How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You?

[Iceweasel]

Thanks for the permission but you made statements of faith and declared non believers as unintelligent. That's just silly.

Sorry but I did no such thing. It is rather unintelligent though to accuse people of saying something they didn't say when you can read the evidence right here.

"But nobody with any intelligence or education is willing to say that Jesus of Nazareth never existed..."

Looks plain enough to me. Does your god make you lie?

So what is wrong with saying that the intelligent--those who recognize the profound influence Jesus of Nazareth has had on the entire world--or the educated who have actually studied and understood the evidence that there is will know that Jesus of Nazareth existed? It is an either/or statement. You focused on the intelligent only and took it out of the full context.

Nope. Why do you mischaracterize people? I agreed Christianity plays a profound role but took issue with your statement that I even put in bold. Do you need giant red letters. I asked for said evidence, so far nothing. I have studied up on biblical matters for over twenty years so I'd love to see it.

I referred you to the evidence but you probably didn't read that any better than you did my other post. So it sort of follows that your 20-year study may possibly have been lacking.

More victory dancing. You can't bullshit everyone so easily. YOU PROVIDED NO PROOF OF JESUS.

 

[Foxfyre]

My experience is proof that I saw my shadow on the sidewalk this morning. But I cannot prove that I was outside or saw my shadow to another living soul because nobody saw me outside this morning.

But any seeing person has seen their shadow so it isn't a leap. Fail.

Not a fail if your experience on the next block is different from mine on my block. You still have to take it on faith that I had a different experience than you did.

What manner of thinking is this? If you said your shadow walked away from you you'd need some evidence to be believed. Saying you had a shadow isn't a stretch.

Nope. But believing the testimony of others about anything when you have not experienced it yourself is sometimes a stretch. And refusing to believe just because you don't want to believe or because you haven't experienced it is very limiting to a person.

It's one thing to accept that the Earth is round or what the speed of light is if those studying come up with the same answer. That's different than accepting beliefs based on faith. It isn't matter of what I want to believe, I wanted very much to believe in Christianity and did so for 20 plus years. My friends were Christian. It was comforting to believe that God knows me and cares. However the more I dug into things the more faith it required of me. And it took a good three years after knowing it wasn't true that I could call myself a non-Christian. It was very much part of me.

So it is a little irritating when someone accuses you of not thinking because you don't share the faith. You are in effect saying it isn't a faith but a fact. And when asked for said facts you get defensive.

It would irritate me too. Which is why I didn't do that.

 

[Foxfyre]

Sorry but I did no such thing. It is rather unintelligent though to accuse people of saying something they didn't say when you can read the evidence right here.

"But nobody with any intelligence or education is willing to say that Jesus of Nazareth never existed..."

Looks plain enough to me. Does your god make you lie?

So what is wrong with saying that the intelligent--those who recognize the profound influence Jesus of Nazareth has had on the entire world--or the educated who have actually studied and understood the evidence that there is will know that Jesus of Nazareth existed? It is an either/or statement. You focused on the intelligent only and took it out of the full context.

Nope. Why do you mischaracterize people? I agreed Christianity plays a profound role but took issue with your statement that I even put in bold. Do you need giant red letters. I asked for said evidence, so far nothing. I have studied up on biblical matters for over twenty years so I'd love to see it.

I referred you to the evidence but you probably didn't read that any better than you did my other post. So it sort of follows that your 20-year study may possibly have been lacking.

More victory dancing. You can't bullshit everyone so easily. YOU PROVIDED NO PROOF OF JESUS.

I didn't attempt to. I did provide proof that Jesus, whether he lived or not, had a profound affect on humankind. And I also believe there is sufficient historical evidence to believe that such a man lived for those with the intelligence to see it - OR - the ability to study the evidence honestly and objectively. Those who study the evidence with no intent to learn anything or just because it is expected of them or who intend to declare it all bullshit of course will reach the conclusion they had to begin with.

 

[Iceweasel]

"But nobody with any intelligence or education is willing to say that Jesus of Nazareth never existed..."

Looks plain enough to me. Does your god make you lie?

So what is wrong with saying that the intelligent--those who recognize the profound influence Jesus of Nazareth has had on the entire world--or the educated who have actually studied and understood the evidence that there is will know that Jesus of Nazareth existed? It is an either/or statement. You focused on the intelligent only and took it out of the full context.

Nope. Why do you mischaracterize people? I agreed Christianity plays a profound role but took issue with your statement that I even put in bold. Do you need giant red letters. I asked for said evidence, so far nothing. I have studied up on biblical matters for over twenty years so I'd love to see it.

I referred you to the evidence but you probably didn't read that any better than you did my other post. So it sort of follows that your 20-year study may possibly have been lacking.

More victory dancing. You can't bullshit everyone so easily. YOU PROVIDED NO PROOF OF JESUS.

I didn't attempt to. I did provide proof that Jesus, whether he lived or not, had a profound affect on humankind. And I also believe there is sufficient historical evidence to believe that such a man lived for those with the intelligence to see it - OR - the ability to study the evidence honestly and objectively. Those who study the evidence with no intent to learn anything or just because it is expected of them or who intend to declare it all bullshit of course will reach the conclusion they had to begin with.

I didn't dispute the influence of Christianity and said I didn't want to believe it wasn't true but I'm the one that can't read? I gave a few examples of why it wouldn't be true, the historians of the day for example. Jesus not writing anything down. Different language tells the story, Greek. But Jesus spoke Aramaic. Why didn't he speak Greek if that was the goal? No original works are extant so the whole story is 250 years minimum removed from the supposed events.

 

[Foxfyre]

So what is wrong with saying that the intelligent--those who recognize the profound influence Jesus of Nazareth has had on the entire world--or the educated who have actually studied and understood the evidence that there is will know that Jesus of Nazareth existed? It is an either/or statement. You focused on the intelligent only and took it out of the full context.

Nope. Why do you mischaracterize people? I agreed Christianity plays a profound role but took issue with your statement that I even put in bold. Do you need giant red letters. I asked for said evidence, so far nothing. I have studied up on biblical matters for over twenty years so I'd love to see it.

I referred you to the evidence but you probably didn't read that any better than you did my other post. So it sort of follows that your 20-year study may possibly have been lacking.

More victory dancing. You can't bullshit everyone so easily. YOU PROVIDED NO PROOF OF JESUS.

I didn't attempt to. I did provide proof that Jesus, whether he lived or not, had a profound affect on humankind. And I also believe there is sufficient historical evidence to believe that such a man lived for those with the intelligence to see it - OR - the ability to study the evidence honestly and objectively. Those who study the evidence with no intent to learn anything or just because it is expected of them or who intend to declare it all bullshit of course will reach the conclusion they had to begin with.

I didn't dispute the influence of Christianity and said I didn't want to believe it wasn't true but I'm the one that can't read? I gave a few examples of why it wouldn't be true, the historians of the day for example. Jesus not writing anything down. Different language tells the story, Greek. But Jesus spoke Aramaic. Why didn't he speak Greek if that was the goal? No original works are extant so the whole story is 250 years minimum removed from the supposed events.

Jesus spoke Aramaic because he lived his entire life on Earth in a very small area in all Aramaic speaking communities. There are some first century manuscripts written In Aramaic but most of the late First Century and Second Century manuscripts were written in Latin or Greek. Most of the New Testament was written in classical Greek which was fairly universally understood throughout the Roman Empire.

The earliest intact manuscripts we have of New Testament material were the letters of Paul written mid First Century when many eye witnesses to First Century events were still around and far too early for any kind of mythology to have time to develop.

We do not have the original manuscripts of Plato and Aristotle either, but nobody questions that they existed or that the words attributed to them are made up. We have nothing from Cyrus of Persia or Alexander the Great but we are pretty sure they existed and had a profound influence on their part of the world at that time. It is widely believed that many of the ancient manuscripts were in the great library of Alexandria when it burned. It is possible that many of the original manuscripts of the Bible were also lost at that time.

 

[Mudda]

If god is going through all that trouble to lead me to him, why doesn't he just contact me directly? It makes no sense that he's there but won't actually do what it takes to convince me.

The people talked and walked with Jesus and watched him perform miracles, and yet they didn't understand. They didn't believe. There are many miraculous things that happen to all of us and I just can't believe they are all due to pure chance. If God spoke to you right now would you believe it? Or would you think it was due to maybe mental illness or somebody's practical joke?

You see, you are placing demands on God before you will believe. That's not the best way to get acquainted with him.

God knows that in my heart, I'm simply the type of person who needs concrete proof to believe something. He chooses not to contact me. That's his call.

Problem solved. Your loss.

So in your opinion, what am I looking for as a sign from god? Maybe I've seen a bunch and never thought of them that way. Go for it. I have a big bag.

I have no idea what you are looking for but then again I don't think you are looking at all.

So you have no clue. Why does that not surprise me?

 

[Mudda]

But you just did it to Islam.

Christianity has a very evil history. No matter how many good things a lie does it's still a lie and this lie is holding us back intellectually.

For example denying global warming and evolution is very Christian thing to do. Stupid

We are presently in an interglacial cycle. Our present temperature is well below the peak temperatures of previous interglacial cycles. Deny that.

But our planet shouldn't be heating up this fast. Which means that we're helping the warming.

Who says this is any different than previous interglacial cycles? Does that mean you concede that our present temperature is below previous interglacial cycles.

Science says that humans are influencing the warming of the planet. Or don't you believe in science today?

Science tells us they we have been cycling between glacial and interglacial cycles and that our present temperature is below the temperatures of previous interglacial cycles. What you are referring to are computer models.

No, science tells us that the earth's temperature has risen too quickly for it to be a natural event.

 

[hobelim]

Nope. Why do you mischaracterize people? I agreed Christianity plays a profound role but took issue with your statement that I even put in bold. Do you need giant red letters. I asked for said evidence, so far nothing. I have studied up on biblical matters for over twenty years so I'd love to see it.

I referred you to the evidence but you probably didn't read that any better than you did my other post. So it sort of follows that your 20-year study may possibly have been lacking.

More victory dancing. You can't bullshit everyone so easily. YOU PROVIDED NO PROOF OF JESUS.

I didn't attempt to. I did provide proof that Jesus, whether he lived or not, had a profound affect on humankind. And I also believe there is sufficient historical evidence to believe that such a man lived for those with the intelligence to see it - OR - the ability to study the evidence honestly and objectively. Those who study the evidence with no intent to learn anything or just because it is expected of them or who intend to declare it all bullshit of course will reach the conclusion they had to begin with.

I didn't dispute the influence of Christianity and said I didn't want to believe it wasn't true but I'm the one that can't read? I gave a few examples of why it wouldn't be true, the historians of the day for example. Jesus not writing anything down. Different language tells the story, Greek. But Jesus spoke Aramaic. Why didn't he speak Greek if that was the goal? No original works are extant so the whole story is 250 years minimum removed from the supposed events.

Jesus spoke Aramaic because he lived his entire life on Earth in a very small area in all Aramaic speaking communities. There are some first century manuscripts written In Aramaic but most of the late First Century and Second Century manuscripts were written in Latin or Greek. Most of the New Testament was written in classical Greek which was fairly universally understood throughout the Roman Empire.

The earliest intact manuscripts we have of New Testament material were the letters of Paul written mid First Century when many eye witnesses to First Century events were still around and far too early for any kind of mythology to have time to develop.

We do not have the original manuscripts of Plato and Aristotle either, but nobody questions that they existed or that the words attributed to them are made up. We have nothing from Cyrus of Persia or Alexander the Great but we are pretty sure they existed and had a profound influence on their part of the world at that time. It is widely believed that many of the ancient manuscripts were in the great library of Alexandria when it burned. It is possible that many of the original manuscripts of the Bible were also lost at that time.

Not to mention that the gospels openly record that Jesus was ridiculed, rejected and despised as a nutjob and unrepentant sinner and drunk who was ultimately executed as a common criminal of no account.

The obvious reason for lack of historical corroboration is that no one recording important things going on back then would have thought otherwise.


Not the type of person even worthy of a footnote.


The only reason the name of Jesus is known at all unlike every other first century drunk is because the people who knew him personally believed in him and knew that he wasn't crazy to claim to be the messiah after hearing him teach and seeing with their own eyes Jesus reveal things that had been kept secret since the foundation of the world.

 

[Foxfyre]

I referred you to the evidence but you probably didn't read that any better than you did my other post. So it sort of follows that your 20-year study may possibly have been lacking.

More victory dancing. You can't bullshit everyone so easily. YOU PROVIDED NO PROOF OF JESUS.

I didn't attempt to. I did provide proof that Jesus, whether he lived or not, had a profound affect on humankind. And I also believe there is sufficient historical evidence to believe that such a man lived for those with the intelligence to see it - OR - the ability to study the evidence honestly and objectively. Those who study the evidence with no intent to learn anything or just because it is expected of them or who intend to declare it all bullshit of course will reach the conclusion they had to begin with.

I didn't dispute the influence of Christianity and said I didn't want to believe it wasn't true but I'm the one that can't read? I gave a few examples of why it wouldn't be true, the historians of the day for example. Jesus not writing anything down. Different language tells the story, Greek. But Jesus spoke Aramaic. Why didn't he speak Greek if that was the goal? No original works are extant so the whole story is 250 years minimum removed from the supposed events.

Jesus spoke Aramaic because he lived his entire life on Earth in a very small area in all Aramaic speaking communities. There are some first century manuscripts written In Aramaic but most of the late First Century and Second Century manuscripts were written in Latin or Greek. Most of the New Testament was written in classical Greek which was fairly universally understood throughout the Roman Empire.

The earliest intact manuscripts we have of New Testament material were the letters of Paul written mid First Century when many eye witnesses to First Century events were still around and far too early for any kind of mythology to have time to develop.

We do not have the original manuscripts of Plato and Aristotle either, but nobody questions that they existed or that the words attributed to them are made up. We have nothing from Cyrus of Persia or Alexander the Great but we are pretty sure they existed and had a profound influence on their part of the world at that time. It is widely believed that many of the ancient manuscripts were in the great library of Alexandria when it burned. It is possible that many of the original manuscripts of the Bible were also lost at that time.

Not to mention that the gospels recorded that Jesus was ridiculed, rejected and despised as a nutjob and unrepentant sinner and drunk who was ultimately executed as a common criminal of no account.


The obvious reason for lack of historical corroboration is that no one recording important things going on back then would have thought otherwise.

Exactly. Nobody cared or thought about him as any more important than one more trouble maker. The Romans could have cared less. Certainly no notation of his existence needed to be made any more than the two thieves crucified beside him. The Pharisaic Jews and the Sadduccees didn't consider him any more important than one more heretic to be disposed of.

Writing was tedious and painstaking in those days so only the most important events or personalities were recorded at all.

The ONLY ones who were at all even interested in his life and death were those moved by his message and a few bright historians who were more curious about their times and the people in it than were the average people.

 

[sealybobo]

4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.

I agree, as a former pure agnostic I can tell you that you'll eventually realize there is some sort of higher power, assuming you're indeed a committed thinking man.

I'm very open to a higher power, of which there could very well be one. But as of right now, I see no actual proof. And neither do you.

You can't know that because you cannot know what BTM knows or has experienced. You can only speak for yourself when it comes to matters of faith and experience. You have no information or authority to tell him what he does and does not have as proof of anything.

My experience is proof that I saw my shadow on the sidewalk this morning. But I cannot prove that I was outside or saw my shadow to another living soul because nobody saw me outside this morning. Just because it is overcast on your street one block over, does not mean that the sun did not break through on mine. We should be very careful of dictating to somebody else what he or she is required to believe.

But you say you are open to the possibility. Would you be willing to put it to the test? Ask God to make himself known to you? And put absolutely no restrictions of any kind of when, how, or in what form he does that? This is an exceedingly difficult thing for most especially highly intelligent people to do. But it is worth the effort.

I am totally open to god contacting me, have been for quite a long time. I've said so many times on this board that my heart is open for the supreme being to contact me. So far nothing. Nada. Zip.
Proof isn't what you might think happened to you, proof is something tangible that can be proven scientifically.

The same experience that tells them God exists I don't think would prove anything to you or I.

And besides, if there is a God he doesn't visit you just like he doesn't visit dogs or sheep. What makes humans think we are special? If you throw away all the holy books that say he visited this creator might not be caring. Are you agnostic about heaven? Seems to me to be made up

 

[sealybobo]

The church was responsible for many wars, greed, power, torture, lighting people on fire... so ya, Jesus did have a big influence on western society.

Atheism and Islam and paganism have waged far more violence on the world's people than have small groups/sects of Christians or corrupt Popes who indeed did bad things. And the good that Christianity has done has outweighed the bad by a thousand fold. Those following man made religion no matter what its label are probably going to get it wrong though much may be harmless or even satisfying to those who practice it.

I don't excuse the politically motivated crusades or the Inquisitions or the Salem Witch Burnings or any other atrocities committed in the name of Christianity. But neither do I see any of those things as Christian acts but rather contrary to Christian teachings. To judge all of Christianity by those isolated and short lived acts or events is to dishonestly characterize Christianity as something it is not.

But you just did it to Islam.

Christianity has a very evil history. No matter how many good things a lie does it's still a lie and this lie is holding us back intellectually.

For example denying global warming and evolution is very Christian thing to do. Stupid

We are presently in an interglacial cycle. Our present temperature is well below the peak temperatures of previous interglacial cycles. Deny that.

But our planet shouldn't be heating up this fast. Which means that we're helping the warming.

Who says this is any different than previous interglacial cycles? Does that mean you concede that our present temperature is below previous interglacial cycles.

We are pumping too much pollution into the atmosphere now that India, mexico and china are all manufacturing and driving cars. We're in trouble

 

[BreezeWood]

4. Pure agnostic. It's the thinking person's position.

I agree, as a former pure agnostic I can tell you that you'll eventually realize there is some sort of higher power, assuming you're indeed a committed thinking man.

I'm very open to a higher power, of which there could very well be one. But as of right now, I see no actual proof. And neither do you.

You can't know that because you cannot know what BTM knows or has experienced. You can only speak for yourself when it comes to matters of faith and experience. You have no information or authority to tell him what he does and does not have as proof of anything.

My experience is proof that I saw my shadow on the sidewalk this morning. But I cannot prove that I was outside or saw my shadow to another living soul because nobody saw me outside this morning. Just because it is overcast on your street one block over, does not mean that the sun did not break through on mine. We should be very careful of dictating to somebody else what he or she is required to believe.

But you say you are open to the possibility. Would you be willing to put it to the test? Ask God to make himself known to you? And put absolutely no restrictions of any kind of when, how, or in what form he does that? This is an exceedingly difficult thing for most especially highly intelligent people to do. But it is worth the effort.

.

But you say you are open to the possibility. Would you be willing to put it to the test? Ask God to make himself known to you?

if what you say is true then follow your same instructions and ask the Almighty to speak not just to yourself but with someone with you for them to hear the same response ... this would be the proof Mudda could not refute. is there any irrefutable proof you have to offer.

I'm afraid ordering the Almighty to do anything is way beyond my pay grade. I however have experienced such confirmation myself, but in a way that would be incomprehensible to somebody who had never experienced it.

.

I'm afraid ordering the Almighty to do anything is way beyond my pay grade.

if what you say is true then follow your same instructions and ask the Almighty to speak not just to yourself but with someone with you for them to hear the same response ...

who said anything about ordering the Almighty ...

have you ever heard of more than one person hearing the same voice together, spoken in the open - has anyone heard the voice you say you hear while they were with you, is it audible.

 

[ding]

Atheism and Islam and paganism have waged far more violence on the world's people than have small groups/sects of Christians or corrupt Popes who indeed did bad things. And the good that Christianity has done has outweighed the bad by a thousand fold. Those following man made religion no matter what its label are probably going to get it wrong though much may be harmless or even satisfying to those who practice it.

I don't excuse the politically motivated crusades or the Inquisitions or the Salem Witch Burnings or any other atrocities committed in the name of Christianity. But neither do I see any of those things as Christian acts but rather contrary to Christian teachings. To judge all of Christianity by those isolated and short lived acts or events is to dishonestly characterize Christianity as something it is not.

But you just did it to Islam.

Christianity has a very evil history. No matter how many good things a lie does it's still a lie and this lie is holding us back intellectually.

For example denying global warming and evolution is very Christian thing to do. Stupid

We are presently in an interglacial cycle. Our present temperature is well below the peak temperatures of previous interglacial cycles. Deny that.

But our planet shouldn't be heating up this fast. Which means that we're helping the warming.

Who says this is any different than previous interglacial cycles? Does that mean you concede that our present temperature is below previous interglacial cycles.

We are pumping too much pollution into the atmosphere now that India, mexico and china are all manufacturing and driving cars. We're in trouble

Do you think that CO2 is pollution?

 

[Foxfyre]

I agree, as a former pure agnostic I can tell you that you'll eventually realize there is some sort of higher power, assuming you're indeed a committed thinking man.

I'm very open to a higher power, of which there could very well be one. But as of right now, I see no actual proof. And neither do you.

You can't know that because you cannot know what BTM knows or has experienced. You can only speak for yourself when it comes to matters of faith and experience. You have no information or authority to tell him what he does and does not have as proof of anything.

My experience is proof that I saw my shadow on the sidewalk this morning. But I cannot prove that I was outside or saw my shadow to another living soul because nobody saw me outside this morning. Just because it is overcast on your street one block over, does not mean that the sun did not break through on mine. We should be very careful of dictating to somebody else what he or she is required to believe.

But you say you are open to the possibility. Would you be willing to put it to the test? Ask God to make himself known to you? And put absolutely no restrictions of any kind of when, how, or in what form he does that? This is an exceedingly difficult thing for most especially highly intelligent people to do. But it is worth the effort.

.

But you say you are open to the possibility. Would you be willing to put it to the test? Ask God to make himself known to you?

if what you say is true then follow your same instructions and ask the Almighty to speak not just to yourself but with someone with you for them to hear the same response ... this would be the proof Mudda could not refute. is there any irrefutable proof you have to offer.

I'm afraid ordering the Almighty to do anything is way beyond my pay grade. I however have experienced such confirmation myself, but in a way that would be incomprehensible to somebody who had never experienced it.

.

I'm afraid ordering the Almighty to do anything is way beyond my pay grade.

if what you say is true then follow your same instructions and ask the Almighty to speak not just to yourself but with someone with you for them to hear the same response ...

who said anything about ordering the Almighty ...

have you ever heard of more than one person hearing the same voice together, spoken in the open - has anyone heard the voice you say you hear while they were with you, is it audible.

It is not audible at least it has never been to me. I cannot speak for others. It is an impression that I have no words to describe. It must be experienced.

 

[ding]

We are presently in an interglacial cycle. Our present temperature is well below the peak temperatures of previous interglacial cycles. Deny that.

But our planet shouldn't be heating up this fast. Which means that we're helping the warming.

Who says this is any different than previous interglacial cycles? Does that mean you concede that our present temperature is below previous interglacial cycles.

Science says that humans are influencing the warming of the planet. Or don't you believe in science today?

Science tells us they we have been cycling between glacial and interglacial cycles and that our present temperature is below the temperatures of previous interglacial cycles. What you are referring to are computer models.

No, science tells us that the earth's temperature has risen too quickly for it to be a natural event.

Really? How much resolution is in that data (i.e. how many data points per year)? How much resolution is there in the previous interglacial periods? And lastly, are you acknowledging that our present temperatures are below the peak temperatures of previous interglacial periods?

 

[ding]

The people talked and walked with Jesus and watched him perform miracles, and yet they didn't understand. They didn't believe. There are many miraculous things that happen to all of us and I just can't believe they are all due to pure chance. If God spoke to you right now would you believe it? Or would you think it was due to maybe mental illness or somebody's practical joke?

You see, you are placing demands on God before you will believe. That's not the best way to get acquainted with him.

God knows that in my heart, I'm simply the type of person who needs concrete proof to believe something. He chooses not to contact me. That's his call.

Problem solved. Your loss.

So in your opinion, what am I looking for as a sign from god? Maybe I've seen a bunch and never thought of them that way. Go for it. I have a big bag.

I have no idea what you are looking for but then again I don't think you are looking at all.

So you have no clue. Why does that not surprise me?

Maybe it doesn't surprise you because you really haven't been looking for God at all.

 

[BreezeWood]

I'm very open to a higher power, of which there could very well be one. But as of right now, I see no actual proof. And neither do you.

You can't know that because you cannot know what BTM knows or has experienced. You can only speak for yourself when it comes to matters of faith and experience. You have no information or authority to tell him what he does and does not have as proof of anything.

My experience is proof that I saw my shadow on the sidewalk this morning. But I cannot prove that I was outside or saw my shadow to another living soul because nobody saw me outside this morning. Just because it is overcast on your street one block over, does not mean that the sun did not break through on mine. We should be very careful of dictating to somebody else what he or she is required to believe.

But you say you are open to the possibility. Would you be willing to put it to the test? Ask God to make himself known to you? And put absolutely no restrictions of any kind of when, how, or in what form he does that? This is an exceedingly difficult thing for most especially highly intelligent people to do. But it is worth the effort.

.

But you say you are open to the possibility. Would you be willing to put it to the test? Ask God to make himself known to you?

if what you say is true then follow your same instructions and ask the Almighty to speak not just to yourself but with someone with you for them to hear the same response ... this would be the proof Mudda could not refute. is there any irrefutable proof you have to offer.

I'm afraid ordering the Almighty to do anything is way beyond my pay grade. I however have experienced such confirmation myself, but in a way that would be incomprehensible to somebody who had never experienced it.

.

I'm afraid ordering the Almighty to do anything is way beyond my pay grade.

if what you say is true then follow your same instructions and ask the Almighty to speak not just to yourself but with someone with you for them to hear the same response ...

who said anything about ordering the Almighty ...

have you ever heard of more than one person hearing the same voice together, spoken in the open - has anyone heard the voice you say you hear while they were with you, is it audible.

It is not audible at least it has never been to me. I cannot speak for others. It is an impression that I have no words to describe. It must be experienced.

.

It must be experienced.

that's not possible, have you reached the Apex of Knowledge, Triumphed Good vs Evil maybe they are angels you are hearing from ... the 4th century book is greater than any forbidden fruit, history is its witness.

 

[BreezeWood]

.
and what of the Almighty's Garden vs the asphalt jungle ...

they say 100% of the deforestation of s america is caused by 4th century christians.

 

[Foxfyre]

.
and what of the Almighty's Garden vs the asphalt jungle ...

they say 100% of the deforestation of s america is caused by 4th century christians.

Really? Who says that? So far as I know, no Christian had ever set foot in the Americas until the late 15th Century.

 

[sealybobo]

But you just did it to Islam.

Christianity has a very evil history. No matter how many good things a lie does it's still a lie and this lie is holding us back intellectually.

For example denying global warming and evolution is very Christian thing to do. Stupid

We are presently in an interglacial cycle. Our present temperature is well below the peak temperatures of previous interglacial cycles. Deny that.

But our planet shouldn't be heating up this fast. Which means that we're helping the warming.

Who says this is any different than previous interglacial cycles? Does that mean you concede that our present temperature is below previous interglacial cycles.

We are pumping too much pollution into the atmosphere now that India, mexico and china are all manufacturing and driving cars. We're in trouble

Do you think that CO2 is pollution?

I know what the right wing spin is. I have a global warming denier buddy at work. Co2, glabal warming, pollution, bottom line is what were doing ain't good. Even right wingers don't deny it anymore. They may say there's nothing we can do about it or that it's not that big a deal but only the most retarded still deny it altogether.

Co2 ya later