/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.2994233]

Hey /sci/,
How can you prove me that God doesn't (or didn't) exist?

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.2994236]

[Anonymous No.2994241]

You can't.

[Anonymous No.2994248]

BABBY'S FIRST DEVIL'S PROOF

You cannot prove something "DOESN'T" exist!

>>2994236

You realize that "God is malevolent" is a perfectly acceptable answer, right?
If you then say, "well why worship him", that would be because he'd only be EVEN MORE malevolent.
Be on my bad side or be on my worse side, in other words.

[Anonymous No.2994250]

>>2994241
Then God could possibly exist?

[Anonymous No.2994251]

We don't prove anything.

We just argue (convincingly through science!) that there currently is no validity in the statement: 'God exists'.*
*'Existence' being determined as 'having objective reality'. We don't deny that God has an obvious subjective 'reality'. But that is an arbitrary, troublesome basis for deriving moral authority.

[Anonymous No.2994252]

Obvious burden shift is obvious.

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.2994257]

>>2994248
if he existed he would indeed be malevolent.
flooding the world..creating virus's, creating hell for people to burn in.
i'm very glad he is fictional.

[Anonymous No.2994259]

>>2994250
Yes. There is no (reliable) evidence to actually support the "God Hypothesis", but yes, theoretically, it could be true.

[Anonymous No.2994260]

>>2994250

If you say "magic", anything can exist.

Because you also can't prove magic doesn't exist, and magic can make anything else exist!

Embrace the witch.

[Anonymous No.2994272]

>>2994248
>You cannot prove something "DOESN'T" exist!

Wrong, here is an example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermat_last_theorem

[Anonymous No.2994279]

If you woke up today and found out that "you" were not a human being, but a toxoplamsmic parasite, would you really be upset or would you feel a sense of accomplishment having taken over a human instead of a cat?

I'm happy I won the lotto and got inside a human, go me fuck yeah.

[Anonymous No.2994317]

>>2994272

Sorry, I used magic to make it work. The numbers are "tetramos" for a, "zooditar" for b, and "seven" for c.

[Anonymous No.2994323]

>>2994317

And n was seven trillion!

ahaha.wav

[Anonymous No.2994344]

One can prove that specific, named, described gods don't exist. Like the god of some holy book or another, or the gods of the various pantheons. They just don't exist. They are described as doing things that they just don't do, they are said to describe the world as being a certain way, and it just isn't. These gods DO NOT EXIST.

One can't say anything about subtle, or vague, or distant gods. I can't say they don't exist, because I have nothing to go on. The other guy can't say they do exist, because he has nothing to go on. If they do think they have a source, like god talking to them or something, it is up to them to distinguish this from a fiction they are creating. This god could or could not exist, but anyone who says they know anything about it is lying, or mistaken, or delusional.

[Anonymous No.2994360]

>>2994344

>These gods DO NOT EXIST.

They do, I just invited them to the Golden Land to have magical parties.

Demons are more fun to play with, but old gods just know how to get shitfaced in the best way.

Don't you get it? You can't beat magic.

[Anonymous No.2994362]

Can you prove he does?

No one but idiots are saying that some kind of god absolutely doesn't exist. Stop being so defensive.

[Anonymous No.2994372]

>>2994362
However, I would submit to you that given the content contained within the holy texts of each major monotheistic religion, the idea of god these texts present is almost certainly...unrealistic. However it's up to you to come to your own conclusions on this.

[Anonymous No.2994374]

>>2994362

If it were possible to prove it, then there would be only one religion.

[Anonymous No.2994379]

Lets assume that God is (or was) real. Lets also use the bible to identify him/her/it.

Generally, the catholic community recognizes god as a loving, forgiving, all powerful, all knowing, peaceful, and the only God that exist.

The bible, the holy book for catholics, has a little bit of a different opinion.

All Loving
>God has murdered hundreds and thousands in the bible. Those who stood against his will even slightly were prime candidates for death. ex. Luke 19:27

Forgiving
>...for I the lord thy god am a jealous god, visiting onto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me. Exodus 20:5

All powerful
>About half of the acts attributed to God's power were the work of man, such as the slaughter of the 1st born in Egypt which Moses claimed to be God's power. Also, an all powerful being, for some reason, needs humans to do his work shows that they are not all powerful.

All knowing
>Why would an all knowing god need to "test" people? Why does an all knowing god ask questions, such as in the story of Cain and Abel.
Why does god need someone to count the people if he should already know (1 Chronicle 21:1)

Peaceful
>Assuming that God, the Holy Spirit, and Jesus are all one in the same being, what Jesus says should also be the opinion of God. "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth. I came not to send peace but a sword. Matthew 10: 34

Only god
>Nowhere in the bible does it say that God is the only God. It does say that it is wrong to worship other gods however.

Therefore, according to the bible, "god" is not all powerful, not all knowing, loving only to those who blindly follow, not always forgiving, not peaceful, and not the only god, should other gods exist.

Assuming "God" exist, he/she/it is about the same as man.

[Anonymous No.2994378]

>>2994374
Well then it's not really worth arguing about until you prove one way or the other now is it?

[Anonymous No.2994385]

>>2994372

That's why saying that one is a blanket atheist, and must demonstrate every god wrong, is fallacious.

Deistic gods, that is, those subtle, vague or distant, are different from theistic gods, that is, those described in detail.

Atheists hold that the latter do not exist, and the former cannot be shown, though we have a gut feeling they don't. Deists hold that the latter do not exist, and former cannot be show, though they have a gut feeling they do. Theists hold that the former is irrelevant (except when arguing with atheists over whether gods exist or not), because they hold the latter, and that is, one specific example or set of the latter, to exist.

[Anonymous No.2994396]

Lutero fucked the whole thing up

So now you have to read the bible and accept Christ as your savior to be saved? Well what if I was born in India, or in some african tribe? He turned salvation into a lottery game

[Anonymous No.2994400]

>>2994379

>God has murdered hundreds and thousands in the bible. Those who stood against his will even slightly were prime candidates for death. ex. Luke 19:27

You can love someone but still have to put them down.

>for I the lord thy god am a jealous god, visiting onto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me. Exodus 20:5

God did not become forgiving until he sent his only Son down.

>About half of the acts attributed to God's power were the work of man, such as the slaughter of the 1st born in Egypt which Moses claimed to be God's power. Also, an all powerful being, for some reason, needs humans to do his work shows that they are not all powerful.

1. Prove it.
2. It's plausible that God CAN do these things, but has his children do it to prove their value. Or, that God acts through people, since God is omnipresent.

>Why would an all knowing god need to "test" people? Why does an all knowing god ask questions, such as in the story of Cain and Abel.
>Why does god need someone to count the people if he should already know

These are unknowable. Who are you to say there's even a "why"? An omniscient entity does not have to think like anything you could understand.

>Assuming that God, the Holy Spirit, and Jesus are all one in the same being, what Jesus says should also be the opinion of God. "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth. I came not to send peace but a sword. Matthew 10: 34

Matthew probably heard him wrong. That's one of the most disputed quotes of Jesus.

>Nowhere in the bible does it say that God is the only God. It does say that it is wrong to worship other gods however.

They're consistently called "false idols". Implicating that they represent a falsity.


I am the devil's advocate, for I am a witch.

[Anonymous No.2994410]

what is the evolutionary advantage of thinking about god?

[Anonymous No.2994411]

>>2994400

Repeat in red bitch.

[Anonymous No.2994418]

>>2994411

I refuse on the grounds of ahaha.wav.

[Anonymous No.2994420]

>>2994400

>creates us
>already is aware exactly how everything is going to go
>people need to "prove their value"

How cute.

[Anonymous No.2994421]

>>2994410

None, it's a bug of the human brain.

It is of great advantage to spot patterns, so we even sometimes spot patterns that aren't there.

It is of great advantage to spot when an agency is acting, so sometimes we attribute agency to impersonal events or objects.

It is of great advantage to believe what our elders tell us on faith alone, since there is much in the world that a child could not know, and an adult could not explain easily, and yet could be vital to life, so we accept their word even in the face of counter-evidence.

Add it all up, iterate over a few thousand generations, and god.

[Anonymous No.2994422]

>>2994396
do you understand basic biology?

you are the offspring of your mother and father, in case you didn't know. you were not some cosmic ghost waiting for a newborn baby just at the right second to inhabit.

if your parents were faithful God fearing people, then you were raised properly. if not, then not.

Jesus said, I am the vine, and you are the branches. any branch that does not bear fruit I will cut off and cast it into the fire.

yeah, Jesus is not Rainbow Brite, and you cannot outsmart Him. the sooner you figure that out, the better off you'll be.

[Anonymous No.2994428]

>>2994233
An atheist doesn't have to prove something doesn't exist, he just has to believe it himself that it doesn't.
A theist on the other hand is the one who says it exists, therefore he should be the one to prove it does. For instance, it would be like me saying the yeti does exist, you say "Prove it". I say "Prove it doesn't exist". How do you do so? Why would you even need to do so considering you're not the one making shit up.., even though in this case you are the one making shit up, so how about you prove it does exist rather than asking the people how say it doesn't to

[Anonymous No.2994431]

>>2994420
people need to accept the fact that they can never "prove their value", and that if they do not receive a pardon, they will pay for all of their own sins. sins committed with the free will God gave them, in defiance of God's rules.

an offense against an eternal entity requires an eternal punishment

do you ever get tired of being wrong, and just want to end it all?

[Anonymous No.2994436]

>>2994431
>Free will

[Anonymous No.2994437]

If imagination is also a product of evolution then arent we predisposed to think of God?

[Anonymous No.2994438]

>>2994236
oh, so now you're the retard in the bunch that hasn't abandoned epifagcurious yet

protip: God is ready, able, and willing to, and will, eradicate all evil in the entire universe, then burn the entire universe and start all over.

on His timetable, not epifagcurious'

[Anonymous No.2994435]

>>2994418
In which case what you said doesnt even count for devils advocate. Have a good day

[Anonymous No.2994439]

>>2994431
>free will

No such thing, under God.

[Anonymous No.2994441]

>>2994436
i'll tell you why you have free will, and then you can stop wondering whether or not you have free will.

you have free will so that you can love your Creator of your own free will.

if He wanted robots, He would have made robots.

and He takes your choices you make with your free will more seriously than you do, if you are willing to defy Him to your own damnation

[Anonymous No.2994442]

>>2994420

Omniscience does not equal predetermination, except in an infinite sense.

God knows all of the ways the universe CAN go, but leaves it up to humans to decide WHICH way it WILL go.

In the back of his mind he probably knows that anyway, but let's say God is a sporting fellow.

[Anonymous No.2994443]

>>2994422

He loved us so much, He sent is only son to die for a bunch of us who had believer parents?

[Anonymous No.2994445]

>>2994438
>So one question, do you think Earth is the only habitable planet in the entire universe, if no then you're bible is wrong! Its as simple as that, now whether you believe in a creator or not, I have no problem with, just please realize the bible has been outdated for years now..

[Anonymous No.2994450]

>>2994439
only by God do you have free will; if you think you're the accidental mutation of primordial ooze, then you have no basis to say you have free will.

we hold these truths to be self evident; that all men were created equal, and endowed by their Creator with

>endowed by their Creator
>Creator

[Anonymous No.2994455]

>>2994443
what do those believer parents believe in?

and how could those believer parents predate the Creator, the one they believe in?

no, Jesus came to seek and save those who are lost, which is everyone; it is not His will that any should perish, but that all should live in Him.

[Anonymous No.2994463]

He condemns us for the sin that eve commits, damning all of us, then makes a virgin pregnant with his son, whom he sacrifices to himself to save us from the sin he originally condemned us to.

Makes perfect sense to me...

[Anonymous No.2994466]

>>2994445
only habitable? by what, humans? how would i know?

the only things i know for sure are from the bible; that God created the heavens and the earth for His supreme creation, mankind. the earth is full and made just for us; the sun warms us; the moon and stars guide us by night.

so if my choice is between the God who made everything, and some guys that think they know what's really going on, i'll stick with God, and his risen Son, Jesus Christ, every single time.

good science never disproves the bible, and any science that "disproves" the bible is foolishness. actually, all of mankind's knowledge is foolishness to God.

think about it for one second. if you made the universe, you'd be God. He made the universe. He's God.

[Anonymous No.2994479]

>>2994463
what about it does not make sense? that you can't surprise God with current events? that eve sinned? that adam sinned? that satan rebelled? that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary?

oh, that's right; none of it makes any earthly sense whatsoever. so, if God never reached down to man, none of those things would ever have happened.

i see your point.

now see mine. with heavenly eyes, and an open heart, God is calling to you to join him in universe 2.0. this universe is destined for destruction and will end in universal nuclear holocaust.

and all you have to do is to apologize to Him for all of the crimes you have committed against Him, or any one of His creations, including other men, ask Him to forgive you, ask Him to take you into His kingdom, and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead.

do that, and you will be saved from the upcoming armegeddon.

[Anonymous No.2994487]

>>2994466
> good science never disproves the bible
So what is 'bad' science?

> and any science that "disproves" the bible is foolishness.
Example?

> actually, all of mankind's knowledge is foolishness to God.
How do you know? Do you presume to know what he's thinking? How arrogant.

> think about it for one second. if you made the universe, you'd be God. He made the universe. He's God.
How do you know? How do you know he made the universe? Did he tell you? Do you see him do it?

[Anonymous No.2994497]

>>2994466
>>2994479

Beatrice does not involve herself with boring people such as you.

[Anonymous No.2994498]

>Create men and make them able to sin
>You know theyre going to sin
>Ask them to aplogize anyway

[Anonymous No.2994501]

>>2994498

>teach your children to man the fuck up to mistakes they will invariably commit

God sounds like a good father.

[Anonymous No.2994505]

>>2994487
> good science never disproves the bible
So what is 'bad' science?
>anything that claims to disprove any jot or tittle of the Word of God

> and any science that "disproves" the bible is foolishness.
Example?
>that the universe sprang into existence from nothing, via gravity

> actually, all of mankind's knowledge is foolishness to God.
How do you know? Do you presume to know what he's thinking? How arrogant.
>it's a direct quote from the bible. you might want to read it for yourself:
1 Corinthians 3:19 (New King James Version)
19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, “He catches the wise in their own craftiness”;[a]

> think about it for one second. if you made the universe, you'd be God. He made the universe. He's God.
How do you know? How do you know he made the universe? Did he tell you? Do you see him do it?
>Genesis 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

keep searching for truth, and you will find Jesus Christ

[Anonymous No.2994511]

>>2994498
did your parents ever expect you to do anything wrong?
did you do anything wrong?
did your parents teach you to apologize when you did something wrong?

how else would your heavenly Father act, if your earthly parents know to teach you such things?

[Anonymous No.2994514]

>>2994497
i don't want you to meet me; i want you to meet Jesus Christ, and on good terms, so that you can be spared the agony of paying for your own crimes against Him

[Dr. White !!/zv2MTbpUH9 No.2994519]

The null hypothesis. The default position is to not believe any proposition until evidence makes that position untenable.

[Anonymous No.2994525]

>>2994400

>You can love someone but still have to put them down.

"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring them hither, and slay them before me" Luke 19:27

>God did not become forgiving until he sent his only Son down.

Who are you to say that it takes the birth of his/her/it's son to have a change of heart? If god is a being which knows everything and transcends time, why would his feelings change over time instead of remaining constant with his knowlege?

>About half of the acts attributed to God's power were the work of man
>Prove it.

"Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD. Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves." Numbers 31: 16-18
> It's plausible that God CAN do these things, but has his children do it to prove their value. Or, that God acts through people, since God is omnipresent.

Who are the "children" proving theyre value to? Why does something which knows everything need proof?

[Anonymous No.2994530]

>>2994525

Part 2

>These are unknowable. Who are you to say there's even a "why"? An omniscient entity does not have to think like anything you could understand.

What exactly is unknowable to an all knowing being? True, an omniscent entity doesnt have to think like we do, but it also implies they dont have to think. To think is to formulate an answer, which should already be known to one who knows all.

>Matthew probably heard him wrong. That's one of the most disputed quotes of Jesus.

There are also several accounts of God being alright and encouraging sacrafice of children, inferiority of other people, ect. How many can be wrong?

>I am the devil's advocate, for I am a witch.
1 Chronicle 21:1 and 2 Corinthian 24:1 proves that the idea of the devil was created because people could not continue to attribute bad acts to God. At first, "satan" meant accuser, it was later used to talk about a spirit which tempted men.

All of this found in the handy dandy bible.

[Anonymous No.2994532]

>>2994519
a man named Jesus Christ is proven historically to have lived about 2,000 years ago; His claims that He and God were One and the same were documented by eyewitnesses that lived with Him for over three years; during those three years, dozens of miracles were performed by this Jesus Christ, and His disciples; Jesus has been historically proven to have been crucified under Pontius Pilate, and to raise from the dead on the third day, as He Himself prophesied, so that all men might know that He is God. Hundreds of eyewitnesses saw Him after He was raised from the dead. Books were written on the subject, including the best selling book of all time.

These are all well documented facts, and explain the explosion of Christianity immediately following the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Hundreds of millions of people have bent the knee and call Him God.

Still going to stick to your null hypothesis?

[Anonymous No.2994543]

>>2994514

Witches will fall to hell on their own schedule! Trying to save a witch is folly.

>>2994525

Magic, magic, magic, magic, and magic.

[Anonymous No.2994544]

>>2994532
>a man named Jesus Christ is proven historically to have lived about 2,000 years ago

Get the fuck out, troll

[Anonymous No.2994554]

God exists as long as people believe he/they do. And there is nothing wrong with believing that a higher being has a plan for your dead dog, or for why you lost your job. Leave em alone.

[Dr. White !!/zv2MTbpUH9 No.2994555]

>>2994532
Oh you want to play this game do you?

>His claims that He and God were One and the same were documented by eyewitnesses

We know that's not true. The new testament existed for at least a hundred years as word of mouth before being written down.

>His claims that He and God were One and the same were documented by eyewitnesses

Your proof of this is?

[Anonymous No.2994558]

>>2994544
learn2history
lrn2josephus, lrn2tiberius
open your eyes
why are we talking about a joo carpenter 2000 years later>

[Anonymous No.2994566]

>>2994519

Correct, Dr. White.

And when I am asked to give an account for my mostly blind acceptance of science, which is fair, I say this;

Science works. It is a good way of figuring out the rules of the universe, the laws of nature. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the proof of this is in technology. We are able to do more, better, cheaper, easier, with technology than we ever used to; an improved capacity to exploit the laws of nature is good enough for me to believe that we have an improved understanding of the laws of nature.

And why is my acceptance of science blind? Because I don't understand most of it, I haven't done the research myself, I haven't tracked down sources myself.

[Anonymous No.2994567]

>>2994555

Sorry, but to anyone who doesnt believe this, your wrong. There was a Jesus, and science has proven that much

[Anonymous No.2994574]

>>2994555
Oh you want to play this game do you?
>it's not a game, it's deadly serious

>His claims that He and God were One and the same were documented by eyewitnesses
We know that's not true. The new testament existed for at least a hundred years as word of mouth before being written down.
>despite your trips, you still have to tell the truth. the gospels were written between 40 AD and 70 AD, not a hundred years after Christ. they were written by men that lived side by side with the man, and written during the lifetime of tens of thousands of eyewitnesses to the events they were writing about.

>His claims that He and God were One and the same were documented by eyewitnesses
Your proof of this is?
>Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul

look, there are a lot of things that seem good to a man, but they all lead to death. by denying that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, all you are doing is signing your own death warrant. if you think you're going to somehow stick your thumb in the eye of the God, you are sadly misled.

[Anonymous No.2994585]

>>2994567
>There was a Jesus, and science has proven that much
Bullshit.

[Anonymous No.2994589]

>>2994574

>We know that's not true. The new testament existed for at least a hundred years as word of mouth before being written down.

You are using evidence AGAINST yourself to prove your point.

WORD OF MOUTH DISTORTS OVER TIME.

[Anonymous No.2994591]

>>2994585
Jesus was a real man who really lived, really was killed by the Roman empire, and really changed the world.

all you have is "bullshit"

[Dr. White !!/zv2MTbpUH9 No.2994593]

>>2994567
The truth of the existence of a man does not prove the truth of the actions attributed to him.

I could prove that there was a man named St. Nicholas, but that doesn't mean he actually rides around the world on Christmas eve.

[Anonymous No.2994597]

>>2994589
odd, then, how the dead sea scrolls confirmed the translation of Isaiah over a thousand years prior to our modern translation as being virtually identical

the bible has more historical proof than any other document, ever. more than plato, socrates, more than homer, more than shakespeare, more than anything

to turn a blind eye to the mountain of evidence supporting God and God's word should suggest to you that perhaps you are being influenced, to your detriment

[Dr. White !!/zv2MTbpUH9 No.2994598]

>>2994589

Actually, he was quoting me. His post-fu is weak.

[Anonymous No.2994603]

>>2994532

If my brother reincarnated before my eyes, I would probably acknowledge something beyond my ken happened.

If my brother said he reincarnated last week, when I was away, I may take his word on it.

If my brother said he saw someone reincarnate last week, I may even take his word on that.

If my brother said he heard about someone reincarnating a few states over, I would be a fool to just take it at face value, especially if it came with a set of instructions that only held weight if the proponent was reincarnated.

If my brother heard of someone who got reincarnated on the other side of the world, it would be way out to accept that. This, by the way, is from reality. People right now claim this, and have thousands of believers who claim to have witnessed it.

And if I read a book by an unknown set of authors, translated and transcribed dozens of times in between, the original manuscripts based on second or third hand testimony of people, all of whom differ on the details of the event, who claim to have heard of someone who reincarnated from eyewitnesses, and this comes with a set of instructions that must be followed, it would be absolutely perverse to accept it.

tl;dr; a once off experience of the supernatural does not trump our continuous experience of the natural; and a second (or third, or nth) account of this should not be compelling in the slightest.

[Anonymous No.2994609]

>>2994233
1. because there are buildings older then the 6000year age of humanity the bible clames.
2. Geneticly impossible for mankind to be made up of 2 individuals "adam and eve"
3. if adam and eve had 2 children "cane and able" how did they get reproduce
4. Snakes don't talk

[Anonymous No.2994610]

>>2994593

He does, you know.

But Santa is rather mean. I'm not always a naughty girl. I should get presents at least SOME times too..

[Anonymous No.2994614]

>>2994585

Bullshit
>Historians have found documents which tell about Jesus, not proving any divine connections, just Jesus as a man, and through the use of carbon dating, have determined the documents to be from the same era when the bible was written.

No sir. No bullshit here. Jesus existed. As for his miracles and divinity and stuff like that, not proven.

[Dr. White !!/zv2MTbpUH9 No.2994615]

>>2994597
Well, its a good thing we got the accurate translation of Isaiah correct.

The fact remains that even if the bible we have is EXACTLY the same as was used by the isrealites, it would not prove the theological claims about God that it makes.

The same goes if it's historic facts are 100% correct.

Which they probably aren't.

[Anonymous No.2994617]

>>2994593
that is correct.

but once we agree that there was in history a man named Jesus Christ, we can talk about whether or not His claims that He was God are actually consistent with history, archeology, philosophy, etc.

it is a historical fact that after Jesus was crucified, a huge following grew all claiming that He was alive. His disciples, who were cowering in fear when He was crucified, somehow became titans and changed the world as we know it. they took down the roman empire and turned it into a christian stronghold. these fishermen, these tax collectors, a tent maker and a doctor, all say they saw a risen Jesus Christ, a carpenter and a wandering rabbi, raised from the dead three days after He was crucified.

this is all evidence. to dismiss it out of hand is to shirk your intellectual curiosity on whether or not this man Jesus Christ actually was the eagerly awaited messiah prophecied in jooish scriptures for thousands of years.

[Anonymous No.2994623]

>>2994591
>all you have is "bullshit"
That, and the complete lack of evidence to support your claim.

Fact is, "science" has done fuck all to definitely prove that Jesus really existed. There are some oddballs on the fringes throwing their respective pet theories around, but that's a far cry from your claim that "there was a Jesus, and science has proven that much".

[Anonymous No.2994624]

>>2994603
This is actually an insightful post. Did you copy/paste it from somewhere?

It would be better if it had more "steps" to it between lines 5 and 6, making a more gradual transition that gets just a little bit harder to believe at each step.

[Anonymous No.2994628]

So why are you guys worrying about this again?

[Anonymous No.2994629]

Inb4 you all going to hell

[pascal !n5Z3VuZapw No.2994630]

>>2994609 3

And the sons of god took upon wives from the daughtwrs of man.

Obviously created humans mated with evolved humans

[Anonymous No.2994631]

>>2994609
Atheist, but just wanted to point out that Adam and Eve (supposedly existed and) had more children than just Cain and Able. Adam lived for 930 years, and they had a pretty hefty list of descendents, and an unspecified number of "other sons and daughters".

[Anonymous No.2994633]

>>2994593
>The truth of the existence of a man does not prove the truth of the actions attributed to him.
True, but keep in mind that the truth of the man's existence hasn't been conclusively established yet either.

[Dr. White !!/zv2MTbpUH9 No.2994637]

>>2994617
The funny thing is, every time I read the bible, Jesus always refers to himself as "The Son of Man" and never as the son of God. He claims he was sent by God, but lots of prophets said that.

Everyone else around him said he was the son of God. When Pilot asked him point blank if he was the son of god, Jesus said something like "if you say so"

[Anonymous No.2994639]

>>2994617

And the texts from around that time that claim Jesus had a twin brother, do you disregard them? Dozens of gospels about Jesus' life were thrown out, and many of the ones now in the bible were once, and for hundreds of years, considered heterodox (revelations, for example).

There is about as much evidence for Jesus as for Socrates. Enough to say that there was probably a guy who said many of the things attributed to him from around that time and place. If people claimed Socrates could fly, there would not be enough evidence for that.

[Anonymous No.2994643]

>>2994603
first off, it's resurrected from the dead, not reincarnated

secondly, if you saw Jesus Christ killed and raised from the dead three days later, would you believe He was God?

if you read an account of how Jesus Christ was killed and raised from the dead three days later, and you actually saw Jesus Christ a month after He was killed, would you believe? and tell some people about it?

thousands of people saw the risen Savior. thousands more heard from people they knew that He is alive

Jesus told Thomas, you have seen Me, and believed; blessed are they who have not seen, yet still believe.

be one of the blessed; there is no future in being a skeptic, and there is no second chance. you have today to be saved; you are not promised tomorrow.

[Anonymous No.2994646]

>>2994624

I used it in an /r9k/ thread a while ago. And it did have more points in between. I thought I had the original in a txt file somewhere, but no. So I had to write it from scratch and it's not as good as it was.

The main point is the tl;dr part, the rest is just to make sure everyone is on the same page.

[Anonymous No.2994650]

>>2994630

[Dr. White !!/zv2MTbpUH9 No.2994652]

>>2994643
>first off, it's resurrected from the dead, not reincarnated

They are both equally fantastic requiring fantastic evidence, not just some word of mouth over 2000 years old.

[Anonymous No.2994655]

>>2994609
1. because there are buildings older then the 6000year age of humanity the bible clames.
>there are not; there are only braggadocious claims that there are. most if not all of recorded human history is within the last 4,500 years or so. a chinese claim that their ancestry goes back 10,000 years, but the claim is only 3,000 years old.

2. Geneticly impossible for mankind to be made up of 2 individuals "adam and eve"
>it has already been indicated that not only is this possible, but that they think they have isolated "eve's" dna

3. if adam and eve had 2 children "cane and able" how did they get reproduce
>adam and eve probably had dozens, if not hundreds, of children; they lived to be like 900 years old

4. Snakes don't talk
>serpents possessed by satan do

[Anonymous No.2994656]

[Dr. White !!/zv2MTbpUH9 No.2994665]

>>2994639
>There is about as much evidence for Jesus as for Socrates.

This is most likely true, but no one is demanding we believe Socrates existed, they just want us to consider what he had to say. To do this all we have to do is read his works (actually plato's works, but w/e)

Christians on the other hand demand we believe Jesus existed and the truth of what he said. To do this we need to see evidence as well as read his works.

[Anonymous No.2994670]

>>2994615
the bible lost nothing in translation, and lost nothing over time.

also, it would be hard to explain the exact prophecies of Isaiah coming true precisely as told beforehand, without the intervention of a God

nostradameus wrote a few vague quatrains; Isaiah predicted to the date when Jesus would ride into Jerusalem hundreds of years later

you do yourself a disservice by not delving into the bible, for whatever reason; history, art, literature, stories, wisdom, whatever the reason

the entire book is about Him; odd how many shun it. if it were not about Him, it would be the most used literature on earth, and the most accurate

[Anonymous No.2994672]

>>2994643

If I saw it for myself, it would still fall under the heading of a once off experience of the supernatural compared to a continuous experience of the natural. That doesn't mean I wouldn't accept it.

I would never accept a second hand account of this sort. I, and you for that matter, do not accept the thousands of other second hand accounts of this nature that are available to be found. Incidents from before Jesus to the present day.

[Anonymous No.2994683]

>>2994630
angels and humans mated before the Flood, and probably afterwards

and not the good angels

[Anonymous No.2994684]

>>2994670

So if any two translations disagree, or if we discover a historical bible that has different text, this would disprove the bible? According to your standard that nothing in the bible changed in translation.

[pascal !n5Z3VuZapw No.2994686]

>>2994650
the bible is plenty pro evolution

[Dr. White !!/zv2MTbpUH9 No.2994687]

>>2994655
>it has already been indicated that not only is this possible, but that they think they have isolated "eve's" dna

Just FYI, greentext is used for quoting, not the other way around.

And just for the record, mitochondrial eve , which is what you are refering to, is a fascinating discovery in genetics. We also found Y Chromosomal Adam too! But guess what, the two lived about 50000 years apart.

[Anonymous No.2994688]

>>2994683

You know, it was never stated whether the Nephilim were good or bad, just that they scared the SHIT out of the jews.

[Anonymous No.2994690]

>>2994655

Mitochondrial Eve would have existed tens of thousands of years ago.

[Anonymous No.2994694]

>>2994637
indeed

here are some other things Jesus said:
I and the Father are One;
If you have not the Son, you have not the Father
I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no man comes to the Father but by me.
to the rabbi prosecuting Him: before Abraham was, I am. (hence the death sentence).

if Jesus was not God, i wouldn't think He was sane

[Anonymous No.2994697]

>>2994614
No. All accounts of jesus were along the same vein as the bible. A story carried by word of mouth and written at minimum a century after his supposed crucifixion. No documents or records, or anything at all first hand in nature, and almost nothing you can't link directly to churches.

[Anonymous No.2994701]

>>2994670
> the bible lost nothing in translation, and lost nothing over time.
This is just another unfounded claim for which you cannot provide evidence.

Suppose I write a book and that book tells a story that is in direct contradiction of the Bible. It tells of events and people and happenings that disagree very specifically with the events in the Bible. Now, my book also says that it is written by God and that absolutely every word of it must be taken as literal truth.

Would you accept my book?

[Anonymous No.2994703]

>>2994643
>if you read an account of how Jesus Christ was killed and raised from the dead three days later, and you actually saw Jesus Christ a month after He was killed, would you believe?
Wouldn't have happened, though, considering the fact that the earliest accounts of Jesus' zombie tale can only be traced back to a few decades after his supposed resurrection.

[Anonymous No.2994704]

>>2994694

So the only options are lunatic or lord? What about liar or legend?

Which was Mohammed?

[Anonymous No.2994708]

>>2994665
you have touched on an interesting point

why do so many millions of people want to follow Jesus Christ, when they don't have that same urging to "follow" Socrates or Shakespeare?

could it be due to the claims of being deity, and promises of eternal life, as opposed to eternal agony?

which do you think more people would choose; life and good, or death and evil?

oddly enough, more people will choose death and evil; i just pray that somebody reading this will stop for a moment and consider Christ's claims, and His proof, and speak to Him.

He's always listening; His ear has not grown deaf, and His arm has not been shortened. He can and will reach you, if you ask Him to.

[Anonymous No.2994710]

>>2994672
the resurrection of a man who claimed to be God, who said He would be raised on the third day after He was killed, and walked out of His grave on day three, you would brush off as a "one-off"?

really?

[Anonymous No.2994716]

>>2994684
if you want to be really tichy about it, i suppose you would have to go back to the original hebrew and greek texts to check out whether or not your translation accurately reflects what the original document said, in fact and flavor

but since you're starting at zero, it seems unlikely to me that you would learn greek and hebrew in order to test out various translations.

why not just grab a KJV or a New KJV and see if you can understand it?

[Dr. White !!/zv2MTbpUH9 No.2994717]

>>2994708
>oddly enough, more people will choose death and evil

That is the dumbest thing I have read today. No one chooses death or evil or misery or unhappiness.

The fact of the matter is that YOU have yet to prove that YOUR way will provide life or goodness or happiness.

[Anonymous No.2994718]

>>2994708
Do you believe that gay people are an abomination?

[Anonymous No.2994720]

>>2994687
thank you for the correction

i posited that "science" saw the possibility that all mankind came from one mated pair, and "science" agrees. just the timeline is different.

and the timeline is all-important to "science", and has nothing whatsoever to do with the truth of God's word.

[Anonymous No.2994721]

>>2994710

Yes. If I saw something that was impossible, utterly impossible, it would be a once off experience of the supernatural.

Now, if, for example, Jesus lived and walked the earth answering questions forever, to this day, and modern DNA science showed that he was the same exact individual he was two thousand years ago, and anyone who wanted could go and meet him in person; THEN we're talking compelling evidence.

Would you accept the word of thousands of Indians that some baba came back from the dead? If you go to India you can meet them, and him, today. Surely that is more compelling than a book written thousands of years ago from second hand accounts of something that happened once and was witnessed by a few dozen biased witnesses?

[Anonymous No.2994723]

>>2994558
Are you kidding? No seriously, are you trolling or just incredibly stupid?

Josephus wasn't even alive during the supposed life of jesus. And Tiberius has nothing to do with the gospels other than being mentioned in passing. Considering that the gospels were written after the writings of Josephus, that's not very impressive. As for Josephus, even if we accept that someone who was born after the events in question can have any authoritative pull on their veracity, there's still the fact that he only mentions the name jesus twice. The first time was clearly a different jesus, and the second has been deemed interpolated beyond repair by every literary scholar who has studied the subject.

FUCKING FAIL.

[Anonymous No.2994726]

>>2994688
i believe it said that they were men of great renowned; we may have stories of their exploits that developed over time into Beowulf, etc.

i believe Goliath, as in David and Goliath, was nephelim based, as well as his brothers, who were all eventually killed.

[Anonymous No.2994729]

>>2994614
>Historians have found documents which tell about Jesus, not proving any divine connections, just Jesus as a man, and through the use of carbon dating, have determined the documents to be from the same era when the bible was written.
My, isn't that convincing evidence. How about you actually read a bit into the whole scholarly Jesus research that has been going on for fucking centuries instead of assuming it to have already reached a definitive conclusion based on nothing but a fucking Wikipedia paragraph, or wherever that worthless quote of yours is from?

Fact:
Contrary to your unfounded claim, there simply is no definitive proof of Jesus' existence, and no scientific consensus either.

[Anonymous No.2994730]

>>2994708

Socrates or Shakespeare never claimed they were god.

David Koresh did have followers.

[Anonymous No.2994733]

>>2994723
no, the only proof i need is the bible; if you need outside proof of the existence of a man named Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, you can go to Josephus and Tiberius and read their anti-christian accounts of Him

the only fail is the failure to recognize that God reached down to a fallen mankind and offered a pardon under grace to be saved; to fail to accept that offer is to suffer a horrible fate, and one that you would justly deserve

[Dr. White !!/zv2MTbpUH9 No.2994740]

>>2994720
Hang on, I think I need to reboot my brain from that overload of stupidity.

Okay, back.
>all mankind came from one mated pair, and "science" agrees

No, they did not, and no they do not. Mito Eve and Y chrom Adam lived tens of thousands of years apart, they never could have been a mated pair. Did you not read my post when I told you that here?>>2994687

My troll senses are starting to register.

[Anonymous No.2994747]

>>2994733
OH GOD IT BURNS

How could anyone be so stupid?

Sincerely,
>>2994723

[Anonymous No.2994748]

>>2994721
okay, here's my problem

you are going to get what you want; Jesus Christ is going to come back to earth to rule and to reign from Jerusalem, and soon; almost certainly in the lifetime of everyone reading this. you will have all of the proof you will need to know once and for all that Jesus Christ is Lord, and that all heaven and earth belong to Him.

if you survive the upcoming troubles of Jacob; the upcoming tribulation; the upcoming armegeddon, where billions of people will be killed.

don't take the chance. take the free pardon while it is still being offered. you have nothing to lose by joining Jesus' kingdom, and heaven to gain.

[Anonymous No.2994753]

This thread:

Genuine religious arguments are indistinguishable from trolling.

Q to the E to the motherflipping D.

[Anonymous No.2994757]

This thread is like homeopathy VS medicine

[Anonymous No.2994758]

>>2994748
>mfw none of that happens

[Anonymous No.2994761]

>>2994730
indeed. and they followed him into a fire.
buddha has followers too; they will all follow him into death.
mohammad has followers too; they will all follow him into hell.
krishna, vishnu, ra, osiris, isis, [insert false god here] all have followers, too, and all will perish.

there is a straight path, and a narrow gate, that leads to heaven, and that path, and that gate, is Jesus Christ.

however, wide is the path that leads to destruction, and many are there who will find it.

be one of the few

[Anonymous No.2994763]

>>2994748

Well, when I am face to face with god, I will believe then.

And if that's not good enough for god, then god is not good enough for me. He knew exactly why I didn't believe, nothing to do with hate or fear or anger, and he knew exactly what it would take to make me believe, and he didn't do it. If following my conscience and reason wasn't good enough, then what could be?

[Anonymous No.2994765]

>>2994701
So, I'll take the absence of a response to this to mean "no, I would not accept such a book."

[Anonymous No.2994770]

>>2994763
> If following my conscience and reason wasn't good enough, then what could be?

Sacrificing a goat or two wouldnt hurt....

[Anonymous No.2994771]

>>2994761

We should measure it by how many followers each one had in their lifetime. Because eyewitness testimony is the most important and reliable measure, correct?

Mohammed, then, is it?

[Dr. White !!/zv2MTbpUH9 No.2994773]

>>2994763

All that is needed for me to believe in God is for a God that want me to believe in it.

After that it can reveal itself to me in a way that I know I'm not going crazy.

[Jorgen von Strangle !!mgMKicKl27e No.2994769]

>>2994748
No, don't do this! Join the ranks of the glorious allah's followers, the koran is a consistent and holistic account and you'll even get 72 virgins.

don't take the chance. take the free pardon while it is still being offered. you have nothing to lose by joining Mohammad's kingdom, and heaven to gain.

[Anonymous No.2994774]

>>2994740
i'm not trolling you; i'm suggesting that the science is wrong

that should not be a surprise to anyone who studies science; science is always being "updated"

the bible says that adam and eve were created together in a garden and told to populate the earth. some bishop sometime back in the medieval days did a geneology, which the bible provides, tracing Adam to Abraham to David to Jesus to modern times, and that geneology was only a few thousand years old.

there is a ton of science to support a young earth; it is a very unpopular field of study, and subject to immense ridicule and loss of funding.

don't start with the "fact" that there is no God.

look for Him yourself.

[Anonymous No.2994775]

Praise God everyday

[Anonymous No.2994783]

>>2994747
well, oddly enough, you would be correct; if there is no God, and Jesus Christ did not raise from the dead, then i as well as every other christian, living and dead, are to be pitied as fools.

the way of the cross is foolish to the unbeliever; Jesus Christ Himself is a stumbling block to God's chosen people

these things only make sense if there is a God, and Jesus Christ is His Son, who promised to save all who believe in Him, and love Him.

[Anonymous No.2994784]

>>2994774

We start with the 'fact' (actually an assumption) that the information reaching us from our senses is representative of a consistent external universe.

[Anonymous No.2994779]

>>2994774
>i'm suggesting that the science is wrong
>there is a ton of science to support a young earth

confirmed for troll

[Anonymous No.2994785]

>>2994753
agreed, and it is a little bit frustrating

[Anonymous No.2994788]

>>2994774
Actually, anyone who studies science doesn't really bother with words like "wrong." In science, there is only evidence, hypotheses, theories... You don't ever really get to say "this is right" or "this is wrong." You can say "evidence doesn't support that claim," but even that statement remains open to the possibility that the contradicting evidence is flawed.

[Anonymous No.2994789]

>>2994708
You dont think the billions of people who belive in jesus may be due to cultural norm, catholic missions, inquisitions, crusades, and the general controll of europe and areas of the middle east by the christian powers since its founding. Most people who consider themselfs athiest or agonostic would tell you we have considered jesus or even been a part of the church but have listened to the facts and were "converted" to science.

[Anonymous No.2994793]

>>2994779
have you looked for evidence supporting a young earth?

even once? glanced at anything about dinosaur connective tissue, the sahara desert, the great barrier reef, the shape of the milky way galaxy, the dust on the moon, anything?

[Anonymous No.2994797]

>>2994784
i could never get geometry, because i could never assume there was a point in space

when our assumptions are wrong, our conclusions are wrong

[Anonymous No.2994798]

>>2994793
>evidence supporting a young earth?

[Anonymous No.2994799]

>>2994774
>i'm not trolling you; i'm suggesting that the science is wrong

>that should not be a surprise to anyone who studies science; science is always being "updated"
But that happens based on new evidence and better theoretical models, not based on someone's random, unsubstantiated claims. You can't just say "Science is wrong" and expect it to weigh as much as science actually being *proven* wrong by new data that falsify old theories.

>there is a ton of science to support a young earth;
Please share your sources.

[Anonymous No.2994800]

>>2994793

Recorded history extends past the point where the earth supposedly began.

That alone should burst the young earth.

[Anonymous No.2994806]

/sci/, trolled by religion yet again

[Anonymous No.2994807]

>>2994788
agreed; it would be disheartening to always have to admit that something you thought was true always was wrong, again, and again, and again, and again....


if two wrongs don't make a right, science thinks that maybe a billion wrongs will make a right.

they won't

[Anonymous No.2994810]

>>2994797

So what assumptions should we make, then?

I start with, I believe things I see with my own eyes.

[Anonymous No.2994811]

>>2994793
I'm not him, but I've looked for it and haven't seen any yet. I've seen a lot of extremely sound evidence to support a very old universe. Much of it is even trivially observable. Like the fact that light travels at a certain speed and stars are a certain distance away, and that light couldn't have reached my eyeballs in less than a few billion years.

[Dr. White !!/zv2MTbpUH9 No.2994814]

>>2994793

Everytime I have seen "evidence" of YEC, it has been either a misrepresentation, ignoring other facts, or just saying "lol this theory has flaws, ours must be right!"

[Anonymous No.2994817]

>>2994789
no, what i believe is that those people that believe in Jesus, will receive what Jesus promised them

and the people that believe in whatever else, will get what that thing promised them, and also what Jesus promised them; separation from Him eternally

it's a really, really bad bargain to think God won't keep His word

[Anonymous No.2994819]

>>2994807

Better than insisting you find out was wrong was actually true.

Science: Wrong, but getting less wrong.

Religion: Wrong, but we know we're right.

[Anonymous No.2994820]

>>2994793
I've read all of the arguments. They're all fallacious, as any actual scientist in the respective fields which the young earth proponent claim to have a monopolies of knowledge on will gladly explain to you.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-yea.html#proof1

Read more, bro.

[Anonymous No.2994827]

>>2994799
why? do you really think i don't know what the reaction will be? do you really think that creation scientists haven't tried to persuade their colleagues? do you really think christians don't get ostracized in mainstream science?

if you want to look around for yourself, why not go to their website? why ask me?

http://www.icr.org/

[Anonymous No.2994831]

>>2994820
I will only read my bible.

[Anonymous No.2994833]

>>2994800
it in fact does not; recorded human history does not go back 6,000 years

claims made 3,000 or 4,000 years ago about things that happened 7,000 or 6,000 years prior are not proof of that antiquity at all; they are just boasts, mostly found in chinese dynasties

[Anonymous No.2994834]

>>2994807
> it would be disheartening to always have to admit that something you thought was true always was wrong, again, and again, and again, and again....

No, and this is probably the source of all your frustration. Science can't be called "wrong." It's always open to improvement, and is always being improved, and that's what's great about it.

A point of view (yours) that claims to be "infallible" immediately sets itself up to be argued. If you enjoy being defensive and arguing and finding loopholes to explain contradictions, then your point of view will probably provide you with much to do, and you'll probably enjoy it. I don't have a problem with that.

[Anonymous No.2994838]

>>2994806
i like the "I love you this much" one showing my savior taking a bullet (cross) for me. so much love, so much compassion, so much sacrifice; how could i not worship Him after what He did for me?

[Anonymous No.2994839]

>>2994810
what an awful assumption; you see visible light rays only, and have no evidence whatsoever that everything important happens in that band

[Anonymous No.2994843]

>>2994833
>they are just boasts

Tell it like it is brother. word of mouth doesn't mean shit. The new testament is the perfect word of god.

[Anonymous No.2994844]

>>2994827
Bad scientists get ostracized from modern science. That's the way it's supposed to work.

[pascal !n5Z3VuZapw No.2994847]

>>2994838
Unless you are a jew, he didnt do it for you. Enjoy no afterlife

[Anonymous No.2994848]

>>2994811
unless time were somehow effected by gravity....

i'm not claiming i have the answers to that question; i only know that i worship a God who can easily make light travel instantaneously, and then slow it down later

i worship a God who says mankind can live to 1000, and then resets the limit to 120 years.

i worship a God who can turn back the clock 45 minutes one night as proof to a doubting king of israel, or keep the sun stationary to an observer to rout their enemies for days.

i worship a God in whom all things are possible

i also set it up so that i can talk to Him at length later about how He did all of those things.

and i want to include you too.

[Anonymous No.2994859]

>>2994819
you won't often see me sing the praises of "religion"

"religion" is mankind's way of reaching out to the gods

i preach Jesus Christ and the Kingdom of God; once you are a citizen of that, you can pray to find a bible believing church and fellowship with likeminded believers

but if you are not already counted in the Kingdom of God, you can go to the best, most established church in the entire world and still be lost

[Anonymous No.2994863]

>>2994833

I see. Is there a reason Aborigines seem to have been living in Australia for 40,000 years?

[Dr. White !!/zv2MTbpUH9 No.2994864]

>>2994848
>i only know that i worship a God who can easily make light travel instantaneously, and then slow it down later

You also worship a god who makes it look like it would take light millions of years to reach us, but in actuality it only took a short time. That is to say that you worship a god who makes the universe look different than it actually is.

Ergo, you worship a troll god.

[Anonymous No.2994865]

>>2994820
i agree; if you start with the proposition that the world and the universe are billions of years old, you can discount at your leisure anything that evidences otherwise

[Anonymous No.2994870]

>>2994827
>if you want to look around for yourself, why not go to their website? why ask me?
Well, because I wouldn't know where to start.

I don't quite understand your reaction to my post, to be honest. I wasn't trying to be confrontational.

[Dr. White !!/zv2MTbpUH9 No.2994872]

>>2994865
You are either a troll, or you don't know how science works. Why would we start out with the idea that the universe is really old in the first place?

[Anonymous No.2994877]

Final destination:

Scientific claims tend to converge. Religious claims tend to diverge.


If observing this alone doesn't convince you that one is honing in on a right answer, and the other is going with whatever sounds good, then nothing will.

[Anonymous No.2994878]

>>2994834
from a biblical perspective, Jesus said that He is the rock, and the wise man builds his house upon the rock.

the foolish man builds his house on shifting sand

when the storms of life come, the house built on shifting sand will fall, but the house built on the rock of Jesus Christ will endure forever.

if you could meet the entity that created everything, wouldn't you want to?

[Anonymous No.2994882]

>>2994843
Jesus Christ is the Word of God; in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Jesus is just as much in the "old" testament, for Jesus said that if you believe in Moses and the prophets, you believe in Jesus, because Moses and the prophets spoke of Him

[Anonymous No.2994884]

>>2994865

Science (western, enlightenment science) started out assuming the world was thousands of years old, as described in the bible. We found evidence that led us away from that conclusion.

[Anonymous No.2994885]

>>2994817
Thats the reason i dont believe in god, because its mindsets like yours that say "everyone who doesnt share my beliefe is going to hell" that started the crusades.

[Anonymous No.2994887]

>>2994844
gee, i thought all the godless types of people valued diversity so much

[Jorgen von Strangle !!mgMKicKl27e No.2994888]

>>2994878
>every post, making the assumption that everything in the bible is true

[Anonymous No.2994893]

>>2994888
prove that it isnt, faggot.

[Anonymous No.2994902]

>>2994893

>find one thing in the bible that is wrong

People cannot live inside whales.

The Jews were never slaves in Egypt.

[Anonymous No.2994912]

>>2994902
The common christians answer to your statement would be, it wasnt a whale it was a big fish

[Anonymous No.2994914]

[Anonymous No.2994915]

>>2994847
to the jew first, and then to the gentile

pretty sure i know my Lord's word

[Anonymous No.2994916]

>>2994902
Normal people cant, but with god at your side anything is possible bro.

And you cant prove that jews were never slaves.

[Anonymous No.2994920]

>>2994863
why would you think i would agree with that timetable, when i stated that the earth was younger than that?

what are you relying on? aboriginal diaries? lol

[Anonymous No.2994926]

>>2994916

>implying god was on job's side

[Anonymous No.2994929]

>>2994864
kind of. He said that He preached in parables to confound the lost

christfag out; love you all; hope to see some of you in heaven but gtg

[Anonymous No.2994935]

>>2994920

So when did the first aborigines reach australia?

And why do most people think it was 40,000 years ago?

[Anonymous No.2994951]

>>2994935
they are lost souls that have not found the way to christ

[Anonymous No.2994955]

>>2994233
God is beyond existence therefor god dose not exist

[Anonymous No.2994968]

It isn't possible.
As it shouldn't be possible to believe in (to know) something that has offered you no direct evidence of its existence. ...but the human mind is flawed, so here we go....

[Anonymous No.2994982]

full of trolls

[Anonymous No.2994988]

>>2994257
That's too simplistic.... even I, an atheist, could come out with tons of ideas to explain why he isn't malevolent...
Just one : suffering , death is an illusion, when you die and achieve repentance and god's forgiveness, you turn into a being of pure energy/soul that is way beyond death, suffering, sadness etc so you understand His schemes and all is good.
Hell doesn't exist, it is only a place where you can learn and evolve into abovementionned meta-being, God always has his way to make even the more disgusting being a blessed Man again.

etc etc..

[Anonymous No.2994993]

>>2994988

It's easy to imagine that kind of being.

If you take the bible as the source, though, you have no justification to believe in such a being.

[Anonymous No.2995004]

keep this religious bullshit off my /sci/

[Anonymous No.2995048]

>>2994878

Consider, Chuckles: The unyielding tree snaps in the violent storm, while the reed bends in the gale.

[Anonymous No.2995208]

I have come to tell you all the truth: Jesus is awesome, but Goku is better.

Proof:
Jesus saved the Earth once. Goku saved us all at least eight times.

Jesus was resurrected once. Goku was resurrected at least four times.

Jesus could heal people. Goku could fly, shoot energy from his hands, transport anywhere instantly, communicate telepathically, and transform into a giant monkey.

POINT:
Goku > Jesus

[Anonymous No.2995394]

>>2995208
goku=jesus=god=elvis

[Anonymous No.2995435]

>>2995394
My penis = much more science than this thread