Originally posted by Beliver
And I think SCIENCE is more than happy to show you that man can not feed 500 people with a couple of fish and a loaf of bread, or cause a body of water to part by sheer force of will. Unless you know differently of course.
which is why, you know, they are called miracles
Originally posted by Beliver
I didn't realist that I had to follow an "ist" to have an opnion on the "fact" that at no point in time (the past or the present) has any event even remotley close to those in bible.
You didn't realist? What the hell does that mean.
Originally posted by Beliver
Therefor LOGICALLY I deduce that the events were made up or the "witness" (i use the term loosely) was experiencign an altered sense of reality ( a delusion if you will).
You have given no evidence for your logic so it's not logic yet.
Originally posted by Beliver
And I think SCIENCE is more than happy to show you that man can not feed 500 people with a couple of fish and a loaf of bread, or cause a body of water to part by sheer force of will. Unless you know differently of course.
Actually science can only prove that no one so far tested in modern times has those abilities. From that we can extrapolate that it's unlikely anyone did it before, but we still cannot prove anything.
Much as you can't disprove Superman you can't disprove God. At most you can say there's no good reason to believe in or worship either one (which there isn't, IMO) but you can't, logically, state that either does has been or can be proven non-existent.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You didn't realist? What the hell does that mean.You have given no evidence for your logic so it's not logic yet.
Actually science can only prove that no one so far tested in modern times has those abilities. From that we can extrapolate that it's unlikely anyone did it before, but we still cannot prove anything.
Much as you can't disprove Superman you can't disprove God. At most you can say there's no good reason to believe in or worship either one (which there isn't, IMO) but you can't, logically, state that either does has been or can be proven non-existent.
I can disprove Superman as he is a fictional character developed to tell fictional stories. Superman only exsists in the fictional not the factual. Unless you can prove to me and the rest of the world otherwise.
And I didn't mean to type realist. I mean to to type realise.
Originally posted by Beliveryou can create a counter theory with a simpler line of reasoning. not proof.
I can disprove Superman as he is a fictional character developed to tell fictional stories. Superman only exsists in the fictional not the factual. Unless you can prove to me and the rest of the world otherwise.And I didn't mean to type realist. I mean to to type realise.
Originally posted by Beliver
And I think SCIENCE is more than happy to show you that man can not feed 500 people with a couple of fish and a loaf of bread, or cause a body of water to part by sheer force of will. Unless you know differently of course.
Science called. She says you don't understand her.