Titanic Gospel: There's Only Two

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You believe your birth certificate which you cannot authenticate is genuine.

So why not believe [b]Dr. Donald Whitaker's life-after-death testimony on YouTube?

He's more educated than you so give him the benefit of the doubt. [/B]

JIA, stop being obtuse. We already had this dance. A birth certificate is more easily verified than someone's Near-Death-Experience. They have replicated out of body experiences with jolts to the brain; am I to believe that researchers have initiated spiritual transportation?

Stop being daft.

Also, Dr Donald Whitaker is an OBGYN. Anything he says can't be trusted.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
You ignored this post:

You ignored this:

The fact that you cannot prove something is not proof of anything other then the fact you can't prove something.

I have posted this over and over, and you have ignored it every time.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
JIA, stop being obtuse. We already had this dance. A birth certificate is more easily verified than someone's Near-Death-Experience. They have replicated out of body experiences with jolts to the brain; am I to believe that researchers have initiated spiritual transportation?

Stop being daft.

Also, Dr Donald Whitaker is an OBGYN. Anything he says can't be trusted.

I'm not being obtuse.

I'm being logical, and following your train of thought to it's contradictory conclusion.

A birth certificate only says what you think that it says.

You cannot prove that it is accurate, true, or genuine.

It could have been doctored or falsified.

You are just taking for granted that it is accurate, but you really don't know.

See what I mean by the double standard?

Dr. Donald Whitaker gives you his life-after-death testimony on YouTube and you choose not to believe it.

But you cannot prove that George Washington existed or that your birth certificate is true without believing the actions or words of the person who generated it.

So, a man who completed 4 years of college, and 3 or 4 years of medical school, plus residency, and is a physician who obtained a PhD in Research-Science and Chemistry is less credible than you?

Your logic is inconsistent, lacking, and fails to add up under scrutiny.

See ^, this argument is just stupid.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Trick?

What trick?

I'm not David Copperfield.

I'm not Whoudini.

I just presented you with the truth and apparently you couldn't handle it.

You misspelled "Houdini."

Also, do you ever plan to answer the points that I put to you? It's all the way two pages ago but [I checked] it doesn't take much time or energy to get there. Also, I begin by directly answering a question which was put to this thread.

And I have seen my birth certificate - a couple of copies of it, even. My real birth certificate is in a scrapbook that my Mom made for me of baby pictures and the program for my baptism [my dad's dad was a congregationalist minister, and he was the one who baptized me]. Then when I moved out of my house, I had to show another copy to my landlord[s] when I moved in to their apartment buildings.

Please don't ask me to show it to you. Anyone with an inch of computer common sense knows that you don't give out your personal information in case someone wants to adopt is as their own.

Also, many, many artifacts "proving people are real" trump one artifact, which was written in such a patchwork style and over hundreds of years, and then wasn't even counted as "real" until a roman Emperor said, "Hey, I think it would be a profit to me if we became a Christian nation. Yes, indeed. Let's make all the money we can!"

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I'm not being obtuse.

I'm being logical, and following your train of thought to it's contradictory conclusion.

A birth certificate only says what you think that it says.

[b]You cannot prove that it is accurate, true, or genuine.

It could have been doctored or falsified.

You are just taking for granted that it is accurate, but you really don't know.

See what I mean by the double standard?[/b]

This is lunacy. Let me make this clear to you:

It is not a double standard, because a birth certificate is simply a reaffirmation of an event that's already verified by other documents, living people, and events which can even be recorded. The Bible isn't any such thing, and you've ignored time and time again the facts that surround its conception and validity because it hurts your bias.

Is that clear enough for you? It is NOT a double standard. They are not comparable. You need to stop clinging to this.

[b]Dr. Donald Whitaker gives you his testimony on YouTube and choose not to believe it.[/b]

Anyone can give testimony. His status as a doctor is an appeal to authority fallacy. His 'experience' is not verifiable in any meaningful way, any more than it is verifiable to say that Ma and Pa saw a UFO, or Joe Bob fought a yeti.

But you cannot prove that George Washington existed or that your birth certificate is true without believing the actions or words of the person who generated it.

You are raising the standard of what is or isn't acceptable proof to beyond reasonable levels in order to say "Look, the Bible is on the same footing as actual history". But this isn't the case. As I have said before and as you have repeatedly ignored to date, the situations are NOT the same. GW or a birth certificate are not sole islands of verification of events otherwise beyond personal experience. The Bible is precisely this.

So, a man who completed 4 years of college, and 3 or 4 years of medical school, plus residency, and is physician who obtained a PhD in Research-Science and Chemistry is less credible than you?

His credentials are irrelevant. He is claiming a spiritual personal event that cannot be recorded, verified by others, or repeated.

Why would I believe this? Because of his scientific background? You know, the same background you rail against if the theories don't support your bias?

Your logic is inconsistent, lacking, and fails to add up under scrutiny.

This is utter rubbish and you are a fool for reasserting it.

Your reasoning is the same as every other fundamentalist, and calling it 'reason' is being entirely too kind.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
You misspelled "Houdini."

Also, do you ever plan to answer the points that I put to you? It's all the way two pages ago but [I checked] it doesn't take much time or energy to get there. Also, I begin by directly answering a question which was put to this thread.

And I have seen my birth certificate - a couple of copies of it, even. My real birth certificate is in a scrapbook that my Mom made for me of baby pictures and the program for my baptism [my dad's dad was a congregationalist minister, and he was the one who baptized me]. Then when I moved out of my house, I had to show another copy to my landlord[s] when I moved in to their apartment buildings.

Please don't ask me to show it to you. Anyone with an inch of computer common sense knows that you don't give out your personal information in case someone wants to adopt is as their own.

Also, many, many artifacts "proving people are real" trump one artifact, which was written in such a patchwork style and over hundreds of years, and then wasn't even counted as "real" until a roman Emperor said, "Hey, I think it would be a profit to me if we became a Christian nation. Yes, indeed. Let's make all the money we can!"

👆

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
See ^, this argument is just stupid.

5 posts ^ appears to be an irrefutable position for the one and only Shakyamunison.

Didn't think that was possible.

*Sniffle*

😄

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
5 posts ^ appears to be an irrefutable position for the one and only Shakyamunison.

Didn't think that was possible.

*Sniffle*

😄

You don't get it? Its called logic.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
This is lunacy. Let me make this clear to you:

[b]It is not a double standard, because a birth certificate is simply a reaffirmation of an event that's already verified by other documents, living people, and events which can even be recorded. The Bible isn't any such thing, and you've ignored time and time again the facts that surround its conception and validity because it hurts your bias.

Is that clear enough for you? It is NOT a double standard. They are not comparable. You need to stop clinging to this.

Anyone can give testimony. His status as a doctor is an appeal to authority fallacy. His 'experience' is not verifiable in any meaningful way, any more than it is verifiable to say that Ma and Pa saw a UFO, or Joe Bob fought a yeti.

You are raising the standard of what is or isn't acceptable proof to beyond reasonable levels in order to say "Look, the Bible is on the same footing as actual history". But this isn't the case. As I have said before and as you have repeatedly ignored to date, the situations are NOT the same. GW or a birth certificate are not sole islands of verification of events otherwise beyond personal experience. The Bible is precisely this.

His credentials are irrelevant. He is claiming a spiritual personal event that cannot be recorded, verified by others, or repeated.

Why would I believe this? Because of his scientific background? You know, the same background you rail against if the theories don't support your bias?

This is utter rubbish and you are a fool for reasserting it.

Your reasoning is the same as every other fundamentalist, and calling it 'reason' is being entirely too kind.

I told you you wouldn't believe it if I gave you someone's testimony in the here and now, so what chance does the Bible have?

You just choose not to believe, but you believe that George Washington existed because of documents that you cannot even prove weren't falsified or doctored.

You are missing my point.

Those living people could have lied to you, and been lying to you your whole life about where you were born, or who your parents are.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You don't get it? Its called logic.

No, it's called using your own flawed logic to show you how inconsistent you are being.

Well hey there JIA. Do you plan on answering my posts?

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
No, it's called using your own flawed logic to show you how inconsistent you are being.

First answer siriuswriter question.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
Well hey there JIA. Do you plan on answering my posts?

No.

You are mean to me.

I don't enjoy being victimized.

But I still love you with the love of the Lord and pray for you.

No hard feelings.

Have a good day!

Please, how am I being mean? In many threads, you challenge us as a forum to ask you anything, because your faith in God is so ultimate that you will be able to answer any/all of them.

Do I not fit in your "People who can be dismissed because they obviously don't believe in God,"/"People who can be dismissed because they're trolling" ultimatum? I'm asking intelligent questions, I'm remembering what you've said in the past so those questions don't have to reasked, I'm trying to figure out why you need to prove everything about God instead of just having faith in him... which I would understand. The Bible says that this is how Christ wants his people to be, not manic proselytizers, but people who ACT OUT "how" to be a Christian, because will the former just talks and talks, the latter actually makes the world a more "Christian" place.

Seriously, I'm trying to challenge you into stepping outside of your comfort zone, to think about things that maybe you're not used to thinking about.

How is this being mean? Do you think I'm the Devil's Instrument, trying to seduce you into a place of doubt? Do you think [like many Evangelicals] that women are somehow lesser than men and that we are induced to sin because of Eve? I'm completely curious, you have grabbed my attention with your efforts to not speak to me.

Also, I don't like being victimized either, which is what you write in lots of detail every day. You victimize all of us who don't believe exactly what you do. This is a chance to grow not only spiritually, but as a person...

Originally posted by Stealth Moose

Circular Reasoning

Your birth certificate says you were born in Timbuktu.

But how can you be sure that you were born in Timbuktu?

Because your birth certificate says so.

But why believe your birth certificate?

Because the doctor and those people (who have possibly conspired to keep the truth about where I was really born, and who my real family is) wouldn’t lie to me.

But how do you know that those people who call themselves your family wouldn’t lie to you?

Because the doctor and those people (who have possibly conspired to keep the truth about where I was really born, and who my real family is) wouldn’t lie to me.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
Please, how am I being mean? In many threads, you challenge us as a forum to ask you anything, because your faith in God is so ultimate that you will be able to answer any/all of them.

Do I not fit in your "People who can be dismissed because they obviously don't believe in God,"/"People who can be dismissed because they're trolling" ultimatum? I'm asking intelligent questions, I'm remembering what you've said in the past so those questions don't have to reasked, I'm trying to figure out why you need to prove everything about God instead of just having faith in him... which I would understand. The Bible says that this is how Christ wants his people to be, not manic proselytizers, but people who ACT OUT "how" to be a Christian, because will the former just talks and talks, the latter actually makes the world a more "Christian" place.

Seriously, I'm trying to challenge you into stepping outside of your comfort zone, to think about things that maybe you're not used to thinking about.

How is this being mean? Do you think I'm the Devil's Instrument, trying to seduce you into a place of doubt? Do you think [like many Evangelicals] that women are somehow lesser than men and that we are induced to sin because of Eve? I'm completely curious, you have grabbed my attention with your efforts to not speak to me.

Also, I don't like being victimized either, which is what you write in lots of detail every day. You victimize all of us who don't believe exactly what you do. This is a chance to grow not only spiritually, but as a person...

Hi.

😄

What a troll.

.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
[b]Dr. Donald Whitaker was a self-described, hardcore atheist when he slipped into eternity without Christ in his heart.

He was not an OBGYN.

You Googled the wrong Dr. Donald Whitaker.

The Dr. Donald Whitaker that I am talking about was a physician, with a PhD in Research-Science and Chemistry.

His life-after-death testimony can be found on YouTube.

He's wearing clear prescription glasses with a black rim, and sitting in a chair as he relates his testimony of what happened to him when he died from acute hemorrhagic necrotic pancreatitis in 1975. [/B]

Answer siriuswriter question first.