Grassblade wrote:
> There's these guys stating they saw something. Apparently you don't believe
> them. Fine.

Oh, even if I did believe they saw it, that doesn't mean I believe their 
interpretation of what they saw. I saw David Copperfield make the statue 
of liberty disappear too.

 > Do you then disbelieve Chinese recording the 1054 supernova?

No, because we have modern-day scientific evidence of it. You can point 
a telescope and see the remains of the supernova where they said it 
happened, and calculate how long ago it happend, which turns out to be 
just about 1000 years.

 > Do you disbelieve historians of centuries past?

Of course I do. They may or may not be accurate, depending on their 
point of view. Do you think there are no histories with conflicting 
information in them?

What historians, *other* than biblical, do you base your entire life and 
view of the universe around?

Do you believe in Islam? How about Mormonism? If not, why not? Aren't 
those historical figures just as valid as the folks in the Bible?

How about Jason and the Argonauts? Do you believe in that? Why not?

>> to mind is "what, outside the Bible, should I look at to be convinced?"

> If there was an answer to that, the question would be meaningless, no?

I wouldn't think so.

>> Here's a question for you: What would it take you to convince you that
>> ESP is real? Would you consider yourself egotistical to ask to see an
>> actual ESP experiment that succeeded? Or is just reading Doctor Mesmer's
>> writing good enough for you? If you came across a book written in the
>> 1700s talking about how there was this one guy who could predict what
>> card was coming up next in the deck, would that convince you that ESP is
>> real? If not, why not?
> Depends if it was his deck or not, I guess. ;-)

I'll take that as meaning there's nothing that would convince you. 
Again, why not? Why do you believe biblical historians, and not someone 
from just a few hundred years ago?

>> Do you see how you're starting from the presumption that you know you're
>> right? Do you see how each response you make implies that the God I
>> would wind up believing in is the same one you believe in?

> As opposed to atheists, who just know there is no God?

Except I only "know" it in the scientific sense. I am confident, not 
faithful. I not only am confident your god doesn't exist, I'm confident 
that Shiva doesn't exist, that Zeus doesn't exist, etc.

>> That while I
>> should believe in your God without miracles, believing in someone else's
>> God even with miracles is wrong?

> You lost me there.

I've lost too much context to explain what I was getting at. Except that 
I'm pretty sure that you'd expect me to believe in your God even if some 
other God was offering actual physical evidence.

If not, then why kill witches?

>>>> A faith healer who can regenerate amputated limbs through the power of
>>>> touch.
>> Funny how nobody seems to argue with this one, isn't it?
>>
> If you insist. Does limb regeneration without a healer count? 

No. The point is that if God does it, I'll believe in that God. Which 
God should I believe in if it happens to an atheist? Indeed, that's even 
more evidence that those who believe in God are incorrect - why would he 
do a miracle for an unrepentant atheist?

>> The Vatican has a lightning rod on the top. Clearly, someone believes
>> prayer by the Pope is insufficient to prevent burning down St Paul's.
> Would that be St Peter?

Yep. My mistake.

>>> Churches are human institutions and are just
>>> as fallible and bound to the original sin.
>> Even the Mayan temples? The Pele shrines? See how you assume you're right?
> Looks to me he assumes he's right about as much as you do.

Right. I'm just pointing it out.

>> In any case, I thought baptism got rid of original sin or something? Is
>> the Pope really still being punished in this world for Original Sin? I
>> thought believing in Jesus and/or doing the right rituals got rid of
>> that original sin? That whole "Jesus died for our sins" isn't right? Is
>> there anything one can do to stop being punished for Adam's "sin"?
>>
> That is correct. For Christians baptism gets rid of original sin.

Then saying there's evil in the world that happens to Christians because 
of original sin doesn't make much sense.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     It's not feature creep if you put it
     at the end and adjust the release date.

Post a reply to this message