Are Exorcisms and Demons Real?

[kal-el]

"God" doesn't condemn people for that.

For what lying? Sure he does, he hates blasphemy:

Proverbs 6:16-19
There are six things the lord hates, seven that are detestable to him:haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies, and a man who stirs up dissention among brothers.

That's what the whole Jesus thing was about....forgiveness.

Ha. Your dead carpenter was quite the dishonest person. For instance, he said "Anything that you ask for in prayer, it shall be given to you." When is the last time you moved a mountain?

Matthew 21:21
Jesus replied," I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, "Go, throw yourself into the sea" and it will be done. "If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer."

It is no longer a "necessity" to sacrifice a lamb or something for forgiveness of sins. This was "Old Testament." In the "New Testament," Jesus was the sacrificial lamb for all of man kind and now one only must ask for forgiveness and believe.

Let me get this right, somehow the death of an innocent carpenter pays for other people's sins. How does that work? It's a bit like saying I will forgive my friend for something, but first I must kill my dog, it's stupid. It seems you are just parroting the same old **** you were told to believe.:lol:

It's in the Bible.

Ahh, yes, as is having sex slaves, donkey's that can talk, stoning people, lies, and rape.

 

[MSgt]

The bolded statement is absolutely false. The practice of confessing your sins is taken directly from the Bible and has nothing to do with controlling the people.



It is believed that the priest, by dedicating his life to the work of God, is the perfect vessel for confession. His divine inspired wisdom and study of the faith gives him insight into what absolution is necessary and he is protected from corruption when hearing the sins of others. Plus, it affords a protection and security to the confessor because there is a seal on the confession and the priest cannot tell what was discussed in confession without being defrocked.

It still comes down to one thing.....will God forgive you of your sins if you do not "Confess" to a priest? If so, the act of "confessing" is a hold over passed down tradition of early catholicism.

 

[MSgt]

For what lying? Sure he does, he hates blasphemy:






Ha. Your dead carpenter was quite the dishonest person. For instance, he said "Anything that you ask for in prayer, it shall be given to you." When is the last time you moved a mountain?






Let me get this right, somehow the death of an innocent carpenter pays for other people's sins. How does that work? It's a bit like saying I will forgive my friend for something, but first I must kill my dog, it's stupid. It seems you are just parroting the same old **** you were told to believe.:lol:



Ahh, yes, as is having sex slaves, donkey's that can talk, stoning people, lies, and rape.

You're holding "Old Testament" on the same level of "New Testament." The New Testament dispelled with the passed down barbaric traditions of the past.

The "Carpenter" was supposed to be the Son of God or God in man form. The damned were condemned to hell to party with Satan since Adam and Eve. However, the "Carpenter" was sacrificed and the damned were no longer doomed to be condemned to hell. Like I said, it was about forgiveness.
Jesus forgave a whore and a murderer. The rest of what your typed was mere self assurance to dis-belief.

Your soul, not mine.:shrug:

 

[George_Washington]

:rofl Yea, the bible god is a lying pimp, who has no problem with men raping women, soliders dashing children to pieces, and destroying anything that refuses to kiss his ass. But I will give him this, he lays all his cards on the table- he let's us know exactly what he's about.

lol You know, Kal El, one thing I've never understood about atheists is that they spend an awfully lot of time trying to disprove the Bible and the Christian faith. If you are so secure in your beliefs, why do you even care to bash or disprove Christians? You constantly try to prove contradictions in the Bible. Why is that? You don't see me going around trying to disprove what atheists say. I couldn't really care, anyway. I'm secure in my beliefs. It seems, however, that your not to sure of yourself. This is obvious by the way you put that picture of Jesus in your avatar. Do you see me putting a satirical picture of an atheist in my avatar? You sound insecure if you ask me.

 

[George_Washington]

If God is the type of "person" that condemns people to hell for saying "jesus christ" I don't want to go to heaven. Dude sounds like a prick.

You won't go to hell just for saying, "Jesus Christ," Kelzie.

If you love God or anyone for that matter, why would you want to use their name in vain? If you love your mother, would you go around throwing out her name in a derogatory manner? Perhaps God has feelings, too, and wants us to show him some respect. What is wrong with that, Kelzie? Nothing that I can see.

 

[kal-el]

You're holding "Old Testament" on the same level of "New Testament." The New Testament dispelled with the passed down barbaric traditions of the past.

If it weren't for the OT, the NT would be totally irrelevant, not to mention, non-existent.

The "Carpenter" was supposed to be the Son of God or God in man form. The damned were condemned to hell to party with Satan since Adam and Eve. However, the "Carpenter" was sacrificed and the damned were no longer doomed to be condemned to hell. Like I said, it was about forgiveness.
Jesus forgave a whore and a murderer. The rest of what your typed was mere self assurance to dis-belief.

If he is a omnibenevolent god, why would he demand numerous blood sacrifices throughout the bible, not to mention, sending his only son to be tortured and strung on a cross, knowing full well what was going to happen to him, with the power to stop it. Sounds like a guy I don't care to worship.

Your soul, not mine.:shrug:

Translation: Your genetic code, not mine.:shrug:

 

[kal-el]

lol You know, Kal El, one thing I've never understood about atheists is that they spend an awfully lot of time trying to disprove the Bible and the Christian faith.

Hey, I'm trying to open people's minds, give them freedom of thought. As atheism is a clear alternative to superstition.

If you are so secure in your beliefs, why do you even care to bash or disprove Christians?

Well, I'm certainly not going to idoly stand by, while Christians spout their wild, unfounded claims, and not challenge them.

You constantly try to prove contradictions in the Bible. Why is that? You don't see me going around trying to disprove what atheists say.

Wow, you Christians seem like seasoned judgementals. All the fundie Christians I ran into on this forum blatanly disregard their savior's teachings, and judge away. Actually, you do try and disprove what I say, and quite often at that. So you're not being completely honest there. And as for contradictions in the bible, I am showing that it's not "infallible" after all.

I couldn't really care, anyway. I'm secure in my beliefs.

Hooray for you. Stay buried in your religious cacoon, if you so choose.

It seems, however, that your not to sure of yourself. This is obvious by the way you put that picture of Jesus in your avatar. Do you see me putting a satirical picture of an atheist in my avatar? You sound insecure if you ask me.

Dude, the only thing I believe is that there is no god. I believe that there was a fellow named Jesus, but that he was misunderstood in his time, and not divine. That paragraph shows everyone how quick Christians are to rush to judgement. And Jesus was being dishonest, he himself (2) times, judged people, and he himself said you should not judge. Can you smell the hypocracy?

 

[MSgt]

If it weren't for the OT, the NT would be totally irrelevant, not to mention, non-existent.

What's your point? Your were still attempting to hold "Old Testament" barbarisms to "New Testament" revisions.

If he is a omnibenevolent god, why would he demand numerous blood sacrifices throughout the bible, not to mention, sending his only son to be tortured and strung on a cross, knowing full well what was going to happen to him, with the power to stop it. Sounds like a guy I don't care to worship.

You're assuming that your brain would be on the same level as a deity by arguing the absence of perfect understanding. It's called free will. If the guy is real, it really doesn't matter what you care to worship does it? There are two choices - Heaven or Hell.....if it's real.



Genesis 3:19
By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return.

Ha! Do you even know what that means? This is the seperation between body and soul..er...I mean genetics.

 

[kal-el]

You won't go to hell just for saying, "Jesus Christ," Kelzie.

Actually, If you believe that Jesus was god in human form, according to the 3rd commandment, you will:

You shall not misuse the name of the lord your god...

"I did not come to abolish the law, but to fullfill it."-Jesus.

And, according to Jesus, if you call someone a "fool" you're going to hell:

Matthew 5:22
"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgement. Again, anyone who says to his brother, Raca, is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, "You fool" will be in danger of the fire of hell."

And Jesus says, if a women is raped, she must marry her raper. Let me ask any women here, would you marry a guy who raped you?

If you love God or anyone for that matter, why would you want to use their name in vain?

Dude, it is a simple figure of speech, everyone at one time said, "Oh my god". It doesn't mean they don't love this god fellow, or anything stupid like that.

If you love your mother, would you go around throwing out her name in a derogatory manner?

Probably not, but this god fellow favors men over women. Why the hell did he create Adam first? And if a women damages a man's testicle's her hand must be cutt off. Sounds like a loving god to me.:lol:

Perhaps God has feelings, too,

Yes, and he does, he is shown as a emotional, egotistical, malevolent, killer diety.:lol:

and wants us to show him some respect.

You're not kidding. He must have an ego problem? A perfect entity demands endless worship by fallible humans.

What is wrong with that, Kelzie? Nothing that I can see.

I see wrong everywhere. Do you want to worship such a sadistic, bloodthirsty entity?

 

[kal-el]

What's your point? Your were still attempting to hold "Old Testament" barbarisms to "New Testament" revisions.

Uhh, according to your dead carpenter, the OT laws still stand.

Matthew 5:17
Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fullfill them.

The Law and the Prophets is simply what early theologians at that time referred to the bible as. So, when Jesus saying that the OT laws still stand, I guess it's ok to stone people, commit rape, beat your wives, murder, lie, and numerous other horrors.

You're assuming that your brain would be on the same level as a deity by arguing the absence of perfect understanding.

Well it would, after all, he made us "in his image."

It's called free will.

Hahaha. So I guess this god fellow wants us to have free will? And free will demands the existence of human evil. And, this guy is the cause of it.

If the guy is real, it really doesn't matter what you care to worship does it?

If he comes down from the sky fortress, and performs some huge miracle, I'll worship him too. But until then, he's better left in some's imaginations.

There are two choices - Heaven or Hell.....if it's real.

What about a 3rd option?

Genesis 3:19
By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return.

Ha! Do you even know what that means? This is the seperation between body and soul..er...I mean genetics.

Uhh, it doesn't mention "soul" at all. God cleary states that we were taken from dust, and after we die, to dust we will return. How hard is that to comprehend?

 

[MSgt]

Actually, If you believe that Jesus was god in human form, according to the 3rd commandment, you will:



"I did not come to abolish the law, but to fullfill it."-Jesus.

And, according to Jesus, if you call someone a "fool" you're going to hell:



And Jesus says, if a women is raped, she must marry her raper. Let me ask any women here, would you marry a guy who raped you?



Dude, it is a simple figure of speech, everyone at one time said, "Oh my god". It doesn't mean they don't love this god fellow, or anything stupid like that.



Probably not, but this god fellow favors men over women. Why the hell did he create Adam first? And if a women damages a man's testicle's her hand must be cutt off. Sounds like a loving god to me.:lol:



Yes, and he does, he is shown as a emotional, egotistical, malevolent, killer diety.:lol:



You're not kidding. He must have an ego problem? A perfect entity demands endless worship by fallible humans.



I see wrong everywhere. Do you want to worship such a sadistic, bloodthirsty entity?

You have a lot of misinterpretation in your doctrine. It appears like it is of design rather than from study. ...

Matthew 5:22 - This is a verse teaching against anger. It was also a verse surrounded by other verses. It was in direct reference to the Pharisees and the quality of their goodness to be higher. Jesus viewed them as lawful and religious vice spiritual. Jesus was speaking on a better world for his people than what their rulers were offering.

Also, there is no verse that where Jesus tells a rape victim to marry her rapist.

Again....if it's real, it's not a matter of what you want. There is only two choices.

 

[MSgt]

Uhh, according to your dead carpenter, the OT laws still stand.



The Law and the Prophets is simply what early theologians at that time referred to the bible as. So, when Jesus saying that the OT laws still stand, I guess it's ok to stone people, commit rape, beat your wives, murder, lie, and numerous other horrors.





Well it would, after all, he made us "in his image."



Hahaha. So I guess this god fellow wants us to have free will? And free will demands the existence of human evil. And, this guy is the cause of it.



If he comes down from the sky fortress, and performs some huge miracle, I'll worship him too. But until then, he's better left in some's imaginations.



What about a 3rd option?




Uhh, it doesn't mention "soul" at all. God cleary states that we were taken from dust, and after we die, to dust we will return. How hard is that to comprehend?

Again....you are taking specific pieces of scripture and taking them out of context and configuring them to your needs. It is by design. It appears like you have a little "cheat sheet" of scriptures to wage battle on Christians. That insecure? The passed down barbaric traditions of the "Old Testament" hold no weight anymore. This is what the "New Testament" was about. This does not mean that we should not take from lessons of the "Old Testament" or abide by specific laws that were carried over. This is where Christianity and the Bible has changed to suit the needs of a progressive society.

Free will means that we are free to exercise our minds as we see fit. The fitness of how we keep it determines our destinies in the after life. If men decide to turn on his fellow man and takes on an evil presence then it is up to good men to strike him down.

There is a seperation between body and soul. Dust is your body. This is poetic verse and it is surrounded by other verses. The Bible is full of this as was the era from when it was written. But, if bashing verses for its verbatim words makes you feel suggly safe, so be it. Politicians do the same thing when picking apart an opponents speech. They disregard the speech and pick out select sentences to mold inot something else. You must have had a hard time interpreting Shakespeare.

 

[kal-el]

You have a lot of misinterpretation in your doctrine. It appears like it is of design rather than from study. ...

How can you misinterpret something that is infallible? Unless, of course, you're admitting that the bible isn't infallible?

Matthew 5:22 - This is a verse teaching against anger. It was also a verse surrounded by other verses. It was in direct reference to the Pharisees and the quality of their goodness to be higher. Jesus viewed them as lawful and religious vice spiritual. Jesus was speaking on a better world for his people than what their rulers were offering.

It was included in his famous "sermon on the mount", and it says nothing about that it was referencing the Pharisees. "Anyone that is angry with his brother" Does that sound like he was referencing the Pharisees? You are making assertions that aren't supported by scripture, therefore are guilty of adding to this fellow's words:

Proverbs 30:5-6
Every word of god is flawless, he is a shield to thos who take refuge in him. Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.

Also, there is no verse that where Jesus tells a rape victim to marry her rapist.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29
If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father 50 sheckels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

And according to Jesus, this law still stands:

Matthew 5:17
Do not think that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets, I have not come to abolish them, but to fullfill them.

Again....if it's real, it's not a matter of what you want. There is only two choices.

Uhh, I don't accept that a bloodthirsty, egotistical, idiotic entity, decides who goes where as he sees fit. For god sakes, Hitler believed in god, so I guess he's in heaven, and Buddha didn't, so I guess he's burning in hell?

 

[alphieb]

I don't buy that $hit for one second.

 

[kal-el]

Again....you are taking specific pieces of scripture and taking them out of context and configuring them to your needs. It is by design.

Once again, it is impossible to take something infallible out of context. If it is infallible, it is beyond capacity of a fallible human to take it out of context. By you claiming that I'm taking verses out of context, you're conceding that the bible is infallible.

It appears like you have a little "cheat sheet" of scriptures to wage battle on Christians. That insecure?

Uhh, if the bible is a "cheat sheet", I am guilty of what you say.

The passed down barbaric traditions of the "Old Testament" hold no weight anymore.

Not according to Jesus, you wouldn't want to argue with Jesus, would you?

This is what the "New Testament" was about.

Actually, the NT was basically about turning the world upside down.

This does not mean that we should not take from lessons of the "Old Testament" or abide by specific laws that were carried over.

Once again, arguing with Jesus. Did he not say that he came not to abolish the laws, but to fullfill them? Why do you keep on dancing around that point? He did not say, "don't abide by the OT laws, for they are barbaric".

Free will means that we are free to exercise our minds as we see fit. The fitness of how we keep it determines our destinies in the after life. If men decide to turn on his fellow man and takes on an evil presence then it is up to good men to strike him down.

Isn't this guy a sadistic fellow then? If he gives us free will, he creates evil, and he knows beforehand if we ultimately choose it, but does nothing to prevent it. Why would a perfect, loving god desire free will to exist, when it is the cause of human evil?

There is a seperation between body and soul.

Utterly opinionated, first offer prove that humans have a unique soul.

Dust is your body.

Yup.

This is poetic verse and it is surrounded by other verses.

Your point being?

The Bible is full of this as was the era from when it was written. But, if bashing verses for its verbatim words makes you feel suggly safe, so be it. Politicians do the same thing when picking apart an opponents speech. They disregard the speech and pick out select sentences to mold inot something else. You must have had a hard time interpreting Shakespeare.

You're semantic gymnastics are not impressive.

 

[MSgt]

How can you misinterpret something that is infallible? Unless, of course, you're admitting that the bible isn't infallible?

What is infallable is your designed misinterpretations. Why do you like to try tp trip up Christian beliefs? Oh yes.......the "hypocrit" aspect. Those darned Christians...striving to be perfect but failing like the rest of us.:roll:

Uhh, I don't accept that a bloodthirsty, egotistical, idiotic entity, decides who goes where as he sees fit. For god sakes, Hitler believed in god, so I guess he's in heaven, and Buddha didn't, so I guess he's burning in hell?

Pathetic. You don't accept that a God can't do what he wants?

A serial killer can murder 200 people and claim that he believes in God. But if his heart is evil and his mind is twisted, he cannot believe in God. Who am I to say where Hitler or Buddha is?

 

[MSgt]

Once again, it is impossible to take something infallible out of context. If it is infallible, it is beyond capacity of a fallible human to take it out of context. By you claiming that I'm taking verses out of context, you're conceding that the bible is infallible.

Conceding? Like I said, "your soul not mine." What do I care of your determinations.

Not according to Jesus, you wouldn't want to argue with Jesus, would you?

I'm not arguing with anyone. I've read the Bible and I choose not to isolate versus from the full message. This would be your argument.

Once again, arguing with Jesus. Did he not say that he came not to abolish the laws, but to fullfill them? Why do you keep on dancing around that point? He did not say, "don't abide by the OT laws, for they are barbaric".

Once again, taking a scripture and seperating it from the message.

Isn't this guy a sadistic fellow then? If he gives us free will, he creates evil, and he knows beforehand if we ultimately choose it, but does nothing to prevent it. Why would a perfect, loving god desire free will to exist, when it is the cause of human evil?

You're never going to understand it, so why try? If you succeed, you will be the first. And by the way, God has been described in the Bible as much more than just "loving." But, by doing so, it enables you to keep in consistency with picking selectively what you need to bash.

Utterly opinionated, first offer prove that humans have a unique soul.

Prove they don't.

You're semantic gymnastics are not impressive.

Were my goal to "impress" you I would care about the discussion.:roll:

 

[kal-el]

What is infallable is your designed misinterpretations.

Wow, that's the first time I heard that I'm infallible. Thanks for the compliment.:lol:

Why do you like to try tp trip up Christian beliefs?

Because once one makes the claim that god exists, they are obligated to prove it; it's a statement about reality. Like when someone would say "the earth is flat" that's a stement about reality, so they are obligated to prove it.

Oh yes.......the "hypocrit" aspect. Those darned Christians...striving to be perfect but failing like the rest of us.:roll:

Of course Christians aren't perfect. Are they able to cast out demons, heal the sick, are they immune to deadly poisons? Do they shoot people who work on the Sabbath? I didn't think so, so yes, hypocrites.

Pathetic. You don't accept that a God can't do what he wants?

According to the bible, this fella does whatever he wants, including killing, giving orders to stroll around naked, and numerous other absurdities.

A serial killer can murder 200 people and claim that he believes in God.

Yes, as can a select President send bombs thousands of miles, killing a whole generation of civilians, because he heard a voice in his head.:lol:

But if his heart is evil and his mind is twisted, he cannot believe in God.

O, so tiring, how do you know? Can you get into his train of thought?

Who am I to say where Hitler or Buddha is?

Well, I might be wrong here, but you said there are only 2 choices, so if you're correct, Hitler and Buddha must be in 1 or the other.

 

[kal-el]

Conceding? Like I said, "your soul not mine." What do I care of your determinations.

Why I'm on the point, when you make claims like "your soul not mine", please provide evidence for such wild claims, or else stop putting spectacular claims forth. Thanks.

I'm not arguing with anyone.

Well I think you're arguing with me.

I've read the Bible and I choose not to isolate versus from the full message. This would be your argument.

The full message. Yes, that the bible is a book full of errors, contradictions, and blatant misconceptions. It was assembled by fallible men, who decided what not to, or include based on their prejudices at the time.

Once again, taking a scripture and seperating it from the message.

Well, does the "message" in its entirety, say that Jesus came to abolish the laws? If it does, please point mein the direction where it states this.

You're never going to understand it, so why try?

Understand... O, free will, Ha, I uderstand it perfectly. This "god" fellow places a knowingly forbidden tree in a garden, and instructs Adam and Eve not to eat from it, or else they will die, when they use their "free will" and choose to eat from it, he blames them for it. This ****ing guy is incredible!:lol:

If you succeed, you will be the first.

Uhh, it isn't that hard.

And by the way, God has been described in the Bible as much more than just "loving."

You're right, he's also described as a jealous, emtionally insecure, lying, and genocidal maniac.

But, by doing so, it enables you to keep in consistency with picking selectively what you need to bash.

What? Do you want me to post the whole passage? I only post 1 verse cause it saves time, if I posted the entire message, you're argument here would be paralyctic.

Prove they don't.

Negative. You made the assertion. You are obligated to prove it. The disbeliever is under no such restraint.

Were my goal to "impress" you I would care about the discussion.:roll:

Huh, you're not making sense here.

 

[MSgt]

Because once one makes the claim that god exists, they are obligated to prove it; it's a statement about reality. Like when someone would say "the earth is flat" that's a stement about reality, so they are obligated to prove it.

Bull ****. This is about a personal problem that you have. Either you believe in God or you don't. I'm no preacher and could care less what you believe.

Of course Christians aren't perfect. Are they able to cast out demons, heal the sick, are they immune to deadly poisons? Do they shoot people who work on the Sabbath? I didn't think so, so yes, hypocrites.

As opposed to hypocrit non-Christians? This is a common simpleton whine. When in doubt...call 'em hypocrits. I guess if you say lieing is wrong, but then you turn around and lie...you're only a hypocrit if you're Christian? This argument falls apart with everyone's projected views that Christians profess to be perfect. I find it mostly to be a way for people to exonerate themselves from believing. It seems to me that you are trying awful hard to prove God is a complete myth over my proving that God is real.



According to the bible, this fella does whatever he wants, including killing, giving orders to stroll around naked, and numerous other absurdities.

O, so tiring, how do you know? Can you get into his train of thought?



Well, I might be wrong here, but you said there are only 2 choices, so if you're correct, Hitler and Buddha must be in 1 or the other.

This is in perfect consistency to your posts. You pick apart the first sentence and remove it from the third. The third answers your pathetic accusingly question........Who am I to say where Hitler or Buddha is?

There are only two choices. They're in Heaven or they are in Hell. Not up to me to know what is in their hearts, though I could make a pretty good guess about Hitler.

 

[Engimo]

As opposed to hypocrit non-Christians? This is a common simpleton whine. When in doubt...call 'em hypocrits. I guess if you say lieing is wrong, but then you turn around and lie...you're only a hypocrit if you're Christian? This argument falls apart with everyone's projected views that Christians profess to be perfect. I find it mostly to be a way for people to exonerate themselves from believing. It seems to me that you are trying awful hard to prove God is a complete myth over my proving that God is real.

I know it's not really important, but there's an 'e' at the end of "hypocrite". rof . It was bothering me.

 

[MSgt]

Why I'm on the point, when you make claims like "your soul not mine", please provide evidence for such wild claims, or else stop putting spectacular claims forth. Thanks.

Proof that your life and anyhting else is in your own hands is a wild claim? Just because you don't believe it doesn't make it not true. You want proof, find a preacher and ask for it. Like I said, "Your soul, not mine."

Well I think you're arguing with me.

Post 101. Your argument. I'm just hanging out.


The full message. Yes, that the bible is a book full of errors, contradictions, and blatant misconceptions. It was assembled by fallible men, who decided what not to, or include based on their prejudices at the time.




Well, does the "message" in its entirety, say that Jesus came to abolish the laws? If it does, please point mein the direction where it states this.





Understand... O, free will, Ha, I uderstand it perfectly. This "god" fellow places a knowingly forbidden tree in a garden, and instructs Adam and Eve not to eat from it, or else they will die, when they use their "free will" and choose to eat from it, he blames them for it. This ****ing guy is incredible!:lol:



Uhh, it isn't that hard.



You're right, he's also described as a jealous, emtionally insecure, lying, and genocidal maniac.



What? Do you want me to post the whole passage? I only post 1 verse cause it saves time, if I posted the entire message, you're argument here would be paralyctic.




Negative. You made the assertion. You are obligated to prove it. The disbeliever is under no such restraint.




Huh, you're not making sense here.

I didn't bother reading the rest, because I tire of replying to every syllable in my posts. Plus, I don't care what you believe, though you seem awfully concerned about mine.

 

[MSgt]

I know it's not really important, but there's an 'e' at the end of "hypocrite". rof . It was bothering me.

You think that bothers you.....imagine being a Gunnery Sergeant and misspelling "Sergeant" all of the time. It's just one of those words that have always kicked my ass from time to time.

 

[kal-el]

Bull ****. This is about a personal problem that you have. Either you believe in God or you don't. I'm no preacher and could care less what you believe.

Actaully, there are certain statements which are obvious like "the earth is round" that are agreed on without needing to be proven. Of course if you said "I believe god exists", I would say the belief itself is not open to argument, as it is not directly saying anything about reality. You can believe in god, but think that there is not enough evidence to declare it as fact. But I get irritated when people say "God exists"- that is a direct assertion about reality. One shouldn't assert this without supporting evidence.

As opposed to hypocrit non-Christians? This is a common simpleton whine. When in doubt...call 'em hypocrits. I guess if you say lieing is wrong, but then you turn around and lie...you're only a hypocrit if you're Christian?

Nope, this god fella too, he is quite the blasphemer.

This argument falls apart with everyone's projected views that Christians profess to be perfect. I find it mostly to be a way for people to exonerate themselves from believing. It seems to me that you are trying awful hard to prove God is a complete myth over my proving that God is real.

Am I asserting that "god is a myth?" Nope, I acknowledge it is possible for a god to exist, but it is logically impossible for the bible god to exist.

This is in perfect consistency to your posts. You pick apart the first sentence and remove it from the third. The third answers your pathetic accusingly question........Who am I to say where Hitler or Buddha is?

Dancing around my question I see. I believe I asked, "How do you know?" How do you know that their hearts are evil and that his mind is twisted, and that he doesn't believe in god? You always seem to do this- avoid statements or questions by putting forth all sorts of fancy linguistics, but I, sir, am not going to fall for it.

There are only two choices.

How can you be so sure? Cause some book says so?

They're in Heaven or they are in Hell.

Another spectacular assertion, it would be fine if you said "I believe they're in heaven or hell". I urge you to provide proof for this claim, or else please retract it. Thanks.

 

[MSgt]

Dancing around my question I see. I believe I asked, "How do you know?" How do you know that their hearts are evil and that his mind is twisted, and that he doesn't believe in god? You always seem to do this- avoid statements or questions by putting forth all sorts of fancy linguistics, but I, sir, am not going to fall for it.

Dancing around the question? You insult me. I believe I have answered your question. The answer to your question, again, is "I don't." This is what "Who am I to say where Hitler or Buddha is" means. See, this is the third time I have answered your question. Only God can no what is in the hearts of men. I'd say Hitler is in Hell, but who the hell am I to say so?

Another spectacular assertion, it would be fine if you said "I believe they're in heaven or hell". I urge you to provide proof for this claim, or else please retract it. Thanks.

I would think that you would know by now that I don't play these word games. It smacks of simplicity. And stop thanking me. Save the ass kissing for someone else.