someone has to be wrong

[SweetSue92]

Oh how perfect. You have zero proof for that I'm sure, but believe it easily enough.

You're such a complete fraud

Actually, there are thousands of accounts of people describing old friends and places that they've never been to, of someone who recently died. You on the other hand, have a book of fiction. And I'm saying that reincarnation is a definite POSSIBILITY, not a fact, yet.

But you believe it, you complete fraudster. On people's ACCOUNTS.

You're completely done in Taz, a total fraud. Just admit you hate the Christian God and are a total poser

So you tell me how these people know all these things, or how a 4 year old can master the piano, or math...

But why does this make you so upset?

Oh and btw, if you were the least bit interested in any kind of "proof" as you say, you might consider that Mozart was probably an autistic savant with his giftedness and most certainly not reincarnated.

But you're just so exposed Taz

You can't prove that Mozart wasn't reincarnated.

So, Taz prefers the supernatural explanation that cannot be proven rather than the scientific one, which makes a lot more sense.

Interesting

 

[Taz]

Actually, there are thousands of accounts of people describing old friends and places that they've never been to, of someone who recently died. You on the other hand, have a book of fiction. And I'm saying that reincarnation is a definite POSSIBILITY, not a fact, yet.

But you believe it, you complete fraudster. On people's ACCOUNTS.

You're completely done in Taz, a total fraud. Just admit you hate the Christian God and are a total poser

So you tell me how these people know all these things, or how a 4 year old can master the piano, or math...

But why does this make you so upset?

Oh and btw, if you were the least bit interested in any kind of "proof" as you say, you might consider that Mozart was probably an autistic savant with his giftedness and most certainly not reincarnated.

But you're just so exposed Taz

You can't prove that Mozart wasn't reincarnated.

So, Taz prefers the supernatural explanation that cannot be proven rather than the scientific one, which makes a lot more sense.

Interesting

I say it's a leading THEORY, imho. Nothing scientifically proven, which I have no problem with. Unlike you, who thinks your invisible superbeing is real without any scientific proof.

 

[SweetSue92]

But you believe it, you complete fraudster. On people's ACCOUNTS.

You're completely done in Taz, a total fraud. Just admit you hate the Christian God and are a total poser

So you tell me how these people know all these things, or how a 4 year old can master the piano, or math...

But why does this make you so upset?

Oh and btw, if you were the least bit interested in any kind of "proof" as you say, you might consider that Mozart was probably an autistic savant with his giftedness and most certainly not reincarnated.

But you're just so exposed Taz

You can't prove that Mozart wasn't reincarnated.

So, Taz prefers the supernatural explanation that cannot be proven rather than the scientific one, which makes a lot more sense.

Interesting

I say it's a leading THEORY, imho. Nothing scientifically proven, which I have no problem with. Unlike you, who thinks your invisible superbeing is real without any scientific proof.

That's not what you said. Here is what you said exactly, post 99:

I believe that we live over and over again (reincarnation). Maybe you'll be smarter next time around.

And then you confirmed it by saying this is how 4 year olds can have amazing talents.

Wow, Taz.

 

[Taz]

So you tell me how these people know all these things, or how a 4 year old can master the piano, or math...

But why does this make you so upset?

Oh and btw, if you were the least bit interested in any kind of "proof" as you say, you might consider that Mozart was probably an autistic savant with his giftedness and most certainly not reincarnated.

But you're just so exposed Taz

You can't prove that Mozart wasn't reincarnated.

So, Taz prefers the supernatural explanation that cannot be proven rather than the scientific one, which makes a lot more sense.

Interesting

I say it's a leading THEORY, imho. Nothing scientifically proven, which I have no problem with. Unlike you, who thinks your invisible superbeing is real without any scientific proof.

That's not what you said. Here is what you said exactly, post 99:

I believe that we live over and over again (reincarnation). Maybe you'll be smarter next time around.

And then you confirmed it by saying this is how 4 year olds can have amazing talents.

Wow, Taz.

I believe it in the sense that it's very likely, imho. Hope that helps.

Btw, you're very angry this morning. Got kicked out of church?

 

[SweetSue92]

Oh and btw, if you were the least bit interested in any kind of "proof" as you say, you might consider that Mozart was probably an autistic savant with his giftedness and most certainly not reincarnated.

But you're just so exposed Taz

You can't prove that Mozart wasn't reincarnated.

So, Taz prefers the supernatural explanation that cannot be proven rather than the scientific one, which makes a lot more sense.

Interesting

I say it's a leading THEORY, imho. Nothing scientifically proven, which I have no problem with. Unlike you, who thinks your invisible superbeing is real without any scientific proof.

That's not what you said. Here is what you said exactly, post 99:

I believe that we live over and over again (reincarnation). Maybe you'll be smarter next time around.

And then you confirmed it by saying this is how 4 year olds can have amazing talents.

Wow, Taz.

I believe it in the sense that it's very likely, imho. Hope that helps.

Btw, you're very angry this morning. Got kicked out of church?

Stop projecting Taz. It's not my problem you exposed yourself as a fraud

 

[Taz]

You can't prove that Mozart wasn't reincarnated.

So, Taz prefers the supernatural explanation that cannot be proven rather than the scientific one, which makes a lot more sense.

Interesting

I say it's a leading THEORY, imho. Nothing scientifically proven, which I have no problem with. Unlike you, who thinks your invisible superbeing is real without any scientific proof.

That's not what you said. Here is what you said exactly, post 99:

I believe that we live over and over again (reincarnation). Maybe you'll be smarter next time around.

And then you confirmed it by saying this is how 4 year olds can have amazing talents.

Wow, Taz.

I believe it in the sense that it's very likely, imho. Hope that helps.

Btw, you're very angry this morning. Got kicked out of church?

Stop projecting Taz. It's not my problem you exposed yourself as a fraud

Why are you so worried about calling me a fraud? The church is the real fraud, I'm not actually hurting anyone with what I believe. Why does it bother you so much?

 

[diver52]

Extremely unlikely.

.

Extremely unlikely.

the final judgement will be when all remaining are the same persuasion. correctly, were there a final judgement.

And if everyone were a democrat there would be no more arguments on policy. Where you have one person, you have agreement - maybe. Where you have two people, you have an argument.

.

And if everyone were a democrat there would be no more arguments on policy. Where you have one person, you have agreement - maybe. Where you have two people, you have an argument.

for the faithful, the final judgement will be for all humanity as proclaimed there will not be dissension among those remaining all will have triumphed in unison as the reason for their judgement for either their admission to the Everlasting or their extinction.

It has always struck me that the typical definition of "the faithful" is "people who agree with me." Of course, it finally comes down to the reality that the only person who fully agrees with you is you.

.

It has always struck me that the typical definition of "the faithful" is "people who agree with me." Of course, it finally comes down to the reality that the only person who fully agrees with you is you.

there has to be a reciprocal response for faith to have meaning.

faith is the means to fulfill what is perceived - faith a house can be built does not build it, after the house is built the faith accomplished the objective.

evolutionary change occurs through faith by means of the metaphysical to accomplish an objective.

Faith is a very human thing. Everyone has it in one fashion or another. Some of the atheists here show very high levels of faith. However, when you referred to "the faithful" you weren't talking about people with faith. You were talking about people who agreed with you.

 

[diver52]

that's not proof at all....
not a big problem for you?? so no proof is not a problem?

I have proof enough for me and those who accept what I testify to. You are the one who is lacking.

no--you do not have proof at all--plain and simple = not true--not real
let's be real here--there are no spirits/etc as you claim

Like I said it is your prerogative to believe that. As for me and my household we believe it is most definitely real and we have enough proof for ourselves. Again it is you that is lacking.

if no proof---not real--plain and simple
believe --yes you believe--that's all there is
re·li·gion
/rəˈlijən/
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

be·lief
/bəˈlēf/

1. an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
   "his belief in the value of hard work"
2. trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.

I believe that Jesus Christ lived, was dead and buried, and rose again from the dead. I believe this on good evidence from the time AND on other evidence. If I am wrong, I am dead in my sins and my faith is in vain. The Bible says so.

It is not a "feeling". Christianity is not based on a "feeling".

But you are assuming your sins are real. What if there is no such thing?

 

[harmonica]

I have proof enough for me and those who accept what I testify to. You are the one who is lacking.

no--you do not have proof at all--plain and simple = not true--not real
let's be real here--there are no spirits/etc as you claim

Like I said it is your prerogative to believe that. As for me and my household we believe it is most definitely real and we have enough proof for ourselves. Again it is you that is lacking.

if no proof---not real--plain and simple
believe --yes you believe--that's all there is
re·li·gion
/rəˈlijən/
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

be·lief
/bəˈlēf/

1. an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
   "his belief in the value of hard work"
2. trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.

I believe that Jesus Christ lived, was dead and buried, and rose again from the dead. I believe this on good evidence from the time AND on other evidence. If I am wrong, I am dead in my sins and my faith is in vain. The Bible says so.

It is not a "feeling". Christianity is not based on a "feeling".

But you are assuming your sins are real. What if there is no such thing?

sin is also a human made word/etc = fake

 

[diver52]

no--you do not have proof at all--plain and simple = not true--not real
let's be real here--there are no spirits/etc as you claim

Like I said it is your prerogative to believe that. As for me and my household we believe it is most definitely real and we have enough proof for ourselves. Again it is you that is lacking.

if no proof---not real--plain and simple
believe --yes you believe--that's all there is
re·li·gion
/rəˈlijən/
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

be·lief
/bəˈlēf/

1. an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
   "his belief in the value of hard work"
2. trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.

I believe that Jesus Christ lived, was dead and buried, and rose again from the dead. I believe this on good evidence from the time AND on other evidence. If I am wrong, I am dead in my sins and my faith is in vain. The Bible says so.

It is not a "feeling". Christianity is not based on a "feeling".

But you are assuming your sins are real. What if there is no such thing?

sin is also a human made word/etc = fake

So you quite firmly believe. Faith is a funny old thing, isn't it?

 

[ding]

only one religion can be right, correct? ..that means the others are wrong--correct?

Are you 6 years old?

Because that’s the logic of a 6 year old.

a very thoughtful, mature reply

Yes, it was. Stop acting like a six year old and you won’t be treated like a six year old.

 

[harmonica]

only one religion can be right, correct? ..that means the others are wrong--correct?

Are you 6 years old?

Because that’s the logic of a 6 year old.

a very thoughtful, mature reply

Yes, it was. Stop acting like a six year old and you won’t be treated like a six year old.

hahahhahaha
we've had these discussions before ''my friend'''
hahahhahahahah
no--YOUR reply was immature
....I try to have civil/MATURE/adult/polite discussions until the other poster starts to be a jackass --like YOU
...YOU are the one who did not want a civil/mature/polite discussion = this is one of the major problems in the WORLD--jackasses like you

 

[ding]

only one religion can be right, correct? ..that means the others are wrong--correct?

Are you 6 years old?

Because that’s the logic of a 6 year old.

Religion 1 says, "My religion is true. Other religions are wrong."

Religion 2 says, "My religion is true. Other religions are wrong."
.......................

Religion 294 says, "My religion is true. Other religions are wrong."

Mathematically only a maximum of one of these religions are true. I learned that when I was 7. Can you give us your advanced 8 year old understanding?

Show me where religions say that.

 

[harmonica]

Like I said it is your prerogative to believe that. As for me and my household we believe it is most definitely real and we have enough proof for ourselves. Again it is you that is lacking.

if no proof---not real--plain and simple
believe --yes you believe--that's all there is
re·li·gion
/rəˈlijən/
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

be·lief
/bəˈlēf/

1. an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
   "his belief in the value of hard work"
2. trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.

I believe that Jesus Christ lived, was dead and buried, and rose again from the dead. I believe this on good evidence from the time AND on other evidence. If I am wrong, I am dead in my sins and my faith is in vain. The Bible says so.

It is not a "feeling". Christianity is not based on a "feeling".

But you are assuming your sins are real. What if there is no such thing?

sin is also a human made word/etc = fake

So you quite firmly believe. Faith is a funny old thing, isn't it?

no I don't believe in ''sin''
humans rape/rob/murder/etc because they are human
let's look at the ''''sin'' of murder.....over 85% of murders are committed by males
why don't females commit more murders?

 

[diver52]

if no proof---not real--plain and simple
believe --yes you believe--that's all there is
re·li·gion
/rəˈlijən/
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

be·lief
/bəˈlēf/

1. an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.
   "his belief in the value of hard work"
2. trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.

I believe that Jesus Christ lived, was dead and buried, and rose again from the dead. I believe this on good evidence from the time AND on other evidence. If I am wrong, I am dead in my sins and my faith is in vain. The Bible says so.

It is not a "feeling". Christianity is not based on a "feeling".

But you are assuming your sins are real. What if there is no such thing?

sin is also a human made word/etc = fake

So you quite firmly believe. Faith is a funny old thing, isn't it?

no I don't believe in ''sin''
humans rape/rob/murder/etc because they are human
let's look at the ''''sin'' of murder.....over 85% of murders are committed by males
why don't females commit more murders?

I don't believe in sin either. I just don't think that something is true or not true simply because of what I believe.

 

[presonorek]

..so--what you really are saying, no one knows anything....the bible can be interpreted a million ways = no one knows anything--it's all man made--interpreted by humans and WRITTEN by humans.....?

As C.S. Lewis put it, "When the Author walks on the stage the play is over".

He will walk on the stage and make no mistake. But then the play is over.

So when does this happen? Have any clue at all?

I am not trying to tell you a date as to when it will happen. I am saying that it has not happened yet is why the world is still spinning even today. The Bible is "written by humans" because when the Author reveals all, "the play is over".

So if the Bible was written by humans, then humans are the authors, not your invisible buddy.

"Invisible buddy"

More 12 year old garbage. Are you actually 12?

So the legitimate concerns of a 12 year old are irrelevant just because of their age?

Insulting people does not make the insulter correct. That is flawed logic. Here are the two sides of the argument:

The Bible was written by human beings.

The Bible was written by the God character inside the Bible. (Most people have never seen this God character. That is why Taz calls Him invisible. It is nothing personal against you.)

Prove your side of the argument to be most logical. If not then bow out gracefully. Don't make inaccurate age assertions. That causes me to question your other assertions.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

One of these statements is true. Just because the others are false does not make one of the them untrue.

No, that's a silly, elementary error on your part. A more accurate illustration of the direct conflicts between religions and their claims would be to list 4 claims from 4 religions that were mutually exclusive.

But, even that illustration would be more constrained than what I am saying and than what would be required to show no two religions can be simultaneously 'all true'. You don't actually need a list of claims from all religions, the truth of each precluding the truth of all others. You would only need to list two at a time -- one each from two different religions -- and show they preclude each other. Then another pair from another combination of religions, and so on, until you have shown that no two religions can be simultaneously all true. And in this way you will have shown that only one or none of the religions can be all true.

It seems your skills in logic aren't quite what you were making them out to be. Some higher level math in college would have helped. Specifically, Discrete Mathematics.

Wanna try again, or do you want me to do it for you?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So, by the above exercise, it's academic that only one or none of the religions may be 'all true'.

So, how do we decide which one? Or, that none of them are true?

We can't. There is no good method to tell which is true and which is false. And this is where scientists check out.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I don't believe in sin either. I just don't think that something is true or not true simply because of what I believe

But there is the elephant in the room of false equivalence in your unqualified statement.

I will assume you don't believe that rainbow unicorns make ice cream in the 6th dimension. Or in leprechauns, or in the tooth fairy.

You proceed through life as if these things are false, whether you want to admit it or not. So, in the end, what is the difference between declaring them false, and not? There isn't any, save for in an esoteric philosophical discussion.

Now, consider the claim that a new antibiotic can cure a specific strain of Lyme Disease. The evidence thus far is sparse, but we can continue testing this claim.

Surely you don't place this claim on the same shelf as a claim of rainbow unicorns making ice cream in the 6th dimension. For one, we have a way of testing its truth. Second, it is plausible and requires no magic.

"Sin" is more fantastic than rainbow unicorns. Look at all of the other extraordinary, magical claims that must also be true for "sin" to be true.

 

[BreezeWood]

.
the final judgement will be when all remaining are the same persuasion. correctly, were there a final judgement.

And if everyone were a democrat there would be no more arguments on policy. Where you have one person, you have agreement - maybe. Where you have two people, you have an argument.

.

And if everyone were a democrat there would be no more arguments on policy. Where you have one person, you have agreement - maybe. Where you have two people, you have an argument.

for the faithful, the final judgement will be for all humanity as proclaimed there will not be dissension among those remaining all will have triumphed in unison as the reason for their judgement for either their admission to the Everlasting or their extinction.

It has always struck me that the typical definition of "the faithful" is "people who agree with me." Of course, it finally comes down to the reality that the only person who fully agrees with you is you.

.

It has always struck me that the typical definition of "the faithful" is "people who agree with me." Of course, it finally comes down to the reality that the only person who fully agrees with you is you.

there has to be a reciprocal response for faith to have meaning.

faith is the means to fulfill what is perceived - faith a house can be built does not build it, after the house is built the faith accomplished the objective.

evolutionary change occurs through faith by means of the metaphysical to accomplish an objective.

Faith is a very human thing. Everyone has it in one fashion or another. Some of the atheists here show very high levels of faith. However, when you referred to "the faithful" you weren't talking about people with faith. You were talking about people who agreed with you.

.

Faith is a very human thing. Everyone has it in one fashion or another. Some of the atheists here show very high levels of faith. However, when you referred to "the faithful" you weren't talking about people with faith. You were talking about people who agreed with you.

Faith is a very human thing ...

all beings have faith there is no certainty.


You were talking about people who agreed with you ...

that's a stretch, no one else here recognizes the religion of antiquity that I am aware of - that really is not relevant though to your skewed idea that faith is not reciprocal as to a conclusion that does put you in the same boat as the false theists.