Forums → WEPR → Theism and Atheism
| 4668 | 1465484 |
I grew up atheist for 16 years. I had always kept an open mind towards religion, but never really felt a need to believe in it. My sister started going to a Wednesday night children's program at a church. Eventually, I was dragged into a Christmas Eve service. Scoffing, I reluctantly went, assuming that this was going to be a load of crap, but when I went, I felt something. Something that I've never felt before. I felt a sense of empowerment and a sense of calling. Jesus called upon my soul, just like he did with his disciples. he wanted me to follow him. Now, my life is being lived for Christ. He died on the cross for my sins, and the sins of everyone who believes in him. He was beaten, brutalized, struck with a whip 39 times, made to carry a cross up to the stage of his death. This I believe to be true, and I can never repay him for what he has done.
I still have my struggles with Christianity, but I've found this bit of information most useful. Religion is not comprehensible in the human mind, because we cannot comprehend the idea of a perfect and supreme being, a God, but we can believe it in our heart, and that's the idea of faith. Faith is, even though everything rides against me believing in Jesus, I still believe in him because I know that it's true in my heart. I invite my fellow Brothers and sisters of the LORD to talk about how Jesus has helped you in your life. No atheists and no insults please
- 4,668 Replies
Cite me for this please, otherwise this didn't happenI was asking to cite me. Well, taking embryonic stem cells involves death of an embryo, therefore it's like abortion, regardless of the method that resulted in a living embryo. Either this, or they take those that were aborted, thus implicitly encouraging people to do abortions. Both actions (making and encouraging abortion) are condemned, and the first one results in excommunication ipso facto.
here for a start
Who decides which hole?God decides of course. I told you it's a sin, this means an action against God's commandments. So, what's a sin and what is not a sin, it's up to God to decide, in any case.
CAnnibalism is supposed to be bad but anyway he could've just gotten flesh and blood from somewhere.He could, however the remainder of scientific data seems to be ignored by you. Weighing issues for example.
The lack of faith, and the flesh and blood once being bread and wine are all subjective claims. So really all we have is a monk with an unrealistic story and some flesh and blood. Nothing here demonstrates that it was once bread and wine. So your evidence is still subjective.What about other properties of flesh and blood, like remaining fresh and "alive" as to be ready for transfusion, for 1200 years?
He could, however the remainder of scientific data seems to be ignored by you. Weighing issues for example.
Can't seem to find a reliable source to confirm. Even the few sources on the link are pretty poor.
What about other properties of flesh and blood, like remaining fresh and "alive" as to be ready for transfusion, for 1200 years?
It doesn't say that and even so doesn't prove the claims made that it was once bread and wine.
It doesn't say that and even so doesn't prove the claims made that it was once bread and wine.Putting the question up front: Is THIS a miracle?
Putting the question up front: Is THIS a miracle?
What it is, is a completely ridiculous story.
Not a bad link, but still you did not answer E1337. As of now, there are rediculous claims and wrong morals running through Christianity and the end of that video says "If you deny Christ he will deny you also", well yeah, I deny him because the rules are dumb and actually prevent the bettering of ourselves. At the moment that's a standing argument.
- H
Still a ridiculous story. Some of the assertions being made such as it's connection with the shroud or that it couldn't have come from a corpse just because there were not preservatives seem very questionable. I have to wonder the video said Dr. Linoli was the only one to examine the relics, but later it says a scientific commission was appointed with over 500 examination conducted confirming Dr.Linoli's findings. If Dr.Linoli was the only one to examine the relics I don't see how his findings could be confirmed.
And yet again at best all the findings give us is the flesh and blood were human. The story that it was once bread and wine remains just that, a story. Your really trying to claim "ure freakin magic" here.
Don't you have God for that?
Yes, but because God is not an earthly being and it is very hard and confusing to "talk to" Him and it wouldn't be like talking to another person, you should have a human guide/advisor/mentor.
Yes, but because God is not an earthly being and it is very hard and confusing to "talk to" Him and it wouldn't be like talking to another person, you should have a human guide/advisor/mentor.
Shouldn't God be able to communicate to us in a way that isn't confusing?
Your beloved argument.
This is a video which says there is flesh and blood. No proof about bread and wine.
Yes, but because God is not an earthly being and it is very hard and confusing to "talk to" Him and it wouldn't be like talking to another person, you should have a human guide/advisor/mentor.
I never needed one. Well not a single one all the time but occasionally asking questions of them doesn't count as an actula mentor. And how come the pope doesn't need one.
And yet again at best all the findings give us is the flesh and blood were human. The story that it was once bread and wine remains just that, a story.Yes, I expect that the fact of transsubstantion is unverifiable from your POV by now, since you require proof, and evidence given does not suffice for you. You'd require a vid of that I think. Still, what about their condition after 1200 years of existance?
And how come the pope doesn't need one.Why, the Pope has advisors, all the bishops in case of something crucial, that's why the Ecumenical Councils are collected. Smaller matters can be solved within the Papal Curia, in prayers, investigations, consulting with all the sides, etc.
Still, what about their condition after 1200 years of existance?
Even assuming it is that old, nothing I wouldn't expect from tissue that has been well sealed up.
Even assuming it is that old, nothing I wouldn't expect from tissue that has been well sealed up.Let it be, even vacuumed, but a well sealed up living blood, that degrades in 42 days by medicinal standards? And here we have a blood that's in state like being ready for transfusion (all reactions seem to be in normal bounds), sealed for 1200 years.
Still, what about their condition after 1200 years of existance?
I have found no scientific research that concludes what they examined was 1200 years old, it is only the believe who believe it a miracle who say that.
You must be logged in to post a reply!