n8nrgmi

i have witnessed unverified conjecture of the supernatural.in others 

there was a few things at a church of the holy spirit type place.

-one, my friend said he had a cracked spine that hurt sometimes, but he said at a healing service we were at that he didn't hurt no more and the crack was gone. i can't verify it though and am not sure what to believe.

-once i saw someone speaking in tongues and someone responding to them in plain english as if that person understood the tongue speak. it didn't go on long enough to verify that they understood tongue speak. i guess it's possible i understood the second person as if they were really speaking in tongues, now that i think about it.... but i doubt it. 

-there were prophets that gave anyone a prophecy if they wanted it. their words were too ambiguous to tell if they were accurate and specific to each person's situation, but they did seem to be in the abstract. 

once someone i know was dying of cancer and was on his death bed and said he saw jesus coming off the cross to get him. but he was doped up on drugs so it's hard to say. 

i have not had anything supernatural, but i have had intense emotional experiences that i call spiritual. once my soul felt like it was dancing while in church on a random day, it was ecstatic. things were clear as normal but felt like all was one. it's hard to explain. another time i was studying 'christus victor' view of atonement with christianity, and i had an overwhelming feeling of liberation and love wash over me as i realized that the essence of the gospel good news of Jesus is that love conquers death

i am not as new age or spiritual as eternal view, but my screen name means 'innate energy' because i can be esoteric in a spiritual way as well. 

i can't prove it, but i suspect humans will never create consciousness. they may mimic it with AI, but it won't be self aware and free thinking and philosophical. 

so you honestly think humans are just advanced robots? doesn't that rub against your common sense, or intuition? do you have intuition that says humans might more than just robots but you trump it with your (poorly formed) logic? 

how do you view NDEs? hallucinations? if they're hallucinations why aren't the experiences just random like a drug trip? how can there be such consistency with them with common elements such as meeting dead relatives, going through a tunnel, meeting a being of light, having a life review etc? you seriously think there's a death story embedded in our brain or in our genes? how far fetched is that? how do you explain it happening the in the same way to kids and people who've never heard of them? that's not even getting into the out of body experience evidence out there. 

if you don't believe in god or a higher power, then you must think that this world and its creatures are just robots from cause and effect chemical reactions. i suppose this is another way of saying can atheists, and how many are there, believe in free will in a deeper sense than we are free to make choices that are based on cause and effect chemical reactions?

it's not exhaustive proof of God, and is sort of like the complexity argument for God. but i dont know how you can look at humans and think we're just robots. it lacks common sense. 

so are you guys saying people from shit hole countries should always have their opinions tied to their homeland even if they were born here and are removed from their ancestry? 

i can't assume trump didn't know they were from shit hole countries, but superficially looking at it, id say it's probably the best bet. 

i think this is where gray parrot says he'd call out white people from shit hole countries too. of course this ignores the fact that parrot was just saying most african countries are shit holes and he was implying it's safe to assume people of color are from shit holes. can't get a straight or reasonable answer from him, so it's probably not worth trying. 

i'm not PC dude either. i dont want immigrants from shit hole countries, and i agree the race card and racism is thrown around too much and unjustifiably too. but you have to draw the line somewhere. 

you can't judge a book by its cover, which is what you are doing by saying it's okay to make those comments on the basis of race alone. you're the one using race in an unjustifiable way here, not me. that's why it's racist. 

i disagree. even if trump was right that they came from shit holes doesnt mean it's safe to assume it based on their skin color. it's still a racist thing to do.... what if he turned out to be wrong? you claim to judge each country individually so it's not reasonable for you to think otherwise. 

cruz and even that ambassador weren't born here. plus they were in situations where their home country was at issue. completely different than the squad situation, cause most of them were born here and there was no reason to link them with their home countries other than race.  

what the british ambassador born in the usa?  that sounds like a unique position where he'd be associated with britian too. those women had no reason to associate them with their ancestoral country 

how do you know that trump knew the country of origin of each of them? that seems far fetched. just because you could know the info doesn't mean you would, especially someone like trump 

why doesn't trump say those sorts of things to white people from shitty countries? 

if you judge each country individually, how can you think it's fair to just take a group of colored skinned people and tell them to go home if you disagree with them when you know nothing about their country of origin, when he doesn't do the same to whites? 

why doesn't he tell white people to go to their ancesteral country and try their ideas out? colored skin countries suck?

plus another thing you and gray parrot are overlooking is that probably more colored skin countries are pure free market than anything 

non white countries suck? how is this not an accurate assessment of your views? what colors of skin do you make exceptions for? asians maybe? 

plus, cortez at least isn't african descent.

sounds like you think it's fair to tell anyone with colored skin (or what colors of skin do you make exceptions for?) that you disagree with to shut up or go try their ideas out in their ancesteral country. i'm trying to state that in the nicest way possible to make your point, but it still is racist. 

so the opinions of black people don't matter given african is a mix of socialism and capitalism? or, black people cant have opinions that differ from you? 

as i said, african countries have both pure free market and some socialism. it's a mix. so you are basically telling any black person who disagrees with you to shut up about america or go back to their home country? and if a leftist disagrees with them shouldn't it also be fair to tell them to shut up or go home? black people can't have opinions? or at the very least they can't disagree with you? 

i dont think african country equates to socialism which is what trump would complain about. a lot of those places are free market to the point of starvation. 

so basically, you think african american's who were born here cannot have valid opinions? we should believe they should shut up and enjoy america or go back to their ancesters' origin?

"Newsflash, it's okay to call someone an asshole for their behavior and not care anything about their skin color."

if he doesn't care about skin color, why does he only say these things to black people who are critical of the usa? you think it's fair to assume all countries with black skin are shit holes? 

is it fair to tell any african american who was born here to go back to their shit hole ancesteral country if you disagree with them politically?

i assume there's no evidence that the women came from specifically bad countries, other than the fact they are black. it's fair to point out that black countries are often shitholes, but the women were born here so there's no reason to assume you should tell them to 'go back' and not all black countries are shit holes.

or, is it fair to tell any african american who was born here to go back to their shit hole ancesteral country if you disagree with them?

how did those women act like they were from another country, besides their skin color?  

if it's because they have ideas critical of the usa, how are they any more critical of the usa than white people who trump himself? 

if it's because they have ideas critical of the usa, why doesn't trump assume white people who are critical of the usa are not from here? 

trump wouldn't have said those sorts of things to white people who were born here, and you've shown no indication that he has or would have

i can't make it any simpler.

all the hoops you jump through to suck his dick are on you 

"go back... from where they came" = something he'd never just assume to say to white people

i guess it's not as racist as i thought, but trump is still singling them out to go back from where they came, which he would never do with white people who were born here. ted cruz, as ive said repeatedly, wasn't born here, and it was an open question about whether he could even be president at the time he was running. 

actually now that above poster has put the quotes in context, it may not have been racist after all. 

have you noticed you're the only one with the cockamamie theory that trump was only referring to the person that wasn't born here? dont you think it's weird that no one in the media or fox news or even trump himself is making that argument? it's obvious you're making things up 

it doesn't make sense to tell someone to go back to their home country if they were born here, but that's what trump did. if you think it doesn't make sense, it's because you refuse to see trump singling people out based on their skin color. 

because it's not racist to criticize someone for the economic agenda if it has nothing to do with their skin. trump singled those women out based on their skin color, which is obvious by the context of the stiaution. he wouldn't have said it to white people, and none of you trump dick suckers have shown otherwise. 

you're just making things up to suit your agenda. he was talking to all of them. he wouldn't have said those things to white people. this is the reality you refuse to acknowledge. 

ted cruz wasn't even born in the usa. it was an open question whether he was even eligible to be president. this is different than the squad situation. 

you say he was talking to just that one lady, but he obviously was talking to them all. 

you say they just happened to be people of color who he said it to, but it's far fetched to think he would have said something like that to a white person. do you honestly think trump would have told white people who were born here to go back to their own shit hole country? 

this thread is yet another example of that study that showed trump supporters score lower on intelligence tests. these gawd dam trump supporters can't even string together coherent arguments. 

i dont know the context of obama's quote, but if the black commnity has a problem not getting a job when they should, it's not racist to tell them to do so.

trump on the other hand, merely didn't like that those women were critical of the usa. (even though trump is the king of being critical of the usa) this isn't a problem that is specific to people of color, and he never says this stuff to whites, so it's racist. 

do you honestly think trump would have said to go back to your home country if they were white?      

because if you discriminate against one race over another, that's a basic example of racism. it's not as bad as 'i hate you because you're black' racism, but it's still racism. 

i wouldn't be so sure of that. there may have been a lot of people who approved of kasich or maybe someone like marco rubio more than trump, cause a lot of republicans didn't like trump at all. never trumpers they were called. just because you have a plurality in voting doesn't mean you are the most popular. our system promotes small factions of people foisting candidates who may not even be that popular on everyone else to choose from. 

show me trump saying something like that to a native born white person, and i'll change my mind 

cruz wasn't even born in the usa, unlike the current congresswomen. there was an open question as to whether cruz was even eligible to be president. trump doesn't say things like 'go back to your country' to white born native people, and doesn't find controversies like the birther conspiracy with obama, which was only based on obama's skin color. 

you do see how the approval rating system is different than our current primaries, right? trump and hillary had low approval ratings, even lower than some of the people they beat. 

i'm referring to the comments in regard to the dark skin congresswomen recently, three fourths of whom were actually born in the usa. 

the reason it's racist, is because he never says those sorts of things about white people.

also, his comments about how the countries they came from were shit holes.... he's effectively saying the people who come from there are shit hole people. (he has said he doesn't want to get immigrants from shit hole countries) i actually agree that the people from sub par countries are often sub par people, but you can't generalize onto specific people. so, that comment was racist as well given he only talks about dark skin countries that way. . 

the song is: 'fifty nifty united states'. not 'fifty three nifty united states'. 53 just doesn't have the same ring to it. 

,,,

every voter should mark approve or disapprove for every candidate on the ballot. the top two candidates should have a run off election to refine their arguments and the winner becomes president. the great thing about this approach is it gives the presidency to the person with the broadest base of support. it prevents elections like the last one, where we had two very unpopular candidates on the ticket.

i guess if you like having more extreme candidates having shots at president, then this method might not be for you. the thing is though, even if you get your extreme candidate from time to time, the other side will get theirs more often too. i would guess someone like john kasich would have done well in this sort of election. we shouldn't let a plurality that is less than a majority be able to foist their candidate on everyone else. 

i dont think it's realisitc to think a retina would just heal itself like that. i can't say it's impossible, though. so, what about that proposition i always give? can you find something like a healed retina happening to an atheist? i know you can find inexplicable things, but not things that look like violations of the laws of nature. 

we have someone getting their vision restored from an irrevresible disease. yet, you insist there's no evidence of the supernatural when it's right in front of you. like an ostrich that sticks its head in the sand 

your fallacy is finding one in what i said. if you dont think the evidence is sufficient or corroborated enough, that's one thing, but that's not a fallacy. the thing is, though, those sorts of 'miracles' happen all the time. a good place to look for more is the congregation for the causes of the saints in the catholic church. they require three 'miracles' before a person is canonized. 

i think a better argument on your part would be to say that these are inexplicable things but that doesn't mean there's no explanation possible ever. i dont buy that.... i think these look like violations of the laws of nature, not just inexplicable that could later be explained. damaged retinas for example don't just spontaneously heal themselves. 

it blows my mind how much of a heretic and sinner you are. and you are obstinate in your sin, despite having been shown the truth.

yes i do believe that Jesus is God

you must be missing where i'm arguing that jesus is god and citing scripture to back that up. 

the science is overwhelming that that story of noah is a myth, a bible error