Originally posted by josephw I can think of one very important way in which the Spirit interacted with the universe. It happened when Jesus was resurrected.
But few will believe it even though there were over 500 witnesses.
Be careful, we're not talking about 500 indiependently verifiable witnesses. This didn't happen on youtube.
We have a written account by someone that claims that 500 people saw it.
Isn't that known as hearsay?
I'm not saying it's an incorrect account (although obviously I believe it is) but you have to recognise the incomplete context in which the account is coming to us from.
Originally posted by scottishinnz If it isn't matter or energy, and doesn't exist in 4-dimensions then science says it doesn't exist. Knightmeister, on the other hand, knows better than Professor Einstein, Hawkins or any of the rest of them, has something that can exist in non-existence, even though non-existence doesn't exist for him.
Originally posted by amannion Be careful, we're not talking about 500 indiependently verifiable witnesses. This didn't happen on youtube.
We have a written account by someone that claims that 500 people saw it.
Isn't that known as hearsay?
I'm not saying it's an incorrect account (although obviously I believe it is) but you have to recognise the incomplete context in which the account is coming to us from.
They all knew each other! They all saw the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ. That's what it says.
Originally posted by josephw They all knew each other! They all saw the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ. That's what it says.
You're missing my point. It doesn't matter if they knew each other or if they all saw it. Our only account comes through a SINGLE written statement. We're TOLD that they all saw it. But we don't have 500 DIFFERENT statements about the events - just ONE that SAYS there were 500 people there.
Do you get the difference?
The writer could make any claim.
How would we know the difference?
Originally posted by amannion You're missing my point. It doesn't matter if they knew each other or if they all saw it. Our only account comes through a SINGLE written statement. We're TOLD that they all saw it. But we don't have 500 DIFFERENT statements about the events - just ONE that SAYS there were 500 people there.
Do you get the difference?
The writer could make any claim.
How would we know the difference?
Sorry I missed your point. Technically you're right. But I believe everything the bible says, so I guess I'm biased.
Originally posted by josephw Sorry I missed your point. Technically you're right. But I believe everything the bible says, so I guess I'm biased.
2000 saw me knock off 50 supermodels (they arent included in the 2000 as they were blindfolded) so that means my story is 4 times more likely than the jesus story!
Originally posted by jaywill 1.) Whether the earth was ever flood totally by water is a matter of HISTORY not just science.
2.) It is a matter of interpretation as to whether or not the Bible intended to teach that the entire planet was flooded with water or just the area where early mankind was living (which would have been the world as far as they were concerned).
3.) Even i ...[text shortened]... ny people consider that to be spiritual and to be religious are not necessarily the same thing.
1-3, that;s not what the bible specifically states though, is it?
Oh, and feel free to find all that missing water, otherwise, you are basing your whole hypothesis on the sole evidence of one book, with no physical evidence whatsoever.
4. Have a cry if that's what makes you feel better.
We've broached this subject many times. Being religious doesn't make someone stupid. What makes someone stupid is ignoring the evidence so that they can continue to believe in their preferred beliefs.
Science!
10 Mar '07 23:41
Back to Top