How about this. Breaking any recorded medical records for length of time that someone was clinically dead. That would fall into the realm of "defying medical science" as you stated.
I listed that as a reason why someone can extend the period of time after being "clinically deceased" and still be resuscitated and in many cases even without incurring brain damage (though nerve damage and frost bite can also occur)
Well sort of, basically what is occurring is the body’s need for oxygen can be reduced somewhat.
I believe I had highlighted 8 minutes. They were able to revive that baby 8 minutes later which is not medically unexplainable. That’s not the same thing as several days at room temperature.
Yes it is actually. We are asking that something supernatural occur here. In order for it to qualify as such, it MUST defy medical science as you stated yourself.
Yes a doctor, not Jesus.
See above for clarification.
Birth is amazing truly, yet it is not supernatural.
Yes find that because I want to know how many days before they resuscitated her had passed. She was also in cold storage so we will need to extend the time. It wasn’t like they found her decomposing in an apartment bedroom and THEN brought her back. Then, we would be getting somewhere and into the realm of supernatural and outside forces intervening in some respect.
No doubt. That is why I am using the specific criteria that I noted.
How is me requiring that you find the contradiction you want to address "me backing down"? Doesn’t that give you the clear advantage?
What? What are you talking about?
My "comeback" is "Mike, please pull out ANY contradiction that I have posted on either this thread, or this forum. You can take your pick of ANY. I am doing this in order to give you the clear advantage.”
I have asked you to address only 1 (ONE) contradiction that I have brought forth on this forum and you have refused to do so. How is that "me backing out?" exactly?
Why do I need to pick the contradiction? They were already addressed to you on the thread. Wouldn’t it be to your advantage to pick the one that you feel most comfortable addressing?
Well since clearly we know that a human (if you are referring to a human here) can be resuscitated some time later and without brain damage. Especially if the person has been frozen as sometimes occurs when falling through thin ice. If an animal or human was raised from the dead after several days, I would declare that significant evidence. I would require that it break any current standing records.
As explained, that does not defy medical science necessarily.
It has not been accomplished based on the criteria I just listed above. Even if it had, who would take the credit for it? The Christians? The Muslims? The Wiccans? The Satanists? Every religious sect on the planet more than likely.
I guess I don’t even need to respond.
See above post and also I would need to know how long she was in cold storage. Days?
Ooby is my friend and I respect his opinions and I felt this thread to be significant. What have you contributed thus far? You hijacked the thread at one point as an argument over whether or not "Catholics are true Christians." Even another Catholic jumped on (beachbum) in defense.
At one point in that post did he ever refer to ALL home schooled children? You are creating a straw man argument clearly. He described children that were being raised in an isolationist environment with no transparency as to what their home school curriculum involved. My sister in law is a teacher but she works for the state of California and visits home school families to keep track of what the parents are instructing the children in and that certain criteria for math, science, and reading are being fulfilled. It did not sound as if this were occurring from his post.
The main point to this was that Jesus came to threaten what they held most dear.
I realize she was addressing Jesus Christ.
I was not.
I stated that IF today, someone was capable of raising either an animal or human from the dead, I would accept that as proof. But there are several variables involved. Proof of what? Which god? Would it be a human who is accomplishing this feat?
I was not referring to Jesus or the past in any way but if this was to occur today.
I have posted several now on this thread. All you need to do is go back through and pick ANY one of them out to address. That’s all you have been asked to do. There has been no "scatter or confusion" tactics utilized on my part.
By putting the word "source" in quotations, you are already dismissing my potential resources of which I have yet to present.
Yet you are implying that the websites that are not of religious designation will somehow be "biased" in my favor and will support my position. Is this merely going to become a debate over which sources are credible and which are to be excluded?
Well as I stated earlier, begin a separate thread. I am hardly convinced of anything you have presented thus far. I also informed you that I felt it was rude of you to pursue a mission of commandeering this thread for your own purposes. What happened to the argument about substantiating a negative premise or did you forfeit that one so easily?
Oh the Christians would disagree of course. I never claimed otherwise.
Start another thread. However if you are going to argue that all of my material from books or websites is secular based and therefore erroneous and biased, then what do you want to do? I can clearly make the same argument of your materials however I feel much more confident and that I would not even need to.
It has been accomplished to my satisfaction but I am convinced by the Egyptologists and other researchers who have made these claims. The burden of proof is subjective of course.
Then show me real proof? You have not refuted anything I have stated thus far.
It is debated whether or not Horus was born of a virgin. I never site that as a detail because the problem with it is that Jesus was never claimed to be born of a virgin. If you have looked through the bible at all (not saying that you have not) you will notice that the Hebrew word "almah" is used to describe Mary, the mother of Jesus. The word Almah in Hebrew simply refers to a young woman. This would have been an accurate description for Mary if left alone. Some time later, Christians changed the definition of the word (or misinterpreted it) to mean "virgin." The word for virgin in Hebrew is "betula". Spellings may vary.
Let me just get this straight. You are allowed to use apologetic websites to bolster your case, yet I am not permitted to use any other source material basically? Well that’s fair....
Who have I ever ignored? You? Who? I always respond. If you scroll through this thread (or any other) any time someone quotes me, I respond directly to them. Unless they are simply in agreement or are repeating a similar opinion. If it does not warrant a response I won’t bother of course. Conrad has never plagiarized or taken credit for ANYTHING that I have ever seen. He often copy and pastes but he ALWAYS gives credit and a link for his source. He never implies it’s his own words, he merely states that this is an opinion he agrees with. I don’t understand what your problem is with him in that respect. It does not involve me anyway.
All I have posted on this thread (which you claim is so rude) is the fact that you can not require that someone substantiate a negative premise. If you go back to page one and actually take the time to read this entire thread, you will notice that close to about 30 other different people pointed this fact out just as I did. Here is yet another for your perusal. Why not begin a campaign of accusing EVERY single member that did this of being rude?
I would accept the reanimation of dead flesh as legitimate proof. Even if it was an animal raised from the dead that would be enough for me, provided it was not a magician's trick of some kind. Would a human be doing this? And wouldn’t every faith attempt to take credit for it?
I have done no such thing. In fact I have asked you several questions already and pointed out issues within these passages and you ignore me. What do you want me to do? You talk at me, not to me.
I find contradictions because THEY ARE THERE. I have pointed them out to you several times and you have yet to take one of them on and attempt an explanation. Partly this is because even theologians admit that there are problems found within the text.
Well be my guest...
Sir, obviously I am quite literate in regards to the bible, even you admitted that.
I refuse to accept anything in my life on blind faith. It’s just the kind of person I am. I’m a bit of a stickler for the details and I won’t just take things at face value because it would make you feel more comfortable. We aren’t in a prisoner of war camp here. I don’t need any brain scrubbing.
"'Come now, and let us reason together,' Says the LORD, 'Though your sins are like scarlet, They shall be as white as snow; Though they are red like crimson, They shall be as wool. If you are willing and obedient, You shall eat the good of the land; '" Isaiah 1:18-19
"Come now, and let us reason together"
This one I do like. I’ve read that before and I marked it with a green stickie. I don’t find the ENTIRE bible distasteful. But this sentence I agree with, for obvious reasons.
Well if they are not contradictions, please explain them, any of them. Don’t simply go onto other passages. Address specifically what I am posting. I will respect that approach ten fold over what you are doing now which is ignoring my posts and then picking random passages.
God will kill those who despise his word and fail to follow his laws. Their carcasses will be "torn in the midst of the streets."
5:25 Therefore is the anger of the LORD kindled against his people, and he hath stretched forth his hand against them, and hath smitten them: and the hills did tremble, and their carcases were torn in the midst of the streets. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still.
In other words, Yahweh required the blood sacrifice of his only son in order to make up for the horrible mistake that he had created known as "human." Gotcha. That doesn’t really address WHY god gave the Law to Moses to begin with.
Interesting passage. Let’s see. Paul says the law is dead and no longer binding. But Jesus said that the law will be binding in its entirety "till heaven and earth pass away." It’s just another one of those contradictions I guess...
Yep sure do. Its one of the more famous contradictions in fact.
I refer to the law handed down to Moses by god.
Its one in the same.
But is the Law still binding? The bible conflicts itself on this point several times. Here is one I could locate.
Genesis 17:19 And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.
As noted already, we know from a cultural anthropological stand point that stoning occurred in the Middle East as it was sanctified by God. It also still takes place even to this day and normally it is perpetrated in public. It is also done to women very often. Amnesty International went into detail on it.
No not that all. One of the Mosaic Laws stated that a woman who is determined not to be a virgin on her wedding night shall be stoned to death if this claim can be substantiated.
He can start off by not condemning innocent humans to death by stoning. That’s just my opinion however. You seem to disagree.
Yeah that’s pretty bad Mike.
No, he DEMANDS our adoration and obedience or else he calls for our murder.
I’m not sure who has even used sarcasm on this thread. It’s difficult to even determine that without body language and voice inflection. I’m not saying it can’t be accomplished non-verbally but I tend not to notice or be looking for silly things like that. I am scrutinizing their remarks for the "meat on the bones" so to speak.
krimsa Forum Posts (1,345)
RE: what is "comfort food?
Me to. Cant stand organ meats.