Aliens and the Bible

This is silly rob. How is your position different from his?
How is the human body the "most sophisticated vessel" in the universe? WHy can't there be more sophisticated vessels?
What is sosphisticated?
How does "virgin birth" qualify one for being an alien?
Why do the gospels talk of a human?
What evidence is there for the ascendence of this alien?
Do you have any outside (of the bible) corroboration of this alien and the things this alien did?Or is this all an assertion by the master theologaster rob?

anecdotes aren't evidence.How can we now that you did in fact meet 'the Christ' and not some figment of your imagination?By the way, I've born his name for nearly 20 years and have yet to meet him. Don't you think he could at least say hello to his bearer?Nice dodge. Answer my first post.

No need to. So? This doesn't prove that what you see isn't a figment of your imagination. Smeagol thinks Gollum is a different person. He talks to Gollum, and Gollum talks to Smeagol. Frodo can see Smeagol, and Sam can see Gollum. However, Smeagol doesn't see that Gollum isn't real. This doesn't make Gollum real. That is, it doesn't make Gollum separate from Smeagol--Gollum is Smeagol, Smeagol is Gollum.And no, the gospel is not the answer to my questions. Here they are again:
How is your position different from his?
How is the human body the "most sophisticated vessel" in the universe? WHy can't there be more sophisticated vessels?
What is sosphisticated?
How does "virgin birth" qualify one for being an alien?
Why do the gospels talk of a human?
What evidence is there for the ascendence of this alien?
Do you have any outside (of the bible) corroboration of this alien and the things this alien did?
Or is this all an assertion by the master theologaster rob?The gospel answers none of those questions (yes, even the one asking why the talk about a human instead of an alien).One final thing--you sold your soul. You exchanged everlasting obediance for an answer to a question man is capable of answering on his own. Congrats.

That's a screwy way to define a scientific endevour. Forget the faith part. evidence is not the result of testing and confirmation.Evidence is what you start with. You may not know what it is evidence for to begin with, but evidences are facts. Then you test an explanation of the facts. And if it's confirmed, you have a possible explanation for the facts.That's actually where your 'faith' would come in. For you, a good scheme would be like:
miracle (or fact) ->explanation? ->test explanation ->confirmed?->possible 'faith' explanation of miracle (or fact).

Way to totally miss the point of the analogy.Let me tell you in clear terms, since my analogy apparently went over your head. Smeagol thinks Gollum is real. Gollum isn't real. Gollum is a figment of Smeagol's imagination, but he doesn't see that.Rob thinks God is real. God isn't real. God is a figment of Rob's imagination, but he doesn't see that.The point was this--how can you tell it's not a figment of your imagination? You claimed that he was separate from you, and thus, real. Well, Smeagol claims the same about Gollum. How can Smeagol tell that Gollum isn't a figment of his imagination?The rest of your claptrap is, well, pointless. Congrats on creating yet another sermon about how I'm going to suffer and about how I really do want to believe but can't bring myself to believe. Edited by AdminPD, : Warning