Hans Blaster
Hood was a loser.
- Mar 11, 2017
- 21,553
- 16,256
- 55
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
It didn't do anything when did believe, why should I waste my time on it now.
Upvote
0
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.
It didn't do anything when did believe, why should I waste my time on it now.I didn't have any "faith" usually defined as "belief" when first I prayed.
I didn't even believe in God
I had an open mind and a curiosity.
I thought it was a interesting experiment of no great political or social import.
But I can't test it for you.
You can only test it for yourself
Fair enoughIt didn't do anything when did believe, why should I waste my time on it now.
Is that why you believe in the Resurrection? Because you believe the Bible?You need to do your own research.
It has generally been accepted as historical fact.
In this you are beating a dead horse as all of the arguments you cite against the historical record and accuracy have been thoroughly examined by historians for centuries.
The Biblical Account remains historical fact, even through centuries of attempts to discredit it.
Why displace them? Surely he can just protect them? He is the ALMIGHTY, after all!I ignored it.
You're suggesting God displace a whole network of people and personnel, living and working on a mountain, for the sake of science.
That is the near EPITOME of scientific thoughtlessness.
Such zen!A little thing called SALVATION, perhaps you've heard of it? Apparently it's good news.
Are we as Christians the first that the secular world wants to invalidate our Scriptures? It is a slippery slope.So then we can not take the entire Bible as literal, can we?
So, how do we tell which parts are literally true and which parts are not?
What test can I perform to make a determination?
Even the most forgiving historian would say that all they can claim is that Jesus lived and was crucified. They wouldn't agree that there is evidence to show he was the son of God or anything like that.You need to do your own research.
It has generally been accepted as historical fact.
In this you are beating a dead horse as all of the arguments you cite against the historical record and accuracy have been thoroughly examined by historians for centuries.
The Biblical Account remains historical fact, even through centuries of attempts to discredit it.
Infallible is not the same as literal.Such zen!
Are we as Christians the first that the secular world wants to invalidate our Scriptures? It is a slippery slope.
I really dislike to use graphics, but I found this image similar to the discussion, starting with the Bible not being infallible:View attachment 359837
@AV1611VET did you draw this? This seems like one of your workings
They can be intertwined in certain ways, not all, but someInfallible is not the same as literal.
I couldn't find any rational answers.Maybe you need a course in Dispensation 101?
Why did Paul, who at one point could heal the sick and raise the dead, have to leave a friend behind sick?
2 Timothy 4:20 Erastus abode at Corinth: but Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick.
If you know the answer to this, it'll help you understand the first century AD a lot better.
Scholars generally agree that Jesus was a real person and many facts of His life are documented in sources other than the Bible.Given the lack of contemporary evidence, I find it hard to believe that there was even a real person named Jesus on whom the claims they do accept are based.
Why displace them? Surely he can just protect them? He is the ALMIGHTY, after all!
I couldn't find any rational answers.
Why don't you tell me?
If all you can test is the natural, it is the same thingYou seem unable to see that "testable" is not the same thing as "natural."
By 'we' you mean natural only science. they see the natural. Nothing elseWhy can't they see it? Is there like some invisibility screen?
Show us one spirit science dissected?Again, they are not limited to the natural.
You have shown that you are in denial off the obviousI have explained this to you many times, I can only conclude that you are being deliberately false now.
Jesus mentioned the seed. I put it in perspective using that and other scripturesNor you, though I suspect you're just making all this "how much faith is equivalent to a mustard seed" stuff up as you go.
Your choiceI have read it. Still an atheist.
Did the bible give a number? Does science give a number? Why would you want posters to make stuff up?And how many faith units is that? Give me a number.
Some things we know. Science knows nothing at all about anything at all except the natural.You're going out of your way to be vague about this stuff. It's almost like you don't actually know, and you can only repeat things that sound like they might be tangentially related.
It is good to hear the word, that is true. First people should come to Jesus. Then they will actually understand some of what they hear.So why don't you get a thousand Bibles on audiobook playing, listen to them all at once, and your faith levels should skyrocket.
They were.Is James Kirk and actor? Leonard McCoy an actor? I don't think so?
Cheers"Your peeps."
Honestly, thanks for the laugh.
A few were Paul, John, Peter, James, Thomas, Matthew and Philip. Mary also of course.So what?
What were their names? Can you show another source that speaks of these people?
What you believe not to be true does not make it so.Nah, you just believe it to be true. Belief doesn't make fact.
Frankly, I'd have it hauled away.Fair enough
Grandfather had an old car in the yard. He used to go out and kick it once in a while but it never would run.
I am well aware of the fact that many Biblical scholars hold that Jesus existed. But there are only two events that most scholars can agree on, and that's that he was baptised and that he was crucified. Several scholars hold the position that he existed, but the Biblical accounts about him are fictional. Biblical scholars will also tell you that there's no evidence that the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses. I also suspect that the fact that the majority of people in the past were Christian is a heavy influence on why the majority of scholars believed he existed.Scholars generally agree that Jesus was a real person and many facts of His life are documented in sources other than the Bible.
Please, do some research. Google historical Jesus
Several scholars hold the position that he existed, but the Biblical accounts about him are fictional. Biblical scholars will also tell you that there's no evidence that the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses.
If you want to pray for that, you go right ahead. And if it happens, I'll convert to your particular interpretation of Christianity instantly.I'll tell you what.
Why not just someone pray that God throw the whole street you live on into the Timor sea?
IF He protects you and your neighbors, I have a feeling the economic impact on your lives will be devastating.
Now you're homeless, all your personal belongings gone, possibly out of work as well; and all for what?
Someone was doing a scientific test on a verse of Scripture.
Aren't you glad science can take a hike?
That doesn't actually tell me why Paul, who at one point could heal the sick and raise the dead, have to leave a friend behind sick, does it?It's called Dispensation 101.
I'm not discussing anything further with you. You constantly repeat the same false claims, you show that youa re not interested in doing anything other than repeating these claims. You are not interested in a reasonable discussion, and you lack the understanding of science required to have such a discussion even if you did want one.If all you can test is the natural, it is the same thing
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?