Scientific proof that God exists?

[Decksperiment]

Ok, let's cut to the chase..

BADecker seems to think I'm some kind of occultist, not recognising that his society is BUILT using occultism, not religion. It is built to the square of mercury, which, despite me posting the evidence, he CHOOSES to ignore. What most folks do not understand is that I have had only one goal in this thread. That is to prove the existance of god. Do I need to believe in god to prove his existance? No, I need only know I can produce him if I mix whatever ingredient with whatever ingredient. Do I need faith to know if I jump off a bridge I will fall?, no, I know I will be pulled to the ground by gravity, if gravity was non-existant, I would remain in a fixed position, now what does faith, hope, or charity have to do with this? BADecker thinks I'm taking the piss out of his god, no I am showing that he worships false idols. I have proven using everything BUT the bible that HIS god exists, yet he has yet to see his god's messenger.. because that messenger is more in tune with atheism, although as previously stated, I do not beleive in nothing, but another version of this nothing, which is best descibed as a circle, or my personal favorite, a loop, or the loop of life, the science behind the circle. It seems I am indeed saved, even though BADecker has yet to admit it.. because everything I have said to him, is taken from his book, and covered by many esoteric/exoteric books written eon's before the thought of a stupid fuckin bible.. and is agreed with by the book he quotes the most:

1927: In the words of the Fama and Confessio: "Our philosophy is not a new invention, but as Adam after
his fall hath received it, and as Moses and Solomon used it, also it ought not to be much doubted of.
No other philosophy we have than that which is the head of all the faculties, sciences and arts, the
which (if we behold our age) containeth much of theology and medicine, but little of jurisprudence
(because in 1614, as now, human justice, so-called, often ran counter to cosmic law.--P.C.); which
searcheth heaven and earth with exquisite analysis, or, to speak briefly thereof, which doth sufficiently
manifest the Microcosmus man. (It is that) wherein Plato, Aristotle, Pythagoreans, and others did hit
the mark, and wherein Enoch, Abraham, Moses, David and Solomon did excel, but especially
wherewith that wonderful book the Bible agreeth."

BADecker: God never wrote your book, neither did jesus. jesus's direct decendants live in the kingdom alright, the kingdom of fife.. magdalene is his mothers maiden name is it not? The second city of jerusalem is ross-lyn chapel approx 7 miles from here surrounded by 7 hills, a castle sit's on 1, the next is where arthur contemplated a spider, arthur's seat, which incidently has the appearance of a lion, hence "in ore leonis verbumi inveni.." "in the lions mouth I found the word." So you go fuck yourself, for you are a loser pitting non-believers against you and your kind by decrying anything that dont fit your narative, not your books. You are nothing but a singular opinion that does your book ZERO justice, as you decry those that at least make an attempt to understand.. Your bible agree's with my theories of what it's actually about, you ignore that, the bible says god is the light, proving, according to your bible, god is a planetary being known as SOL. AKA LUCIFER.


Do me a favour, at least show us your qualifications, do you have any with regards to the bible? If not, fuck off and die.. quietly.. so I can show you how to be reborn.. like jesus did with.. lol.. saul?


Edit: So to quote Jesus.. "Only through me.." - Do you have any idea how hard it is to run through a human being, never mind one that crumbled to dust OVER 2000 years ago? What, cant take the dna from the spear of levictus and revive the mother fucker? Cause they can do it with dolly buxom the sheep can they no? No? Ever seen the reverse side of a masonic apron? These fuckers would rather bring back the sheep, so they can fuck that again, rather than a stupid mother fucker who, whilst he may have died on the cross, was killed for being a loanshark, that very predator the bible says what of? Neither a borrower or a lender be.. Just how much of a misery did jesus make of levictus for not paying back that loan? I guess he got paid back in kind, an eye for an eye huh?


"The Qabalah was first taught by God Himself to a select company of angels. After the Fall the angels
communicated the heavenly doctrine to the disobedient child of earth, to furnish the protoplasts with
the means of returning to their pristine nobility and felicity. From Adam it passed over to Noah, and
then to Abraham who emigrated it to Egypt, where he allowed a portion of it to ooze out. Thus the
Egyptians obtained some knowledge of it, and other Eastern nations could introduce it into their
philosophical systems. Moses was first initiated into the Qabalah in Egypt, but became most proficient
in it during his wanderings in the wilderness, when he devoted to it the leisure hours of the whole forty
years. He covertly laid down the principles of this secret doctrine in the first four books of the
Pentateuch, but withhold them from Deuteronomy. Moses initiated the seventy elders, and they
transmitted the doctrine from hand to hand. Of all who formed the unbroken line of tradition, David
and Solomon were the most deeply initiated into the Qabalah."

Question: What do you know huh? You may be a christian of sort's, but really, your a masonic/jewish puppet, a little lost sheep.. now you know who the sheep are you twat!!

Another angle:

Two stories of a revelation at Beth-el to Jacob. So who exactly is this Jacob?
Two accounts of God changing Jacob's name to Israel - When reading bible, one would be forgiven for thinking Jacob was a human.

As one would be forgiven for thinking Jesus was a country.. although clearly not the country known as Israel, since this was Jacob..

The select company of angels are the 7 inner planets, which the days are named after, Noah clearly existed at the same time as Adam, in order to receive what he passed to Abraham, but what if these were neither planet, days of the week, people, countries, but states of conciousnous?

Is lucifer really tiamat? That planetary body that was apparently destroyed by nibiru as it passed on it's 26.000 year odd orbit of the sun? This would be the fall would it not, since it is a fair statement to say that NOAH was a country as was Jacob. So which country built the international space station? Still cant figure the events of the bible are yet to take place? Just how do you get all that dna of 2 of every creature in existance on this ball into a boat that could'nt fit a city? You'd need more than a city just to keep 2 of every creature in one space.. Unless you only used the dna, which is the only thing that makes sense.. noahs ark is the international space station, it has been done before, is happening again, and yes, thousands of years ago, maybe in two years time, the astronauts will again fall from orbit in a shuttle like craft, after earth was flooded (again) and the survivors of the nuclear apocalypse who have lost all compus mentus after havin a blast, wont remember them astronauts being sent up into orbit as the last refuge of humanity carried what was left of the dna, less than a month ago. The bible is backwards for a reason.

BADecker.. I think you are a wigger.. a white shite bag. And Jesus is a pork suseJ

[1714968305]

1714968305

[1714968305]

1714968305

[1714968305]

1714968305

[1714968305]

1714968305

[the joint]

Unfortunately, people who have steeped themselves in a particular religion, mostly find it difficult to set it aside when they find out it is a false religion.

Can you compile a list for us all of all these false religions?
How do you recognise a false religion?

No, I probably couldn't. I would probably miss at least a few. Besides, I don't have the time that it would take to investigate and compile. You could probably search Wikipedia for a list of main ones.

Well, with Christianity all around you, and with all the talk about the Bible I have been doing in this thread, start there, the Bible, and ask God to direct you on your journey into this kind of religious seeking.

But you have to be sincere in your testing for God. Ask Him to prove Himself to you if He really exists. But do it from the standpoint of really asking sincerely. He doesn't cater to people who are simply playing around or attempting to mock Him.

I would be particularly interested to hear you respond *directly* to his question about how you are able to recognize a false religion.

The direct instructions for such would probably be similar to the instructions Moses gave the people of Israel for determining if a prophet was a prophet of the Lord, or a false prophet. This would be to match the things that he said with what happened. You could say similar about matching a religion with the way things work.

In fact, in this and other threads, I have been pointing out that the things we call science don't always match all the scientific ideas that should be applied to them. A lot of what we call science (I'm not talking about pure science, or the scientific method, here) simply doesn't have enough information behind it to say that it is absolute truth, or often very near the truth.

The Bible is full of prophecies that were fulfilled. There are others that have not been fulfilled yet. Other religions have few prophecy listings, and few that are fulfilled. One of the greatest prophesies of the Bible that has been fulfilled is that of the fall of Israel as a nation because they disobeyed God. The fall lasted around 1,900 years. They have only come back according to other prophesy, and not with the glory that they held in the past.

Responding in order:

1) Logic fail.  You're shooting yourself in the foot again.  Let me get this straight - you think that the way to determine whether a religion is true or false is to first assume Christianity is true and then look to it for a method of distinguishing true religions from false ones?  What the heck kind of logic is that?  You're putting the cart way, way, WAY before the horse.  

The point here is that you can't just assume Christianity is true before you've subjected it to a method to determine whether it is true or false.  The result is that you are self-evidently using an illogical approach to determine whether Christianity is true rather than a logical one.

2) Stop contorting what science is.  When you say things like, "...A lot of what we call science (I'm not talking about pure science, or the scientific method, here)..." you are just talking out your rear.  The word 'science' has several concrete, established definitions.  When you start making up new definitions on the fly, you are simply demonstrating an inability to effectively communicate with others.

Type in "science definition" into Google and check the result.  The definitions that pop up are the only definitions applicable to 'science.'  When you use the word 'science,' it must be used according to those definitions.  If you don't, then you're simply not talking about science.  Period.

And, when you say "...the things we call science don't always match all the scientific ideas that should be applied to them..." I would remind you that you continue to demonstrate that you have no idea what science is (because you continually invent definitions for it).  It's pretty hard for the "things we call science" to match the "scientific ideas that should be applied to them" when you change the definition of what 'science' is but not the definition of 'pure science' or 'the scientific method.'  Your reasoning here is shockingly terrible.

3)  Talking about prophecies is irrelevant if you can't subject Christianity to the same method used to determine whether a religion is true or false.  

Lol.  A fall that lasted 1900 years?  Haha what the hell?  Are you joking?  Do you have any idea how stupid this sounds?

You finally came up against something that shows you what God is all about, and you just can't take it. I can accept that.

Is this in response to my post?  This isn't even relevant to anything I said.  I did not "come up with anything" in my post that shows me what God is all about, nor can't I take it, and so therefore you are "accepting" whatever you just imagined.

Care to respond directly to my points, or would you like to continue making up my point of view for me, ignoring me when I tell you that's not my point of view, and then believe you are the victor for winning (and somehow, still losing) an argument against yourself?

Please be specific about your ideas.  I truly have no idea what the hell your post was about.

Keep on trying. You just might figure it out. Of course, nobody figures anything out that they don't want to, right?

I will assume your continued failure to respond to specific points that I make is a reflection of your inability to do.  I respond point-by-point to virtually every consideration in your posts.  As a result, I am holding the door wide open for you to do the same, and so you have the opportunity to select from any number of my ideas and to demonstrate why those ideas are wrong.

Furthermore, I structure my posts in a way which makes it even easier to respond by numbering my considerations.  For example, I numbered three (3) considerations, but you failed to respond directly to any of them.  I would challenge you to respond in kind by similarly numbering your considerations so that you are able to provide a clear rebuttal to each of mine.  Again, failure to do so will be considered a reflection of your inability to provide sound reasoning for your beliefs.

[bl4kjaguar]

I recognize the wisdom in the Bible, but you call me crazy because I have read more wisdom than you?

BADecker, an educated man makes use of resources and THINKS.
An ignorant man cannot see outside of his immediate perception and belief system (B.S.)

Since your standard for truth is the Bible, I must ask, which other resources have you used to form your opinion about Saul's doctrine? What about for Phoenix Journals? Is truth really a matter of getting the right book? I do not believe in ' magic books ', only truth; if you like, read Phoenix Journals and see which truth you would rather have on your side--EVERY TIME.

And where is your evidence that it even matters what the source is when the message is TRUTH?
After all, I recognize truth in your book; I am nOt prejudiced against any source; I read it all to know truth and make use of these resources because God never limits you in your search for truth. Only MAN'S DOCTRINES have such limitations.

[bl4kjaguar]

The chess match recorded by Eisenbeiss actually happened, so it is true;
the questions were answered correctly, so that part is also true.
Finally, rebirth is a key message of spirituality and it is even in the Bible,
So that part of Eisenbeiss is also true.
What part is actually being questioned?
It seems to me that the source is giving us the truth every time.
Thus the source is not of importance; having an open mind for truth is what is important!

Please use own discernment; I have already referenced for you the "First Christians" audio so that you may follow up on the references/resources therein. I have also posted on the topic of rebirth in the Bible in this thread; I discern that you do not really understand where the Bible came from, nor are you even interested. You have no right to pound on my truth (you have no answer to the problem of the criterion, since you can't explain this presumed knowledge/criteria, you have a fatal flaw in your argument); judge not lest it be in ignorance!

[BADecker]

I recognize the wisdom in the Bible, but you call me crazy because I have read more wisdom than you?

BADecker, an educated man makes use of resources and THINKS.
An ignorant man cannot see outside of his immediate perception and belief system (B.S.)

Since your standard for truth is the Bible, I must ask, which other resources have you used to form your opinion about Saul's doctrine? What about for Phoenix Journals? Is truth really a matter of getting the right book? I do not believe in ' magic books ', only truth; if you like, read Phoenix Journals and see which truth you would rather have on your side--EVERY TIME.

And where is your evidence that it even matters what the source is when the message is TRUTH?
After all, I recognize truth in your book; I am nOt prejudiced against any source; I read it all to know truth and make use of these resources because God never limits you in your search for truth. Only MAN'S DOCTRINES have such limitations.

Do you remember the 2005 movie Serenity, by Joss Whedon? In that movie, the spaceship, Serenity, made a landfall on the planet where Shepherd Derrial Book (played by Ron Glass) had started his "religious" settlement. The second time Serenity made a landfall there, the "outpost" that Shepherd Book had started had just been destroyed by a gunship of the Empire. Shepherd Book, a non-violent man, had shot down the gunship, but was wounded in the fray and was dying.

Captain Malcolm Reynolds (played by Nathan Fillion) of the Firefly ship, Serenity, had just found the wounded Shepherd Book among the rubble, and was trying to comfort him:

Book: "I shot him down."
Reynolds: "Yeah, I see."
Book: "I killed the ship that killed us. Not very Christian of me."
Reynolds: "You did what's right."
Book: "Coming from you, that means... almost nothing."


Regarding your post above ^^, "Coming from you, that means... almost nothing."

[BADecker]

The chess match recorded by Eisenbeiss actually happened, so it is true;
the questions were answered correctly, so that part is also true.
Finally, rebirth is a key message of spirituality and it is even in the Bible,
So that part of Eisenbeiss is also true.
What part is actually being questioned?
It seems to me that the source is giving us the truth every time.
Thus the source is not of importance; having an open mind for truth is what is important!

Please use own discernment; I have already referenced for you the "First Christians" audio so that you may follow up on the references/resources therein. I have also posted on the topic of rebirth in the Bible in this thread; I discern that you do not really understand where the Bible came from, nor are you even interested. You have no right to pound on my truth (you have no answer to the problem of the criterion, since you can't explain this presumed knowledge/criteria, you have a fatal flaw in your argument); judge not lest it be in ignorance!

The question isn't about whether mediums and the like can exist or not. The questions have to do with their authenticity and their integrity, as well as questions of the authenticity and integrity of the "spirits" that move the mediums. The larger question has to do with what God wants us to do regarding mediums and "spiritists," and the spirits that they contact.

The Bible speaks to these questions several times in various places. God tells us in the Bible to not seek out mediums, spiritists, or the spirits. Why? Because it is God to Whom everyone is supposed to individually go, directly. We don't need a medium with God on the job.

In addition, as mentioned above, the authenticity and integrity of the spirits, as well as the mediums, is always in question. Why? Because nobody knows who the spirits are, or what is on their minds and hearts. And the mediums may well be liars, themselves, not having any spirit contact at all, but rather, deceiving the people for their own, selfish, purposes.

If somebody who is considered to be a medium doesn't say, "Seek God, not me or the spirits," then he is not of God. If a person who is of God seeks out a medium and hears him/her, that seeker is starting to turn away from God by doing so. It's in the Bible.

[bl4kjaguar]

I am happy to agree with you that God exists within. I think that is where the "proof" of God will come from: within you! 

The chess match recorded by Eisenbeiss actually happened, so it is true;
the questions were answered correctly, so that part is also true.
Finally, rebirth is a key message of spirituality and it is even in the Bible,
So that part of Eisenbeiss is also true.
What part is actually being questioned?
It seems to me that the source is giving us the truth every time.
Thus the source is not of importance; having an open mind for truth is what is important!

Please use own discernment; I have already referenced for you the "First Christians" audio so that you may follow up on the references/resources therein. I have also posted on the topic of rebirth in the Bible in this thread; I discern that you do not really understand where the Bible came from, nor are you even interested. You have no right to pound on my truth (you have no answer to the problem of the criterion, since you can't explain this presumed knowledge/criteria, you have a fatal flaw in your argument); judge not lest it be in ignorance!

The question isn't about whether mediums and the like can exist or not. The questions have to do with their authenticity and their integrity, as well as questions of the authenticity and integrity of the "spirits" that move the mediums. The larger question has to do with what God wants us to do regarding mediums and "spiritists," and the spirits that they contact.

The Bible speaks to these questions several times in various places. God tells us in the Bible to not seek out mediums, spiritists, or the spirits. Why? Because it is God to Whom everyone is supposed to individually go, directly. We don't need a medium with God on the job.

In addition, as mentioned above, the authenticity and integrity of the spirits, as well as the mediums, is always in question. Why? Because nobody knows who the spirits are, or what is on their minds and hearts. And the mediums may well be liars, themselves, not having any spirit contact at all, but rather, deceiving the people for their own, selfish, purposes.

If somebody who is considered to be a medium doesn't say, "Seek God, not me or the spirits," then he is not of God. If a person who is of God seeks out a medium and hears him/her, that seeker is starting to turn away from God by doing so. It's in the Bible.

Hypothetically, the Phoenix Journals could be inauthentic, but this possibility is eliminated upon reading them. Since you are basically saying the same thing about the Bible and also declaring your book to be literal, I think my rational faith will have more appeal than an ancient book; you are the only one still arguing against the material that I present Humbly and in TRUTH. In fact, Phoenix Journals have the best explanation of all Biblical material, but how would you know if you condemn without knowledge?

The scribe Dharma and messengers Hatonn/Aton (who travels with Christ 'irrefutably') and crew scribed the message for our time; it is about being responsible enough to learn the truth about man and God. Since the Journals are more mysterious, it is well worth your "time"; please be aware that all that I am is a point of view.
Here is a small part of what Phoenix Journals say about "other speakers".
Search Phoenix Journals for "other speakers" --in quotes--here:
http://www.phoenixsourcedistributors.com/html/site_search.html

Dude, you could just meditate or read some of the poems of Tagore and come to the truth about God; if I choose to read Journals, who are you to say it is not authentic for me¿¿¿ You do not bother to read much of anything or even to cite an example where these writings are not authentic

[BADecker]

Hypothetically, the Phoenix Journals could be inauthentic, but this possibility is eliminated upon reading them. Since you are basically saying the same thing about the Bible and also declaring your book to be literal, I think my rational faith will have more appeal than an ancient book; you are the only one still arguing against the material that I present Humbly and in TRUTH. In fact, Phoenix Journals have the best explanation of all Biblical material, but how would you know if you condemn without knowledge?

The scribe Dharma and messengers Hatonn/Aton (who travels with Christ 'irrefutably') and crew scribed the message for our time; it is about being responsible enough to learn the truth about man and God. Since the Journals are more mysterious, it is well worth your "time"; please be aware that all that I am is a point of view.
Here is a small part of what Phoenix Journals say about "other speakers".
Search Phoenix Journals for "other speakers" --in quotes--here:
http://www.phoenixsourcedistributors.com/html/site_search.html

Dude, you could just meditate or read some of the poems of Tagore and come to the truth about God; if I choose to read Journals, who are you to say it is not authentic for me¿¿¿ You do not bother to read much of anything or even to cite an example where these writings are not authentic

The fact that you can read, and the fact that you may be reading something if you are, isn't the thing that determines that what you are reading is authentic. Obviously, the fact that you can read is authentic, and the fact that you are reading, if you are, is authentic, and even the fact that somebody put together the materials that you are reading, and the fact that you may actually be able to hold the materials, themselves, in your hands may be authentic. That's not the thing that isn't authentic.

What is or may be non-authentic are some of the things that someone (you) might say about the materials that you are reading.

If you would start with some explanation of who or what your God is, and then if you explain that your God is described by some writings from India or something, that's okay. It is even authentic. But here is your problem.

You take the Christ, Who is explained by the Bible, and Who someone would have to dream up on his own if he didn't have a copy of the Bible, and then you apply to the Christ all kinds of stuff that the Bible says is absolutely NOT what the Christ is about, and then you go around claiming that you have found the truth about the Christ.

Meanwhile, a bunch of people who don't know that you are not talking about the Christ of the Bible, start thinking that, hey, maybe I missed something in the Bible. Later, they find out that their discussion with you is about a totally different God, and they wonder why they ever even listened to anything you had to say in the first place. But of course, they know the answer. It is because they believe in the Christ of the Bible.

The fact that you are not straight forward with the fact that you are not talking about the Christ of the Bible, makes almost everything you say to be NOT authentic.

Then you come along and say that your info IS about the Christ of the Bible, and that the Bible doesn't have much if any truth about the Christ. So, you attempt to nullify the Bible but keep the Christ, when all along there wouldn't have been any Christ if the Bible hadn't spoken about Him in the first place. People can become very retarded. But you are pushing the limit.

[numanoid]

Science and God are different .
And i believe in both

[BADecker]

Science and God are different .
And i believe in both

Absolutely true. Both exist and both are different, just like a potter is different from the clay that he is molding into a vase.

[Zeta0S]

[bl4kjaguar]

Then you come along and say that your info IS about the Christ of the Bible, and that the Bible doesn't have much if any truth about the Christ. So, you attempt to nullify the Bible but keep the Christ, when all along there wouldn't have been any Christ if the Bible hadn't spoken about Him in the first place. People can become very retarded. But you are pushing the limit.

I am totally justified in discussing any and all aspects of God in this thread and of making an educated comparison that relates to my faith; in PM I mentioned to you some chapter(s) in Journals relating my point of view on this very topic of "Biblical Christianity" and now I have bolded an astounding statement of yours; i am totally confused. Christ was a being and is still a being!, not a story; Christ energy is not differing from GOD'S ENERGY. He IS ONE WITH GOD and GOD DWELLS WITHIN THE TEMPLE THAT IS YOU!

I do not understand why you did not address what was outlined in those chapters; please go ahead and PM me if you prefer.

[LordOfCoin]

Science can never prove the existence of something that never existed. If the thing some people consider god would just come forward there would be no confusion. Until then, stop believing in fairytales.

Simply put, we are all god, good=god.

[BADecker]

Then you come along and say that your info IS about the Christ of the Bible, and that the Bible doesn't have much if any truth about the Christ. So, you attempt to nullify the Bible but keep the Christ, when all along there wouldn't have been any Christ if the Bible hadn't spoken about Him in the first place. People can become very retarded. But you are pushing the limit.

I am totally justified in discussing any and all aspects of God in this thread and of making an educated comparison that relates to my faith; in PM I mentioned to you some chapter(s) in Journals relating my point of view on this very topic of "Biblical Christianity" and now I have bolded an astounding statement of yours; i am totally confused. Christ was a being and is still a being!, not a story; Christ energy is not differing from GOD'S ENERGY. He IS ONE WITH GOD and GOD DWELLS WITHIN THE TEMPLE THAT IS YOU!

I do not understand why you did not address what was outlined in those chapters; please go ahead and PM me if you prefer.

How do you know that you are totally justified in anything? Simply because you can do it doesn't mean that you are justified in doing it.

No wonder you are totally astounded. You still can't seem to understand that the Bible is the place that talks about the Christ, and explains Him clearly. Since you are unwilling to come out from your confusion, remain confused.

What does the fact that Christ is partially energy have to do with anything? All material is energy, acting and reacting upon itself in complex ways so that we have this stuff that looks like material, but is really interacting energy.

Simply because God dwells within a person doesn't mean that the person is God. It may mean that he has some of the attributes of God. But he is simply the temple that God dwells within.

Why would anyone want to read any of your stuff, since we already have the Bible that way more accurately explains all we need to know about salvation?

[BADecker]

Science can never prove the existence of something that never existed. If the thing some people consider god would just come forward there would be no confusion. Until then, stop believing in fairytales.

Simply put, we are all god, good=god.

We are all God?

Prove it about yourself by keeping yourself alive for 200 years or more. Stay alive after jumping into a pool of molten lava in an active volcano. Prove it by staying alive and fully able to see after shooting yourself in both eyes with a .357 Magnum. Prove it by flying across the sky like superman.

Prove it by healing the sick people that you meet, like Jesus did. At least prove it to yourself.

[(oYo)]

Science can never prove the existence of something that never existed. If the thing some people consider god would just come forward there would be no confusion. Until then, stop believing in fairytales.

Simply put, we are all god, good=god.

[BADecker]

Science can never prove the existence of something that never existed. If the thing some people consider god would just come forward there would be no confusion. Until then, stop believing in fairytales.

Simply put, we are all god, good=god.

If Jesus made Himself visible to the world in such a way that everybody would really know that it was absolutely, indeed Him, then nobody would believe. They wouldn't believe because firsthand knowledge would take the place of faith.

This is why it is so extremely important that people believe in Him now. Faith saves. Knowing doesn't. When He comes, we will know. There will be no more room for faith.

Those who have been locked in to Him because they had faith before He came, will remain in Him. Those that didn't have faith, or had too little of it, will have no more opportunity to get faith, because faith will be out of the picture.

Believe now, while you have the chance. Love logic. That's why you fuck her. After all, you don't fuck the things that you don't love, even if it is only a love for fucking them.

[LordOfCoin]

Your ideas what a god is, is wrong. When you come back with fairy tale points, you have no argument.

I am God. I know I am God because there is no other answer. The ideas of god have always been made up by man and nothing else. I would find it much more entertaining to believe in Harry Potter than a god, according to the man made stories, who has killed so many for all the wrong reasons. If you read the bible, you should worship the light bringer, aka Lucifer--the only one that has any sense.

[(oYo)]

Your ideas what a god is, is wrong. When you come back with fairy tale points, you have no argument.

I am God. I know I am God because there is no other answer. The ideas of god have always been made up by man and nothing else. I would find it much more entertaining to believe in Harry Potter than a god, according to the man made stories, who has killed so many for all the wrong reasons. If you read the bible, you should worship the light bringer, aka Lucifer--the only one that has any sense.

[Buffer Overflow]

When He comes, we will know.

You might have a long wait.