Comments on: Grief without God is a challenge for unbelievers

By: Esther

Esther — Tue, 30 Oct 2012 03:51:00 +0000

Hi Joe, Yes, Jeff is the epitome of a realist. Are you still mad at me getting my doctorate and have you looked up Westminster in PA, try Beale?

By: Bodey042

Bodey042 — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 18:34:58 +0000

As I stated earlier, you are wrong. The fallacy of your argument is that the 20 foot squirrel is not an accepted truth. You are claiming that an organism which is universally accepted to be nonexistent indeed exists. It is for the individual posing the challenge to demonstrate that his or her challenge is valid. You challenge the faith of a multitude of believers. It is YOUR responsibility to demonstrate that the existence of that which science can not observe or measure does not exist. I cannot observe the wind directly. I can only measure its effects. Does the wind therefore not exist? By your logic that would be a reasonable conclusion. Except, we know the wind does exist. So your logic is therefore flawed.

By: Bodey042

Bodey042 — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 18:26:49 +0000

Again you are wrong! Talk to a scientist who espouses evolution and they are convinced their assertions are correct and the only valid viewpoint. You are no better in that you leave no room for even the possibility that you are wrong.

So much for the objectivity of the scientific mind.

By: Bodey042

Bodey042 — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 12:41:33 +0000

That is where you are most certainly wrong. Any time a challenge is mounted against the status quo, it becomes the responsibility of the challenger to demonstrate the challenge is even worthy of consideration. Even the great scientific minds of the past understood this to be true.

Protocol was never the problem. The problem comes when enough factual evidence is presented, yet the establishment continues to hide behind doctrine as in the case of Galileo Galilei.

You claim that no evidence has every been sufficiently demonstrate the existence of an afterlife let alone the existence of any Diety (no just the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob). I suggest plenty of evidence has been offered. Not just on this board but on the other boards of which you are no doubt a member and in life in general.

The problem is not with the evidence. The problem is with the mind considering the evidence. You maintain that any evidence presented is invalid. Well, just as you question the evidence; members of this and any other forum are proper in questioning your objectivity. I would maintain you are not being objective.

In this you are certainly no better than another former member of this forum with whom I believe you are aquainted: msamericanpatriot. Each of you close minded. Each of you lacking objectivity. And as you demonstrated quite well in another thread: each of you quite willing to descend into character assassination and insults.

By: ned kelly

ned kelly — Wed, 22 Feb 2012 08:29:02 +0000

yes babies and young people do grow and learn in paradise . as for relatives hopefully they will change for the better as we change for the better.

By: Michael G.

Michael G. — Wed, 22 Feb 2012 03:44:54 +0000

Heaven and Hell exist outside time and space. That's why you don't know where they are.

By: Michael G.

Michael G. — Wed, 22 Feb 2012 03:43:47 +0000

That's one thing. I thought it might be a Test Pattern, and have to watch that for Eternity.
Or how about Bill Mahre?

By: Michael G.

Michael G. — Wed, 22 Feb 2012 02:31:23 +0000

So have I. I know for a fact that Eternity is real; I've seen it; not in a way Jeff would accept, but it is real just the same.

By: Michael G.

Michael G. — Wed, 22 Feb 2012 02:27:56 +0000

A little 'Tough Love' Huh?