Zecrit
|
  |
| Joined: 24 Jan 2013 |
| Total Posts: 2618 |
|
| |
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 06:57 PM |
| God exists because the earth is round. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Zecrit
|
  |
| Joined: 24 Jan 2013 |
| Total Posts: 2618 |
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 06:58 PM |
@super
Wo. Mind blown.
Hand me a bible. My PIN is 1337. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Inploded2
|
  |
| Joined: 29 Oct 2013 |
| Total Posts: 793 |
|
| |
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 06:59 PM |
believe in him cause yolo
mmmmmmm coffee |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
lowjoe
|
  |
| Joined: 13 Jan 2008 |
| Total Posts: 609 |
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 06:59 PM |
| I do find it funny how forceful Atheists and Christians are. (Some) |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 07:02 PM |
i cant prove to you that god is real, i just believe he is
believe what you want lmao |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
lava3321
|
  |
| Joined: 04 Mar 2008 |
| Total Posts: 6851 |
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 07:05 PM |
1. as an atheist, i ask you to please stop posting this tired old crap and making the rest of us look bad
2. you cannot prove/disprove an entitity that is defined by its believers as non-material, non-physical, silent, invisible, unknowable and incomprehendible
its like trying to prove or disprove there isnt an invisible non-material teapot named francis orbiting pluto - there is no room for a scientific analysis because there is nothing you can analyze
also, lack of disproof is NOT proof and it never ever will be |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 07:06 PM |
| It's not our responsibility to prove to you God exists. It's your decision to seek Him out openly or simply contend to your confirmation bias. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 07:07 PM |
what parteh said love her like so much
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
lava3321
|
  |
| Joined: 04 Mar 2008 |
| Total Posts: 6851 |
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 07:14 PM |
It's not our responsibility to prove to you God exists. _____________________________________________________________
but you try to do it anyway and fail miserably at it, making yourselves look foolish
It's your decision to seek Him out openly or simply contend to your confirmation bias. _____________________________________________________________
'him' is not a proper noun, no matter how much you want it to be - capitalization of a name is not a sign of reverence; it is a distinction, much like between mark and Mark, beaver dam and Beaver Dam.
i, with my (supposedly god-given) mind, have observed the universe from tabula rasa and have discovered that the universe came about and exists by natural means and that supernatural intervention is neither neccesary nor logical to describe the existence of the universe. hate me. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 07:19 PM |
"but you try to do it anyway and fail miserably at it, making yourselves look foolish"
um not everyone does???
"'him' is not a proper noun, no matter how much you want it to be - capitalization of a name is not a sign of reverence; it is a distinction, much like between mark and Mark, beaver dam and Beaver Dam."
it's used that way in the bible, and if thats what they believe theyre free to use it that way...
"i, with my (supposedly god-given) mind, have observed the universe from tabula rasa and have discovered that the universe came about and exists by natural means and that supernatural intervention is neither neccesary nor logical to describe the existence of the universe. hate me."
you could lose the part in the parentheses, cause insulting people is not going to make them want to listen to you
if thats what you believe, cool, good luck |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 07:20 PM |
>'him' is not a proper noun, no matter how much you want it to be - capitalization of a name is not a sign of reverence; it is a distinction, much like between mark and Mark, beaver dam and Beaver Dam.
Can I not address my father with reverence?
>i, with my (supposedly god-given) mind, have observed the universe from tabula rasa and have discovered that the universe came about and exists by natural means and that supernatural intervention is neither neccesary nor logical to describe the existence of the universe.
I very much doubt that you've observed the Universe coming about by natural means. Unless, you're a time-traveller.
>hate me.
I refuse |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 07:25 PM |
| Well there's obviously something out there that's preventing humanity from destroying itself. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
lava3321
|
  |
| Joined: 04 Mar 2008 |
| Total Posts: 6851 |
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 07:25 PM |
it's used that way in the bible, and if thats what they believe theyre free to use it that way... ________________________________
no, it isnt.
have you ever wondered why "Lord" is in "lower-case-capital-letters"? thats because the word that was originally there was Jehovah (shortened to JHVH but said as Elohim due to the jews believe saying gods chosen name, Jehovah, might break the 3rd commandment)
"Him" when used in the new testament is a replacement for anything from Yahweh, Jehovah, Elohim, or the more than 2 dozen jewish names for god. it is typically italicized - all sections of the KJV or later versions have areas that are approximated (i.e. direct translation is nonsensical or impossible) italicized. thats why seemingly random sections of the bible are in italics. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
hoovs007
|
  |
| Joined: 21 Feb 2011 |
| Total Posts: 3786 |
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 07:27 PM |
| god exists because my ass still smells weird |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 07:27 PM |
| well that was a pretty minor point of my post but alright...if they want to capitalize it thats their thing, just let them do what they want |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
lowjoe
|
  |
| Joined: 13 Jan 2008 |
| Total Posts: 609 |
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 07:29 PM |
| WHOA, Everyone calm down. This is gonna turn into some kind of battle. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
lava3321
|
  |
| Joined: 04 Mar 2008 |
| Total Posts: 6851 |
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 07:29 PM |
Can I not address my father with reverence? ___________________________________________
once again, capitalization is NOT a sign of reverence - capitalizing a pronoun simply because it refers to a deity isnt showing extra respect, its simply improper grammar.
I very much doubt that you've observed the Universe coming about by natural means. Unless, you're a time-traveller. ___________________________________________
i can reasonably explain (or at least understand) how the universe came into being without the need for supernatural invervention. the "you werent there" argument is completely invalid because you can piece together an event from residual data, an eyewitness account is rarely ever required.
Well there's obviously something out there that's preventing humanity from destroying itself. ___________________________________________
overwhelming numbers and self-preservation, with a hint of communal existence. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Dedenne
|
  |
| Joined: 08 Aug 2013 |
| Total Posts: 458 |
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 07:34 PM |
| arceus is real if it wasn't for him i wouldn't be here ); |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 07:54 PM |
>capitalizing a pronoun simply because it refers to a deity isnt showing extra respect, its simply improper grammar.
Yet I do it for the purpose of showing respect, regardless of whether its proper or not. But I suppose I'm just an idiot.
>i can reasonably explain (or at least understand) how the universe came into being without the need for supernatural invervention.
I'm not entirely convinced but I'll give the benefit of the doubt.
>the "you werent there" argument is completely invalid because you can piece together an event from residual data, an eyewitness account is rarely ever required.
It's not invalid by any means. Using residual data that supposedly adheres to a theory of creation would be making an inference, which is not scientifically conclusive. For it to follow the scientific method, it would need to be replicatable, or at least tangibly observable. Anyhow, a creation of the universe by 'natural' means seems unfeasible as any natural laws that would govern such a phenomenon would not exist before the universe was already existant. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
lava3321
|
  |
| Joined: 04 Mar 2008 |
| Total Posts: 6851 |
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 09:38 PM |
It's not invalid by any means. Using residual data that supposedly adheres to a theory of creation would be making an inference, which is not scientifically conclusive. For it to follow the scientific method, it would need to be replicatable, or at least tangibly observable. Anyhow, a creation of the universe by 'natural' means seems unfeasible as any natural laws that would govern such a phenomenon would not exist before the universe was already existant. _______________________________________________________
you cannot replicate the titanic disaster (within reason) - that does not disprove it. news reports and eyewitness testimony as well as various other records can conclusively prove the titanic did indeed exist and sink, and we also have the aftermath of the disaster. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Marlov
|
  |
| Joined: 04 Oct 2012 |
| Total Posts: 13945 |
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 09:42 PM |
But that's the thing It can't be proven People put their faith into something that they truly believe It gives them hope and it gives them meaning It's a beautiful thing for people who believe in it and if you don't believe in such a thing well that's your business. What isn't your business is other peoples religion. If it's what makes them happy and it's what they believe in WHAT RIGHT DO YOU HAVE TO QUESTION THEM? ABSOLUTELY NONE
Wewease the kwaken |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 12 Nov 2013 10:48 PM |
>eyewitness report
Ergo it would have been observed and not just simply inferred. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|