Yo 'joint', how about adequately addressing this thread and the comments I have made about the Eisenbeiss case and other comments? Do you need a recap? I never heard an adequate reply to my comments either. The proof of God from after-life evidence is a very logical and well-connected framework, especially useful is the Phoenix Journal called "Human the Science of Man" and supporting evidence in the rest of these volumes.
Is anyone on the same page? There is no adequate reply nor conversation on these topics that I bring up.
I am sure this thread deserves adequate discussion on the topic of God and that is why I am pointing out the banned Pleiades Connection series of Phoenix Journals. I will appreciate discussion of this topic by referencing the poster to evidence of the WORD which gives TRUTH.
Yes, I would need a recap to thoroughly reply to it.
Based upon this sentence, however...:
The proof of God from after-life evidence is a very logical and well-connected framework, especially useful is...
...I would say that any reply I would make would likely be generally condensed to something along the lines of, "Any after-life evidence, or
any empirical evidence in general, could only be used as corollary or suggestive evidence of God's existence if there previously exists some 'a priori' philosophical proof for God's existence, and the evidence would need to be framed within the context of that philosophical proof."