And after all that time, not even an attempt at a cite for anything. This issue has already been discussed in this thread: most atheists will tell you they they can’t disprove the existence of any god. It’s also not necessary to disprove a god to take the atheist position. You’ve been asked repeatedly why your preferred version of god is better supported by evidence than any other version and you’ve offered nothing substantial in response. Yes, some people have had their lives changed by their belief in Christianity. You could say the same about many other religions and many other non-religious beliefs to boot. You seem to have acknowledged this by repeatedly ducking the question. We’re communicating in text here: when you avoid a question, everybody can see it.
Uhm, excuse me, but Christianity is absolutely real.
As a human construct and institution in various forms, it is as real as communism and democracy are.
The particular historical events on which its set of beliefs are based on, are what we should be discussing when trying to establish Christianity as having been based on actual events.
Of course, archaeology, historical analysis, anthropology, etc, have conclusively established that Christianity’s base proclamations about it’s history are nothing more than the written down, but originally oral traditions of bronze age sheep herders trying to come to grips with their lot in life the best way they could: by making shit up to make themselves feel better.
The “history” they devised is made up of various streams of consciousness with varying levels of fiction and both political and religious propaganda, sprinkled with a handful of historical events of varying accuracy.
Unfortunately for Christian, none of those sprinkles of “truth” have anything to do with the core of their nonsensical, primitive, superstitious beliefs.
A drunk monkey on a broken typewriter couldn’t come up with a more incomprehensible statement.
Hey! I resemble that remark!
So sorry about your typewriter. 
Whenever atheists have nothing to offer, they resort to insults. Pathetic and sad.
Ah, I see you have stopped thinking on how to disprove Santa Clause.
You had indeed better give that up.
This again? I posted links with documented evidence of divine healing. Of course you reject it because well you HAVE to, but you can’t say that I NEVER posted a single cite.
How about a cite proving that objects can suddenly fly horizontally across a room and defy laws of gravity? That was your baseless claim. Would love to see that one.
Nothing posted here has changed my previous notion that atheism and honesty are oxymorons.
Then how about this: I’d congratulate you on having
“presented enough evidence to at least suggest the possibility that Christianity is real”, but that really wasn’t necessary. I can prove that Christianity is real by looking out my front door and to the left and seeing the church on the corner. Of course this does nothing to show that any gods are real.
What is arrogant about “convince me”, exactly ? Do you accept any harebrained theory put forward to you, uncritically, out of humbleness ?
As a sworn sitter on the fence however, I gotta tell you: “I know and you fuckin’ well don’t” is somewhat more arrogant than “I have no clue, nor do I much care”, which is where most atheists I know stand.
No, you didn’t. You posted a story, a story that is obviously full of holes, and even if true it suggests that our conception of medicine is wrong. It does not, however, speak to the Christian God any more than it does to Ahura Mazda. Provide proof that your God healed the guy and not Ahura Mazda, Vishnu, Apollo, etc… Show your work.
(Or tacitly admit that not only are you wrong, but you are totally unable to argue your own case, and complain about a lack of respect or nasty atheists or… something)
You do not understand how gravity works, at all.
Of course objects can fly across the room horizontally. If you disagree, just watch any baseball game, ever. Pitchers are quite good at demonstrating this fact. What also happens is that objects tend to follow a parabolic ballistic trajectory as the acceleration due to Earth’s gravity pull the object towards the ground. Any sufficient horizontal/diagonal vector can, and will, produce the kind of motion you’ve described and claim is “impossible”. What’s more, your story is of shockingly limited utility - we do not know, for example, whether or not your friend was truthful with you, whether you are being truthful with us, whether your friend was on drugs or something of the sort at the time, whether there was a minor earthquake/his house’s foundation settled/etc… and something flew off the shelf as a result, etc…
And yet again you are relying on the Bifurcation Fallacy. Even if we accept that something supernatural was chucking stuff off your buddy’s shelves (Why? Was it a disembodied emo teen?) then that still does not yield the outcome you’d prefer. Yet again, prove that it was the Christian God that somehow caused/allowed falling stuff and not an angry Tulpa, a playful Coyote, or a bored Loki.
We HAVE to? No we don’t. In fact, you’ve had several responses pointing out that medical science would LOVE for it to be true, and that fame and riches await the one who can show it to be true. You’ve also had several posts suggesting some major discrepancies with the account. But I guess you HAVE to ignore anyone who points out the obvious flaws in your argument.
That’s not proof of Christianity. Heck, if true that’s more likely to be proof of poltergeists.
Nothing posted anywhere by anyone ever will change your mind. The difference between us is that you think that this is a good thing. You are the one who does not wish to know.
[QUOTE=GEEPERS]
Nothing posted here has changed my previous notion that atheism and honesty are oxymorons.
[/QUOTE]
Wow in nearly the same post.
There’s a routine Bill Hicks does… and he talks about how religious Fundamentalism destroys any sense of irony in folks. I can see that.
Seems like Geepers might want to have a word with you and what you have to offer.
Whups! Looks like you got to this first!
Yes, this again. And again until you address the questions surrounding it: the logical and medical flaws in the story and the problem in connecting this event to Christianity specifically. Do you plan to do that?
I never made that claim. Here’s what actually happened: you were asked (for what feels like the hundredth time) how we’re supposed to differentiate between one religion and another. You never got around to a solid answer, but you started with the following:
I never claimed anything can defy gravity because nothing defies gravity. You asserted that your friends experienced something supernatural. You didn’t see it, of course, but apparently you accept their claims at face value and we should do the same. I said there were several plausible, non-impossible (excuse me, “supernatural”) explanation for what happened. Those range from earthquakes to badly built shelves to someone hitting the shelf in the book situation and short circuits in the case of the radio. I guess you found the radio explanation convincing because you stopped mentionining it. I didn’t mention the possibility that your friends were lying to you, but that possibility also exists. In general, the simpler explanation is always going to be preferred, and “the book fell of the shelf” is going to be preferred to the unconfirmable and physically inexplicable actions of ghosts. I’ve acknowledged that I didn’t see any of these things happen, so I can’t say for sure what happened. I can say that some explanations are more likely than others. Of course, you didn’t see them either, so you’re really in no position to say what happened either. You say your friends insist something impossible happened - the books didn’t just fall off the shelf, they flew clear across the room - and evidently you think they’re honest and credible, so you’re suspending your disbelief and you assume they’re not only being honest, but their description is completely accurate. I have no reason to assume any of those things because I don’t know your friends.
You say. Something you yourself didn’t even see to judge for yourself, nevermind that I didn’t see it, is supposed to debunk atheism. You’re right that you have a very different attitude from atheists as far as taking other people’s word for things, but that attitude isn’t required for religious faith.
Did. Guy’s deader than Jesus. Pancreatic cancer, IIRC. And we’re all poorer for it.
MORE PROOF THAT GOD DOES NOT EXIST ! 
Do you question everything your friends tell you as a potential lie? Again, I provided a cite. Just because it didn’t hold up to your asinine measure stick of acceptable evidence does not mean I never provided a cite.
The fact is that atheists smugly have narrowed the parameters so tightly that it is simply impossible to prove anything supporting Christianity. If you applied those same parameters to anything else, it could be called into question. Funny how atheist rarely apply such standards to science which often can be wrong.
Let’s see, cell phones don’t call brain cancer according to science. Oh wait, it does cause brain cancer according to science. Next year, they say the opposite. Israel becoming the geopolitical center of the world in the last days just as the Bible predicted? Now that’s a solid fact I can feel confident about.
Nope, I proved proof with documentation of an event that defied the laws of science. The onus is on you to scientifically explain how someone can be raised from the dead.
The baseball does not move by itself. It requires an energy source to go horizontal.
Of course, you point out how easy it is for atheists to dismiss evidence. " I wasn’t there, I didn’t see it" = it didn’t happen. Even if it was video taped which you can easily find on youtube, you would claim it was faked.
God help us if our children are being taught by arrogant atheists who hate Christians.