Here is the proof of God's existence for those that have the guts!
Posted on: March 26, 2008 - 3:39pm
Offline
Here is the proof of God's existence for those that have the guts!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTcZXb5wGDU
How do you explain the existence of the Virgin Mary and the scientfically proven miracles that have occurred at Fatima, Lourdes, Akita, Zeitun. If there is a Virgin Mary, then...Jesus, ya think? 100's of thousands see these miracles and you say there is no proof?
If you are sincerely seeking the truth, then you will find it. If you are working against God, then I am certain you will not respond to this message, and that will be proof that you are representing the "dark side" so to speak.
- Login to post comments
If the Bible is correct:
The omniscient God knew full well we'd choose as we did.
This God, who is called love in 1 John 4:8, also knew the punishment that awaited us and chose to do nothing.
Your God is 0-2 at present. Care for a third swing or would you rather be called out on strikes?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Here is what you get for playing today, a quote:
(Excerpt from Our Holy Father, Pope John Paul II's homily continued.)
"I Am the Living Bread" (Jn 6:51). The message of John's Gospel completes the liturgical picture of this great Eucharistic mystery that we are celebrating today... The words of John's Gospel are the great proclamation of The Eucharist, after the miraculous multiplication of bread near Capernaum. Anticipating as it were the time even before the Eucharist was instituted, Christ revealed what it was. He spoke thus: "I Am the Living Bread which came down from heaven; if anyone eats of this Bread, he will live forever; and the Bread which I shall give for the life of the world is My Flesh" (Jn 6:51). And when these words brought protests from many who were listening Jesus added: "Truly, truly I say to you, unless you eat the Flesh of the Son of man and drink His Blood, you have no life in you; he who eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For My Flesh is food indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed. He who eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood abides in me, and I in him." (Jn 6:53-56).
Has it already been mentioned that David Copperfield could probably do this trick? Y'know, like making the statue of liberty disappear. Actually, making the statue of liberty disappear would be way harder ... and he did that.
Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence
You couldn't take the word of the son of your god for it? You had to wait for JP2 to explain it to you?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
If the Bible is correct:
The omniscient God knew full well we'd choose as we did.
--yes, but He allows us free will. your point?
This God, who is called love in 1 John 4:8, also knew the punishment that awaited us and chose to do nothing.
--punishment? Yes, being separated from God, is painful. Perhaps that is the so called "fires of hell", namely the burning pain of being away from God's love and presence. Remember, we are using finite words to describe something infinite, beyond our comprehension and mortal minds.
Your God is 0-2 at present. Care for a third swing or would you rather be called out on strikes?
--No, I like these odds!
I do understand what you are saying, but during both the Crusades and The Inquisition the activities of the terrestial church did condone the punishment and heinous crimes. As to the extra-terrestrial Church how can you know? I did read you suggested links, and throughly chose to disagree. I have also read about 10 other books on the Inquisition. The number of murdered persons has been exagerated and is likely to be only hundreds of thousands. The Church in fact used the secular governments as tools to accomplish their goals of suppression of heresy. There are cases of documented legal murder. I'll give you just one to start:
This scene occurred on May 13, 1239 in Mont-Wimer in Champagne.
In this mass murder of Cathars 183 innocent people are burned at the stake. Their crime is only that they are Cathars and refuse to become practicing Roman Catholics. The host of the marshmallow roast was the Inquisitor General of France Robert le Bougne. The assembled fans were the bishops of Orleans, Troyes, Meaux, Verdun, and Langres as well as all of the citizens of the towns nearby.
As to the Church not particpating in torture, I beg to differ,
according to Newadvent link "It was first authorized by Innocent IV in his Bull "Ad exstirpanda" of 15 May, 1252, which was confirmed by Alexander IV on 30 November, 1259, and by Clement IV on 3 November, 1265. The limit placed upon torture was citra membri diminutionem et mortis periculum -- i.e, it was not to cause the loss of life or limb or imperil life. Torture was to applied only once, and not then unless the accused were uncertain in his statements, and seemed already virtually convicted by manifold and weighty proofs."
However it wasn't followed as such resulting in this according to another Newadvent link:
"Therefore on 27 April, 1260, Alexander IV authorized inquisitors to absolve one another of this irregularity. Urban IV on 2 August, 1262, renewed the permission, and this was soon interpreted as formal licence to continue the examination in the torture chamber itself. The inquisitors manuals faithfully noted and approved this usage. The general rule ran that torture was to be resorted to only once. But this was sometimes circumvented -- first, by assuming that with every new piece of evidence the rack could be utilized afresh, and secondly, by imposing fresh torments on the poor victim (often on different days), not by way of repetition, but as a continuation (non ad modum iterationis sed continuationis), as defended by Eymeric;"
This is all from the Catholic Website Newadvent found here: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08026a
The standard Catholic position is secular authorities did the torture and murders and the Church didn't bear a reponsibility for it.
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
This is painful. Evidence for people lying to themselves, deluding themselves into thinking/believing they saw miracles, making crap up to prey upon the "not so intelligent" is all around you, both present day and throughout history....The sad part is those same people convincing themselves that it's always someone else who falls for tricks and not them. The apparitions I see are fact.
---A camera lens does not have to convince itself it sees an image of the Virgin Mary. Why is this concept so hard to grasp? Also, to keep comparing valid apparitions with false apparitions and goofy cheese toast nonsense is not really accomplishing anything.
This event was a reported fact. There is plenty of supporting documentation to conclude that something supernatural occurred.
RRS=If you can't respond rationally, then discredit the poster with insults, FSM, and any other stupid analogy that we all know does not compare to anything any of us remotely believe. Example=Virgin Mary on a grilled cheese sandwich.
1. My point is very simple. Omniscience makes free will impossible. If God knows everything, humans cannot make a choice that he doesn't already know they'll make. Either there's no free will or your god is not omniscient.
2a. Wouldn't a God who truly loved us not want us to be separated from him? Your God apparently doesn't want that.
2b. I was basing the punishment aspect on your Christ's descriptions of Hell. Oops, I forgot. You don't pay attention to those, do you? My bad.
Gotta love this guy. He gets his teeth kicked in repeatedly on point after point, comes back with "Thank you, sir. May I have another?" and actually thinks he's winning.
A line from a Cheech & Chong sketch comes to mind, "Before I found the Lord, I was all messed up on drugs. Then I found the Lord and now I'm all messed up on the Lord".
Theism - intellectual anesthesia.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
What would you do if, through whatever process you'd like, an archbishop became convinced that God wanted you to kill someone, and that it had to be done right away?
--I thought I answered that already. I would disobey the archbishop since it violates God's law.
Can God not give you a direction that goes against something said previously? Why or why not?
--Once again, if God is giving me a teaching on faith and morals through scripture, or through His Church, then I obey. To answer your unlikely hypothetical, if God gave and order that conflicted with unchangeable teachings on faith and morals, then we can quite simply deduce that it is not from God.
You couldn't take the word of the son of your god for it? You had to wait for JP2 to explain it to you?
---no, Jesus saying it was just fine by me.
"Truly, truly I say to you, unless you eat the Flesh of the Son of man and drink His Blood, you have no life in you; he who eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For My Flesh is food indeed, and My Blood is drink indeed. He who eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood abides in me, and I in him." (Jn 6:53-56)----there it is!! The eternal truth right before your eyes, spoken by Jesus Himself.
The glorification of cannibalism and vampirism? No thanks.
Or is that just as symbolic and fictional as the one who said it?
I've noticed you gave up on those who thoroughly debunked your appearances of Mary and the Padre who likes giving himself the stigmata. Do you think I'm easier or am I just beating you up in a nicer manner?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Hey Jill, I may be going in circles, but I am making great time.
JC wrote:
Gotta love this guy. He gets his teeth kicked in repeatedly on point after point, comes back with "Thank you, sir. May I have another?" and actually thinks he's winning.
--Happy to get my teeth kicked in repeatedly if it helps anyone here, your worth it! I will continue to pray for you all. May God bless you. I consecrate you all to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Keep an open mind, heart and soul. Try getting on your knees privately, and praying to God...a miracle just might happen to you.
Soon thereafter in John 6:67 Douay-Rheims it says "After this many of his disciples went back; and walked no more with him." Apparently the eating of the flesh and drinking of blood wasn't seen as an analogy and was taken too seriously! Perhaps it was just a little much for Jewish belief at the time? Talk about unclean.
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
The Bible truly is "barking mad." If you really believe in that transubstantiation nonsense, get the church to consent to having the cracker and wine tested for human DNA.
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
The glorification of cannibalism and vampirism? No thanks.
---No, its the body and blood of God Himself...come on, you know that.
Or is that just as symbolic and fictional as the one who said it?
---No, not a symbol. It is in fact the body and blood of Christ. "The greatest love story of all time in a little white host"
I've noticed you gave up on those who thoroughly debunked your appearances of Mary and the Padre who likes giving himself the stigmata. Do you think I'm easier or am I just beating you up in a nicer manner?
---Thought I addressed those already. Okay, Padre Pio, medical doctors examined him and proven fact that stigmata wounds were not self-inflicted. Also, many other miracles associated with St. Padre Pio.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=HpQi_8ZhedA&feature=related
And for those who really want to delve into this, rent the movie Padre Pio just made in the year 2000. Whether you believe or not, it is a very well done feature film.
The Bible truly is "barking mad." If you really believe in that transubstantiation nonsense, get the church to consent to having the cracker and wine tested for human DNA.
--Actually, there have been lots of miracles of the Eucharist where it has literally changed into flesh and blood:
http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/engl_mir.htm
This sometimes help those that doubt the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist to believe.
Sure enough Matt, when these miracles have occurred, they have tested it, and behold, human flesh and human blood!
Usually however, when we eat the body and blood of Christ, it still has the appearance of bread and wine. Yet, what the eye cannot see is the truth, that is we are partaking in the very life of God in the Eucharist.
Great question, thank you!
All right, so would I. I was wondering if the order came from someone you feel has a better grasp of divine will would change how you felt about it.
Last in this line of questions: what would you do if, through whatever process you'd like, the pope makes an ex cathedra statement that god has given him, through divine revelation, the task of telling you personally that god wants you to kill someone and it had to be done right away?
So you don't think that god would ever directly give you an order? All orders from god come through the Church, not to an individual? That seems rather convenient for those who run the church.
--
maybe if this sig is witty, someone will love me.
As I said, I'm neither a cannibal nor a vampire so eating human flesh and drinking human blood (or sincerely believing I am) is not for me.
As for miracles, the human body can do amazing things. No prayer, ritual or god needed.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Soon thereafter in John 6:67 Douay-Rheims it says "After this many of his disciples went back; and walked no more with him." Apparently the eating of the flesh and drinking of blood wasn't seen as an analogy and was taken too seriously!
---not an analogy. Many today as you can see are mocking this teaching. Most Christians do not believe this teaching. Here is a link that may help:
http://www.acfp2000.com/Miracles/eucharistic.html
Last in this line of questions: what would you do if, through whatever process you'd like, the pope makes an ex cathedra statement that god has given him, through divine revelation, the task of telling you personally that god wants you to kill someone and it had to be done right away?
---Surprised you are using ex cathedra to make this point. No longer valid since ex cathedra only applies when teaching on faith and morals. Therefore, answer is the same, I would not obey it since I am not obliged to.
Can you point out which of those pdfs have the accounts of the testing? I went through all the pdfs for the 20th and 21st centuries and didn't find one where it said they were tested and conclusively found to be human flesh and blood. I found one report of non-decayed hosts, but that's it.
I did, however find this report, but that originates from the 8th century. Eyewitness accounts do not proof make. It also wasn't tested until the 1970s, and I must say, not only is 1200 years stretching the bounds of credibility on expectations that these relics were never tampered with, they were tested rather stupidly.
Matt's got a point: why don't Catholics put their money where their mouth is and let some scientists actually DNA test the wafer and wine before, during and after? What could they possibly fear?
So you believe in transubstantiation, not consubstantiation? The bread literally becomes a hunk of flesh?
--
maybe if this sig is witty, someone will love me.
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
I wouldn't do it, either.
So how would this situation be explained, then? God's emissary on earth has just explained about a divine revelation that someone must die, and that someone must do it. How could this be handled? Do you think that he would be telling the truth about his divine revelation? Is that not a "teaching on faith"? I will be the first to admit that I cannot keep all the ins and outs of catholicism straight, so if my understanding isn't correct, please tell me.
Additionally, if god can't reliably give accurate messages to you, an archbishop or the pope, does that present problems for the accurate teaching of belief?
--
maybe if this sig is witty, someone will love me.
Matt's got a point: why don't Catholics put their money where their mouth is and let some scientists actually DNA test the wafer and wine before, during and after? What could they possibly fear?
---nothing to fear. if it was tested, they would most certainly see that it is bread and wine. However, what the eye cannot behold is the supernatural reality that it is in fact the body and blood of Christ.
So you believe in transubstantiation, not consubstantiation? The bread literally becomes a hunk of flesh?
--Yes, trans, not cons. No, it is not a hunk of flesh, still looks like bread and wine. Here is a quote I found on Wiki that explains it pretty well:
"When at his Last Supper, Jesus said: "This is my body", what he held in his hands still had all the appearances of bread: these "accidents" remained unchanged. However, the Roman Catholic Church believes that, when Jesus made that declaration,[1] the underlying reality (the "substance"
of the bread was converted to that of his body. In other words, it actually was his body, while all the appearances open to the senses or to scientific investigation were still those of bread, exactly as before. The Church holds that the same change of the substance of the bread and of the wine occurs at the consecration of the Eucharist"
From John, Ch. 20. 8
Don't you get that the Buybull is not gonna help ya? It has about as much validity and authority to us as MAD magazine. Anyway, those videos and pictures, if they really were valid, would have been top news stories and seen more than just on YouTube. They are about as useful as pictures and videos of UFO's or Bigfoot. The kind of thing you see on bad TV shows on Cable or in tabloids, not on CNN or in serious newspapers.
Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team
Damn, one afternoon passes and this thread booms with 100 responses! No wonder, watching a guy eat crud while convinced is suffle is kind of funny and sad at the same time.
Still it doesn't change the fact your chasing your own tail. Looking for more suffle perhaps?
1) Do you have any idea how many proselytisers have come and gone from this forums? I've seen six or seven in my short three month stay here, and each of them claimed they had the one and only correct way to bark at the moon, and they all differed, sometimes diametrically, in how the barking was to be done. Each of them claimed that, through the study of some field(s) of knowledge and -mostly- by means of personal discovery/revelation they knew, for a fact, they had to do the barking one way or the other: while standing on the right leg, in the right spot, with the precise tone and intensity and to the right crater of the moon, and any deviation from said process resulted in the displeasing of the moon.
Your attempts here are nothing new, and trust me on this one, you will not, let me stress that, will NOT, convince nor convert anyone here by religious rhetoric alone. Your odds will be even less promising if you just stick to repeating dogmatic arguments we've all heard millions of times before. You have a better chance of gaining something here if you actually partake on the debate, and that includes, believe it or not, refuting other people's arguments. Which brings me to the main point of this, when will you answer to my debunking of La Virgen de Guadalupe?
2) Do not bother praying for us, at least not for me, you're better off investing your time in something more productive, like truly helping others with real problems they did not choose to have. Go help some homeless people, or anyone who is not to blame for their current misfortune. We CHOSE to be atheists, and if that gets us in yahweh naughty list then it is by our own accord, we damn well please to be in such list! You who believe that free will nonsense should be able to understand that (Oh, I forgot, you don't actually trust you own mind. Still, free will is in the Holy Babble, so you shouldn't have much problems getting the point I'm making).
To hammer the point home, I would like to take this opportunity to take the blasphemy challenge: I Albedo_00 and the person that avatar represents, completely and wholeheartedly deny the Holy Spirit. I have read the Holy Babble (twice) and know that, in accordance to Mark 3.29, this will irrevocably damn me, beyond all possible forgiveness. I do this willingly and on my own accord. So Fuck the Holy Spirit, fuck the woman it raped, fuck the bastard geezus she squeezed out as a result, and fuck the whole trinity right in the asshole with a petrified Secoya, with all it's branches still on.
So there, don't bother praying for me. I'm as damned as Ghandi, Plato and Hemingway were.
And one more thing: "Try getting on your knees privately, and praying to God". Right back at'cha kiddo, and don't take it from me, take it from the word of god: Matt. 6:5-6.
Lenore, The Cute Little Dead Girl. Twice as good as Jesus.
It often happens that I wake up at night and think about a serious problem and decide that I must tell the Pope about it. Then I wake up completely and realize that I am the Pope. Pope John XXIII
I often want to ask, beg and tell god a thing or two and then realize I AM GOD, as you.
Atheism Books.
Ahh, I love it when occasional religious nuts pass by. And this one is named after a shoddy Ford car. We used to have a Sierra when I was a kid.
Sierra, can you pray for my blasphemous soul? Not that I really want forgiveness from your bigoted God, but just because it would amuse me to know that you were praying for me. I like being prayed for, it makes me feel somehow superior, like they're actually wasting time praying for my "doomed soul" to their chosen deity, while I'm comfortably enjoying my happy, God-free life. And no, I'm not actually a dick, I'm just tired and bored of all this religious bullshit.
Atheist Books
---Wow! What a tragedy. I may not win you over to my side, but your foul language and lack of respect sure will not win me over to your viewpoint either. I will be honest, I have read everything you all have posted and even browsed other topics including LOC's 10 responses to evidence of God which was very well done I might add.
Albedo wrote:
1) Do you have any idea how many proselytisers have come and gone from this forums? I've seen six or seven in my short three month stay here, and each of them claimed they had the one and only correct way to bark at the moon, and they all differed, sometimes diametrically, in how the barking was to be done. Each of them claimed that, through the study of some field(s) of knowledge and -mostly- by means of personal discovery/revelation they knew, for a fact, they were barking while standing on the right leg, in the right spot, with the precise tone and intensity and to the right crater of the moon, and any deviation from said process resulted in the displeasing of the moon.
---No, I do not know how many, I am new here. So, many have traveled through here barking a message? I am not like them. My message is different. In fact 179 or so posts in a little over 24 hours, not bad a for a new guy eh? Granted, about a 1/3 of those were mine. Anyway, my message has struck a nerve here. Why? Because deep down, many of you know its the truth. The others are simply denying God for whatever reason, that's between you and Him.
Question for the forum that I tried to ask earlier:
If Jesus were to appear to you right now, revealed to you eternal truth, and explained everything to you in a way that made sense, and you knew beyond a shadow of a doubt the truth of God's love, would you choose to accept and obey Him, or would you reject and deny Him????
I actually have answered every question to the best of my ability. How about you all answer one of my questions now???
I promise you the question is not a trick or to make you look foolish in some way. I am sincerely interested in your responses and I do not have any pre-planned responses. I will respond to whatever you answer to this question.
I promise you the question is not a trick or to make you look foolish in some way. I am sincerely interested in your responses and I do not have any pre-planned responses. I will respond to whatever you answer to this question.
sierra, as you would expect, we reject your claims of divine paranormal manifestations because we are atheists. That's perfectly consistent with our "belief" system. ( go figure
)
I would enjoy watching you post your topic on a forum that caters to Protestant fundamentalist Christians. You know, share all your Virgin Mary stories with Christians who reject Catholicism. You feel your evidence for these miracles is so compelling that even we atheists would be forced to concede yet even god-fearing Protestants would flatly reject your claims ( and probably denounce your faith ).
It's one thing for atheists to reject these "miracles" but I would love to see the theological train wreck that would ensue between the Catholic church's historical nemesis and arch enemy....the Protestant Church.
Angry Catholics and Protestants arguing over metaphysical bull shit...now that would be a real war !!!
Obviously Bible miracles are a thing of the past ..... why is that ? Seen any angels or ghosts, etc lately ? Sheezzzz
But it ain't funny 
Watching Xains pray is both fun and sad, and big J wisdom said not to do that in public ..... ummm ? Why ? Because it is unhealthy reinforcing idol worship for one ....
Just to add .... there is wise J and stupid J in the Bi Bull , religion J is like a disease.
so sad .....
Atheism Books.
sierra, as you would expect, we reject your claims of divine paranormal manifestations because we are atheists. That's perfectly consistent with our "belief" system
---yes, I know, but if I have provided factual data that proves miracles/supernatural events etc, then you would have to conclude as a reasonable person that your position of denying such realities is no longer a valid position. I have tried to do this with more than just the Virgin Mary apparitions, but with Padre Pio stigmata, incorruptible bodies of the saints, miracles of the Eucharist, and miraculous cures.
---Also, interesting you should bring up debating Protestants on these supernatural events. They wholeheartedly believe they are occurring, however they attribute them to the devil. So, I must conclude something here. Since Protestants deny many aspects of the Catholic faith, especially these supernatural events as being of God, yet, they do acknowledge the validity of such events, it is obvious that you folks are being a bit unreasonable here. Think about it. I have researched Protestants views on these supernatural events, and the ones I have cited are not disputed at all by Protestants. They believe them to be of supernatural origin (because its obvious if you just dig a little deeper and research it), they simply state that they are from the devil! Well, if they are from the devil, then there you go, supernatural phenomenon.
I'm thinking this guy is worse - and certainly more irrational - than St Michael was. Remember him?
Its a simple question, don't be scared to answer it.
Sierra ,
keep hanging out here at wonderful RRS and you have may a better chance of being "saved" ..... Atheists are the true modern disciples of a Jesus philosophy that promoted atheism, the One with the Cosmos (father) idea.
Good luck ..... and let us know when you see a miracle .....
Atheism Books.
Sierra ,
keep hanging out here at RRS and you have a chance of being "saved" ..... Atheists are the true modern disciples of a Jesus philosophy that promoted atheism, the One with the Cosmos (father) idea.
Good luck ..... and let us know when you see a miracle .....
---wow, thanks even if you are being sarcastic.
---no answer to my question though?
Yes Catholic evangelists are becoming quite rare. Actually you should join my missionary niece on her trips to Moslem countries to save them from Allah. Actually she is a Lutheran heretic so that wouldn't be acceptable.
Back to your question. Since it must be considered in a supernatural way or as a revelation, I can't envision that occuring. Saying revealed in eternal truth assumes I will see something in that which I have already rejected. I see no such thing as eternal truth, thats why I'm an atheist ex-christian heretic Catholic. As I have taken the path of reason I require real evidence not an inner mind experience. So that only leaves physical which is heretical claim for a Catholic.
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
sierra, you obviously reject all theological doctrines except those of catholicism. God is defined only by the beliefs of your particular denomination..all other interpretations are false. You are absolutely convinced that your interpretation is the correct one.
The funny thing is this forum has been bombarded by other theists, even other Christian theists, who will flatly disagree with your doctrines. Like you, they are sure that their own unique interpretations are the only correct ones. They supply lengthy rebuttals, quote their favorite Christian apologists, and offer detailed responses to support their views....and you are no different.
That is why I thought it more significant that you disagree not with atheists only, but with other Christian theists. You all claim to have an exclusive claim upon God's truth yet you consistently disagree with each other.
Its a simple question. Stop with the rhetoric.
I have a had many respond to my posts. I doubt very many will have the guts to answer this simple question.
So here it is again, rephrased:
If you knew, 100%, without a doubt the Jesus of the New Testament was real, and everything I have been saying is true, (regardless of how you knew it-PaulJohn), would you accept Him or deny Him?
Well, if denying him meant that he would then resort to physically torturing me for eternity ( ie, Hell ) what choice would I have ? Is that the sort of offer that you consider to be "the good news" of Christ's love ?
Here's a similar analogy for you sierra, if I poured a gallon of gasoline all over your body and threatened to set you on fire if you refused to "accept me"..would you say no ?
(edited for clarity of meaning)
Sierra - I would still doubt. Hey maybe it is just the clever aliens playing with us .....
Further more , if a Jesus wise guy existed it changes nothing for me, and the same goes for Buddha. I AM a fan of lots of ancient philosophies, and lots of it sucks too.
What we have in ancient religious texts are competing ideas. Did J or B write anything ? ...... NO.
Atheism Books.
Well, if denying him meant that he would then resort to physically torturing me for eternity ( ie, Hell ) what choice would I have ? Is that the sort of offer that you consider to be "the good news" of Christ's love ?
Here's a similar analogy for you sierra, if I poured a gallon of gasoline all over your body and threatened to set you on fire if you refused to "accept me"..would you say no ?
---This is not the Christ I believe in. The good news of Christ's love is simply accept Him and live in paradise forever, deny Him, and live outside of His loving paradise forever. Call it hell, call it burning in gasoline, whatever you like. Like I said earlier, hell is separation from God, from God's love. That may be a painful experience, but it is not God who sends you to it. He lets you freely choose to be with Him or without Him. With Him is what I have chosen. What would you choose if there was no fear of punishment, but you knew he existed and was offering heaven? Would you accept it or deny it? This is not a fear based question, remember, I am Catholic, not a fire and brimstone corner preacher.
Sierra - I would still doubt. Hey maybe it is just the clever aliens playing with us ..
---thank you for answering. Aliens, wow, that's an interesting notion. Followed through to its conclusion, why would aliens perpetuate such a lie?
Ever play / create live ant wars ? Red against Black !
Ever play live ant wars ? Red against Black !
---oic what you mean. No, have not played it. After watching A Bug's Life, had sudden compassion for the little ants...jk
LOL ..... If bibles started raining from the sky, with even an added 3rd testament, I would still not believe "gawed" works that way !
ummm, me god must give them a book !
Atheism Books.
And yet you still fail to respond the call to defend your virgin.
And I'm not trying to "win you over" to my side, I don't care what you believe, in fact I respect your right to believe what you will, so long as it doesn't affect me nor it results in the detriment of others. But when you don't even practice what you preach (Matt. 6:5-6; Note to self: you moron, you mixed Matt with Mark, the hell's wrong with you?) then I automatically lose respect for the believer and call the belief into question.
Borderline argumentum ad populum. And a damn arrogant too. Hasn't crossed your mind, even for a second, that the reason there's so many replies here is based more on, let's assume, an entertainment factor? I seriously doubt you have struck anything but our funny bones here.
A convenient and self serving rationalization, backed by no evidence whatsoever.
If this were to happen I would check myself in a mental institution right away. After my sanity is proven, I would then ask other people to verify if they can see this guy claiming to be Jesus and verify his existence. If that checks out I would then ask Jesus some proof of his supernatural powers, nothing fancy, just something he himself said he would do, like moving a mountain from point a to point b by commanding it to do so. And no funny business like "Mountain, I command you to erode from that place to another in a naturally reasonable space of time". Nope, I wanna see the whole thing float, grow legs or in some other way which would be naturally impossible, move to another location, say, the Sahara desert, and plant itself there. And I want an audience, with cameras and a qualified scientific crew to measure the whole event, so that, without a shadow of a doubt, we know the mountain actually moved, and was this alleged Jesus did not pulled a David Copperfield or Chris Angel kind of thing. Then, and only then, I would accept Him and bow down, bend over or whatever other position Jesus wants me to assume.
And regarding my language. It usually ain't my way to throw around insults nor ad hominems without cause or merit, but the single pace, mild tone, proselytising responses you spew time and again, with little to no substance, while disregarding many serious attempts for debate pissed me off, and wanted to see if a little screw you would spice things enough to get the ball rolling. A shot in the dark, I admit, and a failed one as I can see.
Lenore, The Cute Little Dead Girl. Twice as good as Jesus.