No, it's not. I think I understand Him better than those who do believe in him, because I understand that he is nothing but a human construct because we are afraid of dying and of being unloved. And because we cannot concieve the idea that this is all pointless.
So you are saying the aspect of God only seperates between the believers and unbelievers. I am born a christian and I went to church for a decade only to be an unbeliever for 2 years until recently. What you are saying is dangerous because you cannot simply say such things. Have you talked to a pastor before?
don't think it's uniform, but the majority of Christians will tell you that they know that God loves them, because it says so in the Bible. And they know the Bible is true because it is the word of God. Can you not see the flaw in that logic?
Apart from being perfect, he has created a feeling of love in us. He gave us life and taught us to love. Who can love us, better than anybody else? God created people, and yet people despise him. In a way, we are like A.I gone bad. If A.I had free will and consciousness, the outcome would be pretty negative. Even machines cant be perfect. The fact that I wrote that Bible has been fully passed down for these few milleniums show that the Bible has stayed strong and was never lost despite many powerful people who tried to destroy it. This is good enough to say that something up there does not want the Bible to be destroyed.
So Mason Verger throwing men to be eaten alive by the pigs didn't kill them? It was the pigs that did the killing, and Verger bears none of the culpability? I don't see your logic. Either they were not born mortal and would have died anyway, or God caused them to die. Either they would have suffered anyway, or God caused them to suffer.
I don't see your point either. You don't see that God didn't cause their suffering, a ton of explanation wouldn't help. I would repeat it one more time, THEY (Adam and Eve), caused their own suffering for EATING the FRUIT, DESPITE a STRICT WARNING FROM GOD. SO, GOD did not cause them to SUFFER or DIE.
Ever heard of Northern Ireland? It happens on an almost daily basis.
Do you see their purpose to fight? Do they fight in the name of Jesus, saying that they are fighting for their religion, or rather political purposes? People fight, people have war not because they want to. But it's only human nature to be greedy and selfish. You don't see bishops or pastors telling people to fight them because their religion is being insulted.
Ever heard of Northern Ireland? It happens on an almost daily basis.
Technically I am, but in the case of the groups of religion, I prefer to be called a Christian because I believe in God. Period. No point debating on this.
In which case you cannot dogmatically stand by your position that there is a God because you can't prove that, either.
Yes. You are right. I cannot prove it. But in which case, would which position stand stronger? The possibility of a higher being in existence is more likely than none. I don't see why millions can believe in ET's and NOT God, simply because their technology is seemingly advanced just because they have 'spaceships'?
Experiences are not proof. Ask the police how reliable eyewitness testimony is. Ask a mentallist. and theories are exactly that, theories, not proof.
If you stand by an atheist position, so tell me what proof is there that there is NO God at all? Isn't it also a theory?
Well, thank you for telling me what I think. You are wrong.
So tell me, what do you think is right?
They do if you read them.
Frankly there is nothing debatable or to think about. I just have to simply quote and reply by answering in what I think, that's it. It doesn't give me the idea of debate.
ut we are discussing what scripture says about the story of the Garden Of Eden. You cannot claim that the story says something other than what it says and then offer up something that it doesn't say at all as proof that it actually says something different.
You only seem to emphasize that first part of what I said. Have you read the later parts? They were backed up by the Scriptures.
Then again, who said it DID?
I don't know. I'm not the Serpent. I don't pretend to know everybody's motives for anything. Why did Bud Dwyer shoot himself at a press conference? I don't know. And neither do you.
That's the logic, you don't know. So you cannot simply say the serpent did this and that. You didn't know what the serpent did, so how do you know if the serpent is telling the truth?
We're talking about the same entity that rebelled against God and started a war in heaven, was cast out and set to rule over the domain of Hell. Why did he do that?
In the first place, Lucifer was the most beautiful creation of God. He thought he could overpower GOd, he thought he could replace God. He never expected the consequences. Do you see people in war expecting to lose, do you see Hitler planning to lose? Correction, Satan does not rule over Hell. In fact he is imprisoned there, he doesn't reside in there. Satan is the prince of the Air and the Earth.
That my mother is an unnecessarily cruel and vengeful woman.
And would that be what you are trying to apply to God too?
Okay, but it still dopesn't make sense. Why would it not be ethical for a skeptic to point out flaws he sees in the Bible? Why would it not be ethical for a skeptic to be skeptic about the Bible? In fact, what have ethics got to do with it at all?
What I'm trying to say that, one does not just pick any contradiction without trying to interpret the several meanings it may impose. If you plan to pick one out and say it's wrong, what is there to refute it? Is it because it sounds wrong and evil? That is not ethical.
Well, my hypothesis is that God doesn't exist.
By saying that, you have argued over several things about God which means God could exist. That is not the right answer.
Can you quote me the scripture where the Serpent tells the lie and God tells the truth about the tree, please? I've quoted you the scripture where God lies and the Serpent tells the truth.
Genesis 3 verse 1: Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made.
The serpent is not satan.
Genesis 3 verse 4: You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman.
Although Adam and lived close to a thousand years, however they did die right? The serpent said they would not SURELY die. This was a lie to Eve because she expected to be like God and immortal.
Genesis 3 verse 5: For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
Yes. Although their eyes were opened and they knew Good and Evil. Apart from that, they were definitely NOT like God.
Genesis 3 verse 13: The serpent deceived me, and I ate
God had a reason for forbidding them to eat the tree and for a very good reason too. The serpent however, deceived them to eat the fruit despite the warning from God.
Gensis 3 verse 14: Because you have done this
"This" implies the lie that deceived Eve.
But it seems he will take pleasure in randomly making your life miserable for a bet.
He doesn't do that. Satan is the one that makes our lives miserable.
If it is by "experiences and other theories" then they CANNOT prove it. You cannot prove to me there is a God because you had an experience.
Also, I read an interesting article (in either Time or Mcleans, I can't remember which) on how archeologists believe much of the Old Testament did not happen. They believe that Exodus did not in fact happen. There is no archeological evidence of a large mass of people crossing the desert and leaving Eqypt in this time, nor are there any recorded historical records of this happening. This is significant because the Egyptians kept very accurate records of border events in this time.
Also, there is historically no kings named Solomon or David that ruled any significant kingdom in this era. There was more but I cannot remember it all, I will try to find the magazine since I don't think that I threw it out.
What I am trying to say is that these stories are obviously heavily distorted over time or plain false, using any of it to argue one way or the other appears pointless.
Yes. True. Not everything from the Bible has been uncovered. But there is proof of a world flood and the footprints of man and dinosaurs match the same age they were. There are as many things that say that the Bible speaks the truth then what is false.
Interesting
Apart from the fact that Time did not back up its claims to any extent, fair enough, so does this webpage.
