Why do you need to know the reason why I might need to know the reason?  Because nobody agrees with my in this forum that atheist are not able to love. Thank You. My daughter would laff her head off i am not able to love .. right what about the muslim who let his daughter drown because of his religion in dubai seen a muslim father stoning his own daughter because she slept with another man..  this was all done in this past month..the 21st century and this happens..it makes my blood boil and because i am an atheist i cannot love  fuck you religious fuckers don.t know the meaning of love you love a book more than your own family soft stupid people |
|
|
|
Video: Why Jewish People Do Not Believe In JesusComment: "The Talmud was written by Rome centuries after the New Testament , so every Jew that is worshiping the Talmud is deceived." Yes, everyone on earth will rise again. The ones that Jesus finds favor with will live forever, and the rest will not. They will be ashes under our feet. SO WHATS THE POINT IN KILLING US ALL THEN BRINGING US ALL BACK TO LIFE  BE MUCH EASIER TO JUST LET US ALL LIVE FOREVER |
|
|
|
Are you able to keep your informations concise? Are you high? ==================================================================================================================
The important thing that comes from the Bible is the message of Jesus Christ, the Messiah. All who believe in the salvation of Jesus, through His death on the cross and His resurrection to eternal life, will receive eternal life from Him. Those people will be raised from death at the last day to live forever.
The rest of the info in the Bible is all there to back up this most important thing... the salvation that is there for as many as will receive it.
You are talking like a Christian. Dont' close your mind and you'll be able to understand all. :-| Can I ask you a question: why are you interested in atheism? Thank You and best regards. atheism is someone who does not worship gods..well i don.t..plus so much war and hate caused by religion plus arguing about something that is not there its bonkers its the 21st century get real nutters |
|
|
|
You've "factual evidence" of nothing and atheism has no doctrines.
Come now. Just because I haven't sat down and explained clearly why the 3 laws prove God exists, doesn't mean that they don't prove such. I have explained in other posts clearly enough that one can explain it to himself if he wants. I would rather you use your ability to think than lay it out completely for you. ---------- The first great doctrine of atheism is that God (supreme being) does not exist. The second is that atheism is not a religion. Following that are many of the scientific theories that are held by atheists as laws of nature. Because these are held as truths, they are doctrines to the holder. For example. There is a sect of atheism that holds that the Big Bang is law, when in reality it is theory (not fact), and probably could never be proven at all even if it HAD HAPPENED. The reason atheists need something like the Big Bang is (even though they are mostly ignorant of it because they hide it from themselves), atheists, like everyone else, don't know for a fact anything about their future. Because of this, they build up all kinds of limited and temporary fantasies in their mind about what they think will happen. Their fantasies are their doctrines, just as formally religious people have doctrines, while all the while each individual's doctrine is slightly (or greatly) different from the individual doctrine of anyone else. It all has to do with the weakness that we all have when trying to predict the future. We think that we would have security if we had control. The atheists try to gain control by making themselves the authority (supreme being) and then try to go about eliminating the supreme being (themselves) in their minds by upholding atheism. Atheism is the most pathetic religion around. It doesn't even deserve to be a religion. But, by its attributes, definitely is one.  YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE BIBLE YOU MAKE YOUR OWN LAW TO THE BIBLE...DUMB ASS..so if there is a hell your going there for not doing gods teachings  because you know nothing about the bible very good stories but that is all they are nothing else A BOOK ..and no wisdom comes from the bible just common sense thou should not kill...NO SHIT |
|
|
|
@popcorn1 Please keep all your replies in one post. Multiple replies in multiple posts is considered SPAM. =================================================================================================================== I gave you the simple definition of atheism and atheist. All the rest of the definitions suggest the same meaning, although many of them do it with an abundance of words. Since I also showed you that, even if there happened to be no God, the atheist himself is the supreme being he is trying to deny, all you jokers are doing is batting at the air... air that you happen to attach words to, because words are easy. Since I also showed you that God exists through 3 common scientific laws, atheism is a complete nullity. All that atheists want to do is make noise to prove they are something. But you jokers don't have to do this. God knows you are there, and He accepts you. Now accept Him. Too bad for you atheist jokers. There isn't anything there in you. And there won't be until you start to accept the fact that God exists. Yes and I did agree with you with the definition of atheism being the one in the Oxford dictionary: Definition of atheism in English:
noun
[mass noun]
Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. Ref: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/atheismWhat are you rattling about? Thank You and best regards. SPAM spam on your face idiot..i will post to who ever i want too.. so shut thou face i have no ads ..so no spam right that is you sorted.. now badecker left.. OH I FORGOT YOU TALK SO MUCH POOOOOOOOOOOO |
|
|
|
@CashBTC you asked Denker: "What's your definition of atheism?"
Can he have his own definition?
I would hope that his definition is the definition since there is only one.
In my experience, religious people are the ones who often have multiple definitions or interpretations.
I do love chatting with religious people tho....hours of entertainment for sure.
My definition is the Oxford dictionary definition. =================================================================================================================== ...omissis...
most of your life revolves around science..you would not be typing on this thread if not for science..
Your Life should revolve around people not science: this is called a cool Life. tell me 1 invention that has come out of the bible or any religious books..
...omissis...
Life. Once you cool down tell me how you are going to create Life with your cellphone. So what you trying to say GOD created life THICK CUNT WHAT YOUR SAYING MAKES NO SENSE TO ME GO AND JUMP OF THE ROOF HEAD FIRST YOU STUPID TWAT  I SWEAR YOU REALLY ARE A DICK .. How about i have a wank and cum on me cell phone and ram it up your girlfriends cunt here is a way.. sounds stupid does it .. WELL SO DO YOU TIT HEAD.. what a wanker... you talk a load of shit..i know i sound harsh..but omg soft twat. .how do you create life with a cell phone you thick cunt..what a waste of space you really are. .if this is how you think go kill yourself dick head i wont loose any sleep world be a better place without thinkers like you TOSSER YOU OWN THE AWARD FOR THE BIGGEST PLONKER I HAVE EVER SEEN TYPE ON HERE WOW WOW WOW |
|
|
|
I'm an Atheist. I don't hate religions. I just believe in science that's all. But what I realized is that many wars, conflicts happened and still happen because of different religions. This is silly!!
I have friends who are jews, christians (catholic, evangelic orthodox), moslems. None of them asked me why I'm not religious. But from time to time they're arguing with each other and I'm just sitting there and shaking my head.
Science works, but 'how' and 'why' does it work? Unfortunately, science will forever lack the means to answer these questions as the scientific method lacks the ability to explore and comment about real-but-abstract phenomena, e.g. mathematical principles governing physics in general, or the act of perception from which scientific knowledge can be inferred. Because science cannot explore anything universal enough whose properties distribute to everything, it will never be a source of complete understanding, let alone a complete theory of knowledge in general. WHAT most of your life revolves around science..you would not be typing on this thread if not for science.. tell me 1 invention that has come out of the bible or any religious books.. the good thing about science is we always learn more and more useful information that can make our lives better.. So how will it make our lives better by reading the bible ..what will we discover that will benefit mankind.. i mean you get religious freaks saying science is the devil and that same person uses all the implements made by science this is how dumb you religious freaks are OK lets say we had no science would your life be better or worse.. I will tell you no running hot baths no phone no telly no cars i could go on for ages what science as invented.. OK lets say we never had religion would your life be better or worse.. my life would be better or no worse because the bible serves no purpose but tells you how to be a better person ..which you should already know because you have feelings and emotions So before you call out SCIENCE..think of all the everyday stuff you use that was invented because of science..DUMBASS RELIGIOUS FREAKS.. SCIENCE IS THE DEVIL THEN YOU DUMB ASSES GO MAKE A CALL ON YOUR PHONE OR USE THE INTERNET AND SWITCH THE TELLY ON THICK STUPID DUMB ASSES |
|
|
|
Do fish believe or disbelieve in a supreme being? Don't really know. But probably not. WELL YOUR WRONG..plus you of all people should know they do i bet you never knew this..watch and learn you will learn something www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfuMR3rlCIIDAGON |
|
|
|
flight 93 www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vV3fjfeb9Qso now explain the phone calls on the hijacked plane made to loved ones.. remember the passengers on the plain tackled the hijackers and brought it down.. but now Dick Chaney saying he give the order to shoot it down.. So? It didn't get shot down. What difference does it make what order he gave? Two situations. 1. "Fire at my command." 2. "Fire at will." #1 is almost always the way things work, look at how engagement in Afganishtan was handled. So he set a standing order, more like #2. But your video leaps then to the conclusion that "giving the order" implies "they shot it down on his order." That makes NO SENSE. He says he gave the order to shoot down a plane that was heading for Washington.. You work for something to do with government..spendy i know you do plus explain the worker in the pentagon she said no plane hit the building..now she was there.. so now explain.. Dick chaney give the order to shoot a passenger plane that was heading to washington.. now ok lets say it was nothing to do with 9/11 .. someone posted that imagine the government saying they shoot a passenger plane down there be hell fire..it be all over the news.. well he did say it and no its not a fake video.. try prove me wrong on the pentagon you just will not do it...... And one of my relatives had just walked out of the tower to the starbucks across the street when the plane hit. So? So Cheney gave an order, but that DOESN'T mean a jet shot the 4th plane down. Here's what the LA Times had to say about that.
...Cheney did not hesitate. He authorized fighter aircraft "to engage the inbound plane."
In the decision to issue a lethal order without precedent in American history -- to shoot down a plane filled with American civilians -- Cheney both struggled with the confusion of that morning and personified it, according to a staff report issued Thursday by the national commission investigating the terrorist attacks.
The order given by Cheney was never received by the fighter pilots, and, in the end, it came too late to interrupt the assault.
Perhaps in his haste to act -- President Bush was in Florida at the time -- Cheney might have shortcut White House protocol, the report said. The normal chain of command for military "engage" orders goes from the president to the secretary of Defense, and not through the vice president, it said.
Although Cheney said he conferred with the president before giving the order, the commission staff could not confirm that a phone call took place in that time frame. Several minutes after giving the order, Cheney informed Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld that he had done so.
"So we've got a couple of aircraft up there that have those instructions at the present time?" Rumsfeld asked.
"That is correct," Cheney replied. "And it's my understanding they've already taken a couple of aircraft out." That understanding turned out to be mistaken.Anyway, SO WHAT? I'm okay if the jets had rammed the planes. They didn't have ammo IIRC, so that's what they would have had to do. Meaning the pilots would have probably been killed. But it didn't happen. I can't see why something like this would have been covered up if it had happened. People would understand that the MUSLIM TERRORISTS' EVIL INTENTIONS needed to be fought. they shot it down ..he said he done it quickly watch and learn.. www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1BJQOHAs-Mplus you think your government covers nothing up ..Because you work for them |
|
|
|
im curious how does me having a different opinion than you make me a rich dumbass? oh god i just realized its 88 people not 88%  . guess i am a dumbass WELL I GUESS YOU ARE THEN |
|
|
|
im curious how does me having a different opinion than you make me a rich dumbass? NEVER SAID YOU WAS RICH JUST SAID YOUR A DUMBASS |
|
|
|
flight 93 www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vV3fjfeb9Qso now explain the phone calls on the hijacked plane made to loved ones.. remember the passengers on the plain tackled the hijackers and brought it down.. but now Dick Chaney saying he give the order to shoot it down.. So? It didn't get shot down. What difference does it make what order he gave? Two situations. 1. "Fire at my command." 2. "Fire at will." #1 is almost always the way things work, look at how engagement in Afganishtan was handled. So he set a standing order, more like #2. But your video leaps then to the conclusion that "giving the order" implies "they shot it down on his order." That makes NO SENSE. He says he gave the order to shoot down a plane that was heading for Washington.. You work for something to do with government..spendy i know you do plus explain the worker in the pentagon she said no plane hit the building..now she was there.. so now explain.. Dick chaney give the order to shoot a passenger plane that was heading to washington.. now ok lets say it was nothing to do with 9/11 .. someone posted that imagine the government saying they shoot a passenger plane down there be hell fire..it be all over the news.. well he did say it and no its not a fake video.. try prove me wrong on the pentagon you just will not do it.. So? It didn't get shot down. What difference does it make what order he gave? Two situations. 1. "Fire at my command." 2. "Fire at will." and he said none of the above he said he gave the order to shoot the plane down.. after 3 had already gone into buildings.. So spendy go in the bathroom and give your ears a good clean because your not hearing the video properly.. its all done for money and power.. to lower the population of what ever people they don.t like.. keep the people in check..and to have slaves..yes this is all done by the super rich END OF STORY.. so what we need to do is invent something everyone wants and then you can join them.. you can order everyone around whiles wearing your smoking jacket.. ok yar oh i forgot to say make sure it does not upset one of the super rich businesses or your a dead duck as bush says money trumps peace |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
:oTHIS IS MY FACE
