Home



Discussion/ debate, from the Bible, on whether or not the majority of people are saved (going to heaven).
12:48

AFTER listening, what is your opinion?
Didn't listen, but the answer is "no".

What do you think about that? Is there a Bible reference or reason for that answer Tyrone?
Matthew 22 is a pretty good indication and pretty accurately describes prevailing attitudes.

Matthew 22
https://thekingjamesversionbible.com/matthew-22

The wedding parable. Yes, that's a great illustration.
"13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:

14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. " (Matthew 7)
“And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?”
I don't know what that has to do with this subject, but has anyone considered that there are those without "beams in their eyes"?
Saved, from what?
What part of "Straight is the way and narrow is the gate and few there be that find it" did you miss?
Only about 30% of the worlds people claim to be Christian, and even among them there's no universal agreement on the requirements for salvation.
Eventhough Happy Queef has me on ignore.

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]
Originally Posted by FOsteology
Saved, from what?

Saved from sin and the wages of sin, which is death in hell.
It's an uncomfortable subject, but I would be unloving if I avoided it.

Romans 6:23
"For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

Revelation 20:14, 21:8
"And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death."
"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."

That said, how many people would someone caught killing, reported in the Sunday paper, have kill to be considered a murderer?
Well all going to hell with Billy, Happy Crappy, Turnip Truck and Anderson.
Believe it's 62% that are fully vaxed now.


Ye must be born again.
Originally Posted by SAcharlie
Believe it's 62% that are fully vaxed now.


We don't agree on much I suspect, but I will give credit where credit is due. That is some clever trolling. In a troll thread, nonetheless!
Happy Camper


Thank you for your tireless efforts to add value to the website.
Yes, and I'm envious; he pulled down two Beaver Awards.
Outstanding accomplishment !
Originally Posted by SAcharlie
Believe it's 62% that are fully vaxed now.


So are they going to Hell, or does the Vax save?
Originally Posted by alwaysoutdoors
Happy Camper


Thank you for your tireless efforts to add value to the website.


comedic value. laugh
Is Billy Graham in hell for eternity or will he be let out on parole at some point?
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Only about 30% of the worlds people claim to be Christian, and even among them there's no universal agreement on the requirements for salvation.
30% of 7.9 billion people is 2.37 billion people, currently living people who…as you asserted…profess to be Christian. That’s a pretty huge number, especially when one considers that it all started with a tiny and despised, illicit sect in the armpit of an empire, that followed the teachings of Jesus, and that during the first 300 years of its existence, they were pretty much always subject to oppression and open persecution throughout the Roman Empire.

Yet they still continued to gain adherents among both Jews and non-Jews throughout the Roman world. Adding those who’ve died who professed to being Christian to your numbers above, and you have an even greater number than those already mentioned. Jesus predicted that His movement would spread all over the earth and outlast the Roman Empire, and that it would change the world. At the time, His prediction must have sounded outlandish to even his closest followers.

But here we are, over 2,000 years later, and the Roman Empire exists only in history books, while Jesus’ movement is still goin’. His message clearly offers hope to “a great multitude that no one could number.” Thanks for pointing out some significant and impressive numbers antelope_sniper.
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Is Billy Graham in hell for eternity or will he be let out on parole at some point?


Piker
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Only about 30% of the worlds people claim to be Christian, and even among them there's no universal agreement on the requirements for salvation.
30% of 7.9 billion people is 2.37 billion people, currently living people who…as you asserted…profess to be Christian. That’s a pretty huge number, especially when one considers that it all started with a tiny and despised, illicit sect in the armpit of an empire, that followed the teachings of Jesus, and that during the first 300 years of its existence, they were pretty much always subject to oppression and open persecution throughout the Roman Empire.

Yet they still continued to gain adherents among both Jews and non-Jews throughout the Roman world. Adding those who’ve died who professed to being Christian to your numbers above, and you have an even greater number than those already mentioned. Jesus predicted that His movement would spread all over the earth and outlast the Roman Empire, and that it would change the world. At the time, His prediction must have sounded outlandish to even his closest followers.

But here we are, over 2,000 years later, and the Roman Empire exists only in history books, while Jesus’ movement is still goin’. His message clearly offers hope to “a great multitude that no one could number.” Thanks for pointing out some significant and impressive numbers antelope_sniper.



30% is not "most". About half of those are Catholic and plenty of Christian will spout all the reasons they believe Catholics are not "Real Christians" and going to hell.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
30% is not "most". About half of those are Catholic and plenty of Christians will spout all the reasons they believe Catholics are not "Real Christians" and going to hell.
Still, none of that negates a single word of the facts that I referred to. His message isn’t the problem.
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
30% is not "most". About half of those are Catholic and plenty of Christians will spout all the reasons they believe Catholics are not "Real Christians" and going to hell.
Still, none of that negates a single word of the facts in my post.


Nor does anything you claimed negate my response to the question in the title of this thread:
Are the Majority of People Saved?

Math is Math. 15% or less is not "the Majority"
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Nor does anything you claimed negate my response to the question in the title of this thread:
Are the Majority of People Saved?
”Negate”…? I was appreciative that you pointed out some pretty significant and impressive numbers. Thanks again.
I'd certainly say the odds of a Muslim being saved are greater than Jag (a self proclaimed Christian) paying his bet
Our founding fathers were pretty smart in giving us the first amendment. A lot of people don’t get it but freedom of religion also means freedom from religion.
Originally Posted by BeanMan
Our founding fathers were pretty smart in giving us the first amendment. A lot of people don’t get it but freedom of religion also means freedom from religion.

It hasn't helped us much in the fight to be free from the religion of Global Climate Change.
Originally Posted by FOsteology
Saved, from what?

His alleged followers.........
No, but 100% of truthful believers in Christ are.
Originally Posted by NH K9
Originally Posted by FOsteology
Saved, from what?

His alleged followers.........



I laughed
Originally Posted by reivertom
No, but 100% of truthful believers in Christ are.

👍
Good point reivertom.

"And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.
These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God."
I John 5

The Word of God is the record.
One either believes on Christ to save them, or they are adding Him to their "good works". If they believe on Christ, they have life and if they don't, then they don't have everlasting life.
That's how I see it.
Is that what you believe?
Originally Posted by FOsteology
Saved, from what?

Happy Crappers stupid posts.
Originally Posted by Huntz
Originally Posted by FOsteology
Saved, from what?

Happy Crappers stupid posts.

The unhappy noncamper is satan is disguise.

Amen.
Salvation appears to be a Theology of Fear.

Reward and punishment: Have 'faith in Jesus' in order to be saved, if not, you are eternally damned.
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works. The only thing God owes you or can reward you with is punishment for your sins.
Since His Son was nearly beaten to death in extreme torture, then nailed with spikes to suffer the torments of everyone's sins, He was rewarded with the death we deserve.
He offers not only a full pardon, but forgiveness.
Free for the asking.
Only a fool would turn that down.
Fear is the beginning of wisdom.
Originally Posted by reivertom
No, but 100% of truthful believers in Christ are.


So by extension, if none of it is true no one is Saved.
Originally Posted by ironbender
Originally Posted by Huntz
Originally Posted by FOsteology
Saved, from what?

Happy Crappers stupid posts.

The unhappy noncamper is satan is disguise.

Amen.


Hippie's a great Christian.
He'd be right at home in the employee of Tomás de Torquemada.
Didn't watch the video, but according to the most recent Pew Research survey the answer is a resounding NO.
Jesus said there would be few that follow the straight & narrow route, so I say no. I can't say whether anyone is saved, reprobate or in between. It's between them and God.
Do all the millions of races of space aliens have the same God? Same Bible? Did Jay Zus go to all of them? Do they all have their own heaven or does every being have to share just one?
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works. The only thing God owes you or can reward you with is punishment for your sins.
Since His Son was nearly beaten to death in extreme torture, then nailed with spikes to suffer the torments of everyone's sins, He was rewarded with the death we deserve.
He offers not only a full pardon, but forgiveness.
Free for the asking.
Only a fool would turn that down.


Pascals Wager is flawed for a number of reasons. Morally, Ethically, what it says about the character of God, etc...

What if someone is fallable, incapable of good works, exploitative, selfish, greedy, yet has great faith in Jesus?

Or someone who has no 'faith in Jesus' yet is a great humanitarian, engaged in helping those in need and is doing their best to build a better society?

The former is saved while the latter burns in hell?
Originally Posted by UncleAlps
Fear is the beginning of wisdom.


The God of Love seeks to instill fear?
Originally Posted by RockyRaab
Do all the millions of races of space aliens have the same God? Same Bible? Did Jay Zus go to all of them? Do they all have their own heaven or does every being have to share just one?



God might be an alien, although on the other hand it is alleged that he created man in his own image so therefore he must be an ape - a space ape?
Originally Posted by UncleAlps
Fear is the beginning of wisdom.



To the superstitious primitives it's an open door to fantasy.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper



Discussion/ debate, from the Bible, on whether or not the majority of people are saved (going to heaven).
12:48

AFTER listening, what is your opinion?



No opinion, but a question: how long have you been a whack-job? Seriously. You're nuts. crazy
I think Jesus is an inspiring figure that we can learn a lot from regardless of what one’s beliefs are. Not all conversations about Him have to involve conversion or church or the Bible or salvation or anything else that typically goes along with these kinds of conversations. Regardless of what people’s thoughts are about Him, He dealt with a lotta the struggles that we deal with every day. And he made friends with people who were nothing like Him, and they made friends with each other because of their love for Him.

There are other expectations and understandings of Jesus than what many people typically currently have. I think it’s likely that many people are open to exploring more about Jesus…not religion and all that it entails…but Jesus period, and many more likely think the world would be a better place if His teachings were actually lived by many more of those who profess to be His followers, and by those who don’t.
Originally Posted by antlers
I think the stories of Jesus is an are inspiring figure morality tales that we can learn a lot from regardless of what one’s beliefs are. Not all conversations about Him have to involve conversion or church or the Bible or salvation or anything else that typically goes along with these kinds of conversations. Regardless of what people’s thoughts are about Him, He dealt with a lotta the struggles that we deal with every day. And he made friends with people who were nothing like Him, and they made friends with each other because of their love for Him.

There are other expectations and understandings of Jesus than what many people typically currently have. I think it’s likely that many people are open to exploring more about Jesus…not religion and all that it entails…but Jesus period, and many more likely think the world would be a better place if His teachings were actually lived by many more of those who profess to be His followers, and by those who don’t.


Some minor adjustments so we can agree....
How moral is a blood sacrifice as a condition for forgiveness? How moral is a conditional salvation based on faith, expecting a conviction in the absence of evidence?
People? as in physically alive?

0% are saved.

Kent
I don't know about saved, but the majority of people who I have met lack common sense.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works. The only thing God owes you or can reward you with is punishment for your sins.
Since His Son was nearly beaten to death in extreme torture, then nailed with spikes to suffer the torments of everyone's sins, He was rewarded with the death we deserve.
He offers not only a full pardon, but forgiveness.
Free for the asking.
Only a fool would turn that down.


Pascals Wager is flawed for a number of reasons. Morally, Ethically, what it says about the character of God, etc...

What if someone is fallable, incapable of good works, exploitative, selfish, greedy, yet has great faith in Jesus?

Or someone who has no 'faith in Jesus' yet is a great humanitarian, engaged in helping those in need and is doing their best to build a better society?

The former is saved while the latter burns in hell?


Exactly right. Works don’t save anyone, only believing in Jesus Christ sacrifice for your sins and resurrection will save you.
Originally Posted by LBP
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works. The only thing God owes you or can reward you with is punishment for your sins.
Since His Son was nearly beaten to death in extreme torture, then nailed with spikes to suffer the torments of everyone's sins, He was rewarded with the death we deserve.
He offers not only a full pardon, but forgiveness.
Free for the asking.
Only a fool would turn that down.


Pascals Wager is flawed for a number of reasons. Morally, Ethically, what it says about the character of God, etc...

What if someone is fallable, incapable of good works, exploitative, selfish, greedy, yet has great faith in Jesus?

Or someone who has no 'faith in Jesus' yet is a great humanitarian, engaged in helping those in need and is doing their best to build a better society?

The former is saved while the latter burns in hell?


Exactly right. Works don’t save anyone, only believing in Jesus Christ sacrifice for your sins and resurrection will save you.



If only it were that simple:

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
Originally Posted by LBP
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works. The only thing God owes you or can reward you with is punishment for your sins.
Since His Son was nearly beaten to death in extreme torture, then nailed with spikes to suffer the torments of everyone's sins, He was rewarded with the death we deserve.
He offers not only a full pardon, but forgiveness.
Free for the asking.
Only a fool would turn that down.


Pascals Wager is flawed for a number of reasons. Morally, Ethically, what it says about the character of God, etc...

What if someone is fallable, incapable of good works, exploitative, selfish, greedy, yet has great faith in Jesus?

Or someone who has no 'faith in Jesus' yet is a great humanitarian, engaged in helping those in need and is doing their best to build a better society?

The former is saved while the latter burns in hell?


Exactly right. Works don’t save anyone, only believing in Jesus Christ sacrifice for your sins and resurrection will save you.


So you see this as being moral and just? Saving an arse*hole because he has 'faith in Jesus' is preferable to saving a humanist who strives towards a higher standard of morality?
Originally Posted by LBP
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works. The only thing God owes you or can reward you with is punishment for your sins.
Since His Son was nearly beaten to death in extreme torture, then nailed with spikes to suffer the torments of everyone's sins, He was rewarded with the death we deserve.
He offers not only a full pardon, but forgiveness.
Free for the asking.
Only a fool would turn that down.


Pascals Wager is flawed for a number of reasons. Morally, Ethically, what it says about the character of God, etc...

What if someone is fallable, incapable of good works, exploitative, selfish, greedy, yet has great faith in Jesus?

Or someone who has no 'faith in Jesus' yet is a great humanitarian, engaged in helping those in need and is doing their best to build a better society?

The former is saved while the latter burns in hell?


Exactly right. Works don’t save anyone, only believing in Jesus Christ sacrifice for your sins and resurrection will save you.



I'm glad that you understand God's grace LBP!
Who led you to the Lord? Sunday school teacher?
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by LBP
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works. The only thing God owes you or can reward you with is punishment for your sins.
Since His Son was nearly beaten to death in extreme torture, then nailed with spikes to suffer the torments of everyone's sins, He was rewarded with the death we deserve.
He offers not only a full pardon, but forgiveness.
Free for the asking.
Only a fool would turn that down.


Pascals Wager is flawed for a number of reasons. Morally, Ethically, what it says about the character of God, etc...

What if someone is fallable, incapable of good works, exploitative, selfish, greedy, yet has great faith in Jesus?

Or someone who has no 'faith in Jesus' yet is a great humanitarian, engaged in helping those in need and is doing their best to build a better society?

The former is saved while the latter burns in hell?


Exactly right. Works don’t save anyone, only believing in Jesus Christ sacrifice for your sins and resurrection will save you.


So you see this as being moral and just? Saving an arse*hole because he has 'faith in Jesus' is preferable to saving a humanist who strives towards a higher standard of morality?

"All have sinned and come short of the glory of God."
That starts with me. None of us are worthy of God's kindness.

I was directed to this O.T. Proverb. 20
"Most men will proclaim every one his own goodness: but a faithful man who can find?" And...
"Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin?"

We can compare ourselves to others who appear morally inferior just as we could search and find others who seem to have holiness. However, the proverbs still apply. God doesn't grade on a curve. It's pass or fail. He said to a "holy" man,

"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."
Crappy Hamper is ignoring my question. Inquiring minds want to know.

Is Billy Graham in hell for eternity or will he be let out on parole at some point?

Congratulations on your two Beaver Awards Crappy!
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by LBP
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works. The only thing God owes you or can reward you with is punishment for your sins.
Since His Son was nearly beaten to death in extreme torture, then nailed with spikes to suffer the torments of everyone's sins, He was rewarded with the death we deserve.
He offers not only a full pardon, but forgiveness.
Free for the asking.
Only a fool would turn that down.


Pascals Wager is flawed for a number of reasons. Morally, Ethically, what it says about the character of God, etc...

What if someone is fallable, incapable of good works, exploitative, selfish, greedy, yet has great faith in Jesus?

Or someone who has no 'faith in Jesus' yet is a great humanitarian, engaged in helping those in need and is doing their best to build a better society?

The former is saved while the latter burns in hell?


Exactly right. Works don’t save anyone, only believing in Jesus Christ sacrifice for your sins and resurrection will save you.



I'm glad that you understand God's grace LBP!
Who led you to the Lord? Sunday school teacher?



Sounds like a green light for those pedophile preachers out there.
Originally Posted by LBP
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works. The only thing God owes you or can reward you with is punishment for your sins.
Since His Son was nearly beaten to death in extreme torture, then nailed with spikes to suffer the torments of everyone's sins, He was rewarded with the death we deserve.
He offers not only a full pardon, but forgiveness.
Free for the asking.
Only a fool would turn that down.


Pascals Wager is flawed for a number of reasons. Morally, Ethically, what it says about the character of God, etc...

What if someone is fallable, incapable of good works, exploitative, selfish, greedy, yet has great faith in Jesus?

Or someone who has no 'faith in Jesus' yet is a great humanitarian, engaged in helping those in need and is doing their best to build a better society?

The former is saved while the latter burns in hell?


Exactly right. Works don’t save anyone, only believing in Jesus Christ sacrifice for your sins and resurrection will save you.

That’s how it works.
"Are the Majority of People Saved?"

Jesus says,

Matthew 7:13-14 “'Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.'"
Originally Posted by DBT
How moral is a blood sacrifice as a condition for forgiveness? How moral is a conditional salvation based on faith, expecting a conviction in the absence of evidence?



An atheist pontificating about what is moral. That's rich! crazy
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by LBP
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works. The only thing God owes you or can reward you with is punishment for your sins.
Since His Son was nearly beaten to death in extreme torture, then nailed with spikes to suffer the torments of everyone's sins, He was rewarded with the death we deserve.
He offers not only a full pardon, but forgiveness.
Free for the asking.
Only a fool would turn that down.


Pascals Wager is flawed for a number of reasons. Morally, Ethically, what it says about the character of God, etc...

What if someone is fallable, incapable of good works, exploitative, selfish, greedy, yet has great faith in Jesus?

Or someone who has no 'faith in Jesus' yet is a great humanitarian, engaged in helping those in need and is doing their best to build a better society?

The former is saved while the latter burns in hell?


Exactly right. Works don’t save anyone, only believing in Jesus Christ sacrifice for your sins and resurrection will save you.


So you see this as being moral and just? Saving an arse*hole because he has 'faith in Jesus' is preferable to saving a humanist who strives towards a higher standard of morality?

"All have sinned and come short of the glory of God."
That starts with me. None of us are worthy of God's kindness.

I was directed to this O.T. Proverb. 20
"Most men will proclaim every one his own goodness: but a faithful man who can find?" And...
"Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin?"

We can compare ourselves to others who appear morally inferior just as we could search and find others who seem to have holiness. However, the proverbs still apply. God doesn't grade on a curve. It's pass or fail. He said to a "holy" man,

"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."


That says nothing about the morality of salvation based on a belief held without sufficient evidence: faith... that saving an arse*hole is preferable over a decent human being because the latter has an inquiring mind that questions, not simply believes. So, I guess that the god of the NT values compliancy over both reason and justice.
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
How moral is a blood sacrifice as a condition for forgiveness? How moral is a conditional salvation based on faith, expecting a conviction in the absence of evidence?



An atheist pontificating about what is moral. That's rich! crazy



No need to pontificate. The bible itself describes what is moral, even while describing its God transgressing these very same principles.....
Given that there are nearly 8 billion people are on the planet, I’m going to say 4 billion of them aren’t honest Christians, or any one particular religion. Therefore, whoever has the religion thing figured out, the answer is no.
Originally Posted by Jeffrey
Given that there are nearly 8 billion people are on the planet, I’m going to say 4 billion of them aren’t honest Christians, or any one particular religion. Therefore, whoever has the religion thing figured out, the answer is no.



Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
How moral is a blood sacrifice as a condition for forgiveness? How moral is a conditional salvation based on faith, expecting a conviction in the absence of evidence?



An atheist pontificating about what is moral. That's rich! crazy



No need to pontificate. The bible itself describes what is moral, even while describing its God transgressing these very same principles.....


No need...but you do it anyway and as a relativist no less! laugh crazy
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works.
Only a fool would turn that down.

Now I know you are not a Christian.You have no idea what being a Christian entails.Don`t continue to show what a liar you are.
Originally Posted by Tarquin
An atheist pontificating about what is moral. That's rich! crazy

As opposed to who, Catholic Priests?
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by LBP
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works. The only thing God owes you or can reward you with is punishment for your sins.
Since His Son was nearly beaten to death in extreme torture, then nailed with spikes to suffer the torments of everyone's sins, He was rewarded with the death we deserve.
He offers not only a full pardon, but forgiveness.
Free for the asking.
Only a fool would turn that down.


Pascals Wager is flawed for a number of reasons. Morally, Ethically, what it says about the character of God, etc...

What if someone is fallable, incapable of good works, exploitative, selfish, greedy, yet has great faith in Jesus?

Or someone who has no 'faith in Jesus' yet is a great humanitarian, engaged in helping those in need and is doing their best to build a better society?

The former is saved while the latter burns in hell?


Exactly right. Works don’t save anyone, only believing in Jesus Christ sacrifice for your sins and resurrection will save you.


So you see this as being moral and just? Saving an arse*hole because he has 'faith in Jesus' is preferable to saving a humanist who strives towards a higher standard of morality?

"All have sinned and come short of the glory of God."
That starts with me. None of us are worthy of God's kindness.

I was directed to this O.T. Proverb. 20
"Most men will proclaim every one his own goodness: but a faithful man who can find?" And...
"Who can say, I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin?"

We can compare ourselves to others who appear morally inferior just as we could search and find others who seem to have holiness. However, the proverbs still apply. God doesn't grade on a curve. It's pass or fail. He said to a "holy" man,

"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."


That says nothing about the morality of salvation based on a belief held without sufficient evidence: faith... that saving an arse*hole is preferable over a decent human being because the latter has an inquiring mind that questions, not simply believes. So, I guess that the god of the NT values compliancy over both reason and justice.

God's justice was satisfied when His Son said,
Tetelestai, "It is finished!"
That was the perfect justice of God completed.
The will of the Father was stated by His Son in John 6.
The will of the Father is for you to believe on His Son. He made it free of any effort, since Jesus took care of the hard part.
Originally Posted by Huntz
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works.
Only a fool would turn that down.

Now I know you are not a Christian.You have no idea what being a Christian entails.Don`t continue to show what a liar you are.

I've only demonstrated that the Lord deserves ALL of the credit and glory for every salvation.

What is your disagreement?
Originally Posted by Ringman
"Are the Majority of People Saved?"

Jesus says,

Matthew 7:13-14 “'Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.'"


If the small gate is for those morally and ethically corrupt sinners that accept Jesus as their saviour, it's hardly surprising anyone would what to go through it. Why mix with murderers and pedophiles?

Couldn't they have come up with a better advertisement?
And it came to pass that St. Victor was taken from this place to another place, where he was lain upon pillows of silk and made to rest himself among sheets of muslin and velvet. And there, strokèd was he by maidens of the Orient. For sixteen days and nights strokèd they him, yea verily, and caressèd him.
His hair rufflèd they, and their fingers rubbèd they in oil of olives, and runnèd them across all parts of his body for as much as to soothe him. And the soles of his feet lickèd they, and the upper parts of his thigh did they anoint with a balm of forbidden trees. And with the teeth of their mouths nibblèd they the pointy bits at the top of his ears. Yea, verily, and did their tongues thereof make themselves acquainted with his most secret places.

For fifteen days and nights did Victor withstand these maidens. But on the sixteenth day, he cried out, saying:
"This is fantastic! Oh, this is terrific!"

And the Lord did hear the cry of Victor. And verily, came he down and slew the maidens, and caused their cotton-wool buds to blow away, and their Kleenex to be laid waste utterly.
And Victor, in his anguish, cried out that the Lord was a rotten bastard.
And the Lord sent an angel to comfort Victor for the weekend, and entered they together the jacuzzi.

I'm not claiming to be an authority but I have died and faced judgement and I can say with certainty your choices matter. What I can't say is who determines what is moral. Either there is a universal morality or you are judged on how well you follow the morality you were taught. I suspect it is a combo of those.

Originally Posted by RockyRaab
Do all the millions of races of space aliens
have the same God? Same Bible? Did Jay Zus go to all of them? Do they all have their own heaven or does every being have to share just one?


According to the born again guy I talked to in college 30 years ago he died for them as well. It's an old thought and boring. If aliens ever come here I think it'll make news for a week and then we'll all yawn, unless they come to destroy us, then we're screwed.
Originally Posted by kolofardos
And it came to pass that St. Victor was taken from this place to another place, where he was lain upon pillows of silk and made to rest himself among sheets of muslin and velvet. And there, strokèd was he by maidens of the Orient. For sixteen days and nights strokèd they him, yea verily, and caressèd him.
His hair rufflèd they, and their fingers rubbèd they in oil of olives, and runnèd them across all parts of his body for as much as to soothe him. And the soles of his feet lickèd they, and the upper parts of his thigh did they anoint with a balm of forbidden trees. And with the teeth of their mouths nibblèd they the pointy bits at the top of his ears. Yea, verily, and did their tongues thereof make themselves acquainted with his most secret places.

For fifteen days and nights did Victor withstand these maidens. But on the sixteenth day, he cried out, saying:
"This is fantastic! Oh, this is terrific!"

And the Lord did hear the cry of Victor. And verily, came he down and slew the maidens, and caused their cotton-wool buds to blow away, and their Kleenex to be laid waste utterly.
And Victor, in his anguish, cried out that the Lord was a rotten bastard.
And the Lord sent an angel to comfort Victor for the weekend, and entered they together the jacuzzi.


God didn't treat women all that well did he, ever since the Lilith incident
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by LBP
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works. The only thing God owes you or can reward you with is punishment for your sins.
Since His Son was nearly beaten to death in extreme torture, then nailed with spikes to suffer the torments of everyone's sins, He was rewarded with the death we deserve.
He offers not only a full pardon, but forgiveness.
Free for the asking.
Only a fool would turn that down.


Pascals Wager is flawed for a number of reasons. Morally, Ethically, what it says about the character of God, etc...

What if someone is fallable, incapable of good works, exploitative, selfish, greedy, yet has great faith in Jesus?

Or someone who has no 'faith in Jesus' yet is a great humanitarian, engaged in helping those in need and is doing their best to build a better society?

The former is saved while the latter burns in hell?


Exactly right. Works don’t save anyone, only believing in Jesus Christ sacrifice for your sins and resurrection will save you.



I'm glad that you understand God's grace LBP!
Who led you to the Lord? Sunday school teacher?


My mom the Sunday school teacher. 😉
Originally Posted by LBP
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by LBP
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works. The only thing God owes you or can reward you with is punishment for your sins.
Since His Son was nearly beaten to death in extreme torture, then nailed with spikes to suffer the torments of everyone's sins, He was rewarded with the death we deserve.
He offers not only a full pardon, but forgiveness.
Free for the asking.
Only a fool would turn that down.


Pascals Wager is flawed for a number of reasons. Morally, Ethically, what it says about the character of God, etc...

What if someone is fallable, incapable of good works, exploitative, selfish, greedy, yet has great faith in Jesus?

Or someone who has no 'faith in Jesus' yet is a great humanitarian, engaged in helping those in need and is doing their best to build a better society?

The former is saved while the latter burns in hell?


Exactly right. Works don’t save anyone, only believing in Jesus Christ sacrifice for your sins and resurrection will save you.



I'm glad that you understand God's grace LBP!
Who led you to the Lord? Sunday school teacher?


My mom the Sunday school teacher. 😉

That's extra awesome when it's your own parent who has that honor.
Yes Sir.
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
How moral is a blood sacrifice as a condition for forgiveness? How moral is a conditional salvation based on faith, expecting a conviction in the absence of evidence?



An atheist pontificating about what is moral. That's rich! crazy



No need to pontificate. The bible itself describes what is moral, even while describing its God transgressing these very same principles.....


No need...but you do it anyway and as a relativist no less! laugh crazy



You ignored the part where I pointed out that the bible itself defines morality. The bible itself describes the attributes of Love, and tells us that God is Love. It is there for anyone to see and read, therefore nobody needs to pontificate, only read what is there.

Why do you ignore this?
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by Huntz
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works.
Only a fool would turn that down.

Now I know you are not a Christian.You have no idea what being a Christian entails.Don`t continue to show what a liar you are.

I've only demonstrated that the Lord deserves ALL of the credit and glory for every salvation.

What is your disagreement?





"Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good? " (Lamentations 3:38)


Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?" (Amos 3:6, KJV)


"The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.'' Proverbs 16:4


The Problem of Evil: "If I could stop a man from raping a child, I would. That's the difference between me and your god." Tracie Harris
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by Huntz
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Wrong DBT.
"Reward "would be earning your acceptance with God due to YOUR good works.
Only a fool would turn that down.

Now I know you are not a Christian.You have no idea what being a Christian entails.Don`t continue to show what a liar you are.

I've only demonstrated that the Lord deserves ALL of the credit and glory for every salvation.

What is your disagreement?





"Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good? " (Lamentations 3:38)


Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?" (Amos 3:6, KJV)


"The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.'' Proverbs 16:4


The Problem of Evil: "If I could stop a man from raping a child, I would. That's the difference between me and your god." Tracie Harris


God can't seem to do what man does, like writing a book for example.
I’m not at all discouraged or threatened or bothered by the one-sided commentary of the atheists. Their religion and the tenets that it embraces are fine with me, and so is their proselytizing.

The original version of Christianity was vigorous. It was stronger than the steel of the Roman Empire and tougher than their nails. Against tremendous odds a small sect of Jesus’ followers defied that empire and asserted that Jesus came to replace the Jewish Temple; and over 2,000 years later, His movement is still going. So I’m not doubtful at all.

But I do think the church needs to be willing to make changes to its approach. Many people nowadays see the version of Christianity that they grew up with is not well-suited for the sociological and scientific realities of the world in which they live. Changing times calls for changing approaches, to accomplish an unchanging mission.

And pounding people over the head with the Bible is no different than a Muslim leader pounding Christians over the head with the Koran. The Koran carries zero weight with Christians, and they don’t see it as authoritative. And at least half of Americans don’t see the Bible as authoritative either. So over half of em’ aren’t gonna be reached by an approach of “the Bible teaches” or “God’s word is clear” or “the Bible says” or anything else along those lines. They’re ineffective approaches to people nowadays.

I see the New Testament…the very words of the original texts…as an inspired collection of manuscripts documenting events that really happened, as opposed to seeing the whole Bible as a spiritual book to live by. And it doesn’t undermine anything about the Bible. It actually underscores the historicity of the events in those New Testament manuscripts. That’s why I have no doubt that Christianity’s foundation are the events that inspired different writers to document insights, conversations, and events…with the pivotal event being Jesus’ resurrection.

And even though nowadays we wouldn’t know of these events had they not been documented, they were documented hundreds of years before ‘the Bible’ ever existed, and it’s the events themselves…not the record of the events…that launched Christianity. Christianity is the reason ‘the Bible’ was created.

The faith of the first-century followers of Jesus is the enduring version of the Christian faith. The one tougher than nails and harder than steel. The one rooted in events, not a book.
Nobody here is saved...

yet...

Kent
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

What do you think about that? Is there a Bible reference or reason for that answer Tyrone?

Read Matthew 13:1-23. The parable of the seeds that were sown. Only 1/4 of them reached maturity. Pretty good indication of the answer to your question.
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

What do you think about that? Is there a Bible reference or reason for that answer Tyrone?

Read Matthew 13:1-23. The parable of the seeds that were sown. Only 1/4 of them reached maturity. Pretty good indication of the answer to your question.

That's a good point.
Originally Posted by antlers
I’m not at all discouraged or threatened or bothered by the one-sided commentary of the atheists. Their religion and the tenets that it embraces are fine with me, and so is their proselytizing.

The original version of Christianity was vigorous. It was stronger than the steel of the Roman Empire and tougher than their nails. Against tremendous odds a small sect of Jesus’ followers defied that empire and asserted that Jesus came to replace the Jewish Temple; and over 2,000 years later, His movement is still going. So I’m not doubtful at all.

But I do think the church needs to be willing to make changes to its approach. Many people nowadays see the version of Christianity that they grew up with is not well-suited for the sociological and scientific realities of the world in which they live. Changing times calls for changing approaches, to accomplish an unchanging mission.

And pounding people over the head with the Bible is no different than a Muslim leader pounding Christians over the head with the Koran. The Koran carries zero weight with Christians, and they don’t see it as authoritative. And at least half of Americans don’t see the Bible as authoritative either. So over half of em’ aren’t gonna be reached by an approach of “the Bible teaches” or “God’s word is clear” or “the Bible says” or anything else along those lines. They’re ineffective approaches to people nowadays.

I see the New Testament…the very words of the original texts…as an inspired collection of manuscripts documenting events that really happened, as opposed to seeing the whole Bible as a spiritual book to live by. And it doesn’t undermine anything about the Bible. It actually underscores the historicity of the events in those New Testament manuscripts. That’s why I have no doubt that Christianity’s foundation are the events that inspired different writers to document insights, conversations, and events…with the pivotal event being Jesus’ resurrection.

And even though nowadays we wouldn’t know of these events had they not been documented, they were documented hundreds of years before ‘the Bible’ ever existed, and it’s the events themselves…not the record of the events…that launched Christianity. Christianity is the reason ‘the Bible’ was created.

The faith of the first-century followers of Jesus is the enduring version of the Christian faith. The one tougher than nails and harder than steel. The one rooted in events, not a book.


An absence or lack of religion is not a religion. You, yourself reject all religions, Hinduism, Islam, Shinto, etc, except your own. Does rejecting all other religions make you religious?
Atheism is not simply disbelief in God. Atheism is most definitely a belief system, just as Christianity is a belief system. Atheism embraces its own tenets, just as Christianity embraces its own tenets.
Originally Posted by antlers
Atheism is not simply disbelief in God. Atheism is most definitely a belief system, just as Christianity is a belief system. Atheism embraces its own tenets, just as Christianity embraces its own tenets.


If atheism is a religion, bald is a hair colour. An absence of conviction is certainly not a religion. We can lack conviction in any number of things, politics, ideologies, etc....Which doesn't make our lack of conviction a religion.

Your claim is patently absurd.

Are you religious because you are not convinced in the reality of Allah or Brahman?
Believer's mindsets are clouded by delusion - delusion being defined as persistent false belief that does not change despite evidence to the contrary, or seeing evidence for that belief that isn't actually there. And for some reason they think everybody else's mind works the same way, but they have ignore or deny facts to make it line up properly. Faith has been an acceptable form of delusion for some time now - delusion is not otherwise considered a good trait.
religion is a bigger scam than covid
Some people think it’s delusional to believe that there is no God. It’s delusional to believe that the world (including humans) is nothing more than biology, chemistry, and physics. Some people think it’s delusional to believe that we don’t have a body, we are a body. It’s delusional to believe that there’s no free will. Some people thinks it’s delusional to believe that everything about the human experience is determined. It’s delusional to believe in determinism. Some people think it’s delusional to believe that something came from nothing. It’s delusional to believe that first life emerged from no life with no help.

But it’s OK with me what others choose to believe (atheists included). Why does it bother you so much that others choose to believe what they do…? Why does it bother you so much…really…?
As far as Christianity goes, the approach that resonates with me isn’t new at all. It’s modeled on the teaching of the earliest Christian evangelists…the ones who, against all adds…turned the world upside down and fired Jesus’ movement so that it garnered the attention…and ultimately…the participation of the pagan world both inside and outside the Roman Empire.
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Believer's mindsets are clouded by delusion - delusion being defined as persistent false belief that does not change despite evidence to the contrary.…
Let’s see this “evidence” that God doesn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus didn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus wasn’t resurrected…?
If the one true God being banned from a nation is good I wonder when we'll start seeing the fruits of it improving our society? I always see a hint of that desire in any thread that comes up on here concerning God and the Bible. So if you have a desire to see even more of throwing God out of our nation please explain to me when we'll start seeing the good in this.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Jeffrey
Given that there are nearly 8 billion people are on the planet, I’m going to say 4 billion of them aren’t honest Christians, or any one particular religion. Therefore, whoever has the religion thing figured out, the answer is no.





Damn, Lope!

You were quick on the draw with that one. And poignant too! Lol.

Maybe we need to send Camper a copy of that movie for him to watch.
But, is Billy Graham still in Hell?
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Believer's mindsets are clouded by delusion - delusion being defined as persistent false belief that does not change despite evidence to the contrary.…
Let’s see this “evidence” that God doesn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus didn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus wasn’t resurrected…?



You should know about absence of evidence by now. The nature of justification has been explained enough times. If there is no evidence for the existence of a Zeus, Yahweh, Allah, Brahman, etc, there is no reason to be convinced that any version of God exists. There are as many versions of God as there are believers in God.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Believer's mindsets are clouded by delusion - delusion being defined as persistent false belief that does not change despite evidence to the contrary.…
Let’s see this “evidence” that God doesn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus didn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus wasn’t resurrected…?



You should know about absence of evidence by now. The nature of justification has been explained enough times. If there is no evidence for the existence of a Zeus, Yahweh, Allah, Brahman, etc, there is no reason to be convinced that any version of God exists. There are as many versions of God as there are believers in God.



And the foregoing, of course, is complete nonsense. The lack of evidence for the existence of Zeus is no evidence whatsoever for the non-existence of an Supreme Intelligence that created the Universe. We know the Universe had a begnnning (which Genesis also happens to posit) and we know that natural selection cannot explain the origin of life (the origin of the coded information which is a condition precedent to biological replication). We know that natural selection cannot explain the diversity of life either for that matter (for a host of reasons). No one posits that "Zeus" is the intelligence existing outside of time and matter which brought into existence time and matter but they certainly do posit the exist of a responsible Supreme Intelligence (God) and the probability His existence is as reasonable, if nor more so, than the competing inference.
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Believer's mindsets are clouded by delusion - delusion being defined as persistent false belief that does not change despite evidence to the contrary.…
Let’s see this “evidence” that God doesn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus didn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus wasn’t resurrected…?



You should know about absence of evidence by now. The nature of justification has been explained enough times. If there is no evidence for the existence of a Zeus, Yahweh, Allah, Brahman, etc, there is no reason to be convinced that any version of God exists. There are as many versions of God as there are believers in God.



And the foregoing, of course, is complete nonsense. The lack of evidence for the existence of Zeus is no evidence whatsoever for the non-existence of an Supreme Intelligence that created the Universe. We know the Universe had a begnnning (which Genesis also happens to posit) and we know that natural selection cannot explain the origin of life (the origin of the coded information which is a condition precedent to biological replication). We know that natural selection cannot explain the diversity of life either for that matter (for a host of reasons). No one posits that "Zeus" is the intelligence existing outside of time and matter which brought into existence time and matter but they certainly do posit the exist of a responsible Supreme Intelligence (God) and the probability His existence is as reasonable, if nor more so, than the competing inference.



Nope...name shifting from Zeus to "Supreme Intelligence" or "God" doesn't alter anything.

We have evidence for the existence of a Universe, but not a God. How the universe came to be (it may be cyclic) is assumed by some to be the work of God, which invokes an inexplicable element - God - as an explanation for something that we don't have an answer.
Zeus and the God described from Genesis to Revelation certainly have nothing but extreme differences from given descriptions.
A simple crayon drawing of a five year old shows evidence of existence of the artist. An automobile likewise has a maker. Why is it when the mechanism is so much more complex that atheism dogma chooses to assign it to chaotic chance and laws of nature?
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Believer's mindsets are clouded by delusion - delusion being defined as persistent false belief that does not change despite evidence to the contrary.…
Let’s see this “evidence” that God doesn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus didn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus wasn’t resurrected…?



You should know about absence of evidence by now. The nature of justification has been explained enough times. If there is no evidence for the existence of a Zeus, Yahweh, Allah, Brahman, etc, there is no reason to be convinced that any version of God exists. There are as many versions of God as there are believers in God.



And the foregoing, of course, is complete nonsense. The lack of evidence for the existence of Zeus is no evidence whatsoever for the non-existence of an Supreme Intelligence that created the Universe. We know the Universe had a begnnning (which Genesis also happens to posit) and we know that natural selection cannot explain the origin of life (the origin of the coded information which is a condition precedent to biological replication). We know that natural selection cannot explain the diversity of life either for that matter (for a host of reasons). No one posits that "Zeus" is the intelligence existing outside of time and matter which brought into existence time and matter but they certainly do posit the exist of a responsible Supreme Intelligence (God) and the probability His existence is as reasonable, if nor more so, than the competing inference.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Zeus and the God described from Genesis to Revelation certainly have nothing but extreme differences from given descriptions.
A simple crayon drawing of a five year old shows evidence of existence of the artist. An automobile likewise has a maker. Why is it when the mechanism is so much more complex that atheism dogma chooses to assign it to chaotic chance and laws of nature?



Crayon drawings are clearly made by someone. The natural world works according to its own principles, nobody has to form stars, form planets, organize their orbits, geology....nobody blows the wind, makes the rain fall, grows the trees or the grass.....these are all natural processes. Physics, energy, chemistry, three billion years of microbes before multicellular organisms evolved, etc, etc....
But, is Billy Graham still in Hell?
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Zeus and the God described from Genesis to Revelation certainly have nothing but extreme differences from given descriptions.
A simple crayon drawing of a five year old shows evidence of existence of the artist. An automobile likewise has a maker. Why is it when the mechanism is so much more complex that atheism dogma chooses to assign it to chaotic chance and laws of nature?



Crayon drawings are clearly made by someone. The natural world works according to its own principles, nobody has to form stars, form planets, organize their orbits, geology....nobody blows the wind, makes the rain fall, grows the trees or the grass.....these are all natural processes. Physics, energy, chemistry, three billion years of microbes before multicellular organisms evolved, etc, etc....
That's a gratuitous assertion.
JAG is, because he's a lying POS and has other lying POS standing up for his lying. Thus he is a good Christian.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Zeus and the God described from Genesis to Revelation certainly have nothing but extreme differences from given descriptions.
A simple crayon drawing of a five year old shows evidence of existence of the artist. An automobile likewise has a maker. Why is it when the mechanism is so much more complex that atheism dogma chooses to assign it to chaotic chance and laws of nature?



Crayon drawings are clearly made by someone. The natural world works according to its own principles, nobody has to form stars, form planets, organize their orbits, geology....nobody blows the wind, makes the rain fall, grows the trees or the grass.....these are all natural processes. Physics, energy, chemistry, three billion years of microbes before multicellular organisms evolved, etc, etc....



Your every assertion assumes as true that which must be proven true and which has not been proven true.... But you make one intelligent point: when we see drawings on a cave wall, we infer that they were made by an intelligent being, not random natural processes because our experience tells us that is the most likely explanation. Likewise, when we see the complex numeric code in DNA--a code far more complex than any computer code devised by the mind of man and when we see the unbelievable complexity of the simplest cell (a complexity Darwin could not even begin to fathom)---we also reason: what is the likely source of that complex coded information given that all of human experience tells us that complex coded information can only come from an intelligent source?
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
Atheism is not simply disbelief in God. Atheism is most definitely a belief system, just as Christianity is a belief system. Atheism embraces its own tenets, just as Christianity embraces its own tenets.


If atheism is a religion, bald is a hair colour. An absence of conviction is certainly not a religion. We can lack conviction in any number of things, politics, ideologies, etc....Which doesn't make our lack of conviction a religion.

Your claim is patently absurd.

Are you religious because you are not convinced in the reality of Allah or Brahman?



If it is patently absurd, then you might consult the arguments of the eminent British philosopher John Gray. He makes the same point: atheism is essentially a faith-based metaphysical belief system. It's simply the negative side of the religion coin and it's not even particularly intellectually defensible. A more honest position (intellectually and factually) would be agnosticism. You're very bit as religiously dogmatic as Happy and Jag, you just can't admit it! laugh
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
Atheism is not simply disbelief in God. Atheism is most definitely a belief system, just as Christianity is a belief system. Atheism embraces its own tenets, just as Christianity embraces its own tenets.


If atheism is a religion, bald is a hair colour. An absence of conviction is certainly not a religion. We can lack conviction in any number of things, politics, ideologies, etc....Which doesn't make our lack of conviction a religion.

Your claim is patently absurd.

Are you religious because you are not convinced in the reality of Allah or Brahman?



If it is patently absurd, then you might consult the arguments of the eminent British philosopher John Gray. He makes the same point: atheism is essentially a faith-based metaphysical belief system. It's simply the negative side of the religion coin and it's not even particularly intellectually defensible. A more honest position (intellectually and factually) would be agnosticism. You're very bit as religiously dogmatic as Happy and Jag, you just can't admit it! laugh


If that is the case, John Gray hasn't got a clue, not about justification, evidence, logic or reason.

Think about it, for example, Muslims make claims about the existence of Allah, without evidence.....what reason do we have to believe in Allah? None. There is no reason to be convinced in the reality of Allah (the Muslim version of God).

If you do not accept the existence of Allah without evidence for His existence, how is that your faith or religion? You must be an extremely religious person given all the things you are not convinced of because they have no evidence. wink
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Zeus and the God described from Genesis to Revelation certainly have nothing but extreme differences from given descriptions.
A simple crayon drawing of a five year old shows evidence of existence of the artist. An automobile likewise has a maker. Why is it when the mechanism is so much more complex that atheism dogma chooses to assign it to chaotic chance and laws of nature?



Crayon drawings are clearly made by someone. The natural world works according to its own principles, nobody has to form stars, form planets, organize their orbits, geology....nobody blows the wind, makes the rain fall, grows the trees or the grass.....these are all natural processes. Physics, energy, chemistry, three billion years of microbes before multicellular organisms evolved, etc, etc....
That's a gratuitous assertion.


Not in the least. It's supported by evidence from cosmology, geology, physics, chemistry, the fossil record, evolution....yet no sign of God.
Originally Posted by Jim1611
If the one true God being banned from a nation is good I wonder when we'll start seeing the fruits of it improving our society? I always see a hint of that desire in any thread that comes up on here concerning God and the Bible. So if you have a desire to see even more of throwing God out of our nation please explain to me when we'll start seeing the good in this.


So 9 hours later and no takers on my question? I don't want to argue, I just want the facts so please explain them to me.
The Fool Says in his heart, There Is No God - Ps 14:1
Bible is the only truth in the universe which does not change, if you noticed humanity and the environment changes, we change on daily basis, we change our minds on various things, governments change, human morality changes but God does not, therefore we can hold on to His word as an anchor in this ever changing and unstable world. we may not be able understand the works of God in creation, cosmology, geology, physics, chemistry even fossils, but consider this; how can something evolve from nothing. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. the heavens are much older than the earth and include the whole universe, the earth was created after angels who witnessed it - Job 38. It takes greater amount of faith to believe in evolution that something ignited when there was nothing, then to humbly believe that God is the Creator, Savior and the final Judge.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
Atheism is not simply disbelief in God. Atheism is most definitely a belief system, just as Christianity is a belief system. Atheism embraces its own tenets, just as Christianity embraces its own tenets.


If atheism is a religion, bald is a hair colour. An absence of conviction is certainly not a religion. We can lack conviction in any number of things, politics, ideologies, etc....Which doesn't make our lack of conviction a religion.

Your claim is patently absurd.

Are you religious because you are not convinced in the reality of Allah or Brahman?



If it is patently absurd, then you might consult the arguments of the eminent British philosopher John Gray. He makes the same point: atheism is essentially a faith-based metaphysical belief system. It's simply the negative side of the religion coin and it's not even particularly intellectually defensible. A more honest position (intellectually and factually) would be agnosticism. You're very bit as religiously dogmatic as Happy and Jag, you just can't admit it! laugh


If that is the case, John Gray hasn't got a clue, not about justification, evidence, logic or reason.

Think about it, for example, Muslims make claims about the existence of Allah, without evidence.....what reason do we have to believe in Allah? None. There is no reason to be convinced in the reality of Allah (the Muslim version of God).

If you do not accept the existence of Allah without evidence for His existence, how is that your faith or religion? You must be an extremely religious person given all the things you are not convinced of because they have no evidence. wink



This is hysterically funny! laugh John Gray---Oxford educated, published extensively, highly regarded, extreme critic of religion and other faith-based ideologies---but stupid. How do we know this? Because some anonymous, wholly uncredentialed poster (DBT) on some obscure gun forum says so! crazyThat's called argument by assertion and it's worthless. Read him and tell us, with logic and evidence, why he's wrong. Should be a piece of cake for you. He's only an Oxford Phd! laugh


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gray_(philosopher)
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by Jim1611
If the one true God being banned from a nation is good I wonder when we'll start seeing the fruits of it improving our society? I always see a hint of that desire in any thread that comes up on here concerning God and the Bible. So if you have a desire to see even more of throwing God out of our nation please explain to me when we'll start seeing the good in this.


So 9 hours later and no takers on my question? I don't want to argue, I just want the facts so please explain them to me.


The answer is in and the evidence is overwhelming in your favor: the farther we move from Judeo-Christian monotheism and the parallel idea of a natural, non-sectarian moral order not of our choosing, but to which our behavior ought to conform, the worse the world and socieites become.
Originally Posted by duke61
The Fool Says in his heart, There Is No God - Ps 14:1
Bible is the only truth in the universe which does not change, if you noticed humanity and the environment changes, we change on daily basis, we change our minds on various things, governments change, human morality changes but God does not, therefore we can hold on to His word as an anchor in this ever changing and unstable world. we may not be able understand the works of God in creation, cosmology, geology, physics, chemistry even fossils, but consider this; how can something evolve from nothing. In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. the heavens are much older than the earth and include the whole universe, the earth was created after angels who witnessed it - Job 38. It takes greater amount of faith to believe in evolution that something ignited when there was nothing, then to humbly believe that God is the Creator, Savior and the final Judge.


Quoting verse doesn't prove the existence of God, calling people fools for not being convinced is just a rationale. Is someone a fool because they are not convinced in the existence of Allah or Brahman?
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
Atheism is not simply disbelief in God. Atheism is most definitely a belief system, just as Christianity is a belief system. Atheism embraces its own tenets, just as Christianity embraces its own tenets.


If atheism is a religion, bald is a hair colour. An absence of conviction is certainly not a religion. We can lack conviction in any number of things, politics, ideologies, etc....Which doesn't make our lack of conviction a religion.

Your claim is patently absurd.

Are you religious because you are not convinced in the reality of Allah or Brahman?



If it is patently absurd, then you might consult the arguments of the eminent British philosopher John Gray. He makes the same point: atheism is essentially a faith-based metaphysical belief system. It's simply the negative side of the religion coin and it's not even particularly intellectually defensible. A more honest position (intellectually and factually) would be agnosticism. You're very bit as religiously dogmatic as Happy and Jag, you just can't admit it! laugh


If that is the case, John Gray hasn't got a clue, not about justification, evidence, logic or reason.

Think about it, for example, Muslims make claims about the existence of Allah, without evidence.....what reason do we have to believe in Allah? None. There is no reason to be convinced in the reality of Allah (the Muslim version of God).

If you do not accept the existence of Allah without evidence for His existence, how is that your faith or religion? You must be an extremely religious person given all the things you are not convinced of because they have no evidence. wink



This is hysterically funny! laugh John Gray---Oxford educated, published extensively, highly regarded, extreme critic of religion and other faith-based ideologies---but stupid. How do we know this? Because some anonymous, wholly uncredentialed poster (DBT) on some obscure gun forum says so! crazyThat's called argument by assertion and it's worthless. Read him and tell us, with logic and evidence, why he's wrong. Should be a piece of cake for you. He's only an Oxford Phd! laugh


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gray_(philosopher)


Argument from authority is a fallacy. I can quote any number of Academics who disagree with John Gray.

There are plenty of academic articles on justification of belief, Stanford, etc.

You need to widen your reading, not cherry pick philosophers you agree with.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
Atheism is not simply disbelief in God. Atheism is most definitely a belief system, just as Christianity is a belief system. Atheism embraces its own tenets, just as Christianity embraces its own tenets.


If atheism is a religion, bald is a hair colour. An absence of conviction is certainly not a religion. We can lack conviction in any number of things, politics, ideologies, etc....Which doesn't make our lack of conviction a religion.

Your claim is patently absurd.

Are you religious because you are not convinced in the reality of Allah or Brahman?



If it is patently absurd, then you might consult the arguments of the eminent British philosopher John Gray. He makes the same point: atheism is essentially a faith-based metaphysical belief system. It's simply the negative side of the religion coin and it's not even particularly intellectually defensible. A more honest position (intellectually and factually) would be agnosticism. You're very bit as religiously dogmatic as Happy and Jag, you just can't admit it! laugh


If that is the case, John Gray hasn't got a clue, not about justification, evidence, logic or reason.

Think about it, for example, Muslims make claims about the existence of Allah, without evidence.....what reason do we have to believe in Allah? None. There is no reason to be convinced in the reality of Allah (the Muslim version of God).

If you do not accept the existence of Allah without evidence for His existence, how is that your faith or religion? You must be an extremely religious person given all the things you are not convinced of because they have no evidence. wink



This is hysterically funny! laugh John Gray---Oxford educated, published extensively, highly regarded, extreme critic of religion and other faith-based ideologies---but stupid. How do we know this? Because some anonymous, wholly uncredentialed poster (DBT) on some obscure gun forum says so! crazyThat's called argument by assertion and it's worthless. Read him and tell us, with logic and evidence, why he's wrong. Should be a piece of cake for you. He's only an Oxford Phd! laugh


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gray_(philosopher)


Argument from authority is a fallacy. I can quote any number of Academics who disagree with John Gray.

There are plenty of academic articles on justification of belief, Stanford, etc.

You need to widen your reading, not cherry pick philosophers you agree with.


I don't agree with John Gray, but he is an atheist who does not agree with you. You're correct: the fact that Gray is an Oxford Phd doesn't mean he's correct. On the other hand, it does point to the absurdity of some anonymous internet cowboy blithely dismissing him with the wave of a hand and the unsupported claim Gray doesn't know what he's talking about. Prove it!
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by Jim1611
If the one true God being banned from a nation is good I wonder when we'll start seeing the fruits of it improving our society? I always see a hint of that desire in any thread that comes up on here concerning God and the Bible. So if you have a desire to see even more of throwing God out of our nation please explain to me when we'll start seeing the good in this.


So 9 hours later and no takers on my question? I don't want to argue, I just want the facts so please explain them to me.



How many cultures and societies have believed in gods, a creator, supernatural entities, etc, yet were violent? History has many examples.
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
Atheism is not simply disbelief in God. Atheism is most definitely a belief system, just as Christianity is a belief system. Atheism embraces its own tenets, just as Christianity embraces its own tenets.


If atheism is a religion, bald is a hair colour. An absence of conviction is certainly not a religion. We can lack conviction in any number of things, politics, ideologies, etc....Which doesn't make our lack of conviction a religion.

Your claim is patently absurd.

Are you religious because you are not convinced in the reality of Allah or Brahman?



If it is patently absurd, then you might consult the arguments of the eminent British philosopher John Gray. He makes the same point: atheism is essentially a faith-based metaphysical belief system. It's simply the negative side of the religion coin and it's not even particularly intellectually defensible. A more honest position (intellectually and factually) would be agnosticism. You're very bit as religiously dogmatic as Happy and Jag, you just can't admit it! laugh


If that is the case, John Gray hasn't got a clue, not about justification, evidence, logic or reason.

Think about it, for example, Muslims make claims about the existence of Allah, without evidence.....what reason do we have to believe in Allah? None. There is no reason to be convinced in the reality of Allah (the Muslim version of God).

If you do not accept the existence of Allah without evidence for His existence, how is that your faith or religion? You must be an extremely religious person given all the things you are not convinced of because they have no evidence. wink



This is hysterically funny! laugh John Gray---Oxford educated, published extensively, highly regarded, extreme critic of religion and other faith-based ideologies---but stupid. How do we know this? Because some anonymous, wholly uncredentialed poster (DBT) on some obscure gun forum says so! crazyThat's called argument by assertion and it's worthless. Read him and tell us, with logic and evidence, why he's wrong. Should be a piece of cake for you. He's only an Oxford Phd! laugh


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gray_(philosopher)


OK, I've had time to look through John Grays work. It seems the problem is not so much with what Gray says, but what you think he says.

The problem lies in your interpretation of Gray. Gray proposes that some atheists place faith in humanism rather than God, not that a lack of conviction is necessarily an example of faith.

It is you who needs to work on your comprehension.
Yeah, but is Billy Graham still in Hell?
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by Jim1611
If the one true God being banned from a nation is good I wonder when we'll start seeing the fruits of it improving our society? I always see a hint of that desire in any thread that comes up on here concerning God and the Bible. So if you have a desire to see even more of throwing God out of our nation please explain to me when we'll start seeing the good in this.


So 9 hours later and no takers on my question? I don't want to argue, I just want the facts so please explain them to me.



How many cultures and societies have believed in gods, a creator, supernatural entities, etc, yet were violent? History has many examples.


I asked the question for the proof of taking God out of our country, the USA. So show me the proof it's working. I'm not interested in other places and times. Just here and now. This also goes beyond violence too. More like a moral decay which covers allot. Proof, not questions to me, that's what I want.
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Believer's mindsets are clouded by delusion - delusion being defined as persistent false belief that does not change despite evidence to the contrary.…
Let’s see this “evidence” that God doesn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus didn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus wasn’t resurrected…?


Let's see the evidence of a god.
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Believer's mindsets are clouded by delusion - delusion being defined as persistent false belief that does not change despite evidence to the contrary.…
Let’s see this “evidence” that God doesn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus didn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus wasn’t resurrected…?



You should know about absence of evidence by now. The nature of justification has been explained enough times. If there is no evidence for the existence of a Zeus, Yahweh, Allah, Brahman, etc, there is no reason to be convinced that any version of God exists. There are as many versions of God as there are believers in God.



And the foregoing, of course, is complete nonsense. The lack of evidence for the existence of Zeus is no evidence whatsoever for the non-existence of an Supreme Intelligence that created the Universe. We know the Universe had a begnnning (which Genesis also happens to posit) and we know that natural selection cannot explain the origin of life (the origin of the coded information which is a condition precedent to biological replication). We know that natural selection cannot explain the diversity of life either for that matter (for a host of reasons). No one posits that "Zeus" is the intelligence existing outside of time and matter which brought into existence time and matter but they certainly do posit the exist of a responsible Supreme Intelligence (God) and the probability His existence is as reasonable, if nor more so, than the competing inference.


You might want to educate yourself better on the facts of evolution.

And just remember there are no facts of god. Lack of our ability to explain something doesn't mean a god did it - that's just an absurd statement. May as well have been aliens or magic, with equal credibility.
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by Jim1611
If the one true God being banned from a nation is good I wonder when we'll start seeing the fruits of it improving our society? I always see a hint of that desire in any thread that comes up on here concerning God and the Bible. So if you have a desire to see even more of throwing God out of our nation please explain to me when we'll start seeing the good in this.


So 9 hours later and no takers on my question? I don't want to argue, I just want the facts so please explain them to me.



How many cultures and societies have believed in gods, a creator, supernatural entities, etc, yet were violent? History has many examples.


I asked the question for the proof of taking God out of our country, the USA. So show me the proof it's working. I'm not interested in other places and times. Just here and now. This also goes beyond violence too. More like a moral decay which covers allot. Proof, not questions to me, that's what I want.


There are plenty of more secular countries that have lower crime rates and greater life satisfaction if you care to entertain considering beyond your belief.
The show me proof argument is always humerus. Some say God doesn’t exist and prove that he does. I would say God does exist and prove that he doesn’t. It all comes down to faith. You either have it or you don’t and it really is that simple. You either believe or you don’t. This also includes Jesus and the resurrection. It’s an argument that just goes in circles.
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by Jim1611
If the one true God being banned from a nation is good I wonder when we'll start seeing the fruits of it improving our society? I always see a hint of that desire in any thread that comes up on here concerning God and the Bible. So if you have a desire to see even more of throwing God out of our nation please explain to me when we'll start seeing the good in this.


So 9 hours later and no takers on my question? I don't want to argue, I just want the facts so please explain them to me.



How many cultures and societies have believed in gods, a creator, supernatural entities, etc, yet were violent? History has many examples.


I asked the question for the proof of taking God out of our country, the USA. So show me the proof it's working. I'm not interested in other places and times. Just here and now. This also goes beyond violence too. More like a moral decay which covers allot. Proof, not questions to me, that's what I want.


The state of a nation, its laws and values, depends on far, far more than just people believing in God.
Quote
I asked the question for the proof of taking God out of our country, the USA. So show me the proof it's working. I'm not interested in other places and times. Just here and now. This also goes beyond violence too. More like a moral decay which covers allot. Proof, not questions to me, that's what I want.


And I could throw that question right back at you. When has worshipping a God, yours or any other, transformed any society into a peaceful paradise where murder and rape and violence and immorality of every type didn't exist? Answer, never. And one of the main reasons why is that despite what rules these religions write down in a book there are always easy paths to get around those rules whenever the need arises. A common Christian way to make a end run around these pesky rules is to just claim that God gave you a special exemption to do it in this particular case.

Murder is wrong but boy it sure would be nice to have that land the Canaanites are living on. And bam! What do you know God just happens to tell the Israelites at that precise moment that the Canaanites are wicked and it's okay to kill all of them and take their lands. Wow, what nice timing for the Israelites. Of course we have to just take their word that God told them this. But no problem there. I'm sure the same kind of men that could slit women and childrens throats wouldn't lie about why they were doing it. LOL!
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Believer's mindsets are clouded by delusion - delusion being defined as persistent false belief that does not change despite evidence to the contrary.…
Let’s see this “evidence” that God doesn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus didn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus wasn’t resurrected…?



You should know about absence of evidence by now. The nature of justification has been explained enough times. If there is no evidence for the existence of a Zeus, Yahweh, Allah, Brahman, etc, there is no reason to be convinced that any version of God exists. There are as many versions of God as there are believers in God.



And the foregoing, of course, is complete nonsense. The lack of evidence for the existence of Zeus is no evidence whatsoever for the non-existence of an Supreme Intelligence that created the Universe. We know the Universe had a begnnning (which Genesis also happens to posit) and we know that natural selection cannot explain the origin of life (the origin of the coded information which is a condition precedent to biological replication). We know that natural selection cannot explain the diversity of life either for that matter (for a host of reasons). No one posits that "Zeus" is the intelligence existing outside of time and matter which brought into existence time and matter but they certainly do posit the exist of a responsible Supreme Intelligence (God) and the probability His existence is as reasonable, if nor more so, than the competing inference.


You might want to educate yourself better on the facts of evolution.

And just remember there are no facts of god. Lack of our ability to explain something doesn't mean a god did it - that's just an absurd statement. May as well have been aliens or magic, with equal credibility.



It doesn't matter how many times the fallacies are pointed out, they just keep being trotted out as if nothing was said...
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by Jim1611
If the one true God being banned from a nation is good I wonder when we'll start seeing the fruits of it improving our society? I always see a hint of that desire in any thread that comes up on here concerning God and the Bible. So if you have a desire to see even more of throwing God out of our nation please explain to me when we'll start seeing the good in this.


So 9 hours later and no takers on my question? I don't want to argue, I just want the facts so please explain them to me.



How many cultures and societies have believed in gods, a creator, supernatural entities, etc, yet were violent? History has many examples.


I asked the question for the proof of taking God out of our country, the USA. So show me the proof it's working. I'm not interested in other places and times. Just here and now. This also goes beyond violence too. More like a moral decay which covers allot. Proof, not questions to me, that's what I want.

I've talked to lots of parents and grandparents who claimed that they lived in neighborhoods decades ago where they could leave the doors unlocked at night and when leaving the house. They wouldn't think of doing that today.
Back then, most people attended Church. There's always been sin as long as there's been people. It's just that cultural norms in the USA have changed to exclude Biblical principles of morality. I had four break-ins this fall. I believe that makes big round number ten over my lifetime.
Anybody who thinks that society moving away from biblical principles is a positive move toward decency, freedom, or prosperity is delusional.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by Jim1611
If the one true God being banned from a nation is good I wonder when we'll start seeing the fruits of it improving our society? I always see a hint of that desire in any thread that comes up on here concerning God and the Bible. So if you have a desire to see even more of throwing God out of our nation please explain to me when we'll start seeing the good in this.


So 9 hours later and no takers on my question? I don't want to argue, I just want the facts so please explain them to me.



How many cultures and societies have believed in gods, a creator, supernatural entities, etc, yet were violent? History has many examples.


I asked the question for the proof of taking God out of our country, the USA. So show me the proof it's working. I'm not interested in other places and times. Just here and now. This also goes beyond violence too. More like a moral decay which covers allot. Proof, not questions to me, that's what I want.


The state of a nation, its laws and values, depends on far, far more than just people believing in God.


Agreed. I have always said that if the only thing keeping a person from raping, robbing and killing people is the fear of a deity then that person is a piece of chit to start with.
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
I asked the question for the proof of taking God out of our country, the USA. So show me the proof it's working. I'm not interested in other places and times. Just here and now. This also goes beyond violence too. More like a moral decay which covers allot. Proof, not questions to me, that's what I want.


And I could throw that question right back at you. When has worshipping a God, yours or any other, transformed any society into a peaceful paradise where murder and rape and violence and immorality of every type didn't exist? Answer, never. And one of the main reasons why is that despite what rules these religions write down in a book there are always easy paths to get around those rules whenever the need arises. A common Christian way to make a end run around these pesky rules is to just claim that God gave you a special exemption to do it in this particular case.

Murder is wrong but boy it sure would be nice to have that land the Canaanites are living on. And bam! What do you know God just happens to tell the Israelites at that precise moment that the Canaanites are wicked and it's okay to kill all of them and take their lands. Wow, what nice timing for the Israelites. Of course we have to just take their word that God told them this. But no problem there. I'm sure the same kind of men that could slit women and childrens throats wouldn't lie about why they were doing it. LOL!


Well put.
Originally Posted by DBT
How many cultures and societies have believed in gods, a creator, supernatural entities, etc, yet were violent? History has many examples.
You are assuming that violence corresponds with immorality. You are also assuming that an atheist society would be different.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by DBT
How many cultures and societies have believed in gods, a creator, supernatural entities, etc, yet were violent? History has many examples.
You are assuming that violence corresponds with immorality. You are also assuming that an atheist society would be different.




Violence may arise for any number of reasons, scarcity of resources, stratification, power in the hands of a few, royalty, kings, emperors, political ideology, religious hierarchy...look at the power of the church during the middle ages.
Originally Posted by Springcove
The show me proof argument is always humerus. Some say God doesn’t exist and prove that he does. I would say God does exist and prove that he doesn’t. It all comes down to faith. You either have it or you don’t and it really is that simple. You either believe or you don’t. This also includes Jesus and the resurrection. It’s an argument that just goes in circles.





Word

🦫
Didn't listen to the video. Don't know about the Majority of People. I am.
Originally Posted by Beaver10
Originally Posted by Springcove
The show me proof argument is always humerus. Some say God doesn’t exist and prove that he does. I would say God does exist and prove that he doesn’t. It all comes down to faith. You either have it or you don’t and it really is that simple. You either believe or you don’t. This also includes Jesus and the resurrection. It’s an argument that just goes in circles.





Word

🦫


Faith is not a pathway to truth.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Beaver10
Originally Posted by Springcove
The show me proof argument is always humerus. Some say God doesn’t exist and prove that he does. I would say God does exist and prove that he doesn’t. It all comes down to faith. You either have it or you don’t and it really is that simple. You either believe or you don’t. This also includes Jesus and the resurrection. It’s an argument that just goes in circles.





Word

🦫


Faith is not a pathway to truth.



If that’s what you believe then that’s what you believe. It makes no difference to me. We all have to choose our own path.
Originally Posted by Springcove
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Beaver10
Originally Posted by Springcove
The show me proof argument is always humerus. Some say God doesn’t exist and prove that he does. I would say God does exist and prove that he doesn’t. It all comes down to faith. You either have it or you don’t and it really is that simple. You either believe or you don’t. This also includes Jesus and the resurrection. It’s an argument that just goes in circles.





Word

🦫


Faith is not a pathway to truth.



If that’s what you believe then that’s what you believe. It makes no difference to me. We all have to choose our own path.

"Want" has nothing to do with it. Having "Faith" there's 10 billion dollars in my brokerage account wouldn't make it true.
A billion Muslim hold a faith different than yours. Do that make yours false? If not, how would your faith make their false?
Originally Posted by Springcove
The show me proof argument is always humerus. Some say God doesn’t exist and prove that he does. I would say God does exist and prove that he doesn’t. It all comes down to faith. You either have it or you don’t and it really is that simple. You either believe or you don’t. This also includes Jesus and the resurrection. It’s an argument that just goes in circles.
I am of the belief there IS a supernatural creator.

But the challenge to prove that God does not exist comes up against the rule that you cannot prove a negative.

Like how do I prove there are no Ivory Bill wood peckers.

How do I prove there is no extraterrestrial life out there.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by DBT
How many cultures and societies have believed in gods, a creator, supernatural entities, etc, yet were violent? History has many examples.
You are assuming that violence corresponds with immorality. You are also assuming that an atheist society would be different.


Across the board as populations become less religion measures of well being improve.
If we look at per capita income, the more atheist a country the higher per capita income after controlling for human capital, resources, education, geography etc.
The order of prosperity is:

Atheist
Jewish
Christian
Hindu/Buddhist
Muslim
Folk Religions.

The less fanatical the people, the more their core belief system aligns with reality the higher per capita income. Of course it doesn't stop there, same goes for crime, teen pregnancy rate, numbers of abortions etc.
If you want a well research primer on the subject which quotes the relevant studies, I suggest Ryan Cragun's "What you Don't know about Religion {but should}".

Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Springcove
The show me proof argument is always humerus. Some say God doesn’t exist and prove that he does. I would say God does exist and prove that he doesn’t. It all comes down to faith. You either have it or you don’t and it really is that simple. You either believe or you don’t. This also includes Jesus and the resurrection. It’s an argument that just goes in circles.
I am of the belief there IS a supernatural creator.

But the challenge to prove that God does not exist comes up against the rule that you cannot prove a negative.

Like how do I prove there are no Ivory Bill wood peckers.

How do I prove there is no extraterrestrial life out there.

And that's why the burden of proof lies with the one making the positive claim.
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Believer's mindsets are clouded by delusion - delusion being defined as persistent false belief that does not change despite evidence to the contrary.…
Let’s see this “evidence” that God doesn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus didn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus wasn’t resurrected…?
Let's see the evidence of a god.
So you clearly can’t provide the “evidence” that you asserted above.

And instead, you crawfished.



shocker


Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Springcove
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Beaver10
Originally Posted by Springcove
The show me proof argument is always humerus. Some say God doesn’t exist and prove that he does. I would say God does exist and prove that he doesn’t. It all comes down to faith. You either have it or you don’t and it really is that simple. You either believe or you don’t. This also includes Jesus and the resurrection. It’s an argument that just goes in circles.





Word

🦫


Faith is not a pathway to truth.



If that’s what you believe then that’s what you believe. It makes no difference to me. We all have to choose our own path.

"Want" has nothing to do with it. Having "Faith" there's 10 billion dollars in my brokerage account wouldn't make it true.
A billion Muslim hold a faith different than yours. Do that make yours false? If not, how would your faith make their false?



I don’t see anywhere that I used the word “want”. I just posted about the circular argument of proof where God is concerned. I’m not posting to change anyones mind and they certainly won’t change mine. My belief is just that it’s mine.
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Believer's mindsets are clouded by delusion - delusion being defined as persistent false belief that does not change despite evidence to the contrary.…
Let’s see this “evidence” that God doesn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus didn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus wasn’t resurrected…?
Let's see the evidence of a god.
So you clearly can’t provide the “evidence” that you asserted above.

And instead, you crawfished.



shocker




Absence of evidence. Without evidence, there is no reason to be convinced. You can speculate as much as you wish.
Originally Posted by DBT
Absence of evidence. Without evidence, there is no reason to be convinced.
So when an atheist asserts they have “evidence to the contrary”…exactly like was done above…but they can’t provide that evidence…exactly like was done above…there is no reason to be convinced of their assertion. Got it.
The Apostle Paul spent 30 years of his life traveling all around the Mediterranean rim spreading the Gospel, and he was arrested and beaten and imprisoned and stoned but he kept doing what he was called to do. And he established ekklesias in port cities all along the way as he preached the Gospel that God had done something in the world and Jesus being raised from the dead was proof of it.

And then in his early to mid 60’s he was arrested one more time and taken to Rome, where he was imprisoned when Nero was the emperor. And then one morning they marched him out, and that would be his last morning on earth. Now imagine if we could’ve gone back from nowadays and accompanied him from his cell to his execution right outside the city.

And we could tell him that his efforts to evangelize and spread the Gospel beyond the Holy Land worked. We could tell him that this city that is adorned with icons and statues of pagan gods will one day be adorned with icons and statues of Jesus. And that on the tops of buildings all across this city there will be crosses, and they’re not gonna be crosses that represent Roman crucifixion, they’re gonna represent and remind people of one single crucifixion, the crucifixion of Jesus. And that over there where Nero’s circus is, where he persecutes Christians and allows wild animals to tear them apart, where he crucifies Christians, where he impales them on stakes and puts tar in their hair and lights them on fire to illuminate his gardens…there will be a magnificent building to commemorate his friend Peter, and it will be the most beautiful building on the planet.

And we could tell him that one day, millions of people will come to this city from all over the world, and they won’t ask where Caesar Augustus was buried or if they could visit Tiberius’ palace, they’re gonna ask their tour guides to show them where he was imprisoned. And one day there will be no Roman Empire, but there will be Christian Churches in cities and countries throughout the world. And all of those letters that he wrote and handed to trusted friends hoping they made it to their destinations in Ephesus and Thessalonica and Christians in Rome and other places, one day his letters and teachings would be translated into 1200 different languages and distributed all over the world.

And one day, once a year, people will mention Caesar Augustus…but not because he was the mighty emperor of Rome…he’ll simply be a footnote in the story of the birth of Jesus. And we could tell Paul, before he died, he should know that one day parents will name their children Peter and Paul, and they’ll name their dogs Nero and Caesar. Could he even imagine that this city that was responsible for crucifying Jesus would one day be the capital of Christianity…? Could he imagine that the Roman Forum would one day be ruins, a tourist attraction…? Could he imagine that the Coliseum would be adorned with crosses dedicated to the Christian martyrs who died there during that period of persecution…?
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by DBT
Absence of evidence. Without evidence, there is no reason to be convinced.
So when an atheist asserts they have “evidence to the contrary”…exactly like was done above…but they can’t provide that evidence…exactly like was done above…there is no reason to be convinced of their assertion. Got it.


Evidence to the contrary is the evidence we have for natural evolution over special creation.


If the universe is self-forming - stars, planets, galaxies, etc - and self-sustaining. This is clearly not special creation as described in the bible. If life emerged three billion years ago, only microbes for three billion years before multicellular organisms evolved, this evidence paints a picture of natural evolution rather than special creation as described in the bible.

The evidence supports natural evolution over special creation. Then of course, we have the absence of evidence for the existence of a Creator. So not only is faith a belief held in the absence of evidence, but at times in the face of evidence to the contrary.
That’s just using semantics as a fallback position while ignoring the real assertion that was made.



shocker
He missed every part of it because he cherry picks his scriptures.

2 Timothy 4:3 In the last days there will be men who will not put up with the healthful teachings but they will be turned aside to false stories looking for teachers to tickle there ears

How many people made it thru the flood in Noah's time?
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by DBT
Absence of evidence. Without evidence, there is no reason to be convinced.
So when an atheist asserts they have “evidence to the contrary”…exactly like was done above…but they can’t provide that evidence…exactly like was done above…there is no reason to be convinced of their assertion. Got it.
Evidence to the contrary is the evidence we have for natural evolution over special creation.
What about the “evidence to the contrary” that God does exist…? What about the “evidence to the contrary” that Jesus did exist…? What about the “evidence to the contrary” that Jesus was resurrected…? And what about the “evidence to the contrary” that natural evolution was the method used for special creation…?
Originally Posted by antlers
Believing there is no evidence for God is not proof that there is no God.

Atheists believe there is no God, but there is no evidence that there is no God; therefore atheists believe, by faith, that there is no God. Just like others believe, by faith, that there is a God.

There is no proof of God’s nonexistence.

There is no proof of Jesus’ nonexistence.

There is no proof that Jesus wasn’t resurrected.

But what atheists…or anybody else…chooses to believe, that’s more than OK with me.


So you want a world where people have to prove a negative rather than proving the positive. So if I were to accuse you of being a child molester and give zero evidence to support that accusation it would still be up to you to provide evidence that you were not a child molester. And if you can't provide hard evidence that disproves my claim then it means I'm right and you are indeed a child molester.

That the way you want the world to proceed? That the standard you want to implement? Because I think that's madness.
Originally Posted by antlers
That’s just using semantics as a fallback position while ignoring the real assertion that was made.



shocker


It's not semantics. Astronomy and Astrophysics is the study of the Universe on a large scale, we have the fossil record, we have genetics, comparative anatomy, comparative embryology, molecular biology....all providing evidence that supports natural evolution not special creation.
Quote
What about the “evidence to the contrary” that God does exist…? What about the “evidence to the contrary” that Jesus did exist…? What about the “evidence to the contrary” that Jesus was resurrected…? And what about the “evidence to the contrary” that natural evolution was the method used for special creation…?


And where is that evidence? Oh and here's a helpful hint before you reply. Fairytales made up by goat herders 2000 years ago who believed in witches; thought the earth was flat; and that the sun orbited the earth is not actual evidence. They're just stories. And every culture and religion has a different set of them.
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by DBT
Absence of evidence. Without evidence, there is no reason to be convinced.
So when an atheist asserts they have “evidence to the contrary”…exactly like was done above…but they can’t provide that evidence…exactly like was done above…there is no reason to be convinced of their assertion. Got it.
Evidence to the contrary is the evidence we have for natural evolution over special creation.
What about the “evidence to the contrary” that God does exist…? What about the “evidence to the contrary” that Jesus did exist…? What about the “evidence to the contrary” that Jesus was resurrected…? And what about the “evidence to the contrary” that natural evolution was the method used for special creation…?


Absence of evidence where evidence should be found is evidence of absence.
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Believer's mindsets are clouded by delusion - delusion being defined as persistent false belief that does not change despite evidence to the contrary.…
Let’s see this “evidence” that God doesn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus didn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus wasn’t resurrected…?
Let's see the evidence of a god.
So you clearly can’t provide the “evidence” that you asserted above.

And instead, you crawfished.



shocker




Creation and the flood of the bible are proved false by evidence that verifies explanation otherwise. If you choose to not accept these parts of the bible then that's a good sign of start of rational thought. Fact remains that you still can't prove existance of a god.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Believer's mindsets are clouded by delusion - delusion being defined as persistent false belief that does not change despite evidence to the contrary.…
Let’s see this “evidence” that God doesn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus didn’t exist…? Let’s see this “evidence” that Jesus wasn’t resurrected…?



You should know about absence of evidence by now. The nature of justification has been explained enough times. If there is no evidence for the existence of a Zeus, Yahweh, Allah, Brahman, etc, there is no reason to be convinced that any version of God exists. There are as many versions of God as there are believers in God.



And the foregoing, of course, is complete nonsense. The lack of evidence for the existence of Zeus is no evidence whatsoever for the non-existence of an Supreme Intelligence that created the Universe. We know the Universe had a begnnning (which Genesis also happens to posit) and we know that natural selection cannot explain the origin of life (the origin of the coded information which is a condition precedent to biological replication). We know that natural selection cannot explain the diversity of life either for that matter (for a host of reasons). No one posits that "Zeus" is the intelligence existing outside of time and matter which brought into existence time and matter but they certainly do posit the exist of a responsible Supreme Intelligence (God) and the probability His existence is as reasonable, if nor more so, than the competing inference.


You might want to educate yourself better on the facts of evolution.

And just remember there are no facts of god. Lack of our ability to explain something doesn't mean a god did it - that's just an absurd statement. May as well have been aliens or magic, with equal credibility.



It doesn't matter how many times the fallacies are pointed out, they just keep being trotted out as if nothing was said...


Yeah, it's a bizarre mindset of really wanting something to be true but clearly isn't. Facts don't seem to matter.
Originally Posted by Hastings


I am of the belief there IS a supernatural creator.



The creator represented by Christianity in particular is morally and ethically corrupt.
Originally Posted by Willto
So you want a world where people have to prove a negative rather than proving the positive. So if I were to accuse you of being a child molester and give zero evidence to support that accusation it would still be up to you to provide evidence that you were not a child molester. And if you can't provide hard evidence that disproves my claim then it means I'm right and you are indeed a child molester.
People don’t “have to prove” anything. You can believe whatever it is that you choose to believe, and I’m OK with it. And I can choose to believe whatever it is that I choose to believe, even if you’re not OK with it.
Originally Posted by Willto
That the way you want the world to proceed? That the standard you want to implement? Because I think that's madness.
The world can proceed with you believing whatever it is that you choose to believe, and I’m OK with it. The world can proceed with me believing whatever it is that I choose to believe, even if you’re not OK with it.
Originally Posted by antlers
What about the “evidence to the contrary” that God does exist…? What about the “evidence to the contrary” that Jesus did exist…? What about the “evidence to the contrary” that Jesus was resurrected…? And what about the “evidence to the contrary” that natural evolution was the method used for special creation…?
Originally Posted by Willto
And where is that evidence?
You tell me…? An atheist here made the assertion that he had “evidence to the contrary” regarding what believer’s believed. And when asked for that evidence, he crawfished.
Originally Posted by Willto
Oh and here's a helpful hint before you reply. Fairytales made up by goat herders 2000 years ago who believed in witches; thought the earth was flat; and that the sun orbited the earth is not actual evidence. They're just stories. And every culture and religion has a different set of them.
It’s OK with me that you choose to believe that. I don’t agree with your beliefs…at all…but I have zero problem with you believing them.
Why are you bothered so much by what other people believe…? Why are you bothered so much by what other people believe…really…?
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by Jim1611
If the one true God being banned from a nation is good I wonder when we'll start seeing the fruits of it improving our society? I always see a hint of that desire in any thread that comes up on here concerning God and the Bible. So if you have a desire to see even more of throwing God out of our nation please explain to me when we'll start seeing the good in this.
So 9 hours later and no takers on my question? I don't want to argue, I just want the facts so please explain them to me.
How can God be banned from our nation…? He doesn’t live in courthouses and public schools and capitol buildings. He lives in the hearts of His followers. A way bigger question to me is, If the one true God lives in the hearts of His followers, I wonder when we’ll start seeing the fruits of it improving our society…? Instead of passing the buck, why don’t His followers simply ‘live’ according to Jesus’ greatest command…? Why don’t they simply ‘live’ according to the Law of Christ…? If the over 205 million ‘Christians’ in America simply and truly did that, it would change the country…we would see the fruits of it improving our society…we would see the good in it.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Faith is not a pathway to truth.
But truth is a pathway to faith.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by DBT
How many cultures and societies have believed in gods, a creator, supernatural entities, etc, yet were violent? History has many examples.
You are assuming that violence corresponds with immorality. You are also assuming that an atheist society would be different.
Across the board as populations become less religion measures of well being improve.
If we look at per capita income, the more atheist a country the higher per capita income after controlling for human capital, resources, education, geography etc.
I don't know what that has to do with violence, but you have a purely materialistic view of well being.

I haven't seen the study you are citing, so it's hard for me to criticize it, but you could apply the same overlay of geography and come up with nearly identical results.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by Jim1611
If the one true God being banned from a nation is good I wonder when we'll start seeing the fruits of it improving our society? I always see a hint of that desire in any thread that comes up on here concerning God and the Bible. So if you have a desire to see even more of throwing God out of our nation please explain to me when we'll start seeing the good in this.


So 9 hours later and no takers on my question? I don't want to argue, I just want the facts so please explain them to me.



How many cultures and societies have believed in gods, a creator, supernatural entities, etc, yet were violent? History has many examples.


I asked the question for the proof of taking God out of our country, the USA. So show me the proof it's working. I'm not interested in other places and times. Just here and now. This also goes beyond violence too. More like a moral decay which covers allot. Proof, not questions to me, that's what I want.


The state of a nation, its laws and values, depends on far, far more than just people believing in God.


John Adams and others in his day differ with that statement.
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
You still have failed to show evidence that a Godless nation is a good thing.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Faith is not a pathway to truth.
I disagree with that. Wholeheartedly. Faith is the pathway to knowing the truth about Jesus. I did my own soul searching and my own research. And I’d encourage others to do the same if there’s any interest there. And I found that only when I had a completely honest and personal relationship with Him that it became unquestionably real and true. And faith was the pathway that took me there. I found that there’s something to be said for knowing that truth, and being set free by it.
It looks like atheists and agnostics are interested in the beliefs that challenge their own. However, few took time to listen to
the original audio/video that was originally posted on YouTube by an atheist who challenged my Christian brother Matt.

There was an atheist named Josh who wrote a book that details his Evidence That Demands a Verdict. His story is here.

Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Springcove
The show me proof argument is always humerus. Some say God doesn’t exist and prove that he does. I would say God does exist and prove that he doesn’t. It all comes down to faith. You either have it or you don’t and it really is that simple. You either believe or you don’t. This also includes Jesus and the resurrection. It’s an argument that just goes in circles.
I am of the belief there IS a supernatural creator.

But the challenge to prove that God does not exist comes up against the rule that you cannot prove a negative.

Like how do I prove there are no Ivory Bill wood peckers.

How do I prove there is no extraterrestrial life out there.

And that's why the burden of proof lies with the one making the positive claim.



Well, there is evidence for the existence of God all around us. You either reject it or don’t see it.

Also, as it has been posted before, when the Creator comes to abide “within” the believer, that believer indeed has “proof.”

But, you apparently don’t see and you apparently “don’t have.”

Still, you comment above piques some interest. You state “…. the burden of proof lies with the one making the positive “claim.”….

I think this is nothing but word bafflegab. You may believe that Christians are making a “claim,” but I see it as Christians providing a testimony or witness of our experience.

But, you choose you words carefully and there is one interesting way to look at your post.

Should you be judged….. by a God you claim has not proved His existence….. this God, at your judgment may “play the video tape” of your life and show you literally dozens of times He made His presence known to you…. Only to have you somehow reject the witness.

No one can “argue” you into belief….. Only God can “get you to flip.” I wonder how many times the Spirit has knocked on your door, but you refused to answer the knock. You will say that that has never happened. I would expect that God will show you He knocked dozens of times when the tape rolls.
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Creation and the flood of the bible are proved false by evidence that verifies explanation otherwise. If you choose to not accept these parts of the bible then that's a good sign of start of rational thought. Fact remains that you still can't prove existance of a god.


Your info about proving the flood is dated. The more currant info seems to indicate the layers were laid down in quick succession. Consider the evidence provided by Mt. St. Hellens. The folded rock formations around the world. The volcanic action studied in the Grand Canyon.
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Springcove
The show me proof argument is always humerus. Some say God doesn’t exist and prove that he does. I would say God does exist and prove that he doesn’t. It all comes down to faith. You either have it or you don’t and it really is that simple. You either believe or you don’t. This also includes Jesus and the resurrection. It’s an argument that just goes in circles.
I am of the belief there IS a supernatural creator.

But the challenge to prove that God does not exist comes up against the rule that you cannot prove a negative.

Like how do I prove there are no Ivory Bill wood peckers.

How do I prove there is no extraterrestrial life out there.

And that's why the burden of proof lies with the one making the positive claim.



Well, there is evidence for the existence of God all around us. You either reject it or don’t see it.

Also, as it has been posted before, when the Creator comes to abide “within” the believer, that believer indeed has “proof.”

But, you apparently don’t see and you apparently “don’t have.”

Still, you comment above piques some interest. You state “…. the burden of proof lies with the one making the positive “claim.”….

I think this is nothing but word bafflegab. You may believe that Christians are making a “claim,” but I see it as Christians providing a testimony or witness of our experience.

But, you choose you words carefully and there is one interesting way to look at your post.

Should you be judged….. by a God you claim has not proved His existence….. this God, at your judgment may “play the video tape” of your life and show you literally dozens of times He made His presence known to you…. Only to have you somehow reject the witness.

No one can “argue” you into belief….. Only God can “get you to flip.” I wonder how many times the Spirit has knocked on your door, but you refused to answer the knock. You will say that that has never happened. I would expect that God will show you He knocked dozens of times when the tape rolls.

Well said TF.
I thought I was the only one who used that Tom Baker term. LoL!

The atheists choose to believe what they will in spite of the overabundance of creation that cries out daily, "There IS a Creator....look at me!".
I think that the religion of atheistic secularism that started with my first library book at age five had something to do with shaping my beliefs with the children's version of Darwin's most popular book. The dinosaur books and church of Evolutionism that I was sent to daily makes me wonder how I was ever able to choose to place my faith in Christ. However, it is all a choice we have been given when presented with those facts about the Savior. Hopefully there are more eyes that see and ears to hear on this forum and in our neighborhoods.
2 Timothy 2:23-26

"But refuse foolish and ignorant speculations, knowing that they produce quarrels. The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will."
Originally Posted by Ringman
2 Timothy 2:23-26

"But refuse foolish and ignorant speculations, knowing that they produce quarrels. The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will."

Yes, that's exactly what I did when I posted this thread.
Matt's discussion with the atheist was so civil, that it was the atheist he spoke to who put it on YouTube for the world to hear. However, anyone who listened to it should be convinced of one thing. You know what that is no doubt.

My recent follow up was the story of a former atheist who had misplaced bitterness against God, blaming Him for what a Reprobate did to him as a child.

Audio book intro:

https://christianaudio.com/evidence...ell-and-josh-mcdowell-audiobook-download


GET YOUR BULLHORN YET?


LOL
You haven't heard anything yet.
Peeker and a liar.
Is Billy Graham still in Hell?
Crappy Hamper is saved!

6/17/20 – HC survives being poisoned by his "girlfriend".
"Good news is that it had a happy ending because I survived. I came within an inch of my life as organ failure set in. I'm grateful that God miraculously brought a vision of charcoal to my mind and where to find it. Then he gave me enough strength to drag myself off my back, get to it and eat it before dying. It absorbed the poison she put in the food and I recovered."
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Crappy Hamper is saved!

6/17/20 – HC survives being poisoned by his "girlfriend".
"Good news is that it had a happy ending because I survived. I came within an inch of my life as organ failure set in. I'm grateful that God miraculously brought a vision of charcoal to my mind and where to find it. Then he gave me enough strength to drag myself off my back, get to it and eat it before dying. It absorbed the poison she put in the food and I recovered."


Personally, I'm glad he survived.
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by Jim1611
If the one true God being banned from a nation is good I wonder when we'll start seeing the fruits of it improving our society? I always see a hint of that desire in any thread that comes up on here concerning God and the Bible. So if you have a desire to see even more of throwing God out of our nation please explain to me when we'll start seeing the good in this.


So 9 hours later and no takers on my question? I don't want to argue, I just want the facts so please explain them to me.



How many cultures and societies have believed in gods, a creator, supernatural entities, etc, yet were violent? History has many examples.


I asked the question for the proof of taking God out of our country, the USA. So show me the proof it's working. I'm not interested in other places and times. Just here and now. This also goes beyond violence too. More like a moral decay which covers allot. Proof, not questions to me, that's what I want.


The state of a nation, its laws and values, depends on far, far more than just people believing in God.


John Adams and others in his day differ with that statement.
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
You still have failed to show evidence that a Godless nation is a good thing.


You only need to look at history to see that belief in God or gods is not an indicator of peace and harmony. Human behaviour is driven by more than just a belief in God. I mentioned the dark ages and the power of the church.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Faith is not a pathway to truth.
But truth is a pathway to faith.


How is that logical?
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Crappy Hamper is saved!

6/17/20 – HC survives being poisoned by his "girlfriend".
"Good news is that it had a happy ending because I survived. I came within an inch of my life as organ failure set in. I'm grateful that God miraculously brought a vision of charcoal to my mind and where to find it. Then he gave me enough strength to drag myself off my back, get to it and eat it before dying. It absorbed the poison she put in the food and I recovered."


Personally, I'm glad he survived.

I'm glad that you survived the challenges and perils that you've faced too.
Unlike the NVs, you believe that God answers prayer.
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Creation and the flood of the bible are proved false by evidence that verifies explanation otherwise. If you choose to not accept these parts of the bible then that's a good sign of start of rational thought. Fact remains that you still can't prove existance of a god.


Your info about proving the flood is dated. The more currant info seems to indicate the layers were laid down in quick succession. Consider the evidence provided by Mt. St. Hellens. The folded rock formations around the world. The volcanic action studied in the Grand Canyon.


Nope, it never happened. There's evidence of populations of people living elsewhere around the world before and after the time of the alledged flood event. Geological evidence dismisses a global flood event.

The people who wrote the bible didn't know that so got caught out on that lie too. The biblical tale of creation is also fiction.
As determined by God or by some self-righteous man?
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Crappy Hamper is saved!

6/17/20 – HC survives being poisoned by his "girlfriend".
"Good news is that it had a happy ending because I survived. I came within an inch of my life as organ failure set in. I'm grateful that God miraculously brought a vision of charcoal to my mind and where to find it. Then he gave me enough strength to drag myself off my back, get to it and eat it before dying. It absorbed the poison she put in the food and I recovered."


Personally, I'm glad he survived.

I'm glad that you survived the challenges and perils that you've faced too.
Unlike the NVs, you believe that God answers prayer.



Your stories come accross as contrived.....essentially, "look what happened to me, it's a miracle of god"

You probably mean well, but bending the truth to achieve an aim often just comes back to bite the storyteller.
I do believe that the blood of Jesus, shed on the cross, provides the sole basis for the forgiveness of sin. And I do believe that God freely offers salvation to anyone who places their faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus as sufficient payment for their sin.
Saved from what?
Originally Posted by antlers
I do believe that the blood of Jesus, shed on the cross, provides the sole basis for the forgiveness of sin. And I do believe that God freely offers salvation to anyone who places their faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus as sufficient payment for their sin.


Why faith? Why are we expected to believe what is written in old scrolls?
Originally Posted by BeanMan
Saved from what?
From spending eternity…and not just after death, but eternity including right now and from now on…separated from God. Again, this is my belief.
Quote
Your info about proving the flood is dated. The more currant info seems to indicate the layers were laid down in quick succession. Consider the evidence provided by Mt. St. Hellens. The folded rock formations around the world. The volcanic action studied in the Grand Canyon.


That is utter horse chit and no actual scientific study shows any such thing. You may find some evangelical spewing some such psuedo science on places like youtube but it's laughable to consider those idiots as a credible source of information.
If it's any consolation, at least believers will likely not be able to experience the dissapointment of their faith in the final moments of consciousness as they die.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
I do believe that the blood of Jesus, shed on the cross, provides the sole basis for the forgiveness of sin. And I do believe that God freely offers salvation to anyone who places their faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus as sufficient payment for their sin.


Why faith? Why are we expected to believe what is written in old scrolls?



Exactly. If there is a god that wants us to believe and follow certain things then why not just appear in undeniable fashion now to the whole world and tell us straight up. Why all this ancient mystery bullchit? Why must I trust the word of 2000 year old goat herders who believed in all manner of superstious crap and thought the earth was flat. People who were ignorant of and wrong about most things concerning the nature of the earth and the universe. If this is the best plan god can come up with to spread the truth of his word then we must have been assigned a seriously incompetent god.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by Jim1611
If the one true God being banned from a nation is good I wonder when we'll start seeing the fruits of it improving our society? I always see a hint of that desire in any thread that comes up on here concerning God and the Bible. So if you have a desire to see even more of throwing God out of our nation please explain to me when we'll start seeing the good in this.


So 9 hours later and no takers on my question? I don't want to argue, I just want the facts so please explain them to me.



How many cultures and societies have believed in gods, a creator, supernatural entities, etc, yet were violent? History has many examples.


I asked the question for the proof of taking God out of our country, the USA. So show me the proof it's working. I'm not interested in other places and times. Just here and now. This also goes beyond violence too. More like a moral decay which covers allot. Proof, not questions to me, that's what I want.


The state of a nation, its laws and values, depends on far, far more than just people believing in God.


John Adams and others in his day differ with that statement.
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
You still have failed to show evidence that a Godless nation is a good thing.


You only need to look at history to see that belief in God or gods is not an indicator of peace and harmony. Human behaviour is driven by more than just a belief in God. I mentioned the dark ages and the power of the church.


John Adams is part of my nations history. A huge part. To ignore his words is exactly why things are as they are too. Peace and harmony cannot exist as long as there is good and evil. There will always be division. There has to be. Why would someone like myself agree to join myself with someone else that believes abortion is okay? Or that socialism is a decent form of government. Both of those concepts are evil. They are to be opposed and fought against. But back to my original question as far as presenting me with facts that a nation that is Godless is a good nation. I am looking for specific examples, if you have any. Not general references to the past.
Originally Posted by Willto
If there is a god that wants us to believe and follow certain things then why not just appear in undeniable fashion now to the whole world and tell us straight up. Why all this ancient mystery bullchit?
I believe that He clearly did exactly that just a little over 2,000 years ago. And it wasn’t “ancient mystery bullchit” then. No mystery about seeing things with one’s own eyes, as those eyewitness did, including those eyewitnesses who were hostile towards Him and remained hostile towards Him even after He appeared in undeniable fashion and told them straight up.
Originally Posted by Willto
Why must I trust the word of 2000 year old goat herders who believed in all manner of superstious crap and thought the earth was flat. People who were ignorant of and wrong about most things concerning the nature of the earth and the universe.
You don’t have to. You can choose to believe whatever you choose to believe. You’ve made your beliefs regarding these things pretty clear. As have others. Believers and non-believers both.
Originally Posted by Willto
If this is the best plan god can come up with to spread the truth of his word then we must have been assigned a seriously incompetent god.
So the Creator of the universe didn’t go about things the way you think He should have…? Got it. Anyway, that’s what you’ve chosen to believe, and it’s fine by me. Your beliefs are yours, have at it.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Crappy Hamper is saved!

6/17/20 – HC survives being poisoned by his "girlfriend".
"Good news is that it had a happy ending because I survived. I came within an inch of my life as organ failure set in. I'm grateful that God miraculously brought a vision of charcoal to my mind and where to find it. Then he gave me enough strength to drag myself off my back, get to it and eat it before dying. It absorbed the poison she put in the food and I recovered."


Personally, I'm glad he survived.

I'm glad that you survived the challenges and perils that you've faced too.
Unlike the NVs, you believe that God answers prayer.



Your stories come accross as contrived.....essentially, "look what happened to me, it's a miracle of god"

You probably mean well, but bending the truth to achieve an aim often just comes back to bite the storyteller.

Coming from an A-theist that wastes our time on my threads trying to convince everyone that the Bible and God of the Bible are contrived, it's no wonder you think that.
You reject the idea that miracles happen. That speaks for itself.
I speak for myself and yes miracles happen.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Crappy Hamper is saved!

6/17/20 – HC survives being poisoned by his "girlfriend".
"Good news is that it had a happy ending because I survived. I came within an inch of my life as organ failure set in. I'm grateful that God miraculously brought a vision of charcoal to my mind and where to find it. Then he gave me enough strength to drag myself off my back, get to it and eat it before dying. It absorbed the poison she put in the food and I recovered."


Personally, I'm glad he survived.

I'm glad that you survived the challenges and perils that you've faced too.
Unlike the NVs, you believe that God answers prayer.



Your stories come accross as contrived.....essentially, "look what happened to me, it's a miracle of god"

You probably mean well, but bending the truth to achieve an aim often just comes back to bite the storyteller.

Coming from an A-theist that wastes our time on my threads trying to convince everyone that the Bible and God of the Bible are contrived, it's no wonder you think that.
You reject the idea that miracles happen. That speaks for itself.
I speak for myself and yes miracles happen.
Originally Posted by BeanMan
Saved from what?

Beanman,

Saved from sin and the wages of sin, which is death in hell.
It's an uncomfortable subject, but I would be unloving if I avoided it.

Romans 6:23
"For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

Revelation 20:14, 21:8
"And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death."
"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."

That said, how many people would someone caught killing, have kill to be considered a murderer? ...Or any other crime for that matter?
Miracles happen to the superstitious, otherwise they are considered low probability events.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

I'm glad that you survived the challenges and perils that you've faced too.
Unlike the NVs, you believe that God answers prayer.


Happy's Prayers

6/13/20 – (HC prays for sockets)
“I had a bunch of rachets, extra too, but was missing some sockets that had cracked and a set similar to what you are asking about with sizes that I didn't have surprisingly. Now I'm not saying this to sell you mine because I need these. I just want to encourage and for you to get what you're looking for.

I asked the Lord specifically as if He were in my shop with me one day for the socket set and mini driver that I needed once in a while for mowers, etc.
Guess what Fireball?
Next thing I know, I'm driving down the road and at the busy intersection near a sport arena. I see something that caught my attention. After pulling into the parking lot, I looked down and saw a bunch of sockets strewn all over the road and a box off in the lot. There were no trucks around or jobs or I would have asked if they lost their socket set and helped pick them up.
I picked them up and put them in the insets of the kit. I was surprised to see that they were all there except for maybe one that I already had a duplicate of!!!”

6/25/20 – (God provides HC with Starbucks)
"The BEST Starbucks ever was not served at the coffee shop.
It was an answer to prayer. A couple months ago.
Not prayer to some impersonal universe or cosmic consciousness, no mantra chanting meditation either....Just asked my Father in the name of His Son, my best Friend.
Went to Kroger's and what did I see on shelf by itself?
A bunch of bags of Starbucks Whole beans......at $2 BUCKS PER BAG! Fresh, not outdated. No issues. Just cheaper than wholesale. Coincidence? I'm sure some atheist will say so."

7/1/20 – (The Lord provides a bat.)
"I've taught wildlife education and I'm also against harmful chemicals.
I taught a class on environmental factors of bats and human interaction. The Lord provided a live bat several days prior to my lectures..... miraculously."

11/16/20 - (God provides HC with kitchen knives)
“You won't believe this, but its true.
I broke an old pairing knife at the thin part of the tang and talked to my Father about it. I wanted something of better quality that sharpens and keeps an edge better. I couldn't find any quality kitchen knives in town and just wanted a pairing knife.
Later that day, I walked to the grocery store.
On the way there, what did I see on the side of the road by itself?
It was something I never would have noticed other than some litter someone threw out their window.
It was a black fabric roll. I opened it and what did my Father give me in a most unusual surprise......FREE but not cheap???
A full set of Hinkle French Chef knives and a steel !!!!!!!
When I got, home, I cleaned them and noticed that they were brand new! God is good!”
Reprobates

Crappy, how does one become deputized to place people on a "reprobate" list?
Do you have a special agent card from the Holy Trinity? If so I'll need to see it and I'll need you to perform at least 3 miracles to prove it's legit.
I know I'm on your list so I'm just wondering if you're really juiced with the big guys or if St. Peter and I are just going to have a laugh at your expense at the Pearly Gates.
You know, like most here do now.

P.S.
I think your a poser.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Crappy Hamper is saved!

6/17/20 – HC survives being poisoned by his "girlfriend".
"Good news is that it had a happy ending because I survived. I came within an inch of my life as organ failure set in. I'm grateful that God miraculously brought a vision of charcoal to my mind and where to find it. Then he gave me enough strength to drag myself off my back, get to it and eat it before dying. It absorbed the poison she put in the food and I recovered."


Personally, I'm glad he survived.

I'm glad that you survived the challenges and perils that you've faced too.
Unlike the NVs, you believe that God answers prayer.



Your stories come accross as contrived.....essentially, "look what happened to me, it's a miracle of god"

You probably mean well, but bending the truth to achieve an aim often just comes back to bite the storyteller.

Coming from an A-theist that wastes our time on my threads trying to convince everyone that the Bible and God of the Bible are contrived, it's no wonder you think that.
You reject the idea that miracles happen. That speaks for itself.
I speak for myself and yes miracles happen.



It's a discussion forum where all members can express their views. Nobody is wasting your time. You can either choose to respond or not...you are not being forced to 'waste your time,"
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Nope, it never happened. There's evidence of populations of people living elsewhere around the world before and after the time of the alledged flood event. Geological evidence dismisses a global flood event.

The people who wrote the bible didn't know that so got caught out on that lie too. The biblical tale of creation is also fiction.
Didn't the Black Sea suddenly flood many 1000s of years ago at the end of the last ice age when the ocean broke over the barrier and put hundreds of feet of water over inhabited land. The Hebrew bible is not the only ancient account of a catastrophic flood. There are a lot of the bible accounts that have been found to have some basis in the evidence uncovered by archeologists such as the total destruction of Jericho.
"It', does take Faith.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Nope, it never happened. There's evidence of populations of people living elsewhere around the world before and after the time of the alledged flood event. Geological evidence dismisses a global flood event.

The people who wrote the bible didn't know that so got caught out on that lie too. The biblical tale of creation is also fiction.
Didn't the Black Sea suddenly flood many 1000s of years ago at the end of the last ice age when the ocean broke over the barrier and put hundreds of feet of water over inhabited land. The Hebrew bible is not the only ancient account of a catastrophic flood. There are a lot of the bible accounts that have been found to have some basis in the evidence uncovered by archeologists such as the total destruction of Jericho.


There likely was a localised flood but not a global flood that wiped out all but those on the ark, as the writers of the bible claimed. The story is repeated in other religious sources too - copied from early texts.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Crappy Hamper is saved!

6/17/20 – HC survives being poisoned by his "girlfriend".
"Good news is that it had a happy ending because I survived. I came within an inch of my life as organ failure set in. I'm grateful that God miraculously brought a vision of charcoal to my mind and where to find it. Then he gave me enough strength to drag myself off my back, get to it and eat it before dying. It absorbed the poison she put in the food and I recovered."


Personally, I'm glad he survived.

I'm glad that you survived the challenges and perils that you've faced too.
Unlike the NVs, you believe that God answers prayer.



Your stories come accross as contrived.....essentially, "look what happened to me, it's a miracle of god"

You probably mean well, but bending the truth to achieve an aim often just comes back to bite the storyteller.

Coming from an A-theist that wastes our time on my threads trying to convince everyone that the Bible and God of the Bible are contrived, it's no wonder you think that.
You reject the idea that miracles happen. That speaks for itself.
I speak for myself and yes miracles happen.



It's a discussion forum where all members can express their views. Nobody is wasting your time. You can either choose to respond or not...you are not being forced to 'waste your time,"





Holy Crapper wastes his own time, every time.
Any dude that can predict his own death and resurrection…and pull it off…I’m goin’ with whatever that dude says…!
I just read this book, hard to put down.[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
Originally Posted by antlers
Any dude that can predict his own death and resurrection…and pull it off…I’m goin’ with whatever that dude says…!


But you did not witness any of that. You are taking the word of unknown people from over 2000 years ago that it happened. People whose credibility you know nothing about because you don't know them. People who lived in a time of backwards ass superstition and believed all manner of crap that we now know is bullchit.
Originally Posted by Willto
Originally Posted by antlers
Any dude that can predict his own death and resurrection…and pull it off…I’m goin’ with whatever that dude says…!
But you did not witness any of that. You are taking the word of unknown people from over 2000 years ago that it happened. People whose credibility you know nothing about because you don't know them. People who lived in a time of backwards ass superstition and believed all manner of crap that we now know is bullchit.
Hey man, it’s OK with me that you choose to believe whatever you do. Why are you bothered so much by what other people believe…? Why are you bothered so much by what other people believe…really…?
Originally Posted by Willto
Originally Posted by antlers
Any dude that can predict his own death and resurrection…and pull it off…I’m goin’ with whatever that dude says…!


But you did not witness any of that. You are taking the word of unknown people from over 2000 years ago that it happened. People whose credibility you know nothing about because you don't know them. People who lived in a time of backwards ass superstition and believed all manner of crap that we now know is bullchit.


Nope, I am taking God’s word for it.

See John 14:17 ……
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by Willto
Originally Posted by antlers
Any dude that can predict his own death and resurrection…and pull it off…I’m goin’ with whatever that dude says…!


But you did not witness any of that. You are taking the word of unknown people from over 2000 years ago that it happened. People whose credibility you know nothing about because you don't know them. People who lived in a time of backwards ass superstition and believed all manner of crap that we now know is bullchit.


Nope, I am taking God’s word for it.

See John 14:17 ……


Also written by MEN 2000 years ago who "CLAIMED" they were writting the word of god.
Originally Posted by Willto
Also written by MEN 2000 years ago who "CLAIMED" they were writting the word of god.
No they didn’t. The men who wrote the separate documents…that were collected and bound together hundreds of years later into what was called, collectively, the New Testament…didn’t claim that. They were simply documenting what happened, what they saw, and what others saw.

Matthew (an eyewitness) wrote about it, Mark (who spent time with Peter) wrote about it, Luke (who said he was going to investigate these things and put them in chronological order so we don’t miss anything) wrote about it, John (an eyewitness who took care of Jesus’ mother) wrote about it, James (what would it take for your brother to convince you that he was the son of God, and your Savior) was an eyewitness who wrote about it, Peter (who ran and hid like a coward) was an eyewitness and wrote about it, and Paul (who knew all of these people) was a contemporary who met the risen Jesus and believed that God had raised Him from the dead based on the eyewitness accounts and the testimonies of those who were closest to Jesus, he wrote about it.

They weren’t writing the Bible. They weren’t writing the New Testament. The weren’t writing “the word of God.” To them, they were simply documenting what happened, what they saw, and what others saw.
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by Willto
Originally Posted by antlers
Any dude that can predict his own death and resurrection…and pull it off…I’m goin’ with whatever that dude says…!


But you did not witness any of that. You are taking the word of unknown people from over 2000 years ago that it happened. People whose credibility you know nothing about because you don't know them. People who lived in a time of backwards ass superstition and believed all manner of crap that we now know is bullchit.


Nope, I am taking God’s word for it.

See John 14:17 ……


God can't write
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Reprobates

Crappy, how does one become deputized to place people on a "reprobate" list?
Do you have a special agent card from the Holy Trinity? If so I'll need to see it and I'll need you to perform at least 3 miracles to prove it's legit.
I know I'm on your list so I'm just wondering if you're really juiced with the big guys or if St. Peter and I are just going to have a laugh at your expense at the Pearly Gates.
You know, like most here do now.

P.S.
I think your a poser.

Yes you are on Reprobate mode with me.
Whether or not you have been erased from the Lamb's Book of Life is up to the Lamb.
Didn't HC win the biggest retard at the beaver awards.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Reprobates

Crappy, how does one become deputized to place people on a "reprobate" list?
Do you have a special agent card from the Holy Trinity? If so I'll need to see it and I'll need you to perform at least 3 miracles to prove it's legit.
I know I'm on your list so I'm just wondering if you're really juiced with the big guys or if St. Peter and I are just going to have a laugh at your expense at the Pearly Gates.
You know, like most here do now.

P.S.
I think your a poser.

Yes you are on Reprobate mode with me.
Whether or not you have been erased from the Lamb's Book of Life is up to the Lamb.


Is Billy Graham still in Hell?
Poor Billy.

Always liked him.
Originally Posted by Raferman
Didn't HC win the biggest retard at the beaver awards.

Anything like Hustlers Beaver if the Month?
Originally Posted by antlers
Any dude that can predict his own death and resurrection…and pull it off…I’m goin’ with whatever that dude says…!


We have nothing from that Dude. We have what others have written decades later.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Nope, it never happened. There's evidence of populations of people living elsewhere around the world before and after the time of the alledged flood event. Geological evidence dismisses a global flood event.

The people who wrote the bible didn't know that so got caught out on that lie too. The biblical tale of creation is also fiction.
Didn't the Black Sea suddenly flood many 1000s of years ago at the end of the last ice age when the ocean broke over the barrier and put hundreds of feet of water over inhabited land. The Hebrew bible is not the only ancient account of a catastrophic flood. There are a lot of the bible accounts that have been found to have some basis in the evidence uncovered by archeologists such as the total destruction of Jericho.


If the Black Sea flood occurred, it was a local event and not consistent with the world wide flood of the Bible.
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Reprobates

Crappy, how does one become deputized to place people on a "reprobate" list?
Do you have a special agent card from the Holy Trinity? If so I'll need to see it and I'll need you to perform at least 3 miracles to prove it's legit.
I know I'm on your list so I'm just wondering if you're really juiced with the big guys or if St. Peter and I are just going to have a laugh at your expense at the Pearly Gates.
You know, like most here do now.

P.S.
I think your a poser.

Yes you are on Reprobate mode with me.
Whether or not you have been erased from the Lamb's Book of Life is up to the Lamb.


Is Billy Graham still in Hell?

Why do you consider the substitutionary death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ inadequate sacrifice for sins?
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Jim1611
Originally Posted by Jim1611
If the one true God being banned from a nation is good I wonder when we'll start seeing the fruits of it improving our society? I always see a hint of that desire in any thread that comes up on here concerning God and the Bible. So if you have a desire to see even more of throwing God out of our nation please explain to me when we'll start seeing the good in this.


So 9 hours later and no takers on my question? I don't want to argue, I just want the facts so please explain them to me.



How many cultures and societies have believed in gods, a creator, supernatural entities, etc, yet were violent? History has many examples.


I asked the question for the proof of taking God out of our country, the USA. So show me the proof it's working. I'm not interested in other places and times. Just here and now. This also goes beyond violence too. More like a moral decay which covers allot. Proof, not questions to me, that's what I want.


The state of a nation, its laws and values, depends on far, far more than just people believing in God.


John Adams and others in his day differ with that statement.
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
You still have failed to show evidence that a Godless nation is a good thing.


You only need to look at history to see that belief in God or gods is not an indicator of peace and harmony. Human behaviour is driven by more than just a belief in God. I mentioned the dark ages and the power of the church.


John Adams is part of my nations history. A huge part. To ignore his words is exactly why things are as they are too. Peace and harmony cannot exist as long as there is good and evil. There will always be division. There has to be. Why would someone like myself agree to join myself with someone else that believes abortion is okay? Or that socialism is a decent form of government. Both of those concepts are evil. They are to be opposed and fought against. But back to my original question as far as presenting me with facts that a nation that is Godless is a good nation. I am looking for specific examples, if you have any. Not general references to the past.



John Adams was a man of his time and place, a statesman. His aim was to help build a nation based on the values that he grew up with, Christian values as he perceived them to be, which does not alter world history, which shows that simply believing in God did not make people better or their society fairer and more peaceful.

In the past, most people probably did believe in creation, a God or gods...which did not stop them from acting out of self-interest, being fallible or behaving badly.

Another ten pages from the happy folks... Next?
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Nope, it never happened. There's evidence of populations of people living elsewhere around the world before and after the time of the alledged flood event. Geological evidence dismisses a global flood event.

The people who wrote the bible didn't know that so got caught out on that lie too. The biblical tale of creation is also fiction.
Didn't the Black Sea suddenly flood many 1000s of years ago at the end of the last ice age when the ocean broke over the barrier and put hundreds of feet of water over inhabited land. The Hebrew bible is not the only ancient account of a catastrophic flood. There are a lot of the bible accounts that have been found to have some basis in the evidence uncovered by archeologists such as the total destruction of Jericho.


If the Black Sea flood occurred, it was a local event and not consistent with the world wide flood of the Bible.
I understand that, but to the people that survived the Black Sea flood which almost surely happened their whole world flooded and you know oral histories can get somewhat distorted. So there is a historical event that roughly corresponds to the biblical flood and some survivors. As to Jericho there is evidence that a hostile nomadic tribe (Hebrews) besieged and broke through and razed the place. They very well may have been aided by a seismic event at the opportune time. There may have been a fifth column (Rahab's family) in the city acting as Hebrew agents. Who knows what got abbreviated or left out or embellished in the telling but the story can easily be roughly true.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Reprobates

Crappy, how does one become deputized to place people on a "reprobate" list?
Do you have a special agent card from the Holy Trinity? If so I'll need to see it and I'll need you to perform at least 3 miracles to prove it's legit.
I know I'm on your list so I'm just wondering if you're really juiced with the big guys or if St. Peter and I are just going to have a laugh at your expense at the Pearly Gates.
You know, like most here do now.

P.S.
I think your a poser.

Yes you are on Reprobate mode with me.
Whether or not you have been erased from the Lamb's Book of Life is up to the Lamb.


Is Billy Graham still in Hell?

Why do you consider the substitutionary death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ inadequate sacrifice for sins?


I don't consider that. What put that thought in your demented mind? The TBIs?

7/22/20 – (Best explanation yet for HC’s personality disorder.)
Believe it or not, this happened to me at a mall.
Instead of a hoe, it was a steel "I" beam and security gate chainlink. Free fell full speed with no resistance out of the ceiling directly onto my head. Nearly killed me. This happened the day after I insulted my very smart, awesome Dad. I was arrogant, frustrated and said something unkind to him. This wasn't karma. It was God humbling me, by using a store attendant who purposely pushed the button to drop it on my head.
The medical physicians said that I had no hope of recovery.
The Good Lord (The Great Physician), gave me healing in spite of my sin. I deserved to die that day.
It's not supposed to happen but my brain works now. Some would say otherwise and might be right.
Couldn't remember so much as a 7 digit phone number from the page to dial.... after studying it a while.

Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Reprobates

Crappy, how does one become deputized to place people on a "reprobate" list?
Do you have a special agent card from the Holy Trinity? If so I'll need to see it and I'll need you to perform at least 3 miracles to prove it's legit.
I know I'm on your list so I'm just wondering if you're really juiced with the big guys or if St. Peter and I are just going to have a laugh at your expense at the Pearly Gates.
You know, like most here do now.

P.S.
I think your a poser.

Yes you are on Reprobate mode with me.
Whether or not you have been erased from the Lamb's Book of Life is up to the Lamb.


Is Billy Graham still in Hell?

Why do you consider the substitutionary death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ inadequate sacrifice for sins?


I don't consider that. What put that thought in your demented mind? The TBIs?

7/22/20 – (Best explanation yet for HC’s personality disorder.)
Believe it or not, this happened to me at a mall.
Instead of a hoe, it was a steel "I" beam and security gate chainlink. Free fell full speed with no resistance out of the ceiling directly onto my head. Nearly killed me. This happened the day after I insulted my very smart, awesome Dad. I was arrogant, frustrated and said something unkind to him. This wasn't karma. It was God humbling me, by using a store attendant who purposely pushed the button to drop it on my head.
The medical physicians said that I had no hope of recovery.
The Good Lord (The Great Physician), gave me healing in spite of my sin. I deserved to die that day.
It's not supposed to happen but my brain works now. Some would say otherwise and might be right.
Couldn't remember so much as a 7 digit phone number from the page to dial.... after studying it a while.


What do you think that is required of you to be saved?
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Nope, it never happened. There's evidence of populations of people living elsewhere around the world before and after the time of the alledged flood event. Geological evidence dismisses a global flood event.

The people who wrote the bible didn't know that so got caught out on that lie too. The biblical tale of creation is also fiction.
Didn't the Black Sea suddenly flood many 1000s of years ago at the end of the last ice age when the ocean broke over the barrier and put hundreds of feet of water over inhabited land. The Hebrew bible is not the only ancient account of a catastrophic flood. There are a lot of the bible accounts that have been found to have some basis in the evidence uncovered by archeologists such as the total destruction of Jericho.


If the Black Sea flood occurred, it was a local event and not consistent with the world wide flood of the Bible.
I understand that, but to the people that survived the Black Sea flood which almost surely happened their whole world flooded and you know oral histories can get somewhat distorted. So there is a historical event that roughly corresponds to the biblical flood and some survivors. As to Jericho there is evidence that a hostile nomadic tribe (Hebrews) besieged and broke through and razed the place. They very well may have been aided by a seismic event at the opportune time. There may have been a fifth column (Rahab's family) in the city acting as Hebrew agents. Who knows what got abbreviated or left out or embellished in the telling but the story can easily be roughly true.


The problem was that it was grossly exagerated as a narrative to support their story. Shows another failure of god and raises again the issue of incest.
Saved from what? Life's tough and it even tougher when you're stupid.
RB

Originally Posted by Happy_Camper



Discussion/ debate, from the Bible, on whether or not the majority of people are saved (going to heaven).
12:48

AFTER listening, what is your opinion?

Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by Willto
Originally Posted by antlers
Any dude that can predict his own death and resurrection…and pull it off…I’m goin’ with whatever that dude says…!
But you did not witness any of that. You are taking the word of unknown people from over 2000 years ago that it happened. People whose credibility you know nothing about because you don't know them. People who lived in a time of backwards ass superstition and believed all manner of crap that we now know is bullchit.
Hey man, it’s OK with me that you choose to believe whatever you do. Why are you bothered so much by what other people believe…? Why are you bothered so much by what other people believe…really…?


It's called a discussion forum. This is a topic being discussed. If you are being forced to participate against your will by some armed individual just type "Help Me" and hit enter. Hopefully we can get someone over there to assist you.
Originally Posted by Willto
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by Willto
Originally Posted by antlers
Any dude that can predict his own death and resurrection…and pull it off…I’m goin’ with whatever that dude says…!


But you did not witness any of that. You are taking the word of unknown people from over 2000 years ago that it happened. People whose credibility you know nothing about because you don't know them. People who lived in a time of backwards ass superstition and believed all manner of crap that we now know is bullchit.


Nope, I am taking God’s word for it.

See John 14:17 ……


Also written by MEN 2000 years ago who "CLAIMED" they were writting the word of god.



You may not understand John 14:17….. God comes and abides with and within the believer. When that happens, there is no doubt.

The witness within of the Holy Spirit is powerful.
Quote
You may not understand John 14:17….. God comes and abides with and within the believer. When that happens, there is no doubt.

The witness within of the Holy Spirit is powerful.


Well there are 4000 recognized religions on this planet and all of them have members who believe just as powerfully as you that they are on the one true path. Yep, no doubts in their mind at all.

And yet simple deductive logic tells you that 3999 of them have to be wrong. So much for the accuracy of powerful feelings.
Originally Posted by TF49
I think this is nothing but word bafflegab. You may believe that Christians are making a “claim,” but I see it as Christians providing a testimony or witness of our experience.

And here's some people providing a testimony or witness of their experiences being abducted by aliens:





One major difference between the world religions and Biblical Christianity is the following.

Religions require the works of the individual to be the means of salvation.

Biblical Christianity has the works completed by the perfect sinless Sacrifice. He obtained salvation for all.
The choice to receive that gift is making Jesus the Object of your faith. You trust Him to save you because He is the Savior Who gave Himself for all sins.
Originally Posted by antlers
I do believe that the blood of Jesus, shed on the cross, provides the sole basis for the forgiveness of sin. And I do believe that God freely offers salvation to anyone who places their faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus as sufficient payment for their sin.


Exactly right, Amen!
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
You may not understand John 14:17….. God comes and abides with and within the believer. When that happens, there is no doubt.

The witness within of the Holy Spirit is powerful.


Well there are 4000 recognized religions on this planet and all of them have members who believe just as powerfully as you that they are on the one true path. Yep, no doubts in their mind at all.

And yet simple deductive logic tells you that 3999 of them have to be wrong. So much for the accuracy of powerful feelings.





Well, you are focused on my personal belief and how you think it is not different from someone else's belief. You are not getting the "why" of my belief.

OK.... I'll just repost a response to one who was claiming that there is "no evidence" and leave you all to it.....





".......Well, there is evidence for the existence of God all around us. You either reject it or don’t see it.

Also, as it has been posted before, when the Creator comes to abide “within” the believer, that believer indeed has “proof.”

But, you apparently don’t see and you apparently “don’t have.”

Still, you comment above piques some interest. You state “…. the burden of proof lies with the one making the positive “claim.”….

I think this is nothing but word bafflegab. You may believe that Christians are making a “claim,” but I see it as Christians providing a testimony or witness of our experience.

But, you choose you words carefully and there is one interesting way to look at your post.

Should you be judged….. by a God you claim has not proved His existence….. this God, at your judgment may “play the video tape” of your life and show you literally dozens of times He made His presence known to you…. Only to have you somehow reject the witness.

No one can “argue” you into belief….. Only God can “get you to flip.” I wonder how many times the Spirit has knocked on your door, but you refused to answer the knock. You will say that that has never happened. I would expect that God will show you He knocked dozens of times when the tape rolls."
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
You may not understand John 14:17….. God comes and abides with and within the believer. When that happens, there is no doubt.

The witness within of the Holy Spirit is powerful.


Well there are 4000 recognized religions on this planet and all of them have members who believe just as powerfully as you that they are on the one true path. Yep, no doubts in their mind at all.

And yet simple deductive logic tells you that 3999 of them have to be wrong. So much for the accuracy of powerful feelings.





Well, you are focused on my personal belief and how you think it is not different from someone else's belief. You are not getting the "why" of my belief.

OK.... I'll just repost a response to one who was claiming that there is "no evidence" and leave you all to it.....





".......Well, there is evidence for the existence of God all around us. You either reject it or don’t see it.

Also, as it has been posted before, when the Creator comes to abide “within” the believer, that believer indeed has “proof.”

But, you apparently don’t see and you apparently “don’t have.”

Still, you comment above piques some interest. You state “…. the burden of proof lies with the one making the positive “claim.”….

I think this is nothing but word bafflegab. You may believe that Christians are making a “claim,” but I see it as Christians providing a testimony or witness of our experience.

But, you choose you words carefully and there is one interesting way to look at your post.

Should you be judged….. by a God you claim has not proved His existence….. this God, at your judgment may “play the video tape” of your life and show you literally dozens of times He made His presence known to you…. Only to have you somehow reject the witness.

No one can “argue” you into belief….. Only God can “get you to flip.” I wonder how many times the Spirit has knocked on your door, but you refused to answer the knock. You will say that that has never happened. I would expect that God will show you He knocked dozens of times when the tape rolls."

They still using tape in heaven? No dvd? Hmmm, that's odd. They use VHS or Betamax format?

Why would an omnipotent being capable of blinking the universe into existence give two chits what a being like myself (an ameoba by comparrison) thinks or does? Even worse why would such a being desire to be worshipped by such lowly creatures? That isn't a good look for an all powerful universal super being. Seems a very tawdry human desire.

No, this whole story smacks heavily of what it is. A man made story of which Christianity is but one of many.
God gave us all free will to believe or not to each their own. That said

Philippians 2:10-11
English Standard Version
10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

I will happily kneel and confess Jesus Christ is Lord. I suppose some won’t be happy, but it won’t change that they will kneel and confess Jesus Christ is Lord.
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by Willto
Originally Posted by antlers
Any dude that can predict his own death and resurrection…and pull it off…I’m goin’ with whatever that dude says…!
But you did not witness any of that. You are taking the word of unknown people from over 2000 years ago that it happened. People whose credibility you know nothing about because you don't know them. People who lived in a time of backwards ass superstition and believed all manner of crap that we now know is bullchit.
Hey man, it’s OK with me that you choose to believe whatever you do. Why are you bothered so much by what other people believe…? Why are you bothered so much by what other people believe…really…?



Why the deflection?
Why not address what he wrote?
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by Willto
Originally Posted by antlers
Any dude that can predict his own death and resurrection…and pull it off…I’m goin’ with whatever that dude says…!
But you did not witness any of that. You are taking the word of unknown people from over 2000 years ago that it happened. People whose credibility you know nothing about because you don't know them. People who lived in a time of backwards ass superstition and believed all manner of crap that we now know is bullchit.
Hey man, it’s OK with me that you choose to believe whatever you do. Why are you bothered so much by what other people believe…? Why are you bothered so much by what other people believe…really…?



Why the deflection?
Why not address what he wrote?


A belief beyond rational explanation maybe? Something that should be true for all if it were true at all.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Nope, it never happened. There's evidence of populations of people living elsewhere around the world before and after the time of the alledged flood event. Geological evidence dismisses a global flood event.

The people who wrote the bible didn't know that so got caught out on that lie too. The biblical tale of creation is also fiction.
Didn't the Black Sea suddenly flood many 1000s of years ago at the end of the last ice age when the ocean broke over the barrier and put hundreds of feet of water over inhabited land. The Hebrew bible is not the only ancient account of a catastrophic flood. There are a lot of the bible accounts that have been found to have some basis in the evidence uncovered by archeologists such as the total destruction of Jericho.


If the Black Sea flood occurred, it was a local event and not consistent with the world wide flood of the Bible.
I understand that, but to the people that survived the Black Sea flood which almost surely happened their whole world flooded and you know oral histories can get somewhat distorted. So there is a historical event that roughly corresponds to the biblical flood and some survivors. As to Jericho there is evidence that a hostile nomadic tribe (Hebrews) besieged and broke through and razed the place. They very well may have been aided by a seismic event at the opportune time. There may have been a fifth column (Rahab's family) in the city acting as Hebrew agents. Who knows what got abbreviated or left out or embellished in the telling but the story can easily be roughly true.


Hastings,
I used the word "if" for a reason. You're presuming the alleged Black Sea deluge occurred, but that's only one of several competing hypothesis. In reality, The Black Sea area has been sealed off and reconnected many times during the last 500,000 years, with several later studies showing no evidence for the claimed deluge.

Even if it did occur, you've basically conceded the Biblical writer adapted an earlier oral tradition for their own purposes, or stole an earlier written story, perhaps one written in Cuneiform?
Originally Posted by LBP
God gave us all free will to believe or not to each their own. That said

Philippians 2:10-11
English Standard Version
10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

I will happily kneel and confess Jesus Christ is Lord. I suppose some won’t be happy, but it won’t change that they will kneel and confess Jesus Christ is Lord.


Just because something written in your book, that doesn't mean it's true.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by LBP
God gave us all free will to believe or not to each their own. That said

Philippians 2:10-11
English Standard Version
10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

I will happily kneel and confess Jesus Christ is Lord. I suppose some won’t be happy, but it won’t change that they will kneel and confess Jesus Christ is Lord.


Just because something written in your book, that doesn't mean it's true.


Ok
Originally Posted by LBP
God gave us all free will to believe or not to each their own. That said

Philippians 2:10-11
English Standard Version
10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

I will happily kneel and confess Jesus Christ is Lord. I suppose some won’t be happy, but it won’t change that they will kneel and confess Jesus Christ is Lord.


We don't believe or disbelieve on the basis of 'free will'
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
You may not understand John 14:17….. God comes and abides with and within the believer. When that happens, there is no doubt.

The witness within of the Holy Spirit is powerful.


Well there are 4000 recognized religions on this planet and all of them have members who believe just as powerfully as you that they are on the one true path. Yep, no doubts in their mind at all.

And yet simple deductive logic tells you that 3999 of them have to be wrong. So much for the accuracy of powerful feelings.





Well, you are focused on my personal belief and how you think it is not different from someone else's belief. You are not getting the "why" of my belief.

OK.... I'll just repost a response to one who was claiming that there is "no evidence" and leave you all to it.....





".......Well, there is evidence for the existence of God all around us. You either reject it or don’t see it.

Also, as it has been posted before, when the Creator comes to abide “within” the believer, that believer indeed has “proof.”

But, you apparently don’t see and you apparently “don’t have.”

Still, you comment above piques some interest. You state “…. the burden of proof lies with the one making the positive “claim.”….

I think this is nothing but word bafflegab. You may believe that Christians are making a “claim,” but I see it as Christians providing a testimony or witness of our experience.

But, you choose you words carefully and there is one interesting way to look at your post.

Should you be judged….. by a God you claim has not proved His existence….. this God, at your judgment may “play the video tape” of your life and show you literally dozens of times He made His presence known to you…. Only to have you somehow reject the witness.

No one can “argue” you into belief….. Only God can “get you to flip.” I wonder how many times the Spirit has knocked on your door, but you refused to answer the knock. You will say that that has never happened. I would expect that God will show you He knocked dozens of times when the tape rolls."


If you were born and raised a muslim you'd be using the same arguement for allah. How do you know your god isn't actually allah? Did he clearly identify himself to you?

By the way, why would god be keeping video footage? Does it say this in the bible? Wouldn't both parties already know what they've done, or is god forgetfull these days? Sounds like some fresh bafflegab to me.
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm


If you were born and raised a muslim you'd be using the same arguement for allah. How do you know your god isn't actually allah? Did he clearly identify himself to you?




God is not the issue, fuckwits that think they know all about God are.
Originally Posted by antlers
Hey man, it’s OK with me that you choose to believe whatever you do. Why are you bothered so much by what other people believe…? Why are you bothered so much by what other people believe…really…?
Originally Posted by Willto
It's called a discussion forum. This is a topic being discussed. If you are being forced to participate against your will by some armed individual just type "Help Me" and hit enter. Hopefully we can get someone over there to assist you.
Then let’s discuss why you’re so bothered by what other people believe…? Let’s discuss why you’re so bothered by what other people believe…really…?
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by Willto
Originally Posted by antlers
Any dude that can predict his own death and resurrection…and pull it off…I’m goin’ with whatever that dude says…!
But you did not witness any of that. You are taking the word of unknown people from over 2000 years ago that it happened. People whose credibility you know nothing about because you don't know them. People who lived in a time of backwards ass superstition and believed all manner of crap that we now know is bullchit.
Hey man, it’s OK with me that you choose to believe whatever you do. Why are you bothered so much by what other people believe…? Why are you bothered so much by what other people believe…really…?
Why the deflection? Why not address what he wrote?
Do you both only believe what you personally witness…? Not only regarding all of ancient history, but regarding all of all history, and also regarding all current events…? Do you both only believe anything at all that you personally witness…?
Originally Posted by Willto
Why would an omnipotent being capable of blinking the universe into existence give two chits what a being like myself (an ameoba by comparrison) thinks or does?
If you have children, why did y'all create em’…? We created our children because we wanted some children to love. And we wanted to have relationship with em’. I believe that God did the same regarding His children.
Originally Posted by Willto
Even worse why would such a being desire to be worshipped by such lowly creatures? That isn't a good look for an all powerful universal super being. Seems a very tawdry human desire.
If you have children, do you desire to be worshipped by them…? Or do you desire to be loved by them…? And, do you desire to have relationship with them…? I believe that God loves His children and desires to be loved by His children, and I believe He wants relationship with His children.
Originally Posted by Willto
No, this whole story smacks heavily of what it is. A man made story of which Christianity is but one of many.
Again, that’s what you choose to believe. I choose to believe otherwise. But I’m OK with what you choose to believe. Are you OK with what I choose to believe…?
Quote
If you have children, why did y'all create em’…?


Terrible example. My child is a being of the exact same type that I am. Compared to an omnipotent universe creating God we don't even rise up to ant level. Do you have conversations with ants?

Quote
If you have children, do you desire to be worshipped by them…?


No. Only a sick twisted ego maniac desires to be worshipped. It's not a healthy desire. Besides who would want to be worshipped by ants?

And you can lay off the why do you care what I believe mantra. I don't. The discussion here doesn't hinge on anyones concern over what you believe. People are just having a discussion. Sorry it's difficult for you to grasp that. Perhaps another year or two of remedial English would boost your powers of comprehesion.
The universe doesn't appear to be created.
Originally Posted by Willto
Terrible example. My child is a being of the exact same type that I am. Compared to an omnipotent universe creating God we don't even rise up to ant level.
I think it’s a really good example. He refers to us, specifically, as His children. I believe we are the supreme object of His creation.
Originally Posted by Willto
And you can lay off the why do you care what I believe mantra. I don't. The discussion here doesn't hinge on anyones concern over what you believe. People are just having a discussion.
And this whole discussion is specifically about beliefs. All of the threads of this nature are specifically about beliefs. Believers believe what they do, and skeptics and agnostics/atheists believe what they do. And those beliefs are discussed on threads such as this. Questions are often part of a discussion. You’ve asked many questions yourself during the course of this discussion.
Apostle John witnessed crucifixions, but He didn’t just see them, he heard em’ and he smelled em’. He experienced some pretty awful things, things that many of us can’t even imagine. He experienced the murders of his friends, and the persecution of Jesus’ followers by King Herod Agrippa I and by Emperor Domitian.

And despite all of that, he still came to the conclusion that God is love. It’s not just an attribute, it’s a core aspect of His character. And the greatest expression of His love is imparted to us in the Gospel.
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
You may not understand John 14:17….. God comes and abides with and within the believer. When that happens, there is no doubt.

The witness within of the Holy Spirit is powerful.


Well there are 4000 recognized religions on this planet and all of them have members who believe just as powerfully as you that they are on the one true path. Yep, no doubts in their mind at all.

And yet simple deductive logic tells you that 3999 of them have to be wrong. So much for the accuracy of powerful feelings.


Tf49


Well, you are focused on my personal belief and how you think it is not different from someone else's belief. You are not getting the "why" of my belief.

OK.... I'll just repost a response to one who was claiming that there is "no evidence" and leave you all to it.....





".......Well, there is evidence for the existence of God all around us. You either reject it or don’t see it.

Also, as it has been posted before, when the Creator comes to abide “within” the believer, that believer indeed has “proof.”

But, you apparently don’t see and you apparently “don’t have.”

Still, you comment above piques some interest. You state “…. the burden of proof lies with the one making the positive “claim.”….

I think this is nothing but word bafflegab. You may believe that Christians are making a “claim,” but I see it as Christians providing a testimony or witness of our experience.

But, you choose you words carefully and there is one interesting way to look at your post.

Should you be judged….. by a God you claim has not proved His existence….. this God, at your judgment may “play the video tape” of your life and show you literally dozens of times He made His presence known to you…. Only to have you somehow reject the witness.

No one can “argue” you into belief….. Only God can “get you to flip.” I wonder how many times the Spirit has knocked on your door, but you refused to answer the knock. You will say that that has never happened. I would expect that God will show you He knocked dozens of times when the tape rolls."


If you were born and raised a muslim you'd be using the same arguement for allah. How do you know your god isn't actually allah? Did he clearly identify himself to you?

By the way, why would god be keeping video footage? Does it say this in the bible? Wouldn't both parties already know what they've done, or is god forgetfull these days? Sounds like some fresh bafflegab to me.



Hmm…. You and willto don’t seem to get allegory or even metaphor…… I guess I am not surprised.
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Reprobates

Crappy, how does one become deputized to place people on a "reprobate" list?
Do you have a special agent card from the Holy Trinity? If so I'll need to see it and I'll need you to perform at least 3 miracles to prove it's legit.
I know I'm on your list so I'm just wondering if you're really juiced with the big guys or if St. Peter and I are just going to have a laugh at your expense at the Pearly Gates.
You know, like most here do now.

P.S.
I think your a poser.

Yes you are on Reprobate mode with me.
Whether or not you have been erased from the Lamb's Book of Life is up to the Lamb.


Is Billy Graham still in Hell?

Why do you consider the substitutionary death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ inadequate sacrifice for sins?


I don't consider that. What put that thought in your demented mind? The TBIs?

7/22/20 – (Best explanation yet for HC’s personality disorder.)
Believe it or not, this happened to me at a mall.
Instead of a hoe, it was a steel "I" beam and security gate chainlink. Free fell full speed with no resistance out of the ceiling directly onto my head. Nearly killed me. This happened the day after I insulted my very smart, awesome Dad. I was arrogant, frustrated and said something unkind to him. This wasn't karma. It was God humbling me, by using a store attendant who purposely pushed the button to drop it on my head.
The medical physicians said that I had no hope of recovery.
The Good Lord (The Great Physician), gave me healing in spite of my sin. I deserved to die that day.
It's not supposed to happen but my brain works now. Some would say otherwise and might be right.
Couldn't remember so much as a 7 digit phone number from the page to dial.... after studying it a while.


Guess what, God humbled me and then healed me.
I had the idea that
"You consider the substitutionary death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ inadequate sacrifice for sins inadequate."..
You responded here that it comes from a demented mind while you and your bud call that message a "steaming pile of dog [bleep]" on the next thread. This isn't unusual. You attack most gospel (good news) messages that have the theme of the Savior's allsufficient sacrifice. What am I to think???

Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by smokepole
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
I need to get a bull horn like that for the whiners here that don't like my Sunday posts. LoL!😄


Yep, there are a lot of parallels between your Sunday posts and someone leaving a steaming pile of dog shìt in the front yard.


LOL, spot on!



Is that not what you think?
Your answer to the gospel is to either twist my words and call ME a liar or to say that my Sunday post is demented.
I ask you about what you think is required for salvation?
Simple question. I will take that as your answer then.

I wonder what the Lord thinks when He reads your comments that blaspheme His Son and all that He offers as a gift?
There are only so many chances anyone gets that offer of life, then it's too late.
Quote
He refers to us, specifically, as His children.


Oh you mean that's what it says in a book written by men that you don't know and none of which can be verified. You are taking the word of an unknown "MAN" that there is a god and that he ever said such a thing. And there's the weak link in your chain Skippy.


Quote
I believe we are the supreme object of His creation.


.Men wrote the Bible and it paints man as Gods special creation. LOL! There's a shock.
Originally Posted by DBT
The universe doesn't appear to be created.
Where did all this matter come from? There are way more questions than answers. Earth is but a grain of sand compared to the universe.
Originally Posted by Willto
Oh you mean that's what it says in a book written by men that you don't know and none of which can be verified. You are taking the word of an unknown "MAN" that there is a god and that he ever said such a thing. And there's the weak link in your chain Skippy.
It’s OK with me that you choose to see these things the way that you do. I choose to see em’ the way that I do.
Originally Posted by Willto
Men wrote the Bible and it paints man as Gods special creation. LOL! There's a shock.
The theology is that the original manuscripts by the original writers were inspired. But if you choose to believe otherwise, then so be it.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Nope, it never happened. There's evidence of populations of people living elsewhere around the world before and after the time of the alledged flood event. Geological evidence dismisses a global flood event.

The people who wrote the bible didn't know that so got caught out on that lie too. The biblical tale of creation is also fiction.
Didn't the Black Sea suddenly flood many 1000s of years ago at the end of the last ice age when the ocean broke over the barrier and put hundreds of feet of water over inhabited land. The Hebrew bible is not the only ancient account of a catastrophic flood. There are a lot of the bible accounts that have been found to have some basis in the evidence uncovered by archeologists such as the total destruction of Jericho.
If the Black Sea flood occurred, it was a local event and not consistent with the world wide flood of the Bible.
Why does nearly every culture on every continent, have a flood myth? A lot of them even feature survivors who survived on a single boat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_flood_myths
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Reprobates

Crappy, how does one become deputized to place people on a "reprobate" list?
Do you have a special agent card from the Holy Trinity? If so I'll need to see it and I'll need you to perform at least 3 miracles to prove it's legit.
I know I'm on your list so I'm just wondering if you're really juiced with the big guys or if St. Peter and I are just going to have a laugh at your expense at the Pearly Gates.
You know, like most here do now.

P.S.
I think your a poser.

Yes you are on Reprobate mode with me.
Whether or not you have been erased from the Lamb's Book of Life is up to the Lamb.


Is Billy Graham still in Hell?

Why do you consider the substitutionary death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ inadequate sacrifice for sins?


I don't consider that. What put that thought in your demented mind? The TBIs?

7/22/20 – (Best explanation yet for HC’s personality disorder.)
Believe it or not, this happened to me at a mall.
Instead of a hoe, it was a steel "I" beam and security gate chainlink. Free fell full speed with no resistance out of the ceiling directly onto my head. Nearly killed me. This happened the day after I insulted my very smart, awesome Dad. I was arrogant, frustrated and said something unkind to him. This wasn't karma. It was God humbling me, by using a store attendant who purposely pushed the button to drop it on my head.
The medical physicians said that I had no hope of recovery.
The Good Lord (The Great Physician), gave me healing in spite of my sin. I deserved to die that day.
It's not supposed to happen but my brain works now. Some would say otherwise and might be right.
Couldn't remember so much as a 7 digit phone number from the page to dial.... after studying it a while.


Guess what, God humbled me and then healed me.
I had the idea that
"You consider the substitutionary death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ inadequate sacrifice for sins inadequate."..
You responded here that it comes from a demented mind while you and your bud call that message a "steaming pile of dog [bleep]" on the next thread. This isn't unusual. You attack most gospel (good news) messages that have the theme of the Savior's allsufficient sacrifice. What am I to think???

Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by smokepole
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
I need to get a bull horn like that for the whiners here that don't like my Sunday posts. LoL!😄


Yep, there are a lot of parallels between your Sunday posts and someone leaving a steaming pile of dog shìt in the front yard.


LOL, spot on!



Is that not what you think?
Your answer to the gospel is to either twist my words and call ME a liar or to say that my Sunday post is demented.
I ask you about what you think is required for salvation?
Simple question. I will take that as your answer then.

I wonder what the Lord thinks when He reads your comments that blaspheme His Son and all that He offers as a gift?

There are only so many chances anyone gets that offer of life, then it's too late.


What's God's screen name on the "fire"?
Wonder how often he logs in?
I'd like to know his take on the .270 vs .30-06 debate.
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Nope, it never happened. There's evidence of populations of people living elsewhere around the world before and after the time of the alledged flood event. Geological evidence dismisses a global flood event.

The people who wrote the bible didn't know that so got caught out on that lie too. The biblical tale of creation is also fiction.


Your ignorant prejudice is obvious when you talk about time lines.
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
Your info about proving the flood is dated. The more currant info seems to indicate the layers were laid down in quick succession. Consider the evidence provided by Mt. St. Hellens. The folded rock formations around the world. The volcanic action studied in the Grand Canyon.


That is utter horse chit and no actual scientific study shows any such thing. You may find some evangelical spewing some such psuedo science on places like youtube but it's laughable to consider those idiots as a credible source of information.


So you reject science because a Creationist with a Ph.D from a secular college give facts about Mt. St. Hellens and other geological formations?

That's real scientyific!
Originally Posted by Sauer200

What's God's screen name on the "fire"?
Wonder how often he logs in?

A claimant to the throne is here and I won't give him the opening by naming him but he posts umpteen times a day.
Originally Posted by Willto
Oh you mean that's what it says in a book written by men that you don't know and none of which can be verified.


So you don't accept legal historical evidence?
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Why does nearly every culture on every continent, have a flood myth? A lot of them even feature survivors who survived on a single boat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_flood_myths

That would be pretty easily explained which I'm guessing you know. There is only one ocean. If the ocean suddenly broke through the strait between mainland Turkey and Europe and inundated thousands of square miles you can bet the same thing happened other places all over the world. I would imagine people living close to the original beach had boats on which some survived. I'm not believing the Alps, Himalayas, Rockies, etc. went under water. You don't believe that, do you?
Originally Posted by Hastings
If the ocean suddenly broke through the strait between mainland Turkey and Europe and inundated thousands of square miles you can bet the same thing happened other places all over the world. I would imagine people living close to the original beach had boats on which some survived. I'm not believing the Alps, Himalayas, Rockies, etc. went under water. You don't believe that, do you?


Those mountains didn't exist prior to the Flood. Even secular geologist recognize they are uplifted.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Sauer200

What's God's screen name on the "fire"?
Wonder how often he logs in?

A claimant to the throne is here and I won't give him the opening by naming him but he posts umpteen times a day.

No, actually He is described in vivid details in a book that you have mostly rejected.
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by Hastings
If the ocean suddenly broke through the strait between mainland Turkey and Europe and inundated thousands of square miles you can bet the same thing happened other places all over the world. I would imagine people living close to the original beach had boats on which some survived. I'm not believing the Alps, Himalayas, Rockies, etc. went under water. You don't believe that, do you?


Those mountains didn't exist prior to the Flood. Even secular geologist recognize they are uplifted.

Well, yes, the mountains are uplifting even now. How long ago was the flood? How old are those mountains? If every piece of ice on earth melted do you think water would have covered the mountains as they were 5000, 10,000, or 12,000 years ago? Mount Ararat is almost 17,000 feet above sea level. Was it flat land back then?
I kind of think that these threads on religion tend to run on and on because there are those who, even though salvation is achieved as a gift, seem to believe that they somehow score some sort of points each time they act as a defender of the faith. I don't intend for that to be an attack on them, just as an observation from a believer who doesn't often post on these discussions.
"Saved from" ?
The RONA, U.S. Gov?

What exactly are we looking for here?
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Why does nearly every culture on every continent, have a flood myth? A lot of them even feature survivors who survived on a single boat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_flood_myths

That would be pretty easily explained which I'm guessing you know. There is only one ocean. If the ocean suddenly broke through the strait between mainland Turkey and Europe and inundated thousands of square miles you can bet the same thing happened other places all over the world. I would imagine people living close to the original beach had boats on which some survived. I'm not believing the Alps, Himalayas, Rockies, etc. went under water. You don't believe that, do you?

I recognize that God works in ways we can only begin to understand.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by DBT
The universe doesn't appear to be created.
Where did all this matter come from? There are way more questions than answers. Earth is not a grain of sand compared to the universe.


We don't know, therefore God is a poor assumption. Must anything we don't know be the work of God?

What is this thing you call "God?" Where did it come from? How does it make a Universe appear from nothing? What was it doing before the Universe?
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by DBT
The universe doesn't appear to be created.
Where did all this matter come from? There are way more questions than answers. Earth is not a grain of sand compared to the universe.


We don't know, therefore God is a poor assumption. Must anything we don't know be the work of God?

What is this thing you call "God?" Where did it come from? How does it make a Universe appear from nothing? What was it doing before the Universe?


Exactly. Just claiming that a God did something doesn't solve any mystery of the universe. It just kicks the can down the road a little. Because the next logical question (as you already stated) simply becomes Okay, where did this God come from? What made it? How does it have these powers? Religious people can't justifiably berate scientists for their lack of being able to explain everything about the origin of the universe when the answers the religious people offer don't really explain how everything in the universe started either. God is an invented solution to the puzzle for which they have no proof.

And even if one subscribed to the "Hey all this must have come from somewhere so there must be a God" line of thinking (I don't) that generalistic notion in no way indicates which of the many gods the religions on this earth subscribe to is the correct one.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by DBT
The universe doesn't appear to be created.
Where did all this matter come from? There are way more questions than answers. Earth is not a grain of sand compared to the universe.


We don't know, therefore God is a poor assumption. Must anything we don't know be the work of God?

What is this thing you call "God?" Where did it come from? How does it make a Universe appear from nothing? What was it doing before the Universe?

"What is this thing you call "God?" Where did it come from?" I asked my mother this same question when I was less than 6 years old and all I got was a stammering " we don't know".

It is a fair question and you and she are right, we don't know.

There is a power and a first cause at the center of the universe that no one understands.

The teachings of Jesus are easy to understand if you strip away all the blathering of those that try to interpret for him to their own advantage. And I do believe he was who claimed to be.

But to be honest, Jesus' message and teachings weren't new or confined to the Hebrew God. Many religions and societies had the same basic teachings. Islam accepts Jesus as a prophet. I have met Hindus that accept Jesus.

The problem with "Christians" and for that matter most religions is the evil that uses it for cover.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by DBT
The universe doesn't appear to be created.
Where did all this matter come from? There are way more questions than answers. Earth is not a grain of sand compared to the universe.


We don't know, therefore God is a poor assumption. Must anything we don't know be the work of God?

What is this thing you call "God?" Where did it come from? How does it make a Universe appear from nothing? What was it doing before the Universe?

"What is this thing you call "God?" Where did it come from?" I asked my mother this same question when I was less than 6 years old and all I got was a stammering " we don't know".

It is a fair question and you and she are right, we don't know.

There is a power and a first cause at the center of the universe that no one understands.

The teachings of Jesus are easy to understand if you strip away all the blathering of those that try to interpret for him to their own advantage. And I do believe he was who claimed to be.

But to be honest, Jesus' message and teachings weren't new or confined to the Hebrew God. Many religions and societies had the same basic teachings. Islam accepts Jesus as a prophet. I have met Hindus that accept Jesus.

The problem with "Christians" and for that matter most religions is the evil that uses it for cover.


Just saying - "there is a power and a first cause at the center of the universe that no one understands" - is the assumption of 'We don't know, therefore God' regardless of whether we put a name to the thing called "God" or not.

If we don't know, we simply don't know, and the answer is: we don't know.
I gave up sinning a long time ago, why don't the rest of you, or is sinning just that much fun?
We can not, give up sinning.
Originally Posted by Wrapids
I gave up sinning a long time ago, why don't the rest of you, or is sinning just that much fun?

Is that how we get to heaven when we leave this world?
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Nope, it never happened. There's evidence of populations of people living elsewhere around the world before and after the time of the alledged flood event. Geological evidence dismisses a global flood event.

The people who wrote the bible didn't know that so got caught out on that lie too. The biblical tale of creation is also fiction.
Didn't the Black Sea suddenly flood many 1000s of years ago at the end of the last ice age when the ocean broke over the barrier and put hundreds of feet of water over inhabited land. The Hebrew bible is not the only ancient account of a catastrophic flood. There are a lot of the bible accounts that have been found to have some basis in the evidence uncovered by archeologists such as the total destruction of Jericho.
If the Black Sea flood occurred, it was a local event and not consistent with the world wide flood of the Bible.
Why does nearly every culture on every continent, have a flood myth? A lot of them even feature survivors who survived on a single boat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_flood_myths


Because floods are common.
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
Your info about proving the flood is dated. The more currant info seems to indicate the layers were laid down in quick succession. Consider the evidence provided by Mt. St. Hellens. The folded rock formations around the world. The volcanic action studied in the Grand Canyon.


That is utter horse chit and no actual scientific study shows any such thing. You may find some evangelical spewing some such psuedo science on places like youtube but it's laughable to consider those idiots as a credible source of information.


So you reject science because a Creationist with a Ph.D from a secular college give facts about Mt. St. Hellens and other geological formations?

That's real scientyific!


The Creationist Mt. St. Helens craps been long debunked.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Why does nearly every culture on every continent, have a flood myth? A lot of them even feature survivors who survived on a single boat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_flood_myths

That would be pretty easily explained which I'm guessing you know. There is only one ocean. If the ocean suddenly broke through the strait between mainland Turkey and Europe and inundated thousands of square miles you can bet the same thing happened other places all over the world. I would imagine people living close to the original beach had boats on which some survived. I'm not believing the Alps, Himalayas, Rockies, etc. went under water. You don't believe that, do you?


The "God Inspired" Bible is very specific that the water's covered the highest mountains.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Why does nearly every culture on every continent, have a flood myth? A lot of them even feature survivors who survived on a single boat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_flood_myths

That would be pretty easily explained which I'm guessing you know. There is only one ocean. If the ocean suddenly broke through the strait between mainland Turkey and Europe and inundated thousands of square miles you can bet the same thing happened other places all over the world. I would imagine people living close to the original beach had boats on which some survived. I'm not believing the Alps, Himalayas, Rockies, etc. went under water. You don't believe that, do you?

I recognize that God works in ways we can only begin to understand.


In other words, much of what's claimed in The Bible makes absolutely no sense at all.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by Hastings
If the ocean suddenly broke through the strait between mainland Turkey and Europe and inundated thousands of square miles you can bet the same thing happened other places all over the world. I would imagine people living close to the original beach had boats on which some survived. I'm not believing the Alps, Himalayas, Rockies, etc. went under water. You don't believe that, do you?


Those mountains didn't exist prior to the Flood. Even secular geologist recognize they are uplifted.

Well, yes, the mountains are uplifting even now. How long ago was the flood? How old are those mountains? If every piece of ice on earth melted do you think water would have covered the mountains as they were 5000, 10,000, or 12,000 years ago? Mount Ararat is almost 17,000 feet above sea level. Was it flat land back then?



Don't listen to Ringman, he's a Young Earth Creationist who gets his "science" from the like of Answers in Genesis.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by DBT
The universe doesn't appear to be created.
Where did all this matter come from? There are way more questions than answers. Earth is not a grain of sand compared to the universe.


We don't know, therefore God is a poor assumption. Must anything we don't know be the work of God?

What is this thing you call "God?" Where did it come from? How does it make a Universe appear from nothing? What was it doing before the Universe?


And answering a mystery with an ever greater mystery does not simplify the original mystery.
Originally Posted by Hastings
The problem with "Christians" and for that matter most religions is the evil that uses it for cover.

And that my friend is one of the biggest problems with religions. All evil, including mass murder, mass rape, ethnic cleansing ang genocide can be justified with religion.
All the black folks in my neck of the woods are. They go out stealing and killing on Saturday night. Then in church Sunday asking for forgiveness!
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
You may not understand John 14:17….. God comes and abides with and within the believer. When that happens, there is no doubt.

The witness within of the Holy Spirit is powerful.


Well there are 4000 recognized religions on this planet and all of them have members who believe just as powerfully as you that they are on the one true path. Yep, no doubts in their mind at all.

And yet simple deductive logic tells you that 3999 of them have to be wrong. So much for the accuracy of powerful feelings.


Tf49


Well, you are focused on my personal belief and how you think it is not different from someone else's belief. You are not getting the "why" of my belief.

OK.... I'll just repost a response to one who was claiming that there is "no evidence" and leave you all to it.....





".......Well, there is evidence for the existence of God all around us. You either reject it or don’t see it.

Also, as it has been posted before, when the Creator comes to abide “within” the believer, that believer indeed has “proof.”

But, you apparently don’t see and you apparently “don’t have.”

Still, you comment above piques some interest. You state “…. the burden of proof lies with the one making the positive “claim.”….

I think this is nothing but word bafflegab. You may believe that Christians are making a “claim,” but I see it as Christians providing a testimony or witness of our experience.

But, you choose you words carefully and there is one interesting way to look at your post.

Should you be judged….. by a God you claim has not proved His existence….. this God, at your judgment may “play the video tape” of your life and show you literally dozens of times He made His presence known to you…. Only to have you somehow reject the witness.

No one can “argue” you into belief….. Only God can “get you to flip.” I wonder how many times the Spirit has knocked on your door, but you refused to answer the knock. You will say that that has never happened. I would expect that God will show you He knocked dozens of times when the tape rolls."


If you were born and raised a muslim you'd be using the same arguement for allah. How do you know your god isn't actually allah? Did he clearly identify himself to you?

By the way, why would god be keeping video footage? Does it say this in the bible? Wouldn't both parties already know what they've done, or is god forgetfull these days? Sounds like some fresh bafflegab to me.



Hmm…. You and willto don’t seem to get allegory or even metaphor…… I guess I am not surprised.


You missed the first part of my response.

Your allegorical metaphorical statement was nonsense so I responded with more speculation.
Originally Posted by Buck720
All the black folks in my neck of the woods are. They go out stealing and killing on Saturday night. Then in church Sunday asking for forgiveness!

If you have proof and names, might I suggest asking for a meeting with their pastor? Who knows if he might have some pull with them and tell them to return the list of stolen property and add restitution. I can't say if it'll work, but you probably know how far you'll get with the criminal justice system in the city.
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Nope, it never happened. There's evidence of populations of people living elsewhere around the world before and after the time of the alledged flood event. Geological evidence dismisses a global flood event.

The people who wrote the bible didn't know that so got caught out on that lie too. The biblical tale of creation is also fiction.


Your ignorant prejudice is obvious when you talk about time lines.


Where's your evidence to support your accusation?

No evidence that man was even ever globally wiped out, let alone by a mega-flood that never happened.
Originally Posted by Buck720
All the black folks in my neck of the woods are. They go out stealing and killing on Saturday night. Then in church Sunday asking for forgiveness!

On the other subject, I'll be the first to tell you that although church attendance is important, if it's led by a saved pastor: However, church attendance never saved anyone.

Living a moral life, baptism and every other good deed is not payment for even one sin.

Check out 8,9. https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Ephesians-2-8/
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper


Living a moral life, baptism and every other good deed is not payment for even one sin.



Explains why many christians are in jail - end of the day it doesn't matter as long as you accept Jesus as your saviour and your sins will be automatically forgiven.
Absolutely!
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper


Living a moral life, baptism and every other good deed is not payment for even one sin.



Explains why many christians are in jail - end of the day it doesn't matter as long as you accept Jesus as your saviour and your sins will be automatically forgiven.

I never made excuses for any criminals. Nor did I say that the thieves mentioned in the topic at hand were believers.
How do you Atheists maintain such impeccable integrity as your own gods? It must be a tough job.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper


Living a moral life, baptism and every other good deed is not payment for even one sin.



Explains why many christians are in jail - end of the day it doesn't matter as long as you accept Jesus as your saviour and your sins will be automatically forgiven.

I never made excuses for any criminals. Nor did I say that the thieves mentioned in the topic at hand were believers.
How do you Atheists maintain such impeccable integrity as your own gods? It must be a tough job.


Show me where any atheist in this thread's claimed to be a god?

Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Hastings
The problem with "Christians" and for that matter most religions is the evil that uses it for cover.

And that my friend is one of the biggest problems with religions. All evil, including mass murder, mass rape, ethnic cleansing ang genocide can be justified with religion.

Ain't that the truth. It was all Tito could do to keep Yugoslavia peaceful and stopping Roman Catholics, Orthodox Catholics, and Bosnian Muslims from going on genocidal pogroms. Look what happened after that courageous man died. Somehow or another Jesus' real teachings get left in the dust although all 3 of those religions claim the utmost respect for Jesus.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper


Living a moral life, baptism and every other good deed is not payment for even one sin.



Explains why many christians are in jail - end of the day it doesn't matter as long as you accept Jesus as your saviour and your sins will be automatically forgiven.

I never made excuses for any criminals. Nor did I say that the thieves mentioned in the topic at hand were believers.
How do you Atheists maintain such impeccable integrity as your own gods? It must be a tough job.


Show me where any atheist in this thread's claimed to be a god?

I'm not saying you have. I've talked to locals and there seems to be a common thread about that. They use it metaphorically I think, but nevertheless think of selves as masters of their own destinies and themselves as their own"gods". Either way, the shameful way that someone behaves against others is no indication of the Biblical believer's faith. Nor are believers sinless. They have the same sin nature as they did before believing on Christ. The new nature is a spiritual part that is available at the moment one decides to choose faith. If they opt to function in the sin nature, then they will certainly act as their old self. We should not, but it is a constant choice as all men and women are tempted to sin.

Time for devotions and sleep.
Later
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper


Living a moral life, baptism and every other good deed is not payment for even one sin.



Explains why many christians are in jail - end of the day it doesn't matter as long as you accept Jesus as your saviour and your sins will be automatically forgiven.

I never made excuses for any criminals. Nor did I say that the thieves mentioned in the topic at hand were believers.
How do you Atheists maintain such impeccable integrity as your own gods? It must be a tough job.


Show me where any atheist in this thread's claimed to be a god?

I'm not saying you have. I've talked to locals and there seems to be a common thread about that. They use it metaphorically I think, but nevertheless think of selves as masters of their own destinies and themselves as their own"gods".



That's a load of crap (surprise?). Who would think that they are a god? Why would anyone want to be as immoral and unethical as the god portrayed in the bible for example?
Me in red.

Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

[Re: NVhntr]

Guess what, God humbled me and then healed me. You are about as far from humble as anyone I have ever encountered.
I had the idea that
"You consider the substitutionary death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ inadequate sacrifice for sins inadequate."..
You responded here that it comes from a demented mind (You made an ignorant statement regarding my beliefs. Your saying what I believe is not what I believe. Where do you get off telling others what they believe? The fact that you consistently do that to those you disagree with, as well as the numerous brain injuries you have told us about, indicates your demented mind.) Example: your statement two posts up from this one where you state atheists think they are Gods
...while you and your bud call that message a "steaming pile of dog [bleep]" on the next thread. Yes, I consider your condescending, hateful, holier than thou, rantings, videos and links to be about as valuable as canine feces. Has your presence and delivery here gained any converts to Christianity? Name one.

This isn't unusual. You attack most gospel (good news) messages that have the theme of the Savior's all sufficient sacrifice. What am I to think??? As usual, you are a liar. I have never attacked any "gospel". Your unusual dogma is not gospel. My attacks are entirely personal and aimed at YOU and YOU alone.
Is that not what you think?
Your answer to the gospel is to either twist my words and call ME a liar or to say that my Sunday post is demented. The only one who twists words here is you. The quotes that I provide are your words verbatim, the dates of the quotes are provided; anyone who questions their accuracy can find them easy enough.
I ask you about what you think is required for salvation? I consider entering into a serious religious discussion with you to be a waste of time. Let's just say that I agree with very little of what you post and leave it at that.
Simple question. I will take that as your answer then. Whatever

I wonder what the Lord thinks when He reads your comments that blaspheme His Son and all that He offers as a gift? Please provide a link to a quote where I have blasphemed the Lord. You seem to conflate my personal opinion of you as blasphemy. Let me tell you a little secret Happy, you are not the Lord. You also don't have the commission to name reprobates, but that doesn't seem to stop you.
There are only so many chances anyone gets that offer of life, then it's too late. Thank you for stating the obvious, no need to make yourself a nuisance preaching to the choir.



Originally Posted by LBP
Absolutely!


Is this situation supposed to continue in Heaven.....people behave badly, do the wrong thing and have to be constantly forgiven, forever and ever amen? Like on Earth, so in Heaven? Once a sinner, always a Sinner?
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
You may not understand John 14:17….. God comes and abides with and within the believer. When that happens, there is no doubt.

The witness within of the Holy Spirit is powerful.


Well there are 4000 recognized religions on this planet and all of them have members who believe just as powerfully as you that they are on the one true path. Yep, no doubts in their mind at all.

And yet simple deductive logic tells you that 3999 of them have to be wrong. So much for the accuracy of powerful feelings.


Tf49


Well, you are focused on my personal belief and how you think it is not different from someone else's belief. You are not getting the "why" of my belief.

OK.... I'll just repost a response to one who was claiming that there is "no evidence" and leave you all to it.....





".......Well, there is evidence for the existence of God all around us. You either reject it or don’t see it.

Also, as it has been posted before, when the Creator comes to abide “within” the believer, that believer indeed has “proof.”

But, you apparently don’t see and you apparently “don’t have.”

Still, you comment above piques some interest. You state “…. the burden of proof lies with the one making the positive “claim.”….

I think this is nothing but word bafflegab. You may believe that Christians are making a “claim,” but I see it as Christians providing a testimony or witness of our experience.

But, you choose you words carefully and there is one interesting way to look at your post.

Should you be judged….. by a God you claim has not proved His existence….. this God, at your judgment may “play the video tape” of your life and show you literally dozens of times He made His presence known to you…. Only to have you somehow reject the witness.

No one can “argue” you into belief….. Only God can “get you to flip.” I wonder how many times the Spirit has knocked on your door, but you refused to answer the knock. You will say that that has never happened. I would expect that God will show you He knocked dozens of times when the tape rolls."


If you were born and raised a muslim you'd be using the same arguement for allah. How do you know your god isn't actually allah? Did he clearly identify himself to you?

By the way, why would god be keeping video footage? Does it say this in the bible? Wouldn't both parties already know what they've done, or is god forgetfull these days? Sounds like some fresh bafflegab to me.



Hmm…. You and willto don’t seem to get allegory or even metaphor…… I guess I am not surprised.


You missed the first part of my response.

Your allegorical metaphorical statement was nonsense so I responded with more speculation.




No, I did not miss the first part of your response. I chose not to respond to it because it is just complete nonsense. See Brandolini’s Law.


Many people raised in one religion convert to another. Nobody is locked in because of how they were raised. Many, after being raised in a particular belief system choose to become non-believers … or adherents of different beliefs of their own choice. The “ first part of ‘your’ response” is simply an untruth.

Seems to me that one frequent poster on this forum has related that he was once a Christian and then later abandoned the faith. I wonder how he was raised.
Being born into a culture, you are conditioned by that culture. You don't choose the culture you were born into, or the religion you grew up with....but if exposed to other cultures, other ideas, it is possible to change the way you see the world.
If god was a planet manager the galaxy area manager would go jehovah- we gave you a budget of infinity and a workscope of infinity with a supporting staff of infinity and after 6000 years you have.

1. Failed to communicate to all staff you were the manager. It took 6000 years before the last races even heard you were the manager
2. 70% of the people you created still dont believe you exist.
3. 70% of all people live in abject poverty.
4 . You have an excessiive disciplinary policy being just 80 years of crime in a lifetime is somehow punished by a billion billions of years in hell.


Jehovah would not get his bonus.

Seriously you could give the same power to the average gamer millenial stoner and get better KPI's.
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
You may not understand John 14:17….. God comes and abides with and within the believer. When that happens, there is no doubt.

The witness within of the Holy Spirit is powerful.


Well there are 4000 recognized religions on this planet and all of them have members who believe just as powerfully as you that they are on the one true path. Yep, no doubts in their mind at all.

And yet simple deductive logic tells you that 3999 of them have to be wrong. So much for the accuracy of powerful feelings.


Tf49


Well, you are focused on my personal belief and how you think it is not different from someone else's belief. You are not getting the "why" of my belief.

OK.... I'll just repost a response to one who was claiming that there is "no evidence" and leave you all to it.....





".......Well, there is evidence for the existence of God all around us. You either reject it or don’t see it.

Also, as it has been posted before, when the Creator comes to abide “within” the believer, that believer indeed has “proof.”

But, you apparently don’t see and you apparently “don’t have.”

Still, you comment above piques some interest. You state “…. the burden of proof lies with the one making the positive “claim.”….

I think this is nothing but word bafflegab. You may believe that Christians are making a “claim,” but I see it as Christians providing a testimony or witness of our experience.

But, you choose you words carefully and there is one interesting way to look at your post.

Should you be judged….. by a God you claim has not proved His existence….. this God, at your judgment may “play the video tape” of your life and show you literally dozens of times He made His presence known to you…. Only to have you somehow reject the witness.

No one can “argue” you into belief….. Only God can “get you to flip.” I wonder how many times the Spirit has knocked on your door, but you refused to answer the knock. You will say that that has never happened. I would expect that God will show you He knocked dozens of times when the tape rolls."


If you were born and raised a muslim you'd be using the same arguement for allah. How do you know your god isn't actually allah? Did he clearly identify himself to you?

By the way, why would god be keeping video footage? Does it say this in the bible? Wouldn't both parties already know what they've done, or is god forgetfull these days? Sounds like some fresh bafflegab to me.



Hmm…. You and willto don’t seem to get allegory or even metaphor…… I guess I am not surprised.


You missed the first part of my response.

Your allegorical metaphorical statement was nonsense so I responded with more speculation.




No, I did not miss the first part of your response. I chose not to respond to it because it is just complete nonsense. See Brandolini’s Law.



No it's not. The key point being there is one thing all religions have in common - they can't prove their gods exist. Pick one that suits you best or just go with whatever you were born in to.

Or have a good think about it and realise the truth of the matter is that there is no truth in it at all. Many people have lost the baggage and admit to being better off for it. We've evolved to have a brain that can perform critical thinking - why adopt a belief system that says this is wrong and that punishes you for using it?

Brandolini's law is a falsehood. The onus is always to prove a claim, not to try and disprove a false allegation. An unproved claim doesn't warrant consideration.
So let me get this straight, intelligent life and all of creation can come from nothing, but a divine awareness could not…?
Originally Posted by antlers
So let me get this straight, intelligent life and all of creation can come from nothing, but a divine awareness could not…?



So let me get your position straight. The universe could not have come from nothing on it's own but an omnipotent all powerful God could just spring into existence from nothing on it's own. See how that can come right back at you?

Unlike you I don't pretend to know all the mysteries of the origin of the universe. I DON'T KNOW is a perfect acceptable answer to some questions. But not knowing something should not cause you to sit down and make up a fairytale to fill in the gaps of your knowledge. And that is basically what religions are

Originally Posted by antlers
So let me get this straight, intelligent life and all of creation can come from nothing, but a divine awareness could not…?


Life didn't come from nothing. There is no proof of a divine awareness - it's a man made idea to fill the gaps but has no factual basis ie we don't know, therefore god/aliens/magic.

I repeat the statement - science doesn't know everything, religion knows nothing.
If you choose to believe that first life emerged from no life with no help, then so be it. If you choose to believe that you go from lifeless matter to the digital elegance of DNA without a Creator, then so be it.
Originally Posted by antlers
So let me get this straight, intelligent life and all of creation can come from nothing, but a divine awareness could not…?


Why do you say 'from nothing" if we don't know whether time had a beginning or not? The Universe may be cyclic, a part of a multiverse or something not yet imagined.

Nor did life emerge 'from nothing.' We have a planet, water, chemistry, energy from the sun, etc, etc....which is something, not nothing.
Originally Posted by antlers
If you choose to believe that first life emerged from no life with no help, then so be it. If you choose to believe that you go from lifeless matter to the digital elegance of DNA without a Creator, then so be it.


We consider the evidence, not "choose to believe." Your "choose to believe" is a rationale.
Originally Posted by antlers
If you choose to believe that first life emerged from no life with no help, then so be it. If you choose to believe that you go from lifeless matter to the digital elegance of DNA without a Creator, then so be it.


You are the one choosing to believe a completely unsubstatiated story. I do not choose to believe anything. I examine actual evidence as it becomes available which shapes my opinion. I follow the facts. I don't try to manipulate the facts to fit a story I want to believe.

The scientific method of figuring out the true nature of things has given us technology that has taken us from living in caves wielding stone tipped spears to landing spaceships on distant planets. Not to mention all the advancements in the medical world that help preserve and lengthen our lives.

Religion? Well it's kept much of the earths population mired in ignorance to the point that we are still killing each other in many areas over who is praying to the correct invisible friend.
Then post up that “actual evidence” that shapes your opinion that first life emerged from no life with no help, and that it’s gone from lifeless matter to the complexity of DNA without a Creator. Post up those “facts” that you follow that leads you to your opinion that first life emerged from no life with no help, and that it’s gone from lifeless matter to the complexity of DNA without a Creator. Show us how a creator-less creation is ‘substantiated.’
Again; we don't know, therefore God, is not an explanation.
Originally Posted by antlers
Then post up that “actual evidence” that shapes your opinion that first life emerged from no life with no help, and that it’s gone from lifeless matter to the complexity of DNA without a Creator. Post up those “facts” that you follow that leads you to your opinion that you’ve made clear on this thread regarding this matter.



So you want me to copy and paste 100 years of scientific research into this thread. And do it in such a way that even your simple science denying ass can understand it. I can post some links to good reads for you if you like. And oh yeah. While I am getting ready to post them please reciprocate by posting the hard factual evidence of your specific god's existence.
No. I simply want you to provide the “actual evidence” and “facts” that you said existed, specifically the ones that substantiate that everything came into being without a creator.

And while you’re at it, go ahead and show where I ever said I had “hard factual evidence” of God’s existence.
Start here. Read these then I will suggest a few more.

The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution by Richard Dawkins

Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne
Now where is your evidence for God?
I haven’t opened this thread until today. Mostly because any thread with more than 2-3 pages turns into a chit show.

Yawn, the usual Richard Craneums show up …

But the answer would have to be …obviously not.
Saved from what exactly? Religion is hocus pocus if you really think about it. I don't hate on anyone that believes in such things, but don't expect me to drink the same koolaid.
Originally Posted by antlers
No. I simply want you to provide the “actual evidence” and “facts” that you said existed, specifically the ones that substantiate that everything came into being without a creator.


I have not said any evidence exists for how the universe first came into being. Did you miss the part about I DON'T KNOW being the way to answer some questions. Now you explain why not knowing the answer to that question makes it okay to invent a God with no evidence whatsoever to support the claim. You always ask questions but never answer any. Wonder why?
Now you’re crawfishin’.




shocker
Originally Posted by Willto
Originally Posted by antlers
Then post up that “actual evidence” that shapes your opinion that first life emerged from no life with no help, and that it’s gone from lifeless matter to the complexity of DNA without a Creator. Post up those “facts” that you follow that leads you to your opinion that you’ve made clear on this thread regarding this matter.



So you want me to copy and paste 100 years of scientific research into this thread. And do it in such a way that even your simple science denying ass can understand it. I can post some links to good reads for you if you like. And oh yeah. While I am getting ready to post them please reciprocate by posting the hard factual evidence of your specific god's existence.


It's no use - he repeatedly, flippantly dismisses the evidence, and likes the gaps so he can claim "therefore god" even without a thread of supporting evidence for his case. An honest person sees the gaps and says "I don't know". This delusion is common to believers. I really can't understand why people can be so dishonest with themselves - they otherwise appear normal in the more mundane tasks of daily life. You know, they will stop at red traffic lights and avoid running with sissors - their faith doesn't extend beyond common sense in these instances at least.
Originally Posted by antlers
Now you’re crawfishin’.




shocker



Now you are just proving yourself a liar. Not crawfishing on a thing. And what evidence can you provide for your claims? Does the word ZERO ring a bell? I don't know the exact way the universe originated. No one does. That means you too. There exists plenty of good research on how it has developed since if you care to read it. None of which involves inventing a fairytale story.
I have no problem with evolution.

I absolutely believe that the world and life on this earth are God's creation, and I believe that evolution was a very clever way that God used to achieve His creative objectives. I see no incompatibilities between science and spirituality. None. I see science as a source of spirituality.
Originally Posted by antlers
I have no problem with evolution.

I absolutely believe that the world and life on this earth are God's creation, and I believe that evolution was a very clever way that God used to achieve His creative objectives. I see no incompatibilities between science and spirituality. None. I see science as a source of spirituality.



Great. Then show me the proof of this god and we can wrap this up all on the same side.
I choose to believe what I do. And you choose to believe what you do, despite your assertion that you have “actual evidence” that you clearly don’t have. The ‘only’ one in this particular discourse between you and I who has mentioned “evidence” for God’s existence has been you. Clearly.
Originally Posted by antlers
None. I see science as a source of spirituality.




You got proof of "spirituality"? What is "spirituality" anyway?
Originally Posted by antlers
I choose to believe what I do. And you choose to believe what you do, despite your assertion that you have “actual evidence” that you clearly don’t have. The ‘only’ one in this particular discourse between you and I who has mentioned “evidence” for God’s existence has been you. Clearly.


Can you choose not to believe whatever it is you do believe is true? Being convinced of the truth, are you able to just switch your conviction off as a matter of choice?
Originally Posted by antlers
I choose to believe what I do. And you choose to believe what you do, despite your assertion that you have “actual evidence” that you clearly don’t have. The ‘only’ one in this particular discourse between you and I who has mentioned “evidence” for God’s existence has been you. Clearly.


I have never said that I have evidence of the origin of the universe. You are a consistent liar on that claim which doesn't seem to jibe with the whole Christian restriction on bearing false witness. But hey, when have Christians ever abided by their own rules.

I said I base my opinions on evidense not fairytale stories. My official opinion on the ultimate begining of the universe is (as stated before) I DON'T KNOW because there is no definitive evidence in that area. But why on earth would we fill the inevitable gaps in our scientific knowledge with made up fairytales for which there is no evidence at all. Where is the logic in that?


Life clearly didn't need a creator otherwise there would be clear evidence of a creator. Existance of a creator needs to be proved before any evidence can be claimed against him/her/it.
Opinions and beliefs are both decisions that someone thinks is true. And you’ve voiced a lot of yours in this discourse, but you’ve provided zero “actual evidence” at all upon which you claim to base your opinions…which again, are simply beliefs by another name. I have no problem with your beliefs.
Originally Posted by antlers
Opinions and beliefs are both decisions that someone thinks is true. And you’ve voiced a lot of yours on this thread, but you’ve provided zero “actual evidence” at all upon which you claim to base your opinions…which again, are simply beliefs by another name. I have no problem with you beliefs.


Where is the evidence you base your beliefs on? Or do you admit they are based on nothing.
And keep in mind you are the one claiming a god exists. It is therefore not incumbent apon me to prove he doesn't but rather your task to show me the evidence that he does.
People almost invariably arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof but on the basis of what they find attractive. And then they go looking for reasons to substantiate their belief. This applies to one’s ‘rejection of’ the existence of God (as you appear to have), as well as one’s ‘belief in’ the existence of God (which I definitely do have).
You don't understand science and project your ignorance as a shared mindset of everyone else.
Quote
People almost invariably arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof but on the basis of what they find attractive.


So you just like the story and decided to believe it despite a lack of any evidence to support it. Okay.


Ultimately I don't give a chit what you want to believe. You can nail the bumper bracket from a 73 Volvo to your wall; light candles under it; and sacrifice a chicken to it every day for all I care. But if you enter a conversation where you are going to try and chit on science for the gaps in it's understanding of the universe while on the other hand believing in a deity for which there is no evidence at all, then yeah I will push back.
Originally Posted by antlers
People almost invariably arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof but on the basis of what they find attractive. And then they go looking for reasons to substantiate their belief. This applies to one’s ‘rejection of’ the existence of God (as you appear to have), as well as one’s ‘belief in’ the existence of God (which I definitely do have).


A lack of conviction in the existence of a God is justified by an absence of evidence for the existence of a God.
Originally Posted by antlers
People almost invariably arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof but on the basis of what they find attractive.
Originally Posted by Willto
So you just like the story and decided to believe it despite a lack of any evidence to support it. Okay. Ultimately I don't give a chit what you want to believe. You can nail the bumper bracket from a 73 Volvo to your wall; light candles under it; and sacrifice a chicken to it every day for all I care.
We see things differently. That’s OK with me. I’m not bothered by your beliefs.
Originally Posted by Willto
But if you enter a conversation where you are going to try and chit on science for the gaps in it's understanding of the universe while on the other hand believing in a deity for which there is no evidence at all, then yeah I will push back.
I’m OK with what you choose to believe. I disagree with your beliefs on this matter, especially the highlighted part of your comment above…I don’t feel that way at all…but if you choose to see it that way, it’s OK with me.
Originally Posted by antlers
People almost invariably arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof but on the basis of what they find attractive. And then they go looking for reasons to substantiate their belief. This applies to one’s ‘rejection of’ the existence of God (as you appear to have), as well as one’s ‘belief in’ the existence of God (which I definitely do have).


Bam!
Have we got this matter settled yet?
Originally Posted by Hastings
Have we got this matter settled yet?


Don't know. Apparently Billy Graham and everyone else like him are roasting right now.


So..no. Apparently hardly anyone is or has been saved.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Have we got this matter settled yet?



Um no… Apparently we’re at scuttling one’s beliefs so we can all be on the same side. Some of us are ok with you not believing in God, Jesus Christ and the resurrection but the ones who don’t believe in such things are not ok with our beliefs.
Originally Posted by Springcove
Originally Posted by Hastings
Have we got this matter settled yet?

Um no… Apparently we’re at scuttling one’s beliefs so we can all be on the same side. Some of us are ok with you not believing in God, Jesus Christ and the resurrection but the ones who don’t believe in such things are not ok with our beliefs.
I'm not atheist, and I believe Jesus was the agent of the supernatural creator.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by Hastings
If the ocean suddenly broke through the strait between mainland Turkey and Europe and inundated thousands of square miles you can bet the same thing happened other places all over the world. I would imagine people living close to the original beach had boats on which some survived. I'm not believing the Alps, Himalayas, Rockies, etc. went under water. You don't believe that, do you?


Those mountains didn't exist prior to the Flood. Even secular geologist recognize they are uplifted.

Well, yes, the mountains are uplifting even now. How long ago was the flood? How old are those mountains? If every piece of ice on earth melted do you think water would have covered the mountains as they were 5000, 10,000, or 12,000 years ago? Mount Ararat is almost 17,000 feet above sea level. Was it flat land back then?


Flood was about 5,000 -6,000 years ago. Due to tides and current beyond our present understanding the earth would have been pretty much planed to almost smooth. Any graduate student or serious student of geology knows if the earth was smoothed out, water would be about two miles deep.
Originally Posted by Willto
Because the next logical question (as you already stated) simply becomes Okay, where did this God come from? What made it? How does it have these powers?
And even if one subscribed to the "Hey all this must have come from somewhere so there must be a God" line of thinking (I don't) that generalistic notion in no way indicates which of the many gods the religions on this earth subscribe to is the correct one.


Your question is a logical dodge. It's like asking, to whom is the bachelor married? Only an Infinite Being could qualify as God. Anything less is angel or demon worship.

The idea that it all came from somewhere actually supports the idea God exist because even a child knows nothing produces nothing. It makes no difference how many degrees a person has they know deep inside the child is correct.
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Nope, it never happened. There's evidence of populations of people living elsewhere around the world before and after the time of the alledged flood event. Geological evidence dismisses a global flood event.

The people who wrote the bible didn't know that so got caught out on that lie too. The biblical tale of creation is also fiction.


Your ignorant prejudice is obvious when you talk about time lines.


Where's your evidence to support your accusation?

No evidence that man was even ever globally wiped out, let alone by a mega-flood that never happened.


Because you don't accept evidence in no way lets you off the hook.
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by Hastings
If the ocean suddenly broke through the strait between mainland Turkey and Europe and inundated thousands of square miles you can bet the same thing happened other places all over the world. I would imagine people living close to the original beach had boats on which some survived. I'm not believing the Alps, Himalayas, Rockies, etc. went under water. You don't believe that, do you?

Those mountains didn't exist prior to the Flood. Even secular geologist recognize they are uplifted.

Well, yes, the mountains are uplifting even now. How long ago was the flood? How old are those mountains? If every piece of ice on earth melted do you think water would have covered the mountains as they were 5000, 10,000, or 12,000 years ago? Mount Ararat is almost 17,000 feet above sea level. Was it flat land back then?

Flood was about 5,000 -6,000 years ago. Due to tides and current beyond our present understanding the earth would have been pretty much planed to almost smooth. Any graduate student or serious student of geology knows if the earth was smoothed out, water would be about two miles deep.
I didn't know that. I was lucky to graduate high school.
Quote
even a child knows nothing produces nothing.


Then how did god come from nothing. If it's absurd to think that the universe may have always existed in some form then it's equally ridiculous to turn around and say that a god has just always existed. If everything must come from something then where did god come from? You want to give this god you believe in a special exemption from the same logic you want to force others to rigidly adhere to.
Who here is ‘forcing’ anyone else here “to rigidly adhere to” anything…? We’re just having a discussion. On a discussion forum.
Originally Posted by antlers
Who here is ‘forcing’ anyone else here “to rigidly adhere to” anything…? We’re just having a discussion. On a discussion forum.


Wasn't talking to you. I was pointing out the ridiculous double standard of saying on the one hand that the universe must come from something but then exempting a god from that same logic. This is pretty easy to understand. It's almost like you guys are intentionally obtuse.
As opposed to “you guys” pointing out that life on earth and all of creation can come from nothing, but then exempting God from that same logic.
Originally Posted by antlers
As opposed to “you guys” pointing out that life on earth and all of creation can come from nothing, but then exempting God from that same logic.


Well the difference is that the universe undeniably exists. There is no evidence of god.
I didn't make up the existence of the universe or the earth. But men did make up god as a means to explain it's origin.
Originally Posted by Willto
There is no evidence of god.
Others choose to see things differently than you do. And that is their prerogative.
Originally Posted by Willto
But men did make up god as a means to explain it's origin.
That’s your assertion; I disagree with it, but I have no problem with it.
If you believe in a highest good, you believe in God.
If you believe in truth, you believe in God.
If you believe in transcendent beauty, you believe in God.

Is that worthy of worship? Should we worship this?
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by antlers
I choose to believe what I do. And you choose to believe what you do, despite your assertion that you have “actual evidence” that you clearly don’t have. The ‘only’ one in this particular discourse between you and I who has mentioned “evidence” for God’s existence has been you. Clearly.


Can you choose not to believe whatever it is you do believe is true? Being convinced of the truth, are you able to just switch your conviction off as a matter of choice?


No answer?
If you believe in an uncaused cause, you believe in God.
I read that the universe is 13.8 billion years old and was formed when gravity or something pulled all matter into such a dense mass that something had to give and we had the mother of a nuclear type of an explosion. Young earth folks say against all evidence that creation was like 5,000 years ago and earth was created and populated in 7 days. I am not atheist but sticking to that 5000 year story doesn't wash. I believe a lot of these 5,000 year creationists cause a lot of thinking people to shake their heads and walk off.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
If you believe in an uncaused cause, you believe in God.


False Dichotomy. There are other possibilities, the universe may be cyclic, a part of a multiverse, etc, etc....it is not known.

We don't know.

We don't know, therefore God, is not an argument.
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by Willto
There is no evidence of god.
Others choose to see things differently than you do. And that is their prerogative.
Originally Posted by Willto
But men did make up god as a means to explain it's origin.
That’s your assertion; I disagree with it, but I have no problem with it.


How does seeing things differently relate to evidence? Seeing evidence where no evidence exists? Interpreting something that may have multiple explanations in one's own favour?

Evidence is something that anyone can examine and draw much the same conclusion.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Tyrone
If you believe in an uncaused cause, you believe in God.


False Dichotomy. There are other possibilities, the universe may be cyclic, a part of a multiverse, etc, etc....it is not known.

We don't know.

We don't know, therefore God, is not an argument.
You are proposing an uncaused cause too.
[Linked Image from hosting.photobucket.com]For those who are interested in such, you might enjoy this read.
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by Hastings
If the ocean suddenly broke through the strait between mainland Turkey and Europe and inundated thousands of square miles you can bet the same thing happened other places all over the world. I would imagine people living close to the original beach had boats on which some survived. I'm not believing the Alps, Himalayas, Rockies, etc. went under water. You don't believe that, do you?


Those mountains didn't exist prior to the Flood. Even secular geologist recognize they are uplifted.

Well, yes, the mountains are uplifting even now. How long ago was the flood? How old are those mountains? If every piece of ice on earth melted do you think water would have covered the mountains as they were 5000, 10,000, or 12,000 years ago? Mount Ararat is almost 17,000 feet above sea level. Was it flat land back then?


Flood was about 5,000 -6,000 years ago. Due to tides and current beyond our present understanding the earth would have been pretty much planed to almost smooth. Any graduate student or serious student of geology knows if the earth was smoothed out, water would be about two miles deep.




The bible says it rained for 40 days and 40 nights until the highest mountains were covered to a depth of 15 cubits. It doesn't say the earth was planed smooth. You say the earth was planed smooth.
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Nope, it never happened. There's evidence of populations of people living elsewhere around the world before and after the time of the alledged flood event. Geological evidence dismisses a global flood event.

The people who wrote the bible didn't know that so got caught out on that lie too. The biblical tale of creation is also fiction.


Your ignorant prejudice is obvious when you talk about time lines.


Where's your evidence to support your accusation?

No evidence that man was even ever globally wiped out, let alone by a mega-flood that never happened.


Because you don't accept evidence in no way lets you off the hook.



I make my statements based on the plethora of evidence and peer reviewed science. Just because you choose to be ignorant you can't just accuse everyone else of the same.
Originally Posted by antlers
As opposed to “you guys” pointing out that life on earth and all of creation can come from nothing, but then exempting God from that same logic.



We're not saying it came from nothing, we say we don't know yet. You say it was a creator and then don't (can't) provide any evidence. The former position is accurate and honest, the latter is dishonest - asserting something to be true without knowing it to be true.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Tyrone
If you believe in an uncaused cause, you believe in God.

False Dichotomy. There are other possibilities, the universe may be cyclic, a part of a multiverse, etc, etc....it is not known.
We don't know.
We don't know, therefore God, is not an argument.
Would you at least say the super natural is a possibility?
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by antlers
As opposed to “you guys” pointing out that life on earth and all of creation can come from nothing, but then exempting God from that same logic.
We're not saying it came from nothing, we say we don't know yet. You say it was a creator and then don't (can't) provide any evidence. The former position is accurate and honest, the latter is dishonest - asserting something to be true without knowing it to be true.
In your mind is the concept of a creator a possibility?
Originally Posted by antlers
If you choose to believe that first life emerged from no life with no help, then so be it. If you choose to believe that you go from lifeless matter to the digital elegance of DNA without a Creator, then so be it.


DNA is not digital, it's a chain of nucleotides, which are organic.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by antlers
As opposed to “you guys” pointing out that life on earth and all of creation can come from nothing, but then exempting God from that same logic.
We're not saying it came from nothing, we say we don't know yet. You say it was a creator and then don't (can't) provide any evidence. The former position is accurate and honest, the latter is dishonest - asserting something to be true without knowing it to be true.
In your mind is the concept of a creator a possibility?


An intelligent creator - no.

Mono- or poly- creator/s as represented by the writings of any religion - hell no.

But other than that, unless clear, demonstrable, unequivocal proof comes to light, consideration is not really warranted since it's only speculation (just like I don't give any consideration to magic or ghosts etc). The possibilities that can be generated are endless, and meaningless unless true - except for entertainment value I suppose.
Originally Posted by antlers
Then post up that “actual evidence” that shapes your opinion that first life emerged from no life with no help, and that it’s gone from lifeless matter to the complexity of DNA without a Creator. Post up those “facts” that you follow that leads you to your opinion that first life emerged from no life with no help, and that it’s gone from lifeless matter to the complexity of DNA without a Creator. Show us how a creator-less creation is ‘substantiated.’


Here you go:

https://www.amazon.com/Miller-Levine-Biology-Level-Student/dp/0133669513/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2F285MRE7XJ3P&keywords=kenneth+miller+biology&qid=1641603315&sprefix=kenneth+miller%2Caps%2C126&sr=8-1
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
If you choose to believe that first life emerged from no life with no help, then so be it. If you choose to believe that you go from lifeless matter to the digital elegance of DNA without a Creator, then so be it.
DNA is not digital, it's a chain of nucleotides, which are organic.
The discovery of the structure of DNA transformed biology profoundly, catalysing the sequencing of the human genome and engendering a new view of biology as an information science. Two features of DNA structure account for much of its remarkable impact on science: its digital nature and its complementarity, whereby one strand of the helix binds perfectly with its partner. DNA has two types of digital information--the genes that encode proteins, which are the molecular machines of life, and the gene regulatory networks that specify the behaviour of the genes.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12540920/
Originally Posted by antlers
No. I simply want you to provide the “actual evidence” and “facts” that you said existed, specifically the ones that substantiate that everything came into being without a creator.

And while you’re at it, go ahead and show where I ever said I had “hard factual evidence” of God’s existence.


Are you saying you don't have “hard factual evidence” of God’s existence?
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Willto
Originally Posted by antlers
Then post up that “actual evidence” that shapes your opinion that first life emerged from no life with no help, and that it’s gone from lifeless matter to the complexity of DNA without a Creator. Post up those “facts” that you follow that leads you to your opinion that you’ve made clear on this thread regarding this matter.



So you want me to copy and paste 100 years of scientific research into this thread. And do it in such a way that even your simple science denying ass can understand it. I can post some links to good reads for you if you like. And oh yeah. While I am getting ready to post them please reciprocate by posting the hard factual evidence of your specific god's existence.


It's no use - he repeatedly, flippantly dismisses the evidence, and likes the gaps so he can claim "therefore god" even without a thread of supporting evidence for his case. An honest person sees the gaps and says "I don't know". This delusion is common to believers. I really can't understand why people can be so dishonest with themselves - they otherwise appear normal in the more mundane tasks of daily life. You know, they will stop at red traffic lights and avoid running with sissors - their faith doesn't extend beyond common sense in these instances at least.


Because he wants the afterlife. He can't bear the thought the life is fleeting, and when it ends so does his existence.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
No. I simply want you to provide the “actual evidence” and “facts” that you said existed, specifically the ones that substantiate that everything came into being without a creator. And while you’re at it, go ahead and show where I ever said I had “hard factual evidence” of God’s existence.
Are you saying you don't have “hard factual evidence” of God’s existence?
I choose to believe what I do.

Do you have “hard factual evidence” of God’s non-existence…?
Originally Posted by Willto
Originally Posted by antlers
I choose to believe what I do. And you choose to believe what you do, despite your assertion that you have “actual evidence” that you clearly don’t have. The ‘only’ one in this particular discourse between you and I who has mentioned “evidence” for God’s existence has been you. Clearly.


I have never said that I have evidence of the origin of the universe. You are a consistent liar on that claim which doesn't seem to jibe with the whole Christian restriction on bearing false witness. But hey, when have Christians ever abided by their own rules.

I said I base my opinions on evidense not fairytale stories. My official opinion on the ultimate begining of the universe is (as stated before) I DON'T KNOW because there is no definitive evidence in that area. But why on earth would we fill the inevitable gaps in our scientific knowledge with made up fairytales for which there is no evidence at all. Where is the logic in that?


The 10 Commandments are part of the Old Testament Law. Antlers believes Jesus death on the cross abolished the law and it no longer applies to Christians.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Because he wants the afterlife. He can't bear the thought that life is fleeting, and when it ends so does his existence.
I believe that following Jesus has as much or more to do with this life as it does the next.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by Hastings
If the ocean suddenly broke through the strait between mainland Turkey and Europe and inundated thousands of square miles you can bet the same thing happened other places all over the world. I would imagine people living close to the original beach had boats on which some survived. I'm not believing the Alps, Himalayas, Rockies, etc. went under water. You don't believe that, do you?

Those mountains didn't exist prior to the Flood. Even secular geologist recognize they are uplifted.

Well, yes, the mountains are uplifting even now. How long ago was the flood? How old are those mountains? If every piece of ice on earth melted do you think water would have covered the mountains as they were 5000, 10,000, or 12,000 years ago? Mount Ararat is almost 17,000 feet above sea level. Was it flat land back then?

Flood was about 5,000 -6,000 years ago. Due to tides and current beyond our present understanding the earth would have been pretty much planed to almost smooth. Any graduate student or serious student of geology knows if the earth was smoothed out, water would be about two miles deep.
I didn't know that. I was lucky to graduate high school.


That's because it's not true. Ringman gets his "science" from Young Earth Creationist sites such as Answers in Genesis.
As a High School graduate, you are actually more educated than Ringman who only has a GED, and never graduated High School.
Originally Posted by antlers
I choose to believe what I do.
Do you have “hard factual evidence” of God’s non-existence…?
I believe there is a creator also.
But once again, proving a negative is not something that can done. At least with this subject it cannot.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
If you believe in a highest good, you believe in God.
If you believe in truth, you believe in God.
If you believe in transcendent beauty, you believe in God.

Is that worthy of worship? Should we worship this?


Not true.
You can believe in all those things without believing in supernatural beings.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by antlers
I choose to believe what I do.
Do you have “hard factual evidence” of God’s non-existence…?
I believe there is a creator also. But once again, proving a negative is not something that can done. At least with this subject it cannot.
If you can't prove beyond reasonable doubt that certain things don't exist, then the claim is just false. We prove the nonexistence of things on a regular basis.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/believing-bull/201109/you-can-prove-negative?amp
Originally Posted by Hastings
I read that the universe is 13.8 billion years old and was formed when gravity or something pulled all matter into such a dense mass that something had to give and we had the mother of a nuclear type of an explosion. Young earth folks say against all evidence that creation was like 5,000 years ago and earth was created and populated in 7 days. I am not atheist but sticking to that 5000 year story doesn't wash. I believe a lot of these 5,000 year creationists cause a lot of thinking people to shake their heads and walk off.


In order to believe the Bible is perfect in every factual detail, a 6,000 to 10,000 year old earth is required. Once you no longer believe the age of the earth as portrayed in the Bible is wrong it opens up the question to how much more of it is wrong. Additionally, if the God inspired Bible is wrong about this, God is not all knowing, with brings into question all other attributes attributed to him in the Bible.

From there, it get's worse for Christians. No literal creation story, not Adam and Eve. No Adam and Eve no original Sin. Without Original Sin there's no need for the Crucifixion, and Reresection, without which there's no pathway to Heaven and an eternity in Happily Ever After Land.

So, without a young earth, there's no trip to Disney Land.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Tyrone
If you believe in an uncaused cause, you believe in God.

False Dichotomy. There are other possibilities, the universe may be cyclic, a part of a multiverse, etc, etc....it is not known.
We don't know.
We don't know, therefore God, is not an argument.
Would you at least say the super natural is a possibility?
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by antlers
As opposed to “you guys” pointing out that life on earth and all of creation can come from nothing, but then exempting God from that same logic.
We're not saying it came from nothing, we say we don't know yet. You say it was a creator and then don't (can't) provide any evidence. The former position is accurate and honest, the latter is dishonest - asserting something to be true without knowing it to be true.
In your mind is the concept of a creator a possibility?


Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The time to consider super natural causes or Creators is when extraordinary evidence leads in that direction.
Honest question. It seems to bother some of you that people have faith why?
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
No. I simply want you to provide the “actual evidence” and “facts” that you said existed, specifically the ones that substantiate that everything came into being without a creator. And while you’re at it, go ahead and show where I ever said I had “hard factual evidence” of God’s existence.
Are you saying you don't have “hard factual evidence” of God’s existence?
I choose to believe what I do.

Do you have “hard factual evidence” of God’s non-existence…?


How about a straight answer?
Originally Posted by Springcove
Honest question. It seems to bother some of you that people have faith why?

Honest answer:
I'm not bothered in the least by the faithful. I despise hypocrite Bible thumpers who feel the need to push their beliefs on others.
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
No. I simply want you to provide the “actual evidence” and “facts” that you said existed, specifically the ones that substantiate that everything came into being without a creator. And while you’re at it, go ahead and show where I ever said I had “hard factual evidence” of God’s existence.
Are you saying you don't have “hard factual evidence” of God’s existence?
I choose to believe what I do.

Do you have “hard factual evidence” of God’s non-existence…?


There you go again, "shifting the burden of proof" because you have no good evidence.
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by antlers
I choose to believe what I do.
Do you have “hard factual evidence” of God’s non-existence…?
I believe there is a creator also. But once again, proving a negative is not something that can done. At least with this subject it cannot.
If you can't prove beyond reasonable doubt that certain things don't exist, then the claim is just false. We prove the nonexistence of things on a regular basis.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/believing-bull/201109/you-can-prove-negative?amp
His main example was the unicorn. If you tell me there were in fact unicorns I would certainly say there is no evidence that is true, but I sure cannot prove there were/are no such thing.

That article would seem to buttress the atheist position more than take away from it.
Originally Posted by NH K9
Originally Posted by Springcove
Honest question. It seems to bother some of you that people have faith why?

Honest answer:
I'm not bothered in the least by the faithful. I despise hypocrite Bible thumpers who feel the need to push their beliefs on others.


Like the OP?
Originally Posted by Springcove
Honest question. It seems to bother some of you that people have faith why?


Does it bother you that the 9/11 Hijackers murdered over 3,000 Americans and plunged us into a 20 year long war?
Originally Posted by NH K9
Originally Posted by Springcove
Honest question. It seems to bother some of you that people have faith why?

Honest answer:
I'm not bothered in the least by the faithful. I despise hypocrite Bible thumpers who feel the need to push their beliefs on others.



I agree with you 100%. People like the OP are disingenuous as they come.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Springcove
Honest question. It seems to bother some of you that people have faith why?


Does it bother you that the 9/11 Hijackers murdered over 3,000 Americans and plunged us into a 20 year long war?




Yes…
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by antlers
I choose to believe what I do.
Do you have “hard factual evidence” of God’s non-existence…?
I believe there is a creator also. But once again, proving a negative is not something that can done. At least with this subject it cannot.
If you can't prove beyond reasonable doubt that certain things don't exist, then the claim is just false. We prove the nonexistence of things on a regular basis.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/believing-bull/201109/you-can-prove-negative?amp
His main example was the unicorn. If you tell me there were in fact unicorns I would certainly say there is no evidence that is true, but I sure cannot prove there were/are no such thing.

That article would seem to buttress the atheist position more than take away from it.


Hasting, it's an issues of definitions. The religion are careful to insure the gods are unfalsifiable. In other words, constructed in such a way they cannot be disproven. It's a dishonest trick, and I suspect most Christians here know it's dishonest, but they persist anyway.

Bertrand Russell used the example of a China tea pot between Earth and Mars in 1953:

Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them. This is, of course, a mistake. If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.

And his further comments from 1958:

I ought to call myself an agnostic; but, for all practical purposes, I am an atheist. I do not think the existence of the Christian God any more probable than the existence of the Gods of Olympus or Valhalla. To take another illustration: nobody can prove that there is not between the Earth and Mars a china teapot revolving in an elliptical orbit, but nobody thinks this sufficiently likely to be taken into account in practice. I think the Christian God just as unlikely
The atheists think that by dismantling the Bible, they can dismantle the faith of Christianity. It’s a tactic that is employed over and over again by the same atheists on this board.

But the Bible didn’t even exist when Christianity was launched. And for those who choose to believe that the Bible is the foundation of Christianity, then their whole faith comes tumbling down like a house of cards…which is what the atheists want…when it’s proven, for example, that the literal account of creation in Genesis is simply not true.

I believe that the faith of Christianity is much stronger than that. I believe that the foundation of the faith of Christianity is the resurrection of Jesus, as did His earliest followers, hundreds of years before the Bible ever came into existence.

Christianity began when Jesus rose from the dead, and His followers recognized that He was who He claimed to be. People followed Jesus after the resurrection because of the resurrection. That’s how Christianity got started. It’s not near as fragile as many think; it doesn’t hang by a thread of some passage in the Old Testament, it’s much more sturdier than that. If it was that fragile, Christianity would have never survived the 1st century.
I want to be in that, Number.
Originally Posted by Springcove
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Springcove
Honest question. It seems to bother some of you that people have faith why?


Does it bother you that the 9/11 Hijackers murdered over 3,000 Americans and plunged us into a 20 year long war?


Yes…


Actions are manifest from beliefs. So actions based on accurate beliefs congruent with the objective reality yield better outcomes.
As beliefs deviate from objective reality, so do the quality of the actions based upon those bad believes and the worse the outcomes.

Unfortunately the bad impacts of those bad actions are not always limited to those holding the objectively wrong beliefs.
Combine bad fanaticism with objectively bad believes and you get very bad outcomes, like 9/11, half million "witches" burned at the stake, modern science deniers who attempt to substitute religions classes for science class, trillion is economic damage fighting the evils of modern progress, and 100 million dead under Mao.
Originally Posted by NH K9
Originally Posted by Springcove
Honest question. It seems to bother some of you that people have faith why?

Honest answer:
I'm not bothered in the least by the faithful. I despise hypocrite Bible thumpers who feel the need to push their beliefs on others.


As a believer, I'm right there with you.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Springcove
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Springcove
Honest question. It seems to bother some of you that people have faith why?


Does it bother you that the 9/11 Hijackers murdered over 3,000 Americans and plunged us into a 20 year long war?


Yes…


Actions are manifest from beliefs. So actions based on accurate beliefs congruent with the objective reality yield better outcomes.
As beliefs deviate from objective reality, so do the quality of the actions based upon those bad believes and the worse the outcomes.

Unfortunately the bad impacts of those bad actions are not always limited to those holding the objectively wrong beliefs.
Combine bad fanaticism with objectively bad believes and you get very bad outcomes, like 9/11, half million "witches" burned at the stake, modern science deniers who attempt to substitute religions classes for science class, trillion is economic damage fighting the evils of modern progress, and 100 million dead under Mao.



Different beliefs have lead to every war in the history of man. I’m not here to argue how someone believes. I’m just trying to understand why some have an issue in how I believe. I have no issue with people who don’t share my beliefs because that is their choice. I have made mine and you have made yours and I respect that.

My friend and hunting partner of more than 30 years is agnostic/atheist I’m actually not sure. I just know he doesn’t share my beliefs but it hasn’t affected are friendship because of it.

People like the OP do a disservice to a lot of Christians and that is unfortunate.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by antlers
I choose to believe what I do. Do you have “hard factual evidence” of God’s non-existence…?
I believe there is a creator also. But once again, proving a negative is not something that can done. At least with this subject it cannot.
If you can't prove beyond reasonable doubt that certain things don't exist, then the claim is just false. We prove the nonexistence of things on a regular basis.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/believing-bull/201109/you-can-prove-negative?amp
His main example was the unicorn. If you tell me there were in fact unicorns I would certainly say there is no evidence that is true, but I sure cannot prove there were/are no such thing. That article would seem to buttress the atheist position more than take away from it.
You can prove that you aren't nonexistent. I can prove that you aren’t non-existent. Atheists can’t prove that God is non-existent. You have evidence that you aren’t non-existent. I have evidence that you aren’t non-existent. Atheists have zero evidence that God is non-existent.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper



Discussion/ debate, from the Bible, on whether or not the majority of people are saved (going to heaven).
12:48

AFTER listening, what is your opinion?


https://vm.tiktok.com/TTPdMAgUvg/
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by antlers
I choose to believe what I do. Do you have “hard factual evidence” of God’s non-existence…?
I believe there is a creator also. But once again, proving a negative is not something that can done. At least with this subject it cannot.
If you can't prove beyond reasonable doubt that certain things don't exist, then the claim is just false. We prove the nonexistence of things on a regular basis.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/believing-bull/201109/you-can-prove-negative?amp
His main example was the unicorn. If you tell me there were in fact unicorns I would certainly say there is no evidence that is true, but I sure cannot prove there were/are no such thing. That article would seem to buttress the atheist position more than take away from it.
You can prove that you aren't nonexistent. I can prove that you aren’t non-existent. Atheists can’t prove that God is non-existent. You have evidence that you aren’t non-existent. I have evidence that you aren’t non-existent. Atheists have zero evidence that God is non-existent.


Hastings existence is proof that he exists. Saying that he doesn't exist is a lie. There is no proof that god/s exist, and to try and claim any evidence as something created by a god you'd have to prove his/her/its existence first.
I choose to believe what I do. When anyone demands proof for another’s faith, or proof for the basis of another’s faith…even if proof of such were possible…the demand for more proof by the skeptics would certainly follow, as would their denial. The Pharisees had proof of Jesus’ miracles, and they did exactly the above.

It’s common on every single one of these threads for the same skeptics to demand proof of another’s faith, or proof for the basis of another’s faith. The atheists on this board do just as much proselytizing for their position as the ‘Christians’ do.

I don’t have to prove anything about what I choose to believe to the skeptics…that what I have faith in is very real to me…that I have to prove the unprovable issue of faith. I do enjoy the genuine and honest discussions on these types of threads. But I feel zero compulsion to make others see things the way that I see them.

I would encourage others…those who are interested enough in it…to do their own soul searching and investigation into these things, as opposed to having any of it dictated to them by others, whether those others are believers or skeptics. For me, it all became unquestionably real when I put forth much effort to have a personal and honest relationship with Jesus.

Other’s mileage may vary.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Tyrone
If you believe in an uncaused cause, you believe in God.


False Dichotomy. There are other possibilities, the universe may be cyclic, a part of a multiverse, etc, etc....it is not known.

We don't know.

We don't know, therefore God, is not an argument.
You are proposing an uncaused cause too.


Where did I do that? Saying ''I don't know'' is not a claim on how the universe came about. Saying it may be cyclic, a part of a greater system, etc, is not a conclusion. Proposing various possible models based on physics is not a conclusion. Religion offers conclusions, not science.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Tyrone
If you believe in an uncaused cause, you believe in God.

False Dichotomy. There are other possibilities, the universe may be cyclic, a part of a multiverse, etc, etc....it is not known.
We don't know.
We don't know, therefore God, is not an argument.
Would you at least say the super natural is a possibility?
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by antlers
As opposed to “you guys” pointing out that life on earth and all of creation can come from nothing, but then exempting God from that same logic.
We're not saying it came from nothing, we say we don't know yet. You say it was a creator and then don't (can't) provide any evidence. The former position is accurate and honest, the latter is dishonest - asserting something to be true without knowing it to be true.
In your mind is the concept of a creator a possibility?



I don't know whether it is possible or not. There is no evidence that there is a Creator. The evidence supports natural processes at work.
Originally Posted by antlers
I choose to believe what I do. When anyone demands proof for another’s faith, or proof for the basis of another’s faith…even if proof of such were possible…the demand for more proof by the skeptics would certainly follow, as would their denial. The Pharisees had proof of Jesus’ miracles, and they did exactly the above.


You didn't address the question:

Can you choose to disbelieve whatever it is you do believe is true? Being convinced that something is true, are you able to switch off your conviction as a matter of choice? In other words, being convinced in the existence of God, can you decide that now you are an atheist?
I'd still like to know, evolutionarily speaking, which came first the chicken or the egg? Or more precisely, an egg laying species or it's egg? How did it bridge the reproduction gap?
Originally Posted by Springcove
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Springcove
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Springcove
Honest question. It seems to bother some of you that people have faith why?


Does it bother you that the 9/11 Hijackers murdered over 3,000 Americans and plunged us into a 20 year long war?


Yes…


Actions are manifest from beliefs. So actions based on accurate beliefs congruent with the objective reality yield better outcomes.
As beliefs deviate from objective reality, so do the quality of the actions based upon those bad believes and the worse the outcomes.

Unfortunately the bad impacts of those bad actions are not always limited to those holding the objectively wrong beliefs.
Combine bad fanaticism with objectively bad believes and you get very bad outcomes, like 9/11, half million "witches" burned at the stake, modern science deniers who attempt to substitute religions classes for science class, trillion is economic damage fighting the evils of modern progress, and 100 million dead under Mao.



Different beliefs have lead to every war in the history of man. I’m not here to argue how someone believes. I’m just trying to understand why some have an issue in how I believe. I have no issue with people who don’t share my beliefs because that is their choice. I have made mine and you have made yours and I respect that.

My friend and hunting partner of more than 30 years is agnostic/atheist I’m actually not sure. I just know he doesn’t share my beliefs but it hasn’t affected are friendship because of it.

People like the OP do a disservice to a lot of Christians and that is unfortunate.


SC,
Not all religions/belief systems are created equal, nor are all Christianities.

A good majority of Christians in America today are what I call functional Atheist. They claim to believe, don't really know what's in their bible, go to Chruch for weddings and funerals and focus on solving this world problems in this world, and don't unquestionably based their actions on dubiously sourced ancient parchments, and attempt to force other to conform to the same belief their at the point of a gun by trying to pass laws based on their old book. When debating, these are not the Christians I'm looking for, and I suspect you fall squarely in this camp. Dont' get me wrong, I'll still debate you for fun, to see if you have new or cleaver apologetics I've never head and to hone my skills, but you are not the droid I'm looking for.

When we study the impacts of religion against measures of well being, the evidence is crystal clear. The more fundamentalist the beliefs the worst the outcomes. It really doesn't matter what you measure, income per capita, teen pregnancy rates, rates of imprisonment, life expectancy, educational attainment, across the board, greater levels of fundamentalism lead to worse outcomes.

These are the believer's I'm looking for. Those who's beliefs are so wrong they impact the greater world in a negative way. I don't limit myself to Christians Fundamentalist's. I'm also opposed to Marxist, Muslim, Global Warming Alarmist, Hindu, Shinto, and Jainist Fundamentalist, we just don't have may of those of The Fire, so our religious debates typically revolve around Christianity.


Additionally, fundamentalist creates a viscous cycle. When fundamentalist fail they attribute their failure to an insufficient level of fundamentalism.
Put another way, fundamentalism leads to bad outs, bad out comes for fundamentalist leads to greater levels of fundamentalism, which lead to worse outcomes, and more fundamentalism etc. To better understand this in action, I suggest you read Lawrence Wrights "The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11".
Originally Posted by wabigoon
I want to be in that, Number.

And there in lies part of the problem.
You are willing to believe anything for the illusion that you could be part of that number.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by wabigoon
I want to be in that, Number.
And there in lies part of the problem. You are willing to believe anything for the illusion that you could be part of that number.
His beliefs are not a problem for him. But his beliefs are clearly a problem for you. Why…?
Originally Posted by 12344mag
Originally Posted by NH K9
Originally Posted by Springcove
Honest question. It seems to bother some of you that people have faith why?

Honest answer:
I'm not bothered in the least by the faithful. I despise hypocrite Bible thumpers who feel the need to push their beliefs on others.


As a believer, I'm right there with you.


Compare the OP to Ken Howell.

Both are/were Christian, and that's where the comparison ends.

Ken started a lot of theological threads, but seldom did I feel the need to join in. Ken enjoyed debating the finer points of theology in a way that would make Christians better men as measured by their actions on this earth. He never reverted to based tactics, such as Pascals Wager, until he neared his end, and at that point, I felt it no longer fair to debate him. The younger sharper Ken would of been a lot of fun to debate. He'd of run circles around me, but not without my learning a lot in the process.

Ken Howell was a fine gentleman. Crappy Hampster is an insufferable, patronizing, arrogant, condescending asshat.
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by wabigoon
I want to be in that, Number.
And there in lies part of the problem. You are willing to believe anything for the illusion that you could be part of that number.
His beliefs are not a problem for him. But his beliefs are clearly a problem for you. Why…?


Do you care about truth?
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by wabigoon
I want to be in that, Number.
And there in lies part of the problem. You are willing to believe anything for the illusion that you could be part of that number.
His beliefs are not a problem for him. But his beliefs are clearly a problem for you. Why…?
Do you care about truth?
Why the diversion…? Why not answer the question that was first asked of you…?
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by wabigoon
I want to be in that, Number.
And there in lies part of the problem. You are willing to believe anything for the illusion that you could be part of that number.
His beliefs are not a problem for him. But his beliefs are clearly a problem for you. Why…?
Do you care about truth?
Why the diversion…? Why not answer the question that was first asked of you…?


It's not a diversion. I asked that questions for purpose.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
It's not a diversion. I asked that question for purpose.
And I first asked a question of you for purpose.
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
It's not a diversion. I asked that question for purpose.
And I first asked a question of you for purpose.


You're being obtuse today, so let me ask this a different way.

What's better. For a persons beliefs to align with objective really or to believe in fairy tales that make them feel good?
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
It's not a diversion. I asked that question for purpose.
And I first asked a question of you for purpose.
You're being obtuse today, so let me ask this a different way. What's better. For a persons beliefs to align with objective really or to believe in fairy tales that make them feel good?
How about you just first answer the simple question that was first asked of you, and then we’ll move on from there…?
F A I R Y T A L E ..

There was an old lady who lived in a shoe,
She had so many children, she didn't know what to do.
So she fed them some broth without any bread,
Then whipped them all soundly and sent them to bed.

O B J EC T I V E R E A L I T Y ...

Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures,
and that he was buried, and that he rose again the
third day according to the scriptures.
(1Corinthians 15:3-4)
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Crappy Hampster is an insufferable, patronizing, arrogant, condescending asshat.
To say the least
Originally Posted by Tyrone
I'd still like to know, evolutionarily speaking, which came first the chicken or the egg? Or more precisely, an egg laying species or it's egg? How did it bridge the reproduction gap?


Not nitpicking here but for the egg to develop then hatch, the Rooster had to cum first.
Originally Posted by Houston_2
Originally Posted by Tyrone
I'd still like to know, evolutionarily speaking, which came first the chicken or the egg? Or more precisely, an egg laying species or it's egg? How did it bridge the reproduction gap?


Not nitpicking here but for the egg to develop then hatch, the Rooster had to cum first.

That does complicate things.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Houston_2
Originally Posted by Tyrone
I'd still like to know, evolutionarily speaking, which came first the chicken or the egg? Or more precisely, an egg laying species or it's egg? How did it bridge the reproduction gap?


Not nitpicking here but for the egg to develop then hatch, the Rooster had to cum first.

That does complicate things.


Pay attention now.

The hen came about and was created from the ribs of the rooster.

Don’t you know anything, farm boy ?

As VG would say,,,,Double Sheeesh, Dude !
Originally Posted by the_shootist
F A I R Y T A L E ..

There was an old lady who lived in a shoe,
She had so many children, she didn't know what to do.
So she fed them some broth without any bread,
Then whipped them all soundly and sent them to bed.

O B J EC T I V E R E A L I T Y ...

Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures,
and that he was buried, and that he rose again the
third day according to the scriptures.
(1Corinthians 15:3-4)

You speak truth.

Jesus is the Truth.

Those who reject the Word of God, no matter how much evidence has been provided them, are unconvincable.
Would another year worth of truth convince them?...I doubt it.
I think that they made it clear that their purpose in life is to lead people away from the truth. NV, Cantaloupe Snipper, etc.
[Linked Image from i.pinimg.com]
Originally Posted by wabigoon
[Linked Image from i.pinimg.com]


You left out the part where he said, “and it ain’t no skin off my ass if you go “.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

You speak truth.

Jesus is the Truth.

Those who reject the Word of God, no matter how much evidence has been provided them, are unconvincable.
Would another year worth of truth convince them?...I doubt it.
I think that they made it clear that their purpose in life is to lead people away from the truth. NV, Cantaloupe Snipper, etc.



Did you ever stop and think that maybe your job is to stop shoving the word of god down peoples throats and start showing them gods word. being you're particularly obtuse I'll give you a hint, showing them gods word is not opening the bible and showing them the pages.
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
It's not a diversion. I asked that question for purpose.
And I first asked a question of you for purpose.
You're being obtuse today, so let me ask this a different way. What's better. For a persons beliefs to align with objective really or to believe in fairy tales that make them feel good?
How about you just first answer the simple question that was first asked of you, and then we’ll move on from there…?


You don't address my questions.
Originally Posted by the_shootist
F A I R Y T A L E ..

There was an old lady who lived in a shoe,
She had so many children, she didn't know what to do.
So she fed them some broth without any bread,
Then whipped them all soundly and sent them to bed.

O B J EC T I V E R E A L I T Y ...

Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures,
and that he was buried, and that he rose again the
third day according to the scriptures.
(1Corinthians 15:3-4)


They are both fairy tales of sorts. The heading for the second paragraph is falsely asserting the following as a fact but without evidence, so it's a lie.
Originally Posted by the_shootist
F A I R Y T A L E ..

There was an old lady who lived in a shoe,
She had so many children, she didn't know what to do.
So she fed them some broth without any bread,
Then whipped them
[quote=the_shootist]F A I R Y T A L E ..

There was an old lady who lived in a shoe,
She had so many children, she didn't know what to do.
So she fed them some broth without any bread,
Then whipped them all soundly and sent them to bed.

O B J EC T I V E R E A L I T Y ...

Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures,
and that he was buried, and that he rose again the
third day according to the scriptures.
(1Corinthians 15:3-4)


It hasn't been established as objective reality, which is why it takes faith to believe.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
I'd still like to know, evolutionarily speaking, which came first the chicken or the egg? Or more precisely, an egg laying species or it's egg? How did it bridge the reproduction gap?


The egg is just part of the lifecycle of a chicken. Eggs of various forms have been around for over 300 million years. Chicken ancestors developed about 50,000 to 60,000 years ago, and the domestic chicken about 8,000 years ago. I don't think the bible mentions any of that for some reason.

Eggs are part of sexual reproduction - even us placental mammals use the egg system. It has been successful under the natural selection process for a long time now.

Obviously I don't know the answer myself and haven't looked to research the topic so can't really help except to say that the starting point happened way before the chicken ever existed at all.
We live in a culture that questions biblical authority…understandably so…so like Apostle Peter did when he talked with a Gentile audience in Caesarea, it makes sense to me to adapt the approach and communication to be more receptive to those who don’t consider the Bible as authoritative.

The Bible didn’t even exist, but he didn’t quote from the Hebrew Scriptures either. When he talked with a Hebrew audience in Jerusalem during the Hebrew festival of Pentecost, he did, but he didn’t here because the Gentiles didn’t consider the Hebrew Scriptures as authoritative.

The Hebrew Scriptures were given to the Hebrews. So Peter instead focused on the life and death and resurrection of Jesus. And he made it clear to the Gentiles that the resurrection had implications way beyond the Hebrews, and that everyone who believes in Jesus receives forgiveness of sins through His name.

Peter’s messages differed in their use of the Hebrew Scriptures, but both messages centered on Jesus’ ministry and death and resurrection. That’s what mattered most. And to me, that’s still what matters most.
Originally Posted by 12344mag
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

You speak truth.

Jesus is the Truth.

Those who reject the Word of God, no matter how much evidence has been provided them, are unconvincable.
Would another year worth of truth convince them?...I doubt it.
I think that they made it clear that their purpose in life is to lead people away from the truth. NV, Cantaloupe Snipper, etc.



Did you ever stop and think that maybe your job is to stop shoving the word of god down peoples throats and start showing them gods word. being you're particularly obtuse I'll give you a hint, showing them gods word is not opening the bible and showing them the pages.



So when you guys tag team like the hooded pro wrestlers against my kindhearted Sunday sermons, you want me to smile and keep my mouth shut while you run off every decent believer and unbeliever.
I'm going to take a wild guess that the thieves at the Stop & Rob convenience store hope to find unarmed passive victims to make their tasks easier. Satan didn't like Jesus armed with the Words of God from the O.T. either.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by 12344mag
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

You speak truth.

Jesus is the Truth.

Those who reject the Word of God, no matter how much evidence has been provided them, are unconvincable.
Would another year worth of truth convince them?...I doubt it.
I think that they made it clear that their purpose in life is to lead people away from the truth. NV, Cantaloupe Snipper, etc.



Did you ever stop and think that maybe your job is to stop shoving the word of god down peoples throats and start showing them gods word. being you're particularly obtuse I'll give you a hint, showing them gods word is not opening the bible and showing them the pages.



So when you guys tag team like the hooded pro wrestlers against my kindhearted Sunday sermons, you want me to smile and keep my mouth shut while you run off every decent believer and unbeliever.
I'm going to take a wild guess that the thieves at the Stop & Rob convenience store hope to find unarmed passive victims to make their tasks easier. Satan didn't like Jesus armed with the Words of God from the O.T. either.


Crappy's dodging and misdirection as usual. How many converts have you brought into the fold Crappy?
How many have you scared away?
Waiting for replies.

Originally Posted by NVhntr
Me in red.

Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

[Re: NVhntr]

Guess what, God humbled me and then healed me. You are about as far from humble as anyone I have ever encountered.
I had the idea that
"You consider the substitutionary death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ inadequate sacrifice for sins inadequate."..
You responded here that it comes from a demented mind (You made an ignorant statement regarding my beliefs. Your saying what I believe is not what I believe. Where do you get off telling others what they believe? The fact that you consistently do that to those you disagree with, as well as the numerous brain injuries you have told us about, indicates your demented mind.) Example: your statement two posts up from this one where you state atheists think they are Gods
...while you and your bud call that message a "steaming pile of dog [bleep]" on the next thread. Yes, I consider your condescending, hateful, holier than thou, rantings, videos and links to be about as valuable as canine feces. Has your presence and delivery here gained any converts to Christianity? Name one.

This isn't unusual. You attack most gospel (good news) messages that have the theme of the Savior's all sufficient sacrifice. What am I to think??? As usual, you are a liar. I have never attacked any "gospel". Your unusual dogma is not gospel. My attacks are entirely personal and aimed at YOU and YOU alone.
Is that not what you think?
Your answer to the gospel is to either twist my words and call ME a liar or to say that my Sunday post is demented. The only one who twists words here is you. The quotes that I provide are your words verbatim, the dates of the quotes are provided; anyone who questions their accuracy can find them easy enough.
I ask you about what you think is required for salvation? I consider entering into a serious religious discussion with you to be a waste of time. Let's just say that I agree with very little of what you post and leave it at that.
Simple question. I will take that as your answer then. Whatever

I wonder what the Lord thinks when He reads your comments that blaspheme His Son and all that He offers as a gift? Please provide a link to a quote where I have blasphemed the Lord. You seem to conflate my personal opinion of you as blasphemy. Let me tell you a little secret Happy, you are not the Lord. You also don't have the commission to name reprobates, but that doesn't seem to stop you.
There are only so many chances anyone gets that offer of life, then it's too late. Thank you for stating the obvious, no need to make yourself a nuisance preaching to the choir.



Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by 12344mag
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

You speak truth.

Jesus is the Truth.

Those who reject the Word of God, no matter how much evidence has been provided them, are unconvincable.
Would another year worth of truth convince them?...I doubt it.
I think that they made it clear that their purpose in life is to lead people away from the truth. NV, Cantaloupe Snipper, etc.



Did you ever stop and think that maybe your job is to stop shoving the word of god down peoples throats and start showing them gods word. being you're particularly obtuse I'll give you a hint, showing them gods word is not opening the bible and showing them the pages.



So when you guys tag team like the hooded pro wrestlers against my kindhearted Sunday sermons, you want me to smile and keep my mouth shut while you run off every decent believer and unbeliever.
I'm going to take a wild guess that the thieves at the Stop & Rob convenience store hope to find unarmed passive victims to make their tasks easier. Satan didn't like Jesus armed with the Words of God from the O.T. either.



Shouldn't truth be able to withstand questioning and debate? Are we supposed to just accept what is written in old scrolls?
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by 12344mag
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

You speak truth.

Jesus is the Truth.

Those who reject the Word of God, no matter how much evidence has been provided them, are unconvincable.
Would another year worth of truth convince them?...I doubt it.
I think that they made it clear that their purpose in life is to lead people away from the truth. NV, Cantaloupe Snipper, etc.



Did you ever stop and think that maybe your job is to stop shoving the word of god down peoples throats and start showing them gods word. being you're particularly obtuse I'll give you a hint, showing them gods word is not opening the bible and showing them the pages.



So when you guys tag team like the hooded pro wrestlers against my kindhearted Sunday sermons, you want me to smile and keep my mouth shut while you run off every decent believer and unbeliever.
I'm going to take a wild guess that the thieves at the Stop & Rob convenience store hope to find unarmed passive victims to make their tasks easier. Satan didn't like Jesus armed with the Words of God from the O.T. either.


Crappy's dodging and misdirection as usual. How many converts have you brought into the fold Crappy?
How many have you scared away?

I'm not sure he's driven any away.............even those looking for 'something' can see that he's not the right way too get there. Those who already Believe should be able to see him for what he is and create distance. Those who aren't going to believe but are willing to debate harmoniously with those who do aren't going to be able to due to the personality type. Any of the above can find better examples of what they're looking for close at hand.

George
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by 12344mag
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

You speak truth.

Jesus is the Truth.

Those who reject the Word of God, no matter how much evidence has been provided them, are unconvincable.
Would another year worth of truth convince them?...I doubt it.
I think that they made it clear that their purpose in life is to lead people away from the truth. NV, Cantaloupe Snipper, etc.



Did you ever stop and think that maybe your job is to stop shoving the word of god down peoples throats and start showing them gods word. being you're particularly obtuse I'll give you a hint, showing them gods word is not opening the bible and showing them the pages.



So when you guys tag team like the hooded pro wrestlers against my kindhearted Sunday sermons, you want me to smile and keep my mouth shut while you run off every decent believer and unbeliever.
I'm going to take a wild guess that the thieves at the Stop & Rob convenience store hope to find unarmed passive victims to make their tasks easier. Satan didn't like Jesus armed with the Words of God from the O.T. either.


Crappy's dodging and misdirection as usual. How many converts have you brought into the fold Crappy?
How many have you scared away?

Of course you are still here so I must not be doing something right.
But the Lord did say that, This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by 12344mag
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

You speak truth.

Jesus is the Truth.

Those who reject the Word of God, no matter how much evidence has been provided them, are unconvincable.
Would another year worth of truth convince them?...I doubt it.
I think that they made it clear that their purpose in life is to lead people away from the truth. NV, Cantaloupe Snipper, etc.



Did you ever stop and think that maybe your job is to stop shoving the word of god down peoples throats and start showing them gods word. being you're particularly obtuse I'll give you a hint, showing them gods word is not opening the bible and showing them the pages.



So when you guys tag team like the hooded pro wrestlers against my kindhearted Sunday sermons, you want me to smile and keep my mouth shut while you run off every decent believer and unbeliever.
I'm going to take a wild guess that the thieves at the Stop & Rob convenience store hope to find unarmed passive victims to make their tasks easier. Satan didn't like Jesus armed with the Words of God from the O.T. either.


Crappy's dodging and misdirection as usual. How many converts have you brought into the fold Crappy?
How many have you scared away?


I knew he would answer that way, typical Happy Camper M.O.

He will never be able to comprehend.
And he's a toggler.
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
It's not a diversion. I asked that question for purpose.
And I first asked a question of you for purpose.
You're being obtuse today, so let me ask this a different way. What's better. For a persons beliefs to align with objective really or to believe in fairy tales that make them feel good?
How about you just first answer the simple question that was first asked of you, and then we’ll move on from there…?


If you'd been paying attention, you'd have notice I've already addressed your question.

How about you respond to what I've already written on the subject.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
... my kindhearted Sunday sermons...

That's funny.
You are not kinhearted, but an insufferable, patronizing, arrogant, condescending asshat.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
... my kindhearted Sunday sermons...

That's funny.
You are not kinhearted, but an insufferable, patronizing, arrogant, condescending asshat.




You sir are 100% correct…
Originally Posted by antlers
We live in a culture that questions biblical authority…


Coulda left it there

Adherents of scientific materialism have run head on into the limitation of that world view and the predictable response has been relativistic nihilism.

From that point there is nothing but cynicism toward anything and everything that makes a universal claim of any kind.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
... my kindhearted Sunday sermons...

That's funny.
You are not kinhearted, but an insufferable, patronizing, arrogant, condescending asshat.


If you and your friends ever came into my church speaking Jesus Christ's name blasphemously and acting like you do here, you could expect more than that Jack.
Originally Posted by wabigoon
I want to be in that, Number.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
And there in lies part of the problem. You are willing to believe anything for the illusion that you could be part of that number.
Originally Posted by antlers
His beliefs are not a problem for him. But his beliefs are clearly a problem for you. Why…?
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
If you'd been paying attention, you'd have noticed I've already addressed your question.
No, you haven’t answered the question that was first asked of you (above).
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
How about you respond to what I've already written on the subject.
How about you just first answer the simple question that was first asked of you (above), and then we’ll move on from there…?
WOW! I'm glad I don't get involved in these threads, this is better than going to the circus.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
... my kindhearted Sunday sermons...

That's funny.
You are not kinhearted, but an insufferable, patronizing, arrogant, condescending asshat.


If you and your friends ever came into my church speaking Jesus Christ's name blasphemously and acting like you do here, you could expect more than that Jack.


Don't you have some more community service you need to perform?
Happy Copeland....

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

So when you guys tag team like the hooded pro wrestlers against my kindhearted Sunday sermons, you want me to smile and keep my mouth shut while you run off every decent believer and unbeliever.
I'm going to take a wild guess that the thieves at the Stop & Rob convenience store hope to find unarmed passive victims to make their tasks easier. Satan didn't like Jesus armed with the Words of God from the O.T. either.



Your incessant equating of everyone who disagrees with you as
disagreeing with God demonstrates pharisaical hubris on your part.

Over and over again you condemn as if you’re God Himself, exemplifying a confidence that appears antithetical to the humblility that comes from having been convinced that it is only by grace you are saved.

Many here aren’t attacking your message but they’re attacking the messenger.
Efu,

You really think everyone on the forum is so stupid that they can't so much as read the TITLE of this thread.

You are welcome to go to hell if you wish to.
You have been provided every opportunity and I have never stood in your way other than to provide you and your friends the good news. You don't want it. I get that. What makes you and your buddies so evil is how you keep others from heaven.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
... my kindhearted Sunday sermons...

That's funny.
You are not kinhearted, but an insufferable, patronizing, arrogant, condescending asshat.
I think self righteous prig is more descriptive with the admission that I really have no right to judge and am not a mind reader. I know everybody fights a hard battle of some sort and we know not what H/C's been through. He certainly impresses as not happy and a quite unsuccessful ambassador for Jesus. My church has members that can run off more than we can bring in.

Maybe I should quit criticizing and start praying for him. I often think how maybe some of the most reviled men in Christendom may have repented and received salvation. Namely Judas and Pilate, there is evidence that both repented. Paul may have repented before he died, so there is a chance for myself and the other small fry on this little forum.

I have no idea what or where hell is or even if it exists. Maybe a place of eternal death but a permanent place of torture doesn't make sense. In any case I would bet if it does exist in whatever form it will receive as its internees many many self proclaimed religious officials from many Popes and John Calvin on down the line to the lowest soldier of the church. And Christianity is chief among said religions. Jesus must be appalled with his "friends".
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Efu,

You really think everyone on the forum is so stupid that they can't so much as read the TITLE of this thread.

You are welcome to go to hell if you wish to.
You have been provided every opportunity and I have never stood in your way other than to provide you and your friends the good news. You don't want it. I get that. What makes you and your buddies so evil is how you keep others from heaven.


EFW's one of the finest Christians on The Fire.

Your speaking to him this way just confirms your total lack of character.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Efu,

You really think everyone on the forum is so stupid that they can't so much as read the TITLE of this thread.

You are welcome to go to hell if you wish to.
You have been provided every opportunity and I have never stood in your way other than to provide you and your friends the good news. You don't want it. I get that. What makes you and your buddies so evil is how you keep others from heaven.


Jesus has got to be the only one who loves you, Frank. And, that’s even questionable, since he has a propensity for sending god like pretenders to the abyss.

LMAO

🦫
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
... my kindhearted Sunday sermons...

That's funny.
You are not kinhearted, but an insufferable, patronizing, arrogant, condescending asshat.
If you and your friends ever came into my church speaking Jesus Christ's name blasphemously and acting like you do here, you could expect more than that Jack.
Could you be so kind as to provide the name and street address of your church. I want to sneak in and take a listen. I promise not to do anything disruptive. I'll just listen. You may have something I need and you just may not be able to articulate it here.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
... my kindhearted Sunday sermons...

That's funny.
You are not kinhearted, but an insufferable, patronizing, arrogant, condescending asshat.
If you and your friends ever came into my church speaking Jesus Christ's name blasphemously and acting like you do here, you could expect more than that Jack.
Could you be so kind as to provide the name and street address of your church. I want to sneak in and take a listen. I promise not to do anything disruptive. I'll just listen. You may have something I need and you just may not be able to articulate it here.

What makes you think that you are saved Hastings?
Originally Posted by Beaver10
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Efu,

You really think everyone on the forum is so stupid that they can't so much as read the TITLE of this thread.

You are welcome to go to hell if you wish to.
You have been provided every opportunity and I have never stood in your way other than to provide you and your friends the good news. You don't want it. I get that. What makes you and your buddies so evil is how you keep others from heaven.


Jesus has got to be the only one who loves you, Frank. And, that’s even questionable, since he has a propensity for sending god like pretenders to the abyss.

LMAO

🦫




What did you do to deserve a place in Heaven beaver?
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
[quote=Happy_Camper]... my kindhearted Sunday sermons...

That's funny.
You are not kinhearted, but an insufferable, patronizing, arrogant, condescending asshat.


If you and your friends ever came into my church.... ?


"My church" as in you're the preacher man, or just a building you attended for Sundays services?
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by Beaver10
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Efu,

You really think everyone on the forum is so stupid that they can't so much as read the TITLE of this thread.

You are welcome to go to hell if you wish to.
You have been provided every opportunity and I have never stood in your way other than to provide you and your friends the good news. You don't want it. I get that. What makes you and your buddies so evil is how you keep others from heaven.


Jesus has got to be the only one who loves you, Frank. And, that’s even questionable, since he has a propensity for sending god like pretenders to the abyss.

LMAO

🦫




What did you do to deserve a place in Heaven beaver?


Nothing.

And you?

🦫
Originally Posted by renegade50
Happy Copeland....

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]


Kenny Copeland, an ambassador for God.
Originally Posted by 12344mag
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

You speak truth.

Jesus is the Truth.

Those who reject the Word of God, no matter how much evidence has been provided them, are unconvincable.
Would another year worth of truth convince them?...I doubt it.
I think that they made it clear that their purpose in life is to lead people away from the truth. NV, Cantaloupe Snipper, etc.



Did you ever stop and think that maybe your job is to stop shoving the word of god down peoples throats and start showing them gods word. being you're particularly obtuse I'll give you a hint, showing them gods word is not opening the bible and showing them the pages.


Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
... my kindhearted Sunday sermons...

That's funny.
You are not kinhearted, but an insufferable, patronizing, arrogant, condescending asshat.
If you and your friends ever came into my church speaking Jesus Christ's name blasphemously and acting like you do here, you could expect more than that Jack.
Could you be so kind as to provide the name and street address of your church. I want to sneak in and take a listen. I promise not to do anything disruptive. I'll just listen. You may have something I need and you just may not be able to articulate it here.

What makes you think that you are saved Hastings?


Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by Beaver10
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Efu,

You really think everyone on the forum is so stupid that they can't so much as read the TITLE of this thread.

You are welcome to go to hell if you wish to.
You have been provided every opportunity and I have never stood in your way other than to provide you and your friends the good news. You don't want it. I get that. What makes you and your buddies so evil is how you keep others from heaven.


Jesus has got to be the only one who loves you, Frank. And, that’s even questionable, since he has a propensity for sending god like pretenders to the abyss.

LMAO


What did you do to deserve a place in Heaven beaver?


Did I miss the announcement that it's non-sequitur night?
Ok, I'll play.

Happy,
What good, demonstrable evidence do you have that heaven and salvation are real?
If you wish to use the Bible, you must first provide sufficient good, demonstrable to establish it's credibility and reliability.
I’d bet serious money that Happy Camper isn’t a Christian and is just a troll (at best) or perhaps even a bot.
Originally Posted by Hastings


I have no idea what or where hell is or even if it exists. Maybe a place of eternal death but a permanent place of torture doesn't make sense. In any case I would bet if it does exist in whatever form it will receive as its internees many many self proclaimed religious officials from many Popes and John Calvin on down the line to the lowest soldier of the church. And Christianity is chief among said religions. Jesus must be appalled with his "friends".


I always caution against the temptation to condemn people… especially those from completely different times and cultures…

As our Lord said we ought to remove the plank from our own an eye before assisting an our neighbor with the splinter in his.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Could you be so kind as to provide the name and street address of your church. I want to sneak in and take a listen. I promise not to do anything disruptive. I'll just listen. You may have something I need and you just may not be able to articulate it here.
Originally Posted by efw
I’d bet serious money that Happy Camper isn’t a Christian and is just a troll (at best) or perhaps even a bot.


You could be on to something. His chips were overheating tonight.!
Originally Posted by efw
I’d bet serious money that Happy Camper isn’t a Christian and is just a troll (at best) or perhaps even a bot.


He's not a bot.
He's way too stupid to be a bot.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Hastings
Could you be so kind as to provide the name and street address of your church. I want to sneak in and take a listen. I promise not to do anything disruptive. I'll just listen. You may have something I need and you just may not be able to articulate it here.


He won't, Frank (HC) is very careful not to divulge any personal information that would let anyone expose even more of his lies.
He has been asked many times about his background, education, vocation, etc. and he never answers.
His trail of lies is all we know about him.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by efw
I’d bet serious money that Happy Camper isn’t a Christian and is just a troll (at best) or perhaps even a bot.


He's not a bot.
He's way too stupid to be a bot.



And I think a bot has more self respect.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by 12344mag
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

You speak truth.

Jesus is the Truth.

Those who reject the Word of God, no matter how much evidence has been provided them, are unconvincable.
Would another year worth of truth convince them?...I doubt it.
I think that they made it clear that their purpose in life is to lead people away from the truth. NV, Cantaloupe Snipper, etc.



Did you ever stop and think that maybe your job is to stop shoving the word of god down peoples throats and start showing them gods word. being you're particularly obtuse I'll give you a hint, showing them gods word is not opening the bible and showing them the pages.



So when you guys tag team like the hooded pro wrestlers against my kindhearted Sunday sermons, you want me to smile and keep my mouth shut while you run off every decent believer and unbeliever.
I'm going to take a wild guess that the thieves at the Stop & Rob convenience store hope to find unarmed passive victims to make their tasks easier. Satan didn't like Jesus armed with the Words of God from the O.T. either.


I'm seeing a pretty large tag team here Frank. At what point do you realize that when you go about your day and all you encounter are azzholes, maybe the real azzhole is you?
Nobody is being forced to read or participate. Those who do can provide their own arguments in the expectation that their claims will be questioned.

Religious claims are problematic because they are faith based. Faith based beliefs, by definition, cannot be tested objectively.
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Hastings
Could you be so kind as to provide the name and street address of your church. I want to sneak in and take a listen. I promise not to do anything disruptive. I'll just listen. You may have something I need and you just may not be able to articulate it here.


He won't, Frank (HC) is very careful not to divulge any personal information that would let anyone expose even more of his lies.
He has been asked many times about his background, education, vocation, etc. and he never answers.
His trail of lies is all we know about him.

Now I am getting curious. Who is he?
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Tyrone
I'd still like to know, evolutionarily speaking, which came first the chicken or the egg? Or more precisely, an egg laying species or it's egg? How did it bridge the reproduction gap?


The egg is just part of the lifecycle of a chicken. Eggs of various forms have been around for over 300 million years. Chicken ancestors developed about 50,000 to 60,000 years ago, and the domestic chicken about 8,000 years ago. I don't think the bible mentions any of that for some reason.

Eggs are part of sexual reproduction - even us placental mammals use the egg system. It has been successful under the natural selection process for a long time now.

Obviously I don't know the answer myself and haven't looked to research the topic so can't really help except to say that the starting point happened way before the chicken ever existed at all.
It's not about "chickens" per se. The question is "How does an organism (or a plant for that matter) go from, say, asexual budding or some other form of reproduction to laying eggs or dropping seeds? Would a bird be a bird if it reproduced by budding?
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Tyrone
I'd still like to know, evolutionarily speaking, which came first the chicken or the egg? Or more precisely, an egg laying species or it's egg? How did it bridge the reproduction gap?


The egg is just part of the lifecycle of a chicken. Eggs of various forms have been around for over 300 million years. Chicken ancestors developed about 50,000 to 60,000 years ago, and the domestic chicken about 8,000 years ago. I don't think the bible mentions any of that for some reason.

Eggs are part of sexual reproduction - even us placental mammals use the egg system. It has been successful under the natural selection process for a long time now.

Obviously I don't know the answer myself and haven't looked to research the topic so can't really help except to say that the starting point happened way before the chicken ever existed at all.
It's not about "chickens" per se. The question is "How does an organism (or a plant for that matter) go from, say, asexual budding or some other form of reproduction to laying eggs or dropping seeds? Would a bird be a bird if it reproduced by budding?



If you are really interested in the question, and not just trying to suggest "We don't know, therefore God", here's an interesting article on the subject:

https://www.science.org.au/curious/earth-environment/which-came-first-chicken-or-egg
I always get a charge out of non believers accusing believers of shoving the truths of the Bible down their throats. The easiest way to avoid that is o close your mouth and open your ears and your hearts.

Jesus Christ is a well known historical fact being recorded in even secular encyclopedia if anyone cares to read something written on paper any more.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
If you are really interested in the question, and not just trying to suggest "We don't know, therefore God", here's an interesting article on the subject:

https://www.science.org.au/curious/earth-environment/which-came-first-chicken-or-egg
That is an interesting article. It does explain that eggs came first. But it doesn't explain the bridge between asexual reproduction and sexual reproduction, namely, eggs and seeds.
Originally Posted by the_shootist
I always get a charge out of non believers accusing believers of shoving the truths of the Bible down their throats. The easiest way to avoid that is o close your mouth and open your ears and your hearts.

Jesus Christ is a well known historical fact being recorded in even secular encyclopedia if anyone cares to read something written on paper any more.

What about Believers who don't want to hear folks like HC spewing their bullschitt?
Originally Posted by the_shootist
I always get a charge out of non believers accusing believers of shoving the truths of the Bible down their throats. The easiest way to avoid that is o close your mouth and open your ears and your hearts.

Jesus Christ is a well known historical fact being recorded in even secular encyclopedia if anyone cares to read something written on paper any more.


What does it say about Jesus in the encyclopedia?
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
If you are really interested in the question, and not just trying to suggest "We don't know, therefore God", here's an interesting article on the subject:

https://www.science.org.au/curious/earth-environment/which-came-first-chicken-or-egg
That is an interesting article. It does explain that eggs came first. But it doesn't explain the bridge between asexual reproduction and sexual reproduction, namely, eggs and seeds.


The evolutionary diversion leading to plants and animals happened a long time ago. There is no subsequent link between the two - natural selection favored those changes that provided a survival benefit given the environmental circumstances. You can look to compare similarities or differences between the two but there is no link between them, apart from a common source a long time ago.
To me, if Jesus is reduced to just a ticket to Heaven, or to just a forgiver of sins, we’re missin’ out on His foremost appeal for our lives, and for the opportunity to be accompanied through this life by Him.
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
If you are really interested in the question, and not just trying to suggest "We don't know, therefore God", here's an interesting article on the subject:

https://www.science.org.au/curious/earth-environment/which-came-first-chicken-or-egg
That is an interesting article. It does explain that eggs came first. But it doesn't explain the bridge between asexual reproduction and sexual reproduction, namely, eggs and seeds.


The evolutionary diversion leading to plants and animals happened a long time ago. There is no subsequent link between the two - natural selection favored those changes that provided a survival benefit given the environmental circumstances. You can look to compare similarities or differences between the two but there is no link between them, apart from a common source a long time ago.

You misunderstand again.
How did plants "evolve" from asexual reproduction to seeding? Species at the time of said change is irrelevant.
How did animals "evolve" from asexual reproduction to sexual reproduction via eggs? Species at the time of said change is irrelevant.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
If you are really interested in the question, and not just trying to suggest "We don't know, therefore God", here's an interesting article on the subject:

https://www.science.org.au/curious/earth-environment/which-came-first-chicken-or-egg
That is an interesting article. It does explain that eggs came first. But it doesn't explain the bridge between asexual reproduction and sexual reproduction, namely, eggs and seeds.

True. But that's a different question that you would expect to find addressed in a different article.
Originally Posted by DBT
Nobody is being forced to read or participate. Those who do can provide their own arguments in the expectation that their claims will be questioned.

Religious claims are problematic because they are faith based. Faith based beliefs, by definition, cannot be tested objectively.

The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
If you are really interested in the question, and not just trying to suggest "We don't know, therefore God", here's an interesting article on the subject:

https://www.science.org.au/curious/earth-environment/which-came-first-chicken-or-egg
That is an interesting article. It does explain that eggs came first. But it doesn't explain the bridge between asexual reproduction and sexual reproduction, namely, eggs and seeds.

True. But that's a different question that you would expect to find addressed in a different article.

There is no article that explains abiogenesis as believed in by materialists. Such an article does not exist because science is clueless as too how true abiogenesis can happen in a materialist narrative.
Quote

He won't, Frank (HC) is very careful not to divulge any personal information that would let anyone expose even more of his lies.
He has been asked many times about his background, education, vocation, etc. and he never answers.

That is what people with half a brain do. The internet is not a world of friends.

Quote
The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


You obviously haven't read this thread as this has already been addressed several times. The non religious participants here have made no such claim about the origin of the universe. We have consistently said that we don't know how it originally came to be. Neither do you. But you are the ones claiming to KNOW how it started despite having no evidence to support that claim.
Jesus last words on the subject at hand: Revelation 22:12 "and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his WORK shall be." 14 "Blessed are they that do his COMMANDMENTS, that they have the right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city (eternal life)".

"straight is the gate, and narrow is the way which leadeth unto life and FEW there be that find it"
Quote
Such an article does not exist because science is clueless as too how true abiogenesis can happen in a materialist narrative.


And you cannot provide any evidence as to how a god could originate from nothing. You scoff at the notion of the universe coming from nothing or always existing in some form but on the other hand totally embrace the notion that a god could have always been or came from nothing. Seems a bit of a double standard.

And since it's obvious that you haven't read all of this thread I will repeat something I said earlier. There are 4000 recognized religions on the planet Earth. Each with their own god and creation story. Please provide the evidence you used to home in on which one of them actually created the universe.
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
Such an article does not exist because science is clueless as too how true abiogenesis can happen in a materialist narrative.


And you cannot provide any evidence as to how a god could originate from nothing. You scoff at the notion of the universe coming from nothing or always existing in some form but on the other hand totally embrace the notion that a god could have always been or came from nothing. Seems a bit of a double standard.

And since it's obvious that you haven't read all of this thread I will repeat something I said earlier. There are 4000 recognized religions on the planet Earth. Each with their own god and creation story. Please provide the evidence you used to home in on which one of them actually created the universe.

You are right about "we don't know" and there are a bunch of religions. But a whole lot of those religions and their beliefs are fairly harmonious as to creation and morals if we could just get them to stop killing each other over perceived differences. Of course the killing is most often egged on by evil leaders using religion for cover.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
If you are really interested in the question, and not just trying to suggest "We don't know, therefore God", here's an interesting article on the subject:

https://www.science.org.au/curious/earth-environment/which-came-first-chicken-or-egg
That is an interesting article. It does explain that eggs came first. But it doesn't explain the bridge between asexual reproduction and sexual reproduction, namely, eggs and seeds.


The evolutionary diversion leading to plants and animals happened a long time ago. There is no subsequent link between the two - natural selection favored those changes that provided a survival benefit given the environmental circumstances. You can look to compare similarities or differences between the two but there is no link between them, apart from a common source a long time ago.

You misunderstand again.
How did plants "evolve" from asexual reproduction to seeding? Species at the time of said change is irrelevant.
How did animals "evolve" from asexual reproduction to sexual reproduction via eggs? Species at the time of said change is irrelevant.



Stop asking questions Tyrone. Don't you know we're supposed to accept it on faith! Truth is, scientists don't have a clue nor do they have a clue how material, inorganic matter became alive. They have nothing but hand-waving.
Quote
Truth is, scientists don't have a clue nor do they have a clue how material, inorganic matter became alive. They have nothing but hand-waving.


So whenever there is a gap in what science knows we should fill those gaps with a story written on scrolls by superstitious goat herders 2000 years ago who thought the earth was flat. Got it.
Of course I’m saved, I’m Catholic. 😎
Originally Posted by Violator22
Of course I’m saved, I’m Catholic. 😎

Welcome Violator22!
I'm glad you have interest in spiritual matters. The local Catholic church just reminded me that it's noon as the big liberty bell rang in the tower.

Isaiah 61:1
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


You obviously haven't read this thread as this has already been addressed several times. The non religious participants here have made no such claim about the origin of the universe. We have consistently said that we don't know how it originally came to be. Neither do you. But you are the ones claiming to KNOW how it started despite having no evidence to support that claim.

A materialist rejects God. Science has already settled the creation of the Universe as an event. Therefore the only possible option is for a materialist is to have faith in ex nihilo, ergo my statement is absolutely correct. Atheism is faith based. Just because empty words about "not knowing" are said makes no difference. If a materialist truly did not know then they would allow for God as an option. They don't.

You have obviously not read what I posted i other threads. I have shown clear evidence for the creation of the universe in the past via a supernatural means.

"Kalam Cosmological Argument" is a start, but I'm sure it will be ignored because it is not convenient for faith filled atheists to consider seriously.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Jesus last words on the subject at hand: Revelation 22:12 "and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his WORK shall be." 14 "Blessed are they that do his COMMANDMENTS, that they have the right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city (eternal life)".

"straight is the gate, and narrow is the way which leadeth unto life and FEW there be that find it"

This is why you obsessively reject Paul's witness. You believe in a works based religion.

Paul taught what Christ and Peter taught. Salvation through faith and not by works.
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by Hastings
Jesus last words on the subject at hand: Revelation 22:12 "and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his WORK shall be." 14 "Blessed are they that do his COMMANDMENTS, that they have the right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city (eternal life)".

"straight is the gate, and narrow is the way which leadeth unto life and FEW there be that find it"

This is why you obsessively reject Paul's witness. You believe in a works based religion.

Paul taught what Christ and Peter taught. Salvation through faith and not by works.

Amen

He has yet to answer Jesus' plan of salvation where He took the first half of John 3 to explain it simply to a devout Jew who trusted his obedience to the works of the law to be saved.

Summery:

"For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God....
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him."

Believing/ faith is the absence of any works.
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by Hastings
Jesus last words on the subject at hand: Revelation 22:12 "and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his WORK shall be." 14 "Blessed are they that do his COMMANDMENTS, that they have the right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city (eternal life)".

"straight is the gate, and narrow is the way which leadeth unto life and FEW there be that find it"

This is why you obsessively reject Paul's witness. You believe in a works based religion.

Paul taught what Christ and Peter taught. Salvation through faith and not by works.

Maybe so. But Jesus is quoted as saying exactly what I posted and clearly stated the law would stand as long as heaven and earth endure. And you know that.
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


You obviously haven't read this thread as this has already been addressed several times. The non religious participants here have made no such claim about the origin of the universe. We have consistently said that we don't know how it originally came to be. Neither do you. But you are the ones claiming to KNOW how it started despite having no evidence to support that claim.

A materialist rejects God. Science has already settled the creation of the Universe as an event. Therefore the only possible option is for a materialist is to have faith in ex nihilo, ergo my statement is absolutely correct. Atheism is faith based. Just because empty words about "not knowing" are said makes no difference. If a materialist truly did not know then they would allow for God as an option. They don't.

You have obviously not read what I posted i other threads. I have shown clear evidence for the creation of the universe in the past via a supernatural means.

"Kalam Cosmological Argument" is a start, but I'm sure it will be ignored because it is not convenient for faith filled atheists to consider seriously.


No what you are is the type who tries to frame the other persons case for them and does it incorrectly on purpose to leave himself a weak point to attack. Sorry but your third grade level debate tactic is glaringly transparent. I say "I Don't Know" when there is insufficient evidence to state something as a fact. So does science. I do not falsely claim to know something by making up a story and just CHOOSING to believe it. And I am wide open to listen to evidence of God. The problem is that none exists beyond generalistic and flawed observations like "Well all this had to come from somewhere, so therefore GOD". Or some "I FEEL IT" nonsense. Passionate belief is meaningless as a guide to the truth. People have been passionately wrong about thousands of things throughout history.
[Linked Image from quotefancy.com]
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Nobody is being forced to read or participate. Those who do can provide their own arguments in the expectation that their claims will be questioned.

Religious claims are problematic because they are faith based. Faith based beliefs, by definition, cannot be tested objectively.

The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


That's not the atheist claim. That's your claim on behalf of atheists.
[Linked Image from azquotes.com]
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
If you are really interested in the question, and not just trying to suggest "We don't know, therefore God", here's an interesting article on the subject:

https://www.science.org.au/curious/earth-environment/which-came-first-chicken-or-egg
That is an interesting article. It does explain that eggs came first. But it doesn't explain the bridge between asexual reproduction and sexual reproduction, namely, eggs and seeds.


The evolutionary diversion leading to plants and animals happened a long time ago. There is no subsequent link between the two - natural selection favored those changes that provided a survival benefit given the environmental circumstances. You can look to compare similarities or differences between the two but there is no link between them, apart from a common source a long time ago.

You misunderstand again.
How did plants "evolve" from asexual reproduction to seeding? Species at the time of said change is irrelevant.
How did animals "evolve" from asexual reproduction to sexual reproduction via eggs? Species at the time of said change is irrelevant.



Stop asking questions Tyrone. Don't you know we're supposed to accept it on faith! Truth is, scientists don't have a clue nor do they have a clue how material, inorganic matter became alive. They have nothing but hand-waving.


God did it is hand waving. We don't know, God did it. We don't understand, its the work of God. How did that happen, God works in mysterious ways. How did the Universe come about, God spoke and the Universe appeared.....
Originally Posted by Tarquin
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
If you are really interested in the question, and not just trying to suggest "We don't know, therefore God", here's an interesting article on the subject:

https://www.science.org.au/curious/earth-environment/which-came-first-chicken-or-egg
That is an interesting article. It does explain that eggs came first. But it doesn't explain the bridge between asexual reproduction and sexual reproduction, namely, eggs and seeds.


The evolutionary diversion leading to plants and animals happened a long time ago. There is no subsequent link between the two - natural selection favored those changes that provided a survival benefit given the environmental circumstances. You can look to compare similarities or differences between the two but there is no link between them, apart from a common source a long time ago.

You misunderstand again.
How did plants "evolve" from asexual reproduction to seeding? Species at the time of said change is irrelevant.
How did animals "evolve" from asexual reproduction to sexual reproduction via eggs? Species at the time of said change is irrelevant.



Stop asking questions Tyrone. Don't you know we're supposed to accept it on faith! Truth is, scientists don't have a clue nor do they have a clue how material, inorganic matter became alive. They have nothing but hand-waving.


God did it is hand waving. We don't know, God did it. We don't understand, its the work of God. How did that happen, God works in mysterious ways. How did the Universe come about, God spoke and the Universe appeared.....
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


You obviously haven't read this thread as this has already been addressed several times. The non religious participants here have made no such claim about the origin of the universe. We have consistently said that we don't know how it originally came to be. Neither do you. But you are the ones claiming to KNOW how it started despite having no evidence to support that claim.

A materialist rejects God. Science has already settled the creation of the Universe as an event. Therefore the only possible option is for a materialist is to have faith in ex nihilo, ergo my statement is absolutely correct. Atheism is faith based. Just because empty words about "not knowing" are said makes no difference. If a materialist truly did not know then they would allow for God as an option. They don't.

You have obviously not read what I posted i other threads. I have shown clear evidence for the creation of the universe in the past via a supernatural means.

"Kalam Cosmological Argument" is a start, but I'm sure it will be ignored because it is not convenient for faith filled atheists to consider seriously.


When did science settle Creation by a Creator as an event?
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Nobody is being forced to read or participate. Those who do can provide their own arguments in the expectation that their claims will be questioned.

Religious claims are problematic because they are faith based. Faith based beliefs, by definition, cannot be tested objectively.

The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


That's not the atheist claim. That's your claim on behalf of atheists.

bullshit
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by Hastings
Jesus last words on the subject at hand: Revelation 22:12 "and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his WORK shall be." 14 "Blessed are they that do his COMMANDMENTS, that they have the right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city (eternal life)".

"straight is the gate, and narrow is the way which leadeth unto life and FEW there be that find it"

This is why you obsessively reject Paul's witness. You believe in a works based religion.

Paul taught what Christ and Peter taught. Salvation through faith and not by works.

Maybe so. But Jesus is quoted as saying exactly what I posted and clearly stated the law would stand as long as heaven and earth endure. And you know that.

God requires us to read the entire Scripture. Not snippets. Christ taught faith based salvation. He also taught that His followers should worship Him as God because He is God. Jesus is not some angle. Christ is not created.
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Nobody is being forced to read or participate. Those who do can provide their own arguments in the expectation that their claims will be questioned.

Religious claims are problematic because they are faith based. Faith based beliefs, by definition, cannot be tested objectively.

The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


That's not the atheist claim. That's your claim on behalf of atheists.

bullshit


You made a false claim. Saying 'bullshit' doesn't prove your claim.
You presume to speak on behalf of atheists.
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


You obviously haven't read this thread as this has already been addressed several times. The non religious participants here have made no such claim about the origin of the universe. We have consistently said that we don't know how it originally came to be. Neither do you. But you are the ones claiming to KNOW how it started despite having no evidence to support that claim.

A materialist rejects God. Science has already settled the creation of the Universe as an event. Therefore the only possible option is for a materialist is to have faith in ex nihilo, ergo my statement is absolutely correct. Atheism is faith based. Just because empty words about "not knowing" are said makes no difference. If a materialist truly did not know then they would allow for God as an option. They don't.

You have obviously not read what I posted i other threads. I have shown clear evidence for the creation of the universe in the past via a supernatural means.

"Kalam Cosmological Argument" is a start, but I'm sure it will be ignored because it is not convenient for faith filled atheists to consider seriously.


When did science settle Creation by a Creator as an event?
[/quote]
Science settled the creation event. Science cannot settle how the event occurred since science before the event is not possible.

Metaphysics offers logical sound arguments for that event having been initiated by a sentient Creator.

It is wrong to think science can answer all questions.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


You obviously haven't read this thread as this has already been addressed several times. The non religious participants here have made no such claim about the origin of the universe. We have consistently said that we don't know how it originally came to be. Neither do you. But you are the ones claiming to KNOW how it started despite having no evidence to support that claim.

A materialist rejects God. Science has already settled the creation of the Universe as an event. Therefore the only possible option is for a materialist is to have faith in ex nihilo, ergo my statement is absolutely correct. Atheism is faith based. Just because empty words about "not knowing" are said makes no difference. If a materialist truly did not know then they would allow for God as an option. They don't.

You have obviously not read what I posted i other threads. I have shown clear evidence for the creation of the universe in the past via a supernatural means.

"Kalam Cosmological Argument" is a start, but I'm sure it will be ignored because it is not convenient for faith filled atheists to consider seriously.


When did science settle Creation by a Creator as an event?

Science settled the creation event. Science cannot settle how the event occurred since science before the event is not possible.

Metaphysics offers logical sound arguments for that event having been initiated by a sentient Creator.

It is wrong to think science can answer all questions.
Originally Posted by Violator22
Of course I’m saved, I’m Catholic. 😎

Hey, Les great to see you post, this happy camper is another lee 24 and a nut.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Nobody is being forced to read or participate. Those who do can provide their own arguments in the expectation that their claims will be questioned.

Religious claims are problematic because they are faith based. Faith based beliefs, by definition, cannot be tested objectively.

The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


That's not the atheist claim. That's your claim on behalf of atheists.

bullshit


You made a false claim. Saying 'bullshit' doesn't prove your claim.
You presume to speak on behalf of atheists.

It says you spoke bullshit when you made your claim.

I spoke to my claim when I responded to willto. I used reason. You just spoke.
As much as these “Are you saved” threads that pop up or continue on indefinitely. One could muse that most who post on them are needing saving 3-4 times a day...sans, Antlers.

SMH

🦫
Originally Posted by Violator22
Of course I’m saved, I’m Catholic. 😎

Hey, Les great to see you post, this happy camper is another lee 24 and a nut.
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
Such an article does not exist because science is clueless as too how true abiogenesis can happen in a materialist narrative.


And you cannot provide any evidence as to how a god could originate from nothing. You scoff at the notion of the universe coming from nothing or always existing in some form but on the other hand totally embrace the notion that a god could have always been or came from nothing. Seems a bit of a double standard.

And since it's obvious that you haven't read all of this thread I will repeat something I said earlier. There are 4000 recognized religions on the planet Earth. Each with their own god and creation story. Please provide the evidence you used to home in on which one of them actually created the universe.

God did not originate. That is why he is called God. He is called the first cause. Google it. How many religious variations there are says nothing about abiogenisis. Science is unable to answer the most fundamental question of science.

Dawkins was an intellectual lightweight.. You should not read his words if you want to gain knowledge. Science will never explain abiogeneisis because the evidence consistently gets stronger and stronger that it is impossible. If scicen had any thing to say about it then internet atheists would say something about it. They never do.

Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Nobody is being forced to read or participate. Those who do can provide their own arguments in the expectation that their claims will be questioned.

Religious claims are problematic because they are faith based. Faith based beliefs, by definition, cannot be tested objectively.

The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


That's not the atheist claim. That's your claim on behalf of atheists.

bullshit


You made a false claim. Saying 'bullshit' doesn't prove your claim.
You presume to speak on behalf of atheists.

It says you spoke bullshit when you made your claim.

I spoke to my claim when I responded to willto. I used reason. You just spoke.







Sorry but you do not possess the power to change reality just by making a false claim. Although believers such as yourself do often engage in that sort of magical thinking.
Quote
God did not originate. That is why he is called God.


Which one of the 4000 gods is that? What evidence do you have to narrow it down to a specific god of one religion?

And why is god excluded from the need to have a start or a creation? Just because it shields you from having to explain how god came into being from nothing? LOL! That's convenient. Believers just yank these rules out of their ass and try to force you to accept them as absolute. They are not.

Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


You obviously haven't read this thread as this has already been addressed several times. The non religious participants here have made no such claim about the origin of the universe. We have consistently said that we don't know how it originally came to be. Neither do you. But you are the ones claiming to KNOW how it started despite having no evidence to support that claim.

A materialist rejects God. Science has already settled the creation of the Universe as an event. Therefore the only possible option is for a materialist is to have faith in ex nihilo, ergo my statement is absolutely correct. Atheism is faith based. Just because empty words about "not knowing" are said makes no difference. If a materialist truly did not know then they would allow for God as an option. They don't.

You have obviously not read what I posted i other threads. I have shown clear evidence for the creation of the universe in the past via a supernatural means.

"Kalam Cosmological Argument" is a start, but I'm sure it will be ignored because it is not convenient for faith filled atheists to consider seriously.


When did science settle Creation by a Creator as an event?

Science settled the creation event. Science cannot settle how the event occurred since science before the event is not possible.

Metaphysics offers logical sound arguments for that event having been initiated by a sentient Creator.

It is wrong to think science can answer all questions.
[/quote]


Your wording - creation event - is designed to imply a creator. The big bang does not need a creator as an explanation, just physics.

It is not known whether time had a beginning, or what set off the BB.

We don't know, therefore God, is not an argument.

We don't understand, therefore God must have done it....is a poor rationale.
It's easier for some to believe artificial intelligence in some super computer with self adaptive learning could eventually take over the world in our realm of reality than to consider God similarly evolving. Astronomers know there is more out there than we can observe, possibly ever. Such daunting mystery obviously cannot disprove the existence of Omnipotence, the incomprehensible sublime. Some say aliens visit us from deep space by bending time to overcome distance, techniques we scoff at. Earth is 4,5 billion years old. Humanity, even in crude form, much younger. Geology tells fantastic tales of creation far more complex than Genesis with no mention of enormous fossilized creatures roaming a human free planet long before Jesus, Moses, Mohamed, Budda or Rumi. Jews are the chosen people. Muslims jihad against all infidels while Christians, the biggest bullies of all, have killed more of their own fellow believers over doctrinal differences than any pagans ever did; until forming the disunited states of America where the Baptists, and Anglicans and Catholics, in their separate states, could peacefully coexist in mutual disgust of the wild Irish and sour Germans without killing each other over who's going to heaven. Now we got Haitians, Somalians, Afghans, and Central Americanos, and rigged voting machines. O, Lost!
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Nobody is being forced to read or participate. Those who do can provide their own arguments in the expectation that their claims will be questioned.

Religious claims are problematic because they are faith based. Faith based beliefs, by definition, cannot be tested objectively.

The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


That's not the atheist claim. That's your claim on behalf of atheists.

bullshit


You made a false claim. Saying 'bullshit' doesn't prove your claim.
You presume to speak on behalf of atheists.

It says you spoke bullshit when you made your claim.

I spoke to my claim when I responded to willto. I used reason. You just spoke.







You make baseless claims, then accuse your opponent of bullshit, all the while being unaware of the irony of your tactics.
Organized religion is man-made and you don't need it to have faith, and be saved, It's the biggest money-making scam of all time. All you need is faith.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
If you are really interested in the question, and not just trying to suggest "We don't know, therefore God", here's an interesting article on the subject:

https://www.science.org.au/curious/earth-environment/which-came-first-chicken-or-egg
That is an interesting article. It does explain that eggs came first. But it doesn't explain the bridge between asexual reproduction and sexual reproduction, namely, eggs and seeds.


The evolutionary diversion leading to plants and animals happened a long time ago. There is no subsequent link between the two - natural selection favored those changes that provided a survival benefit given the environmental circumstances. You can look to compare similarities or differences between the two but there is no link between them, apart from a common source a long time ago.

You misunderstand again.
How did plants "evolve" from asexual reproduction to seeding? Species at the time of said change is irrelevant.
How did animals "evolve" from asexual reproduction to sexual reproduction via eggs? Species at the time of said change is irrelevant.


You"ll have to research that yourself but that change happened a long time ago with organisms that aren't around today and would be otherwise unrecognisable to us. My point being that using a modern day chicken to peruse variations of that magnitude is not applcable.

I think that you are looking for a magical "hey presto" answer but it's likely more complicated than that. Mutations happen quickly but sometimes there needs to be a series of successful mutations before a characteristic forms, more so with a more complex organism. If I recall correctlysomething like 99% of the species that ever evolved are extinct, due to ongoing changes, competition etc. Evolution is still ongoing.
Originally Posted by NH K9
Originally Posted by the_shootist
I always get a charge out of non believers accusing believers of shoving the truths of the Bible down their throats. The easiest way to avoid that is o close your mouth and open your ears and your hearts.

Jesus Christ is a well known historical fact being recorded in even secular encyclopedia if anyone cares to read something written on paper any more.

What about Believers who don't want to hear folks like HC spewing their bullschitt?


I'm a believer Shootist.
I haven't seen a non-believer here state that the Bible was being shoved down their throat. Do you have a link to that post?
Plenty of debate here which is healthy, serves to lead one to either strengthen their beliefs or question them.
Christianity covers a wide spectrum of beliefs, not just the rigid judgmental dogma dished out by the Happy Camper types.


Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


You obviously haven't read this thread as this has already been addressed several times. The non religious participants here have made no such claim about the origin of the universe. We have consistently said that we don't know how it originally came to be. Neither do you. But you are the ones claiming to KNOW how it started despite having no evidence to support that claim.

A materialist rejects God. Science has already settled the creation of the Universe as an event. Therefore the only possible option is for a materialist is to have faith in ex nihilo, ergo my statement is absolutely correct. Atheism is faith based. Just because empty words about "not knowing" are said makes no difference. If a materialist truly did not know then they would allow for God as an option. They don't.

You have obviously not read what I posted i other threads. I have shown clear evidence for the creation of the universe in the past via a supernatural means.

"Kalam Cosmological Argument" is a start, but I'm sure it will be ignored because it is not convenient for faith filled atheists to consider seriously.


When did science settle Creation by a Creator as an event?

Science settled the creation event. Science cannot settle how the event occurred since science before the event is not possible.

Metaphysics offers logical sound arguments for that event having been initiated by a sentient Creator.

It is wrong to think science can answer all questions.


I haven't seen the last few pages of responses but suspect yours are all similar to the above and are just plain wrong. You don't understand science, evidence or logic, and makes for some sloppy arguements from yourself.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by Violator22
Of course I’m saved, I’m Catholic. 😎

Welcome Violator22!
I'm glad you have interest in spiritual matters. The local Catholic church just reminded me that it's noon as the big liberty bell rang in the tower.

Isaiah 61:1


Happy Camper has said some pretty nasty things about the Catholic Church here Violator22. But he's being nice because he's really hard up for anyone who will listen to him presently.
Originally Posted by wabigoon
[Linked Image from azquotes.com]


Happy Camper says that Billy Graham is in Hell.
I posted that, did I not.
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Happy Camper has said some pretty nasty things about the Catholic Church here Violator22. But he's being nice because he's really hard up for anyone who will listen to him presently.
Happy Camper will come around to the truth that is the Catholic Church when he figures out why Jesus, with the ability to read hearts, made Judas an Apostle.
Originally Posted by wabigoon
I posted that, did I not.


Yes Wabi, you posted it and I added my comment.
You do recall Happy Camper posting the sermon declaring Billy Graham is in Hell don't you?
Originally Posted by wabigoon
I posted that, did I not.


If a God exists and wants to interact with His creation, why stay hidden from it? According to the bible, God was not so shy in biblical times. Yet we are meant to take the word of ancient people? People who believed all sorts of things that are plain wrong.
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
God did not originate. That is why he is called God.


Which one of the 4000 gods is that? What evidence do you have to narrow it down to a specific god of one religion?

And why is god excluded from the need to have a start or a creation? Just because it shields you from having to explain how god came into being from nothing? LOL! That's convenient. Believers just yank these rules out of their ass and try to force you to accept them as absolute. They are not.


God is not a scientific concept. If something physical or metaphysical requires a Creator then by definition we are not talking about the Creator. Very simple logic. You you define something as requiring a Creator then you are by definition not talking about God. YYou are talking about something created.
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
God did not originate. That is why he is called God.


Which one of the 4000 gods is that? What evidence do you have to narrow it down to a specific god of one religion?

And why is god excluded from the need to have a start or a creation? Just because it shields you from having to explain how god came into being from nothing? LOL! That's convenient. Believers just yank these rules out of their ass and try to force you to accept them as absolute. They are not.


God is not a scientific concept. If something physical or metaphysical requires a Creator then by definition we are not talking about the Creator. Very simple logic. You you define something as requiring a Creator then you are by definition not talking about God. YYou are talking about something created.





Man created god/s
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by wabigoon
I posted that, did I not.


If a God exists and wants to interact with His creation, why stay hidden from it? According to the bible, God was not so shy in biblical times. Yet we are meant to take the word of ancient people? People who believed all sorts of things that are plain wrong.

Christians don't claim He is hidden. You do.

Atheists always explain away any and all divine manifestations as hallucinations or lies. They always do. They do today. They would do it tomorrow. The supernatural is by definition not repeatable. It is not subject to the empirical method. Atheists are trapped in a fishbowl. Falsely believing that the only truth is that which the scientific method can prove.
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
God did not originate. That is why he is called God.


Which one of the 4000 gods is that? What evidence do you have to narrow it down to a specific god of one religion?

And why is god excluded from the need to have a start or a creation? Just because it shields you from having to explain how god came into being from nothing? LOL! That's convenient. Believers just yank these rules out of their ass and try to force you to accept them as absolute. They are not.


God is not a scientific concept. If something physical or metaphysical requires a Creator then by definition we are not talking about the Creator. Very simple logic. You you define something as requiring a Creator then you are by definition not talking about God. YYou are talking about something created.





Man created god/s

Yes, of course. But God created man.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Happy Camper has said some pretty nasty things about the Catholic Church here Violator22. But he's being nice because he's really hard up for anyone who will listen to him presently.
Happy Camper will come around to the truth that is the Catholic Church when he figures out why Jesus, with the ability to read hearts, made Judas an Apostle.

To fulfill prophecy.
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


You obviously haven't read this thread as this has already been addressed several times. The non religious participants here have made no such claim about the origin of the universe. We have consistently said that we don't know how it originally came to be. Neither do you. But you are the ones claiming to KNOW how it started despite having no evidence to support that claim.

A materialist rejects God. Science has already settled the creation of the Universe as an event. Therefore the only possible option is for a materialist is to have faith in ex nihilo, ergo my statement is absolutely correct. Atheism is faith based. Just because empty words about "not knowing" are said makes no difference. If a materialist truly did not know then they would allow for God as an option. They don't.

You have obviously not read what I posted i other threads. I have shown clear evidence for the creation of the universe in the past via a supernatural means.

"Kalam Cosmological Argument" is a start, but I'm sure it will be ignored because it is not convenient for faith filled atheists to consider seriously.


When did science settle Creation by a Creator as an event?

Science settled the creation event. Science cannot settle how the event occurred since science before the event is not possible.

Metaphysics offers logical sound arguments for that event having been initiated by a sentient Creator.

It is wrong to think science can answer all questions.


I haven't seen the last few pages of responses but suspect yours are all similar to the above and are just plain wrong. You don't understand science, evidence or logic, and makes for some sloppy arguements from yourself.

The Kalam Cosmological Argument is not mine. How is it sloppy?

Do you believe all truth can be found through the scientific method?
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm


Man created god/s




My perspective is somewhat different in that I think men created religion.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Nobody is being forced to read or participate. Those who do can provide their own arguments in the expectation that their claims will be questioned.

Religious claims are problematic because they are faith based. Faith based beliefs, by definition, cannot be tested objectively.

The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


That's not the atheist claim. That's your claim on behalf of atheists.

bullshit


You made a false claim. Saying 'bullshit' doesn't prove your claim.
You presume to speak on behalf of atheists.

It says you spoke bullshit when you made your claim.

I spoke to my claim when I responded to willto. I used reason. You just spoke.







You make baseless claims, then accuse your opponent of bullshit, all the while being unaware of the irony of your tactics.


How is the Kalam Cosmological argument wrong?
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by NH K9
Originally Posted by the_shootist
I always get a charge out of non believers accusing believers of shoving the truths of the Bible down their throats. The easiest way to avoid that is o close your mouth and open your ears and your hearts.

Jesus Christ is a well known historical fact being recorded in even secular encyclopedia if anyone cares to read something written on paper any more.

What about Believers who don't want to hear folks like HC spewing their bullschitt?


I'm a believer Shootist.
I haven't seen a non-believer here state that the Bible was being shoved down their throat. Do you have a link to that post?
Plenty of debate here which is healthy, serves to lead one to either strengthen their beliefs or question them.
Christianity covers a wide spectrum of beliefs, not just the rigid judgmental dogma dished out by the Happy Camper types.



Christianity is defined by Christ. Do you agree?
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by wabigoon
I posted that, did I not.


If a God exists and wants to interact with His creation, why stay hidden from it? According to the bible, God was not so shy in biblical times. Yet we are meant to take the word of ancient people? People who believed all sorts of things that are plain wrong.

Christians don't claim He is hidden. You do.

Atheists always explain away any and all divine manifestations as hallucinations or lies. They always do. They do today. They would do it tomorrow. The supernatural is by definition not repeatable. It is not subject to the empirical method. Atheists are trapped in a fishbowl. Falsely believing that the only truth is that which the scientific method can prove.


It's not my claim, the fact is that nobody argues over the existence of things that are visible to anyone who cares to look.

Nobody argues over the existence of the things of the world, people, animals, plants, rivers, streams, lakes, the moon or Sun....but people do argue over the existence of a God and other things supernatural.

Why? Because they are not seen, cannot be examined or tested.

What you take as evidence for God is your own belief and its related subjective experiences.

Subjective experience alone is not evidence that what is being experienced is true and factual, especially not when it comes to fantastic things like experiencing God or having a relationship with God.
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Nobody is being forced to read or participate. Those who do can provide their own arguments in the expectation that their claims will be questioned.

Religious claims are problematic because they are faith based. Faith based beliefs, by definition, cannot be tested objectively.

The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


That's not the atheist claim. That's your claim on behalf of atheists.

bullshit


You made a false claim. Saying 'bullshit' doesn't prove your claim.
You presume to speak on behalf of atheists.

It says you spoke bullshit when you made your claim.

I spoke to my claim when I responded to willto. I used reason. You just spoke.







You make baseless claims, then accuse your opponent of bullshit, all the while being unaware of the irony of your tactics.


How is the Kalam Cosmological argument wrong?


Plenty of reasons, basically;

What it should say but doesn't;
1. Everything that begins to exist has both an efficient and material cause of its existence.

2. The universe began to exist.

3. Therefore, the universe has both an efficient and material cause of its existence.

"So there you have it, the evidence in support of the first premise of the Kalam Cosmological Argument. Two lines of reasoning that support the idea of the universe having both a material and efficient cause, and a complete non sequitur that falsely equates something with nothing and asks us to cherry pick which aspects of causality we consider to be metaphysical in nature. Of course the argument does have a second premise...''

https://www.cambridgeskeptics.org.uk/post/arguments-against-the-kalam-cosmological-argument
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


You obviously haven't read this thread as this has already been addressed several times. The non religious participants here have made no such claim about the origin of the universe. We have consistently said that we don't know how it originally came to be. Neither do you. But you are the ones claiming to KNOW how it started despite having no evidence to support that claim.

A materialist rejects God. Science has already settled the creation of the Universe as an event. Therefore the only possible option is for a materialist is to have faith in ex nihilo, ergo my statement is absolutely correct. Atheism is faith based. Just because empty words about "not knowing" are said makes no difference. If a materialist truly did not know then they would allow for God as an option. They don't.

You have obviously not read what I posted i other threads. I have shown clear evidence for the creation of the universe in the past via a supernatural means.

"Kalam Cosmological Argument" is a start, but I'm sure it will be ignored because it is not convenient for faith filled atheists to consider seriously.


When did science settle Creation by a Creator as an event?

Science settled the creation event. Science cannot settle how the event occurred since science before the event is not possible.

Metaphysics offers logical sound arguments for that event having been initiated by a sentient Creator.

It is wrong to think science can answer all questions.


I haven't seen the last few pages of responses but suspect yours are all similar to the above and are just plain wrong. You don't understand science, evidence or logic, and makes for some sloppy arguements from yourself.

The Kalam Cosmological Argument is not mine. How is it sloppy?

Do you believe all truth can be found through the scientific method?


Science provides us with many facts and explanations and will correct any errors of previous, if needed. There are still many unknowns.
Compare the achievements of science to the achievements of religion in terms of our understanding of the natural world.
Well good folks, "It', is a leap of Faith.
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by Willto
Quote
The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


You obviously haven't read this thread as this has already been addressed several times. The non religious participants here have made no such claim about the origin of the universe. We have consistently said that we don't know how it originally came to be. Neither do you. But you are the ones claiming to KNOW how it started despite having no evidence to support that claim.

A materialist rejects God. Science has already settled the creation of the Universe as an event. Therefore the only possible option is for a materialist is to have faith in ex nihilo, ergo my statement is absolutely correct. Atheism is faith based. Just because empty words about "not knowing" are said makes no difference. If a materialist truly did not know then they would allow for God as an option. They don't.

You have obviously not read what I posted i other threads. I have shown clear evidence for the creation of the universe in the past via a supernatural means.

"Kalam Cosmological Argument" is a start, but I'm sure it will be ignored because it is not convenient for faith filled atheists to consider seriously.


When did science settle Creation by a Creator as an event?

Science settled the creation event. Science cannot settle how the event occurred since science before the event is not possible.

Metaphysics offers logical sound arguments for that event having been initiated by a sentient Creator.

It is wrong to think science can answer all questions.


I haven't seen the last few pages of responses but suspect yours are all similar to the above and are just plain wrong. You don't understand science, evidence or logic, and makes for some sloppy arguements from yourself.


IQ and education are inversely related to religiosity. Old Hat's a prime example of this.
Originally Posted by stxhunter
Organized religion is man-made and you don't need it to have faith, and be saved, It's the biggest money-making scam of all time. All you need is faith.

Are you 100% certain that you will be directly in heaven when you die?
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by stxhunter
Organized religion is man-made and you don't need it to have faith, and be saved, It's the biggest money-making scam of all time. All you need is faith.

Are you 100% certain that you will be directly in heaven when you die?

Aren't you supposed to be doing some community service?
Originally Posted by the_shootist
I always get a charge out of non believers accusing believers of shoving the truths of the Bible down their throats. The easiest way to avoid that is o close your mouth and open your ears and your hearts.

Jesus Christ is a well known historical fact being recorded in even secular encyclopedia if anyone cares to read something written on paper any more.

Amen. You are absolutely correct.
I can show a dozen places that christians are told to share that good news with unbelievers from God's Word.
NV, Stx and others try their hardest to push unbelievers and believers alike away from the Lord. Just check out my past Sunday posts where there's been interest. They aren't sharing the good news. They hate the messages. Because they know that's not popular with Christians here, they lie and say, "It's not the messages that we keep trolling on Sunday after Sunday, it's just you. Look at my signature.... that's me he keeps kicking at. Check out the Christian and atheist debate at the OP, that's me.

You know as well as the other Christians that you are welcome to contact me anytime PM and I am happy to help you with anything I can.

Happy Camper
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
IQ and education are inversely related to religiosity. Old Hat's a prime example of this.
A/S: You wound me. Your words are sharper than a serpents tooth. I do lack formal education but never thought of myself as stupid or low IQ. I understand you directed this at Old Hat, and even though he and I seriously disagree I'm not atheist. I actually believe religion could be beneficial if we realized that most of them are parallel on matters of morals and organization of society. For the life of me I can't understand why Muslims, Christians, Hindus, and Hebrews are all at each others throats. With burnings, inquisitions, Witch trials, ethnic cleansing, genocide, beheadings, crashing planes into buildings, caste systems, and social stratification that religion promotes I can see where God gets a bad name to the casual observer. I sure understand the Hindu leader Gandhi saying I like Jesus, It's his followers I don't like.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

NV, Stx and others try their hardest to push unbelievers and believers alike away from the Lord. (That is a blatant lie, which is expected of you as you have proven countless times here that you are a pathological lier. If anyone doubts that they can check out the Happy Camper, Renaissance Man? thread and make up their own mind regarding your credibility. You are the focus of the push back, not religion, not Christ, not the Bible, just you Happy Camper) Just check out my past Sunday posts where there's been interest. They aren't sharing the good news. They hate the messages. Because they know that's not popular with Christians here, they lie and say, "It's not the messages that we keep trolling on Sunday after Sunday, it's just you. (Wrong and you know it. It is in fact you. Name anyone else here who receives the derision you get and deserve.) Look at my signature.... that's me he keeps kicking at. Check out the Christian and atheist debate at the OP, that's me.

You know as well as the other Christians that you are welcome to contact me anytime PM and I am happy to help you with anything I can. Interesting how you always want to take it to PMs so you are shielded from the push back. You don't want anyone to know how you operate)

Happy Camper



Just for schyts and giggles
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
IQ and education are inversely related to religiosity. Old Hat's a prime example of this.
A/S: You wound me. Your words are sharper than a serpents tooth. I do lack formal education but never thought of myself as stupid or low IQ. I understand you directed this at Old Hat, and even though he and I seriously disagree I'm not atheist. I actually believe religion could be beneficial if we realized that most of them are parallel on matters of morals and organization of society. For the life of me I can't understand why Muslims, Christians, Hindus, and Hebrews are all at each others throats. With burnings, inquisitions, Witch trials, ethnic cleansing, genocide, beheadings, crashing planes into buildings, caste systems, and social stratification that religion promotes I can see where God gets a bad name to the casual observer. I sure understand the Hindu leader Gandhi saying I like Jesus, It's his followers I don't like.

Hastings my friend, you may be religious, but on a scale of religiosity, you are no where close to the Happy Campers, Old Hats and Young Earth Creationist like our very own Ringman.

You see the contradictions in the Bible, and as a result have a more nuanced interpretation then the example I gave above. The same can be said for Antlers own Christianity. Keep in mind, correlations are just indicative, not determinative. There are plenty of outlawyers on both sides of that equation. But in general, the lower a persons IQ, the less educated and more agreeable the person the easier it is to swindle them into believing BS.

You are far from the fundamentalist religion drones who believe everything just because it's written in their old book. Your welcome to sit an my fire and drink my rum anytime.
NV,

Who made you God???
Why do you demand like some super narcissistic communist dictator to read everyone's private mail or messages???

I have and will continue using the private message feature as it was intended when Rick set these forums up for the benefit of others.
You have absolutely NO business demanding to know who or what I talk about you delusional tin horn forum dictator want-a-be.
Hastings,
Please consider my previous comment in this context:

Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Not all religions/belief systems are created equal, nor are all Christianities.

A good majority of Christians in America today are what I call functional Atheist. They claim to believe, don't really know what's in their bible, go to Chruch for weddings and funerals and focus on solving this world problems in this world, and don't unquestionably based their actions on dubiously sourced ancient parchments, and attempt to force other to conform to the same belief their at the point of a gun by trying to pass laws based on their old book. When debating, these are not the Christians I'm looking for, and I suspect you fall squarely in this camp. Dont' get me wrong, I'll still debate you for fun, to see if you have new or cleaver apologetics I've never head and to hone my skills, but you are not the droid I'm looking for.

When we study the impacts of religion against measures of well being, the evidence is crystal clear. The more fundamentalist the beliefs the worst the outcomes. It really doesn't matter what you measure, income per capita, teen pregnancy rates, rates of imprisonment, life expectancy, educational attainment, across the board, greater levels of fundamentalism lead to worse outcomes.

These are the believer's I'm looking for. Those who's beliefs are so wrong they impact the greater world in a negative way. I don't limit myself to Christians Fundamentalist's. I'm also opposed to Marxist, Muslim, Global Warming Alarmist, Hindu, Shinto, and Jainist Fundamentalist, we just don't have may of those of The Fire, so our religious debates typically revolve around Christianity.


Additionally, fundamentalist creates a viscous cycle. When fundamentalist fail they attribute their failure to an insufficient level of fundamentalism.
Put another way, fundamentalism leads to bad outs, bad out comes for fundamentalist leads to greater levels of fundamentalism, which lead to worse outcomes, and more fundamentalism etc. To better understand this in action, I suggest you read Lawrence Wrights "The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11".
Where did I claim to be God?
Where did I demand to read your PMs?
You can continue operating however you would like, and I will do the same.
Commenting on how you operate is not demanding to know what you are talking about. Are you really that dense.........never mind.

I've been meaning to ask you if there are any other jobs we need to add to your resume Leonardo.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Hastings,
Please consider my previous comment in this context:

Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Not all religions/belief systems are created equal, nor are all Christianities.

A good majority of Christians in America today are what I call functional Atheist. They claim to believe, don't really know what's in their bible, go to Chruch for weddings and funerals and focus on solving this world problems in this world, and don't unquestionably based their actions on dubiously sourced ancient parchments, and attempt to force other to conform to the same belief their at the point of a gun by trying to pass laws based on their old book. When debating, these are not the Christians I'm looking for, and I suspect you fall squarely in this camp. Dont' get me wrong, I'll still debate you for fun, to see if you have new or cleaver apologetics I've never head and to hone my skills, but you are not the droid I'm looking for.

When we study the impacts of religion against measures of well being, the evidence is crystal clear. The more fundamentalist the beliefs the worst the outcomes. It really doesn't matter what you measure, income per capita, teen pregnancy rates, rates of imprisonment, life expectancy, educational attainment, across the board, greater levels of fundamentalism lead to worse outcomes.

These are the believer's I'm looking for. Those who's beliefs are so wrong they impact the greater world in a negative way. I don't limit myself to Christians Fundamentalist's. I'm also opposed to Marxist, Muslim, Global Warming Alarmist, Hindu, Shinto, and Jainist Fundamentalist, we just don't have may of those of The Fire, so our religious debates typically revolve around Christianity.


Additionally, fundamentalist creates a viscous cycle. When fundamentalist fail they attribute their failure to an insufficient level of fundamentalism.
Put another way, fundamentalism leads to bad outs, bad out comes for fundamentalist leads to greater levels of fundamentalism, which lead to worse outcomes, and more fundamentalism etc. To better understand this in action, I suggest you read Lawrence Wrights "The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11".


I was joking with you. You and I don't agree with everything but I value your input on a variety of subjects. I suspect you and I could be good friends.
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Where did I claim to be God?
Where did I demand to read your PMs?
You can continue operating however you would like, and I will do the same.
Commenting on how you operate is not demanding to know what you are talking about. Are you really that dense.........never mind.

I've been meaning to ask you if there are any other jobs we need to add to your resume Leonardo.



Leonardo...I though he was one of the swaggarts?
A/S: The part of my post chastising you was in jest. I doubt you think I'm stupid. Now the end of my post was serious about the various religions being mixed up in the evil schemes of the world.
Originally Posted by JSTUART
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Where did I claim to be God?
Where did I demand to read your PMs?
You can continue operating however you would like, and I will do the same.
Commenting on how you operate is not demanding to know what you are talking about. Are you really that dense.........never mind.

I've been meaning to ask you if there are any other jobs we need to add to your resume Leonardo.



Leonardo...I though he was one of the swaggarts?

I listen to Jimmy Swaggart for entertainment sometimes and his beautiful and pleasant wife Frances. Their preaching would fit right in with our zealots.
Originally Posted by JSTUART
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Where did I claim to be God?
Where did I demand to read your PMs?
You can continue operating however you would like, and I will do the same.
Commenting on how you operate is not demanding to know what you are talking about. Are you really that dense.........never mind.

I've been meaning to ask you if there are any other jobs we need to add to your resume Leonardo.



Leonardo...I though he was one of the swaggarts?


Check out the Happy Camper, Renaissance Man?.

Happy Camper, Renaissance Man?
Originally Posted by Hastings
A/S: The part of my post chastising you was in jest. I doubt you think I'm stupid. Now the end of my post was serious about the various religions being mixed up in the evil schemes of the world.


Good to hear. We sure could use a sarcasm and I'll messing with you font.

I'm not so sure all the evil we attribute to religion are just or deserved, especially as it pertains to warfare.

The vast majority of war are fought for economic reasons and economic boundaries closely follow ethnic and religious boundaries. As an example, the Crusades to the east were billed religious wars, when in reality they over trade routes. Part of what makes the "Holy Lands" holy is they are the end of the southern fork of the Silk Road and the gateway to the Mediterranean. In calling for one of the Crusades the Pope references his inability to obtain silk from China for his papal robes.

The slaughter in Rwanda was preached from the Pulpit of Catholic Church under the guise of religious religious reason, much like those in the Slaughter of the Midianites, but that was just the excuse employed by the majority to slaughter a minority with better more productive lands. I could go on for days, but you get the point.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper


Good to hear. We sure could use a sarcasm and I'll messing with you font.

I'm not so sure all the evil we attribute to religion are just or deserved, especially as it pertains to warfare.

The vast majority of war are fought for economic reasons and economic boundaries closely follow ethnic and religious boundaries. As an example, the Crusades to the east were billed religious wars, when in reality they over trade routes. Part of what makes the "Holy Lands" holy is they are the end of the southern fork of the Silk Road and the gateway to the Mediterranean. In calling for one of the Crusades the Pope references his inability to obtain silk from China for his papal robes.

The slaughter in Rwanda was preached from the Pulpit of Catholic Church under the guise of religious religious reason, much like those in the Slaughter of the Midianites, but that was just the excuse employed by the majority to slaughter a minority with better more productive lands. I could go on for days, but you get the point.




From my observations I would postulate that it is always without exception poor men dying for rich men's assets.
I believe that Jesus was God in a bod, and that He’s as close as we’ll ever get to understanding God while we’re on this earth.
It's hard to determine what exactly happened a week ago, yet alone two thousand years based on a collection of works written decades after the described event. The ancients wanted to believe, they searched for signs and wonders, they sought miracle workers, they sought hope.......
The Christian faith doesn’t require Jesus’ followers to look away from suffering, injustice, and cruelty. I’m compelled to look TOWARD these things. Not only at these things that were caused by those who professed to be Christians, but also at these things that were caused by those who professed NOT to be Christians. ‘Christians’ who did/do these things were/are acting of their own accord. Nowhere in the New Testament are Christians commanded to do these things. Ever.

Unlike the instances in the Old Testament, where the Hebrews are actually commanded by God to carry out genocide and “not to let a soul remain alive”, which they appeared to do enthusiastically. There are other times when the Hebrews took it upon themselves to commit genocide, even against their own.

There’s plenty of killin’ and sufferin’ and cruelty to go around.
When Paul, who was a Jew, was standing in the synagogue in Antioch, surrounded by other Jews, he made a point that was crystal clear to them; and it was undoubtedly offensive to some, as it is today. He said that he wanted them to know that the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed through Jesus. And that everyone who believes through Him is set free from their sins; they receive a justification that they clearly were not able to obtain under the Law of Moses.

Translation = Jesus did what the Law of Moses couldn’t.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat

The atheist belief that the universe was created from nothing(ex nihilo) is a faith based claim.


That's not the atheist claim. That's your claim on behalf of atheists.

bullshit


You made a false claim. Saying 'bullshit' doesn't prove your claim.
You presume to speak on behalf of atheists.

It says you spoke bullshit when you made your claim.

I spoke to my claim when I responded to willto. I used reason. You just spoke.



You make baseless claims, then accuse your opponent of bullshit, all the while being unaware of the irony of your tactics.


How is the Kalam Cosmological argument wrong?


Plenty of reasons, basically;

What it should say but doesn't;
1. Everything that begins to exist has both an efficient and material cause of its existence.

2. The universe began to exist.

3. Therefore, the universe has both an efficient and material cause of its existence.

"So there you have it, the evidence in support of the first premise of the Kalam Cosmological Argument. Two lines of reasoning that support the idea of the universe having both a material and efficient cause, and a complete non sequitur that falsely equates something with nothing and asks us to cherry pick which aspects of causality we consider to be metaphysical in nature. Of course the argument does have a second premise...''

https://www.cambridgeskeptics.org.uk/post/arguments-against-the-kalam-cosmological-argument

No where is something equated with nothing. That is why you just cut and paste and the sentence is so short. It's bald.
Odin has a guarantee.
Originally Posted by nathanial
Odin has a guarantee.

For hell.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=william+lane+craig+kalam+cosmological+argumen

If everything that begins to exist must have a cause and the universe must have had a beginning because actual infinities are metaphysically impossible, where did God come from? The original formulation of the Cosmological Argument stated that everything that exists must have a cause, but modern apologists changed that to everything that begins to exist must have a cause. This provided them with a loophole to state that God is exempt from the first premise since he didn't actually have a beginning and therefore didn't need a cause to begin to exist.

Well, aside from the fact that this leads to all sort of mental wrangling whereby you have to claim that, in order to never have had a beginning, God must simultaneously be an immaterial being consisting of pure "mind" (whatever that means) existing outside of space and time and somehow be able to interact with space and time whenever he wants, it also ignores the second premise of the argument that claims that the universe must have had a beginning because an actual infinity is impossible. If that is actually true, then it would also apply to God. Claiming that God, being an infinite and eternal being, is the exception to the rule that actual infinities are impossible is just a case of special pleading and one would be equally justified claiming that the universe (or multiverse) is the exception to the rule and therefore there's no need for God. In other words, if the universe necessarily had a beginning then so did God, and no amount of making up claims out of whole cloth that God must be "timeless" can avoid that fact.
Originally Posted by OldHat


No where is something equated with nothing. That is why you just cut and paste and the sentence is so short. It's bald.


What is Bald is your failure to read the article and consider what it says about the problems with the Kalams cosmological argument.

You are not willing to consider the possibility of being wrong.

You yourself believe in something from nothing, that a God - whatever that is supposed to be - just spoke the Universe into existence from nothing..."let there be light, and there was light."

You believe in Magical Creation.



[img]https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1...22x11_white_wash_grande.png?v=1463376984[/img]



Belief? Hindus believe. Muslims believe. Jews believe. Christians believe. Buddhists believe.....
Originally Posted by DBT


Hardly surprising that some believers jump onto the bandwagon and try to use this for their "therefore god" stance. The apologetics embarrassingly cling to their flawed versions of science and logic.
Nowadays many people, especially well-educated people, are well aware of all of the issues with the Bible…issues in terms of our culture’s view of the Bible…like a literal six day creation, no real geological evidence for a one-time catastrophic worldwide flood, and no archeological evidence for the exodus of the Hebrews.

So when somebody leverages the authority of “the Bible says” to many in our postmodern and secular society…in their minds, since they can discredit parts of it…they often discredit all of it. But the foundation of the Christian faith is not the Bible.

Since the Protestant Reformation and the concept of Sola Scriptura…when the reformer’s tried to rescue the church from the tradition driven and man-made doctrines that had been implemented over the previous 1200 years…many Christians unfortunately came to believe that the 66 books of the Bible were the only sufficient and infallible source for the faith of Christianity and its practice.

For the first 300 years of Christianity, the focus of the faith was centered on an event, not a book. The issue wasn’t the Bible, the issue was Jesus’ resurrection. Twenty seven different books (that we know of) were written about it back then…by eyewitnesses and those who knew eyewitnesses…and they were all written within the lifetimes of these people. The earliest Christians didn’t focus on the historical and scientific accuracy of the Old Testament, they focused on the event that launched the faith.

This singular event was described by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, James, and Paul…eyewitnesses and their contemporaries. Maybe the very thing that the earliest Christians focused on, their central focus…the very foundation of their faith, the very thing that empowered them to evangelize under the persecution that they endured, and their singular “living hope”…maybe that should be what we focus on, maybe that should be our central focus as well.

It’s certainly easier to defend a smaller part of scripture written by eyewitnesses and their contemporaries than it is to defend the entire Bible.
Antlers, I just wanted to pop in and point out that you consistently give the zealots a bad name.

😉
https://www.catholiccompany.com/a-c...ing-science-behind-eucharistic-miracles/
https://shop.catholic.com/a-catholic-scientist-champions-the-shroud-of-turin/
https://www.catholic.org/news/hf/faith/story.php?id=68835
I'd be pleased if Mister Antlers would fill in some Sunday at our church.
Originally Posted by goalie
Antlers, I just wanted to pop in and point out that you consistently give the zealots a bad name.

😉



Still have a house full of guests so I have not kept up… but I just popped in here and noticed your comment.

I take your comment as a true compliment directed toward mr antlers…. and a commendation. I agree.



I wouldn't pay too much attention to that library source - they substitute facts with magic.
[Linked Image from i.ytimg.com]
Wabigoon,

Good morning sir!
Hope you and yours are well.
Here's a short video that I'd like your opinion on if you have time. It's 16 minutes or so.
Thank you for your prayers and have a great day.

HC
Happy Camper tells us that Billy Graham is in hell.
Happy Camper says wiping front to back is a sin.


NV rafer,
Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can you escape the damnation of hell?
The existence of Hell and a God of Love is a contradiction....
LOL, peeked huh?
You are a clueless clown.
I guess I'll have to be happy in Hell with Billy Graham.
LMAO laugh cry laugh cry laugh
Originally Posted by DBT
The existence of Hell and a God of Love is a contradiction....


God's love is conditional and he will abuse those who don't follow his rules, or so the story goes
Originally Posted by DBT
The existence of Hell and a God of Love is a contradiction....


I have always thought so as well. On the one hand Christians tell me that the love of God is pure and on a level we mere mortals can't begin to comprehend. But then on the other hand his one and only punishment for any deviation from the path is to fling you into a pit of fire for all eternity. A fate that I would not inflict apon my worse enemy. Which would make me more compassionate than God. That probably shouldn't be possible.

It also seems a little weird that all people get the same punishment. Some guy born in India who grows up a Hindu but never harms anyone his whole life gets......Pit of fire forever. Hitler who directly gassed 6 million Jews and started a war that killed 50 million people? Yep, you guessed it. Same punishment as the completely peaceful Hindu guy. Seems fair. LOL!
Originally Posted by Willto
Originally Posted by DBT
The existence of Hell and a God of Love is a contradiction....
It also seems a little weird that all people get the same punishment.
Where do you get that?
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by DBT
The existence of Hell and a God of Love is a contradiction....


God's love is conditional and he will abuse those who don't follow his rules, or so the story goes


Yes, so much for tolerance and understanding.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by DBT
The existence of Hell and a God of Love is a contradiction....
God's love is conditional and he will abuse those who don't follow his rules, or so the story goes
Yes, so much for tolerance and understanding.
What do you think being in Heaven involves? Getting 72 virgins?
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper


NV rafer,
Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can you escape the damnation of hell?



You sure like threatening people who disagree with you.
Ole Crappy Hamster doing the my way or the highway God and Jesus puppeteering routine on rubes. Ones who pay credance to the garbage that spills outta the religous sockpuppet persona he runs.


[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]


News flash Happy Copeland....
Your little ploy to put Christains in a bad light on here aint working.

Only one we are after is your dumb azz since you showed up here spewing bullschit lies and running this religious zealot sockpuppet troll persona...
The theology of many evangelicals is that Jesus is comin’ back, people are gonna be judged, and sent to hell if they’re not ‘Christians’. And it seems there’s a lotta ‘Christians’ that are really excited about that…especially about the goin’ to hell part for those who aren’t ‘Christians’. Seems they can’t wait…!

Jesus spoke of hell in maybe two or three percent of His messages, and He spoke of Heaven in maybe nine or ten percent of His messages. But in the overwhelming majority of His messages…maybe eighty-seven to eighty-nine percent of the time…He was teaching about relationship with God, relationships with other people (all of them loved by God), and goin’ through this life in ways that are good for us and good for others.

Once long ago, there were a handful of disenfranchised Jews who were crushed between the Roman Empire and the Jewish Temple. And against overwhelming odds, they maintained their faith in a resurrected Jesus and changed the world.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper


NV rafer,
Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can you escape the damnation of hell?



You sure like threatening people who disagree with you.

I'm not threatening anyone.
Neither has answered this question, yet spew their venom like the vipers that Jesus directed this.
I'm quoting a question that Jesus posed. We should all answer it sooner than later.

He also told a devout Jew just as he does us today,
"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

You would say that Jesus is threatening you as if He has no business telling you the truth. What He is doing is warning you and instructing you how to avoid condemnation.
Originally Posted by antlers
The theology of many evangelicals is that Jesus is comin’ back, people are gonna be judged, and sent to hell if they’re not ‘Christians’. And it seems there’s a lotta ‘Christians’ that are really excited about that…especially about the goin’ to hell part for those who aren’t ‘Christians’. Seems they can’t wait…!

Jesus spoke of hell in maybe two or three percent of His messages, and He spoke of Heaven in maybe nine or ten percent of His messages. But in the overwhelming majority of His messages…maybe eighty-seven to eighty-nine percent of the time…He was teaching about relationship with God, relationships with other people (all of them loved by God), and goin’ through this life in ways that are good for us and good for others.

Once long ago, there were a handful of disenfranchised Jews who were crushed between the Roman Empire and the Jewish Temple. And against overwhelming odds, they maintained their faith in a resurrected Jesus and changed the world.

So you don't think Jesus warned about hell?
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper


NV rafer,
Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can you escape the damnation of hell?



You sure like threatening people who disagree with you.

I'm not threatening anyone.
Neither has answered this question, yet spew their venom like the vipers that Jesus directed this.
I'm quoting a question that Jesus posed. We should all answer it sooner than later.

He also told a devout Jew just as he does us today,
"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

You would say that Jesus is threatening you as if He has no business telling you the truth. What He is doing is warning you and instructing you how to avoid condemnation.


Of course it's a threat.
Saying "My dad's says going to beat you up" is a threat, no different than your threat hiding behind "Jesus says you're going to hell"....

You have no real argument, and no real honor, that's why you resort to threats.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by antlers
The theology of many evangelicals is that Jesus is comin’ back, people are gonna be judged, and sent to hell if they’re not ‘Christians’. And it seems there’s a lotta ‘Christians’ that are really excited about that…especially about the goin’ to hell part for those who aren’t ‘Christians’. Seems they can’t wait…!

Jesus spoke of hell in maybe two or three percent of His messages, and He spoke of Heaven in maybe nine or ten percent of His messages. But in the overwhelming majority of His messages…maybe eighty-seven to eighty-nine percent of the time…He was teaching about relationship with God, relationships with other people (all of them loved by God), and goin’ through this life in ways that are good for us and good for others.

Once long ago, there were a handful of disenfranchised Jews who were crushed between the Roman Empire and the Jewish Temple. And against overwhelming odds, they maintained their faith in a resurrected Jesus and changed the world.

So you don't think Jesus warned about hell?


Do you have a reading comprehension problem, did you choose to ignore what Antlers actually wrote, or are you just an asshat?

I'm told, “A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;”
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

I'm told, “A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;”


And I'm told you're a dishonest prick.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by antlers
The theology of many evangelicals is that Jesus is comin’ back, people are gonna be judged, and sent to hell if they’re not ‘Christians’. And it seems there’s a lotta ‘Christians’ that are really excited about that…especially about the goin’ to hell part for those who aren’t ‘Christians’. Seems they can’t wait…!

Jesus spoke of hell in maybe two or three percent of His messages, and He spoke of Heaven in maybe nine or ten percent of His messages. But in the overwhelming majority of His messages…maybe eighty-seven to eighty-nine percent of the time…He was teaching about relationship with God, relationships with other people (all of them loved by God), and goin’ through this life in ways that are good for us and good for others.

Once long ago, there were a handful of disenfranchised Jews who were crushed between the Roman Empire and the Jewish Temple. And against overwhelming odds, they maintained their faith in a resurrected Jesus and changed the world.

So you don't think Jesus warned about hell?


Do you have a reading comprehension problem, did you choose to ignore what Antlers actually wrote, or are you just an asshat?



Yes.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by DBT
The existence of Hell and a God of Love is a contradiction....
God's love is conditional and he will abuse those who don't follow his rules, or so the story goes
Yes, so much for tolerance and understanding.
What do you think being in Heaven involves? Getting 72 virgins?


I said nothing about conditions in Heaven. The point was about what puts you in Hell, in relation to a God of Love.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

I'm told, “A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;”


And I'm told you're a dishonest prick.

+1
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper


NV rafer,
Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can you escape the damnation of hell?



You sure like threatening people who disagree with you.

I'm not threatening anyone.
Neither has answered this question, yet spew their venom like the vipers that Jesus directed this.
I'm quoting a question that Jesus posed. We should all answer it sooner than later.

He also told a devout Jew just as he does us today,
"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

You would say that Jesus is threatening you as if He has no business telling you the truth. What He is doing is warning you and instructing you how to avoid condemnation.

If you believe in Jesus why don't you act like it. Judge not that ye be judged. For with the judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged. And go back through all those lying posts and quit your lying. People out there are looking at you and thinking they want nothing to do with the Jesus you represent. Quit lying and quit judging. Straighten up your own act.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

I'm told, “A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;”


Huh?
Who knows.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

I'm told, “A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;”


Huh?


He's always been on the razor edge of sanity. I think our rejection of his fugged up dogma has sent him off the cliff.
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

I'm told, “A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;”


Huh?


He's always been on the razor edge of sanity. I think our rejection of his fugged up dogma has sent him off the cliff.

You did us a favor by reminding us of all his obvious lies a few days ago. If he is for real he is bad off the rails mentally. I mean seriously crazy.
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper


NV rafer,
Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can you escape the damnation of hell?



You sure like threatening people who disagree with you.

I'm not threatening anyone.
Neither has answered this question, yet spew their venom like the vipers that Jesus directed this.
I'm quoting a question that Jesus posed. We should all answer it sooner than later.

He also told a devout Jew just as he does us today,
"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

You would say that Jesus is threatening you as if He has no business telling you the truth. What He is doing is warning you and instructing you how to avoid condemnation.

If you believe in Jesus why don't you act like it. Judge not that ye be judged. For with the judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged. And go back through all those lying posts and quit your lying. People out there are looking at you and thinking they want nothing to do with the Jesus you represent. Quit lying and quit judging. Straighten up your own act.

A dozen Saducee trolls who hate the preaching of the simple gospel message calling me names is like the water off of my duck cloth rain jacket I wear as I write this.
Consider that you trolls attack the answers from my Father doesn't put YOU in very good light. That you call them lies is a testimony that God does not listen to your prayers IF you even talk to Him. Wish you were saved, but...
"Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles."
[Linked Image from quotefancy.com]
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

I'm told, “A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;”


Huh?

You rejected OVER half the New Testament.
I am to reject you. I moved on looong ago. You keep coming back like an bitter old woman whose been scorned.
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by DBT
The existence of Hell and a God of Love is a contradiction....
God's love is conditional and he will abuse those who don't follow his rules, or so the story goes
Yes, so much for tolerance and understanding.
What do you think being in Heaven involves? Getting 72 virgins?
I said nothing about conditions in Heaven. The point was about what puts you in Hell, in relation to a God of Love.
Does spending eternity praising and glorifying God seem like something you'd like to do? How does an eternal praise & worship service sound to you?
[Linked Image from quotemaster.org]
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by DBT
The existence of Hell and a God of Love is a contradiction....
God's love is conditional and he will abuse those who don't follow his rules, or so the story goes
Yes, so much for tolerance and understanding.
What do you think being in Heaven involves? Getting 72 virgins?
I said nothing about conditions in Heaven. The point was about what puts you in Hell, in relation to a God of Love.
Does spending eternity praising and glorifying God seem like something you'd like to do? How does an eternal praise & worship service sound to you?


Nope. Not in the slightest. An eternity kissing ass in Heaven, or burning in burning in Hell.
Screw that. The Vikings heaven sounds much better.
God made us all free agents, take "It", or leave it.
Originally Posted by wabigoon
God made us all free agents, take "It", or leave it.

That's presuming there is a god, and it's yours.
I have yet to see you present any good evidence to support his existence.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Nope. Not in the slightest. An eternity kissing ass in Heaven, or burning in burning in Hell.
Screw that. The Vikings heaven sounds much better.
So you're in the "72 virgins"-type camp.
DBT?
The only people more obnoxious than the openly pious are libertarian atheists.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Nope. Not in the slightest. An eternity kissing ass in Heaven, or burning in burning in Hell.
Screw that. The Vikings heaven sounds much better.
So you're in the "72 virgins"-type camp.
DBT?


72 White Raisins is Muslim, not Viking.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Nope. Not in the slightest. An eternity kissing ass in Heaven, or burning in burning in Hell.
Screw that. The Vikings heaven sounds much better.
So you're in the "72 virgins"-type camp.
DBT?
72 White Raisins is Muslim, not Viking.
Philosophically, that is a distinction without a difference. Both are appeals to the temporal interests of Man.
They are not appeals to perfection. God is perfection, the goal of our highest attainment. Last time I checked, getting hammered on Saturday night and screwing whores wasn't one of our higher attainments. An attainment, surely, but not one aimed at perfection. In this sense, the Vikings make more sense than the Moslems. The Vikings didn't claim there to be any perfection in a god, just powerful but flawed individuals.
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Nope. Not in the slightest. An eternity kissing ass in Heaven, or burning in burning in Hell.
Screw that. The Vikings heaven sounds much better.
So you're in the "72 virgins"-type camp.
DBT?


Do you think that you'll be "off the hook" in your heaven, or will it be 24/7 god praising to show your gratitude?
[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]

[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
9 yr old Happy Camper Aka: dead eye with a mauser rifle...


Happy Crapper bringing people together like Torquemada.
One more time.[Linked Image from i.etsystatic.com]
Originally Posted by wabigoon
God made us all free agents, take "It", or leave it.


Not according to the bible;


"And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? Or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? Have not I the Lord?" Exodus 4:11


"The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.'' Proverbs 16:4


''For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you. And the brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death.'' - Matthew 10:20 - 21


'''Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?" (Amos 3:6, KJV)
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by DBT
The existence of Hell and a God of Love is a contradiction....
God's love is conditional and he will abuse those who don't follow his rules, or so the story goes
Yes, so much for tolerance and understanding.
What do you think being in Heaven involves? Getting 72 virgins?
I said nothing about conditions in Heaven. The point was about what puts you in Hell, in relation to a God of Love.
Does spending eternity praising and glorifying God seem like something you'd like to do? How does an eternal praise & worship service sound to you?


That still doesn't answer the question.
He11 knows?
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Nope. Not in the slightest. An eternity kissing ass in Heaven, or burning in burning in Hell.
Screw that. The Vikings heaven sounds much better.
So you're in the "72 virgins"-type camp.
DBT?
72 White Raisins is Muslim, not Viking.
Philosophically, that is a distinction without a difference. Both are appeals to the temporal interests of Man.
They are not appeals to perfection. God is perfection, the goal of our highest attainment. Last time I checked, getting hammered on Saturday night and screwing whores wasn't one of our higher attainments. An attainment, surely, but not one aimed at perfection. In this sense, the Vikings make more sense than the Moslems. The Vikings didn't claim there to be any perfection in a god, just powerful but flawed individuals.


The god of the Bible is far from perfect. To quote Dawkins:

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all of fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."
The bad parts are typically ignored or brushed aside....yet they are there.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Nope. Not in the slightest. An eternity kissing ass in Heaven, or burning in burning in Hell.
Screw that. The Vikings heaven sounds much better.
So you're in the "72 virgins"-type camp.
DBT?
72 White Raisins is Muslim, not Viking.
Philosophically, that is a distinction without a difference. Both are appeals to the temporal interests of Man.
They are not appeals to perfection. God is perfection, the goal of our highest attainment. Last time I checked, getting hammered on Saturday night and screwing whores wasn't one of our higher attainments. An attainment, surely, but not one aimed at perfection. In this sense, the Vikings make more sense than the Moslems. The Vikings didn't claim there to be any perfection in a god, just powerful but flawed individuals.


The god of the Bible is far from perfect. To quote Dawkins:

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all of fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."


Thats just like your opinion man.
For over 1200 years, ‘Christians’ used Old Covenant values and practices to justify mistreating other people. It’d be impossible to launch an organized massacre of Jews and Muslims, or to start an Inquisition, by leveraging Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. But there’s plenty to work with by reaching back into the Old Testament.

Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by Tyrone
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Nope. Not in the slightest. An eternity kissing ass in Heaven, or burning in burning in Hell.
Screw that. The Vikings heaven sounds much better.
So you're in the "72 virgins"-type camp.
DBT?
72 White Raisins is Muslim, not Viking.
Philosophically, that is a distinction without a difference. Both are appeals to the temporal interests of Man.
They are not appeals to perfection. God is perfection, the goal of our highest attainment. Last time I checked, getting hammered on Saturday night and screwing whores wasn't one of our higher attainments. An attainment, surely, but not one aimed at perfection. In this sense, the Vikings make more sense than the Moslems. The Vikings didn't claim there to be any perfection in a god, just powerful but flawed individuals.


The god of the Bible is far from perfect. To quote Dawkins:

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all of fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."


Yeah when ever I bring up the Old Testament the local evangelicals hit me with the, "Oh we don't live by the Old Testament anymore". As if that explains away or excuses why much of the truly heinous crap in the Old Testament was "EVER" okay. Why would a just and loving God have ever been okay with slavery; selling your own daughter; genocide; slaughtering innocent women and children; etc; etc; the list goes on and on.

Yeah God loves you allright but be careful were you pitch your tent. If it happens to be somewhere he has given to his choosen people you might wake up with a God sanctioned sword in your ass. And your wife and kids won't fare any better either. But God loves you. Remember that as you bleed to death.
Originally Posted by antlers
For over 1200 years, ‘Christians’ used Old Covenant values and practices to justify mistreating other people. It’d be impossible to launch an organized massacre of Jews and Muslims, or to start an Inquisition, by leveraging Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. But there’s plenty to work with by reaching back into the Old Testament.



Are the moral values of God supposed to be eternal or relative?
Originally Posted by antlers
For over 1200 years, ‘Christians’ used Old Covenant values and practices to justify mistreating other people. It’d be impossible to launch an organized massacre of Jews and Muslims, or to start an Inquisition, by leveraging Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. But there’s plenty to work with by reaching back into the Old Testament.




No, there isn’t.
With the establishment of Jesus’ New Covenant, His followers aren’t required to sacrifice animals to be on speaking terms with God, and Leviticus is full of things that Jesus’ followers aren’t required to do. But many today choose to selectively blend aspects of the old covenant with the new. This blending began when church leaders decided to claim the Hebrew Scriptures as their own. And then church leaders in the fourth century validated the creation of an oppressive form of the church by leveraging Old Testament concepts after Constantine legalized Christian worship.

And that’s when ‘Christians’ started persecuting pagans like pagans had previously done to Christians. The church even had remission of sin and get outta hell proclamations by the eleventh century, for those who would join a Holy War and commit genocide against Jews and Muslims. Four hundred years later, ‘Christians’ were at war with each other; villages were razed to the ground over and over after weaponizing Christianity in the name of God. Completely unchristian attitudes and behavior prevailed wherever Old Testament concepts were leveraged.

Since the fourth century, ‘Christians’ have justified mistreating others by leveraging Old Testament values and practices. The earliest church leaders…Peter and James (Jesus’ brother) and Paul…eventually moved past the old covenant. They realized that Jesus…even though He was foreshadowed in the Old Testament…did not come to extend the old covenant; He came to fulfill it, complete it, and inaugurate something entirely new.

The Old Testament is right up there at the top of the list when it comes to stumbling blocks to faith. For those who struggle to believe, the Old Testament is often to blame. I don’t need to reach back beyond the cross to take from a temporary and inferior covenant compared to the one established by Jesus. The author of Hebrews says Jesus was the guarantor of a better covenant, and that His covenant was built on better promises. And, I wasn’t included in the old covenant to begin with…!
Consider the thief on the cross.
Originally Posted by antlers
For over 1200 years, ‘Christians’ used Old Covenant values and practices to justify mistreating other people. It’d be impossible to launch an organized massacre of Jews and Muslims, or to start an Inquisition, by leveraging Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. But there’s plenty to work with by reaching back into the Old Testament.


You like to talk about early Christians, so let's not forget Marcion, who could not reconcile the Jesus with the God of Old Testament and concluded they must be different gods.

Believers,

Keep in mind that " the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

I can't waste all day answering the questions of the atheists with reasoning and the scriptures that would answer the so called atheists arguments against the existence of God." The mean God of the O.T. vs the Jesus of the New" fallacy has been dealt with before. There's no convincing those who don't want to know the truth. Perhaps they will be humbled by hardship some day and humbly look outside of that person they trust.
God is available to the humble, yet resists the proud.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

Believers,

Keep in mind that " the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

I can't waste all day answering the questions of the atheists with reasoning and the scriptures that would answer the so called atheists arguments against the existence of God." The mean God of the O.T. vs the Jesus of the New" fallacy has been dealt with before. There's no convincing those who don't want to know the truth. Perhaps they will be humbled by hardship some day and humbly look outside of that person they trust.
God is available to the humble, yet resists the proud.
[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]forever in my heart poem


🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
So rene' is not a backslidden catholic, but an atheist now.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

Believers,

Keep in mind that " the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

I can't waste all day answering the questions of the atheists with reasoning and the scriptures that would answer the so called atheists arguments against the existence of God." The mean God of the O.T. vs the Jesus of the New" fallacy has been dealt with before. There's no convincing those who don't want to know the truth. Perhaps they will be humbled by hardship some day and humbly look outside of that person they trust.
God is available to the humble, yet resists the proud.



So explaining God to those that don't understand is a waste of time.........Got it.
Originally Posted by renegade50
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

Believers,

Keep in mind that " the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

I can't waste all day answering the questions of the atheists with reasoning and the scriptures that would answer the so called atheists arguments against the existence of God." The mean God of the O.T. vs the Jesus of the New" fallacy has been dealt with before. There's no convincing those who don't want to know the truth. Perhaps they will be humbled by hardship some day and humbly look outside of that person they trust.
God is available to the humble, yet resists the proud.
[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]forever in my heart poem


🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣


Looks about as coherent as Tom Cruise.
Originally Posted by Jim_Conrad
Originally Posted by renegade50
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

Believers,

Keep in mind that " the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

I can't waste all day answering the questions of the atheists with reasoning and the scriptures that would answer the so called atheists arguments against the existence of God." The mean God of the O.T. vs the Jesus of the New" fallacy has been dealt with before. There's no convincing those who don't want to know the truth. Perhaps they will be humbled by hardship some day and humbly look outside of that person they trust.
God is available to the humble, yet resists the proud.
[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]forever in my heart poem


🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣


Looks about as coherent as Tom Cruise.



Dude uses a capo, that's cheating.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

I'm told, “A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;”


Huh?

You rejected OVER half the New Testament.
I am to reject you. I moved on looong ago. You keep coming back like an bitter old woman whose been scorned.

No sir H/C: I'm trying to lead you to salvation. It is no wonder you are confused. You have bet all your chips on Paul who not only contradicted Jesus, he contradicts himself. If you removed Paul from the mix the Catholic Church and her lineal descendants would have no differences. All doctrinal arguments between the sects comprising Christianity are rooted in Paul. Jesus and his real disciples messages are congruent except for the obvious 4th century forgery additions of 2nd Peter. James and Revelation directly refute Paul. I am praying that you will read and compare and come to the salvation that Jesus offered. You are obviously an earnest and troubled man but I believe study with an open mind will reveal Jesus to you.
Dude's probably a capon!
Well, he should be able to hit the high notes then.
Originally Posted by 12344mag
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

Believers,

Keep in mind that " the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

I can't waste all day answering the questions of the atheists with reasoning and the scriptures that would answer the so called atheists arguments against the existence of God." The mean God of the O.T. vs the Jesus of the New" fallacy has been dealt with before. There's no convincing those who don't want to know the truth. Perhaps they will be humbled by hardship some day and humbly look outside of that person they trust.
God is available to the humble, yet resists the proud.



So explaining God to those that don't understand is a waste of time.........Got it.

I have explained Him once a week for how long?
Every post has His love expressed in two video presentations of His good news.

After all of that you still don't understand Him?
We understand that you are a shill and an anti Christian troll.
8/16/21 – (Happy Camper narrowly escapes death at the hands of preachers.)
“It reminds me of the time I was staying the week with some preachers while seeing a week at a Church near Fort Worth Texas. This was back when I taught Sunday school, but hadn't considered ever Preaching. At 3-4 AM I was woken up with a pillow crushed against my face and two of the preachers holding my arms down, so I would smother to death.”
NV,
No doubt you would try to choke the life out of me too if I gave you the chance.


"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth..." John ch. 8


9-14-2021
"Originally Posted by rainshot
He's been allowed to roam free for far too long. Get a rope.

NVhntr said,
"Happy Camper?? I agree."
Originally Posted by NVhntr
8/16/21 – (Happy Camper narrowly escapes death at the hands of preachers.)
“It reminds me of the time I was staying the week with some preachers while seeing a week at a Church near Fort Worth Texas. This was back when I taught Sunday school, but hadn't considered ever Preaching. At 3-4 AM I was woken up with a pillow crushed against my face and two of the preachers holding my arms down, so I would smother to death.”

Stay after him NVhntr. He will either repent and confess all his lying or follow Cowboy Tim and Paddler away from here like they did when the heat got too hot for them. H/C does have a thick skin. I would have left long ago if I was exposed and ridiculed like he has been.
What a drama queen.
Lol
Originally Posted by Hastings

Stay after him NVhntr. He will either repent and confess all his lying or follow Cowboy Tim and Paddler away from here like they did when the heat got too hot for them. H/C does have a thick skin. I would have left long ago if I was exposed and ridiculed like he has been.


I don't think it's thick skin it's more like a typical Liberal, no f ucking brains.
6/17/20 – Happy Camper survives being poisoned by his girlfriend.
"Good news is that it had a happy ending because I survived. I came within an inch of my life as organ failure set in. I'm grateful that God miraculously brought a vision of charcoal to my mind and where to find it. Then he gave me enough strength to drag myself off my back, get to it and eat it before dying. It absorbed the poison she put in the food and I recovered."
Jesus SAVES! but Moses INVESTS... a MUCH better option..
The derision ye recieveth here is of thou ownst making; verily thine own words will convict thee. NV chap.1

7/22/20 – (The first time 8 year old Happy Camper shoots a rifle, it’s a 15 shot one hole group at 100 paces with an 8mm Mauser.)
“Reminds me of getting yelled at my first time at a range. The first rifle that was put against my shoulder as an 8 y.o. boy was a 98 M in 8mm. My target had one hole after fully loading it around 3 times. It Made mom's second husband mad for wasting all that expensive ammo. Red face, yelling, cussing, not a good first experience. He thought I missed the target altogether until we went to get a close look. Not a bad rifle at 100 long paces.”
NV,
No doubt you would try to choke the life out of me too if I gave you the chance.


"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth..." John ch. 8


9-14-2021
"Originally Posted by rainshot
He's been allowed to roam free for far too long. Get a rope.

NVhntr said,
"Happy Camper?? I agree."
Happy's Starbucks saga:


6/25/20 – (HC congers up story about dating, discovers too many Arabs, LEOs, and soy boys at Starbucks.)
"I used to take dates there from time to time.
Then it got overrun by black SUVs doing steakouts and Saudis who would hit and run backing out of parking spaces......soyboys working behind the counter asking if I want a Grande' or a Tall. And I'm waiting to ask for someone to handle my drink that doesn't have a lisp and has been tested for AIDS. About that time it's good to sit down and wait for the gal who doesn't look like she sleeps with Habeeb to get me a refill."

6/25/20 – (God provides HC with Starbucks)
"The BEST Starbucks ever was not served at the coffee shop.
It was an answer to prayer. A couple months ago.
Not prayer to some impersonal universe or cosmic consciousness, no mantra chanting meditation either....Just asked my Father in the name of His Son, my best Friend.
Went to Kroger's and what did I see on shelf by itself?
A bunch of bags of Starbucks Whole beans......at $2 BUCKS PER BAG! Fresh, not outdated. No issues. Just cheaper than wholesale. Coincidence? I'm sure some atheist will say so."
Salvation? Finite consequences for finite transgressions: put them into reform school.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
NV,
No doubt you would try to choke the life out of me too if I gave you the chance.


"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth..." John ch. 8


9-14-2021
"Originally Posted by rainshot
He's been allowed to roam free for far too long. Get a rope.

NVhntr said,
"Happy Camper?? I agree."


H/C: Now be honest. Who has been on here posting all kinds of fantastic lies? It's you but you may not know, you may be one of the people who doesn't even realize the lies he makes up are not true. They start believing their own lies. It has become almost comical and sad at the same time. NVhntr has caught you and chronicled enough to certify you as to what you are. Tell us again, did you shoot a one hole group with an 8mm Mauser at 100 yards when you were less than 10 years old? Just answer that. With 10 or 15 shots no less?
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
So rene' is not a backslidden catholic, but an atheist now.

LMFAO!!!
You don't know squat you little female dog!!!
Finally got the toggling religous sockpuppet troll persona to react.

TFF!!!
That pic is most def going in the 30 rd mag for future use among all the other funny as fugg anderson pics I googled this morning in less than 30 seconds before I left the house.
Soooooooooo much material to work with.
You aint seen nothing yet bytch.
Outta the blue whenever I want too.
To show everyone on here what a tool and poser you are.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Originally Posted by renegade50
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

Believers,

Keep in mind that " the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

I can't waste all day answering the questions of the atheists with reasoning and the scriptures that would answer the so called atheists arguments against the existence of God." The mean God of the O.T. vs the Jesus of the New" fallacy has been dealt with before. There's no convincing those who don't want to know the truth. Perhaps they will be humbled by hardship some day and humbly look outside of that person they trust.
God is available to the humble, yet resists the proud.
[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]forever in my heart poem


🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Crappy Hamster.
What's the matter little fella.

That last sentence in your cpt cut and paste blurb conflict with that picture.

Struck a nerve in your simpleton thought process.

I deliberately picked that picture to tie in with that last sentence

Your playing T ball.
Rest of us are hitting fastballs and driving in runs...


Dumbfugg....
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Originally Posted by Jim_Conrad
We understand that you are a shill and an anti Christian troll.


Bazinga!!!!!
Originally Posted by NVhntr
6/17/20 – Happy Camper survives being poisoned by his girlfriend.
"Good news is that it had a happy ending because I survived. I came within an inch of my life as organ failure set in. I'm grateful that God miraculously brought a vision of charcoal to my mind and where to find it. Then he gave me enough strength to drag myself off my back, get to it and eat it before dying. It absorbed the poison she put in the food and I recovered."

🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

Eating charcoal after dragging himself where God told him he could find some...
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣


[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
NV,
No doubt you would try to choke the life out of me too if I gave you the chance.


"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth..." John ch. 8


9-14-2021
"Originally Posted by rainshot
He's been allowed to roam free for far too long. Get a rope.

NVhntr said,
"Happy Camper?? I agree."


H/C: Now be honest. Who has been on here posting all kinds of fantastic lies? It's you but you may not know, you may be one of the people who doesn't even realize the lies he makes up are not true. They start believing their own lies. It has become almost comical and sad at the same time. NVhntr has caught you and chronicled enough to certify you as to what you are. Tell us again, did you shoot a one hole group with an 8mm Mauser at 100 yards when you were less than 10 years old? Just answer that. With 10 or 15 shots no less?

🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤣🤣🤣🤣🥴🥴🥴🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🙄🙄🙄🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Below is a pic of Happy Camper.
AKA: The Mauser Kid!!!


[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Happy's Starbucks saga:


6/25/20 – (HC congers up story about dating, discovers too many Arabs, LEOs, and soy boys at Starbucks.)
"I used to take dates there from time to time.
Then it got overrun by black SUVs doing steakouts and Saudis who would hit and run backing out of parking spaces......soyboys working behind the counter asking if I want a Grande' or a Tall. And I'm waiting to ask for someone to handle my drink that doesn't have a lisp and has been tested for AIDS. About that time it's good to sit down and wait for the gal who doesn't look like she sleeps with Habeeb to get me a refill."

6/25/20 – (God provides HC with Starbucks)
"The BEST Starbucks ever was not served at the coffee shop.
It was an answer to prayer. A couple months ago.
Not prayer to some impersonal universe or cosmic consciousness, no mantra chanting meditation either....Just asked my Father in the name of His Son, my best Friend.
Went to Kroger's and what did I see on shelf by itself?
A bunch of bags of Starbucks Whole beans......at $2 BUCKS PER BAG! Fresh, not outdated. No issues. Just cheaper than wholesale. Coincidence? I'm sure some atheist will say so."

We need to add Juan Valdez mule owner and coffee bean transporter to Happy Copelands job list now???

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Originally Posted by renegade50
Originally Posted by NVhntr
6/17/20 – Happy Camper survives being poisoned by his girlfriend.
"Good news is that it had a happy ending because I survived. I came within an inch of my life as organ failure set in. I'm grateful that God miraculously brought a vision of charcoal to my mind and where to find it. Then he gave me enough strength to drag myself off my back, get to it and eat it before dying. It absorbed the poison she put in the food and I recovered."

🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

Eating charcoal after dragging himself where God told him he could find some...
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣


[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]


That's not even the best part of the story. A few days later, Happy was lost in the desert with nothing to eat. Some geese were flying overhead, and a lightning bolt struck one and dropped it right at his feet. So God had provided him with meat. He had matches, but there were no trees in the desert, so there was nothing to build a fire with to cook his meat.

Then he remembered the charcoal, dropped trow, and shat out two dozen perfect briquettes and was saved! And to top it all off, they were match light briquettes!!
Originally Posted by renegade50
Originally Posted by NVhntr
Happy's Starbucks saga:


6/25/20 – (HC congers up story about dating, discovers too many Arabs, LEOs, and soy boys at Starbucks.)
"I used to take dates there from time to time.
Then it got overrun by black SUVs doing steakouts and Saudis who would hit and run backing out of parking spaces......soyboys working behind the counter asking if I want a Grande' or a Tall. And I'm waiting to ask for someone to handle my drink that doesn't have a lisp and has been tested for AIDS. About that time it's good to sit down and wait for the gal who doesn't look like she sleeps with Habeeb to get me a refill."

6/25/20 – (God provides HC with Starbucks)
"The BEST Starbucks ever was not served at the coffee shop.
It was an answer to prayer. A couple months ago.
Not prayer to some impersonal universe or cosmic consciousness, no mantra chanting meditation either....Just asked my Father in the name of His Son, my best Friend.
Went to Kroger's and what did I see on shelf by itself?
A bunch of bags of Starbucks Whole beans......at $2 BUCKS PER BAG! Fresh, not outdated. No issues. Just cheaper than wholesale. Coincidence? I'm sure some atheist will say so."

We need to add Juan Valdez mule owner and coffee bean transporter to Happy Copelands job list now???

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣


[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]
[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]
I could be wrong, but I'd wager that God isn't allowing pathological liars past the Pearly Gates.
Originally Posted by smokepole


That's not even the best part of the story. A few days later, Happy was lost in the desert with nothing to eat. Some geese were flying overhead, and a lightning bolt struck one and dropped it right at his feet. So God had provided him with meat. He had matches, but there were no trees in the desert, so there was nothing to build a fire with to cook his meat.

Then he remembered the charcoal, dropped trow, and shat out two dozen perfect briquettes and was saved! And to top it all off, they were match light briquettes!!





Makes as much sense as the other rubbish crappy hamster comes out with.
Originally Posted by JSTUART
Originally Posted by smokepole


That's not even the best part of the story. A few days later, Happy was lost in the desert with nothing to eat. Some geese were flying overhead, and a lightning bolt struck one and dropped it right at his feet. So God had provided him with meat. He had matches, but there were no trees in the desert, so there was nothing to build a fire with to cook his meat.

Then he remembered the charcoal, dropped trow, and shat out two dozen perfect briquettes and was saved! And to top it all off, they were match light briquettes!!





Makes as much sense as the other rubbish crappy hamster comes out with.


What, God doesn't send you discount coffee beans?
Originally Posted by smokepole


What, God doesn't send you discount coffee beans?



Pretty sure that would be way down the list.
Originally Posted by Jim_Conrad
Originally Posted by renegade50
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper

Believers,

Keep in mind that " the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

I can't waste all day answering the questions of the atheists with reasoning and the scriptures that would answer the so called atheists arguments against the existence of God." The mean God of the O.T. vs the Jesus of the New" fallacy has been dealt with before. There's no convincing those who don't want to know the truth. Perhaps they will be humbled by hardship some day and humbly look outside of that person they trust.
God is available to the humble, yet resists the proud.
[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]forever in my heart poem


🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣


Looks about as coherent as Tom Cruise.


Like Cruise, we won't come out of the closet:



And he's a fudge packer:

It's a Strange, Strange World we live in.....
Originally Posted by NVhntr
8/16/21 – (Happy Camper narrowly escapes death at the hands of preachers.)
“It reminds me of the time I was staying the week with some preachers while seeing a week at a Church near Fort Worth Texas. This was back when I taught Sunday school, but hadn't considered ever Preaching. At 3-4 AM I was woken up with a pillow crushed against my face and two of the preachers holding my arms down, so I would smother to death.”



Happy,
Did you bite the pillow?
Originally Posted by Hastings
Tell us again, did you shoot a one hole group with an 8mm Mauser at 100 yards when you were less than 10 years old? Just answer that. With 10 or 15 shots no less?


You mean this one:


7/22/20 – (The first time 8 year old HC shoots a rifle, it’s a 15 shot one hole group at 100 paces with an 8mm Mauser.)
"Reminds me of getting yelled at my first time at a range. The first rifle that was put against my shoulder as an 8 y.o. boy was a 98 M in 8mm. My target had one hole after fully loading it around 3 times. It Made mom's second husband mad for wasting all that expensive ammo. Red face, yelling, cussing, not a good first experience. He thought I missed the target altogether until we went to get a close look. Not a bad rifle at 100 long paces."


[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
Or how about this one:


6/23/20 – (HC rants on long haired Jesus pictures. Has another homo fantasy. HC thinks about homos….alot.)
"The idea that Jesus had long hair does NOT COME FROM THE BIBLE. It comes from homo-sodomite artists that enjoyed painting naked men with long hair. During the Renaissance long hair was the fashion of these queers commissioned to paint "Jesus", which is another Jesus....a wicked substitute of their imagination."


6/13/20 - (God provides Crappy with a socket set)
“I had a bunch of rachets, extra too, but was missing some sockets that had cracked and a set similar to what you are asking about with sizes that I didn't have surprisingly. Now I'm not saying this to sell you mine because I need these. I just want to encourage and for you to get what you're looking for.

I asked the Lord specifically as if He were in my shop with me one day for the socket set and mini driver that I needed once in a while for mowers, etc.
Guess what Fireball?
Next thing I know, I'm driving down the road and at the busy intersection near a sport arena. I see something that caught my attention. After pulling into the parking lot, I looked down and saw a bunch of sockets strewn all over the road and a box off in the lot. There were no trucks around or jobs or I would have asked if they lost their socket set and helped pick them up.
I picked them up and put them in the insets of the kit. I was surprised to see that they were all there except for maybe one that I already had a duplicate of!!!”



[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
Or even this one:


9/30/20 – (HC’s medical appears to be in a veterinary office)
“Our office used to give out thousands of rabies vaccines.”


[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
Originally Posted by NVhntr
I could be wrong, but I'd wager that God isn't allowing pathological liars past the Pearly Gates.

Especially ones that involve him in all their bullschit lies..
The ultimate hyprocrite...
A sock puppet troll playing a religious persona for attention and with the intention to make people of actual faith look bad.

Well Happy Camper the only person we go after is you....
That should be pretty telling in and of itself.
And apparent to many I'm sure.
Yet a few rubes still interact with him despite all his lies and outrage when ya trigger him...


Some think he is a person of faith....
🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️
He is Captain Cut and paste from google fu......
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Hastings
Tell us again, did you shoot a one hole group with an 8mm Mauser at 100 yards when you were less than 10 years old? Just answer that. With 10 or 15 shots no less?


You mean this one:


7/22/20 – (The first time 8 year old HC shoots a rifle, it’s a 15 shot one hole group at 100 paces with an 8mm Mauser.)
"Reminds me of getting yelled at my first time at a range. The first rifle that was put against my shoulder as an 8 y.o. boy was a 98 M in 8mm. My target had one hole after fully loading it around 3 times. It Made mom's second husband mad for wasting all that expensive ammo. Red face, yelling, cussing, not a good first experience. He thought I missed the target altogether until we went to get a close look. Not a bad rifle at 100 long paces."


[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]


Offhand, no doubt, firing as fast as the bolt can be worked....
I just noticed something if you zoom into Holy Crappers avatar:

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Hastings
Tell us again, did you shoot a one hole group with an 8mm Mauser at 100 yards when you were less than 10 years old? Just answer that. With 10 or 15 shots no less?


You mean this one:


7/22/20 – (The first time 8 year old HC shoots a rifle, it’s a 15 shot one hole group at 100 paces with an 8mm Mauser.)
"Reminds me of getting yelled at my first time at a range. The first rifle that was put against my shoulder as an 8 y.o. boy was a 98 M in 8mm. My target had one hole after fully loading it around 3 times. It Made mom's second husband mad for wasting all that expensive ammo. Red face, yelling, cussing, not a good first experience. He thought I missed the target altogether until we went to get a close look. Not a bad rifle at 100 long paces."


[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]


Offhand, no doubt, firing as fast as the bolt can be worked....

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
What makes it all even funnier.
It's a old TV show based in get even fantasy for picked on B types to watch.
And they made it "woke" now.
Denzel Washington in a movie as "The Equalizer"
And now Queen Latifah on TV as " The Equalizer"
Happy Crapster,s hero has transformed into groids....


🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Hastings
Tell us again, did you shoot a one hole group with an 8mm Mauser at 100 yards when you were less than 10 years old? Just answer that. With 10 or 15 shots no less?

You mean this one:

7/22/20 – (The first time 8 year old HC shoots a rifle, it’s a 15 shot one hole group at 100 paces with an 8mm Mauser.)
"Reminds me of getting yelled at my first time at a range. The first rifle that was put against my shoulder as an 8 y.o. boy was a 98 M in 8mm. My target had one hole after fully loading it around 3 times. It Made mom's second husband mad for wasting all that expensive ammo. Red face, yelling, cussing, not a good first experience. He thought I missed the target altogether until we went to get a close look. Not a bad rifle at 100 long paces."
[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]

Offhand, no doubt, firing as fast as the bolt can be worked....

Or, just a bit faster than possible.

That’s our happy cancer for ya!
Originally Posted by mauserand9mm
Originally Posted by Hastings
Tell us again, did you shoot a one hole group with an 8mm Mauser at 100 yards when you were less than 10 years old? Just answer that. With 10 or 15 shots no less?


You mean this one:


7/22/20 – (The first time 8 year old HC shoots a rifle, it’s a 15 shot one hole group at 100 paces with an 8mm Mauser.)
"Reminds me of getting yelled at my first time at a range. The first rifle that was put against my shoulder as an 8 y.o. boy was a 98 M in 8mm. My target had one hole after fully loading it around 3 times. It Made mom's second husband mad for wasting all that expensive ammo. Red face, yelling, cussing, not a good first experience. He thought I missed the target altogether until we went to get a close look. Not a bad rifle at 100 long paces."


[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]



That is friggin hilarious
I don’t think Jesus’ New Covenant followers are required to follow any of the commandments in the old covenant. His followers are expected to obey the all-encompassing command in the new covenant that Jesus Himself instituted at the Last Supper. This new covenant replaced the old one. This new covenant established by Jesus retired the old one that God established with the nation of Israel.

And His new commandment was a replacement for all of the old commandments, just as His new covenant replaced the old covenant. His new commandment wasn’t an additional commandment to the already existing list of commandments. He didn’t introduce it as “here’s the 614th commandment.” He introduced it as “By this all people will know that you are my disciples.” While the old covenant, and all of the rules and regulations that came with it, was significant in God’s creation of the nation of Israel, and it helped separate them from their neighbors, and it gave them some moral guidelines — Jesus’ death and resurrection marked the end of the covenant that God made with Israel, and all of the rules and regulations that came with it.
The majority of people aren't even christian.
The majority in church ain't even saved so .............
The Norse-type "heavens" were a common idea before Christ's resurrection. In fact, that was the basic Jewish conception too. I don't think that conception is by accident. But Christ opened the real Heaven, the union with the Godhead.

Originally Posted by antlers
I don’t think Jesus’ New Covenant followers are required to follow any of the commandments in the old covenant. His followers are expected to obey the all-encompassing command in the new covenant that Jesus Himself instituted at the Last Supper. This new covenant replaced the old one. This new covenant established by Jesus retired the old one that God established with the nation of Israel.

And His new commandment was a replacement for all of the old commandments, just as His new covenant replaced the old covenant. His new commandment wasn’t an additional commandment to the already existing list of commandments. He didn’t introduce it as “here’s the 614th commandment.” He introduced it as “By this all people will know that you are my disciples.” While the old covenant, and all of the rules and regulations that came with it, was significant in God’s creation of the nation of Israel, and it helped separate them from their neighbors, and it gave them some moral guidelines — Jesus’ death and resurrection marked the end of the covenant that God made with Israel, and all of the rules and regulations that came with it.


You didn't answer my question.

Are the God of the OT and Jesus reconcilable, or was Marcion correct saying they are not?
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
You didn't answer my question. Are the God of the OT and Jesus reconcilable, or was Marcion correct saying they are not?

Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
For over 1200 years, ‘Christians’ used Old Covenant values and practices to justify mistreating other people. It’d be impossible to launch an organized massacre of Jews and Muslims, or to start an Inquisition, by leveraging Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. But there’s plenty to work with by reaching back into the Old Testament.
You like to talk about early Christians, so let's not forget Marcion, who could not reconcile the Jesus with the God of Old Testament and concluded they must be different gods.
This was the comment that you made.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
I don’t think Jesus’ New Covenant followers are required to follow any of the commandments in the old covenant. His followers are expected to obey the all-encompassing command in the new covenant that Jesus Himself instituted at the Last Supper. This new covenant replaced the old one. This new covenant established by Jesus retired the old one that God established with the nation of Israel.

And His new commandment was a replacement for all of the old commandments, just as His new covenant replaced the old covenant. His new commandment wasn’t an additional commandment to the already existing list of commandments. He didn’t introduce it as “here’s the 614th commandment.” He introduced it as “By this all people will know that you are my disciples.” While the old covenant, and all of the rules and regulations that came with it, was significant in God’s creation of the nation of Israel, and it helped separate them from their neighbors, and it gave them some moral guidelines — Jesus’ death and resurrection marked the end of the covenant that God made with Israel, and all of the rules and regulations that came with it.


You didn't answer my question.

Are the God of the OT and Jesus reconcilable, or was Marcion correct saying they are not?




Never heard of Marcion till now. Why did he say they are not?
It comes down to the character of God as described in the OT in comparision to the NT.
Originally Posted by DBT
It comes down to the character of God as described in the OT in comparision to the NT.

A person has to actually read the entire Old and New Testament to have any knowledge of God's character.
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by DBT
It comes down to the character of God as described in the OT in comparision to the NT.
A person has to actually read the entire Old and New Testament to have any knowledge of God's character.
I thought you left this discussion in shame after NVhntr published your fantastic stories (lies). Here you are back. You are persistent even if you are a liar. Did you shoot a one hole group with an 8mm Mauser when you were a child? Under 10 years old and with 3 full magazines of ammo? At 100 yards?
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
I don’t think Jesus’ New Covenant followers are required to follow any of the commandments in the old covenant. His followers are expected to obey the all-encompassing command in the new covenant that Jesus Himself instituted at the Last Supper. This new covenant replaced the old one. This new covenant established by Jesus retired the old one that God established with the nation of Israel.

And His new commandment was a replacement for all of the old commandments, just as His new covenant replaced the old covenant. His new commandment wasn’t an additional commandment to the already existing list of commandments. He didn’t introduce it as “here’s the 614th commandment.” He introduced it as “By this all people will know that you are my disciples.” While the old covenant, and all of the rules and regulations that came with it, was significant in God’s creation of the nation of Israel, and it helped separate them from their neighbors, and it gave them some moral guidelines — Jesus’ death and resurrection marked the end of the covenant that God made with Israel, and all of the rules and regulations that came with it.


You didn't answer my question.

Are the God of the OT and Jesus reconcilable, or was Marcion correct saying they are not?




Never heard of Marcion till now. Why did he say they are not?


You've never heard of the very first man to assemble a Christian Cannon?

You now that little of biblical history?

Really?
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by DBT
It comes down to the character of God as described in the OT in comparision to the NT.

A person has to actually read the entire Old and New Testament to have any knowledge of God's character.


Incorrect...

Kent
LMFAO!!!!
Happy Dumbfugg...
The gift that keeps on giving from his sheer stupidity.
Fugging sockpuppet troll is utterly failing..


As usual..

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Originally Posted by Happy_Camper
Originally Posted by DBT
It comes down to the character of God as described in the OT in comparision to the NT.

A person has to actually read the entire Old and New Testament to have any knowledge of God's character.


Why do you assume I haven't? I have. Not only me, but countless others who have read the bible and have pointed out the contradictions in the character of God between the OT and the NT.
Originally Posted by BuckHaggard
The majority of people aren't even christian.


Yep, and christianity is the new kid on the block. Hinduism has been around twice as long. Kinda looks like things were made up by the suspicious as they went along - look at the multiple flavours of christianity that have evolved over time. Without demonstrable facts, anything is possible.
What about the time where Jesus says he has not come to change any part of the Law (the Law = the first five books of the OT). "Not a jot nor a tittle."
Originally Posted by IndyCA35
What about the time where Jesus says he has not come to change any part of the Law (the Law = the first five books of the OT). "Not a jot nor a tittle."

That is what I read. He said to do what the religious leaders say but not to do as they do. His problem with them and the law was that the religious leaders put burdens on the people that they would not carry themselves. He said that. He never said the law was finished or ever would be.
Jesus said “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear, until its purpose is achieved.” The last part of His comment is very significant.

The purpose of the Law was to make known our sin and to highlight our need for a Savior. Jesus accomplished (achieved) everything that the Law required.

This is very clear to me. If other’s have a difference of opinion on this matter, that’s more than OK with me. One’s salvation doesn’t depend on one’s interpretation of this verse.
What purpose? Not everything has been accomplished. The world goes on as normal. People are people, business as usual.

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. 18For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.…"
Originally Posted by DBT
What purpose? Not everything has been accomplished. The world goes on as normal. People are people, business as usual.

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. 18For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.…"
You are correct. That is what he said.
[Linked Image from biblepic.com]
Originally Posted by Hastings
Originally Posted by IndyCA35
What about the time where Jesus says he has not come to change any part of the Law (the Law = the first five books of the OT). "Not a jot nor a tittle."

That is what I read. He said to do what the religious leaders say but not to do as they do. His problem with them and the law was that the religious leaders put burdens on the people that they would not carry themselves. He said that. He never said the law was finished or ever would be.

Not until heaven and earth pass away...
Originally Posted by antlers
Jesus said “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear, until its purpose is achieved.” The last part of His comment is very significant.

The purpose of the Law was to make known our sin and to highlight our need for a Savior. Jesus accomplished (achieved) everything that the Law required.

This is very clear to me. If other’s have a difference of opinion on this matter, that’s more than OK with me. One’s salvation doesn’t depend on one’s interpretation of this verse.

Weak rationalization.
Originally Posted by wabigoon
[Linked Image from biblepic.com]


If god were that powerful, he probably could have achieved the same result without the need for human sacrifice.

This is also the condition for unconditional love.
God works in strange, and mysterious ways.

He, is my Lord.
When ‘Christians’ try to erect a monument of the Ten Commandments, it makes more sense to me…if they’re followers of Jesus…to instead erect a monument of the Sermon on the Mount, or of His all-encompassing commandment to “Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.”

If they’re gonna erect a monument as a testament of their faith, it makes more sense to me that it should at least be a monument of something that actually applies to em’.

Jesus finished the Old Covenant and establish the New Covenant. “It is finished” (His words from the cross) meant just that.
Originally Posted by antlers
When ‘Christians’ try to erect a monument of the Ten Commandments, it makes more sense to me…if they’re followers of Jesus…to instead erect a monument of the Sermon on the Mount, or of His all-encompassing commandment.

If they’re gonna erect a monument as a testament of their faith, it makes more sense to me that it should at least be a monument of something that actually applies to followers of Jesus.

Jesus came to finish the Old Covenant and establish the New Covenant. “It is finished” meant just that.



Why say - ''Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them'' - then proceed to abolish the laws of the Prophets?

It makes no sense.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
I don’t think Jesus’ New Covenant followers are required to follow any of the commandments in the old covenant. His followers are expected to obey the all-encompassing command in the new covenant that Jesus Himself instituted at the Last Supper. This new covenant replaced the old one. This new covenant established by Jesus retired the old one that God established with the nation of Israel.

And His new commandment was a replacement for all of the old commandments, just as His new covenant replaced the old covenant. His new commandment wasn’t an additional commandment to the already existing list of commandments. He didn’t introduce it as “here’s the 614th commandment.” He introduced it as “By this all people will know that you are my disciples.” While the old covenant, and all of the rules and regulations that came with it, was significant in God’s creation of the nation of Israel, and it helped separate them from their neighbors, and it gave them some moral guidelines — Jesus’ death and resurrection marked the end of the covenant that God made with Israel, and all of the rules and regulations that came with it.


You didn't answer my question.

Are the God of the OT and Jesus reconcilable, or was Marcion correct saying they are not?




Never heard of Marcion till now. Why did he say they are not?


You've never heard of the very first man to assemble a Christian Cannon?

You now that little of biblical history?

Really?



Yeah, really….. so why did Marcion say the OT and Jesus are not to be reconciled?

Also never heard that he was the first man to assemble a canon.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
Jesus said “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear, until its purpose is achieved.” The last part of His comment is very significant.

The purpose of the Law was to make known our sin and to highlight our need for a Savior. Jesus accomplished (achieved) everything that the Law required.

This is very clear to me. If other’s have a difference of opinion on this matter, that’s more than OK with me. One’s salvation doesn’t depend on one’s interpretation of this verse.
Weak rationalization.
Nope. Matthew posits a chief purpose of Jesus’ earthly ministry was to fulfill the Law and the Prophets, to accomplish all that it foretold, to complete all of the righteousness that it required.

https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2526&context=plr
So Jesus says that he has not come to abolish the law of the prophets, yet by "fulfilling" them they are abolished?
Originally Posted by antlers
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by antlers
Jesus said “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear, until its purpose is achieved.” The last part of His comment is very significant.

The purpose of the Law was to make known our sin and to highlight our need for a Savior. Jesus accomplished (achieved) everything that the Law required.

This is very clear to me. If other’s have a difference of opinion on this matter, that’s more than OK with me. One’s salvation doesn’t depend on one’s interpretation of this verse.
Weak rationalization.
Nope. Matthew posits a chief purpose of Jesus’ earthly ministry was to fulfill the Law and the Prophets, to accomplish all that it foretold, to complete all of the righteousness that it required.

https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2526&context=plr




You are entirely correct. See Colossians 2:13-14….

“When you were dead in your sins …(sinful breakers of the “law” of God)….God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins…(note that these sins were the result of falling short and breaking the “law.) ……having CANCELLED the CHARGE of our legal indebtedness….(the charge against is breaking the law….and we are guilty of it…. ). Which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away….(he takes away the CHARGE…..)…. nailing it to the cross.

The CHARGE against us is taken away…. nailed to the cross…..the sin debt which results from our sins against God…. The CHARGE against “me” is paid by Jesus….. the final and perfect sacrificial lamb of God. In simple but incomplete terms, the OT and the system established of temporary animal blood sacrifices was a “set up” for the final and perfect sacrifice.

In my opinion, the Law still stands but the charges that might be brought against us are….. gone…. Nailed to the cross.

Forgiven …. Christ’ purpose fulfilled.

Charges against us obliterated by the blood.

The Law, however, still is there….that is what those who reject the gift will be judged with.

A thought is that “The Law” will stand until the last soul has been judged at the Great White Throne Judgment. Idk….maybe after that there will be no need for the Law……purpose fulfilled then?



Ok, then, so Jesus did come to abolish the law in spite of saying he had not come to abolish the law......?
That’s a good post TF49.
Originally Posted by DBT
Ok, then, so Jesus did come to abolish the law in spite of saying he had not come to abolish the law......?



You may not be seeing some angles here. So, one….only one comment, will I make here.

Consider the tripartite nature of the godhead….Father, Son and Holy Spirit. One way that has been used to describe the godhead is One God manifest in Three persons.

Could it be that it was the Father that gave the Law that Jesus the Son fulfilled?

Jesus did not come to abolish the law given by his Father, but to “fulfill” the Law’s requirement of a sin sacrifice.

Yep, much to “not fully comprehend here.” God does that and He keeps some mystery to Himself that He may explain to us when we enter His presence.

May the Father someday “abolish” the Law? Will the Father someday …after the Great White Throne….direct Jesus, the one who fulfilled the law to declare the law “abolished?” I would guess not, but Idk….. He is sovereign…. Perhaps there will be no more need for the Law after the judgment….idk…there are some unknowns and some mysteries.


So, DBT…..no…as I have tried to explain…….Jesus did not “abolish the law”……

Seems to me that the charges against me…. As a result of my sinful lawbreaking, have been “dropped”…..,being cancelled and nailed to the cross.

In my opinion, the “Law” is still valid and will be enforced on those who do not accept the gift and received pardon.
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by DBT
Ok, then, so Jesus did come to abolish the law in spite of saying he had not come to abolish the law......?



You may not be seeing some angles here. So, one….only one comment, will I make here.

Consider the tripartite nature of the godhead….Father, Son and Holy Spirit. One way that has been used to describe the godhead is One God manifest in Three persons.

Could it be that it was the Father that gave the Law that Jesus the Son fulfilled?

Jesus did not come to abolish the law given by his Father, but to “fulfill” the Law’s requirement of a sin sacrifice.

Yep, much to “not fully comprehend here.” God does that and He keeps some mystery to Himself that He may explain to us when we enter His presence.

May the Father someday “abolish” the Law? Will the Father someday …after the Great White Throne….direct Jesus, the one who fulfilled the law to declare the law “abolished?” I would guess not, but Idk….. He is sovereign…. Perhaps there will be no more need for the Law after the judgment….idk…there are some unknowns and some mysteries.


So, DBT…..no…as I have tried to explain…….Jesus did not “abolish the law”……

Seems to me that the charges against me…. As a result of my sinful lawbreaking, have been “dropped”…..,being cancelled and nailed to the cross.

In my opinion, the “Law” is still valid and will be enforced on those who do not accept the gift and received pardon.


Or,
Matthew was written by someone with a more Jewish perspective, and Colossians is a late first century, perhaps even early second century forgery not written by "Paul". It's interesting that authorship of is claimed as Paul and Timothy, and both Fist and Second Timothy are known later forgeries.
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by DBT
Ok, then, so Jesus did come to abolish the law in spite of saying he had not come to abolish the law......?



You may not be seeing some angles here. So, one….only one comment, will I make here.

Consider the tripartite nature of the godhead….Father, Son and Holy Spirit. One way that has been used to describe the godhead is One God manifest in Three persons.

Could it be that it was the Father that gave the Law that Jesus the Son fulfilled?

Jesus did not come to abolish the law given by his Father, but to “fulfill” the Law’s requirement of a sin sacrifice.

Yep, much to “not fully comprehend here.” God does that and He keeps some mystery to Himself that He may explain to us when we enter His presence.

May the Father someday “abolish” the Law? Will the Father someday …after the Great White Throne….direct Jesus, the one who fulfilled the law to declare the law “abolished?” I would guess not, but Idk….. He is sovereign…. Perhaps there will be no more need for the Law after the judgment….idk…there are some unknowns and some mysteries.


So, DBT…..no…as I have tried to explain…….Jesus did not “abolish the law”……

Seems to me that the charges against me…. As a result of my sinful lawbreaking, have been “dropped”…..,being cancelled and nailed to the cross.

In my opinion, the “Law” is still valid and will be enforced on those who do not accept the gift and received pardon.


You are talking about two different things, forgiveness and the law of the prophets. One does not exclude the other.
Originally Posted by antelope_sniper
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by DBT
Ok, then, so Jesus did come to abolish the law in spite of saying he had not come to abolish the law......?



You may not be seeing some angles here. So, one….only one comment, will I make here.

Consider the tripartite nature of the godhead….Father, Son and Holy Spirit. One way that has been used to describe the godhead is One God manifest in Three persons.

Could it be that it was the Father that gave the Law that Jesus the Son fulfilled?

Jesus did not come to abolish the law given by his Father, but to “fulfill” the Law’s requirement of a sin sacrifice.

Yep, much to “not fully comprehend here.” God does that and He keeps some mystery to Himself that He may explain to us when we enter His presence.

May the Father someday “abolish” the Law? Will the Father someday …after the Great White Throne….direct Jesus, the one who fulfilled the law to declare the law “abolished?” I would guess not, but Idk….. He is sovereign…. Perhaps there will be no more need for the Law after the judgment….idk…there are some unknowns and some mysteries.


So, DBT…..no…as I have tried to explain…….Jesus did not “abolish the law”……

Seems to me that the charges against me…. As a result of my sinful lawbreaking, have been “dropped”…..,being cancelled and nailed to the cross.

In my opinion, the “Law” is still valid and will be enforced on those who do not accept the gift and received pardon.


Or,
Matthew was written by someone with a more Jewish perspective, and Colossians is a late first century, perhaps even early second century forgery not written by "Paul". It's interesting that authorship of is claimed as Paul and Timothy, and both Fist and Second Timothy are known later forgeries.



Well, you have been presented a reasonable answer to your post about “weak rationalization.” But then you switch to trying to undermine the authority of Matthew….. this is “weak.” You are evading the issue.

Also, you made mention of Marcion as it it were of some importance. I don’t think it is….. would you care to explain why Marcion had trouble reconciling the OT and Jesus?




Further to your “Or…” comment

Or….The ideas I expressed are exactly right and the authorship and interpretation of the Colossians passage is absolutely correct. And….. It could be that the thorn in Paul’s side was very poor vision and the different styles noted in Paul’s writings are indicative of his use of different scribes.

Still….. you must make choices…..
The "Thing", is He came, He lives!
We don't know. Live with the mystery.
Originally Posted by TF49
Originally Posted by DBT
Ok, then, so Jesus did come to abolish the law in spite of saying he had not come to abolish the law......?



You may not be seeing some angles here. So, one….only one comment, will I make here.

Consider the tripartite nature of the godhead….Father, Son and Holy Spirit. One way that has been used to describe the godhead is One God manifest in Three persons.

Could it be that it was the Father that gave the Law that Jesus the Son fulfilled?

Jesus did not come to abolish the law given by his Father, but to “fulfill” the Law’s requirement of a sin sacrifice.

Yep, much to “not fully comprehend here.” God does that and He keeps some mystery to Himself that He may explain to us when we enter His presence.

May the Father someday “abolish” the Law? Will the Father someday …after the Great White Throne….direct Jesus, the one who fulfilled the law to declare the law “abolished?” I would guess not, but Idk….. He is sovereign…. Perhaps there will be no more need for the Law after the judgment….idk…there are some unknowns and some mysteries.


So, DBT…..no…as I have tried to explain…….Jesus did not “abolish the law”……

Seems to me that the charges against me…. As a result of my sinful lawbreaking, have been “dropped”…..,being cancelled and nailed to the cross.

In my opinion, the “Law” is still valid and will be enforced on those who do not accept the gift and received pardon.

"Consider the tripartite nature of the Godhead" The tripartite or trinity sounds like a bunch of hooey. Jesus was a Rabbi and a Prophet with supernatural power given by God to prove he was legitimately sent by God to call Israel first and then mankind to repentance as had the other prophets including John the Baptist who Jesus called "the greatest of the all". It ain't complicated, Paul not withstanding.

On an aside note I find it interesting and believable that the 2 conflicting genealogies of Jesus agree that his connection to King David came through Joseph indicating Mary wasn't a virgin after all.

Jesus' instructions for salvation were simple but hard to stick with. Repent and straighten up your act. Follow the commandments and love God and your neighbor. Hence the straight gate and narrow way.
Isaiah 7:14 may mean young women. 
It’s pretty clear that when ya’ get right down to it, we are all each individual denominations unto ourselves. There are clearly lots of different opinions among all believers, we all have different theological beliefs, and we all have different interpretations of what the Bible says…we even clearly have different interpretations of what those in the Bible, Jesus for instance, are saying…and we have the personal freedom to have varying interpretations on these things. I’m OK with it.
Originally Posted by antlers
It’s pretty clear that when ya’ get right down to it, we are all each individual denominations unto ourselves. There are clearly lots of different opinions among all believers, we all have different theological beliefs, and we all have different interpretations of what the Bible says…we even clearly have different interpretations of what those in the Bible, Jesus for instance, are saying…and we have the personal freedom to have varying interpretations on these things. I’m OK with it.


That's well put, but it won't register with those who are absolutely right while all the rest of us are wrong.


Seems to me that there are some essentials….


The Deity of Christ - Jesus is God in flesh…..(John 8:58, 1John 4:2-3)

Salvation by Grace - “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast,” (Ephesians 2:8–9).

The Resurrection of Christ - “And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith,” (1 Cor. 15:14)


The Gospel Message - The gospel message which in its entirety is that Jesus is God in flesh, who died for sins, rose from the dead, and freely gives the gift of eternal life to those who believe.

Born Again - “Jesus answered and said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God,” (John 3:3). (I am ok with "alive in the Spirit" if some quibble about 'born again.')

Monotheism - There is only one God (Exodus 20:3; Isaiah 43:10; 44:6, 8)


There are other secondary doctrines that are important and then you will have …..as has already been noted……..many differing holdings about all kinds of issues. Ok to have discussions and even disagreements about all kind of things… the rapture, origin of the universe etc…. but within the Body of Christ, I would expect full agreement on these 6 essentials.


btw.... this thread seems a bit stale..... signing off.
Originally Posted by antlers
It’s pretty clear that when ya’ get right down to it, we are all each individual denominations unto ourselves. There are clearly lots of different opinions among all believers, we all have different theological beliefs, and we all have different interpretations of what the Bible says…we even clearly have different interpretations of what those in the Bible, Jesus for instance, are saying…and we have the personal freedom to have varying interpretations on these things. I’m OK with it.


Good observation. I've said pretty much the same here in the past, but I think someone else said if first:

I agree that in addition to essential beliefs, I think we have liberty in non-essential beliefs. The Gospel Message that you posted above is pretty all-inclusive.

We are told that without passing judgment on disputable matters… who are any of us to judge someone else’s servant…? And to their own master servants will stand or fall…
Originally Posted by 5sdad
Originally Posted by antlers
It’s pretty clear that when ya’ get right down to it, we are all each individual denominations unto ourselves. There are clearly lots of different opinions among all believers, we all have different theological beliefs, and we all have different interpretations of what the Bible says…we even clearly have different interpretations of what those in the Bible, Jesus for instance, are saying…and we have the personal freedom to have varying interpretations on these things. I’m OK with it.


That's well put, but it won't register with those who are absolutely right while all the rest of us are wrong.

And there in my friend lies the problem.
For believers, The Bible is one giant Rorschach test. They see the version that benefits them, the one that supports their psychological dispositions, their life choices, and for those so inclined, the greatest ability to force others to conform to their personal world view. That how we got things like The Inquisition, Crusades, and half a million "witches" burned. Add in concepts like "Gods will", "saving souls from hell", "Chosen People(s), "Divine Right", and some Christians can justify anything. Of course, this is in no way limited to Christianity. We've all seen the abuses is Islam, and he Japanese soldiers followed a Buddhist code to justify their war atrocities.

Some Christians, like our friend Antlers take a live and let live approach. He own's the fact that his version of Christianity is his, and his alone, and you're welcome to live your version so long as it doesn't interfere his well being and some additional reasonable limitation that he can articulate if he so chooses.

Now he a much different kind of Christian than Happy Inquisitor.

Take a moment and imagine a world where he had the powder of the inquisition over an unarmed populace.....
Snipper,

I've shared the good news with many people since I've been here.
What I have a problem with is your extreme Marxist ideology that tyrannically opposed me sharing that good news with anyone. If you don't like it, then leave. I'm not going to grovel like Mr passive milktoast to you.
The lions are coming Fappy!

Caesar just turned them on you!
Posted By: Happy_Camper