On Hell and Forgiveness

[Amarok]

Can you prove that?

Nobody outside of fundamentalist apologetic s believes otherwise

Road to Damascus.

That not an interaction with Jesus that's a story Paul wrote after his conversion 

LOL - it's unclear that there was a resurrection account before the earliest Christian documents?

And your ignorance of your very own religion of full display

---

1. For the first, you have otherwise sane witnesses attesting that they've experienced it, despite suffering from such attestation

Psychology disagrees with you .A person can be total rational the majority of the time and still have irrational experiences and attribute irrational believes to things they witnessed and again even sane people can be willing to die for a falsehood. 

2. For the second, you have no such witnesses

We don't need them for this to work 

The first is better supported than the second. You can choose not to believe either if you like, but to claim that there's no difference is ridiculous.

Nope there is nope difference one is just as indefensible as the other .

---

Can you prove that?


Road to Damascus.


LOL - it's unclear that there was a resurrection account before the earliest Christian documents?

Standard historical research into the documents proves what I said.

Paul's 'interaction' was certainly NOT with the Jesus of the gospels. It is much easier described as an epileptic fit.

It is unclear there was a resurrection story between the death of Jesus and the conversion of Paul.

Also there is zero evidence that Paul or any of the first gen Christians were killed for believing Jesus rose from the dead

[John V]

Standard historical research into the documents proves what I said.

Let's see the research.

Paul's 'interaction' was certainly NOT with the Jesus of the gospels.

Certain because you say so?

It is much easier described as an epileptic fit.

Doesn't sound like an epileptic fit to me.

It is unclear there was a resurrection story between the death of Jesus and the conversion of Paul.

NSS, the state of thought during undocumented times is necessarily unclear.

[RoadRunner79]

Standard historical research into the documents proves what I said.

Let's see the research.

Paul's 'interaction' was certainly NOT with the Jesus of the gospels.

Certain because you say so?

It is much easier described as an epileptic fit.

Doesn't sound like an epileptic fit to me.

It is unclear there was a resurrection story between the death of Jesus and the conversion of Paul.

NSS, the state of thought during undocumented times is necessarily unclear.

I don’t think that other people seeing and hearing as well; is coherent with an epileptic fit.

[polymath257]

Let's see the research.


Certain because you say so?


Doesn't sound like an epileptic fit to me.


NSS, the state of thought during undocumented times is necessarily unclear.

I don’t think that other people seeing and hearing as well; is coherent with an epileptic fit.

Which version of the story are you reading? The one where nobody else hears it or the one where they do?

[Amarok]

I don’t think that other people seeing and hearing as well; is coherent with an epileptic fit.

Which version of Pauls story

[RoadRunner79]

That’s because you have not really made an argument, but have just made statements. If you where making arguments for evolution, and I countered with non-sense about replacing evolution with garden gnomes and declaring it non-sense; I don’t think you would take it seriously. If you want to make a thread discussing the rationality of a paticular argument, then knock your socks off. I’m not impressed or interested in anything that you have presented this far, which is pretty much nothing.

In contrast to deities and garden gnomes, evolution has mountains of evidence that is testable, public, and a theory that is tested and can make predictions of future observations.

Neither the 'evidence' for deities nor for garden gnomes comes anywhere close to that for evolution. In fact, it isn't even nearly as good as the evidence for dark matter.

Pick whichever argument in favor of the existence of deities you please. In NO case does the supposed evidence weigh more than the evidence for garden gnomes.

You don’t seem to understand, you replace evolution with garden gnomes, and therefore it’s delisional. You can even throw in a “from the goo to the zoo” argument to drive the point home.

[Amarok]

Let's see the research.

You'll just deny it

Certain because you say so?

No because it is

Doesn't sound like an epileptic fit to me. 

Because you say so?

NSS, the state of thought during undocumented times is necessarily unclear.

Nope it's simply not

[RoadRunner79]

I don’t think that other people seeing and hearing as well; is coherent with an epileptic fit.

Which version of the story are you reading? The one where nobody else hears it or the one where they do?

Hear can have multiple meanings. Such as when Jesus said the they hear but do not hear. Or someone claims that you are not hearing them; meaning that you don’t understand. There is no issue there. In either case they saw the light and Paul talking with someone. Which doesn’t fit you epilepsy theory.

[Amarok]

Hear can have multiple meanings. Such as when Jesus said the they hear but do not hear. Or someone claims that you are not hearing them; meaning that you don’t understand. There is no issue there. In either case they saw the light and Paul talking with someone. Which doesn’t fit you epilepsy theory.

Nope that's just bullshit excuse making

[John V]

I don’t think that other people seeing and hearing as well; is coherent with an epileptic fit.

Yep, or being blinded until going to a certain person and having them pray for you, then regaining sight.

---

Believing that reality is bigger than the physical universe is not delusional.

What is there other than the physical universe? I’m genuinely curious.

God, heaven, angels, etc.