home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   alt.flame.jesus.christ      But... wasn't he a carpenter?      88,286 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 86,373 of 88,286   
   Malte Runz to All   
   Re: Undeniable ruination of news group a   
   05 Nov 14 22:02:32   
   
   XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
   From: malte_runz@forgitit.dk   
      
   "Bob Casanova"  skrev i meddelelsen   
   news:19ok5a1q93hi0ngk0uiem8fh0iuhktk3b4@4ax.com...   
   >   
   > On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 08:50:29 +1100, the following appeared   
   > in sci.skeptic, posted by felix_unger :   
   >   
   > >On 05-November-2014 12:57 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:   
   > >   
   > >> On Tue, 4 Nov 2014 00:32:39 +0100, the following appeared in   
   > >> sci.skeptic, posted by "Malte Runz"   
   > >> :   
   > >>   
   > >>> "Bob Casanova"  skrev i meddelelsen   
   > >>> news:oprc5a1ito4taguc3j971q5e913bi0ic3l@4ax.com...   
   > >>>> On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 23:32:20 +1100, the following appeared   
   > >>>> in sci.skeptic, posted by Sylvia Else   
   > >>>> :   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>>> On 1/11/2014 7:05 AM, The.W@tcher wrote:   
   > >>>>>> For years atheists have demanded what they call "evidence" of God's   
   > >>>>>> existence,   
   > >>>>>> when what they really have been demanding is proof. When presented   
   > >>>>>> with   
   > >>>>>> evidence   
   > >>>>>> of various types they dishonestly have denied the fact that it is   
   > >>>>>> evidence,   
   > >>>>> Care to list what you consider to be the evidence that's been   
   > >>>>> presented?   
   > >>>> Any bets on whether it consists of a combination of   
   > >>>> religious texts, number of believers and arguments from   
   > >>>> incredulity?   
   > >>> Don't forget the 'many documented miracles'.   
   > >> That, too.   
   > >   
   > >what are miracles evidence of it not that a miraculous event has   
   > >occurred?   
   >   
   > If there's no physical, objective evidence they occurred,   
   > they're evidence that someone thinks they occurred. As I   
   > noted elsethread, we have different definitions for   
   > "evidence", and mine doesn't include unsupported testimony.   
      
   Neither does mine. This one, on the other hand, is as close to actual proof   
   as one can get (most have probably seen it before):   
   http://tinyurl.com/jw5obm9   
      
   --   
   Malte Runz   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca