If atheists get accused of taking verses out of context, how do we know fundamentalists making those accusations aren’t doing the same as well?

[Lapidem]

You are right in a witness not being objective analysis. Most proof is not objective analysis, e.g., documents. Again, let's go back to walking in the woods and happening upon a book.

The book is proof. The book is evidence.

The objective analysis is not by the jury not by the evidence, which includes witness testimony.

Regarding the objective analysis of the book, the existence of the book, implies the existence of a writer.

Witnesses are evidence. Your own sources confirm it. A witness is not merely asserting their believe but what they experienced first hand. You are dismissing this moutain of evidence - as there are billions of witnesses - due to your bias. Witness testimony is accepted all the time as acceptable evidence. And friend, billions are credible witnesses. As am I.

I once was a humanist. Then I had a supernatural experience. There is no doubt about it. It was independently confirmed. It is proof. I am the proof. And there is no way around it. No way around it. And I am not alone. You are drowning in evidence. How do you explain denying the existence of what you are drowning in? How do you explain my experience?

You're repeating things we've covered multiple times in this thread. I've answered every one of the points raised there. I'm not going to entertain your continual cyclical repetition of the same fallacies.

 

[Lapidem]

Wrong. I probably understood Occam's Razor before you were born. What is a simpler explanation:

1. God created the universe?
2. There is an infinite number of universes, whose origins still cannot be explained?

3. Beings more advanced and intelligent than humans designed many of the life forms on Earth

Beings that are fallible - because many of the life forms are very far from perfect
Beings that are malevolent - because many of the life forms are terrible and wicked in the way they naturally hunt and exist
Beings that are indifferent - because they evidently left things to evolve in chaos and didn't care about the ultimate levels of suffering that would ensue.

Also you persist in using and abusing the term "God" as some blanket catch-all entity which remains intellectually dishonest. For the purposes of this thread/discussion when YOU refer to God it means the Christian concept of a God that is all-powerful, all-loving, all-knowing and all-present. Occam's Razor and everything we see around us demonstrates that no such God exists and that it is a falsehood peddled by the Churches as part of a psychological system of control for the weak-minded.

An entity, a "god", an energy, a life source COULD exist but it very clearly is not the Christian concept of God.

 

[bbyrd009]

It is truly rich that Atheist go on a Christian forum to deny God even exists - when we have eye witness testimony that not only did he send his son, he resurrected the man Jesus, which is proof and our guarentee of our future inheritance - to later cry about others demonstrating being right is more important. The unmitigated gall!

well he seemed plainly agnostic about it, whereas you purport to know, and i can only suggest once again that he is likely closer to truth and wisdom than you are there.

you do not have eyewitness testimony by any stretch of the imagination, for the simple reason that the eyewitness cannot be cross-examined

Yea, right! The 1st Biblical principle to get right is the Sh'ma, the most important commandment. You have to obey his commandments, talk about them all the time and put them on door frames. Atheists removed them from schools. You are as far away from adhering to the principles of the Bible as possible

well idk what a Sh’ma is, sounds like some religious Jewish thing? And tbh i prefer ppl who practice the commandments rather than preach about them anyway

HINT: You cannot love your God with all your heart, soul and strength if you only acknowledge he *might* exist.

and he who says that he knows anything, doesnt, Wrangler, and i am now once again not having a conversation, since you are not addressing the post at all see, i am just the latest victim who has been tagged for another Proclamation from on High. Address the point, if you will pls. If you even can, which i am now suspecting you cannot, at least in your present frame of mind, and tbh thats ok, ok
personally i never would have broached the subject of Spirit with a literalist Bible reader anyway
i mean you still think you are reading history, right? tells me all i need to know

So let me speak more plainly; if you insist that God exists despite the lack of objective evidence, imo you are waaay worse off, and most likely worse as a person, than any Samaritan (atheist), whom Jesus praised while you revile, bc he can change his mind, while you are a wolf in sheep’s clothing who cannot.

And it bears repeating—even to someone who currently cannot hear—that you have no objective evidence of God, nor does faith in Him require any, lest in not even be faith, which i guess you dont know anything about anyway, being as you still hold beliefs that are in reality Absolute Truths, that Must Be Protected at All Costs right

k, not reading the rest of your non-responsive sermonettes, and i wish you the best of luck in your journey to become an immortal, that you imagine is promoted by Scripture

No. I testify for the Defense of Yahweh, not against him

yes, i understand that that is what you think you are doing ok, but wadr you came here to teach, right, instead of learn, which going out in the way of the Seventy would reveal to you fwiw
so good luck with that, and cardboard dumpsters are great sleeping spots when it gets cold ok :)
how can you teach it when you havent even done it?

but i do have some Good News for you; imo you are just fine right where you are, right now…
as long as you get that that is probably not where you will end up being. Do you believe that your faith is now complete?

but i will tell you again that i at least want no part in any god that you can provide objective evidence for anyway; If someone tells you “here He is, right over here!” dont even bother going to look

 

[Romanov2488]

Denial. A witness is not appealing to subjective reasoning.

Yes it is.

 

[bbyrd009]

Denial. A witness is not appealing to subjective reasoning.

fine. then since your witness is not here for a cross, you can speak for him, go ahead and present your witnesses’ evidence, and i will cross examine you instead, how about that

but proceed at your own peril here ok; i will require that you actually address the cross, and not just be tagging me to take off on some new sermonette

now i have been invited to leave this forum, cannot even post as a Christian anymore, so wadr i am anxious to wrap this up ok. Be brief, be concise, present your evidence, and be prepared for a cross exam, ty

 

[bbyrd009]

believers, firmly under the law, sheesh already

 

[Romanov2488]

Again, there are tons of evidence. For instance, no response to 1/137 and many other fine tuning observations that imply a fine tuner.

Friend, denial is not just a river in Egypt.

“Imply” is not the same as “proves”. Again, you have a tendency to make arguments from ignorance. There’s also much disorder and chaos in the universe that negates “intelligent design”.

 

[bbyrd009]

“Imply” is not the same as “proves”. Again, you have a tendency to make arguments from ignorance. There’s also much disorder and chaos in the universe that negates “intelligent design”.

ah, but who defines “intelligent” there?
lol

 

[Romanov2488]

You are right in a witness not being objective analysis. Most proof is not objective analysis, e.g., documents. Again, let's go back to walking in the woods and happening upon a book.

The book is proof. The book is evidence.

The objective analysis is not by the jury not by the evidence, which includes witness testimony.

Regarding the objective analysis of the book, the existence of the book, implies the existence of a writer.

Witnesses are evidence. Your own sources confirm it. A witness is not merely asserting their believe but what they experienced first hand. You are dismissing this moutain of evidence - as there are billions of witnesses - due to your bias. Witness testimony is accepted all the time as acceptable evidence. And friend, billions are credible witnesses. As am I.

I once was a humanist. Then I had a supernatural experience. There is no doubt about it. It was independently confirmed. It is proof. I am the proof. And there is no way around it. No way around it. And I am not alone. You are drowning in evidence. How do you explain denying the existence of what you are drowning in? How do you explain my experience?

Witnesses are not evidence. A witness can be biased, have ulterior motives, not be all mentally there.

Supernatural experiences are also not evidence of God. They differ from person to person, can be brought on by drugs, mental illness, hypnosis, etc. I know you really want your god to be real but you one thing I’ve never seen you have is the humility to say “I don’t know”.

 

[Romanov2488]

Wrangler, how do we know you were “all mentally there” when you had your supernatural experience?

 

[Wrangler]

No you do not have any eye-witness testimony

Denial. I have BILLIONS of eye witness testimony.

 

[Wrangler]

An eye-witness is a real living person who can stand up in court and declare what they have seen, physically with their own eyes. You have no such person.

There are nearly 2 BILLION witnesses to Christ alive today. What are you talking about?

 

[Wrangler]

To escape the prison you are trapped in as I have said you need to first acquire some humility to be able to entertain the notion that you may have been lied to and duped in one or more ways.

I should believe your lie rather than the divine power from my own experience?

 

[Romanov2488]

Denial. I have BILLIONS of eye witness testimony.

There’s also billions of eye witness testimony of the prophet Muhammad.

 

[Wrangler]

The Bible is NOT literal in a great many areas.

Agreed.

However, our dumbed down society foolishly equates something that is fiction means it is false. For instance, the parables that Jesus taught were fiction, yet contain eternal truths. The best example being the Protocol Son. Some say it is the best story of all time.

 

[Wrangler]

You'll find the same in every mainstream religion.

No sir! Only the Christian faith has a living God, where people witnessed his Son's resurrection from the dead.

Other religions have mythologies. Christianity has a living God that people witnessed - and testify to this day. So, your "Bible is not literal" Strawman carries no weight. I am not saved because of the Bible. I am saved because I have been sealed by the Holy Spirit. This is my experience. This is my testimony. So, help me God.

 

[Wrangler]

If you believed a fraction of the nonsense you have spouted in this thread you'd believe that indoctrination wasn't necessary at all and that God would reveal himself to children when he is ready to do so.

There need not be one path to Christ.

 

[Wrangler]

They forcefully indoctrinate their kids, make them believe in God, make the pray, make them say Grace a the dinner table and so on. Clear to see the hypocrisy in this.

It is not hypocrisy or indoctrination to teach and train youth.

I do not want to "make" anyone believe. I want them to experience what I experienced and be convinced. Do you think it is a bad thing to express gratitude for the many blessing you have in life, including the food you are about to eat?

 

[Wrangler]

Genesis is NOT talking about the creation of the universe.

ROFLMAO

 

[Romanov2488]

No sir! Only the Christian faith has a living God, where people witnessed his Son's resurrection from the dead.

Other religions have mythologies. Christianity has a living God that people witnessed - and testify to this day. So, your "Bible is not literal" Strawman carries no weight. I am not saved because of the Bible. I am saved because I have been sealed by the Holy Spirit. This is my experience. This is my testimony. So, help me God.

We don’t know if those witnesses were all mentally there to begin with. This was long ago, when electricity didn’t even exist.