My son, when he was very little (until he was about 4) would talk about "his world" where Jesus lived (and no, he did not see a picture of Jesus, he just knew the name) and where he saw his grandpa (who died 12 years before his birth and shares his name.)
He's 13 now and does not remember these conversations we had about "his world." But I really cherished these talks that he and I had. It really strengthened my testimony in a very sweet and personal way.
2007-12-02 14:46:00
·
answer #1
·
answered by colebolegooglygooglyhammerhead 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
I am a Christian, saved by the blood of Jesus and I have trouble believing that a picture which we know does not look anything like Jesus could invoke some kind of fetal memory of Jesus. As one of the other answerers said, children are attracted to pretty pictures and colors and I believe that all of your children were quieted by these pictures. I am not saying that small children don't have memories from "before", but not from a picture where there is no likeness.
2007-12-03 03:49:46
·
answer #2
·
answered by judyarb1945 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
31 weeks remains somewhat early so i'd not problem too a lot. My boy change into sideways for a lengthy time period and then 2 weeks before i change into due he determined breech can make a replace. instructed my representative i don't have a c-area except actually needed-he would not do the exterior flow the baby technique as he suggested it wasn't nicely well worth the disadvantages. they strive against to flow the baby round by ability of pushing them from outdoors yet in accordance to my representative you're booked in for a c-area 'basically in case' because it may reason infant misery and deliver you into premature labour (that you don't need to do breech for sure). instructed him i might want to be scrubbing flooring to get infant to reveal. I followed the scrubbing the floor position (really get on your palms and knees like you're going to scrub the floor) even as leaning on a side table with a cushion on-genuinely better comfortable than it sounds-each available second till my a million week before d-day appointment and he'd moved into the right spot. The representative laughingly suggested he suggested it yet did not have self belief it! infant will flow about properly as a lot as and which includes labour so do not panic over how a lot time is left....the awkward little horror that change into sideways and then breech and then positive waited till i change into 2 minutes aside to bypass lower back to lower back on me-served me properly for wondering that on my third there'd be fewer suprises, lol. provide it a bypass-it's going to both paintings or no longer and contained in the propose time relax and earnings from the perfect few weeks. sturdy success!!
2016-10-25 08:33:07
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of course, this test isn't done with varying the face while keeping the same style. They may be responding to a human face or some other attribute in the picture. Your activities while holding the picture may please them.
This is a common theme among believers. Instead of making a very stringent test, they set the bar so low that plain chance or human action causes a positive result. They then claim this very low bar somehow proves a supernatural god.
If you want to be taken seriously, you need the process of peer review. Have someone close to you look at the problems of your test before making your claims public. Otherwise you look like an idiot.
2007-12-02 14:47:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by DogmaBites 6
·
2⤊
3⤋
Reasoning to Religionists, doesn't matter what religion,
But "reasoning to religionists is like sunshine to vampires" (patcondell)
By the way..watch the Zeigeist movie series on youtube starting with this 9 minute segment, enter the suffix, watch?v=KeZB2EsPqGE, after youtube dot com and gain knowledge; and then, search for The awesome wit of patcondell on youtube.
Then come back after the Truth sets you free.
2007-12-02 15:07:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
How did you obtain a picture of Jesus?
Seriously. Think about it. Any picture you would have of Jesus would be a fictitious picture since there were no pictures drawn or paintings made of the Jesus from 2000 years ago.
I do agree that babies don't lie ~ but they couldn't possibly recognize a picture of Jesus until they are taught to recognize an inaccurate representation of the man.
2007-12-02 14:43:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by No Chance Without Yo Mama 6
·
4⤊
4⤋
the attraction of children towards colors can be another reason or the size of photograph or the way its is revered to.....they do get their attention diverted easily.....even I believe that the babeies are nearest to the truth
2007-12-02 18:44:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by BigDK 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Um....babies are simply fascinated by faces in general....never mind. I am attempting to use scientific studies. It would go right over your head
2007-12-02 15:04:30
·
answer #8
·
answered by ~Heathen Princess~ 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Was this the blonde, blue-eyed version of Jesus with the mullet? Or was this the swarthy semitic middle-easterner version from National Geographic?
We need to think critically.
2007-12-02 14:48:42
·
answer #9
·
answered by CC 7
·
4⤊
3⤋
Babies are intrigued by pictures, and jesus looks like us so they we're probably just looking at the picture...don't read more into this that what it is...show them pics of jesus, you, your husband, their family members, barbie, elmo, santa, big bird etc. they'll get a kick out of all of them.
2007-12-02 14:46:04
·
answer #10
·
answered by chell 2
·
3⤊
3⤋