Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Experiments versus Experience... A Philosophy Thread

Interesting. Wrongdoers can be saved if we truly repent...recognize our wrong acts, confess them to God, and turn our lives from that behavior and live for God. Then yes, we go to heaven. Those choices...free will...have to made during our physical lives. Heaven is a place where the temptation to fill our lives with ungodly things does not exist. So, no need to expel anyone. Unrepented choices made during physical life that result in spending eternity in hell can no longer be changed. Simple really.

Reason doesn't apply to atheists; it only seems to keep their belief system intact. Notice they will continually argue in circles, as we are currently seeing in these threads. Notice the atheist's method is circular arguments, and as evidenced, they are full of hot air (better get used to it).

They can't prove or disprove anything and continue to close their eyes and stiffen their necks (pity the ignorant fools). They have a comeback for everything, and it's a game to them. They try to be knowledgeable and intellectual, not realizing God is omnipresent, unchanging, and who has all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Colossians 2:3). Atheists use God's laws of logic but at the same time deny God made the laws possible.

Pity the fools...

Chase my tail? That's funny.

The God-haters here go to tremendous lengths to stir the christians pot, to puff themselves up. Christians simply share what we've been given, take it or leave it. Don't want it, easy, don't take it.

Christians simply quoting the Bible drives a non-believer right over the top, like it did 4ager awhile back. If the conviction in your heart in just hearing the Word is more than you can bear, you probably better seriously analyze that!

After all, to you it should be just mumbo jumbo gibberish about an irrelevant non-existent spiritual being. Why would you get so worked up if God is not really God? Do you get worked up trying to argue against the existence of unicorns too? LOL.

If I believed in unicorns would you lay awake at night compiling data and statistics to prove me wrong? Would you cite scientific studies by prestigious universities showing the folly of my belief? Would you argue or would you simply say, "Wow, you're off your rocker", and move on?

That's what would be so stinking funny if it weren't so darned sad, the desperation of the God-haters to argue against God. Who are you trying to convince? Me or yourself?? Like the kid caught in a lie trying desperately to convince dad he didn't do it. Even he wants to believe it's true, but it don't make it so.



What a fine compliment you paid me when you sought to cut me down. I am so glad to be known as an outspoken believer here.

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.

Romans 8:28

The Christian God is unchanging?
Really?
I guess you've never compared are contrasted the Gods of the Old and New Testaments.

Then you concede there is no free will in Heaven.

Fireball,

I'm against all supernatural believes that cause a person to make wrong decisions that are determent to themselves or others. Unicorns, faeries, Aliens that visit them in the night, Boogie Man, Man Made Global Warming, it doesn't matter.

However in this country, the most common supernatural misbeief is one in the Christian God

Curdog, old friend, glad to see you could join us tonight.

The arts of Logic and Rhetoric are largely lost upon this generation, be the practitioner Theist, Atheist, or Anti-theist. I agree that using the Bible to prove the Bible is not an effective technique. The book of Genesis is a real gift for the Anti-theist because it effectively disproves the Christian God if defined in certain way, however, it just disproves the Christian God, and does not disprove any of the other thousand creation myths.

Yes, science is about observation evidence, and predictions. , and the controlled experiment is one of it's tools.

As for non-laboratory occurrences, we don't discount them, we just want to know how you differentiate it from random chance. If prayer actually worked, we should be able to measure the difference in outcomes, be it medical, wages, crop success, marriages, etc. As an economist, I tell you it would be simple. Take a given event where we can record the number and type of people who prayed for a given outcome, collect a large enough data set, plug the numbers into a good statistics program, an see how much, and what type of prayer by folks who go to which church, how many times a year, and tithe what percent, for the result to be a long happy marriage. Not only that, if it worked, I would be one of the person's creating that data and selling it so people could invest their time and efforts in prayer and save their money. If it worked, I would convert more people the Billy Graham..

But it doesn't, and when the Pro-religious Templeton Foundation actually did a double bind study on the effect of prayer on medical patients, there was no effect, and when the patients knew they were being prayed for, the medical outcomes were actually slightly worse.

But back to your point. Most of what you call experience, is not verifiable. If Jesus came to me tomorrow in my backyard, how could I ever verify it? Unless he gave me some special piece of information with predictive power that could not have originated from this world, you couldn't. It's an extraordinary claim, I would expect you require extraordinary evidence. The problem isn't that you weren't there, it THAT I HAVE NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE CLAIM.

In contrast, if a University Professor does an experiment involving rats, I can go to the University, see the rats, talk with the 3 dozen Grad students who did all the actual work, taking all the measurements, participate in the peer review, read the published article, and see how many times the experiment has been duplicated.

The level of proof needs to be consistent with the level of the claims. If the professor is claiming he's created cold fusion with rats, it's going to take some serious convincing....

As for the conscious being a evidence for a supernatural creator being, you have to do more then just assert it. You need to provide evidence. What you call the conscious, is just a through process within the brain, and our brains are just physical matter and electrical impulses contained within our body...so how do you make the leap from a thought process to a God?

The real problem with your argument is the variations within conscious's. All you have to do is look at the member of ISIS and some of the other monsters mentioned within this thread to realize that the proposition that each person received their conscious from God is to suggest a very imperfect God.

i do believe in a higher power....

but on taking individuals experiences as proof....problem is people can experience stuff that is very real to them but is not there.....good example is hallucinations.....i have a bad habit of doing so when i get a high fever.....at the time it is VERY phuggin real to me though after the fever is gone i realize what i went through or more usually am aware at that time what i am experiencing is not real....also went through auditory hallucinations real bad coming off a medication....

so knowing this even believing in a higher power it cant help but make one sit back and think and ask if another's experience is real or a trick of the mind....course thats why they call it faith, may never have a real answer....

I'm against all supernatural believes that cause a person to make wrong decisions that are determent to themselves or others.

"It doesn't sound fair to deal out the same retribution to those who do not know God as to those who don't obey the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, from my point of view."

From your "point of view?" Is that supposed to swing any weight with anybody? No scripture to back up your statement?

A Creation WITH a Creator is more believable than a creation WITHOUT a Creator...

That one jumped out at me, is it more believable or more comfortable? No, not a trick question. In fact it kinda gets to the root of it. Makes you ask interesting (if difficult) questions about yourself anyway.

One take on conscience is we're not born with a moral conscience (the kind you're talking about) but with the ability to form a moral conscience. We are divinely inspired to make the right choices but that inspiration is ours to accept or reject.