Feed on Posts or Comments 27 September 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 19 Jul 2014 at 7:33 pm 1.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    Like I said you guys are in Grave Danger. You are defying power at its greatest, 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 of the nuclear fusion that powers our sun or any other sun or star. A power greater than the universe itself 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 it 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 creatures to concern themselves with being intellects. And so Jesus Christ The First as the Creature which represents the infinite God is invariable the first intellect.

    To say someone is possessed of intellect strictly speaking 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.

    All intelligence of God or of the spiritual world which neglects the adoration and exaltation of JC is not intelligence but dis-intelligence.

    You guys are not in a position to bargain you don’t have any power or wealth of your own to say, ‘this I have even to challenge God’ far less match him. Take God out of the picture and the world lies an empty ruin. No computers, No architecture, No battle ships, No war planes, No medical labs, No farms, No space ships all these things depend on the provisions God provides which men are now trying to steal, criminally treasure and abuse.

    You guys are empty, vain, lost, insane, or 2 Dumb for the Words of God to reach the inward parts or your hearts.

  2. on 19 Jul 2014 at 7:39 pm 2.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    We can offer the best in adjectives when praising God but we must accept their humility and their inadequacy in doing so. No word phrase or adjective adequately Describes God or even comes close to doing so. The best we can do is offer or eternal lives in sacrifice to even become vaguely respected by God. Even if we offered the highest praise to God for the rest of eternity do you think we would be flattering God. Ye if we put on only a couple diamond stones that the Universe Creator, God himself created that would be flattering to us.

  3. on 19 Jul 2014 at 7:41 pm 3.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    But if the whole realm of nature were ours that would be enough as a gift to flatter God.

    Why do you think that statement was made. What thought was going through the saints head when he said that.

    Think on that.

    Where would you have to be mentally and spiritually to realise that truth.

  4. on 19 Jul 2014 at 7:42 pm 4.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    Where the whole realm of nature mine it were a present far too small

    Love so amazing so divine demands my heart and soul my life my all

  5. on 19 Jul 2014 at 7:47 pm 5.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    Even as I say this my hands shake and my eyes sob tears for those of us so lost, so endangered yet so arrogant.

    May God have mercy on us all.

  6. on 19 Jul 2014 at 8:02 pm 6.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    The only way to God is through Jesus Christ the intermediary. You know that only too well why harden your hearts.

  7. on 19 Jul 2014 at 8:02 pm 7.alex said …

    2Dumb4WordsofGod. righteous, predictable, bullshit. business as usual for these motherfuckers.

    oooh, i’m so scared because the motherfucker says i’m in danger. what a fucking moron.

  8. on 19 Jul 2014 at 10:37 pm 8.TJ said …

    To DPK,

    Now that my beliefs are laid to bare, do you still wish to engage in conversation with me?

  9. on 20 Jul 2014 at 1:29 am 9.DPK said …

    Why sure, TJ… But when you preach fire and brimstone at me or try to use the bible to prove the bible, don’t be surprised when I call bullshit on you.
    Wanna answer the question I asked 2dumb?
    Why should I believe your claims?
    If you can’t give me a solid reason as to why I should give credence to anything you say, then you are no different from all the others preaching demands of different gods.

  10. on 20 Jul 2014 at 9:57 am 10.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    Why So Foul Mouthed?

    And what does being a moron mean? Does it mean that I am not who I am? Does it mean that I don’t like myself? Does it mean that I don’t have a happy life? Does it mean that I can eat, drink, sleep and be contented with life? Does it mean that I cannot study, work and excel at sport, recreation and social life? Does it mean that I can’t serve my God freely, happily and with blessings? Does it mean that I will not happily make my way to the higher realm when life on earth expires? Does it mean that I don’t see the hand of God in the things that happen in my life every day blessing me and lifting me above the rest above the stress? Does it mean that I will not live to see the horrible reward of the wicked, the evil, the unrighteous and the unbelievers? Does it mean that believing in God has not given me all the best but prepared me for the worse? Does it mean that I do not have within a joy that passeth all understanding and a peace such as God giveth and that the world could not give if it even tried?

    Do you know why it is so moronic to disbelieve in God. The word Yah or Yahweh means the one who causes to exist. To say there is no God not only means that there is no god but means that there is no one or nothing that causes to exist. And this is contrary to the evidence as something does exist. Any normal person would realize that since something exist, the one or thing who caused it to exist also does exist and he or she would align themselves with that thing or person.

    If you were hired for work in a Fortune 500 company would you look at an intelligently designed company and just decide that it did not have a creator and that you wanted to work for it but did not want to align yourself, your ambitions and your motives with the CEO and the work and wishes and designs of the Entrepreneur? Because in you pea sized brain the company exists but the creator of the company doesn’t exist?

    That is moronic.

    All religions imply worship tell me about one that doesn’t. All imply a higher state of being tell me about one that does not. All imply a return to the source and the peace that existed at the beginning tell me about one that doesn’t? All imply a detachment from the created that the peace of the un-created may enter?

    All religions therfore imply the values of Christianity. And they seek for that which Christianity also seeks for and has.

    The Father is the Absolute who is Greater than all Are. There is only one thing Greater than all are and that is the Absolute in Islam through their wisdom they call that God Allah. Hindus call it Brahma.

    In the Hindu religion there is the trinity Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. The creator, the preserver and the destroyer.

    The trinity does not speak of three Gods but one. In the olden days it was know that all 1s are 3s. The three represented equally the sum, the total, the universe, the father (who is greater than all), the son represented the physical or focal point, and the spirit represented the working that brought the thing, the situation or the time-space coordinate into being.

    It is the same for all things, there is not one thing on earth or heaven that is not a trinity thus viewed. I am a trinity, my computer is a trinity equally physical, and equally spirit or life cycle; and equally part of and inseparable from the sum total otherwise known as the universe the father which is greater than all.

    This is all the ancients said. There is the truth, but if you want to live there is a way this is all Jesus said, I and the father the one greater than all, the unity, the singularity, are one. Yet I am a man, a focal point (or we wouldn’t be having this conversation), yet I show forth a process, a function, a dynamic, a life cycle a spirit and I am inseparable from that and those things are inseparable from me.

    I am the measure of all things attributed and I and the total are one.

    But blaspheme not against the spirit which brings purging, health, cleansing and pruning. Blaspheme not against the ministry (which is of the spirit which works to supply every need). Blaspheme not against spirit which is the life blood and immunity of the body bringing destruction to every threat to the body – that no corruption may persist in the body.

    Do you think Muslims worship the Father and not the son? you are wrong.

    Ask any Muslim they will tell you, we strive in Islam: ie to subject themselves to God but they have never seen or met God, they only have a focus on God and the focus on God is not God. This is what Jesus said focus on me, on my life and my teachings and my example and you will have done your bit to know and worship God. No image mental or otherwise is God, God is the sum total such a focus is only an attempt to communicate with God and to align yourself with God.

    Is Jesus a man? Is Jesus a body of a man? How tall is Jesus. 6 feet? When he was a child how tall was he 4 feet? Contradiction. How can Jesus be 4 feet and still 6 feet? When Jesus was a blood clot in his mother womb how tall was he? Was he still Jesus? No hands, no head, no body, no feet – so not a man as you know it but still Jesus? Therefore the Son is a focal point, not the form of a man struggling to carry a cross up a hill in a village in the middle east.

    Cast out our sin and enter in, if you are a person 4 feet tall are you going to let a man 6 feet tall enter in your body and could he fit?

    Therefore the carnal mind cannot understand spiritual things.

  11. on 20 Jul 2014 at 10:04 am 11.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    If you have a beginning you can have a multifaceted end. However if you are beginning you can only have one beginner and strictly speaking only one first born of creation.

    Only a schizophrenic would think it to be other wise.

  12. on 20 Jul 2014 at 10:18 am 12.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    Do you Scientist think you own the universe. I have a 5 cd set on the universe. Yet the scientist most powerful telescopes haven’t even vaguely peered deeply into space. And this won’t happen in a thousand years. What you call the universe is a few pictures garnered by a telescope and then flung together on a computer to get a better picture.

    Not only is it inaccurate to assume that you have pieced the observable universe together properly but you guys are the proverbial ant trying to make love to an elephant and the proverbial sage trying to drain the ocean with a spatula. Then you get some sort of chemical imbalance in your brains and you attack Christians. You are a cursed lot and the wrath of God abideth on you.

    You should let God alone do it.

    You will call down an intolerable judgement of unbearable proportions down on your selves. If you can’t escape the gravitational pull of the earth; do you think you will escape the grip and gravitational pull of hell? Indeed of your own reprobate and corrupt minds?

  13. on 20 Jul 2014 at 3:04 pm 13.DPK said …

    2dumb ranted:
    A bunch of disjointed, rambling, crazy ass bs like ” How tall is Jesus. 6 feet? When he was a child how tall was he 4 feet? Contradiction. How can Jesus be 4 feet and still 6 feet? When Jesus was a blood clot in his mother womb how tall was he?”

    Do you think your Chorpa-like idiotic attempt at sounding philosophical impresses anyone? Only weak minded dolts like yourself, and they don’t need convincing.

    Want anyone to take you seriously? Answer my question. Why should anyone believe anything you say? Give us valid reasons as to why anyone should accept that the claims you make about gods and the nature of reality are true.

    “Any normal person would realize that since something exist, the one or thing who caused it to exist also does exist…”
    And yet, you claim that god exists without a one, or thing that caused him to exist, no? Is this not your claim? How can that be? You are presenting a premise, then violating your own premise with your very next breath.

  14. on 20 Jul 2014 at 4:41 pm 14.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    Who is Chorpa what did he say about this?

  15. on 20 Jul 2014 at 5:25 pm 15.DPK said …

    Sorry… Auto correct. Deepack Chopra. The master of new age doublespeak and bullshit spewing word salad.

    So, I take your lack of a response as an admission that you actually have no good reason to offer as to why anyone should believe any of your claims?
    I thought as much.
    Come back when you figure it out.

  16. on 20 Jul 2014 at 7:06 pm 16.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    HOW CAN YOU PROVE THAT SOMEONE IS ALMIGHTY WHAT EVIDENCE CAN BE PUT FORWARD AND UNTIL YOU CAN THINK OF SOMETHING HARDER TO DO THAN THE PRODUCTION OF A BOUNDLESS UNIVERSE THE ALMIGHTY HAS ALREADY PUT FORWARD HIS EVIDENCE AND DOES NOT NEED TO DO MORE WHY SHOULD HE NEED TO DO MORE HE HAS ALREADY PUT FORWARD THE UNIVERSE AND YOU CAN GET OVER IT.
    IF SOME ONE RAN A 100 METER RACE IN 9.45 SECONDS FLAT WOULD YOU SAY THAT IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH RUN IT IN 14 SECONDS TO PROVE THAT YOU ARE FAST WHAT MADNESS WOULD THAT BE. DO YOU WANT THE HIMALAYAS REMOVED TO PROVE THAT GOD EXISTS WHEN GOD HAS JUST MADE A BOUNDLESS MAGNIFICENT UNIVERSE A FEAT TRILLIONS OF TIMES GREATER THAN REMOVING THE HYMALAYS MOUNTAINS.

  17. on 20 Jul 2014 at 7:29 pm 17.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    Contest’

    Do we believe the claims of 2Dumb4WordsofGod or Dippy?

    One claims God created everything and set creation into motion. Dippy claims everything created itself (chuckle).

    Computing…………

    No contest, a Creator is logical, essential and fits the evidence.

    Case dismissed. DPK, pay your court costs on the way out.

  18. on 20 Jul 2014 at 7:54 pm 18.DPK said …

    Haha.. The only thing really funnier than 2dumb trying to scream at me through a computer screen is A’s complete and total inability to grasp a simple concept.
    Neither I have never claimed to know how the universe began. I have repeatedly said “no one knows.” YOU three, A, 2dumb and Messy, are currently the only ones here claiming to know how the universe began. I just want to know why I should accept your version of events over say, RA the sun god, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Zeus the mighty, Ravi the magical interdimensional sea turtle, or even the Hawkings version of time leading back toward the Big Bang becoming fuzzy?
    So far all I hear is that the universe is here… That only proves that it is here, not that it was created by a creature who was never created.
    Got anything to offer? If not, I stand by my position that while I do not know how the universe was created, neither do you. And that doesn’t mean you can make up some fairy tale and expect people to believe it under threat of eternal damnation.
    I call bullshit!
    Lol. You guys are funny though.

  19. on 20 Jul 2014 at 8:31 pm 19.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    Every religion concerns itself with the beginning but there is no beginning. The Bible speaks of everlasting and the one whose going forth has been from everlasting. It does not claim an absolute beginning however it speaks of a beginning of creation. God did not need to become. But all the things that became are things that Yaweh the one who causes to becomel; caused to become. Creatures are not from everlasting but the absolute is from everlasting. I have never heard of a temporal absolute nor have I heard of an eternal relative nor an eternal creature, nor an eternal man nor an eternal animal or an eternal tree or an eternal…. Athiest?

  20. on 20 Jul 2014 at 9:06 pm 20.DPK said …

    Again, why should I believe you?
    So far you have offered me nothing more than ” because it says so in the bible” a book written by primitives that has contains demonstrable, factual errors and contradictions.
    Do you have anything else?
    If not, then your woo woo words mean nothing.
    Next.

  21. on 20 Jul 2014 at 9:18 pm 21.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    The word of God does not contain factual errors the word of God is the standard of truth.

    Are we to believe that Life, and the Universe was created by what then.

    The primitives were closer to the case, and the evidence than we are why not believe them.

    If we don’t believe God what is the Alternative.

    I always say God is the All in All not the Alternative.

    The big bang is ludicrous.

    Even more so a big bang which set itself off.

  22. on 20 Jul 2014 at 9:19 pm 22.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    Alice in Wonderland had more faith, hope and a better guidance principle than you all.

  23. on 20 Jul 2014 at 9:24 pm 23.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    Further more the universe should not be thought of strictly in terms of Matter, Energy, Space and Time there is also a moral universe and a whole host of spiritual realities which contribute to the totality of things. The big bang doesn’t explain those.

  24. on 20 Jul 2014 at 10:32 pm 24.DPK said …

    As you are so amply demonstrating, faith is nothing more than pretending to know things you do not know. If your claims about god and these mysterious spiritual dimensions of the universe could be shown in any way to actually exist, then I would not need faith to believe them.

    Let’s try an excercise, shall we? Let’s make a list of all the things that were once attributed to gods that later were found to have a natural, no supernatural explanation.
    The sun, the moon, the tides, storms and rain, earthquakes, thunder and lightning, floods, disease, mental illness, epilepsy, birth defects, solar and lunar eclipses, the change of seasons, etc, etc, etc…. Get the idea?
    Now let’s list all the things that were thought to have a natural explanation that later turned out to be caused by supernatural gods:
    ______________________________________________
    Oh yeah…. Nothing.

    You ask, “If we don’t believe God what is the Alternative?”
    Not believing in god, maybe?
    Let me ask you a like question. If we don’t believe in leprechauns, what is the alternative? You can’t explain where the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow comes from, can you? Leprechauns are the only possible answer.

    Now, you have made many claims, based completely on faith…. Pretending you know things you do not in fact know, and I ask you again, WHY should I believe you?
    You must know. You believe it yourself…. Why?

  25. on 20 Jul 2014 at 11:48 pm 25.TJ said …

    To DPK,

    WHY should I believe you?
    You must know. You believe it yourself…. Why?

    You are not required to believe me, it is of course your choice to believe what you will.

    However speaking for myself only. Of all the alternative explanations for origins, I consistently found their roots in the rejection of the biblical texts.
    Why so much effort to discredit it?
    You and I both understand why nobody tries to discredit the Easter bunny, Santa and lepricorns.
    But why does the bible receive so much attention both positive and negative? Were the ancients so primitive, or is this based on a theory who’s logics begins with a rejection of biblical scripture?

    Perhaps we should review the origins of man made theories and measure their worth of acceptance or rejection.

    My faith is based on a will to believe with all my faculties, and not based on it simply is. No other possibility offers or answer for me, to the big three questions. No other possibility encompasses all that I can observe and perceive and put it into a context/framework that I can rationalise.

    Anybody who claims to have no belief system is only fooling themselves. To say something is untrue or that they don’t believe, is to believe it be untrue, a belief within and of itself.

    When I look to anything, I am biased in my belief. I rationalise, make assumptions and speculate. This is no different to anybody else who claims anything to be true or untrue. I have never claimed otherwise.

    …You must know. You believe it yourself…. Why?

    By a process of rationalising, speculating, assuming, rejecting what I choose, accepting what I choose and finally conviction by what I can only describe as an overwhelming personal spiritual experience. And that is all I can offer you as to why I believe.

    From here I can only discuss and offer my interpretation, remaining biased in my belief. I cannot give you the smoking gun you desire.

  26. on 21 Jul 2014 at 12:04 am 26.alex said …

    “…I consistently found their roots in the rejection of the biblical texts.
    Why so much effort to discredit it?
    You and I both understand why nobody tries to discredit the Easter bunny, Santa and lepricorns.”

    that’s why you’re a dumb motherfucker. who are the dipshit theists that mostly post in here? surprise, bitch! it’s xtian motherfuckers. pullin out the persecuted shit, eh?

    if the mooslum motherfuckers posted here as much as you assholes did, you thunk they wouldn’t be discredited just as much?

    goddamn right nobody discredits the bunny, santa, or lepricorns. do you see any of them believers posting their shit?

    you keep desperately trying to pin that belief shit on atheists, but you fail bitch. the disbelief in allah, rah, zeus, hesus, yeti and the rest of the bullshit does not constitute belief any more than the disbelief in tarot cards.

    bitch, motherfucker.

  27. on 21 Jul 2014 at 12:11 am 27.alex said …

    “Why So Foul Mouthed?”

    you wave the eternal damnation shit and you complain about cursing?

    “And what does being a moron mean?”

    you complaining about the big bang like it’s relevant and that it’s the only known alternative? alice in wonderland being better than atheists? screaming in CAPS? and posting and reposting your bullshit?

  28. on 21 Jul 2014 at 12:35 am 28.alex said …

    “Do we believe the claims of 2Dumb4WordsofGod or Dippy?”

    are we debating DPK’s claim? you dumbass, motherfucker.

    why not my claim that the earth is flat? does that prove your god? you dumb motherfucker.

  29. on 21 Jul 2014 at 1:49 am 29.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    TJ,

    Great job demolishing DPKs illogical rationalizations while in the process causing Alex to meltdown.

    I dunno seems to be all the atheist have to offer which is why the cult of atheism remains small, irrelevant, without answers and hope.

    The funniest claim by atheist is that when science discovers a new scientific law or truth they believe they have disproved God!!

    lol!!!!

  30. on 21 Jul 2014 at 2:07 am 30.alex said …

    “…I dunno seems to be all the atheist have to offer which is why the cult of atheism…”

    reality check, bitch, motherfucker. here’s your entire m.o. for all to see: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS. oh look, it auto updates itself with your latest bullshit.

    remember your quip? “China is selling fetuses as a delicacy”

    and how you posted as martin and then congratulated yourself with “Martin, Good One!”

    that’s right motherfucker. i’m the constant reminder that you’re a piece of shit and it’s time for your ass to move on to a different moniker. try using “dumbass motherfucker”.

  31. on 21 Jul 2014 at 2:39 am 31.DPK said …

    To DPK,
    WHY should I believe you?
    You must know. You believe it yourself…. Why?

    What is it you think I believe TJ? I have stated that no one actually knows how the universe began. Is that untrue?
    I have stated that the properties commonly assigned to god are impossible, and I have shown you logically why it is not possible for there to be perfect foreknowledge and the free ability to change it. I have shown you logically that if a god has a perfect knowledge of events that will occur, then he cannot be omnipotent because there will be things he then could not do without invalidating his foreknowledge. Is that untrue?
    I have stated that I see no reason to accept your claims about the existence of gods and the supernatural, and that that god or creator is one described in the bible, or any other holy book. You have not presented one single shred of reason or evidence as to why I should. Not one.

    “You and I both understand why nobody tries to discredit the Easter bunny, Santa and lepricorns.” Because no one actually believes they actually exist and do the things the fables say they do. Sadly, the same cannot be said for the various god myths… witness otherwise sane people to this day killing each other daily because one does not pray to the same invisible man the other does.
    No one expends energy on discrediting the Easter Bunny because no one is demanding that the Easter Bunny story be taught as science in school, that colored eggs must be consumed on Easter Sunday, or that laws must be passed in agreement with the will of the Bunny. I really thought you were smarter than making such a silly statement. Rational people discredit silly religious beliefs because they matter in our world.

    “My faith is based on a will to believe with all my faculties,” in other words, wishful thinking. You freely admit that you believe because you want to, not because there is actually any rational reason to do so. Thanks for the admission… that’s your choice, but don’t try to convince me it is based on anything more than that, and don’t get angry with me when I call bullshit… because that’s how I see it.

    “Anybody who claims to have no belief system is only fooling themselves.” True that we all have ideas that we more or less accept, and those that we reject. I believe when I get in my car that the other drivers will stay in the proper lane. I believe when I drop a book it will fall to the floor. I believe when I boil a pot of water it will eventually evaporate. These belief systems are based on evidence and observation. How does that compare to a belief that there is a powerful god who loves us, but allows bad things to happen to good people everyday. A belief that a god answers prayers, when every rational study shows prayer has no effect? A belief that our consciousness somehow survives the death of our brains, and lives eternally in some other magical realm, when there is absolutely no reason to believe that any such thing happens. A belief in a all powerful god who’s feats have regressed along with the ability of humans to document and witness such feats from the likes of parting the Red Sea to occasional appearances on slices of burnt toast?
    Which one of us is fooling themselves, TJ? Really?

    “From here I can only discuss and offer my interpretation, remaining biased in my belief. I cannot give you the smoking gun you desire.”

    I know you can’t. But we disagree on the reason you can’t. You think it is because your beliefs are founded in some transcendent reality beyond the physical world, and I think, more practically, it is simply because they are not true. Ocam’s Razor and all that. But thank you for your honesty and for ceding the point. You appear to be at least an honest and sincere person, unlike most of the others on here, who are without a doubt the most unchristian christians you can imagine. I wish you well.

  32. on 21 Jul 2014 at 7:24 am 32.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    Why were fairy tales written? Because they were true or there was evidence for them? No.

    Was it because man wanted to believe in something? I think not.

    Superstition and fairy tales were written to satisfy man’s need for a little fiction.

    In a world like this it would not be complete unless men and women had a little fiction to believe in or to lighten life up.

    This is not the same reason 3 billion odd Christians and 2 billion odd Muslims visit the church and the Mosque every week.

    There is no perfect evidence for a thing except the thing it self: if we would analyse it.

    And you have an academic fallacy in your minds. You are holding to the fact that if a certain category of evidence for God were produced, that would mean that God would exist.

    Then I believe your next step would be to say if that evidence were produced anyone not believing would be wrong and I supposed you would get foul mouthed on them.

    Yet this is not how evidence works if you look at the rigorous court systems in the world evidence is produced for this and that and the courts take action on this evidence yet not all the evidence is conclusive and many persons are prosecuted wrongly because the courts have come to the wrong conclusion based on evidence (which is incomplete) no matter how convincing.

    I could not produce complete evidence for anything far less that God exists.

    Some people doubt their very eyes and ears far less evidence.

    I have strong evidencial logic.

    Jesus did miracles that people might believe that a person connected to the source of life could do extraordinary things, yet he never said ‘So Judges and Jury I have given you categorical evidence that God exists’.

    Can you give me categorical evidence at this present stage in man’s development that the centre of the earth exist or that the centre of the sun exists.

    NO; but you believe that every spherical object has a centre therefore the centre of the earth exist or that certainly the centre of the sun exist.

    You believe that the universe exist as a total although you have only seen part of the universe and there is no categorical evidence that the furthest reach of the universe exist as no one has real seen it, measured it or come in contact with it.

    Similarly no one has seen the one who has brought this extraordinarily miraculously ordered universe and existence into being yet we believe that that person exists.

    No evidence: but logic.

    A court does not decide by evidence alone. If there was 100 proof there would be no need for a court case.

    But seeing certain realities; logic is used to arrive at a conclusion.

  33. on 21 Jul 2014 at 10:13 am 33.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    I don’t think that believing that God exists is the same as religion.

    There are a lot of people who believe that God exist that are not religious people.

    Just like I don’t have to be a technology freak to believe that the Laptop I am using has a maker.

    How much more complex the Universe we have and we don’t have to be a religious person to take one look at it and come to the logical conclusion that it has been created.

    The Bible says that the even the devils believe in god and tremble.

    This is why I believe that most or all Atheists know deep in their hearts that God exist but they have a demonic agenda. This is why I am so hard on atheist.

    And so demanding that believers are not swayed by this oldest of heresies.

    s

  34. on 21 Jul 2014 at 11:44 am 34.alex said …

    “I have strong evidencial logic.” followed by the unproven… “Jesus did miracles..”

    just like your round god with 4 corners, eh? that’s the equivalent of an all knowing god giving you free will, you dumbass, motherfucker.

    “..give me categorical evidence …that the centre of the earth exist…”

    so using your impeccable logic, if i can’t produce it, then your bullshit god exist? if i can’t produce it, we should teach creationism?

    that’s why your new name is “dumbass motherfucker”. you doubt the same science that produce the computer you’re working on, the same science that produced the medicine/food you’re ingesting, and you doubt the scientific proof for the center of the earth?

    “demonic agenda.” again, that’s why your new name is “dumbass motherfucker”. bibles and demons don’t mean shit here.

  35. on 21 Jul 2014 at 1:05 pm 35.freddies_dead said …

    Well that escalated quickly…

    Holy shit! Where did 2Dumb4Words come from? He’s even more batshit crazy than messy. What the fuck does he mean by “evidencial logic”? Especially when he then brings up Jesus and miracles which are illogical by nature and lack any objective evidence for their existence. The whole ‘believing in God doesn’t make you religious’ schtick and his laptop having a laptop maker are the standard fare of the terminally stupid. It’s so sweet that he thinks he’s ‘hard on atheists’ too. The only thing hard about anything he’s said is the sheer difficulty of reading his diatribes without falling to the floor laughing.

    And I see TJ has given up his cloak of reason in order to start thumping his Bible really, really hard. Feigning ignorance as to why people push back against primitive texts which preach hatred and intolerance in the name of imaginary Gods. When the leprechaunists start pushing for laws that favour their faith over the faiths of others and people of no faith then you can be sure that you’ll see push back against them too. I also have to ask just where and how he perceives his God? Maybe he can point His God out to the rest of us instead of pointing at a whole raft of other things and telling us his God made them – the same God that we have no choice but to imagine. Just how can we differentiate between TJ’s God and something he may merely be imagining?

  36. on 21 Jul 2014 at 2:37 pm 36.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    The evidence of the Universe is strong evidential logic.

    You have a hard time proving that there can be a highly ordered and fruitful universe without a creator of the universe otherwise called God.

    Jesus miracles were about human psychology.

    It was part of the agenda to help the chosen ones believe and to convict other stubborn of the divine.

    I don’t want to provide evidence to you or anyone.

    I love myself but I don’t even want to provide evidence to myself.

    I am satisfied with faith.

    Because anything else would be dumb ass bullshit.

    The idea that we know anything is a fairy tale we don’t, we can’t and it is not possible. Not even Jesus knew anything. The Bible teaches that he who knows, knows not as he ought to know.

    This is why we have faith.

    Faith is the evidence of things not seen the hope of things eternal. Hebrews 11:1

    There is no evidence that the far reaches of the Universe exist yet scientist believe in that anyway.

    It is on discretion AND WITH UNDERSTANDING that we talk about ‘KNOWING’.

    That said there are a lot of scientist who believe in God.

    You don’t want to be religious THAT IS WHAT IT IS WITH YOU; like we said believing that God exist does not make you Religious there are a lot of people out there who do believe that God exist and they are not Religious.

    I am not a technological freak, nor do I need to be to believe that my Laptop has a maker.

    I have evidence that you don’t have because I was born AND raised a Christian and since then I have been born again, I have walked every step of my life with God – and what a miracle filled life that has been.

    If I even begin to express the least of those miracles the atheist begin screaming psyco, illusion, just like the roman soldiers began ‘oh they have stolen Jesus body’ AND ‘he didn’t really resurrect.’

    You don’t have proof for God’ so you say he doesn’t exist. Where is your proof that he doesn’t exist. If you don’t have that you don’t have a point. Whether you like it or not!

    I know what is your standard response are fairies and leprachans real.

    Cool

    But are fairies and leprachans necessary for the creation of the universe?

    Rod of Moses to your backs!!!!!!

    …yet if they were things that only a leprachan could create and I was seeing that stuff all around we would have to begin believing that leprachans existed won’t we?

  37. on 21 Jul 2014 at 2:56 pm 37.alex said …

    “You have a hard time proving that there can be a highly ordered and fruitful universe without a creator of the universe otherwise called God.”

    that’s why you’re a dumb, motherfucker.

    You have a hard time proving that there can be a highly ordered and fruitful universe without a creator of the universe otherwise called Zeus.

  38. on 21 Jul 2014 at 3:08 pm 38.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    I serve ‘Yahweh’ or THE ONE WHO CAUSE TO BECOME. I don’t have a problem worshiping Allah if he were the prime mover who caused to become.

    I don’t have a problem with worshiping Zeus if Zeus is the prime mover who causes to become.

    I don’t care if the creator even has a name.

    I know that no name ever named or to be named can be created with out the prime mover ‘Yahew’ the one who cause to be come.

    When is God equal to a leprechaun.

    A leprechaun is a form.

    The Almighty Prime Move God is formless. In fact the only most formless.

    Since everything else has formed itself around him. And as he preexisted the concept of form.

    I don’t think of my salvation as a play thing.

    If I were to lose my Salvation I personally would be the one to put a Chris Copper Bullet in the brains of the individual or those individuals who were responsible for such a tragedy and victimization.

    I personally would fling them kicking and screaming into the lake of fire.

    Even now I am sending in my application to God.

    God do you need someone to execute the wicked on the judgement day.

    Someone:
    To lock the evil into an eternal hell.
    To throw lost souls into eternal darkness.
    To throw those with the mark of the beast into the lake of fire.
    To throw the lost angels into the bottomless pit.

    To place a noisome pestilence on errant and rebellious sons of men.

  39. on 21 Jul 2014 at 3:39 pm 39.the messenger said …

    397.alex,stop wasting space on this blog with your lies, diversions, and other nonsense.

  40. on 21 Jul 2014 at 3:42 pm 40.alex said …

    “I don’t have a problem with worshiping Zeus”

    so a nameless god, who acts like he doesn’t exist is ok by you? hey! that’s my god.

    but we all know you have a problem with that. because you need your personal god to deliver the virgin goodies and to cast us heathens into hell.

    dumbass.

  41. on 21 Jul 2014 at 3:47 pm 41.alex said …

    “alex,stop wasting space on this blog…”

    oyyy, the other dumbass is missing for attention.

    here’s your automagically updated pile of shit:
    http://goo.gl/7fbnA4

    please. bring back your:
    “I have also seen heaven my self and it is amazing.”

    and your universally accepted:
    “if a man rapes a woman that is not married, he is to bind himself to her(through marrage)”

    bleh!

  42. on 21 Jul 2014 at 3:50 pm 42.the messenger said …

    451.DPK, Santa and other fairy tails are disproven. But GOD cannot be disproven. Also I have provided evidence that suggests that GOD does exist.

    Furthermore, all animals on the earth naturally focus on self protection and self benefit. Therefore kindness and love are against our natural instincts. So where did kindness, generosity, and other moral teaching come from? They had to have come from an intelligence other than that of earth. The answer is clear, it came from GOD.

  43. on 21 Jul 2014 at 3:52 pm 43.the messenger said …

    461.alex, I have told you many times, the heaven vision that I had was just a dream. Secondly you took that quote out of context by leaving out the “in order to serve her” part.

  44. on 21 Jul 2014 at 3:58 pm 44.alex said …

    —–messenger (convicted of raping a virgin):

    your honor, in lieu of punishment for my rape conviction, i would like to propose that i am to bind himself to her(through marrage)…..

    —–judge (cutting off the dumbass, messenger):

    are you out of your motherfucking, mind?

    —–messenger:

    would it help if i added that i have to serve her?

    lol, that, motherfucker.

  45. on 21 Jul 2014 at 4:17 pm 45.DPK said …

    “451.DPK, Santa and other fairy tails are disproven. But GOD cannot be disproven. ”

    Really? Let’s see… disprove Santa. I’ll bet anything you absolutely cannot.

  46. on 21 Jul 2014 at 4:42 pm 46.Anonymous said …

    Good if you know that I need a personal god why are you trying yo Rob me out of him.

    If I.am Individual and unique wont I as formless as I may ever be need to interact with the formless prime mover in a unique way,

    We touched on this in talkhing about the trinity focal point versus totality and relationship.

    Even if you are totally generic and open and non committal every stance or action needs an apex of functionality. Whether leadership comes through dictates, guidance or whether it is communally fostered – unity of decision is inevitable there is no getting away from this.

  47. on 21 Jul 2014 at 4:44 pm 47.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    2 dumb that :)

  48. on 21 Jul 2014 at 4:58 pm 48.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    So glory be to the Triune prime mover who is before and exalted over all.

    The strength of Religion is that it never changes and it never needs to change. In this it gives glory to the one who is over all and before all.

    The only religion that needs to change is religion that itself has changed; other wise known as apostasy or false religion.

  49. on 21 Jul 2014 at 5:03 pm 49.alex said …

    “Good if you know that I need a personal god why are you trying yo Rob me out of him.”

    who the fuck is trying to? what? because, you’re not allowed to teach your creationism shit in school? what? because, your bullshit nativity scene isn’t allowed at city hall? what? because when you show up at my house with your bible shit, i curse the motherfucking shit out of you? you feeling the bullshit persecution? switch gears bitch. do it as a muslim and it’s the exact same shit.

    worship your stupid ass god. can you just keep the shit to yourself?

  50. on 21 Jul 2014 at 5:33 pm 50.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    Who made your schools?

    Who gave you a school?

    If ‘your’ school is made of concrete and steel and wooden benches and glass windows and plastic shutters; where did the original material to make these things come from?

    The students in the school: Who made the blood cells in their brain?

    If you run around teaching them Darwin. Did Darwin make himself?

    God gave the poor creatureslife they lived it and they gave up the Ghost and left their bones and fossils in the rock?

    Nosy Darwin goes around spying and desecrating the dead and scraping together bones, which God and only God originally made and comes up with some apostasy crap.

    Where did you get a house from? You don’t even own the blood in your Satan worshiping veins or the marrow in you devil worshiping bones far less a house.

    You don’t own anything on earth or in the universe.

    May god pluck out the covetous eyes you use to peep into ‘your’ microscopes and ‘your’ telescopes.

    Taking up God’s things pretending they are yours, refusing to acknowledge him, talking baby babble and prattle with your dumbass atheist friends who will not help you in the afterlife.

    You will be scorched for ever. Barbecue Soul.

    Every tongue that rises up against us in judgement we will condemn.

    You will be judged, you will be punished, you will burn.

  51. on 21 Jul 2014 at 5:44 pm 51.alex said …

    “Who made your schools?” prove that zeus didn’t.

    “where did the original material to make these things come from?” prove that zeus didn’t make em.

    “Who made the blood cells in their brain?” prove that zeus didn’t make em.

    see where this shit is headed?

    “You will be scorched for ever. Barbecue Soul.” this is horrible shit and you complain about my cursing? why ain’t i scared of zeus hell?

  52. on 21 Jul 2014 at 5:49 pm 52.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    So nobody made them?
    Nor should a person be interested in finding out?
    A very hot part of hell is reserved for the indifferent.

  53. on 21 Jul 2014 at 5:57 pm 53.alex said …

    “So nobody made them?”

    if you’re asking who made the universe, it’s been answered many times with the “i don’t know”, but it’s not good enough for you.

    you claim to know, but unfortunately for you, your imaginary, baseless god ain’t no different than zeus or ra. would you like to prove otherwise?

    but you’re too dumb to figure this out.

  54. on 21 Jul 2014 at 5:58 pm 54.alex said …

    “Nor should a person be interested in finding out?”

    of course. but you’re not interested, are you?

  55. on 21 Jul 2014 at 6:21 pm 55.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    What about the person who has seen where Zeus is from and where he is going. Where Rah is from and where he is going and so on.

    But may not have seem where the Christian trinity originates only.

    Not everyone is subject to your limitations, ignorance, and paradigms and you should not try to imposed them on us..

    Tell Satan your master that your Calvary is battle weary, has been seen through, is now ineffective against God, as prophesied, and needs to be taken out of action as it is now a liability to his cause.

  56. on 21 Jul 2014 at 6:35 pm 56.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    Most High,

    I take my Leave.

  57. on 21 Jul 2014 at 7:03 pm 57.alex said …

    “the person who has seen where Zeus is from and where he
    is going.”

    but the standup comic, hesus, that cast demons into pigs is believable to you?

    “Not everyone is subject to your limitations…”

    my inability to believe bullshit is a limitation? and you, blindly swallowing the shit, is a good attribute for you?

    “Tell Satan your master…”

    the same inconsequential devil that your bullshit god could not defeat? i’m sorry, i remember now. your omnipotent god had problems with chariots with iron spinners.

    peace out, motherfucker.

  58. on 21 Jul 2014 at 7:54 pm 58.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    You are missing the point you should be begging for a few pigs for Jesus to cast the deamons (that are inhabiting you and doing you such diservice) into.

    You should realize by now that I have a black belt in walking with God and also a black belt in Divine apologetics and that parabolic-ally speaking I will catch your bullets of doubt and wrath with my holy teeth and bend you swords of fury with my bare but righteous hands.

    The ultimate in unarmed combat – unarmed but for the truths of God.

    Just like Jesus drew the forces of darkness, hate and aggression together two thousand years ago and defeated them even with his hands nailed together, his feet nailed together and while bleeding and dying with a Roman sword stuck in his side.

    Yes my lamb style will beat your beast style.

    JEHOVAH KNOWS

    I TAKE MY LEAVE

  59. on 21 Jul 2014 at 8:27 pm 59.DPK said …

    What a nutjob.
    Bet he lives in a van behind the supermarket covered in bible quotes and preaches at people in the parkinglot with a bullhorn! hahahaha.

    Hey 2dumb… nobody is buying you woo woo bullshit. Give it a rest. Even TJ keeps his distance from you… LOL.

  60. on 22 Jul 2014 at 3:28 am 60.DPK said …

    “… there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” ? Neil deGrasse Tyson

    And 2 dumb goes phycotic and says:
    “God do you need someone to execute the wicked on the judgement day.
    Someone:
    To lock the evil into an eternal hell.
    To throw lost souls into eternal darkness.
    To throw those with the mark of the beast into the lake of fire.
    To throw the lost angels into the bottomless pit.
    To place a noisome pestilence on errant and rebellious sons of men.”

    TJ… How about you? Are you also anxious to throw us wicked evil doers into the lake of fire? What do you think Jesus would have to say about 2dumbs ravings?

  61. on 22 Jul 2014 at 6:50 am 61.reason said …

    I love machines and I will freely admit that I like them better then people. They are made to do a job and some of them do it better then others. But when I look at nature and compare the machine that a tree is compared to a machine that man has made like a car or even a computer. The tree is far more complex and is beyond our power to reproduce. All man made machines are designed and the machines of nature I would think would have to have an engineer or engineers that made them also. I can not speak on behalf the Creator of this universe. (As far as we know we could be the dream of some alien mind and how could we prove or disprove that we are apart of someone else imagination). When I can take atoms and create a living fish on my own then I might be willing to say their is no God but for now I would not be so quick to rule out God. The arguments for and against God boils down to belief and both sides will have to agree that belief and reality are not always the same thing. The reality of it is that we don’t know because we don’t have all the answers and we never will. What has a Christian lost if he or she is wrong nothing, but if a Christian is right and those deny God are wrong then they have lost everything. Just a thought from an old man.

  62. on 22 Jul 2014 at 8:59 am 62.TJ said …

    “TJ… How about you? Are you also anxious to throw us wicked evil doers into the lake of fire? What do you think Jesus would have to say about 2dumbs ravings?”

    Lol, I’m playing catch up.

    However it’s not my Job to condemn anyone to the lake of fire. That right is Gods alone.

    I would rather share view points… while we both still can.

    As for his ramblings, it’s a reaction. It is hard for unbeliever and believers to relate to each other on these matters. It is far easier and less challenging to digress into rant.

    If Alex is the action, then 2Dumb4WordsofGod is the opposite and equal reaction.

    2Dumb4WordsofGod did point towards something I had been pondering for some time…

    The bible claims that even demons cannot deny Christ.

    I have noticed that Alex consistently uses “hesus” when referring to Christ in a negative, false or derogative manner. He comfortably uses “Jesus” when pointing out biblical claims to believers who say something that conflicts the bible. He also rightly warned me of the consequences of swearing on the Name of Jesus Christ in my claim that I was not Hor. And he also regularly substitutes Ra or Zeus for God in a similar fashion.

    Just my observation, I would ask him to explain but the fact that he has not answered one single question I’ve asked him. Instead continuing to rant and sow his seeds of doubt in response. Further more, I said I would’t bother him any more.

    So we can all read into it what we will.

  63. on 22 Jul 2014 at 9:48 am 63.TJ said …

    To reason,

    You present a rational and balanced view.

    I would only add that creating a fish from atoms would only prove the method used and highlight the intelligence of those involved. It would neither prove or dis-prove the existence of God.

  64. on 22 Jul 2014 at 10:38 am 64.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    Life is large and it is big business.

    I guarantee that on the day of Judgement you will find someone who WILL throw the wicked into the fire.

    Whether it is a machine.

    A computer program.

    A person really hard done by Atheist and the wicked.

    A totally faithful angel.

    Someone scared stiff by God and quite willing.

    Someone who is idiotically faithful to God.

    or even Some one willing to do it for the highest bidder :)

    or By plain bad luck as Islam teaches that as the wicked walk over the valley of fire they will be slipping, falling and being dragged down in to it.

    AND IF THIS DIFFERS IN FORM IT WILL NOT DIFFER IN ESSENCE.

    When God wanted to create the seemingly boundless eternity he didn’t carry on a conference with Atheist before he did it? NO he just did it. When he wants to dispatch the wicked he will not hold a conference he WILL do it.

    Do you guys even understand what is meant by justice.

    This is not religion. This is not idealism. This is practical.

    God will not have anything going against his Authority and Plan.

    Does the President of the US or the Monarch of the UK have their rights and Authority flouted.

    Was God’s word that unreasonable. Did he say I God am going to burn people’s souls because I am a bully or a hater.

    Or did he say I am ridding the world of pollution AND of corruption.

    hell is basically a bad bank. Better to have a few Atheistic souls roasting in a small corner of the universe than have defiance, pollution, entropy and sin and death polluting the world.

    Or

    You either get rid of the few cancer cells or you let the cancer spread body wide… ..Like some have allowed the excrement of ignorance, doubt and satanism to spread into and throughout their Atheistic brains.

  65. on 22 Jul 2014 at 11:41 am 65.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    You guys are very weak, you actually need to take a refresher course in your philosophy, epistemology, ontology and critical thinking again.

    When can you compare God to a leprechaun?

    If A, B, and C are said to exist.

    Do I say that A cannot exist because I am equally ignorant about it as I am about the existence of B and C?

    And is that a definitive logic and conclusion when your soul is at stake?

    I have tried to get you to step out of the Religious sphere to get you to understand the logical, the strong ‘evidential logic’.

    If something is then it must be caused, to deny the cause of something is equal to the denial of a the existence of a thing.

    Think if you want to deny something coming into being in the future what would you do? You would deny it a cause.

    But you have allowed your hatred of God to blur your thinking.

    Or Maybe

    You want also to deny the future ‘barbecue of lost souls’ an existence so you reactionarily seek to deny it a cause even though you are the puniest of creatures and the one you seek to deny is the Almighty Sovereign of All. Then your brain melts down and you say that Yahweh the God to be feared above all Gods doesn’t exist.

    Man is that moronic!!!

  66. on 22 Jul 2014 at 11:54 am 66.alex said …

    “I have noticed that Alex consistently uses “hesus” when referring to Christ in a negative, false or derogative manner.”

    that’s why you’re a dumb motherfucker. this is an atheist site. did you also notice that i don’t capitalize allah? how can i be derogatory towards bullshit?

    “regularly substitutes Ra or Zeus for God” that’s because you’re too dumb to get it. using your same argument with the different god, you fail to see that it’s no different.

    “he has not answered one single question I’ve asked him.”

    why the hell should i? tried using my refusal as proof? ooops, i forget. hor consistently tries that and fails. you motherfuckers constantly try that shit and it leads to nowhere. case in point. can you prove the center of the earth? can you prove the big bang? you see why i don’t have to answer shit.

    “continuing to rant..” my postings are a direct response to your bullshit. you otoh, pretend to be all cerebral and shit, but predictably you revert to your bible, hell and brimstone shit, see post 394.

    and then you whine like a little bitch “do you still wish to engage in conversation”. who’s ranting?

    “I said I would’t bother him any more.” then quit the bullshit.

  67. on 22 Jul 2014 at 11:55 am 67.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    TJ

    Do you see how when we are on our knees and praying.

    There are others pursuing their Satanic mission with every breath and every thought. Every action.

    That is not even passive sin

    It is rotten, dirty, mean evil wrapped in delusion, wrapped in illusion, wrapped in propaganda, outright lies and deceptive influence at work.

    Unashamedly at work

  68. on 22 Jul 2014 at 12:00 pm 68.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    They attack us with 7 times the venom of someone who has the evidence that God does not exist.

    or

    Even know what is going on.

    Yet they don’t have a shred of evidence.

    Well God is the Master at the Helm of the ship of my Mind.

    I am not going to allow myself to replace the Master of Masters from this post by dirty, lowdown, rotten Athiest.

    I would never fall for such a trick.

    And I stand watchful for the Elect’s sake.

  69. on 22 Jul 2014 at 12:05 pm 69.alex said …

    “your hatred of God to blur your thinking.”

    wrong, you asshole. my nonexistent hatred of bigfoot doesn’t blur my ability to recognize the bullshit. ditto for your god.

    “barbecue of lost souls” you don’t think atheists know there is nothing more horrible? however it’s bullshit, fantastic, imagined bullshit. should i be scared of the moslem equivalent too? or the monsters in dark version too?

    this is what pisses off you xtian motherfuckers. you’re scared and you don’t understand why atheists aren’t.

    go fuck yourself.

  70. on 22 Jul 2014 at 12:09 pm 70.freddies_dead said …

    436.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    The evidence of the Universe is strong evidential logic.

    For the universe, yes. Planets, stars, comets etc… what’s your evidence that it was a) created? and b) created specifically by your God?

    You have a hard time proving that there can be a highly ordered and fruitful universe without a creator of the universe otherwise called God.

    On the contrary, the universe exists. It’s your job to prove the existence of your “creator”. You’re welcome to try at any point.

    Jesus miracles were about human psychology.

    It was part of the agenda to help the chosen ones believe and to convict other stubborn of the divine.

    So Jesus “miracles” were no more than parlour tricks? I thought you were a Christian?

    I don’t want to provide evidence to you or anyone.

    Correction, you can’t provide evidence to me or anyone because none exists outside of your imagination.

    I love myself but I don’t even want to provide evidence to myself.

    I am satisfied with faith.

    I don’t share your gullibility.

    Because anything else would be dumb ass bullshit.

    You obviously have no use for reason or rationality in which case, why are you here?

    The idea that we know anything is a fairy tale we don’t, we can’t and it is not possible.

    How do you know this? Oh wait, you’ve already said you don’t. Self defeating drivel is self defeating.

    Not even Jesus knew anything.

    How do you know this? Oh wait, you’ve already said you don’t. Self defeating drivel is self defeating.

    The Bible teaches that he who knows, knows not as he ought to know.

    Which is just one of the many reasons why the Bible is absurd.

    This is why we have faith.

    Faith is the evidence of things not seen the hope of things eternal. Hebrews 11:1

    Faith in the imaginary, yes. I’m not impressed.

    There is no evidence that the far reaches of the Universe exist yet scientist believe in that anyway.

    Ignoring, for a moment, the veracity of your claim, what does this have to do with the existence of your God? Are you saying the scientists are wrong to believe as they do? In which case the same can be said of your belief that God exists with it’s attendant lack of evidence for doing so. It seems you’d be better served suggesting the scientists are right to believe as they do as, at least then, you’d be consistent with your own evidence free beliefs.

    It is on discretion AND WITH UNDERSTANDING that we talk about ‘KNOWING’.

    How do you know this? Oh wait, you’ve already said you don’t. Self defeating drivel is self defeating.

    That said there are a lot of scientist who believe in God.

    And as long as they don’t bring their imaginary friend into the work they do then it’s irrelevant.

    You don’t want to be religious THAT IS WHAT IT IS WITH YOU;

    It’s nothing to do with religion and all to do with what is rational, your God is not.

    like we said believing that God exist does not make you Religious there are a lot of people out there who do believe that God exist and they are not Religious.

    Being religious or not has no bearing on the truth of your claims.

    I am not a technological freak, nor do I need to be to believe that my Laptop has a maker.

    And yet you stated that belief right here on this thread. I know why you’re backing away from the claim though. It’s because that way leads only to infinite regress. What created the creator that created your laptop? What created the creator that created the creator that created your laptop? And so on… Your only way out of that is to do a bit of special pleading. Your God is different. He doesn’t need a maker. Which of course just gives us the option that things can exist that aren’t created and we can dispense with your imaginary God.

    I have evidence that you don’t have because I was born AND raised a Christian and since then I have been born again, I have walked every step of my life with God – and what a miracle filled life that has been.

    Then you’ll have no problem presenting this “evidence”? Oh wait, you already said you don’t want to provide evidence. More self defeating bullshit from you.

    If I even begin to express the least of those miracles the atheist begin screaming psyco, illusion, just like the roman soldiers began ‘oh they have stolen Jesus body’ AND ‘he didn’t really resurrect.’

    And you have absolutely no response to either the call for evidence or the naturalistic explanations. Of course, that’s your problem, not mine.

    You don’t have proof for God’ so you say he doesn’t exist.

    The burden of proof lies with the one making the positive claim for God’s existence. The onus is on you to prove that He does exist. Care to try?

    Where is your proof that he doesn’t exist. If you don’t have that you don’t have a point. Whether you like it or not!

    My proof is in the metaphysical primacy of existence. The fact that objects exist independently of consciousness. Christianity asserts the opposite – that consciousness holds metaphysical primacy over existence – but that leads to subjectivity and absurdity. No recourse to logic, truth, proof, evidence etc… It’s incoherent.

    I know what is your standard response are fairies and leprachans real.

    Cool

    But are fairies and leprachans necessary for the creation of the universe?

    Gods aren’t necessary either, as we can see from our own universe.

    Rod of Moses to your backs!!!!!!

    Excuse me? Have you forgotten your meds?

    …yet if they were things that only a leprachan could create and I was seeing that stuff all around we would have to begin believing that leprachans existed won’t we?

    Well rainbows, pots and gold all exist so why aren’t you claiming that leprechauns do?

    You’re getting it all backwards as usual. You’re pointing at stuff and saying that “God did it” without ever demonstrating that said God exists and creates that “stuff”. Maybe you’d like to try instead of rambling on like a lunatic?

  71. on 22 Jul 2014 at 12:34 pm 71.freddies_dead said …

    461.reason said …

    I love machines and I will freely admit that I like them better then people. They are made to do a job and some of them do it better then others. But when I look at nature and compare the machine that a tree is compared to a machine that man has made like a car or even a computer. The tree is far more complex and is beyond our power to reproduce.

    But not beyond the trees power to reproduce…

    All man made machines are designed and the machines of nature I would think would have to have an engineer or engineers that made them also.

    If only you could present evidence for the existence of this magical engineer…

    I can not speak on behalf the Creator of this universe.

    Why not, it’s your imaginary being and I’m sure you could whip up a few words for it. Racial hatred, support of slavery, denigration of women. All those have been quite popular so far.

    (As far as we know we could be the dream of some alien mind and how could we prove or disprove that we are apart of someone else imagination).

    Are you the dream of an alien mind? Are you suggesting (as 2Dumb4Words did) that we cannot know anything? If so, how do you know that?

    When I can take atoms and create a living fish on my own then I might be willing to say their is no God but for now I would not be so quick to rule out God.

    As TJ has already pointed out, the Christians aren’t going to be happy until you create those atoms ex nihilo – despite them being totally unable to produce evidence that their God exists and creates things ex nihilo. You’re supposed to ignore their double standard too.

    The arguments for and against God boils down to belief and both sides will have to agree that belief and reality are not always the same thing.

    Actually my argument against boils down to the axioms – existence and consciousness – and the metaphysical primacy of existence i.e. the self-evident, rather than any beliefs.

    The reality of it is that we don’t know because we don’t have all the answers and we never will.

    And we’re back to 2Dumb4Words’ argument that we cannot know anything (in your case this is because we don’t know everything). How do you know this? It’s really silly to make knowledge claims whilst trying to deny our ability to know things.

    What has a Christian lost if he or she is wrong nothing, but if a Christian is right and those deny God are wrong then they have lost everything. Just a thought from an old man.

    Pascal’s wager is just so much bullshit. The false dichotomy – Christianity vs atheism – has been refuted for a long time. What if the Christian picked the wrong God? What if the God hates those who pick the wrong incarnation? What if that God likes those who choose the “no God” option? What then? The Christian loses everything after spending their life worshipping the wrong God whilst the atheist gets Heaven for choosing “no God”.

  72. on 22 Jul 2014 at 12:39 pm 72.freddies_dead said …

    468.2Dumb4WordsofGod said …

    Well God is the Master at the Helm of the ship of my Mind.

    Based on what you’ve posted on this thread I’d argue that it’s more likely to be Class A drugs that are at the helm of the ship of your Mind.

  73. on 22 Jul 2014 at 3:26 pm 73.DPK said …

    463.TJ said …
    “To reason,
    You present a rational and balanced view.”

    Actually, he doesn’t. If your default position is that anything not fully understood is god’s work, then god lives in a constantly shrinking bubble.
    Remember, at one time humans looked at thunder and volcanoes and concluded that gods were the only possible explanation. This “god of the gaps” argument has not served religions well historically, yet the faithful still cling to it as the last resort.
    Actually, science gives us a very clear picture at how the complexity of life arose from simpler forms over the enormity of geologic time without a “designer”. Is it a rare, highly unlikely occurrence? No one really knows. It is a very big universe, and perhaps this is the ONLY place in all that unfathomable space that it has happened, perhaps it is very common and the way nature tend to behave when conditions are right. In any event, the fact that occurred here, at least once allows for the fact that you are here pondering the question. Nothing more.
    The last foothold of god’s domain seems to be abiogensis. But the fact that we do not as yet fully understand the process by which life first originated does not logically resort to a magical god, anymore than it was logical to assume angry volcano gods when no one understood geothermal dynamics, does it?
    ALL of your arguments are based on trying to cram a god into gaps of knowledge. This has never, ever, EVER helped progress human knowledge and understanding, only hindered it. And trying to incite belief based on fear and punishment is really, really despicable human behavior that we should have left behind the last time religions were allowed free reign over knowledge… they called it the Dark Ages, and for good reason.

  74. on 22 Jul 2014 at 3:36 pm 74.TJ said …

    To Alex,

    You got it tough man,

    I wasn’t going to say anything but, as you brought it up…see post 394.

    If its not the xtian wanting to teach creationism at the schools, it’s the politicians sobbing and offering their thoughts and prays to the victims of the latest tragedy. Every day you feel compelled to return here whilst you wait for your Java to build, and look how they try to sell their righteous nonsense to you… is nowhere sacred?

    If that’s not enough they’ll knock on your front door on weekends, the bum on street can’t even accept a gift without some religiously flavoured gratitude. Even at the family gathering. Is no place safe? And what if you sneeze?

    For an imaginary God, he seems to have a very real impact on your life.

  75. on 22 Jul 2014 at 3:40 pm 75.TJ said …

    Oh..and..Alex?

    Save your breath and shut the fuck up… and I don’t need to explain.

  76. on 22 Jul 2014 at 3:47 pm 76.TJ said …

    To DPK,

    Early morning here, and I need to get to bed. You raise good points worthy of discussion, I’ll get back to when time permits.

    Cheers

  77. on 22 Jul 2014 at 3:52 pm 77.DPK said …

    “For an imaginary God, he seems to have a very real impact on your life.”

    Maybe peddle your condescending bullshit to the victims of 911. Imaginary gods sure seemed to have an impact on their lives now didn’t they?

    Tell it to the children in Africa who have been burned alive for being witches… yeah, whats the big deal if some people believe there is a god who want them to do it?

    Maybe tell a child who dies from a simple infection because his parents believe medical intervention is against god’s will and decided to pray for him instead.

    Your attempt to brush off the impact of religious beliefs in the world and play the persecution card is a low for you TJ. Doesn’t say much for your position when you need to resort to distorting facts to support it. What’s next? The lake of fire?

  78. on 22 Jul 2014 at 3:55 pm 78.alex said …

    “Save your breath and shut the fuck up… ”

    the holier than thou motherfucker reverts. case closed, beeyatch. xtian protest? chirp. chirp.

  79. on 22 Jul 2014 at 4:02 pm 79.DPK said …

    Alex, when their delusions are exposed and their arguments dismissed they always resort to either the persecution card, or the anger and hatred emerges.

    Note how neither 2dumb or TJ offered even an attempt to justify their omnipotent and omniscient god claim when I showed clearly that it is not possible. Instead we got bible quotes and dire warnings of eternal damnation to the lake of fire. Last resort stuff indeed.

    No one escapes any type addiction without a lot of denial, resistance and resentment. The fact that you elicit a guttural response means you have struck very close to a nerve.

  80. on 22 Jul 2014 at 4:05 pm 80.DPK said …

    And I’m still waiting for messenger to disprove Santa…. another empty claim, Messy?

  81. on 22 Jul 2014 at 4:32 pm 81.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    Try going for a day on things you know only, not believe or are confident that they are the case but ‘know only’ and be brutally honest.
    Do you know am I male? Female? Young
    or Old? Over 16 that you are using foul language?

    Etc

  82. on 22 Jul 2014 at 4:35 pm 82.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    How do you know that I am not an atheist pretending or even Jesus or God or Zeus or Rah that you are telling me that I do not exist?

  83. on 22 Jul 2014 at 4:52 pm 83.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “Alex, when their delusions are exposed and their arguments dismissed they always resort to either the persecution”

    ROTFL!!! Sure they do……..no persecution anywhere especially in the Middle East!! Lol!!!!

    No Santa, been to the North Pole and studied satellite imagery. So stop believing Dippy and Alexander! I also have posted cameras at numerous fireplaces on the Eve……nope no Santa!

    lol!!!!!!!!!

  84. on 22 Jul 2014 at 5:11 pm 84.DPK said …

    Santa’s workshop is invisible to satellite imagery, silly. And Santa can appear down the chimney without ever appearing on camera. He is a Saint, after all.
    Don’t doubt the Clause… how else can you possibly explain the magical appearance of all those toys? Do you think they built, wrapped, and delivered themselves?
    Sorry, I don’t have that much faith… LOL

    “ROTFL!!! Sure they do……..no persecution anywhere especially in the Middle East!! Lol!!!!”
    Who’s doing the persecuting in the middle east their sparky?

  85. on 22 Jul 2014 at 5:15 pm 85.DPK said …

    482.2dumb4wordsofgod said …
    “How do you know that I am not an atheist pretending or even Jesus or God or Zeus or Rah that you are telling me that I do not exist?”

    You are a poster child for the nut jobs of the world.
    How do you know I am not the Flying Spaghetti Monster and you are impudently claiming some false god created the universe when it was me? I could have you cast into the eternal pot of boiling marinara sauce for your arrogance.

    Do I have any volunteers?

  86. on 22 Jul 2014 at 5:17 pm 86.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    Oh I thought Santa left you a universe that creates it self. Not existence that creates itself but stars, galaxies, flora fauna billions of ecosystems with man can’t himself create. He promised me one of those but he hasn’t come through, he also promised me a new grandmother his reindeer ran over her

    He seems like he won’t be able to come through.

    He embarrassed as ever left me a KJV telling me he couldn’t get around the IP rights I think he just doesn’t know how to
    Compete with the master.

    However if you define the creator but say he Is fictitious then I am afraid you are also imaginary and live in an imaginary universe.

  87. on 22 Jul 2014 at 5:19 pm 87.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    Am I only imagining that it would make a difference.

  88. on 22 Jul 2014 at 5:45 pm 88.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “Santa’s workshop is invisible to satellite imagery, silly”

    Really? According to all available writings that is not true…..making you……a liar.

    lol!!!!!!!

    Santa disproven silly.

    “Who’s doing the persecuting”

    In China, Cuba and Russia it is atheists. Can you call your dogs off there Dippity?

    lol!!!!!!

  89. on 22 Jul 2014 at 6:11 pm 89.DPK said …

    “He promised me one of those but he hasn’t come through, he also promised me a new grandmother his reindeer ran over her.. He seems like he won’t be able to come through.”

    So, you think asking Santa for something and not receiving it is a valid reason to doubt his existence?

    “Really? According to all available writings that is not true…..making you……a liar.”

    Show me where it is written that Santa’s workshop is visible to satellite imaging. And provide the evidence for such claim. Indeed, the FACT that there are no satellite images of Santa’s workshop, despite the fact that there are numerous written descriptions of Santa’s workshop, and many eyewitness accounts placing it in the vicinity of the north pole, would prove my contention. Why do you think it’s a SECRET workshop, dumbbell?
    You think just because you say it isn’t there, that somehow proves something? Besides, we all know that Santa will never reveal himself to disbelievers. That explains why you don’t believe. Trust me on this, once you open your heart and start to truly believe in Santa, you will find out very quickly that you actually do believe in Santa. Its miraculous how that works.

    “Who’s doing the persecuting in the middle east their sparky?”

    “In China, Cuba and Russia it is atheists.”

    Your concept of the middle east seems to be in line with your claim that Mumbia is a large city in India that used to be called Bangkok. You are just too funny. Been snacking on baby fetuses too much I think..

  90. on 22 Jul 2014 at 6:17 pm 90.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    Who tries to create the eternal and who tries to make the created eternal. Not optimistically but historically.

    …tut tut tut…

  91. on 22 Jul 2014 at 6:45 pm 91.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    The bible holds that God’s going forth from everlasting.

    The universe has a birthdate mate…

  92. on 22 Jul 2014 at 6:51 pm 92.DPK said …

    2 dumb… you need to lay off the acid man… seriously, that shit ain’t good for you. LOL

    Of course, “A” likely thinks your bullshit deepisms are profound, but he also thinks Cuba is in the middle east, so there ya go…. hahaha He is a “science guy” after all.

  93. on 22 Jul 2014 at 9:50 pm 93.alex said …

    “Santa disproven silly.”

    i guess we can’t use the same disproof criteria for your god, eh? since you can’t accept anything that you don’t like about your god, how would you and i know if the real deal, allah showed up?

    speak up, bitch, motherfucker. ask dumb and dumber. they seem to represent all theists.

    i already tolya. for me, it’s cake for a god. none of this complicated, amputee healing shit. just let the motherfucker levitate. i’m easily convinced. obviously, quoting from the koran won’t work for me and you.

    you talk a big theist game, but at the end of the day, you can’t even consider that there could be another god other than your bullshit Jesus.

    are you happy with “Jesus”, tj, motherfucker.

    dichotomy is a bitch though. theists crying even though their relatives are paradise bound? tsk. tsk. you know what the score is.

  94. on 22 Jul 2014 at 10:22 pm 94.alex said …

    “In China, Cuba and Russia it is atheists.”

    and in brazil, america, argentina, spain, italy, nigeria, india, canada, and many more countries, it’s the non-Wandjina believers persecuting lika motherfucker. can you call off the dogs? i guess this is an argument for converting to Wondjinaism?

    “The universe has a birthdate mate…” how many years ago? biblically? 10k is reasonable, ya? dumbass.

  95. on 22 Jul 2014 at 11:28 pm 95.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “So, you think asking Santa for something and not receiving it is a valid reason to doubt his existence”

    Dob’t you. Thats so sad… Um, no not at all. I know the history of Santa, so that really nails it down for me. Not to mention my other evidence.

    But hey, you believe Dippity, lol;!!!. And what I won’t do…..as a Real unbeliever is constantly cuss and hate on you for being a Santian nor will I argue his non-existence with you. REAL unbelievers have no need!

    ROTFL!!!!!!!

    Alex, love ua babe but God has been proven time and time again babe.

    Good day mates

  96. on 22 Jul 2014 at 11:39 pm 96.alex said …

    “Alex, love ua babe but God has been proven time and time again babe.”

    you’re so damn brainwashed, scared, you can’t/won’t even contemplate other gods can you? you know, moslem hell is just as probable as you xtian version.

    that’s why atheists are equally zilch, scared.

  97. on 23 Jul 2014 at 1:33 am 97.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “you can’t/won’t even contemplate other gods”

    Sure I will…….hold on…..
    ………
    ……….
    ……….

    Ok done. I contemplated other Gods……..um no fear there…..is that it Alexis? Thanks for caring bra!

    lol!!!!!! Luv ya Alex! You are a such a great ambassador for the faith bro!

  98. on 23 Jul 2014 at 1:38 am 98.alex said …

    “Ok done. I contemplated other Gods”. no you didn’t, you dismissed them, just like i dismissed your bullshit, Jesus. (tj, you listening, you dumbass).

    so, tell me, motherfucker. how would i be able to tell if allah was the real deal and he shows up?

  99. on 23 Jul 2014 at 1:52 am 99.alex said …

    “You are a such a great ambassador for the faith bro!”

    no such thing, the atheist faith, you lying bitch. but you can’t help yourself can’t you? your posts at: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS, clearly demonstrate your propensity, but it’s understood. you’re blindly following your god’s plan.

    martin, science guy, biff, xenon, little ‘A’, Sweetness, boz, RL Wooten, ‘Everyone’, Horatio.

    how many times do i need to remind you that you’re a proven, recorded, piece of shit, liar.

    check it out again. http://goo.gl/UYo1uS, did allah magically update it?

  100. on 23 Jul 2014 at 2:38 am 100.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    Have you ever considered that science may have taken an early step that led them away from the truth?

    After all man is possessed of imperfect senses. Which of you can answer whether Rubin’s vase is a vase or a pair of faces?

    Of the messiah the bible teaches he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes nor reprove after the hearing of his ears.

    Maybe there was an alien race out there whose correct approach led them to God,

    Think about that if you can trust the cognitions of your brains.

  101. on 23 Jul 2014 at 7:27 am 101.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    I once heard a story of a scientist who left for work but when he got there The lab had burnt down.

    Think he knew or just had faith?

    YET

    MANY scientist get up every day and go to work to find their lab open and up and running.

    Did they have faith or knowledge?.

    I won’t say they are lucky but that like the first group they go to work every day on faith.

    Tomorrow it may be their time to turn up for work to find their lab burnt down.

    Proving it is all faith sometimes fallible faith and not infallible knowledge,

  102. on 23 Jul 2014 at 7:33 am 102.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    Faith in God like scientific knowledge does not make men infallible but it is a good lot better and far more honest.

  103. on 23 Jul 2014 at 7:42 am 103.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    If man as a species persists for another trillion years by means science they will fail to perfect them self in that time.

    Put my word above my very name.

  104. on 23 Jul 2014 at 11:17 am 104.alex said …

    “Think about that if you can trust the cognitions of your brains.”

    another example of a dipshit theist saying stupid shits leading to nowhere. “prove the center of the earth exists”, remember that? you dumb, motherfucker.

    “I once heard a story of a scientist who left for work…”

    heard? reminds you of the Jesus fables? note the caps, tj, motherfucker.

    “Faith in God like scientific knowledge does not make men infallible…”

    who gives a shit. you think people really pay attention to god statement bullshits?

    first there was the s0l0m0n motherfucker, then the dipshit messenger, now we got the third brother motherfucker, 2dumb4wordsofgod. and of course, the head dipshit, motherfucker, hor.

  105. on 23 Jul 2014 at 12:15 pm 105.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    You guys are the sorriest of creatures and it is not just the future barbaque of souls your judgement has already started now. Judgement begins at the house of Those of faith so I cam face my hostility but the weakness of God is stronger than the strength of men not only are your attacks ineffective but your hurt will be 7 fold multiplied when you are paid back in your own
    coin.

  106. on 23 Jul 2014 at 12:19 pm 106.freddies_dead said …

    500.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    Have you ever considered that science may have taken an early step that led them away from the truth?

    That doesn’t make sense in light of the fact that science works. Had science stepped away from the truth (truth is a concept you can’t account for in your inherently subjective Christian worldview btw) then nothing science came up with would work and yet, here you are, on a computer devised by science, claiming that science is somehow faulty.

    Self defeating bullshit is self defeating.

    After all man is possessed of imperfect senses. Which of you can answer whether Rubin’s vase is a vase or a pair of faces?

    It’s a vase – it’s right there in the name – pillock.

    But seriously, how do you get to “imperfect senses” when your eyes are perceiving exactly as they should i.e. the light from the picture is passing into your pupil, your lens focuses that light onto your retina where the photoreceptors convert the light signals into electrical signals. No, it’s not your non-volitional senses that are at issue here, instead it’s the identification of what you’re perceiving that causes the confusion.

    Of the messiah the bible teaches he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes nor reprove after the hearing of his ears.

    So you trust your ‘imperfect’ senses when it comes to the Bible? Why? If your sense are so useless how can you possibly trust what you see in the Bible or hear from the pulpit?

    Self defeating bullshit is, once more, self defeating.

    Maybe there was an alien race out there whose correct approach led them to God,

    Your point? Unless you’re claiming to be one of those aliens? Based on your track record so far I wouldn’t put it past you.

    Think about that if you can trust the cognitions of your brains.

    So you don’t trust your own brain now, but you want us to accept your claims regarding God? Claims that you must have decided are true using your brain?

    Self defeating bullshit is, once again, self defeating.

    This is just too funny.

  107. on 23 Jul 2014 at 12:22 pm 107.freddies_dead said …

    505.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    You guys are the sorriest of creatures and it is not just the future barbaque of souls your judgement has already started now. Judgement begins at the house of Those of faith so I cam face my hostility but the weakness of God is stronger than the strength of men not only are your attacks ineffective but your hurt will be 7 fold multiplied when you are paid back in your own
    coin.

    Your fear theology might be more impressive if you could show how we can distinguish between your fearsome God and something you may merely be imagining.

  108. on 23 Jul 2014 at 12:34 pm 108.alex said …

    “future barbaque of souls”

    dude, there’s nothing worse, but it’s bullshit, so stop it. quit scaring your kids.

    “I cam face my hostility”. you’re trying to dish it out, but you’re getting your ass handed to you.

    “..the weakness of God..” i remember now. he didn’t have much of a ground game. the mma dude, isiah, didn’t he put a beatdown on your god?

  109. on 23 Jul 2014 at 2:46 pm 109.DPK said …

    500.2dumb4wordsofgod said …
    “Have you ever considered that science may have taken an early step that led them away from the truth?”

    Do you even understand what science is? Love to hear your interpretation of it, because it is obviously incorrect.

    “After all man is possessed of imperfect senses. Which of you can answer whether Rubin’s vase is a vase or a pair of faces?”

    Um, actually it is neither. It’s a drawing.

    LOL

    How do you know your senses aren’t deceiving you when you perceive a god interacting in your life? Really, how do you know.
    And why won’t you answer my simple question… tell me why I should accept anything you say as true?
    I explained my reasons to TJ, and no one refuted a single reason. But you ask us to accept your version of reality over any other because………….???

    Your inability to answer this question only leads me to believe you don’t really know.

  110. on 23 Jul 2014 at 5:01 pm 110.DPK said …

    495.The Prickly Science Guy said …
    “So, you think asking Santa for something and not receiving it is a valid reason to doubt his existence”
    Dob’t you. Thats so sad… Um, no not at all.”

    Actually, your comment should be addressed at 2 dumb as he is the one who said he didn’t believe in Santa because Santa failed to come though on something that was promised.
    So, let’s recap, you don’t believe in Santa, but NOT because you asked him for something you didn’t get.. check.
    You don’t believe in Santa because the secret workshop at the North Pole is not visible on satellite photos and “it is written” somewhere that it should be, even though I have told you Santa has a secret invisibility cloak that prevents it from being detected. You seem to dismiss this out of hand for no other reason than you don’t like it. check.
    You don’t believe in Santa because you “know the history” of Santa and because of other secret evidence you won’t disclose… similar to the evidence for your imaginary god. check
    Man, you’re a hot mess…
    Nevertheless, I contend Santa is real and you haven’t disproved him at all. Maybe you could get some Cuban atheists from Middle Eastern Russia to help you sort it out. LOL

    Funny, but I’m not seeing anything you offer that actually disproves Santa….. I guess you actually CAN’T do it, huh?

  111. on 23 Jul 2014 at 11:18 pm 111.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “truth is a concept you can’t account for in your inherently subjective Christian worldview”

    Oh Goodie!

    Freddie, tell us what truth is for an atheist? Can you? Science? Is that it?

    prediction: Freddie runs and refuses to answer even this simple question

    ….sigh…….! Lol!!!

    Dippity spewed:

    “I contend Santa is real”

    lol!!!!!!! OK, I have no need to convince you otherwise. I have all the evidence I need…its all good Santian! Lol!!!!! I allow Santians to live without persecution ????

    ROTFL!!!!!!!

  112. on 24 Jul 2014 at 2:19 am 112.DPK said …

    Oh, how nice of you. Do you mean that I’d be a real asshole if I were to say, troll a website of people like you who don’t believe and continually insist that Santa is real and insist that they don’t know what they are talking about? I guess that would make me a real douche bag, huh? Especially since all I have to offer in way of proof that Santa exists is a bunch of made up bullshit and wishful thinking.
    Your right, only a real asshole would do something like that. Thanks for making that so clear! Lol.
    D

  113. on 24 Jul 2014 at 2:45 am 113.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “if I were to say, troll a website of people like you who don’t believe”

    Hmmmm, are you implying that this blog is only for atheist? So why all the efforts to evangelize and convert theist to atheist? Hmmm?
    lol!!!!!!! Epic fail Dippity!

    For the record I welcome Santians like yourself in all areas of the net. I rather enjoy your kind :)

    “I guess that would make me a real douche bag, huh”

    Well, you said it…lol!!!! But I luv ya babe!

    Respecting the rights of Santians around the world!!

  114. on 24 Jul 2014 at 11:04 am 114.freddies_dead said …

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

    “truth is a concept you can’t account for in your inherently subjective Christian worldview”

    Oh Goodie!

    Freddie, tell us what truth is for an atheist? Can you? Science? Is that it?

    I can’t tell you what it is for all atheists. I do, however, know what it is for Objectivists (a subset of atheists). Truth is the identification of a fact of reality.

    Now you can tell us what truth is for a Christian.

    prediction: Freddie runs and refuses to answer even this simple question

    ….sigh…….! Lol!!!

    And, as usual, the lying prick predicts wrong.

  115. on 24 Jul 2014 at 2:45 pm 115.DPK said …

    The douchebag said:
    “Hmmmm, are you implying that this blog is only for atheist?”

    No, according to the website statement, this is a place to “explore the existence of God.”

    You don’t explore or discuss anything. Your participation here amounts to nothing more than my insistence that Santa is real because you can’t prove he isn’t. You’re a troll, nothing more. You have zero substance to add, nothing at all meaningful to contribute. The tragedy is you know this, which is why you refuse to even try, and instead play the persecution card….

    Poor TJ at least made an attempt at an honest discussion. Even though he got severely trounced and had to resort to the ultimate retreat of bible thumping and hellfire and damnation, and ultimately disappearing. At least he gave it a shot. He isn’t a coward, like you, hiding behind various aliases in an attempt to fluff yourself up.

  116. on 24 Jul 2014 at 3:03 pm 116.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    Oj Freddie you smooth talking rascal. I luv you too buddy!

    “I can’t tell you what it is for all atheists”

    then he comes back with….

    “Truth is the identification of a fact of reality”

    So the implication is all atheists have different truths? Hmmmmm, I though truth did not change?????

    Then Freddie claims to have another variation of truth. First he has reality. He claims his reality is truth. What is that reality?

    His second ingredient of Truth is facts. What are those facts?
    No God? He does nor have the propensity to exhaust every possible scenario therefore this claim is not factual.

    A fish with a bony process proves macro evolution? Lol!!!! No, not a fact proving macro but a very creative assumption…..yes! Lol!!!!!

    So what ate his facts? What his his reality? Freddie?

    Lets watch this unfold……

  117. on 24 Jul 2014 at 3:52 pm 117.TJ said …

    You Guy’s got it out of your systems yet?

    Stop trash talking each other, this ain’t high school.

    Talk about this…

    “Truth is the identification of a fact of reality.”

    discuss relative and absolute truths… give me something interesting to read.

  118. on 24 Jul 2014 at 3:58 pm 118.TJ said …

    … throw in something about the origins of the scientific method and Darwin’s attempt to free the sciences from Moses.

  119. on 24 Jul 2014 at 4:06 pm 119.TJ said …

    … and then analyse weather we are “body and mind” or “body, mind and something more”.

  120. on 24 Jul 2014 at 6:04 pm 120.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    You guys are the typical high school students giving typical high school answrrs. Alex if I were correcting your answer I would understand your effort. And give you points for trying but you don’t understand with God there are no Cs for answers no Bs for answers no As you don’t get points for better attempts it comes down to being saved or not being saved. Your eyes are fallible, science is fallible, your thinking is fallible, you can climb the ladder well but that doesn’t mean it is leaning against the right wall. Only the imputed righteousness of God means anything. A thousand years are a day in God’s eyes the science of man is but a play thing. You will slave for hundred of years to advance science meanwhile God is not amused. You will be weary broken on your scientific failures and you willing come crawling up to God’s boot tired weary and oppressed by your efforts and failures and God having observed the little scientific shenanigans over the past 10000 years will slowly and deliberately crush your science falsely so called under his feet.

  121. on 24 Jul 2014 at 6:14 pm 121.2dumb4wordsofgod said …

    And because it is called Rubin’s Vase does not mean it is a vase. What about the devils tuning fork there are several objects which the senses can’t make sense of.

  122. on 24 Jul 2014 at 6:45 pm 122.DPK said …

    520.2dumb4wordsofgod said …
    “blah blah blah blah blah….”

    And once again I ask you… what reason can you give me, other than the threat of eternal damnation, that anything you say is actually true? Messenger says he has been to heaven and spoken with god and that we do NOT go to hell forever. Indeed, only the “bad” parts of us go to hell and the good parts go to heaven. I could live with loosing my bad parts, so what’s the problem. Is he wrong? He says he’s spoken to god, have you?
    Eban Alexander supposedly died and went to heaven, and the creatures there told him that “you are loved deeply, cherished forever, there is nothing you have to fear, you will always to be loved, and there is nothing you could do wrong.”
    Why should I believe you, and not him?

    If I came up to you on the street and told you that there was a giant invisible rabbit standing next to me and he was going to rip your head off unless you gave me your car keys and wallet… would you just believe it?

  123. on 24 Jul 2014 at 6:51 pm 123.DPK said …

    517.TJ said …
    “Truth is the identification of a fact of reality.”
    discuss relative and absolute truths… give me something interesting to read.”

    Since this board’s purpose is to discuss the existence of god… are you claiming that the existence of god is an absolute, or relative truth?

  124. on 25 Jul 2014 at 12:35 am 124.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    Oh Freddie!

    Gave you all day and you couldn’t

    Tell us what are your facts? What is your reality? Why should they be ours? Freddie? Well?

    Lets watch this unfold……

  125. on 25 Jul 2014 at 1:38 am 125.TJ said …

    To DPK,

    In my beliefs, yes, it is accepted as essential, that the existence of a God, is an absolute truth.

    Proving it… not so easy… which is what makes it faith.

    I make no apologies for this.

    For all other alternatives to be true, it is essential to accept that the existence of a God is absolute nonsense.

    Proving it… not so easy…

    Each of us posses an inner space/realm. Inside all our thoughts process, imagination occurs and all the other process commonly attributed to the mind, or by some, the soul/spirit.

    I cannot enter your personal inner realm any more that you can enter mine. Self determining weather we are more than the sum of our parts and their associated chemical and electrical processes is a very individual thing.

    I have personally self determined that I am more than mere biochemistry. Declaring it true to myself via no other external means. This is a bases for my faith that there is more than what we can simply physically measure and understand through materialistic methods. Perhaps my starting point of faith?

    …but that is simply a truth, relative to me personally.

    Do you have any relative truths that are personal to you or perhaps an absolute one?

  126. on 25 Jul 2014 at 3:28 am 126.alex said …

    “Do you have any relative truths that are personal to you or perhaps an absolute one?”

    when i die, that’s it. any morons want to prove otherwise? in an accident, a seatbelt may save my life. why should i substitute your god for a seatbelt? praying to santa to cure cancer, yields similar results if i don’t pray at all. your god can do better? prove it?

    santa claus believers don’t war on nonbelievers. santanians don’t push their views. santanians don’t campaign for preferential treatment. never heard of santanians going to prison. santanians don’t care if you don’t believer in santa. santanians believe in the humanitarian, unwritten, moral code. santanians believe you get random xmas gifts regardless of your behavior. and bleh, and motherfucking bleh.

    why don’t all you fuckers see that? it’s so obvious. should we all be santanians?

    why should santanians be otherwise? hell? prove it?

  127. on 25 Jul 2014 at 7:03 am 127.TJ said …

    To Alex,

    I am neither a santanian or a member of any other organised group, religious or otherwise. I do not push my views, I simply offer them in response to being asked or prompted to do so.

    I will not answer on behalf of those who campaign for preferential treatment or anything else that is not from me.

    I say, I am Christian in the sense of an individual who believes in the existence of one true God.

    I do not align myself with any organised religion. I believe almost all, to be false religions. I base this belief on the teachings, actions, works and the “fruits” they produce, which are in direct conflict with a literal reading of biblical text.

    My church does not have four walls and a cross as a sign post. My Church and my family are one and the same.

    When God declares “I am”.
    I say, “I am too”

    I cannot deny myself. This is an absolute truth for me. Nobody can declare to me that “I am not”. This is a base for my faith.

    I do not require further validation to myself, not from you or anybody else. I do not require proof, I am self validated.

    From this base, I can perceive the existence of your “self” and every other person. Is it really such a stretch to consider the existence of a greater “self” than myself or yourself?

    Or is it presumptuous to rule it out as a possibility, especially as we simply do not have all the facts available to us?

    When you look to the world, Alex. You see a world deprived and devoid of a loving caring God. Concluding God to be imaginary.

    When I look, I see a world that reflects God’s claim to have separated and removed himself from man, so that man could live out the consequence of his choice to reject God’s rule and authority over him. Just as it is written in the bible.

    Neither of these two view points are “so obvious”. For if they were, we would not be discussing it.

  128. on 25 Jul 2014 at 7:17 am 128.TJ said …

    …when i die, that’s it.

    Alex, are you content with this?

    I’m not asking to upset or mock you. I am curious, I have shared this thought in the past. It was for me, personally lacking and difficult to accept. I constantly questioned myself and purpose as to what I should be doing with my limited existence to ensure that I was fulfilled and not just a waste.

    You could easily argue that my faith filled a void, but I would much more appreciate an honest personal response. I will not make issue if you refuse.

    regards,

  129. on 25 Jul 2014 at 10:28 am 129.freddies_dead said …

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

    Oj Freddie you smooth talking rascal. I luv you too buddy!

    “I can’t tell you what it is for all atheists”

    then he comes back with….

    “Truth is the identification of a fact of reality”

    So the implication is all atheists have different truths? Hmmmmm, I though truth did not change?????

    You really are an idiot. I know you struggle with simple concepts but not all atheists are Objectivists. That’s why I stated that they are a subset. As such I cannot claim to know how every atheist defines truth – just as I would not expect you to claim to know how all Christians define truth but how your specific sect defines it instead. Although, as you’re a dishonest prick, you’ll probably just say that anyone identifying as Christian, who defines truth differently to you, can’t be a Christian.

    I note you fail to give your own definition of truth while you attempt to deny mine. I’m not surprised as you’ve shown yourself to have only a very tenuous link with the truth at the best of times.

    Then Freddie claims to have another variation of truth. First he has reality. He claims his reality is truth. What is that reality?

    What is this drivel? There is no “variation”. Truth depends on reality. The facts of reality inform truth. If you disagree then you’re going to have to give your own definitions; of truth and what informs it etc… while we wait for you to try and find a way to avoid giving any definitions of your own I will note that Objectivism defines reality as that which exists.

    His second ingredient of Truth is facts. What are those facts?

    Facts are those things with actual existence.

    No God? He does nor have the propensity to exhaust every possible scenario therefore this claim is not factual.

    It’s this sort of logic that leaves you so open to mockery via DPK’s insistence on the existence of Santa. You’re essentially requiring omniscience in order to know things. As you’re not omniscient, then, by your own logic, you cannot know that omniscience is a pre-requisite to knowledge. You’re making a knowledge claim that denies the very possibility of knowledge. Self defeating bullshit is self defeating.

    As for God, as I’ve said before, the metaphysical primacy of existence rules out any possibility of a creator God. So, in the same way that I don’t need to “exhaust every possible scenario” to know that square circles do not exist, I can be totally confident that illogical postulates like your God do not exist either.

    A fish with a bony process proves macro evolution? Lol!!!! No, not a fact proving macro but a very creative assumption…..yes! Lol!!!!!

    You already lost the evolution argument. Your red-herring is duly noted … and promptly ignored.

    So what ate his facts? What his his reality? Freddie?

    Lets watch this unfold……

    Yes, let’s watch the lying prick start twisting and turning in a desperate attempt to avoid answering any questions about his God. I wonder how long it will be before he starts making up new personas to throw in bullshit comments so he can pat himself on the back. Will he be as stupid as before; to congratulate his sockpuppet whilst posting as that sockpuppet? I would say it’ll be interesting but this is A the lying prick so it’ll most likely be a tiresome pile of shit.

  130. on 25 Jul 2014 at 10:28 am 130.freddies_dead said …

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

    Oh Freddie!

    Gave you all day and you couldn’t

    Tell us what are your facts? What is your reality? Why should they be ours? Freddie? Well?

    Lets watch this unfold……

    Hahahahahahaha. I don’t post to your schedule you dumb shit.

  131. on 25 Jul 2014 at 10:30 am 131.freddies_dead said …

    525.TJ said …

    To DPK,

    In my beliefs, yes, it is accepted as essential, that the existence of a God, is an absolute truth.

    According to your beliefs did your God create everything through a conscious action i.e. did He will everything into existence?

  132. on 25 Jul 2014 at 10:51 am 132.alex said …

    “I do not align myself with any organised religion.”

    but you call yourself an xtian and believe in the bible? how original.

    —“direct conflict with a literal reading of biblical text.” compared to messenger, how do you resolve all the contradictions?

    —“Or is it presumptuous to rule it out as a possibility” it’s presumptuous of you to think i (or anyone else) have never considered the possibility of anything.

    “I do not require further validation to myself, not from you or anybody else.” your posted confession suggests otherwise.

    —“You see a world deprived and devoid of a loving caring God. Concluding God to be imaginary.” wrong. that’s not what i see. you’re making up shit.

    —“…his choice to reject God’s rule and authority over him. Just as it is written in the bible.” the bible don’t mean shit. how the fuck can i reject?

    on death. —“Alex, are you content with this?” the sales pitch, eh? yes i’m content. this question is old and it only works on morons. if you’re not content, then you make up shit. why stop at seven heavenly virgins? why not eleven six foot blond virgins? saw two donuts at work and you ate one? why not eat both? oh, i fergit. gluttony is a sin, but it’s ok, coz you can always wipe your ass clean with the best selling Jesus Inc. Redemption toilet paper!

    response personal enough?

  133. on 25 Jul 2014 at 12:01 pm 133.TJ said …

    To Alex,

    ”You see a world deprived and devoid of a loving caring God. Concluding God to be imaginary.” wrong. that’s not what i see. you’re making up shit.

    Fair enough, I read a little too much into this…“what is the atheist statement/claim? there is no personal god, period.

    “I do not require further validation to myself, not from you or anybody else.” your posted confession suggests otherwise.

    Oh? my confession in post #391 suggests something that conflicts with…
    I cannot deny myself. This is an absolute truth for me. Nobody can declare to me that “I am not”. This is a base for my faith.
    or…
    I have personally self determined that I am more than mere biochemistry. Declaring it true to myself via no other external means.

    are you cherry picking from me now?

    and…
    —”…his choice to reject God’s rule and authority over him. Just as it is written in the bible.” the bible don’t mean shit. how the fuck can i reject?

    …the bible don’t mean shit. how the fuck can i reject? Is this not a rejection of the bible? Is it unreasonable to assume a rejection of the bible is also a rejection of God? Unreasonable to assume a rejection of God is also a rejection of God’s rule and authority?

    Just to be clear… not hesus, zeus or ra, but the God of Abraham and the Bible.

    Finally…
    response personal enough?

    Yes it was. Your content with “that’s it”. But if you had the choice it would be 11 six foot blonds, a couple of guilt free donuts and a clean arse.

    …perhaps, I am making shit up again.

  134. on 25 Jul 2014 at 12:09 pm 134.A The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “You really are an idiot.”

    Diversions…ad homenim

    “I note you fail to give your own definition of truth”

    Attempt to change the subject. I made no truth claim, you did.

    “Truth depends on reality. The facts of reality inform truth.”

    Yet you fail….AGAIN….to define truth and reality.

    “You’re essentially requiring omniscience in order to know things.”

    Actually, no I never did.

    “the metaphysical primacy of existence rules out any possibility of a creator God.”

    How do you know? Based on what? The, show us this truth claim.

  135. on 25 Jul 2014 at 12:19 pm 135.alex said …

    “Is this not a rejection of the bible?” wrong, motherfucker. i do not reject fairies, yetis, and your bible.

    “But if you had the choice it would be 11 six foot blonds, a couple of guilt free donuts and a clean arse.” wrong again, bitch. i said, why stop there….

    “I do not require further validation to myself, not from you or anybody else.” then what the fuck do you want? more cursing. here goes. go fuck yourself?

    “are you cherry picking from me now?” i did say it suggested, didn’t i? now, go fuck yourself?

    “perhaps, I am making shit up again.” demonstrated.

  136. on 25 Jul 2014 at 12:29 pm 136.TJ said …

    To freddies_dead,

    According to your beliefs did your God create everything through a conscious action i.e. did He will everything into existence?

    Hmmm, Jesus claims to be the first begotten son of God. The first born of creation and the image God created for himself. He is also described as the word of God. We are told that through the word of God, all things were created.

    From this it could be argued that the formless God first created an image for himself via a conscious will. Then embodied that image and via the power of his word spoke forth to create everything else. There is also the bit about the spirit of God moving over the waters, but this implies manipulation of what was created and not the act of creating.

    I don’t claim to have understanding of process, just my interpretation of what is written.

  137. on 25 Jul 2014 at 12:34 pm 137.TJ said …

    To Alex,

    Do you get anything from talking to me?

    Because by your own admission you offer me nothing, and you are good to your word.

  138. on 25 Jul 2014 at 1:00 pm 138.alex said …

    “Do you get anything from talking to me?”

    i get bullshit.

  139. on 25 Jul 2014 at 1:02 pm 139.TJ said …

    Y’know your not required to talk me?

  140. on 25 Jul 2014 at 1:31 pm 140.freddies_dead said …

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

    “You really are an idiot.”

    Diversions…ad homenim

    It’s an observation. You should also look up “ad hominem” – not just for the correct spelling either – it’s a fallacy where you attack the person rather than the argument they present. As you haven’t actually presented an argument there’s no ad hominem here. If you do actually have an argument then you’re welcome to state your premises (along with any evidence for them) and show how they support your conclusion.

    “I note you fail to give your own definition of truth”

    Attempt to change the subject. I made no truth claim, you did.

    Where do I change the subject? We’re discussing “truth”. I simply noted that you’ve so far failed to offer your own definition of the word. As you’re disputing my definition it would be nice to know on what basis you’re calling it wrong. Oh, and you have made many truth claims, including where you just made the truth claim that you made no truth claim. Maybe your definition of truth allows for such contradictions but we wouldn’t know as you haven’t told us what your definition is.

    “Truth depends on reality. The facts of reality inform truth.”

    Yet you fail….AGAIN….to define truth and reality.

    This is simply a lie – not really a surprise as you are well known for your dishonesty. I have given the definitions (as Objectivism states them) and so far you’ve offered us no way of knowing how you’re actually judging those definitions to be insufficient.

    “You’re essentially requiring omniscience in order to know things.”

    Actually, no I never did.

    Actually yes you did. When you said I didn’t have “the propensity to exhaust every possible scenario” meaning I couldn’t claim God’s non-existence as fact. If you didn’t mean omniscience was required then your statement was plainly false i.e. whether I have the propensity to exhaust every possible scenario is irrelevant as I don’t actually have to exhaust every possible scenario in order to know things as fact. It’s your choice, either you hold that knowledge requires omniscience (in which case you’ve denied your own ability to “know” anything) or you concede that your statement is patently false. Either way you’re screwed.

    “the metaphysical primacy of existence rules out any possibility of a creator God.”

    How do you know? Based on what? The, show us this truth claim.

    How do I know? Why, because of the axioms existence, consciousness and identity coupled with the metaphysical primacy of existence of course.

  141. on 25 Jul 2014 at 2:09 pm 141.freddies_dead said …

    536.TJ said …

    To freddies_dead,

    According to your beliefs did your God create everything through a conscious action i.e. did He will everything into existence?

    Hmmm, Jesus claims to be the first begotten son of God. The first born of creation and the image God created for himself. He is also described as the word of God. We are told that through the word of God, all things were created.

    From this it could be argued that the formless God first created an image for himself via a conscious will. Then embodied that image and via the power of his word spoke forth to create everything else. There is also the bit about the spirit of God moving over the waters, but this implies manipulation of what was created and not the act of creating.

    I don’t claim to have understanding of process, just my interpretation of what is written.

    Maybe it’s just me but this comes off as evasive. You self identify (loosely) as a Christian but you don’t seem prepared to say whether you believe the Bible claims concerning your God. I also didn’t ask if you understood how He did it, just whether you believe that He did.

  142. on 25 Jul 2014 at 2:16 pm 142.TJ said …

    “How do I know? Why, because of the axioms existence, consciousness and identity coupled with the metaphysical primacy of existence of course.”

    Now, I got accused of double bullshit talk, just recently.

    I am unashamed to admit that I have no idea what the above quoted sentence is supposed to encompass?

  143. on 25 Jul 2014 at 2:38 pm 143.TJ said …

    “Maybe it’s just me but this comes off as evasive.”
    and
    “I also didn’t ask if you understood how He did it, just whether you believe that He did.”

    You want a yes/no answer, my honest opinion coupled with my rational or something else?

    I don’t have all the answers, any more than you, I’d assume.

    To state anything as an absolute fact is bold in any arena.

    I state myself to be more than just the sum of my physical parts and their associated functions, as a self determined absolute fact. I also state that God exists as an absolute fact based on what I can only describe as an overwhelming personal spiritual experience.

    Other than these two claims, I can only offer you, hopefully, my honest, bias belief based interpretation/opinion…and if it’s too hard or I don’t know, that’s what you’ll get.

    If this seems evasive, I’m sorry, I can give you what I don’t have.

  144. on 25 Jul 2014 at 2:57 pm 144.DPK said …

    525.TJ said …
    “To DPK,
    In my beliefs, yes, it is accepted as essential, that the existence of a God, is an absolute truth.
    Proving it… not so easy… which is what makes it faith. I make no apologies for this.”

    I understand. You accept an absolute truth based on no proof, and no evidence. In other words, you pretend to have knowledge you in fact do not have, and have no problem with that. Curious. You seem to think that this is somehow a virtue. How is this essentially any different from my belief in Santa?
    That’s not mockery… really, where is the distinction between this any ANY other claim I care to make about any other imaginary construct?

    “For all other alternatives to be true, it is essential to accept that the existence of a God is absolute nonsense.”

    I’m not sure what you mean by “all other alternatives”, but I don’t think this is an accurate statement. There could be host of postulated gods who simply do not fit your definition of a god. He could be a disinterested god. He could be an impotent god, powerless to change the events he has already determined will occur. There could be a panel of gods, like Congress, gridlocked in endless self bickering.

    “I have personally self determined that I am more than mere biochemistry. Declaring it true to myself via no other external means. This is a bases for my faith that there is more than what we can simply physically measure and understand through materialistic methods. Perhaps my starting point of faith? …but that is simply a truth, relative to me personally.”

    Truth is that which exists whether you believe it or not. What you are calling “truth” is merely belief. You are certainly aware that many other people have had spiritual experiences just as you have who have “self determined” the existence of DIFFERENT gods, or different “realities” of the supernatural. Is your claim that they are ALL correct… at the same time? Anything we convince ourselves of is therefore true? This seems to be what you are saying, in which case, Santa lives!

    I appreciate that you are earnest in your belief. Many people where earnest in their belief that the world was flat, that demonic possession was real, and that thunder and lighting were caused by angry gods. These people also “self determined” the existence of countless gods who now reside in the trash cans of civilizations.

    If there indeed was an “absolute truth” that could in fact be “self determined” and involved an omniscient, omnipotent, infinite and transcendent being, wouldn’t it be reasonable to assume that the SAME absolute truth would be determined by everyone? But it isn’t. There is an absolute mis-mash of thousands of contradictory absolute truths. The only actual truth that remains is that they cannot all be right, but they can certainly all be wrong.

  145. on 25 Jul 2014 at 3:16 pm 145.TJ said …

    That’s not mockery… really, where is the distinction between this any ANY other claim I care to make about any other imaginary construct?

    No, I get it. Your right, it’s a fair question. I guess how do you determine what is imaginary and what isn’t?

    At some point in your analyse you self determine the reality of santa. This is no different to going either way with God. It is simply that we arrived at different conclusions. I can’t account for all your thoughts and analyse along the way that ended with…
    God = nil

    I couldn’t satisfactory recall, let alone pass on to you, all the logic, analyse and imagination I had to use to rationalise all the things I simply don’t understand or know. But in the end I arrived at…
    God = true

  146. on 25 Jul 2014 at 3:30 pm 146.TJ said …

    Read the rest of your post…

    And your right. Y’know I can’t account for how and why anyone else arrives at where they do.

    At some point though you’ve got to believe something. Even if you believe it is impossible to know anything absolutely.

    At the end of the day, you only have your own personal thoughts to reconcile against.

    By self determining my own absolute facts, I make them relative to me.

    This is the conundrum of faith. I’m fully aware and not afraid to admit that my faith is based on my ability to self determine.

    I mean the only other option I have is to say I cannot determine for myself. Who should determine for me then?

    I self determine every other aspect of my life to the best of my abilities, so why not my beliefs too.

  147. on 25 Jul 2014 at 3:44 pm 147.A The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “You should also look up “ad hominem” – not just for the correct spelling either – it’s a fallacy where you attack the person rather than the argument they present.”

    Yes, which you practice regularly. The tactics of a weaponless man? My sincere apologies for the typo…..another diversion.

    “As you’re disputing my definition it would be nice to know on what basis you’re calling it wrong.”

    Disputing? LOL!! Nothing to dispute, you only use words like “reality” and you define none of them. I might dispute once you define :)

    “When you said I didn’t have “the propensity to exhaust every possible scenario”

    You do not have the propensity to eliminate a majority of scenarios do you? How to you test and eliminate the possibility of God Fred? What % of possible scenarios do you think you CAN eliminate? Hmmm?

    “Why, because of the axioms existence, consciousness and identity coupled with the metaphysical primacy of existence of course.”

    Indeed! So you, as an atheist, have a universal accepted premise of existence that eliminates God!!! Please illuminate on the topic. This one interest me the most. Is THIS your reality? This should be good! I may get my popcorn out.

  148. on 25 Jul 2014 at 3:45 pm 148.DPK said …

    “I can’t account for all your thoughts and analyse along the way that ended with…
    God = nil”

    That isn’t exactly accurate. My conclusion would more correctly be stated god = unsupported and highly unlikely. I have never claimed to “know” there is no god… I just find the idea ridiculous and unsupported.

    “I couldn’t satisfactory recall, let alone pass on to you, all the logic, analyse and imagination I had to use to rationalise all the things I simply don’t understand or know. But in the end I arrived at…
    God = true”

    If your belief system was in fact grounded in reality, it would seem to me that you should be able to demonstrate it to me. If I claim that gravity exists and causes things to fall up, and not down, would it not be reasonable for you to ask me to demonstrate this? I am always amused by theists who insist that god exists in a non-physical world and can therefore not be tested or observed by physical means…. then go on in the next breath to describe how god intercedes in the physical world every day, answering prayers, performing miracles, appearing on toast and cloud formations. Sorry, if god interacts in the physical world, then he can be observed physically.

    You and are just wired differently. I used to be like you. I was raised in a christian household. I was spoon fed the dogma. But for me, no spiritual revelation ever took place… not for lack of trying. So, if your god exists, you can only assume he has a reason for this… no? Why does a god who wants to have a personal relationship with us make it impossible for a great many of us to actually do so? There actually is a very simple explanation for why this is so, but your own confirmation bias won’t allow you to accept what is actually the simplest and most logical answer.
    You have admitted yourself that it required a torturous process of “logic, analysis, and imagination” to “rationalize” your beliefs. Why can’t you accept the fact that there is a simple answer that does not require rationalization? One that fits perfectly with what we actually observe in the world, one that does not require you to pretend to know things you do not know? This is foreign to me, and makes no sense.

  149. on 25 Jul 2014 at 3:56 pm 149.TJ said …

    Why can’t you accept the fact that there is a simple answer that does not require rationalization?

    Simply the fact that I am able rationalise.

  150. on 25 Jul 2014 at 4:09 pm 150.TJ said …

    You have admitted yourself that it required a torturous process of “logic, analysis, and imagination” to “rationalize” your beliefs.

    Oh, you had better believe I was a suborn bastard, and hard of heart. I was the hold up, not God.

    “You and are just wired differently. I used to be like you. I was raised in a christian household. I was spoon fed the dogma. But for me, no spiritual revelation ever took place… not for lack of trying.”

    If you never had a spiritual revelation, then you were never like me. And You still reject God.

    Tell me, have you ever truly asked God to reveal himself to you in Ernest? Honestly without contempt?

  151. on 25 Jul 2014 at 5:18 pm 151.DPK said …

    Tell me, have you ever truly asked God to reveal himself to you in Ernest? Honestly without contempt?

    Yes, many times, truthfully and in earnest, I have. I got nothing. Do you think I’m the only one? That leads me to ask why god has favored you, and not me? Why has god led others to worship a false god, ultimately to their eternal doom, according to the bible?

    “Simply the fact that I am able rationalize.”

    Perhaps we have a different understanding of “rationalize” because that statement sounds like a crazy person talking.
    Rationalize:
    “attempt to explain or justify (one’s own or another’s behavior or attitude) with logical, plausible reasons, even if these are not true or appropriate.”

    So you claim that you cannot accept the fact that there is a simpler and more logical explanation that doesn’t require you to rationalize because you have the ability to “attempt to explain or justify (one’s own or another’s behavior or attitude) with logical, plausible reasons, even if these are not true or appropriate.”
    So, according to your reasoning, if I have the ability to convince myself that leprechauns exists, despite the fact that there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that leprechauns exist, then THAT is sufficient reason to reject out of hand the idea that leprechauns are actually imaginary?

    Do you really comprehend how entirely crazy that sounds?

  152. on 25 Jul 2014 at 11:45 pm 152.TJ said …

    “Yes, many times, truthfully and in earnest, I have. I got nothing. Do you think I’m the only one? That leads me to ask why god has favored you, and not me? Why has god led others to worship a false god, ultimately to their eternal doom, according to the bible?”

    I don’t know why God appears to have favoured me, perhaps I had given up the fight to resist God, perhaps I had truly accepted Christ on faith the very moment before I had my experience. I really don’t have the answer for you.

    I certainly don’t believe God leads people away from himself towards worship of other Gods. In my acceptance of the bible I have to consider the role of the adversary, the devil. And any role he may play in leading people astray.

    “Do you really comprehend how entirely crazy that sounds?”

    Of course I do. But I’m not ashamed to state my beliefs to you all the same.

    “So, according to your reasoning, if I have the ability to convince myself that leprechauns exists, despite the fact that there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that leprechauns exist, then THAT is sufficient reason to reject out of hand the idea that leprechauns are actually imaginary?”

    According to my reasoning, I reject the existence of leprechauns. If you convince yourself otherwise, that’s on you. Right now I’m only claiming a faith in the God of the bible, by way of my personal way, and process of rationalisation.

    Would it be more sane if I borrowed Neil Degrasse Tyson’s “Ship of the Imagination” and took it for a spin to see what I could determine?

    I mean you rationalise my rationalisation based on your own ability to rationalise. And that’s fine, I wouldn’t expect anything less.

    Just because not everyone reaches the same conclusions merely testifies to exceptional effectiveness of our faculties to imagine and express free self determined will. The same self determined will that God claims to posses. The bible is the only source of information that provides and explain the origins of such a creative imagination, whilst providing a holistic approach to the three big questions. I do not understand it all by a long shot.

    There is no simple answer to complex questions. And most of the answers only provide more questions. Do you think the scientists and engineers who build particle colliders, do so without using their ability to rationalise and imagine first?

    If they didn’t, I’d determine them to be crazy.

  153. on 26 Jul 2014 at 4:37 am 153.DPK said …

    “I don’t know why God appears to have favoured me, perhaps I had given up the fight to resist God, perhaps I had truly accepted Christ on faith the very moment before I had my experience. I really don’t have the answer for you.”

    I can think of one that makes perfect sense, but you are too closed minded to cconsider it. Instead, you will blame me, or gods mysterious ways. Have you heard of the “no true Scotsman” fallacy?

    “I certainly don’t believe God leads people away from himself towards worship of other Gods. In my acceptance of the bible I have to consider the role of the adversary, the devil. And any role he may play in leading people astray.”

    Confused… Doesn’t everything happen according to gods divine will and plan? Or is that only for things you like? You are the one claiming there is an absolute truth, and god wants us to find it. But many earnest and sincere people who seek this truth are deceived by the devil and god doesn’t care? Your rationalization is really talking you down Thea rabbit hole.

    “Do you really comprehend how entirely crazy that sounds?”
    Of course I do. But I’m not ashamed to state my beliefs to you all the same.

    “So you admit it is crazy, and you’re proud of it. And this is a good thing?

    “According to my reasoning, I reject the existence of leprechauns. If you convince yourself otherwise, that’s on you. Right now I’m only claiming a faith in the God of the bible, by way of my personal way, and process of rationalisation.”

    Way to try to intentionally miss the point. What is the arbitrary distinction you make between god and the leprechauns? You are making one… Why? You have already told us proudly your believe is based on rationalization… Convincing yourself of something using evidence that is either not true or not applicable. And you are proud of this? That is the definition of delusion.

    Would it be more sane if I borrowed Neil Degrasse Tyson’s “Ship of the Imagination” and took it for a spin to see what I could determine?

    I haven’t read it, but I would be surprised to find that Dr. Tyson would ask you to believe anything without evidence to back it up. If you are claiming that imagination is essential to the belief in supernatural gods, I wouldn’t disagree. But while a scientific idea may indeed start in the imagination, it never ends there.

    I mean you rationalise my rationalisation based on your own ability to rationalise. And that’s fine, I wouldn’t expect anything less.

    No, I don’t. Tell me exactly how you think I am rationalizing. Everything I am pointing out to you is based on your own statements.

    Just because not everyone reaches the same conclusions merely testifies to exceptional effectiveness of our faculties to imagine and express free self determined will. The same self determined will that God claims to posses. The bible is the only source of information that provides and explain the origins of such a creative imagination, whilst providing a holistic approach to the three big questions. I do not understand it all by a long shot.

    Again, you seem to imply that reality is completely subjective. The fact that not everyone arrives at the same conclusion doesn’t mean everyone is right. With regard to the existence of god, one thing is clear. One of us is right, and one of us is wrong. The fact that people can reach wrong conclusions is not evidence of a god, and you claims about the bible are unsupported none sense.

    There is no simple answer to complex questions. And most of the answers only provide more questions.
    The existence of supernatural gods is not a complex question. They are real, or they are not. Historically, all of them to date have been imaginary. I think yours is no different, and you haven’t given me any reason to think otherwise. Indeed, you admit you have to rationalize in order to convince yourself. I won’t do that. I think if I was created by a god with intelligence, he would frown on rationalization and self delusion as a poor use of his design.

    Do you think the scientists and engineers who build particle colliders, do so without using their ability to rationalise and imagine first?
    If they didn’t, I’d determine them to be crazy.

    But they use that imagination as a basis to test and gather actual evidence, not as a means to self determine. The Higgs particle was imagined before it was discovered, but it was not accepted based on imagination. The evidence had to be discovered.

    Got any?

  154. on 26 Jul 2014 at 8:53 am 154.TJ said …

    To DPK,
    What you are asking me for are spiritual answers. You keep reverting back to scientific methods and analogy. Science rejects the concept of a soul, and therefore does not account for it.

    There are no answers to be found currently in the scientific world. I assume you wouldn’t be here at this site if you were not at some point seriously seeking answers to spiritual questions.

    If you are currently seeking to destroy me with circular logic, chest beating and finger pointing whilst chanting “crazy person”. Then I will happily declare you the winner, leave this site and not return.

    I will not…
    deny my spirit,
    deny God,
    deny my belief in Christ
    or answer for others.

    Otherwise everything else is open for discussion.

    Sincerely TJ

  155. on 26 Jul 2014 at 1:42 pm 155.alex said …

    “Y’know your not required to talk me?”

    here’s why:
    “Science rejects the concept of a soul..” soul is bullshit. no? prove it, motherfucker.

    “There are no answers to be found currently in the scientific world.” none? serious?

    “I assume you wouldn’t be here at this site if you were not at some point seriously seeking answers to spiritual questions.” more bullshit.

    “If you are currently seeking to destroy me with circular logic…” you’re full of shit and nobody’s buying it.

    go fuck yourself.

  156. on 26 Jul 2014 at 2:06 pm 156.DPK said …

    “I will not…
    deny my spirit,
    deny God,
    deny my belief in Christ
    or answer for others.
    Otherwise everything else is open for discussion.”

    In other words, anything is open for discussion except “the existence of god in the world…” the point of the blog.
    You remind me very much of a point in the recent debate on evolution vs creationism between Ken Hamm and Bill Nye. The moderator asked each of them “what would make you change your mind about your position?”
    Nye replied, “evidence”. Hamm said “absolutely nothing”.

    “Science rejects the concept of a soul, and therefore does not account for it.” Incorrect. Science does not “reject” the concept of a soul, science holds there is no evidence for it… big difference. I could use your same justification to say “science rejects the idea of Leprechauns, therefore science can provide no answers relative to the existence of leprechauns. And your implication is that this somehow validates your belief in Leprechauns.

    “If you are currently seeking to destroy me with circular logic…”

    Show me where my logic is circular. Pointing out the contradictions and flat out fallacies in your own reasoning is not “circular logic”.

  157. on 26 Jul 2014 at 2:07 pm 157.A The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “Science rejects the concept of a soul, and therefore does not account for it.”

    Untrue TJ, science only rejects that which it can disprove. Just as science does not reject “little green men”(SETI), Science also does not reject the soul/spirit (Biocentrism).

    I cannot express myself as clearly as alexis (that silver tongued rascal, lol), but I do hope the point is made

  158. on 26 Jul 2014 at 2:24 pm 158.alex said …

    “I cannot express myself as clearly as alexis”

    loud and clear, mon motherfucker. there’s no doubt about your mastery of bullsheeyat. here’s the proof:
    http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

    oh, look, it automagically updated itself with your most recent crap. somewhere is a god programmer?

  159. on 26 Jul 2014 at 4:07 pm 159.alex said …

    “Untrue TJ, science only rejects that which it can disprove.”

    but, you swallow the chinese fetus stew rather easily? not surprising since your skydad loves him some burnt flesh.

  160. on 26 Jul 2014 at 5:54 pm 160.DPK said …

    At last “A” and I find something to agree on. Science also does not “reject” the idea of gods, it just finds no evidence to support it. Saying, “well, you can’t explain ___________ (fill in the gap of the day) does not then default to “then god musta did it. If it did we would still be sacrificing virgins at the volcano. Actually, civilization would have longs since collapsed because we would have no doubt run out of virgins before we ran out of gods to which to sacrifice them.

  161. on 26 Jul 2014 at 7:47 pm 161.alex said …

    “…science only rejects…”

    desperate plea for legitimacy. waah! the scientist won’t debate my xtian ass! schools should present creationism side by side with evolution! bleh, motherfucking bleh.

  162. on 26 Jul 2014 at 7:48 pm 162.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    TJ

    what science does reject is that if A is not true, that it follows A’ is also not true. The faulty logic and rhetoric one must, unfortunately, hear from atheist…..volcanos . … Virgins…..Santian religion…….elves, …..blah blah blah…..lol!!!!!

  163. on 26 Jul 2014 at 8:11 pm 163.DPK said …

    Wrong again A-hole. Shame on you for trying to burn this straw man again. You’ve been spanked many times before on it. But you keep trying hoping someone won’t notice the snake oil you are peddling.
    No one says because leprechauns aren’t real, then gods aren’t real.
    We say if the process you use to determine gods exist can equally be used to determine leprechauns exists, then the process is not a valid or reliable one.
    TJ has drawn a very arbitrary, but very real distinction between leprechauns and god. Why? The distinction is he knows leprechauns are not real, but he doesn’t want to consider the possibility that gods are not real. But the process he uses to rationalize his belief in gods can be equally used to rationalize belief in leprechauns, so how can we trust it?

  164. on 26 Jul 2014 at 9:06 pm 164.alex said …

    “what science does reject is that if A is not true, that it follows A’ is also not true.”

    that’s why you’re a lyin, dumbass, motherfucker.

    recorded magically: http://goo.gl/UYo1uS

  165. on 27 Jul 2014 at 4:45 am 165.Anonymous said …

    tj,

    How did you come to find god? Seems you were a non-believer that has become a christian. The prick posting above was once a drug addict and found salvation (and sobriety) through Christ. Is your story similar? Just out of curiosity.

    Also, how old do you (and your beliefs) say that the planet Earth is?

  166. on 27 Jul 2014 at 3:53 pm 166.TJ said …

    “But they use that imagination as a basis to test and gather actual evidence, not as a means to self determine.”

    Who determines if the evidence supports the imagined basis which is being tested?

    What is the imagined basis for the big bang?

    What is the imagined basis for planetary formation?

    What is the imagined basis for evolutionary theory?

    What is the imagined basis for multiple Ice age theory?

    What is the imagined basis for deep time?

    What is the imagined basis for dark energy/matter?

    What is the imagined basis for dating methods?

    etc…etc

    If science does not reject God or the soul, do they ever factor either of these as variables in any of their tests?

    If lack of evidence to prove or disprove conclusively is the problem, then why are the above theory’s taught as acceptable?

    ——————–

    From what I can personally rationalise, from what some of your are trying to tell me, is this…

    – I cannot trust my own ability to rationalise for my self.

    – I should only consider proven, evidence based “facts”.

    – for “facts”, I should trust only those that imagined a basis, tested it, and determined that the results from the tests they imagined and performed, match their imagined basis. I should accept the imagined basis as a “fact”, especially if others agree that the results from the tests performed show evidence that supports the imagined basis.

    – once I have somehow determined reliable “facts”, I should only consider these “facts” when I try to determine for my self. All the while accepting that I cannot trust my own ability to rationalise for my self.

    I am then asked how can anyone trust anything I say regarding my beliefs? Well, for a start I don’t limit myself by excluding any possibilities in my rationalisation process. But I do, dismiss and reject many things in my conclusions. What you determine for yourself is for you.

    I don’t ask that anyone trust me, change their beliefs or that they must accept mine, I am simply here to discuss the possibility of the existence of a God.

    If I am to limit myself to only considering that which can be proven only. Then how far will I be able to run with it? Like a computer’s logic I will soon come up against a statement without a true, false or stated value. My rational will crash to desktop. I will be left to declare “I don’t know”. And that will always be the case until I accept or imagine a value for the problem statement.

    Unlike a computer, I can imagine, exaggerate, self edit, make corrections, seek wisdom and new information from other sources, fantasize, ponder, compare, relate, associate, create and ultimately rationalise and weigh up the plausibility of all the unknowns from within.

    I say again, if I can’t determine for myself, then who should I trust to determine for me? I certainly don’t suggest that anybody take my word for anything.

    As I claim, nothing I say can change what anyone else believes. Belief happens within the individual. I can add extra information, but I cannot control the individuals rationalisation outcomes.

    To say, “I don’t know” is acceptable.
    To say, “I haven’t yet been able to determine for myself” is acceptable
    To say, “I can’t determine for myself” is selling yourself short.

    When you guys say, “God is imaginary”.

    Is it your personal rationalisation?
    or is it borrowed from some place else?

    …of course, all the above, is only my own rationalisation.

    Within my own rationalisation, I have determined that I can trust my rational. Why?

    Because I have determined that I am more than a mere bio-mechanical machine. I have determined that I am able to be angry, jealous, vengeful, loving, sad, wroth, joyous, creative, imaginative and many other attributes associated to God. And I accept that these attributes constitute the living soul assigned to me in the image of God.

  167. on 27 Jul 2014 at 5:02 pm 167.TJ said …

    “How did you come to find god? Seems you were a non-believer that has become a Christian. The prick posting above was once a drug addict and found salvation (and sobriety) through Christ. Is your story similar? Just out of curiosity.”

    The short version is that I came to a realisation after speaking to my mother about the concept of “being born again” and the promise of the holy spirit as a comforter.
    My mother claimed to believe, yet admitted she had doubts. Both her parents claimed to be born again, as does her sister and daughters(both my sisters).

    My mother stated “I don’t know what I’m waiting for, they all tell me it’s simply about believing”.

    A week or so later I was cleaning the kitchen, washing the dishes listening to the radio. Kids were at school and the missus was laid up in bed with chronic back pain as usual.

    A song came over the radio…”what are you waiting for…” the lyrics went. I got to thinking about my conversation with my mother.

    I asked myself “what the fuck am I waiting for?”
    I though “I’ve looked it all up down and over, this lot say this and those say that. What am I supposed to believe?”
    I spoke quietly, out loud, to God, assuming that if he was real, he would hear me and he would recognise that I was serious in my questioning.
    I do not remember my exact words but they where in line with this tone…
    “Why does a god who wants to have a personal relationship with us make it impossible for a great many of us to actually do so?”
    …”and if all I have to do is have faith and believe…”
    …then I stated to God directly that I’d had enough and that I accepted that he knew what the whole deal was, and that I would never be able to know all that I need to be 100% certain… and before I could conclude it hit me.

    It was as if for a brief moment I had complete access and understanding of all things relating to my personal salvation. I was overwhelmed with emotion and feeling of relief, assurance and eternal security. I sobbed and sobbed like a great big sook.

    I did not breath a word of my experience to anybody for at least a month. To my surprise, my aunty, grandmother and one of my sisters, all claim that they were at the sink doing the dishes when they had their personal experience.

    Since my experience, I feel like the weight of the world has been lifted off my shoulders. I have been able to focus on personal relationships with my family and friends with a greater tolerance, acceptance and calmness. I feel I can be honest and at peace with myself for possibly the first in my life.

    The longer version includes past drugs use, kids to multiple partners, court cases, moral struggles, fluctuating beliefs and one hell of an arrogant, self centred main character ie. me.

    I still have a lot of room for personal improvement, I’m still very much the same, just more aware and willing to make positive changes within my ways.

  168. on 27 Jul 2014 at 5:28 pm 168.TJ said …

    Also, how old do you (and your beliefs) say that the planet Earth is?

    Straight up, the bible doesn’t state the age specificity. Many have sat and poured over the pages and mathematically calculated dates based on biblical content. I personally have not done this.

    The dates associated are on average as follows…

    -creation of the earth is 4045 B.C.
    -global flood 1656 years after creation.
    -total time of the earth just over 6000 years old.

    I often see the 6000 years extended to 6000-10000.
    I’m not entirely sure where the extra 4000 comes from, but I would speculate that it would be an attempt to line biblical text with archaeological dating evidence.

    You can read my personal assessment of dating methods in comment #332 of this post.

    If the dates above truly match up with the biblical text, as I haven’t personally done the maths myself. But if they do, then I would assert that they match my beliefs.

  169. on 27 Jul 2014 at 6:39 pm 169.alex said …

    “What is the……”

    you’re a moron. your attempt to cast doubt on everything is irrelevant. whether or not the big bang happened doesn’t validate your god any more than it validates big foot.

    “do they ever factor either of these as variables in any of their tests?” what is the god test? you already admitted that you have no proof so what the fuck is the test? you’re the one that’s waving the god flag so state your test. oh, that’s right, there’s no test, you just know god exists in your heart/head.

    a simple “How did you come to find god?” and you jumped in with your testimony bullshit. roll on the floor, motherfucker. throw in some tongues shit.

    not trust dating methods? this somehow reconciles your biblical earth age? you’re a fucking moron. the speed of light you doubt? is that why your god did not create stars but instead created the light in transit so that we can see them?

    dumbass, motherfucker.

  170. on 27 Jul 2014 at 9:54 pm 170.Anonymous said …

    tj,

    I thought there might have been pre-existing conditions which aided your search for the lord. The belief of a god seems to be working for you and if it helps you walk the line and be a better person, good for you.

    I think that we can both agree that life is about compromise. When you subscribe to a fundamental belief, you MUST also learn to filter reality so that the belief remains unfettered. And that’s where the problems begin.

    You seem to claim so much of science is “imagined”. Such as: “What is the imagined basis for the big bang?”
    What’s wrong with using honest and objective analytical methods for such work? One must clear the mind of pre-conceived notions and ideals and start with, perhaps, creating a hypothesis. Doing research will yield facts and observations. But what if the initial hypothesis is wrong and the facts don’t fit? Well, the facts remain but a new hypothesis may be formulated. Does that work for a “god hypothesis”? No, god is a faith. Science is based on fact and observation. Science is about, for lack of a better example, shifting the decimal point when calculating the speed of light. God is excluded from such exercises.

  171. on 27 Jul 2014 at 10:06 pm 171.alex said …

    “The belief of a god seems to be working for you and if it helps you walk the line and be a better person, good for you.”

    no doubt. i’m friends with a few of those and they don’t go around yanking anybody’s chain. i thought they were godless heathens like me. and they thought i was xtian!

    surprisingly, they think i’m going to heaven. of course, the resident morons here know they ain’t real xtians. what is the xtian test again?

  172. on 27 Jul 2014 at 10:46 pm 172.Anonymous said …

    Once upon a time persons kept quite while passing a church house.

    Now you guys are using foul language to Christians.

    You will not escape the fire.

  173. on 27 Jul 2014 at 11:01 pm 173.alex said …

    “You will not escape the fire.”

    my cursing is WAY WORSE than you doling out eternal damnation? failed, motherfucker.

  174. on 28 Jul 2014 at 12:52 am 174.A The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “If I am to limit myself to only considering that which can be proven only. Then how far will I be able to run with it?”

    TJ.

    I think you may be confusing science with truth. Science is an epistemological endeavor and as such makes conclusions that may or may not be true. Consequently, scientist come into the endeavor with their own presuppositions, their biases, and is some instances beliefs they must embrace by their peers. Yes, science in some instances is influenced by politics.

    So what can be proven to be truth? Evolution? Climate Change? God? It all depends on who the inquiry is made to and what they have decided to accept as evidence. The nature of evidence is a crucial point in this process.

    Analytical science is typically straightforward. The gate voltage of a BJT transistor, the Ph of an acidic solution, semiconductor conductivity, etc are just a few examples. However historical sciences lend themselves to untestable assumptions and inherent biases that skew the resulting conclusions. Macroevolution is a great example here.

    Good luck mate and thanks for sharing your experience.

  175. on 28 Jul 2014 at 12:58 am 175.TJ said …

    The God test?

    Tell me how much money has been spent on theorising and development of technology and equipment to produce data or evidence?

    Do you realise the scientific method was developed by God fearing early scientists to provide evidence of a God who claims to have created the universe with unchanging rules, laws and an inherent balance? This was the emergence out of the dark ages of superstition.

    Do you realise that the enlightenment was a movement set out to explain the observed inherent balance, unchanging rules and laws without the presence of a creator? Darwin claimed his goal was to “free the sciences from Moses.”

    Google “hadron particle collider” read the wikipedia page. Read the “Purpose” section, and click on the linked word “early universe”.

    I say that science has rejected the possibility of a God and therefore does not account for it in it’s considerations, and I stand firm.

    I don’t claim to have proof for you, just my rational.

  176. on 28 Jul 2014 at 1:10 am 176.Anonymous said …

    prick claims:

    historical sciences lend themselves to untestable assumptions and inherent biases that skew the resulting conclusions. Macroevolution is a great example here.

    Did you forget about shared DNA and physiology? This information is available to researchers of today. It can be cross referenced to the fossil record. Links can be determined. So much information…so many facts. It ALL points to EVOLUTION. Unless you literally believe the bible to be true….and then you’ve just got to invent shit that fits your safe and comfortable mindset that there’s a sentient being that cares that Tebow got a touchdown, I got a raise, my family survived the car crash (and if they didn’t – they’re in a better place now), etc, etc.

    Prick is someone who CLEARLY demonstrates the necessary detachment from reality to enable a faith (aka belief in a god) to exist. It also helps his sobriety.

  177. on 28 Jul 2014 at 1:18 am 177.Anonymous said …

    tj,

    As a side note, Prick says the universe is Billions of years old. He also, like you, claims to be a Christian. And, what a coincidence, he also had issues with maintaining sobriety.

    As an interesting exercise, Prick should explain to you how it’s possible to believe in a Billions of year old Universe and still have Christ guy as your go to guy. I’ll let him have the floor now. Please proceed, Prick. Popcorns on!!! LOL!!!

  178. on 28 Jul 2014 at 1:21 am 178.TJ said …

    the speed of light you doubt? is that why your god did not create stars but instead created the light in transit so that we can see them?

    I’m not going to do all the thinking for you.
    Speed is the given distance travelled over a measured time frame right?
    According to Einstein and accepted theory of relativity. The passing of time can vary in relation to proximity to gravitational forces… a bending of time and space, as the description goes. GPS and satellite tracking systems are only accurate due to mathematical equations that account for the confirmed slight time variation in satellite orbits.

    Has anyone ever observed a light particles journey from one star to next. Would the passing of time itself vary depending on proximity to and from each star. Does dark matter exist? and does it affect time?

    the speed of light you doubt?

    No I don’t, I believe we can relativity rely on our measurements within our ability to measure. Can I say that what we can measure from here on earth holds true across the vastness of space… I cannot.

    If all else seems to vary depending on how it relates and reacts with what is around it, then why can’t the speed of light vary?

    Also I don’t claim to understand Gods creative process.

  179. on 28 Jul 2014 at 1:40 am 179.TJ said …

    “I think you may be confusing science with truth.”

    No, many here are confusing my rational with claims of truth.

    I offered my 2 “Absolute truths”, but only as truths relative to me personally.

    The rest is research, conjecture, speculation, imagination, and personal conclusive rationalisation.

    You either agree, disagree, accept, reject or otherwise. But ultimately you will personally rationalise all that you read of what I say and reach your own conclusions, even if that means you conclude I’m insane… so be it.

    As for…

    “historical sciences lend themselves to untestable assumptions and inherent biases that skew the resulting conclusions.”

    I absolutely agree. I admit that I am terribly bias in my beliefs when rationalising historical sciences, conjecturing with my own versions of untestable assumptions.

    I only take it personally when I am called a liar, whilst being told of the high standards of objectivity in science.

  180. on 28 Jul 2014 at 1:41 am 180.TJ said …

    Good luck mate and thanks for sharing your experience.

    Thanks mate, your welcome.

  181. on 28 Jul 2014 at 2:06 am 181.alex said …

    “I’m not going to do all the thinking for you.
    Speed is the given distance travelled over a measured time frame right?”

    “why can’t the speed of light vary?”

    that’s why you’re a dumbass, motherfucker. since the andromeda galaxy is about 2.5 million light years away, how in the fuck did its light travel to be visible in your 10,000 year old earth? so to support your bullshit earth age, you’d have to crank up the speed of light by some crazy factor, don’t you? is this the thinking you’re doing for me?

    bullshit, motherfucker.

  182. on 28 Jul 2014 at 2:16 am 182.TJ said …

    “You seem to claim so much of science is “imagined”. Such as: “What is the imagined basis for the big bang?”
    What’s wrong with using honest and objective analytical methods for such work? One must clear the mind of pre-conceived notions and ideals and start with, perhaps, creating a hypothesis. Doing research will yield facts and observations. But what if the initial hypothesis is wrong and the facts don’t fit? Well, the facts remain but a new hypothesis may be formulated. Does that work for a “god hypothesis”? No, god is a faith. Science is based on fact and observation. Science is about, for lack of a better example, shifting the decimal point when calculating the speed of light. God is excluded from such exercises.”

    I see no problem using honest and objective analytical methods for such work.
    However when hypothesis is created. Any objective analytical methods used, are chosen for their potential to investigate the claims of the hypothesis. Not to investigate claims excluded by the hypothesis itself.

    And this is of course the nature of scientific investigation. Again no problem from me.

    The problem is there is more than one hypothesis. I get called narrow minded and a dumbarse motherfucker for not limiting myself to any one realm of hypothesis. Instead I insist on questioning everything to gather raw information from many sources. I then claim to trust my own “(bias) God given” ability to rationalise and determine for my own self. Often coming up with the same conclusions as others… in that truths can be elusive in light of the rationalisations of others and the evidences and proofs that are often presented as fact.

    I am just crazy enough to admit it openly… and still profess faith in something “unproven”.

  183. on 28 Jul 2014 at 2:17 am 183.alex said …

    “Good luck mate and thanks for sharing your experience.”

    and come back with more of your delicious, mind numbing testimonials. just to aggravate the fuck out of these atheists. it really works you know. the aggravation, i mean.

    dumbass, motherfuckers.

  184. on 28 Jul 2014 at 2:21 am 184.Anonymous said …

    tj:

    the speed of light you doubt? is that why your god did not create stars but instead created the light in transit so that we can see them?
    I’m not going to do all the thinking for you.

    You won’t do my thinking for me? Thank Christ ;-) for that, **insert irony**. My god, like yours, is invisible and unresponsive – on that we can agree.

    No, I don’t doubt the speed of light. I think you missed my point. Or tried a dodge and weave. I am saying that the science points to the big bang, evolution, etc, etc. The research won’t do a 180 degree turn without some solid reasoning. Maybe you have the smoking gun to achieve the turn around? I doubt it. The research marches on. It’s why you’re able to communicate with me and others over the internet….thank-you science.

    tj, I don’t think you can comprehend how big the Universe actually is. There are more stars in the Universe than grains of sand on planet Earth. And you claim some god decided that we are so SPECIAL that it wanted to create US in it’s image just for shits and giggles? And we’re to believe in and worship this entity lest we put into peril of our eternal souls? Puhleeeze….Don’t insult my intelligence. Grow the fuck up!!! OR – If this is what you need to stay sober, chive on, mate.

  185. on 28 Jul 2014 at 2:23 am 185.alex said …

    “Instead I insist on questioning everything to gather raw information from many sources.”

    fine. the big bang is bullshit. dark matter is bullshit. light speed can vary. evolution is bullshit. and guess what, motherfucker? your god is still bullshit.

    don’t feel bad. we both believe in seat belts, don’t we? we both believe in aspirin? both believe in pasteurized milk? see, we have a lot in common, yes?

  186. on 28 Jul 2014 at 3:25 am 186.TJ said …

    To Anonymous,
    You said…
    My god, like yours, is invisible and unresponsive – on that we can agree.

    I say…
    “No, I do not agree. I say the invisible God created himself an image/form, before all else. Planned to interact with mankind on planet earth using this image/form, commanding them be fruitfull, multiply and fill the earth. What was to happen after the earth was full is anybody’s guess. But there appears to be a vast limitless universe to explore.

    I say God’s plan was interrupted by another creation of Gods. One who’s jealousy of Man’s special status prompted him to challenge Man ability to wield free will and remain obedient to God.

    God then used his image/form to directly influence the choices of selected men & women up to the point of fulfilling a promise to present himself as a kinsman redeemer sacrificing his original form/image to take on a fleshly form and then sacrificing that only to regain it, all on behalf of man to satisfy whatever the requirements of universal justice may be (I don’t understand why it had to be this way). After this was fulfilled he left in this fleshly form to prepare a new place for us. He left a spiritual comforter for anybody who would sincerely ask for it.

    I claim to have got a response in the form of an overwhelming personal spiritual experience. I conclude that this was the spiritual comforter, and it remains within me.

    You said…
    “I am saying that the science points to the big bang, evolution, etc, etc. The research won’t do a 180 degree turn without some solid reasoning.”

    I say…
    The science is focused on pointing research towards the big bang, evolution etc. It cannot turn in any other direction without accepting an alternative focus.

  187. on 28 Jul 2014 at 3:36 am 187.Anonymous said …

    tj,

    You, like the Prick, have swallowed the Kool-aid. Both seeking salvation from themselves through an external entity. Seems like it works for you both. Maybe you should explain to the Prick why he is wrong in assuming a Billions of years old Earth and Universe.

  188. on 28 Jul 2014 at 5:22 am 188.TJ said …

    To Anonymous,

    Who suggested…

    “Maybe you should explain to the Prick why he is wrong in assuming a Billions of years old Earth and Universe.”

    Are you the same Anonymous, that said this to me?

    “And we’re to believe in and worship this entity lest we put into peril of our eternal souls? Puhleeeze….Don’t insult my intelligence. Grow the fuck up!!!”

    ?

  189. on 28 Jul 2014 at 12:15 pm 189.freddies_dead said …

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

    “You should also look up “ad hominem” – not just for the correct spelling either – it’s a fallacy where you attack the person rather than the argument they present.”

    Yes, which you practice regularly. The tactics of a weaponless man? My sincere apologies for the typo…..another diversion.

    Wrong as usual. When I note that you’re a lying prick it’s based on your many acts of dishonesty and, as I’ve already pointed out, you’ve yet to present an argument … about anything really, so it’s impossible for me to commit the fallacy you accuse me of. If you do actually have an argument then you’re welcome to state your premises (along with any evidence for them) and show how they support your conclusion.

    “As you’re disputing my definition it would be nice to know on what basis you’re calling it wrong.”

    Disputing? LOL!! Nothing to dispute,

    So you agree that truth is the identification of a fact of reality then? In which case your posturing has what purpose? If you don’t agree then on what basis are you calling it wrong? Just what is your definition of truth?

    you only use words like “reality” and you define none of them.

    And you’re back to lying. I’ve given you the definitions you asked for.
    Truth is the identification of a fact of reality.
    Facts are those things with actual existence.
    Reality is that which exists.

    I might dispute once you define :)

    I have defined already, you’re just dodging as usual.

    “When you said I didn’t have “the propensity to exhaust every possible scenario”

    You do not have the propensity to eliminate a majority of scenarios do you?

    What difference does it make if I can’t eliminate “a majority” of scenarios? Is there a fundamental distinction between that and eliminating “a minority” of scenarios? If I can do one but not the other how does that prove that your God exists? And why does it stop me from knowing that your God isn’t real?

    How to you test and eliminate the possibility of God Fred?

    Easy. As Anton Thorn notes:
    “The claim that a god exists is self-contradictory. To claim that god exists, you must both assume the truth of the primacy of existence and deny it at the same time. When you say “x exists” (where ‘x’ is some entity, attribute or relationship), you are assuming that it exists independently of consciousness, which means: You imply the primacy of existence principle. But when you say what exists is a form of consciousness which creates existence, then you assume explicitly the primacy of consciousness principle, which contradicts the principle of the primacy of existence. In this way, the claim that god exists must be rejected as a falsehood. Either way, existence exists, and your god is out of a job.”

    What % of possible scenarios do you think you CAN eliminate? Hmmm?

    I don’t need to worry about percentages when you’re affirming the impossible.

    “Why, because of the axioms existence, consciousness and identity coupled with the metaphysical primacy of existence of course.”

    Indeed! So you, as an atheist, have a universal accepted premise of existence that eliminates God!!! Please illuminate on the topic. This one interest me the most. Is THIS your reality? This should be good! I may get my popcorn out.

    The Objectivist position eliminates any God said to hold metaphysical primacy over existence. It certainly isn’t “universally accepted” (and I never claimed that it was) as we can all see from the continuing existence of theists who irrationally affirm the metaphysical primacy of consciousness.

  190. on 28 Jul 2014 at 12:17 pm 190.freddies_dead said …

    542.TJ said …

    “How do I know? Why, because of the axioms existence, consciousness and identity coupled with the metaphysical primacy of existence of course.”

    Now, I got accused of double bullshit talk, just recently.

    I am unashamed to admit that I have no idea what the above quoted sentence is supposed to encompass?

    Generally I have found that theists who ask “how do you know?” are utterly disinterested in an actual theory of knowledge and are simply seeking to undermine the atheist’s certainty when disbelieving in their God. As such I’ve given up attempting to explain Objectivist epistemology and instead point to Objectivism’s reliance on the self-evident axioms and the proper subject-object relationship as the foundation upon which our knowledge rests.

  191. on 28 Jul 2014 at 1:36 pm 191.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    TJ,

    Her is a great example of assumptions and biases from Anonymous (aka Freddie).

    “science points to the big bang, evolution, etc”

    Does science really point to these theories or are they based on conclusions ripe with bias and presuppositions?

    The later of course. The Facts do not speak and the creationist and the Evolutionist use the same facts.

  192. on 28 Jul 2014 at 1:55 pm 192.Anonymous said …

    on the question of having souls.

    on how everything is not down to matter energy space and time.

    or molecules and atoms.

    to the athiest

    you may reject the example but try to fathom the meaning.

    if a wizard or even an advanced scientific method could turn your wives and children (men) or your husband and children (women) into a bunch of apples. how many of you would say oh the apples just consist of molecules i will eat it happily.

    you would probably have some sort of a conscience.

    to me the conscience is the closest partner to the soul and indicates that there are other elements of importance beside the matter the space and time.

    do you think you need to believe in god to believe in these elements?

  193. on 28 Jul 2014 at 1:58 pm 193.Anonymous said …

    is a person: and a bunch of thrown together atoms and molecules really on the same one of your indifference curves?

  194. on 28 Jul 2014 at 1:59 pm 194.Anonymous said …

    if so is that right?

  195. on 28 Jul 2014 at 2:03 pm 195.Anonymous said …

    you see i am deep. i search out all viewpoints, ideas faiths and intermingle with all wisdom.

    if i am not thrown by the christian view completely, i am not going to be moved by a few foul mouth rants of a few athiest.

  196. on 28 Jul 2014 at 6:40 pm 196.Anonymous said …

    Mouse:“science points to the big bang, evolution, etc”

    a, The Prick, Wooten (aka the Hor): Does science really point to these theories or are they based on conclusions ripe with bias and presuppositions?

    The bias you speak of was erased in the 1800’s when it was assumed that all species are fixed. The biblical view, for lack of evidence, was the prevailing idea – basically, goddidit. Along comes this Darwin fellow who started investigating. He removed the bias. Where’s the problem? What have you got?

    tj, you really need to discuss the age of the planet Earth with the Prick. How can he say that the Earth is Billions, YES, BILLIONS, of years old and still be a xtian? He has also condemned atheists to the lake of fire if we don’t subscribe to the Christ-guy.

  197. on 28 Jul 2014 at 8:03 pm 197.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    “Along comes this Darwin fellow”

    and claimed “timediddit”..Nope, that does not provide the evidence to support macroevolution. Lol!!!!

    Time to pull out the fish fossil Anonymous aka Freddie? :)

  198. on 28 Jul 2014 at 10:05 pm 198.Anonymous said …

    The Hor, Wooten, Prick, et al:
    Just as I thought. You subscribe to silly 1850-ish biblical thinking. Congratulations!!! You truly are successfully maintaining the faith. Like numerous other born-again ex-drug addicted xtians you gotta keep running, gotta believe it’s eternal damnation if you slip…. and that’s what keeps the bottle at arms length. Chive on.

  199. on 28 Jul 2014 at 10:44 pm 199.The Prickly Science Guy said …

    ” You subscribe to silly 1850-ish biblical thinking”

    lol!!!! I never said a word about the Bible…..lol!!! Which goes to show you accept it on faith. That’s OK……vling to your fish fossil:)

    I do think for myself and I know for a FACT macro evolution has never been proven……it is simply the dogma of the day based a huge number of assumptions and creative drawings.

  200. on 28 Jul 2014 at 10:59 pm 200.Anonymous said …

    Prick,
    OK Einstein what is the real deal? You have something better than Evolution? Something to explain the biodiversity, common DNA and physiology? I am all ears. Oh yeah, your story has something about an Ark and a flood.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply