Churches religion....
They want you to believe so they can pimp their church.


If the church wanted to be an example they should set one, a house to honor god in does not have to be shiny.
God will not look at the building, but at the people inside.
The intention of putting people together is to share the knowledge of the bible and not so you can sit your ass on comfortable heated seats.

If you need all that to get people to go to church then those people are not really believers, are they?


How easy can it be to build 4 walls, 2 with openings for light, 1 solid wall and one with doors in it, and a roof.

Is it so bad for 1 day of the week to suffer, cause face it your job isn't 1% of the hard labor there was back in the far past when they didn't have office jobs.
It should remind you that you have gotten life from god and the freedom you talk of...would you have freedom if you were not born? Be happy that you have some freedom 6 days in the week, yet this freedom is limited to some basic rules of the bible and face it, how hard is it to follow the actual rules of the bible?
People think too much about it, the rules of the bible are basic rules, sometimes people think religion has so many rules, Look at america. Learn all their laws. You would waste a lifetime learning all those laws.

Now think of a place where biblical rules apply, so few rules yet the same is achieved, or better.

Tilly wrote:

Monty wrote:

If you have proof, what is the point of faith Allister?

How can god's omniscience and man's free will coexist in the universe? If man does not have free will, god can be omniscient. If man does have free will, god deliberately curtailed the extent of his own knowledge to the extent that man's actions are unknowable. Sin is therefore a result of god's ignorance and man's willfullness combined.

You might as well toss a deck of cards into the air, tell them to worship you or else, then eternally damn all the ones that landed face down and refused to roll over on your "request".

One of the best aruments I've seen on religion. However, you could argue that to god, man's actions are knowable, despite free will. God could just as well be a master of time as well as space, and allows sin to happen to keep free will, but still be aware of every action and intent, leaving it to be judged in the future, or that there just is no other way to have natural order.

I can't see how god could be all knowing in this sense unless the universe is completely deterninistic and what we perceive as quantum uncertainty is the mechanism god uses to mask this determinism.

Free will puts the kybosh on both complete knowledge and determinism.

God is simply a highly anthropomorphic invention to assuage the ego of mankind.

Genesis 1:26

Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

That bit isn't turning out so well lately. Where's the part about not befouling the planet he made us or eating species to extinction?

freestyler_3 wrote:

Churches religion....
They want you to believe so they can pimp their church.


If the church wanted to be an example they should set one, a house to honor god in does not have to be shiny.
God will not look at the building, but at the people inside.
The intention of putting people together is to share the knowledge of the bible and not so you can sit your ass on comfortable heated seats.

If you need all that to get people to go to church then those people are not really believers, are they?


How easy can it be to build 4 walls, 2 with openings for light, 1 solid wall and one with doors in it, and a roof.

Is it so bad for 1 day of the week to suffer, cause face it your job isn't 1% of the hard labor there was back in the far past when they didn't have office jobs.
It should remind you that you have gotten life from god and the freedom you talk of...would you have freedom if you were not born? Be happy that you have some freedom 6 days in the week, yet this freedom is limited to some basic rules of the bible and face it, how hard is it to follow the actual rules of the bible?
People think too much about it, the rules of the bible are basic rules, sometimes people think religion has so many rules, Look at america. Learn all their laws. You would waste a lifetime learning all those laws.

Now think of a place where biblical rules apply, so few rules yet the same is achieved, or better.

I agree that ostentatious churches are quite ridiculous.

Applying your thoughts on religious rules to the RC Church Freestyler: You seem to be arguing that the only rules that are necessary are biblical ones. Fair enough to a certain extent; but this excludes regulation of anything that didn't yet exist when the bible was compiled. Does that mean that condoms are OK, or does Onanism have to be re-interpreted on their invention? What about birth control pills then?

Good post mate.

Aye that's the problem with the Bible rules...
The church keeps on bitching about how you should follow the rules written in the Bible and so on.
Problem is we're 2000 years further, things have changed.
The rules should change when the world changes.

Monty wrote:

If you have proof, what is the point of faith Allister?

Nobody has "proof", it is a relative term unique only to each individual, because my proof might not be proof to you. But you also have faith in whatever you believe in. Hebrews 11:1 is probably the most concise definition of faith found in the Bible. It is considered the classical definition of faith. Faith is both the substance of things hoped for and the evidence that things exist that are not yet perceived with the senses. When presented with anything in this life, say the bible, or a miracle, it still requires faith to believe that those things came from God. And just because you have "proof" or any kind of evidence, it doesn't discredit or nullify your faith. Peoples proof, and their views on what is truth are always changing, so everyone will rely on faith in something at some point in their life. God has left us enough evidence to have reason to believe he exists. But it is still faith, because he is virtually invisible to us in this world - unable to be sensed. But, there are some that he reveals himself to, through apparitions, visions, healing, miracles, etc. but he reveals these things to reward or enhance the existing faith of the faithful. If you are not willing to follow God without "proof" he will not offer you more evidence than he has already provided through the scriptures and through the lives of his people.

Monty wrote:

How can god's omniscience and man's free will coexist in the universe? If man does not have free will, god can be omniscient. If man does have free will, god deliberately curtailed the extent of his own knowledge to the extent that man's actions are unknowable. Sin is therefore a result of god's ignorance and man's willfullness combined.

This makes no sense. I don't really see how God allowing his creation to freely decide to love or reject him (sin), would inhibit his own knowledge. That has no solid base of reason. A loving parent does not force their child to return their love. They long for their child's love, but accept rejection if that is the option of choice. Likewise, God does not force his children to love him. Our love for him, or our disobedience (as evidence by sin), does not impair or affect his love for us in any way. So how would mans ability to do whatever they want limit Gods knowledge of what they are doing? He allows them to do whatever they want, purely out of love - hoping that they will freely love him in return. If he forced us to love him, it wouldn't actually be love.

Monty wrote:

You might as well toss a deck of cards into the air, tell them to worship you or else, then eternally damn all the ones that landed face down and refused to roll over on your "request".

Parents give life to their children, feed them, cloth them, give them a home and they deserve their child's respect. Likewise, God has given us life through our parents, has provided for our survival, and yes, even given us his very self. What more can he do to provide for the salvation of his people? Why would he force us to love him if we don't want to? That would not be love. We choose to love or to despise him, so we choose for ourselves whether or not we will go to Hell. He obviously does not want us to, but he allows us to if that is what we want. Hell is the eternal absence of Gods love - not created for man, but for satan and his angels. If you rejected his love your whole life, obviously you would not want to be with him in eternity. Upon meeting the God that atheists never believed and anyone who chose not to live for God (for whatever reason) the only words that would make sense for them to receive are "I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!" (matthew 7:23). People ask why a loving God would send his beloved creatures to hell but the real question is why would the creatures of a loving God choose to deny his love for an eternity in Hell?

Denial Cabi wrote:

Problem is most religious people wouldn't know the difference between verifiable fact and dogma, and then get offended when someone tries to inform them of the difference. Religion is a theory for what is not know. Anyone successful at building a human from a single rib bone yet? Yeah, the scrutiny of science over the past 150 years is quickly disassembling the political structure created thousands of years ago know as the bible.

There are many Christians who believe that Genesis was meant to be taken literally (world was created in 7 24 hour days, adam from dirt and eve from his rib, etc). However, there are many Christians especially among the Catholic church who widely accept the theories of evolution and the big bang so long as they do not replace the belief that God was the creator that initiated these events. The book of Genesis can be taken in a figurative way. Ch.1 links up so well with the modern theory of the Big Bang that I really don't see why very few see it.

Christianity offers much reason to believe that there is a God and that the Christian perspective of Him is actually the most accurate. There are many different religions, even many different denominations amongst the same religion, but as related to the different theories of evolution, there can only be 1 truth. It is our job to investigate what is most likely the 1 truth, or what most closely resembles it.

Man, just give up. Despite the fact that your post falls under "tl;dr", I read it. Now what you don't seem to understand is (in brief bullet points!!):

a) Filecabi is pretty far from being religious, so you might as well give up

b) You keep talking about the Bible as a proof of God's existence, yet the Bible was written by man over 2000 years ago! That's no fucking proof. Where is the "God connection" in there? Because they say it's his words? So in other terms, you believe some dude that's been dead for 2000 years based solely on the fact that he wrote some stuff down?

c) As for you saying that Christianity is the "right" religion, well that's just fucking weird. Why would Buddhism be wrong? Because they don't have some guy writing down fictional stories "quoting" a deity? Oh wait, they do! Just to name one example out of many..

There is something wrong in religion?


I beleive, one is responsible for all his actions, whatever he does, whenerver he does it.
No one else to blame but himselfe.

Crashing a car is not the blame of the traffic lights, just not looking to left or right was the mistake.

A bad treatment from parents is not the blame, being bullied all year long is not the blame.

The moment you pull the trigger it is 100% you, no one else to blame.


Some say, God told me to do it, but who did it? yes.

If God told you to jump into a pool of lava, would you do it?


Whatever I do of say (drunk or sober. Happy or sad. euphoric or depressed), comes out of my own head, and makes me 100% responsible.


Nothing wrong with religion, no offence. But I have my own.

Monty wrote:

Tilly wrote:

Monty wrote:

If you have proof, what is the point of faith Allister?

How can god's omniscience and man's free will coexist in the universe? If man does not have free will, god can be omniscient. If man does have free will, god deliberately curtailed the extent of his own knowledge to the extent that man's actions are unknowable. Sin is therefore a result of god's ignorance and man's willfullness combined.

You might as well toss a deck of cards into the air, tell them to worship you or else, then eternally damn all the ones that landed face down and refused to roll over on your "request".

One of the best aruments I've seen on religion. However, you could argue that to god, man's actions are knowable, despite free will. God could just as well be a master of time as well as space, and allows sin to happen to keep free will, but still be aware of every action and intent, leaving it to be judged in the future, or that there just is no other way to have natural order.

I can't see how god could be all knowing in this sense unless the universe is completely deterninistic and what we perceive as quantum uncertainty is the mechanism god uses to mask this determinism.

Free will puts the kybosh on both complete knowledge and determinism.

God is simply a highly anthropomorphic invention to assuage the ego of mankind.

Genesis 1:26

Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

That bit isn't turning out so well lately. Where's the part about not befouling the planet he made us or eating species to extinction?

freestyler_3 wrote:

Churches religion....
They want you to believe so they can pimp their church.


If the church wanted to be an example they should set one, a house to honor god in does not have to be shiny.
God will not look at the building, but at the people inside.
The intention of putting people together is to share the knowledge of the bible and not so you can sit your ass on comfortable heated seats.

If you need all that to get people to go to church then those people are not really believers, are they?


How easy can it be to build 4 walls, 2 with openings for light, 1 solid wall and one with doors in it, and a roof.

Is it so bad for 1 day of the week to suffer, cause face it your job isn't 1% of the hard labor there was back in the far past when they didn't have office jobs.
It should remind you that you have gotten life from god and the freedom you talk of...would you have freedom if you were not born? Be happy that you have some freedom 6 days in the week, yet this freedom is limited to some basic rules of the bible and face it, how hard is it to follow the actual rules of the bible?
People think too much about it, the rules of the bible are basic rules, sometimes people think religion has so many rules, Look at america. Learn all their laws. You would waste a lifetime learning all those laws.

Now think of a place where biblical rules apply, so few rules yet the same is achieved, or better.

I agree that ostentatious churches are quite ridiculous.

Applying your thoughts on religious rules to the RC Church Freestyler: You seem to be arguing that the only rules that are necessary are biblical ones. Fair enough to a certain extent; but this excludes regulation of anything that didn't yet exist when the bible was compiled. Does that mean that condoms are OK, or does Onanism have to be re-interpreted on their invention? What about birth control pills then?

Good post mate.

Where in the bible does it say that when you have sex that you must do it with the intention of making children.
Onanism?

Regulation of what? Drinking? I Have not read the bible, only parts. I do not say how much you can drink, but I think that you can drink as long as you don't break the main 10 rules.

Not many things are not OK.

Now let's discuss whether or not a blowjob/handjob is cheating.

Monty wrote:

I can't see how god could be all knowing in this sense unless the universe is completely deterninistic and what we perceive as quantum uncertainty is the mechanism god uses to mask this determinism.

Free will puts the kybosh on both complete knowledge and determinism.

God is simply a highly anthropomorphic invention to assuage the ego of mankind.

Genesis 1:26

Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

That bit isn't turning out so well lately. Where's the part about not befouling the planet he made us or eating species to extinction?

I think you're reading too much into it, or you're assuming that allowing sin somehow defeats the purpose of "all-knowing." Free will exists, as does the fourth dimension we know as time. Time exists, past, present, and future. It's not necessarily in a sense that everything is predetermined, it's just that everyone's actions and choices in life have already spanned throughout all time, and we're just currently living in the present moment of it.

As for your interpretation of befouling the planet and all that, it seems pretty irrelevant to the topic. Maybe in a different subject, you might be on to something, but not this one.

religious debates make me want to smash my head through a wall

to each their own, no 1 is right/wrong, etc., etc., etc...

crazyjoe wrote:

religious debates make me want to smash my head through a wall

to each their own, no 1 is right/wrong, etc., etc., etc...

You are SOOOOOO wrong.

crazyjoe wrote:

religious debates make me want to smash my head through a wall

to each their own, no 1 is right/wrong, etc., etc., etc...

I'd say the same but when people try and push others around, preaching (no matter what it is) that is when I can't sit back anymore. Like this allisterfiend calling out atheists. That just plain pisses me off. He can be a Christian nutter/fag in his spare time if he wants to, but he's well fucked if he's calling me out, calling atheism dumb and Christianity the one true religion.

religion is all about faith.

bigbadbear wrote:

religion is all about faith.

= I just want to believe what ever I want and not justify it to anyone else... mainly because I can't.

JooX wrote:

bigbadbear wrote:

religion is all about faith.

= I just want to believe what ever I want and not justify it to anyone else... mainly because I can't.

Bazinga.

freestyler_3 wrote:

Where in the bible does it say that when you have sex that you must do it with the intention of making children.
Onanism?

"Onanism" is a euphemism for pulling out and spilling the money shot on the ground. Onan was killed by god for doing this after being commanded to impregnate his sister in law after her husband was killed by god. If goat-gut condoms were around then, Onan probably would have used them to the same result.

Quote :

Regulation of what? Drinking? I Have not read the bible, only parts. I do not say how much you can drink, but I think that you can drink as long as you don't break the main 10 rules.

Not many things are not OK.

The ten commandments don't proscribe rape or slavery.

More is needed.

QED

Because back in the days rape and slavery was awwwwright...

allisterfiend? wrote:

Monty wrote:

If you have proof, what is the point of faith Allister?

Nobody has "proof", it is a relative term unique only to each individual, because my proof might not be proof to you.

If proof is entirely subjective then why assert the following?

allisterfiend? wrote:

There is a God, and this I am certain. I can prove any atheist wrong. just test me.

allisterfiend? wrote:

But you also have faith in whatever you believe in. Hebrews 11:1 is probably the most concise definition of faith found in the Bible. It is considered the classical definition of faith. Faith is both the substance of things hoped for and the evidence that things exist that are not yet perceived with the senses. When presented with anything in this life, say the bible, or a miracle, it still requires faith to believe that those things came from God. And just because you have "proof" or any kind of evidence, it doesn't discredit or nullify your faith. Peoples proof, and their views on what is truth are always changing, so everyone will rely on faith in something at some point in their life. God has left us enough evidence to have reason to believe he exists. But it is still faith, because he is virtually invisible to us in this world - unable to be sensed. But, there are some that he reveals himself to, through apparitions, visions, healing, miracles, etc. but he reveals these things to reward or enhance the existing faith of the faithful. If you are not willing to follow God without "proof" he will not offer you more evidence than he has already provided through the scriptures and through the lives of his people.

Faith and belief are then precursors to knowledge. Some things will remain articles of faith; some through human inquiry are explained empirically and no longer require faith. Being 'virtually invisible', god's existence obviously requires faith or trust in the words of people he has revealed himself to- and such trust can be cruelly exploited. Granted, this is a cynical position but I still hold to it.

allisterfiend? wrote:

Monty wrote:

How can god's omniscience and man's free will coexist in the universe? If man does not have free will, god can be omniscient. If man does have free will, god deliberately curtailed the extent of his own knowledge to the extent that man's actions are unknowable. Sin is therefore a result of god's ignorance and man's willfullness combined.

This makes no sense. I don't really see how God allowing his creation to freely decide to love or reject him (sin), would inhibit his own knowledge. That has no solid base of reason.

God creates man: God knows everything that man will do. How can free will fit in there without god's imperfect knowledge of his own actions?

By definition, omniscience is total knowledge of the entire universe over all time. For god to not only create the universe but also have this complete knowledge, by definition he cannot create free will. In creating free will, god curtails his own knowledge of how the universe unfolds and the actions of its denizens.

There is plenty of room left for god; the universe is an utterly remarkable entity. God as watchmaker? No, god as rule-maker: 'Let there be energy and spacetime,' if I may be so bold. IMHO that is a hell of a lot more impressive than parting the Red Sea.

allisterfiend? wrote:

A loving parent does not force their child to return their love. They long for their child's love, but accept rejection if that is the option of choice. Likewise, God does not force his children to love him. Our love for him, or our disobedience (as evidence by sin), does not impair or affect his love for us in any way. So how would mans ability to do whatever they want limit Gods knowledge of what they are doing? He allows them to do whatever they want, purely out of love - hoping that they will freely love him in return. If he forced us to love him, it wouldn't actually be love.

Yes, true love must be freely given.

If the choice is for a man to freely love god or to suffer eternal damnation then the choice is not free but coerced.

What if someone's like "oh, yeah- I think the ten commandments are OK and all; I won't break them because I think they're wrong but sorry god I don't believe in you, heaven or hell."

allisterfiend? wrote:

Monty wrote:

You might as well toss a deck of cards into the air, tell them to worship you or else, then eternally damn all the ones that landed face down and refused to roll over on your "request".

Parents give life to their children, feed them, cloth them, give them a home and they deserve their child's respect. Likewise, God has given us life through our parents, has provided for our survival, and yes, even given us his very self. What more can he do to provide for the salvation of his people? Why would he force us to love him if we don't want to? That would not be love. We choose to love or to despise him, so we choose for ourselves whether or not we will go to Hell. He obviously does not want us to, but he allows us to if that is what we want. Hell is the eternal absence of Gods love - not created for man, but for satan and his angels. If you rejected his love your whole life, obviously you would not want to be with him in eternity. Upon meeting the God that atheists never believed and anyone who chose not to live for God (for whatever reason) the only words that would make sense for them to receive are "I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!" (matthew 7:23). People ask why a loving God would send his beloved creatures to hell but the real question is why would the creatures of a loving God choose to deny his love for an eternity in Hell?

What happens after one dies? I have no idea. Probably nothing at all- one's consciousness simply ends. A putative eternal afterlife in heaven or hell is merely a consequence of one's actions in the here and now.

If an atheist lives a good life in the eyes of himself and his fellow men, surely that is as good as the life of a pious but human churchgoer who confesses his sins every week and dutifully says his hail Marys?

allisterfiend? wrote:

Denial Cabi wrote:

Problem is most religious people wouldn't know the difference between verifiable fact and dogma, and then get offended when someone tries to inform them of the difference. Religion is a theory for what is not know. Anyone successful at building a human from a single rib bone yet? Yeah, the scrutiny of science over the past 150 years is quickly disassembling the political structure created thousands of years ago know as the bible.

There are many Christians who believe that Genesis was meant to be taken literally (world was created in 7 24 hour days, adam from dirt and eve from his rib, etc). However, there are many Christians especially among the Catholic church who widely accept the theories of evolution and the big bang so long as they do not replace the belief that God was the creator that initiated these events. The book of Genesis can be taken in a figurative way. Ch.1 links up so well with the modern theory of the Big Bang that I really don't see why very few see it.

Christianity offers much reason to believe that there is a God and that the Christian perspective of Him is actually the most accurate. There are many different religions, even many different denominations amongst the same religion, but as related to the different theories of evolution, there can only be 1 truth. It is our job to investigate what is most likely the 1 truth, or what most closely resembles it.

If there can only be one truth, then how is it that proof of such is so subjective, as you assert in the beginning of this post?

To what purpose should we investigate this truth, given that you've said god is 'virtually invisible' and only known through his miracles and revelations to certain people? Perhaps we should investigate by reading Papal bulls and examining toast Jesus?

Many thousand years ago the earth was dark with no sun and moon. A raven (a known trickster) turned himself into a spruce needle and placed himself on a river. The local chief's daughter went to the river to drink the water. When drinking the water she inadvertently swallowed the spruce needle, which impregnated her (the raven's plan). The chiefs daughter gave birth to a son. The boy grew quickly, quicker than other children. One day the boy beg his grand father chief to play with the sun, moon and stars, which the chief kept as his personal possessions. The chief said no, but the boy was incessant and eventually the chief allowed the boy to play with his possessions. The boy found great pleasure with the possessions and change into a raven. The raven stole the sun, moon and stars from the chief and flew higher than anything ever known and hung the sun, moon and stars in the sky, giving the earth light. This is very condensed, but that's how we got the earth we know today.

Man, just give up. Despite the fact that your post falls under "tl;dr", I read it. Now what you don't seem to understand is (in brief bullet points!!):

In response:
#1. You approach with an attitude of hostility and aggression, trying to intimidate your opponents - or at least embarrass. This is a tactic used by most atheists (I know, I used to be one) to shut up Christians without having to really consider or be open to what they had to say.

a) This website is pretty far from being religious, so you might as well give up

- this website is not far from religious, hence why I posted this thread on it. I used to have these same convos on the old site.
Also, you imply that my spreading Christ's message is based in the hopes that people will hear and accept me and my God. I don't speak so you will like me, I know you won't, Christ foretold that you wouldn't, but I do it because it is what's right.

b) You keep talking about the Bible as a proof of God's existence, yet the Bible was written by man over 2000 years ago! That's no fucking proof. Where is the "God connection" in there? Because they say it's his words? So in other terms, you believe some dude that's been dead for 2000 years based solely on the fact that he wrote some stuff down?

St. Peter, upon whom Christ founded his Church, is historically noted as a real character. He was crucified upside down by Nero. He wrote of his experiences with Jesus and died out of love for him. Would he have made it all up? and for what reason? BTW, his death was predicted by Christ in john 21:18. If peter was real, then Why would Christ and his ministry be a lie...

-did I ever say that the bible was proof of God's existence? I did not. It is evidence of his existence though. In fact, our time-line is based off of Christ. He must have been pretty unimportant though right?

Also, Christ (whom I guess you are referring to as "some dude") did not write the bible. His followers wrote accounts of the experiences the apostles had while following him. The old testament, which had many prophecies that were fulfilled by Christ, was written by numerous unknown people, in different languages, at different times, all claiming the same God.

c) As for you saying that Christianity is the "right" religion, well that's just fucking weird. Why would Buddhism be wrong? Because they don't have some guy writing down fictional stories "quoting" a deity? Oh wait, they do! Just to name one example out of many..

-Why would it be weird for a Christian to say that Christianity is the "right" religion? If I didn't believe it were so, I would not follow Christ. Buddhists also believe that theirs is right, but there can only be one truth. My belief in God and in Christ, the son of God, does not affect the reality that they exist. If God is real and Christ is the Son of God, that would not be affected by your belief or lack thereof in him. Likewise, He is not proven by my belief in him - I believe based on faith.

Okay so to sum it up: you are still convinced that the Bible is 100% accurate. And that Jesus somehow "predicted" St. Peter's death. Well what if that section was written at the time of Peter's death? How do you know the Bible is so accurate? And as for the characters in it, I'm not saying it's all made up. People were crucified etc, but how does that prove that there is a God? Just answer me this question: how does the mentioning of historical characters prove the existence of a supreme being?

And you also insist that there can be only one truth, but you avoid completely the point I made about Buddhism: they believe they are right, so do you. But what is your (motherfucking!!) proof that you actually are. Please, only facts, observations and logical arguments are considered valid responses.

For the record, my "aggressive" stance is only due to your attack on atheism and because you claim that you're so cool because you're Christian and that all the rest of us are dumbasses because we don't believe, so get off your high horse and then we'll talk about aggressiveness, aight?

All right I'm tired of arguing about this shit. For me it's so obvious that it's bullshit, and that you're being ignorant by trying to "spread the word of Christ". You won't convert me, you won't convince me of anything and I feel that I'm in the same deadlock.

It's amazing how some people are impregnable to knowledge and scientific fact..

In the meantime, here's some George Carlin to wrap it up.

I'm god and so is my wife.

JooX wrote:

I'm god and so is my wife.

but you're not married...

*lucky SOB

allisterfiend? wrote:

Man, just give up. Despite the fact that your post falls under "tl;dr", I read it. Now what you don't seem to understand is (in brief bullet points!!):

In response:
#1. You approach with an attitude of hostility and aggression, trying to intimidate your opponents - or at least embarrass. This is a tactic used by most atheists (I know, I used to be one) to shut up Christians without having to really consider or be open to what they had to say.

a) This website is pretty far from being religious, so you might as well give up

- this website is not far from religious, hence why I posted this thread on it. I used to have these same convos on the old site.
Also, you imply that my spreading Christ's message is based in the hopes that people will hear and accept me and my God. I don't speak so you will like me, I know you won't, Christ foretold that you wouldn't, but I do it because it is what's right.

b) You keep talking about the Bible as a proof of God's existence, yet the Bible was written by man over 2000 years ago! That's no fucking proof. Where is the "God connection" in there? Because they say it's his words? So in other terms, you believe some dude that's been dead for 2000 years based solely on the fact that he wrote some stuff down?

St. Peter, upon whom Christ founded his Church, is historically noted as a real character. He was crucified upside down by Nero. He wrote of his experiences with Jesus and died out of love for him. Would he have made it all up? and for what reason? BTW, his death was predicted by Christ in john 21:18. If peter was real, then Why would Christ and his ministry be a lie...

-did I ever say that the bible was proof of God's existence? I did not. It is evidence of his existence though. In fact, our time-line is based off of Christ. He must have been pretty unimportant though right?

Also, Christ (whom I guess you are referring to as "some dude") did not write the bible. His followers wrote accounts of the experiences the apostles had while following him. The old testament, which had many prophecies that were fulfilled by Christ, was written by numerous unknown people, in different languages, at different times, all claiming the same God.

c) As for you saying that Christianity is the "right" religion, well that's just fucking weird. Why would Buddhism be wrong? Because they don't have some guy writing down fictional stories "quoting" a deity? Oh wait, they do! Just to name one example out of many..

-Why would it be weird for a Christian to say that Christianity is the "right" religion? If I didn't believe it were so, I would not follow Christ. Buddhists also believe that theirs is right, but there can only be one truth. My belief in God and in Christ, the son of God, does not affect the reality that they exist. If God is real and Christ is the Son of God, that would not be affected by your belief or lack thereof in him. Likewise, He is not proven by my belief in him - I believe based on faith.

brief bullet points or not.

TL;DR motherfucker.

And I liek Mudkipz... *suggestive wink*