Prove there's a god.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#573282 Dec 14, 2012
waaasssuuup wrote:
when one thinks that they're wiser than God, it's the epitome of foolishness. it would almost be funny if the stakes weren't so grave
Only if the god exists. Otherwise, giving your time, your money, your attention, your children, and your only shot at an authentic life to a lying church is the foolish choice.

How can we tell the difference besides relying on YOUR gut feeling over my skepticism?
JOEL

Mumbai, India

#573283 Dec 14, 2012
The Last True Liberal wrote:
<quoted text>

26 people shot to death at a Connecticut school, including 18 children--kindergarten and first-graders.
There's your proof.
That's the law of cause and effect in operation at the human level.

Since: May 11

Ilkeston, UK

#573284 Dec 14, 2012
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Mister C!
Long time, no C!
life interrupting my internet!!!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#573285 Dec 14, 2012
lightbeamrider wrote:
It is not so much the ethical code as you call it but the fact people want to do their own thing without consequences.
Then Christianity is perfect for them. There are no consequences to anything unless you forget to get your forgiveness on demand just before you die.
lightbeamrider wrote:
They do not want to give an account to God for the lives they had and the opportunities they ignored.
You mean that they want to be rewarded for groveling on earth no matter whatever else they did to others while here. There is no accountability in a religion that offers forgiveness so cheaply.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#573287 Dec 14, 2012
boooots wrote:
<quoted text>
It is horrible, and hopefully no one comes back on here and says that an atheist did it, because that is what atheists do. At least not until we have some info if they release any, about the shooter and his possible motives. I don't know Conn's gun laws, and I know that guns are available anyway to anyone who wants to kill someone, but somehow I can't get away from the fact that the lax gun laws in the USA seems to have something to do with some of these killings, especially in the case, as in Columbine, when kids get a lot of guns.
I have been around guns for much of my life, and I am not for having no guns at all, but only for the purpose for which I had them and that was for hunting, target shooting and possibly killing some animals that might be attacking our livestock. I never actually had that happen. We also used them at times, for putting down sick livestock, or even sick pets.
I highly doubt that most people who had guns in their homes would even think to use them in the case of being invaded by a killer or a thief. The guns were not there for purposes of using on other humans, and that would not be something that would come to a person's mind.
Somebody will, any minute now.

Restricting gun ownership is, at this point, to no purpouse. Like restricting wheels.

I could buy a hobby-shop set-up in Sears Roebuck and turn out a few machine pistols a week.

And felons learn shop in prison...

As a reference point, the Brit WWII Sten gun had about five moving parts, and was manufactured for about $3.50 a copy. Full- auto 9mm.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#573288 Dec 14, 2012
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
life interrupting my internet!!!
I hate it when that happens.

How've ya been?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#573289 Dec 14, 2012
waaasssuuup wrote:
really??? would you like to prove it then? or, would you prefer to walk away now and keep your insatiable pride in tact?
Ask more nicely.

Or just Google the following parameters and look at any of the hundreds of links:

site:topix.com "it aint necessarily so" "Your bible is self-refuting"

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#573290 Dec 14, 2012
Laconic Assassins wrote:
You would benefit.
How would I benefit from another disproof of your god - or even from one?
Laconic Assassins wrote:
The basis of your question, when you ASK FOR PROOF THERE IS A GOD, is based on your need.
You must have me confused with somebody else. I haven't asked for proof of a god. I didn't start the thread.
Laconic Assassins wrote:
Given that 90 plus percent of the world believes that there is a God, it is kind of like you trying to prove that earth is not a planet. You know what I mean?
No.

Most of the world agrees that your god is a mythological creature. Know what I mean?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#573291 Dec 14, 2012
Laconic Assassins wrote:
The nation was founded under Christian principles
Which aspect of the American government did you think was founded on Christian principles? Civil and human rights? There is nothing like it in your bible or your religion.

Likewise with liberty, democracy, egalitarianism, individualism, populism and laissez-faire. They are nowhere to be found in your bible.

Nor is due process in your bible. Nor the limiting, division, or decentralization of power. Jehovah is an absolute dictator over man.

The rule of law is hardly Christian since Jehovah is above it.

So where are the Christian principles upon which you claim that American government was founded? It isn't church state separation. It's not even the census. The US Constitution calls for a census, whereas Jehovah went apoplectic and killed 70,000 innocent Hebrews when David took one.

The American government is indifferent to the doctrines of sin, atonement, and salvation. It doesn't care about idol worship,honoring ones parents, or obeying the sabbath.

There is zero overlap between The Ten Commandments and The Bill of Rights, which is why it would be absurd to hang the Ten Commandments in an American courtroom :

"The Ten Commandments fit the United States like $10 shoes, from the first, where we install the "almighty " dollar as an idol, to the last, when we rely on covetousness to turn the wheels of commerce. We keep the Sabbath holy by shopping for bargains and allow and excuse false witness for advertising and political spin. We have been casual about killing for a nation that believes in "Thou shall not kill." And as for adultery, we apparently couldn't have a Congress without it. Beyond all that, we revere the Ten Commandments to shreds.” Tom Blackburn

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#573292 Dec 14, 2012
Laconic Assassins wrote:
2 Timothy 4:3-5
King James Version (KJV)
3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.
Why tell me?

I have something here of equal value to offer in exchange. I trust you'll find it just as inspirational and meaningful in your life as I find your bible is in mine. It's from the bible of your chief competitor :

Qu'ran Al-Ghashiyah
88:11 Wherein they will hear no unsuitable speech.
88:12 Within it is a flowing spring.
88:13 Within it are couches raised high

I want you to think about that long and hard. Here we have couches raised high. Yes, couches will be raised high. Did you hear that? Couches! High davenports. Raised settees. Elevated chesterfields. Hoisted ottomans. Skyward chaises. Heavenly divans. Uplifted futons.

It's all so very holy!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#573293 Dec 14, 2012
peter wrote:
Why arent you criticising islam
I just did in my last post. Well, I mocked its bible, anyway.

Why? How would that help either of us? Most people reading these words already disesteem that religion.
peter wrote:
no it always christianity, why because christians are civilized people and allow your free speech
Actually, you used to burn us for that speech. Secularists were the ones that civilized you.

peter wrote:
while islamists will threaten to bash and kill you
Not me. I wouldn't even know where to find one today.
peter wrote:
so are you a muslim or just afraid of muslims?
Neither. I am an atheist, and Muslims play zero part in my life.

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#573294 Dec 14, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
You call opinions against your biased because you don't like them, not because they aren't justified. My negative opinions of your church are evidence based, and in my opinion, represent a fair assessment of the burden that that church imposes on American society, as I have argued at length.
Can you demonstrate otherwise - that those conclusions aren't just?
a person defending homosexuality takes all objectivity out of a moral/spiritual debate. shot - goal!

“What are you looking at?”

Since: Jan 08

Albuquerque, NM

#573295 Dec 14, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm a little skittish about owning slaves, stoning people to death, or taking advice from a source that sanctioned either.
I prefer the barbaric paganism that criminalized all of that.
Very good post IANS!!

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#573296 Dec 14, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. I don't have much respect for its advice or values.
Faith, obedience, self-abnegation, chastity, worship and piety, are not virtues. And there is no such thing as sin.
The virtues include integrity, compassion, autonomy, authenticity, patience, responsibility, courage, and the like.
On a societal scale, the virtues would include such things as political freedom, democracy, egalitarianism, justice, and opportunity.
i don't much care for your religion in which you preside as god over society & decide what's moral and what isn't. ICK!!!

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#573297 Dec 14, 2012
waaasssuuup wrote:
<quoted text>
actually, under Jewish law, on the year of julilee the jews were required to set slaves/indentured servants free whether they paid their debt off by then or not. many of them would refuse freedom and chose to continue to be members of jewish households because they saw how God was in their midst.
it was really a wonderful law, considering the barbarism of the surrounding nations at the time.
why are pagans always so barbaric and why do you refuse God's ways???
That was for the Hebrew slaves they had.

Wikipedia entry about the Midrash and its function. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrash also http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Catholic_Encycl... (1913)/Midrashim

More about slavery in the OT from Judaic Midrash halakha, "VE-eileh ha-mishpatim" (AND these are the statutes). It was a deeper explanation kept by the Rabbi's concerning OT text. An exegesis of the Torah. Essentially ,"fine print".

Quoting:

"Your slaves and maidservants that you shall possess from the nations that surround you, from them you may purchase slaves and maidservants. Also, from the children of the sojourners who reside with you from them you may purchase [slaves], and from their families that live among you that were born in your land.[All these] shall be your permanent possession. You shall will them as inheritance to your children after you as hereditary property; you shall keep them in servitude permanently. However regarding your bretheren, Bnei Yisroel, man over his brother, you
must not rule over him to crush him."
Vayikra 25:39-46

Commentary: A non-Jewish servant, however, can be passed on to descendants through inheritance! The possession of a non-Jewish slave is eternal. But note another difference: A Jewish slave may not be subjected to “hard labor”(b’farech); a non-Jewish slave has no such condition. Seemingly, a non-Jewish slave may be worked to the bone with the most menial of work.

As we mentioned above, a Jewish servant must be released after six years of work.

Not so, however, is the case for a non-Jewish slave. How are we supposed to understand that they are kept forever? How are we to allow hard labor for someone who was purchased like property? How can we understand the purchase of another human being at all?

The institution of slavery represents a blurring of the line dividing human personhood from property. This blurring is reflected clearly in some of the laws recorded in the parasha (Note that I am treating the institution of slavery in toto, without reference to the important distinction between Hebrew slaves and Canaanite slaves, as in Vayikra 25:39-46):

(a) When a master strikes his slave and the slave subsequently dies (after 24-48 hours), the master is exempt from punishment "because he is his property" (21:21-22. Rashbam: "and the law allows him to strike him in order to chastise him.")

(b) An ox that gores and kills a slave subjects its owner only to a 30-shekel fine and not to "ransom money" designed to redeem the master from a death penalty (21:29-32).

(c) The master may (sometimes) compel his slave to cohabit with a slave-girl and the children will belong to the master (21:4).
End quote. YESHIVA UNIVERSITY http://www.yu.edu/ http://www.slideshare.net/steiny100/jewish-sl...

"the children will belong to the master"

I'm disgusted, are you?

It also appears that the modern day Rabbi is appalled as well, and he should be, but, notice, he's not trying to deny it or explain it away. He doesn't attempt to make excuses or only select the good parts or the parts he likes. The Rabbi doesn't try to ignore anything, but then again...

He's not a Christian.

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#573298 Dec 14, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm a little skittish about owning slaves, stoning people to death, or taking advice from a source that sanctioned either.
I prefer the barbaric paganism that criminalized all of that.
LOL! at the time when God seperated the jews through the law of moses, the pagan egyptians were holding them as slaves. AND all the surrounding nations were sacrificing their children in the 'fire of molach'. DON'T YOU KNOW ANYTHING?

you ain't gonna win this war, pal!

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#573299 Dec 14, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no such thing as sin or sinners.
<quoted text>
Nope, not again. Been there, done that. Your god failed to reveal himself then, and failed to keep his promises. I got no peace that passeth all understanding, no fruits of the spirit, and no power to move even pebbles - let alone mountains - despite much more than a mustard seed of faith.
Once I realized that I was being lied to and that the promises of the church and its god were worthless, I realized that there wasn't going to be a heaven either, and that there was no hell.
That was thirty-five years ago, and I've had a good life because of that choice to confirm the validity of my decision. Your church really has nothing to offer me.
"FAILED TO REVEAL HIMSELF"!!!

you've simply rejected God by rejecting His Son

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#573300 Dec 14, 2012
waaasssuuup wrote:
<quoted text>
a person defending homosexuality takes all objectivity out of a moral/spiritual debate. shot - goal!
Homosexuality needs no defending.

Christianity does, however. People are starting to question your claim to a monopoly on moral virtue. In America - and the UK as well according to their recently released census - your church's numbers are falling rapidly, as the ranks of the irreligious swell.

That means that your church will increasingly be asked to support its claim that homosexuality is a societal problem or a personal defect of any kind. And I expect that before long, irrational, divisive, and unkind values like Christian homophobia will fall by the wayside.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#573301 Dec 14, 2012
waaasssuuup wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL! at the time when God seperated the jews through the law of moses, the pagan egyptians were holding them as slaves. AND all the surrounding nations were sacrificing their children in the 'fire of molach'. DON'T YOU KNOW ANYTHING?
you ain't gonna win this war, pal!
Jewish people were never in Egypt during that era.

“let's do this thang!”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#573303 Dec 14, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Only if the god exists. Otherwise, giving your time, your money, your attention, your children, and your only shot at an authentic life to a lying church is the foolish choice.
How can we tell the difference besides relying on YOUR gut feeling over my skepticism?
"only shot at an authentic life"

what life?! yours is running out fast; isn't it?

look pal - the 'church thing' failed you - get in line!
so don't go to church and don't give your money, no biggie! but, don't blame God for the faults of flawed people, cuz you're not gonna win that argument:)

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 3 min Sky Writer 31 183,628
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 7 min truth 667,933
London TV viewers fixed on trump Inaugural process 7 min Mr About Town 1
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 11 min Chess Jurist 92,709
Everyone is a fool 58 min Truthiness 4
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr crucifiedguy 286,073
Poll Why does bill clinton hold his mouth wide open? (Feb '08) 2 hr Mszymanski 16
More from around the web