Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 51 (9221 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: danieljones0094
Post Volume: Total: 920,774 Year: 1,096/6,935 Month: 377/719 Week: 19/146 Day: 0/19 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Proof and analysis of Biblical end time accuracey [Synnegi]
sidelined
Member (Idle past 6233 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 23 of 155 (171047)
12-23-2004 1:33 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by umliak
12-22-2004 11:19 PM


Edit to remove double post
This message has been edited by sidelined, 12-23-2004 01:34 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by umliak, posted 12-22-2004 11:19 PM umliak has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 6233 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 24 of 155 (171048)
12-23-2004 1:33 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by umliak
12-22-2004 11:19 PM


umliak
Well, for the record the sky is not always blue. It's a part of creation, and if you'd like some insight, I'd suggest that you light a match and look at the flame. The blue is the sky, the orange is sunset. The sky really is a flame; it is fire. The Bible describes things on a more spiritual and deeper level--a truthful level
You are asserting that the sky is a flame as though you actually believe this.Perhaps you could explain this statement to the satisfaction of myself and others who may be suspicious of the purpose for this assertion.
I don't know why you're participating in a Biblical thread which supports its accuracey in order to tell us believers we're wrong.
I think you have yet to show how you come to assert the accuracy of the bible since you will not present anything to have a debate upon. Is this because you doubt your ability to defend the position you are declaring?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by umliak, posted 12-22-2004 11:19 PM umliak has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by umliak, posted 12-23-2004 7:16 PM sidelined has replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 6233 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 34 of 155 (171228)
12-23-2004 8:44 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by umliak
12-23-2004 6:54 PM


Re: The same old same old.
umliak
There is about is more faithful evidence of a flood than evolution.
Talk is cheap. How about presenting your evidence that we might debate its worth or do you fear having to defend the rigidity of your stance?
I'm assuming you follow evolution since you claim to be an atheist. No? In fact your beliefs are much less developed than theology.
LOL you are so far off the mark it is stunning.Evolution has no dependency upon belief unlike the entirety of theology.The mechanisms that underlie the operation of evolution in nature work regardless of belief.They functioned before men came along and they will manage after we are long gone.
You drift along, as Jesus would say, like a tossing wave of the sea foaming up your shame
As an atheist myself I can assure you I most certainly do not drift along.Just like you I enjoy my life and my friends and family.Just like you I have my challenges and griefs to bear.WE are human you and Ibound to the same fate,and unable to get out of the game.
To me,this means that I do not have to impress others with my piety. There is no heaven nor is there hell but there is freedom from the fear of having to live up to unconscionable standards of conduct.
I care for people as a matter of enjoyment and not of imposed duty.
I am willing to die without question when the time comes fully aware that it is a permanent severence from the life I have lived and that there is nothing past that ending.
As I said, you believe in nothing and for some reason attempt to continue this nothingness and the end that is your lie
You need to get a grip and back up your little tirade by justifying your statement concerning lies.Perhaps you need to attack on a personal level because your are devoid of content for an arguement supporting your stance.
You want another analogy? Like a maggot that cannot see a man, though both exist and are living, and like a maggot has no eyes to see, so a man is a maggot to higher beings, with no 'eyes' to 'see' them, though both exist. If you were a maggot you probably wouldn't be aware of humans, so what makes you so great a human so as to be an atheist?
Here's another analogy: like a fetus you were with closed eyes in the womb, and one with your mother, so you are a fetus still with closed eyes in earth's womb, whereas at death you exit the womb (your body) to open your spiritual eyes--like you opened your eyelids at birth to discover this current life, and your human body.
Analogies are all you have? For one thing being an atheist isn't great or not great. It is just a stance I for one take based on the rationality of evidence presented.Do you really think we are atheist as a matter of ego?What possible connection is rolling through your gray matter that you would consider such drivel?
You credit scientific textbooks, but discredit spiritual testimony.
Spiritual testimony is very poor evidence in the same way as eyewitness estimony at a traffic accident or scene of a crime.
It is not poor because of the claim of spirituality it is poor because human beings are very susceptible to error especially about things at a personal or traumatic level.
You believe you are your body, though if you lost your arm you would not cease to exist. You can take foods out of your diet to change the composition of your physical body, yet if you take your entire physical body out of your diet, you believe you are no more.
I think you need to clarify this section I have highlighted.I will not comment on this part until I can unerstand properly just what you are trying to say here.
I would show you the Biblical passage, but while you can accept Newton's Laws and many other historical claims, you cannot accept anything beyond your realm of witness. A good website for you would be: Home - Near-Death Experiences and the Afterlife
Newtons laws can be tested to determine their validity and that validity does not require that you believe in it.Perhaps you would be willing to start a thread on any one of the topics on the website you presented and let us see how it stands up to the light of inquiry.
I didn't say I was a psychic, but by projecting the animal's spirit I can get a response--while it was licking itself.
Let's see your previous statement was...
can tell you that I have used the Holy Spirit and God to communicate telepathically with my pet cats
Now which is it.Projecting the animals spirit{whatever is that?}or communicating telepathically via the h.s. or god?When you are presenting bullshit at least make it a consistent bullshit.
Stand at a distance, and as you watch the animal, ask it questions about the Lord. Such as, "As a creature of God, and a witness of the Lord, in my time of distress and weak-faith, tell me what you know. I seek only the truth, for the truth will set me free."
So there is no possibilty you are delusional eh? I thought not.
And so I tell you the truth, you will receive all that you ask, but you must desire the truth and eternal life--as it belongs to God, not to you. The more you seek the truth and God, the more God will give you. But do not seek material things to possess, or status and power, for these belong to God, and afterall you were born naked and poor, and so you die naked and poor. So leave on earth what is part of earth, and give to God (yourself) to what is God's.
This is where we differ I suppose.I do not seek truth or eternal life. The former is a silly venture of people to be assured of a thumb to suck while the latter is the worst possible torture I could imagine inflicting upon a person.
So you are here to make war against God?
War on a non entity dreamed up by human beings? That would be such an excercise in futility.How about you bring god over to my place in person and then we will talk.Till then you are just blowing smoke up your own butt.
Please feel free to bring forth something more substantial than wishful thinking ok?

A centipede was happy quite, until a toad in fun
Said, "Pray, which leg comes after which?'
This raised his doubts to such a pitch
He fell distracted in the ditch
Not knowing how to run.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by umliak, posted 12-23-2004 6:54 PM umliak has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 6233 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 38 of 155 (171307)
12-24-2004 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by umliak
12-24-2004 10:53 AM


umliak
All believers must provide proof and backups to everything they say or believe in?
Only to those that can be tested. When you make statements about physical events happening such as this from your OP
So earth becomes solid white, as ice expands to take over the sky, and it cannot contend with the fire below, as earth is now physically transformed into Jesus' great white throne;
Here you have launched into realms where science can be applied through such studies as thermodynamics and your assertion can be shown invalid as a physical possibilty.
If you stick to strictly faith based personal events where the listener must agree with you without being able to apply critical reasoning then you may proceed.However this does not warrant you being able to state that this is anything more than your opinion.If I wish to debate you on this then I must do it on another level.
Likewise all you have to do is deny them on the basis you ignore or don't believe in them.
Such is the problem with free willed people is it not? I personally do not necessarily ignore these things however if they are not reasonable in their structure or they directly conflict with evidence they do not occupy much of my gray matter. I suppose if you do not like the rules then you must deal with it.
I didn't ask for the debate, you guys brought it up.
Buddy are you dense? This is a debate forum. You cannot post here without expecting a rebuttal.Why don't you run off to a nice christian discussion site where everyone believes and will tell you how insightful you are.
If you don't credit my opinion, then don't post in this thread
Opinions are like assholes,everybody has one. Here at evc we must back up our statements not merely by pointing out websites or literature but by explaining why we take the particular positions we do.You make statements then you are astonished to find thinking people who disagree with you?Horrors!
I've done enough 'debating' as it is. And I'm not a reknown Bible scholar, there are studies out there to support it
In other words you are not sure of the veracity of the book you so boldly refer to? Perhaps you should make an effort to find out a little bit about it don't you think?How about you take one item from the website you mentioned and see if you can show your reasoning for accepting this as correct?
just like there are studies to support your beliefs (evolution)
Ah isn't education wonderful? First off evolution is an observed phenomena that shows changes occuring over large periods of time.This is only the most simple of statements to descibe the general overall structure that is evidenced in the world.
The theory of evolution is that which we construct to explain the evidence we find.It is a huge model which,owing to the grandeur of life,is present in hundreds of different scientific disciplines from anthopology to genetics to physics,chemistry,biology, neuroscience, you get the picture.These are evidence not belief and they converge on the same general principle evolution.
And if evolution isn't a belief why is it referred to as Darwinism?
It has to be classified as something by humans since that is how we deal with knowledge.There are neo-darwinists too I suppose but these are divisions within the system dealing with how the evidence is read not the evidence itself.

A centipede was happy quite, until a toad in fun
Said, "Pray, which leg comes after which?'
This raised his doubts to such a pitch
He fell distracted in the ditch
Not knowing how to run.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by umliak, posted 12-24-2004 10:53 AM umliak has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 6233 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 54 of 155 (171614)
12-26-2004 8:26 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by umliak
12-23-2004 7:16 PM


So what would be the source of this "flame" as you call it. Is it something that our pilots have to deal with on a regular basis?
Why does the flame not extend down to the surface with the rest of the atmosphere?What is the evidence you have to present sir.
Why should I provide links to things you people have access to?
Because sir you are the one making the claim for the accuracy of the bible it is necessary for you to defend your position.Pick one claim,any one and we will listen to your arguement.

A centipede was happy quite, until a toad in fun
Said, "Pray, which leg comes after which?'
This raised his doubts to such a pitch
He fell distracted in the ditch
Not knowing how to run.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by umliak, posted 12-23-2004 7:16 PM umliak has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by umliak, posted 12-27-2004 12:29 PM sidelined has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 6233 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 80 of 155 (171986)
12-28-2004 7:59 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by mike the wiz
12-28-2004 6:54 PM


Re: Tongues
buzsaw
I speak in tongues.
Really? because you could give the validity of your claim a huge boost in believability if you were to have someone record you on videotape while doing so since the only thing I have ever heard from people saying they could do this was incomprehensible drivel.
There is a notice about the "speaking in tongues" phenomena at this website. glossolalia - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com
glossolalia
Glossolalia is fabricated, meaningless speech.
According to Dr. William T. Samarin, professor of anthropology and linguistics at the University of Toronto,
glossolalia consists of strings of meaningless syllables made up of sounds taken from those familiar to the speaker and put together more or less haphazardly .... Glossolalia is language-like because the speaker unconsciously wants it to be language-like. Yet in spite of superficial similarities, glossolalia fundamentally is not language [Nickell, 108].
When spoken by schizophrenics, glossolalia are recognized as gibberish. In charismatic Christian communities glossolalia is sacred and referred to as "speaking in tongues" or having "the gift of tongues." In Acts of the Apostles, tongues of fire are described as alighting on the Apostles, filling them with the Holy Spirit. Allegedly, this allowed the Apostles to speak in their own language but be understood by foreigners from several nations. Glossolalics, on the other hand, speak in a foreign language and are understood by nobody.
Glossolalics behave in various ways, depending upon the social expectations of their community. Some go into convulsions or lose consciousness; others are less dramatic. Some seem to go into a trance; some claim to have amnesia of their speaking in tongues. All believe they are possessed by the Holy Spirit and the gibberish they utter is meaningful. However, only one with faith and the gift of interpretation is capable of figuring out the meaning of the meaningless utterances. Of course, this belief gives the interpreter unchecked leeway in "translating" the meaningless utterances. Nicholas Spanos notes: "Typically, the interpretation supports the central tenets of the religious community" [Spanos, 147].
Uttering gibberish that is interpreted as profound mystical insight by holy men is an ancient practice. In Greece, even the priest of Apollo, god of light, engaged in prophetic babbling. The ancient Israelites did it. So did the Jansenists, the Quakers, the Methodists, and the Shakers.
Perhaps you would be willing to submit to James Randi and have the claim verified.You could simultaneously slap us back to the stone age in disbelief while at the same time winning the prize of 1 million dollars which you could donate to a good cause as you see fit.Here is the website. JREF - Home
Even though there is no good reason not to{other than avoiding having to back up your assertio0n} I doubt very much that there will be a snowballs chance in hell of this for one silly reason or another. In fact I am willing to bet on it.So how about it buz.Let us find a way to actually put our money where our mouth is eh? Put up or be done with it.

A centipede was happy quite, until a toad in fun
Said, "Pray, which leg comes after which?'
This raised his doubts to such a pitch
He fell distracted in the ditch
Not knowing how to run.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by mike the wiz, posted 12-28-2004 6:54 PM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by mike the wiz, posted 12-29-2004 8:56 AM sidelined has replied
 Message 104 by Shaz, posted 12-30-2004 2:29 PM sidelined has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 6233 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 92 of 155 (172195)
12-29-2004 11:19 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by mike the wiz
12-29-2004 8:56 AM


Re: Tongues
MTW
1 Corinthians 14:2 says For one who speaks in an (unknown) tongue speaks not to men but to G-d, for no one understands of catches his meaning, because in the (Holy) Spirit he utters secret truths and hidden things
How can the author of corithians make this statement? No one understands or catches the meaning so this implies he is talking to god as opposed to just plain babbling? Why would you utter secret and hidden things? For who's benefit?
This is about as classic a dodge as I could ever imsgine.You speak in tongues no one can understand about secret hidden things no one knows about.SHEESH. Talk about being PHD.And this is the work of someone with even marginal critical thinking skills?
P.S. Sorry for refering to you as buz.Must be the ...umm..umm... Oh yeah! Senilty.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by mike the wiz, posted 12-29-2004 8:56 AM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by jar, posted 12-29-2004 11:36 PM sidelined has not replied
 Message 94 by Phat, posted 12-30-2004 10:12 AM sidelined has replied
 Message 97 by umliak, posted 12-30-2004 11:25 AM sidelined has replied
 Message 108 by mike the wiz, posted 12-30-2004 6:22 PM sidelined has replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 6233 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 106 of 155 (172350)
12-30-2004 5:33 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by Phat
12-30-2004 10:12 AM


Re: Tongues
Phatboy
One reason that I have heard is because demons who are everywhere cannot understand the tongues and so God alone gets the message without Beezlebub running interference.
Why do you not question things? Obviously the person you heard this from cannot have knowledge of it being more than incomprehensible babble since we have already estasblished this,so the person who stated such has some other reason to do so. This is the same situation with the writer of corinthians.His statement cannot be something he could have verified as he is supposerdly incapable as are the rest of us.

A centipede was happy quite, until a toad in fun
Said, "Pray, which leg comes after which?'
This raised his doubts to such a pitch
He fell distracted in the ditch
Not knowing how to run.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Phat, posted 12-30-2004 10:12 AM Phat has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 6233 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 107 of 155 (172351)
12-30-2004 5:47 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by umliak
12-30-2004 11:25 AM


Re: Tongues
umliak
If men knew how to interpret tongues, which is a real language, then we would understand
My point exactly! The writer of corinthians could have no knowledge of the very claim he is trying to establish in exactly the way he says none of us can.And what is the basis for your claim that it is a real language?
However it is better to be told things by God which you cannot understand than to hear nothing from God at all
How is any of that make the least bit of sense? God speaks in a laguage you cannot understand? If I were to tell you something vitally important in Swahili how is that of any value? How would you judge its worth?It is no different from hearing nothing at all.
For God plants seeds, and they grow. In time and experience the inspiration from God nourishes you.
So you say.There is no way you can attribute that to speaking in tongues since as you say you cannot understand what is being said.
I would say, you learn from it in time, but then someone like you would look at that and disbelieve--rationalizing it. So I explain it in a manner you will believe, because this manner is true.
And by what means do I determine it is true or just you fooling yourself?
If you look at a new type of animal one day and don't know or understand it, but then with time it becomes more familiar to you, then it is no longer "gibberish" to you, is it
Of course not since I can test the validity of the understanding because I have the animal here to examine. I have no such thing with your glossolia.

A centipede was happy quite, until a toad in fun
Said, "Pray, which leg comes after which?'
This raised his doubts to such a pitch
He fell distracted in the ditch
Not knowing how to run.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by umliak, posted 12-30-2004 11:25 AM umliak has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 6233 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 115 of 155 (172381)
12-30-2004 8:08 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by mike the wiz
12-30-2004 6:22 PM


Re: Tongues
Baba {the glossaliac formerly known as mike the wiz}
But all I said is that I speak in tongues. It's a statement of fact.
Why would you bring forth a statement concerning the speaking in tongues when it is a meaningless statement devoid of both concept and evidence? That a person can speak gibberish and it is considered a conduit to god and not an abberation of the person's personality convinces only those who do not raise their bullshit radar.
Oh and BTW it is not fact it is opinion until you offer verification Baba.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by mike the wiz, posted 12-30-2004 6:22 PM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by mike the wiz, posted 12-30-2004 8:14 PM sidelined has not replied
 Message 117 by mike the wiz, posted 12-30-2004 8:25 PM sidelined has replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 6233 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 119 of 155 (172517)
12-31-2004 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by mike the wiz
12-30-2004 8:25 PM


Re: Tongues
MTW
I am not angry mike I am concerned.
R u considering that I was just mentioning tongues as a personal reality?Y must I be bull****ing? Y r u so cynical against mikey?
You need not be bullshitting however you may well be deluding yourself. I am not cynical I am critical of your lack of willingness to properly question your "gift".
This message has been edited by sidelined, 12-31-2004 12:15 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by mike the wiz, posted 12-30-2004 8:25 PM mike the wiz has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025