Um, hail!

Great. Can you prove that god exists without the application of logical fallacies, and preferably without bad grammar and misspelling of pronouns?

Most theists wait until they get frustrated at being wrong to start throwing insults, but 'dare to be different' I guess.

Your faith may keep you strong, but what will keep you rational?

Aw, I was hoping to be pwned by the Oscar Meyer Wiener today.

Care to demonstrate?

I don't think it actually requires a new thread. This one is fine.

That's good. We aren't scary, I hope.

 Wow, you start this with violence.

I have the true gods on my side dumbass. Your god is just a peice of  mistranslated parchment/toilet paper for preists to jack off into.

Dodgy. GET IT?

Dodgy, as in you'll be dodging the questions! 

 

Why don't you do it here? R U scared?!?! ROLFCAKES!

As a fellow representative of a deity (More like deities, but who's counting), I know that it takes quite some time to build up a decent case for yourself.

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

< OBJECTION! >

\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed. Your god is a delusion. It's time to wake up out of your stupor and join the human species in crawling out of it's cave. Good morning!

oh, oh, oh, I think I know!! My mom (Who's also an atheist) answered this for me. Something about "none of the people, who were from Egypt where supposed to make it to the promised land." so god purposly made them lose themselves continuously.

 

In other words, god's a prick. 

hail everybody!

1st off, i wish to appologise to all those who have made a coment refering to my use of the word dumbass. it was intended humourously, and upon re-reading the text, i see this may have been misinterpreted.

2nd, i didnt use the shift key, as i see no reason to. it has no effect on what i have written, and, provided my english teacher doesn't read this, nobody really has any problem with it. those that mention it are clearly just trying to find as many problems with me as they can.

to keep my rationality, i will simply use the logic that i was born with. but, based on my faith, many of you are sure to try and point out that 'i wasn't born with any logic'. i would like to point out that i was an atheist for many years, based on the logic many of you use to justify your arguments.

although i was born with many gifts, the ability to spell was not one of them. if any of you have a real problem with this, then you'll just have to teach me every spelling, of every word in every language, so i never make these horrible mistakes again. i must add, that i see there is a spellcheck button on here, but i desided that my text's are too long to use this feature on. i'll be here all day.

now, onto HIV. i am not a great expert on HIV. all i know is what i am taught in school (that's right. im in year 11. im a 15 year old, filling you in on the secrets of the universe. lol. what? you thought only adults are smart enough to do this?), but as far as i know, a cure for it is in an advanced state. they have been able, as far as i know, to use bacteria to smuggle genetic sequences, or something similar, into the appropriate cells, which either destroy most forms of the AIDS virus, or prevent it from entering, or something like that. as i said, im no expert. anyway, that wasn't the question, was it. the question was something about a strand of HIV being perfect with childrens t-cells. i cannot stress this next part enough. I DONT KNOW WHAT GOD THINKS. i can only do what everyone in the world can do. i can speculate.

i'll answer this in jesus style. also know as a parable. if you were to have children, or if you already have children, and he/she misbehaves, is it wrong to punish them for what they have done? is it wrong to punish a criminal for commiting a crime? no. it is fair to say that it is not wrong to punish those who do wrong. thus, if humans, as a species misbehave, is it wrong to punish them for this? well, following the same logic, no it is not. im not saying that the children have done anything wrong, so any quotes i get, saying that this is what i have claimed, will be ignored, as i have clearly said, just now that is not what i mean.

what i mean is, again i point out i am only speculating (isnt that a great word?), that god needs to punish the whole species, what specifically for i cannot say as it may not be simply a single reason, and thus created illnesses, natural disasters etc. this is my personal belief, but other reasons may include that he is testing people, that satan made these diseases, and god has simply aloud them onto the earth to punish/test people. the reasons continue, but i think you get the idea.

a short paragraph now, whats FSM? it is not a term i have come across before.

a message to ophios, i like your style. what's your religion? if i had to guess, it would tend towards hinduism, but this is only a guess, as i said.

on the matter of the proof of god's existence, i am as we speak prepareing it on word, so i can check it through to be 100% sure it makes sence and is as clear as possible.

now i have had a few people claiming that im either not answering the questions they have asked, or that my faith has failed me. i think that now might be the time to point out that only 1 day has passed, in england at least for all you intercontinental atheists. it is unreasonable to make statements such as these after such a short time span.

someone going by the name of vastet decided to make his views clear.

'Matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed. Your god is a delusion. It's time to wake up out of your stupor and join the human species in crawling out of it's cave. Good morning! '

it is true that matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed. this is basic physics. i should know. my dad teach's the stuff. but there is a fundamental flaw with this. if it cant be created, how did it come into existence? i'll go into a bit more detail with my 'proof of god's existence' thread.

ooo! rigor_omortis left a nice long one! well, if there is the choise of a and b, and god knows he will choose a, b is still actually an option. it's just an option the person won't take. er. if a was to have all his dreams come true, and b was to dwell forever in his nightmares (it calls him man, so i think it's safe to call him a he) theres always one he's going to prefer, most likely a (but then again, some people like nightmares), but that doesn't make b any less of an option. it just makes it an option that will not be taken, as opose to an option that cannot be taken. kinda like minority report, where it was known that the murders would take place. it was later proved that the murderers still had the choise not to commit the murder, but only if they had the knew in advance that they were going to be murderers. this is kind of the same thing, but not quite, as the man does not know what choise he will make untill he has chosen it.

now, about jesus. how do we know he wasn't the son of satan? well, to start with, he did GOOD things, like healing etc. 2nd, he fought AGAINST satan. if he were the son of satan, and he fought against satan, there would be the biggest paradox of all time. in order to fight against satan, jesus would need to be, in essence good. but if he was created by satan, he could only be pure evil. do you see the dilema?

as far as i know, many of the disasters that took place at the moment of jesus's death actually happened. the sky was reported to darken, earthquakes were recorded to have happened, etc. and all of this was recorded, not by the disiples, but by the romans.

u ask why the gospels dont agree with each other, when they actually compliment each other very nicely. the confusion that this subject has caused to rise, is based on things such as the wise men being recorded in one, and shepards in another at jesus's birth and things like that. 1stly, the wise men and the shepards were not even at his birth at the same time. it has been worked out that they arrived two years later. 2ndly, the gospels were written with an audience in mind, before they were all brought together in one book. the gospel describing the wise men was aimed at the higher classes, kings, nobles etc. who would not have given a rats ass if shepards had been in a stable. likewise, the shepard story was aimed to the lower classes, beggers etc.

the reason that the jews took as long in getting to caanan, was because they were being punished. it is described in exodus, that they angered god, by building an idol to worship when they knew they weren't suposed to.

i am no eygptologist, but there could be any number of reasons why the drowning of an army could have not been recorded. the pharoh may have desided that it not be recorded, so as the eygption empire stayed looking as powerful as it was previously. he could have simply hired new soilders, so he concidered the loss, not problematic, and thus left out of the history books of the time. or it may have been recorded, and u've just not found it outside of the bible.

there are threereasons i can think of as to why miricles are not seen on tape. 1) 1 persons miricle, is another persons everyday occurence. 2)in todays society, tapes can be faked expertly 3) if all the prophets that every walked the earth cannot convince you that god exists using all the miricles they have ever done, why would a recording of you not being convinced help?

what is the soul. nice question. i like a bit of philosophy. the soul is simply the immortal part of you. it is your conciousness, the reason you have morals, and is the reason you have 'awe and wonder moments'. like when you climb a mountain, and look out at the setting sun on the sea. well, thats one for me. it is also a form of music that originated from black American gospel singing.not relivent, i know, but i want to cover all answers possible. wouldn't want to be unfair now, would i?

you are right when u ask if anyone else sees a problem with that huge statement thing about the trinity. u've got it all wrong. the trinity is the same essence, but god did not sacrifice jesus to himself. jesus was actually sent to hell, because he was taking the sins of the world with him. this was done to save the world, which is NOT god, and so that the apostles could know him through and prepair for his return, which in answer to another question will come when people least expect it. so live everyday like he's coming that afternoon, and you should be fine.

as you can see, i have 'dodged' no questions, though i do wonder how 'hail' can be interpreted as 'violence'. and as a final point, i will explain why i said i was not prefect, not because i cannot give good answers, but because i am not god. i only speak on his behalf. i am doing the best i can to answer all the questions you are asking, and will continue to do so, even when outnumbered by athiests, like i am here.

have i made myself clear enough?

Not the shit comparing hell to parents punishing children again. Yes, it would be wrong for a parent to punish a child by burning him or her alive.

Question mark in science. Don't know, but doesn't mean Goddidit.

i'll go over the proof of gods existence in a different thread, where everyone can see and be amased

thats a chance im willing to take. but no matter how many times you see it, its still makes all its points through logic.

I've seen argument after argument like the one you claim you're going to use and none of them work, so I highly doubt you're bringing new evidence to the table (or any, rather).

And perhaps your english teacher is not reading this, but proper grammer makes reading things easier and makes it easier to understand your points. You're not the worst out there, and perhaps it is nitpicky to go over your errors, but it's somewhat laborous to read your large poorly structured blocks of text.

On another thing, if you're 15 it is impossible that you were an atheist for a great many years. When I was 15 (17 now, actually) I was barely beginning to figure out how I felt on the cosmos. At the time I believed in God, which is how I was raised, but didn't start to really think about it until I was 16 and then I became an atheist recently. At first a somewhat weak atheist at first, but an atheist nonetheless-I'm more and more certain that this is the correct viewpoint all the time, and certainly the only one for me. I'm not saying that your points, if you have any, are any less valid because of your age-but unless you were a child-genius, you've only recently entered the time of your life when you can look at questions like that properly.

Whether or not you're focusing on this thread anymore, yes, it is quite possible they happened-but why do they have to have divine effects? Coincidences happen all the time. I believe that it's actually been confirmed that a volcano erupted at the time of the plagues in Egypt, which can explain most if not all of them. It's a lot easier to explain "miracles" and what not than most religious people believe-you just have to look at it objectively instead of focusingo n how much you may want it to be true.

Well said, Ophios.

The Judeo Christian hell is a senseless notion because of these things. Really it seems like most other religious afterlives seem to at least be temporary punishment or reincarnation into a harder life or something and, while those are still ridiculous, the idea of eternal suffering for what is usually less than 100 years of living a life that just isn't quite up to snuff enough to please God, why that just blows paying Charon to take you across the River Styx out of the water.

Some of the characters in Stephen King's Desperation talked about God being cruel, but his cruelty being refining-but that would only apply to this life. If God really did hand out some punishments for bad deeds in this life in order to improve humanity for later parts of it, it would make at least a little sense, but instead he allegedly tosses us into eternal hellfire to an eternity of ceaseless suffering unimagined on this Earth. Oh, that's a forgiving and loving being. Punishments in this life wouldn't make for much anyway-lots of kids with strict parents end up rebelling or at least resenting their parents, and humanity would be no different.

I'm willing to bet a substantial amount of money that your argument will be completely debunked.  Unfortunately, I don't have a substantial amount of money, so we'll just make it a gentlemen's bet, okay?

Here's a question we often ask: Are you willing to admit to the possibility you're wrong?  

I am.  If you can prove god's existence, I'd be happy to admit I'm wrong.  However, you must realize that outrageous claims require outrageous proof and that god's existence has been disproved to a large extent.  Read The God Delusion for those arguments.  Of course, god can never be 100% disproven (at least not yet).  Then again, you can't disprove the notion that there are invisible, microscopic elephants living on my nostril hairs.

The whole notion of a god is pretty ludicrous, so you'd better have some solid evidence.  

I took it as a joke, so at least someone got it. Your post seemed lighthearted to me. 

I have no intention of nitpicking, but it is hard to take an argument seriously when it systematically disregards standard spelling and grammar rules for no reason. I suspect that the reason you perceived people doubting your abilities was more due to poor writing or the announcement of your argument before it existed. You're the one who mentioned your age, repeatedly. I wouldn't even have known, otherwise, at least not based on what you have said so far.

I ask you to understand that we have heard and read so many arguments purporting to prove the existence of god that we are rather used to expecting more of the same, and when someone claims to have a new argument without showing it up front, our skepticism engages automatically.

As for my response to the 'dumbass' comment, it was not meant to be very serious. But these things do not always come across in forums very well.

I look forward to your argument, and the possibility of discussing it rationally.

Well. To a similar answer must come a similar response.

Due to the fact that an average human makes one decision per minimal timespan, that makes a huge ammount of decisions per day. Multiply this by 6 billion and we're referring only to humans. Also add all living creatures and you get a number of decisions that's too big to think about.

So I ask... is there any possibility that at least one of these decisions is wrong? Wrong as in "different from what God knows". Because it is quite difficult to actually believe that everybody just "happens" to take 246xE32 decisions per day without at least one being erroneous.

Applying reverse logic to this, it comes to the conclusion that, since the probability of taking all those decisions according to a pre-defined pattern is practically ignorable, the entity called a human cannot take different decisions.

Since this is obviously far too advanced for many theists, and since at 15 years I seriously doubt that you have the necessary scientific background to be able to fully grasp the concepts, I'm going to offer you a little twist for the problem, but later, after I deal with the rest of your answers.

Obviously, at 15 you are still naive enough to not see the possibility of reverse logic being applied.

I'll start off from the beginning:

1. Did Jesus really do good things? Well, undoubtedly, he did SOME good things. He healed one or two here, resurrected another one there... But did that REALLY help society? Was he REALLY helpful to people? Well, considering that the emperor Hadrian once got fed up with the Jews revolting over and over again, he sent a few legions to silence them. Perhaps without the teachings of Jesus and other "prophets" at that time, this would not have happened. If Jesus was the son of God, he surely would have known: medicine (which was quite banned in Israel at that time), efficient crop growing, sanitation mechanisms, etc., with which he would greatly have helped his "chosen people"... instead, he only did a miracle here and there, more for publicitary reasons.

2. How do you know Jesus ACTUALLY fought against Satan? Because if Jesus only mimed it, and he undoubtedly was a good actor, that, coupled with crowds of people watching, would be enough proof that Jesus was the son of God, this being the greatest deception Satan would have ever thrown out at people.

3. "he could only do pure evil" - not exactly. Because I can myself do a very little ammount of good to one, but that, in the longer run, would do pure evil to many more people; think about it: if Christianity is Satan's twist of religion, and the old religion of the Jews is the real one, how many people will burn in hell for following the wrong teachings? Billions and billions. That surely justifies a few healings... You lose few, but you win billionfold at least. Satan isn't dumb, you know...

So there you have it.

Really? Where were they recorded?

Wow, that's a pretty intricate twist of biblical teachings you have there. If the "wise men" arrived two years later, where did they arrive? Certainly not where Jesus was born, which kind of contradicts your scripture, dude.

As for the Gospels being written for different audiences... If what the Gospels state is true, than that has to be the most ridiculous idea I've ever heard. You're talking about a man that works miracles, heals the blighted, resurrects and sacrifices himself for all our sins, and you have to make a bias in what you teach, for the sake of different social categories? It would make quite a lot of sense if what was written in the Gospels was simply a fairy-tale. And also it would make a lot of sense if these four gospels were the only ones, but the latter isn't exactly true...

Do take a look at the Skeptics' Annotated Bible for a list of contradictions.

To be perfectly frank with you, it would take less to go round Syberia on the way. And God has already punished them for that with "fiery serpents" (remember the brass-serpent-on-a-pole trick?), so basically he's punishing them twice for the same sin. Also, people had no idea that it was a sin to have other gods before Yahweh, since Moses hadn't returned with the commandments yet, when they made the idol.

The question remains: where did they go so much? Which way did they take after parting the Red Sea? There isn't much room to go, and I can't imagine that none of the Jews ever said "Hey, guys, Canaan is right there, past the hill on the left!", to which Moses responded "No, we must take it past that hill on the right. That's what my inner compass tells me."

Learn some more history.

I'll answer the three reasons:

1. So it isn't a miracle at all. Just some normal things that one person is simply too ignorant to know it's not a miracle

2. OK, so, following your logic, there should exist tapes of miracles, possibly faked. But there aren't any... NOT EVEN FAKED...

3. I'm not sure what to make up of this. I only understood what the fisrt part of the reason tells, and I'm going to reply directly to that: "miracles" have happened and prophets have walked the Earth in Christianity, Buddhism, Islamism, Shintoism, Taoism, Zoroastrism, etc.... practically all religions. Which one are true miracles from "God" and not from "Satan" ?

So... the soul is the immortal part of me. That part that makes the "awe" moments... Certainly it's not an electrical response to the release of dopamine in the brain, is it?

If you are certain that my "soul" is my consciousness, then why is it that this "immortal" part of me is so dependent on very mortal parts of me, like the eyes (to get visual stimuli), ears (to get auditive stimuli), neurons (to carry the impulse around), etc. ?

Just because you are ignorant to a topic doesn't mean that you shouldn't be put down in debates. Look up "argument from ignorance".

OK, let me rephrase: God sacrificed himself to Satan, so that the creation of himself can escape the wrath of himself, and so that the creation of himself can also receive himself later, through the coming of himself.

Big change, what can I tell you...

Couldn't God have simply forgiven us and implant "the words" in the Apostles' heads, just like that? Why was torture of Jesus also necessary? Why was Hell necessary, if God is so all-loving and all-forgiving?

I'm sorry, dude, your "best" just isn't good enough.

 

And now for the problem that I wanted to post to you. You should be at least able to think this one through. Here's a little story:

In a Muslim country lives a small family: husband, wife and little Ismail, the young lad. The area is a medium-sized town, but it is located in a remote area. The family has no contact with Christianity, Buddhism, Shintoism, etc., actually, they don't even know what these funny names are. The family is poor, and little Ismail isn't having a very happy life. When he turns 14, war starts, and cruise missiles return their city into the Earth it came from. Little Ismail survives and is abducted by Christian soldiers, who rape him and abuse him. At one occasion, he sees the chance to escape and attempts to render the guard unconscious. He fails, and sees himself in the position of having to kill the guard in order to survive. Surprisingly, he manages to do just that and exits the place of his detention, but only to find himself surrounded by three more soldiers that shoot him dead.

We shall talk as if Yahweh, the Christian God, is the only true one. Where does little Ismail go? To Heaven, or to Hell? And why?

hail! sorry it's taken me so long to respond. unusual amount of homework this week, but that's probably just because i have GCSE's coming up.anyway, i have some questions to answer and some misunderstandings to correct. let's see.....after my last essay of answers, many people had a similar question about one of the topics, and it made me realise i had unintentionally missed out an entire aspect of hell. it's parable time!!! two men work for a large industrial company. the company is so large, that the true boss of the company is unknown by most of the workers. but the boss watches all his workers in action, and he notices that these two workers, let's name them 'bill' and 'ben', are working harder than most of the executive staff. he desides he wants to talk to these two in more detail, so sends them each an invitation to a large party he's having, in which he tells them that he is the big boss of the company. but bill and ben act differently to the invitation. bill realises that this invite truly is from his boss, and instantly sends a reply saying that he will be at this party. unfortunatly, ben desides that, not only is this man not his boss, that he isn't even real, perhaps a prank by some of his co-workers, and subsequently throws the invite away and doesn't respond. bill goes to the party, talks to his boss and his hard work is rewarded with an instant promotion. ben sits at home eating pizza, watching eastenders re-runs.  the boss is actually a very nice man, and desides to give ben more chances, as he is still working very hard. he sends him another invite. this time he sends bill to hand it to him personally, and tells him 'go as a witness to my existence'. this ben does, and say's to ben 'the boss is inviting you to another party. i went to the last one and he gave me my promotion. if you go, he'll give you one too.' but still, ben refuses to belive that the boss exists. so the boss gives him one last chance, and sends his one and only son to ben, who we shall call jake, who also tells him the bosses intentions, but ben, who has had enough of this game, beats him to within an inch of his life, the boss see's this, and sends a final message to ben, 'you have rejected me, my messengers and my son. i shall send no more invites, but my offer still stands. if you come to my house at any point, u will get your promotion. but u have a time limit. one day, my son will return, and if by that time you still haven't excepted me, then im afraid it's too late.' needless to say, ben ignored this. years later, he goes for an interview for the job he was offered and ignored, and see's jake as an interviewer. jake says 'i have returned. u failed to belive in my father, and now its too late. ur not getting this promotion, because, until U felt like it, u didnt belive it existed.' and when ben asked 'why did no-one tell me?' jake answered 'we did.' does every1 understand?vastet..... god didnt create humans just to punish them, he loves humans. we'er idiots, but he still loves us. thats why he's so willing to forgive us when we ask for it. flying spaggetti monsters = insanity. theism is anything but.

energy! i like that theory in which it traveled at an infinate speed because it has no weight and thus is unaffected by time. it reminds me of communism. nice theory, but doesn't work in practise. see, energy doesn't travel at an infinate speed. lets take light as an example. light has no mass, or weight, or what ever u wish to use, and yet travels through a vacumn (eg. space) at a set speed. which is 300,000 km per second. do you see the problem? i'll go into more detail when i compose my 'proof of god's existence' thread.

godlesslitany, a paragraph for you now! u say i cannot have been an atheist for many years, due to my age not being high enough to properly get to grips with the problems of the universe. well, im no child-genius, but i am not an idiot. no matter what my faith is, there is no-one who can claim that i am interlectually challenged. or naive for that matter Rigor_OMortis. i cannot honestly say im not a little disapointed in u Rigor_OMortis, u seem very intelligent, and have many fair, and challenging (in the fun way) questions, and u still feel the need to attack my intelligence, or my wisdom, which are not the same thing, for those who are getting confused. anyway, i was talking to godlesslitany. u made a point on coincidenses. yes, it is possible that all of these things happened at the point of jesus's death, and were merely coincidences, but it is also possible for all the oxygen in a room to rush to the sides, leaving a person in the middle, suffacating (forgive my spelling). and yet, it just doesn't happen. the probablity is too low for it to work. and it also wouldn't describe the people who can back to life for a short time and were seen, and reported, by a large amount of people. the number 200 springs to mind, but i may have to check later, if anybody wants the acurate number.

Iruka Naminori, IF anyone can prove me wrong, then yes, i will admit to my mistakes. but the problem on this website, is that (im guessing, i haven't really been a member long enough to be sure) when people are wrong, they either cook up some rediculous theory, based on nothing, eg. earth's gravity is caused by an extreamely flatulent alien pointing in the direction of earth, or sulk. this is probably why a load of people will read my 'proof of god' thread and thus find themselves 'serverely underwhelmed'.

 

now, a probably very large paragragh for mr/master/sir/mrs/miss/ms Rigor_OMortis (i have very little information about you, and thus do not know which title fits appropreatly). you said 'Due to the fact that an average human makes one decision per minimal timespan, that makes a huge ammount of decisions per day. Multiply this by 6 billion and we're referring only to humans. Also add all living creatures and you get a number of decisions that's too big to think about.' u seem to be forgeting (or ignoring) the fact that the number is too big for the human mind, in the same way thinking of the universe going on forever, or of a time before time, is. for a god, or more accuratly THE god, the 'mind' will be far greater, and be able to cope with infinatly more than the human mind. if that is unclear as i think it may be, i will re-write it in another comment. u also said 'Applying reverse logic to this, it comes to the conclusion that, since the probability of taking all those decisions according to a pre-defined pattern is practically ignorable, the entity called a human cannot take different decisions.' u are forgetting the subtle difference between 'cannot', and 'will not'.

i did not think i would have to go back over the same jesus argument twice, but apparently i didn't go into enough detail last time. jesus did good things. this is not exactly debatable. he healed, raised others from the dead, he died so our sins could be forgiven when we truely desire them to be. but the reason he didn't introduce things like medicine, sanitation mechanisms etc. is because these are not miricles. it is not a miricle for me to get in a car and drive down the road. being able to drive without being taught how to would be a miricle, but not one worth testing out, as i doubt anyone would belive me if i said it happened, or blame random chance etc. the miricles were to show his divine connections. we know jesus actually was fighting satan, because, (if you're going to assume the existence of satan, u must logicaly need to asume the existence of god), jesus was prophesied by many people in the old testiment, right down to the roman guards gambling for his clothes. now, why would god alow 2 people forfilling the same prophesy? he would not site idley by, and watch another forfill the messiah's place. he would at least have caught fire during the many prayers to god he made.

what do you mean 'where were the disaster's that took place at jesus's death recorded?'?!?! where was julius caesar's existence recorded? where was democritus's life recorded? pythagoras? i could continue, but i think u get the idea. to answer your question, there is no 1 place they were recorded. there are many different romans telling the same story.

u are misinterpreting what i am saying. the reason that the gospels were written to specific targets, was to attract the audience to jesus, then to read the other gospels to learn all about him. and the wize men arrived at bethlehem also. a census is not a quick thing, you do over night. well, not in those days. and i looked at the skeptic's annotated bible. it was ridiculous. i looked at the 'absurd' part. on of it's points was 'the finger of god'. another was solely about the fact god has feet! shock-horror! almost everything else was just misinterpretation as far as i could see, but i will check again.

moses and the isralites, again, were not to arrive at caanan was because they needed to be punished. the whole calf thing. very annoying for god. they knew they were to only worship god, because he made them promise to do so, before he sent moses up the mountain. when they all worshipped a peice of metal, claiming it brought them out of egypt, they needed to be punished. this was before the days of the 'you repent, i forgive' agreement, and thus even those that repented still needed punishment. this is why they were to march around the dessert for 40 years. though i cant for the life of me find those 'firey serpents' you spoke of. could you give me a bible reference for that?

you tell me to learn more history. fine. i will. just tell me the specific time period you want me to research (in eygpt, at the time of moses) and i'll get your answers.

miricles. 1 persons miricle is anothers every day occurence. that doesnt make it any less a miricle. eg. if a person were to recover from a serious disease in, say, africa, it would be a miricle, yet in england, if someone were to recover from the same illness, it would be a more regular occurence. it doesnt mean that the african case isn't a miricle. it's just different for different people.    and who says there arn't faked miricle tapes? there arn't any mainstream ones, due to the fact THEY WERE PROVED FAKE!! y stare in awe at a screen, when it has been proven false? and any miricles caught on tape are acused by athiests of being fake, and generally wont change their minds. even if they see the tape being examined themselves. they hold this judgement that the tape is faked, but is faked in a way that makes it hard to prove faked. so it wouldn't help you if you saw a tape of a miricle. now, WHICH is the real religion, u just need to look at the prophets ur talking about. now i dont know much about many of the other religions u mentioned, but i think its a safe bet to go with the prophet who actually defeted death. ie, jesus. the one guy i know of to die for 3 days, come back to life, then NOT DIE AGAIN AFTERWARDS! he's the one living ancient prophet!

ok, 3 left for ur large coment. that electrical impulse u mentioned. what sets it off? the soul is not just the cause, it's also the essence of who u are. lets face it, ur brain is simply a mixture of ur parents, but YOU arn't. the bit that makes you YOU is something compleatly different. otherwise, u, and ur siblings would be, essentially, the same person. the soul does not rely on mortal parts to suvive, it relys on them to stay in this universe. i apologise if my argument is a little thin at the moment. i am a little tired, so i will return to this subject tomorrrow at a suitable point.

i'll rephrase the sentence for you. 'god sacrificed himself to satan, so that his creation ie. the universe could survive his wrath, and so that the universe could also become close to him later through the coming of himself, and he will one day return to pass judgement on the universe.' howzat?

and the words could not just be placed in the apostles heads. the sin still needed punishing for, so he went down himself, sinless, and payed the price of all the sins, past present and future.

and my best is just fine thank you very much! it's better than 1/2 the other peoples on this website.

and ur final problem is piss easy. ismail, in my opinion, will go to heaven. the christian god is a forgiving god, and he is likely to forgive those who have not had a true chance to learn about him. since the only chance he's had is while being arse-raped by the worst examples of christianity around, god'll forgive and let him into the biggest party ever. (heaven)

finally, there is still sin, because jesus was paying the price, not removing it. the time will come of sinlessness. either we die, and enter heaven, where we will become perfect, (under god of course) or jesus will return and the universe will end, we'll be judged, and some will enter heaven. ok. thats enough for tonight. i need sleep.

just one last thing.. ophios, u never told me, what is your religion?

Oh Boy!!!



How would that happen? I don't know if you realize this, but most parables start with a situation that is at least plausible.



Let's take a break here so for a question. First, why would the 'boss' of a company give instructions directly to people so far below him that they have never met? And, why would those instructions not be passed through the regular chain of command for the company? At most large companies, it isn't considered a good thing if you trust everyone you don't know to be legitimate. How do you know the person giving the invite isn't a spy trying to steal the company's secrets?



I know you have your idea of how this correlates to Christianity so firm in your mind that you can only see that logic, but stop for a moment and ask yourself, in this situation, which of these men behaved rational, and in what ways.

Bill trusted a man he'd never met, and believed that he was a high-ranking officer of the company. There are a lot of cases where that could get you in serious trouble, especially if you deal with sensitive information.

Ben, on the other hand, by ignoring the invitation acted totally rationally. He might have asked his manager for clarification, but there's no call for such bypassing of the ranks, and his skepticism is the only justified position. Believing the boss does not exist is irrational, no one would do that, but that's because obviously if you get an invitation, someone sent it to you.

Since I think I've shown that your parable is fundamentally flawed, so I'm gonna skip the rest of it.



If I worked at a company like that, I would quit.



I don't know what you're referring to, so I'm not gonna respond to this.



You have really low standards for what constitutes a miracle. Learning to drive without help is not a miracle, how do you think the first driver learned? Divine intervention?



Julius Caesar is an integral part of history, Jesus was not.



So, then the world 'miracle' is meaningless.



One reason your brain is different from your parents is that your experiences are different from theirs.



You and your siblings do not have identical genes. Think, if you did, you would all be the same gender. You're using too simple a model of gene combination. The genes that you inherit are not exactly the same as those your siblings inherit.

ok, i dont hve time right now to go over all of this, so i'll just quickly make a few basic points.

1) the story i told, IS ONLY A STORY! it is not intended to be in anyway, shape or form literal. it is only to project my message in a more interesting way. STOP OVER ANYLISING IT! i dread to think how many of you reacted to ashops fables. 'a talking fox? OUTRAGOUS!!!'

2)im going to re-do the last section of the previous message, because i was very tired at the time, and my argument lost some momentum.

3) who say's jesus wasn't an intrical part of history? and finally for now,

4) vastet. im not american. as i said before, im english. as in, born, raised and currently in, england. dont insult me by bunging me in with the amerian dumbass's! (that's another joke, for those who are going to try and make some huge, philosophical outcry over this. if you cant take a joke, then i'd stop reading this thread. i intend to make many jokes, and would apreciate people not purposefully misinterprating them)

ok, bye for now

the story is a completely HYPOTHETICAL senario. people are reading it and saying 'how could that possible happen?'. answer? simple. it didnt! ITS A STORY! it simply has a meaning behind it. and if you think it doesn't fit the profile of a parable, then fine! its a fable! it's the meaning that's important, not the improbablity of the storyline.

fine! i'll explain the whole story using simple sentences, so people can stop calling my story an inappropriate metaphor.

the large company is the world, the boss is god, the invites are christianity, jake is jesus, bill is a christian and ben an athiest.

god is in charge of the company, but while many people know OF him, little know who he is (it's a metaphor, there are actually many, many people who know who he is). god invites two people to heaven (well, he actually extends this invite to everyone, only some take the 'ben' route). one accepts the invite, one doesn't. so god sends the 1st as a prophet to prove his existence. ben rejects the prophet. god sends his son. ben not only rejects the son, but treats him worse than the other prophet(s). idealy, i would have killed jake, but resurection would have been accepted worse than the story has so far. god warns ben of the time limit before it's too late. ben eventually dies and goes to get the promotion (heaven), only to find jake (jesus) there, telling him it's now too late. alternatively, ben waits till jesus returns to earth, only to be told it is now too late. ben claims no1 told him this. jake tells ben how ignorent ben is. ben doesn't get the promotion (hell). does it make more sence now?

Seriously, all this story does is just make it a little clearer how arbitrary and basically unfair the whole Christian idea is.

To match what we are presented with today better, some people would be claiming that the boss sent invites to some of their distant ancestors, and here is a copy of a copy of a copy etc of a document, which was originally written in another language, which says a whole bunch of sometimes conflicting things, and some of the things it says can be interpreted as invitations to some hypothetical party.

When one guy finds this not remotely convincing, the person who showed him this copy of the document points to another part of the document which claims that proof was provided 2000 years ago, but for some reason the boss is not interested in repeating this proof now. You just gotta take this person's word for it that it was very convincing to some people at the time.

And anyway, if you can make yourself change your whole approach to what you consider reasonable evidence to accept that any document that claims it is true must be true, then you will find this document true...

And if you find you can't honestly do that, then the boss will have you shot, or maybe tortured for eternity with no option for saying "OK you've convinced me"...

See where I'm going here??

Sure, the idea that a guy named 'Jesus Christ' may have existed and done certain things was an 'integral' part of European and Middle Eastern history for the last millenium or so is certainly true.

So was the idea that the Sun went round the earth. 

Enough serious arguments have been presented that he may not have existed, especially as portrayed in the Bible, that no honest person can claim that it is anywhere near 100% certain that he did. 

Its that simple. 

We have been waiting for quite some time for your so-called brilliant proof that God exists.

Not to sound belittling, but far greater men have tried: Paley, Aquinas and Aslan to name a few. What makes you think you can do it where these minds have failed?