Only a REAL FOOL would claim there is no God! Man creates awesome skyscrapers, fake hearts, tunnels, vehicles etc.. If we are very imperfect then what more can God create THE UNIVERSE! You must accept Jesus Christ as your Savior to receive eternal rest in heaven! Simple! John 3:16 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him! Repent & accept Jesus Christ! Jesus Christ or HELL?!? Visit cbn. com
@Claymatt52 Although that is obviously a utterly stupid and erroneous assumption, even in context you are incorrect showing, once again, that you lot never ever really think things trough when you say something. If Hitch has indeed gone to hell, he obviously found out via the EASY way! Sheesh...
How can creatards watch this and not go hide under a rock? It amazes me that in the face of all of this - creatards will still believe in the bullshit :-)
Exactly right. I believe I said something similar: I can believe all I want that I can shoot three pointers well. I can believe it down to my TOES. But when I get into three point land, rarely if ever playing basketball, a swish is not on the agenda. If I practice, I will get at least a little better. But NOT because I believed in myself, but because I practiced. The belief would've led to the thing that'd improve my skill-practice. By itself, does nothing one way or another.
@RakeeshJ4 As I said before, I know that belief at any given moment will not necessarily make a significant difference. The mindset you have while you practice affects your progress. That's what I was trying to tell you. A positive mindset means that you will progress faster. You should know by now that I was not saying that belief on its own will make you good at something. Please read my comments carefully. Anyways, let's stop here and just leave it at respecting each other's opinions.
-my disbelief doesn't impact my ability to learn about it. I've asked you to offer me some real, testable evidence for astral projection. In fact my disbelief ENCOURAGES me to learn about it: one of the benefits of skepticism. If I didn't disbelieve, I wouldn't be challenging the belief's advocates to prove it. If true, astral projection is made MORE authentic a belief by my challenge, not less. It is only the things which aren't, in fact, true that demand you believe them w/o testing.
@RakeeshJ4 I said that your disbelief is affecting your willingness to learn about it, not your ability. It's something that you have to plunge into to find out more about, assuming that you don't find an astral projector to do an experiment with. If your disbelief is encouraging you to learn more about it, then do your own research rather than continuing our conversation. There is no direct proof for me to give you. Unfortunately, I can only tell you how to get the proof.
-I can point out how stupid and naive a belief it is, how much it frees you of personal responsibility to the world (as all conspiracy theories of this sort do), and how unsupported by evidence this theory is.
Not unlike astral projection: you can't do it, alright. You clearly think you've seen it done, then. We can perform the experiment with one of those people who is capable, if you can refer them. It would be just as straightforward: let us find an astral projector, and TEST IT.--
@RakeeshJ4 How is it stupid and naive to believe it's true? It's actually stupid and naive to believe otherwise. Also, it does not free you of personal responsibility to the world. It does the opposite, so you're making no sense. This as well as many other conspiracies are supported by a lot of evidence, so please stop trying to say otherwise. You cannot see AP done since it is a spiritual experience. You have to find an astral projector yourself or do it yourself. We've went over that already.
A video doesn't prove anything, though being called an ignorant fool by an advocate for astral projection is interesting! The claims offered in the video might prove something, except they've all been thoroughly debunked by objective investigators-not just government investigators. That the fire wouldn't have been hot enough, that there was some hidden explosive, that the planes should've responded faster or slower-it's all nonsense, and while I can't compell you to change your mind-
@RakeeshJ4 Yes, a video does prove something, and there are many to prove that 9/11 was an inside job. You can see me calling you an ignorant fool as interesting if you wish, but that's not a bad thing since astral projection is real, not just some fantasy as you would like to believe. Nothing in those videos have been debunked. They are all true, and every "objective" investigator can forget about proving otherwise. The fact that you call it all nonsense shows how badly you've been brainwashed.
So, since we've established my disbelief shouldn't impact your ability to astral project, let's just test it. Simple. Hell, I'd even accept a video of you standing behind a screen, throwing some dice onto a fully recorded table in a room I can see all of, and then without stepping past the screen telling me what the dice say.
You won't, of course, do this-which would be the most simplistic way to verify astral projection. You won't because you CAN'T. Because it can't be done.
@RakeeshJ4 Your disbelief does affect it to a certain extent. First, it's preventing you from even learning more about it and practicing it. Second, even if you did try, staying in that mindset would hinder your progress. I'm not going to post a video. We went over this. You either do it yourself or find an astral projector, or you wait for me to learn how. It's better that you yourself find evidence. I can't do it now, but astral projection is real. Your ignorance is to be pitied.
My beliefs have an impact on the outcome of my actions. What they DON"T impact is your ability or inability to astral project. It can be tested with a simple experiment, independent of my disbelief. The more likely I believe in something, generally, will happen has NO impact on whether it does. My belief that I can, for example, shoot a free throw might-but all the belief in the world won't make me good at it if I've never picked up a basketball before.
@RakeeshJ4 You just gave me the logical highground by failing to admit that 9/11 was an inside job. Also, Christianity as a whole cannot be done. It is a set of ideas. Astral projection can be done. Also, when it comes to your personal efforts in trying to do astral projection, your beliefs DO have an effect. As I said before, the more you believe in something, the more likely you are to do it. It's simple. I never said that your belief alone allows you to do something well. Read CAREFULLY.
@nar3sas I tried to stay away, but I couldn't. :) I'm not gonna argue about astral projection(or 9/11 for that matter), 'cause I doubt we'll see eye to eye on that anytime soon. With regards to belief, I agree that your beliefs can affect the outcome i.e. the succes rate, if you will, of a given action/attempt. However, what belief can't impact, is the actual capability you have. If you want to run 100 meters in 10 secs flat, you either can or you can't.
@SanDanielDK I understand. Sometimes people's opinions conflict so much with yours that you can't help but give yours. I think I know what you mean. At a given moment, you either can or can't do something, but belief can help you in the long run. I wasn't saying that belief alone will give you the ability to do something. I think that combined with practice will help you greatly though. When you practice, you should stay in the mindset that you will be able to do what you're attempting.
@nar3sas I think, without going into specifics, that where you and I part ways is how we evaluate the validity of any given claim. I think that's mainly due to the difference in the "tools", if you will, we use. For instance, to be fair, I checked out one of your 9/11 videos and, on the face of it, I can definitely see the appeal. But once you look into the counterarguments, that appeal falters(at least for me). I'm only interested in the truth; be that a comforting or ugly one.
@SanDanielDK You're right, and your way of evaluating the validity of claims seems to be lacking. Watch this /watch?v=K9mbotpeuJM. Do you want to be like the Fox idiot, or do you want to be the guy questiong things and knowing the truth? My 9/11 videos not only have appeal but are completely true. One of the buildings fell at free fall speed. That should be enough for you, so you have no excuse to be swayed by the counterarguments. Look at the facts carefully, and you'll see that I'm right.
@nar3sas I'm not being swayed by anything, that's implying that I made up my mind before hearing the counterarguments. I don't work like you, I don't make up my mind based solely on one side of the argument. I look at all the available evidence from both sides and then base my conclusion on that. I doubt you have read the NSIT or the 9/11 commission report in full, as I have. 9/11 was an utter failure by an incompetent administration who were completely caught off guard.
@SanDanielDK I understand what you mean by your first statement, but I'm sure that you did make up your mind before seeing the counterargument. It's subconsciously done even if you tell yourself you haven't. I don't see why I have to see the counterargument when it is all government-based and found to be contradictory to the facts. There is clear proof that it was an inside job, and that should be enough. The NSIT and 9/11 commission report are both crap. The government (liars) made those up.
@nar3sas This is where the intellectual dishonesty comes into play. You've made sure that your claims can never be refuted. You haven't even read the reports you're arguing against. If anyone offers any kind of counterargument, you're gonna go "he's a plant", "it's the government", "can't be trusted", so that you don't have to offer an argument. "I don't see why I have to see the counterargument" says it all. Yet you accuse others of being closeminded, truly hypocrisy at its finest.
@SanDanielDK I don't see it as intellectual dishonesty since I'm arguing against the government's explanation, which I'm sure is not true. I am sure that my "claims" cannot be refuted. I'll listen to any counterargument, but there are none that can show that 9/11 was not an inside job. Everything points to the fact that it was. I have been and still am open-minded, even if you think I'm being hypocritical. If you have any counterargument, I'll listen for the sake of open-mindedness.
@nar3sas Here's the thing you don't seem to understand. Even if I grant you, that there are things that, by the look of it, definitely seems strange, that's still only a fraction of the evidence of what transpired that day. So the ones, like myself, who do not see the evidence of a conspirary are still supported by 99,98% of the evidence. Now, if you wanna look at this scientifically, I suggest you apply Occam's razor.
@SanDanielDK I understand completely, but you don't seem to understand. There were a lot of strange things that happened that clearly show that it was all an inside job. There is more than enough evidence. Plus, even if you don't want to believe that the government placed bombs in the buildings, they at least allowed it to happen. It was predicted well before it happened, and Osama (a CIA agent) was working with the government. Your "99.98%" evidence is nonsense. I've shown that I'm right.
@nar3sas There were definitely a lot of things happening that day, whether they were strange or not is open to interpretation. You've been brainwashed into not considering any kind of counterargument to what you've seen on youtube and dismiss it out of hand. I think that's a shame. You're clearly a wellspoken, eloquent and intelligent individual. If only you'd spend some of that energy on the actual atrocities taking place in the world, you might very well help make it a better place.
@SanDanielDK I'm sure they were objectively strange, not subjectively as you believe. Also, *I* have been brainwashed? I definitely haven't been. I've been shown the truth, which has exposed the counterarguments for what they are, and they would be lies created by the government and supported by brainwashed people. Thank you for the compliment, but I have been spending energy on the actual atrocities taking place in the world for years, and I have made the world a better place.
@SanDanielDK When I was in Lebanon, I was told that collecting a certain amount of bottle caps (500 or 1000) would help make one wheelchair. I collected *thousands* of caps on my own. Also, despite not knowing for sure if I would ever find a recycling bin in Lebanon, I collected thousands of bottles and other recyclable materials on my own, and I eventually found one recycling bin. At a university there called Lebanese American University, I made a petition for a designated area for smokers.
@SanDanielDK I collected 405 signatures in 3 days, and I didn't just leave it at that. I wanted to know for sure that my petition went to the right person and that it was being acted upon. I would always tell people who were smoking indoors to stop, and it would usually work out. Eventually, restrictions on smoking on campus were put in place after I left, so I succeeded. I play a game on facebook called WeTopia, which helps actual children as you progress, so you should play it.
@SanDanielDK I also go to thehungersite dot c-om each day to click for each of the 8 categories, and I've been doing that for a very long time, so I've made a significant difference through that. I am trying to fight overpopulation by informing people. I am trying to fight the NWO, which is the hugest problem facing the world, by informing people. As I've been trying to tell you, 9/11 was one of their many planned events. Watch these /watch?v=MKjyCz62Lr0 and /watch?v=ssuAMNas1us.
@SanDanielDK Even if you don't believe that 9/11 was an inside job, the Illuminati and their plan for a NWO are real. I'm sure you'll agree with me on that. Do your own research, and you'll see the truth about what they've been doing and what they plan to do. The best thing to do now is inform others. The more people that know about their plan, the more of a chance we'll have of stopping them. We'll definitely make the world a better place by doing that.
Well there you go. It was an inside job whether the means by which you claim it was an inside job actually took place or not. It's an inside job because it was an inside job-you don't actually have to be able to point to some piece of evidence that SHOWS it-you just know. My point all along. If you knew believing in something just because lots of people believe it was foolish, you wouldn't have tried to bring it up to suppoort astral projection. And people DO think Chr. can be 'done'.
@RakeeshJ4 I'm clearly dealing with an ignorant fool who doesn't know how to read. I gave you one video that proves why it was an inside job. If you need to, go look for more. It's not that hard. Here's another one since you're apparently not smart enough to look for more yourself /watch?v=ezIU6ZxYU3A. You can't possibly refute the fact unless you wish to continue arguing for the sake of arguing. Also, I did not bring it up to support AP. I was testing you, and you failed.
But of course I suspect you won't. 'Worldliness' makes it not work or something, I suspect. Here's a free tip: actual phenomenon work regardless of what some total stranger thinks.
@RakeeshJ4 As you probably know, your beliefs have an effect on the outcomes in your life. The more you believe in something, the more likely it is to happen. The less you do, the less likely it is to happen. So wordliness can be problematic if you keep that with you while you're practicing. The more you believe, the faster you will progress. I mostly see it as a problem though since it prevents people from accepting the possibility of astral projection and trying it. Your tip is obvious.
As for unicorns and fairies, YOU were the one who tried to say that if it weren't real, there wouldn't be so many people believing in it. That's a stupid, faulty reason to believe in something. I gave an example why. I've also explained why you shouldn't believe it. If you can actually do it yourself, or know someone who can, contact me and we'll conduct a quick experiment right now. I could take down some numbers and scan them, saving the image; you tell me the # on screen.
@RakeeshJ4 How many people actually believe in unicorns and fairies aside from some children? Few people. The number of people that believe in astral projection, however, is somewhere in the millions, and it includes children as well as adults. It is a real phenomenon, and it is something you DO. I know that believing in something just because many others do is stupid. Christianity would be an example, but Christianity cannot be *done*. Astral projection IS something that can be done.
@RakeeshJ4 So as you can see, there is a difference between believing in something that is simply an idea and believing in something that can actually be applied. I will contact you once I gain the ability to do it or once I find someone else who can do it, but don't wait for me. You can try to learn it yourself or find some astral projector. If not, you'll just have to wait for me, but it would be more reliable for you to get your own evidence. I'm sure you can agree with me on that.
OK, now I'm not sure whether you're messing with me or not. If you are, good one I guess? If not, then it's clear you ARE a knucklehead. There isn't a facet of Truther claims that hasn't been thoroughly debunked more than once-temperature, fuel, building strength, occupants of building, so on and so forth. It's nonsense but if you believe it at this point there's no persuading you, most likely.
Here's the thing: if astral projection were a real phenomena, the 'worldly' would be happy!
@RakeeshJ4 I'm not messing around with you. It would seem that you are messing around with me and that YOU would be the knucklehead as you have been this whole time. I know that our "truther" claims have been "debunked". That's been done by the government (consistent liars) and brainwashed people like you. It WAS an inside job whether there really were controlled detonators or not. Osama was a CIA agent working with the U.S., so it WAS planned. Worldliness keeps people from believing in AP.
Now, you can either offer something substantive-something peer reviewed, for example-on the existence of astral projection, or I'll simply ignore you. If it exists, it's not something 'worldliness' would impede-that is only a reason to *continue*believing in it in the face of lack of real evidence. People would LOVE to believe in it, if it had actually happened anywhere. It would be very useful and special. The reason 'worldliness' stops people believing is that it's a fraud.
@RakeeshJ4 You can ignore me if you want, but that does not change the fact that astral projection is real. I gave you one video which you can use to become more informed about it and start doing it, and it's your choice as to whether you're going to be open enough to watch it and apply the information or not. There are many more videos which you can watch as well as articles which you can read to learn more about it. Wordliness does impede a lot of people. There is real evidence as I told you.
@RakeeshJ4 The fact that the people who claim to have the ability to do it give methods for inducing it and talk about the benefits of doing it means that it must be real. There are actual techniques like the rope method of induction. Look it up. It's not something that happens "anywhere" as if it can be seen in our physical world. It takes place in what is called the astral world. It is not a fraud, and it IS very useful and special. In the end, it's your choice to believe or not.
Wait, I should believe it because lots of other people have posted videos and 'articles' (not one of which appears in a modern, credible scientific magazine, btw) about it?
Let's list some of the other things you must believe in by this standard as well: unicorns, fairies, lucky numbers, horoscopes, racism, ghosts, telekinesis, Nostradomus, the 9/11 conspiracy, the Jewish world conspiracy...the list goes on. A bunch of credulous knuckleheads online claiming it works isn't evidence. Cont
@RakeeshJ4 Well, I'm not saying you should believe in it completely without having your own evidence. Even relying on a "credible" scientific magazine for information about it would be unreliable. Like I told you, you need to either know an astral projector or do it yourself. Now, it's time to point out flaws in your examples. Unicorns and fairies are out of the question since there is nothing supporting their existence. Lucky numbers and racism have nothing to do with this.
@RakeeshJ4 I'll agree with you about horoscopes being meaningless. Ghosts and spirits are real, but they are not encountered by everyone. Watch this /watch?v=SpnVmEiCamk. Telekinesis is real, but it takes a very long time to master, which is why people are skeptical of it. There happen to be different kinesis kinds like pyrokinesis, electrokinesis, and hydrokinesis. Watch this /watch?v=ThZnAeIS-vk. It is well-known that many of Nostradamus' predictions came true. Watch this /watch?v=fkmu0sIXEFE.
@RakeeshJ4 I'll agree with you about horoscopes being meaningless. Ghosts and spirits are real, but they are not encountered by everyone. Watch this /watch?v=SpnVmEiCamk. Telekinesis is real, but it takes a very long time to master, which is why people are skeptical of it. There happen to be different kinesis kinds like pyrokinesis, electrokinesis, and hydrokinesis. Watch this /watch?v=ThZnAeIS-vk. It is well-known that many of Nostradamus' predictions came true. Watch this /watch?v=fkmu0sIXEFE.
@RakeeshJ4 The 9/11 conspiracy is a fact. It WAS an inside job. Watch this /watch?v=mB3gwgBVUyw. There are many other videos that make that fact clear. About the Jewish world conspiracy, I believe you're referring to the NWO which will be established by the Illuminati. This is very real. It should be a well-known fact by now. Watch this /watch?v=5GOfu1M3inY. This is one of many videos explaining what their plan is. These people are not a bunch of credulous "knuckleheads". Do some research.
Proof is not 'unavailable to everyone' if it is, in fact, proof. No one, anywhere, has ever done a double-blind properly run experiment to attempt to disprove the idea of astral projection. If they had, it would be world famous and you could send me a link to it now. Telling ms it can be done doesn't serve as proof or even evidence.
@RakeeshJ4 Yes, that is the case with astral projection. The only way for you to KNOW that it is real is for you to do a simple experiment with an astral projector (not likely that you will find one) or to do it yourself (will take some time to actually do). The things I put in parantheses are important. It's not world famous because so many people are worldly, lacking the open-mindedness needed to accept our spiritual reality. This as far as a conversation about astral projection can go.
@RakeeshJ4 If you would like to go further into the subject, do your own research and watch some videos. Here's a video for you /watch?v=E97fKPJm0U4. Practice what the guy tells you, and you should eventually do it. As I've said before in previous comments, you wouldn't have all of these people posting articles and videos about astral projection if it wasn't an actual concept. Do it yourself, and you'll have your personal proof. It's not that hard to understand.
There is not proof of astral projection. You cannot claim to believe in the scientific method with its reliance on skepticism and trial and verification and then claim there is proof of such a thing. Who has ever done it in front of others, and performed actions or learned information that couldn't have been known to them unless they projected? Who verified that it happened? There is no proof of astral projection.
@RakeeshJ4 There is proof, but it's not available readily or for everyone. There are two ways to get proof as I mentioned below. One is to do the experiment I mentioned in which you have an astral projector astral project to tell you about something that he or she could not see normally once that person is back in his or her body. The second one is that you practice until you do it yourself. It has been proven, but you would need to know an astral projector or do it yourself. It's that simple.
Spot-on! But, the operative words were "Thinking Person", and Christians can't think for themselves, because that's all been done for them, from generation-to-generation; little programmed robots prepared to do whatever they're told, because they're too stupid to think for themselves. And, why would a perfect being, akin to an apparently consummate craftsman, make something as flawed as us...and then banish us to hell for being flawed in the first place? Honestly, what sick fuck would do that?
@Bre4kb0t - I am not sure about enlightening such a wise man, for a start he is enlightened already in my and many peoples views. Secondly, there is no afterlife or atonement so no chance of that happening neither. We die, we rot, our bodies get recycled, end of....
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexuality and homosexuality. Even non-religious people know this.
The homosexual agenda is not good for anyone, including those who consider themselves "gay".
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have successfuly framed themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
No miracles exist? Well, the way we came into existence, as according to the athiestic viewpoint, there are infinite odds against our being here in the result of an accident. If athiesm were true, then our existence and intelligence would be a still be a miracle, Designer or not.
@UnkownSoldier100 If a miracle is defined as "something inexplicable by the laws of nature and thus explained in supernatural terms," it is directly related to the belief in a supernatural being or force. I tend to use the word "probability" to discuss our existence. We had a very low probability of existing here. Does that agree with your view.
@UnkownSoldier100 No, because the definition of a miracle is an event that is impossible, happening. The concept you speak of is obviously not important, thus not a miracle. Get a grip.
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
"Wouldnt it be nice if we just believed everything we saw and read?"
I didn't say I believed it. The evidence may turn out to be bogus; I'm not in a position to be able to verify it. I just think it shouldn't be ruled out yet.
I love this guy. I want to share something with him. Do a YouTube search on "Forbidden Archeology". It may turn out that we're being lied to about how long homo sapiens has been on the earth too.
@Cosmored save me the time and cite the sources. Then I'll do a search and I'll let you know if its credible and honest. Wouldnt it be nice if we just believed everything we saw and read? I may think the same crazy things as a young earth advocate in this case.
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
Ha ha, Christians believe in zombies, fucking idiots. The Hitch destroys with logic, wit, common sense and down right brilliance. God is dying and i'm happy with that, just imagine a world without religion! The world would without doubt would be a much better place for all. As the Hitche's book says, "religion poisons everything", never a truer word spoken.
@SirGrowalott Christians don't believe in zombies and are not idiots. I agree about Hitchens being logical and brilliant, but at least he's respectful. Try being the same. How can you say God is dying when you don't believe He exists? A world without religion might be much worse than you would think. You never know. Watch the "Turek vs. Hitchens" debate. Turek says so clearly that everything poisons religion, not the other way around. I also hope Hitchens beats his cancer and recovers soon. :)
@SirGrowalott Christians don't believe in zombies and are not idiots. I agree about Hitchens being logical and brilliant, but at least he's respectful. Try being the same. How can you say God is dying when you don't believe He exists? A world without religion might be much worse than you would think. You never know. Watch the "Turek vs. Hitchens" debate. Turek says so clearly that everything poisons religion, not the other way around. I also hope Hitchens beats his cancer and recovers soon. :)
@nar3sas Christians believe in a savior that rose from the dead (the only requisite of being a zombie) and that upon Jesus' crucifixion, "And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose." There are other instances, but these are the main ones. This is what we refer to when we say "zombies."
The Turek/Hitchens debate was nothing more than the same old cosmological, moral, ontological arguments that go in circles.
@EpicPhalosophy Well, Jesus and the saints came to back to life in the same condition. There was no brain or bodily difference. They were the same, so I don't see how they're zombies. I don't think coming back from the dead alone makes you a zombie. I get what you're saying about the Turek/Hitchens debate, but they were debating the existence of God. It wasn't about following the Bible and Christian teachings. You're right about it going in circles. You can't end a debate like that.
@nar3sas Any person (other than those who belong to one of the three great monotheisms) is astounded to hear that religion claims things like that. Saints came back from the dead?? And the Bible doesn't even MENTION what they said?? The Bible doesn't say what condition they were in- you completely took a guess there. It isn't specific in any detail about the event.
Turek tried to argue the (deistic) existence of God, but he always fell back on his own theism.
@EpicPhalosophy I myself don't remember hearing about the saints coming back to life, but I know that Jesus did, and I know that he came back to life in perfect condition (aside from the holes in his hands and feet). Considering there are limits to my knowledge about this, I'll have to read the whole Bible to be fit to discuss this subject with anyone else. I'll check out the debate between Turek and Hitchens again to see what you meant by him falling back on his own theism.
@nar3sas Matthew 27:50-53. You haven't heard about it because it's absolutely ridiculous. It seems that resurrections were somewhat of a banality at the time (to use the words of Christopher Hitchens.) Christians often claim "eye-witness accounts" of the events of the crucifixion and resurrection are some of the best evidence, yet none of these witnesses bothered to include what the saints (who just rose the dead) told them?? It's one of the many glaring gaps in the story, if you ask me.
@EpicPhalosophy Well, note that it said many holy people. It could have been hundreds, so the people who wrote the Bible were not going to take the time to mention what each one said. You could call it a banality, but he only resurrected 3 people prior to that with that being the last time. These were good people He resurrected. You could say there's a gap, but what would they have said? They must have been surprised at first and continued normally after that.
@nar3sas Literally everything you just said was a guess. Nothing you said has any scriptural basis.
What would they have said? What does it matter? If I saw someone that I knew had died, and saw them come back to life, I'd write down WHATEVER they said.
"people who wrote the Bible were not going to take the time to mention what each one said" Except that they did not even mention what a single one of them said. So what was the point of the whole thing?
@EpicPhalosophy Well, they mentioned what a lot of people said in the Bible. Why does it matter if these holy people said anything or not, considering their number? Would that support what you said about zombies in any way? No. They would not have said anything of great importance anyways, considering that everyone heard everything that needed to be said from Jesus. The point was to show that He is omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent as God is. It was to show that He is God.
@nar3sas Raising an unknown number of holy people without mentioning why or mentioning what they said once they were alive again does not prove that Jesus was god or that he was omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, or omnibenevolent. It shows that the story has random details floating about, and none of the "eye witnesses" mentioned anything the saints said in order to corroborate this random detail. If so many dead were risen, why are there not accounts from EVERYONE who witnessed it?
@EpicPhalosophy They were resurrected based on how good they were. The fact that Jesus did that does prove that He is what I said He is. No one else has had the power to do so in all of history. It does not show that there are random details. They had nothing of importance to say to anyone. Also, would you believe in that anymore than you did before if the Bible had mentioned something said by these resurrected people? You don't believe in the events of the Bible, so why does it matter?
@nar3sas - You're just making stuff up. There is no evidence that Jesus actually did anything let alone exist. Even if he existed his miracles are not proven in any meaningful way - they only appear in one book authored years after he may have existed by multiple people who did not even meet him. Its just sill herders spooky stories.
@ricko1111 I'm not making things up. I never said there was any evidence for Jesus' existence. There doesn't have to be. There was no evidence for a lot of people in history, and He happens to be one. If He did exist, then the parts of the Bible about Him doing miracles may very well be true. If Jesus as we define Him existed, then that must be the case. The Bible was authored by people guided by God and has been unchanged since. It's not just "sill herders spooky" stories.
@SirGrowalott A *metaphor*, and I understand what you're saying. With full respect to who you are and what your beliefs are, relgion is not dying. Even the tradfitional part of religion is not as it continues to be done in Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, and especially Islam (which is quite strict). Even if it were happen with the first 3, it would be nearly impossible for that to happen with Islam. Even without tradition, the beliefs will always be in the minds of the people.
@nar3sas Yes, I agree, and I fully respect your comment, but you have admit that the minds of a lot of humans are now very suspect of religion and its dogma. I know religion will never fully die, but people are growing out of it.
@SirGrowalott I agree with you about humans growing out of dogma. I used to unquestioningly believe in everything I was told about Christianity until a certain point in my life when I was old enough to think things out. I stopped going to church, which has been better off for me. I haven't been praying. I left tradition and started being more practical, actually doing good things. Actions are what are necessary. We need to help make our world a better place for everyone as well as every animal.
It was Jesus Christ invented the threat of eternal damnation- by far the most evil and monstrous "idea" ever put forth in all human history. It's the ultimate direct threat of physical violence. It simply isn't POSSIBLE to formulate a concept more evil than torture for eternity. How could anyone (except in ignorance) worship such a beast ? You people who worship a bloody peasant on a stick really disgust me. Put down the damn childish bible myths and read some Aristotle or something.
@BadDolphin I as a Christian am with you on hating the concept of eternal damnation. I'm not sure if that's true or not myself. Maybe it's possible that you do go to Hell, but the time differs for each person based on their sins and the severity of each. Of course, it's possible you could go straight to Heaven. I'm sure that would be fair, considering you are measured by your actions rather than your beliefs. No matter what, we'll eventually see what the afterlife is actually like after we die.
@nar3sas the BS you believe in requires no respect what so ever......the absurd should be treated as such...as BS.....funny how you think the nonsense you believe in requires a "Special" respect and sensitivity.....try again....!
@07087joenj Well, then everything you have to say will be treated as BS and will not be given any respect by anyone. It is "absurd" to you, but not to billions of people. Christianity is not nonsense, and that's the same with aura viewing and astral projection. You can look up the last two I mentioned. Both of them can be proven and have been proven. Sucks to be wrong, doesn't it? I thought so. Now go away ignoramous.
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions of tons of Earth soil)
@Mogley52 -All these cases are fine, and you probably explain them very well. However, just because something is complex, or highly unlikely to naturally occur etc.. Does not force the answer to the default position of " therefore, must have been God that did it".
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn't mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life and the universe works don’t mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws explain how the order in the universe works, but mere undirected natural laws can't explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete and living cell, the genetic code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when no directing code or mechanisms existed in nature?
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or a cell works, but it's irrational to believe that mere undirected natural laws can bring about either. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
SCIENTISTS HAVE NEVER CREATED LIFE. And, even if they do it won't be by chance but by intelligent design. By genetically engineering already existing forms of life, scientists have produced new forms of life, but they did not produce these new life forms from non-living matter. Even in synthetic life, scientists design and build DNA from scratch, through intelligent design, and then insert their man-made DNA into an already living cell. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all it is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed or useless.
BURDEN OF PROOF: Anyone who claims the level of complexity and order in life and the universe happened by chance has the burden of proof. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
@nar3sas No, you're mistaken. Those who make a claim have the burden of proof, not those who deny the claim. Atheists deny the claims of religion. It is religions who make the claims and then offer no proof.
And it is a VERY extraordinary claim to say you know the nature, will and word of a supernatural deity. It is a VERY extraordinary claim to say that Jesus was a son of a deity. You offer NO evidence for those claims, only assertions.
Atheism requires no support as it makes no claims.
@ciaochowbella Well, when atheists try to disprove Christianity, they need to, in a way, show proof that it is incorrect. Of course, there is nothing showing Christianity is false. Let's put this way for the sake of open-mindedness. It could be real no matter how much atheists don't believe in it, and it could also be false. I even considered atheism myself, but I chose to not give up my belief in a creator who I call God and the other Christian beliefs. Is there anything wrong with that?
@nar3sas You are mistaken. The burden of proof lies on the one MAKING THE CLAIM. Not the one rejecting the claim. Atheism makes absolutely no claims. It rejects the claims of an existence of a deity.
For example, I don't have to prove that leprechauns DO NOT exist. If someone claims they DO exist, it is up to him to prove it. Disbelief is the default position. Making assertions without proof is not evidence.
It is up to you to prove your god exists, not up to atheists to prove it doesn't.
@ciaochowbella Think about it, and you'll see that. Christopher Hitchens has accepted the fact that he needs to provide proof for why he is atheistic, and he's doing the best anyone can do as an atheist, which is really good. Just because you can't prove Christianity wrong, it doesn't meean that all atheists shouldn't have to provide anything. Also, this is different than your leprechaun argument. No one tries to prove that wrong.
@ciaochowbella I understand what you're saying. He offers reason, but not proof, which is the only way to disprove Christianity. You need proof, which none of you atheists have. I know more about logic than you, so don't bring that up. I can use logica and reason properly in a debate. It's just that atheists make a debate retarded. They screw it up, so there's no reasoning with them. So, I know logic, and I have read enough of the Bible to know what you're reffering to.
This has been flagged as spam show
"God is dead" - said Hitchens
"Hitchens is dead" - says God
miguelmirana 1 day ago
God makes disease man makes vaccines
espyd21c 3 days ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Only a REAL FOOL would claim there is no God! Man creates awesome skyscrapers, fake hearts, tunnels, vehicles etc.. If we are very imperfect then what more can God create THE UNIVERSE! You must accept Jesus Christ as your Savior to receive eternal rest in heaven! Simple! John 3:16 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him! Repent & accept Jesus Christ! Jesus Christ or HELL?!? Visit cbn. com
tigersforchrist 3 days ago
ah shut the fuck up
zerubabel3 5 days ago
Putting religion to shame one debate at a time! Rip
thinkboutit 2 weeks ago
...can be considered...
enyskept 3 weeks ago
So, the creation of HELL cab be considered a moral act because "GOD" created it?
enyskept 3 weeks ago
@enyskept
God didn't create Hell, the Demons did and if you wanna go there listen to this dumb ass.
zerubabel3 5 days ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
He found out the hard way that there is indeed a hell
Claymatt52 3 weeks ago
@Claymatt52 Would surely be better than "eternal heaven" where you'll get fucking bored. LOL, fuck religion.
Amitt149 2 weeks ago
@Claymatt52 Although that is obviously a utterly stupid and erroneous assumption, even in context you are incorrect showing, once again, that you lot never ever really think things trough when you say something. If Hitch has indeed gone to hell, he obviously found out via the EASY way! Sheesh...
Voxnulla 2 weeks ago
@Claymatt52 so like the religious to gloat over death
yaakhee 2 weeks ago 2
How can creatards watch this and not go hide under a rock? It amazes me that in the face of all of this - creatards will still believe in the bullshit :-)
MrDevilstreaker 3 weeks ago
CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS WAS GREAT ! The world need more people like him.
ray180597 1 month ago
Masa je mama
Kneleist 1 month ago
@SanDanielUK
Exactly right. I believe I said something similar: I can believe all I want that I can shoot three pointers well. I can believe it down to my TOES. But when I get into three point land, rarely if ever playing basketball, a swish is not on the agenda. If I practice, I will get at least a little better. But NOT because I believed in myself, but because I practiced. The belief would've led to the thing that'd improve my skill-practice. By itself, does nothing one way or another.
RakeeshJ4 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 As I said before, I know that belief at any given moment will not necessarily make a significant difference. The mindset you have while you practice affects your progress. That's what I was trying to tell you. A positive mindset means that you will progress faster. You should know by now that I was not saying that belief on its own will make you good at something. Please read my comments carefully. Anyways, let's stop here and just leave it at respecting each other's opinions.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@nar3sas
-my disbelief doesn't impact my ability to learn about it. I've asked you to offer me some real, testable evidence for astral projection. In fact my disbelief ENCOURAGES me to learn about it: one of the benefits of skepticism. If I didn't disbelieve, I wouldn't be challenging the belief's advocates to prove it. If true, astral projection is made MORE authentic a belief by my challenge, not less. It is only the things which aren't, in fact, true that demand you believe them w/o testing.
RakeeshJ4 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 I said that your disbelief is affecting your willingness to learn about it, not your ability. It's something that you have to plunge into to find out more about, assuming that you don't find an astral projector to do an experiment with. If your disbelief is encouraging you to learn more about it, then do your own research rather than continuing our conversation. There is no direct proof for me to give you. Unfortunately, I can only tell you how to get the proof.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@nar3sas
-I can point out how stupid and naive a belief it is, how much it frees you of personal responsibility to the world (as all conspiracy theories of this sort do), and how unsupported by evidence this theory is.
Not unlike astral projection: you can't do it, alright. You clearly think you've seen it done, then. We can perform the experiment with one of those people who is capable, if you can refer them. It would be just as straightforward: let us find an astral projector, and TEST IT.--
RakeeshJ4 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 How is it stupid and naive to believe it's true? It's actually stupid and naive to believe otherwise. Also, it does not free you of personal responsibility to the world. It does the opposite, so you're making no sense. This as well as many other conspiracies are supported by a lot of evidence, so please stop trying to say otherwise. You cannot see AP done since it is a spiritual experience. You have to find an astral projector yourself or do it yourself. We've went over that already.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@nar3sas
A video doesn't prove anything, though being called an ignorant fool by an advocate for astral projection is interesting! The claims offered in the video might prove something, except they've all been thoroughly debunked by objective investigators-not just government investigators. That the fire wouldn't have been hot enough, that there was some hidden explosive, that the planes should've responded faster or slower-it's all nonsense, and while I can't compell you to change your mind-
RakeeshJ4 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 Yes, a video does prove something, and there are many to prove that 9/11 was an inside job. You can see me calling you an ignorant fool as interesting if you wish, but that's not a bad thing since astral projection is real, not just some fantasy as you would like to believe. Nothing in those videos have been debunked. They are all true, and every "objective" investigator can forget about proving otherwise. The fact that you call it all nonsense shows how badly you've been brainwashed.
nar3sas 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Miracles: God's way of proving He is who He says He is.
Your choice: Either believe or don't believe they
are proof of God and of someone to be taken very seriously.
theetrue 1 month ago
@nar3sas
So, since we've established my disbelief shouldn't impact your ability to astral project, let's just test it. Simple. Hell, I'd even accept a video of you standing behind a screen, throwing some dice onto a fully recorded table in a room I can see all of, and then without stepping past the screen telling me what the dice say.
You won't, of course, do this-which would be the most simplistic way to verify astral projection. You won't because you CAN'T. Because it can't be done.
RakeeshJ4 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 Your disbelief does affect it to a certain extent. First, it's preventing you from even learning more about it and practicing it. Second, even if you did try, staying in that mindset would hinder your progress. I'm not going to post a video. We went over this. You either do it yourself or find an astral projector, or you wait for me to learn how. It's better that you yourself find evidence. I can't do it now, but astral projection is real. Your ignorance is to be pitied.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@nar3sas
My beliefs have an impact on the outcome of my actions. What they DON"T impact is your ability or inability to astral project. It can be tested with a simple experiment, independent of my disbelief. The more likely I believe in something, generally, will happen has NO impact on whether it does. My belief that I can, for example, shoot a free throw might-but all the belief in the world won't make me good at it if I've never picked up a basketball before.
RakeeshJ4 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 You just gave me the logical highground by failing to admit that 9/11 was an inside job. Also, Christianity as a whole cannot be done. It is a set of ideas. Astral projection can be done. Also, when it comes to your personal efforts in trying to do astral projection, your beliefs DO have an effect. As I said before, the more you believe in something, the more likely you are to do it. It's simple. I never said that your belief alone allows you to do something well. Read CAREFULLY.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@nar3sas I tried to stay away, but I couldn't. :) I'm not gonna argue about astral projection(or 9/11 for that matter), 'cause I doubt we'll see eye to eye on that anytime soon. With regards to belief, I agree that your beliefs can affect the outcome i.e. the succes rate, if you will, of a given action/attempt. However, what belief can't impact, is the actual capability you have. If you want to run 100 meters in 10 secs flat, you either can or you can't.
SanDanielDK 1 month ago
@SanDanielDK I understand. Sometimes people's opinions conflict so much with yours that you can't help but give yours. I think I know what you mean. At a given moment, you either can or can't do something, but belief can help you in the long run. I wasn't saying that belief alone will give you the ability to do something. I think that combined with practice will help you greatly though. When you practice, you should stay in the mindset that you will be able to do what you're attempting.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@nar3sas I think, without going into specifics, that where you and I part ways is how we evaluate the validity of any given claim. I think that's mainly due to the difference in the "tools", if you will, we use. For instance, to be fair, I checked out one of your 9/11 videos and, on the face of it, I can definitely see the appeal. But once you look into the counterarguments, that appeal falters(at least for me). I'm only interested in the truth; be that a comforting or ugly one.
SanDanielDK 1 month ago
@SanDanielDK You're right, and your way of evaluating the validity of claims seems to be lacking. Watch this /watch?v=K9mbotpeuJM. Do you want to be like the Fox idiot, or do you want to be the guy questiong things and knowing the truth? My 9/11 videos not only have appeal but are completely true. One of the buildings fell at free fall speed. That should be enough for you, so you have no excuse to be swayed by the counterarguments. Look at the facts carefully, and you'll see that I'm right.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@nar3sas I'm not being swayed by anything, that's implying that I made up my mind before hearing the counterarguments. I don't work like you, I don't make up my mind based solely on one side of the argument. I look at all the available evidence from both sides and then base my conclusion on that. I doubt you have read the NSIT or the 9/11 commission report in full, as I have. 9/11 was an utter failure by an incompetent administration who were completely caught off guard.
SanDanielDK 1 month ago
@SanDanielDK I understand what you mean by your first statement, but I'm sure that you did make up your mind before seeing the counterargument. It's subconsciously done even if you tell yourself you haven't. I don't see why I have to see the counterargument when it is all government-based and found to be contradictory to the facts. There is clear proof that it was an inside job, and that should be enough. The NSIT and 9/11 commission report are both crap. The government (liars) made those up.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@nar3sas This is where the intellectual dishonesty comes into play. You've made sure that your claims can never be refuted. You haven't even read the reports you're arguing against. If anyone offers any kind of counterargument, you're gonna go "he's a plant", "it's the government", "can't be trusted", so that you don't have to offer an argument. "I don't see why I have to see the counterargument" says it all. Yet you accuse others of being closeminded, truly hypocrisy at its finest.
SanDanielDK 1 month ago
@SanDanielDK I don't see it as intellectual dishonesty since I'm arguing against the government's explanation, which I'm sure is not true. I am sure that my "claims" cannot be refuted. I'll listen to any counterargument, but there are none that can show that 9/11 was not an inside job. Everything points to the fact that it was. I have been and still am open-minded, even if you think I'm being hypocritical. If you have any counterargument, I'll listen for the sake of open-mindedness.
nar3sas 3 weeks ago
@nar3sas Here's the thing you don't seem to understand. Even if I grant you, that there are things that, by the look of it, definitely seems strange, that's still only a fraction of the evidence of what transpired that day. So the ones, like myself, who do not see the evidence of a conspirary are still supported by 99,98% of the evidence. Now, if you wanna look at this scientifically, I suggest you apply Occam's razor.
SanDanielDK 1 month ago
@SanDanielDK I understand completely, but you don't seem to understand. There were a lot of strange things that happened that clearly show that it was all an inside job. There is more than enough evidence. Plus, even if you don't want to believe that the government placed bombs in the buildings, they at least allowed it to happen. It was predicted well before it happened, and Osama (a CIA agent) was working with the government. Your "99.98%" evidence is nonsense. I've shown that I'm right.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@nar3sas There were definitely a lot of things happening that day, whether they were strange or not is open to interpretation. You've been brainwashed into not considering any kind of counterargument to what you've seen on youtube and dismiss it out of hand. I think that's a shame. You're clearly a wellspoken, eloquent and intelligent individual. If only you'd spend some of that energy on the actual atrocities taking place in the world, you might very well help make it a better place.
SanDanielDK 1 month ago
@SanDanielDK I'm sure they were objectively strange, not subjectively as you believe. Also, *I* have been brainwashed? I definitely haven't been. I've been shown the truth, which has exposed the counterarguments for what they are, and they would be lies created by the government and supported by brainwashed people. Thank you for the compliment, but I have been spending energy on the actual atrocities taking place in the world for years, and I have made the world a better place.
nar3sas 3 weeks ago
@SanDanielDK When I was in Lebanon, I was told that collecting a certain amount of bottle caps (500 or 1000) would help make one wheelchair. I collected *thousands* of caps on my own. Also, despite not knowing for sure if I would ever find a recycling bin in Lebanon, I collected thousands of bottles and other recyclable materials on my own, and I eventually found one recycling bin. At a university there called Lebanese American University, I made a petition for a designated area for smokers.
nar3sas 3 weeks ago
@SanDanielDK I collected 405 signatures in 3 days, and I didn't just leave it at that. I wanted to know for sure that my petition went to the right person and that it was being acted upon. I would always tell people who were smoking indoors to stop, and it would usually work out. Eventually, restrictions on smoking on campus were put in place after I left, so I succeeded. I play a game on facebook called WeTopia, which helps actual children as you progress, so you should play it.
nar3sas 3 weeks ago
@SanDanielDK I also go to thehungersite dot c-om each day to click for each of the 8 categories, and I've been doing that for a very long time, so I've made a significant difference through that. I am trying to fight overpopulation by informing people. I am trying to fight the NWO, which is the hugest problem facing the world, by informing people. As I've been trying to tell you, 9/11 was one of their many planned events. Watch these /watch?v=MKjyCz62Lr0 and /watch?v=ssuAMNas1us.
nar3sas 3 weeks ago
@SanDanielDK Even if you don't believe that 9/11 was an inside job, the Illuminati and their plan for a NWO are real. I'm sure you'll agree with me on that. Do your own research, and you'll see the truth about what they've been doing and what they plan to do. The best thing to do now is inform others. The more people that know about their plan, the more of a chance we'll have of stopping them. We'll definitely make the world a better place by doing that.
nar3sas 3 weeks ago
@nar3sas
Well there you go. It was an inside job whether the means by which you claim it was an inside job actually took place or not. It's an inside job because it was an inside job-you don't actually have to be able to point to some piece of evidence that SHOWS it-you just know. My point all along. If you knew believing in something just because lots of people believe it was foolish, you wouldn't have tried to bring it up to suppoort astral projection. And people DO think Chr. can be 'done'.
RakeeshJ4 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 I'm clearly dealing with an ignorant fool who doesn't know how to read. I gave you one video that proves why it was an inside job. If you need to, go look for more. It's not that hard. Here's another one since you're apparently not smart enough to look for more yourself /watch?v=ezIU6ZxYU3A. You can't possibly refute the fact unless you wish to continue arguing for the sake of arguing. Also, I did not bring it up to support AP. I was testing you, and you failed.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@nar3sas
But of course I suspect you won't. 'Worldliness' makes it not work or something, I suspect. Here's a free tip: actual phenomenon work regardless of what some total stranger thinks.
RakeeshJ4 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 As you probably know, your beliefs have an effect on the outcomes in your life. The more you believe in something, the more likely it is to happen. The less you do, the less likely it is to happen. So wordliness can be problematic if you keep that with you while you're practicing. The more you believe, the faster you will progress. I mostly see it as a problem though since it prevents people from accepting the possibility of astral projection and trying it. Your tip is obvious.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@nar3sas
As for unicorns and fairies, YOU were the one who tried to say that if it weren't real, there wouldn't be so many people believing in it. That's a stupid, faulty reason to believe in something. I gave an example why. I've also explained why you shouldn't believe it. If you can actually do it yourself, or know someone who can, contact me and we'll conduct a quick experiment right now. I could take down some numbers and scan them, saving the image; you tell me the # on screen.
RakeeshJ4 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 How many people actually believe in unicorns and fairies aside from some children? Few people. The number of people that believe in astral projection, however, is somewhere in the millions, and it includes children as well as adults. It is a real phenomenon, and it is something you DO. I know that believing in something just because many others do is stupid. Christianity would be an example, but Christianity cannot be *done*. Astral projection IS something that can be done.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 So as you can see, there is a difference between believing in something that is simply an idea and believing in something that can actually be applied. I will contact you once I gain the ability to do it or once I find someone else who can do it, but don't wait for me. You can try to learn it yourself or find some astral projector. If not, you'll just have to wait for me, but it would be more reliable for you to get your own evidence. I'm sure you can agree with me on that.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@nar3sas
OK, now I'm not sure whether you're messing with me or not. If you are, good one I guess? If not, then it's clear you ARE a knucklehead. There isn't a facet of Truther claims that hasn't been thoroughly debunked more than once-temperature, fuel, building strength, occupants of building, so on and so forth. It's nonsense but if you believe it at this point there's no persuading you, most likely.
Here's the thing: if astral projection were a real phenomena, the 'worldly' would be happy!
RakeeshJ4 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 I'm not messing around with you. It would seem that you are messing around with me and that YOU would be the knucklehead as you have been this whole time. I know that our "truther" claims have been "debunked". That's been done by the government (consistent liars) and brainwashed people like you. It WAS an inside job whether there really were controlled detonators or not. Osama was a CIA agent working with the U.S., so it WAS planned. Worldliness keeps people from believing in AP.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@nar3sas
Now, you can either offer something substantive-something peer reviewed, for example-on the existence of astral projection, or I'll simply ignore you. If it exists, it's not something 'worldliness' would impede-that is only a reason to *continue*believing in it in the face of lack of real evidence. People would LOVE to believe in it, if it had actually happened anywhere. It would be very useful and special. The reason 'worldliness' stops people believing is that it's a fraud.
RakeeshJ4 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 You can ignore me if you want, but that does not change the fact that astral projection is real. I gave you one video which you can use to become more informed about it and start doing it, and it's your choice as to whether you're going to be open enough to watch it and apply the information or not. There are many more videos which you can watch as well as articles which you can read to learn more about it. Wordliness does impede a lot of people. There is real evidence as I told you.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 The fact that the people who claim to have the ability to do it give methods for inducing it and talk about the benefits of doing it means that it must be real. There are actual techniques like the rope method of induction. Look it up. It's not something that happens "anywhere" as if it can be seen in our physical world. It takes place in what is called the astral world. It is not a fraud, and it IS very useful and special. In the end, it's your choice to believe or not.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@nar3sas
Wait, I should believe it because lots of other people have posted videos and 'articles' (not one of which appears in a modern, credible scientific magazine, btw) about it?
Let's list some of the other things you must believe in by this standard as well: unicorns, fairies, lucky numbers, horoscopes, racism, ghosts, telekinesis, Nostradomus, the 9/11 conspiracy, the Jewish world conspiracy...the list goes on. A bunch of credulous knuckleheads online claiming it works isn't evidence. Cont
RakeeshJ4 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 Well, I'm not saying you should believe in it completely without having your own evidence. Even relying on a "credible" scientific magazine for information about it would be unreliable. Like I told you, you need to either know an astral projector or do it yourself. Now, it's time to point out flaws in your examples. Unicorns and fairies are out of the question since there is nothing supporting their existence. Lucky numbers and racism have nothing to do with this.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 I'll agree with you about horoscopes being meaningless. Ghosts and spirits are real, but they are not encountered by everyone. Watch this /watch?v=SpnVmEiCamk. Telekinesis is real, but it takes a very long time to master, which is why people are skeptical of it. There happen to be different kinesis kinds like pyrokinesis, electrokinesis, and hydrokinesis. Watch this /watch?v=ThZnAeIS-vk. It is well-known that many of Nostradamus' predictions came true. Watch this /watch?v=fkmu0sIXEFE.
nar3sas 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RakeeshJ4 I'll agree with you about horoscopes being meaningless. Ghosts and spirits are real, but they are not encountered by everyone. Watch this /watch?v=SpnVmEiCamk. Telekinesis is real, but it takes a very long time to master, which is why people are skeptical of it. There happen to be different kinesis kinds like pyrokinesis, electrokinesis, and hydrokinesis. Watch this /watch?v=ThZnAeIS-vk. It is well-known that many of Nostradamus' predictions came true. Watch this /watch?v=fkmu0sIXEFE.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 The 9/11 conspiracy is a fact. It WAS an inside job. Watch this /watch?v=mB3gwgBVUyw. There are many other videos that make that fact clear. About the Jewish world conspiracy, I believe you're referring to the NWO which will be established by the Illuminati. This is very real. It should be a well-known fact by now. Watch this /watch?v=5GOfu1M3inY. This is one of many videos explaining what their plan is. These people are not a bunch of credulous "knuckleheads". Do some research.
nar3sas 1 month ago
Christianity has had 2000 years to make its case, it has failed, time to shut the fuck up now.
yatter1 1 month ago
"I don´t need 2 minutes to finish with this religion... but thanks."
MrPizzaballs 1 month ago
Naresas,
Proof is not 'unavailable to everyone' if it is, in fact, proof. No one, anywhere, has ever done a double-blind properly run experiment to attempt to disprove the idea of astral projection. If they had, it would be world famous and you could send me a link to it now. Telling ms it can be done doesn't serve as proof or even evidence.
RakeeshJ4 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 Yes, that is the case with astral projection. The only way for you to KNOW that it is real is for you to do a simple experiment with an astral projector (not likely that you will find one) or to do it yourself (will take some time to actually do). The things I put in parantheses are important. It's not world famous because so many people are worldly, lacking the open-mindedness needed to accept our spiritual reality. This as far as a conversation about astral projection can go.
nar3sas 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 If you would like to go further into the subject, do your own research and watch some videos. Here's a video for you /watch?v=E97fKPJm0U4. Practice what the guy tells you, and you should eventually do it. As I've said before in previous comments, you wouldn't have all of these people posting articles and videos about astral projection if it wasn't an actual concept. Do it yourself, and you'll have your personal proof. It's not that hard to understand.
nar3sas 1 month ago
There is not proof of astral projection. You cannot claim to believe in the scientific method with its reliance on skepticism and trial and verification and then claim there is proof of such a thing. Who has ever done it in front of others, and performed actions or learned information that couldn't have been known to them unless they projected? Who verified that it happened? There is no proof of astral projection.
RakeeshJ4 1 month ago
@RakeeshJ4 There is proof, but it's not available readily or for everyone. There are two ways to get proof as I mentioned below. One is to do the experiment I mentioned in which you have an astral projector astral project to tell you about something that he or she could not see normally once that person is back in his or her body. The second one is that you practice until you do it yourself. It has been proven, but you would need to know an astral projector or do it yourself. It's that simple.
nar3sas 1 month ago
Spot-on! But, the operative words were "Thinking Person", and Christians can't think for themselves, because that's all been done for them, from generation-to-generation; little programmed robots prepared to do whatever they're told, because they're too stupid to think for themselves. And, why would a perfect being, akin to an apparently consummate craftsman, make something as flawed as us...and then banish us to hell for being flawed in the first place? Honestly, what sick fuck would do that?
MrAlban003 1 month ago
That was behond a hitch slap but more a H-BOMB
alexanderhulse 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hitchens sure cracked a nut with a sledge hammer
keshdogga 1 month ago
Comment removed
keshdogga 1 month ago
for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him WILL BELIEVE IN ANYTHING!
chesster423 1 month ago 13
The trouble is there are far too many non-thinking folk out there that will just about believe anything!
JT2012a 1 month ago 6
"I don't need two minutes to finish with this religion, but thanks." He was just awesome.
Brenda2OOO 1 month ago
He's right. It's all nonsense.
Brenda2OOO 1 month ago
Brilliant!!
Pwnage1982 2 months ago
in a way it's a shame there isn't a god.. i'd love to see christopher hitchslap jesus infront of the pearly gates
1919dpg 2 months ago
Comment removed
dylpot 2 months ago
@Bre4kb0t - I am not sure about enlightening such a wise man, for a start he is enlightened already in my and many peoples views. Secondly, there is no afterlife or atonement so no chance of that happening neither. We die, we rot, our bodies get recycled, end of....
dylpot 2 months ago
@BRE4KB0T when are you going to start making sense>?
jabom99 2 months ago
Hitchen's is one of the best modern thinkers we have today hope you get better.
yellowocean01 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nar3sas
None of what you believe in is real.
If it had be proven it would be front page news across the world.
MrAgentGreeny 3 months ago
@MrAgentGreeny True
human2011able 3 months ago
His favourite miracle "TURN WATER INTO WINE" LOOOOOL 0:38
tusi1390 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexuality and homosexuality. Even non-religious people know this.
The homosexual agenda is not good for anyone, including those who consider themselves "gay".
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have successfuly framed themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 3 months ago
Christopher Hitchens is THE BEST!!!
carpediem380 3 months ago
No miracles exist? Well, the way we came into existence, as according to the athiestic viewpoint, there are infinite odds against our being here in the result of an accident. If athiesm were true, then our existence and intelligence would be a still be a miracle, Designer or not.
UnkownSoldier100 3 months ago
@UnkownSoldier100 If a miracle is defined as "something inexplicable by the laws of nature and thus explained in supernatural terms," it is directly related to the belief in a supernatural being or force. I tend to use the word "probability" to discuss our existence. We had a very low probability of existing here. Does that agree with your view.
dwbryant3 3 months ago
@UnkownSoldier100 No, because the definition of a miracle is an event that is impossible, happening. The concept you speak of is obviously not important, thus not a miracle. Get a grip.
edgelessmoocow 3 months ago
Hasa Diga Eebowai!!!
PendulousSkin420 3 months ago
Fucking beautiful, go hitch!!
JokerzKard 4 months ago 2
@MrWWSD666 Hitchslap major!,,,,,,lovely!
MUHAMMADFUCKEDAKID1 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
itwastyped. com under the 'conspiracy theories' tab for ACTUAL truth. intelligent, rational people only please!
culturebully3 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
My 1 page masterpiece DESTROYS atheism, click on my channel to see...
youneekk 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 4 months ago
The bible in an encryption; hitch how could you understand it.
NorthNorth2009 4 months ago
Now that, in my professional opinion, is an ASS WHOOPIN'.
BreaktheChainsofFate 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
My 1 page masterpiece DESTROYS atheism, click on my channel to see...
youneekk 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Wouldnt it be nice if we just believed everything we saw and read?"
I didn't say I believed it. The evidence may turn out to be bogus; I'm not in a position to be able to verify it. I just think it shouldn't be ruled out yet.
Here's a video.
/watch?v=0UhPMzsrZbw
Cosmored 4 months ago
I love this guy. I want to share something with him. Do a YouTube search on "Forbidden Archeology". It may turn out that we're being lied to about how long homo sapiens has been on the earth too.
Cosmored 4 months ago
@Cosmored save me the time and cite the sources. Then I'll do a search and I'll let you know if its credible and honest. Wouldnt it be nice if we just believed everything we saw and read? I may think the same crazy things as a young earth advocate in this case.
Johnf85 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 4 months ago
Ha ha, Christians believe in zombies, fucking idiots. The Hitch destroys with logic, wit, common sense and down right brilliance. God is dying and i'm happy with that, just imagine a world without religion! The world would without doubt would be a much better place for all. As the Hitche's book says, "religion poisons everything", never a truer word spoken.
Hope you beat your cancer Mr Hitchens, love ya.
SirGrowalott 4 months ago
@SirGrowalott Christians don't believe in zombies and are not idiots. I agree about Hitchens being logical and brilliant, but at least he's respectful. Try being the same. How can you say God is dying when you don't believe He exists? A world without religion might be much worse than you would think. You never know. Watch the "Turek vs. Hitchens" debate. Turek says so clearly that everything poisons religion, not the other way around. I also hope Hitchens beats his cancer and recovers soon. :)
nar3sas 4 months ago
@SirGrowalott Christians don't believe in zombies and are not idiots. I agree about Hitchens being logical and brilliant, but at least he's respectful. Try being the same. How can you say God is dying when you don't believe He exists? A world without religion might be much worse than you would think. You never know. Watch the "Turek vs. Hitchens" debate. Turek says so clearly that everything poisons religion, not the other way around. I also hope Hitchens beats his cancer and recovers soon. :)
nar3sas 4 months ago
@nar3sas Christians believe in a savior that rose from the dead (the only requisite of being a zombie) and that upon Jesus' crucifixion, "And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose." There are other instances, but these are the main ones. This is what we refer to when we say "zombies."
The Turek/Hitchens debate was nothing more than the same old cosmological, moral, ontological arguments that go in circles.
EpicPhalosophy 4 months ago
@EpicPhalosophy Well, Jesus and the saints came to back to life in the same condition. There was no brain or bodily difference. They were the same, so I don't see how they're zombies. I don't think coming back from the dead alone makes you a zombie. I get what you're saying about the Turek/Hitchens debate, but they were debating the existence of God. It wasn't about following the Bible and Christian teachings. You're right about it going in circles. You can't end a debate like that.
nar3sas 4 months ago
@nar3sas Any person (other than those who belong to one of the three great monotheisms) is astounded to hear that religion claims things like that. Saints came back from the dead?? And the Bible doesn't even MENTION what they said?? The Bible doesn't say what condition they were in- you completely took a guess there. It isn't specific in any detail about the event.
Turek tried to argue the (deistic) existence of God, but he always fell back on his own theism.
EpicPhalosophy 4 months ago
@EpicPhalosophy I myself don't remember hearing about the saints coming back to life, but I know that Jesus did, and I know that he came back to life in perfect condition (aside from the holes in his hands and feet). Considering there are limits to my knowledge about this, I'll have to read the whole Bible to be fit to discuss this subject with anyone else. I'll check out the debate between Turek and Hitchens again to see what you meant by him falling back on his own theism.
nar3sas 4 months ago
@nar3sas Matthew 27:50-53. You haven't heard about it because it's absolutely ridiculous. It seems that resurrections were somewhat of a banality at the time (to use the words of Christopher Hitchens.) Christians often claim "eye-witness accounts" of the events of the crucifixion and resurrection are some of the best evidence, yet none of these witnesses bothered to include what the saints (who just rose the dead) told them?? It's one of the many glaring gaps in the story, if you ask me.
EpicPhalosophy 4 months ago
@EpicPhalosophy Well, note that it said many holy people. It could have been hundreds, so the people who wrote the Bible were not going to take the time to mention what each one said. You could call it a banality, but he only resurrected 3 people prior to that with that being the last time. These were good people He resurrected. You could say there's a gap, but what would they have said? They must have been surprised at first and continued normally after that.
nar3sas 4 months ago
@nar3sas Literally everything you just said was a guess. Nothing you said has any scriptural basis.
What would they have said? What does it matter? If I saw someone that I knew had died, and saw them come back to life, I'd write down WHATEVER they said.
"people who wrote the Bible were not going to take the time to mention what each one said" Except that they did not even mention what a single one of them said. So what was the point of the whole thing?
EpicPhalosophy 4 months ago
@EpicPhalosophy Well, they mentioned what a lot of people said in the Bible. Why does it matter if these holy people said anything or not, considering their number? Would that support what you said about zombies in any way? No. They would not have said anything of great importance anyways, considering that everyone heard everything that needed to be said from Jesus. The point was to show that He is omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent as God is. It was to show that He is God.
nar3sas 4 months ago
@nar3sas Raising an unknown number of holy people without mentioning why or mentioning what they said once they were alive again does not prove that Jesus was god or that he was omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, or omnibenevolent. It shows that the story has random details floating about, and none of the "eye witnesses" mentioned anything the saints said in order to corroborate this random detail. If so many dead were risen, why are there not accounts from EVERYONE who witnessed it?
EpicPhalosophy 4 months ago
@EpicPhalosophy They were resurrected based on how good they were. The fact that Jesus did that does prove that He is what I said He is. No one else has had the power to do so in all of history. It does not show that there are random details. They had nothing of importance to say to anyone. Also, would you believe in that anymore than you did before if the Bible had mentioned something said by these resurrected people? You don't believe in the events of the Bible, so why does it matter?
nar3sas 4 months ago
@nar3sas - You're just making stuff up. There is no evidence that Jesus actually did anything let alone exist. Even if he existed his miracles are not proven in any meaningful way - they only appear in one book authored years after he may have existed by multiple people who did not even meet him. Its just sill herders spooky stories.
ricko1111 4 months ago
@ricko1111 I'm not making things up. I never said there was any evidence for Jesus' existence. There doesn't have to be. There was no evidence for a lot of people in history, and He happens to be one. If He did exist, then the parts of the Bible about Him doing miracles may very well be true. If Jesus as we define Him existed, then that must be the case. The Bible was authored by people guided by God and has been unchanged since. It's not just "sill herders spooky" stories.
nar3sas 4 months ago
@nar3sas When I say god is dying, it's a meta-fore for Religion is dying. Which it is, and about time to.
SirGrowalott 4 months ago
@SirGrowalott A *metaphor*, and I understand what you're saying. With full respect to who you are and what your beliefs are, relgion is not dying. Even the tradfitional part of religion is not as it continues to be done in Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, and especially Islam (which is quite strict). Even if it were happen with the first 3, it would be nearly impossible for that to happen with Islam. Even without tradition, the beliefs will always be in the minds of the people.
nar3sas 4 months ago
@nar3sas Yes, I agree, and I fully respect your comment, but you have admit that the minds of a lot of humans are now very suspect of religion and its dogma. I know religion will never fully die, but people are growing out of it.
SirGrowalott 4 months ago
@SirGrowalott I agree with you about humans growing out of dogma. I used to unquestioningly believe in everything I was told about Christianity until a certain point in my life when I was old enough to think things out. I stopped going to church, which has been better off for me. I haven't been praying. I left tradition and started being more practical, actually doing good things. Actions are what are necessary. We need to help make our world a better place for everyone as well as every animal.
nar3sas 4 months ago
It was Jesus Christ invented the threat of eternal damnation- by far the most evil and monstrous "idea" ever put forth in all human history. It's the ultimate direct threat of physical violence. It simply isn't POSSIBLE to formulate a concept more evil than torture for eternity. How could anyone (except in ignorance) worship such a beast ? You people who worship a bloody peasant on a stick really disgust me. Put down the damn childish bible myths and read some Aristotle or something.
BadDolphin 4 months ago
@BadDolphin I as a Christian am with you on hating the concept of eternal damnation. I'm not sure if that's true or not myself. Maybe it's possible that you do go to Hell, but the time differs for each person based on their sins and the severity of each. Of course, it's possible you could go straight to Heaven. I'm sure that would be fair, considering you are measured by your actions rather than your beliefs. No matter what, we'll eventually see what the afterlife is actually like after we die.
nar3sas 4 months ago
@nar3sas the BS you believe in requires no respect what so ever......the absurd should be treated as such...as BS.....funny how you think the nonsense you believe in requires a "Special" respect and sensitivity.....try again....!
07087joenj 4 months ago
@07087joenj Well, then everything you have to say will be treated as BS and will not be given any respect by anyone. It is "absurd" to you, but not to billions of people. Christianity is not nonsense, and that's the same with aura viewing and astral projection. You can look up the last two I mentioned. Both of them can be proven and have been proven. Sucks to be wrong, doesn't it? I thought so. Now go away ignoramous.
nar3sas 4 months ago
@nar3sas: "I will make you leave."
Are we getting close to the part where you make me leave? I don't wanna miss it.
mikefromwa 4 months ago
@nar3sas: "I will make you leave."
Hey, don't mean to bug ya, but I'm still waiting for you to make me leave. :)
mikefromwa 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALTHOUGH I'M A CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN (Baptist), I no longer believe that the Bible teaches eternal torment or suffering. The Bible teaches eternal punishment, but it's not eternal torment. In my popular Internet article, TRADITIONAL DOCTRINE OF HELL EVOLVED FROM GREEK ROOTS, I explain how and why teaching of eternal torment entered early into Christianity and how Scriptures have been misinterpreted and taken out of context to support that teaching. ~Babu G. Ranganathan (B.A. theology/biology)
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE could not have sustained itself eternally because of entropy (even in an open system). Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM (Article)
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
EINSTEIN CONFIRMED that space and time are just as physical as matter. That's why space and time can be altered by gravity, and space produces particles. Einstein's equations show that the universe couldn’t be eternal. It had a beginning. Einstein believed, because of science, in the existence of God behind the origin and order of the universe. He didn't believe in a personal God like Christians do, but he did believe science pointed to the existence of an all powerful and intelligent Creator
Mogley52 4 months ago
THE SCIENTIFIC CASE AGAINST ATHEISM: Please read this Internet article of mine published in Russia's English Pravda. It will be a real eye-opener for all who think belief in a Creator is merely subjective blind faith. Also read my article, LIFE ON MARS NO SURPRISE (In the Earth's past there was powerful volcanic activity which spewed life-containing dirt and rocks (meteors) into outer space. Mars may literally have millions of tons of Earth soil)
Mogley52 4 months ago
@Mogley52 -All these cases are fine, and you probably explain them very well. However, just because something is complex, or highly unlikely to naturally occur etc.. Does not force the answer to the default position of " therefore, must have been God that did it".
paulcorda 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution across "kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their vital structures, organs, reproductive systems hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss: Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DAWKINS, HITCHENS, AND HAWKING REFUSE TO DEBATE with creationists who are SCIENTISTS, such as the scientists at The Institute for Creation Research. Dawkins and his friends only debate non-scientist creationists. Read articles by scientists supporting creation at The Institute for Creation Research site. Read analysis from creation scientists about the latest news on fossils, genetics, astronomy, etc. that you won't read in the main stream media. Visit the Institute for Creation Research site.
Mogley52 4 months ago
EXPLAINING HOW AN AIRPLANE WORKS doesn't mean no one made the airplane. Explaining how life and the universe works don’t mean there was no Maker behind them. Natural laws explain how the order in the universe works, but mere undirected natural laws can't explain the origin of that order. Once you have a complete and living cell, the genetic code/mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how did the cell originate when no directing code or mechanisms existed in nature?
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WHAT IS SCIENCE? Science simply is knowledge based on observation. No one observed the universe coming by chance or by design, by creation or by macro-evolution. These are positions of faith. The issue is which faith the scientific evidence best supports. Natural laws can explain how an airplane or a cell works, but it's irrational to believe that mere undirected natural laws can bring about either. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
SCIENTISTS HAVE NEVER CREATED LIFE. And, even if they do it won't be by chance but by intelligent design. By genetically engineering already existing forms of life, scientists have produced new forms of life, but they did not produce these new life forms from non-living matter. Even in synthetic life, scientists design and build DNA from scratch, through intelligent design, and then insert their man-made DNA into an already living cell. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
THE ODDS of the sequence of molecules in a cell coming together by chance are similar to the odds of magnetic letters randomly bonding together in a sequence to form all the words and sentences in a dictionary. Without the right sequence, a cell's molecules won't work. Amino acids can come by chance but not proteins. Without DNA there can be no proteins and vice versa. Gradually won't do. It's all at once or not at all for a cell's survival. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL SELECTION DOESN'T PRODUCE ANYTHING. It can only "select" from what is produced that has survival value. If a variation occurs that helps a species survive, that survival is called being "selected." That's all it is. There's no conscious selection by nature. It's a passive process. Natural selection is a figure of speech. The term itself is a tautology. Natural selection only operates once there is life and reproduction, not before. Read my article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NATURAL SELECTION IS NO BLIND WATCHMAKER because it can only "select," not produce or arrange. If a variation survives, that's called being "selected." Natural selection operates only once there is life and reproduction, not before, so it couldn't have been involved in life's origins. A partially-evolved cell (an oxymoron) would quickly disintegrate. It couldn't wait ("survive") millions of years for chance to complete it and then make it alive! Read: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ARE FOSSILS REALLY MILLIONS OF YEARS OLD? Popular Internet article examines assumptions concerning fossil deposition as well as built-in assumptions involved in modern radiometric dating (not used for dating fossils but other rocks), and arguments from starlight and time. Discusses lack of true transitional forms in the fossil record and lack of "age" sequence of the fossil layers. Discussion of mixed species (i.e. dinosaur, reptile, mammal fossils in the same stratum).
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
IMAGINE A FISH WITH PART FINS, part feet with the fins evolving (transitioning) into feet. What survival benefit would there be? The fish couldn't use its fins or its feet, and there are no fossils showing such a creature ever existed. They only exist on automobile bumper stickers! There are no true transitional forms, either living or fossilized. Evolutionists realize this fact! Read my Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from ape-like creatures anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from four-legged-pawed dog-like creatures. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GENETIC INFORMATION CANNOT HAPPEN BY CHANCE, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! Also, "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read my popular Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ALL REAL EVOLUTION ( i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.) in nature is the expression, over time, of already existing genes. Evolution is possible only if there’s information (genes) directing it. Only variations of already existing genes are possible, which means only limited evolution and adaptations are possible. Nature has no ability to invent new genes via random mutations caused by random environmental forces. That’s evolutionary faith, not science. Read my article, WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DO EYES CARRY SCARS OF EVOLUTION? Read this fantastic Internet article by biologist and creationist Brian Thomas. Thomas refutes every argument of a "flawed" design for the eye, and explains how and why the so-called flaw is actually the best thing for the eye. Read the article! It's amazing what facts evolutionists will ignore. Numerous times evolutionists have been proven wrong about their interpretation of a structure as being flawed or useless.
Mogley52 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BURDEN OF PROOF: Anyone who claims the level of complexity and order in life and the universe happened by chance has the burden of proof. Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM
Mogley52 4 months ago
@nar3sas No, you're mistaken. Those who make a claim have the burden of proof, not those who deny the claim. Atheists deny the claims of religion. It is religions who make the claims and then offer no proof.
And it is a VERY extraordinary claim to say you know the nature, will and word of a supernatural deity. It is a VERY extraordinary claim to say that Jesus was a son of a deity. You offer NO evidence for those claims, only assertions.
Atheism requires no support as it makes no claims.
ciaochowbella 4 months ago
@ciaochowbella Well, when atheists try to disprove Christianity, they need to, in a way, show proof that it is incorrect. Of course, there is nothing showing Christianity is false. Let's put this way for the sake of open-mindedness. It could be real no matter how much atheists don't believe in it, and it could also be false. I even considered atheism myself, but I chose to not give up my belief in a creator who I call God and the other Christian beliefs. Is there anything wrong with that?
nar3sas 4 months ago
@nar3sas You are mistaken. The burden of proof lies on the one MAKING THE CLAIM. Not the one rejecting the claim. Atheism makes absolutely no claims. It rejects the claims of an existence of a deity.
For example, I don't have to prove that leprechauns DO NOT exist. If someone claims they DO exist, it is up to him to prove it. Disbelief is the default position. Making assertions without proof is not evidence.
It is up to you to prove your god exists, not up to atheists to prove it doesn't.
ciaochowbella 4 months ago
@ciaochowbella Think about it, and you'll see that. Christopher Hitchens has accepted the fact that he needs to provide proof for why he is atheistic, and he's doing the best anyone can do as an atheist, which is really good. Just because you can't prove Christianity wrong, it doesn't meean that all atheists shouldn't have to provide anything. Also, this is different than your leprechaun argument. No one tries to prove that wrong.
nar3sas 4 months ago
@nar3sas Hitchens does not offer 'proof'. He offers reasons. There is a difference.
This is not one whit different from the leprechaun argument. If you make a claim, ANY CLAIM, you have the burden of proof. This is Logic 101.
You're proving your inability to use logic and reason properly in a debate. I suggest you study these things as well as read that Bible of yours.
ciaochowbella 4 months ago
@ciaochowbella I understand what you're saying. He offers reason, but not proof, which is the only way to disprove Christianity. You need proof, which none of you atheists have. I know more about logic than you, so don't bring that up. I can use logica and reason properly in a debate. It's just that atheists make a debate retarded. They screw it up, so there's no reasoning with them. So, I know logic, and I have read enough of the Bible to know what you're reffering to.
nar3sas 4 months ago