The existence of the United States is not required for information to kept.
.....unless all means of storage has been disintegrated in nuclear holocaust. I'm not banking for that though and the purpose for bringing up the point has been lost so I will not argue with you any more on this one.
What is noteworthy that and perhaps with an exception or two, none of the verifyible data from the biblical rendition is verified.
No kidding, it was two thousand years ago! Whose rendition can be really trusted without divine revelation? I know, remember Pete the camel-trader.....he wrote that book about Jesus......he was a pretty reputable guy wasn't he.....let's see, did he ever tell a lie.....I just can't quite remember.....it was two thousand years ago!!!
But seriously, there were reputable renditions, verified by church historians hundreds of years ago! And these are in the Bible! I don't have to prove the impact of the words contained in the gospels that have changed the entire world to an atheist. If the Bible is not your bag, we can talk science and philosophy.
Just remind me not to waste any time quoting you Bible!
And also of note, a body of information was purposely destroyed and surpressed that would have shed light on Christ because of the bias of the Early Church and developing theology.
The Catholic church was responsible for some of this. Also, many books were lost when the library of Alexandria was burned to the ground.
I have not seen any challange to the authenticity of the major documents - personal letters here and there of course but not the official documents.
Your lack of knowledge in the contestation of the authenticity of legal documents can hardly be used as a persuasive point.
I have none. Investigation in science is done on matters that do exist or are supposed to exist by hypothesis.
You have zero proof that God does not exist? Then do you admit that it is possible that he could exist?
Science deals with the "natural". God is supernatural and science can not observe or measure that.
God is both natural and supernatural. God is imbued into all creation. You cannot measure the universe with your minute capacity much less God!
But it does show (and not by intent) that the hypothetical biblical creation is bunk as a science..
That is because the Biblical story of creation has been grossly misinterpreted!
Yes it was - I don't think I've ever had greater joy. In medicine, don't you think that it is wonderful that 20% of those that take placebo's feel better with disappearing symptoms.
I have no doubt about the power of a placebo. But I do have doubt about a controlled study of "fake" surgery on a diagnosed problem - I base it on ethical concerns. Could you cite the study for us?
I'll dig it up for you. It is an amazing article.
Your premise that the body is an image of God needs to be proven before you can talk about the cause and effect. See, this is the point of why you have the burden of proof.
My bad. I forgot that you don't believe in the Bible. I'll have to tackle that point another way....
You do forget, however, that most scientific discoveries start with the observation of the effect and work their way backwards from there. The effect noticed here is that of humans who sometimes unexplainably achieve super-human types of feats. We must work our way backward from that thread....
Au contraire, it was a good analogy. And I have seen and felt the effects of the Holy Spirit. If you are convinced that the effects of the Holy Spirit are a placebo than I am sure you must have some tangible proof of this... gut feelings don't count.
What are the measurements that you've taken? - what are the units of measurement of whatever you are measuring? An effect must have a cause - causes can be measured
There are many effects that the universe has on the earth....yet you cannot measure the universe. It seems infinite from the scientific perspective. So here we have a cause that cannot be measured (besides you already said science can't deal with the super-natural). I'm not really sure what your point is here? You are trying to disprove the Holy Spirit based on an experience that you had which incidentally:
1) If your experience with the Holy Spirit was not legitimate that hardly disproves the existence of the Holy Spirit
2) If your experience with the Holy Spirit was real we have no argument here
The analogy is fine. It is the premise that makes the analogy weak as an indication of the reality of the Holy Spirit.
The Bible itself describes one of the effects of the Holy Spirit on the disciples in the upper chamber as a "mighty rushing wind". I hardly think that it is a stretch to use the wind as an analogy for something sharing similar descriptions.
As to my premise, I'm working backward from the effect again as any good scientist has done. My premise is that I have felt the Holy Spirit quicken me and fill me with love and life......
We believe in the same thing here. You name it "placebo" and I name it "Holy Spirit". Who cares what you name it, the effect is real and usually only happens among christians. You can call it the "Holy Placebo" if you want to........but I want more of it I can tell you that!
You're assuming that I meant "lot" as a type of destiny/fate. I don't believe in fate. But I do believe in destiny. Can you choose a different destiny? I believe so. I just think that some people choose lower destinies. They have a right to do this because of free choice. And I have the right to encourage them to do something else because of free choice.
Yes semantics seems to the major disagreement here.
You see, so many people believe in like ways but are divided over definitions. You probably believe more in God than you know....you just don't like the name "God" because it has been used and abused by so many people.....
The Bible contains a story about these people who worshipped God ignorantly! They didn't call Him "the God of Abraham", but it was the same thing nonetheless. And the Bible says they got the credit that they were worshipping the "Hebrew" God.
If your belief includes the sharing of true love, you are possibly closer to God than some christians.
But some christians will say "you can't make it to heaven by any name but the name of Jesus Christ!" How's that spelled? J_E _S_U _S.....Jesus.
So that's the only name? Jesus?
But I thought that His Hebrew name was "Y'shua".
That's the same thing?
What about all the other names that the Bible says Jesus has: the Lamb, Redeemer, Emanuel, Prince of Peace, Everlasting Father, etc.? Do those work too?
They do?!!!
Why does Jesus need all those other names???
Different charactaristics of Jesus that He uses!
So someone could call on any of the representations of Jesus and be saved?
What did Jesus claim was the greatest message of the commandments?
Love the Lord your God and love your neighbor as yourself!!
Jesus represented love!
The Bible does say that God is love....
And Jesus represented God....
You can be calling out for love and Jesus/Love might answer you?
There just might be hope for you love-filled atheists out there yet!!!
We may be totally bogged down by definitions, but the Spirit of the word is more important and powerful than the Letter of the law.....Jesus clearly taught this when He was busy breaking all of those Jewish laws!
Don't get angry with me, the Bible says all of this, it wasn't my idea.
Take care pah,
It was fun chatting with you.