Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
According to you we can't test the past. That's why I asked why anyone should accept something they cannot be sure of.How do you propose to 'test' the past and future exactly?
How was the bible tested if we cannot test the past? You reject a lot of history, so being historical does not make the bible reliable or demonstrate testability (apparently).The bible is tested and true. What it says about the past is now history.
FYI, I wasn't expecting (or asking) you to provide any evidence "against" the notion that committing murder is (at least in some cases) a form of "mental illness", and you're welcome to disagree if you like, it doesn't matter to me.
As I mentioned, I can conceive of some instances (like self defense or by accident) where murder might be the only logical option or it's not intentional, but in such instances people are usually not convicted of 'murder' to begin with.
It need not "do the job as well" (or as often) as medicine, but why would someone want to take drugs to cure their depression if they have the same (or better) result by embracing (a) religion? I don't see that as being an "inferior" choice.
Can you demonstrate (via a study) that we can get rid of the religious aspects entirely and still get the same result, or are you expecting me to "disprove" that claim for you?
No one made up spirits, good or bad. They are found in Scripture. You can deny for no reason at all, or you can respect the overwhelming majority of people's experiences and beliefs.
Not really. When offering an unsupported opinion on demons, not sure anyone much cares.
No such thing as a burden of proof in the realm of physical evidence when talking about the spiritual. There is the burden of denial or belief.
What is the point of bring science into it, if it cannot discern spiritual things but only see the effects in the physical?
No. You cannot kill God or angels, or even demons.
Or they could send you somewhere...whatever.
Science cannot test what spirits existed or not. They can't test what nature existed here etc.According to you we can't test the past.
We can be sure if we do as God asked. He said if we do what He says then we will know. I am also sure that bible prophecy has been fulfilled. Done deal. Tried, tested proven and repeated. Science can't be sure because it does not have a clue on spiritual matters.That's why I asked why anyone should accept something they cannot be sure of.
The Scripture and spiritual WAS tested by Mary. She felt and heard and saw the proof.How was the bible tested if we cannot test the past?
The issue is not accepting all of history as gospel, but whether we accept the fundamental ground rules of life when it was written. We do not need to know that a king conquered all the other guys that he claims, for example. But when a king says he ate food, that should be valued as evidence that food was eaten at that time. If a record has spirits in it, we can take that as evidence that spirits were considered real at that time.You reject a lot of history, so being historical does not make the bible reliable or demonstrate testability (apparently).
You thought most people of all ages believed in spirits with no evidence? No. There is plenty. None of which science can deal with.Doesn't make them real. And if there's not a single shred of evidence to support the claim, then why should I believe it?
Why would they since there are many reasons for illness besides evil influences of spirits?I don't see many people turning to an exorcist to cure them of their mental illnesses though, do you?
Nothing to ignore.So you want to ignore the stuff that disagrees with you and only listen to whatever tells you what you want to hear.
Maybe refresh our memory here with your attempted parable. Who exactly was going to church, and why should we care?I am saying that the benefit they got was from having social interactions. They did not get the benefit because of the religious nature of going to church.
You thought most people of all ages believed in spirits with no evidence? No. There is plenty. None of which science can deal with.
Why would they since there are many reasons for illness besides evil influences of spirits?
Nothing to ignore.
Do not confuse people not accepting your beliefs as ignoring things.
Maybe refresh our memory here with your attempted parable. Who exactly was going to church, and why should we care?
Special pleading. Beats all comers and requires no support. The fallacy of choice of everyone who knows they are wrong but is too proud to admit it.Science cannot test what spirits existed or not. They can't test what nature existed here etc.
We can test Scripture by doing as God said and see if it works. It does. It always has, like Mary found out.
We can be sure if we do as God asked. He said if we do what He says then we will know. I am also sure that bible prophecy has been fulfilled. Done deal. Tried, tested proven and repeated. Science can't be sure because it does not have a clue on spiritual matters.
The Scripture and spiritual WAS tested by Mary. She felt and heard and saw the proof.
The Scripture IS tested today by those who do what He says because they then know if it is true. It is also tested by looking at the prophecies that are now history.
The issue is not accepting all of history as gospel, but whether we accept the fundamental ground rules of life when it was written. We do not need to know that a king conquered all the other guys that he claims, for example. But when a king says he ate food, that should be valued as evidence that food was eaten at that time. If a record has spirits in it, we can take that as evidence that spirits were considered real at that time.
No, the issue is that you claimed people who murder are usually suffering from a mental illness. I asked you to back up that claim with evidence, and you said you weren't required to.
While it is only a minority of individuals with severe mental illness (SMI) that are likely to commit homicide, a large proportion of convicted homicide offenders are diagnosed with SMI (Joyal, Côté, Meloche & Hodgins, 2011).
Except you can't even show that it does the job as well as or better than medication.
I could say, "I don't really feel obligated to do that," but I actually prefer to debate with integrity, and I'm happy to provide my sources. So, yes, I can.
I said it was likely the social interactions of going to church that created the improvement in mental health, not the religious aspects of church attendance. Here's a study supporting that. Social Relationships and Health: A Flashpoint for Health Policy
Now, since I have provided a source to back up my claims, I expect you to do the same.
Provide a source saying that people who commit murder usually do so because they suffer from mental illnesses.
Not sure beliving in spirits in a thread about God and evidence etc is havoc.I see someone has crawled out of their chasm to cause havoc...causing trouble again dad?
They saw Jesus back from the dead doing miracles again and chatting it up. That works for me.They often had a very low standard for what counted as evidence, and they often didn't bother checking it. Also, superstition played a much bigger part in their lives because they didn't know how the world worked.
Well, if there are many ways to get to the store, such as bicycle trails, forest paths, side roads, main roads, helicopter, etc why would I focus only on say, bicycle paths as the only way to get to the store? There are many factors at work in the world, and that includes spiritual ones.If there are many influences other than spirits, why do you bother invoking spirits at all?
Yes, the guy in the bible that was out of his gourd because of bad spirits. People confirmed it by recognizing the fact. Jesus confirmed it by sending the foul spirit away and the guy was completely sane again.Can you give me a single example of anyone who had any mental illness that was confirmed to be the result of an evil spirit?
In the matter of spirits, one would be silly to ask physical only science.You literally said you wouldn't bother with science because it didn't tell you what you wanted to hear.
Ah, OK. So why would you speak to me about Michael's link? I do not go to church so am not too concerned with that. I would respect the changed lives of Christians in the world who are less selfish though.Michael posted a link showing that religious people were happier.
I said that the increase in happiness was probably a result of the increased social interaction that comes with going to church, and that the same benefits will come from having similar social interaction, even if church is not involved.
Facing the obvious fact that physical only disciplines cannot and do not cover anything spiritual is not special pleading.Special pleading. Beats all comers and requires no support. The fallacy of choice of everyone who knows they are wrong but is too proud to admit it.
Indeed not. But claiming your beliefs are not subject to the same requirements for support as others' is.Facing the obvious fact that physical only disciplines cannot and do not cover anything spiritual is not special pleading.
Even you admit here that they were only considered real, not that they actually were real. And I'll agree with this conclusion.If a record has spirits in it, we can take that as evidence that spirits were considered real at that time.
People considered trees real also. Mountains, etc. If you claim it is not real you would need some evidence.Even you admit here that they were only considered real, not that they actually were real. And I'll agree with this conclusion.
I'm not trying to convince you of anything. Either you agree or you don't, but either way I don't really care.However, if you insist....
Method of homicide and severe mental illness: A systematic review
The fact it does it *without* medication makes it "better" in my book. Just look at the number of people who overdose every year.
Are we done now?
My original point was that religion has positive effects on mental health, not that *other* things do not.
They saw Jesus back from the dead doing miracles again and chatting it up. That works for me.
Well, if there are many ways to get to the store, such as bicycle trails, forest paths, side roads, main roads, helicopter, etc why would I focus only on say, bicycle paths as the only way to get to the store? There are many factors at work in the world, and that includes spiritual ones.
Yes, the guy in the bible that was out of his gourd because of bad spirits. People confirmed it by recognizing the fact. Jesus confirmed it by sending the foul spirit away and the guy was completely sane again.
In the matter of spirits, one would be silly to ask physical only science.
Ah, OK. So why would you speak to me about Michael's link? I do not go to church so am not too concerned with that. I would respect the changed lives of Christians in the world who are less selfish though.
Trees and mountains are demonstrably real now, so your point is completely meaningless.People considered trees real also. Mountains, etc.
Actually, no. You're the one making positive claims (spirits were/are real) so you're the one who needs evidence.If you claim it is not real you would need some evidence.
I have met Jesus because of their testimony and we know it is true. Millions have met Jesus, He is still alive and well. He has said that He will come in and be part of our lives if asked. So it is by the living proof that we know, not just the testimony of holy men and women giving their lives to verify they were telling the truth.No, you have read stories about how they saw Jesus come back, and you have no way of verifying those stories.
Most men on earth in all ages know the spiritual works.How about you look at all the ways that you can get there and then only concentrate on the ones that actually work, and don't use the ones that are blocked, overgrown, washed out, etc?
No such thing as far as spirits go! Why make stuff up? Who are you gonna call to analyze a ghost exactly?And to make it clear, I am saying that we should only use analytical techniques that have produced results that can be verified.
Because it does work millions have tested and proven it.Using your stories as evidence for your stories doesn't work.
Yes, there is. If we check out Jesus and He is real, it is all true!There is no way to check the details. What was the guy';s name? Where are the eyewitness accounts?
They can be and are and have been and continue to be. Science cannot verify or deny. It would be foolish to apply physical scientific methods to the spiritual!In the matter of anything, one would be silly to rely on something that produces results that can't be verified.
Fine. He was right. Belief in Jesus or what some call religion has a great track record of charity.Michael posted in post 445.
I replied to Michael in post 455.
You then replied to my response to Michael in post 462.
So don't barge into a conversation I was having with someone else and then ask why I'm bothering talking about it with you, okay?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?