence to suggestion there may be a relation.
How would you prove to an alien being that Spiderman never existed? Simple, we have documentation from Stan Lee showing that he created the character from his imagination. That’s why your Spiderman comparison doesn’t work.
Yes.
[[Warning reversed on further consideration.]]
Geepers, if you wish to discuss the inerrancy or trustworthiness of the Bible, here’s a thread that is already open.
If two different people came to me and told me that a mysterious voice told them to do something they would not normally do in the course of their day, I would consider it to be evidence that something out of the ordinary is happening, especially if it can be shown that one could not have communicated to the other beforehand. On the other hand, if you tell me a secondhand story about two anonymous people we don’t know and have no way to contact doing something at some unknown time,then no…it isn’t evidence-it’s a story you happen to believe.
I would say that like The Bell Theorem and EPR paradox, it suggests non-locality by someone besides our questionable Dr. Goswami. Non-locality suggests the presence of a connection between all things in the universe, and the diety that I believe in (or would like to believe in -still pending further review) would be the collection of all consciousness. The sum of the parts make up the whole and visa versa. Having said that, I am open minded enough to say, that if proven wrong I will accept it. I have stated that I have experienced things that cannot be explained other than pure coincedence with unbelievable timing. This I cannot prove and will not attempt to do so. So I want to believe there is something greater than our local existence and that is the deity that I feel a cosmic connections to. How’s that for a vague enough answer to a straight forward question? So yes. It’s worth presenting.
Bell’s Inequality, the Aspect Experiment, etc…
They all show us that reality is fucking weird, and we don’t really understand what’s going on, or what ‘thingness’ really means. That does not, however, open the door to any general god-concept, let alone whichever specific god someone wants to shoehorn in. God of the Gaps is a fallacy no matter how surreal the gap in question.