Why didn't God kill baby Adolf Hitler?

[Glacier]

As well you should be. (extremely skeptical of miracles). A miracle can't be proven and goes against everything to understand to be real.
Based on your coles notes of the bone spurs, I'd suggest that you're not fairly skeptical. You actually sound like you want to believe, not that you just find overwhelming evidence as a reason to do so.

Well when the doctor basically told him it was a miracle and cannot explain what happened, it would be extremely arrogant of me who wasn't there to tell him what happened. Nothing says dogmatic scumbag like a guy who thinks he knows more than the people who were there.

It's like how my brother told me he saw Big Foot. I told him it was probably a bear or something, and told me I was an idiot for telling him what he saw. Fair enough, I wasn't there. I have zero facts to go on. I won't go as far as to say I believe in Big Foot, but to tell my brother that he saw a bear when I have ZERO facts to backs is a jerk move.

The same applies to people's claims of miracles and other other things I can't explain. I have zero facts, and I wasn't there, so no use being an arrogant jerk telling people what they saw.

It's best to give them the benefit of the doubt until evidence to the contrary comes about.

[youjustcomplain]

Well when the doctor basically told him it was a miracle and cannot explain what happened, it would be extremely arrogant of me who wasn't there to tell him what happened. Nothing says dogmatic scumbag like a guy who thinks he knows more than the people who were there.

This tells me that his doctor believes in miracles and would sooner call it a miracle than admit error. Regardless, my claim isn't that I know better, my claim is that I have doubts that this story doesn't contain an error.
If I told you that I just sat down on my lazyboy last night, and it took off, launching me through the roof of my house and into deep space, then after a few hours of orbiting Saturn, it lowered me back to earth gently and as I got up from my chair, I looked up to see that there was no hole in the ceiling.... If I told you that, you'd have doubts too. In fact, you'd be gullible to believe it. But if someone makes a mistake in the medical profession, it must be a miracle?

It's like how my brother told me he saw Big Foot. I told him it was probably a bear or something, and told me I was an idiot for telling him what he saw. Fair enough, I wasn't there. I have zero facts to go on. I won't go as far as to say I believe in Big Foot, but to tell my brother that he saw a bear when I have ZERO facts to backs is a jerk move.

So you don't believe in Big Foot. But you're willing to accept his account of having seen bigfoot? You don't have zero facts to go on. He gave you a story that can't be verified, and not only that, but since there is no evidence that bigfoot exists, it's pretty safe to have the default position that big foot is a myth. If someone tells me they saw the tooth fairy, I'd presume they made a mistake.

The same applies to people's claims of miracles and other other things I can't explain. I have zero facts, and I wasn't there, so no use being an arrogant jerk telling people what they saw.
It's best to give them the benefit of the doubt until evidence to the contrary comes about.

But you do have facts. A miracle is something that defies nature and science. You base your understanding of the world on nature and science right? So if someone tells me their chair launched them into Saturns orbit, you don't need to have evidence it didn't happen to not believe them. The claim itself isn't believable.

The benefit of the doubt belongs to things that are explainable.

[Glacier]

So you don't believe in Big Foot. But you're willing to accept his account of having seen bigfoot? You don't have zero facts to go on. He gave you a story that can't be verified, and not only that, but since there is no evidence that bigfoot exists, it's pretty safe to have the default position that big foot is a myth. If someone tells me they saw the tooth fairy, I'd presume they made a mistake.

The evidence I have is his witness. In a court of law a person's testimony is considered evidence. Now, the prosecution will cross-examine the witness to see if his account is credible. I know my brother. He has never been one to hallucinate. Upon cross-examination, I cannot think of a single example of him making up stories or having lying eyes. It could very well be that he did hallucinate, but I believe in innocence until proven guilty, so I'm left to both take his word for it and remain skeptical of Big Foot. There's no evidence that my brother is a liar or disillusion, nor is there evidence that Big Foot exists. Going by evidence alone, I think you can see the conundrum I face here.

You don't know my brother, so it's perfectly reasonable for you to be far more skeptical of his story than I am -- especially since you don't know me either. As far as you know, I could be making up the entire thing just to justify my other story (which I'm not, but of course, it's perfectly reasonable to form that opinion when you read strange things on the internet). That's why it's perfectly reasonable for people disagree and draw different conclusions over mysteries with no provable answer.

As for the chair around Saturn, I'm not closed minded enough to rule anything out, but the witness would have to be extremely credible, and have no holes in their story whatsoever. Speaking of space, there's a book called "I saw heaven" that believes in god and heaven told me about. I'm 100% convinced (okay, maybe 99.99%) that it's fiction. I've done some research on the kid who "saw heaven" and some things just don't check out. That's house science and critical thinking is done. You don't just dismiss something out of hand, but an incredible story that sounds too good to be true better have every single fine detail making sense before you can safely say that it's possibly true.

[Ptolemy Soter]

People will do whatever they can to verify their own opinions and assertions, especially if it takes being closed-minded, smug, and arrogant no matter what is being analyzed.

There's no point in constantly debating these subjects.

[Necro]

People will do whatever they can to verify their own opinions and assertions, especially if it takes being closed-minded, smug, and arrogant no matter what is being analyzed.

There's no point in constantly debating these subjects.

Yet here you are, expressing your opinion just like everyone else.

[Ptolemy Soter]

I am the one who intentionally plays the hypocrite in order to, hopefully, make a point.

[Necro]

I'm just happy you didn't twist your ankle on the step down.

[bcpaul]

Hitler is nothing compared to abortion - the biggest genocide in the history of humanity

[Fancy]

Not the same.

The term "genocide" did not exist before 1944. It is a very specific term, referring to violent crimes committed against groups with the intent to destroy the existence of the group.

https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.ph ... d=10007043

[Thinktank]

World War 2 was the deadliest military conflict. 60 Million died!
Baby Adolf, survived ..... WHY?

When I was in church, here's what my pastor said:

"There's a reason German was more advanced - in every area, from music to industrial production - than
all other countries. God wanted Germany to start WW2, so there could be an Israel."

So there you have it. God killed maybe 40 million Slavic people so there could be an Israel.

But that's not very efficient. Everywhere I look, I see God is efficient. And WW2 was not efficient.
So God could not have wanted WW2.

And it's funny how Canada can kill millions of babies without blinking an eye,
but Germany couldn't even kill one. Even with all their superior technology.

[Glacier]

Your pastor needs a history lesson. The Jewish state boundaries were set in the 1920s in the aftermath of WW1.

[youjustcomplain]

And it's funny how Canada can kill millions of babies without blinking an eye,
but Germany couldn't even kill one. Even with all their superior technology.

Huh? Canada kills millions of babies? Since when does a country kill babies, let alone millions of them?

Germany couldn't kill one baby? Either a country CAN kill babies or it can't. which is it?

I, for the life of me, can't figure out what you're talking about, ever, (whether it be in this thread or any other). You certainly have a unique way of offering your point of view; it always leaves me wondering what your point was.

[maryjane48]

because if god killed hitler , standard oil would have made less money