Prove there's a god.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#625909 May 22, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
So i guess you dont believe in Capitol punishment?
You should be thankful those laws dont apply to us today here in the USA.
Wow, man. Wow. I didn't know people like you existed anymore. No, I do not believe in capitol punishment. It is barbaric, absurd, and hypocritical, to say nothing of all the innocent men who have been murdered by the government.

I should be thankful these laws don't exist in the USA? Are you serious? Do I sense a tinge of wistful longing for the "good ol' days," when you and your christian buddies could have just dragged me out into the town square and beat me to death for my blasphemous ways?
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>Anyway........
We may think God’s laws in the Old Testament were cruel, but in reality these laws prevented many crimes. For a time in Israel, when they obeyed God’s law like they were commanded, there were hardly any murders, rapes, kidnappings, thefts, etc.
Proof? Source? The "deterrent" method of crime prevention has been so thoroughly discredited I am astounded to see even you repeating it here. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised though - this *is* coming from the guy who just suggested that I was "lucky" I am not at risk for a stoning.
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>When they thought they would be soft on crime and criminals many of the above crimes took place in Israel. So who has the better idea?
Proof? Source? Anything beyond this vague bit of nonsense?
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
To stone someone it would have to be done in public, and this was part of the instructions. Since stoning was public, and carried out right away after the trial, it worked as a great """deterrent """".
Which is something i think this country needs today,( not stoning ) so dont get bent out of shape timmy, a swift and justice punishment/execution, instead of housing criminals for life...
Again, the deterrent theory of crime prevention is false. If deterrent was a viable method of convincing criminals to stop commiting crimes, don't you think the drug war would have ended decades ago? There are certain countries where the penalty for trafficking drugs is death - by your logic, all drugs should have vanished from their country after the first execution. I can provide hard proof against "deterrence" if you wish.

You truly reveal your morally repugnant nature with this one, honestly. You advocate for swift, public executions. Ignoring the outright barbarism inherent in the practice of public execution itself, your proposed "deterrent" effect does not exist.
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>There is one case where God had told the Jews to keep the Sabbath and a man was found in direct violation of God’s commands. This man was stoned.(Numbers 15:32-36)
You consider this a valid method of punishment for failing to keep the sabbath? Really? Why?
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>Another legitimate case in the Old Testament was when Achan stole from Jericho when they had been told full well what would happen if they did. His family was also stoned with him, because they evidently knew about it and didn’t say anything. All the ones in his family involved in the crime must have all been old enough to know what they were doing.(Joshua 7)
Ohh, and when you say "believe" are you implying that "i agree" or would like to see that happen?
Legitimate? Really? So, a man stole, and not only was he stoned in public, but his entire family made to die with him as well? The filthy christian notion of substitutional atonement rears it's head: your religion has actually brainwashed you into believing that someone can justifiably be made to pay for the actions of another. Absurd. I honestly don't even know how to respond to this.

No, I don't "agree" with stoning. If you knew how to read, or were a moral person, you would never have entertained the notion of stoning as legitimate.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#625910 May 22, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
The depth of your mind is akin to a mud puddle after a short (2 minute) burst of light misty rain...
Where do you guys get your comprehension and understanding from, and on top of that the INability to distinguish "good from evil"???
The implication that you, of all people, are a moral person is especially hilarious in light of the post of yours that I just responded to. You cling to a vindictive, violent, hypocritical, and stunningly backwards notion of justice, and yet you suggest that you know the "difference between good and evil." The irony is almost palatable.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#625911 May 22, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Here you go pojecting your stupid lies again...lol
What little info is there that supports the "assumed" "possibility of a maybe there could of been, a " HIGHLY LOW RISK" of humans EVER mateing with neanderthals, only supports the already NON factual aledged MYTH to begine with!!!
It's funny thats the only lame thing you could say, and come up with to counter that post!
The post points out the many FLAWS and contridiction, and disagreements within the people of that part of science,,, duffessss... And only shows TWOM his rants in his post of "knowing 100%"" we came from them, is only his concept and asumptions as well!!
READ the darn thing, and be honest with yourself and others for once in your life!!
You are dense. Even if we did not mate with neanderthals, it doesn't matter. Whether or not this happened has no implications for the overall theory of evolution.

You do understand that it's the disagreements and constant refinement that makes the TOE so robust, right? Disagreements are a *good* thing. They mean that we are constantly adding to and refining an already completely substantiated theory. It's as if you expect for the TOE to be exactly the same as it was when darwin first formulated it.

So... what's a "HIGHLY LOW RISK," anyway?

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#625912 May 22, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Beautiful.
But who would want to wake up next to any one of them in the morning?

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#625913 May 22, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>But who would want to wake up next to any one of them in the morning?
I was (halfway) joking.

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#625914 May 22, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>I was (halfway) joking.
I'd consider doing Gary.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#625915 May 22, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>I'd consider doing Gary.
Stephen Hawking ftw. I swear I would do it just to be able to say I did.

Since: May 11

Edinburgh, UK

#625916 May 23, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
For 5 minutes? Ok, sure. give me one shred of anything that they actually exist.
...now if only you could apply the same intellectual honesty to your god.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#625917 May 23, 2013
thewordofme wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think that if a God came down from heaven to make us humans that he would make us a relative of Neanderthals. Neanderthal DNA is close to but not actually human.
The fact of our carrying genes/blood from Neanderthals has been repeated and peer reviewed.
What do you make of this fact??
I don't know, and I don't care to do the research on it, so I'll take your word on it that Homo sapiens and Neanderthals have similar DNA. So we'll play along with that.

So what if we do we also have similar DNA with that of a potato and a bee, does that negate the possibility that God created us that way?

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#625918 May 23, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>You haven't heard of all the parents who kill their children for jesus?
Nope.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#625919 May 23, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Beautiful.
Well, thank you.*blushes*

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#625920 May 23, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>Many of the gods that we as a species have come up with have taken quite an interest in our genetalia, and the use thereof. If this statement is too much for you, replace "our genetalia, and the use thereof," with "our sexual lives."
Ok....

No examples?

Judged:

10

10

9

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#625921 May 23, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>You brush me off, but what I am saying is not a controversial statement. It is absolutely filled with contradictory statements, commandments, sentiments, and allegories; there is no clear way to tell allegory from historical retelling; there is no clear way to determine which stories are for whom and why; and there is no clear method for deciphering the meaning of these stories, allegories, and commandments once they have been "identified" as such. Each individual christian, or more charitably, each christian sect, has his/her or it's own private "cheat sheet," which informs their interpretation on the various subtleties of the bible. It's a veritable flustercuck.
I didn't brush you off to be rude, I brushed you off because you can't seem to learn anything beyond what you've convinced yourself of.

To say that there's 2 billion different forms of Christianity is absolutely ludicrous.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#625922 May 23, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>If you knew anything about evolution or psychology, you would understand why your statement is actually true. The tendency to infer "agency" was a useful trait for the vast majority of our history as a species.
A bush rattles a few feet away. Was it a tiger, or the wind? Better to assume "agency," and decide that the bush was made to move by *something.* Do you see the obvious connection? Humans see lightning in the sky, and naturally assume that something, or rather someone, is causing it.
I also enjoy how you so readily accept the work of those scientists whose work can be adapted to support the christian narrative; but you instantly reject anything which seems to contradict your beliefs.
Lol, I didn't accept it dude. I mocked it.

Judged:

10

10

9

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“THE LORD IS MY SHEPHERD;”

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#625923 May 23, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>The distinction between "micro" and "macro" is an invented controversy.
Of course timmy, of course. You are catching on.

Just like the rest of the "theory of evolution" is also an invented MYTH.

Since: May 11

Edinburgh, UK

#625924 May 23, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course timmy, of course. You are catching on.
Just like the rest of the "theory of evolution" is also an invented MYTH.
...tell it to your second chromosome.

“Listen to the sounds”

Since: Feb 09

of your own extinction......

#625926 May 23, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
You assume wrong once again. What makes you think i "pick and choose"? I believe every word written in the Bible OT and NT, i do my very best to live and obey what is written in the NT and what is required of a follower of Jesus Christ.
Show me were Hitler "picked" his reason to do the things he done, from Gods word? What scripture could he possibly use to support his actions?
Same for the kkk, what part of the Bible says to kill black's and have hatred for every race except for white Americans?
Why do you only follow the NT? Jesus said in Matthew:

5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

The law refers to the Torah and the prophets refers to the books of the prophets in the OT.

“THE LORD IS MY SHEPHERD;”

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#625927 May 23, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, man. Wow. I didn't know people like you existed anymore. No, I do not believe in capitol punishment. It is barbaric, absurd, and hypocritical, to say nothing of all the innocent men who have been murdered by the government.
I said "Justice" for the GUILTY and likewise for the innocent. So you think a person who is a murder and rapeist of an innocent child/person,, should live his life out in a prison? And thats what you call Justice??
I should be thankful these laws don't exist in the USA? Are you serious? Do I sense a tinge of wistful longing for the "good ol' days," when you and your christian buddies could have just dragged me out into the town square and beat me to death for my blasphemous ways?
LIAR! The deciet and dishonesty in you is amazing. You have a sick and twisted fear of imagination.. Seek help ASAP.
<quoted text>
Proof? Source? The "deterrent" method of crime prevention has been so thoroughly discredited I am astounded to see even you repeating it here. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised though - this *is* coming from the guy who just suggested that I was "lucky" I am not at risk for a stoning.
<quoted text>
See how EASY it is for "you" to MAKE UP an alledged theory, and then try to present it as it being a real one?? You have the most sever case of distinguishing "reality" from your demented imagination.. You need to learn what comprehension means timmy. It was "only" a statement of comparing capitol punishment back then to now a days... duffesss...geeesh.
Proof? Source? Anything beyond this vague bit of nonsense?
<quoted text>
Again, the deterrent theory of crime prevention is false. If deterrent was a viable method of convincing criminals to stop commiting crimes, don't you think the drug war would have ended decades ago? There are certain countries where the penalty for trafficking drugs is death - by your logic, all drugs should have vanished from their country after the first execution. I can provide hard proof against "deterrence" if you wish.
You truly reveal your morally repugnant nature with this one, honestly. You advocate for swift, public executions. Ignoring the outright barbarism inherent in the practice of public execution itself, your proposed "deterrent" effect does not exist.
<quoted text>
You consider this a valid method of punishment for failing to keep the sabbath? Really? Why?
<quoted text>
Legitimate? Really? So, a man stole, and not only was he stoned in public, but his entire family made to die with him as well? The filthy christian notion of substitutional atonement rears it's head: your religion has actually brainwashed you into believing that someone can justifiably be made to pay for the actions of another. Absurd. I honestly don't even know how to respond to this.
No, I don't "agree" with stoning. If you knew how to read, or were a moral person, you would never have entertained the notion of stoning as legitimate.
It's hard to come up with a word that defines you timmy! Pathetic, is a start though.

It is no wonder that you are the screwed up person that you are today, your logic, your deciet, your DISHONESTY and INABILTY to comprehend what you read and the absurd hypothetical ignroant concepts you portray on here of others is as immature as a 10 year old. Your projecting of me and my christian buddies who would want to stone you??/ lol.. WOW..

I could say more about your post on the deterrent issue,, bu thonestly talking with you is boreing and pointless!

But here is just a little something to educate yourself with..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_and_corp...

Since: May 11

Edinburgh, UK

#625928 May 23, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
I said "Justice" for the GUILTY and likewise for the innocent. So you think a person who is a murder and rapeist of an innocent child/person,, should live his life out in a prison? And thats what you call Justice??
<quoted text>
LIAR! The deciet and dishonesty in you is amazing. You have a sick and twisted fear of imagination.. Seek help ASAP.
<quoted text>
See how EASY it is for "you" to MAKE UP an alledged theory, and then try to present it as it being a real one?? You have the most sever case of distinguishing "reality" from your demented imagination.. You need to learn what comprehension means timmy. It was "only" a statement of comparing capitol punishment back then to now a days... duffesss...geeesh.
<quoted text>
It's hard to come up with a word that defines you timmy! Pathetic, is a start though.
It is no wonder that you are the screwed up person that you are today, your logic, your deciet, your DISHONESTY and INABILTY to comprehend what you read and the absurd hypothetical ignroant concepts you portray on here of others is as immature as a 10 year old. Your projecting of me and my christian buddies who would want to stone you??/ lol.. WOW..
I could say more about your post on the deterrent issue,, bu thonestly talking with you is boreing and pointless!
But here is just a little something to educate yourself with..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_and_corp...
www.exonerated.org

“THE LORD IS MY SHEPHERD;”

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#625929 May 23, 2013
True Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you only follow the NT? Jesus said in Matthew:
5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
The law refers to the Torah and the prophets refers to the books of the prophets in the OT.
Matthew 22:34 But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together.

35.Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,

36.Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

37.Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38.This is the first and great commandment.

39.And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

****
40.On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
****

Because the OT was done away with when Christ "fulfilled" the Mosiac laws" in the OT. There is no need of daily sacrifices and rituals to perform in order to recieve Gods grace/forgiveness of sin. Jesus done away with that on Calvary "once" and for all.

We are no longer under the Mosiac law, thats not to say it is done away with or disregarded. For it is "still" the Holy scripture of the Torah, but it is no longer binding to Christians today.

In other words, the Grace of God in the NT is suffecient to save us and give us access to his throne, a "relationship" through and by Jesus Christ.

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
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 3 min Trump Worshiper 679,392
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 1 hr TanRestedReady 2,896
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 1 hr Chess Jurist 119,368
Why are most white people so arrogant? (Apr '10) 2 hr Alexander Chen 1,018
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 3 hr Born again past JW 46,221
__POPE's 'World Plan' matches MARK of BEAST__ 4 hr WorldNewsYTube 1
Needs sex with a girl in London (Jan '14) 6 hr Gloriah23 4
More from around the web