>a man or a woman who is a ventriloquist or a charmer shall surely be put to death
>>18525413Sounds based, what's the problem?
>>18525418I wish it were more common Christian knowledge that Edgar Bergen is burning in hell right alongside Hitler and Jack the Ripper.
If Jesus weren't the son of Pantera, he wouldn't be the son of Pantera. But he was the son of Pantera, and therefore was the son of Pantera.
>>18525441Thanks, schizo.
>>18525413>>18525436It doesn't mean a puppeteer or anything like that, it means a channeler of spirits or speaker for the dead. Mong.
>>18525413if clowns were added to the list nobody would protest
>>18525513Sounds a lot like exorcists and speakers in tongues.
>>18525519Oh yeah, exactly. If I didn't know what those words meant, I'd totally agree with you.
>>18525519You should study with a guide if you're new to this, so you don't get confused - not trying to be insulting, I'm just genuinely saying this, you will often get confused if you lack context. Exorcism and speaking in tongues use divine power coming from God, so they're sanctioned. But things like necromancy or witchcraft use evil/demonic "magic" which is ungodly and therefore dangerous and unsanctioned. It's like how raising a soulless corpse for a minion considered unholy, but using God's divine force to resurrect a person with their whole body and soul intact is considered holy and pure.Even if you played an RPG, something like World of Warcraft, you should understand these concepts. Like the difference in power source between a warlock and a paladin. You seem new to it all.
>>18525543>bro it's the vibes kwim
>>18525548Sorry, I didn't realize you were of African-American descent and couldn't understand the White Man's tongue, let me translate:>ay bruh dat satanic shih corny af bruh ion fw dat, but dat divine shih bussin' ong
>>18525563Thank you for your service, anon
>>18525543>Exorcism and speaking in tongues use divine power coming from God, so they're sanctioned. But things like necromancy or witchcraft use evil/demonic "magic" which is ungodly and therefore dangerous and unsanctioned. It's like how raising a soulless corpse for a minion considered unholy, but using God's divine force to resurrect a person with their whole body and soul intact is considered holy and pure.Nigga none of that shit is real those are spells from videogames. >Jesus likes it when you cast cure spells but resurrection tomes and necromancy cantrips send you straight to hell
>>18525513Doesn’t Samuel or whoever actually contact one of those though?
>>18525608>Jesus likes it when you give Him His due and trust Him with your problems but trusting exclusively in your own power and demonic forces separates you from Him.Yeah.
>>18525618But magic doesn't work. It's not real. Even if you sacrifice a goat and light candles you can't do magic. You understand this right?
>>18525631You cannot comprehend higher things. You're like an animal. How sad.
>>18525644Okay then, show me proof of some magic.
>>18525650Burden of proof is on you. You made the claim that it doesn't exist. Defend it.
>>18525650magical footjob from beato's pillowy witch soles
>>18525413that surely is a translation mistake. it probably meant original posters instead.
>>18525650>Okay then, show me proof of some magic.Start praying earnestly and you'll see proof of higher things.
>>18525660Russel's teapot. The burden of proof lies with the one making an unfalsifiable claim. You claim that magic is real and ask me to disprove it. It's your responsibility to show me magic or you forfeit this contest.>>18525669About how long does that take, and are the signs incapable of being misinterpreted as mere coincidence or wishful thinking?>>18525661Hot, but you have to acknowledge that Beato is a man.
>>18525673>About how long does that take, and are the signs incapable of being misinterpreted as mere coincidence or wishful thinking?It varies. To be safe, give it a few months. Conduct the experiment and find out.
>Russel's teapot. The burden of proof lies with the one making an unfalsifiable claim.
>>18525690Yes, you need to provide some kind of evidence for the existence of magic or god. You can't ask people to falsify unfalsifiable claims. That would be like me saying "Vampires are real unless you prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they couldn't possibly exist.">>18525686If the only way to witness the power of prayer is to sincerely believe in it then how can you tell what really is and isn't an act of god?
>>18525712Yes. I'm still waiting for proof of magic, spells, demons, whatever.
>>18525732I don't believe in magic, spells, demons, whatever. I believe in your damaged chromosomes and I believe in eugenics.
>>18525732Proof of the unverifiable claim that beliefs need proof?
>>18525708>If the only way to witness the power of prayer is to sincerely believe in it then how can you tell what really is and isn't an act of god?That doesn't sound like honest experimentation to me, anon.
>>18525712Literally yes. What's so retarded to understand about this basic truth?You obviously don't believe in magic invisible unicorns because it's unfalsifiable, so why would your god be any different?
>>18525740If you're the original poster I was replying to then you're lying. You talk about magic and exorcisms here >>18525543 >>18525746If you want your belief to be taken seriously you should provide some kind of evidence to convince others. Otherwise there's nothing separating your belief from pure fiction. I could say "I'm capable of floating in the air" and refuse to do it or prove it, and since nobody can DISprove that I can float by your logic you would have to assume that I really can float in the air.>>18525747It just doesn't add up. In order to witness proof of god's existence I have to sincerely believe, silence all doubt, do it honestly without any ulterior motive or design, and have that faith for a long amount of time. So to prove Heaven's gate is lying, I would have to sincerely join and believe in Heaven's gate? And the same goes with Scientology? And Islam?
>>18525708>"Vampires are real unless you prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they couldn't possibly exist."Yes, actually. That's how shit works.
>>18525513>it doesn't mean what it says it means something completely different!!!!!!!Cope. Seethe.
>>18526112>most intelligent atheist
>>18526102In order to prove something is true or real, you must construct a witness (an example) as a reference. This is standard constructive logic, which is the standard in modern computer science, philosophy, physics, logic, etc.
>>18526699I love how this shit for brains (you're extremely easy to see) has one of the lowest IQs of the regular posters on this board, but says that atheists can't reason or are low IQ (despite atheists being the highest IQ demographic and christians being unable to reason)
>>18526708>everyone who can plainly see what a clueless ignorant retard I am is... LE SAME PERSONMeds time.
>>18526702Let me put it to you this way. If I have seen a gorilla and you have not, and I tell you gorillas exist, you are fully within your rights to say, >"UM, PROOF!? EXACTLY! YOU HAVE NO PROOF, SO THEY DON'T EXIST!" But you're still wrong because regardless of whether or not someone presents you with evidence you find acceptable, gorillas still exist.In this anon's case>>18525759Somebody said, "Hey, go to the jungle and wait around, that's how you find gorillas."To which he replied, "So if I want to prove fish exist I have to go live in the ocean? I have to fly to prove birds exist!?"It's a ridiculous length to go to just to avoid engaging, and it's extremely retarded. Don't be extremely retarded, you were given a mind for a reason. Don't squander it thinking you've already maxed it out.
>>18526721No, you'd be able to provide evidence for the Gorilla. You can't do so with god because there is no actual evidence for it. You or someone would have presented it at this point, like they have for Gorillas.You're correct about the specific example of the jungle and the sea, but you're wrong about the general principle. There is no evidence whatsoever for God, and not you nor any person in history has every presented any. This doesn't apply to jungles, or fish, or gorillas, or the sea. God still doesn't exist and you (and everyone else) still has no evidence for it.
>>18525441Oh I think you mean Pantera raped Jesus? That makes sense.
>>18527362>Reading comprehension below 6th grade level.Statistically, there was a 1/3 chance of this happening, so I forgive you.
>>18527527It's 54% IIRC, so more likely than not that any random person you're arguing with on this site isn't going to have the reading comprehension to capture your meaning.
>>18526721There's evidence you can use to prove the existence of gorillas without ever seeing one in person. There is no evidence for the existence of miracles, because the only evidence is faith. With a Gorilla I can see it move around, sleep, eat a banana, etc. Where's the evidence of miracles?>Someone had a near death experience and said they saw heaven>There's an object that sort of looks like jesus in a Peruvian village>150 years ago a kid in a small rural town said they saw the virgin mary and everyone started freaking out>I prayed for good fortune and won 200 dollars on online slots
>>18527559>t. Functional illiterate
>>18527362>>18527559Hey illiterates, the situations was:>If I have seen a gorilla and you have not, and I tell you gorillas existIn this scenario, you're not being given evidence for gorillas.You retards are just doing the "But I did eat breakfast" meme
>>18527527>>18527536>>18527564>>18527573They're not illiterate anons, they're struggling with abstract and conditional reasoning. It's a fair supposition that most people hell-bent on naturalist philosophy do, accepting only that which they can personally see and verify.
>>18527573>In this scenario, you're not being given evidence for gorillas.No I'm not being given evidence for the existence of god by you right now. Your hypothetical gorilla scenario sucks, do you have evidence for god or not beyond "uhh just become a sincere christian and it will all make sense."
>>18527580>But I did eat breakfast.
>>18525613King Saul in a long line of sinful decisions goes to a witch who claims to talk to spirits. He asks her to talk to the spirit of Samuel the prophet, so to punish Saul God sends Samuel down to give King Saul a rollicking for consulting mediums. The witch is scared half to death by this ordeal (implying she was a fraud anyway) and kicks King Saul out of her house.The lesson is we should pray to God directly and follow his commands, don’t go to the occult for guidance, because it doesn’t work, and even if it does, it’s not going to be for your benefit.
