For my Christians Friends

Quote from stu:

In that respect a watch does not prove the existence of a watchmaker.

I don't expect you to believe anyone's experience about a watchmaker or a watch. So can you substantially prove there is a watchmaker, or do you simply have faith that there is one only because you see a watch?
Or is there something else everyone knows they can do, to prove the existence of both a watchmaker and a watch?

You are omitting the more important thing lack of evidence does not prove.


May I inquire are you ready yet to answer the question I put to you so many times before ?
More...


So a watch consisting of many pieces all of a sudden appears out of the blue sky ?


Like a seiko big bang theory ?
 
Quote from murray t turtle:

=================================
That is partial truth, for sure,smiley;
& sin means ''miss the mark, a target shooting term''

So we still need a savior/Lord Jesus;
surely you dont claim to hit the target all the time, do you?????

If you do that is another miss the mark-lying.

Thanks,smileyS:)
More...

ORIGINAL sin is different from plain vanilla sin. On original sin, see the apostle Paul and Augustine.
 
Quote from I am...:

The Kingdom is win-win. A system of win-lose is not rational. To gain a win-lose system, you must *lose* the win-win system because these systems are incompatible.

Jesus
More...
In your makebelieve scenario you call The Kingdom, you only have win-win. In mine, you have win-win+1.
According to what you say , a system of win-win is not now rational. To gain a win-win you must *lose* the win-win+1 system "because these systems are incompatible."

Or do you not follow your own reasoning?

stu
 
Quote from volente_00:
You stu

The stars will be out tonight.
when I awake in the morning and do not see them does that mean they do not exist ?
More...
Well? Does it?

Quote from volente_00:

So a watch consisting of many pieces all of a sudden appears out of the blue sky ?
Like a seiko big bang theory ?
More...
Well? Does it?


Let me guess. You might say no and no if you ever do allow yourself to answer any questions at all
But according to you, that understanding could not come from another's writings.

Science does not take stuff at face value. Science tests and re-tests through the only method which , even when you use only a fragment of its process , allows yourself to pose questions and confirm answers on stars and watches.

It's the Scientific Method available to everyone and it's why you would choose it to substantiate a road map and a satnav against a Bible to cross the desert. Even though for some reason you won't admit it.

Then why would you believe or have faith in another's writings from an old folk lore story book called the Bible anyway.
 
Quote from Turok:

OMG Murray......

http://www.nypost.com/seven/11092007/tv/did_history_channel_find_big_foot__713410.htm

Even the group that did the 'research' (and I do use that term loosely) doesn't claim to have determined bigfoot's existence. They say (and it's their quote) "it's up to the viewers". ROFLAO!!

Tell me this Oh shelled one -- without a conclusive specimen, what would one (anyone) compare a dna sample against to determine if a visitor was Bigfoot or say Smallfoot or Mediumfoot or Bigscam for that matter? ???

You....."let there be light" .

Next time you come out of your shell and say that I proved your point, actually present something that proves it.

JB
More...
=======================
You quote me a NY newspaper......,Turok;
thats not the exact evidence i gave you.Told you they[History satellite TV] proved it with bloody dna evidence off a porch ....

Also gave you exact evidence of footprint they call them;
satillite TV netwrok''footprints ''named Daystar, TBN,
and add Sky Angel Network-more big footprint evidence for Lord that is,.

Sorry,JB, i dont have time to research your medium footprint question, comment on that later.

You may or may not be aware of it''smallfoot''or medium foot human;
bigfoot ape member is not the same dna .LOLSorry if you chose not to be aware of that ; but thats is your choice.
===========================================

Listen i dont know the answer to your medium foot answer;
we were talking about big foot,small foot,science , Lord & big satellite footprint.

:p
 
Quote from smilingsynic:

ORIGINAL sin is different from plain vanilla sin. On original sin, see the apostle Paul and Augustine.
More...
=====================
Exactly, smiley, you hit the target center on that;
& original sin like plain vanilla sin , both miss the mark.

As you say, smilingS, they are different.

Mr. Turok gave me some newspaper evidence of ''bigfoot'' Think the ''2 am stone throw back in the dark '' proves nothing & thats not the evidence i gave you Mr Turok. Hovever at least they admitted it was 2 am in the dark.So really no eyewitnesses there @2 am.
Resurrection of Jesus Christ,compared, had over 500 eyewitnesses in Israel;
eyewitnesses friends & eyewitnesses enemies.

But they admitted the ''irregular dna evidence matched a primate.'' Strange indeed some one would focus on ''up to viewers'' When even the newspaper said''irregular dna evidence matched a primate''.

Thanks Turok, i also saw Ben Stein's movie ad /warning about some liking intelligence expelled from science.


:cool:
 
Quote from murray t turtle:

=======================
You quote me a NY newspaper......,Turok;
thats not the exact evidence i gave you.Told you they[History satellite TV] proved it with bloody dna evidence off a porch ....

Also gave you exact evidence of footprint they call them;
satillite TV netwrok''footprints ''named Daystar, TBN,
and add Sky Angel Network-more big footprint evidence for Lord that is,.

Sorry,JB, i dont have time to research your medium footprint question, comment on that later.

You may or may not be aware of it''smallfoot''or medium foot human;
bigfoot ape member is not the same dna .LOLSorry if you chose not to be aware of that ; but thats is your choice.
===========================================

Listen i dont know the answer to your medium foot answer;
we were talking about big foot,small foot,science , Lord & big satellite footprint.

:p
More...
scientist= i found no dna
expidetion member= i think i found dna

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ijrC9W1jVo&feature=related
 
Science is the theoretical explanation of phenomena.




Theory is an assumption based on limited information or knowledge.




Assumption is something taken for granted or accepted as true without proof.






So an atheist says one should believe in theories based on assumptions that are not proven ?





Sounds the same as believing in God to me




















:confused:
 
Is there a such thing as a blind atheist ?


If one is born blind, and God was to be proven then would the blind atheist still be an atheist ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top