Search results

And do you apply this same reasoning to Islam? Hinduism? The fact there are believers does not mean that the belief they hold is true.

Verifiable records of Jesus that come from the time when he actually lived. As in something where we can verify who wrote it and when. I mean, Jesus did a lot of miraculous stuff, like healing the blind, bringing the dead back to life. How is it that there is not a single verifiable record of...

So what? You think AI is some higher power? It's an advanced auto-complete, nothing more. I've seen it say there are only two Rs in the word strawberry, so don't pretend that it's some great intelligence that has access to a well of knowledge and understanding that we mere mortals don't have. I...

No, I'm saying that I find the evidence for Jesus that I have seen is quite lacking and I don't find it convincing.

Please tell me these witnesses. Do you mean the Gospels? How did you verify the authorship of them? Such as what? Can you show me any contemporary historical records? An investigative journalist? So he had no qualifications in any relevant field? Why does his opinion matter then? It's like...

What evidence is there for the existence of Jesus? Pretty much everything I have seen is people speaking after the fact and even they are just repeating what other people already believe. There's no contemporary accounts I am aware of. Are there any verifiable eyewitness accounts? Anything...

ChatGPT's ability to hallucinate is well known. If you haven't checked its claims against a valid source, then I wouldn't trust it for the truth. If you have checked the claims against valid evidence, why don't you present that instead of the cut and paste from ChatGPT? In any case, a...

I hardly think ChatGPT is going to give you an accurate reading of the Bible.

So your breain took a concept it was already aware of and used that in a dream that stemmed from your own imagination. I don't see how this can be connected to objective parallel worlds. At best, it's lucid dreaming.

Of course. Why would Christianity have the monopoly on gods?

Are you actuallky saying that imaginary friends are really just God in cosplay?

I think it depends. If there isn't much evidence one way or the other, then we can decide, perhaps based on whatever appeals most to us. For example, I choose to believe that I will still be alive in a week. But at a certain point, the amount of evidence leads to only one conclusion. If I go...

By this reasoniong, a child's imaginary friend is real if that imaginary friend helps that child through a difficult time.

And how is your understanding of it not the same thing as your definition of it?

First of all, how could you tell? If someone speaks of God, how do you tell if they are speaking of a God like the Abrahamic one or a more pantheistic idea of God? Secondly, the vast majority of religious people (at least in western society) are refering to a deity when they speak of God, not a...

I don't see how this address my point at all, which was that you claim that redefining things is wrong, yet you are doing it yourself.

So then we are agreed: God knows what would convince me. The next question is this: Is he capable of producing this evidence?

But you are redefining the name as well. You are redefining God to mean "The universe". We already have a name for the universe. That name is: "The Universe." Deciding that "God" is a better name for it is not justifiable (at least as far as I can see) for two reasons. First, you've provided...

Something which clearly violated things we know to be true. The moon turning into a disco ball, or something? But that could be explained away by aliens with sufficient technology. Maybe a bit in the Bible describing some scientific knowledge that is cl;ear about what it is talking about, but...

Why should the process by which something comes about determine how well that thing does something?