wake up dummy, he is talking about everything.

the perfect logical tautology. he is talking about x and not x. he has left nothing out.

the christian who says the atheist needs to disprove god needs to understand that the atheists feels the same way about christianinty that the christian feels about roman mythology. i do not go around asking people to disprove roman myths.

You don't need to "disprove" God to me. Nor can I "prove" God to you as far as a tangible person. And you are absolutely correct about it being a matter of faith. The Bible states that it is through the grace of God and our faith that we shall be known as His people.

Some faiths preach that you must receive the gift of "tongues" as evidence that you have been saved. You have to speak in an utterance for them to accept that you are saved. In my opinion, these people are doing the same thing as the atheist. In other words, SHOW me something that will PROVE to me that YOU exist. How easy is that to fake? If your family or peer group is pressuring you to "accept" the gift of tongues, you just stand up and speak gibberish. I had a pastor of that faith tell me that when he was a child, the grown-ups in their church would make them kneel at an alter to pray for the gift of tongues. They would not allow them to go outside to play until they received this gift. He said it did not take the kids long to learn to stand up and speak gibberish so they could go play.

But the gift of tongues IS BIBLICAL. But the Bible tells us that it is a lessor talent. The Bible tells us how it is used. What good does it do to speak to someone in an unknown tongue if there is no interpretuer present? The Bible even asks why would someone speak in tongues using a thousand words that are meaningless instead of a few words that can be understood. The Bible tells us that an interpretuer will be present if it is of God. I'm sure I would really impress and bring SALVATION to Martin and USM if I met them in person and began to speak in some utterance. I can just see them falling prostrate on the ground, grinding their teeth, tearing their clothes, and repenting. Yep.....and the Rebs will be this years National Champs....bet the house on it.:hihi: :geauxtige

BTW---As for the statement Sourdough made about "unexplainable" things----

Are you guys aware that DUKE UNIVERSITY offers a degreed program in "PARA-PHYCHOLOY"? They study abnormal occurances and such. Ghosts...mediums...mental telepathy...etc I believe these examples are correct.

I wonder how hard it is to get a job if that was your major. Must be jobs available or people would not spend four years studying this sort of stuff.

I'm currently reading Jesus Among Other Gods by Ravi Zacharias (this man is an absolute genius) and I really recommend it to everyone. I won't repeat what he says word for word, but the third chapter is all about faith. It's mindblowing.

I was still responding to this quote from USMTiger.
I believe the supernatural could happen such as ghosts, etc he doesn't meaning that I don't have to see, feel or touch something to believe it could exist he does.
The same applies to God or Christ.

Also this quote:

How do you explain the fact that cold or hot air happens all the time and yet you can't look at your house window and see it.
Hot and Cold air is invisible so by USMTiger's logic it doesn't exist.
You can see the results of hot or cold air at times but you can't feel it from inside your house.

your mind must be blown incredibly easily. there is no chance this book is not an embarrassment to literature.

this chapter on faith, what does it say about faith that is so amazing? does it talk about how glorious it is to make something up and then believe it for no reason? maybe blow up a research lab or a science book or other sources of real knowledge? have a contest to see who can believe the most ludicrous statements the fastest?

Perhaps because we can measure it with a device that can observe heat and cold? We also know that the sun, cosmic rays, and our atmosphere is responsible for hot and cold air. I didn't say that because something is invisible it doesn't exist. Something does not have to be visible to be observed.

Translation: I have nothing to present to you as evidence, so I'll just say that I do but I'm too busy to tell you what it is.

You are missing the point: I have looked for evidence on my own. Far and wide. I have found none. Zip. Zero. I was consumed by this for years before I reached my atheistic conclusion. How can I discover your version of the truth if you won't fill me in on what knowledge you have that I missed? Also, you have over 8,000 posts here. Lack of time is obviously not a concern. Lack of answers is probably more like it.

I do know the bible, front to back. One does not have to believe it to have detailed knowledge of it. How can I be open minded when I have no evidence from your side to consider?

Thanks, you have a good life too?

My stories make no sense to you because they are examples of obvious conclusions drawn from logical thinking and reasoning.

Well a few posts ago you said you knew of evidence. I can't find any so I was hoping you'd help. Thanks for not sharing.

If I had it my way we would bomb Mecca and burn every copy of the Qu'ran. I would make it illegal to spread Islam like Germany did to the Nazi way of thinking after World War 2. Does that clarify it for you enough, or do you want me to keep harping on how Islam has absolutely no redeeming value at all?

So, to sum it all up, your entire post was dodging my uncomfortable questions and then trying to deflect the conversation towards a discussion on Islam. I'm seeing a pattern here.

It talks about, as an example, the beginning of the universe. Creationists believe that God made the universe 6000 years ago. Intelligent designists and Big Bangers believe there was an event that started the formation of the universe as we know it today. The IDers believe God started this event, while Big Bangers believe singularity existed before this event. The problem is that in the case where singularity exists, the laws of physics do not exist, and therefore we cannot prove the existance of a state of singularity. Therefore the Big Bangers have as much of an idea as the IDers about the creation of the universe, only the IDers have some semblance of an idea of what they believe.

BRB going to my car to get the book so that I can dictate part of this into here.

I'd call that mindblowing.

Read the book, martin, if nothing then to at least tell me that I'm a twat for reading it.