I Know That God Does Not Exist

So much for witness evidence. Might as well just assume nobody ever tells the truth about anything they experience that you can't prove yourself. But of course you only disbelieve the things that oppose your bias. There's an example of irrationality for you. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Your "facts" are just fallen human cogitations and they violate God's revelation so they aren't facts at all. I do care though, too bad humanity keeps getting things wrong. It's very sad.

How much you think you know with your fallen mind.I've got a ton of independent corroboration. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

if all you've got is eyewitness testimony that's what even the courts have to go by. You do your best to discover which is the most trustworthy. Throwing it all out would be truly irrational.

Looked it up. No Buddhists did that, only Hindus and they attacked Buddhist shrines. Hindus today are continuing to attack those they object to, particularly Christians in India.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I do have a ton of independent corroboration for my claims about Christianity. Yes I do.And as for claiming to be right and the rest of the world wrong, the point is that I'mn the only YEC on the thread and I'm not going to give up my observations just because everybody else subscribes to the establishment OE/ToE point of view. I don't think that's quite the same thing. And I've often accepted something said by the opposition, but only when it supports my view of course.The Flood is right and the Old Earth is wrong. That's not me, that's an independent source.ABE: I do think that anyone with an independent fair mind would have to agree with me about most of it.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Not ONE eyewitness. You need a number of eyewitnesses to make a case. But in the usual court case these days witnesses are not all you have anyway. But the Bible ONLY has witnesses to the evidence for the reality of God and His nature. You believe them or you don't.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Well no. But there must be SOME independent fair minded people out there somewhere.But your description is kind of like how to you an independent source is another biased OE/ToE believer whose bias is shared by the whole Scientific Community. Well, no it wouldn't because they absolutely could not entertain for half a minute that any argument for the Flood could be right. They wouldn't even give it a thought. At all. About anything. They are committed to the establishment view. That is not an independent mind. Exactly. Neither independent nor fair.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Yes the papacy lost its power to do that at the Protestant Reformation. But if the Protestant Reformation hadn't defanged the Roman papal system there would never have been any secular humanism. Besides which the Reformation itself stopped the burnings at the stake and created modern civilization, and gave us the Constitution of the US.. I don't identify with the Republican party for your information.However, the papacy is still working on getting its political power back and if they ever do THEY might indeed burn you at the stake, and me as well. Actually they'd probably start with me. Be careful who you call evil because if you are wrong it's the "good guys" in your opinion who are going to turn on you.For all your study of history you sure didn't learn much that matters. But then that's typical for secular education.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You think any of them dispute the OE/ToE?

It's because they THINK there's evidence, but there really isn't much.But you were the one who said it wouldn't be possible to get the whole scientific community to share the same bias. But obviously they do. And of course it's bias. And so is the belief that they have evidence. They ASSUME they have evidence, they rarely check it out, and they certainly don't pay any attention to a YEC.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I'm aware of a few, very few, Protestant punishments of heretics, such as of the Anabaptists, which were soon after soundly repudiated. Interesting that when I google it, trying all sorts of ways to say "Punishment of heretics BY PROTESTANTS" I get lots of entries about Protestants BEING punished by Catholics. Since that reflects my own understanding I think it a lot truer than the claim that Protestants did the same. I know they did in very few situations. It was far less Protestant policy than a sort of holdover from their Catholic days that eventually was completely rejected.So since you are so convinced and call me ignorant for my view of it, please prove your accusation. Article about the Anabaptists at Wikipedia blurs together persecutions by Protestants and Catholics so it's hard to tell exactly what the role of Protestants was. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You say my view is "known to be crap" but I'd guess you don't even know what my view is. It's absolutely unique to me so how could it be "known to be crap?" As usual I doubt anybody really gets what my view is. They always say they do but they really don't. And I'm VERY sure YOU don't.

An established scientific position recognized around the world is not a conspiracy.

Thank you for giving evidence.Comte has no understanding of the actual historical situation. Just calling the Roman Church "the old established Christian Church" shows his total ignorance of the issues. The Reformation had exposed Catholicism as paganism rather than Christianity, paganism with a few remnants of Christianity thrown in so that there could actually be some Christians among them, without which there couldn't have been a Reformation at all since they were able to recognize the antichristian nature of Romanism by studying the Bible. And they exposed the papal system as the heir of the Roman pagan religions in complete contradiction with Christianity. The garb worn by the Pope and the priests of Romanism was, and is, the same garb worn by the priests of the pagan religions. It has absolutely zero relation to anything Christian. Also, Comte says this supposed original Christian Church goes back 1500 years, which it still claims to itself, but the fact is that the papacy was established in 606 AD by the Byzantine emperor Phocas, calling the Bishop of Rome the supreme bishop, and it was Pope Gregory who declared that such a designation made the Pope the antichrist. Which became a theme of the Reformation as one by one the Reformers recognized the doctrines of Rome to be the doctrines of the Antichrist. Including the forbidding of meats, so that they had fish on Friday, and the requirement of celibacy for their priests and nuns, which became the cause of all the sexual explotation they are now known for. Those two doctrines are specifically identified in the Bible as the marks of a false teacher.As for the Protestant persecutions, Comte doesn't spell them out and neither do you. There were a few that were soundly denounced by the Protestants in later years because they WERE violations of their own doctrine. But there is nothing in them to compare with the Roman Inquisitions which, according to the estimate of Plaisted, over 600 years murdered some 67 million "heretics" of which 50 million were dissidents against Romanism the Reformers recognized as early Protestants. Protestant persecutions of heretics were considered to be mistakes even by many Protestant leaders at the time but now universally by Protestantism at large. But Catholicism has never repudiated their Inquisition, it is still on their books and ready to be revived as needed. One Pope made a phony "apology" in which he blamed the Catholic people for what was actually the work of the papacy of which the people were largely ignorant.So what I said originally is true. You would not be burned at the stake by any Protestants but if they ever get their power back it might happen at the hands of the Roman Catholics. Not too likely in America where they have been tamed by the Protestant influence and by American patriotism, but there are still Catholic murders of Protestants in third world Catholic countries, in South America for instance. As late as the late nineteenth century the general Garibaldi discovered torture dungeons in the Vatican when he took the city of Rome, where the Inquisition was still being practiced in secret. There is reason to believe it still persists in secrecy in some Catholic countries.I don't have quotes to offer but on this page you'll find a list of books in which this sort of information can be found:Roman Catholicism & Other Antichrists & ApostasiesEdited by Faith, : No reason given.