The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.
I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negativeIn 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it... Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid. You said you could DISPROVE Santa He's dead, I win. So is God, I win How can you say this when you can't prove he ever existed? Didn't your God died on the cross? No, that would be God's begotten Son. Don't get it twisted. Who is one with his Father. Son/Father/And Holy spirit, you forgot the mantra. They all died on the cross. You misunderstand: God created the angels, Jesus was one of them, he sent Jesus to Earth, we crucified him. What Christian denomination are you? Jesus was God's son and God himself. Holy trinity (son+father+holy spirit) that is what Roman Catholics thought me. So according to their twisted logic, the whole trinity died on the cross. Like three Musketeers. One for all, all for one. You misunderstand: God created the angels, Jesus was one of them, he sent Jesus to Earth, we crucified him.
You misunderstand your own dogma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrinityThe Christian doctrine of the Trinity defines God as three consubstantial persons, expressions, or hypostases: the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature". By that same article: "According to this central mystery of some Christian faiths," which means, some, not all. Name a denomination that does not believe in the Trinity I have no denomination, but I believe in righteousness and have a strong moral code. What you folks are doing is purely hateful, calling out others for the sake of attacking them and their beliefs. I'm ashamed to share this forum with you. Good for you. So do I. You might have a strong moral code, but that code is not from the Bible. It is based on what you as a person believe is producing least suffering. That is what most normal people use as basis for their moral code. There are of course cultural influences as well. Again nothing to do with a bronze age story book. At least I hope you are not getting moral code from it. We are not hateful, we are just pointing out the obvious nonsense. PS. I suspect you did not actually read the whole Bible. I suggest you do. By the time you get to the end, you'll be an Atheist. |
|
|
|
You misunderstand: God created the angels, Jesus was one of them, he sent Jesus to Earth, we crucified him.
You misunderstand your own dogma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrinityThe Christian doctrine of the Trinity defines God as three consubstantial persons, expressions, or hypostases: the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature". By that same article: "According to this central mystery of some Christian faiths," which means, some, not all. Name a denomination that does not believe in the Trinity He is frantically searching...What a bozo? Jesus was an angel, WTF? That is a new low, even for a Christian. |
|
|
|
The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.
I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negativeIn 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it... Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid. You said you could DISPROVE Santa He's dead, I win. So is God, I win How can you say this when you can't prove he ever existed? Didn't your God died on the cross? No, that would be God's begotten Son. Don't get it twisted. Who is one with his Father. Son/Father/And Holy spirit, you forgot the mantra. They all died on the cross. You misunderstand: God created the angels, Jesus was one of them, he sent Jesus to Earth, we crucified him. What Christian denomination are you? Jesus was God's son and God himself. Holy trinity (son+father+holy spirit) that is what Roman Catholics thought me. So according to their twisted logic, the whole trinity died on the cross. Like three Musketeers. One for all, all for one. |
|
|
|
The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.
I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negativeIn 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it... Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid. You said you could DISPROVE Santa He's dead, I win. So is God, I win How can you say this when you can't prove he ever existed? Didn't your God died on the cross? No, that would be God's begotten Son. Don't get it twisted. Who is one with his Father. Son/Father/And Holy spirit, you forgot the mantra. They all died on the cross. God send his son (who is God himself) to die on the cross, remember? Or you forgot that twisted part too? |
|
|
|
The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.
I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negativeIn 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it... Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid. You said you could DISPROVE Santa He's dead, I win. So is God, I win How can you say this when you can't prove he ever existed? Didn't your God died on the cross? |
|
|
|
You have the same evidence for God as young kids have for Santa Claus.
You're comparing a belief in something that is known to be untrue, and something that is unknown to be untrue. I'm comparing two fictional characters. There is absolutely no difference. What did God give you?
Free will, 'Pain, misery, wars, stake burning, chopping hands and feet, stoning, chopping heads off, etc.' are a direct result of said free will. People chopped hands off, burn people alive because they thought Bible is a word of God. Nothing to do with free will (not even sure what you mean). It has everything to do with the God's legal advice. There is no Santa Claus just like there is no God.
The existence of Santa Clause can be dis-proven, but the existence of God can only be speculated. God is not physically observable so by definition it does not exist. God is the most vengeful, hateful, masochistic, misogynistic being ever invented by a human mind.
You're right, God is all things including loving, forgiving, and righteous; Anything the human mind can imagine was put there by God. You have no proof our thoughts were put in our heads by God. You want proof: Burn the Bible. I became Atheist reading first few verses when he created Earth in the dark, then created plants before creating the Sun and the Stars.
A plant can be created without it growing; seeds can sprout in darkness. Besides, you got that verse twisted, read "whose seed is in itself", meaning it hasn't grown yet. You are twisting a bronze age dream to fit our current understanding of how the world was created. 1000 years ago people would not interpret this creation story the same way as you do today. You are injecting your own bias. There is no mention of physics behind the world creation which proves one thing: it is a bronze age story. If this creation story does make sense to you, you are clueless:
Day 1: He created Earth (formless and empty) and heaven in the dark. Spirit of God was covering waters, Then he created light
Day 2: He separated sky (the vault) from the water (some magic water that did not freeze)
Day 3: He created dry land (after he created Earth) and plants
Day 4: He created Sun and other stars (poor plants, they had to wait for Sun to show up)
Day 5: Created animals
Day 6: Started farming (no industrial revolution, no science, no Internet? Why not?)
That's a pretty twisted way of reading Genesis. Here's my interpretation: Day 0: Spirit of God gets an idea, the Earth and Heavens. Neither exist, thus void and formless and are referred to as "waters". Day 1: God creates light, divides it from the darkness, calls it night and day. Day 2: God "divided waters from waters" and separated matter from anti-matter, creating Earth and Heavens. Day 3: Dry land and oceans formed, then the Earth brings forth plants, whose seed is in itself (so the plants didn't have to wait for sun cuz they haven't grown) Day 4: Then God made the Sun and Moon, day and night, seasons, etc... Day 5: Sea creatures and flying things. Day 6: Land animals & Man in the likeness of God in Spirit. Day 7: Sabbath Day 8: God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. THEN, man started farming; industrial revolution came after. and so on... To add to the confusion, 'heaven' seems to be used in place of 'sky', 'space', and 'heaven as in dimention'. PS: NIV is terrible, KJV or Tanakh in Hebrew or go home. Except the Bible says he created Earth and Heaven on day 1. The waters refers to actual waters. The bronze age understanding of the world was that the heavens and Earth are separated by a dome surrounded by water. This dome was enclosing a flat Earth that was supported by pillars. I you are defending it, you are a despicable human being.
People do fucked up shit and a lot of that was recorded in the bible. In modern times, we keep our bullshit in what we call "history". But you guys say Bible was inspired by God. So the moral code was inspired by God as well, or you conveniently skip that part and only the nice (love your neighbor parts) are inspired by God? That is what I would call an intellectual dishonesty. I'd not even know how to twist these words.
Evil hearts spew evil from their mouths. Pointing out misunderstood bible verses is one thing, but you follow up with extremelt hateful speech: "unless you are already a psychopath" "a collective work of some sick, bronze age psychopaths" "you are a despicable human being" And I'm not even halfway through the thread yet. You are a psychopath if you think the moral code in the Bible is the correct moral code to follow. There is no question about it. Check yourself to a mental institution because you might be a danger to other people. Anyone who believes everything in the Bible is true and is word of God is either ignorant or dishonest.
Ok. Your blanket statements are starting to piss me off. See: 2 Timothy 3:16 "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" Inspiration does not equal fact. Ever watch a movie that states "inspired by a true story"? Same idea: take the moral, leave the details. You are ignorant of modern moral code, modern legal systems and modern ethics. You are dishonest because you ignore nasty parts of the Bible and concentrate on the nice parts. That is dishonesty. Deal with the vile parts first. Reconcile those with modern times first, before you even read the rest of this vile book. After I saw responses from the Christians on this forum, I have changed the title of this thread.
Why not include "crazy shit atheists say"? Everyone here is an asshole so why point one group out over another? Atheist position is the most rational, most compatible with science position. We are in the mists of the scientific revolution, if you care to notice. Show us the wisdom of God.
Their silence is proof of wisdom. Wisdom to withhold the fuel that feeds the hateful fire you've started. Your God is dick on wheels. And he is imaginary. How can you not see it? Those aren't quotes, just some vague and inaccurate descriptions of a few verses.
And you copied and pasted them from Google anyway.
So go ahead and Google for answers if you're interested.
That is what I thought. Ignorance is a bliss. No, he's actually right. All you've done is copy+paste the most fucked up shit from the bible for the soul purpose of delivering hate. You're more evil than all the verses you've referred to. What are you talking about. It is your God inspired book. I did not write it. What I have problem is with people who try to tell me black is white. Believe it or die. I have a problem with shit disturbers like you. You've made absolutely zero points other than proof of hate for the bible. So what? Keep your shit to yourself, and if someone presses their white on your black then press back when it's appropriate. I'm not lying, it says the Earth is flat with 4 corners, squared in fact:
Give me a shape with an end four squares and which is not flat!
Not in fact, you've added the squared part. What is fact is words sometimes have two meanings. See here for the four corners and their corresponding ends:  I know, he thinks we are attacking his religion.
How are you completely blind to the fact that you are attacking religion?!  I'm pointing out the craziness and irrationality of this myth. |
|
|
|
I'm a Christian but this thread's saying that atheism is poison? No they aren't , I respect what they're belief is even they do not believe in God. This thread is just putting religion versus atheist. Why not start with your self, love one another, if you got some extra cash feed the poor, feed the beggar. Because there are atheist that are doing this. And I'm wishing one day they will change their belief that God is real.
Societies need myths. Religion is unifying people behind a common cause. Atheists reject this myth because its irrational claims cannot be explained scientifically. Religious people and Atheists might share other myths such as nationalism, patriotism, humanism, human rights, capitalism, socialism, money etc. These common beliefs are needed for any large society to function. Today we have many replacements for the religion myth, making it obsolete. In scientific revolution (which we are now), secular societies will progress faster than religious societies, because religion is hindering a scientific progress. The OP and title of this thread does not make sense. Atheism is just one of many world views ( most rational, and most compatible with science). Any world view that is compatible with scientific revolution is also the most beneficial to societies. Religion is an ancient relic that will eventually be abandoned as such. |
|
|
|
Atheism and IQHigh IQ is usually regarded by those that possess it as an unmitigated good. Those gifted with superior intellect are not only smarter, they are also taller, healthier, and more athletic than average. In his 1920 study on high IQ children Lewis Terman noted that despite these advantages high IQ is not always beneficial. He found that the very brightest often grew up maladjusted in some way suffering from anxiety, depression, personality disorder, or nervous breakdowns. In Mensa Magazine Bruce G Charlton posited three fundamental disadvantages of high IQ . Charlton’s triad: 1) Socialism 2) Atheism 3) Infertility Charlton argued that IQ is associated with a tendency to blindly embrace big government, a rejection of religious teachings, and ultimately a declining fertility Bullshiot. Nothing in the blog post you link to mentions governments. How much else of your wordy presentation here is also of your fevered imaginings? +1 I'm an Atheist and an Anarchist/Libertarian. I don't trust government because it is made up by a group of elected idiots, not experts in given fields. For example a head of USDA is a lawyer. Nothing against lawyers, but I'd prefer someone with masters or PhD in agriculture in that position. I don't see how IQ is related to infertility. Having less children so that you can send them to Yale or Harvard is not the same as infertility. You can be quite fertile and still decide not to have children. The choice not to reproduce like rabbits is not the same as infertility. Atheists might care more about others, and value life in general more than religious people because we know humans only got one life, and once we are dead, well, we are dead. So we spend each day like it is our last. Religious people don't care much about others, especially if the other people believe in different God(s), or disagree with them on how to pray, conduct masses, dress or how to interpret that fucked up, bronze age book. So Atheists in general would lean more towards ideas of equality, helping those in need, anti-war movements etc. There are probably exceptions. Religious people are intolerant of others and support a bronze age moral code. They generally support everything the Bible supports or condones such as wars, killing, rape, slavery, cannibalism, human sacrifices etc. |
|
|
|
So, along with high IQ comes critical thinking skills... 1) Socialism is a no-brainer for intelligent people - it just makes sense to help those less fortunate than yourself 2) Atheism is a no-brainer for intelligent people - it just makes sense... 3) Intelligent parents have no need to produce dozens of brainwashed children... 1-2 smart children are better than 6 stupid ones destined for welfare Newsflash: Atheists are a minority... you cannot blame the world's problems on 3% of the population... try blaming the 97% (religion) for your problems Why blame the Mormons, and Jews and Atheists for all of your problems? Why do religious people always blame and hate everyone?I deny your claim about socialism Moloch. I'm a bit sad, I thought you were an intelligent lad :-/ No worries, I was raised in America too... I fully understand how the American education system demonizes that word... it's not your fault I'm a christian and I don't hate atheists. I can't actually remember when was the last time I felt hate, probably back when I was still an atheist and slave to my emotions like moloch is today  Glad religion worked for you to help you overcome issues you had. But now you are delusional, so keep those delusions to yourself. |
|
|
|
proving there can't be more than one God!
Not really a proof as it stands, since it is just my opinion that there cannot safely be more than one God. You mean one God would wack the others. He loves killing, blood, sacrifices, giving him money for protection. Basically, he is a gangster. Makes sense, right? |
|
|
|
Not all women are as weak as you want them to be.
Not all women... but, where do you draw the line? My Sr. Drill Instructor in Boot Camp would regale us with stories about working as an aircraft mechanic... Part of the job entailed hauling around a 70-lb workbench to fix the planes... (you can probably see where this is going already) There was only one woman in his unit... she was great at fixing planes, but could not move the workbench herself... all the men could carry it solo, but she always required help from a man... just to do her job... that all the men could do without help... Being the military, she got paid the same as the men, regardless of the work she could perform... In the real world, I feel a woman should get paid the same as a man, only if she can do the same quality and quantity of work that a man does... the real world only cares about results If the requirement for the job was to carry 70lb workbench and she could not do it by herself, she should never have passed the basic training. If the physical fitness test did not include testing this, well that is the problem with testing and recruitment. You know how they score physical fitness test based on sex and age, well that is just wrong. There should be one scale for everybody. Regardless of age or sex. For example: to get a full score, you do 60 push ups regardless of age, male or female. She should have been discharged. She could not do her job. I'm sure they could find many other women who can carry 100lb on their backs, back and forth all day long. |
|
|
|
If the men get 72 virgins, what do the women get?
Women get the shitty end of the stick in heaven too?... Dayum
Well they get lots of piece. They have to take care of 1 man but they're 72 for that! So it's far better than on Earth!!! And one man gets his 72 women... Depends on the women but that can be close to hell IMHO I couldn't imagine having to listen to 72 women complain about their day Seriously... what do you get in heaven if you have been good?  Maybe pray some more and read the Bible, again, over and over. I don't know, this heaven and hell idea is beyond me. |
|
|
|
^ i've seen all of that  oh and btw. the only capacity that is gonna be important is intelligence, body strength will be a thing of the past when we have working exo skellets or biological engineering. (to be honest it is already for a great part a thing of the past, just look at the machines we use today) Your little inventions are not for now, so why changing the present about a future event which is currently a pure speculation ? Yeah, now we use chainsaw instead of handsaw, but this still need a lot of strenght to accomplish a tree harvesting job. Woman was a supervisor of the framing crew that build my new house. And trust me you'd not want to fuck with her. Strong as a bull. Other guys on her team listen to her as she had more experience. Very friendly gal. Stereotypes are just that: stereotypes. Youtube women lumberjacks if you don't think they exist. You want to see a woman firing .50 cal revolver with one hand: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyUP4Ac_bb8&ebc=ANyPxKogFhvJfnmHgga30pOcYC_g2o-iRxP-NgnlToZp3_6Prl00u8oiIZX3YFPVczo7WktrrdNeZ0ONSraAnXWRIvTP6eJLiwIf you have ever fired 0.50 cal handgun, you know what it takes to control this caliber. Not all women are as weak as you want them to be. |
|
|
|
Is it about laziness?
If atheism is a religion, could laziness be one as well?
BAD Decker - you have the floor. Hit it.
If laziness is a religion then I can become an adept xD Anyway none of the dumbasses here have ever answered to the original questions. They still never explained why the Earth is flat and square in the Bible... Or why God thinks the sky is blue because it is made of water... (Genesis chapter 1, day 2) Ahah, didn't know that. It's a good way to end any logical discussion xD "God separated the waters above (sky) the firmament (land), from the waters below (oceans) the firmament" From what are made clouds  ? Also, there is some water in every bit of air, so I don't think that this statement is false (you see, I don't come and just say : "that's in the Bible so that's true !" ). So he made the space from water? Damn it's a shame space is empty nah? ^^ Why do you say that space is empty ? Also, why do you just mention the space. We're talking about the Earth's sky, everything what is above the land and under the ozone. Because God calls the waters of the sky, "heaven"... ... that's not air, that's a bit higher up, right?... Actually, Where is heaven? We've looked up... it's not there... we searched the entire universe and cant seem to find this heaven anywhere... In the early days of Christianity, heaven simply meant the sky... but... heaven is definitely not in the sky... its not floating on clouds, etc There's some things that the humans can't see, and Heaven is one of them. That's like the souls of damned people which are blocked on Earth. Ok so it exists but we can't see or feel it? Same goes for the soul? Yes, that's part of another world, God's kingdom, where the men who followed a good life go. It's everwhere but it's nowhere at the same time. Practical. But why wasn't it written in the Bible? That come from the common sense. This is like "women aren't equal to men". Everyone should know that if they were correctly educated. Ahahah xD Just hope it's humour. If it is, it's damn funny! If it is not... Well shame on your education but it's still funny xD That's half humour. When I meant not equel, I meant that they don't have the same role. Would you look a women that pass all her days in the pub, that smoke big cigars, that live alone in the woods and that hunt as a normal woman ? I doubt it, and that's a part of the humanity to know what task involve to whom. Why would you even have to ask? What makes you think we "suppose to have different roles"? Roles defined in the Bible perhaps (written by men). Who cares? Women are more important than men from a specie survival perspective. You just need few men to produce enough sperm for thousands of women. Women produce offspring. What do men do? Invent religions and start wars? No I agree with him here. Men and women are different and have different roles.Just natural selection. A woman taking care of her man and her children will have more chance to have lots of children and thus her genes will be passed upon next generation. it's just bare natural selection. Doesn't mean they have to stay home of course ^^ But they're not the one who shall take and bare the risks in a couple for example, and that won't change IMHO We are biologically different, yes. As a result we play different roles in procreation. Roles (take care or children, smoke cigars, hunt, wage wars) he is talking about are assigned by culture and religion. There are no inherent, innate roles that women must follow. Roles are imposed by men with guns. I have male friends who take care of their children while their women chase the next research grant for their hospitals. My wife takes care of our children, not because that is her "assigned by God" role, but because she is better that task. I suck at it. I can barely take care of myself. You are going to refuse women framers to frame your house just because they are women? Or operate on you just because they are women? Women can kill and process deer as well as a men. I have personally met such women. If you ask, who is more predisposed to do the killing, then yes there is strong evidence that men have been more willing to kill other animals (including humans). Women tend to value life more. |
|
|
|
Is it about laziness?
If atheism is a religion, could laziness be one as well?
BAD Decker - you have the floor. Hit it.
If laziness is a religion then I can become an adept xD Anyway none of the dumbasses here have ever answered to the original questions. They still never explained why the Earth is flat and square in the Bible... Or why God thinks the sky is blue because it is made of water... (Genesis chapter 1, day 2) Ahah, didn't know that. It's a good way to end any logical discussion xD "God separated the waters above (sky) the firmament (land), from the waters below (oceans) the firmament" From what are made clouds ? Also, there is some water in every bit of air, so I don't think that this statement is false (you see, I don't come and just say : "that's in the Bible so that's true !" ). So he made the space from water? Damn it's a shame space is empty nah? ^^ Why do you say that space is empty ? Also, why do you just mention the space. We're talking about the Earth's sky, everything what is above the land and under the ozone. Because God calls the waters of the sky, "heaven"... ... that's not air, that's a bit higher up, right?... Actually, Where is heaven? We've looked up... it's not there... we searched the entire universe and cant seem to find this heaven anywhere... In the early days of Christianity, heaven simply meant the sky... but... heaven is definitely not in the sky... its not floating on clouds, etc There's some things that the humans can't see, and Heaven is one of them. That's like the souls of damned people which are blocked on Earth. Ok so it exists but we can't see or feel it? Same goes for the soul? Yes, that's part of another world, God's kingdom, where the men who followed a good life go. It's everwhere but it's nowhere at the same time. Practical. But why wasn't it written in the Bible? That come from the common sense. This is like "women aren't equal to men". Everyone should know that if they were correctly educated. Ahahah xD Just hope it's humour. If it is, it's damn funny! If it is not... Well shame on your education but it's still funny xD That's half humour. When I meant not equel, I meant that they don't have the same role. Would you look a women that pass all her days in the pub, that smoke big cigars, that live alone in the woods and that hunt as a normal woman ? I doubt it, and that's a part of the humanity to know what task involve to whom. Why would you even have to ask? What makes you think we "suppose to have different roles"? Roles defined in the Bible perhaps (written by men). Who cares? Women are more important than men from a specie survival perspective. You just need few men to produce enough sperm for thousands of women. Women produce offspring. What do men do? Invent religions and start wars? |
|
|
|
It's cool how what's supposed to prove God is a fact/law and the thousands of things that refutes his existence are just mere theories. And it's funny how no scientist know it hmm?
That's literally the definition of delusional https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DelusionA delusion is a belief held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary. 100 Renowned Academics Speaking About God
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=De6j01DCsZMWell anyway he doesn't really care about reason. He just gives his opinions like they were facts rock solid! There is so much knowledge and information that is not yet knowledge, that a thousand academics, or a million of them, would never know it all. And even if they did know it all, they would never be able to think about it all. Not in this lifetime. So, if they are against the existence of God, why would they want to speak ideas that suggest God exists? Especially if they have not thought in the directions of the ways that prove that God exists? Needle in a haystack. Can you find the needle? And if you pretend to be looking, but really don't want to find, will you express your find if you find it by accident? Of course not. You will go off and ignore the fact that you did find.  EDIT: Just to show how flawed the video is (which I am not going to watch, btw), the title beneath the video in Youtube is "100 Renowned Academics Speaking About God." But the title inside the video itself is, "50 Renowned Academics Speaking About God." If the joker who put the video up on Youtube can't get it right, it's because he fits right in with the 50 renowned academics. Scientists don't care about God because they cannot observe it or built mathematical model for it. God is not even a serious topic for discussion. They do talk about God when asked by non scientists. If you think scientists have some sort of anti-God agenda, you are delusional. You want people to put on bronze age 'God' glasses to see everything through them. If we did that, we would still be in the bronze age. Don't be afraid to watch the video. God will not punish you if you do. You are refusing to accept any new information that would contradict the Bible because you are afraid that God will kill you and send you to Hell? Is that it? BTW, where is HELL? Don't you need unlimited supply of oxygen for it to work? Or is that also imaginary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2LSLv8_Gvs |
|
|
|
Oh you blasphemers! Hell awaits for you. And it has an open bar  They think it's just nothing to mock God. But God is a righteous judge to judge each and everyone's work in this world. So according to their saying don't worry just wait for it. Don't rush on things God wants you to repent for the bad things you said a while ago. Dude, why don't you get it? He is not real. Does he talk to you? It is just an idea in your head. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oH0ReL3Cew |
|
|
|
The bible is a joke for stupid humans like reading harry potter then make it out to be real  watch that movie if got time and not seen it before looks good .. Be careful on what you are saying about God's word and don't even try to mock God. There are celebrities did try to mock God and they died because of it like John Lennon. The bible is true, and if you are saying we are stupid about believing what the bible says because we are following God. Then believe what you believe. You may laugh today but when God returns to judge this world, I don't know if you can still laugh that time. There's always time to repent. If God went around killing everyone who talked shit about him, we'd all be dead... I think Madalyn Murray O'Hair replies to this best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfGOZ9RjRP8in the end, the Christian prick says: " if we give right, we can live right".... That sums things up what this religion is all about. The more money you give to the church, the better your life will be, LOL. Fucking scam. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
