Feed on Posts or Comments 29 May 2016

Christianity Admin on 03 Oct 2013 11:23 pm

GodIsImaginary.com needs technical assistance… Can anyone help?

If you go to Google and type in “GodIsImaginary.com” as the search term, the top entry that Google returns is what you would expect. But when you click on the link, it does not go to GodIsImaginary.com. It gets redirected to some other web site.

Does anyone know how to fix this problem?

We have written to the site’s hosting company. They said that the problem would resolve itself the next time Google indexes the site. But the problem has not resolved itself.

We would be grateful for any assistance you can provide in fixing this problem.

Thanks.

848 Responses to “GodIsImaginary.com needs technical assistance… Can anyone help?”

  1. on 18 Jun 2014 at 3:09 am 1.Angel said …

    Messenger – you forget the teachings of Paul in his first letter to the church in Corinth when he wrote

    Now we have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things that are freely given to us by God. And we speak about these things, not with words taught us by human wisdom, but with those taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual things to spiritual people. The unbeliever does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him. And he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. The one who is spiritual discerns all things, yet he himself is understood by no one. For who has known the mind of the Lord, so as to advise him? But we have the mind of Christ.

    Yes it can be hard for anyone to step aside of their own pride, the own self imposed limits of worldly education, if there is no desire to. I do find it amazing that when one does explore the possibility and put the obvious bias aside and perform a true search for the truth aside from worldly boundaries, men have found there truly exists a spirit being, a presence of omnipotence, far greater in love, power, mercy, forgiveness and especially a true freedom, men such as CS Lewis, Alister McGrath, and many others. But until that time, no amount of debate, arguing, scripture or verse will avail or do what the Spirit of God can do.

  2. on 18 Jun 2014 at 11:44 am 2.alex said …

    “But until that time, no amount of debate, arguing, scripture or verse will avail or do what the Spirit of God can do.”

    ain’t no damn debate, demonstrate. your god, along with the countless others, is bullshit. go ahead and prove me wrong.

  3. on 19 Jun 2014 at 10:28 am 3.freddies_dead said …

    201.Angel said …

    Messenger – you forget the teachings of Paul in his first letter to the church in Corinth when he wrote

    Now we have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things that are freely given to us by God.

    How do you know this “spirit” is from God? What evidence can you adduce to demonstrate a) the existence of the spirit you mention b) the existence of your God and c) how we can know that one is responsible for the other?

    And we speak about these things, not with words taught us by human wisdom, but with those taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual things to spiritual people.

    So you have to have a whole other language to talk about these imaginary things?

    The unbeliever does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him.

    Or it’s because they don’t accept the idea of gaining knowledge through imaginary means.

    And he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

    I understand them just fine, it’s how I know they’re nonsense. Imaginary beings doing imaginary things isn’t impressive.

    The one who is spiritual discerns all things, yet he himself is understood by no one. For who has known the mind of the Lord, so as to advise him? But we have the mind of Christ.

    What evidence do you have for this “mind of Christ”? What differentiates the “true” Christians from the false? How can we tell a false Christian before they fall away from the faith?

    Yes it can be hard for anyone to step aside of their own pride, the own self imposed limits of worldly education, if there is no desire to.

    Oh goody, here’s where you claim it’s the unbeliever’s fault that your claims are incoherent.

    I do find it amazing that when one does explore the possibility and put the obvious bias aside and perform a true search for the truth aside from worldly boundaries, men have found there truly exists a spirit being, a presence of omnipotence, far greater in love, power, mercy, forgiveness and especially a true freedom, men such as CS Lewis, Alister McGrath, and many others.

    So, because others are credulous fools we should be just like them? Just believe because then you’ll believe. Where’s your evidence Angel?

    But until that time, no amount of debate, arguing, scripture or verse will avail or do what the Spirit of God can do.

    That’s a pitiful excuse for your failure to convince us of the existence of your God. He’s supposed to be omnipotent but He can’t even provide you with a single scrap of evidence or a sound argument to present.

  4. on 20 Jun 2014 at 5:38 pm 4.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “So, because others are credulous fools we should be just like them?”

    We don’t feel like we should be like the atheist cult! Lol!!! Atheism us just plain foolishness like all other cults!

    lol!!!!

  5. on 21 Jun 2014 at 6:19 am 5.alex said …

    “Atheism us just plain foolishness like all other cults!”

    back to your dumbass, motherfuckerness, eh? just like the rest of your shit in your book: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

    i guess i belong to the church of no bullshit tolerated incorporated. in case you missed, here’s your bullshit collection once again: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

    and miraculously, it includes your latest bullshit about atheist cults. right below your “China is selling fetuses as a delicacy”, dumbass, bitch.

  6. on 22 Jun 2014 at 4:07 am 6.the messenger said …

    220.Angel, I see your point. I respect you, my friend. But my mission is to open the minds of non believers so that they will seek the knowledge of GOD and pursue his spirit.

  7. on 22 Jun 2014 at 4:21 pm 7.alex said …

    “But my mission is to open the minds of non believers…”

    here’s part of his mission charter, quoted from his (messenger’s) manifesto at: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    1. if you have a glass of salt water and you pour more water in(fresh water), it does not change the salinity, ph, temp or chemistry

    2. if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage)

    3. Hell does not last forever.

    4. Even though the bible does not state that God created the ansestors of the animals of 2013, it is logical to say that he did infact create the ansestors of the modern day animals, and those animals that God created in the beginning did infact evolve into the modern animals that we know today.

    5. I have also seen heaven my self and it is amazing.

    6. Allah and Yahweh are the same GOD, but the muslim view of GOD is wrong.

    puking yet? …and many more. i ain’t lying. in his book, the original wwgha link is included.

  8. on 23 Jun 2014 at 2:23 am 8.the messenger said …

    226.alex, so you think that if you take a glass of water and pour more water in it that it will cease to be H2O? Dude you are stupid.

    That second quote is out of context.

    The thing about hell was proven by text evidence from the bible.

    I stated that evolution occurred. Are you denying that evolution is true?

    I told you, that vision of heaven was just a dream.

    Yes, islam is false.

  9. on 23 Jun 2014 at 3:49 pm 9.freddies_dead said …

    204.A The Lying Prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “So, because others are credulous fools we should be just like them?”

    We don’t feel like we should be like the atheist cult! Lol!!! Atheism us just plain foolishness like all other cults!

    lol!!!!

    I’d ask you to point out how “not believing in God” qualifies as a cult, but you’re a lying prick and nothing you say can be trusted.

  10. on 23 Jun 2014 at 3:51 pm 10.freddies_dead said …

    208.the messenger said …

    The thing about hell was proven by text evidence from the bible.

    There’s a difference between throwing out a couple of verses from your book of myths and actually proving something.

  11. on 23 Jun 2014 at 4:24 pm 11.alex said …

    “so you think that if you take a glass of water and pour more water in it that it will cease to be H2O?”

    lying bitch motherfucker. this is your entire paragraph:

    637.DPK, if you have a glass of salt water and you pour more water in(fresh water), it does not change the salinity, ph, temp or chemistry. So how would a flood change the salinity, ph, temp or chemistry of the sea water?

    can’t squirm outta of that one, eh? asshole.

    “That second quote is out of context.”

    again, you lie. your entire paragraph post:

    623.alex, if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage) and serve her for the rest of his life.

    “The thing about hell was proven by text evidence from the bible.”

    that hell is temporary? quote the Catholic stance on this. of course, you can’t, coz you a lyin, bitch, motherfucker.

    your book doesn’t lie, mess motherfucker. it’s all archived here: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

  12. on 24 Jun 2014 at 12:45 am 12.the messenger said …

    231.alex, what I mean is that if you have a glass of water with a teaspoon of salt in it, then you poor some more water(fresh water) into it, there is still a teaspoon of salt in it.

    You are a lying idiot. You clamed ,in comment 226, that this is my full paragraph: “2. if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage)”

    This is my full paragraph(quoted directly from my book.”623.alex, if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage) and serve her for the rest of his life.This is not so much a punishment, but a chance for redemption.”

    This is proof that you are a ridiculous liar.

  13. on 24 Jun 2014 at 12:48 am 13.the messenger said …

    230.freddies_dead, the bible is the key source for information on hell and heaven.

    I found specific verses and passages from the bible that prove my claim that hell is temporary.

  14. on 24 Jun 2014 at 12:55 am 14.the messenger said …

    231.alex, in comment 231 you claimed that this quote “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage)” was not taken out of context. Yet you also claimed that the following quote is the full quote(623.alex, if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage) and serve her for the rest of his life.).

    You took a quote out of context and then claimed that it was not out of context, then immediately displayed the ” entire paragraph ” thus proving that the quote you took was out of context.

    You are not only a liar, but also an extremely stupid liar.

    I pity you.

  15. on 24 Jun 2014 at 1:06 am 15.alex said …

    the motherfucker messenger pities me. he whines that i take his quote out of context. he claims that he represents the catholic church.

    you be the judge. this is entire collection with the original wwgha posting links: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    the bitch is getting desperate. he must be dying of cancer or some shit and he’s afraid, there’s no more. guess what, motherfucker, there ain’t. har!

    “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her (through marrage)…”

    out of context or not, you can’t spin it, you bitch, motherfucker. ain’t nobody here, or anywhere else, buys your bullshit.

  16. on 24 Jun 2014 at 2:29 am 16.the messenger said …

    235.alex, I was not whining. I was simply pointing out that you lied.

    You are the desperate one. Your arguements are so pathetic that you resort to “name calling ” like a child, and randomly bringing up the “salt water thing” in order to distract people from your obvious stupidity.

    lastly, quoting a sentence and leaving out the most important part, is in fact “taking out of context”.

  17. on 24 Jun 2014 at 2:41 am 17.alex said …

    “randomly bringing up the “salt water thing””

    demonstrates what every reader already knows. you’re a dumb motherfucker and your entire collection at http://goo.gl/7fbnA4 validates your stupidity.

    your entire, complete post:
    “623.alex, if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage) and serve her for the rest of his life.
    This is not so much a punishment, but a chance for redemption.”

    …is disgusting. that’s why you can’t find anybody that will support you on the thing. no matter how much you whine about me cutting it, it doesn’t change your vile, caveman view.

    go fuck yourself.

  18. on 24 Jun 2014 at 3:14 pm 18.freddies_dead said …

    213.the messenger said …

    230.freddies_dead, the bible is the key source for information on hell and heaven.

    The Lord of the Rings trilogy is the key source for information on the Shire and Mordor…

    The Harry Potter books are the key source for information on Hogwarts and Diagon Alley…

    Works of fictional that describe imaginary places aren’t sources of truth.

    I found specific verses and passages from the bible that prove my claim that hell is temporary.

    And I presented specific verses and passages from your book of myths that contradict your claim.

    Maybe you could stop begging the question and demonstrate a) that your God exists, b) that He divinely inspired the Bible and c) that Heaven and Hell exist. Only then could we even begin to take the Bible seriously as a key source of information regarding any of your ridiculous claims.

  19. on 25 Jun 2014 at 12:20 am 19.the messenger said …

    238.freddies_dead, the US constitution is the key source for information on how the US government is run. Just as the bible is the key source for information on heaven and hell.

    I provided thousands of eye witness accounts(by both religious and atheist people) of a Christian miracle. Also many documented heaven and hell experiences (also by both atheists and theists). That evidence proves that the Jewish/Christian GOD is real, and therefore the texts containing his teachings(the books of the bible, and some parts of the Talmund) are true.

    Lastly, you claim to have presented verses that contradict the claim that hell is temporary. This your problem; you interpret the bible through individual verses. The true way to interpret it is as a complete text and a complete message. All of the heaven and hell verses as one complete message about them.

  20. on 25 Jun 2014 at 12:26 am 20.alex said …

    221.the messenger said …

    bleh, motherfucker, bleh. same ole shit, from the same ole bullshit, motherfucker. until you come up with some original shit, i will continue to debunk your shit.

    your shit collection grows, yet again: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    go ahead hor, motherfucker. proclaim again that i, alex, don’t have any bullshit to offer.

  21. on 25 Jun 2014 at 2:14 am 21.the messenger said …

    240.alex, to quote you, I will stop “feeding the troll”.

    (Troll aka you.)

  22. on 25 Jun 2014 at 10:40 am 22.freddies_dead said …

    219.the messenger said …

    238.freddies_dead, the US constitution is the key source for information on how the US government is run.

    Because we know the US government exists. We can point out it’s buildings and the people who work there.

    Just as the bible is the key source for information on heaven and hell.

    2 places we can only imagine. Where is Heaven exactly? What about Hell? What’s the decor like? Do they have doors and windows? Carpets? Do they use IKEA furniture?

    I provided thousands of eye witness accounts(by both religious and atheist people) of a Christian miracle.

    Not entirely true. You presented an account of an alleged miracle which claimed that thousands of people experienced the miracle. There’s no actual evidence for the claims made by some of the people who were there and many of those claims actually contradicted each other as to what happened. So once again we’re left imagining what they claim to have seen. This may impress you but I don’t share your level of credulity.

    Also many documented heaven and hell experiences (also by both atheists and theists).

    Once again there’s no verifiable evidence here, just unsubstantiated claims.

    That evidence proves that the Jewish/Christian GOD is real,

    It’s simply not evidence. It’s a bunch of unsubstantiated claims – mostly from people who already believe in a God and are happy to let their confirmation bias rule what they think they experienced.

    and therefore the texts containing his teachings(the books of the bible, and some parts of the Talmund) are true.

    Your conclusion doesn’t follow from your unsubstantiated premises.

    Lastly, you claim to have presented verses that contradict the claim that hell is temporary. This your problem; you interpret the bible through individual verses. The true way to interpret it is as a complete text and a complete message. All of the heaven and hell verses as one complete message about them.

    So the verses that say hell is forever can be reconciled with the one verse you claim says it’s not? This is the “complete” message you’re dealing with here. A contradictory mish-mash of claims which have no referents in the real world. That is your problem not mine.

  23. on 25 Jun 2014 at 3:37 pm 23.the messenger said …

    242.freddies_dead, it is not contradictory. Remember, Matthew 18:8 states
    8 “If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away; it is better for you to enter life maimed or lame than to have two hands or two feet and to be thrown into the eternal fire.”.

    Although that verse says eternal fire(aka hell),it only says that only the bad parts of us will be in the eternal fire.

    Romans 10:13 states “13 For, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”. Thus proving that if we reach out to GOD, even from hell, we will be saved(aka go to heaven and out of hell), and our bad parts(our hate, lust, greed,….) will be felt in hell.

  24. on 25 Jun 2014 at 3:39 pm 24.the messenger said …

    242.freddies_dead, in that last sentence I meant to type “left in hell” not “felt in hell”.

    My Bad.

  25. on 25 Jun 2014 at 4:22 pm 25.freddies_dead said …

    223.the messenger said …

    242.freddies_dead, it is not contradictory.

    Of course it’s not contradictory to have different verses saying the opposite thing. Oh wait, yes it is.

    Remember, Matthew 18:8 states
    8 “If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away; it is better for you to enter life maimed or lame than to have two hands or two feet and to be thrown into the eternal fire.”.

    Although that verse says eternal fire(aka hell),it only says that only the bad parts of us will be in the eternal fire.

    No, it really doesn’t. It says it would be better to cut off your hand or foot in order to enter Heaven rather than keep it and go to Hell. There’s no way a plain reading of that verse gets you to “Your bad parts go to Hell while the rest of you goes to Heaven”.

    Romans 10:13 states “13 For, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.”. Thus proving that if we reach out to GOD, even from hell, we will be saved(aka go to heaven and out of hell), and our bad parts(our hate, lust, greed,….) will be felt in hell.

    We’ve been through this bullshit before. Matthew 25:46 – And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. 2 Thessalonians 1:9 – Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power. Mark 9:48 – Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. Even the dead get judged Daniel 12:2 – And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame [and] everlasting contempt. Plus God ain’t listening Isaiah 59:2 – But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid [his] face from you, that he will not hear.

    The whole concept of Hell – an eternal separation from God – laughs at your ridiculous claim.

  26. on 25 Jun 2014 at 8:39 pm 26.the messenger said …

    245.freddies_dead, it also is explaining that only the parts of us that cause us to sin (our hate, anger, greed,…) are cast into hell. Hell is often referred to as an “eternal fire” in the bible. Prophets usually used metaphors to explain things to people, much like Jesus’s parables. Therefore we conclude that the “cut off arm or foot” thing is a metaphor that John was using to explain GOD’s message. If the “cut off foot thing” is literal then why aren’t we seeing millions of Christians cutting off their feet?

  27. on 25 Jun 2014 at 9:48 pm 27.alex said …

    “If the “cut off foot thing” is literal then why aren’t we seeing millions of Christians cutting off their feet?”

    your line of thinking says, if millions of xtians aren’t doing it, it’s not to be taken literal?

  28. on 26 Jun 2014 at 10:10 am 28.freddies_dead said …

    226.the messenger said …

    245.freddies_dead, it also is explaining that only the parts of us that cause us to sin (our hate, anger, greed,…) are cast into hell.

    It does no such thing. It simply states that you’d be better off cutting off the parts that cause you sin because they will send the entirety of you to Hell if you let them. It’s an attempt to get you to stop sinning altogether. It doesn’t mean that your dick will go to Hell for fornicating while the rest of you gets to smell it burning while you lounge around in Heaven.

    Hell is often referred to as an “eternal fire” in the bible. Prophets usually used metaphors to explain things to people, much like Jesus’s parables.

    Never! And here I was thinking that the eating and drinking of Christ’s body and blood were a real thing … oh, wait, doesn’t the Catholic Church actually believe exactly that through the transubstantiation? If only we had somebody who could consistently tell us which bits were truly metaphorical (and what those metaphors mean) and which bits we should take literally i.e. that whole bit where they insist on stoning people to death – with real stones and real death – for instance.

    Therefore we conclude that the “cut off arm or foot” thing is a metaphor that John was using to explain GOD’s message. If the “cut off foot thing” is literal then why aren’t we seeing millions of Christians cutting off their feet?

    I’m well aware it’s most likely a metaphor. It’s you that is reading in the bizarre concept that literally only parts of you go to Hell. The reason millions of Christians aren’t cutting off their feet is that, unlike you, they realise that the passage actually says they should cut out sin if they want to go to Heaven instead of spending eternity in Hell.

  29. on 27 Jun 2014 at 6:17 pm 29.the messenger said …

    228.freddies_dead, if the “cutting off foot” verse is metaphorical, then what does it really mean, and why does it mention the fire? What is the purpose of mentioning the fire? The answer if obvious. The fire represents hell, and the removing of the foot(which is not literal) means that the bad qualities of us are cast into the fire(aka hell). Jesus constantly talked about removing bad qualities within us, and therefore it is logical to believe that John was saying the same thing in his “cutting off foot” metaphor.

    In Matthew 3:11 John speaks about fire again, but this time he says that the Messiah will baptize people with it. Jesus never took a tourch or oil and lit someone on fire to remove their sins, so what does john mean when he is talking about fire? It is clear that he is refering to the same fire that was mentioned in the “cutting foot off” verse. Baptism is the washing away of sins, and if the fire(aka hell) is used for baptising then it is obvious that hell is a place where our sins(and sinful qualities) are washed off and condemned while we rise from it and into heaven.

  30. on 27 Jun 2014 at 10:59 pm 30.the messenger said …

    228.freddies_dead, I miss spoke a few times in that comment. Here is the amended version of it.

    228.freddies_dead, if the “cutting off foot” verse is metaphorical, then what does it really mean, and why does it mention the fire? What is the purpose of mentioning the fire? The answer if obvious. The fire represents hell, and the removing of the foot(which is not literal) means that the bad qualities of us are cast into the fire(aka hell). Jesus constantly talked about removing bad qualities within us, and therefore it is logical to believe that he was saying the same thing in his “cutting off foot” metaphor.

    In Matthew 3:11 John speaks about fire, but he says that the Messiah will baptize people with it. Jesus never took a tourch or oil and lit someone on fire to remove their sins, so what does john mean when he is talking about fire? It is clear that he is refering to the same fire that was mentioned in the “cutting foot off” verse. Baptism is the washing away of sins, and if the fire(aka hell) is used for baptising then it is obvious that hell is a place where our sins(and sinful qualities) are washed off and condemned while we rise from it and into heaven.

  31. on 27 Jun 2014 at 11:09 pm 31.the messenger said …

    228.freddies_dead, comment continued….

    Don’t get me wrong, hell is a place of punishment but also of cleansing of sins. Our sins are payed off and our souls are cleansed of evil by our pain in hell, similar to the pain jesus had to go through in order to clean the world of it’s sins.

  32. on 27 Jun 2014 at 11:47 pm 32.alex said …

    “Don’t get me wrong, hell is a place of punishment but also of cleansing of sins.”

    does the pope say this? then, who the fuck are you? what makes you think you know better than the pope?

    does the pope agree with your “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage)”

    does the pope agree with your “Hell does not last forever.”

    does the pope agree with your “Allah and Yahweh are the same GOD”

    i can go on, but your entire collection here is proof of your bs: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    contradicting the pope means you ain’t catholic, but just another loud mouth motherfucker righteously tryna to preach.

    that’s right bitch. your posts have no creds as demonstrated by your previous bullshits.

    as for you hor, motherfucker. i have no bullshits to offer as an alternative to your crap. your entire bullshit collection at: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

  33. on 28 Jun 2014 at 12:05 am 33.the messenger said …

    252.alex, I’m no longer debating with you. You would rather throw insult, twist words, and take things out of context than have a logical discussion.

    You sad, strange little man.

  34. on 28 Jun 2014 at 12:26 am 34.alex said …

    “You would rather throw insult, twist words, and take things out of context than have a logical discussion.”

    what a moron. your entire collection at: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    is verbatum, with original wwgha links. how is that twisting words? the internet doesn’t lie, you bitch, motherfucker. even though you masquerade with your little moniker “messenger”, your shits are archived.

    whilst, i do post anonymously, what have i claimed? you on the other hand, had posted countless, stinky, disgusting shits as evidenced by: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    that’s right, bitch. you’re tired of me, but since i’m fortunate enough to job at home, i’ll keep calling out your bullshit.

    even though only few visitors stop by here, you’re still compelled to spew your shit don’t you? that’s ok, i’m still here waiting for my java build.

  35. on 30 Jun 2014 at 1:28 pm 35.freddies_dead said …

    230.the messenger said …

    228.freddies_dead, if the “cutting off foot” verse is metaphorical, then what does it really mean, and why does it mention the fire?>/i>

    From a plain reading it says to stop sinning and that you’d be better off cutting parts of yourself off (if they cause you to sin) if you’d rather go to Heaven than burn for all eternity in Hell. Why fire? Obvious, fire burns, burns hurt and no-one wants to burn forever. It’s a fairly typical religious fear tactic.

    What is the purpose of mentioning the fire? The answer if obvious. The fire represents hell, and the removing of the foot(which is not literal) means that the bad qualities of us are cast into the fire(aka hell).

    Odd. Nowhere in that verse does it mention anything about the parts that you cut off being cast into Hell. Not even metaphorically. You’re having to add to the Bible in order to create your own interpretation.

    Jesus constantly talked about removing bad qualities within us, and therefore it is logical to believe that he was saying the same thing in his “cutting off foot” metaphor.

    Did Jesus ever say anything directly about casting those “bad qualities” into Hell? I certainly don’t recall the chapter/verse if He did.

    In Matthew 3:11 John speaks about fire, but he says that the Messiah will baptize people with it. Jesus never took a tourch or oil and lit someone on fire to remove their sins, so what does john mean when he is talking about fire? It is clear that he is refering to the same fire that was mentioned in the “cutting foot off” verse. Baptism is the washing away of sins, and if the fire(aka hell) is used for baptising then it is obvious that hell is a place where our sins(and sinful qualities) are washed off and condemned while we rise from it and into heaven.

    John was talking to the Pharisees and Sadducees and basically said that Jesus would pass judgement on them regardless, gathering the wheat to him and sending the chaff into the unquenchable fire. Again, a plain reading suggests we’re talking about whole people here, not bad bits and good bits going to different places.

    231.the messenger said …

    Don’t get me wrong, hell is a place of punishment but also of cleansing of sins. Our sins are payed off and our souls are cleansed of evil by our pain in hell, similar to the pain jesus had to go through in order to clean the world of it’s sins.

    There’s nothing in the Bible about getting out of Hell once you’ve been sent there for your sins, instead we read about a place where you do nothing but suffer. There’s no hope and no release.

    You’re performing eisegesis here, not exegesis.

    Not that any of this matters as we’re still just talking about the imaginary. Imaginary Heavens, imaginary Hells, imaginary Gods.

  36. on 30 Jun 2014 at 1:32 pm 36.freddies_dead said …

    Mmmm italics all messed up so I’ll post it again.

    230.the messenger said …

    228.freddies_dead, if the “cutting off foot” verse is metaphorical, then what does it really mean, and why does it mention the fire?

    From a plain reading it says to stop sinning and that you’d be better off cutting parts of yourself off (if they cause you to sin) if you’d rather go to Heaven than burn for all eternity in Hell. Why fire? Obvious, fire burns, burns hurt and no-one wants to burn forever. It’s a fairly typical religious fear tactic.

    What is the purpose of mentioning the fire? The answer if obvious. The fire represents hell, and the removing of the foot(which is not literal) means that the bad qualities of us are cast into the fire(aka hell).

    Odd. Nowhere in that verse does it mention anything about the parts that you cut off being cast into Hell. Not even metaphorically. You’re having to add to the Bible in order to create your own interpretation.

    Jesus constantly talked about removing bad qualities within us, and therefore it is logical to believe that he was saying the same thing in his “cutting off foot” metaphor.

    Did Jesus ever say anything directly about casting those “bad qualities” into Hell? I certainly don’t recall the chapter/verse if He did.

    In Matthew 3:11 John speaks about fire, but he says that the Messiah will baptize people with it. Jesus never took a tourch or oil and lit someone on fire to remove their sins, so what does john mean when he is talking about fire? It is clear that he is refering to the same fire that was mentioned in the “cutting foot off” verse. Baptism is the washing away of sins, and if the fire(aka hell) is used for baptising then it is obvious that hell is a place where our sins(and sinful qualities) are washed off and condemned while we rise from it and into heaven.

    John was talking to the Pharisees and Sadducees and basically said that Jesus would pass judgement on them regardless, gathering the wheat to him and sending the chaff into the unquenchable fire. Again, a plain reading suggests we’re talking about whole people here, not bad bits and good bits going to different places.

    231.the messenger said …

    Don’t get me wrong, hell is a place of punishment but also of cleansing of sins. Our sins are payed off and our souls are cleansed of evil by our pain in hell, similar to the pain jesus had to go through in order to clean the world of it’s sins.

    There’s nothing in the Bible about getting out of Hell once you’ve been sent there for your sins, instead we read about a place where you do nothing but suffer. There’s no hope and no release.

    You’re performing eisegesis here, not exegesis.

    Not that any of this matters as we’re still just talking about the imaginary. Imaginary Heavens, imaginary Hells, imaginary Gods.

  37. on 01 Jul 2014 at 2:50 am 37.the messenger said …

    255.freddies_dead, if the bible truly says that hell is forever then why does it say that GOD will never forsake us (Deuteronomy 31:6, Deuteronomy 31:8, and many other verses)? If hell is eternal then that would mean that he has forsaken us. Therefore hell cannot possibly be eternal.

    You stated:”Nowhere in that verse does it mention anything about the parts that you cut off being cast into Hell. Not even metaphorically. You’re having to add to the Bible in order to create your own interpretation.”

    Tell me, do you deny that hell is often referred to in the bible as a fire? It depends on how it is interpreted. Fire is often associated and referred to as hell in the bible, therefore leading me to believe that Jesus was referring to hell in that statement.

    Psalm 9:10, Romans 10:13, and Acts 2:21 all say that GOD will save us if we call upon him. Hell is not excluded in any of these verses, so therefore it is logical to believe that GOD is offering all sinners a way to escape hell. Jesus came, suffered, and died to save sinners. If anyone went to hell forever then Jesus would have died for nothing, which furthers my belief that Hell is a temporary punishment, and that any verse that says hell is eternal is simply an exaggeration or (as I believe) referring to just our bad qualities burning forever.

    John was talking about how he removed sin and how Jesus would remove sin. He did not make a reference to the temple sacrifices of the calf and other various animals.

  38. on 01 Jul 2014 at 3:05 am 38.the messenger said …

    256.freddies_dead, the following is not an attempt to sway you to my views, it is simply a note of thanks.

    Thank you for being respectful throughout this ongoing debate, unlike Alex who enjoys insulting anyone who disagrees with his views.

    I respect you brother.

  39. on 01 Jul 2014 at 2:38 pm 39.alex said …

    “unlike Alex who enjoys insulting anyone who disagrees with his views.”

    you are a moron as evidenced by: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    i enjoy insulting you as much as i enjoy flushing the toilet. you are shit, no? anybody here jumping up and defending your “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her…”?

    that’s why i keep bring up your bullshit. you try to hide behind your righteous message, but underneath, you’re nothing but a piece of shit.

    go fuck yourself, motherfucker.

  40. on 01 Jul 2014 at 3:13 pm 40.freddies_dead said …

    237.the messenger said …

    255.freddies_dead, if the bible truly says that hell is forever then why does it say that GOD will never forsake us (Deuteronomy 31:6, Deuteronomy 31:8, and many other verses)? If hell is eternal then that would mean that he has forsaken us. Therefore hell cannot possibly be eternal.

    Those passages were spoken to living men, urging them to be faithful and fear not because God would stand by them as they went out into Jordan. The reason Hell is eternal is because you go there after the judgement of God. The whole point of Hell is that it’s a place where you are removed from the presence of God. He hasn’t forsaken you, He has judged that that is where you belong and that is where you will stay … for ever.

    You stated:”Nowhere in that verse does it mention anything about the parts that you cut off being cast into Hell. Not even metaphorically. You’re having to add to the Bible in order to create your own interpretation.”

    Tell me, do you deny that hell is often referred to in the bible as a fire?

    No I don’t.

    It depends on how it is interpreted.

    Agreed. However, my interpretation doesn’t require anything to be added to the text in order to make sense (as much as anything can be said to make sense amid the general incoherence of the Bible).

    Fire is often associated and referred to as hell in the bible, therefore leading me to believe that Jesus was referring to hell in that statement.

    He may well have been but nowhere does he state that only the bad bits go to Hell while the good bits go to Heaven, that’s all you.

    Psalm 9:10, Romans 10:13, and Acts 2:21 all say that GOD will save us if we call upon him. Hell is not excluded in any of these verses, so therefore it is logical to believe that GOD is offering all sinners a way to escape hell.

    Psalm 9 is David praising the Lord for his rebuke of the nations. If you take a quick look at 9:5 you’ll note how God “hast rebuked the heathen”, “hast destroyed the wicked” and “hast put out their name for ever and ever”. Because the judgement from God is an eternity (ever and ever) in Hell.

    Romans 10:13 is part of the Pauline epistles which concern salvation. Every activity mentioned throughout those epistles is an action taken by the living and Paul’s words continually tell how the judgement will come after death. Romans 7:1 “Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?”

    Acts 2:21 (the author is traditionally identified as Luke the Evangelist) talks of what the apostles did as part of Jesus’ commission. Again, they go out and speak to the living, explaining what God will do as the day of judgement nears.

    There’s no need for those verses to exclude Hell as it is excluded implicitly by them being for the living. Hell only comes into it after judgement has taken place i.e. after you’re dead. There are no end of verses that mention that only one man escaped from Hell – Jesus – who did so after a dodgy long weekend being dead.

    Jesus came, suffered, and died to save sinners. If anyone went to hell forever then Jesus would have died for nothing, which furthers my belief that Hell is a temporary punishment, and that any verse that says hell is eternal is simply an exaggeration or (as I believe) referring to just our bad qualities burning forever.

    Of course Jesus died for nothing. His story hasn’t made a blind bit of difference. People continue to sin regardless of what the Bible told us Jesus’ mission was. That’s got nothing to do with Hell being permanent and all to do with the stories being myths. Jesus was an imaginary deity who was alleged to have spent a long weekend in an imaginary place before being whisked off to another imaginary place. If Jesus truly existed and died to end sin we’d be living in a world without sin. We aren’t. So the writers of the Bible made up some shit about how it’ll take some time before the judgement day finally arrives. It’s been 2000+ years and we’re still waiting – despite the Bible claiming that there were some there that day who would still be alive to see the return of Jesus. That it doesn’t make any sense is not my problem as I’m not the one espousing a book of myths as some infallible source of knowledge.

    John was talking about how he removed sin and how Jesus would remove sin. He did not make a reference to the temple sacrifices of the calf and other various animals.

    John was talking about Jesus’ judgement of the Pharisees and Sadducees. According to the myth He’d remove sin alright, by casting the sinners into Hell’s unquenchable flames.

  41. on 01 Jul 2014 at 11:01 pm 41.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    Lol!!!!

    Nothing cutier than atheist theologians!!
    It is precious and it is hilarious!! Really! They don”t believe…yet….they take time to do hermeneutics for believers. How absolutely adorable of them :)

    Alex, you sweet talking rascal….you had at the first and hundredth f-bomb!……lol!!!!

  42. on 02 Jul 2014 at 2:17 am 42.alex said …

    “Nothing cutier than atheist theologians!!”

    but it’s ok with you that the same motherfucker who uttered “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her…” is perfectly legit to interpret the bullshit bible? to those who don’t know, it’s the idiot fuckhead otherwise known as “messenger”. here’s his entire bullshit collection again: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    but of course, you’re the proven lying motherfucker, aka, martin, science guy, biff, xenon, little ‘A’, Sweetness, boz, RL Wooten, ‘Everyone’, and of course Horatio. it’s all here http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

    “….you had at the first and hundredth f-bomb!……”

    you dumb motherfucker. if i had the millionth, motherfucking, f-bomb, it still doesn’t change your bullshit god, does it?

    asshole.

  43. on 02 Jul 2014 at 2:25 am 43.the messenger said …

    260.freddies_dead, those verses speak of GOD’s loyalty to us, not our faith in him.

    I did not add anything to the text, I simply make a logical conclusion based on text evidence.

    Giving us an eternal punishment is to forsake us. But GOD will never forsake us(according to David and many others), therefore hell cannot be a forever punishment.

    Due to the fact that David states that GOD will not forsake us, and that Jesus’s message is about forgiveness for all sinners, it is logical to believe that David’s statements about “eternal punishment” are simply an exaggeration or a figure of speech representing a long punishment(but not necessarily a eternal one).

    Yes in psalm David thanks GOD for rebuking the other nations, but he also states that GOD will never people who seek him. Therefore if we reach out to GOD in hell he will save us from it.

    Jesus died so that all sins will be washed off the earth, not to stop humans from sinning completely. Yes people still sin, but because of Jesus’s sacrifice the sins are immediately washed clean of them.

    The new covenant is largely about forgiveness. Jesus’s message was all about loving GOD and our neighbors as much as we love our selves and forgiving others. Jesus did not proclaim anything about an eternal punishment, but an eternal love and forgiveness. He did not come to condemn sinners, he came to save them all.

    John was telling the pharressies and saddases about how Jesus would cleans people of sin, but he never said anything about Jesus casting anyone into hell. And nowhere in that entire text is that hinted either.

  44. on 02 Jul 2014 at 2:32 am 44.the messenger said …

    I made some errors. Sorry. Here is the corrected version.

    260.freddies_dead, those verses speak of GOD’s loyalty to us, not our faith in him.

    I did not add anything to the text, I simply made a logical conclusion based on text evidence.

    Giving us an eternal punishment is to forsake us. But GOD will never forsake us(according to David and many others), therefore hell cannot be am eternal punishment.

    Due to the fact that David states that GOD will not forsake us, and that Jesus’s message is about forgiveness for all sinners(1 Timothy 1:15), it is logical to believe that David’s statements about “eternal punishment” are simply an exaggeration or a figure of speech representing a long punishment(but not necessarily a eternal one).

    Yes in Psalm 9 David thanks GOD for rebuking the other nations, but he also states that GOD will never forsake people who seek him. Therefore if we reach out to GOD, in hell or anywhere, he will save us from it.

    Jesus died so that all sins will be washed off the earth, not to stop humans from sinning completely. Yes people still sin, but because of Jesus’s sacrifice we are immediately washed clean of them.

    The new covenant is largely about forgiveness. Jesus’s message was all about loving GOD and our neighbors as much as we love our selves and forgiving others. Jesus did not proclaim anything about an eternal punishment, but an eternal love and forgiveness. He did not come to condemn sinners, he came to save them all.

    John was telling the pharressies and saddases about how Jesus would cleans people of sin, but he never said anything about Jesus casting anyone into hell. And nowhere in that entire text is that hinted either.

  45. on 02 Jul 2014 at 2:35 am 45.alex said …

    “I did not add anything to the text, I simply make a logical conclusion based on text evidence.”

    and where did your motherfucking ass find the text evidence that made you conclude “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her…”?

    and where did your motherfucking ass find the text evidence that made you conclude “if you have a glass of salt water and you pour more water in(fresh water), it does not change the salinity, ph, temp or chemistry”?

    cite the verses you dumb motherfucker. do it because your disciple “hor” needs you to live up to your hero status.

  46. on 02 Jul 2014 at 4:12 am 46.the messenger said …

    260.freddies_dead, the following are some reasons and information that leads me to believe in GOD.

    First and foremost, my great-grandfather (and his brother), his son my grandfather, my grandmother, and their son my father. As an early Irish immigrant to America my grandfather grew up very poor and poverty stricken, but at least he had family, but not for long because shortly after their arrival to America his parents died in a car accident. Soon after their deaths my grandfather (at the age of 12) and his younger brother (age 8) were going to be put into a foster home. Fearing for his brother, my grandfather and his brother ran away from the orphanage and lived on the streets for the next 10 years. What got them through it all was their bond as brothers and their faith in the almighty.

    After my Great grandfather earned enough money to buy a house for him and his brother, he got married and had a son(my grandfather). My grandfather got married to a polish woman named Rita(my grandmother), and they had 2 sons(one is my father) and 3 daughters. Life was good for them and their Catholic faith grew. But then my grandmother became very ill with a brain tumor and many other medical issues that was slowly killing her. Both my grandfather and father witnessed her suffering until she became a invalid and they had to unplug all of the devices keeping her alive soon after. Most people would have gone off the deep end and the family would have fallen, but they kept their faith in GOD and it bound them together as a family and now we are stronger than ever.

    To look upon the lives of my father, grandfather and great grandfather and say that the faith that got them through it all is actually false would be completely insane. To hold a family together through all that pain would take more than a human force. I believe that GOD is real and that he got my family through it.

  47. on 02 Jul 2014 at 4:20 am 47.the messenger said …

    comment continued…..

    In 13 October 1917, 30,000 to 100,000 people(theists and atheists alike) gathered near Fátima, Portugal and witnessed a foretold miracle in which a large sphere of light appeared in the sky and crashed down into the ground nearby. None of the witnesses denied that it happened.

  48. on 02 Jul 2014 at 4:38 am 48.the messenger said …

    Comment continued….

    I realize that there is controversy over what was seen in Portugal. Some claimed to see just the light, but others(including atheists that are now converts) claim to have seen Mary, Jesus, joseph, or the entire holy family. I personal believe that what appeared was a combination of all of those things and that some people honed in on the first things that they saw happening.

    Dr. Eben Alexander ( well renowned neurosurgeon ) documented an afterlife experience that he had in which he left his body and saw his body in the hospital and also went to heaven. Here is a quote from him. “Critics have maintained that my near-death experience, like similar experiences others before me have claimed, was a brain-based delusion cobbled together by my synapses only after they had somehow recovered from the blistering weeklong attack. […] I also experienced that transitional period, when my mind began to regain consciousness: I remember a vivid paranoid nightmare in which my wife and doctors were trying to kill me, and I was only saved from certain death by a ninja couple after being pushed from a 60-story cancer hospital in south Florida. But that period of disorientation and delusion had absolutely nothing to do with what happened to me before my cortex began to recover: the period, that is, when it was shut down and incapable of supporting consciousness at all. During that period, I experienced something very similar to what countless other people who have undergone near-death experiences have witnessed: the transition to a realm beyond the physical, and a vast broadening of my consciousness. The only real difference between my experience and those others is that my brain was, essentially, deader than theirs.”

  49. on 02 Jul 2014 at 4:48 am 49.the messenger said …

    Fred, just incase this comes up in the debate, I do not support the literal interpretation of the creation story or Noah as literal. The catholic church and countless Rabbis also oppose the literal interpretation of those stories.

    P.S., the parts of genesis regarding Abraham(father of the Jews and Samaritans) are literal.

  50. on 02 Jul 2014 at 11:34 am 50.alex said …

    “I do not support the literal interpretation of the creation story or Noah as literal.”

    “the parts of genesis regarding Abraham(father of the Jews and Samaritans) are literal.”

    after all the veneer is stripped away, the messenger’s distilled beliefs lay bare. he and him alone, is the lone interpreter of what parts of the bible are literal. he cites that the catholic church and rabbis oppose the literal interpretation of those stories, but he, the messenger, motherfucker, get’s to say which stories are literal. that’s why none of these motherfuckers can get their interpretation straight. this is literal, this is not, bleh, motherfucking bleh. face it, bitches, the whole story shit is just that, crap. step back even more, messenger’s/hor’s god is the real deal, muslims say allah, scientologists say infinity, what a crock.

    here’s your twin piles of shit: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS – hor’s, http://goo.gl/7fbnA4 – messenger’s

  51. on 02 Jul 2014 at 11:41 am 51.alex said …

    248.the messenger said …

    having messenger’s ass handed to him numerous times, messenger desperately tries one more time, by pathetically posting his testimonial. i did this, this happened to me, i witnessed this, living a lie. please, please, listen to me, wahhh, motherfucking waaah.

    delusional bitch, you’re gonna die. just like the rest of us. quit your shit. not content with your delusion that i’m going to hell? must you keep posting your bullshit here? well, bring it, motherfucker. i will continue to repudiate your motherfucking, ass. let the readers decide.

    here’s your entire pile of shit collection: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    messenger’s favorite quote: “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her”

    despicable bitch, motherfucker.

  52. on 02 Jul 2014 at 2:48 pm 52.freddies_dead said …

    241.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    Lol!!!!

    Nothing cutier than atheist theologians!!

    And there’s nothing sadder than a pathetic liar for Jesus such as yourself.

    It is precious and it is hilarious!! Really! They don”t believe…yet….they take time to do hermeneutics for believers. How absolutely adorable of them :)

    I would ask whether you understand that hermeneutics is required to interpret any text – not just your specific book of myths – but you’d probably lie in response.

    And of course you wouldn’t approve of me forming an opinion from a plain reading of the text, because doing so shows the generally incoherent and occasionally horrific nature of your book of myths.

  53. on 02 Jul 2014 at 3:42 pm 53.freddies_dead said …

    244.the messenger said …

    I made some errors. Sorry. Here is the corrected version.

    260.freddies_dead, those verses speak of GOD’s loyalty to us, not our faith in him.

    To which verses are you referring to here?

    I did not add anything to the text, I simply made a logical conclusion based on text evidence.

    Where in the text evidence does it say that only the bad parts of people will be cast into Hell while the good bits get to reside in Heaven? The answer, of course, is nowhere. Instead the text says quite clearly that you get sent to one place or the other and that’s where you stay for the rest of eternity.

    Giving us an eternal punishment is to forsake us. But GOD will never forsake us(according to David and many others), therefore hell cannot be am eternal punishment.

    God hasn’t forsaken you to Hell. He has quite deliberately planned for you to go there and mantains Hell for your eternal punishment.

    Due to the fact that David states that GOD will not forsake us, and that Jesus’s message is about forgiveness for all sinners(1 Timothy 1:15), it is logical to believe that David’s statements about “eternal punishment” are simply an exaggeration or a figure of speech representing a long punishment(but not necessarily a eternal one).

    Your conclusion may fit with your premises but your premises don’t reflect the actual texts that they’re based upon. There’s no exaggeration from David and Jesus’ message is quite plain in that you should repent and trust in God before you face judgement (i.e. before you die) as afterwards is too late. You get judged and you spend the rest of eternity wherever God decides you belong.

    Yes in Psalm 9 David thanks GOD for rebuking the other nations, but he also states that GOD will never forsake people who seek him. Therefore if we reach out to GOD, in hell or anywhere, he will save us from it.

    Day of your judgement, messy, when is it? According to the Bible it’s when you die. That’s when you no longer have to seek God. He’s right there, following His plan and sending you to Heaven or Hell accordingly. What’s the point of seeking God when you’ve already found Him and He’s judged you and found you wanting? Exactly how will you seek God as you spend eternity wailing and gnashing your teeth?

    Jesus died so that all sins will be washed off the earth, not to stop humans from sinning completely. Yes people still sin, but because of Jesus’s sacrifice we are immediately washed clean of them.

    The new covenant is largely about forgiveness. Jesus’s message was all about loving GOD and our neighbors as much as we love our selves and forgiving others. Jesus did not proclaim anything about an eternal punishment, but an eternal love and forgiveness. He did not come to condemn sinners, he came to save them all.

    A get out of Hell free card. How convenient. Of course your “bits to Hell, bits to Heaven” theory doesn’t fit with this claim. If you’re washed clean of sin each time then there’s nothing to go to Hell … not even bits. You don’t appear to have thought this through.

    The part about eternal love and forgiveness only makes sense if no-one goes to Hell since Jesus was crucified. Is that your claim? That no-one goes to Hell any more since Jesus paid the price?

    You also say Jesus never proclaimed anything about eternal punishment and yet, in Matthew 18:8 (one of the verses you’ve relied upon) He states that you’ll be thrown into the eternal fire.

    John was telling the pharressies and saddases about how Jesus would cleans people of sin, but he never said anything about Jesus casting anyone into hell. And nowhere in that entire text is that hinted either.

    Just what do you think a baptism by fire actually is, messy? The context is given in Matthew 3:7-12. The Pharisees and Sadducees had come to avoid God’s wrath only for John to warn them that God would not be fooled by their insincerity. In verse 10 there’s the bad fruit cast into the fire by God and in 12 there’s Jesus purging the floor, gathering the good wheat to Him and throwing the chaff into the unquenchable fire. That’s how Jesus would cleanse the sin – by throwing the sinners (chaff) into Hell.

  54. on 02 Jul 2014 at 3:52 pm 54.freddies_dead said …

    246.the messenger said …

    260.freddies_dead, the following are some reasons and information that leads me to believe in GOD.

    First and foremost, my great-grandfather (and his brother), his son my grandfather, my grandmother, and their son my father. As an early Irish immigrant to America my grandfather grew up very poor and poverty stricken, but at least he had family, but not for long because shortly after their arrival to America his parents died in a car accident. Soon after their deaths my grandfather (at the age of 12) and his younger brother (age 8) were going to be put into a foster home. Fearing for his brother, my grandfather and his brother ran away from the orphanage and lived on the streets for the next 10 years. What got them through it all was their bond as brothers and their faith in the almighty.

    After my Great grandfather earned enough money to buy a house for him and his brother, he got married and had a son(my grandfather). My grandfather got married to a polish woman named Rita(my grandmother), and they had 2 sons(one is my father) and 3 daughters. Life was good for them and their Catholic faith grew. But then my grandmother became very ill with a brain tumor and many other medical issues that was slowly killing her. Both my grandfather and father witnessed her suffering until she became a invalid and they had to unplug all of the devices keeping her alive soon after. Most people would have gone off the deep end and the family would have fallen, but they kept their faith in GOD and it bound them together as a family and now we are stronger than ever.

    To look upon the lives of my father, grandfather and great grandfather and say that the faith that got them through it all is actually false would be completely insane. To hold a family together through all that pain would take more than a human force. I believe that GOD is real and that he got my family through it.

    A loving God wouldn’t have made your family suffer in the first place, messy. What you describe here is exactly what we’d expect if there is no God. Things happen to people. Sometimes they’re good things, sometimes they’re bad things. Sometimes a family deals with it, sometimes they don’t – do you think there aren’t families who have suffered similar but that couldn’t make it through as a family. Guess what, they’ll simply say it was God’s will that they split apart. They’ll make new bonds and claim their God did it all for a reason. Even though, like your story, it’s a story that fits perfectly without a God.

    I’m not going to revisit the so called Fatima miracle, we’ve been through it already. I’m not impressed.

    As for Alexander – his story doesn’t hold water (just look at the criticism and reaction section from Wiki).

  55. on 02 Jul 2014 at 5:52 pm 55.the messenger said …

    270.alex, I am not a lone interpreter. The catholic church does not interpret the noah or adam and eve story as literal either.

    Alex, get you head out of your butt and see the light of day.

  56. on 02 Jul 2014 at 5:54 pm 56.the messenger said …

    271.alex, once again you have taken something out of context in order to deceive people from it’s true meaning.

    I pity you.

  57. on 02 Jul 2014 at 6:53 pm 57.the messenger said …

    273.freddies_dead, my apologies. I should have labeled them. My bad.

    When I said “260.freddies_dead, those verses speak of GOD’s loyalty to us, not our faith in him” I was responding to your statement(“Those passages were spoken to living men, urging them to be faithful and fear not because God would stand by them as they went out into Jordan.”) and I was referring to these verses Deuteronomy 31:6, Deuteronomy 31:8.

    I explained already that since “fire” is often associated with hell, and that GOD will never forsake us, it is logical to conclude that the meaning of Jesus’s “cut off foot and cast into the fire” metaphor means that our sinful parts “the foot” will be cut from us and cast into hell.

    To forsake someone is to leave them. If GOD leaves us to burn forever then he has forsaken us. Since GOD will never forsake us he will never let our punishment be forever.

    I agree that Jesus wants us to repent before we are judged, but in the book of revelations GOD will Judge all of us, and if we seek him he will save us(revelation 3:20), even if we are in hell(due to the fact that hell is not excluded in that verse).

    It is not a “get out of jail free card”. Simply because we are clean of sins doesn’t mean that we won’t get punished(either in this life or the next) for sinning.

    Matthew 18:8 states that our foot(a metaphor for our bad qualities, as I explained) will be cast into the eternal fire.

    In Matthew 3:7-12 John was telling them that they would be put into hell if their repentance was not sincere, but he also explained that Jesus(the calf) would burn( like in the temple sacrifices needed for repentance in the old covenant). It could also mean burning with the holy spirit(which is not a painful fire).

  58. on 02 Jul 2014 at 7:00 pm 58.the messenger said …

    274.freddies_dead, GOD new that those hard times would strengthen my family. He knew in the long run that the suffering was necessary to make my family the strong and loving people that they are today. Without that suffering we would not be as strong as we are now.

    The reason that other families did not stay together is because they did not seek GOD and did not keep the faith. Or they were being punished for their own sins.

    Lastly, I still stand by the “miracle of the sun”.

  59. on 02 Jul 2014 at 7:31 pm 59.alex said …

    “I am not a lone interpreter.”

    then why don’t you cite the church and others instead of righteously, repeatedly saying shit, lika “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her”?

    oops, my bad. this is your original lone interpretation, ain’t it? no? cite it then, you dumb motherfucker.

    call me a liar all you want, but you can’t run away from your archives here: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    if you want to compare notes, here’s hor’s: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

  60. on 02 Jul 2014 at 11:54 pm 60.alex said …

    “…you have taken something out of context in order to deceive people from it’s true meaning.”

    which part of this pile of shit of yours http://goo.gl/7fbnA4? did i take out of context?

    this “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her”? you dumbass, no matter how you try to spin it by claiming out of context, your post was and is still, toxic. here’s the entirety:

    “623.alex, if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage) and serve her for the rest of his life.

    This is not so much a punishment, but a chance for redemption.”

    did my quote change its meaning? fuck, motherfucking, no. that’s why you are indeed, the dumb motherfucker.

  61. on 03 Jul 2014 at 12:11 am 61.alex said …

    here’s another gem of your’s that somebody pointed out.

    “but after the great flood that covered the earth, these few species of animals that were on the ark multiplied and evolved into different kinds of animals and kept multiplying and changing and forming new species, and eventually formed into the animals that are with us today.”

    is this taken out of context? do i need to explain why this stupid ass, post of yours, validates your moniker, “dumbass motherfucker”? i bet you can’t find any arguments against your stoopid ass post, can you? of course, as you’ve demonstrated before, you’re too damn lazy to even try to look it up, hence your previous ignorance on “cubits”, which you looked up after getting embarrassed into doing it.

    any xtian homies here, or anywhere else agree with the dumbass messenger’s post on the ark animals? chirp? chirp?

    see?, that’s why you’re not qualified to interpret anything, you dumb motherfucker.

  62. on 03 Jul 2014 at 12:50 am 62.alex said …

    congrats messenger, more and more people are reading your shit collection at: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    they’re even writing me about their favorite quotes of yours. here’s one that was pointed out.

    “P.S. in the bible, GOD only killed bad people, like in the flood.”

    i won’t even clue you in. you’re so dumb, you can’t even see the the stupid in the quote, can’t you? out of context? don’t think so, here goes the entire post:

    “924.alex, you are so stupid.

    People have to leave the earth so day. Death of the human body is nessessary. P.S. in the bible, GOD only killed bad people, like in the flood.

    The burnt flesh is animal flesh. It is just like the smell of a barbecue. What is bad about that.

    GOD fears no one.”, but the stupid ass can’t solve chariots of iron? har!

    stoopid, dumbass, messenger, spreading his own personal version of his bullshit gospel.

  63. on 03 Jul 2014 at 1:44 am 63.the messenger said …

    279.alex, Dude, I haven’t talked about that quote in quite a while. You are the one that keeps bringing it up you idiot.

  64. on 03 Jul 2014 at 1:46 am 64.the messenger said …

    279.alex, I am not righteously saying anything. I am simply spreading GOD’s teachings.

    You have problems.

  65. on 03 Jul 2014 at 1:48 am 65.the messenger said …

    281.alex, that was simply a theory that some protestants believe. I am a catholic. The catholic church and my self do not support the literal interpretation of Noah or Adam and eve.

  66. on 03 Jul 2014 at 1:53 am 66.the messenger said …

    282.alex, are you on drugs or something?

  67. on 03 Jul 2014 at 2:02 am 67.alex said …

    “The catholic church and my self do not support the literal interpretation….”

    that makes you the self appointed interpreter.
    according to your pile of shit: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    you’re quoted with:

    “..my interpretation is not just somewhat catholic..”

    “My interpretation of the bible is trustworthy…”

    “my interpretation says that salvation can be reached outside of the church…”

    “The true way to interpret it is as a complete text…”

    shall i continue? i ain’t making this up, look it up in your bullshit collection at: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    you, in your own mind, are the annointed one and only interpreter. no? then why not fall in line with the rest of the catholic shit and humbly state that “the catholic church interprets” instead of your “my interpretation” or “the true way to interpret”.

    but you won’t, because you’re a dumbass motherfucker and i will continue to call out your bullshit as long as i work from home and i see your stinky drivel fucking up this blog.

    dumb, motherfucker.

  68. on 03 Jul 2014 at 2:05 am 68.alex said …

    “alex, are you on drugs or something?”

    says, the dumbass motherfucker, that said:

    “I have also seen heaven my self and it is amazing.”

    it’s all here in messenger’s stinky pile of shit: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    if you’re not on drugs, what’s your excuse? shit for brains? dumbass, motherfucker.

  69. on 03 Jul 2014 at 2:09 am 69.alex said …

    “You have problems.”

    says the self professed catholic that even cherry picks from his own religion’s delusional basket. why else would the motherfucker keep referring to his own interpretation?

    this is a big problem:
    “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage)”

    that’s why you’ll never live it down, bitch, motherfucker.

    it’s just typical content from your shit book: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

  70. on 03 Jul 2014 at 2:12 am 70.alex said …

    “Dude, I haven’t talked about that quote in quite a while. You are the one that keeps bringing it up you idiot.”

    and you would love for me to shut up about it and let you wave your righteous bullshit flag all over the place?

    oppositto, mon friendo, motherfucko. here’s your book again: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    check it out. it’s blessed. it magically updates itself with your latest bullshit.

  71. on 03 Jul 2014 at 2:44 am 71.the messenger said …

    287.alex, dude I am a catholic, therefore I share the same interpretation as they do. I did not self interpret any of this you idiot. I am simply spreading the catholic interpretation.

  72. on 03 Jul 2014 at 2:46 am 72.the messenger said …

    287.alex, when I said “..my interpretation is not just somewhat catholic..” I was referring to the corrupt medieval catholic church. I am a part of the modern one, and therefore their interpretation is my interpretation.

  73. on 03 Jul 2014 at 2:48 am 73.the messenger said …

    288.alex, I already told you IT WAS JUST A DREAM, YOU IDIOTIC PARROT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  74. on 03 Jul 2014 at 2:52 am 74.the messenger said …

    289.alex, If a man rapes a woman he must serve her for the rest of his life and bind(marry; as in a joining together, but not in holy matrimony) himself to her.

    She gets to punish the man that wronged her. HOW IS THAT BAD?

  75. on 03 Jul 2014 at 2:53 am 75.the messenger said …

    289.alex, I am not going to feed the troll(alex) any more. Like a rat without food, he will starve from lack of attention.

  76. on 03 Jul 2014 at 3:29 am 76.alex said …

    “I am simply spreading the catholic interpretation.”

    which part of the catholic manifesto says this?

    “289.alex, If a man rapes a woman he must serve her for the rest of his life and bind(marry; as in a joining together, but not in holy matrimony) himself to her.”

    you’re a lying bitch, motherfucker. it’s all here: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

  77. on 03 Jul 2014 at 3:32 am 77.alex said …

    “I am a part of the modern one, and therefore their interpretation is my interpretation.”

    which part of the catholic interpretation says this?
    “289.alex, If a man rapes a woman he must serve her for the rest of his life and bind(marry; as in a joining together, but not in holy matrimony) himself to her.”

    or do you just reserve this for yourself and your sexual fantasies? you can’t spin it can’t you? it’s all part of your collection http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

  78. on 03 Jul 2014 at 3:36 am 78.alex said …

    “288.alex, I already told you IT WAS JUST A DREAM”

    and which parts of your bullshit collection at http://goo.gl/7fbnA4 are supposed to be dreams and which ones are literal?

    you just posted this a few minutes ago and it confirms that you’re a dumbass, motherfucker.

    “289.alex, If a man rapes a woman he must serve her for the rest of his life and bind(marry; as in a joining together, but not in holy matrimony) himself to her.
    She gets to punish the man that wronged her. HOW IS THAT BAD?”

    as usual, your book magically grows. why not, your bullshit is like fertilizer. check it out http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

  79. on 03 Jul 2014 at 3:46 am 79.alex said …

    “289.alex, I am not going to feed the troll(alex) any more.”

    no, motherfucker. you can’t help yourself. you persist in trying to spread your vile. even with the sparse audience, you can’t help it? your intoxicating bullshit religion compels you. why not? it’s all prearranged, set in motion by your omniscient god? yah?

    but as long as i’m working on a computer, my bullshit alert app notifies me whenever you post your crap.

    count on my sharp rebuke to your motherfucking ass.

    your book will always be posted here as a stark reminder that you’re a piece of shit with no credibility whatsoever. here it is again: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

  80. on 03 Jul 2014 at 3:52 am 80.alex said …

    “YOU IDIOTIC PARROT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

    the best you can do? you no likey your book: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    it’s a horrible reality check ain’t it? you try and try to be righteous and say all the right things and this little jewel of yours just makes it all bull doesn’t it?

    your words:

    “289.alex, If a man rapes a woman he must serve her for the rest of his life and bind(marry; as in a joining together, but not in holy matrimony) himself to her.
    She gets to punish the man that wronged her.

    HOW IS THAT BAD?”

    ironically, about the rape shit, you still don’t get why nobody is speaking up on your behalf????

  81. on 07 Jul 2014 at 12:37 pm 81.freddies_dead said …

    257.the messenger said …

    273.freddies_dead, my apologies. I should have labeled them. My bad.

    When I said “260.freddies_dead, those verses speak of GOD’s loyalty to us, not our faith in him” I was responding to your statement(“Those passages were spoken to living men, urging them to be faithful and fear not because God would stand by them as they went out into Jordan.”) and I was referring to these verses Deuteronomy 31:6, Deuteronomy 31:8.

    And? You originally touted the verses as evidence that God will never forsake people and I pointed out that the promise was that He would not forsake them in their journey to Jordan – you have to add to the text to extrapolate that out to never. I’ve also pointed out that God doesn’t forsake you to Hell, He sends you there on purpose as punishment for the sins you failed to repent for. He hasn’t forgotten about you. He knows you’re there … forever … and that somehow brings Him glory.

    I explained already that since “fire” is often associated with hell, and that GOD will never forsake us, it is logical to conclude that the meaning of Jesus’s “cut off foot and cast into the fire” metaphor means that our sinful parts “the foot” will be cut from us and cast into hell.

    Again you’re reading into the words something that isn’t there. The verse doesn’t say that the foot (bad part) is cast into Hell. It says that you should cut off that which would cause you to sin – that’s you, the whole of you that’s the sinner – or risk going to Hell … forever.

    To forsake someone is to leave them. If GOD leaves us to burn forever then he has forsaken us. Since GOD will never forsake us he will never let our punishment be forever.

    To forsake is to abandon you. As I’ve said, God hasn’t abandoned you in Hell, He’s judged you as deserving of Hell, placed you there and withheld His presence accordingly.

    I agree that Jesus wants us to repent before we are judged, but in the book of revelations GOD will Judge all of us, and if we seek him he will save us(revelation 3:20), even if we are in hell(due to the fact that hell is not excluded in that verse).

    The reason that Hell isn’t specifically included is because, by that point, it’s painfully obvious that Hell is an eternal punishment. Anyone who has been sent there is automatically precluded. I’ll repeat, explain how you’d be able to seek God whilst being tortured eternally? And explain why you’d do any seeking when you’d know to your eternal cost that when you found Him last time He sent you to Hell?

    It is not a “get out of jail free card”. Simply because we are clean of sins doesn’t mean that we won’t get punished(either in this life or the next) for sinning.

    This makes absolutely no sense. You said that Jesus’ death on the cross meant you were washed clean of sins immediately after sinning. How can anyone who has been washed clean of their sins be judged unworthy of Heaven?

    Matthew 18:8 states that our foot(a metaphor for our bad qualities, as I explained) will be cast into the eternal fire.

    Is simply doesn’t. It says that you should cut off your foot if it causes you to sin – the metaphor is more like “you should stop drinking wine if it causes you to commit adultery”. It is the sin that will stop you going to Heaven but the behaviour itself isn’t cast into Hell – it is after all merely a description of your actions – it either stops and you get to go to Heaven or it continues and you go straight to Hell … forever.

    In Matthew 3:7-12 John was telling them that they would be put into hell if their repentance was not sincere, but he also explained that Jesus(the calf) would burn( like in the temple sacrifices needed for repentance in the old covenant). It could also mean burning with the holy spirit(which is not a painful fire).

    The Holy Spirit reference is the judgement, the fire is the punishment for those that come up short. We see portents of this in Malachi 3 and 4 when the Lord Of Hosts foretells of the prophet who would pave the way for Jesus’ coming. i.e. For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall (Malachi 4:1-2).

  82. on 07 Jul 2014 at 12:38 pm 82.freddies_dead said …

    258.the messenger said …

    274.freddies_dead, GOD new that those hard times would strengthen my family. He knew in the long run that the suffering was necessary to make my family the strong and loving people that they are today. Without that suffering we would not be as strong as we are now.

    The reason that other families did not stay together is because they did not seek GOD and did not keep the faith. Or they were being punished for their own sins.

    And there we have it. It’s God if you suffer and make it through and it’s God if you suffer and don’t make it. I’m sure it’s also God if you don’t suffer and make it through and … surprise, surprise … it’s God if you don’t suffer and still don’t make it through. Just like if there’s no God.

    It also shows your God to be a complete arsehole if, despite Him being omnipotent, He can’t think of a better way to make people strong than making them suffer unimaginable pain. Especially when He seems to be able to do it for others.

    Lastly, I still stand by the “miracle of the sun”.

    You can stand by it all you like but, without any actual evidence to show that something actually happened, you and your imaginary miracle aren’t impressing anyone.

  83. on 07 Jul 2014 at 1:30 pm 83.alex said …

    go ahead, hor. say that atheists have no business interpreting the gospel.

    in your own mind, you’re convinced that to qualify in the business of theological fabrication, one must totally inhale/immerse/believe in the holy bullspirit.

    hor’s sig: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

  84. on 07 Jul 2014 at 2:54 pm 84.A The Prickly Science Guy said …

    alex

    Hey baby! I luv you man. You are a paradigm of atheist virtue and a lighthouse to which we all should point our kids to emulate! We all swoon at your grasp of the English language and you ability to make it come alive with flowery elegance.

    Freddie-Mouse!

    LOL!!!, I luv you too man.

    So, you have a difficult time with the concept of a God who can create and sustain an entire universe being involved in the everyday lives of human beings, living on a blue dot, tucked away in a small solar system, on an insignificant galaxy in the tremendously huge universe?

    lol!!!!, oh yeah! That is way too difficult….lol!!!!

    Be nice fellas!

  85. on 07 Jul 2014 at 4:34 pm 85.alex said …

    “…a paradigm of atheist virtue and a lighthouse…”

    still trying to stick that atheist flag bearer shit on me? what a crock and of course it doesn’t work. repeat after me, moron. atheist common denominator is your bullshit god.

    “..swoon at your grasp of the English language..”

    the way i curse your motherfucking ass? you likey? welcome very mucho, asshole.

    however, your book at: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS, represents the pinnacle of bullshit. read it while holding your nose.

  86. on 08 Jul 2014 at 1:12 am 86.the messenger said …

    301.freddies_dead, dude you are going round in circles, like a city slicker lost in the woods.

    Deuteronomy 31:6, Deuteronomy 31:8 don’t say anything about a journey to Jordan, as you claim. Those verses are a part of the covenant made between the Jews after their release from Egypt.

    The interpretation of the “foot and fire metaphor” that I present is based on vast amounts of text evidence that I presented on this site. The interpretations that you presented are based on a plane reading of the verse or a rejection or ignoring text evidence.

    Psalm 136 speaks many times of GOD’s love being “steadfast” and “forever”. If GOD loves us forever, and his love is steadfast, then he would never send us to hell forever. He would only send us there for a finite amount of time.

    I agree that his judgment is eternal. When GOD judges us he judges that we have sinned and that we can be forgiven and achieve salvation if we pay for our sins and desire to become better people.

  87. on 08 Jul 2014 at 1:17 am 87.the messenger said …

    302.freddies_dead, everything that happens in our lives, both good and bad, happen in order to bring us to moral perfection and help us achieve salvation.

    No one said that the road to salvation was going to be an easy one. Remember, when a person works to acquire something he treasures it more than if it was simply given to him.

  88. on 08 Jul 2014 at 11:07 am 88.freddies_dead said …

    286.the messenger said …

    301.freddies_dead, dude you are going round in circles, like a city slicker lost in the woods.

    Deuteronomy 31:6, Deuteronomy 31:8 don’t say anything about a journey to Jordan, as you claim. Those verses are a part of the covenant made between the Jews after their release from Egypt.

    Lol, seriously? Have you not read the rest of Deuteronomy? In the very first verse Moses tells them that God has told him he will not cross into Jordan but that they should accept Joshua as their leader to follow God into the promised lands.

    The interpretation of the “foot and fire metaphor” that I present is based on vast amounts of text evidence that I presented on this site.

    To what “vast amounts of text evidence” are you referring? I’ve dealt with the few verses you’ve provided and shown that none of them support your claims unless you add to the texts. If you have a verse that categorically states that only the sinful parts of you go to Hell then why haven’t you presented it? Why do you insist on adding to other verses to try and support your claim?

    The interpretations that you presented are based on a plane reading of the verse or a rejection or ignoring text evidence.

    There is nothing in the texts for me to reject or ignore. Your interpretation requires you to add to the texts. Why should we accept your eisegesis over an exegesis of the texts?

    Psalm 136 speaks many times of GOD’s love being “steadfast” and “forever”.

    Not in the version of Psalm 136 I’m reading – the KJV. That repeats the refrain “for his mercy endureth for ever”. Nothing about love being steadfast.

    If GOD loves us forever, and his love is steadfast, then he would never send us to hell forever. He would only send us there for a finite amount of time.

    A God who loved people for ever would never send them to Hell, even for a moment, in fact a God who loved people would never have created a Hell to send them to in the first place, but we’re not dealing with a coherent narrative here.

    The Bible likes to credit your God with plenty of contradictory attributes – being all merciful and all just for example. An all merciful God wouldn’t send anyone to Hell whilst an all just God would send everyone (as apparently everyone has fallen short). To try and get round this problem the Bible claims God sent Himself in the form of His own Son to be sacrificed back to Himself … and yet, whilst you claim that this means your sins are immediately washed clean, you also claim that you’re still due some punishment when you die.

    It’s logically incoherent from start to finish (just like your argument). It’s the product of ignorance. People who were trying to make sense of the world by assigning some sort of supernatural agency to things they didn’t fully understand.

    I agree that his judgment is eternal.

    Then why do you claim that your sentence to Hell would be any less eternal? The verses you’ve quoted haven’t supported your claim so I get the feeling this is something you want to believe because the alternative is too horrific for you to contemplate. An admirable motive but one doomed by your adherence to a book written, codified and edited by wholly fallible men. You cannot find the verses you need to support your wishes so you add to ones that you think are close enough. It might be enough to fool yourself but it’s not going to pull the wool over any other eyes.

    When GOD judges us he judges that we have sinned and that we can be forgiven and achieve salvation if we pay for our sins and desire to become better people.

    The message in the Bible is that you should repent and find forgiveness to achieve salvation before you die, as it is on that day that you will receive your final judgement – eternal bliss or eternal torment.

  89. on 08 Jul 2014 at 11:10 am 89.freddies_dead said …

    287.the messenger said …

    302.freddies_dead, everything that happens in our lives, both good and bad, happen in order to bring us to moral perfection and help us achieve salvation.

    What about when all those events don’t bring us to moral perfection and salvation isn’t achieved? Were those events still designed to “bring us to moral perfection and help us achieve salvation”? The failure calls your God’s omnipotence into question. Or maybe the events have different purposes for different people? Which gives the lie to your original statement.

    Quite simply shit just happens. You have absolutely no evidence that a supernatural agency exists and is intimately involved in our personal lives. Instead you take every event – no matter how contradictory – and ascribe it to your God. It makes your God meaningless.

    No one said that the road to salvation was going to be an easy one. Remember, when a person works to acquire something he treasures it more than if it was simply given to him.

    So a child given sight (through the removal of cataracts) would treasure it more if they’d had to work for the surgery? Not likely. Once again your oversimplified generalisation is dashed to pieces by the rocks of reality.

  90. on 08 Jul 2014 at 11:14 am 90.freddies_dead said …

    284.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    Freddie-Mouse!

    LOL!!!, I luv you too man.

    So, you have a difficult time with the concept of a God who can create and sustain an entire universe being involved in the everyday lives of human beings, living on a blue dot, tucked away in a small solar system, on an insignificant galaxy in the tremendously huge universe?

    lol!!!!, oh yeah! That is way too difficult….lol!!!!

    Be nice fellas!

    Nope, just like you I can imagine such a concept easily enough. However, I recognise that this is just my imagination and that the concept has no referents in reality, whilst you’re a demonstrable liar who will claim to have evidence for your God but then refuse to present it.

  91. on 08 Jul 2014 at 9:22 pm 91.alex said …

    “The interpretation of the “foot and fire metaphor” that I present is based on vast amounts of text evidence that I presented on this site.”

    every other motherfucker like to claim to be the sole biblical interpreter. it’s funny enough that the bullshit bible even needs interpretation, but it’s even funnier that all the dumbass xtians cannot even begin to agree on how to interpret the damn thing.

    that’s why motherfuckers like messenger, love to crow about proclaiming that this is the way it’s supposed to be. even when confronted with contradictory text, they squirm about and excusify the damn thing.

    just like the xtian book of morals, the universal bible interpration doesn’t exist. green light for you, messenger motherfucker. carry on with your bullshit, ya beeeyatch.

    go ahead hor. proclaim again that atheists cannot be bullshit theologians. only xtians need apply.

    this is the vast amounts of text that the dumbass messenger has accumulated: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    difficult to wade thru the bullshit, ain’t it?

  92. on 09 Jul 2014 at 12:57 am 92.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “you I can imagine such a concept easily enough.”

    Of course, even the mentality challenged understand the obvious realty of a Creator. Alcoholics deny they are alcoholics and since help is available at an AA group, you should seek out your own AA.

    “evidence for your God but then refuse to present it.”

    Been there done that bought the T-shirt. Your denial of the obvious facts does not make them any less the reality. Step 3 in the Atheist Anonymous handbook….

    lol!!!!!!!

    Hi Alex, luv ya babe!

  93. on 09 Jul 2014 at 1:46 am 93.the messenger said …

    308.freddies_dead, Deuteronomy 31:6, Deuteronomy 31:8 are part of the covenant between the Jews and GOD. The covenant that is to be used once they get into the land of Judea(aka, the land of Israel, later renamed by the romans as Palestine).

    Find a verse that specifically says that humans will be in hell forever.

    Lastly, you shouldn’t be reading a KJVB. That translation is fill of many mistranslations. The Translations that I use are the GNT, GWT, and NRSVCE.

  94. on 09 Jul 2014 at 1:50 am 94.the messenger said …

    309.freddies_dead, the events meant to bring us to salvation and moral perfection will not end until the final judgment.

  95. on 09 Jul 2014 at 2:09 am 95.the messenger said …

    308.freddies_dead, where in my interpretation did I add to the text?

    I found text evidence that supports that the word “fire” was referring to hell, and I found further evidence that suggests the “foot” was referring to bad qualities within us. I also found evidence that suggests the “cutting off” means to get rid of a part of us.

    Lastly, did it ever occur to you that when it says “Eternal Fire” it means that the fire of hell burns forever, but not referring to our time is hell as forever? Remember, those verses only say that the fire is eternal, but it doesn’t say that our time in the fire is eternal. That fire is probably still burning after we leave it.

  96. on 09 Jul 2014 at 2:11 am 96.the messenger said …

    To everyone. I will not be able to respond for three days starting on Thursday, so do not expect a response on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday.

  97. on 09 Jul 2014 at 11:49 am 97.alex said …

    “That translation is fill of many mistranslations. The Translations that I use are the GNT, GWT, and NRSVCE.”

    there you have it, folks. the dumbass messenger designates which translations you should use. self appointed the motherfucker is, indeed.

    “I found text evidence that supports that the word “fire” was referring to hell, and I found further…”

    more proof that the dipshit picks and chooses, just like the rest of the dipshits. text evidence, my ass. why not the jesus likeness on the dog’s ass as evidence?

    “…do not expect a response..”?? when did we ever get a response from you? all you’ve given is bull, crap, and shit, as demonstrated by http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    how would you know a bullshit jesus from the real one?

    you’ll just know!

    see we’re not different!

  98. on 09 Jul 2014 at 1:32 pm 98.freddies_dead said …

    292.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “you I can imagine such a concept easily enough.”

    Of course, even the mentality challenged understand the obvious realty of a Creator.

    What obvious reality are you referring to? Surely if it was so obvious you’d be able to point to it as evidence? Instead you just keep imagining your God and expect everyone to accept your delusions as reality.

    Alcoholics deny they are alcoholics and since help is available at an AA group, you should seek out your own AA.

    Coming from the man so in denial that he can see the pyramids, this is easily recognised as projection on your part.

    “evidence for your God but then refuse to present it.”

    Been there done that bought the T-shirt.

    When and where? Because you sure as Hell haven’t done it on this site. Why won’t you tell us where we can find your majestic demonstration of the Christian God’s existence? Or are we supposed to just imagine that you’ve done that too?

    Your denial of the obvious facts does not make them any less the reality. Step 3 in the Atheist Anonymous handbook….

    lol!!!!!!!

    What makes them less real is their imaginary nature, you have no facts let alone any obvious ones, you just have your delusions.

  99. on 09 Jul 2014 at 1:34 pm 99.freddies_dead said …

    293.the messenger said …

    308.freddies_dead, Deuteronomy 31:6, Deuteronomy 31:8 are part of the covenant between the Jews and GOD. The covenant that is to be used once they get into the land of Judea(aka, the land of Israel, later renamed by the romans as Palestine).

    So you’ve changed your mind about it referring to their travels to the promised lands then? About time. However, this is irrelevant to the discussion. Your original claim was that those verses in Deuteronomy said God would never forsake us. They don’t. Instead they explain that God would not forsake them during their journey to the promised lands. Now, I have little doubt that there are verses in the Bible that actually support your original claim (that God will never forsake us) but they’re not to be found in Deuteronomy. They are, however, also irrelevant, as I’ve said several times already. God does not forsake you to Hell, He judges you as worthy of Hell and sends you there deliberately as He planned from the outset.

    Find a verse that specifically says that humans will be in hell forever.

    Daniel 12:1-2 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

    2’s the kicker there – nothing like a bit of “everlasting contempt” to show Hell is eternal.

    Matthew 25:45-46 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

    Good old “everlasting punishment”.

    How about 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

    Good old “everlasting destruction”.

    They liked “everlasting”, as good a way as any to denote eternal.

    Revelation 14:9-11 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

    Oooh, dark. “for ever and ever” huh? Sounds pretty eternal to me.

    Lastly, you shouldn’t be reading a KJVB. That translation is fill of many mistranslations. The Translations that I use are the GNT, GWT, and NRSVCE.

    How do you know they’re mistranslations? Have you translated them yourself from the original manuscripts? I mean surely you read Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek right? Lol, a Holy book that depends on translations to have its message made clear. Yup, that’s the sign of an omnipotent God divinely inspiring alright. I do wonder what evidence you have that one translation is better than another. Did God tell you which one tells His message best? Or do you just prefer the versions you’ve chosen?

  100. on 09 Jul 2014 at 1:35 pm 100.freddies_dead said …

    294.the messenger said …

    309.freddies_dead, the events meant to bring us to salvation and moral perfection will not end until the final judgment.

    Hebrews 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment.

    No doubt there’s probably a verse that contradicts this one. Which of course is your problem not mine. You wouldn’t expect a divinely inspired text to offer up contradictory messages but then there’s absolutely no evidence that the Bible was divinely inspired. In fact the multiple contradictions, lack of internal consistency and general incoherence suggest it is exactly what it is – a book written by many fallible men over a long period of time, mistranslated, edited and revised over and over by other fallible men.

  101. on 09 Jul 2014 at 1:36 pm 101.freddies_dead said …

    295.the messenger said …

    308.freddies_dead, where in my interpretation did I add to the text?

    The bit where you claimed that only the bad bits go to Hell and the bit where you suggest Hell is only part time.

    I found text evidence that supports that the word “fire” was referring to hell,

    No-one disagreed with that.

    and I found further evidence that suggests the “foot” was referring to bad qualities within us.

    No-one argued that the verse wasn’t metaphorical either.

    I also found evidence that suggests the “cutting off” means to get rid of a part of us.

    Also non-contentious but I note you fail to show where your claims are supported. There was no evidence showing the bad qualities are cast into Hell and there’s nothing there to show that Hell is anything less than an eternal sentence.

    Lastly, did it ever occur to you that when it says “Eternal Fire” it means that the fire of hell burns forever, but not referring to our time is hell as forever?

    It has but then the verses don’t support the theory. There are no verses that show humans are able to escape Hell. Only one person does that and that’s Jesus. The whole purpose is to help mark Jesus out as unique. Jesus ascending out of Hell wouldn’t be much of a message if everyone else can do exactly the same thing.

    Remember, those verses only say that the fire is eternal, but it doesn’t say that our time in the fire is eternal. That fire is probably still burning after we leave it.

    I’ll just refer back to the verses from earlier that do say that our time in Hell will be eternal.

  102. on 09 Jul 2014 at 2:46 pm 102.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    ” you’d be able to point to it as evidence?”

    Yep time and time again here, there, in the past in the present, in books, in lecture, in classrooms through logic, through philosophy, through science and then just good ol’ common sense.

    lol!!!!!!! Then there is your obsession with arguing against something you “claim’ does not exist!!

    lol!!!

    Get in an AA chapter and leave the cult. Oh and get your theology from a reputable source not atheist blogs…. Lol!!!!

  103. on 09 Jul 2014 at 10:38 pm 103.alex said …

    “Then there is your obsession with arguing against something you “claim’ does not exist!!”

    so, you agree that allah, yahweh, rah, and thor can coexist and we should stop arguing against it? why don’t you accept allah into you heart and quit fighting it?

    who’s obsessed? check your book at: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS and do a find on “obsess”. guess what motherfucker? you stated it 29 times. now, who the fuck is obsessed?

    “get your theology from a reputable source”

    in other words, from the countless, more than likely conflicting sources? pick a reputable source that supports your bullshit and if it’s not agreeable, discard it and go on to the next reputable one?

    “..then just good ol’ common sense.”

    touted by the same motherfucker who said “China is selling fetuses as a delicacy”. ooops, my bad. you didn’t say that, martin did. or was it biff? xenon? rl martin? which one of your admitted lying ass alter ego said that?

    dumbass, motherfucker.

  104. on 10 Jul 2014 at 12:47 am 104.the messenger said …

    319.freddies_dead, here are the Deuteronomy 31:6, Deuteronomy 31:8 word for word.

    “6 Be strong and bold; have no fear or dread of them, because it is the Lord your God who goes with you; he will not fail you or forsake you.”

    “8 It is the Lord who goes before you. He will be with you; he will not fail you or forsake you. Do not fear or be dismayed.”

    Neither of those verses mention anything about the journey to the promised land. Moses is saying in these verses that GOD will be with us wherever we go. Although it does mean that GOD was with the Jews and did not forsake them in their journey to Judea, it also applies to every journey we make. Moses didn’t say that the “not forsake us” thing would only be for the journey to the promised land. Hebrews 13:5 proves the “not forsake us” thing also applies in the new covenant.

  105. on 10 Jul 2014 at 12:58 am 105.the messenger said …

    319.freddies_dead, Daniel 12:1-2 talks about he guilty feelings of sinners during the final judgment. It talks about “shame” and “contempt”. It is obviously talking about how sinners will feel about themselves when reminded of their sins during the final judgment, due to the fact that an eternal fire and or place of punishment is not mentioned.

  106. on 10 Jul 2014 at 1:07 am 106.the messenger said …

    319.freddies_dead, Matthew 25:45-46 is referring to the eternal “contempt” and “shame” mentioned in Daniel 12:1-2. Yes everyone will go to heaven, but some of them will fell the emotions “shame” and “contempt” while there.

  107. on 10 Jul 2014 at 1:21 am 107.the messenger said …

    319.freddies_dead, 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9 talks about everlasting destruction, but it doesn’t say that we will be in the everlasting destruction forever. 2 Thessalonians 1:5 says that we will suffer for salvation, which proves that our suffering in hell will be temporary and that we will leave it and achieve salvation.

  108. on 10 Jul 2014 at 1:31 am 108.the messenger said …

    Revelation 14:9-11 is talking about Jesus when he sacrificed himself, like the burnt temple sacrifices. It also states that the “forever and ever torment” will only happen to those who worship “beast” aka pagans. If a person stopped worshiping beasts and other false gods they would no longer qualify for the “forever and ever torment” thing.

  109. on 10 Jul 2014 at 1:53 am 109.the messenger said …

    319.freddies_dead, the KJVB leaves out the books of Tobit, 1 Maccabees and 2, Wisdom, Lamentations, and many others.

    It also translates Exodus 20:13 as “thou shall not kill”, but many Jewish rabbis and Hebrew speaking scholars have proven that the more accurate translation is not the word “kill”, but the word “murder”.

    There are many other cases similar to this throughout the KJVB. Some parts of it are accurate, but not all of it.

    Lastly, I do not speak Hebrew or Greek, but I do read books written by world renowned translators, and I listen to speeches and debates by rabbis, Hebrew and Greek scholars, and catholic priests that read Hebrew and Greek.

  110. on 10 Jul 2014 at 1:55 am 110.the messenger said …

    319.freddies_dead, I won’t be able to post for the next three days. Just to let you know.

  111. on 10 Jul 2014 at 2:01 am 111.the messenger said …

    319.freddies_dead, If the foot in the “foot and fire metaphor” is a metaphor for our bad qualities, and Jesus wants us to cast them into the fire(which we agree means hell), it is clear that it means only a part of us will be put into hell forever.

  112. on 10 Jul 2014 at 2:41 am 112.alex said …

    308.the messenger said …

    what a dumbass. the motherfucker continues to torment hisself with his fucked up search in the bullshit bible. he already admitted that the shit is subject to interpretation and even though the biblical crap (not literal, according to him) has been pointed out numerous times he continues with his incoherent babbling in the hopes of what? convincing the blog’s atheists to change their mind? really? if not, then what is the motherfucker trying to accomplish? convince the zero non-committal visitors in this blog?
    anybody here non-committal?

    this is the same motherfucker that has compiled his big pile of posts at: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    that’s right, bitch, motherfucker. your book autoupdates itself.

  113. on 10 Jul 2014 at 2:43 am 113.alex said …

    “I won’t be able to post for the next three days.”

    is that your choice or are you just blindly following your god’s plan? leave your seatbelt off, motherfucker. i’m sure allah will take care of you.

  114. on 10 Jul 2014 at 7:28 am 114.TJ said …

    Just what do you think his Gods plan is?

  115. on 10 Jul 2014 at 12:28 pm 115.alex said …

    “what do you think his Gods plan is”

    everything that happens, just like the absence of a god.

    messenger’s postings arent’t even about ALL gods, are they? it’s all about righteously spouting his xtian brand, and vigorously trying to sell it.

    would my objections be more palatable if messenger was an aborigine who keeps posting his garbage here and i cursed him twice as bad? hooray?

    it aint’t about a theist versus an atheists viewpoint, is it? it’s all about the countless, motherfucking theist permutations pushing their shit, most notably, the loudmouth xtians.

  116. on 10 Jul 2014 at 3:12 pm 116.freddies_dead said …

    302.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    ” you’d be able to point to it as evidence?”

    Yep time and time again here, there, in the past in the present, in books, in lecture, in classrooms through logic, through philosophy, through science and then just good ol’ common sense.

    So you can’t point to any actual instances then? Didn’t think so.

    lol!!!!!!! Then there is your obsession with arguing against something you “claim’ does not exist!!

    lol!!!

    Says the lying prick who can’t show that his God is anything but a product of his imagination but argues for it nonetheless. You’re projecting as usual.

    Get in an AA chapter and leave the cult.

    I don’t belong to your cult, or indeed any cult. More projection on your part.

    Oh and get your theology from a reputable source not atheist blogs…. Lol!!!!

    There’s no such thing as a “reputable source” for theology. All it is is just other people’s opinions on their imaginary God and what it’s alleged to have said and done.

  117. on 10 Jul 2014 at 3:13 pm 117.freddies_dead said …

    304.the messenger said …

    319.freddies_dead, here are the Deuteronomy 31:6, Deuteronomy 31:8 word for word.

    “6 Be strong and bold; have no fear or dread of them, because it is the Lord your God who goes with you; he will not fail you or forsake you.”

    “8 It is the Lord who goes before you. He will be with you; he will not fail you or forsake you. Do not fear or be dismayed.”

    Neither of those verses mention anything about the journey to the promised land.

    No, it’s mentioned in verses 1, 2 and 3 as I said.

    Moses is saying in these verses that GOD will be with us wherever we go.

    Where? The passages only mention God being with them in the journey to the promised lands. Your extrapolation to God being with them everywhere they ever go is your addition to the texts.

    Although it does mean that GOD was with the Jews and did not forsake them in their journey to Judea, it also applies to every journey we make. Moses didn’t say that the “not forsake us” thing would only be for the journey to the promised land. Hebrews 13:5 proves the “not forsake us” thing also applies in the new covenant.

    Oh dear, you get totally screwed in Deuteronomy 31:17 when God tells Moses:

    Then my anger shall be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide my face from them, and they shall be devoured, and many evils and troubles shall befall them; so that they will say in that day, Are not these evils come upon us, because our God is not among us?

    So much for being with them wherever they may go, oh well…

  118. on 10 Jul 2014 at 3:14 pm 118.freddies_dead said …

    305.the messenger said …

    319.freddies_dead, Daniel 12:1-2 talks about he guilty feelings of sinners during the final judgment. It talks about “shame” and “contempt”. It is obviously talking about how sinners will feel about themselves when reminded of their sins during the final judgment, due to the fact that an eternal fire and or place of punishment is not mentioned.

    It’s talking about everlasting contempt – if you think sinners will still feel contempt for themselves once they’re in Heaven then your concept of Heaven seems to differ with that of the Bible. No surprise there though as your conceptualisations of a lot of things run contrary to what the Bible says.

  119. on 10 Jul 2014 at 3:15 pm 119.freddies_dead said …

    306.the messenger said …

    319.freddies_dead, Matthew 25:45-46 is referring to the eternal “contempt” and “shame” mentioned in Daniel 12:1-2. Yes everyone will go to heaven, but some of them will fell the emotions “shame” and “contempt” while there.

    I like the way you’ve totally ignored the words everlasting punishment in order to stick with your failed claims. Unless you think Heaven is as much a place of punishment as Hell is? I suppose you might though as you seem to think a place touted as paradise can contain people who hold themselves in eternal contempt.

  120. on 10 Jul 2014 at 3:16 pm 120.freddies_dead said …

    307.the messenger said …

    319.freddies_dead, 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9 talks about everlasting destruction, but it doesn’t say that we will be in the everlasting destruction forever.

    Seriously? So being punished with everlasting destruction isn’t being punished eternally. Words messy, they have meanings. You don’t seem to agree with the common consensus regarding those meanings however. You’re going to need to start defining every word at some point otherwise we’ll always be talking at cross purposes.

    2 Thessalonians 1:5 says that we will suffer for salvation, which proves that our suffering in hell will be temporary and that we will leave it and achieve salvation.

    Does 2 Thessalonians 1:5 say anything about the members of the church at Thessalonica being dead while they suffered? That will be a no.

    It’s one of the main themes of the Bible that you will suffer in this life but have a chance of a better afterlife. If you overcome your troubles and repent of your sins you get everlasting bliss, if you fail … everlasting punishment.

  121. on 10 Jul 2014 at 3:18 pm 121.freddies_dead said …

    308.the messenger said …

    Revelation 14:9-11 is talking about Jesus when he sacrificed himself, like the burnt temple sacrifices.

    Revelation 14 is about the return of Christ on Judgement day. It has quite literally nothing to do with his crucifixion. The verses speak of what will happen when He returns.

    It also states that the “forever and ever torment” will only happen to those who worship “beast” aka pagans.

    So now you admit there really are some people who will go to Hell for all eternity. Not far now.

    If a person stopped worshiping beasts and other false gods they would no longer qualify for the “forever and ever torment” thing.

    And we’re back to my question on how anyone could possibly repent whilst suffering eternal anguish. Suffering so bad that all thought and reason are impossible.

    You seem to be missing almost the entire point of the Bible i.e. to repent and trust in God before you die and it becomes too late.

  122. on 10 Jul 2014 at 3:19 pm 122.freddies_dead said …

    309.the messenger said …

    319.freddies_dead, the KJVB leaves out the books of Tobit, 1 Maccabees and 2, Wisdom, Lamentations, and many others.

    And there are those who call themselves Christians who believe the ESV to be the work of the devil based on perverted manuscripts. Now you can’t both be right, but you can both be wrong. So it’s down to you to demonstrate that the version you’ve chosen is the one true version. Actually providing evidence that your God exists and that the ESV is His word would be a start.

    It also translates Exodus 20:13 as “thou shall not kill”, but many Jewish rabbis and Hebrew speaking scholars have proven that the more accurate translation is not the word “kill”, but the word “murder”.

    And? The main reason for switching from kill to murder was to protect the Bible from the question “Why a command to not kill when God kills?”. It’s irrelevant as there is no way God could kill someone without meaning to do it? Every time God kills someone it’s premeditated – after all God planned it all to happen this way. Whether it’s kill or murder makes no difference when we’re talking about God. He is a murderer … at least He would be if He weren’t imaginary.

    There are many other cases similar to this throughout the KJVB. Some parts of it are accurate, but not all of it.

    And how do you know which is which? Are you being divinely inspired here? If so how can we know you’re being divinely inspired? How can we discern between your God and what you may merely be imagining?

    Lastly, I do not speak Hebrew or Greek, but I do read books written by world renowned translators, and I listen to speeches and debates by rabbis, Hebrew and Greek scholars, and catholic priests that read Hebrew and Greek.

    So you trust fallible men on issues of supposedly divinely inspired texts? Perhaps you believe that the scholars that you agree with are being divinely inspired. In which case how can you discern between scholars who are being divinely inspire and those that aren’t?

  123. on 10 Jul 2014 at 3:20 pm 123.freddies_dead said …

    311.the messenger said …

    319.freddies_dead, If the foot in the “foot and fire metaphor” is a metaphor for our bad qualities, and Jesus wants us to cast them into the fire(which we agree means hell), it is clear that it means only a part of us will be put into hell forever.

    There has been nothing in the verses you have quoted about casting the bad qualities into Hell. Nothing, nada, zip, zero. All we have is verses that tell us to cut out what’s causing us to sin or face being cast into Hell for all eternity. Your conclusion doesn’t fit with what we’ve found. However, I’m sure you’ll keep beating this dead horse for a long time yet. Hell, you’ll probably simply repeat these very same broken claims at some point, as if this conversation never took place. No doubt alex will be around to hold you accountable though.

  124. on 10 Jul 2014 at 4:05 pm 124.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    ND thank you for attending Freddie Mouse’s Bible study. Freddie Mouse will be sill be lecturing weekly on Biblical truths and Systematic Theology. Turn in next week for another action packed adventure with Freddie the Mouse.

    lol!!!!

    But be doesn’t REALLY believe……sshhhh…

  125. on 11 Jul 2014 at 10:48 am 125.freddies_dead said …

    324.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    ND thank you for attending Freddie Mouse’s Bible study. Freddie Mouse will be sill be lecturing weekly on Biblical truths and Systematic Theology. Turn in next week for another action packed adventure with Freddie the Mouse.

    lol!!!!

    I have no problem showing up cafeteria Christians like you and messy so you’re very welcome.

    But be doesn’t REALLY believe……sshhhh…

    Of course I don’t believe. As we’ve seen, the Bible is mostly incoherent and inconsistent bullshit that Christians cherry pick from when they don’t like what it actually says. We’ve also seen that your God is entirely imaginary.

  126. on 11 Jul 2014 at 11:04 am 126.TJ said …

    To the messenger…

    it would seem you need to go back and re-read your bible. freddies_dead is consistent with xtians with most of his interpretation of a literal reading of the same texts.

    I understand you are Catholic?

    1. Do statues of Virgin Mary or Crucified Jesus look at all like Idols or Graven Images to you? Is a small cross around the neck any different?

    2. If Jesus plainly says “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

    Then how does a man in a confession box forgive sins?

    How does the pope represent God?

    ————————————-

    To freddies_dead…

    From your own understanding, which statement is best supported by the biblical texts?

    1. God claims to have control over all things created, including the choices and consequences of man.

    or

    2. God claims to have control over all things created, but has empowered man with free will. Making man accountable for the consequences of his choices.

  127. on 11 Jul 2014 at 3:31 pm 127.freddies_dead said …

    326.TJ asks …

    From your own understanding, which statement is best supported by the biblical texts?

    1. God claims to have control over all things created, including the choices and consequences of man.

    or

    2. God claims to have control over all things created, but has empowered man with free will. Making man accountable for the consequences of his choices.

    From my understanding the Biblical texts support statement 2. However, statement 2 is contradictory to the combined attributes of omniscience and omnipotence coupled with God being said to have a plan. Those attributes and the plan make statement 1 the more logical consequence for humans created by the Christian God.

  128. on 12 Jul 2014 at 12:16 am 128.TJ said …

    To freddies_dead said …

    Ok, so we can agree to say that from the biblical texts no.2 is most consistent.

    Would you then agree or disagree or like to add to…

    God is described in the bible, and self claims to be, all powerful and in possession of all knowledge of all things?

    You earlier stated…
    “You seem to be missing almost the entire point of the Bible i.e. to repent and trust in God before you die and it becomes too late.”

    I agree with your above statement, which was directed at “the messenger”. He seems to have missed a few points in a few key areas.

    In many religious groups, it seems very common for teachings to misrepresent/conflict the source they claim to believe/represent… why this is, could be a long discussion/debate I’m sure.

    From your understanding, what does the Bible say about what Gods plan was/is?

  129. on 12 Jul 2014 at 12:53 am 129.alex said …

    “it seems very common for teachings to misrepresent/conflict the source they claim to believe/represent… why this is, could be a long discussion/debate I’m sure.”

    this is OLD, tired and very obvious. when the source is garbage, strewn with contradictions and bullshit, the teachings become skewed, apologetic, and compared to the source, even more bizarre with their twisted, contorted explanations. ie, the iron chariots or the sun and the moon stopping or jesus cursing the motherfucking fig tree.

    if the source is divine, wouldn’t you expect simple, clear, brilliant directives/wisdom? instead, theists resort to picking thru the garbage and pronouncing them “not literal” or translating them into countless versions. these morons can’t even agree if hell is permanent or not.

    hence, the messenger pile of shit at: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4 and the hor’s at: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

  130. on 12 Jul 2014 at 4:39 am 130.TJ said …

    To Alex…

    The source/bible is Garbage, so logically all teachings will be a reflection of this.

    Ok, I can accept that this is your stand point.

    you also added…

    “if the source is divine, wouldn’t you expect simple, clear, brilliant directives/wisdom?”

    Yes, I would expect exactly this.

    instead, theists resort to picking thru the garbage and pronouncing them “not literal” or translating them into countless versions.

    Absolutely true. But not just theists but atheist too. Each can point to their proof/contradictions to support/disprove their statements/claims.

    And it is old, tied and obvious, which is why we should look at what the source claims and disregard what the “idiot xtians” say.

    Neither of us would choose a favourite football team based on their fan base, any more that we should determine any religious claims based on misguided rabble. Do you agree?

    As for…
    these morons can’t even agree if hell is permanent or not.

    freddies_dead’s literal reading of the text nailed the issue… I have nothing to add or detract.

    If you, Alex, have looked objectively at the Bible texts, and determined for yourself that it is all rubbish, than I respect that.

    I will not try to convince you otherwise and I should expect that you don’t expect me to answer to any of messenger’s or hor’ material.

  131. on 12 Jul 2014 at 10:01 am 131.alex said …

    “But not just theists but atheist too. Each can point to their proof/contradictions to support/disprove their statements/claims.”

    what is the atheist statement/claim? there is no personal god, period. i’m also a non believer in ufo visitors. what is my statement/claim? there is nothing i’m interpreting or contradicting. i also don’t believe you can run a 1 minute mile. and?

    you’re saying that theists and atheists do the same thing therefore each position is viable, but it’s not. that’s why creationisms (in many religious flavors) is not taught in public schools.

    if an atheist looks at the evidence and concludes that the earth is flat, it doesn’t make his atheism any less valid. it just makes him a moron.

    science has been wrong on many aspects before, but this has nothing to do with atheism. element decay dated cro magnon fossils from 40,000 years ago. you want to debate dating methods?

    want to debate evolution? dark matter? this is my fav. science cannot explain certain behavior, so they coined dark matter. whether dark matter is legit or not, this has no bearing on me being an atheist. dark matter has been proven, hooray, and damn, i’m still an atheist.

    that’s why hor can’t find anything to stick on me. sure, i curse, and sure, i’ve misspoken before, but it doesn’t make me any less atheist. and it doesn’t validate his god, regardless how many times hor points out my nastiness.

    theists proclaim that if you are an atheist, you will do all these horrible things, but it’s not true. if i say, “i kills you because of my non-belief”, does it make sense? it just makes me a hater, which of course, theists will point out as equivalent to atheist. that’s why the hitler exercise.

  132. on 13 Jul 2014 at 2:22 am 132.TJ said …

    To Alex,

    “you’re saying that theists and atheists do the same thing therefore each position is viable,…”

    No, you missed my point. I implied that atheists and theist both cherry pick passages to either prove or disprove their point. I implied that, commonly the interpretations of said cherry picked passages are out of context, misinterpreted, and just a plain dumb twisting of what is actually written in the biblical text. My point was that commonly neither point was viable, not that either where viable.

    I went on to point out that freddies_dead’s literal reading of the text by contrast, was bang on the money. You cannot judge anything based on what others simply say. Surely you would agree that it is better to look for meaning within what is written, rather than what is thought, regarding what is written?

    –you want to debate dating methods?

    if you want too. I am not an expert but from what I understand, radioactive decay involves obtaining the known half-life of an unstable radioactive element. Often transmutation occurs with the exchange of energy and atoms… effectively a chemical reaction.

    Despite known problems and assumptions with dating methods, test are usually performed to confirm suspected dates. When dates match predictions, methods are heralded as accurate and reliable. When they don’t fit the assumed age then contamination and other factors come into play.

    A problem exists when the assumption is, that half life’s are calculated as constant and yet we are taught that a chemical reaction cane be slowed or speed up by changing the heat, concentration, pressure affecting surface contact, or the presence of a catalyst.

    In a biblical world view we have a global flood, enduring droughts, fire and brimstone from the heavens, changing weather patterns, volcanic eruptions and the dividing of the earth.

    In a Scientific world view we see deep time, an ever changing environment, magnetic pole shifts, many ice ages, meteor impacts, vast localised flooding, global volcanic eruptions, mass extinctions.

    Both pose problems for accurate reliable dating results.

    If you would also like to talk about evolution and dark matter with me, that would be fine, I’m happy to discuss these with you… UFOs too.

    I am a little unfamiliar with the “hitler exercise”. I assume it refers to a xtian argument which aims to bundle all atheist in hell with hitler?

    The Hitler association is unfair, stereotypical nonsense. Much like derogative xtian’s stereotypes.

    Would you agree though?
    That…
    in recent history (last 2000 years), when nations go to war…
    those that claim “holy war” or “war in the name of God”, do so in direct conflict to their claimed beliefs.
    while those that claim nationalism or some other form of racial superiority, do so in direct accordance with their claimed beliefs.

    As I have stated before belief systems have been used for both evil and good, to control, invoke fear and obtain the goals/objectives of those in power. As individuals we owe it to ourselves to assess what we can, determine and discover what we can, question everything and the exercise the right to believe what we will.

  133. on 13 Jul 2014 at 6:16 pm 133.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    TJ,

    The “Hitler Exercise” is simply atheist making the following logic fallacy.

    Hitler was evil
    Hitler was a Christian
    Christians are Evil

    I will allow you to draw from the exercise the inherent fallacies in the conclusions and the corresponding presuppositions. Insert Crusades, Salem witch trials and Abortion MD killings for more such exercises.

    :)

  134. on 13 Jul 2014 at 11:22 pm 134.TJ said …

    Oh ok…
    I had it back to front.

    I have heard nonsense before, that ties evolution to racial superiority regarding Hitler before and mistakenly assumed this may have been the “Hitler exercise”.

    Thanks for clearing that up. I was ignorant to the term’s understood meaning, on this blog.

  135. on 14 Jul 2014 at 11:53 am 135.alex said …

    “…regarding Hitler before and mistakenly assumed this may have been the “Hitler exercise”.

    Thanks for clearing that up.”

    the dipshit, hor, posts his usual bullshit and you swallow it hook, line, and sinker?

    you dumbass, motherfucker. you pontificate about discovery, determination, and questioning and you do exactly the opposite?

    how about you go fuck yourself? here’s his entire bullshit collection, once again: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

  136. on 14 Jul 2014 at 1:20 pm 136.freddies_dead said …

    328.TJ said …

    To freddies_dead said …

    Ok, so we can agree to say that from the biblical texts no.2 is most consistent.

    Would you then agree or disagree or like to add to…

    God is described in the bible, and self claims to be, all powerful and in possession of all knowledge of all things?

    I’d agree with that statement although the Bible likes to claim God is also “all ” for many other attributes – merciful, just, benevolent etc… It is within these attributions that we start to see problems. Indeed when considering just omnipotence there’s the paradox of the stone and for omniscience Cantor’s theorem is a bit of a blow. When we start combining those attributes all sorts of contradictions occur.

    You earlier stated…
    “You seem to be missing almost the entire point of the Bible i.e. to repent and trust in God before you die and it becomes too late.”

    I agree with your above statement, which was directed at “the messenger”. He seems to have missed a few points in a few key areas.

    In many religious groups, it seems very common for teachings to misrepresent/conflict the source they claim to believe/represent… why this is, could be a long discussion/debate I’m sure.

    From your understanding, what does the Bible say about what Gods plan was/is?

    His own Glory. Now what “His Glory” might be isn’t ever really explained in the Bible. Instead we get told that manifestations of things like love are exhibitions of God’s glory, nature is a reflection of God’s Glory, so is Heaven etc… We never really get a concrete definition so it’s easy for theists to use everything as a pointer to God’s Glory. Sunrise? … God’s Glory. Hummingbirds? … God’s Glory. Hurricane ripping through a trailer park killing dozens of people? … well, erm, yes apparently that’s God’s Glory too.

  137. on 14 Jul 2014 at 11:20 pm 137.TJ said …

    To Alex,

    you stated…
    “theists proclaim that if you are an atheist, you will do all these horrible things, but it’s not true. if i say, “i kills you because of my non-belief”, does it make sense? it just makes me a hater, which of course, theists will point out as equivalent to atheist. that’s why the hitler exercise.”

    Your statement implied the “Hitler exercise” was a Theist argument.

    I questioned the statement with a summery of your statement, to determine/clarify your meaning.

    …”I am a little unfamiliar with the “hitler exercise”. I assume it refers to a xtian argument which aims to bundle all atheist in hell with hitler?”

    I also presented a personal view point…

    “The Hitler association is unfair, stereotypical nonsense. Much like derogative xtian’s stereotypes.”

    The The Prickly Science Guy offered an alternative meaning to the “Hitler exercise”

    I offered a basis for my interpretation of your statement…

    “I have heard nonsense before, that ties evolution to racial superiority regarding Hitler before and mistakenly assumed this may have been the “Hitler exercise”.”

    I thanked him…
    Thanks for clearing that up. I was ignorant to the term’s understood meaning, on this blog.

    Later I rationalised both your statement vs the Prickly Science Guy’s definition of the “Hitler exercise”.

    I then posted an exercise to illustrate my line of thought.

    I concluded with a question…

    “By what content/context should we assess the Christianity of Hitler?”

    Now, please, Alex I need clarification, please explain your statements…

    “you dumbass, motherfucker. you pontificate about discovery, determination, and questioning and you do exactly the opposite?”

    Then, once again explain the relevance of…

    “how about you go fuck yourself? here’s his entire bullshit collection, once again: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

    Help me out buddy, I have trouble discovering your meaning, determining your logic and my questions abound… oh and if you would please, set me straight on the whole “Hitler exercise”.

  138. on 14 Jul 2014 at 11:39 pm 138.TJ said …

    Hi freddies_dead,

    You’ve introduce some great points into our discussion, you’ve also pointed to some related arguments. And you’ve given our investigation into Gods plan some direction. Good stuff.

    I have a busy day ahead and will tonight, give your comments the attention they deserve.

    cheers,

  139. on 15 Jul 2014 at 12:40 am 139.the messenger said …

    335.alex, I am not righteously spouting anything. I simply want to help people see the truth.

  140. on 15 Jul 2014 at 1:25 am 140.the messenger said …

    346.TJ, “it would seem you need to go back and re-read your bible. freddies_dead is consistent with xtians with most of his interpretation of a literal reading of the same texts.”

    Fred uses the KJVB. The KJVB is used by many groups of protestants, but not catholics due to the fact that it contains many mistranslations.

    “I understand you are Catholic?”

    Yes I am a catholic.

    “1. Do statues of Virgin Mary or Crucified Jesus look at all like Idols or Graven Images to you? Is a small cross around the neck any different?”

    Most protestants understand Exodus 20:4 to be a single commandment because they interpret the bible verse by verse. the original biblical texts were not divided into verses; the Christians divided the bible into verses in order to make it easier to find certain parts of the text. But Catholics interpret the bible passage by passage. Exodus 20:4-6 is the full commandment. It means that we should not make idols, it is not a prohibition of all statue making. Making statues and carvings are allowed, due to the fact that the Jews were commanded to make a statue of a snake and also two statues of angels for the ark of the covenant.

    “2. If Jesus plainly says “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”” “Then how does a man in a confession box forgive sins?”

    A priest is a representative of GOD, and therefore has the authority to forgive sin. Also in Luke 5:24 Jesus says that the son of man has the authority to forgive sin.

    “How does the pope represent God?”

    The pope represents GOD as every priest and follower of GOD does. The pope is simply the leader of the catholic church. The first pope was peter, and every pope after him inherits his place as leader of the church.

  141. on 15 Jul 2014 at 1:43 am 141.alex said …

    “… I have trouble discovering your meaning, determining your logic…”

    my hair trigger cursing confuses you? i stated the “hitler exercise”, and the hor moron responded with his predictable bullshit and you thank him for his clarity? and you can’t determine my logic and my disdain for the hor motherfucker?

    as englash is my second language, what is it about my writing that you find unclear? the irrelevance of hor’s collection? with his history of lying and his obvious bullshit comments, you don’t see why?

    the person making the assertion is burdened with the proof. i’m not obligated to investigate alternatives. as with the xtian god, do i need to look at buddism, ufoism, and others? of course, i’ve wondered where we came from and that’s not enough? but i can be convinced. hell, if hesus showed up, levitation would do it for me.

    just to be clear. i don’t claim to represent atheists, buddisst, or any other non xtian group. if i’m a flat earth believer and i call the round earth, a bullshit, isn’t it easy to call me out? go ahead, pick out the bullshits i’ve been spouting and put me in my place.

    if you didn’t really agree with hor on his definition of the “hitler exercise”? then why thank him?

  142. on 15 Jul 2014 at 2:24 am 142.alex said …

    “I simply want to help people see the truth.”

    yeah, along with your fellow dumbasses: buddists, ufonians, baptists, mooslems.

    and you fail again, moron. all you got is the same ole bullshit regurgitation. bullshit readings/interpretations and bullshit miracles.

    go fuck yourself.

  143. on 15 Jul 2014 at 2:47 am 143.DPK said …

    Tj.. A cursory search of past threads here will quickly reveal that the “hitler excercise” in fact always goes like this:
    Theist: “atheists have no morality. One cannot have morality without an absolute code of morality given by a supreme being. That is why mass murderers and genocidal maniacs like Stalin and hitler were atheists.”

    Atheist: “um, excuse me, Hitler was a Christian.”

    Theist: “No true Christian would comitt genocide. Therefore Hitler was not a ‘real’ Christian.”

    Atheist: “who gets to decide who is a real Christian and who isn’t, and where is the absolute moral code you claim exists and was given to us by a perfect omniscient being?”

    Theist: “you can’t prove how life originated.”

    Atheist: “WTF?”

    That’s how logic works here when arguing with people who are proud that they believe what they do on faith, which is, in truth, simply pretending to know things that you do not know.

  144. on 15 Jul 2014 at 12:32 pm 144.A The Prickly Science Guy said …

    TJ

    You see above how it works. DP, above illustrates the point. He believes a master propagandist like Hitler was a Christian just because he states so at one time. Many of the atheist here at one time claimed to be Christians as well, so….with their logic we can still call them Christians….Right?

    Never mind Hitler was a master politican and great use of propaganda, never mind he murdered many Christians who dared to resist his Nazi regime. Never mind his many quotes against religion in general lol!!!

    Great Day to All!!

  145. on 15 Jul 2014 at 1:28 pm 145.DPK said …

    See? Exactly what I told you.
    A gets to decide who is a real Christian and who is not. A gets to decide what god “really means” in the bible. A gets to decide which parts of gods supposed words are literal, and which are metaphorical. All decided, of course, on what supports his delusion and what contradicts it.

    As far as theists cherry picking from the bible in order to support their own position, this is not really the same as theist cherry picking, is it? Theists are claiming the bible is the perfect word of a perfect being, and to support that idea it is absolutely necessary to completely ignore many clearly imperfect attributes of both the bible and the god it describes. Atheists, by virtue of the fact that they CAN cherry pick these parts make the point by the simple fact that it can be done. Not what one would expect from the perfect work of a perfect being with infinite power and infinite knowledge. Simple as that.

  146. on 15 Jul 2014 at 1:32 pm 146.DPK said …

    A also conveniently ignores the fact that, according to his worldview, Hitler was created by god and acted completely in accordance with his master plan for the world, and in complete agreement with his will.
    Of course, this dichotomy too will simply be ignored.

  147. on 15 Jul 2014 at 5:01 pm 147.DPK said …

    All things considered, I think the single most compelling reason to conclude that the bible is not the word of a supreme, trancendant being of infinite power and intelligence is the fact that it requires an idiot like Messenger to explain it to the rest of us.

  148. on 15 Jul 2014 at 8:59 pm 148.alex said …

    “..requires an idiot like Messenger to explain…”

    and to righteously point out that the protestants are using the wrong translator (KJVB)..

    “due to the fact that it contains many mistranslations”.

    messenger’s book: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4, read it and puke.

    don’t forget his gem: “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage)”. like+? chirp. chirp.

  149. on 15 Jul 2014 at 11:19 pm 149.TJ said …

    To Alex,

    “if you didn’t really agree with hor on his definition of the “hitler exercise”? then why thank him?”

    Thanks for clearing that up. I was ignorant to the term’s understood meaning, on this blog.

    Re-read my statement above. It says nothing to claim agreement or disagreement.

    If fact I got a different definition from each individual who responded. How do I determine which is the correct? The only one who did not offer me an explanation, is the only person I directly asked, you!.

    Should I thank the others for offering a definition or scorn them for answering on your behalf?

    But then again, I would not expect an answer based on your belief system.

  150. on 15 Jul 2014 at 11:29 pm 150.TJ said …

    To DKP,

    “As far as theists cherry picking from the bible in order to support their own position, this is not really the same as theist cherry picking, is it? Theists are claiming the bible is the perfect word of a perfect being, and to support that idea it is absolutely necessary to completely ignore many clearly imperfect attributes of both the bible and the god it describes. Atheists, by virtue of the fact that they CAN cherry pick these parts make the point by the simple fact that it can be done. Not what one would expect from the perfect work of a perfect being with infinite power and infinite knowledge. Simple as that.”

    If you truly believe this, and it fits with your world view, then there is nothing I, or anybody can say that will make it untrue for you.

  151. on 15 Jul 2014 at 11:35 pm 151.TJ said …

    To All,

    I state:
    What we believe, is determined more so, by what we reject. As opposed to what we can prove or provide evidence for.

  152. on 16 Jul 2014 at 12:01 am 152.TJ said …

    To DPK,

    “Theists are claiming the bible is the perfect word of a perfect being, and to support that idea it is absolutely necessary to completely ignore many clearly imperfect attributes of both the bible and the god it describes.”

    can you clarify for my own curiosity. Should I understand this to mean that…

    a) the bible is wrong because it conflicts with theist.

    b) the theist are wrong because they conflict with the bible.

    c) both are wrong.

    “Not what one would expect from the perfect work of a perfect being with infinite power and infinite knowledge. Simple as that.”

    Personally if I was asked to answer what I would expect from such a being… I would not know where to begin. So in fairness I will not ask you.

  153. on 16 Jul 2014 at 12:09 am 153.alex said …

    “I would not expect an answer based on your belief system.”

    that’s why you’re a dumb motherfucker. your pswedo intellecfuck postings ain’t foolin anybody. the bullshit god and the bible ain’t no different than the greek gods/mythology. go ahead and step up, bitch. show the proof and i’ll shut up. no?

  154. on 16 Jul 2014 at 12:12 am 154.alex said …

    “then there is nothing I, or anybody can say that will make it untrue for you.”

    careful. you’re beginning to sound/smell like the hor motherfucker.

    are you saying that everything is true by default?

  155. on 16 Jul 2014 at 12:33 am 155.TJ said …

    To Alex,

    You’ve done it! You’ve WON!

    I cannot compete with your belief system.

  156. on 16 Jul 2014 at 12:38 am 156.TJ said …

    and…

    “are you saying that everything is true by default?”

    No. I am not, and I don’t need to explain.

  157. on 16 Jul 2014 at 3:01 am 157.A The Prickly Science Guy said …

    TJ,

    None of use ever carry on a discussion with alex. You see why, just scroll past his posts, chuckle and ignore him. You see the MO, the bitterness and the sickness. He can only be helped when he desires help.

    Its sad, but I throw him a compliment here and there to keep him off the ledge.

    “What we believe, is determined more so, by what we reject. As opposed to what we can prove or provide evidence for.”

    Evidence is a broad term. Define you usage of the term. Empirical? Demonstrative? Documentary? Testimonial?

  158. on 16 Jul 2014 at 3:08 am 158.TJ said …

    To Alex…

    –you asked…

    the bullshit god and the bible ain’t no different than the greek gods/mythology. go ahead and step up, bitch.

    –then claimed…

    show the proof and i’ll shut up. no?

    –When I asked previously…

    “what do you think his Gods plan is”

    –You responded with…

    everything that happens, just like the absence of a god.

    messenger’s postings arent’t even about ALL gods, are they? it’s all about righteously spouting his xtian brand, and vigorously trying to sell it.
    would my objections be more palatable if messenger was an aborigine who keeps posting his garbage here and i cursed him twice as bad? hooray?
    it aint’t about a theist versus an atheists viewpoint, is it? it’s all about the countless, motherfucking theist permutations pushing their shit, most notably, the loudmouth xtians.

    ——————-

    Correct me if I am wrong but don’t you make a distinction the xtian God and ALL gods?

    Has it not been said, that not all Gods can be true… especially one that claims to be “The One and Only”?

    And now you ask me to make a distinction. I will not entertain such folly asked by a fool… and I don’t need to explain.

  159. on 16 Jul 2014 at 4:11 am 159.TJ said …

    To A The Prickly Science Guy…

    “What we believe, is determined more so, by what we reject. As opposed to what we can prove or provide evidence for.”

    Evidence is a broad term. Define you usage of the term. Empirical? Demonstrative? Documentary? Testimonial?

    The very nature of my statement is intended to be broad. Consider this…

    At some point in our lives we all ask ourselves one or all of the three big questions.

    1) How did it all begin?

    2) what is the meaning of life?

    3) What happens when I die?

    How you answer question 1 sets the direction of question 2 and question 3 is a conclusion of 1 and 2.

    Question 1 has only 3 options that I can conceive (someone else may have more). As follows…

    What we call the universe, either…

    a) Burst into existence without an external force or cause.

    b) Burst into existence via an external force or cause.

    c) The universe always has existed in some shape or form.

    Nobody can conclusively point to any of the three options and satisfactorily provide proof. All theory’s, doctrines or otherwise ground themselves in one or more of the three options.
    Choosing any, is often the result of rejecting another.

    Also consider this…
    When confronted with a cross section of the earth’s crust, as in the form of a cut section for a roadway through a hillside. a…

    Evolutionist will see proof and evidence of long ages of layered sedimentary deposits.

    Creationist will see proof and evidence of water born sediments laid during a global flood.

    Logically, both cannot be correct. But both parties consider the proof and evidence based not on the evidence itself, but upon what they have already rejected, which in turn narrows and directs what they will accept/believe.

  160. on 16 Jul 2014 at 4:46 am 160.Anonymous said …

    TJ

    Logically, both cannot be correct. But both parties consider the proof and evidence based not on the evidence itself, but upon what they have already rejected, which in turn narrows and directs what they will accept/believe.

    Some people believe it’s impossible to be a christian and evolutionist. Witness the prick.
    However, it’s possible to accept both, witness Collins (biologos) and Ken Miller as two examples. I am not sure what Miller and Collins had to reject.
    Totally disagree with what you’re saying TJ.

  161. on 16 Jul 2014 at 5:11 am 161.TJ said …

    To Anonymous,

    Totally disagree with what you’re saying TJ.

    That’s cool, curious though. Any particular part or all?

  162. on 16 Jul 2014 at 11:38 am 162.alex said …

    “I cannot compete with your belief system.”

    you dumbass. i don’t have a yeti, god, loch ness monster, ufo, et all, belief systems. quit it, beeyatch.

  163. on 16 Jul 2014 at 11:44 am 163.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    TJ,

    You still never addressed the nature of evidence as I outlined above.

    This is important since we have those who claim they only believe what they claim is ” fact based” when in reality it is faith. They do not understand the nature of evidence. i.e. A fish fossil with a bony protrusion proves macro evolution.

    Second, are you aware of the various types of creationism which are embraced by many? Gap theory, progressive, etc?

    Evolution vs Christianity is not even an issue. Christianity is about accepting Christ and who he claimed to be.

  164. on 16 Jul 2014 at 11:54 am 164.alex said …

    “None of use ever carry on a discussion with alex.”

    because it always ends up with me holding my nose with all the bullshit slung about. no matter how you wrap your god package, your bigfoot package, your leprechaun package, your ufo package, they all end up permeated with the stinky, reekingly obvious bullshit. every single, motherfucking time, i ask. tell me again. why doesn’t your bullshit stink?

    in the end, no matter what diversion you throw around, it always goes back to your lack of proof, doesn’t it. even your ridiculous circular god having four corners, doesn’t faze you one bit, does it?

    let’s say, i’m the bitter motherfucker that you say i am. i need help and i’m about to jump off the ledge. hell, let’s say i jumped off!

    now, how the fuck does that change your bullshit god?

    you chuckle and pity my posts? i’m disgusted at yours, with the proliferation of obvious deceit and lies, among other things. that’s right, motherfucker. it’s all right here: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

  165. on 16 Jul 2014 at 3:28 pm 165.freddies_dead said …

    363.A the lying prick posting as The Prickly Science Guy said …

    Evolution vs Christianity is not even an issue.

    For once A the lying prick says something that’s true. Of course it’s not true based on the rubbish A the lying prick spouts but because, evolution is a fact based explanation of modern biodiversity whilst Christianity is a faith based story about an imaginary deity. It’s like comparing apples to fairies.

  166. on 16 Jul 2014 at 3:49 pm 166.TJ said …

    To Alex,

    I said…
    “I cannot compete with your belief system.”

    You replied…
    you dumbass. i don’t have a yeti, god, loch ness monster, ufo, et all, belief systems. quit it, beeyatch.

    ———————
    All of the following was said by you, to me…

    BTW “my name is alex and i live in the u.s. i publicly state my nonbelief in bullshit, especially this idiotic statement by the motherfucker, messenger that states that:”
    it’s all right here: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

    “i say dark matter is nonsense and i don’t have to discuss shit. bullshit is good enough.”

    “it’s double, bullshit talk. the biblical god is an all knowing god. period. motherfucker. there is no argument there. end of motherfucking story.”

    “i don’t have to justify shit.”

    “try telling me that god is the explanation for planetary motion and of course i will say bullshit. press me to explain it, i would mumble something about gravity. is this “i don’t have to justify shit”?”

    “…because you’re fullashit and you haven’t come up with anything original. that’s why you’re fullashit?”

    “the person making the assertion is burdened with the proof. i’m not obligated to investigate alternatives. as with the xtian god, do i need to look at buddism, ufoism, and others? of course, i’ve wondered where we came from and that’s not enough? but i can be convinced. hell, if hesus showed up, levitation would do it for me.”

    “what is the atheist statement/claim? there is no personal god, period. i’m also a non believer in ufo visitors. what is my statement/claim? there is nothing i’m interpreting or contradicting. i also don’t believe you can run a 1 minute mile. and?”

    “you say your 3 year old son can dunk and i say bullshit and i’m not obligated to present an opposing view point.”

    “want to debate evolution? dark matter? this is my fav. science cannot explain certain behavior, so they coined dark matter. whether dark matter is legit or not, this has no bearing on me being an atheist. dark matter has been proven, hooray, and damn, i’m still an atheist.”

    ————————————–

    I don’t need to explain.

  167. on 16 Jul 2014 at 4:29 pm 167.TJ said …

    To To Anonymous,

    You said…
    Some people believe it’s impossible to be a christian and evolutionist. Witness the prick.
    However, it’s possible to accept both, witness Collins (biologos) and Ken Miller as two examples. I am not sure what Miller and Collins had to reject.

    What did they reject?

    To be a Christian you must accept that Jesus is the Son of God, and that he sacrificed himself to save sinners. And that he rose from the dead and has left to prepare a place for us.

    To accept evolution, you must reject Gods creation process. You must place death and suffering before the fall of man, rejecting God’s claim that the penalty of sin was death. You must also reject the necessity of Jesus’s sacrifice to defeat the last enemy… death.

    Once you begin to reject God’s word… we’re do you stop?

  168. on 16 Jul 2014 at 4:38 pm 168.DPK said …

    At some point in our lives we all ask ourselves one or all of the three big questions.
    1) How did it all begin?
    2) what is the meaning of life?
    3) What happens when I die?

    And here is the difference. A rational person will answer:
    1) How did it all begin? No one knows.
    2) what is the meaning of life? Why do you assume that life has to have a “meaning”. That is a human assumption that assumes facts not in evidence. The universe does not seem to care if I am alive or not. Indeed it has already existed for some 14 billion years without me, so I doubt the idea that it was somehow created for the sole purpose of spawning me.
    3) What happens when I die? When we die the chemical and electrical processes that make you function as an organism stop. That is the only thing we actually know. Why do you assume that something happens to you “after” you die?

    The difference between theists and rational people is that only theists pretend to posses knowledge that they do not have. For a rational person, it is a perfectly acceptable answer to say “I don’t know.” There is only one group here that claims to have all the answers, but sadly, their “answers” are based on one thing. Faith. Faith is the act of pretending to know things you do not know. And what is more, the myriad of different faiths all pretend to know DIFFERENT things that they do not know, and they often directly contradict one another. They cannot all be right, but they can certainly all be wrong. That seem to me to be the most likely probability.

  169. on 16 Jul 2014 at 6:15 pm 169.Anonymous said …

    TJ, just ignore alex. He would rather throw insults like an impudent child than have a logical discussion.

  170. on 16 Jul 2014 at 6:16 pm 170.the messenger said …

    TJ, just ignore alex. He would rather throw insults like an impudent child than have a logical discussion.

  171. on 16 Jul 2014 at 6:18 pm 171.the messenger said …

    346.TJ, “it would seem you need to go back and re-read your bible. freddies_dead is consistent with xtians with most of his interpretation of a literal reading of the same texts.”

    Fred uses the KJVB. The KJVB is used by many groups of protestants, but not catholics due to the fact that it contains many mistranslations.

    “I understand you are Catholic?”

    Yes I am a catholic.

    “1. Do statues of Virgin Mary or Crucified Jesus look at all like Idols or Graven Images to you? Is a small cross around the neck any different?”

    Most protestants understand Exodus 20:4 to be a single commandment because they interpret the bible verse by verse. the original biblical texts were not divided into verses; the Christians divided the bible into verses in order to make it easier to find certain parts of the text. But Catholics interpret the bible passage by passage. Exodus 20:4-6 is the full commandment. It means that we should not make idols, it is not a prohibition of all statue making. Making statues and carvings are allowed, due to the fact that the Jews were commanded to make a statue of a snake and also two statues of angels for the ark of the covenant.

    “2. If Jesus plainly says “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”” “Then how does a man in a confession box forgive sins?”

    A priest is a representative of GOD, and therefore has the authority to forgive sin. Also in Luke 5:24 Jesus says that the son of man has the authority to forgive sin.

    “How does the pope represent God?”

    The pope represents GOD as every priest and follower of GOD does. The pope is simply the leader of the catholic church. The first pope was peter, and every pope after him inherits his place as leader of the church.

  172. on 16 Jul 2014 at 6:32 pm 172.alex said …

    “TJ, just ignore alex”

    i know, right? he keeps bringing up your bullshit book to show how stoopid you really are.

    here it is again: http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    “if you have a glass of salt water and you pour more water in(fresh water), it does not change the salinity, ph, temp or chemistry.”

    lol that, hor motherfucker.

  173. on 16 Jul 2014 at 8:32 pm 173.DPK said …

    “Fred uses the KJVB. The KJVB is used by many groups of protestants, but not catholics due to the fact that it contains many mistranslations.”

    Messenger, why would an all powerful being with infinite power and infinite wisdom allow his direct communication with his creation to be “mistranslated”? Especially when the distortion of his message created by a “mistranslation” would result in the eternal damnation of those unfortunate enough to have been raised in the wrong faith tradition? Seems an omnipotent being would make sure his words and meaning would be crystal clear and would not allow them to be altered. Or does he purposely want us to be confused?

  174. on 16 Jul 2014 at 9:02 pm 174.alex said …

    “To accept evolution, you must reject Gods creation process.”

    and to accept hesus, you must reject all the other gods creation process.

    to reject gods, you don’t have to accept evolution. alien believers already know this. see how your word bullshit don’t go anywhere?

    the atheist belief system doesn’t exist, you dumb motherfucker. repeating the same shit over and over again doesn’t make it true.

  175. on 17 Jul 2014 at 1:30 am 175.Anonymous said …

    the prick

    Evolution vs Christianity is not even an issue.

    Except for maybe yourself.
    tj

    To accept evolution, you must reject Gods creation process.

    Really? I am guessing you failed to look at anything beyond the tip of your nose. I suppose it depends…literalist, apologist, fundamentalist, realist….which category are you in? try biologos -dot- org. There are more ways to think than the one you presently employ.

  176. on 17 Jul 2014 at 11:21 am 176.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “To accept evolution, you must reject Gods creation process”

    Not necessarily TJ. I do not accept evolution simply because it is not even close to being proven. Micro is used in a lame attempt to support macro and that just does not work. The topper? It is now political and we all know how much truth there is in politics! Lol!!!

    I do agree god haters want it to be true so badly that they will in faith place their trust in evolution. They really have no other alternative.

  177. on 17 Jul 2014 at 11:39 am 177.alex said …

    “Not necessarily TJ. I do not accept evolution simply because it is not even close to being proven.”

    motherfucker, who gives a fuck about evolution. just typical diversionary, drivel from your motherfucker ass.

    you have no god proof, so you resort to your old, tired ass arguing about other irrelevant shit. what, now bitch? yetis? camaros? ocean swimming?

    bring it motherfucker.

  178. on 18 Jul 2014 at 2:17 am 178.TJ said …

    To all,

    “To accept evolution, you must reject Gods creation process”

    To accept anything other than what is written in the bible, is to reject what is written. Just as to accept anything specific regarding anything (aliens, science, theology, mythology, religion or otherwise) , is to reject anything which is in conflict to what you accept.

    Alex is the only one to have nailed it.

    “and to accept hesus, you must reject all the other gods creation process.
    to reject gods, you don’t have to accept evolution. alien believers already know this. see how your word bullshit don’t go anywhere?”

    Even he see how all your evidences and proofs confirm what I stated…

    “What we believe, is determined more so, by what we reject. As opposed to what we can prove or provide evidence for.”

    ….and you ask why I don’t ignore him?

    Each of you focused on the two examples I choose to illustrate my point. Further supporting my point by showing your proofs and evidences to support your rejections within the illustrated examples. All arguments go nowhere in terms of proof and evidence.

    as for…
    “You still never addressed the nature of evidence as I outlined above.”
    Assess your own evidence, because my evidence is your response.

    The point however seems to have been lost.

    ———————————–
    A said…
    Really? I am guessing you failed to look at anything beyond the tip of your nose. I suppose it depends…literalist, apologist, fundamentalist, realist….which category are you in? try biologos -dot- org. There are more ways to think than the one you presently employ.

    As an individual I owe it to myself to assess what I can, determine and discover what I can, question everything and exercise the right to believe what I will.

    Does that clear it up for you?
    By all or any of my words do I fit any of your categories?
    If I do, then it will be by your assessment based on your understanding of what is acceptable based on what you believe to be reject-able.
    If I offer my own answer you will either accept or reject it, and we will still, have moved nowhere.
    ——————————

    To DPK,

    you said…
    And here is the difference. A rational person will answer:
    1) How did it all begin? No one knows.

    a) Burst into existence without an external force or cause.

    Many scientific theory’s attempt to explain the events following this starting point. They profess that the formation of life is a result of the natural processes. Thus giving it meaning.

    b) Burst into existence via an external force or cause.

    Science theory’s abound to explain multiple universe’s or/and the possibility of the interconnectedness of extra dimensional plains. Further theories attempt to explain life in among all this, not limited to including Aliens created us, again giving it meaning.

    Religion… need I explain?

    c) The universe always has existed in some shape or form.

    Again theory’s including re-birthing of the universe, elastic expansion and contraction, reincarnation etc.

    All attempt to give meaning as to understand our place in the great cosmos.

    you also said…

    2) what is the meaning of life? Why do you assume that life has to have a “meaning”.

    Are you a rational person?

  179. on 18 Jul 2014 at 3:41 am 179.DPK said …

    “Again theory’s including re-birthing of the universe, elastic expansion and contraction, reincarnation etc.
    All attempt to give meaning as to understand our place in the great cosmos.”

    You are confusing hypothesizing with knowledge. My statement stands – “no one knows” it is possible one of these hypotheses will one day be supported by enough evidence to be considered very likely, or it is possible we will never know, because there is no evidence available to us from “before” the Big Bang, if there even is such a thing as “before”. The only rational and truthful answer to the question “how did it all begin?” is “we don’t know.”

    “you also said…
    2) what is the meaning of life? Why do you assume that life has to have a “meaning”.
    Are you a rational person?”

    I think I am. There is no reason I have seen to assume that life arising on this planet, or anywhere else it may have, is a directed process that has a “meaning”. That is like asking “what is the meaning of comets?” Because we can look at comets as having played a role in bringing water and essential things to earth, that is no different than the puddle assuming the hole in the ground in which it lives was meant specifically for it, because it fits it’s shape to perfection. Both the hole and the puddle are products of things that happen in accordance with the way the universe works. There is no “meaning” or purpose to it. They simply are.

  180. on 18 Jul 2014 at 6:27 am 180.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    THE thinking is not whether the universe is meaningful or purposeful or not.

    It is whether we want to extrapolate meaning or not it is whether we want to extrapolate purpose or not. Even when we do there is no telling that our meanings or purposes will not conflict or conflict with those of other people and who is to say which would be better.

    It is not whether creation is intelligent or not it is whether it appeals to the intelligent mind. But for this to happen there must have be a first intellect. That first intellect is the son of God. Whatever we want we get it from the Absolute God. All the big bangs whatever come from the Absolute. All your pre-existent nothingness whatever comes from the Absolute. And the Absolute is in the Son and the Son is in the Absolute. Do you think front-way, back-way back to back or belly to belly or in or out you could have something coming second not depending on what came first. Even if the second criticizes the first it depends on the first. And whatever portion of intelligence you have or we all have comes from a pre-existent intelligence. And the eternal is a disgrace to the temporal. Worse when the temporal exhalts itself. What would it all mean?

  181. on 18 Jul 2014 at 6:29 am 181.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    The argument is stale: go and help the sick, the dying, the poor – the ignorant in a real way.

  182. on 18 Jul 2014 at 6:35 am 182.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    To accept a chaotic viewpoint is to cosign an orderly view point as chaos cannot by authority prevent order. But it can ignore it.

  183. on 18 Jul 2014 at 8:36 am 183.TJ said …

    To DPK,
    You concluded with…

    “I think I am. There is no reason I have seen to assume that life arising on this planet, or anywhere else it may have, is a directed process that has a “meaning”. That is like asking “what is the meaning of comets?” Because we can look at comets as having played a role in bringing water and essential things to earth, that is no different than the puddle assuming the hole in the ground in which it lives was meant specifically for it, because it fits it’s shape to perfection. Both the hole and the puddle are products of things that happen in accordance with the way the universe works. There is no “meaning” or purpose to it. They simply are.”

    Purpose implies Function. Meaning is explanatory. An explanation for a comet will give meaning to what we observe.
    A depression filled with water is the meaning/explanation for a puddle, not the “purpose”. Purpose and meaning only co-exist it the context of “made for” or “Created for”.

    I agree that… 1) How did it all begin? No one knows.
    you said…
    “You are confusing hypothesizing with knowledge.”

    I’m not the only one. What knowledge is “long ages” and “millions of years” presented as fact based on?

    Which of the following are hypothesized and which are knowledge?…

    “Not what one would expect from the perfect work of a perfect being with infinite power and infinite knowledge. Simple as that.”

    “the atheist belief system doesn’t exist, you dumb motherfucker. repeating the same shit over and over again doesn’t make it true.”

    “…evolution is a fact based explanation of modern biodiversity whilst Christianity is a faith based story about an imaginary deity.”

    “the gist of the matter is, that an all knowing god giving free will is an impossibility.”

    ———————

    I don’t expect anybody to answer the above, it only invites argument.

    All nonsense aside… do you consider it to be a rational statement?…

    “What we believe, is determined more so, by what we reject. As opposed to what we can prove or provide evidence for.”

  184. on 18 Jul 2014 at 11:14 am 184.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “What we believe, is determined more so, by what we reject. As opposed to what we can prove or provide evidence for.”

    No this is not a rational statement. You refuse to define the nature of evidence as you see it so we cannot speculate any further.

  185. on 18 Jul 2014 at 11:28 am 185.alex said …

    this tj motherfucker thinks he’s clever. he bombards this blog with his shock and awe bullshit, but he’s got nothing to say. tryin to trick people into rejecting shit that don’t exist? it’s old and don’t mean a damn thing.

    i reject the xtian god as much as i reject the mothefucking bigfoot, don’t i? does that make sense? rejecting santa, elves, and shit, that don’t exist? do i reject all the motherfucking gods before yahweh and all future gods?

    “define the nature of evidence…”

    then why don’t you, you dumbass. if hesus showed up, how would you know? oh, you’ll just know, right? i bet you’d ask the mofo for some proof, won’t you?

    i bet if hesus levitated it wouldn’t be enough for you? i’m a fucking skeptic, but a simple levitation would do it for me, praise the lord. what’s in your wallet, motherfucker?

  186. on 18 Jul 2014 at 3:08 pm 186.DPK said …

    Which of the following are hypothesized and which are knowledge?…
    “Not what one would expect from the perfect work of a perfect being with infinite power and infinite knowledge. Simple as that.”

    That depends on your definition of god… something the theist her steadfastly refuse to do. If god is defined as a being omniscient, omnipotent and omni-benevolent than it is knowledge that the god of the bible does not fit that definition.

    “the atheist belief system doesn’t exist, you dumb motherfucker. repeating the same shit over and over again doesn’t make it true.”

    In as much as it can be argued that the lack of acceptance is an unsupported claim does not constitute a “belief system”, this is knowledge. If your concept of a belief system is different, that’s your call. But then I suppose you’d have to classify people who do not believe that the Keebler Elves actually make the cookies in a hallowed out tree as a “belief system”. Have at it.

    “…evolution is a fact based explanation of modern biodiversity whilst Christianity is a faith based story about an imaginary deity.”

    The distinction is evidence. The theory of common decent is supported by mountains of evidence. the theory of god is supported by fables and superstitious nonsense. None the less, evolution and common decent could be disproved, rather easily, in fact… but it has not been. That places it about as close to “knowledge” as we can probably hope to get.

    “the gist of the matter is, that an all knowing god giving free will is an impossibility.”

    This is deduced from simple logic. It is not possible for a god to know with certainty what will occur in the future, and say that we are free to change it. Knowledge implies certainty, and if a god is certain (has knowledge) that I will choose to do “X” and no “y” then there would exist no possible scenario in which I could possibly choose “y”. If “A” represents the set of all possible events, and B represents the subset of things an omniscient know will occur, then A-B equals the set of things that cannot occur. If there exists a set of thing that cannot occur, then god cannot be omnipotent, since he would be unable to do anything which would violate his perfect knowledge.

    Look… I have said this here before… define god and we can talk intelligently about it. Until then, the theist merely move the goalposts around to avoid any real discussion. Ther is no doubt there is an order to the universe, a set of laws that govern absolutely the way things work, and it is elegant and beautiful. If you want to call that underlying order “god” in the sense that Einstein used it, no argument from me. It clearly exists and is undeniable.
    But to make the leap from a set of laws that control the nature of the cosmos, to the idea of a magical personal god who reads your thoughts, requires that you worship him, wants to have a personal relationship with you, answers your prayers, and will ultimately judge you for your acts and reward you with an eternal life of bliss in a magical kingdom or punish you with an eternity of suffering and torment… well, that a pretty big leap that requires more than some ancient legends.

  187. on 18 Jul 2014 at 7:30 pm 187.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    That said just as you can percieve order in the world if you look for it because the absolute provides it. you can also ‘see’ God in the totality of things because the absolute provides it. However you can deny order and so too you can deny God. That until your options run out. The fact that you Guys have this blog tells me there is something you just can’t get over. There is a stake that entictes you draws you in because of awe and you are obligated to this. What do you think is the summit of that thing. Can you approach it any how. Is it just a dead academic thing you are at home with or it a playful lion cub in your life but that it will grow up to be in reality a wrathful lion in your life.

    All this power is it ok with you are you saved. All this swearing and badmouthing you do on this blog do you not have fear or respect a feeling that if you don’t approach life rightly there is a power out there that just might hold you and fold you, crush your or rip you to threads if you don’t align your self with favour.

    I don’t think you guys are neither saved nor safe. Don’t approach the idea of God so sceptically, so arrogantly, so naively. You might do your self a disservice the Conquering Lion of Judah is not a paper lion. He is a loyal responsible lion but like any other lion he must be a conqueror and a killer. Do you think the universe in it majesty stand up on nothing or on something lest than itself. Should a little rodent look at a mighty and armed fighting force and arrogantly declare that it doesn’t exist. This is not about winning an argument you are in grave danger.

  188. on 18 Jul 2014 at 8:07 pm 188.alex said …

    “There is a stake that entictes you draws you in because of awe and you are obligated to this.”

    i know what you mean. i keep getting drawn into this other bullshit santa claus blog because my dumbass cousin really believes in it.

    he goes around preaching that the reason i didn’t get any xmas gifts is because i didn’t believe in the jolly old elf.

    i guess i best believe in the bullshit christ because if i don’t, i won’t go to the bullshit heaven?

  189. on 18 Jul 2014 at 8:58 pm 189.DPK said …

    2Dumb:
    “It is not whether creation is intelligent or not it is whether it appeals to the intelligent mind. But for this to happen there must have be a first intellect. That first intellect is the son of God. Whatever we want we get it from the Absolute God.”

    You need to look up the definition of unsubstantiated claim and non-sequitur.

    Just because you can jumble a bunch of woo woo words together in a sentence doesn’t mean it represents any kind of valid thought process. Show us where you have proved that “for this to happen there must have be a first intellect”, because right now that is an empty claim. Claims presented without evidence can be dismissed without reason. Then, assuming you can prove the necessity of this first intelligence, show us how that came to be with a prior intelligence to create it… if you can’t you have just violated your own premise. Then, when you are done with that, show us how you know “That first intellect is the son of God.”? Indeed this would seem to be a problem for you if for no other reason, if the first intelligence is the SON of god, then where does god fit in the picture? Presumably he would have had to be first in order to spawn a son?? And why should anyone accept your particular version of the truth over the thousands of other god claims that have been presented throughout history?
    Your Nobel Prize awaits… don’t forget to show your sources… go!

  190. on 19 Jul 2014 at 1:16 am 190.TJ said …

    To 2Dumb4WordsofGod,

    They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart.

    These guys deny the existence of their own spirit/soul. They believe that only the material world exists, because it is the only thing that can be measured and perceived and corroborated by their fellow man.

    They deny that the spirit and the flesh are bound together to produce what we call life… and that death is of the flesh, a result of man’s fall from grace.

    They can perceive…
    “There is no doubt there is an order to the universe, a set of laws that govern absolutely the way things work, and it is elegant and beautiful. If you want to call that underlying order “god” in the sense that Einstein used it, no argument from me. It clearly exists and is undeniable.”

    But cannot perceive an author of those laws.

    They place great faith in man made terms like omnipotent, but ignore and dismiss the words of god these terms attempt to explain. They ignore that Gods is creator, author and owner of all that is made and that it is all made according to his will and not according to our will or understanding. They believe that in their short life times they can perceive the vastness of the creation. That man and his ever changing theory’s and facts provides the answers.

    They make statements like…
    ““That first intellect is the son of God.”? Indeed this would seem to be a problem for you if for no other reason, if the first intelligence is the SON of god, then where does god fit in the picture? Presumably he would have had to be first in order to spawn a son?? ”

    They either have not read or are unaware of Colossians 1:15…
    He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities– all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.…

    They cannot conceive that the first thing the formless God did was give himself an image. Of all the hosts of the heavens and earth, man was the only thing created in Gods image, that we were created for him, by him.

    They cannot comprehend the concept of being born again in the spirit, when they deny their own spirit.

    They cannot conceive a God who sacrificed his eternal heavenly body for a earthly fleshly body. They cannot perceive a spiritual comforter. Or why a fleshly God who says he has left to prepare a place for us, will not appear on command when prayed to, to do so.

    They cannot understand faith, claiming it baseless and yet confess they don’t have any beliefs. But when pointed out to them that they don’t have faith based on what they reject and not what they can prove or provide evidence for, they then ask you to define and categorize their own evidences.

    They cannot perceive a god with a plan and their own free will to follow it or not. So they say a god of the bible could not be loving and allow man to be wicked. They site the suffering of the young and innocent as evidence claiming, by their own judgement these to be unworthy of eternal damnation, clearly ignoring God’s claim to be “merciful and just” and…

    Matthew 19:14
    Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”

    And yet, when I say to them…
    “If you truly believe this, and it fits with your world view, then there is nothing I, or anybody can say that will make it untrue for you.”

    They do not realise that if they remain lost in Christ, that ultimately when they say “there is no God”. That it will be become all too true when they are eternally separated from him. They have been warned.

    But they are not yet dead, and still have time. They should try praying for God to reveal himself to their spirit in a way that only they would personally perceive… after all, he is a personal saviour.

    But watch as they mock me as I confess to them.
    I TJ bare witness, on the 8th May 2014 at age 38 my eyes were opened and I became born again in the holy spirit. After 27 years of soul searching and perusing an absolute truth, I found it in the God of the Bible. There is no physical proof to show for it is not the physical body that is saved but the spirit.

    When they look inward and can only perceive chemical and electrical effects from a physical cause. How can they conceive when they deny their own spirit?

  191. on 19 Jul 2014 at 1:56 am 191.alex said …

    “But watch as they mock me as I confess to them.”

    confessing when your motherfucking, all knowing god already knew? wtf?

    i don’t mock you, motherfucker. i don’t like motherfuckers like you, righteously spewing your shit because you think you’re entitled. i don’t give a fuck if you’re a mooslim, a scientologist, or even that other dumbass named messenger. try telling me to be nicer without the theist righteousness and i’ll prolly take you up on it.

    right away, i smelled your bullshit, but you still insisted on broadcasting your righteous confession didn’t you?

    occur to you that your god has a plan for all the atheists and you’re fucking with the same god? don’t do it.

  192. on 19 Jul 2014 at 6:50 am 192.TJ said …

    Ha ha ha ha!
    So your entitled to spew your shit? You been doing it here for several years from what I can tell.

    Why? If you don’t like it, why troll a site for religious discussion… that just sounds insane… almost religious.

    All the bullshit you been sniffing for so long it’s now the only thing you can smell.

    But don’t worry Alex, I’ve had my fill of your non-belief in bullshit. You’ve still got what you had at the beginning… nothing. And you can be sure there will be no God for you if you choose so.

    Amazing how a few words on a screen can have such a physical impact on your chemical and electrical brain function.

    “try telling me to be nicer without the theist righteousness and i’ll prolly take you up on it.”

    I wouldn’t expect you to change just for me…

    Good bye Alex, as requested, I won’t bother you any more.

    Oh! If I decide to post again just ignore it, like the ones you dislike, ignore yours.

  193. on 19 Jul 2014 at 8:45 am 193.alex said …

    “If you don’t like it, why troll a site for religious discussion”

    should i stop trolling my family gatherings because i pointed out their bullshit? should i stop buying the the random lunch for the bum because i told him to stop the “god bless” shit?

    “Amazing how a few words on a screen can have such a physical impact on your chemical and electrical brain function.”

    that’s why you’re a dumb motherfucker. you’re amazed at nothing shit. why would you be amazed if you found out that i do all the good shit that you’d expect from an xtian? why would you be amazed at the beautiful sunset? not enough to enjoy it? isn’t skin cancer marvelous?

    but you’re not truly amazed. it’s the xtian variation of the sour grapes. i don’t buy your bullshit, so to you, sarcastically, you’re amazed.

    “I wouldn’t expect you to change just for me..”

    if i changed for you and believed in hesus and turned around and changed as to believed in allah, ra, and zeus, would that make sense?

    as demonstrated, you’re fulla shit. go fuck thyself.

  194. on 19 Jul 2014 at 3:14 pm 194.DPK said …

    390.TJ said …
    To 2Dumb4WordsofGod,
    They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart.

    So, TJ finally shows his colors, abandons his attempt at an approach to reason and resorts to the ultimate last resort of the completely deluded, quoting biblical deep-isms! How sad.

    TJ.. I can quote your bible too.
    But you won’t like my cherry picked verses.

  195. on 19 Jul 2014 at 5:51 pm 195.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “Good bye Alex, as requested, I won’t bother you any more”

    ROTFL!!!!!!! can’t blame you TJ . He gets boring fast eh? I think alexander is just a robot posting…lol!!!. I have seen this so many times but yet the Obamamanaics claim the theist run off the posters!!!

    lol!!!!

    No TJ this is not a site for discussion as claimed. It is, however comic relief. Just poke alex with a stick occasionally for fun! But hey, remain reasonable, continue learning and engage in conversation with the open minded individuals.

    peace

  196. on 19 Jul 2014 at 6:00 pm 196.DPK said …

    ” continue learning and engage in conversation with the open minded individuals.”

    ROTFLOL… yeah that’s why TJ and the Dummy had to resort to bible thumping hellfire and damnation… LOL.. yes, “engage in conversation”… that’s rich, especially coming from YOU of all people.
    Time to change your socks, Hor… they’re filled with the piss running down your leg.

  197. on 19 Jul 2014 at 6:01 pm 197.alex said …

    “Obama”

    back to diversions, eh? what happened to TOE? macro? soup? programmer? obsess? chevy? moral? ocean swimming?

    what about the rest of your personas? got tired of getting your ass busted as: martin, science guy, biff, xenon, little ‘A’, Sweetness, boz, RL Wooten, ‘Everyone’, and of course Horatio?

    i bet you’re tired of me posting your pile of shit? http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

    “It is, however comic relief.”

    not as funny as your “China is selling fetuses as a delicacy”. or when you posted as Martin and commented with: “Martin, Good one!”

    lol, motherfucker?

  198. on 19 Jul 2014 at 7:09 pm 198.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    Like I said you guys are in Grave Danger. You are defying power at its greatest,er a power more real and greater than voodoo, a power more real and greater than black magic, a power more real and greater than the Mob, a power more real and greater than the Secret Services, a power more real and greater than the armies of the world put together, a power more real and greater than any to be found in earth, hell or heaven. A power greater than that the nuclear fusion that powers our sun or any other son or star. A power greater than the universe it self as logic would testify and dictate.

    I don’t care about a Nobel Prize; a Noble Prize is insignificant.

    A vain pursuit compare to the might and majesty of God. Salvation is the prize I keep my eyes fixed on.

    If I was offered $1, 000, 000, 000 to spend just to give up salvation. I would take it but I wouldn’t spend it because I would have for use as toilet paper for life.

    The reason I said that the Son of God is the first intellect is because I don’t consider God himself to be an intellect. It is given to creature to concern themselves with being an intellect. And so Jesus Christ The First as the Creature which represents the infinite God is invariable the first intellect.

    To say someone is possess of intellect is to describe someone God himself is beyond description he is infinite and his greatness is mind-boggling and his grandness is all surpassing.

    The intellect is used in the pursuit of knowledge God doesn’t need to pursue anything he is the embodiment of perfect knowledge.

    In fact intellect or intelligence is something that is built up we speak of someone developing their intellect. Now does an almighty, infinite and omnipresent absolute have to build up any thing to have for himself as an attribute?

    Intelligence itself must bow to God.

    The brightest intellect of man is dark. And the intellect of the sinner is an abomination.

  199. on 19 Jul 2014 at 7:24 pm 199.alex said …

    2Dumb4WordsofGod = dumbass, motherfucker.

  200. on 19 Jul 2014 at 7:27 pm 200.DPK said …

    2Dumb says:
    “God himself is beyond description..”
    And then goes on for 3 paragraphs describing god..

    “he is infinite and his greatness is mind-boggling and his grandness is all surpassing.”

    Now if you are done with your hellfire and damnation speech, answer an even simpler question… why should I believe you?
    I mean messenger says he talks to god himself and has been to heaven, and he says god is all merciful and even hell doesn’t last forever, in fact, only the “bad” parts of us go to hell, and the good parts go to heaven. I’m basically a good person… why should I believe you and not him?
    There was a Muslim maniac on here a while ago that said we were all going to burn unless we rejected Jesus, the false profit, and accepted Allah, the only true god. Why not believe him?
    I mean, if all you have is threats and word salad, what make you any different?
    Put up or shut up. Nobody is buying your bullshit.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply