Re: Obama: First President to Acknowledge Non-Believers

by **catch-22** Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:49 pm

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:Just a thought, but one huge issue America will always face, is the sheer mass and size of popualtion.

Factor in all the cultural swings, and you may have diversity, but you will never have true unity.

Obama might be received one way in NYC and quite another in the deep south....

In 2009, I really believe that many American states might be better of being nations in their own right, with their own culture and own constitution, etc.

If we can create/restore our own culture, we have acheived true unity.

The thrust of Obama's comment was that America is made up of all religious and non-religious cultures and that radical terrorist elements who attack America in the name of their religions or non-religions are attacking the followers of their own faith.

by **CarolinaHound** Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:53 pm

Old Timer wrote:And it seems to be the same with all religions and non believers to. It will never end.

ditto..

by **catch-22** Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:58 pm

HotParadox wrote:
catch-22 wrote:
HotParadox wrote:
catch-22 wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:I was pointing out that there was no substance to the story, therefore, the person that put it together did so with the agenda of it being another cheapshot.
I thought there was a great deal of substance to the story and I think there will be more references to Obama's background as a black American. The struggles of non -white Americans and the consequent triumphs gives him a profound sense of passion and compassion. Something which this planet as a whole has sadly been lacking of late.
I was very impressed with the story, C. I think BO hit one out of the park by acknowledging every American and the author of this piece, I thought, highlighted the positives in BO's speech.
He also said, in an interview, that although there is much to be done, it's the American people who are going to have to do most of the work to get us back on track.
That was what I saw as the main message Obama was putting forward throughout his whole campaign and that is why I voted for him.

If he can pull us together so we take an interest in making things better rather than driving a wedge between us, he just might be able to undo the damage that has been done to us over the last 8 years.

I imagine there will be times when he wishes he didn't get lumbered with all the crap left by Bush, but if he has the support of the people by drawing them together, who knows, maybe we will regain some of the lost respect. I also think the rest of the world will be very watchful of our behavior and if they see some radical changes in a postive way, they will react in the same way.
He's getting high praise world wide for gitmo. Back to the US now; he's going to have a honeymoon period, the first 100 days, just like every other president, where most people will react favorably, let's give him a chance mentality and the polls will be high in his favor. After the first year we will have a pretty good handle on how he operates, who he is, etc. I wish him the best, for our sake. I've read a couple of pieces where some hope he fails. How that could work to our benefit, I have no idea. I guess some just have to be right, at all costs.

For Obama to really impress the world he will need to settle things down in the ME.

He needs to call the dogs off the Arab nations by getting tough with Israel.

This will make things difficult for him back at home because it's big business that really supports Israel, both politically and financially and if he upsets them he will need to have the guts to fight them, toe to toe. That will be the TRUE test. He is now the most powerful man on the planet. If he uses his power properly, he will not fail.

by **HotParadox** Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:33 pm

catch-22 wrote:
HotParadox wrote:
catch-22 wrote:
HotParadox wrote:
catch-22 wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:I was pointing out that there was no substance to the story, therefore, the person that put it together did so with the agenda of it being another cheapshot.
I thought there was a great deal of substance to the story and I think there will be more references to Obama's background as a black American. The struggles of non -white Americans and the consequent triumphs gives him a profound sense of passion and compassion. Something which this planet as a whole has sadly been lacking of late.
I was very impressed with the story, C. I think BO hit one out of the park by acknowledging every American and the author of this piece, I thought, highlighted the positives in BO's speech.
He also said, in an interview, that although there is much to be done, it's the American people who are going to have to do most of the work to get us back on track.
That was what I saw as the main message Obama was putting forward throughout his whole campaign and that is why I voted for him.

If he can pull us together so we take an interest in making things better rather than driving a wedge between us, he just might be able to undo the damage that has been done to us over the last 8 years.

I imagine there will be times when he wishes he didn't get lumbered with all the crap left by Bush, but if he has the support of the people by drawing them together, who knows, maybe we will regain some of the lost respect. I also think the rest of the world will be very watchful of our behavior and if they see some radical changes in a postive way, they will react in the same way.
He's getting high praise world wide for gitmo. Back to the US now; he's going to have a honeymoon period, the first 100 days, just like every other president, where most people will react favorably, let's give him a chance mentality and the polls will be high in his favor. After the first year we will have a pretty good handle on how he operates, who he is, etc. I wish him the best, for our sake. I've read a couple of pieces where some hope he fails. How that could work to our benefit, I have no idea. I guess some just have to be right, at all costs.
For Obama to really impress the world he will need to settle things down in the ME.

He needs to call the dogs off the Arab nations by getting tough with Israel.

This will make things difficult for him back at home because it's big business that really supports Israel, both politically and financially and if he upsets them he will need to have the guts to fight them, toe to toe. That will be the TRUE test. He is now the most powerful man on the planet. If he uses his power properly, he will not fail.

True, back off. But Israel is our biggest ME ally and that's were it gets dicey. Let's hope he has the courage to do what others have failed, C.

by Cartoon Head Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:37 pm

catch-22 wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:Well said, OT.

The difficulty is, and I have always found this, is that the 'believers' seem to take any critique of their religion like an attack on them.

It is boring.
Then they are not at peace with their religion and yes, they are boring.

This is the way I see it, Catch.

Religion? What is it save for a series of rather incredible claims that lack a shred of evidence? What are they except for cults that essentially grew strong?

People are free to believe in whatsoever they wish.

That can be a Muslim idea of god, a Christian one, it might be one of the old Norse gods, or it might be the flying spag monster.

But they should understand that to challenge the religion, even enjoy a bit of banter with it, is not an attack on them.

I am passionate about a lot of things, I don't mind if people want to challenge it, or even have a laugh about it, and that is because I am able to seperate myself from the thing I am passionate about.

I beleive that is a good way to be.

by Cartoon Head Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:39 pm

Israel is a false ally of the US.

What you pay is a heavy annual price via your tax dollar, and, at the same time, you alienate yourself further from the Arab world, by effectively taking sides.

by **CarolinaHound** Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:53 pm

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:
Religion? What is it save for a series of rather incredible claims that lack a shred of evidence? What are they except for cults that essentially grew strong?

People are free to believe in whatsoever they wish.

That can be a Muslim idea of god, a Christian one, it might be one of the old Norse gods, or it might be the flying spag monster.

But they should understand that to challenge the religion, even enjoy a bit of banter with it, is not an attack on them.

I am passionate about a lot of things, I don't mind if people want to challenge it, or even have a laugh about it, and that is because I am able to seperate myself from the thing I am passionate about.

I beleive that is a good way to be.

And so is evolution and the big bang theory. Nothing but a bunch of nuts with man made degrees and fancy ideas about their fables. Not much more than several books full of numbers and a box full of bones, put together in a fashion, by men, so no one can understand to prove their si-fi dreams. Basketball

by Cartoon Head Fri Jan 23, 2009 10:01 pm

CarolinaHound wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:
Religion? What is it save for a series of rather incredible claims that lack a shred of evidence? What are they except for cults that essentially grew strong?

People are free to believe in whatsoever they wish.

That can be a Muslim idea of god, a Christian one, it might be one of the old Norse gods, or it might be the flying spag monster.

But they should understand that to challenge the religion, even enjoy a bit of banter with it, is not an attack on them.

I am passionate about a lot of things, I don't mind if people want to challenge it, or even have a laugh about it, and that is because I am able to seperate myself from the thing I am passionate about.

I beleive that is a good way to be.

And so is evolution and the big bang theory. Nothing but a bunch of nuts with man made degrees and fancy ideas about their fables. Not much more than several books full of numbers and a box full of bones, put together in a fashion, by men, so no one can understand to prove their si-fi dreams.

You are kidding me, right?

Laughing

by **CarolinaHound** Fri Jan 23, 2009 10:45 pm

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:
CarolinaHound wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:
Religion? What is it save for a series of rather incredible claims that lack a shred of evidence? What are they except for cults that essentially grew strong?

People are free to believe in whatsoever they wish.

That can be a Muslim idea of god, a Christian one, it might be one of the old Norse gods, or it might be the flying spag monster.

But they should understand that to challenge the religion, even enjoy a bit of banter with it, is not an attack on them.

I am passionate about a lot of things, I don't mind if people want to challenge it, or even have a laugh about it, and that is because I am able to seperate myself from the thing I am passionate about.

I beleive that is a good way to be.

And so is evolution and the big bang theory. Nothing but a bunch of nuts with man made degrees and fancy ideas about their fables. Not much more than several books full of numbers and a box full of bones, put together in a fashion, by men, so no one can understand to prove their si-fi dreams.

You are kidding me, right?

Nope. Well, maybe on the evolution thing. But that's exactly what the big bang is. A Sci-fi fable based on some numbers somebody put together. Kind of akin to those that try and find code in the bible.

by **catch-22** Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:23 am

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:
catch-22 wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:Well said, OT.

The difficulty is, and I have always found this, is that the 'believers' seem to take any critique of their religion like an attack on them.

It is boring.
Then they are not at peace with their religion and yes, they are boring.

This is the way I see it, Catch.

Religion? What is it save for a series of rather incredible claims that lack a shred of evidence? What are they except for cults that essentially grew strong?

People are free to believe in whatsoever they wish.

That can be a Muslim idea of god, a Christian one, it might be one of the old Norse gods, or it might be the flying spag monster.

But they should understand that to challenge the religion, even enjoy a bit of banter with it, is not an attack on them.

I am passionate about a lot of things, I don't mind if people want to challenge it, or even have a laugh about it, and that is because I am able to seperate myself from the thing I am passionate about.

I beleive that is a good way to be.

Your opinion on what religion is or means to you is duly and respectfully noted.

Yes, people are free to believe whatsoever they wish but where religion is concerned, faith in something they can't see, touch or smell can't be challenged, because to challenge it is to challenge a persons deep, personal ideals and beliefs, unless they are at peace with their faith and cannot be moved by what is said in discussions about their faith. In which case it is not seen as a challenge at all.

Separating yourself from what you are passionate about can be seen by others as being dispassionate. Remember, we are only sharing words, here. 90% of communication is achieved through eye contact. Passion is very hard to convey without being able to look into the eyes who you are communicating with.

Which is why I suggested earlier that you came across as uncaring!

by **catch-22** Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:39 am

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:Israel is a false ally of the US.

What you pay is a heavy annual price via your tax dollar, and, at the same time, you alienate yourself further from the Arab world, by effectively taking sides.

Perhaps Israel is a false ally but that alliance is possibly the only thing preventing Israel from turning the ME into a cinder. I would think that the Arab world would want to thank us for that!

I'm not happy at all with our alliance with Israel but until a peaceful solution can be found to stop the constant wars in the region, we have a responsibility to do what we can. As does every one else, I might add!

by Cartoon Head Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:22 pm

catch-22 wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:
catch-22 wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:Well said, OT.

The difficulty is, and I have always found this, is that the 'believers' seem to take any critique of their religion like an attack on them.

It is boring.
Then they are not at peace with their religion and yes, they are boring.

This is the way I see it, Catch.

Religion? What is it save for a series of rather incredible claims that lack a shred of evidence? What are they except for cults that essentially grew strong?

People are free to believe in whatsoever they wish.

That can be a Muslim idea of god, a Christian one, it might be one of the old Norse gods, or it might be the flying spag monster.

But they should understand that to challenge the religion, even enjoy a bit of banter with it, is not an attack on them.

I am passionate about a lot of things, I don't mind if people want to challenge it, or even have a laugh about it, and that is because I am able to seperate myself from the thing I am passionate about.

I beleive that is a good way to be.
Your opinion on what religion is or means to you is duly and respectfully noted.

Yes, people are free to believe whatsoever they wish but where religion is concerned, faith in something they can't see, touch or smell can't be challenged, because to challenge it is to challenge a persons deep, personal ideals and beliefs, unless they are at peace with their faith and cannot be moved by what is said in discussions about their faith. In which case it is not seen as a challenge at all.

Separating yourself from what you are passionate about can be seen by others as being dispassionate. Remember, we are only sharing words, here. 90% of communication is achieved through eye contact. Passion is very hard to convey without being able to look into the eyes who you are communicating with.

Which is why I suggested earlier that you came across as uncaring!

Well, that is your assertion, and you are entitled to it, even if it happens to be inaccurate, in reality.

At the end of the day, if there was someone on here who believed that all living things were created by Purple Giants, then I could like them, yet would I hesitate to challenge the validity of their claims? Should I avoid starting threads about it, on the basis that I may hurt their feelings? Hardly. That would be self censorship.

So, when it comes to gods, if anyone on here happens to believe in one, fine, just don't expect me to walk on eggshells because of it, that is all I am saying.

Steve

by Cartoon Head Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:24 pm

catch-22 wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:Israel is a false ally of the US.

What you pay is a heavy annual price via your tax dollar, and, at the same time, you alienate yourself further from the Arab world, by effectively taking sides.
Perhaps Israel is a false ally but that alliance is possibly the only thing preventing Israel from turning the ME into a cinder. I would think that the Arab world would want to thank us for that!

I'm not happy at all with our alliance with Israel but until a peaceful solution can be found to stop the constant wars in the region, we have a responsibility to do what we can. As does every one else, I might add!

So Israel BLACKMAILS the US, is that what you are saying?

by **HotParadox** Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:38 pm

If the notion that God exists is "inaccurate, in realilty" then so to is the premise that there is no God. It is not a fact that God does or does not exist.

by Cartoon Head Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:43 pm

People can beleive what they like, if it makes them feel better about themselves.

Just so long as they don't talk to the world about it, as if it were fact.

And if they do, then they should be sure to bring that evidence to the table.

Which they cannot.

Since there is none.

by **HotParadox** Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:45 pm

There is indeed evidence, for both sides. A truly open minded person would check the evidence himself and ponder it.

by **catch-22** Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:59 pm

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:
catch-22 wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:
catch-22 wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:Well said, OT.

The difficulty is, and I have always found this, is that the 'believers' seem to take any critique of their religion like an attack on them.

It is boring.
Then they are not at peace with their religion and yes, they are boring.

This is the way I see it, Catch.

Religion? What is it save for a series of rather incredible claims that lack a shred of evidence? What are they except for cults that essentially grew strong?

People are free to believe in whatsoever they wish.

That can be a Muslim idea of god, a Christian one, it might be one of the old Norse gods, or it might be the flying spag monster.

But they should understand that to challenge the religion, even enjoy a bit of banter with it, is not an attack on them.

I am passionate about a lot of things, I don't mind if people want to challenge it, or even have a laugh about it, and that is because I am able to seperate myself from the thing I am passionate about.

I beleive that is a good way to be.
Your opinion on what religion is or means to you is duly and respectfully noted.

Yes, people are free to believe whatsoever they wish but where religion is concerned, faith in something they can't see, touch or smell can't be challenged, because to challenge it is to challenge a persons deep, personal ideals and beliefs, unless they are at peace with their faith and cannot be moved by what is said in discussions about their faith. In which case it is not seen as a challenge at all.

Separating yourself from what you are passionate about can be seen by others as being dispassionate. Remember, we are only sharing words, here. 90% of communication is achieved through eye contact. Passion is very hard to convey without being able to look into the eyes who you are communicating with.

Which is why I suggested earlier that you came across as uncaring!

Well, that is your assertion, and you are entitled to it, even if it happens to be inaccurate, in reality.

It's not an assertion! It's my opinion! How can my opinion be inaccurate?

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:At the end of the day, if there was someone on here who believed that all living things were created by Purple Giants, then I could like them, yet would I hesitate to challenge the validity of their claims? Should I avoid starting threads about it, on the basis that I may hurt their feelings? Hardly. That would be self censorship.

So, when it comes to gods, if anyone on here happens to believe in one, fine, just don't expect me to walk on eggshells because of it, that is all I am saying.

Steve

Fine, then don't expect those who question the validity of yours to treat you any differently!

by **catch-22** Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:02 pm

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:
catch-22 wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:Israel is a false ally of the US.

What you pay is a heavy annual price via your tax dollar, and, at the same time, you alienate yourself further from the Arab world, by effectively taking sides.
Perhaps Israel is a false ally but that alliance is possibly the only thing preventing Israel from turning the ME into a cinder. I would think that the Arab world would want to thank us for that!

I'm not happy at all with our alliance with Israel but until a peaceful solution can be found to stop the constant wars in the region, we have a responsibility to do what we can. As does every one else, I might add!

So Israel BLACKMAILS the US, is that what you are saying?

As I stated before, if you were paying attention, Israel is the blackamilee. If the US was to stop supporting Israel, they would be alone because on one else will! Without support Israel dies, along with most of the ME.

by **catch-22** Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:05 pm

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:People can beleive what they like, if it makes them feel better about themselves.

Just so long as they don't talk to the world about it, as if it were fact.

And if they do, then they should be sure to bring that evidence to the table.

Which they cannot.

Since there is none.

What the hell are you on?
What kind of a stupid statement is that?

by Cartoon Head Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:24 pm

catch-22 wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:People can beleive what they like, if it makes them feel better about themselves.

Just so long as they don't talk to the world about it, as if it were fact.

And if they do, then they should be sure to bring that evidence to the table.

Which they cannot.

Since there is none.
What the hell are you on?
What kind of a stupid statement is that?

What is stupid about it?

by Cartoon Head Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:26 pm

catch-22 wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:
catch-22 wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:
catch-22 wrote:
The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:Well said, OT.

The difficulty is, and I have always found this, is that the 'believers' seem to take any critique of their religion like an attack on them.

It is boring.
Then they are not at peace with their religion and yes, they are boring.

This is the way I see it, Catch.

Religion? What is it save for a series of rather incredible claims that lack a shred of evidence? What are they except for cults that essentially grew strong?

People are free to believe in whatsoever they wish.

That can be a Muslim idea of god, a Christian one, it might be one of the old Norse gods, or it might be the flying spag monster.

But they should understand that to challenge the religion, even enjoy a bit of banter with it, is not an attack on them.

I am passionate about a lot of things, I don't mind if people want to challenge it, or even have a laugh about it, and that is because I am able to seperate myself from the thing I am passionate about.

I beleive that is a good way to be.
Your opinion on what religion is or means to you is duly and respectfully noted.

Yes, people are free to believe whatsoever they wish but where religion is concerned, faith in something they can't see, touch or smell can't be challenged, because to challenge it is to challenge a persons deep, personal ideals and beliefs, unless they are at peace with their faith and cannot be moved by what is said in discussions about their faith. In which case it is not seen as a challenge at all.

Separating yourself from what you are passionate about can be seen by others as being dispassionate. Remember, we are only sharing words, here. 90% of communication is achieved through eye contact. Passion is very hard to convey without being able to look into the eyes who you are communicating with.

Which is why I suggested earlier that you came across as uncaring!

Well, that is your assertion, and you are entitled to it, even if it happens to be inaccurate, in reality.
It's not an assertion! It's my opinion! How can my opinion be inaccurate?

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:At the end of the day, if there was someone on here who believed that all living things were created by Purple Giants, then I could like them, yet would I hesitate to challenge the validity of their claims? Should I avoid starting threads about it, on the basis that I may hurt their feelings? Hardly. That would be self censorship.

So, when it comes to gods, if anyone on here happens to believe in one, fine, just don't expect me to walk on eggshells because of it, that is all I am saying.

Steve
Fine, then don't expect those who question the validity of yours to treat you any differently!

That's fine.

If I begin to say I believe that Giant Purple Monsters created the planet, feel free to mock or have a laugh with me about it. I won't throw my toys out of the pram, I promise ... Laughing

As to your 'opinion' that I don't care, what is it that you don't think I care about?

With respect, you know nothing about me, let alone what I care about.

by Cartoon Head Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:29 pm

HotParadox wrote:There is indeed evidence, for both sides. A truly open minded person would check the evidence himself and ponder it.

Okay.

Show me real evidence, and something claimed in a book does not count, of any of the miracles of Jesus?

I will look at it with great interest.

by **HotParadox** Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:00 pm

I had questions a few years back and a close friend who I respected and still do, told me to explore the evidence for myself, when I had the time and the desire. Much later, I did just that and found evidence to bring me to where I am today.

Explore the evidence for yourself, when you have the time and the desire.

by **Old Timer** Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:17 pm

You know this has really been interesting reading all of these pro and con posts here about religion.

So let's boil it down to reality shall we.

Neither the believers nor the non believers can prove one darn thing seeing as we were not there in person as an actual witrness to the miracles or lack of them.

So wether you are a religious or a non religious believer it all still comes down to a matter of faith in what you personally do or do not believe in.

Anybody wanna argue with me about that.

by **Peregrine(Endangered)** Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:52 pm

Old Timer wrote:You know this has really been interesting reading all of these pro and con posts here about religion.

So let's boil it down to reality shall we.

Neither the believers nor the non believers can prove one darn thing seeing as we were not there in person as an actual witrness to the miracles or lack of them.

So wether you are a religious or a non religious believer it all still comes down to a matter of faith in what you personally do or do not believe in.

Anybody wanna argue with me about that.

There's the magical word, Faith..it just doesn't pertain to religion but to my beliefs as well...hoooray

by Cartoon Head Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:00 pm

HotParadox wrote:I had questions a few years back and a close friend who I respected and still do, told me to explore the evidence for myself, when I had the time and the desire. Much later, I did just that and found evidence to bring me to where I am today.

Explore the evidence for yourself, when you have the time and the desire.

I have explored.

And found no evidence of the miracles of Jesus, not to mention the other claims.

That is my point, HP.

by Cartoon Head Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:02 pm

Old Timer wrote:You know this has really been interesting reading all of these pro and con posts here about religion.

So let's boil it down to reality shall we.

Neither the believers nor the non believers can prove one darn thing seeing as we were not there in person as an actual witrness to the miracles or lack of them.

So wether you are a religious or a non religious believer it all still comes down to a matter of faith in what you personally do or do not believe in.

Anybody wanna argue with me about that.

Well I won't argue it, as it is obvious.

That said, the burden of proving something should always lie with the person making the claim that an act happened.

That is the basis in which we all live our lives by, and it is the basis on which laws are built.

by **HotParadox** Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:48 pm

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:
HotParadox wrote:I had questions a few years back and a close friend who I respected and still do, told me to explore the evidence for myself, when I had the time and the desire. Much later, I did just that and found evidence to bring me to where I am today.

Explore the evidence for yourself, when you have the time and the desire.

I have explored.

And found no evidence of the miracles of Jesus, not to mention the other claims.

That is my point, HP.

Then you are not looking hard enough because you do not want that evidence.

You will find no evidence if your mind is made up and closed. If you want to find evidence there is plenty to be found. I do not want to provide you with anything because you are closed minded and set in your beliefs. However, I will. I will provide you with these links.

You will disregard all of this because you are not searching for pro-Christ evidence. You want to disprove Him.
It's all about what one wants and is searching for at a particular point in one's life.

But here, knock yourself out and I am not open for debate.

"Evidence of the existance of Jesus Christ by Simon Greenleaf, the Royal Professor of Law at Harvard University. Dr. Greenleaf, the Royal Professor of Law at Harvard University, was one of the greatest legal minds that ever lived. He wrote the famous legal volume entitled, A Treatise on the Law of Evidence, considered by many the greatest legal volume ever written. Dr. Simon Greenleaf believed the Resurrection of Jesus Christ was a hoax. And he determined, once and for all, to expose the "myth" of the Resurrection. After thoroughly examining the evidence for the resurrection — Dr. Greenleaf came to the exact opposite conclusion! He wrote a book entitled, An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists by the Rules of Evidence Administered in the Courts of Justice. In which he emphatically stated:
"it was IMPOSSIBLE that the apostles could have persisted in affirming the truths they had narrated, had not JESUS CHRIST ACTUALLY RISEN FROM THE DEAD, . . ."
(Simon Greenleaf, An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists by the Rules of Evidence Administered in the Courts of Justice, p.29)."

Here is more for you to disregard:
https://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=8D695D7AFBE57D9E

by Cartoon Head Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:51 pm

You're not open for debate?

Always handy on a message board.

I merely asked you to politely give me the evidence that you have for the miracles (sic) of Christ, and once again, you go off on one, v defensive,.

by **HotParadox** Sat Jan 24, 2009 4:00 pm

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:You're not open for debate?

Always handy on a message board.

I merely asked you to politely give me the evidence that you have for the miracles (sic) of Christ, and once again, you go off on one, v defensive,.

I gave it to you Steve. I did the work for you.

Defensive, was I?

OK, then; allow me to rephrase my "defensive" comment "I am not open for debate", if I may :

Would you allow me to not get into a debate with you about this particular subject at this particular time?

by Cartoon Head Sat Jan 24, 2009 4:37 pm

That's up to you.

You are free to add as you see fit, of course, just like anyone else.

You are also free NOT to add, if I or anyone else starts a thread that happens to be about religous actions.

Thanks

What a Face

by **HotParadox** Sat Jan 24, 2009 5:08 pm

In all due respect to you, I will tell you that this is not the best time for me because it is not the best time for you.

If you are truly on a quest, you have a lot to explore on your own, which might or might not include the links I provided. This is something that will take incredible time, if you are truly searching for God.

You must find answers to your questions on your own. If I participate in a debate at this stage of your exploring the options, my opinions would not be of benefit to you. You hold the key to the door of your mind and only you can open that door.

This is exactly what my friend told me. I thought he was wrong and dismissing me, but he was correct. I needed to do this when I was ready and willing and had no interference from or opinions of others. I needed to do this on my own, in solitude, if I sincerely wanted to consider the other side.

No outside noise involved.

by Cartoon Head Sat Jan 24, 2009 5:21 pm

All I am saying is this.

If I were to claim that aliens were real, not just possibly, but really and for sure, and I ever made that known on the internet, and then said that I had evidence, then it would be normal for anyone to ask me what this evidence was.

It would barely be sufficient if I then said, 'go look for it yourself'.

by **HotParadox** Sat Jan 24, 2009 5:59 pm

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:All I am saying is this.

If I were to claim that aliens were real, not just possibly, but really and for sure, and I ever made that known on the internet, and then said that I had evidence, then it would be normal for anyone to ask me what this evidence was.

It would barely be sufficient if I then said, 'go look for it yourself'.

You asked me what this evidence was and that is why I provided you with some evidence which is contained within the links. I did what you asked of me.

by Cartoon Head Sat Jan 24, 2009 6:25 pm

Okay.

Well, if it's okay, I will watch it when I can do it justice.

Multi tasking right now, being a Sat night.

However, if what you are suggesting is evidence, then you will be suggesting something that no other theist I know has ever asserted, and that they can show evidence of the miracles of Jesus, so I will indeed look forward to this.

*waves*

by **HotParadox** Sat Jan 24, 2009 6:44 pm

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:Okay.

Well, if it's okay, I will watch it when I can do it justice.

Multi tasking right now, being a Sat night.

However, if what you are suggesting is evidence, then you will be suggesting something that no other theist I know has ever asserted, and that they can show evidence of the miracles of Jesus, so I will indeed look forward to this.

*waves*

OK, sounds good. Well, for starters, there is evidence of His Resurrection and that certainly was a miracle. I hope you at least enjoy the time you spend doing this.

*waves back at you*

by Cartoon Head Sat Jan 24, 2009 6:46 pm

I would do it now, but the g/f wants to spend some time playing a game, and I am a bit stoned as well!

Wink

by **CarolinaHound** Sat Jan 24, 2009 7:02 pm

This is a interesting chart. Just posting it because it's interesting, that's all, not trying to prove anything.

http://www.sbea.mtu.edu/users/slstonge/scienceconfirm.html

by Cartoon Head Sat Jan 24, 2009 7:04 pm

Science takes a position, until such a time that new and better data comes along, and it is then able to take that on board.

That is what makes it so exciting, imo.

by **CarolinaHound** Sat Jan 24, 2009 7:21 pm

The Ghost Of Yeah Well Fi wrote:Science takes a position, until such a time that new and better data comes along, and it is then able to take that on board.

That is what makes it so exciting, imo.

You're just bull headed. That's southern for stubborn. lol!

by Sponsored content