jump to last post 1-50 of 96 discussions (1046 posts)

Proof in Personal Experience?

  1. JMcFarland profile image92
    JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago

    This Forum is primarily for a discussion between myself and Chris Neal (and anyone else who wants to join) about the nature of his personal experiences with what he claims to be god - and how those experiences relate to proof.  For a critical (not criticizing) examination, discussion and discourse.

    1. 0
      Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

      This is so strange to me, the way you and several others here spend your time. Not to sound overly critical at all... I just don't understand. For instance, I don't believe aliens are real. Never have, never will. I love a good sci-fi movie... but it wouldn't even occur to me to start a thread on aliens. I know there are ... who knows... millions of ppl who may believe in aliens... yet I don't feel even slightly compelled to prove them wrong. I mean if we were already having a conversation, i might put my two cents in, but I'd hate to offend them, I might even think it pointless to try and prove them wrong... after all, what skin is it off my nose if they believe in aliens? And yet, this forum is FULL of ppl starting disrespectful threads, taking pot shots, day after day showing up here to tell a bunch of ppl that their faith is total bs. I just don't understand the point of it.

      1. A Troubled Man profile image61
        A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Aliens have not caused the same atrocities as religions. They aren't here to tell us we are all going to hell.



        Yes, we know. smile

        1. 0
          Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

          You should have said "Christians don't understand the point of it." Saying *I dont understand the point of it is personal. How dare you sir!

        2. SwordofManticorE profile image73
          SwordofManticorEposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          @ATM, Hasn't any decent Christian told you yet that hell is a Christian made myth?

      2. 0
        Rayne123posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        I agree with you fully Beth.

        I do not and have never believed in aliens. However I am not to judge anyone who does. IF that is their belief so be it.

        Crop circles have been proven to be false quite awhile back actually. There was a documentary about crop circles.

        I will say this though, it sure does not take one long to believe in aliens and such and yet because they cant see God they say he is non existence.

        Well we dont see aliens or have real proof of their existence yet they believe.

        They will also believe that "criss angel" who thinks he is Gods gift to woman actually walks across water. Jesus must of taught him how to do so.

        However everyone has different opinions, and they may not agree with mine so I really dont care what others believe. In our hearts we have the right to believe what we want I guess.

        1. 0
          Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I agree with you fully Beth.

          I do not and have never believed in aliens. However I am not to judge anyone who does. IF that is their belief so be it.

          Crop circles have been proven to be false quite awhile back actually. There was a documentary about crop circles.

          I will say this though, it sure does not take one long to believe in aliens and such and yet because they cant see God they say he is non existence.

          Well we dont see aliens or have real proof of their existence yet they believe.

          They will also believe that "criss angel" who thinks he is Gods gift to woman actually walks across water. Jesus must of taught him how to do so.

          However everyone has different opinions, and they may not agree with mine so I really dont care what other believe. In our hearts we have the right to believe what we want I guess.


          I couldnt agree more. smile

      3. JMcFarland profile image92
        JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        How have I started disrespectful threads, and when have I ever told someone that their beliefs are BS?  Why don't you seem to understand that, with a background in biblical theology, years of study and an upbringing about biblical teachings, its a subject that I'm knowledgeable about and I like the dialog?  What is the problem with open discussion between people that believe different things and examining those differences openly?

        1. 0
          Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

          You can take out the words "disrespectful and bs" if they don't suit you.
          To say you are not daily trying to discredit a person's faith seems like an ostrich hiding its head in the sand... but do as you please. I wish I could say it doesn't concern me, but I spose it does to some extent.

          1. JMcFarland profile image92
            JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I am trying to do nothing more than have a conversation with believers.  If you spent over fifteen years studying aliens, you would probably enjoy discussing it, even if you don't personally believe in them.  When you're spent the majority of your life involved in a topic of study, its natural to want to discuss it.  If you find it disrespectful our you don't like it, then why continue to post in these topics?  No one its forcing you to participate, yet here you are.  Then you must be interested in discussing it just like everyone else, so you clearly understand the very topics that made you question my motivations in the first place.

            1. 0
              Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Yes, I spose I do question your motives...
              No matter how simply you would like to make it sound, it comes across with intentions that don't always seem honorable for the reasons I mentioned. It is usually those from your camp who say "why not let it be?" It seems you are the instigator. Maybe you have some unresolved issues.

              1. JMcFarland profile image92
                JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Or, as I said, I just like debating, discussing and exploring the topic because I have well over fifteen years of study under my belt.  Question my motives all you want, but your perception does not define any reality but yours.  In an open forum, people are free to discuss anything.  People who don't want to participate don't have to.  Its simple.

                1. 0
                  Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  You misunderstand.
                  i don't question your right to.
                  When a person turns their back on a belief system, they seldom go back to stew in it.
                  For instance, I am an alcoholic. I wouldn't hang out in the bar asking ppl why they drink.
                  I would know why they drank. If you have the knowledge of one who was a Christian, than what is it you are hoping to gain with this daily discussion? Do you understand what Im asking?
                  What knowledge do you not have that you are hoping to gain?

                  1. 0
                    Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    I know this question was not directed at me, but I feel like throwing my two cents in.

                    The knowledge of why any grown person would still believe in fairy tales? If you can answer that I'll leave you alone for a while.

                  2. JMcFarland profile image92
                    JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Because in this country, christianity influences everything.  throughout western history, christianity has influenced things that it has no place in.  Presidents are saying that atheists should not be considered citizens.  We go to war because bush said god told him to. 

                    Additionally, You do not have to believe in something in order to be interested in discussing it.  I've seen you talk about atheism, but you don't believe in it.  By your own standards, you should have nothing to say.  Same with other religions.  I'm not hopping to gain anything.  I'm hoping to have a conversation with people who think differently than me.  Just like you  do.

      4. Chris Neal profile image84
        Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        I'm taking JM at her word that this is not about  ripping  apart my  beliefs.

    2. 0
      Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      His experiences count as proof. No one has to believe it, or badger him. It is personal proof. Just as others have personal proof which has led them to their beliefs. Attempting to debate (or, more aptly, badger) others into validating your belief by agreeing with you points to one of two things. Either you aren't secure in your belief or you are seeking converts.

      1. 0
        Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        "I agree. So why do you have a problem with possibilities? Calling someone deluded for believing something you don't doesn't sound like someone open to possibilities.

        Are you averse to the idea of freedom of conscience?"

        I think I love you.

        1. 0
          Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          smile If you are like most here, the feeling will pass quickly.

    3. Chris Neal profile image84
      Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Okay, I'm here now. Fire away!

      1. 0
        Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Yay, Chris just walked in. LOL

    4. Chris Neal profile image84
      Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Figures there would be four pages here before I even knew it existed! wink

    5. Chris Neal profile image84
      Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Okay, I've read the first two pages of this forum and I need to say this right now, I had expressed reservations before about this being about just ripping apart my beliefs and simply waiting for the moment to  pounce, psychologize everything to death and belittle me. So far, JM (the person who I am here for,) has been pretty good but if Rad and Zilk and others are just going to play pop-Freud with a baseball bat, I already get that on other forums.  I'm perfectly aware that stating what I believe and what my experiences are makes them fair game, but they've been fair game other places and  I can just as easily go back  to them for abuse.

      Plus,  my experiences are not the sum total of my belief. In case some have forgotten (or came in late and just never knew) I actually built a small reputation among both believers and some non-believers as a guy who actually thinks about this stuff and  makes  every attempt to be honest, fair and respectful. With  the  exception of one person, I still do that. Talking about my experiences made them the centerpiece of every conversation an fodder for those who were simply looking for reasons to say, "Ah ha! I knew he was delusional!" or even more disparaging, anti-Christian things. In that way the prediction of one hubber who no longer haunts these forums has come true,  that it did not "end well" for me.  But I'm about more than simply some sort of psuedo-Charismatic chasing after experiences.

      I'm game for discussion. And as long as most of the people here keep it on that level I'm in.

      1. 0
        Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        You've got an always had my respect. I will not comment on any discussions you are having with JM here.

        1. Chris Neal profile image84
          Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Yeah, sorry. I knew that, it was just that you and Zilk were the two I had read in the first two pages of this forum and so your names came to mind.

          My bad.

          1. 0
            Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Peace Bro.

    6. PhoenixV profile image78
      PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Being biased toward physical reality in regards to a hypothetical creator of physical reality is illogical.

      1. 0
        Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Being biased towards physical reality in regards to a hypothetical creator which can not be show to exist is logical.

        1. PhoenixV profile image78
          PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I have no faith in your existence, no faith in your understanding of what existence means. In a billion years, your existence will have even less merit than it has now, no?

          1. 0
            Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

            there are so many squares in that box I cant even tell whose side youre on.

            1. PhoenixV profile image78
              PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I am on the side of witnessing truth to the best of my ability

              1. 0
                Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Yeah, that helps. lol

            2. PhoenixV profile image78
              PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              What are the options? I only see one side.

              1. 0
                Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                back or front.

                1. PhoenixV profile image78
                  PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Light or shadow?

                  1. 0
                    Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Right or wrong?
                    (This is fun. I like word games.)

    7. 0
      Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Personal experience is proof of the existence of a God only for those who have gone through the experience and those who share the same beliefs. The reality of the matter is that nobody can convince you to believe in or agree with the personal experience because you do not have the same mindset or perspective as another person. This is why it's called PERSONAL experience. it is only experienced by one person. People can have go through the same thing but have a different experience with it.

      The only thing that PERSONAL experience can truly accomplish is to reinforce the PERSONAL belief of the person going through the experience. It is pointless to try to debunk personal experience as false.

      1. JMcFarland profile image92
        JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        I'm not trying to debunk it.  Chris claims that his personal experiences are proof and he wants to discuss them.  Therefore I'm open to listening to what he has to say.  He says that they're never been critically examined, only criticized, so I want to give him the opportunity to explain them and relate them to what he equates to proof.

        1. 0
          Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I'm  sorry.. I wasn't accusing you of trying to debunk them.. I was speaking generally on the subject.

        2. Chris Neal profile image84
          Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I already laid out an outline. I thought there was going to be a series of questions that I would answer.

          1. PhoenixV profile image78
            PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I am curious to your outline. Can you link me?

            1. Chris Neal profile image84
              Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this
              1. PhoenixV profile image78
                PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                I find your testimony believable.

                1. Chris Neal profile image84
                  Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Thank you.

          2. JMcFarland profile image92
            JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            So did I, and then my own forum ran away with me.

            Start with your first experience.  I believe that your hub stated that it happened while you were visiting your future wife's church, but it didn't go into much (or any) detail.  Can you expand on what you experienced and how you came to understand that experience?

            1. 0
              Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Its actually just your own thread, not your own forum. wink

              Ok, Ive begun addressing the alien folk. Ive decided if faith isn't off limits, nothing is.

            2. Chris Neal profile image84
              Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I'm not ignoring the question, I'm thinking about it. I also lost the link to it in my email so I had to find it again. Eek!

            3. Chris Neal profile image84
              Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I’m trying to walk the fine line between too much info in the response and not enough.

              There’s not a whole lot of detail to give about that specific, really. As I said in the hub, I don’t know how many times I actually visited the church when I felt it. I know it wasn’t that many, but nobody who knew me at the time (and certainly not myself) would have described me as leaning any closer to becoming a Christian at the time. What I remember is sitting in the pew, I had been listening to Pastor Fred but I was becoming more and more distracted. At some point I was tuned out of it altogether, just looking out the window and jiggling my knee (I do that a lot or at least I used to.) After it was over I realized that it felt like something had been drawing me away from listening to the sermon (I don’t even remember what the sermon was about.) And Lisa told me that “the call” had been given right about the point that I was completely tuned out.

              It just felt different from other times that I tuned people or things out. I was twenty, so not unlike a lot of twenty-year olds I was pretty good at it, but this was different.

              Lisa and I discussed it some after the evening service that Sunday I decided to kneel down in the parking lot and accept Jesus.

              Had that been an isolated experience I would probably have forgotten about it fairly quickly and moved on in life. And by the same token, if I’d had experiences like that with any frequency before that time I would probably have simply moved on to the next one. Stability and consistency were not my strong suits.

              She bought me a Bible and I started reading it and although there were parts that confused me or that I had trouble getting my head around I felt something while reading it, like a connection to the Holy Spirit. So my initial understanding of the experience became reinforced by that continued experience with the Bible and God.

              That specific is a little hard to explain and I'm sorry if I'm light on detail. If you have any more questions about  that one please, ask. Or any other questions you have.

              1. 0
                Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                That was beautiful, thanks for sharing that Chris. smile

                1. Chris Neal profile image84
                  Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  You're welcome!

              2. PhoenixV profile image78
                PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                It is an amazing thing what a simple parking lot and a couple of knees can accomplish. I agree with Beth, its a beautiful story. I can hardly believe that you are so generous to share such a personal experience.

                1. Chris Neal profile image84
                  Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Thank you also. And you're right, it is amazing what simple surroundings and a bent knee can accomplish!

  2. Zelkiiro profile image83
    Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago

    Personal experience is anecdotal evidence, and anecdotal evidence is not concrete evidence. Anecdotal evidence is taken seriously by no one.

    1. 0
      Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Said the cartoon.

    2. bBerean profile image59
      bBereanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      So if somebody robbed you of cash at gunpoint, and you had no witnesses, nor could prove you were ever in possession of the cash, did it not happen?  It was your personal experience, but there is only your word that it happened, (anecdotal evidence by your reckoning), so nobody should take you seriously regarding it.  Correct?

      1. Don W profile image82
        Don Wposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        bBerean has a point here. If you experience something there is no objective evidence for, aren't you entitled to believe it?

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          You can believe you experienced something in your own mind. That doesn't make the experience factual outside your own mind. Schizophrenic's hear and see things that others don't. I'm not suggesting believers are schizophrenic, only demonstrating the power of the mind.

          1. Don W profile image82
            Don Wposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            "You can believe you experienced something in your own mind. That doesn't make the experience factual outside your own mind."

            I agree, but just because you experienced something in your own mind does not mean the experience is not factual either.

            "schizophrenic's hear and see things that others don't. I'm not suggesting believers are schizophrenic, only demonstrating the power of the mind."

            Schizophrenia is a physiological disorder, so someone with that disorder is unable to rely on their experience. As you say it's unlikely that all believers are schizophrenic so they are as entitled as anyone else to form beliefs grounded in apparent genuine experiences, as we all do.

        2. JMcFarland profile image92
          JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          You are entitled to believe whatever you want to believe, but that does nor make it true.  In the scenario described, if you went to the police and had no proof that you ever had the money and no corroborating evidence to support you, there would be little that could be done.

          1. bBerean profile image59
            bBereanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Agreed, which is exactly what we often see.  You as the victim, however, will never forget it nor will you ever doubt it happened.  You "are a believer" because you know it is true, even if you can't prove it to anyone else.

            1. Peter Vid profile image61
              Peter Vidposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              The human brain is higly susceptible to illusions. It constantly tries to create patterns and relate new information with old. If you're brought up in a religious society you are influenced by religion and if you are looking for religion at some point you will find something that might justify that quest of yours and translate it to a revelation from god.
              David Hume posed this question responding to the case of miracles:
              "Which is more likely; that the laws of nature have been suspended, and in a manner of your choosing, or that you quite simply made a mistake?"

              1. getitrite profile image81
                getitriteposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                But to the deluded religious mind, odds and probabilities don't really exist.

                1. 0
                  Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  To the deluded atheist mind possibilities are too scary to ponder.

                  1. getitrite profile image81
                    getitriteposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    I would think that most atheists, certainly, do embrace the concept of infinite possibilities.

              2. Marisa Wright profile image91
                Marisa Wrightposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Very true.  I watched a fascinating documentary once, where researchers were able to induce visions of some kind of being in the subject's bedroom  - which was interpreted as an alien or a ghost or an angel depending on the subject's background.  The subjects were totally convinced of the reality of their experience.  I think they used some kind of electrical or magnetic field, from memory.

            2. JMcFarland profile image92
              JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I wonder what it would take for you to believe, though.  If a friend told you that they were mugged while walking after dark  in New York City, you would probably take them at their word, depending on how much you trust them.  Someone you just met, you might feel pity for but pretty much accept their assertions.  Would you believe, however, that not only an acquaintance was mugged - but that they were held up by aliens, abducted and taken to their mother ship?  What would it take for you to believe this claim, even if they're convinced that they experienced it?

              Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  If a friend was mugged, you would urge them to follow up with the police - but the police cannot act without evidence.  Don't you agree?

          2. Don W profile image82
            Don Wposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            "You are entitled to believe whatever you want to believe, but that does nor make it true."

            And a lack of objective evidence does not make something false either.

            "In the scenario described, if you went to the police and had no proof that you ever had the money and no corroborating evidence to support you, there would be little that could be done."

            Sure, but the police can only say there is a lack of evidence, they can't say the incident didn't happen. Just because the person is unable to provide sufficient evidence to convince someone else, does not mean the incident didn't happen.

            1. 0
              Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              You made decent points. The points that you've made are points that atheists hold to. Yes, there are some that make the absolute statement that God does not exist, ut there are some (namely Rad Man, JM, and Getit, to name a few) that simply state that there is a lack of evidence to convince them. They are not totally close minded to the possibility, just that they are searching for proof.

              1. 0
                Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                I'm sorry to point this out, since you seem fairly level headed. But the names you chose to associate with those comments is a bit of a stretch. I have seen each call believers delusional, for belief. That, in and of itself, refutes your claim that the impetus behind their participation is merely a search for proof.

                Seriously, if proof were the desire; what sane person would attempt to find it on an online forum? Do you think, perhaps, you are being overly kind (and a little blind) in this assessment?

                1. 0
                  Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Not entirely, Emile. I also have seen them call believers delusional (and I know they disagree with my beliefs as well). But on the other hand, The conversations that I have had with them have been different than ones they have had with other believers and each of them have told me themselves that this is their position on belief. My reply is based on actual conversation with the three of them. Them discussing things on an online forum is merely another avenue for search. You'd never know what you may learn even in an online forum. I've learned a lot in my few months on HP.

                  Never apologize for pointing out what you see as a contradiction. This furthers dialogue (or debate depending on how you present it)

                  If this is overly kind, then I can live with that. But I can understand your position considering that you have not been in on discussions that I have had with them myself. But I assure you that in this, I am not blind in my assessment (but we may just have to agree to disagree on this one)

                  1. 0
                    Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Well, I'm afraid people being courteous and agreeable with me doesn't cause me to not notice repeated behavior patterns that are not in line with that. Being overly kind isn't always a good thing. It can be argued that turning a blind eye is overly unkind to others, on some levels. I suppose it is up to us, as individuals, to determine what motivates our behavior. I tend to agree with atheists, while I abhor the arrogant assumptions that drive the behavior of the most aggressively outspoken. We are all deluded, in one way or another. Pot/kettle thing to throw the accusation out. I've never encountered any evidence that any of the three are open to dialogue...unless it is a cheering session for their particular views. Which I find to be little different from the religious views offered. Dogmatic, unsupportable; but tenaciously held, just the same.

                2. 0
                  Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Huh... I just called you that. Now it looks like I can't come up with appropriate words on my own. <hangs head in shame.>

                  1. 0
                    Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    There is no such thing as original thought. But, I appreciate you thinking I'm level headed. I try to be, although I wouldn't think many would agree that I am. smile

              2. Don W profile image82
                Don Wposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                To be honest that's probably the most reasonable position anyone can hold, unless they have some subjective experience they attribute to a deity which causes them to believe otherwise. There simply isn't any categorical, objectively verifiable evidence either way. I wonder if it would be more fruitful to acknowledge the pluralistic nature of  society and focus on ways we can live more harmoniously, instead of spending our time trying to convince others they are wrong and we are right.

                1. A Troubled Man profile image61
                  A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  It is highly unlikely any given religion would ever capitulate to being wrong or not telling others they are wrong.

                  1. Don W profile image82
                    Don Wposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    You can't really refer to people who subscribe to a particular religion as single, homogenous lump. There is often a disconnect between religious doctrine, and how proponents of a religion actually behave. Only the most Orthodox proponents of a religion tend to follow every aspect of doctrine. In fact that's one of the criticism of religions especially when it comes to tenets like "love thy neighbour", but it works both ways. For example I do not know a single Catholic who hasn't used some form of birth control at some point in their lives. Perhaps that says more about me and the people I know, but I think it's reasonable to draw a general conclusion from that and other anecdotal evidence, that people's behaviour is often not solely determined by the doctrine of the religion they identify with. Their religious doctrine may not be able to accommodate the notion of their belief being "wrong", but people (the most important part of a religion) do tend to able to accommodate the notion that acceptance that others have different beliefs is not the same as agreement with those beliefs.

        3. A Troubled Man profile image61
          A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Sure, if you're of the mind of jumping to irrational conclusions whenever something is not made evident to you.

    3. Chris Neal profile image84
      Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      That's not true.  Statisticians and scientists do pay attention to anecdotal evidence. They don't take it as the sum total of assessment, they look for more, but it's not like intelligent and educated people always dismiss anecdotal evidence out of hand.

      1. A Troubled Man profile image61
        A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        But, an intelligent and educated person would not draw conclusions based on anecdotal evidence,  real, hard evidence is required for that.

        1. Chris Neal profile image84
          Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Seems to me I just said something like that. Some conclusions can be drawn from anecdotal evidence, but I never said that a serious person of any profession takes one or two anecdotes and writes a paper based on that.

  3. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    True. But only if I am trying providing my experience to you as evidence. However that is not what we do. We are saying the evidence is a personal experience of God. If you want the evidence you can have the experience it too, provided you follow some rules.

  4. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    You just have not looked enough.

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Okay, lets look harder. Show me your evidence.

    2. A Troubled Man profile image61
      A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      That's one of the lamest excuses, dude.

  5. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    God is healing some people in the western world but a lot of children are left to die of starvation elsewhere. How is it that the only conclusion that can be drawn from this be that God does not exist?

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      It's not a conclusion, it's a clue and I'd like you to answer it.

  6. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    Belief in God is not only based on the happening of miracles. That is just one way you can know that He exists.

    If you prayed to zeus and your friend was healed I may believe that zeus exists. But further test is required to find if that zeus is the real God.

    To the next part of your question ("would you take my word for it") I would answer like this. No I would not take your word for it. Rather I would study and test him.

    Neither are we asking you to take our word for it.

    1. JMcFarland profile image92
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Okay, I think your statement is a little contradictory of itself.  You say firstly that belief in god is not solely reliant on miracles.  Then you say that miracles are one way that you can know that a god exists.  How else do you know he exists if not for the miraculous?  If you do experience miracles, how do you know which god caused them?  Do you card god when he does something for you, or do you assume that since you prayed to a specific god, that god must be true if you get what you asked for?  What if a different god answered your prayer to try to help you out?  What if NO god answered your prayers, and things just worked out that way for another reason?  If you're looking for confirmation that your god exists and then something happens that you can't explain, you chalk it up to that god.  How much do you truly examine those unexplained things to try to uncover what else could have caused them?  How much do you question them?

      So you wouldn't believe my claim that zeus cured my friend of cancer, you would study and test zeus to try and determine whether or not he was real.  Lets test your claims then.

    2. A Troubled Man profile image61
      A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      So, what has 20 centuries of "testing" revealed about your God?

  7. jlpark profile image90
    jlparkposted 3 years ago

    I think my biggest issue with proof in personal experience is the fact that all personal experience is not considered equality.

    For example, we are expected to believe that just because someone has a personal experience of God, that He exists.  Yet it is these same people that insist that if one is homosexual that one has CHOSEN that path, regardless of the "personal experience" (and therefore, for the sake of this discussion - proof) of those who are homosexual being that it is not.

    Why is it that in the existence of God, personal experience is insisted to be ENOUGH proof, but in the case of sexuality and choice - it is not? It is this that bothers me most about it - it seems one is good for one person, but if s/he doesn't agree with something (like homosexuality) then it's not good enough for anyone else.

    Now, I do not want to turn this into homosexuality debate, so give complete permission to JM to delete this as she wishes.

  8. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    bBerean had asked a valid question. You however did not get the point. So I have a question for you.

    If you were indeed abducted by an Alien and taken to a mother ship and then let out out of it, an you do not have any evidence for it. Did it happen? Yes or No? What would you do if your friends told you that you were just hallucinating? Would you agree with them?

    1. Peter Vid profile image61
      Peter Vidposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      According to NASA there are at least 176 BILLION galaxies out there and each galaxy is estimated to have approximately 100 BILLION solar systems.
      I'll grant you half of the galaxies I mentioned and this still means an immensly huge percentage of potential for alien life to exist.
      Not only intelligent alien life is a possibility but it is almost a certainty.

      The concept of a god is not measurable in the natural world in any way.
      You cannot make assumptions about a divine entity based on observations of the physical world.

      Thus I could justify to myself an alien abduction easier than I would a revelation from god.

      In both cases, however, I would much more consider the fact that there might be something wrong with the frontal lobes of my brain(the region responsible for consciousness)  rather than the fairly improbable possibility that intelligent alien life chose to abduct me personally, and then put me back to earth, or the almost  completely improbable possibility that a divine entity chose to reveal itself to me while I'm alone.

      Are you confident enough to believe that if you thought something as supernatural as a god revelation  happend to you, you would be convinced it were indeed true without first considering the fact that you're a biological machine that operates and functions under certain physical conditions and if these conditions get compromised you might be dysfunctional and create misapprehensions?

      1. 0
        Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Why? Because all you know about *human life lends itself to that conclusion? What if all you know about human life is incomplete? To some of us, we hear the size of the universe and we think "how could there not be a God?"

        It is amazing how small some ppl think, when they feel so assured it is they that have an open mind.

        1. A Troubled Man profile image61
          A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          That's merely an argument from incredulity. Knowledge and understanding of the universe would remedy that.

    2. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      If my friends told me I was hallucinating I'd have myself checked out by an expert. Wouldn't you?

  9. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    Your post has not answered my question. But since the question was not directed at you, I will not make a case of it.

    The attempt is always to show us as people who have blind beliefs (without evidence). You too are taking the same path. But I will show you how your faith and understanding is as absurd as you claim ours to be.



    You have absolutely no evidence for this. You are just taking their word for it, because they are credible in your sight.



    Obviously, God does not belong to this natural world.



    On the basis of your blind belief on NASA, yes you can.



    In other words, your understanding would even lead you to suspect your sanity!! Which would also mean that any experience would never make you suspect your understanding!

    1. JMcFarland profile image92
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Here's the thing. 

      Either a god (or gods) exist or no god exists.  Can we agree that those are the only possibilities?

      if a god exists, then it either interacts with the natural world, or it doesn't.  If it doesn't interact with the natural world, then it is indiscernible from a god that doesn't exist.  If it does interact with the natural world, then there should be evidence of it within the natural world.  You can't have it both ways.  you claim that obviously god is outside of the natural world, but you claim that god also interacts with people, which means he interacts inside of the natural world which should leave evidence behind of his presence.  SO where is it?

      1. 0
        Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        OOH OOH.. Can I play???




        Yes we agree


        Agree



        Good point, But still does not negate the total existence of God.. Explanation below...



        Here is the fun part... For some people, natural disasters, the changing seasons, (basically a lot of things that science explains) are the evidence of God's interaction with the natural world because only God's hand can cause these things to occur. Now, In God's interaction with people, Since he is outside of the natural world, there is still (according to a lot of believers) the spiritual world. A lot of Christians are guided by the holy spirit that dwells within us. The only people that cannot share in this experience are those who (such as a lot of atheists) deny their spiritual selves in favor of their natural selves and this shut off access to hearing the voice of God and the essence of his spirit..


        (NOTE: these are in no way, shape, or form reflective of my OWN actual thoughts at this point in my life. This is what I used to think a long time ago)

        1. JMcFarland profile image92
          JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          You're right, Deepes - and I'm not saying at all that the absence of evidence is evidence of absence.  If there is a god that is truly undetectable, that doesn't mean that deistic god doesn't exist.  It means that there's no way to know.

          Attributing natural disasters to god is a several thousand-year old practice.  I expect it from the greeks or the romans.  But now we know what triggers these disasters.  In a lot of cases we can predict them coming from a mile away.  We know what makes them happen.  The holy spirit is a fine argument, but it doesn't explain cross-cultural experiences.  If you start studying religious experiences across the globe (like I did at one point) the one thing that I was completely blown away by was how similar these experiences are to each other.  Pentecostals, for example, often become "slain in the spirit" and they claim that these experiences are a direct result of being overwhelmed by the presence of the holy spirit and they temporarily enter a trance-like state (and we can if you wish get into what pastors are taught in regards to certain music and certain repetitive phrases that can actually INDUCE that state in their flock).  Then you study the whirling dervishes  that twirl in the worship of a deity and enter a similar trance.  You have people all over the world who all share similar experiences, but they all attribute them to a different understanding of god - or a different god altogether.  These people are raised in different cultures and different religions.  Their lives are totally different from each other, but they all describe similar experiences and similar results. What do they have in common?  They're human beings.  My question to these people is to try to find out WHY they attribute it to a god, and not something that is inherently human.  The similarities between SO MANY of these experiences is remarkable.  It really is a fascinating study.  I guess that's why I'm so interested in the argument from personal experience because it's fascinating to me to see it.  I want to understand it (even if that understanding is ultimately impossible).  I want to know what makes people think that a god is giving them these experiences, and how they know where these experiences are coming from.

          It's interesting that if a Muslim has a religious experience, 99% of the time, they're going to attribute it to Allah.  If a Christian does, they're going to attribute it to Jesus or the Holy Spirit.  If a Hindu has it, they're going to attribute it to Vishnu or Krishna.  Only RARELY do these experiences transcend the bounds of culture or religion.  So rarely in fact that it seems to be a given in itself.  Does that mean that these similar experiences are a direct result of the god that they believe in, which would make all of those god claims appear to be true?  What makes one "truer" than any other - especially when they're describing something so similar that it's indistinguishable from an experience had by someone of a different faith?  I accept that it's impossible to tell without having either experience myself.  But it still interests me, which is why I was so excited about having this discussion with Chris in the first place.

          Wow, I talk a lot.  Sorry.  Didn't mean to turn that response into a huge diatribe.

          1. 0
            Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Now it would appear that we are sliding into the realm of agnosticism. There are some areas of the Bible (Based on my limited understanding) that would suggest that we were pretty much given the ability to look after ourselves and left to our own devices. But we don't know for sure.. That's why I look at possibilities. Not everything that can't be proven is out of the realm of possibility. I'd go more into that line of thinking with you, but I doubt you'd be interested in my special brand of delusion (that both atheists and believers find nuts)



            Agreed. Science has provided a good explanation of the cause of the natural disasters



            Pentecostals... I've had a Pentecostal "experience". A pastor was preaching and laid hands on me and basically pushed me to the floor while whispering for me to receive the spirit and lie down under his breath (which was so bad that it did almost "slay" me...LoL). Basically, A lot of what is shown at these churches is purely for entertainment.. theatrics make a good show



            The funny thing about that of course is that I imagine the possibility that there is actually one God. Not the "Christian" one, nor the "Muslim" god (actually considering the fact that Allah is arabic for God that it is basically one and the same), nor "Hindu" Gods... etc.. I think that basically the only difference is in how each religion views this God and the name (or names) they give Him as well as how they worship him/her/it (If there is one)



            You don't talk too much. Besides, the important thing isn't about talking a lot, it's having something worthwhile to say. I actually enjoy conversing with you.

            1. JMcFarland profile image92
              JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              And this is why I classify myself as an agnostic atheist - or atheist agnostic.  I don't have a belief in a god, but I don't deny the possibility that one might exist.  I don't think that there's any way to know for absolute certain that a god does or doesn't exist, and falling in one category or another is extremely dishonest. 

              You're not the only person I've encountered that thinks that all gods across time and culture may be the same actual thing, just with different names/attributes/requirements.  I don't think it's crazy - I just don't also think that it can be proven - especially when no god has been proven to exist at all for thousands and thousands of years.

              If there were a god, I would imagine that god would be so superior to human emotions and attributes that it would be nothing like anything that humans have created.  If a god truly created the universe and the world, we would be less than ants to it.  I don't require ants to worship me just because I'm bigger.  I think any god that majestic and/or powerful wouldn't give a crap about worship or sacrifice or adoration.  It wouldn't require things from us because it was so far above us.  I imagine that god would be on to bigger and better things than petty human worship/praise/sacrifice.  I mean, why bother?

              I have a problem with any god claim that "requires" things of its subjects/creation.  A god that enjoys the scent of burning flesh, however, and blood sacrifice is not something that I'd consider to be godly.  In the modern age, we look down upon primitive people like the Aztecs who sacrificed human beings constantly and ripped out their still-beating hearts to appease their god.  Their god didn't help them when it came to extinction.  How much better are we now, though?

              1. PhoenixV profile image78
                PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                I apologize, my vision is not so good anymore and for some reason I was thinking you were a guy named Jim.

                I also believe that its possible that God has made Himself aware to many cultures. The Mayans for example have a Temple of the Foliated Cross, Father and Son hieroglyphs, unusual or similar circumcision-like rituals etc. I also think the Hindus have some ancient beliefs that are interesting and comparative.

                1. JMcFarland profile image92
                  JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  yes, and Jesus is remarkably similar to other characters that predate him.  Of course the early church fathers claimed that was Satan's foresight - and nothing more than a temptation to the "real" savior.

                  1. PhoenixV profile image78
                    PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Are you talking about alleged myths where they were carved out of rock or born from an almond -and somehow that equates to them being born of a virgin? Or how they all had 12 disciples, yet that cant be sourced or how they were all born on the 25th of December, and that cant be sourced either, nor is it even scriptural?  If so, thats one of the most embarrassing of atheist claims.

                  2. Chris Neal profile image84
                    Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Modern scholars point out that many of the claims that "predate" Jesus were actually retrofitted (like Mithras) to make the original myth more in line with the growing Christian message.

                    And many of the others have one or two points that may seem like they're similar until you actually start looking at the whole. One or two points is not enough.

                    Why do you focus on December 25th? That is nowhere but nowhere in the Bible. Church historians are more than happy to point out that the early church, after it became the official religion of the Roman Empire, coopted Saturnalia because people kept right on celebrating that one anyway. But most people who study such things say that Jesus was definitely not born in December, let alone on the 25th.

              2. 0
                Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                That's why I like you.. we are not so far apart in some of the way we think. I'm not sure if I'm right or not (and I'm ok with this) but based on my understanding of part of what I've read, God (if he exists out of respect)  gave us the ability to do things for ourselves and not have to call on him for nearly as much as some believers call out to him for



                It certainly can't be proven.. I admit that.. I was simply stating "what if".. But the funny thing is that none of the religions would ever consider such a thing



                I agree with this assessment. Which is specifically why I question how much of this worship mentality is really God's desire and how much was again the inspiration of what the writers of the Bible think he should be . Something that, as you pointed out, is so powerful that he should be worshipped and sacrifices should be made to appease him...

                Did that make sense?

              3. PhoenixV profile image78
                PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                I thought you claimed to have went to Bible College and read the Bible cover to cover many times?

                We are not ants, we were made in God's image. Did Jesus walk amongst men as an ant sent from God? Are ants given eternal life? Do ants become Children of God?

                Worship and praise are things YOU need, if they are true and honest feelings and not defined concepts that you choose to take exception to.

                On Sacrifice. Its abundantly clear you have no working knowledge of the Book of Hebrews and Psalms.


                I thought you claimed to have went to Bible College and read the Bible cover to cover many times?

                Are you still sticking to that story?

                1. PhoenixV profile image78
                  PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  I also want to point out another thing. Ants are part of God's creations too. You compare to disparage, but I will defend the ant as well. Ants have been around for 150 million years. Where were you?  They live all over the world and live for the benefit of each other as opposed to individuals. They communicate with each other and can solve problems. I think they can lift 6 times their own weight.

                2. JMcFarland profile image92
                  JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  you can doubt me and my past all you want, but if you can't even be respectful then there's no point in having a conversation with you.  I'm done.  Believe what you want about me - it doesn't make it true.

                  1. PhoenixV profile image78
                    PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    I have addressed you point for point. You have a tendency to just throw stuff out there and hope noone notices you never back anything up. I do not see any Biblical knowledge that would suggest a Bible College or a reading of the Bible cover to cover multiple times. In my opinion, it seems you barely have a beginners atheist understanding of scripture. What one could find off the internet if one was prone to confirmation bias. I am point blank and direct. I find it disrespectful that others are not that way with me. So I guess we both stand offended.

                3. 0
                  Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Out of curiosity, What does this scripture mean to you?

                  1. PhoenixV profile image78
                    PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    In context with the discussion is was a reply to the notion that we are just ants to a god. I still find that an odd description or analogy to anyone that is well versed in the Bible.


                    What that verse means to me personally, geez. Thats a toughy.

                    I think that God, created mankind as a procreation. To create a being that could have relationship. I have to speculate somewhat on the motivation.

      2. PhoenixV profile image78
        PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        ***Either a god (or gods) exist or no god exists.***

        False dichotomy. Our understanding of existence, especially the nature of a hypothetical creator of reality is incomplete. For instance your own existence comes and goes does it not? Yet you would insist that is a reasonable example of the concept of what it means to exist. The False dichotomy is that if a hypothetical god exists, it must exist as you illogically or incompletely define existence or somehow by default, it does not exist at all?


        ***if a god exists, then it either interacts with the natural world, or it doesn't****

        False dichotomy. If God created reality, it does not necessarily have to to interact linearly or spatially. Its like saying - I threw a frisbee, it must be true that I am continuously spinning it in flight, because I say so.


        **there should be evidence of it within the natural world.***

        False dichotomy. False dichotomy. False dichotomy.


        Reality exists regardless or what you observe as proof.  Reality does not depend on your observation.

        1. 0
          Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Nor is it shaped by beliefs

          1. PhoenixV profile image78
            PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            It would seem that some would claim that anything outside of their personal observation does not exist.

            If anything is out of phase with our reality, it may have more claim to existence than we do.

            I was not here 50 years ago. In 50 years I will be gone. ( or 15 billion years ago or 200 billion in the future)  To insist that anything or everything else should fall within those temporal spatial parameters or to insist that if anything and everything does not fall into those parameters-just dont count-  because I wish it to be true - is illogical.

            1. 0
              Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              That is an interesting point.

        2. JMcFarland profile image92
          JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          You're extremely quick to point out a "false dichotomy fallacy" but you haven't sufficiently proven that there are other options.

          If you say that either there is a god (or multiple gods) or there are no gods, I don't see this as a false dichotomy.  What other options are there that don't fit into these categories?

          Additionally, if a god appears in the natural world, there should be evidence of it within the natural world is not a false dichotomy either - because I'm not limiting things to one of only two options.  I said it SHOULD be evident in the natural world.  Not that it has to.  If you can't see it in the natural world, it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.  It means that it's not detectable.  If it's not detectable, then what standing do you have to say that it exists at all?  That would seem to be more like a deistic approach to god, which was addressed earlier in the statement that a god that does not interact with the natural world is indistinguishable from a god that does not exist.  I'm not saying that god doesn't exist - I'm saying there's no possible way to tell - which is a true statement at all.  I think you're confused on what a false dichotomy fallacy is.

          1. PhoenixV profile image78
            PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Either a virtual particle exists or there are no virtual particles= false dilemma. 

            Petitio principii to false dilemma.

            You use the term of existence as if you know what it means. Therein is your error.

          2. PhoenixV profile image78
            PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Compare to what you wrote earlier:

            Either a god (or gods) exist or no god exists.  Can we agree that those are the only possibilities?

            If you say that either there is a god (or multiple gods) or there are no gods, I don't see this as a false dichotomy.

            Either a god (or gods) exist or no god exists.  Can we agree that those are the only possibilities?


            You are trying to change your own premise. But it does not change anything because you immediately try to apply the original  eg proof, interaction, evidence.


            Reality is like you are a woolly mammoth frozen in the arctic. You have some self awareness. You look around you see ice.  You do not see jungles, entire oceans, mountains or deserts. They exist, you just are incapable of observing them. Its because you are frozen in the temporal spatial ice. And even then for a short temporal period.

            Your premise and claim is that not only should God appear before you, but He should appear to you as ice.

            1. PhoenixV profile image78
              PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              The only way you are ever going to see God, is if it behooves Him to dig you outa the ice.

              That is the possibility- to assume otherwise is an assumption.

            2. JMcFarland profile image92
              JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I rephrased, but both phrases have the exact same meaning.  What is the third option.  A false dichotomy reduces things to two possibilities when there are truly more options - so what are they?  What's another option to either gods exist our they don't?

          3. PhoenixV profile image78
            PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Answer one simple question for me Mr. McFarland.

            How does your physicalism philosophy turn out in the end?  How does your self aware existence play out?


            I find your claim to existence to be false, based upon what I know, upon what you have to admit.

            1. JMcFarland profile image92
              JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I agree, your version of me being a Mr doesn't exist.

              What makes you think that I'm a materialist?

              My existence does not rely on you believing I exist, thankfully.  If I don't exist like you suggest, though, then who is talking to you?

              1. PhoenixV profile image78
                PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                You could not answer one simple question?

                  How does your self aware existence play out?

                1. JMcFarland profile image92
                  JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  I live and I die and then whatever it is that makes me ME stops existing, and I'm gone.  I don't understand what more you're looking for.

                  1. PhoenixV profile image78
                    PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Your existence comes and goes? Is that your standard for existence? Sometimes? But mostly not?

            2. 0
              Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              JM is a female

          4. 0
            Rayne123posted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Just because something cannot be seen, does not mean it isnt in existence

            Sometimes in life we just have to use the faith that God gave us rather the rely on scientific facts that do not coincide with our beliefs..

            Here are Gods words actually
            ..For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. (Romans 1:20).
            and
            1 Timothy 1:4
            4 and occupying themselves with myths and endless genealogies. These myths and genealogies raise a lot of questions rather than promoting God’s plan, which centers in faith.

            I am just saying

            1. JMcFarland profile image92
              JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I'm pretty sure that those are Paul's words, actually - not gods.

              I'm not saying you can only believe in things that you can see with your own eyes at all.  I know that wind and gravity exist because I see their effects.  No faith required.

              1. PhoenixV profile image78
                PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Mind the sword, mind the people watch, mind the enemy, too many mind

                Last Samurai

                1. JMcFarland profile image92
                  JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Lol wow.  good movie

                  1. PhoenixV profile image78
                    PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    I would think that exist means all the time, not sometimes.

                    Because sometimes existing and sometimes not existing,  does not equal existing in my mind.

                    Johnny has a 20 dollar bill
                    Sally sometimes has money.

                    How much does that total exactly?

                    Personally, I would not want to count on Sally's finances.

              2. 0
                Rayne123posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Yes but Paul wrote Gods words

                1. JMcFarland profile image92
                  JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  did he?  And how do you know that?  Because those words say so?

    2. Peter Vid profile image61
      Peter Vidposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Please don't make promiscuous assumptions of what my intentions are. I never judged you or implied anything about anyone.

      The definition of the word "faith" is acceptance of a statement or a situation in the absence of evidence. When you say that you "believe in" god it's a given that you accept something without evidence.
      According to the bible, faith is:
      "the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."
      -Hebrews 11
      In other words your faith substitutes the evidence. So the attempt you just mentioned doesn't come from me or any other atheists. It comes from the very scriptures which constitute the foundations of your faith.

      This, however, is not at all the case with science. The beauty of the scientific method is that it can be tested by anyone. For example, if a scientist claims that water boils at 60 celcius and freezes at 25 celcius you can be at any part of earth and all you need is a thermometer to find out that water boils at 100 celcius and freezes at 0 and disprove him with providing your data. This is why I prefer to trust NASA and any other similar scientific institution that provides such measurable data.

      God revelations and alien abductions aren't usual everyday phenomena.
      If such thing had happened to me yes I would very much doubt my sanity and ask for expert help. If you go to a psychiatric clinic and roam around the corridores apart from the doctors and the nurses you will also see people who DO NOT doubt their sanity.

      To make  a clarification about your question:
      1.If in this hypothesis the person who formulated the hypothesis can gurantee to me that I was indeed abducted by aliens and it wasn't just a subjective experience of mine then yes. It happened and I don't have the evidence to prove it. You do realize though that in a real-life situation there won't be someone to gurantee anything and this is why in this case the hypothesis proves nothing.
      2.If, however, this hypothesis implicates that I just experienced with my senses an alien abduction, then there can't be a "yes" or "no" answer to this and both this and my previous reply are very much valid to your question.
      I hope you can understand the difference between those two premises.

  10. getitrite profile image81
    getitriteposted 3 years ago

    http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u288/Egghebrecht/7329_1229433772636_1132852047_73869.jpg

    1. PhoenixV profile image78
      PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Wow a strawman cartoon from an atheist. Let me count the ironies.

      1. Marisa Wright profile image91
        Marisa Wrightposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Are you implying atheists are straw men?  I thought you said you were tolerant of other people's views?

        1. PhoenixV profile image78
          PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I am saying a cartoon about logic should not include a logical fallacy.  You are in error to suggest that I am intolerant or that I have ever said I was tolerant.

          Tolerance suggest political correctness that I do not ascribe to. Political correctness enables stupidity.

          1. 0
            Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Political correctness prevents minorities from being bullied, it's a way for forcing politeness. Otherwise one could come across as a sexist, racist, homophobic, intolerant bully.

            1. PhoenixV profile image78
              PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              The flaw there is "who gets to decide" who gets to be forced into politeness as you say. Being  impolite is not a crime that has to be subjectively and arbitrarily dictated by a person or group. Political correctness becomes a tactic to silence opinion by people that cannot take honest criticism or truth.

            2. Chris Neal profile image84
              Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              It's both. Having been alive long enough to see this, there are many times I can't help thinking that both sides of the debate can play out sort of like the French Revolution in microcosm, where the peasants, who had been downtrodden and oppressed for centuries and treated little better than cattle (actually, often not as well) just went insane with revenge when they got the upper hand. A genuine desire to correct a genuine wrong, in this case the treatment of minorities, can and sometimes does lead to a sort of tyranny of ideas where expressing genuine concern about something, even if your idea is unpopular, becomes a reason to shut the person up by almost any means. It also becomes an opportunity for some to game the system, even if that's not what they think they're doing (I'm thinking here about the story I heard of a pastor in Canada who expressed concern about Muslims handing out Koran's near public schools and was forced to serve community service in an Islamic center for his "crime." I know where I heard the story but I can't find the specifics of it.)

              I can still remember the first time I heard that phrase, "politically correct." I was hanging out at MIT (no, I never attended) with some friends and one of them made an ironic statement about needing to make sure they buy their food at the "most politically correct grocery store." We were all liberal teenagers or young twenty-somethings and I lived in NYC and I'd never heard the phrase before. Everyone else laughed.

              1. 0
                Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Interesting story Chris, and I agree. Who forced the paster to do community service for expressing his concern? That doesn't sound like Canada. I'd like to find out about that? We just had three youths close to where I live convert to islam and move to north Africa. 2 are dead and one is in jail. I think it's becoming less politically correct to oppose Islam. Or is that more politically correct?

                http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/201 … tania.html

  11. 0
    Beth37posted 3 years ago

    Oh my word, I hate my job. (sigh)
    Ok... we can resume programming... I just had to get that off my chest.

    1. 0
      Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Hope your day got better

      1. 0
        Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Just not being there makes it better. Thanks a million. smile

        1. 0
          Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          No problem!!

  12. oceansnsunsets profile image88
    oceansnsunsetsposted 3 years ago

    Even though one should be used to it, it still always amazes me that people would rather put others down than to rationally and reasonably discuss ideas between each other.  Based on my observations, this occurs when someone really challenges someone's ideas or assertions with good ideas or logical ones.  I guess it is what we do when challenged that makes the difference.

    Anyone can put others down, that is easy.  It takes a much stronger person and one with character to look at an issue head on and discuss things fairly. 

    Call me crazy, but I truly think it is better for each of us to be willing to look inward at what we are "putting out there" in the way of ideas, and what we choose to put our beliefs in.  That is the other big surprise, that so many people really put their faith in something, a lot of it, when it comes down to it.  That is fine, but it isn't so fair to take issue with another for having faith in something that often turns out to have more merit anyway.  Incredibly ironic.

  13. oceansnsunsets profile image88
    oceansnsunsetsposted 3 years ago

    Narcissistic means something in particular, as does the word delusional.  If someone is going to actually call people "names" like those, they need to at the very least point out exactly how.  Otherwise, there is no merit.  From what I have seen, neither has been established, and far from it.  It is also a well known fact, that it is all to easy to just throw things like that out.  It isn't a good reason for doing so.

    For another group to observe pack mentality that kinds of gangs up on others, is also something in particular, and we see this on HubPages on a regular basis.  Many that engage in it likely do not realize how juvenile it looks, and the distraction from the real discussions is likely a side benefit.   It is not a good tactic, and a form of waving a white flag of surrender in debate. 

    I look at it like discussing great ideas, spirals down to where some get behind the nearest rock and begin to throw dirt clods at the opposing side.  Its just goofy, and just because you might have more throwing dirt clods on your "side",  will never mean that you have a winning argument or idea.  The facts of matters, what is most reasonable, logical, and moral wins out in the end.  If any of us holds onto an idea that doesn't hold its weight when critiqued, we have no one to blame but ourselves, and what comes with that.  Getting upset, putting down, or ganging up on the opposing "team" doesn't help your idea become any better for that reason.  Consider, the frustration is to be had with oneself perhaps, for holding on to a bad idea as a good or great idea.  Our preferences on all kinds of things in life never translate automatically into good ideas for us and others.  This is what is wrong with our country currently.....many people voting the same way.....yikes.

  14. 0
    Beth37posted 3 years ago

    haha, you two are killing me. Im glad you stopped making this your own personal chat room though before ATM got to you. He would have given you what for!

    1. 0
      Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Nah. ATM has no use for replying to my posts. I haven't been upbraided by him since a month after I got here. But, DM might have had a post or two to respond to.

      1. 0
        Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Nah. I was realistically done with this particular conversation.. It was fun while it lasted, but it was becoming a tennis match. I never enjoyed tennis much... I actually like you Emile ( well, I like everyone here in one form or another). You provide good conversation and debate and your hubs are interesting.

        1. 0
          Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Funny, because I like you too. I agree with most of your posts. I think we are similar, somewhat in the middle; but our sympathies are at odds.

          1. 0
            Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I can agree with that to a degree. Our sympathies aren't too far different from one another either. just where we place them at times...LOL


            See? This is why I like HP. exchange of ideas. and philosophy.. outside of the occasional tennis match of arguing from perspective, everyone can ultimately reach some type of respectful common ground (more or less)

        2. 0
          Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          You are a quick learner. Love it.

          1. 0
            Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I try, Rad.. I try

          2. 0
            Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Not so fast rad man. You have to wait and see if courtesy is extended where it matters. Politely conversing with me doesn't count.

  15. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    How is it a clue for His non-existence?

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      It's a clue because claiming God helped you make the perfect sandwich or saved you from tripping over a rock, but fails to help starving people from a painful death makes no sense at all.

      1. Chris Neal profile image84
        Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Oooh, theology! At last!

        It does, if you look at larger context.

        Now, don't get me wrong, I think a lot of people are too quick to credit God with small things, but that's largely because they're slow to credit Him with big ones. Or they only credit Him with small things and debit him the big ones (your example of God helping someone making the perfect sandwich while allowing multitudes to starve.) This is one of the reasons I believe in free will, at least to an extent. People do often make their own choices. Now, the natural response here is to say, with some degree of anger, that a poor Somali stuck in the middle of Darfur has no real choice in  a drought. And I agree that most of those people don't have much choice in terms of their physical surroundings because often going to a camp is preferable to staying in the starvation zone but is still not optimal. But they can make the choice of whether they commit themselves to God or not, and their eternal soul does depend on it. And so often what we tend to assume is that the other option would automatically be some kind of earthly paradise, but we don't know that. It might be something even worse than what they are enduring. We humans tend to simplify things in favor of the POV that we already have. I'm certainly not free from that bias. But it is a bias, because we often cannot see things that God can and because we are finite we never will.

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Are you saying that those starving or critically ill babies all over the world only need to give themselves to God to get saved? The cancer wards have Christians well represented, but people open tell us the little things that God did for them. Does that make any sense? He does and can interfere and have conversations with us, but won't give a starving child a piece of bread.

          This only made sense when we look at the individuals who make these claims as God only existing for them.

          1. 0
            Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            This statement reminds of a saying I've heard.. The bible says long ago God created man in his image and ever since then man has been trying to return the favor

          2. Chris Neal profile image84
            Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Your argument goes back to my point about people simplifying things according to their bias. And that goes both ways, some people wanting to make everything an act of God, while others wanting to make out like nothing at all is an act of God. The fact is that the persons who are manning the camps or taking in the bread are also performing acts of God, sometimes directly because they feel called by God (directly or indirectly) to perform these acts. Sometimes they don't conceive of themselves as doing anything in the name of God, but it is God who gets the help to the people. Even that is really painting it simplistically, but I'm pointing out that there are not just two options. It isn't all or nothing, either God does every single thing to the point where humans are really off the hook regardless (a version of universalism that is certainly not supported by the Bible) or God being so removed that even if He did exist He would be powerless.

            1. 0
              Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              This is exactly what I've been saying, somehow people get what they need. There are those who's psyche needs a loving, guiding forgiving father figure and that's just what they get. They can go on doing stuff that God tells them is clearly against the rules because of the forgiving part. I just think it interesting that some think their God interacts and gives them things, but can't see the countless starving or ill people who really need him. Don't you?

              There has to be a grey area, because God is different for everyone, that's the point.

              1. Chris Neal profile image84
                Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Yes and no. It's true to an extent that God is "different for everyone" but that does not mean that God is not the same. I'm different for you than I am for getitrite than I am for JM than I am for Beth than I am for Mark and yet I'm still me.

                1. 0
                  Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Basically, you are still who you are, but everyone interprets your actions and words differently?

                  1. Chris Neal profile image84
                    Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Partly. I also treat different people differently. You are not interested in having the same conversation (or lack thereof) as getitrite. And you and I don't relate the way I and Rad do. And whatever antagonism exists between me and ATM, there have been ups and downs in it that have never existed with getitrite. Situations are different and people act and react differently, and interpret differently, but the person who exists at the center of it is still the same person.

  16. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    In other words even after you seen them, and smelt them and heard them and experienced the pain of what they did to you, if your friends told you that you were hallucinating you would have yourself checked?

    1. 0
      Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

      So we have a red man and a rad man or am I hallucinating?
      You are British, yes?

      Oh, India... that makes sense. smile

    2. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Tell that to someone with schizophrenia. They hear, smell, talk and fell things that aren't there all the time.

      1. Chris Neal profile image84
        Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        And yet how quick are we to ascribe a serious mental disorder to someone based solely on our own bias, without any real understanding of them or their situation?

        Hint, the forums are a great place to find that.

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I didn't say any of you have schizophrenia. I'm merely pointing out the power of the mind.

          1. Chris Neal profile image84
            Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            No, but unless I've misread you, you have said that believers are delusional. It's one thing to say the mind is a powerful thing and another to claim that another person has lost touch with reality.

            1. 0
              Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I've been told many many things here Chris, I don't take it personal.

              Look at it this way, you believe there is a God, I do not, if you are right then I'm delusional, if I'm right, you are delusional. I believe I'm right, and if I believe I'm right I must believe you are delusional. I can back it up with psychology, science and a lack of evidence for a God. I don't blame you or think less of you as a result. Clearly evolution had a role to play in this, so perhaps I'm the unlucky guy who got himself isolated from the clan and eaten by a lion because I didn't believe.

  17. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    What tells me that my God exist is my experience with Him. I can experience His presence and I can hear Him and I can speak to Him.

    Since I have a personal walk with Him I know that there are no other gods other than HIM. We are not dumb fools who just look for random happenings and connect it to God. He specifically gives me things I ask for and sometimes reveals to clearly that I do not require somethings that I already possess.

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      You can prove that you have conversations with God to me by doing one very simple thing. The next time you're having a walk on the beach with God ask him the name of the street RAD MAN lived on in 1980. Post the answer here and if it's correct you will make a believer out of me. That simple.

      1. 0
        Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Your understanding of how/why God speaks to us is so off target.
        God is not a parlor trick. He's the Creator of the universe and He holds our destinies in His hand.

        1. A Troubled Man profile image61
          A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          That is highly offensive, why do you say such mean things?

          1. 0
            Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I think she means he hold our special purposes in his hands. LOL

        2. 0
          Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          He just said he has conversations with God. I believe these conversations are only in his head, but if they are real conversations then why not ask God to supply some information to make a believer out of an Atheist? People ask God for stuff all the time and some claim he gives them stuff, while he allows children to die and starve to death. It's because it make no sense at all that I bring this up. Of course the answer is always... God doesn't work that way. It's always that way because the conversations are only in his/hers head.

          1. 0
            Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I really do want to understand. Why do you come here everyday in an attempt to tear down another human beings faith? I just don't understand the draw. Surely it consumes you for the time you spend on it. You don't post on any other threads. Not one that I can see. What drives you?

            1. JMcFarland profile image92
              JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Why do you see skepticism as "attempting to tear down another persons faith"?  Faith cannot be diminished by simple questions.  If it can, then its not very strong faith to begin with.

              1. 0
                Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                I didn't say you could tear down my faith. I said you attempt to.

                1. JMcFarland profile image92
                  JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  No we don't.  We question it.

                  1. 0
                    Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Someone's got to do it.

                2. JMcFarland profile image92
                  JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  What is it that you want, Beth?  You want to have the freedom to be able to talk about your own personal beliefs, but you don't want people that disagree with you to be able to share their opinions about your beliefs?  You want religious discussions to only exist between like minded believers, while no one else can participate?  You think that religion gets a free pass to say whatever it wants whenever it wants to, without any opposition at all, because someone may be offended?

                  I'll say it again - if discussions were limited to topics that no one could possibly find offensive, no one would ever discuss anything.  you were offended by the church of the flying spaghetti monster for goodness sake.  What aren't you offended by?

                  1. 0
                    Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    It's not that JM, I just have a hard time understanding the motive. Excuse me, sometimes I think out loud. I can tell you if we discussed homosexuality, I would tread softly. The idea of hurting someone especially if we were talking about something precious or very personal to them, is kind of loathsome to me. It is just so hard for me to comprehend mocking and blasting as some do... but whatever. We're all different I spose.

            2. 0
              Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I've answer that question from you about 4 times. I actually don't spend much time here. I read a few posts and move on. At first I wanted to understand the psychology behind these delusion. Now that I understand it I want to confirm it.

              Why would someone think the internal dialogue in ones head isn't in their head? So many claims, no one supplies evidence.

              1. 0
                Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Let me know when it's confirmed.

                1. 0
                  Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Let me know when you get evidence that supports your claim.

                  1. 0
                    Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    And if I don't provide what you're looking for... you will just keep asking on a daily basis?
                    It sounds to me like you are searching.

      2. Chris Neal profile image84
        Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Except God does not jump through hoops for people. He may do it and He may not. You've read the Bible, you should know better than that.

        1. A Troubled Man profile image61
          A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Yes, and nowhere in the Bible does it talk about hoop jumping.

          1. Jerami profile image80
            Jeramiposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Then why are you disapointed that he doesn't ?

          2. Chris Neal profile image84
            Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Amen!

        2. 0
          Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          That's the same response I get when I confront someone who says they interact with God. Don't drink the cool aid.

          1. Chris Neal profile image84
            Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I'm not following your logic. How is what I said the same as "don't drink the Kool Aid?"

            1. 0
              Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Blind faith is what lead to people drinking the poisoned cool-aid. Blind faith is a lack of critical thinking.

              1. Chris Neal profile image84
                Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                So, and I want to be clear about this because sometimes I misunderstand and sometimes I just lose the thread of what we were talking about, are you accusing me of blind faith?

                1. 0
                  Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  I think all believers are accused of having blind faith since there is no physical evidence of the existence of God and our source (other than our experiences) is a book written 2,000 years ago by people who had no access to the technology we have today.

                2. 0
                  Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Isn't faith in God in itself blind? Can you think of anything other than God that you/we have faith in without physical, measurable evidence of? Gravity, higgs particle, dark matter, dark energy, time?

                  1. 0
                    Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    And there it is...LOL

                  2. PhoenixV profile image78
                    PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Logical inference is not blind faith. To say people just have blind faith is a strawman argument. There are many things such as qualia that does not have measurable evidence.

                  3. Chris Neal profile image84
                    Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Are you really asking me if I have proof of God or not? I mean, that satisfies my as to His existence?

      3. 0
        Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        I've gotta ask or this will eat me up.. Let's say that for giggles and grins Augustine were to actually have come back with the correct answer to what you are asking. If you're saying that this will make you a believer that he talks to God, would this also serve as evidence for you that God exists? I'm asking this question because if a correct answer convinces you that he talks to God, then that should serve as an acknowledgment of the existence, right?

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Right. I've asked a specific question that even if he googled me, he wouldn't find that info.

          1. 0
            Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Ok.. Just asked. Just gauging what would it take to prove the existence of God to some people.

            1. 0
              Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              It by itself wouldn't prove anything until looked at a little closer. For all I know the guy is a detective, but it would open my eyes to the possibility.

              1. 0
                Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Ok. that was what I was asking. I asked if  he was able to give you the answer wod it provide evidence that God exists since it would be an acceptance that he talks to God. so it opens up a possibility, but still not a certainty?

                1. 0
                  Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Yes, but let's not jump the gun. They always say God doesn't work that way.

                  1. 0
                    Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Of course.

  18. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    Yes we can



    Yes He does.



    Agreed



    The point is that evidences do exist but you just don't accept them. Some evidences you can see are changed lives and cured diseases. But those are only some effects that everybody can see. Then there are strong evidences that a believer can experience.

    1. JMcFarland profile image92
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      If I ever saw evidence, I would examine that evidence on it's own merit.  I've met dozens of believers who claimed that god healed them - while ignoring the fact that they sought medical treatment and the medication is what led to them getting better - not god.

      I've known atheists with terminal conditions who got better without any understandable reason - without ever praying a single prayer.  I've known believers that have died horrible, lingering deaths where no amount of praying made any bit of difference at all.

      Healing stories are world-wide.  It doesn't matter what religion you attribute them to.  Each person prays to the god that they believe in, and some get better and some don't.  How do you account for that?

      It's all too easy to be sick, and then claim that god healed you when you get better.  I'm sorry, but I'm not going to take a complete stranger's word for it.  Provide the evidence for your miracle.  Saying it happened just isn't enough.  That's not evidence.  That's testimony - and that's completely subjective and unreliable.

  19. Jerami profile image80
    Jeramiposted 3 years ago

    Why would someone think the internal dialogue in ones head isn't in their head? So many claims, no one supplies evidence.
    ======================
    If you were to hear a voice in your head that gives you information that you would otherwise have NEVER known, and that information turns out to be true?  And this happens on numerous occasions  You should give   "some"   credit where credit is due.   You may say to yourself,  maybe this is what those crazy believers are calling God?  or is it a source of knowledge which is outside of myself which I am unaware of?  OR   was I much more intelligent than I think I am?   Is there a vast amount of knowledge within my own head that I am seldom able to tap into? 
      Maybe there is a great divide within our heads that separate us from untaped knowledge and abilities AND WE NEED TO BUILD A BRIDGE ? 
    Even if I were able to accomplish such a feat ?  People are going to think I am crazy for listening to that which they can not hear.   I think that If I were able to build such a bridge ..  I will have gained enough knowledge to know that no one will believe me. So I should not rock their boat  ... and just keep it to myself.
      I say “let the pot call the fork black”.

    1. 0
      Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Radman is going to tell you he guessed the winning lottery numbers twice.

      1. Jerami profile image80
        Jeramiposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Well, if he does, he has missed the point I was attempting to make.

    2. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      You can tell me you have been given information that you could never known until the cows come home. Prove it. What was the name of my street in 1980.

      1. Jerami profile image80
        Jeramiposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Where is the question mark in that statement.
        You can tell me you have been given information that you could never known until the cows                   come home.(?)  ......    Did I say that (!)   
        I make a long post asking a number of questions and all you see is "if" that voice in peoples heads tell them information they would not have known otherwise, where did that information come from?   You immediately make an accusation of "You can tell me "such and such" prove it!!    Did you even see the question?

        ========================   

        Prove it. What was the name of my street in 1980.
        = - = -
        Now that would be a magic trick wouldn't it.?  And even if I could do magic, which I never claimed to be able; you still wouldn't believe anything that I said   or   anything that you  "thought"  I said.    Cause that ain't the way the game is played.

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          When push comes to shove, the answer is always the same. Anyone can claim God gives them knowledge, but they have to prove it. Can you prove it? There's the question mark.

          1. Jerami profile image80
            Jeramiposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Did I say that he did?    NO  I didn't say "That"

            1. 0
              Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              You did say he gives you knowledge that you couldn't have had?

              1. Jerami profile image80
                Jeramiposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                "If you were to hear a voice in your head that gives you information that you would otherwise have NEVER known,  ..."       

                You read that post how many times to see if you were correct ???
                Where in that sentence did I say that this happened to me?
                Your brain thought that it already knew what you were about to read and assumed thai I said that this happened to me.   You believed that I said that this happened to me when I didn't say that.

                  I then said  "You might ask  YOURSELF  ..... (those questions ...}"

                People do the same thing when they read many things especially prophesy  , our presumptions over power our ability to read that which is actually written.   It's OK ...  everyone does it  sometimes.

                1. 0
                  Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Why don't you just be honest next time. You implied something only to try to mess with someone.

                  But it matters not because the fact that some do hear voices and have discussion with something in their head is what we were discussing.

                  1. Jerami profile image80
                    Jeramiposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    I truly didn't do that on purpose.  and ..  I wasn't focusing on that part about "me or you" hearing voices  but  about the posability of there being a hidden wealth of knowledge juuustt out side of our reach lying right there in our head.

                        BUT ...  after ..  I saw that you did misread what I wrote, I saw a perfect example to  show how everyone misreads that which they are reading sometimes ...  especially when it comes to prophesy of scripture. Our minds are already predisposed to see that which we are expecting to see cause we have been taught what it says when it isn't at all what is written.
                         There has been a whole lot of that going on for a long, long time.

  20. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    Even in science one starts of with a belief or faith. That is inevitable. Before starting off with any scientific study one believes (without evidence) that something is there that can be found. For example all of the inventions that scientists have made.

    The knowledge of God begins with faith. Later as we go we find evidence.



    My question was simple and clear. You seem to have a ting towards complicating simple things.

    If you were abducted by some alien into a ship and then were left back, and you don't have evidence for it, DID IT HAPPEN?

  21. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    There are churches where the members do not take medicines or visit doctors. They are always healed through prayer. May be you just have not met such a group.

    And again I am telling you healing is not all the evidences there is.

    1. JMcFarland profile image92
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      and there are a lot of religions that deny blood-transfusions, surgeries and medical attention - and then when their children die, they're prosecuted for neglect and child abuse and put in jail, where they deserve to be.

  22. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    It does not make sense to you because you do not understand how God works, the mind of God and His  nature. You know nothing about God. That is why this does not make sense to you.

    1. JMcFarland profile image92
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      why do you assume that atheists know nothing about god?  Do you assume that we are all atheists from birth and that since we deny religious beliefs in our own lives we always have - and we've never taken the time to study what it is that we don't accept?  That's a hugely arrogant assumption for you to make - and one that certainly is unfounded.

    2. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Perhaps you can enlighten me on why the God you worship would supply something small you pray for and leave starving ill children alone to die?

  23. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    No one knows aliens do exist. But my question was this. ....IF..... you were really abducted by an alien (which would mean that when that happens you will know and have evidence that they do exist) and did some tests on you and sent you back. You don't have any evidence to show anyone that this happened. The question was DID THIS HAPPEN? 

    Either you are evading to answer this question because doing so will crash your logic. Or you just don't have the brains to understand such a simple question as this.

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Have you been abducted by God? Did he bring you up to his ship where he did tests on you before he put you back?

      I would question my sanity. Wouldn't you?

  24. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    That was very simple indeed. At your request I did ask God that question. This is what He told me "Your job is not to prove Me to people. Your job is to just point people where evidence lies. If they need evidence, they need to ask Me."

    1. JMcFarland profile image92
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      how convenient.  But as you wish.

      god, whichever name you really go by and whichever religion you belong to - please give me the name of the street that Rad Man lived on in 1980.  If you truly wish for everyone to come to know you and you're all-powerful, this should be an easy task - and you can make a self-admitted atheist question what it is that they believe.  Oh, and can you also let me know what god you are, so I can examine any answer I get rationally - with the brain that your followers claim that you gave me?  Thanks!  Eagerly awaiting your reply.

      How long is this supposed to take?

      1. bBerean profile image59
        bBereanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Julie,

             I know you know the bible.  It could be awhile.  wink

        "John 9:31 Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth."

        1. JMcFarland profile image92
          JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          if god only hears the prayers of believers, then how do you account for miracles for atheists (which theists are ready to take credit for) and how would anyone ever be saved?  The man said that god told him (conveniently) to ask him ourselves.  I was simply following his rules.  Guess it was all pointless, then.

          1. 0
            Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Off the top of my head... kidding. I lifted this off a site.

            The people of Nineveh prayed that Nineveh might be spared (Jonah 3:5-10). God answered this prayer and did not destroy the city of Nineveh as He had threatened.

            Hagar asked God to protect her son Ishmael (Genesis 21:14-19). God not only protected Ishmael, God blessed him exceedingly.

            In 1 Kings 21:17-29, especially verses 27-29, Ahab fasts and mourns over Elijah's prophecy concerning his posterity. God responds by not bringing about the calamity in Ahab's time.

            The Gentile woman from the Tyre and Sidon area prayed that Jesus would deliver her daughter from a demon (Mark 7:24-30). Jesus cast the demon out of the woman’s daughter.

            Cornelius, the Roman centurion in Acts 10, had the apostle Peter sent to him in response to Cornelius being a righteous man. Acts 10:2 tells us that Cornelius “prayed to God regularly.”

            God does make promises that are applicable to all (saved and unsaved alike) such as Jeremiah 29:13: “You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart.” This was the case for Cornelius in Acts 10:1-6. But there are many promises that, according to the context of the passages, are for Christians alone. Because Christians have received Jesus as the Savior, they are encouraged to come boldly to the throne of grace to find help in time of need (Hebrews 4:14-16). We are told that when we ask for anything according to God's will, He hears and gives us what we ask for (1 John 5:14-15). There are many other promises for Christians concerning prayer (Matthew 21:22; John 14:13, 15:7). So, yes, there are instances in which God does not answer the prayers of an unbeliever. At the same time, in His grace and mercy, God can intervene in the lives of unbelievers in response to their prayers.

            Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/unbeliever- … z2Q1XU7pv5

            1. getitrite profile image81
              getitriteposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              No offense, but why is God so obsessed with destroying whole cities?  Do Christians just not see that there is something wrong with this?  Seriously.

              1. Chris Neal profile image84
                Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                How many actual whole cities in all of history has God destroyed that He could be classified as "obsessed"?

            2. 0
              Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I would assume then that Christians would be vastly unrepresented in cancer wards? Wait no evidence there. All these claims of prayers being answered have left no statistical evidence. Here's a real eye opener, have a walk through the cancer FLOOR at a children's hospital. My cousin has a 7 year old son in one of those beds. I've done this and let me tell you you'll come out a different person.

              1. 0
                Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                The world is full of atrocities. I have seen my share. We process it differently I guess. I see them and think how much a lost and dying world needs God, you look at it and see the lack of God. It's similar. Both are the refusal to welcome Him into our world.

          2. bBerean profile image59
            bBereanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Regarding miracles, who prayed for them?  Only atheists?  That seems odd.  As for being saved, anyone sincerely seeking God will be heard.  Mocking and taunting God...not so much.
            I hate to say it, but I suspect he too, was mocking God, although I do not believe it was his intent to do so.

            1. JMcFarland profile image92
              JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Okay, I have an example in mind.  One of my friends who is an atheist was in dire financial straights.  They were waiting on a payment from their insurance company that was delayed.  They didn't tell ANYONE what they were going to, because they didn't want any prayers on their behalf reaching any god.  They instead waited, and within a week they received a completely different payment for something that got them through until the payment they were waiting for came through.  When they told everyone their story, however, their family members who were believers pointed to god and said "see god provided for you" when no prayers were said at all.

              I didn't mock god with my prayer.  I asked genuinely for the proof that the poster said I should turn to god for.  Of course, I failed to ask how augustine KNEW that god told him to ask him himself.  It sounds like something the voice inside of all of our heads (ourselves) would say when faced with the opportunity to fail to provide the proof we said we could provide.

              I will say, however, that I heard a voice in my head at the same question which was unmistakeably from the flying spaghetti monster who told me "how dare you ask for such trivial details from my noodly appendages.  I have sauce to fling - go bother someone else".  Now who can prove that the flying spaghetti monster DOESN'T exist.  maybe that's who augustine was praying to, since they sound so incredibly similar in their responses.

              1. 0
                Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                I love the fact that they reply, as you said the same way a voice inside their heads would say when faced with the opportunity to fail. Looking from the outside is obvious, but little simulated God won't let them see it.

                It's always the same,
                God answers prayers and saves Christians. (no evidence supplied)
                I talk with God all the time, he gives me information I couldn't have had.

                Okay, prove it?

                God doesn't work that way.

                But look above you just told me he does.

                1. Daddio Hepcat profile image62
                  Daddio Hepcatposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Deleted

                  1. 0
                    Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    And the cat came back.

    2. 0
      Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      WOW, and you're walking right into that one with your eyes open?? Your discernment must have been turned off

    3. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      But I did ask, but found nothing because there is nothing there. You know you didn't tell the truth right? Some prophet.

    4. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Did your God just tell you to tell me to ask him what was the name of the street I lived on in 1980? I already have that answer. I was hoping you could impress me with the answer. You see that little voice in your head is in fact in your head. You are the believer with a supposed relationship with God, and he tell you to tell me to ask a question I already have the answer to?

  25. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    The very fact that one is an atheist shows that one knows nothing about God. You may have studied the Bible you may have studied theology. But you have not know God on a personal level. If you had you would never have become an atheist. So you know nothing about GOD.

    1. JMcFarland profile image92
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      you have no basis for that claim.  I know what I believed, and I know what I felt at the time.  You cannot possibly claim to make that assertion unless YOU are god, and you were aware of my heart at the time.

      1. 0
        Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        ***Disclaimer*** The views represented by the particular believer do not reflect the views of all believers.

    2. 0
      Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      This is a very bold judgment to make. How could you possibly know what is or was in another's heart? You have not walked in the shoes of another, therefore you cannot possibly judge someone else's struggles.. Looks like Matthew 7:1-8 missed you completely huh?

    3. A Troubled Man profile image61
      A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Sorry, but there isn't anything you know more about your God than anyone else who has access to the Bible. Claiming you "know God on a personal level" is a complete fabrication.

  26. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    Probably you will never get a reply, because you do not believe in Him and your prayer is nothing but waste words.



    No, you do not know what you believed. I need not be God to know this but I can tell you this as I know God. I know that that those who have a relationship with Jesus Christ can never become what you are.

    1. JMcFarland profile image92
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      that's just patently absurd.  You have people like Frank Templeton who was a part of the ministry with Billy Gram - now an agnostic.  You have Matt Dillihunty who was headed for seminary when he became an atheist.  You have David Smalley who was active in his church until he studied the bible and became an atheist.  You have Dan Barker who was an Evangelical Pastor who became an atheist.  I think it makes you feel better to tell yourself that no one who was a "true" christian ever becomes an atheist, but it's just not true.  You just discount anyone who is now an atheist as never "truly" saved because you're uncomfortable with the fact that a lot of people of faith lose it along the way and start disbelieving in what you want to be true.  Your assertion does not make it true, and I'm genuinely sorry that you have such a skewed view of atheists as a result.

      Just empty words, huh?  I did EXACTLY what you told me that god told you to do, but of course your god isn't going to answer because I don't already believe in him?  That's circular logic.  So if god doesn't hear the prayers of people who don't believe in him, how is anyone ever saved?  The ball falls back into your court.  You believe in him - you get the name of the street.  Now you're going to repeat what "god" told you, that we should ask him ourselves but when we do it's just empty words.  You've set yourself up a handy "get out of jail free" card that gives you NO responsibility without having to provide any "proof" for your claims at all - which all boils down to the fact that you can't prove it.  Just admit it and we can all move on.

    2. JMcFarland profile image92
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Romans 2:1 You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things.

      1. 0
        Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        That isn't in his bible apparently..

  27. 0
    Beth37posted 3 years ago

    Oooh <claps hands> a parlor trick! Tell me what street I lived on in 1980. It would be impressive cause I can't remember what state I lived in in 1980.
    Hey, I had a dream I met you the other night. I can't remember it yet though.

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      I get that a lot. Not the dreaming part unfortunately, but the I just don't remember part you. LOL

  28. getitrite profile image81
    getitriteposted 3 years ago

    The monster under my bed, from childhood, must be real then, if I am to "logically" have any faith.  And I don't mean blind faith.

    1. 0
      Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      He was. Thing of it is that once you get to be a certain age, monsters get reassigned to other children

      1. getitrite profile image81
        getitriteposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Finally....an explanation. lol

      2. 0
        Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        You think it's like Monsters Inc. the movie?

  29. 0
    Beth37posted 3 years ago

    ig·loo  (gl)
    n. pl. ig·loos
    1. An Inuit or Eskimo dwelling, especially a dome-shaped winter dwelling built of blocks of packed snow.
    2. A dome-shaped structure or building.

    1. PhoenixV profile image78
      PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      a pri·o·ri
      adjective \ˌä-prē-ˈȯr-ē, ˌa-; ˌā-(ˌ)prī-ˈȯr-ˌī, -ˌprē-ˈȯr-ē\
      Definition of A PRIORI
      1
      a : deductive
      b : relating to or derived by reasoning from self-evident propositions — compare a posteriori
      c : presupposed by experience
      2
      a : being without examination or analysis : presumptive
      b : formed or conceived beforehand

      1. 0
        Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        I cant understand the word from the definition. lol

    2. PhoenixV profile image78
      PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Are igloos contingent upon Eskimos ?


      con·tin·gent
      /kənˈtɪndʒənt/ Show Spelled [kuhn-tin-juhnt] Show IPA
      adjective
      1.
      dependent for existence, occurrence, character, etc.,

  30. 0
    Beth37posted 3 years ago

    Well, maybe in origination, but surely not in continuation.

    o·rig·i·nate  (-rj-nt)
    v. o·rig·i·nat·ed, o·rig·i·nat·ing, o·rig·i·nates
    v.tr.
    To bring into being; create: originated the practice of monthly reports.
    v.intr.
    To come into being; start

    1. PhoenixV profile image78
      PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Barring any Eskimo Demolition Companies...

      I wonder if Eskimos carry around blueprints or is the experience of building igloos just passed down from generation to generation.

      ex·pe·ri·ence  (k-spîr-ns)
      n.
      1. The apprehension of an object, thought, or emotion through the senses or mind:

      1. 0
        Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Unfortunately, igloo construction is down do to the economy.

        e·con·o·my  (-kn-m)
        n. pl. e·con·o·mies
        1.
        a. Careful, thrifty management of resources, such as money, materials, or labor: learned to practice economy in making out the household budget.
        b. An example or result of such management; a saving.
        2.
        a. The system or range of economic activity in a country, region, or community: Effects of inflation were felt at every level of the economy.
        b. A specific type of economic system: an industrial economy; a planned economy.
        3. An orderly, functional arrangement of parts; an organized system: "the sense that there is a moral economy in the world, that good is rewarded and evil is punished" (George F. Will).
        4. Efficient, sparing, or conservative use: wrote with an economy of language.
        5. The least expensive class of accommodations, especially on an airplane.
        6. Theology The method of God's government of and activity within the world.

        1. PhoenixV profile image78
          PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          If its a matter of construction materials, I could float them a loan of some  water.

          matter

          /ˈmætər/ Show Spelled [mat-er] Show IPA
          noun
          1.
          the substance or substances of which any physical object consists or is composed:

          1. 0
            Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

            You could float me a loan if you were so inclined. I accept pennies... just ask HP's.

            inclined [ɪnˈklaɪnd]
            adj
            1. (postpositive; often foll by to) having a disposition; tending
            2. sloping or slanting

            1. PhoenixV profile image78
              PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              No problem. I keep my water for loan in lakes.

              jump

              verb (used without object)
              1.
              to spring clear of the ground or other support by a sudden muscular effort; leap:

              lake
              1 /leɪk/ Show Spelled [leyk] Show IPA
              noun
              1.
              a body of fresh or salt water of considerable size, surrounded by land.

              1. 0
                Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                You asking me to jump? That's an odd request for the internet.

                1re·quest
                noun \ri-ˈkwest\
                Definition of REQUEST
                1
                : the act or an instance of asking for something
                2
                : something asked for <granted her request>
                3
                : the condition or fact of being requested <available on request>
                4
                : the state of being sought after : demand

                1. PhoenixV profile image78
                  PhoenixVposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  I was being generous. I can float you a loan of some water because they are my liquid assets.  Are you sure you can handle the interest? I would hate for you to get in over your head.

                  1. 0
                    Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Be assured.

                    1as·sured
                    adjective \ə-ˈshu̇rd\
                    Definition of ASSURED
                    1
                    : characterized by certainty or security : guaranteed

                  2. Chris Neal profile image84
                    Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    I don't want to be a wet blanket but a person could drown in the bad puns floating around here.

              2. 0
                Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                All right, all right, but I figured you needed to see the definition because you clearly didn't understand the word you used.

                1. 0
                  Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  IDK. I figure Phoenix is a woman over 70 and I still had to take a cold shower after that exchange. smile

                  1. 0
                    Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Wow, that exchange got you going? I have to display my rock hard six pack to get my wife to give me a second look. Maybe I should just send her an email?

  31. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    You missed my point again. A "true" (for want  of a better word) Christian is one who has experienced a personal relationship with God and have known Him. How can such a person then become an atheist? Let me illustrate this with an example. You know that gravity exists. You threw a stone up into the air and tested it out. After this will you ever change your mind and start doubting gravity? Then if you hear of someone who knew about gravity before, but now claims that gravity does not exist, what would you make of him? You will know for sure that he had not understood gravity properly in the first place. All the people you have mentioned have not known God personally.



    This itself shows that you do not have the basics of Christian faith.



    Exactly. That is the problem with those who ask for proof. Let me explain.

    With the world...
    You first get evidence then you believe

    With God
    You first believe then you get evidence

    1. JMcFarland profile image92
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Lots of people, as I offered evidence of, know that they're believers.  They still become atheists.  You can assert all you want that me and everyone like me were never "true" believers that had a relationship with Jesus all you want, but your assertions are wrong - and there's no way you can prove them.  People walk away from or lose faith all the time.  You would rather assume that they were never believers in the first place than deal with the fact that people walk away from your religion.  That's on you - not on anyone else.

      Why would you believe something to begin with without evidence?  The world and reality does not work that way.  That's like saying "i've heard of bigfoot, so I'm going to believe he exists because that's the only way he's going to show himself to me" instead of going out into the swamp/forest with a camera hoping to capture him on film so you CAN believe in him.  It's backwards.

      1. 0
        Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        JM. You would know better than anyone about your relationship with God, but I wonder about it. Imagine if you could see God with your eyes and touch Him with your hands. You would have been in a relationship with Him. Walking with Him, talking with Him, following Him, trusting Him with your life and trusting Him with the world as a whole.

        Then one day, you looked at Him and said, "You know? I can't see you anymore."

        Either you had a relationship with Him and then convinced yourself you never did. Or you had one and then rejected Him.

        For someone to love someone then deny their existence is a pretty big leap. If you did have a relationship with Him, there must have been some circumstance that caused you to lose heart. That's how it would be in any relationship. Most ppl don't fall out of love unless something goes wrong. Rejecting someone makes more sense to me cause once you love someone, it's pretty hard to go from that point to saying they don't exist. Anyway, like I said, you would know better than anyone.

        1. JMcFarland profile image92
          JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          as I recently posted in another forum, my experience was a long, hard process.  I did not wake up one morning and realize that I was an atheist, nor did I just decide to not believe overnight.  I fought with it.  I struggled with it, and I stayed up for more sleepless, terrified nights than I can properly count.  If you want to know more about what caused me to turn away from my faith - and my career path actually - i'd be happy to tell you, but I'm not sure that this is the right forum for it.

          1. 0
            Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I guess you missed my point.

            1. JMcFarland profile image92
              JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              of course I did.

              1. 0
                Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Alrighty then. (You were avoiding it or you didn't understand it?)

        2. A Troubled Man profile image61
          A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Yes, that's nice wishful thinking, but that has never happened to anyone, hence it is nothing more than ones imagination running amok.

          1. 0
            Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Good morning ATM, you didn't follow my point either. JM says she was once in a relationship with God, so you'll have to take that up with her... as for the seeing Him part, that was just to make a point.

            1. A Troubled Man profile image61
              A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              JM believes she was once in a relationship with God, just like you and the others believers here, but knows now that was just bs.

              1. 0
                Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                You forgot to say Good Morning.

        3. 0
          Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          It's a slow painful process. It starts with just a tiny bit of doubt and honesty that leads to many sleepless nights. You begin to realize that this relationship you think your in is with someone you can't touch or smell or hear. This love you feel for him is actually for yourself. This love you feel you get is from you. You wake up one morning and realize that person next to you is not there and never was, but you are finally whole.

          1. 0
            Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

            you had a relationship with God at one time too RM?

            1. 0
              Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Of course. My parents made sure I was well indoctrinated in the Catholic faith. I came to my senses much earlier then JM however. LOL

      2. bBerean profile image59
        bBereanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Julie, 

        I know this is a point of contention for you and want to be respectful, but also ask that you hear me out.  You state that you had a relationship with Jesus, like many do, yet claim He was/is not God and in fact wrote a hub espousing it is likely Jesus never existed at all.  You also believe nobody, including you, has ever had evidence to support a god existing.  You can't have it both ways.  At best, you can say you thought you had a relationship with Jesus but were mistaken, and therefore project that onto all others who make that claim saying they too, must be mistaken.  You cannot say you had a relationship with Jesus and then say He never existed. 

        I have this same issue with all the folks who do not understand what being born again is all about, and claim to be saved without it.  Many people follow Christ's teachings to varying degrees, and call themselves Christians.  Jesus made it clear you must be born again to be saved, and that is an event you don't wonder about.  Either it has happened, or it has not.  I spent a great many years fancying myself "saved" and a Christian, also discounting the "born again" part.  When it finally did happen, when I finally understood, my life changed instantly.  My perspective and understanding changed, and all the studying I had done previously started to fit together and make sense.  In any case, there is no way I can  deny it happened or ever go back to not believing or not being sure.  I can't replay these events for you or anyone else so this is my proof, and it is unquestionable for me.  I could never become an atheist now, nor do I believe anyone having been born again could.

        1. JMcFarland profile image92
          JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I don't know how else to say this.  When I was a Christian, I believed I was a Christian.  I prayed, I worshipped, I ministered, I laughed I cried.  I believed what I was taught and what I read.  I believed that god was talking to me, but I was wrong.  Everything I experienced had alternate explanations, down to the feeling of the "holy spirit" to laying hands on people to special revelation.  I had someone telling me what I was experiencing and I believed them with all my heart, until I actually made efforts to be a better Christian and study it for myself.

          As I said before, it wad a long and difficult road for me, and I agonized over it.  Sometimes its still hard.  That doesn't mean I was never truly saved.  Maybe I wasn't, according to you, but I was in my heart and nobody is in a position to judge that.  Saying I was never "saved" is just an easy way out of an uncomfortable reality.  Believers are uncomfortable with the fact that atheism is growing, and church attendance is falling.  Again, whatever helps you sleep at night.

          1. bBerean profile image59
            bBereanposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I am sure you can see how confusing it is to have you say on one hand that nobody can tell you that you weren't truly saved while on the other hand you seem to work tirelessly to say nobody,(and that would include you), has ever been truly saved because there is nothing to be saved from. You have stated many times you don't even believe in sin.

            As for the growing apostasy and delusion, including atheism, that was totally expected considering Jesus himself eluded to how few genuine believers there would be at this time.  Although I do wish it were different, far from being a discouragement, as a sign of the times it is a further validation and encouragement.

            1. JMcFarland profile image92
              JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I don't see what's confusing.  I'm hardly the only atheist who was once a Christian.  What annoys me is simply being dismissed and belittled by a believer asserting that I'm an atheist because I was never a true Christian at all.  Christians do it to each other all the time, and its solely for their own self righteous indignation, nothing more.

              1. 0
                Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Accept it, or not. She has a point. By denying understanding, you basically call her experience a lie. I don't think there is a person on this site who isn't aware that you believe your experience to have been a lie; but it doesn't logically follow that your experience negates hers or anyone else's.

                1. 0
                  Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Doesn't it work both ways. Both sides thinking the others side is in denial?

                  1. 0
                    Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Definitely. However, it's a have your cake and eat it too stand by JM.   It's actually humorous. First we had Christians saying other Christians weren't true Christians. Now we have an atheist saying they aren't because she lost faith so therefore all faith is a lie. As an agnostic, I'm almost prone to say none of you are Christians. Just for the fun of it.

              2. Soozie Crumcakes profile image60
                Soozie Crumcakesposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                The fact that you don't realize how confused you are is confusing.

    2. A Troubled Man profile image61
      A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Sorry, but no one has had personal relationships with gods, you nor anyone else.



      Sorry, but we all can experience gravity, hence your illustration is pointless.



      That is exactly how crackpots and cranks operate with pseudoscience. It is false.

    3. Chris Neal profile image84
      Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      I'm somewhat familiar with Templeton's story and when he started having doubts he enrolled in Princeton Theological Seminary, one of the most liberal and doubt-riddled seminaries in the country even back in the 1950's. But at the end of his life he talked about missing a relationship with Jesus, even though he couldn't bring himself to believe in Him.

  32. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    That was not a judgement at all. It is simple logic. If you knew God atleast a little bit, you would know that he exists. By knowing about God I do not meant reading in the scripture and hearing from someone. I meant knowing him personally. For eg. I know many things about Michael Jackson. But personally I do not know him. In fact without knowing him personally, if I say anything about him from what I have read or heard about him then I am being judgmental. By this logic it is you are being judgmental about God.

    1. 0
      Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      How am I being judgmental about God?

      1. Daddio Hepcat profile image62
        Daddio Hepcatposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Deleted

        1. 0
          Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Oh my word... how long is this gonna last?

  33. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    Well because I ask Him.



    Clearly you are not answering my question.

    1. JMcFarland profile image92
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      are you claiming then that none of the starving, hungry and tortured children around the world who are dying by the hundreds have NEVER asked god for help or to save them ?  That's absurd.

      If your logic was sound, then no christian would ever be in a hospital, and we know that isn't true.

      We know from research like the Templeton prayer study that prayer has no discernible affect when compared to people who were NOT prayed for.  In fact, it's possible that knowing that you're being prayed for makes complications worse.

    2. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      I see all you have to do is ask. Well ask him the name of my street in 1980.


      I would question my sanity. Wouldn't you? That was my answer.

  34. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    God's way is that you need to believe in Him first and then He will provide you ask for. But you want it your way. You want evidence first. It does not work that way.

    1. 0
      Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      If you believe you have a personal relationship, I guess that is good. But you can't judge others because their conclusions aren't yours. If God exists, the same evidence is used to embrace, or deny, His existence. If He exists, all evidence is a part of Him. So, it isn't really saying He doesn't exist as much as it is defining the nature of His existence differently.

      Most of your argument is difficult to believe and comes across as wishful thinking wrapped in a fair amount of ego. I think we have ample evidence that this type of understanding of the nature of existence isn't real. So, I am going to pose a question. Could it be argued that your particular brand of faith is more a denial of God's existence than most of the understandings which belong to those debating you here?

    2. JMcFarland profile image92
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      can you think of anything else in your entire time on earth that you believe BEFORE you have evidence of it?

  35. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    It is very easy to judge anyone who claims to have a personal relationship with God is, and call him a lier. That does not help anyone.

    1. Marisa Wright profile image91
      Marisa Wrightposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      So you're saying that if God has not chosen to make himself known to me personally, then I can never see the evidence you speak of? 

      It doesn't make sense to me that if I pretend to believe (which is all I can do, considering all I'm being told is that I should believe), then God will provide the evidence? 

      I can't fall in love with someone just because I'm told I should be in love with them.  I can't believe in a God just because you tell me I should.  So how does it work?

      1. 0
        Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        I think you're right. You have to meet someone first before you can fall in love with them.

    2. A Troubled Man profile image61
      A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Claiming to have a relationship with gods is a blatant lie and only serves to cause conflict.

    3. Chris Neal profile image84
      Chris Nealposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      I agree. The personal walk of the believer is difficult to describe sometimes and cannot be replicated by another. Have you ever read JI Packer's "Knowing God?"

  36. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    Why do you alway act dumb? Obviously no one would tell you to ask God to show you something you already know. I was talking about evidence of God and I thought you understand that much.

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      I'm the dumb one who told someone to ask God for information they already had because with all my claims of a relationship couldn't pose a simple question?

  37. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    I did not understand what you are saying here.

  38. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    You do not know God personally and yet you have judged He does not exist.

    Note: I am assuming here that you are an atheist. If your not one, then the "being judgmental" part of my post does not apply to you. Just ignore it.

    1. JMcFarland profile image92
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Deepes is a christian, and now your assertions are being made about people that believe in your god as well as people that don't.  This is a prime example of the point I've been trying to make.  Just because you assert something doesn't necessarily mean that you're right and your assertions are true.

      Thanks for demonstrating my point with evidence and proving it nicely :-)

      1. 0
        Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        He made an assumption based on the fact that I disagreed with him. It's ok. There has been a lot of incorrect assumptions made about me lately.. No big deal..

        But thanks for clarifying that to him on my behalf

    2. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Your assumptions are as wrong as your statements.

      1. 0
        Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Thanks Rad Man

    3. 0
      Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      You have assumed incorrectly. I am not an atheist.

  39. 0
    Beth37posted 3 years ago

    Being indoctrinated and having a relationship are two completely different things.

    And could someone *please tell RM the name of his freaking street in 1980! smile

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      You are most certainly correct. You can't have a relationship with a non existent identity. That's what I'm trying to tell you. You're having a relationship with yourself, plus it would be kind of creepy thinking someone is watching you all the time. Creepy.

      1. 0
        Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Or at least that's what you think, but you're incorrect... oops, here we are back at a standstill.

        1. Daddio Hepcat profile image62
          Daddio Hepcatposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Deleted

          1. 0
            Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I cant take it anymore. Talk normal.

          2. 0
            Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Where was that jive talk dictionary again?

    2. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Don't you see Beth, this guy claims to have a personal relationship with a God. He claims he can ask and get anything, but can't get a simple street name. Why? Because the information he is using is in his own head. He can fool himself, but not me. Don't let me make a fool out of you ether.

      1. 0
        Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Good luck with that.

  40. 0
    Beth37posted 3 years ago

    21st St.

  41. Jerami profile image80
    Jeramiposted 3 years ago

    JMcFarland wrote:
    Lots of people, as I offered evidence of, know that they're believers.  They still become atheists.  You can assert all you want that me and everyone like me were never "true" believers that had a relationship with Jesus all you want, but your assertions are wrong - and there's no way you can prove them.  People walk away from or lose faith all the time.  You would rather assume that they were never believers in the first place than deal with the fact that people walk away from your religion.
    = - = - = -

    These are the key words.  away from "religion".   I would guess there are a very small percentage of those people who purposfully walk away from religion that yjat do not still believe in their God on a personal basis.
    And many times their Faith in a higher power is stronger.    Kinda like If I were to go to a dating service.  And I were to meet the woman of my dreams, fall in love.  It is possible to loose faith in the dating service while maintaining my love for the woman of my dreams.  I can loose faith in that dating service, but I can't say that it didn't work for me.   Church is kinda like that for me.

  42. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    Yes.



    It is like this. The problem is not with the way God is, but the problem is they way you are. If you sincerely want to know God all you need to do is to ask Him to show Himself to you. But the problem with you is that you believe that He does not exist. Therefore you cannot ask Him with a sincere heart.

    1. JMcFarland profile image92
      JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      that's the problem.  You think that because I'm an atheist, I believe that god does not exist.  That's not true.  I do not "believe" that god does not exist, I do not have a belief in god because no evidence SHOWS that he exists.  I have a lack of a belief.

      1. 0
        Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        On this note, I do appreciate you and the others clarifying some things regarding atheism with me. I used to think that it was a black and white thing. Either you believed there is a God or you didn't. I was so used to dealing with atheists that simply declared that there is no God at all. I never met an atheist that simply stated they do not have enough evidence and would love to get proof.

        Thanks JM, Rad, Getit, ATM, And others

  43. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    Well I don't understand this. Could you explain?



    Well what kind of evidence?



    Could you make the question a bit more clear. I really can't make out what you are asking here.

    1. 0
      Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      We all have eyes to see. We all view reality and think "That's interesting. How did that happen?" And then follow a course of discovery. Making conclusions along the way.

      Most of our evidence that arguments such as yours are wishful thinking is because you can't back up your statements. We simply are expected to accept them. Anytime anyone of this type has attempted to prove anything, they are shown to be a farce.

      So, if God exists, and your expressed beliefs always result in lies; you couldn't know God. Knowledge is truth, yes?

  44. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    My assertions are right as I have used simple logic which you don't seem to understand. If you know a friend personally how can you later on say that, that person does not exist?



    And there is no way you can prove I am wrong.



    The fact people walk away from my religion does not mean anything as there are lots of people walking into my religion as well.



    That is the problem, with your way of thinking. Everyone believes first and sets out to work. When anyone sets out on a research to invent something, first believes that he is going to find something. Belief is his motivating power.



    Here arises another problem. You believe that this world is all the reality there is. In fact there is much more to reality than meets the eye.



    Let me ask you something. If you already believe that a big foot does not exist, why bother to go out looking for him with a camera? Also is it not just a belief that the big foot does not exist?



  45. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    Are you sure that they asked Jesus? Have they accepted Jesus as their savior? You need to come under His domain and then He will give you what you ask for, otherwise He can't. For example the president of United States is a powerful man and can do many things if you the people. But can he do anything for people of another country? No, because it is out of his domain and someone else is in charge over there.



    No that is not so. There are reasons why Christians are in hospitals. All does end with one becoming a Christian. No one said Christian life is a bed of roses. Once a person becomes a Christian there are lot many changes that has to happen in his life. There are rules that become applicable. When violations happen then there are also punishments as well.



    Such studies make no sense at all. The results of such research can also not be trusted. Were those research done by hardcore Christian believers? If so the result would have been different.  I do not trust such researches.



    This rather demonstrates the fact that you do not read the posts properly before commenting. I have mentioned in it that I am assuming that He was an atheist. I have also mentioned that if he is not an atheist my response does not apply to him. Please read the post properly before accusing anyone.

    1. 0
      Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      It is beliefs such as yours that give belief a bad name. If God can do, and does do for some;  denying help to others in more need...what good is he? He can't even rise to the level of the good samaritan Jesus used as an example?

    2. 0
      Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      This statement undermines and contradicts all of the instances in the bible where Jesus helped and healed people who did not specifically ask for his help nor believed that he was the savior of mankind.. The idea that God will only help those who come under his domain basically contradicts the idea of God being a God full of Grace and mercy for all people.



      Please look at the news. Our country has been sending help to other countries for years between food, money, and even military assistance.. Just ask Iraq, Kuwait, Africa, Well pretty much most countries around the world.




      If I'm understanding you correctly, this statement is saying that Christians that are in the hospital are there because they are being punished for something. Is that what you are saying? Please clarify this statement



      So the only studies and researches you trust are those that are only done by Hardcore Christian believers? How do you define hardcore?



      I think the accusation came in because you responded to me while working under an incorrect assumption (which I didn't take offense to, by the way) instead of asking to make sure your response was truly warranted as written. But no worries.. we all do it or have done it sometimes (even me).



      I disagree with some of the points that you have made here. these statements, in my opinion, reveal a strong bias towards non-Christians that ultimately leads to a more judgmental stance that may rub some people the wrong way and reflects negatively on a majority of people who consider themselves Christians. As it has been pointed out before, it is difficult to judge another person's walk or to say who was or was not ever a believer if you have not had that person's experiences.

    3. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Prove it! God answers your prayers, but you don't pray for anything useful? How Christian of you.

      1. 0
        Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Next question is going to be how is asking God what street you lived on in 1980 useful to him?? LOL..

    4. getitrite profile image81
      getitriteposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      So are you saying that an all powerful being is powerless to help us unless we acquire a certain mindset?  That doesn't sound like an all powerful loving being to me.  It does, however, sound like some made up nonsense.



      lol

      1. 0
        Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        **Note** The views expressed by some are not reflective of the views reflected by all

        1. getitrite profile image81
          getitriteposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Understood

          1. 0
            Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Sometimes one has to enter a disclaimer...LOL

        2. 0
          Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          And it's a dame good thing!!!

          1. 0
            Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            variety is the spice of life..LOl

  46. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    You proved my point that it is a very easy thing to do. All it requires is one line of text.

  47. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    Prove it.

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      You are making the claim so you provide the evidence. The fact that you can't prove it is in itself evidence that ATM is right.

  48. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    Before responding to your answer take a look at this post by bBerean posted 7 days ago.



    I had just re-framed that question by adding the aliens bit there. So let me place the question and your response in perceptive and show you the error.

    My question was that IF you were abducted by aliens and they did something to you, you felt the pain of what they did and you herd them and saw them and smelt them, and you had no evidence, DID THIS HAPPEN? You replied that you would rather question your sanity.

    By that logic, if somebody robbed you of your cash at gun point and you have evidence for it you would suspect your sanity!! That is what you are saying.

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      You can't change the question and use my response to a different question? That is very dishonest, is that what your religion has taught you?

      There are many variables, are there any witnesses? Is there evidence of violence? I go to the police station and explain what happened.

      But that's still not at all what you are claiming is it. You don't touch anyone and they don't touch you, you can't smell or tast or imaginary friend. You may claim you can hear him and you may claim he response to you, but you have no evidence it's not only happening in your own head.

      You can give me that evidence, all you need to do is pray to your God for the information I asked you for. You claim he response to your requests for prove it.

  49. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago



    Well then as I have already mentioned, my post does not apply to you.

    1. 0
      Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      I understand that you are saying that now, but at the time you made the statement it did apply to me because even though it was done under an assumption, it was directed at me. I think this is the point that JM was making. You made a snap judgmental comment without being sure of the beliefs of the person you were addressing

  50. 59
    augustine72posted 3 years ago

    Well explained. Good job.