Religion… What do you think?

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6046

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@king_saturn:

“I looked on that site about Sid Roth's It's Supernatural and have not seen videos of GOD healing someone in real time where we see the effects of GOD restoring or regenerating someone in the video itself. The people would discuss about how they would be healed and what supposedly the sickness it was they was healed from but not a real time event in the video where said person was restored right there from a sickness that could be shown to be real time restoration.”

Well, the real time event is irrelevant, as it can be presumed that said event was previously verified; in order for you to have a point, you'd need to have some sort of proof that the guest was not credible or discredited; this is again your stubbornly sticking to a lost point; if you can produce evidence that a sizable number of his guess, something even less than around 30%, then you might have a good point. These described events are easily verifiable. And, here, we get this, only after I'd shown that you previously was only half reading my posts, almost as if you proved something by reading the post fully for the first time now. Here, it's based on trying to create the premise that people who are aiming to be credible, truthfully, and trustworthy should be viewed with even more skepticism than people who thrive in dishonesty; this is backward logic; you're basically trying to make a claim from the imaginary context, where there is below zero chance of success in the real context; as I said before, the professional thing to do would be to simply move to another point and see if you have something there or just go with the largest population of people on planet earth and just accept that God is real, away from your little sub-bubble group of people. And, then, you have to go and do an exploration into the scholarly Christian community; this is a repose, yes, but, not a refutation of anything without some actual credible counter information like these guests should somehow be deemed as incredible for reasons that you have yet to lay out; and, this would be taking the total number of guests or a sizable number of the guests.

“Everything else you have stated is personal conjecture again. Why do you keep doing this ?”

Do you even know what you're talking about here? I'm responding your your conjectures and speculations: your making a sweeping generalization that God has never regrown a limb before, that people receiving medical treatments somehow means that all examples of God's miracles have been explained somewhere, and that this somehow leads one to conclude that there is scant evidence of God so much so that He's barely worth ever mentioning; however, you've yet to demonstrate that you've done anything close to the comprehensive and exhaustive research for such a sweeping generalization?

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6046

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27852  Edited By dshipp17

@forgotblobfish:

“Newtons equation was proved wrong by A: Einstein and B: The EM drive”

Even if this were true, what would this have to do with my reference that the Newton equation could be used to compute the effects of gravity on objects and your later random, out of the left field reference to another equation, as if that somehow established a point? And, here, again, you're making another off the cuff reference to something that had nothing to do with anything with regards to answering the matter at hand.

My guess is that Einstein established that Newton's equation is off under certain conditions that are not relevant in a real time everyday environment (e.g. it can be shown that Newton's equations are off when you approach the speed of light; however, when Newton derived his equation, we were talking about speeds produced by horse and carriage, conditions where his equations are quite accurate and correct); however, to say that his equation was proven wrong by Einstein is just plan disingenuous and wrong; for reference, go to the field of physics referred to as classical mechanics which is still quite correct under everyday conditions; Newton's laws support this branch of physics quite well; one famous constant in physics that is used in so many different types of physics calculations is the acceleration due to gravity (9.82); you calculate the acceleration due to gravity by using Newton's equation and the Universal gravitational constant; hence, your suggestion that it's wrong is just plan bunk; you're only trying to sound good for people. An EM drive sounds like something from a science fiction movie.

“Ya know what, we had the same problem with forewhatsisface, the debate was not fun anymore because when he was beaten he would not budge. Leave the debate.”

You're starting to sound like an imitation version of Donald Trump here; all someone has to do is disagree and suddenly they're the greatest something that has every existed; the only thing going on is this dude stubbornly refusing to concede a point that he lost many post iterations ago.

Avatar image for forgotblobfish
ForgotBlobfish

151

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17 said:

@forgotblobfish:

“Newtons equation was proved wrong by A: Einstein and B: The EM drive”

Even if this were true, what would this have to do with my reference that the Newton equation could be used to compute the effects of gravity on objects and your later random, out of the left field reference to another equation, as if that somehow established a point? And, here, again, you're making another off the cuff reference to something that had nothing to do with anything with regards to answering the matter at hand.

My guess is that Einstein established that Newton's equation is off under certain conditions that are not relevant in a real time everyday environment (e.g. it can be shown that Newton's equations are off when you approach the speed of light; however, when Newton derived his equation, we were talking about speeds produced by horse and carriage, conditions where his equations are quite accurate and correct); however, to say that his equation was proven wrong by Einstein is just plan disingenuous and wrong; for reference, go to the field of physics referred to as classical mechanics which is still quite correct under everyday conditions; Newton's laws support this branch of physics quite well; one famous constant in physics that is used in so many different types of physics calculations is the acceleration due to gravity (9.82); you calculate the acceleration due to gravity by using Newton's equation and the Universal gravitational constant; hence, your suggestion that it's wrong is just plan bunk; you're only trying to sound good for people. An EM drive sounds like something from a science fiction movie.

“Ya know what, we had the same problem with forewhatsisface, the debate was not fun anymore because when he was beaten he would not budge. Leave the debate.”

You're starting to sound like an imitation version of Donald Trump here; all someone has to do is disagree and suddenly they're the greatest something that has every existed; the only thing going on is this dude stubbornly refusing to concede a point that he lost many post iterations ago.

Newtons equation does not work in extreme situations (e.g. Black hole), that is when we see it is wrong and use Einstein, so if it is wrong in the extremes, God is the ultimate extreme, so therefore wrong. If you ever went to Uni you would know that (I severely doubt you did),and the EM drive sounds silly, so what? Burning immortal fire sounds more ridiculous, and we have NUL proof of that. We have mathematical AND physical proof the EM drive works! (Also, 9:82 is only Earths gravity. I learnt that in year 8 for (badum tish) Gods sake.)

Avatar image for forgotblobfish
ForgotBlobfish

151

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17 said:

@king_saturn:

“I looked on that site about Sid Roth's It's Supernatural and have not seen videos of GOD healing someone in real time where we see the effects of GOD restoring or regenerating someone in the video itself. The people would discuss about how they would be healed and what supposedly the sickness it was they was healed from but not a real time event in the video where said person was restored right there from a sickness that could be shown to be real time restoration.”

Well, the real time event is irrelevant, as it can be presumed that said event was previously verified; in order for you to have a point, you'd need to have some sort of proof that the guest was not credible or discredited; this is again your stubbornly sticking to a lost point; if you can produce evidence that a sizable number of his guess, something even less than around 30%, then you might have a good point. These described events are easily verifiable. And, here, we get this, only after I'd shown that you previously was only half reading my posts, almost as if you proved something by reading the post fully for the first time now. Here, it's based on trying to create the premise that people who are aiming to be credible, truthfully, and trustworthy should be viewed with even more skepticism than people who thrive in dishonesty; this is backward logic; you're basically trying to make a claim from the imaginary context, where there is below zero chance of success in the real context; as I said before, the professional thing to do would be to simply move to another point and see if you have something there or just go with the largest population of people on planet earth and just accept that God is real, away from your little sub-bubble group of people. And, then, you have to go and do an exploration into the scholarly Christian community; this is a repose, yes, but, not a refutation of anything without some actual credible counter information like these guests should somehow be deemed as incredible for reasons that you have yet to lay out; and, this would be taking the total number of guests or a sizable number of the guests.

“Everything else you have stated is personal conjecture again. Why do you keep doing this ?”

Do you even know what you're talking about here? I'm responding your your conjectures and speculations: your making a sweeping generalization that God has never regrown a limb before, that people receiving medical treatments somehow means that all examples of God's miracles have been explained somewhere, and that this somehow leads one to conclude that there is scant evidence of God so much so that He's barely worth ever mentioning; however, you've yet to demonstrate that you've done anything close to the comprehensive and exhaustive research for such a sweeping generalization?

"real time doesn't matter" Wow. Just, wow. You know what? Lets see if you see the problem with that.

Avatar image for abstractraze
AbstractRaze

3560

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27855  Edited By AbstractRaze

Up Helly Aa - Ancestral Festival

All people with Indo-Germanic ancestry around the globe, are greatly invited to take part of the Up Helly Aa festival, to mark the end of the Yule winter season and therefore honor our ancestry, where everything began.

The festival will take place on the 28th January 2020, on the Shetland Islands of Scotland.

Heritage required for a deeper meaning:

No Caption Provided

Of course, people with none-Germanic heritage, are invited, as spectators.

Long-life the All-Father Wotan, caring for us from Walhalla.

-

-

-

-

-

Loading Video...
Loading Video...

-

Even Donald Trump doesn't miss this:

No Caption Provided

Avatar image for forgotblobfish
ForgotBlobfish

151

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Up Helly Aa - Ancestral Festival

All people with Indo-Germanic ancestry around the globe, are greatly invited to take part of the Up Helly Aa festival, to mark the end of the Yule winter season and therefore honor our ancestry, where everything began.

The festival will take place on the 28th January 2020, on the Shetland Islands of Scotland.

Heritage required for a deeper meaning:

No Caption Provided

Of course, people with none-Germanic heritage, are invited, as spectators.

Long-life the All-Father Wotan.

-

-

-

-

-

Loading Video...
Loading Video...

Sounds fun-

Even Donald Trump doesn't miss this:

No Caption Provided

Avatar image for abstractraze
AbstractRaze

3560

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27857  Edited By AbstractRaze

@forgotblobfish said:
@abstractraze said:

Sounds fun-

It's an annual festival, this means, you can come in 2021, 2022 and so on.

It's a festival which is solidifying after every year since 2004 (Modern Festival), the Germanic peoples are crossing miles through the Atlantic and Pacific oceans in order to take part in it.

Avatar image for king_saturn
King Saturn

223610

Forum Posts

509

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17 said:

@king_saturn:

“I looked on that site about Sid Roth's It's Supernatural and have not seen videos of GOD healing someone in real time where we see the effects of GOD restoring or regenerating someone in the video itself. The people would discuss about how they would be healed and what supposedly the sickness it was they was healed from but not a real time event in the video where said person was restored right there from a sickness that could be shown to be real time restoration.”

Well, the real time event is irrelevant, as it can be presumed that said event was previously verified; in order for you to have a point, you'd need to have some sort of proof that the guest was not credible or discredited; this is again your stubbornly sticking to a lost point; if you can produce evidence that a sizable number of his guess, something even less than around 30%, then you might have a good point. These described events are easily verifiable. And, here, we get this, only after I'd shown that you previously was only half reading my posts, almost as if you proved something by reading the post fully for the first time now. Here, it's based on trying to create the premise that people who are aiming to be credible, truthfully, and trustworthy should be viewed with even more skepticism than people who thrive in dishonesty; this is backward logic; you're basically trying to make a claim from the imaginary context, where there is below zero chance of success in the real context; as I said before, the professional thing to do would be to simply move to another point and see if you have something there or just go with the largest population of people on planet earth and just accept that God is real, away from your little sub-bubble group of people. And, then, you have to go and do an exploration into the scholarly Christian community; this is a repose, yes, but, not a refutation of anything without some actual credible counter information like these guests should somehow be deemed as incredible for reasons that you have yet to lay out; and, this would be taking the total number of guests or a sizable number of the guests.

“Everything else you have stated is personal conjecture again. Why do you keep doing this ?”

Do you even know what you're talking about here? I'm responding your your conjectures and speculations: your making a sweeping generalization that God has never regrown a limb before, that people receiving medical treatments somehow means that all examples of God's miracles have been explained somewhere, and that this somehow leads one to conclude that there is scant evidence of God so much so that He's barely worth ever mentioning; however, you've yet to demonstrate that you've done anything close to the comprehensive and exhaustive research for such a sweeping generalization?

Real Time is Totally Relevant, dshipp. The idea that you don't think it is shows that you do not really understand the concept of strong evidence. Having people speak on miracles that GOD has done for them in a video would not compare at all to having real time recording of GOD restoring a limb right in front of your eyes while that person was being prayed for. I can not see how you do not understand how valuable this type of evidence is. Here we go with the personal conjecture again. You can not form a reply without somehow assuming something about me or saying something totally off base.

My speculations ? What have we been talking about, dshipp ? This whole discussion was about what would be The Strongest Evidence for GOD and as I have stated that would be GOD restoring someone in real time in a recording. It's not a sweeping generalization of anything. It's a statement about what would be Strong Evidence for GOD. I said earlier I have not seen anything like this before and you have not shown anything like this as far as Real Time recordings of GOD healing someone. So basically this type of Strong Evidence for GOD is not found very often.

Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@forgotblobfish: On the Religion thread, you called King Saturn an "absolute asshole" after demanding that he stop using bold and italics because you say so. First, you're not his boss; second, you said all of that to him after you stated that only the religious people had been civil. You were wrong on both accounts and therefore made yourself look stupid and a hypocrite. I see a lot of typists on here with very few posts acting like they're top flight, and it's incredibly dumb.

Avatar image for forgotblobfish
ForgotBlobfish

151

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@iron_tiger: Sorry. I didn't mean asshole btw. I meant idiot (t's and c's say its not ok). Gonna stop

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8415

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@iron_tiger: @forgotblobfish:

I am the boss of @king_saturn: and I told him to write the way he writes. And as your boss I request that you argue for a bit longer.

Avatar image for forgotblobfish
ForgotBlobfish

151

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@spareheadone: Yes sir, sorry sir. Would you like a frappachino with that?

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8415

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for forgotblobfish
ForgotBlobfish

151

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@iron_tiger: And i'm not trying to be "top flite" I am trying to help, albiet in a clumsy way

Avatar image for forgotblobfish
ForgotBlobfish

151

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@spareheadone: Yes sir. Coming up. Here's a bit of my breakfast McMuffin too

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8415

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@forgotblobfish:

Stop brown nosing and get back to calling iron tiger a fool!

Avatar image for forgotblobfish
ForgotBlobfish

151

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@spareheadone: And get Terry to fire my driver, I don't like the look of him. He hates me.

(the thick of it)

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6046

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27868  Edited By dshipp17

@forgotblobfish:

“Newtons equation does not work in extreme situations (e.g. Black hole), that is when we see it is wrong and use Einstein, so if it is wrong in the extremes, God is the ultimate extreme, so therefore wrong. If you ever went to Uni you would know that (I severely doubt you did)”

You sound like rubbish here for only partly reading my thread response, where you're still trying to save face; extreme conditions are a type of certain conditions; everyday life isn't within a black hole. Classical mechanics is a relevant branch of physics so Newton's laws are correct (e.g. as I said, the acceleration due to gravity is important in all sorts of physics calculations; it is also important in many engineering calculations). If I'm educating you on physics here, of course I went to university; in your attempt to save face, you're bringing stuff in out of left field whether than sticking the the matter at hand.

You're confusing being off under extreme conditions with being wrong which is a totally different matter altogether.

“(Also, 9:82 is only Earths gravity. I learnt that in year 8 for (badum tish) Gods sake.)”

I'm afraid not; you wouldn't have learned this stuff in an eight grade science class; they start covering some of this in a first year university physics course; sounds good, if you never actually took physics in a university; and, actually, with your out of the left field introduction of other information, the others would start in a second to third year university level physics course.

Also, this side stuff is still irrelevant to the point that gravity has an effect on objects that is represented by its universal gravitational constant.

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6046

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27869  Edited By dshipp17

@king_saturn:

“Real Time is Totally Relevant, dshipp. The idea that you don't think it is shows that you do not really understand the concept of strong evidence. Having people speak on miracles that GOD has done for them in a video would not compare at all to having real time recording of GOD restoring a limb right in front of your eyes while that person was being prayed for. I can not see how you do not understand how valuable this type of evidence is. Here we go with the personal conjecture again. You can not form a reply without somehow assuming something about me or saying something totally off base.”

Here, you've shown that you're back to not fully reading. The context was your attempting to demonstrate that the guests on Sid's show should somehow be automatically be deemed as not credible for some reasons that you've yet to explain, in order to show that you actually have a point somewhere, where what they were saying could otherwise be easily validated by someone; the issue was not whether or not real time events was relevant, in this particular iteration of exchanges.

Thus, your failure to understand is derived from your not reading and trying to extend a nonsensical phrase that you derived for yourself onto me, that was easier for you to address, where, you simply again need to be professional, concede another lost point, and just move on to another attempt, if you could.

Your other stuff is hardly worth addressing, as it has nothing to do with anything in the discussion at hand, during this particular iteration of exchanges. Again, your task is to demonstrate that somehow a sizable number of the guests on Sid's show should not be considered credible and thus, because of that, we should have a solid basis to doubt what they're saying is true as a means of minimizing the fact that God performs miracles for people.

“My speculations ? What have we been talking about, dshipp ? This whole discussion was about what would be The Strongest Evidence for GOD and as I have stated that would be GOD restoring someone in real time in a recording. It's not a sweeping generalization of anything. It's a statement about what would be Strong Evidence for GOD. I said earlier I have not seen anything like this before and you have not shown anything like this as far as Real Time recordings of GOD healing someone. So basically this type of Strong Evidence for GOD is not found very often.”

Here, you're lost in your stubbornness to not fully read what I said by your own admission; these topics and points were already fully covered during repeat prior iterations of exchanges with you, but, you got lost, because you only partly read the responses to go back to your lost point on regrowing a lost limb; again, the collective examples of numerous examples of God's healing powers in action is also strong evidence, perhaps even stronger than the example that you want to keep harking upon.

Sure, you've been entirely speculating that there are no examples of God's growing a lost limb for someone based on the reasons provided to you on several occasions now: you haven't demonstrated that you've done an exhaustive and comprehensive examination of the topic on your own in order to have an independent ability to recite such a generalization that you very likely got as a punchline from one of the atheistic websites; it's a checklist that they think is difficult for Christians to answer; this checklist is their confusion that they generated for themselves, because they won't examine the available evidence that's easily located for themselves, instead, hoping that we'll bring the evidence to them for discussion, where they can take credit for our research on the topics.

And, what we've been talking about are the parts that got lost to you, because, as you admitted, you haven't been reading my responses, instead, electing to just simply repeating a point that you lost a very long time ago for the reasons given by me and amended by me over time on repeated occasions.

Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@king_saturn: He's doing it again. It's gone from hilarious to just plain sad.

Avatar image for king_saturn
King Saturn

223610

Forum Posts

509

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17 said:

@king_saturn:

“Real Time is Totally Relevant, dshipp. The idea that you don't think it is shows that you do not really understand the concept of strong evidence. Having people speak on miracles that GOD has done for them in a video would not compare at all to having real time recording of GOD restoring a limb right in front of your eyes while that person was being prayed for. I can not see how you do not understand how valuable this type of evidence is. Here we go with the personal conjecture again. You can not form a reply without somehow assuming something about me or saying something totally off base.”

Here, you've shown that you're back to not fully reading. The context was your attempting to demonstrate that the guests on Sid's show should somehow be automatically be deemed as not credible for some reasons that you've yet to explain, in order to show that you actually have a point somewhere, where what they were saying could otherwise be easily validated by someone; the issue was not whether or not real time events was relevant, in this particular iteration of exchanges.

Thus, your failure to understand is derived from your not reading and trying to extend a nonsensical phrase that you derived for yourself onto me, that was easier for you to address, where, you simply again need to be professional, concede another lost point, and just move on to another attempt, if you could.

Your other stuff is hardly worth addressing, as it has nothing to do with anything in the discussion at hand, during this particular iteration of exchanges. Again, your task is to demonstrate that somehow a sizable number of the guests on Sid's show should not be considered credible and thus, because of that, we should have a solid basis to doubt what they're saying is true as a means of minimizing the fact that God performs miracles for people.

“My speculations ? What have we been talking about, dshipp ? This whole discussion was about what would be The Strongest Evidence for GOD and as I have stated that would be GOD restoring someone in real time in a recording. It's not a sweeping generalization of anything. It's a statement about what would be Strong Evidence for GOD. I said earlier I have not seen anything like this before and you have not shown anything like this as far as Real Time recordings of GOD healing someone. So basically this type of Strong Evidence for GOD is not found very often.”

Here, you're lost in your stubbornness to not fully read what I said by your own admission; these topics and points were already fully covered during repeat prior iterations of exchanges with you, but, you got lost, because you only partly read the responses to go back to your lost point on regrowing a lost limb; again, the collective examples of numerous examples of God's healing powers in action is also strong evidence, perhaps even stronger than the example that you want to keep harking upon.

Sure, you've been entirely speculating that there are no examples of God's growing a lost limb for someone based on the reasons provided to you on several occasions now: you haven't demonstrated that you've done an exhaustive and comprehensive examination of the topic on your own in order to have an independent ability to recite such a generalization that you very likely got as a punchline from one of the atheistic websites; it's a checklist that they think is difficult for Christians to answer; this checklist is their confusion that they generated for themselves, because they won't examine the available evidence that's easily located for themselves, instead, hoping that we'll bring the evidence to them for discussion, where they can take credit for our research on the topics.

And, what we've been talking about are the parts that got lost to you, because, as you admitted, you haven't been reading my responses, instead, electing to just simply repeating a point that you lost a very long time ago for the reasons given by me and amended by me over time on repeated occasions.

Unbelievable, you totally are not understanding this discussion.

No, again my point is and has been for the last several posts that the Strongest Evidence for GOD would be GOD healing someone in real time recording where we could see the Healing Power of The Almighty in real time. I did not say that Sid Roth's It's Supernatural testimonies from the people was completely not credible but I was expecting to see GOD heal someone in real time in these videos and that was not there. I said also that these examples are not as strong evidence as GOD healing someone in real time. I stated that you can not compare testimony of someone being healed to seeing someone healed of having a limb restored on tape because the latter is much stronger evidence for the Almighty as it could stand critique better than just someone saying that GOD healed them.

Avatar image for king_saturn
King Saturn

223610

Forum Posts

509

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27872  Edited By King Saturn

@iron_tiger said:

@king_saturn: He's doing it again. It's gone from hilarious to just plain sad.

Yeah, I am tired of beating this dead horse. This specific topic that is.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8415

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27873  Edited By SpareHeadOne

@king_saturn:

Ah but you haven't even met a single one of me n Dshipp's challenges. And you haven't even explained how you can prove that something that didn't happen, didn't happen.

You are clearly just trying to save facial hair.

Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27874  Edited By Iron_Tiger
Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@spareheadone: My story is nowhere done, you have to wait much longer. Unless you want to discuss it as well as add things to it?

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8415

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6046

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27877  Edited By dshipp17

@king_saturn:

“No, again my point is and has been for the last several posts that the Strongest Evidence for GOD would be GOD healing someone in real time recording where we could see the Healing Power of The Almighty in real time.”

The thing is, though, is that you needed to actually be reading my replies as a number of important nuances were included that either chanced or refined a topic, or whether or not this was the original topic; here, you're confused by your own adjusting the goal post, when I pointed out that points that you believed were made had failed.

This point was countered with the example that the collective evidence of the others is describing their experiences with God's healing powers is even stronger evidence of God having healed someone. This point was also again countered by your having made a sweeping and blanket statement about a lack of existence, based entirely off of your speculation that something doesn't exist; this, in tern, is because you haven't taken the steps to look, where it's so easily locatable for someone with a genuine interest in finding out; and, this, in tern, was gotten, because your statement comes from a checklist of punchlines from an atheistic website that you want to believe.

If you had been looking, and likely would have found the evidence, then you're clearly in denial in a very major way; wouldn't it be more professional to simply admit that the evidence is there somewhere? Having a recording is merely a subjective preference, when I'm trying to convey and suggest objectivity to the extent feasible in this particular context.

While you might feel that this is the strongest evidence, the collective is even stronger evidence; here, where you're also implying that everything else can be or has been explained away, you first have to be willing to examine the evidence, as you're only hoping that the other pieces of evidence can be explained away or was explained away.

“I did not say that Sid Roth's It's Supernatural testimonies from the people was completely not credible but I was expecting to see GOD heal someone in real time in these videos and that was not there.”

As was explained in the prior two posts, you said things that then placed you in the position where you had to demonstrate that we should presume, by default, that their testimonies were not credible; and, then, I said you couldn't even do this with even a sizable portion of the guests. It doesn't really matter that you didn't say this statement that you're now making from hindsight, it only matters whether or not your implications are creditable. In your last post, you said statements suggesting that the guests were somehow coming on that show and fabricating stories in order to support an implied objective for a scammer in Sid, without having used those specific words. With implications, you don't have to actually say something without it being clear what you're trying to convey.

These specifications should have been the clarity with which you should have specified in your prior posts, which would have then guided how I would have proceeded with my post. But, at this stage, you should have already known after several iterations that I wasn't going to do your own foot work for you where such information or evidence is so easily sought out to be researched by you, as the other point was that you hadn't come close to having done the comprehensive research necessary to support your sweeping generalizations about lack of evidence, availability, and what has been explained away with explanation separate from the powers of God being the true explanation. And this came with my pointing out that these witness accounts of the healing powers of God has dated back to long before any viable medical treatment was available.

“I stated that you can not compare testimony of someone being healed to seeing someone healed of having a limb restored on tape because the latter is much stronger evidence for the Almighty as it could stand critique better than just someone saying that GOD healed them.”

Well here, again, this goes back to my prior point which was that you basically had to start demonstrating that these guests' testimonies do not somehow stand up to critique or scrutiny somehow; and, hence, why you were challenged to show that even a sizable number of Sid's guests were somehow automatically worthy of being looked at as without credit. Again, the totality of these guests produces evidence that is just as strong, if not stronger than your subjective preference for seeing footage of God's miracles in action. Here, either you don't fully realize what you're saying, when you're suggesting that these guests don't stand up to critique or scrutiny, somehow, or, you're trying to save face for a third party reader who wants to agree with you and think that you're making points, where you're not, and, thus, saving face for those third party readers.

Again, video footage would be strong evidence, but the collective of what we already know is also strong evidence. Thus, I'm trying to be objective, not meet every subjective preference that someone can come asking for, as it doesn't otherwise negate that there is otherwise evidence of God's healing powers and that He performs miracles for His praying Christian flock. The way that you presented it, you made unsubstantiated implications that this wasn't the case or that all possibilities had been explained away somehow; and, given this fact, had proven that it has been the case unless I could meet this one specific preference by showing footage of God having regrown a limb for someone, as the only means of recovery from such alternative realty of total refutation of all the other evidence; but, there are many things wrong with this presumptions and many things that Christians who are privy to the evidence would feel insulted, where it's so clear that you haven't investigated; that was my point.

Avatar image for king_saturn
King Saturn

223610

Forum Posts

509

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17 said:

@king_saturn:

“No, again my point is and has been for the last several posts that the Strongest Evidence for GOD would be GOD healing someone in real time recording where we could see the Healing Power of The Almighty in real time.”

The thing is, though, is that you needed to actually the replies as a number of important nuances were included that either chanced or refined a topic or whether or not this was the original topic; here, you're confused by your own adjusting the goal post, when I point that you made had failed.

This point was countered with the collective evidence of the others is even stronger evidence of God having healed someone; the point was also again countered by you're having made a sweeping and blanket statement about a lack of existence, based entirely off of your speculation that something doesn't exist; this, in tern, is because you haven't taken the steps to look, where it's so easily locatable for someone with a genuine interest in finding out; and, this, in tern, was gotten, because your statement comes from a checklist of punchlines from an atheistic website that you want to believe. If yo8u have been looking and likely found the evidence, then you're clearly in denial in a very major way; would it be more professional to simply admit that the evidence is there somewhere? Having a recording is merely a subjective preference, when I'm trying to convey and suggest objectivity to the extent feasible in this particular context.

While you might feel that this is the strongest evidence, the collective is even stronger evidence; here, where you're also implying that everything else can be explained away, you first have to be willing to examine the evidence, as you're only hoping that the other evidence can be explained away or was explained away.

“I did not say that Sid Roth's It's Supernatural testimonies from the people was completely not credible but I was expecting to see GOD heal someone in real time in these videos and that was not there.”

As was explained in the prior two posts, you said things that then placed you in the position where you had to demonstrate that we should presume, by default, that their testimonies were not credible; and, then, I said you couldn't even do this with even a sizable portion of the guests; it doesn't really matter that you didn't say this statement that you're making from hindsight, it only matters whether or not your implications are creditable; in your last post, you said statements suggesting that the guests were somehow coming and fabricating stories in order to support an implied objective of a scammer in Sid, without having used those specific words; with implications, you don't have to actually say something without it being clear what you're trying to convey; this should have been the clarity with which you should have specified in your prior posts, which would have then guided how I would have proceeded with my post. But, at this stage, you should have already known after several iterations that I wasn't going to do your own foot work for you where such information or evidence is so easily researched, as the other point was that you hadn't come close to having done the comprehensive research necessary to support your sweeping generalization.

“I stated that you can not compare testimony of someone being healed to seeing someone healed of having a limb restored on tape because the latter is much stronger evidence for the Almighty as it could stand critique better than just someone saying that GOD healed them.”

Well here, again, this goes back to by prior point which was that you basically demonstrate that these guests' testimonies do not somehow stand up to critique; and, hence, why you were challenged to show that a sizable number of Sid's guests were somehow automatically worthy of being looked at as without credit. Again, the totality of these guests produces evidence that is just as strong, if not stronger. Here, either you don't fully realize what you're saying, when you're suggesting that these guests don't stand up to critique, or, you're trying to save face for a third party reader who wants to agree with you and think that you're making points, where you're not, and, thus, saving face for those third party readers.

Again, video footage would be strong evidence, but the collective of what we already know is also strong evidence; thus, I'm trying to be objective, not meet every subjective preference that someone can come asking for, as it doesn't otherwise negate that there is otherwise evidence of God's healing powers and that He performs miracles for His praying Christian flock. The way that you presented it, you made unsubstantiated implications that this wasn't the case or that all possibilities had been explained away; and, given this, prove that it hasn't by changing me to meet a preference that I showed God having regrown a limb for someone; but, there are many things wrong with this and many things that Christians who are privy to the evidence would feel insulted, where it's so clear that you haven't investigated; that was my point.

Last Reply to this stuff... I will limit my words to each point here and this is it.

1. I never moved the goal post. I said repeatedly that the strongest evidence for GOD would be GOD healing someone in real time specifically the restoration of a limb and you even admitted that it would be strong evidence for GOD so that point was won already.

2. Well that's your opinion. The collective of testimony of people claiming they was healed by GOD could be considered evidence but strong evidence ? Stronger than having footage of a person having an arm or leg restored to full length real time on tape while people are praying for the person in the name of GOD ? I don't think so.

3. No, again I stated what I thought was the strongest evidence for GOD and why I thought it was. I never said that their testimonies could not be credible altogether I merely gave examples of how someone could explain them away potentially and then I explained how it would be harder to explain away GOD healing someone in real time on tape. Hence, real time healing on tape would be stronger evidence.

4. No again, the point is and was as it's has been with me. It's not about trying to discredit Sid's guests testimonies or trying to say GOD can not heal people altogether. It's always and has been this, the Strongest Evidence for GOD would be GOD healing someone in real time on tape recording while people are praying for that person to be healed. You even admitted it was strong evidence and that in itself validates my point even if you yourself think other things can be considered strong evidence.

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6046

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27879  Edited By dshipp17

@king_saturn:

“I never moved the goal post. I said repeatedly that the strongest evidence for GOD would be GOD healing someone in real time specifically the restoration of a limb and you even admitted that it would be strong evidence for GOD so that point was won already.”

You've repeatedly moved the goal post, just in other ways that were also apart of the evolving discussion.

This would not be the strongest evidence; the strongest evidence is what we have: that would be the collective of existing descriptions of God's healing powers in action (e.g. but, embedded within this massive collective examples, there probably exists many examples of video footage of God's healing and miraculous powers in action, including the specific example of God regrowing a lost limb for someone; again, that there may not be examples of video footage is purely speculative); this example that you claim to need is just a subjective preference that you got from somewhere else. This type of evidence that you claim to need is otherwise unnecessary, as we already have evidence supporting the healing power of God in action. The evidence that we already have involves the collective of millions, perhaps even billions, of people baring witness to their collective experiences involving God's healing or miraculous powers in action; that there are billions of these testimonies is what makes this collective even stronger than a video tape of God regrowing a limb for someone, from an objective framework.

“The collective of testimony of people claiming they was healed by GOD could be considered evidence but strong evidence ? Stronger than having footage of a person having an arm or leg restored to full length real time on tape while people are praying for the person in the name of GOD ? I don't think so.”

Sure, from an objective framework, as it involves billions of people dating back to the time of Christ. Given that there are so many people, you'd have to filter through so much information to see the specifics. This evidence involves people claiming that God healed them, but, it comes with a lot more than just that (e.g. thousands of people claiming that God healed them, where they were healed from something like a terminal illness; thus, the specifics would quite key to fully understanding the situation in a given question; you could not compare this to another situation where someone claimed that God healed them from a rash, for example; but, that could have happened, also, except it would be much easier to explain away, even if that possible explanation was not actually the case). With this example, you can see before your very eyes that you were trying to imply something that calls into question the credibility of these people, where it's now on you to demonstrate that they aren't worthy or credence.

“I never said that their testimonies could not be credible altogether I merely gave examples of how someone could explain them away potentially and then I explained how it would be harder to explain away GOD healing someone in real time on tape. Hence, real time healing on tape would be stronger evidence.”

I'm afraid not; this is actually something that I challenged you to do. You did not take examples of Christians claiming that God had healed them and then explained away that specific examples; I gave you an example from last holiday, 2 examples from Sid's show, before you described Sid, and now the collective all the guests from Sid's show. Here, you're going based on your wishful thinking and lack of reading; not once did you cite a Christian claiming to have been healed from an illness and showed someone having explained it away, where you would have to have successfully done this thousands of times to substantiate your sweeping claim or wishful thinking that all of these explains have an explanation; you only speculated that this had been done, as I'd pointed out to you during several iterations. Basically, this is a demonstration that you won't be professional, concede a number of lost points, and move on to trying again with something else. You should probably start reading, next time.

Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@king_saturn: You should only read the last two lines/sentences of his post. They are exactly why nobody else can tolerate him nor can we get through to him. It proves how delusional he truly is.

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6046

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Mark 16:1-20:

And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.

3 And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?

4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.

5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.

6 And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him.

7 But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you.

8 And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.

9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.

11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.

12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.

13 And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.

14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.

15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

Loading Video...
Loading Video...

Avatar image for jonjizz
jonjizz

1849

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

No Caption Provided
Avatar image for coolguy18
COOLGUY18

2073

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

This dude and his memes ^^^^^

Lol.

Avatar image for king_saturn
King Saturn

223610

Forum Posts

509

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@king_saturn: You should only read the last two lines/sentences of his post. They are exactly why nobody else can tolerate him nor can we get through to him. It proves how delusional he truly is.

I read the entirety of his last reply and have come to the conclusion that this was possibly the greatest exercise in trolling that I have encountered from someone on this site.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8415

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Religion is the coolest thing ever!!!!

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6046

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Luke 1:11-20; :

And there appeared unto him an angel of the Lord standing on the right side of the altar of incense.

12 And when Zacharias saw him, he was troubled, and fear fell upon him.

13 But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John.

14 And thou shalt have joy and gladness; and many shall rejoice at his birth.

15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb.

16 And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God.

17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.

18 And Zacharias said unto the angel, Whereby shall I know this? for I am an old man, and my wife well stricken in years.

19 And the angel answering said unto him, I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God; and am sent to speak unto thee, and to shew thee these glad tidings.

20 And, behold, thou shalt be dumb, and not able to speak, until the day that these things shall be performed, because thou believest not my words, which shall be fulfilled in their season.

And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,

27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.

28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

29 And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.

30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.

31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus.

32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?

35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.

37 For with God nothing shall be impossible.

38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

39 And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda;

40 And entered into the house of Zacharias, and saluted Elisabeth.

41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:

42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.

43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

44 For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.

45 And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord.

46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,

47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.

48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

49 For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name.

50 And his mercy is on them that fear him from generation to generation.

51 He hath shewed strength with his arm; he hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.

52 He hath put down the mighty from their seats, and exalted them of low degree.

53 He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away.

54 He hath helped his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy;

55 As he spake to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed for ever.

56 And Mary abode with her about three months, and returned to her own house.

Loading Video...

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8415

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17:

Is this the bit where Mary gets tempted by Stan in the desert and she steps on his head?

Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8415

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@iron_tiger:

Mary turned back and looked at Noah's ark and she turned into a parking lot.

Avatar image for king_saturn
King Saturn

223610

Forum Posts

509

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Numbers 21 is such a bizarre chapter. The Almighty sends Serpents to kill many of the Israelites because they complained about not having Food and Water and hating the miserable food that GOD had gave them. I believe the miserable food was Manna from Heaven which is interesting because how can GOD's Food from Heaven be something that is not appeasing ? You would think The Almighty could at least feed the Israelites foods greater than what they had in Egypt. Also, how the heck did The Almighty not know that the Israelites would not start complaining about not having Food and Water ? Hell, anybody would complain after a while if they don't have Food and Water.

Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@spareheadone: She would forever be walked on, driven on, and parked on. Vandalized by technology and worn down by overweight people.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8415

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27892  Edited By SpareHeadOne

@king_saturn:

The serpents were for them to eat. The Israelites were complaining about bland food and wanted food with more bite to it.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8415

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for king_saturn
King Saturn

223610

Forum Posts

509

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@king_saturn:

The serpents were for them to eat. The Israelites were complaining about bland food and wanted food with more bite to it.

That's a hell of a thing when GOD sends you food to eat that's trying to bite and eat you.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8415

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6046

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17:

Is this the bit where Mary gets tempted by Stan in the desert and she steps on his head?

If you're trying to joke, your trolling is starting to get old, at this stages. Neither here or anywhere in the Bible is this a described event. I'm not Catholic, but, if that's your purpose, to offend, then you're just getting deeper and deeper. Hopefully, you haven't blasphemed the Holy Spirit, despite my warning.

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8415

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27897  Edited By SpareHeadOne
Avatar image for dshipp17
dshipp17

6046

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27898  Edited By dshipp17

@spareheadone said:

@dshipp17:

Stan works for God.

Who does that supposed to be? As a general matter, though, obviously, Satan and his demons continually work contrary and diametrically opposed to the will of God.

Avatar image for iron_tiger
Iron_Tiger

2307

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17: The Holy Spirit is nothing but shit formed into a humanoid shape. I bet that's where Jesus is, trapped inside that shit state, licking his lips whenever just to get a taste. Mary probably boinks it each night in a incestive way. "Gimme the chocolate, my son! Mmm!"

Avatar image for spareheadone
SpareHeadOne

8415

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@dshipp17:

Think of the book of Job

Stan did everything God wanted

Or when kings attributes the same action to Stan as Chronicles does to God.

Or when Joseph say "what you intended for evil, God intended for good"

Or Judas, who was required to have Stan in him so he could betray Jesus.