I'm talking about a very clear message. Something otherworldly, like a miracle beyond human proportion and human comprehension.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Such as dying, raising Himself back up to life, appearing to hundreds of people, showing the wounds from His death, and ascending to heaven?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Or something such as His followers speaking in languages they've never learned, raising people from the dead, healing the sick, feeding the poor, traveling to all ends of the world, and in all ways being transformed from cowards who easily betrayed their Lord into saints who changed the world by serving Him even to their deaths?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Or would feeding 5000 with a couple loafs of bread be enough for you?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If those are too outdated for you, maybe you wouldn't mind hearing some stories of such things happening in modern times to people I know?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Modern day. :wink:

Modern day. :wink:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It would defeat the entire idea of faith if God did that for every single generation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Let me put it to you in another way, in a way one of my philosophy professors has put it. If God did something to make every person in the world realize that it was absolutely impossible to doubt Him, and you knew that not following His rules would leave you eternally in Hell, doesn't that eliminate free will? No person would knowingly submit himself to the power that Christians believe God has. The only reason you have the conscious free will to reject Him is because you don't believe there will be punishment. If there was evidence that a God as powerful as Christians believe He is would send you to Hell for eternity for not listening to Him, no rational being would still ignore Him, thus, defeating free will for the human race.

Let me put it to you in another way, in a way one of my philosophy professors has put it. If God did something to make every person in the world realize that it was absolutely impossible to doubt Him, and you knew that not following His rules would leave you eternally in Hell, doesn't that eliminate free will?

 

 

 

How can we eliminate something we've never had?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I get what you're saying though- you're post was a nice elaboration of my overall opinion of what would happen if God came directly in contact with the human race.

 

My point is, how can we be expected to believe in God, when we can't even be sure he exists?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It would be rather arrogant to throw good people into hell, just because they didn't believe, when there was no real proof to lead them to believe in the first place.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Of course God doesn't throw good people into hell. Your problem is that you assume there is such a thing as a truly good person. Of course, you also assume that there is no proof. I challenge you to prove both of those assumptions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I never assumed anything, the conversation was that god threw Athiests who didn't believe in him into hell, I was going along with that conversation. It was mainly what ifs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As for proof, you find it, find undisputable proof that wasn't written in a manipulated book(You can not argue with me here, Christian priests admitted to changing the bible constantly for their own gain).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I want hard evidence, not a passage in a book saying someone rose from the dead, walked on water, and turned water into wine, which of course, even if it was proven true(Which I'm not doubting it is true, just saying its never been proven), does not prove there is a God, but that there was a person who believed in God who did special things.

 

I'm talking about a very clear message. Something otherworldly, like a miracle beyond human proportion and human comprehension.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Such as dying, raising Himself back up to life, appearing to hundreds of people, showing the wounds from His death, and ascending to heaven?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Or something such as His followers speaking in languages they've never learned, raising people from the dead, healing the sick, feeding the poor, traveling to all ends of the world, and in all ways being transformed from cowards who easily betrayed their Lord into saints who changed the world by serving Him even to their deaths?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Or would feeding 5000 with a couple loafs of bread be enough for you?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If those are too outdated for you, maybe you wouldn't mind hearing some stories of such things happening in modern times to people I know?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You need to read the Bible again, more carefully.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

First off, even I can speak languages I've never learned. When I was younger, I used to speak german in my sleep. I have a tape of it if you'd like. I've had it translated just to see what I was saying, and it's just a bunch of random german words, but again, I don't know german, and I never have. I don't even know anyone who SPEAKS german. So people speaking languages they've never learned, besides being a very random point for you to make, isn't really a point at all. Why did I do that in my sleep? I don't know. Same reason they did it when they were not. Maybe Satan possessed me. Oh dear.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Some say Jesus never healed anyone who was sick. Let's use Captain Leper as an example, shall we? First of all, 96% of all people in the world are completely immune to the bacteria that causes leperacy. "Leperacy" in the Bible is used as a general description for ANY disfiguring characteristics, especially dealing with the skin. The dude could have freakin' had acne for all you know. All Jesus told the guy was to "Go, and sin no more." because the guy didn't want to be around people. That's not really healing. That's telling a guy to get the hell over it. Being that the guy may have thought he was the Messiah, the guy might have been extra persuaded to do as he was told. If Jesus waved his hand over the guys' face and his disfigurment disappeared (he didn't, it didn't) then we wouldn't be discussing this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Feeding the poor isn't very hard, either, and Jesus knew wealthy people. Who was it again...Simon? Simon's wife, Mary, was it? Yea, she was very wealthy. Isn't that the chick who anointed Jesus' feet with oil that costed 300 days wages? And to think some Christians argue that Jesus didn't have the money to just buy all that food for the poor. It isn't like he was a hobo, either. He was a carpenter, and using macroeconomics, a days wages needs to be enough to feed a man, his wife, and two children 3 meals per day. It isn't like they didn't pay people back then, and Jesus was all by his lonesome! Surely he had money to spare to feed the poor, and good job on his part. That's a nice thing to do

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

...But what's this? Jesus getting cranky when a disciple tells Mary not to anoint Jesus' feet with such expensive oil when they could be feeding the poor with it? No no, Jesus did not get mad, really, but he did say; "Leave her alone, you have the poor to feed any day you wish for forever, but you only have me for a short time." or something EXTREMELY close to that. Mmm...That doesn't sound very nice of Jesus. I'd go so far as to call that down-right self-absorbed. He'd rather have his feet washed with what equates today to caviar than to feed many poor people. Hmm. Okay. Fair enough, he was just a man afterall. Oh wait, you claim he was God. Crap. Well, afterall, I guess...God was rude himself sometimes, afterall, he did kill more people than anyone can fathom, so we'll just let this slide. Maybe he was having a bad day.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Traveling to all ends of the world", hmm? Jesus never left the Middle East once. Infact, nowhere in the Bible, old testament or new, takes place anywhere outside of the Middle East. Probably because these people didn't know other places existed. It isn't like Jesus had a charter jet. He was a walker. The man didn't even ride a camel, he seriously just...walked. So if "The world" is Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, etc to you, then okay. I personally am not sure if Jesus ever was in more than one country, but a lot of the new testament takes place in places like egypt, so you get what I mean. Good job throwing that in to make him sound like a charter pilot, though.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is the best part, and the part that makes me say you need to read the Bible more carefully.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jesus fed 5,000 people, yes. You are right. Well, it says so anyways. However, the Bible says a very funny thing. You see, These people were hungry but only had some bread and some fish. Jesus said "No problem, my people! For I am uber-cool and can conjure food n' stuff!" No problem there...Surely a Messianic thing to do, right? Sure. But like I said, the Bible says something VERY odd about this occasion. John, take it away, would you?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In John, it says; "Jesus said, 'Have them recline.' Now there was a great deal of grass in that place. So the men reclined about 5,000 in number."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interesting. Does John mean that they reclined because there was grass to lay on (Huh? You can lay on dirt...), or does John say this because the grass was tall, meaning the people could not see if they reclined? It sounds absurd, that you could trick 5,000 people, but it's possible. Like I said, Jesus knew wealthy people, and was probably well-off himself. He might of been an architect, not a carpenter, even. Do the math. It's something like 250 days wages he would have needed to get that food. He only did this miracle on one occasion. Why not two? More? People are hungry always. But like I said, it's absurd to think he could trick SO many people, right? Yea, hmm...Interesting...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.) "Jesus answered them and said, ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹ÃâAmen, amen, I say to you, you are looking for me not because you saw signs but because you ate the loaves and were filled."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.) "So they said to him ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¦Ã¢â¬ÅWhat sign can you do, that we may see and to believe in you? What can you do? Our ancestors ate manna in the desert. As it is written: ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹ÃâHe gave them bread from heaven to eatÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Seems some of them didn't belieeeeeeve hiiiiiim. Know why? They didn't seeeeeee a miracle, because their eyes were hidden by the tall grass. Then Jesus gives them the "I am the bread of Heaven, eat me, blah blah" line because he couldn't pull the miracle off again.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But of course, this is just what others say. I'm not sure myself, but uhh, it's all right there. Right. There.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I would love to hear these "modern miracles". I really would. Did Jesus come down and feed your friends, or perhaps walk in their bathtubs? I'm just curious, because if he did not, then anything that's happened is a coincidence at best, not a miracle.

 

 

 

The question is whether or not something can exist AND not exist at the same time. By the nature of "existence" this is impossible. I'm not trying to prove whether or not God was imagined into existence, I'm saying that if he was in fact imagined into existence, the words that were written about him before he was imagined into existence are false, because they refer to him doing things at a time before he was imagined into existence.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It doesn't make any sense to say that you wrote something before imagining it. In order to write something you need to mentally process what you are going to write in order to form a coherent sentence. Writing about something is exactly the same thing as imagining something; basically you need to think in order to write.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Then in your "reality" he exists. If he doesn't "exist" in my reality that is a different reality. But in both realities combined, he exists because he exists in at least one of them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If my invisible friend exists in my reality but doesn't in yours, it doesn't mean that my friend really exists; we both know its just my imagination. So I guess everything a person with schizophrenia truly believes to exist, really does; thanks for the heads up.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What you are claiming then is you don't know if my house exists - you are not claiming that in the same reality, my house both exists and does not exist. That is my point you seem to be missing consistently.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No and I never said that something exists and doesn't exist in the same reality (even though you could say that if such a thing were to occur it would be classed as a supernatural effect and ignore the whole problem entirely). You argued that something cant both exist and not exist, full stop. It's pretty clear from our understanding of how the universe works that there is no preferred frame of reference. Arguing about an objective reality where something must or mustn't exist is pointless in the world of relativity.

It doesn't make any sense to say that you wrote something before imagining it. In order to write something you need to mentally process what you are going to write in order to form a coherent sentence. Writing about something is exactly the same thing as imagining something; basically you need to think in order to write.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What Locke meant is that we wrote about God existing before we were alive. Like "God has always existed". That is before we were able to imagine about God. So we wrote about God "existing before we imagined him".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think you were reading it:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We wrote about God existing "before we imagined him".

 

 

 

What Locke meant is that we wrote about God existing before we were alive. Like "God has always existed". That is before we were able to imagine about God. So we wrote about God "existing before we imagined him".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think you were reading it:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We wrote about God existing "before we imagined him".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, and I meant that God came into existence after the first person thought of God, not when you first thought of God.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hebrew isn't the name of the religion. Jews are to judaism as muslim is to islam as christian is to christianity. Hebrew is like chinese is to china.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In other words Hebrew is the Language.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

also the name of the ppl

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:-s where did u get that idea? i havent heard anyone say that.

The Bible never refers to the Jews as Jews unless it is said by a gentile such as a Roman.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Throughout the Bible, the Jews refer to themselves as Hebrew. The language, faith.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note that Moses led the HEBREWS out of Egypt, not the Jews. The reason "Jew" is used a lot in the New Testament is because many of the sermons are given to gentiles.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My name is Hebrew. The Bible was written in Hebrew.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jew really wasn't used that much until the Great Diaspora and even more since the Holocaust.

It doesn't make any sense to say that you wrote something before imagining it. In order to write something you need to mentally process what you are going to write in order to form a coherent sentence. Writing about something is exactly the same thing as imagining something; basically you need to think in order to write.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just to clarify what insane said. If you read the stories written about God, they are stories that happened long before they were written (the initial point we are responding to is, "Would God exist if Man was not smart enough to write?"). What I am saying is that if God did not exist until we imagined him, yet we are writing about things he did before we imagined him, then he either existed before we imagined him or our writings were false.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If my invisible friend exists in my reality but doesn't in yours, it doesn't mean that my friend really exists; we both know its just my imagination. So I guess everything a person with schizophrenia truly believes to exist, really does; thanks for the heads up.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You were the one claiming reality is subjective. The point you are still not addressing is how something can exist and not exist at the exact same time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No and I never said that something exists and doesn't exist in the same reality (even though you could say that if such a thing were to occur it would be classed as a supernatural effect and ignore the whole problem entirely). You argued that something cant both exist and not exist, full stop. It's pretty clear from our understanding of how the universe works that there is no preferred frame of reference. Arguing about an objective reality where something must or mustn't exist is pointless in the world of relativity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You still have not shown how something can exist and not exist at the same time.

You guys have been arguing about that for the last, like...8 pages.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wow.

You guys have been arguing about that for the last, like...8 pages.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wow.

 

 

 

Guna go with Tigra on this one. Can we change the subject or possible get back on topic :lol: ?

The Bible never refers to the Jews as Jews unless it is said by a gentile such as a Roman.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Throughout the Bible, the Jews refer to themselves as Hebrew. The language, faith.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Note that Moses led the HEBREWS out of Egypt, not the Jews. The reason "Jew" is used a lot in the New Testament is because many of the sermons are given to gentiles.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My name is Hebrew. The Bible was written in Hebrew.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jew really wasn't used that much until the Great Diaspora and even more since the Holocaust.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If i traveled back in time about 2,000 years, i would be called a Hebrew, but Hebrew is not a nationality. So in the present, i would be called a jew.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Though i do agree, we can change the subject now.

Hebrew is the race, I am sorry.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jew represents a denizen of the Kingdom of Judea. Which of course does not exist anymore. :(

Jew is the proper name for a follower of Judaism, and I think also for the people of ancient Judea. I think Hebrew is the proper name for a semitic people who lived in modern day Israel. They were similar to the Canaanites and Phoenicians (who, by the way were great sailors and sailed as far as Britain and founded Carthage ['New Town'] which became a great rival to the Romans in the 3rd century BC).

Jew is the proper name for a follower of Judaism, and I think also for the people of ancient Judea. I think Hebrew is the proper name for a semitic people who lived in modern day Israel. They were similar to the Canaanites and Phoenicians (who, by the way were great sailors and sailed as far as Britain and founded Carthage ['New Town'] which became a great rival to the Romans in the 3rd century BC).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gah, your right. Skimming Bible now and Hebrew is used as the language and name of the people, but the religious types are referred to as Jews.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks for the clarification!

Jew is the proper name for a follower of Judaism, and I think also for the people of ancient Judea. I think Hebrew is the proper name for a semitic people who lived in modern day Israel. They were similar to the Canaanites and Phoenicians (who, by the way were great sailors and sailed as far as Britain and founded Carthage ['New Town'] which became a great rival to the Romans in the 3rd century BC).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I just said, that even in Israel, you wouldnt be called a Hebrew,you would be called a Jew.

I meant it more technically.