Its a fact that god does not exist

Other than what it is claimed it says. As with the other gods.
The Bible says there are other Gods. Who am I to argue?

BTW, I think it was you who said above that you needed to be convinced of the existence of God "beyond a reasonable doubt?" With rare exceptions the law prefers a balance of probabilities, except in criminal cases where people might be punished. This is the first time I have heard of the proof of God needing to be beyond a reasonable doubt. Sounds extremist to me?
 
Other than what it is claimed it says. As with the other gods.
Gee but you are sensitive. To me it is not "claimed", it "is".

The reminder by you that you continue to disagree appears is mere surplusage, which I don't do to you. You needn't accept my positions, but replying in every post to expressly dismiss them is unnecessary, IMO. When you express a contrary view your non-acceptance is presumed.
 
Mar 2009
2,187
2
Not an unfair view. However it comes right to the edge of some pretty slippery semantics. Given the nature of divine intervention how do you differentiate between "evidence" and "inspired"? I call it close enough for horseshoes. My interpretation is that the apparent inconsistencies are intentional and made to make us think. Scripture is not intended to be a rote learning tool, 'do it this way and you'll be perfect.' It is capable of being conceptually read and understood by every person in every culture on earth. Does every part have meaning for every person? I don't know. I think that in its entirety the whole Bible is supposed to be a mystery, so by definition it is not to be wholly understood by anyone. Is it "understandable?" I don't know.
Looks as though we are more or less in agreement. I also believe that scripture is not intended to be a rote learning tool. Nor is it intended as empirical evidence for the existence of God. For me the "tug of war" standing on a box and waving the Bible in the air as evidence of God's existence is counter to the spirit of the Bible. But that of course is just my own personal perception. For me it is impossible for either of the two sides to ever agree on the existence of God as empirical evidence and faith are at odds with one another.
 
Feb 2010
151
0
Australia
So, you are just going to ignore post #119? This is all just twaddle designed to bury post #119. Here is an excerpt :

The Truth is that god does not exist, he is made up by societal leaders and other deranged humans. Humans that are broken and pathetic cling to this insane delusion as a "comfort" in pathetic and cowardly lies. The Forbidden Truth is that death is unavoidable. Death occurs because the brain loses it cellular integrity due to lack of blood-flow etc. The brain then begins to behave like a piece of meat outside a fridge - it rots. The cells that make up your brain slowly rot away and you die.

Death is final. When you die, you cease to exist for all eternity, and experience nothingness. It is the same as if you were never born, never existed. Nothing you do in life can ever make any difference to these facts, everything you achieved in life is lost, null and void, upon your unstoppable death. Nothing in life can aid or comfort you in death.

You can delude yourself with the god myth and reject the Truth of death, but death will still come and all will be lost. You will suffer the fate of experiencing nothingness for all eternity and there is nothing you can do about it.
 
Apr 2009
1,943
5
Disunited Queendom
The Bible says there are other Gods. Who am I to argue?
Mein Kampf said Jews are inferior beings. Who are you to argue?

BTW, I think it was you who said above that you needed to be convinced of the existence of God "beyond a reasonable doubt?" With rare exceptions the law prefers a balance of probabilities, except in criminal cases where people might be punished. This is the first time I have heard of the proof of God needing to be beyond a reasonable doubt. Sounds extremist to me?
Doesn't every positive claim have to be proven beyond reasonable doubt to be accepted as scientific fact?
 
Apr 2009
1,943
5
Disunited Queendom
Who am I, a believer, to argue with God?
For which you cite the bible, I presume?

I really am no substitute for experts on this. But it is extraordinarily inaccurate - not to mention for almost every single book (if not all) - the authorship is either questioned or disproven. It's also a fascinating read how the bible was put together and where there have been additions, subtractions etc. Please just read a bit of the works of biblical scholars.

Not that I know of, but what do I know? I suspect you are mixing terms referable to legal versus scientific principles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_evidence
*shrugs* Could be.
 
Apr 2009
1,943
5
Disunited Queendom
Why? To change my mind about God?
Unlike our friend, I have no problem with you believing what you like. I'm merely suggesting you might find the history of the bible interesting - even enlightening. I think everyone would, for that matter. I did - but then, I was a Christian for most of my life, so I suppose it held an interest that way...

:unsure:
 
Unlike our friend, I have no problem with you believing what you like. I'm merely suggesting you might find the history of the bible interesting - even enlightening. I think everyone would, for that matter. I did - but then, I was a Christian for most of my life, so I suppose it held an interest that way...

:unsure:
You are doubtless right. The older I get the more things I discover I want to read. One of my understandings is that the Bible did indeed come together from disparate sources and interpretations. That it did so while maintaining basic congruity is considered by some to be one of the signs of its genuineness. You will find all kinds of believers, from literalists to those who think it is all an analogy. Never mind. My God gives us all great minds and great freedom of thought. He is very forgiving.
 
Mar 2009
2,187
2
Muslims, Jews and Christians all share the first five books of the Old Testament in common.
Right, there seems to be a golden thread running through all of it. Richard Dawkins tried to explain it as being a "meme" like a social virus of a kind, spreading from society to society over centuries of time.
 
Feb 2010
151
0
Australia
Unlike our friend, I have no problem with you believing what you like.
Neither do I. You dont speak for Me. I am simply highlighting the derangement and inferiority of you broken, brainwashed citizen-slaves.

And you have all ran away from My posts because the Truth is slowly being revealed. That seemingly includes you, Dirk.
 
Apr 2009
1,943
5
Disunited Queendom
And you have all ran away from My posts because the Truth is slowly being revealed. That seemingly includes you, Dirk.
I wouldn't say so, in the sense that I remain a secular atheist? Religious debates bore me, is all. I'm still considering whether or not to even bother addressing the point of the old testament being so apparently accurate.
 
Mar 2009
2,187
2
And you have all ran away from My posts because the Truth is slowly being revealed. That seemingly includes you, Dirk.
That has to be an enormous self-delusion. There is no contribution to the Truth when one bases one's victory on the perceived shortcomings of those you are debating with.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2009
5,841
50
Stop with the personal attacks- if you want to challenge a viewpoint, fine, but no need to make it personal. Some of you have time and time again done this and for those of you I am done with the warnings and you will only receive infractions for this from now on (which of course can eventually lead to temporary and if needed permanent bans.)
 

Similar Discussions