I don't see any images at all. As stated that is similar to people who see Christ in their toast. You choose to see that so you see that when all it is is a reflection. I didn;t state that it wasn't human blood. what I did state is that it was a common burial practice. There have been more thna just one shourd found. The shroud covered the deceased body of a noble individual and left for a few days then it was removed and placed in an ostuary box. In these ostuary boxes once in awhile there are bones found while most of the time they are empty because the bones have disolved. You know how 'evolutionists' if you want to call them that, state that fossilization is a very rare occurence? It depends on the atmosphere and the environment the item is stored in, as it does here as well. There are other shrouds that exist from the same time period. Does that mean they all covered the body of Christ?Explain how it's still around after around a 1000 years..and the video is a bleeding eucharist...witnessed by multiple people..also..
Shroud - It is bloodstained and shows faint front and back images of a man who, by the visible wounds appears to have been crucified. He seems to be resting in in burial repose.
The bloodstains on the Shroud are composed of hemoglobin and give a positive test for serum albumin. Numerous tests confirm that the blood is real human blood.
No evidence for pigments (paint, dye or stains) or artist's media was found anywhere on the Shroud. Nor is any photographic emulsion found on the Shroud.
Xx_Hopeless_xX
ATHEISM: The Necessary Proof
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="supa_badman"][QUOTE="Brainkiller05"] That's the problem, you consider this proof there's an all powerful man who created everything from nothing and always existed. The fact you just posted these two things as "proof" backs up my thoughts perfectly.
Well... What about the cloth showing the Maria of Guadalupe? How can you explain that? I can't disprove it, but history repeats itself. You guys believe in stuff until it's proven to be fake, it isn't supposed to work like that, you prove something is real and then believe it. Instead of worshipping a piece of toast only to find out 10 years later that it was a hoax.It's been made out of cactus. Clothes made out of cactus last about 20 years (I think) at most before it decomposes. It's been around for a couple of hundred years. I can't explain it, scientists haven't been able to explain it, but because it shows the image of the Virgin Mary, and it came at a time of disbelief, I'm inclined to believe it's something special and odd.Well... What about the cloth showing the Maria of Guadalupe? How can you explain that? I can't disprove it, but history repeats itself. You guys believe in stuff until it's proven to be fake, it isn't supposed to work like that, you prove something is real and then believe it. Instead of worshipping a piece of toast only to find out 10 years later that it was a hoax.[QUOTE="supa_badman"][QUOTE="Brainkiller05"] That's the problem, you consider this proof there's an all powerful man who created everything from nothing and always existed. The fact you just posted these two things as "proof" backs up my thoughts perfectly.
Brainkiller05
And people like you continue to make the argument it's fake until proven true..as if your looking at a dark brown bottle full of lager that's been sealed shut and trying to say there's nothing in there and making up explanations as to how there's nothing in there even though the proof is right in front of you..
I don't see any images at all. As stated that is similar to people who see Christ in their toast. You choose to see that so you see that when all it is is a reflection. I didn;t state that it wasn't human blood. what I did state is that it was a common burial practice. There have been more thna just one shourd found. The shroud covered the deceased body of a noble individual and left for a few days then it was removed and placed in an ostuary box. In these ostuary boxes once in awhile there are bones found while most of the time they are empty because the bones have disolved. You know how 'evolutionists' if you want to call them that, state that fossilization is a very rare occurence? It depends on the atmosphere and the environment the item is stored in, as it does here as well. There are other shrouds that exist from the same time period. Does that mean they all covered the body of Christ?[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"]
Explain how it's still around after around a 1000 years..and the video is a bleeding eucharist...witnessed by multiple people..also..
Shroud - It is bloodstained and shows faint front and back images of a man who, by the visible wounds appears to have been crucified. He seems to be resting in in burial repose.
The bloodstains on the Shroud are composed of hemoglobin and give a positive test for serum albumin. Numerous tests confirm that the blood is real human blood.
No evidence for pigments (paint, dye or stains) or artist's media was found anywhere on the Shroud. Nor is any photographic emulsion found on the Shroud.
BumFluff122
I didn't say you were supposed to see a face in the video..it is a bleeding eucharist..as stated before..i honestly have no idea what you're talking about when referring to the "toast" and i have yet to see proof of your shrouds....and if you cannot see the picture on the shroud then there is no reason to continue this debate..
I can't disprove it, but history repeats itself. You guys believe in stuff until it's proven to be fake, it isn't supposed to work like that, you prove something is real and then believe it. Instead of worshipping a piece of toast only to find out 10 years later that it was a hoax.[QUOTE="Brainkiller05"]
[QUOTE="supa_badman"] Well... What about the cloth showing the Maria of Guadalupe? How can you explain that?Snipes_2
I don't understand the argument you're trying to make. You believe there's no God, so you believe until it's proven "Fake" as well.
Yes, you see what I'm doing makes sense. Example:1) Worshipping a piece of toast only to find out it's fake.
2) Seeing the piece of toast and presuming it's fake until they prove it is real.
You're trying to twist it saying believing something is fake until it's proven real is as ridiculous as believing something is real until proven fake.
[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"]
Explain how it's still around after around a 1000 years..and the video is a bleeding eucharist...witnessed by multiple people..also..
Shroud - It is bloodstained and shows faint front and back images of a man who, by the visible wounds appears to have been crucified. He seems to be resting in in burial repose.
The bloodstains on the Shroud are composed of hemoglobin and give a positive test for serum albumin. Numerous tests confirm that the blood is real human blood.
No evidence for pigments (paint, dye or stains) or artist's media was found anywhere on the Shroud. Nor is any photographic emulsion found on the Shroud.
You know how 'evolutionists' if you want to call them that, state that fossilization is a very rare occurence? It depends on the atmosphere and the environment the item is stored in, as it does here as well. There are other shrouds that exist from the same time period. Does that mean they all covered the body of Christ?Do you think that if there was an inconsistency like that it would have been brought up?Again, you see what you want to see. All it is is a reflection. There is no definite picture there. None of those question has anythign to do with my statement regarding the Shroud. What I stated was that these shrouds were used for many burials in the time period. There were used for nobility. After a few days the shroud was removed and the bones were placed in an ostuary box. Why does this shourd have to be Jesus when there are other shrouds that exist?No, The first video is of a bleeding host. It may take a few seconds to realize this as the man holding the camera is quite terrified. The Second is the Shroud of Turin.
"The Shroud of Turin is a centuries old linen cloth that bears the image of a crucified man."
http://www.shroud.com/
HEre are some questions if you believe it's a fake.How did a faker of relics alter the chemical properties of the carbohydrate coating to create the color and how did he do so with such artistic precision -- on both sides of the cloth?When a new technique is discovered it is exploited; and over time it is refined and improved. Where are the precedents for pictures such as those that we find on the Shroud? Where are the other works in this new-found technology? Are we to imagine that some genius invented a new way to create pictures, that one picture was made, and the technology was lost to history?How did he create a suitable negative picture hundreds of years before the discovery of photographic negativity? How did he know that he had it right? How, without a camera and film, could he test his work? The negativity is extraordinarily precise and correct.Why did he go against conventional expectations of his era? Why did he create a picture with wounds from nails that went through Jesus' wrists? All art and all expectation throughout medieval Europe showed Jesus nailed to his cross through the palms of his hands. Why is Jesus shown completely naked, unlike in all artistic depictions everywhere in every era?
Can you answer these questions with reliable reference sources? I'm just trying to figure out why people are so against the Shroud of Turin.
Snipes_2
[QUOTE="Snipes_2"]
[QUOTE="Brainkiller05"] I can't disprove it, but history repeats itself. You guys believe in stuff until it's proven to be fake, it isn't supposed to work like that, you prove something is real and then believe it. Instead of worshipping a piece of toast only to find out 10 years later that it was a hoax.
Brainkiller05
I don't understand the argument you're trying to make. You believe there's no God, so you believe until it's proven "Fake" as well.
Yes, you see what I'm doing makes sense. Example:1) Worshipping a piece of toast only to find out it's fake.
2) Seeing the piece of toast and presuming it's fake until they prove it is real.
You're trying to twist it saying believing something is fake until it's proven real is as ridiculous as believing something is real until proven fake.
You're doing the same exact thing you're condemning us for, except it's the other way around.
Again, you see what you want to see. All it is is a reflection. There is no definite picture there. None of those question has anythign to do with my statement regarding the Shroud. What I stated was that these shrouds were used for many burials in the time period. There were used for nobility. After a few days the shroud was removed and the bones were placed in an ostuary box. Why does this shourd have to be Jesus when there are other shrouds that exist?[QUOTE="Snipes_2"]
No, The first video is of a bleeding host. It may take a few seconds to realize this as the man holding the camera is quite terrified. The Second is the Shroud of Turin.
"The Shroud of Turin is a centuries old linen cloth that bears the image of a crucified man."
http://www.shroud.com/
HEre are some questions if you believe it's a fake.How did a faker of relics alter the chemical properties of the carbohydrate coating to create the color and how did he do so with such artistic precision -- on both sides of the cloth?When a new technique is discovered it is exploited; and over time it is refined and improved. Where are the precedents for pictures such as those that we find on the Shroud? Where are the other works in this new-found technology? Are we to imagine that some genius invented a new way to create pictures, that one picture was made, and the technology was lost to history?How did he create a suitable negative picture hundreds of years before the discovery of photographic negativity? How did he know that he had it right? How, without a camera and film, could he test his work? The negativity is extraordinarily precise and correct.Why did he go against conventional expectations of his era? Why did he create a picture with wounds from nails that went through Jesus' wrists? All art and all expectation throughout medieval Europe showed Jesus nailed to his cross through the palms of his hands. Why is Jesus shown completely naked, unlike in all artistic depictions everywhere in every era?
Can you answer these questions with reliable reference sources? I'm just trying to figure out why people are so against the Shroud of Turin.
BumFluff122
It's a Negative of what's on the Shroud, it's a face. All of the afore mentioned questions such as this one "The negativity is extraordinarily precise and correct.Why did he go against conventional expectations of his era? Why did he create a picture with wounds from nails that went through Jesus' wrists?" have to do with the Shroud of Turin.
[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"][QUOTE="Brainkiller05"] I can't disprove it, but history repeats itself. You guys believe in stuff until it's proven to be fake, it isn't supposed to work like that, you prove something is real and then believe it. Instead of worshipping a piece of toast only to find out 10 years later that it was a hoax.
Brainkiller05
And people like you continue to make the argument it's fake until proven true..as if your looking at a dark brown bottle full of lager that's been sealed shut and trying to say there's nothing in there and making up explanations as to how there's nothing in there even though the proof is right in front of you..
I said history repeats itself, all these miracles get proven fake and you move on. Then a new one pops up and you expect us to believe it, instead we laugh.Actually...i have yet to see a miracle of this nature proven "fake"..the bleeding eucharist video i presented to you has been proven true...yet you appear to ignore that fact..
So you are statign that if aliens did exist they are on Earth? That's a HUGE stretch. Perhaps you need to look up the definition for extraterrestrial. It is defined as life that did not begin origins on Earth.Extra-Terrestrials are of this world, if they DID exist. If they existed they would be living somewhere within our Universe, God is not part of this world, as in, he does not belong to our Universe, he is otherworldy.
Snipes_2
[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"][QUOTE="Brainkiller05"] I can't disprove it, but history repeats itself. You guys believe in stuff until it's proven to be fake, it isn't supposed to work like that, you prove something is real and then believe it. Instead of worshipping a piece of toast only to find out 10 years later that it was a hoax.
Brainkiller05
And people like you continue to make the argument it's fake until proven true..as if your looking at a dark brown bottle full of lager that's been sealed shut and trying to say there's nothing in there and making up explanations as to how there's nothing in there even though the proof is right in front of you..
I said history repeats itself, all these miracles get proven fake and you move on. Then a new one pops up and you expect us to believe it, instead we laugh.Here's a list of Miracles (Not even close to all of them), tell me how many of them have been proven false, how and why, with reliable source information.
http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/miracle.html
So you are statign that if aliens did exist they are on Earth? That's a HUGE stretch. Perhaps you need to look up the definition for extraterrestrial. It is defined as life that did not begin origins on Earth. He's saying aliens would be natural and Gods would be supernatural. People tend to put aliens in the same category as ghosts and gods, which obviously is wrong.[QUOTE="Snipes_2"]
Extra-Terrestrials are of this world, if they DID exist. If they existed they would be living somewhere within our Universe, God is not part of this world, as in, he does not belong to our Universe, he is otherworldy.
BumFluff122
And the fact that there was human blood on the item does not mean it is your messiahs blood. That is a fallacy. You are drawing conclusions from another proof and stating it as fact.Proof it was real..Bishop Ricardo of Los Teques was advised, and he had the Host tested in Caracas. He was told that the red substance was IN FACT human blood. http://www.dsanford.com/miraclehost.html
People have free will..i find it hilarious you expect God to make everything perfect when you don't even believe in him..
Xx_Hopeless_xX
So you are statign that if aliens did exist they are on Earth? That's a HUGE stretch. Perhaps you need to look up the definition for extraterrestrial. It is defined as life that did not begin origins on Earth.[QUOTE="Snipes_2"]
Extra-Terrestrials are of this world, if they DID exist. If they existed they would be living somewhere within our Universe, God is not part of this world, as in, he does not belong to our Universe, he is otherworldy.
BumFluff122
No, I'm not saying they are on Earth. I said they are within our Universe, as far as I know the Universe consists of many different planets and stars.
[QUOTE="hyrueprince11"]
I´m kind of an atheist, but if there is a devent proof of a god I´ll start to beleive in god
Snipes_2
What's a "Devent Proof"? I'm not trying to be annoying, I honestly don't know what you mean by "Devent".
meant decent, didn´t fix it because I thought everyone would understand
also for me the proof that there is no god (or at least there is no omnipotent god or maybe he doesn´t care about us anymore is that) there are sooooo many good people thathave horrible lifes and sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo many horrible people that have really good lifes and never pay for what they do and I would understand that maybe god can´t make everything perfect but at least it should be much better
[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"][QUOTE="Brainkiller05"] I said history repeats itself, all these miracles get proven fake and you move on. Then a new one pops up and you expect us to believe it, instead we laugh. Brainkiller05
Actually...i have yet to see a miracle proven "fake"..the two i presented to you have been proven true...et you appear to ignore that fact..
Stop lying to yourself, if they'd been proven true everybody would be a Christian.So we are making this an attack on my character now...?
Interesting...
And that is not true...people will continue to convince themselves things are not true and make up reasons..they do not want to change their way of life...
[QUOTE="Brainkiller05"] Yes, you see what I'm doing makes sense. Example:
1) Worshipping a piece of toast only to find out it's fake.
2) Seeing the piece of toast and presuming it's fake until they prove it is real.
You're trying to twist it saying believing something is fake until it's proven real is as ridiculous as believing something is real until proven fake.
You're doing the same exact thing you're condemning us for, except it's the other way around.
:lol: no, what I'm doing is logical. What you're doing is illogical. You believe some miracle happens and it ends up being proven fake. I believe the miracle is fake and it ends up being fake. IF it ends up being real I admit I was wrong and believe, whereas when you find out it's fake and you believe it you're left looking a bit silly. Then some other "miracle" happens and you take the same stance... and then it turns out fake and you look silly again. Because it's not been able to be proven true or false, it's a matter of perspective. Taking a side would show you're biased towards something.[QUOTE="Brainkiller05"]I can't disprove it, but history repeats itself. You guys believe in stuff until it's proven to be fake, it isn't supposed to work like that, you prove something is real and then believe it. Instead of worshipping a piece of toast only to find out 10 years later that it was a hoax.It's been made out of cactus. Clothes made out of cactus last about 20 years (I think) at most before it decomposes. It's been around for a couple of hundred years. I can't explain it, scientists haven't been able to explain it, but because it shows the image of the Virgin Mary, and it came at a time of disbelief, I'm inclined to believe it's something special and odd.unless it is stored in an envionment similar to what fossilized bones and fossilized skin exists in. That beign an envirnment that has no oygen, is completely cut off from the outter atmosphere, etc... There are many types of possible environments. Just because soem dinosaur bones didn't disolve or soem of the skin is still intact does not mean that Christ was a dinosaur.[QUOTE="supa_badman"] Well... What about the cloth showing the Maria of Guadalupe? How can you explain that?supa_badman
I said history repeats itself, all these miracles get proven fake and you move on. Then a new one pops up and you expect us to believe it, instead we laugh.[QUOTE="Brainkiller05"][QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"]
And people like you continue to make the argument it's fake until proven true..as if your looking at a dark brown bottle full of lager that's been sealed shut and trying to say there's nothing in there and making up explanations as to how there's nothing in there even though the proof is right in front of you..
Snipes_2
Here's a list of Miracles (Not even close to all of them), tell me how many of them have been proven false, how and why, with reliable source information.
http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/miracle.html
you know there are a lot of people who don´t beleive or beleive in something different and experience things like miracles, right?
And the fact that there was human blood on the item does not mean it is your messiahs blood. That is a fallacy. You are drawing conclusions from another proof and stating it as fact.[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"]
Proof it was real..Bishop Ricardo of Los Teques was advised, and he had the Host tested in Caracas. He was told that the red substance was IN FACT human blood. http://www.dsanford.com/miraclehost.html
People have free will..i find it hilarious you expect God to make everything perfect when you don't even believe in him..
BumFluff122
Scientists have examined it and even typed the blood. Right..
The Flesh and the Blood have the same blood-type: AB (Blood-type identical to that which Prof. Baima Bollone uncovered in the Holy Shroud of Turin).
http://www.indefenseofthecross.com/Eucharistic_miracles.htm
[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"]
Proof it was real..Bishop Ricardo of Los Teques was advised, and he had the Host tested in Caracas. He was told that the red substance was IN FACT human blood. http://www.dsanford.com/miraclehost.html
People have free will..i find it hilarious you expect God to make everything perfect when you don't even believe in him..
And the fact that there was human blood on the item does not mean it is your messiahs blood. That is a fallacy. You are drawing conclusions from another proof and stating it as fact. He didn't say that it was Jesus's blood :? Regardless, the fact that it's blood coming out of a bread wafer is something odd.[QUOTE="BumFluff122"]And the fact that there was human blood on the item does not mean it is your messiahs blood. That is a fallacy. You are drawing conclusions from another proof and stating it as fact. He didn't say that it was Jesus's blood :? Regardless, the fact that it's blood coming out of a bread wafer is something odd.[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"]
Proof it was real..Bishop Ricardo of Los Teques was advised, and he had the Host tested in Caracas. He was told that the red substance was IN FACT human blood. http://www.dsanford.com/miraclehost.html
People have free will..i find it hilarious you expect God to make everything perfect when you don't even believe in him..
supa_badman
Actually..read the other post i edited...:P
[QUOTE="Snipes_2"][QUOTE="Brainkiller05"] I said history repeats itself, all these miracles get proven fake and you move on. Then a new one pops up and you expect us to believe it, instead we laugh. Brainkiller05
Here's a list of Miracles (Not even close to all of them), tell me how many of them have been proven false, how and why, with reliable source information.
http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/miracle.html
"5. Lot's wife turned into a "pillar of salt"" Stopped reading there. You seem to think stuff that can't be disproved means it's real. How is someone supposed to disprove a miracle wrote in a 2000 year old book which doesn't even have any evidence in the first place of the miracle.You can't prove there's life on other planets, yet people believe there is. These Miracles have been documented in the Bible, why would someone randomly create such things?
all I saw was a reflection. Are you trying to tell me that that reflection is suppose to be blood? Isn;t there suppose to be soem sort of picture in the reflection or the 'blood'?I didn't say you were supposed to see a face in the video..it is a bleeding eucharist..as stated before..i honestly have no idea what you're talking about when referring to the "toast" and i have yet to see proof of your shrouds....and if you cannot see the picture on the shroud then there is no reason to continue this debate..
Xx_Hopeless_xX
and for the shroud http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/12/091216-shroud-of-turin-jesus-jerusalem-leprosy.html
Do you think that if there was an inconsistency like that it would have been brought up?supa_badmanIt's fairly common knowledge amongst people in-the-know that fossilization is a rare occurence and it depends on the types of environments the item is kept in. It probably has been brought up. you just didn;t choose to hear it as is exactly what you are doing now.
You can't prove there's life on other planets, yet people believe there is. These Miracles have been documented in the Bible, why would someone randomly create such things?Snipes_2yes you can. Go to other planets and find life. Proven. And, I think this one is obvious...
all I saw was a reflection. Are you trying to tell me that that reflection is suppose to be blood? Isn;t there suppose to be soem sort of picture in the reflection or the 'blood'?[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"]
I didn't say you were supposed to see a face in the video..it is a bleeding eucharist..as stated before..i honestly have no idea what you're talking about when referring to the "toast" and i have yet to see proof of your shrouds....and if you cannot see the picture on the shroud then there is no reason to continue this debate..
BumFluff122
and for the shroud http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/12/091216-shroud-of-turin-jesus-jerusalem-leprosy.html
I guess you just refuse to see it...whatever dude...
As for the shroud:
Starting in 2003, new evidence began to appear insecular,peer-reviewed,scientificjournalsthat supported the Shroud of Turin's authenticity. From these journals we learn that the outermost fibers of the cloth are coated with a layer of starch fractions and various saccharides. In places, the coating has turned into a caramel-like substance, thus forming the images. This suggests a chemical reaction took place. We learn, also, of a faint second image of the face on the backside of the cloth. The second face supports the idea of a chemical reaction and adds more proof that the image is not a work of art or a photograph. And in 2005, we learned that the carbon 14 dating was flawed. In fact we learned that the cloth could very well be 2000 years old.
[QUOTE="Snipes_2"]You can't prove there's life on other planets, yet people believe there is. These Miracles have been documented in the Bible, why would someone randomly create such things?smc91352yes you can. Go to other planets and find life. Proven. And, I think this one is obvious...
Ok, Then why don't you? Why is the second part of my post "Obvious"? Don't say "So people would believe in Jesus", that;s a very weak argument. Give me some validated proof why it's "Obvious" please.
What on earth are you taling about? The Shroud of Turin is an actual shroud that covered the body of a decease noble until the remains were placed in an ostuary box. These shrouds were used often in the time of Jesus. I didn;t say the face on the shroud is fake did I? Nor the negative of it. What I have stated is we do not know how Jesus looked. The modern popular image of Jesus was made popular because of renaissance era paintings. You are attributing the negative of the shourd to an image of your messiah that was invented in the middle ages.It's a Negative of what's on the Shroud, it's a face. All of the afore mentioned questions such as this one "The negativity is extraordinarily precise and correct.Why did he go against conventional expectations of his era? Why did he create a picture with wounds from nails that went through Jesus' wrists?" have to do with the Shroud of Turin.
Snipes_2
yes you can. Go to other planets and find life. Proven. And, I think this one is obvious...[QUOTE="smc91352"][QUOTE="Snipes_2"]You can't prove there's life on other planets, yet people believe there is. These Miracles have been documented in the Bible, why would someone randomly create such things?Snipes_2
Ok, Then why don't you? Why is the second part of my post "Obvious"? Don't say "So people would believe in Jesus", that;s a very weak argument. Give me some validated proof why it's "Obvious" please.
I don't have the desire to prove aliens exist. :? And I think the population control motive should be obvious.What on earth are you taling about? The Shroud of Turin is an actual shroud that covered the body of a decease noble until the remains were placed in an ostuary box. These shrouds were used often in the time of Jesus. I didn;t say the face on the shroud is fake did I? Nor the negative of it. What I have stated is we do not know how Jesus looked. The modern popular image of Jesus was made popular because of renaissance era paintings. You are attributing the negative of the shourd to an image of your messiah that was invented in the middle ages.[QUOTE="Snipes_2"]
It's a Negative of what's on the Shroud, it's a face. All of the afore mentioned questions such as this one "The negativity is extraordinarily precise and correct.Why did he go against conventional expectations of his era? Why did he create a picture with wounds from nails that went through Jesus' wrists?" have to do with the Shroud of Turin.
BumFluff122
You said it wasn't a Face on the Shroud in a previous post. You still haven't answered any of the questions.
So you are statign that if aliens did exist they are on Earth? That's a HUGE stretch. Perhaps you need to look up the definition for extraterrestrial. It is defined as life that did not begin origins on Earth.[QUOTE="BumFluff122"]
[QUOTE="Snipes_2"]
Extra-Terrestrials are of this world, if they DID exist. If they existed they would be living somewhere within our Universe, God is not part of this world, as in, he does not belong to our Universe, he is otherworldy.
Snipes_2
No, I'm not saying they are on Earth. I said they are within our Universe, as far as I know the Universe consists of many different planets and stars.
Extra terrestrial refers to soemthing that has it's origins not on Earth.[QUOTE="Snipes_2"]
[QUOTE="BumFluff122"]So you are statign that if aliens did exist they are on Earth? That's a HUGE stretch. Perhaps you need to look up the definition for extraterrestrial. It is defined as life that did not begin origins on Earth.
BumFluff122
No, I'm not saying they are on Earth. I said they are within our Universe, as far as I know the Universe consists of many different planets and stars.
Extra terrestrial refers to soemthing that has it's origins not on Earth.I'm sorry, but as far as I know, the Universe doesn't just consist of Earth.
[QUOTE="Snipes_2"][QUOTE="Brainkiller05"] I said history repeats itself, all these miracles get proven fake and you move on. Then a new one pops up and you expect us to believe it, instead we laugh. Brainkiller05
Here's a list of Miracles (Not even close to all of them), tell me how many of them have been proven false, how and why, with reliable source information.
http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/miracle.html
"5. Lot's wife turned into a "pillar of salt"" Stopped reading there. You seem to think stuff that can't be disproved means it's real. How is someone supposed to disprove a miracle wrote in a 2000 year old book which doesn't even have any evidence in the first place of the miracle.I stopped reading right at the firest one. The creation if the universe, plants and animals. Then I skimmed over the rest because all they are are taking passages from the bible and stating they happened as fact and statign that it is proof of God. I mean I wouldn't take the How the Grinch Stole Christmas book. read a few passages from it then point to some obscure weirdly named machine and stated, "HA I knew this existed! Prove me wrong!"[QUOTE="Snipes_2"][QUOTE="smc91352"] yes you can. Go to other planets and find life. Proven. And, I think this one is obvious...smc91352
Ok, Then why don't you? Why is the second part of my post "Obvious"? Don't say "So people would believe in Jesus", that;s a very weak argument. Give me some validated proof why it's "Obvious" please.
I don't have the desire to prove aliens exist. :? And I think the population control motive should be obvious.A "Population Control Motive", that's REALLY stretching it, considering back in the time the Bible was written most people were of Jewish Descent.
"5. Lot's wife turned into a "pillar of salt"" Stopped reading there. You seem to think stuff that can't be disproved means it's real. How is someone supposed to disprove a miracle wrote in a 2000 year old book which doesn't even have any evidence in the first place of the miracle.I stopped reading right at the firest one. The creation if the universe, plants and animals. Then I skimmed over the rest because all they are are taking passages from the bible and stating they happened as fact and statign that it is proof of God. I mean I wouldn't take the How the Grinch Stole Christmas book. read a few passages from it then point to some obscure weirdly named machine and stated, "HA I knew this existed! Prove me wrong!"[QUOTE="Brainkiller05"][QUOTE="Snipes_2"]
Here's a list of Miracles (Not even close to all of them), tell me how many of them have been proven false, how and why, with reliable source information.
http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/miracle.html
BumFluff122
Ok, Clearly you don't like those because you can't prove them false. How about these?
http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/a3.html
I don't have the desire to prove aliens exist. :? And I think the population control motive should be obvious.[QUOTE="smc91352"][QUOTE="Snipes_2"]
Ok, Then why don't you? Why is the second part of my post "Obvious"? Don't say "So people would believe in Jesus", that;s a very weak argument. Give me some validated proof why it's "Obvious" please.
Snipes_2
A "Population Control Motive", that's REALLY stretching it, considering back in the time the Bible was written most people were of Jewish Descent.
not really when you see the people making these claims. They all wanna change the world somehow. I think you're right about me stretching it though...And the fact that there was human blood on the item does not mean it is your messiahs blood. That is a fallacy. You are drawing conclusions from another proof and stating it as fact.[QUOTE="BumFluff122"]
[QUOTE="Xx_Hopeless_xX"]
Proof it was real..Bishop Ricardo of Los Teques was advised, and he had the Host tested in Caracas. He was told that the red substance was IN FACT human blood. http://www.dsanford.com/miraclehost.html
People have free will..i find it hilarious you expect God to make everything perfect when you don't even believe in him..
Xx_Hopeless_xX
Scientists have examined it and even typed the blood. Right..
The Flesh and the Blood have the same blood-type: AB (Blood-type identical to that which Prof. Baima Bollone uncovered in the Holy Shroud of Turin).
http://www.indefenseofthecross.com/Eucharistic_miracles.htm
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment