Right, because the boy screaming in pain and freaking at the sight of blood could have been an illusion. All of that pain equates to his dad fooling him like pulling a penny out of his ear.<quoted text>If you "know that there is a God", it's not that you don't "need" faith. It's that you don't HAVE faith. You never "need" faith.do whut wrote, "<quoted text>
The blood on the carpet and clothes, the scar, and the boy telling us what happened, along with the eyewitness of both parents is plenty of evidence for me to believe what happened. Especially since I saw the before and after of the carpet and ear. "
I am quite aware of what you've convinced yourself of. You don't need to keep reiterating what you believe. Every logical person here has explained why the basis of your belief would be insufficient as proof.
I will add that I could walk up to any given three year old, pretend to pull a penny out of their ear, and if I was pretty smooth they would be completely convinced that I just pulled a penny out of their ear. What they thought they saw would be enough to convince them. And they would probably argue with people that told them otherwise.
Haha. Whatever. You say 1 witness is enough, then try your best to discount 3 witnesses.
Proof, evidence, whatever you want to call it, it is convincing enough to me, as it would be to any one of you that had this happen to a close friend of yours that you have always trusted as an honest person, as well as their spouse.
You all claim that miracles aren't possible because they are always a coincidence. I give you a good example of one that could not be coincidence, and you all treat me as if I am a fool. Thanks for fulfilling scripture.