You know Kathy, we’ve been fairly blunt with you today. Flippant, too. And it’s tough when people talk to/about you that way. I’m sorry for that.
If we could cut through all the rhetoric for a second, I’d like to commiserate with you. A little over 4 years ago, I was a very dedicated Christian. I had some doubts, but they weren’t about the Christian faith, just my understanding of it.
I felt like there were problems in my beliefs about the gospel. I believed in a literal Hell, and I believed a lot of people would be going there. But I had a very hard time squaring that with a loving God. I had matured enough to realize that most people were pretty decent. Not perfect, certainly, but good people who cared about others and typically wanted to do the right thing. I didn’t think such people deserved Hell. In fact, like Paul, I often thought that if God would accept it, I’d gladly go to Hell myself, if it would save my friends and family. And if everyone else could be added into that deal too, even better.
So if I felt that way, could I be more compassionate than God? Of course not. But I had a very hard time finding anything in the Bible that backed up an idea that most people, regardless of creed or belief would be saved.
I didn’t give up though. I knew about Universalists, so I decided to read up on their reasons for thinking everyone went to Heaven. It sounded good, but I just wasn’t convinced by their arguments. I just didn’t see the Bible teaching such a doctrine, and I still believed the Bible was the inerrant word of God.
I was in a state of flux.
And that’s the position I was in when I first ran across articles that pointed out flaws in the Bible. I was shocked by what the articles said, but since I didn’t have any answers against them at the moment, I got busy with research. I didn’t even comment on the articles — I just went to work. It wasn’t about winning any arguments; it was simply a search for answers.
I think that frame of mind I was in made all the difference for me. Deep down, I was already struggling. The doctrines I had long believed in, and even taught to others, didn’t fit together in my mind as well as they once had.
That’s probably the difference between you and me. I get the feeling that you question nothing about your faith. Not trying to put you down about that; just making an observation.
For me, discovering that the Bible was not the perfect book I had always thought it to be, and finding out that some of these church leaders I had always admired knew of these problems but never spoke of them, helped me make sense of a lot of things. It took time, and it wasn’t easy to come to the realizations, but everything finally fell into place for me when I realized Christianity was just another religion. For the first time, I finally understood the sentiment of that line from “Amazing Grace,” I once was blind, but now I see…
I don’t know if that’s helpful to you at all. Maybe one day it will be. Maybe one day, something will make you ask a few questions, and you’ll think back to those non- believers who were so insistent that Christianity was certainly not the only way. If that day comes, I hope you’ll find this exchange helpful and realize you’re not alone.
Finding Truth 
@ Mike,
I think you have serious reading comprehension problems. I’ve said over and over again that I’ve made no claim that I know anything regarding abiogenesis. You brought that up – not me.
You totally ditched out on the post where I was allowed to ask questions because you’d rather get into these back and forth rants with the rest because your just so damned sure you know everything there is to know about..well…everything. I haven’t made that claim. I’ve asked you questions and it was pretty clear you didn’t have an answer or you would have told me what a nit I am for even asking it. Yes, I skipped to Adam and Eve because that’s where Christianity starts. With the fall. If there isn’t a fall there’s no Christianity as far as I’m concerned. So regardless of whatever supernatural thing might have “created” this you have not demonstrated that it is your God that is that supernatural thing. I have not precluded the supernatural. I’ve only said I don’t believe it’s the God in the Bible.
No, I don’t claim to know everything about the Bible. Never have. I didn’t claim there were contradictions. I claimed that there are a lot of details left out and left to the imagination are filled in in different ways by different people – including you. I see a whole lot of reading into the Bible things that are not there on both sides of this. I only pointed out that if the skeptical side doesn’t get to add details neither does the theist side. That’s being objective. I was reading along and asking questions about the things I don’t have knowledge of specifically because I don’t know all there is to know about those things. Why would I try to debate anyone – on either side – if I’m not confident in my position.
Do I have biases? I’ve already confessed that I do. Based on my understanding of the way the world works and my life experiences and because I’m a human being I have biases. You also have biases. It’s clear as day and yet you think that you’re insulting me by saying that I have biases? Hardly.
Your contention seems to be that unless we’ve studied every ounce of scripture in it’s original language there’s no basis to reject a religion. Have you done that with every religion?
Now, about Israel, I’m going to ask this for a third time: Would you say that God used Great Britain and the U.N. to bring about his ultimate plan of reforming the nation of Israel? Either you have an opinion or you don’t. I’m interested in hearing it if you do.
Lastly, I don’t know what you want me to do about the people you don’t like here. Beat them with a wet noodle? It’s not my blog. I’ve called out what I saw were problems, in the same way I’ve called you out. You can call me a hypocrite all day long. And? Who isn’t? You? Puhlease!
LikeLike
Mike
“LOL….what an apology eh. Using a handicapped little girl to insult me with was not anything of any big proportion eh sparky? Yep still waaaaaay beneath her. keep kidding yourself there.” – mike
Well in your post copied this from you say that you apologized twice for a comment you made to Neuro, as if to say, “what else do you want from me?” Your quote above was in response to my third apology to you, but yes, you were blowing it out of proportion.
I had said that you were a mentally handicapped little girl. that was a dig at you, although admittedly in very poor taste. But you want act as if i was a mentally handicapped little girl – this was not true.
And I never cared that you said anything about Neuro’s husbands – I just pointed it out because it seemed hypocritical to me that you’d cry when someone said something to you that was a little personal after you’ve said something personal to neuro – something you still try and justify – so, really, you should probably put on your big boy pants and deal with it.
I realize all of this is just your way of avoiding the issues and trying to pretend that the idiocy of your previous “points” will get lost in the mire.
you also said,
“but again the whole idea of making it some point against religion in general or pro atheist is just off to me abut cannot be rationally be complained for mentioning counter indicators if you insist on making it part of your narrative against theists.” – mike
I dont know what you’re talking about. This must be addressed to someone else?
LikeLike
Hey Kathy,
you said,
“Yours and Williams need to dismiss all of the real evidence I’ve mentioned over and over is very sad Arch. I’m not trying to be condescending here.. it is just really sad.” – kathy
what real evidence? The things I’ve dismissed from you are the same things you dismiss in other religions but maintain they should still be valid in christianity becuase it’s true and other others are false.
I’m really surprised that we have to keep going over this but, the evidence you should provide is the evidence that shows your religion is the right one. So far, you present things that arent evidences, like martyrdom, and say that it only applied to christianity because i’s true.
How can I know that christianity is true – that’s the question, kathy.
You said,
“I got a story about Santa Claus… but STILL no answer to my question of which religion has more evidence for it’s truth than Christianity…. or a simple honest acknowledgment that Christianity has the most compelling evidence for it’s Truth… STILL no answer … from ANYONE. Why is that??” – kathy
well kathy, you brought up santa, and said that someone who think’s they’re an elf is crazy – how that relates to other religions, i dont know… and we still haven’t seen evidence for christianity – so again, I think asking which religion has more credentials of being divine is like asking which type of roach is prettiest – my answer regarding the roaches would be i think they’re all ugly – similarly, in regard to religion, I would say that none have credentials that show they’re divine.
You are welcome to post the evidence you have that shows otherwise.
You said that martyrs were evidence – we showed that other religions had them too. You said that they didnt count because many muslim (ignoring the other religions) martyrs killed people, and then we pointed out that the OT had god commanding people to slaughter nations including the women and children.
again, you recognize that your evidence and arguments for christianity dont hold up when used for other religions – why you still accept them as valid for christianity isnt exactly clear.
which of your points have I not addressed?
If i missed your evidence, again, please list it – and it may be easier to see and avoid skipping over if you gave a single post, only showing your points. I’ll certainly consider them.
LikeLike
“His point about there being over 80+ percent who believed but did not have a hyper-religious nature was valid but he appeared to overlook my point completely, as though to suggest that those 80+ percent had not been influenced by their environment, therefore that is suppose to be some verifiable evidence that god is real. ”
Nuero you really are quite the accomplished liar. This one is just blatantly obvious. I have never made an argument about the 80+ percent supposing to be “some verifiable evidence that God is real”. You just made that up to suit yourself because your own numbers blew up your argument. The evidence against your argument is overwhelming which is why you run from the points that destroy it every time to post some ill conceived paper ( more about your latest one later).
The world is predominantly theistic. In most polls your side can barely crack double digits. it would be obvious to a little child that given that incontrovertible fact and the fact that we do not have 80-90 percent mental illness that religion cannot be isolated as the cause for mental illness. Its a stupid argument and yes….VASTLY stupid argument because beyond that theres even more evidence its dry rot. Theist are represented in every high intellect profession in the world and that includes scientists because the number you all like to cite are suspect AND recent polls have contradicted them
http://randalrauser.com/2013/06/are-top-scientists-overwhelmingly-atheists/
http://www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/
and if all that were not enough to destroy you drivelling nonsense theres the fact that historically theists have totally dominated among those who made substantial impact in building the culture , science and laws we have now that make our civilization what it was and is. To claim that all that evidence gets thrown out because of the few stupid “papers” (one that claims to have psycho analyzed an alleged 2000+ year dead fictitious character) you googled up on the internets (while ignoring all the studies and papers that contradict your ad hom narrative) is the opposite of intellect.
Stupid papers?
Yes stupid papers. Look at your latest one about people who said they would kill for God. You don’t even seem to understand the difference between laboratory scientific research and poll research. You can slant a poll anyway you wish based on the question. Of course if you ask Christians as a hypothetical premise if God told you to kill would you? If the premise is that God really told you then the answer is going to be yes about ANYTHING for a believer. If you ask a Christian if God WOULD tell you to kill someone the answers would be the total opposite Because Christ commanded the exact opposite. Thats EXACTLy why there are few Christian suicide bombers.
Simple EZ peazy. Finally to add to all of that that you couldn’t think of a civil way to ask a Christian how he came to believe in Christ without asking him if he had been to prison, on drugs, hit his head, was schizophrenic etc pretty much confirms that if anyone needs mental help you very well might.
LikeLike
Kathy, RE: “there are / have been billions who claim Jesus is real”” – there have been billions of equal intellect, who believe Santa is real. Of those who make the claim for Jesus, how many have ever been verified as having seen him? I’m thinking the same number who have been verified as having seen Santa.
“I’ve STILL not gotten a valid answer for which religion (or scientific explanation) has more compelling evidence than Christianity.” And I’ve still not gotten ANY answer as to who these martyrs were who allegedly died to provide you with “compelling evidence.” You HAVE been told, however, that any belief system that has a magic man in it is automatically disqualified from consideration.
“Yours and Williams need to dismiss all of the real evidence I’ve mentioned over and over is very sad Arch.” – no more so than your need to dismiss all of our evidence as “Liberal propaganda” I gave you William G. Dever, son of a minister, raised in religion, attended religious institutions all the way through the University, who became an atheist after spending 35 years as an eminent biblical archeologist in Israel and the Levant, who declares that there is no archeological evidence to support the existence of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, or Moses. There’s further evidence that all of the cities that “Joshua” allegedly conquered, were destroyed long before the time that Joshua allegedly lived – there WAS no Joshua, just a need to unite the Jewish people behind a story that would make it seem to them that they had a “god”-given right to the land of the Levant, so don’t start trotting out archaeology until you can explain the archaeology that already exists, disproving the Bible. Then we have one of the men who never met your jesus, telling us that he (Yeshua) spoke of Abraham and Moses as though they were real people, which means that he didn’t know any more about them, than you do.
What you’re asking, is which nonsense is the least nonsensical, and I don’t believe that’s a question ANYone wants to do enough research to answer, especially since if it’s an answer you don’t want to hear – and the odds are that it will be – you’ll dismiss it all anyway as “Liberal propaganda.”
LikeLike
If you ask a Christian if God WOULD tell you to kill someone the answers would be the total opposite Because Christ commanded the exact opposite. Thats EXACTLy why there are few Christian suicide bombers.
“But these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them in my presence.”~Jesus Luke 19:27
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss!
[Source
LikeLike
William, I get that you are a very kind, considerate person, and that you’ll bend over backward in an effort to be fair, but these are the kinds of people that Mike eats for breakfast and snacks – it’s really none of my business, but I don’t understand why you keep apologizing to him, he’ll only use it against you.
LikeLike
“I think you have serious reading comprehension problems. I’ve said over and over again that I’ve made no claim that I know anything regarding abiogenesis. You brought that up – not me. ”
The reading comprehending and thinking problems are all yours Ruth. You can lie about it if you wish but you did most definitely claim that you were near certain that a materialistic answer would be found for abiogenesis despite having presently no evidence of such an outcome. its faith whether you own it or not. So to say you made no claim to know anything is bending the truth.
“You totally ditched out on the post where I was allowed to ask questions because you’d rather get into these back and forth rants with the rest because your just so damned sure you know everything there is to know about..well…everything.’
As I have said feel free to Lie and twist. its what YOU do Ruth although you swear its my domain. We had structured conversation and all of a sudden you wanted to run off into Adam and Eve. I asked why that should come up at that point and your answer was totally unconvincing. Your side likes to do that alot. don;t like a particular subject so run off into something else. Put up whatever you think might stick (has happened in every thread) . thats why I couldn’t be bothered with that conversation any longer.
” I claimed that there are a lot of details left out and left to the imagination are filled in in different ways by different people – including you. I see a whole lot of reading into the Bible things that are not there on both sides of this.”
I’m sorry Ruth your points have been stupid on that issue. You basically argue that if a passage doesnt; specifically say something then its reading in to a passage to allow for what might have been left out. I realize it makes sense to you but its not thoughtful. You could not pick up any book about on any subject and claim that because the author was not exhaustive in details (and NONE OF THEM ARE) no one could bring some logical assumptions to the book. To illustrate
“Tim woke up that morning and had breakfast. He watched the morning news and then left for work. At work he met Janice and they laughed about the latest episode of the the Big Bang.”
there is a ton load of details left out and your argument basically is if I say well Janice wouldn’t have been the only person he would have met (another person might have said that he saw bill in the parking lot) that I am reading into the story. No I am using BASIC common sense that not every possible detail could , would or was meant to be conveyed in the above paragraph. You might not have realized it or thought it through but in any account of a story we all rely on those assumptions. No author could give every detail of every movement, who was looking where, what everything looked like, every single word spoken.When you find such a book let me know. We can hire a couple semi trucks to load it up.
Further you are not fooling me with your hypocrisy of saying you see both sides. Where? Where have you identified anyone on your side reading in to a passage? You are quiet as a church mouth when its someone on your side making the assumptions and the ONLY one I have seen you pipe up to use the word “you read things in” is in a conversation with me.
“Your contention seems to be that unless we’ve studied every ounce of scripture in it’s original language there’s no basis to reject a religion. Have you done that with every religion? ”
Ruth at this point you are boring me with your half baked shallow pure hypocrisy analysis. I”ve talked about original languages in studying a text that you claim there is a contradiction in . I said nothing about reading every ounce of scripture. You have moments of honesty more than the others but they don’t last as long as you think. You think you know your bias but you have no idea how wide it really is. You’ve made a bunch of assumption that help excuse your sides behavior the last few days totally blinded to the fact that if them responding to me is excusable then my responding to what I read them saying when I got here would be the same.
Told you before. You had Arch, Ark and WIlliam in this community long before me and they didn’t become acidic to theists when I got here. They have posts before me. You just didn’t notice it because its not as noticeable until the persons are disagreeing with your point.
When the African American shows up on the white supremacist website then its supposedly when it got ugly? No it was way ugly before that. there was just universal agreement
So your narrative that its all on me the theist? logically Its just not going to work.
LikeLike
“William, I get that you are a very kind, considerate person, ”
ROFL….. Hey Arch…… honestly how many big joints you got in that small room over where you are at. sheesh William kind. You have got to be kidding. to who? Fellow atheists?
LikeLike
Well, surprise, surprise, surprise. Mike’s twisting words again. That’s your modus operandi. None of what you just said to me was anything like what I actually said. So either you have reading comprehension problems OR you deliberately do it. It’s called gaslighting. And now I’m totally bored with your inability to admit it.
My half-bake hypocrisy? Ha! Okay. Poke Mike with a fork, I think he’s done.
LikeLike
Arch, well, he’ll try to use it against me, but i don think he succeeds in doing so, he really only succeeds in showing his ass – which is fine with me.
When I made the comment about about his mentality being like that of a mentally handicapped girl, I knew it would rub some people the wrong way, although i dont think it’s any worse than anything else that’s been said here. But I dont want to be offensive, nor would i do anything to hurt any child, but i’m not that worked up over it either.
Saying “sorry” is not a big deal to meal. that’s not to say that it doesnt mean anything, but it’s like saying “I dont know” or “maybe I was mistaken”- things that show self reflection and a willingness to change and grow.
Notions like that are missed by people like mike, who think that by acting like they’re certain, despite all the evidence against them, that their ignorant stubbornness will somehow make others blind to the truth – in reality the opposite happens.
Proverbs 1:7 is a good passage, because it ends with “… fools despise wisdom and instruction.” No one likes being shown that they’re wrong, but it’s a fool (mike) who cant see that it’s an opportunity to learn, and will do or say anything so that they go on pretending they’re right.
It would be a foolish mistake to consider apologizes as signs of weakness.
and really, I did the mentally handicapped a great insult by comparing them to mike – and for that, i am sorry.
It is interesting that, related to this, mike said I am beneath her. It strikes me as odd that he’d say that – why not just say that I am low? Is it because he views the mentally handicapped as being beneath him, and by placing me beneath them, I am several levels lower than he is, as if it were an added insult? seems like an inadvertent insult to the mentally handicapped and that just seems odd coming from a guy who get’s so sensitive about the impaired.
LikeLike
“ROFL….. Hey Arch…… honestly how many big joints you got in that small room over where you are at. sheesh William kind. You have got to be kidding. to who? Fellow atheists?” – mike
nah, not just atheists, but i do pick and choose, like you, except mine is based on a justice based merit system.
I have read that christians, unlike you or I, are kind to all. IT is an admirable quality in some respects, but I think fails in other regards. is that why you also dont follow this christian precept – you dont think it works for the best in all cases?
LikeLike
“Now, about Israel, I’m going to ask this for a third time: Would you say that God used Great Britain and the U.N. to bring about his ultimate plan of reforming the nation of Israel? Either you have an opinion or you don’t. I’m interested in hearing it if you do” Ruth
Yes I would. Whats the point? and how does that affect the prophecy written a couple thousand years ago whose writer had no idea of the geo political setup of the 20th century?
Incidentally, Occassionally you might even have to ask a fourth time or take a number. This isn’t command performance. things get lost in long threads. You are an atheist on an atheist blog. You have less people to answer. Shucks It s not just WIlliam I skip reading in a long thread.
LikeLike
Mike,
Would you say that God used Great Britain and the U.N. to fulfill his ultimate plan of the reformation of the nation of Israel?
LikeLike
Mike,
Would you say that God used Great Britain and the U.N. to fulfill his ultimate plan of the reformation of the nation of Israel?
I see where you answered this. Thank you.
Would you say that God used Hitler and the Nazi regime to fulfill his ultimate plan of the reformation of the nation of Israel?
LikeLike
“Shucks It s not just WIlliam I skip reading in a long thread.” – mike
come on, mike…. you’re not fooling anyone. You read all my stuff, but just have a hard time answering.
I’m clearly on your mind a lot since you mention me to others often. It’s a fun game you’re playing though.
LikeLike
“When I made the comment about about his mentality being like that of a mentally handicapped girl, I knew it would rub some people the wrong way,”
Hey William
I am skipping most of what you write but I got to say its funny ocassionally getting glimpses seeing you still trying to justify that. On one hand an indication of maybe a conscience? and on the other still struggling to beat it down. As far the above statement.
Lets call a spade a spade. You used it because you saw me say to neuro that the girl meant something to me. You figured that would be the best dig but it blew up in your face because no one stepped behind you to own using a handicapped girl as insult (well except Arch but hey he’s up for anything ) against the hated theist.
Used her you most definitely did because the whole point of an insult is to say something bad and derogatory about the person. Its not to point out something good. So you were denigrating her to insult me but she’s beyond being denigrated. She’s a sweet little girl. She will never be a rocket scientist but she has lightened up more peoples live than most of those ever will. You match up with her at her shoe laces. She’s that much above you and me
SO I’ll take it as a compliment even though it was meant as an insult.
LikeLike
“Would you say that God used Hitler and the Nazi regime to fulfill his ultimate plan of the reformation of the nation of Israel?” – ruth
sorry to interrupt, and arch, i’m sorry for apologizing again, but not all christian sects viewed the OT prophecies of a new israel as being literal.
the church I attended view it as a metaphor for the church, a spiritual Israel, god;s modern day kingdom. We didnt think god was going to do anything with the actual nation of israel, for several reasons.
1) The NT says there is neither jew nor greek.
2) paul said that he was turning away from the jews becuase they rejected jesus and would instead go to the gentiles.
3) jesus said that his kingdom was not of this earth, and if it was, then would his people fight.
4) the prophecies for a new physical israel werent fulfilled as foretold
5) I could come up with others if i thought long enough about it
But when i was a christian, yes, I though god had used evil people to work toward his end. I often wondered if Hitler was used for some purpose, sort of like god supposedly used Pharaoh’s hard heart as an excuse to display his might.
LikeLike
“Would you say that God used Hitler and the Nazi regime to fulfill his ultimate plan of the reformation of the nation of Israel?”
I would say that God brought his people back despite the holocaust. As Ezekiel 37 indicates.
I’d also say this sleazy back door trying to find a gotcha besides not having any hope of working with me is a new look for you. You are usually a bit better than this
Any chance that will be dealing with the prophecy itself any time this millenia?
LikeLike
“I am skipping most of what you write but I got to say its funny ocassionally getting glimpses seeing you still trying to justify that. On one hand an indication of maybe a conscience? and on the other still struggling to beat it down. As far the above statement.” – mike
“occasional glimpses” – of course.
I skim over most of you and kathy’s crap, because frankly, I have a hard time understanding gibberish. In regard to you two, i spend most of my time trying to get to the parts that relate to what I’ve asked each of you, and takes some real effort to decipher after I’ve realized you werent joking.
I saw mention of a handicapped girl and that’s all. Whether she meant a lot to you, or a little, or whether she was a real person or used as some metaphor, i didnt know and nor did i care. You and kathy say some pretty stupid things and make some really ridiculous claims, so when seeing the mention of a mentally handicapped girl, i assumed it was in reference to kathy at first, but remembering the idiotic things you come up with, I thought perhaps you may be mentally handicapped as well. you can see my confusion.
nothing more to it than that.
What else do you want to talk about since you refuse to speak intelligently on the real subject?
“SO I’ll take it as a compliment even though it was meant as an insult.” – mike
Great! then what are you upset for? I’ll be more than happy to compliment you again.
LikeLike
“My half-bake hypocrisy? Ha! Okay. Poke Mike with a fork, I think he’s done.”
Good night. She’ s coming apart at the seams. That was supposed to be an intelligent retort?
LikeLike
I would say that God brought his people back despite the holocaust. As Ezekiel 37 indicates.
I’d also say this sleazy back door trying to find a gotcha…
There was no back door trying nor sleaze. There was no gotcha. I’d say I was very transparent with my question. You don’t want to give a direct answer to that question because you don’t want to deal with the ramifications of what that would mean for your God. You are not the only one who can play that game. You think I don’t want to deal with the ramifications of a supernatural explanation for the beginnings of the universe? No, I was trying to deal with those ramifications. You’re half-hearted excuse for bailing on it is just that. Half-hearted. Where does the supernatural explanation of the origins of the universe lead, Mike? In my mind, the origin of the human species is the next logical place for it to go.
LikeLike
Where has Ezekiel 37 been fulfilled?
Jews have come from all over to be there, that’s true, but could mean anytime, or any release from captivity.
Regardless, isnt there a huge mosque sitting where the temple once was?
All of jerusalem are not followers of god – the majority being not – according to your beliefs, so how does that reconcile with Ezk 37:23?
Ezk 37 also says that david will be their king forever. Is the current leader of Israel related to davidor even to the tribe of judah?
LikeLike
“There was no back door trying nor sleaze. There was no gotcha. I’d say I was very transparent with my question. You don’t want to give a direct answer to that question because you don’t want to deal with the ramifications of what that would mean for your God. ”
Bingo!….. Just as I said and she just lied she wasn’t trying to do. Go to some idea about the holocaust rather than the prophecy of Israel becoming a nation that was under discussion.
furthermore Your questions was answered you totally dishonest soul.
You asked me what I would say and I told you what I would say in line with Ezekiel 37
” You think I don’t want to deal with the ramifications of a supernatural explanation for the beginnings of the universe? No, I was trying to deal with those ramifications. You’re half-hearted excuse for bailing on it is just that. Half-hearted.”
You just proved why I couldn’t be bother with you then (and shortly as it appears won’t be needing to bother with you again). When you get your atheist back against the wall as you have done here you wish to run off into some other back door antics.
The holocaust did not bring a single soul back to Israel. SYMPATHY after the holocaust had a part to play. So the premise of the question was silly but then now we know you were not trying to deal with the prophecy as you pretended to be doing
Only problem is mike could see your subject switch coming from a mile away so it didn’t work.
LikeLike
“Where does the supernatural explanation of the origins of the universe lead, Mike? In my mind, the origin of the human species is the next logical place for it to go.”
ROFl…for you yes that would be the case because you know the logical step before you talk about HUMAN life would be to talk about LIFE and then you would start running into some more issues with Abiognensis that you KNEW you would have issues with
So ahem lets skip over what would the next REAL logical step eh?
LikeLike