Scientific proof that God exists?

[Horacewoodwood]

There is nothing but presumtions in your links, just as the presumption a God may or may not exist. Nothing there proves the existence of a God, it only gives a religious nonsensical interpretation of science. Therefore, since some intelligent people around already explained to you why they are bullshit, I have no reason to repeat it again. As I stated before, you are not able to properly understand reason or logic. That, or you are trolling. As for the ''orders' thing, you are completely mistaken. It's a pattern that you, followers, follow. Based on that pattern, I simply predicted what you were going to say next. I am as on topic as I could be, you are the one leading and I counter what you claim. Now, besides those bullshit links, your arguments are just modern religious indoctrinating crap, the same arguments you would get from any cultist who has no proof but has to convince people it's his way. As you can see, that's not going to work with me. Not the passive-aggresive attitude, not the mystical shit, not the 'humans can't understand God's way', nothing of this type. I expect you to prove the existence of a God. Your links have been disproven. If you do have something else, please, enlighten us. If not, please, don't resume yourself to that cultist monologue that I can hear at any corner of the street.

Almost everything in your posts is presumption, especially your spelling of the word "presumptions."

 

There is nothing wrong with your believing that science doesn't prove the existence of God. In fact, faith is healthy. It's your religion. I applaud you that you have religion. But, keep searching. You just might find a truthful religion if you do. You might even find the way to Heaven.

I don't 'believe' science doesn't prove the existence of a God, it's a fact it doesn't. I don't need to put my faith in it, you can clearly see it's like that. That's what facts are. Now, notice that I say 'the existence of A god', not your God. That is because you are not the only one to claim a God, there have been and there still are many more. Your God is flawed with simply the fact that the book on which your character's story is based on declares a certain age for life on earth. Science proves that the age on earth is way much older than your shit religion believes it is. From that point of view, your God is out of the picture and it's all just a hoax started by some fishermen and their talented friend. End of story. As for the proof of a God, there is no such thing. It's not that I believe there is no such thing, it's a fact there is no proof of a God. Will there ever be proof of a deity? We can presume nothing is impossible. But we can certainly say the possibility of it is extremely low, to the edge of impossible. As for you, cultist, you're still bringing no proof, no argument, all you do is keeping the cultist lines coming my way and trying to be ironic by correcting my spelling, without noticing it was a slip and the second 'presumption' was written as it should be. No more than a braindead religious follower.

Since you can't seem to step-by-step refute the logic in my links that prove God exists, you probably are simply attempting to believe that He doesn't exist, even though you say you know it.

Now, I could be wrong about you. You might actually have some step-by-step rebuttal. Nobody requires that you show it. So, as long as you can get by without showing it, you should be given the benefit of the doubt.

Most of the rest of what you say, above, is religious talk... maybe even religious doctrine. It's a little off topic, at least until you show the factual rebuttal of the proof that God exists. The proof:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

Come up with something new, cultist, and you shall have a decent answer. Just by ignoring my explanation of why there is no need for me to disprove them anymore you will not solve anything, you will just be a cultist. As for trying to imitate my attitude by saying 'Most of the rest of what you say, above, is religious talk' that is the attitude of someone who needs to win at any cost and tries anything possible to do so. The links you have posted are the same. I presume that is all you know and I think you are over, nothing left to say, nothing left to prove. I don't think you understand something: those links have been proven by other people on this thread to be bullshit. They did a very good job and there is no need for anyone else to explain that to you again, it would be a waste of time. Since you do not understand that, well... no need for me to explain how stupid you are, you are stupid enough to be a religious man. You've got one more try to come up with some new proof. After that, you are officialy donezo on this thread.

That's a nice bunch of blabber you said there. You still haven't rebutted the proof that God exists. As for blabber, even stats has you beat, right in the post above this one. It's kinda fun watching you twist yourself all out of shape to say nothing. You seem to be a professional troll, right?

Thanks for helping to maintain the proof God exists by not rebutting the proof.

That is also not going to work. In order for me to disprove the existence of a God, there must first be a proof. Your presumptions can not be considered proof by any sane human being, your interpretation of quantum mechanics makes less sense than the bible does and that brings me to the same conclusion that you are trying to hang on scientific facts trying to correlate them with the existence of a God. Specifically, you are doing what most of the religious creationists are doing in every debate ever: erronated interpretations of scientific theories, laws and facts that they do not properly understand. More exactly, blabber. What I said earlier was argumented and on point, you may not call that blabber since you ar enot in the position of doing that. You are still a cultist hanging on to his shit story and trying to bring his bullshit to people who understand what they are talking about. Also, the only troll here seems to be the one with short, off-topic answers. That's you, cultist. You're on thinner ice with every shit that you type here. Come with evidence or get the fuck out and go praise whatever bullshit character you want to praise. You either bring evidence here, or get the fuck out, cultist. Got it?

[1714024610]

1714024610

[1714024610]

1714024610

[Horacewoodwood]

And who is the older faith in God or atheism? Maybe it's the actions of Satan, a refutation of the evidence that people have something to believe in. But just do not confuse everything with the fact that God has a physical body. This is not true. And you do not need to confuse people. If you want to refute or slander the faith, then look for other opportunities, and this is not that boring. All people believe and will believe in God.

That is completely wrong. First of all, not all people believe in the same deity and not all people believed in only one deity. Second, not all people believe in a God. Most sane people from civilised countries today do not even want to hear about such stories anymore and pay absolutely no interest to cults. Although religions will still live long enough from now on, they are on really thin ice. There will be a day in the future generations when religions will be what flat earth believers are today: a joke.  That's when they will be where they belong. Until then, we'll struggle with all the bullshit coming from them. Thank you.

[BADecker]

There is nothing but presumtions in your links, just as the presumption a God may or may not exist. Nothing there proves the existence of a God, it only gives a religious nonsensical interpretation of science. Therefore, since some intelligent people around already explained to you why they are bullshit, I have no reason to repeat it again. As I stated before, you are not able to properly understand reason or logic. That, or you are trolling. As for the ''orders' thing, you are completely mistaken. It's a pattern that you, followers, follow. Based on that pattern, I simply predicted what you were going to say next. I am as on topic as I could be, you are the one leading and I counter what you claim. Now, besides those bullshit links, your arguments are just modern religious indoctrinating crap, the same arguments you would get from any cultist who has no proof but has to convince people it's his way. As you can see, that's not going to work with me. Not the passive-aggresive attitude, not the mystical shit, not the 'humans can't understand God's way', nothing of this type. I expect you to prove the existence of a God. Your links have been disproven. If you do have something else, please, enlighten us. If not, please, don't resume yourself to that cultist monologue that I can hear at any corner of the street.

Almost everything in your posts is presumption, especially your spelling of the word "presumptions."

 

There is nothing wrong with your believing that science doesn't prove the existence of God. In fact, faith is healthy. It's your religion. I applaud you that you have religion. But, keep searching. You just might find a truthful religion if you do. You might even find the way to Heaven.

I don't 'believe' science doesn't prove the existence of a God, it's a fact it doesn't. I don't need to put my faith in it, you can clearly see it's like that. That's what facts are. Now, notice that I say 'the existence of A god', not your God. That is because you are not the only one to claim a God, there have been and there still are many more. Your God is flawed with simply the fact that the book on which your character's story is based on declares a certain age for life on earth. Science proves that the age on earth is way much older than your shit religion believes it is. From that point of view, your God is out of the picture and it's all just a hoax started by some fishermen and their talented friend. End of story. As for the proof of a God, there is no such thing. It's not that I believe there is no such thing, it's a fact there is no proof of a God. Will there ever be proof of a deity? We can presume nothing is impossible. But we can certainly say the possibility of it is extremely low, to the edge of impossible. As for you, cultist, you're still bringing no proof, no argument, all you do is keeping the cultist lines coming my way and trying to be ironic by correcting my spelling, without noticing it was a slip and the second 'presumption' was written as it should be. No more than a braindead religious follower.

Since you can't seem to step-by-step refute the logic in my links that prove God exists, you probably are simply attempting to believe that He doesn't exist, even though you say you know it.

Now, I could be wrong about you. You might actually have some step-by-step rebuttal. Nobody requires that you show it. So, as long as you can get by without showing it, you should be given the benefit of the doubt.

Most of the rest of what you say, above, is religious talk... maybe even religious doctrine. It's a little off topic, at least until you show the factual rebuttal of the proof that God exists. The proof:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

Come up with something new, cultist, and you shall have a decent answer. Just by ignoring my explanation of why there is no need for me to disprove them anymore you will not solve anything, you will just be a cultist. As for trying to imitate my attitude by saying 'Most of the rest of what you say, above, is religious talk' that is the attitude of someone who needs to win at any cost and tries anything possible to do so. The links you have posted are the same. I presume that is all you know and I think you are over, nothing left to say, nothing left to prove. I don't think you understand something: those links have been proven by other people on this thread to be bullshit. They did a very good job and there is no need for anyone else to explain that to you again, it would be a waste of time. Since you do not understand that, well... no need for me to explain how stupid you are, you are stupid enough to be a religious man. You've got one more try to come up with some new proof. After that, you are officialy donezo on this thread.

That's a nice bunch of blabber you said there. You still haven't rebutted the proof that God exists. As for blabber, even stats has you beat, right in the post above this one. It's kinda fun watching you twist yourself all out of shape to say nothing. You seem to be a professional troll, right?

Thanks for helping to maintain the proof God exists by not rebutting the proof.

That is also not going to work. In order for me to disprove the existence of a God, there must first be a proof. Your presumptions can not be considered proof by any sane human being, your interpretation of quantum mechanics makes less sense than the bible does and that brings me to the same conclusion that you are trying to hang on scientific facts trying to correlate them with the existence of a God. Specifically, you are doing what most of the religious creationists are doing in every debate ever: erronated interpretations of scientific theories, laws and facts that they do not properly understand. More exactly, blabber. What I said earlier was argumented and on point, you may not call that blabber since you ar enot in the position of doing that. You are still a cultist hanging on to his shit story and trying to bring his bullshit to people who understand what they are talking about. Also, the only troll here seems to be the one with short, off-topic answers. That's you, cultist. You're on thinner ice with every shit that you type here. Come with evidence or get the fuck out and go praise whatever bullshit character you want to praise. You either bring evidence here, or get the fuck out, cultist. Got it?

There isn't any argument, because you can't have argument between two different things. Your points are religious. Mine are scientific. No argument. Besides, I wouldn't be arguing. I would only be stating points.

Since you still haven't rebutted the proof that God exists...
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380,
... and by attempting to avoid rebutting (probably because you are not smart enough to rebut)...
... thanks for supporting the fact of God, even if it is from a standpoint of malicious opposition.

There isn't anything else anybody can do but know that God exists. So, you really don't get much credit for your support of Him. But you support Him just the same.

[BADecker]

And who is the older faith in God or atheism? Maybe it's the actions of Satan, a refutation of the evidence that people have something to believe in. But just do not confuse everything with the fact that God has a physical body. This is not true. And you do not need to confuse people. If you want to refute or slander the faith, then look for other opportunities, and this is not that boring. All people believe and will believe in God.

That is completely wrong. First of all, not all people believe in the same deity and not all people believed in only one deity. Second, not all people believe in a God. Most sane people from civilised countries today do not even want to hear about such stories anymore and pay absolutely no interest to cults. Although religions will still live long enough from now on, they are on really thin ice. There will be a day in the future generations when religions will be what flat earth believers are today: a joke.  That's when they will be where they belong. Until then, we'll struggle with all the bullshit coming from them. Thank you.

That is completely wrong. All people recognize that God exists. They know it in their hearts. The believing part comes from trying to understand things about Him that they do NOT know. Believing also comes from Him telling us things in His Word, the Bible, and the position of our acceptance of what He says.

There will be a day, probably in the very near future, when Jesus God will return to earth the same way He left and went into Heaven. Be glad you are on the ice. The heat of the lake of fire is a very hot heat. You won't like it at all.

BTW, since you are hung up on the topic of religion, get out of this thread that has a topic of showing the proof that God exists.

[alleybuzzy]

I don't think that there is a scientific proof that God exists. It is a far more knowledgeable and complex for the human to do so because we are not equipped to have supernatural powers that's why we couldn't find a scientific proof that it is true. Me as a Christian, relies on the bible alone. And also, it is contradicting for religion and science.

[Horacewoodwood]

There is nothing but presumtions in your links, just as the presumption a God may or may not exist. Nothing there proves the existence of a God, it only gives a religious nonsensical interpretation of science. Therefore, since some intelligent people around already explained to you why they are bullshit, I have no reason to repeat it again. As I stated before, you are not able to properly understand reason or logic. That, or you are trolling. As for the ''orders' thing, you are completely mistaken. It's a pattern that you, followers, follow. Based on that pattern, I simply predicted what you were going to say next. I am as on topic as I could be, you are the one leading and I counter what you claim. Now, besides those bullshit links, your arguments are just modern religious indoctrinating crap, the same arguments you would get from any cultist who has no proof but has to convince people it's his way. As you can see, that's not going to work with me. Not the passive-aggresive attitude, not the mystical shit, not the 'humans can't understand God's way', nothing of this type. I expect you to prove the existence of a God. Your links have been disproven. If you do have something else, please, enlighten us. If not, please, don't resume yourself to that cultist monologue that I can hear at any corner of the street.

Almost everything in your posts is presumption, especially your spelling of the word "presumptions."

 

There is nothing wrong with your believing that science doesn't prove the existence of God. In fact, faith is healthy. It's your religion. I applaud you that you have religion. But, keep searching. You just might find a truthful religion if you do. You might even find the way to Heaven.

I don't 'believe' science doesn't prove the existence of a God, it's a fact it doesn't. I don't need to put my faith in it, you can clearly see it's like that. That's what facts are. Now, notice that I say 'the existence of A god', not your God. That is because you are not the only one to claim a God, there have been and there still are many more. Your God is flawed with simply the fact that the book on which your character's story is based on declares a certain age for life on earth. Science proves that the age on earth is way much older than your shit religion believes it is. From that point of view, your God is out of the picture and it's all just a hoax started by some fishermen and their talented friend. End of story. As for the proof of a God, there is no such thing. It's not that I believe there is no such thing, it's a fact there is no proof of a God. Will there ever be proof of a deity? We can presume nothing is impossible. But we can certainly say the possibility of it is extremely low, to the edge of impossible. As for you, cultist, you're still bringing no proof, no argument, all you do is keeping the cultist lines coming my way and trying to be ironic by correcting my spelling, without noticing it was a slip and the second 'presumption' was written as it should be. No more than a braindead religious follower.

Since you can't seem to step-by-step refute the logic in my links that prove God exists, you probably are simply attempting to believe that He doesn't exist, even though you say you know it.

Now, I could be wrong about you. You might actually have some step-by-step rebuttal. Nobody requires that you show it. So, as long as you can get by without showing it, you should be given the benefit of the doubt.

Most of the rest of what you say, above, is religious talk... maybe even religious doctrine. It's a little off topic, at least until you show the factual rebuttal of the proof that God exists. The proof:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

Come up with something new, cultist, and you shall have a decent answer. Just by ignoring my explanation of why there is no need for me to disprove them anymore you will not solve anything, you will just be a cultist. As for trying to imitate my attitude by saying 'Most of the rest of what you say, above, is religious talk' that is the attitude of someone who needs to win at any cost and tries anything possible to do so. The links you have posted are the same. I presume that is all you know and I think you are over, nothing left to say, nothing left to prove. I don't think you understand something: those links have been proven by other people on this thread to be bullshit. They did a very good job and there is no need for anyone else to explain that to you again, it would be a waste of time. Since you do not understand that, well... no need for me to explain how stupid you are, you are stupid enough to be a religious man. You've got one more try to come up with some new proof. After that, you are officialy donezo on this thread.

That's a nice bunch of blabber you said there. You still haven't rebutted the proof that God exists. As for blabber, even stats has you beat, right in the post above this one. It's kinda fun watching you twist yourself all out of shape to say nothing. You seem to be a professional troll, right?

Thanks for helping to maintain the proof God exists by not rebutting the proof.

That is also not going to work. In order for me to disprove the existence of a God, there must first be a proof. Your presumptions can not be considered proof by any sane human being, your interpretation of quantum mechanics makes less sense than the bible does and that brings me to the same conclusion that you are trying to hang on scientific facts trying to correlate them with the existence of a God. Specifically, you are doing what most of the religious creationists are doing in every debate ever: erronated interpretations of scientific theories, laws and facts that they do not properly understand. More exactly, blabber. What I said earlier was argumented and on point, you may not call that blabber since you ar enot in the position of doing that. You are still a cultist hanging on to his shit story and trying to bring his bullshit to people who understand what they are talking about. Also, the only troll here seems to be the one with short, off-topic answers. That's you, cultist. You're on thinner ice with every shit that you type here. Come with evidence or get the fuck out and go praise whatever bullshit character you want to praise. You either bring evidence here, or get the fuck out, cultist. Got it?

There isn't any argument, because you can't have argument between two different things. Your points are religious. Mine are scientific. No argument. Besides, I wouldn't be arguing. I would only be stating points.

Since you still haven't rebutted the proof that God exists...
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380,
... and by attempting to avoid rebutting (probably because you are not smart enough to rebut)...
... thanks for supporting the fact of God, even if it is from a standpoint of malicious opposition.

There isn't anything else anybody can do but know that God exists. So, you really don't get much credit for your support of Him. But you support Him just the same.

That was your last chance. You are now considered nothing but a bullshit around here and I advise anyone to ignore you and your extremist points of view. cultists are not welcome. Your arguments are not scientific, they are merely retarded religious babble. Fuck off and ndver come back again, cultist. You are over. Next!

[Horacewoodwood]

And who is the older faith in God or atheism? Maybe it's the actions of Satan, a refutation of the evidence that people have something to believe in. But just do not confuse everything with the fact that God has a physical body. This is not true. And you do not need to confuse people. If you want to refute or slander the faith, then look for other opportunities, and this is not that boring. All people believe and will believe in God.

That is completely wrong. First of all, not all people believe in the same deity and not all people believed in only one deity. Second, not all people believe in a God. Most sane people from civilised countries today do not even want to hear about such stories anymore and pay absolutely no interest to cults. Although religions will still live long enough from now on, they are on really thin ice. There will be a day in the future generations when religions will be what flat earth believers are today: a joke.  That's when they will be where they belong. Until then, we'll struggle with all the bullshit coming from them. Thank you.

That is completely wrong. All people recognize that God exists. They know it in their hearts. The believing part comes from trying to understand things about Him that they do NOT know. Believing also comes from Him telling us things in His Word, the Bible, and the position of our acceptance of what He says.

There will be a day, probably in the very near future, when Jesus God will return to earth the same way He left and went into Heaven. Be glad you are on the ice. The heat of the lake of fire is a very hot heat. You won't like it at all.

BTW, since you are hung up on the topic of religion, get out of this thread that has a topic of showing the proof that God exists.

Fuck off, cultist. As a 'science' guy, claiming people know 'in their hearts' tells about how much you understand. Absolutely nothing. Fuck off and go live in a church, you are not welcome here.

[BADecker]

That was your last chance. You are now considered nothing but a bullshit around here and I advise anyone to ignore you and your extremist points of view. cultists are not welcome. Your arguments are not scientific, they are merely retarded religious babble. Fuck off and ndver come back again, cultist. You are over. Next!

Fuck off, cultist. As a 'science' guy, claiming people know 'in their hearts' tells about how much you understand. Absolutely nothing. Fuck off and go live in a church, you are not welcome here.

You still have some chances. As long as you are alive you have chances.

I know that understanding the proof that God exists is a little difficult. And when your religion says just the opposite, it can be a bit unnerving as well.

As far as knowing about science, I wonder if you really understand it? That's why I respond to your religious posts with religion as well as science. Perhaps you might understand religion since you post about it all the time. It might encourage you to understand science... understanding the one proves that you have the ability to understand.

When are you going to understand science... a little?

[qwik2learn]

Don't worry we'll keep BSDecker in check.  He cannot just bullshit here willy-nilly.

BufferOverflow, Moloch, stats, myself and many others have exposed the obvious holes in his "proofs" on many other threads
that he keeps spamming.  I think he works on commission

The guy is in the cult, but his problem is that he is not the sharpest tool in the shed so it is hard for him to understand his predicament.

Why are you focusing only on BADecker? Did anyone ever point out the obvious holes in the 101 proofs from the OP, for example? And what about my proofs? It seems as though many proofs in this thread are simply dismissed without further consideration.

Kindly point out the obvious holes in the proofs that I have provided?

1) Chris Carter summarizes "the evidence that provides a prima facie case for survival [and] demonstrates that alternative explanations, to the extent that they are testable, have been proven false".
2) "the brain is more likely to transmit consciousness than it is to produce consciousness because the transmission hypothesis explains more facts than the production hypothesis"
3) many of the greatest scientific minds believe... that the scientific evidence is best explained by the existence of an intelligent designer of the universe.

Many of the smartest minds were able to comprehend the evidence. Religion came about as a way of explaining evidence that supports survival; this is evidence which comes from many and varying classes of phenomena.

Eminent researchers who recognized the truth about mind were many, often they conducted their own experiments and were critical of Darwinian theory:
https://sites.google.com/site/chs4o8pt/eminent_researchers

Pseudo-skeptics only offer pseudo-scientific excuses for refusing to accept an otherwise straightforward inference from the evidence. Many skeptical arguments against the survival theory are actually arguments from pseudo-skeptics who often think they have no burden of proof. Such arguments are often based on scientism with assumptions that survival is impossible even though survival has not been ruled out.

Why do atheists like to ignore those physical manifestations that suggest the survival of the personality? There are many intriguing examples.

[qwik2learn]

BADecker, why are you in denial about the true origin of Christianity? These scholars are convinced that Christianity originated with Paul, not Jesus!

"An open-minded reader/juror will come to the conclusion that [Paul] is guilty of inventing a new religion, illegitimately appropriating Jesus."

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007Q1H4EG#productDescription_secondary_view_div_1492158700082

[BADecker]

BADecker, why are you in denial about the true origin of Christianity? These scholars are convinced that Christianity originated with Paul, not Jesus!

"An open-minded reader/juror will come to the conclusion that [Paul] is guilty of inventing a new religion, illegitimately appropriating Jesus."

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B007Q1H4EG#productDescription_secondary_view_div_1492158700082

When you compare Old Testament Isaiah in the Dead Sea Scrolls, with the hand-written copies of Isaiah made two thousand years (and more) later, you will find that the differences are few and unimportant. The important points about this have to do with the fastidiousness of the Hebrew people, and the guidance of God.

Although the Jewish (Hebrew) leaders of Jesus time rejected Jesus for the nation of Israel, many of them became followers of Christianity. It is their exacting care that we see in the writings of the New Testament, that has kept the N.T. alive from the time of Jesus Christ. God, Himself, directed this to happen, just as He direct the maintaining of the O.T. as seen in Isaiah.

Many Bible scholars understand this. An open-minded scholar will keep this in mind when he is studying factual and truthful the New Testament is.

[qwik2learn]

An open mind is not suitable if it leads you to assume honesty in all of the texts. Instead, realize that these texts were written by men and many of them. For example one story in the OT has GOD commanding Abraham to kill Isaac, but how could anyone make sense of GOD commanding the torture of a child? Strangely, this story is used to suggest an analogy to the alleged sacrifice of Jesus, but I believe there is no reason to think that Jesus did not resist his capture! In any case I am not going to follow the fake apostle Paul because his teaching is not the one that Jesus gave. In my opinion, the explanation of these events in Phoenix Journal #2 seems far more plausible than any account of blood sacrifice demanded by GOD.
http://www.phoenixsourcedistributors.com/html/j002/

[qwik2learn]

An open mind is not suitable if it leads you to assume honesty in all of the texts. Instead, realize that these texts were written by men and many of them. For example one story in the OT has GOD commanding Abraham to kill Isaac, but how could anyone make sense of GOD commanding the torture of a child? Strangely, this story is used to suggest an analogy to the alleged sacrifice of Jesus, but I believe there is no reason to think that Jesus did not resist his capture! In any case I am not going to follow the fake apostle Paul because his teaching is not the one that Jesus gave. In my opinion, the explanation of these events in Phoenix Journal #2 seems far more plausible than any account of blood sacrifice demanded by GOD.

As your God to post here so that we can discuss this with him (or her).

Why would the messengers of GOD be here? Not much of an audience here at all! What about the content published in both the Phoenix Journals and the CONTACT newspaper?? I do not wish to make or be part of some kind of a “cult of Doris Ekker” but the fact is that this Grandmother managed to write a 200-page book EVERY 3 WEEKS FOR YEARS, hundreds of books in total.  How was this prodigious output, covering such a wide range of topics, possible?  Please do not be too quick to reject the truthful answer, that she scribed DIRECTLY for our Heavenly Father, exactly as stated.  There probably has NEVER been a scribe so well connected — including all of the great ones acknowledged in all of the holy books.

[qwik2learn]

An open mind is not suitable if it leads you to assume honesty in all of the texts. Instead, realize that these texts were written by men and many of them. For example one story in the OT has GOD commanding Abraham to kill Isaac, but how could anyone make sense of GOD commanding the torture of a child? Strangely, this story is used to suggest an analogy to the alleged sacrifice of Jesus, but I believe there is no reason to think that Jesus did not resist his capture! In any case I am not going to follow the fake apostle Paul because his teaching is not the one that Jesus gave. In my opinion, the explanation of these events in Phoenix Journal #2 seems far more plausible than any account of blood sacrifice demanded by GOD.

As your God to post here so that we can discuss this with him (or her).

By observation of phenomena you can infer the existence of a thing or being without further confirmation. The content-source problem is a very important concept in evaluating such evidence.

[BADecker]

An open mind is not suitable if it leads you to assume honesty in all of the texts. Instead, realize that these texts were written by men and many of them. For example one story in the OT has GOD commanding Abraham to kill Isaac, but how could anyone make sense of GOD commanding the torture of a child? Strangely, this story is used to suggest an analogy to the alleged sacrifice of Jesus, but I believe there is no reason to think that Jesus did not resist his capture! In any case I am not going to follow the fake apostle Paul because his teaching is not the one that Jesus gave. In my opinion, the explanation of these events in Phoenix Journal #2 seems far more plausible than any account of blood sacrifice demanded by GOD.
http://www.phoenixsourcedistributors.com/html/j002/

Genesis 22:12, God speaking to Abraham:

“Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.”

Notice the immediate reason why God told Abraham to sacrifice his son? It was a test of Abraham's faith.

God knows everything. Yet there is an aspect of a person's faith that He has hidden from Himself. Part of the reason He has done this is for the joy that He gets when people like Abraham make it through the test with flying colors.

[qwik2learn]

I hope that nobody thinks that terrorizing a child would be worth it!

[BADecker]

I hope that nobody thinks that terrorizing a child would be worth it!

I agree. We should explain to our kids, at an early age, that death at any time from many causes is possible... so that they are prepared.

[qwik2learn]

GOD simply will not terrorize a child and there are many more examples of problems in the Bible on the evilbible website. Zuesse even finds a connection between Paul and the early writings of Hitler. I hope you admit that raising a knife to kill an innocent child is totally immoral and shocking; just imagine being in that position of terror and betrayal, total absence of love! How could this be the test of our love for GOD? Pardon my language but this story sounds totally Satanic to me, a ritual where the key emotional element is fear, and a violent form of mental shock (abuse) is inflicted upon a child. If this story happened today we would call it religious ritual abuse (probably Satanic). The groundbreaking research of Zuesse points out huge problems with the NT, there has obviously been a huge cover-up of the true teachings of Jesus.

[qwik2learn]

An open mind is not suitable if it leads you to assume honesty in all of the texts. Instead, realize that these texts were written by men and many of them. For example one story in the OT has GOD commanding Abraham to kill Isaac, but how could anyone make sense of GOD commanding the torture of a child? Strangely, this story is used to suggest an analogy to the alleged sacrifice of Jesus, but I believe there is no reason to think that Jesus did not resist his capture! In any case I am not going to follow the fake apostle Paul because his teaching is not the one that Jesus gave. In my opinion, the explanation of these events in Phoenix Journal #2 seems far more plausible than any account of blood sacrifice demanded by GOD.

As your God to post here so that we can discuss this with him (or her).

By observation of phenomena you can infer the existence of a thing or being without further confirmation. The content-source problem is a very important concept in evaluating such evidence.

Knowledge only requires a source that is trusted, it does not require firsthand verification. For example, Doyle, creator of Sherlock Holmes, claims that he has received definitive firsthand proof of after-death communications from dead relatives. Other famous skeptics like Anthony Flew became convinced of a creator by the evidence of biology and physics.

[Horacewoodwood]

An open mind is not suitable if it leads you to assume honesty in all of the texts. Instead, realize that these texts were written by men and many of them. For example one story in the OT has GOD commanding Abraham to kill Isaac, but how could anyone make sense of GOD commanding the torture of a child? Strangely, this story is used to suggest an analogy to the alleged sacrifice of Jesus, but I believe there is no reason to think that Jesus did not resist his capture! In any case I am not going to follow the fake apostle Paul because his teaching is not the one that Jesus gave. In my opinion, the explanation of these events in Phoenix Journal #2 seems far more plausible than any account of blood sacrifice demanded by GOD.

As your God to post here so that we can discuss this with him (or her).

By observation of phenomena you can infer the existence of a thing or being without further confirmation. The content-source problem is a very important concept in evaluating such evidence.

Knowledge only requires a source that is trusted, it does not require firsthand verification. For example, Doyle, creator of Sherlock Holmes, claims that he has received definitive firsthand proof of after-death communications from dead relatives. Other famous skeptics like Anthony Flew became convinced of a creator by the evidence of biology and physics.

What evidence of biology and physics? Until now, what I've seen and heard from religious people that try to use science as a helping tool for their cult is this: they take laws, theories, facts from science and they say that those could not happen without a God. Basically, they are not proving anything and they are also asking for arguments from people who contradict them. Take a look at Badecker, who came up with a bunch of copy paste links in which he does exactly what I told you about. But let's do something else, let's go to the roots of Christianity. By the way, that example with Abraham's child is nothing compared to God sending two bears to kill 40 kids for laughing at a bald man or God randomly wrestling a guy, cheating and still losing. But let's give it a try with Jesus. If Jesus is God, why did he not prove he was God?

P.S. Badecker, passive-agressive comments won't prove anything, you are still a dirty, shameless, worthles cultist. I advise everyone to ignore Badecker since he is delusional.