You can’t argue with someone about what they have seen. . People see many things. The miracle is not in what a person sees but in their interpretation of what they saw. No one can deny that I saw a cross in the sky. But the part that can be argued is that that cross is a sign from god telling me to go to war. If people do not differentiate between the phenomenon and my interpretation of that phenomenon, then they will say that I saw a miracle.

As human beings we approach the phenomenal world with a paradigm. If we believe god exists, we will interpret everything we see with a theistic paradigm. If we don’t believe in god, we will interpret everything we see with an atheistic paradigm.

Now the atheistic paradigm says there are natural causes for all phenomenon because all phenomenon occurs in the natural universe. We look for the cause in the same universe with the phenomenon. Once a natural cause is identified, no further assumptions are necessary.

The theist, however, cannot stop there. He must say no that’s just the method my god chose to accomplish that. The assumption is that once someone says god did something, it’s not possible to prove that he did not do it.

What kinda of hippy nonsense is this? Sure you can. You just ask them show me book chapter and verse that says a cross in the sky=war or ask them to show BCV that verifies anything they witnessed or experienced as being a 'miracle.' Their needs to be a biblical precedent for what they experienced otherwise their 'miracle' is not of God.

There are no miracles, dumbass.

A miracle would be if you grew up.

Can't disprove this, PRAISE JESUS !!!

Can't disprove a miracle. Can't prove it either.

As I always say, disprove Bugs Bunny visiting me the other day. It's me saying it, so it has to be right.

(March 8, 2016 at 10:58 am)Drich Wrote: What kinda of hippy nonsense is this? Sure you can. You just ask them show me book chapter and verse that says a cross in the sky=war or ask them to show BCV that verifies anything they witnessed or experienced as being a 'miracle.' Their needs to be a biblical precedent for what they experienced otherwise their 'miracle' is not of God.

bold mine.  For starters, it's "There" not "Their".  Now, for the rest of your post. The bible isn't proof of anything. And you know it. This has been argued to death with you and yet, you still refuse to accept that. The bible is a piece of literature that was written by man from copies of copies of copies of manuscripts that were NOT original. How can you still continue to believe that the bible is any sort of proof of a god?

(March 8, 2016 at 12:46 pm)Nymphadora Wrote:

(March 8, 2016 at 10:58 am)Drich Wrote: What kinda of hippy nonsense is this? Sure you can. You just ask them show me book chapter and verse that says a cross in the sky=war or ask them to show BCV that verifies anything they witnessed or experienced as being a 'miracle.' Their needs to be a biblical precedent for what they experienced otherwise their 'miracle' is not of God.

bold mine.  For starters, it's "There" not "Their".  Now, for the rest of your post. The bible isn't proof of anything. And you know it. This has been argued to death with you and yet, you still refuse to accept that. The bible is a piece of literature that was written by man from copies of copies of copies of manuscripts that were NOT original. How can you still continue to believe that the bible is any sort of proof of a god?

"There" is about physical location or existence. Location example: Dritch's bible is over there. Existence example: There are many people on this forum who disagree with Dritch.

"Their" is about possession. Example: Dritch and his wife are reading their bible.

"They're" means they are. Example: They're reading the bible.

Putting it all together now: They're reading their bible over there.

Maybe I can't but disproving it isn't my job. I'll just wait for theist to prove that whatever happened was "miracle".

Every single one of them uses the bible as their "proof".

"Miracle" is another superstitious bullshit word. YES people have "experiences", but that does not mean they understand the natural reasons of what they observed, they simply gap fill where answers lack.

50 million humans world wide die from everything on average per year. We die in child birth or childhood disease or famine. Humans of all ages die from disease and famine and natural disasters and crime and war. That is world wide every year from stillbirth to old age. Why isn't a "miracle" when people die?

If one passenger jet crashes and only 1 out of 300 survives, stupid humans call that a "miracle". If 299 people survive and 1 dies they also call that a "miracle". When does it cease to be a "miracle" when 150 survive and 150 die?

There is no magic to survival, if you made it it was do to countless multiple factors and conditions, if you die it is also from countless factors and conditions.

Especially with doctors, there is such a thing as misdiagnosis. If you survive there is no magic, you simply got lucky if it is a car or plane because of pilot/driver skill and construction of the plane/car and weather conditions angle of impact and speed.

But the bottom line is nobody survives death after they are dead. Stretching the window only means you got lucky. Once that window is gone and your body and brain are beyond repair, you don't come back. You either survive or you do not, and both have natural reasons.