Let's cut to the chase. Do you have any evidence?

[no evidence no belief]

I feel like we've been beating around the bush for... 6000 years!

Can you please either provide some evidence for your supernatural beliefs, or admit that you have no evidence?

If you believe there once was a talking donkey (Numbers 22) could you please provide evidence?

If you believe there once was a zombie invasion in Jerusalem (Mat 27) could you please provide evidence?

If you believe in the flying horse (Islam) could you please provide evidence?

Walking on water, virgin births, radioactive spiders who give you superpowers, turning water into wine, turning iron into gold, demons, goblins, ghosts, hobbits, elves, angels, unicorns and Santa.

Can you PLEASE provide evidence?

[Goat]

I'm sorry friend, there is no righteous person in this entire world that is not in need of the redemption offered through Christ.

"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus." (Romans 3:23-26)

All have sinned.
All come short.
No one is righteous.

Well, that is the statement of belief. That is what you believe, and you have been conditioned to see your experiences as.

However, what is NOT presented is, you know, evidence.

Is there anything you can 'present' that is not religious literature, dogma, propaganda, or 'personal testimony' that can not be independently verified?

[Sonofason]

I'm sorry friend, there is no righteous person in this entire world that is not in need of the redemption offered through Christ.

"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus." (Romans 3:23-26)

All have sinned.
All come short.
No one is righteous.

Well, that is the statement of belief. That is what you believe, and you have been conditioned to see your experiences as.

However, what is NOT presented is, you know, evidence.

Is there anything you can 'present' that is not religious literature, dogma, propaganda, or 'personal testimony' that can not be independently verified?

I'm sorry, but you are not qualified to determine what is and what is not evidence.
You are not qualified to determine that religious literature is not evidence.
You are not qualified to determine whether or not religious dogma is evidence.
You are not qualified to determine if propaganda, or personal testimony is evidence.
You are not qualified to determine what is and what is not independently verifiable.

[cnorman18]

I'm sorry, but you are not qualified to determine what is and what is not evidence.
You are not qualified to determine that religious literature is not evidence.
You are not qualified to determine whether or not religious dogma is evidence.
You are not qualified to determine if propaganda, or personal testimony is evidence.
You are not qualified to determine what is and what is not independently verifiable.

Um... The obvious question...

Are you?

[Sonofason]

I'm sorry, but you are not qualified to determine what is and what is not evidence.
You are not qualified to determine that religious literature is not evidence.
You are not qualified to determine whether or not religious dogma is evidence.
You are not qualified to determine if propaganda, or personal testimony is evidence.
You are not qualified to determine what is and what is not independently verifiable.

Um... The obvious question...

Are you?

Well of course I am. But when people start tossing out evidences that they don't particularly like, then I know that they are not qualified to determine what evidence is.

[Star]

Has anyone seen NENB around, or NEBE, as I affectionately call him (NoEvidenceBringEvidence)

Nebe's question from assisigirl


What did you know about Balaam's Donkey, before you included it in your OP.
(nothing/something/a lot/wrote a book about it, what?)

Is this what you're referring to?

Balaams Donkey

21 Balaam got up in the morning, saddled his donkey and went with the Moabite officials. 22 But God was very angry when he went, and the angel of the Lord stood in the road to oppose him. Balaam was riding on his donkey, and his two servants were with him. 23 When the donkey saw the angel of the Lord standing in the road with a drawn sword in his hand, it turned off the road into a field. Balaam beat it to get it back on the road.

24 Then the angel of the Lord stood in a narrow path through the vineyards, with walls on both sides. 25 When the donkey saw the angel of the Lord, it pressed close to the wall, crushing Balaams foot against it. So he beat the donkey again.

26 Then the angel of the Lord moved on ahead and stood in a narrow place where there was no room to turn, either to the right or to the left. 27 When the donkey saw the angel of the Lord, it lay down under Balaam, and he was angry and beat it with his staff. 28 Then the Lord opened the donkeys mouth, and it said to Balaam, What have I done to you to make you beat me these three times?

29 Balaam answered the donkey, You have made a fool of me! If only I had a sword in my hand, I would kill you right now.

30 The donkey said to Balaam, Am I not your own donkey, which you have always ridden, to this day? Have I been in the habit of doing this to you?

No, he said.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se ... ersion=NIV

[Danmark]

I'm sorry, but you are not qualified to determine what is and what is not evidence.
You are not qualified to determine that religious literature is not evidence.
You are not qualified to determine whether or not religious dogma is evidence.
You are not qualified to determine if propaganda, or personal testimony is evidence.
You are not qualified to determine what is and what is not independently verifiable.

Um... The obvious question...

Are you?

Well of course I am. But when people start tossing out evidences that they don't particularly like, then I know that they are not qualified to determine what evidence is.

Please explain why you are more qualified, or qualified at all to determine:

... what is and what is not evidence?
... that religious literature is not evidence?
... whether or not religious dogma is evidence?
... if propaganda, or personal testimony is evidence?
... what is and what is not independently verifiable?

It is a very bold and self serving statement to claim you are qualified and even a greater claim to assert you are more qualified than Dr. Norman.

What is your basis for these claims?

[no evidence no belief]

[Replying to post 2149 by no evidence no belief]

The believers do not have to prove the stabilizer. the confirmed fact , the existence of God

[36. Or did they create the heavens and the earth? Nay, but they have no firm Belief.37. Or are with them the treasures of your Lord? Or are they the tyrants with the authority to do as they like? ]



[53. We will show them Our Signs in the universe, and in their ownselves, until it becomes manifest to them that this (the Qur'an) is the truth. Is it not sufficient in regard to your Lord that He is a Witness over all things? ]

Again, you are absolutely welcome to go to as many Star Wars conventions as you want. You are welcome to dress up as Princess Leia, Yoda, or Luke Skywalker. You are welcome to enter debates with your friends about who is stronger, Obi Won Kenobi or Ironman, Yoda or Spiderman, Darth Vedar or the Hulk. You can quote from comic books or movie scripts or whatever. Have fun.

But if you want to convince anybody that al this fun stuff is real as opposed to being fiction, you have to provide evidence, ok?

[micatala]

Dishonestly - saying you answered when you did not. Comparing religion to taste of chocolate or ice scream.

Moderator Comment

Do not throw around accusations of dishonesty. If you think a member did not answer a question, simply point out the details without making inferences of nefarious intention.



Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Sonofason]

I'm sorry, but you are not qualified to determine what is and what is not evidence.
You are not qualified to determine that religious literature is not evidence.
You are not qualified to determine whether or not religious dogma is evidence.
You are not qualified to determine if propaganda, or personal testimony is evidence.
You are not qualified to determine what is and what is not independently verifiable.

Um... The obvious question...

Are you?

Well of course I am. But when people start tossing out evidences that they don't particularly like, then I know that they are not qualified to determine what evidence is.

Please explain why you are more qualified, or qualified at all to determine:

... what is and what is not evidence?
... that religious literature is not evidence?
... whether or not religious dogma is evidence?
... if propaganda, or personal testimony is evidence?
... what is and what is not independently verifiable?

It is a very bold and self serving statement to claim you are qualified and even a greater claim to assert you are more qualified than Dr. Norman.

What is your basis for these claims?

Dear Danmark
Sonofason had written:

I'm sorry friend, there is no righteous person in this entire world that is not in need of the redemption offered through Christ.

"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus." (Romans 3:23-26)

All have sinned.
All come short.
No one is righteous.

And then Goat wrote:

Well, that is the statement of belief. That is what you believe, and you have been conditioned to see your experiences as.

However, what is NOT presented is, you know, evidence.

Is there anything you can 'present' that is not religious literature, dogma, propaganda, or 'personal testimony' that can not be independently verified?

And then Sonofason wrote to Goat:

I'm sorry, but you are not qualified to determine what is and what is not evidence.
You are not qualified to determine that religious literature is not evidence.
You are not qualified to determine whether or not religious dogma is evidence.
You are not qualified to determine if propaganda, or personal testimony is evidence.
You are not qualified to determine what is and what is not independently verifiable.

And then cnorman18 wrote:

Um... The obvious question...

Are you?

To which Sonofason responded:

Well of course I am. But when people start tossing out evidences that they don't particularly like, then I know that they are not qualified to determine what evidence is.

To which for some reason YOU wrote:

It is a very bold and self serving statement to claim you are qualified and even a greater claim to assert you are more qualified than Dr. Norman.

Please now show where I made a self serving statement claiming in any way whatsoever that I am more qualified than cnorman18. I think you should pay better attention to what's going on here.
Wake up.

[cnorman18]

Um, just a guess, Sonofason -- but by any chance, did you mean to write, "Well, of course I am not"? That would clear this up nicely.

By the way, I am not a "doctor" of anything. I was tempted to say "I just play one on the Internet," but that joke might have been misunderstood. I've never claimed to hold a doctorate.