Jesus - Man or Myth?

I am talking about every war in this world. Internal and external wars. Tragedies and suffering. Almost %100 of them are due to the same thing: intolerance.

That's the cruel truth. =/

@Silverline: I will read your book. It says "If you feel trapped by your religion...". Sorry, but I've never felt more free. I have read a lot of stuff against religion etc. and the only thing I have noticed is repetition. It's all based on "I can't see it, it's not there.". I expect from the book to get a better insight on what everything Atheists believe is based on. This will help be develop a better understanding and how to define it's counterpart better. "Knowing your enemy makes it easier to defeat him." >=D

EDIT:

MWUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! KNOWLEDGE IS THE KEY TO POWER!!! >=D

Yup.

But people don't understand that many do actually feel more realized in their lives when they have something to follow, something to believe in. This makes them feel more confident, more secure. Like there is someone watching you and protecting you. I feel that every single thing that happens to me, good or bad, is necessary. We must live good and bad experiences in life. Otherwise, we will never succeed in finding happiness. Because true happiness is that which brings you peace of mind and security. Faith.
When you're happy, it doesn't mean that you will never, ever again encounter problems. There will always be situations in which you will have to find a solution, confront it, and get out "alive". That is part of everyone's lives. God lightens our burden. That is what God does when you believe in his control, his power, and his love.

I don't remember seeing any facts that there was not a Jesus.

I'll let Saucy tear you apart for saying that. !_! I bet she'd rather love to do it than me. Ain't I right, Saucy?

those that have grown up being taught a religion aren't quite at the point where they've begun to think for themselves, and then they read posts from other members here who put down their beliefs and they can't handle it and feel the need to fight for their beliefs, completely ignoring all common sense and logic, and the most important part: facts.

Yeah, that's why we have to show them they're right/wrong, since we're "more" experienced. xD

Actually, it sounds like that was directed at you, as well as your misspelling little bible buddy...

And who are you to know if Atheism IS a faith or not?

Well, I do know it shouldn't be left to the people with a personal biased towards it to give a definition

I also believe that the people who are actually Atheist, get to say what they believe in. It is not in dispute by us the meaning of it: A lack of belief, due to evidence showing otherwise. A belief made due to evidence, is not a religion.

I don’t tell Christians that they have no right to decide the definition of Christianity, that’s up to the church. Make this claim again, and I will decide that you all actually worship a giant hotdog.

The Bible is written in metaphors.

Right, and who decides that? Who decides the metaphors? A metaphor to me sounds like something that can be interpreted a thousand different ways, giving people a full proof to ignore any possibility of error.

4 different versions of the same story: The New Testament. I think this is EVIDENCE enough to show you they DID exist.

The four different stories from the New Testament..? I believe that it's the bible that says they where written separately. You can't use what the evidence says, to prove itself.

What's so hard to understand on this part:
Quote
no need to reply to this part.
I said, I UNDERSTOOD what you meant.

You where taking what I said and twisting the meaning... The comparison was only not making full sense to you, because of your biased views.

Adn Christianity can't be a branch or Buddism, because Christianty was there before Buddism. What you are saying doesn't make sense. It can't even be a "branch".

Ok, I'm not exactly sure what you said there, but: Christianity is a branch from Judaism. I said that there was a branch from Buddhism, that believe Buddha himself to be a god.

I DO understand how Athesist think and I tolerate it. You have the right to believe and think all you want, I'm not judging you. Who said it's a charade? I never saw fake happiness on the face of a true believer. Actually I have seen to much fake happiness on the face of non-believers... It's easy to say "There's not God.", it's way harder to say "There is a God."

Ohh! So that is why about 90% of the Western world is Christian, because it's the "hard" choice. Lucky Atheist, I am forced to live for eternity in heaven when I die, I'm so glad I don't give into the fear of non-immortality!

Interesting view. Well, if everything is just Martix, then the photo is no evidence that I exist. xD

1) That was me being quite sarcastic to your insane rambling.
2) As you agreed, you can't disprove a negative, making it evidence.

Verified evidence is proof and no evidence anymore. If somebody gets killed and the murderer's weapon is found with finger prints, that doesn't make the guy who left the fingerprints to the murderer. Even if it's very good evidence, it's not proof. NOW we're one up.

Ahh not even slightly, as you could "verify" that those twelve "guys" existed and still not have proof that the Jesus they spoke of existed. I could say I have an old script with those "twelve men" writing a confession, but even if it is verified to be from the same general time period with real historical references, that still doesn't make it "proof".

Verified as in shown not to be fraudulent. No you don't have that, and Christianity is not one up against Science.

Two different document mentioning the same person and it DOESN'T count? Then tell me why.

I don't see any evidence how the Koran/Bible is not just a translation of the other, in certain aspects. Same story, with differences to the plot.

Timeflow limits eternity. Isn't it obvious? Eternity means forever, time can't be forever as it isn't continous, time is quantized. Time is just like space consisting out of many very small piece or units of time if you will.

And why are you telling me this? Perhaps if you did more then skim my posts you would see that I have said we come from something timeless.

I know. It makes sense to me and I am able to accept it until I get provided with a better answer.

Just because Christianity likes to throw out wild claims without the proper research, doesn't mean that science will. If you want an answer, the wait a few years and see what happens. I only see one group of people willing to make wild allegations without any evidence what so ever.

I was talking about the part why I believe in God. (-_-)

And you where saying that was an answer to why I took your "do I hear Jesus" question the wrong way, how??

I don't want people to get screwed, just because I was too ignorant to consider this possibility? Wink

Yeah, and your really showing it too,

You haven't shown me one point of expanding your knowledge... Is refusing to actually examine new information despite the evidence of its correctness a form of ignorance..?

Christianity, Islam, etc. We all believe in the same God, but in different ways. But the thing is that we also have different pictures of God. Who are we to understand what God really is?! The Bible is written in metaphors, telling us God is Love, you should be familiar with that. It's a metaphor. How could a simple man like me understand what God is?!

That's another little ignorant point made to stop you from thinking. "I'm so weak! How could I ever possibly understand something written by a god! Rather then question it, I'll just blindly follow".

I asked you for the definition, not for interpretion of the definition.

Alrighty, my definition: A false title or made up entity. Either way, non-existent.

Cheap try by you, not me. I never said you have no REASON to live, I said in the end there is no point in life. You're gonna die anyway. Memories of you will fade away. It will be as if you never existed. Time will consume you, eternity will destroy you.

Oh, so it's this fear that makes you cling to an afterlife..?

The "cheap shot" part was you saying "but you have money, so what do you care". Yeah, that's a cheap shot. It's not that I'm offended, it's just showing you can't handle yourself maturely in this debate.

Why am I coming off as ass? What have I said there that's not factual? Science has done a lot, I am not denying it. I am merely stating that science has done little in comparison what is left to do.

No, what you where saying is that science is a tool of your religion. Factual means you have evidences, strong evidence, which you have not shown. I say pretty much all of what you have said is not factual.

The ^^^^ was pointing to the dictionary reference. I was saying your coming off as naive.

"Just happen" is a term defined within time. I haven't made up any explanation, energy IS omnipotent. Everything is yet another form energy.

Are you saying that energy, or god is omnipotent..? I'm not sure how many people would be willing to say that energy is all knowing... And yes, you did "make up" a deep, foolish sounding theory with no evidential showings. The very basic ideas I handed you are backed to some extent, you however simply wrote a small piece of science fiction.

I am not debating it, I am merely stating the few conclusions I have come to. It's you who are saying all the time "It's void".

Please oh please quote me using the word "void" outside of this sentence. I am not saying that your faith is full stop wrong. I'm saying that the absolute lack of real evidence is evidence on the side of not believing. There is more real evidence to support not believing then the other way around. We are in a debate, and yes putting those ideas of yours on the table is participating. You are not just giving your thoughts , you are fighting for them.

Alien means "outsider" or "foreign". =/ God is no outsider, he's rather an insider. And he doesn't seem to be foreign to me. =/

You have said numerous times that you do not know what your god is ("HOW WHEN WHO” etc...) and yet it is not foreign to you..? If you haven't met god, if you haven't an understanding about him in deep, then he is a foreign subject to you. God is an alien.

[Quote from: Deliciously_Saucy on Yesterday at 05:01:50 PM]
Actually I said that in my previous post, and if your worshiping the actual beginning, then your worshiping something with absolutely no intelligence and you may as well worship a brick wall. After all, I'm sure you look down on Pagans who worshiped the sun, all you would be doing is praying to something bigger.

"Universal/Ultimate" isn't just "something bigger". It's everything.

Only if it’s omnipotent, which it is not. The origin of the universe is just another space phenomenon, no intelligence. It might have made over time something (close) to an omnipotent being, but certainly not intentionally. If you want to worship the mindless origin of life, you would be just as ignorant as those who worshiped the sun as a god.

I'm not thinking this and I never said this. How can somebody who never heard of Christianity know that Christianity is the true faith?! I merely stated it's easier to run from your problems in a metaphor. You just have to take everything literaly, don' you? wink

Congratulations on the first one, you caught me in a technicality! Your prize? The ability to avoid another question directly!

My problem is religion spreading unfounded information. It looks like I’m running directly at it, not away.

Yes, because you were attaking my faith. That it happens to be a part of my religion is just "coincidence". I could care less if you would mock anything else that's not par tof my faith. An example is politics. I have my very own views on it, but I don't share it as nobody has attacked my view so far.

If you can’t handle your faith being put under scrutiny and without taking it personally, then leave.

I never said Jesus existed, don't put words in my mouth. Where do you see in the sentence "It was a translation mistake." the words "Jesus was real."?! It IS a translation mistake regardless if the Bible is fact or not.

Yet you where awfully quick to defend… That doesn’t sound like a mindful observer to me, it sounds like a warrior of faith wielding his sword with a blindfold on… Not because your faith is wrong, but because you reject the evidence of the other side before you see it.

No matter what you say to convince us otherwise, you know you are right, and will justify anything you have to in order to make your religious beliefs correct.

Religion & faith = not the same*

faith          - Show Spelled Pronunciation[feyth] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1.   confidence or trust in a person or thing even without evidence or proof.
2.   belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
3.   belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4.   belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.
5.   a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.
6.   the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.: Failure to appear would be breaking faith.
7.   the observance of this obligation; fidelity to one's promise, oath, allegiance, etc.: He was the only one who proved his faith during our recent troubles.
8.   Christian Theology. the trust in God and in His promises as made through Christ and the Scriptures by which humans are justified or saved.


Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law - Cite This Source
Main Entry: be•lief
Function: noun
: a degree of conviction of the truth of something esp. based on a consideration or examination of the evidence —compare KNOWLEDGE, SUSPICION

I’m sorry, what was that..?

I am calling you a liar, because you are saying I was first attacking you, which isn't true. Read the part above for the rest.
And you can' be lying if you don't know the truth yourself.   

I’m sorry, I actually said you defended my attack showing that you wanted to debate it, therefore to disprove me.

Truth..? What truth are we talking about? Religious truth? Ultimate truth? Or perhaps you are simply saying I don’t know what I’m talking about? Either way, poorly said…

Cute. Is that what you do? Editing older posts of yours? Just take a look. Every post has a log of the last edit. There is NO edit in the posts at the beginning of the topic. At least not after the date I have posted what you quoted.

When the topic was moved, a certain line was left out, shown in the time of my quote. I quoted you saying “Prove the history of man to me”, twice, from two different posts, each with different quote times, yet when the topic was moved, that little line now only appears once…

Who wrote the New Testament again? There is your "evidence". You said, you only need evidence to believe in something, I think the most printed book in the world should be evidence enough.

One piece of evidence, is not enough to convict anything and the amount a book is printed, no matter how widely believed, is not proof, or even evidence that it has any truth to it, even in the smallest detail.

Fiction is printed an awful lot too...

There are not monster under my bed. I've taken a look. Have you?

You took a look? Then perhaps you should also take a look for “life sucking machines” that you seemed quite concerned about in your last post. There truly is no difference between that, and childish boogy men.

That's mean. =/ You're mocking me for being different.

I was mocking you for blatantly calling Silverline less intelligent then you. Really quite arrogant, and very unbecoming.

Energy, space and time are no imagination.

Again not something I disagreed with. Energy and time may not be based on unfounded ideas, but this certainly is;

If parallel universes just start to exist by "splitting up" from an already existent universe, the allover energy is doubled. Again, non-sense. Well, on the other hand, God is supposed to be omnipotent. O_o If he IS energy, I guess he can do whatever he wants if he wants, etc.

You based that on what exactly? I know mainstream science has never been stated explaining parallel universes with any certainty.

Of course not. But would you know about morality if nobody ever told you there is something like morality?

How could I? but you sound confused… Morality has nothing to do with the ideas of good and evil, it has to do with the progress of life, and the survival of a species. Morality is an idea that naturally evolves; it does not need divine inspiration. Even animals have some form of morality, they think it's right to protect their young, no?

Yes, they are made by religion. Religion is made by man. Faith from which all of this comes isn't.

Thanks, I didn’t get the rest, but good work.

It's like telling a child in a poor family "It's possible. You can have a better life. Sorry, I have no idea how, but it's possible.". Hope.

No, that is blatantly lying to them and giving their drunken father another reason not to work.

I pity you.

I was simply proving a point of the stupidity of his question. Hate is not limited to the real.

Muslims think of Jesus as an important prophet, not a the Son of God.

Right, ahh, did I say something contradictory to that..? Everything I stated about Islam was founded. Read the post replying to Nouman.

Weak. Just because you can't touch it, doesn't mean it's not there.

Once I managed to understand his post, I realized it was simply “OH MY! YOU CANT THINK IN THE MIND OF A GOD!!! THEREFORE I’M RIGHT!!!”. Yes, his statement was weak.

But this makes no sense, because both DS and Blizzard are 18+.

Unless I am wrong here, Halo’s post was fully in the favour of Atheists. He was referring to religious types. Besides, we’re all still quite young…

This is EXACTLY what I am talking about! Intolerance! And then you criticize Christians and thier beliefs. Would you like to be offended and said that you're utterly wrong, and that what you believe is not correct? What if you're offended for being atheist? Are you going to stay calm or not feel offended? If so, congratulations, for it means that you don't care for what other people say. But otherwise, stop offending other people's points of view and grow up.

This topic was started in spam. Bio was making a (crude) joke.

Do you gain something from offending Christians? Other than perhaps self-satisfaction. How long does the satisfaction last or how this satisfaction makes you happier, I do not know. It would be you who is supposed to tell me if you want to.

Then again, all I want is that people can finally respect each other someday soon. Forget about damn religious beliefs. I am talking about every war in this world. Internal and external wars. Tragedies and suffering. Almost %100 of them are due to the same thing: intolerance.

First: I’m offended by Christians on a daily basis. I ask you the same thing, in fact this is directed at all Christians;

Do you gain something from offending Atheists, other than perhaps self satisfaction? How long does the satisfaction last or how does this satisfaction makes you happier?

Second: I believe many wars where started by the Christian’s intolerance for others beliefs, no? How many people did they murder for not believing in their god?

But people don't understand that many do actually feel more realized in their lives when they have something to follow, something to believe in. This makes them feel more confident, more secure. Like there is someone watching you and protecting you. I feel that every single thing that happens to me, good or bad, is necessary.

So instead of trying to change your life you move in the wind like a puppet? If it’s all necessary, then it’s really nothing more then predestination, meaning you have no, if not little, control over your life. That, is pointless.

I don't remember seeing any facts that there was not a Jesus.

Nope, no facts, but there is evidence he didn’t exist =)

I'll let Saucy tear you apart for saying that. !_! I bet she'd rather love to do it than me. Ain't I right, Saucy?

Well, I do prefer replying to post I can read and make sense of.


The one thing I love about Christianity is that it has all aspects covered. You see, the problem with Judaism is that they forgot to add a hell you could end up in yourself, so this had to be fixed… "Do as we tell you to do, if not you WILL burn in hell". They even have the aspect of suicide covered, ”if heavens so great, wont people want to just kill themselves so they can live in internal bliss? I know! If you end your life, you go to hell aswel!! Great idea!”. It is truly a well thought out plan for slavery…

I don’t respect any religion that needs fear to gain and control members. People should believe in a faith because of what it teaches, not because of the consequences of what would happen from not believing in it.

I would like like you too answer my question? First of that entire document was large and even in that entire article you gave me no proof or even evidence that Jesus was real. If atheism is so correct them how come it is a series of faiths like creation. There is only one problem is that creation can be proven logical up to the point God created because thatt is the only faith that is required in creation. Thanks for spending time to beat around the bush and not give real answers.

I would like like you too answer my question? First of that entire document was large and even in that entire article you gave me no proof or even evidence that Jesus was real.

No, no I did not give any proof or evidence that Jesus was real. I thought that was your job.

If atheism is so correct them how come it is a series of faiths like creation.

Actually I think it is Creationist who have a faith in creation.

There is only one problem is that creation can be proven logical up to the point God created because thatt is the only faith that is required in creation.

No that is the only faith, in Creationism. I didn't see creationist coming up with evolution, or even natural select. The only thing Creationist have added, is a creator.

Thanks for spending time to beat around the bush and not give real answers.

I gave you plenty of real answers. If you would like me to not do it in such a sarcastic manner, then try this:

I would like you to answer my questions as well. Even in that very large "saga" you made, you still did not manage to answer my question; there is no proof, or evidence that Jesus did not exist.

I have already stated the evidence, that evidence being lack of evidence that he existed! ( Yuppers, that is evidence ).

If Atheism is absolutely correct, then why is it still a series of faith, like Creationism?

It's not. Perhaps you should do some research in science and see the evidence first hand before making the accusation that it is baseless. Atheism has nothing to do with faith on topics, in fact it is the opposite, it is the scrutiny of faith, and a complete biased to believing in something that has a lack of evidence in its favour.

The only problem in the theory of Creationism is showing evidence of the existence of God, the only part of life that requires faith.

Yes, that is a problem. Look at the definition of Atheist that I gave. Let me ask you a question; why do you have this faith? Why do you believe as Christianity to be the true faith despite its complete lack of evidence? Do you really think that you would still be a Christian if you where born in India and raised with their beliefs?

Another question: "If you had a child, that you loved with all your heart, would you really give it a punishment of damnation in complete and utter pain through torture for eternity? Honestly.

With God, Yahweh, a being infinitely more perfect then you, a being that has infinitely more perfect love then you and is something that is full stop pure love, really punish something for ever, it created knowing the decisions that person makes before they even make it ( given that Yahweh is omnipotent, it would surely have to know )? Does that sound like an ALL KNOWING GOD OF PURE LOVE to you?" {Inspired question from a man named Brian Sapient}

 

Maybe you can try to stop twisting my words. There are other books that tell about  his existince he has been seen by roman leaders by large amounts of people and then killed. The United States was built on the idea of freedom to worship Christ.

I would like like you too answer my question? First of that entire document was large and even in that entire article you gave me no proof or even evidence that Jesus was real.

No, no I did not give any proof or evidence that Jesus was real. I thought that was your job.

It is my job and that is not what I said. If you can't have evidence that supports the false idea that Jesus was not there and I have evidence that Jesus is real then therefore my idea is the current winner until you can come up with evidence and just not insult our belief in a negative way until you get evidence of someone other than people on this forum saying what you believe.

Maybe you can try to stop twisting my words.

Then perhaps you can learn to spell..?

you gave me no proof or even evidence that Jesus was real.

I'm not twisting your words, and was replying to what you wrote. I am not here to interpret your poor grammar, even though I kindly did so a few sentences down. Did you even read that?

It is my job and that is not what I said. If you can't have evidence that supports the false idea that Jesus was not there and I have evidence that Jesus is real then therefore my idea is the current winner until you can come up with evidence and just not insult our belief in a negative way until you get evidence of someone other than people on this forum saying what you believe.

I'm sorry, what evidence do you have..? What, this?;

There are other books that tell about  his existince he has been seen by roman leaders by large amounts of people and then killed.

I'm sorry, what books might they be?

As I said, I gave you my evidence; lack of evidence. The only evidence you can truly get to disprove a mans existence. Why? Because you can't disprove a negative, it is the job of the theorist to supply enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the theory is correct. Even if this unnamed book of yours turns out to be writings past fiction, you are still no were near proving the existence of Jesus, the Jesus who claimed godhood.

Contrary to what you think, no, science isn't the tool of the Devil, and yes, if it where shown substantial evidence tipping the balance favorably in the odds of Jesus being a real historical figure, they would announce it to be true.

As it stands, the lack of evidence is still more evident to his non-existence, then evidence the opposition has handed forward in his favour.

And believe it or not, I can also bet I know far more about the bible, then you currently do.

You are the one who hasn't supplied the evidence and You are the one, who cannot articulate your thoughts, into understandable characters. This is not your place.

Edit: It also seems that you didn't answer my  questions!

Hey, here's a little question for you, why can Jesus walk on water?

Jesus is a man. There is logic behind everything. He can walk on water because he chose to walk on shallow points of water where it was only an inch deep. Perhaps stones or a log beneath water?

It has been proven that once every 30 years there is a shallow point in the red sea, where it becomes walkable. Hence how Mosis parted the red sea. However how exactly did a mere man know that every 30 years the red sea would part is a mystery.

@lost: It was a translation mistake... -_- How often do I have to repeat this?!

those that have grown up being taught a religion aren't quite at the point where they've begun to think for themselves, and then they read posts from other members here who put down their beliefs and they can't handle it and feel the need to fight for their beliefs, completely ignoring all common sense and logic, and the most important part: facts.

Yeah, that's why we have to show them they're right/wrong, since we're "more" experienced. xD

Actually, it sounds like that was directed at you, as well as your misspelling little bible buddy...

R U SHURE? I've began thinking for myself a long time ago. I was doubting my faith more than ever. I was about to change. Nobody kept telling me to come back as nobody knew of it. Then I realized, it's what I believe in. It's not something others have forced upon me.
I told you already it's a typo. I thought you wouldn't care if somebody made a mistake like you said. I hope this wasn't just your "alter ego".
I have misspelled Atheism once and Bible once. So what? Are you going that low just to answer a part of my post? Better leave it, I won't think less of you if you do.

And who are you to know if Atheism IS a faith or not?

Well, I do know it shouldn't be left to the people with a personal biased towards it to give a definition

I said that already.

I also believe that the people who are actually Atheist, get to say what they believe in. It is not in dispute by us the meaning of it: A lack of belief, due to evidence showing otherwise. A belief made due to evidence, is not a religion.

I don’t tell Christians that they have no right to decide the definition of Christianity, that’s up to the church. Make this claim again, and I will decide that you all actually worship a giant hotdog.

I already said that I was wrong and that it isn't clearly defined if Atheism is a belief or not.

The Bible is written in metaphors.

Right, and who decides that? Who decides the metaphors? A metaphor to me sounds like something that can be interpreted a thousand different ways, giving people a full proof to ignore any possibility of error.

Do you seriously believe Adam and Eve existed?! I mean, c'mon... For example, that story can only be interpreted in the way that God banished them for not obeying him. There is no other meaning.

4 different versions of the same story: The New Testament. I think this is EVIDENCE enough to show you they DID exist.

The four different stories from the New Testament..? I believe that it's the bible that says they where written separately. You can't use what the evidence says, to prove itself.

Not different stories, different version of the same story. There's a BIG difference in those two terms.

You where taking what I said and twisting the meaning... The comparison was only not making full sense to you, because of your biased views.

I said "But I do understand what you meant." That means regardless of that what I wrote before.

Adn Christianity can't be a branch or Buddism, because Christianty was there before Buddism. What you are saying doesn't make sense. It can't even be a "branch".

Ok, I'm not exactly sure what you said there, but: Christianity is a branch from Judaism. I said that there was a branch from Buddhism, that believe Buddha himself to be a god.

You must've made a typo.

And yes, I am quite aware the beliefs of Buddhist. Did you know that a certain branch of Buddhism believes Buddha himself, to be god? Last time I checked, Christianity was just a "branch"...

And it's not a branch, it's a reformation.

I DO understand how Athesist think and I tolerate it. You have the right to believe and think all you want, I'm not judging you. Who said it's a charade? I never saw fake happiness on the face of a true believer. Actually I have seen to much fake happiness on the face of non-believers... It's easy to say "There's not God.", it's way harder to say "There is a God."

Ohh! So that is why about 90% of the Western world is Christian, because it's the "hard" choice. Lucky Atheist, I am forced to live for eternity in heaven when I die, I'm so glad I don't give into the fear of non-immortality!

You know that many of them were "forced" to accept Christianity and that they actually don't care. They are just a shell of a Christian, you know that. I mean, there are not many parents who would just let their kid abandon its religion if it doesn't feel it's right. This is a bad thing.

Interesting view. Well, if everything is just Martix, then the photo is no evidence that I exist. xD

1) That was me being quite sarcastic to your insane rambling.
2) As you agreed, you can't disprove a negative, making it evidence.

1. metaphoric*
2. Yes, evidence is no proof, just bringing it closer to proof.

Verified evidence is proof and no evidence anymore. If somebody gets killed and the murderer's weapon is found with finger prints, that doesn't make the guy who left the fingerprints to the murderer. Even if it's very good evidence, it's not proof. NOW we're one up.

Ahh not even slightly, as you could "verify" that those twelve "guys" existed and still not have proof that the Jesus they spoke of existed. I could say I have an old script with those "twelve men" writing a confession, but even if it is verified to be from the same general time period with real historical references, that still doesn't make it "proof".

Didn't I tell you it's not the point in Christianity if they existed, but the meaning? Yes, you said right. Even if you had something like a "confession" and it is verified, it's no proof yet, because it's just verified to be of the same time period. Anybody could have written it. It's not verified to really be their confession, what makes it partially verified evidence, so not a full proof.

Verified as in shown not to be fraudulent. No you don't have that, and Christianity is not one up against Science.

You can deny it, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Two different document mentioning the same person and it DOESN'T count? Then tell me why.

I don't see any evidence how the Koran/Bible is not just a translation of the other, in certain aspects. Same story, with differences to the plot.

So you need a disproval that Kuran is not a copy from the Bible? Then I can claim God to be real as long as you don't disprove it. That was an own goal, Saucy.

Timeflow limits eternity. Isn't it obvious? Eternity means forever, time can't be forever as it isn't continous, time is quantized. Time is just like space consisting out of many very small piece or units of time if you will.

And why are you telling me this? Perhaps if you did more then skim my posts you would see that I have said we come from something timeless.

Can you limit virtual reality? Yes you can. See my point? God can limit us in any way he wants. That's what I was trying to say. Since everybody is saying he's eternal and we are not, he must've limited us.

I know. It makes sense to me and I am able to accept it until I get provided with a better answer.

Just because Christianity likes to throw out wild claims without the proper research, doesn't mean that science will. If you want an answer, the wait a few years and see what happens. I only see one group of people willing to make wild allegations without any evidence what so ever.

Everything is just theory before it gets proved. Most of the science's achievments started as wild claims. =P
And more people in the world are "believers" than there are not. It's not "one" group.

I was talking about the part why I believe in God. (-_-)

And you where saying that was an answer to why I took your "do I hear Jesus" question the wrong way, how??

Yes, I was saying "do you hear him" and I meant "did you ever think of this, it sounds pretty much that he's there. HEY, ARE YOU EVEN LISTENING WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT?!".

I don't want people to get screwed, just because I was too ignorant to consider this possibility? Wink

Yeah, and your really showing it too,

I am stating what I believe in and why, I'm not expecting to to do so as well, but to understand why I do.

You haven't shown me one point of expanding your knowledge... Is refusing to actually examine new information despite the evidence of its correctness a form of ignorance..?

I have read your post very well and there is just stuff I don't have anything to say to. What's supposed to be wrong about this? This doesn't make me ignorant. Actually if I had replied and started going against it like I "maybe" think, THIS would be ignorance.

Christianity, Islam, etc. We all believe in the same God, but in different ways. But the thing is that we also have different pictures of God. Who are we to understand what God really is?! The Bible is written in metaphors, telling us God is Love, you should be familiar with that. It's a metaphor. How could a simple man like me understand what God is?!

That's another little ignorant point made to stop you from thinking. "I'm so weak! How could I ever possibly understand something written by a god! Rather then question it, I'll just blindly follow".

The Bible was NOT written by God. I have all the rights to doubt it and you have to do so as well. Divine inspiration or not, every human could have claimed that and just added what he wants. It's important to understand the Bible for what it represents, not for what is written in it.

I asked you for the definition, not for interpretion of the definition.

Alrighty, my definition: A false title or made up entity. Either way, non-existent.

1.   the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe.
2.   the Supreme Being considered with reference to a particular attribute: the God of Islam.
3.   (lowercase) one of several deities, esp. a male deity, presiding over some portion of worldly affairs.
4.   (often lowercase) a supreme being according to some particular conception: the god of mercy.
5.   Christian Science. the Supreme Being, understood as Life, Truth, Love, Mind, Soul, Spirit, Principle.
6.   (lowercase) an image of a deity; an idol.
7.   (lowercase) any deified person or object.
8.   (often lowercase) Gods, Theater.
a.   the upper balcony in a theater.
b.   the spectators in this part of the balcony.
–verb (used with object)
9.   (lowercase) to regard or treat as a god; deify; idolize.
–interjection
10.   (used to express disappointment, disbelief, weariness, frustration, annoyance, or the like): God, do we have to listen to this nonsense?

You obviously have no idea what the word God means by definition.

Cheap try by you, not me. I never said you have no REASON to live, I said in the end there is no point in life. You're gonna die anyway. Memories of you will fade away. It will be as if you never existed. Time will consume you, eternity will destroy you.

Oh, so it's this fear that makes you cling to an afterlife..?

It's not a fear. It's non-apathy. I care for what gets of me. If I am have an immortal soul, I surely don't want it to burn in hell some day. And if you just have to see it as "fear": Fear is natural. There is nothing wrong with it. Actually... Isn't it odd that people stop to fear when they start to believe...?

The "cheap shot" part was you saying "but you have money, so what do you care". Yeah, that's a cheap shot. It's not that I'm offended, it's just showing you can't handle yourself maturely in this debate.

It affects people if they have money or not, regardless if like it or not. If you have everything to your disposal without having to work your ass off for it it's different. I know, I was once "wealthy", now I'm not. I know both sides of the medal, I know how it is, I know what I am talking about. If you COULD handle yourself maturely in this debate, you would stop attacking me. Attack my religion as much as you want, but don't attack me for believing in it.

Why am I coming off as ass? What have I said there that's not factual? Science has done a lot, I am not denying it. I am merely stating that science has done little in comparison what is left to do.

No, what you where saying is that science is a tool of your religion. Factual means you have evidences, strong evidence, which you have not shown. I say pretty much all of what you have said is not factual.

It surely is not a tool. I never said that. I said that religion and science go hand in hand. They are two sides of a medal. They should co-operate instead of fighting each other. What's not factual about what I just said?!

The ^^^^ was pointing to the dictionary reference. I was saying your coming off as naive.

I don't know... Thinking "I can't see it, it's not there." is a lot more naive.

"Just happen" is a term defined within time. I haven't made up any explanation, energy IS omnipotent. Everything is yet another form energy.

Are you saying that energy, or god is omnipotent..? I'm not sure how many people would be willing to say that energy is all knowing... And yes, you did "make up" a deep, foolish sounding theory with no evidential showings. The very basic ideas I handed you are backed to some extent, you however simply wrote a small piece of science fiction.

Fact is that energy can change its shape into anything: temperature, kintetic energy, mass, etc. It IS omnipotent.
The rest of the conclusion is made due to "induction" and "logic". If you don't know what that is, look it up.

I am not debating it, I am merely stating the few conclusions I have come to. It's you who are saying all the time "It's void".

Please oh please quote me using the word "void" outside of this sentence. I am not saying that your faith is full stop wrong. I'm saying that the absolute lack of real evidence is evidence on the side of not believing. There is more real evidence to support not believing then the other way around. We are in a debate, and yes putting those ideas of yours on the table is participating. You are not just giving your thoughts , you are fighting for them.

You never used the word void, I only said it like that not to have to write out your full sentence. Here is a piece that tells me "It's void" right in my face:

And yes, you did "make up" a deep, foolish sounding theory

Alien means "outsider" or "foreign". =/ God is no outsider, he's rather an insider. And he doesn't seem to be foreign to me. =/

You have said numerous times that you do not know what your god is ("HOW WHEN WHO” etc...) and yet it is not foreign to you..? If you haven't met god, if you haven't an understanding about him in deep, then he is a foreign subject to you. God is an alien.

I stated also numerous time that he is energy. Energy is not foreign. You are using it right now to read this post. And it means outsider. He surely is not an outsider if he's "everything and everywhere all the time".

[Quote from: Deliciously_Saucy on Yesterday at 05:01:50 PM]
Actually I said that in my previous post, and if your worshiping the actual beginning, then your worshiping something with absolutely no intelligence and you may as well worship a brick wall. After all, I'm sure you look down on Pagans who worshiped the sun, all you would be doing is praying to something bigger.

"Universal/Ultimate" isn't just "something bigger". It's everything.

Only if it’s omnipotent, which it is not. The origin of the universe is just another space phenomenon, no intelligence. It might have made over time something (close) to an omnipotent being, but certainly not intentionally. If you want to worship the mindless origin of life, you would be just as ignorant as those who worshiped the sun as a god.

Energy IS omnipotent. How can you be sure it's not intentionally? Now you are saying to understand the "thoughts of a god".

I'm not thinking this and I never said this. How can somebody who never heard of Christianity know that Christianity is the true faith?! I merely stated it's easier to run from your problems in a metaphor. You just have to take everything literaly, don' you? wink

Congratulations on the first one, you caught me in a technicality! Your prize? The ability to avoid another question directly!

It was a metaphorical statement, not a question, not an answer. Not my bad if you replied without understanding and twisted my words in your head.

Nvm, I didn't want to say that...

My problem is religion spreading unfounded information. It looks like I’m running directly at it, not away.

Time has make it seem unfounded. Let's assume Jesus did exist, then today you'd still have a problem with that evidence of yours. Let's assume he didn't. Well, did anything change...? There is no evidence that it is unfounded. Maybe it was very valid back then...?
What I believe in is not your problem. I am not telling you all the time "Oh yes, he is!", I am expecting you to stop saying "No, he's not!", especially since you answer wouldn't make any sense if I hadn't said it first.
And it's not unfounded "information". Don't claim it's information if you don't know the definition of "information".

Yes, because you were attaking my faith. That it happens to be a part of my religion is just "coincidence". I could care less if you would mock anything else that's not par tof my faith. An example is politics. I have my very own views on it, but I don't share it as nobody has attacked my view so far.

If you can’t handle your faith being put under scrutiny and without taking it personally, then leave.

Did you even read the part above?! My religion IS NOT personal, though you were attacking my faith which IS personal. If you attack my faith I WILL take it personal.

I never said Jesus existed, don't put words in my mouth. Where do you see in the sentence "It was a translation mistake." the words "Jesus was real."?! It IS a translation mistake regardless if the Bible is fact or not.

Yet you where awfully quick to defend… That doesn’t sound like a mindful observer to me, it sounds like a warrior of faith wielding his sword with a blindfold on… Not because your faith is wrong, but because you reject the evidence of the other side before you see it.

You were attacking my faith as I stated above. All in all, you DID start it. Yes, I have a blindfold on, because I didn't expect YOU attacking MY FAITH (NOT MY RELIGION, as you always seem to confuse one with each other...).

No matter what you say to convince us otherwise, you know you are right, and will justify anything you have to in order to make your religious beliefs correct.

I am right. But that doesn't automatically make my beliefs right. You said that, not me. How many times do I have to repeat I am not trying to convince anybody, I am merely stating what I believe in. You are the one who are constantly saying "It's void." and saying again that I am trying to convince somebody here. If it's that what you still think, even though I have said NUMEROUS times that it isn't then you should stop posting here. I am merely saying "Yeah, this is how I look at things.". All I expect is for you to say "Ok, I accept it. I understand. I don't agree with you, but I can see your point.".
This DOES make it very personal. I thought you would stop with that after our chat yesterday.

Religion & faith = not the same*

faith          - Show Spelled Pronunciation[feyth] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1.   confidence or trust in a person or thing even without evidence or proof.
2.   belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
3.   belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
4.   belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.: to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.
5.   a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.
6.   the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.: Failure to appear would be breaking faith.
7.   the observance of this obligation; fidelity to one's promise, oath, allegiance, etc.: He was the only one who proved his faith during our recent troubles.
8.   Christian Theology. the trust in God and in His promises as made through Christ and the Scriptures by which humans are justified or saved.

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law - Cite This Source
Main Entry: be•lief
Function: noun
: a degree of conviction of the truth of something esp. based on a consideration or examination of the evidence —compare KNOWLEDGE, SUSPICION

I’m sorry, what was that..?

I take it back then. You have to consider English isn't my first language. What I meant is:

Don't believe everything you read on the internet. =P
Somebody without religion can still have faith. I can have faith in my parents to succed in financing me through college. That doesn't make it religion. Faith is belief while religion is more of an organization. A very often made mistake. As I see, in the online dictionary as well...
OH WAIT! That's exactly what just I said:

: a degree of conviction of the truth of something esp. based on a consideration or examination of the evidence —compare KNOWLEDGE, SUSPICION

Own goal. =P

I am calling you a liar, because you are saying I was first attacking you, which isn't true. Read the part above for the rest.
And you can' be lying if you don't know the truth yourself.   

I’m sorry, I actually said you defended my attack showing that you wanted to debate it, therefore to disprove me.

Am I not allowed to defend myself when you attack me or what?! I didn't attack you. If you strike me with a sword and I defend, it doesn't automatically make me strike you with my sword as well.
Because you continued attacking me, I was forced to counter back. In the hope you would stop I had to continue my selfdefence.

Truth..? What truth are we talking about? Religious truth? Ultimate truth? Or perhaps you are simply saying I don’t know what I’m talking about? Either way, poorly said…

You defined the context already when you said I would be calling you a liar. If you can't remember your own words, don't blame me.

Cute. Is that what you do? Editing older posts of yours? Just take a look. Every post has a log of the last edit. There is NO edit in the posts at the beginning of the topic. At least not after the date I have posted what you quoted.

When the topic was moved, a certain line was left out, shown in the time of my quote. I quoted you saying “Prove the history of man to me”, twice, from two different posts, each with different quote times, yet when the topic was moved, that little line now only appears once…

I might have missed it, but it's included in a quote, so it's not gone. I thought I split that as well. Sorry, I'm just human.

Who wrote the New Testament again? There is your "evidence". You said, you only need evidence to believe in something, I think the most printed book in the world should be evidence enough.

One piece of evidence, is not enough to convict anything and the amount a book is printed, no matter how widely believed, is not proof, or even evidence that it has any truth to it, even in the smallest detail.

2nd piece: Kuran.

Fiction is printed an awful lot too...

"The God Delusion" You said it gave you an erection, didn't you?
Anyway, to make sure you don't miss the point again: It's a book. You say, books are often fictional.
Off-topic: To be honest from looking the contents, it looks like it's a book by a guy who got pissed, because he had to go to Church and now as he is grown up, he's gonna write a piece to tell all the world how he's pissed and crying for attention.

There are not monster under my bed. I've taken a look. Have you?

You took a look? Then perhaps you should also take a look for “life sucking machines” that you seemed quite concerned about in your last post. There truly is no difference between that, and childish boogy men.

But what if the monster is invisible?!

That's mean. =/ You're mocking me for being different.

I was mocking you for blatantly calling Silverline less intelligent then you. Really quite arrogant, and very unbecoming.

Intelligence is nothing. All that counts is wisdom, a little bit knowledge and skills. Intelligence is a mere curse. I said, I wished it wasn't so. Being arrogant includes me laughing at him, because he isn't which I did not.
I will never respect somebody for being intelligent. I will only respect achievements like experience, skills, knowledge as well. I will never respect somebody for an advantage he was born with, he could not choose, but only for an advantage he has earned himself.

Energy, space and time are no imagination.

Again not something I disagreed with. Energy and time may not be based on unfounded ideas, but this certainly is;

Why? Energy is omnipotent and time is just there. Energy obviously is trapped within time, since it can't get "away" or "come back" (refering to the fact that energy can be destroyed or created). It's not possible to have one ammount of energy in one "frame" of time and more/less in the next.
Since time is a limitation of eternity and energy, energy is eternity or at least eternal. Simple induction.

If parallel universes just start to exist by "splitting up" from an already existent universe, the allover energy is doubled. Again, non-sense. Well, on the other hand, God is supposed to be omnipotent. O_o If he IS energy, I guess he can do whatever he wants if he wants, etc.

You based that on what exactly? I know mainstream science has never been stated explaining parallel universes with any certainty.

I was refering to this.

I don't see why a god is necessary for man to conceive of its origins, as I'm afraid the simplest explanation is often the correct. The simpler explanation being we evolved ( evolved as in "changed" ) from something very simple and ageless. Possibly parallel universes. I would link up some recourses, but this is not something I put my faith in or currently believe. It's simply a more "simple", logical explanation ( compared to a creator ).

Actually it's way more simple that he just created everything than something complex like the evolution process.

Of course not. But would you know about morality if nobody ever told you there is something like morality?

How could I? but you sound confused… Morality has nothing to do with the ideas of good and evil, it has to do with the progress of life, and the survival of a species. Morality is an idea that naturally evolves; it does not need divine inspiration. Even animals have some form of morality, they think it's right to protect their young, no?

Yes, they are made by religion. Religion is made by man. Faith from which all of this comes isn't.

Thanks, I didn’t get the rest, but good work.

Skimming part you don't like?

Faith isn't.

It's like telling a child in a poor family "It's possible. You can have a better life. Sorry, I have no idea how, but it's possible.". Hope.

No, that is blatantly lying to them and giving their drunken father another reason not to work.

The familiy is poor, I didn't say the father has no job or he's a drinker. My family isn't wealthy, you now that, yet they managed to get me through college so far. You fail to see my point.

I pity you.

I was simply proving a point of the stupidity of his question. Hate is not limited to the real.

Hating the unreal is even worse than loving the unreal. You have proven your point, but at which price?!

Muslims think of Jesus as an important prophet, not a the Son of God.

Right, ahh, did I say something contradictory to that..? Everything I stated about Islam was founded. Read the post replying to Nouman.

You said, they hated him. This is very different from being a prophet. But yeah, I know you apologized already for being wrong on this matter.
I told you how I reply to posts in ID, didn't I? I press quote and reply to each part. Often I forget to go back and fix stuff.

Weak. Just because you can't touch it, doesn't mean it's not there.

Once I managed to understand his post, I realized it was simply “OH MY! YOU CANT THINK IN THE MIND OF A GOD!!! THEREFORE I’M RIGHT!!!”. Yes, his statement was weak.

Your both posts were weak.

Do you gain something from offending Christians? Other than perhaps self-satisfaction. How long does the satisfaction last or how this satisfaction makes you happier, I do not know. It would be you who is supposed to tell me if you want to.

Then again, all I want is that people can finally respect each other someday soon. Forget about damn religious beliefs. I am talking about every war in this world. Internal and external wars. Tragedies and suffering. Almost %100 of them are due to the same thing: intolerance.

First: I’m offended by Christians on a daily basis. I ask you the same thing, in fact this is directed at all Christians;

Heck, even I get offended by the ignorance and annoyance of some Christians!

Do you gain something from offending Atheists, other than perhaps self satisfaction? How long does the satisfaction last or how does this satisfaction makes you happier?

I get revenge for getting offended first. Not that I really cared, but at least it's fun.

Second: I believe many wars where started by the Christian’s intolerance for others beliefs, no? How many people did they murder for not believing in their god?

I agree, this was wrong. The sadest thing it will always be that way. =( Islam is doing the same these days.

But people don't understand that many do actually feel more realized in their lives when they have something to follow, something to believe in. This makes them feel more confident, more secure. Like there is someone watching you and protecting you. I feel that every single thing that happens to me, good or bad, is necessary.

So instead of trying to change your life you move in the wind like a puppet? If it’s all necessary, then it’s really nothing more then predestination, meaning you have no, if not little, control over your life. That, is pointless.

Oddly, most people love to be controlled and not to have to think for themselves.

I'll let Saucy tear you apart for saying that. !_! I bet she'd rather love to do it than me. Ain't I right, Saucy?

Well, I do prefer replying to post I can read and make sense of.

You pwnt him by just saying that. xD

The one thing I love about Christianity is that it has all aspects covered. You see, the problem with Judaism is that they forgot to add a hell you could end up in yourself, so this had to be fixed… "Do as we tell you to do, if not you WILL burn in hell". They even have the aspect of suicide covered, ”if heavens so great, wont people want to just kill themselves so they can live in internal bliss? I know! If you end your life, you go to hell aswel!! Great idea!”. It is truly a well thought out plan for slavery…

I don’t respect any religion that needs fear to gain and control members. People should believe in a faith because of what it teaches, not because of the consequences of what would happen from not believing in it.

Those religions are called sects. Nobody forces you to become a Christian.
Don't get me wrong, there will always be idiots  of missionaries who will go on your nerves, but this is blasphemy. Jesus said "Spread the message.", not "Enforce the message!". Too many people fail to understand this. =/
And also why isn't every Jew just killing himself then?!

The only problem in the theory of Creationism is showing evidence of the existence of God, the only part of life that requires faith.

Yes, that is a problem. Look at the definition of Atheist that I gave. Let me ask you a question; why do you have this faith? Why do you believe as Christianity to be the true faith despite its complete lack of evidence? Do you really think that you would still be a Christian if you where born in India and raised with their beliefs?

Another question: "If you had a child, that you loved with all your heart, would you really give it a punishment of damnation in complete and utter pain through torture for eternity? Honestly.

With God, Yahweh, a being infinitely more perfect then you, a being that has infinitely more perfect love then you and is something that is full stop pure love, really punish something for ever, it created knowing the decisions that person makes before they even make it ( given that Yahweh is omnipotent, it would surely have to know )? Does that sound like an ALL KNOWING GOD OF PURE LOVE to you?" {Inspired question from a man named Brian Sapient}

As an ex-Christian you should actually know that God is offering his love and friendship to anybody who is willing to accept it. If you don't want to, you don't go to hell. Live a good life and be a good human. With this you accepted God's offer already. There is no need to become Christian. You should know this as well.
BUT! If you already are a Christian, you are supposed to stay one. Being a Christian is like giving a promise that you'll be good.
Of course I believe it's wrong to get baptised while you're a self-unaware kid. Everybody should have a choice and this is just wrong. I can understand that parents want to save their children as well, but it's just wrong. They have NO right to take away the choice of your religion OR YET YOUR FAITH!
And BTW, God doesn't tell you what to do. You have free will. He might know what you will do, but he won't control you. I think having the power to control me and not doing it is a very big sign of Love, Saucy.

I might stop posting here, I'm wasting too much of my time for the posts in this topic...

Flavius Josephus, a Jewish historian of the 1st Century, wrote of Jesus, though there has been some unresolved controversy among historians as to whether the passage that mentions him was added in later. I think it is fairly likely that He did exist, because if you expect more textual evidence from a period 2000 years ago, then you're not likely to find it. I'm obviously not a historian, but the sheer number of written documents that don't survive two milennia is staggering, and having even just two accounts exist from such a long time ago suggests some credibility at least.

@Blizzard - Are you sure it's a mistranslation, because the story seems rather prolonged and taken in context it doesn't really make sense: here's the passage:

Code: [Select]

  24 But the ship was now in the midst of the sea, tossed with waves: for the wind was contrary.
  25 And ain the fourth watch of the night Jesus went unto them, walking on the sea.
  26 And when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were troubled, saying, It is a spirit; and they cried out for fear.
  27 But straightway Jesus spake unto them, saying, Be of good acheer; it is I; be not afraid.
  28 And Peter answered him and said, Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on the water.
  29 And he said, Come. And when Peter was come down out of the ship, he walked on the water, to go to Jesus.
  30 But when he saw the wind boisterous, he was aafraid; and beginning to sink, he cried, saying, Lord, save me.
  31 And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little afaith, wherefore didst thou doubt?

It just seems that if you replaced "on" with "by the", then the story wouldn't make any sense.


EDIT:

Sorry, I forgot to mention the second non-biblical source from Tacitus, a 1st century Roman Historian who wrote:

"But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind."

Yes, there is strong evidence that it was a mistranslation. The phrase "on the water" and "next to the water" or "by the water" had one or only 2 different letters. Believe me, I am confused as well. Hm... in the end, the translator could have really messed it up a lot... >_>
None the less, this is some very nice evidence you have there. In fact there is more evidence of Jesus begin real than evidence of him no being real.

EDIT:
Fixxorz'd typos in my post up there. -_-

R U SHURE? I've began thinking for myself a long time ago.

Quite.

those that have grown up being taught a religion aren't quite at the point where they've begun to think for themselves, and then they read posts from other members here who put down their beliefs and they can't handle it and feel the need to fight for their beliefs, completely ignoring all common sense and logic, and the most important part: facts.

Yeah, sounds like it was directed at you too. I don't think you have begun to think for yourself yet in full.

I said that already.

If you already said that, then why post this afterwards..?;

And who are you to know if Atheism IS a faith or not?

I already said that I was wrong and that it isn't clearly defined if Atheism is a belief or not.

No, that's sticking to a corpse. You don't agree with the definition of Atheism, given by Atheist. 

Do you seriously believe Adam and Eve existed?!

No, but there are 10's of millions of Christians that do.

I mean, c'mon... For example, that story can only be interpreted in the way that God banished them for not obeying him. There is no other meaning.

Then I guess that would make most Christians quite stupid.

Not different stories, different version of the same story. There's a BIG difference in those two terms.

I'm sorry, four different stories from the bible..? If so.

You can't use what the evidence says, to prove itself.

Or if your speaking of such things as the Koran, and Judaism; Translations, and extensions.

I said "But I do understand what you meant." That means regardless of that what I wrote before.

Really? Let's try it. Your faith is Void and you have been brainwashed by a cult. But I understand why you say these things, and there is no need to reply to this.

Saying "there is no need to reply to this" does not give you a free pass to get in a non-disputable blow.

You must've made a typo.

Righteo, I don't see one here:

Ok, I'm not exactly sure what you said there, but: Christianity is a branch from Judaism. I said that there was a branch from Buddhism, that believe Buddha himself to be a god.

or here....

And yes, I am quite aware the beliefs of Buddhist. Did you know that a certain branch of Buddhism believes Buddha himself, to be god? Last time I checked, Christianity was just a "branch"...

... Perhaps you could point it out for me? Unless you mean this:

And it's not a branch, it's a reformation.

Not from my point of view. The majority of ( or elder ) Jews believed Christ to just a man, some did not, and branched off to form Christianity. It still has the old testament in its faith (remember Jesus said he wasn't here to change the old testament rules), and are just the Jews who accepted Christ. A major branch, but still a branch as they don't reject Judaism in full.

Reformation in religion would incite change in major, Christians didn't change, they added on and took a different path.   

You know that many of them were "forced" to accept Christianity and that they actually don't care. They are just a shell of a Christian, you know that. I mean, there are not many parents who would just let their kid abandon its religion if it doesn't feel it's right. This is a bad thing.

Yes, it is a bad thing. It's a bad thing they where raised in a religious environment in the first place, even if they had freedom to choose. It may seem like they are still capable of deciding for themselves, but fat parents have fat children for a reason; children emulate authority figures and environment.

1. metaphoric*
2. Yes, evidence is no proof, just bringing it closer to proof.

1) Sarcastic* Humoring you. Metaphoric would imply I was speaking in riddles, that I was not.
2) Proof of what, that you exist? I never claimed to have that... But hopefully you can make the logical decision on that one.

You can deny it, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Denial is refusal to accept despise strong evidence, I am saying there is no over balance in evidence, in fact, there is close to none. You can deny that you have actually showed enough evidence, but that doesn't make it true
 

So you need a disproval that Kuran is not a copy from the Bible? Then I can claim God to be real as long as you don't disprove it. That was an own goal, Saucy.

That doesn't own me Blizz... How many times do I have to repeat myself? You cannot disprove a negative. There is a reason why you don't believe in Santa Claus (well, at least I hope you don't) and that certainly isn't because you have evidence he doesn't exist. You just owned yourself.

You cannot disprove, there for you believe? That truly is a naive way to live. But, you can believe what ever you like (doesn't make it true ).

Can you limit virtual reality? Yes you can. See my point? God can limit us in any wa yhe wants. That's what I was trying to say.

Yeah, but the difference is that the VR AI we make, isn't self aware nor can it question.

Since everybody is saying he's eternal and we are not, he must've limited us.

Everybody is saying that?

He limited us how? So that we can naturally find logic to his non-existence backed by what we "consider" evidence just so we can be punished in hell for eternity for not believing?

Everything is just theory before it gets proved. Most of the science's achievments started as wild claims. =P

No they started with observation. From how I recall it Darwin said there must be some design for evolution, and then observed the surroundings to show it. I don't recall him yelling on the streets with a cardboard sign that says "N.S." before concluding it by evidence... Main stream theories are based on some form of observation, not people wildly claiming BS without the slightest evidence.

Yes, I was saying "do you hear him" and I meant "did you ever think of this".

Alright, not my problem, I reply to what's written.

I have read your post very well and there is just stuff I don't have anything to say to. What's supposed to be wron about this? This doesn't make me ignorant. Actually if I had replied and started going against it, this would be ignorance.

Things you can't respond to... Does this mean you had to question your position?

The Bible was NOT written by God. I have all the rights to doubt it and you have to do so as well. Divine inspiration or not, every human could have claimed that and just added what he wants. It's important to understand the Bible for what it represents, not for what is written in it.

Christianity is about accepting the Bible as word of Yahweh, if you don't then you are not Christian according to what other Christians, and their leaders say.

Your making your own religion based from Christianity, that is all...

You obviously have no idea what the word God means by definition.

You asked for my definition. I gave you my definition.

It's not a fear. It's non-apathy. I care for what gets of me. And if you just have to see it as "fear": Fear is natural. There is nothing wrong with it.

You where simply projecting, if you weren't then you would not have claimed that I had a fear of Satan, and you would not have said that in the end, my life has no meaning. Projection of yourself.

It affects people if they have money or not, regardless if like it or not. If you have everything to your disposal without having to work your ass off for it it's different. I know, I was once "wealthy", now I'm not. I know both sides of the medal, I know how it is, I know what I am talking about.

Then don't put your faith in unfounded things (in your famous words:) "because life has shit on you".

It surely is not a tool. I never said that. I said that religion and science go hand in hand. They are two sides of a medal. They should co-operate instead of fighting each other. What's not factual about what I just said?!

Really, this doesn't sound like harmony and peace to me:

God is the definition of origin, he isn't necessary to explain origin. Religion is used to bring origin closer, science to explain it. Well, we didn't get so far with science so far, lol!

In other words science is used to explain the origin of religion.

Fact is that energy can change its shape into anything: temperature, kintetic energy, mass, etc. It IS omnipotent.
The rest of the conclusion is made due to "induction" and "logic". If you don't know what that is, look it up.

Being metamorphic in ability dose not alone imply omnipotence. Perhaps you don't know what the word means..?

As to the rest: Right-o, so you made it up by your  idea of logic, rather then complete fantasy. You can deny that it is baseless, doesn't make it true

You never used the word void, I only said it like that not to have to write out your full sentence. Here is a piece that tells me "It's void" right in my face:

Quote from: Deliciously_Saucy on Today at 03:10:26 AM

And yes, you did "make up" a deep, foolish sounding theory

Right, and yet that was replying to your theory on parallel universes and not your religious beliefs... Way to misquote.

I stated also numerous time that he is energy. Energy is not foreign. You are using it right now to read this post. And it means outsider. He surely is not an outsider if he's "everything and everywhere all the time".

Knowing just about energy and knowing your god in depth {EDIT: is different and} does not show any real signs of an inner knowledge. If your god was not an outsider, then I would see his effect past things that can be naturally explained. If your saying god is nature and energy, then I refer you to the "sun worship" remark again. Your god can't be supernatural and natural at the same time, the two are contradictory.

Energy IS omnipotent.

Ok, perhaps we are referring to different types of energy then. Unless you say that your referring to some sort of supernatural energy, and I don't think you are, then you are making a accusation on religious assumption.

How can you be sure it's not intentionally? Now you are saying to understand the "thoughts of a god".

I don't believe energy to be god, you do. I'm going on scientific thought, not going on the assumption of energy being accepted as god because you think it is omnipotent.

It was a metaphorical statement, not a question, not an answer. Not my bad if you replied without understanding and twisted my words in your head.

Either way, as said, you successfully avoided my question.

Time has make it seem unfounded. Let's assume Jesus did exist, then today you'd still have a problem with that evidence of yours. Let's assume he didn't. Well, did anything change...? There is no evidence that it is unfounded. Maybe it was very valid back then...?

Not at all, if Jesus really went to all those places, then there would be more separate, differently viewed people, linking evidence.

What I believe in is not your problem. I am not telling you all the time "Oh yes, he is!", I am expecting you to stop saying "No, he's not!", especially since you answer wouldn't make any sense if I hadn't said it first.

I'm afraid it is your answers, that are showing to be a simple repetition. I have answered all showing backed scientific ideas, you have shown faith and you have ignored the hard questions you can't get an answer for.

You were attacking my faith as I stated above. All in all, you DID start it. Yes, I have a blindfold on, because I didn't YOU attacking my FAITH (NOT MY RELIGION, as you always seem to confuse one with each other...).

Yes, you can have faith without the religion, but faith is a word with two meanings in modern English, one of those connected deeply to ones religion. I am obviously not attacking the point that you actually believe all of this on some level, I am debating your religion, a faith.

I am right. But that doesn't automatically make my beliefs right. You said that, not me.

I said you where right?

How many times do I have to repeat I am not trying to convince anybody, I am merely stating what I believe in.

Just stating what you believe means you would not post a rebuttal, you are fighting for your statement, making it a debate.

You are the one who are constantly saying "It's void." and saying again that I am trying to convince somebody here.

If that where true, you would not be replying! If you didn't realise, this is in the debate section WERE YOU MOVED IT. Did you move it here to not defend your statements??

If it's that what you still think, even though I have said NUMEROUS times that it isn't then you should stop posting here.

Saying it doesn't make it true, I am going by your actions, not your words.

I am merely saying "Yeah, this is how I look at things.". All I expect is for you to say "Ok, I accept it. I understand.

Right. Again, this is in the debate section. What great debates we would all have if the only response was, "Ok, I accept it. I understand. I don't agree with you, but I can see your point". If you did not want replies like this, then you should have not moved it to a section with debate  in the title.

This DOES make it very personal. I thought you would stop with that after our chat yesterday.

In the little chat I initiated the other day, I said it would certainly not be worth losing this friendship over a debate, if you can't handle what I'm saying then I won't reply. You said you could handle it without taking it personally. Changed your mind?

Don't believe everything you read on the internet. =P
Somebody without religion can still have faith. I can have faith in my parents to succed in financing me through college. That doesn't make it religion. Faith is belief while religion is more of an organization. A very often made mistake. As I see, in the online dictionary as well...
OH WAIT! That's exactly what I said:

Quote
: a degree of conviction of the truth of something esp. based on a consideration or examination of the evidence —compare KNOWLEDGE, SUSPICION

Own goal. =P

Perhaps you should read more carefully. No "own" as of yet. That quote of yours is the definition of "belief" not faith. Faith does not mention based on evidence, it's also in modern English a word tied heavily to religion, belief is not. The two are not the same, you did not own me, and perhaps you should accept that it is my first language. Faith is a word tied to religion, ask any of my English speaking buddies around here.

Am I not allowed to defend myself when you attack me or what?! I didn't attack you. If you strike me with a sword and I defend, it doesn't automatically make me strike you with my sword as well.
Because you continued attacking me, I was forced to counter back.

1) Of course you can defend you side, but not if your not participating in a debate.

2) You don't have to attack me to participate in this debate. Defending your faith, is participating in this debate.

3) You where not forced into countering back, you made a choice to. BTW, some more English: "Counter back" means attack. 

[4.   something that is opposite or contrary to something else.
 5.   a blow delivered in receiving or parrying another blow, as in boxing.
 6.   a statement or action made to refute, oppose, or nullify another statement or action.]

You defined the context already when you said I would be calling you a liar. If you can't remember your own words, don't blame me.

I'm afraid defending your faith, and calling me a liar really has no difference. Have faith, I don't care, just don't claim it as fact unless you have something to back it with. Your religion is entering sciences territory, not the other way around.

Right, what truth? I didn't say you initiated this...

I might have missed it, but it's included in a quote, so it's not gone. I thought I split that as well. Sorry, I'm just human.

This is not my problem, I go by what I can see.

2nd piece: Kuran.

Already addressed.

"The God Delusion" You said it gave you an erection, didn't you?

Of course, it was a very good book.

But what if the monster is invisible?!

Refer to why I'm glad not to entertain possibilities without evidence.

Intelligence is nothing. All that counts is wisdom, a little bit knowledge and skills. Intelligence is a mere curse. I said, I wished it wasn't so. Being arrogant includes me laughing at him, because he isn't which I did not.

You claimed to be smarter then him, without actually knowing him! Arrogant!

[1.   making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud: an arrogant public official.]

Why? Energy is omnipotent, time is there. Energy obviously is trapped within time, since it can't get "away" or "come back" (refering to the fact that energy can be destroyed or created). Since time is a limitation of eternity, there should be energy outside of time.

Because you said the magical word again, I'll give you a basic definition;

Omnipotent: Having unlimited power, and unlimited knowledge.

You can't claim energy to have that without it being a religious statement.

Then don't say they are there. Sure, you can say they might be there, but don't say they ARE if you have no evidence.

Oh? Go back and read what I originally said on the matter; I don't currently believe this, I will not quote you reference because I don't believe it but it is a more simple explanation then an omnipotent god (referring to Acehms Razor). Yeah that sounds like I said it was a known science

The familiy is poor, I didn't say the father has no job or he's a drinker. My family isn't wealthy, you now that, yet they managed to get me through college so far. You fail to see my point.

You fail to see mine. I was showing you that people have different points of view...

Hating the unreal is even worse than loving the unreal. You have proven your point, but at which price?!

Making a sarcastic point to show someones error, does not seem a big price to me.

You said, they hated him. This is very different from being a prophet. But yeah, I know you apologized already for being wrong on this matter.
I told you how I reply to posts in ID, didn't I? I press quote and reply to each part. Often I forget to go back and fix stuff.

I didn't apologise. That was more sarcasm shown by the points below it. I successfully defended the accuracy of what I was saying.

Those religions are called sects. Nobody forces you to become a Christian.
Don't get me wrong, there will always be idiots  of missionaries who will go on your nerves, but this is blasphemy. Jesus said "Spread the message.", not "Enforce the message!". Too many people fail to understand this. =/

And Jesus is the one who brought on the idea of hell. Sounds like they're spreading his message to me.

As an ex-Christian you should actually know that God is offering his love and friendship to anybody who is willing to accept it. If you don't want to, you don't go to hell. Live a good life and be a good human. With this you accepted God's offer already. There is no need to become Christian. You should know this as well.
BUT! If you already are a Christian, you are supposed to stay one. Being a Christian is like giving a promise that you'll be good.

Perhaps they teach a different version of Christianity in Croatia?? I was never told that. I, at the many different churches I went to was told that if you don't accept Jesus, you go to hell. That's what mainstream Christianity teaches.

I might stop posting here, I'm wasting too much of my time.

I agree, your posts have been becoming weaker, you are ignoring questions, you use the un-debatable "it's a god what could you know?" and have been shown quite wrong on many occasions without admission of defeat. Your not just wasting your time, you are wasting mine.

I've always said you can't have an intelligent, real debate with a Christian, you are the closest to proving me wrong, but you sadly just held out longer before resorting to "it's a god, why question?" excuse. Congratulations.


@MA- "unresolved controversy", ok, nice evidence.

"but the sheer number of written documents that don't survive two milennia is staggering" - I should think that "because things are fragile" does not give more plausibility to lack of overwhelming evidence. All of this has already been addressed by official representations, and unless you really do think science to be the tool of Satan, then it has already been discredited. 

As to the Roman quote: The Roman council willfully changed the belief system of the country to Christianity as to not lose power, if they where smart enough to give up their belief in Paganism to keep complete control, then I am sure they where smart enough to do other things in order to back this new faith.

@MA- "unresolved controversy", ok, nice evidence.

"but the sheer number of written documents that don't survive two milennia is staggering" - I should think that "because things are fragile" does not give more plausibility to lack of overwhelming evidence. All of this has already been addressed by official representations, and unless you really do think science to be the tool of Satan, then it has already been discredited. 

As to the Roman quote: The Roman council willfully changed the belief system of the country to Christianity as to not lose power, if they where smart enough to give up their belief in Paganism to keep complete control, then I am sure they where smart enough to do other things in order to back this new faith.

"all of this has been addressed by official representations, and unless you really do think science to be the tool of Satan, then it has already been discredited"
I'm not quite sure what official representations you are referring to, but in case you do not realize, history is not a science, so treating it as one is a logical flaw. So the second part of the sentence makes no sense whatsoever. Even IF "official representations" (which again, makes no sense, as to my knowledge there is no official representative for all history, whose word is law. In fact, there isn't even a general consensus on the issue) were to come out and say it one way or the other, there could still be debate as there is sufficient evidence on either side to support their view. I found this site, and it appears fairly unbiased http://members.aol.com/fljosephus/testimonium.htm

Forgetting Josephus for the moment, you said "The Roman council willfully changed the belief system of the country to Christianity as to not lose power, if they where smart enough to give up their belief in Paganism to keep complete control, then I am sure they where smart enough to do other things in order to back this new faith." I think that if they did decide to edit the writings of Tacitus in order to make it more favourable to Christianity, they might have thought to take out the part where it calls Christianity a pernicious superstition, a hideous and shameful thing, and the accusation of hatred against humankind. Maybe it's just me, but that doesn't seem so favourable. Maybe they would have taken the trouble to delete that just possibly... Your argument against this text is groundless. At least with the Josephus text, they have reasonable evidence for considering it suspect, but what you said is clearly just an excuse, which is historically groundless and even suggests a lack of creativity on your part. The same could be said for the holocaust, that the Allies overexaggerated the numbers in order to demonize the Nazis. Such a claim is not evidence, it is pure conjecture.

Furthermore, what I am saying is that ANY documents that are able to survive 2000 years should be taken as serious documentation and can't just be dismissed because there are not hundreds of documents that say the same. If anything, it is more unlikely that two such documents could survive if they were the only two ever written. While I am not saying it is absolute proof, it IS evidence. You aren't going to find documentation on everything that happened 2000 years ago, and even the things there is documentation on there is seldom, if ever, 100's of documents corroborating it.

As a side-note, your conception of science is somewhat strange as well. Science does not reject a theory if there is no proof, it just will not accept it. In order to reject a theory, counter-evidence has to be provided. Science is entirely proof-based. You cannot disprove a mathematical equation merely by not proving it, nor can you disprove a biological theory by not providing evidence. That is the reason why a requirement of the scientific theory is that the hypothesis has to be testable and falsifiable. The existence of Jesus is not such a theory, and thus can neither be rejected or accepted in a legitimate scientific construct.

And, by the way, if you truly think that the division between atheism and religion is thinking for oneself, then you are both wrong and conceited. There are atheists who are brought up atheist and do not question it just as there are muslims and christians and any other religion. Furthermore, saying that someone who is religious neccesarily means they do not think for themselves is idiotic. If that were the case, then even the Pope wouldn't be able to think for himself, nor would any bishop or priest or any famous theologian. In fact, Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein were both religious. I guess that means they lacked the ability to think for themselves? That's just not a viable theory, it's exclusive, and it's prejudiced.

R U SHURE? I've began thinking for myself a long time ago.

Quite.

It should be pretty obvious, because I'm not saying "OMG, YOU'RE SO RIGHT, I AM A FOOL TO EVER BELIEVED IN CHRISTIANITY!". I am sorry to disappoint you in being a marionette. You may think that Christians are puppets, but oddly enough they seem to resist Atheistic puppetmasters.

those that have grown up being taught a religion aren't quite at the point where they've begun to think for themselves, and then they read posts from other members here who put down their beliefs and they can't handle it and feel the need to fight for their beliefs, completely ignoring all common sense and logic, and the most important part: facts.

Yeah, sounds like it was directed at you too. I don't think you have begun to think for yourself yet in full.

OH, ALLMIGHTY SAUCY, PLEASE, SHOW ME THE TRUTH!

I said that already.

If you already said that, then why post this afterwards..?;

I should ask you that.

And who are you to know if Atheism IS a faith or not?

I already said that I was wrong and that it isn't clearly defined if Atheism is a belief or not.

No, that's sticking to a corpse. You don't agree with the definition of Atheism, given by Atheist. 

Oddly enough other Atheists say different about this matter.

Do you seriously believe Adam and Eve existed?!

No, but there are 10's of millions of Christians that do.

Those who really do are fools. You know that, I know that, why discuss it?!

I mean, c'mon... For example, that story can only be interpreted in the way that God banished them for not obeying him. There is no other meaning.

Then I guess that would make most Christians quite stupid.

Most humans are quite stupid.

Not different stories, different version of the same story. There's a BIG difference in those two terms.

I'm sorry, four different stories from the bible..? If so.

If Kuran was part of the Bible, you would just throw it in as a 5th part.

You can't use what the evidence says, to prove itself.

Or if your speaking of such things as the Koran, and Judaism; Translations, and extensions.

Bible and Kuran are not the same. You only show that you have no idea what you are talking about.

I said "But I do understand what you meant." That means regardless of that what I wrote before.

Really? Let's try it. Your faith is Void and you have been brainwashed by a cult. But I understand why you say these things, and there is no need to reply to this.

How could I have been brainwashed when I "actually turned away" and came back on my own behalf?

Saying "there is no need to reply to this" does not give you a free pass to get in a non-disputable blow.

Ok.

You must've made a typo.

Righteo, I don't see one here:

Ok, I'm not exactly sure what you said there, but: Christianity is a branch from Judaism. I said that there was a branch from Buddhism, that believe Buddha himself to be a god.

or here....

And yes, I am quite aware the beliefs of Buddhist. Did you know that a certain branch of Buddhism believes Buddha himself, to be god? Last time I checked, Christianity was just a "branch"...

... Perhaps you could point it out for me? Unless you mean this:

And it's not a branch, it's a reformation.

You were refering to Christianity as a branch of Buddism. Your post has a double meaning.

And yes, I am quite aware the beliefs of Buddhist. Did you know that a certain branch of Buddhism believes Buddha himself, to be god? Last time I checked, Christianity was just a "branch"...

Not from my point of view. The majority of ( or elder ) Jews believed Christ to just a man, some did not, and branched off to form Christianity. It still has the old testament in its faith (remember Jesus said he wasn't here to change the old testament rules), and are just the Jews who accepted Christ. A major branch, but still a branch as they don't reject Judaism in full.

Jesus has said something like bringing the new rules. Remember that what elegy said in the other topic? By definition, it's a reformation.

Reformation in religion would incite change in major, Christians didn't change, they added on and took a different path.

What I just saida above.

You know that many of them were "forced" to accept Christianity and that they actually don't care. They are just a shell of a Christian, you know that. I mean, there are not many parents who would just let their kid abandon its religion if it doesn't feel it's right. This is a bad thing.

Yes, it is a bad thing. It's a bad thing they where raised in a religious environment in the first place, even if they had freedom to choose. It may seem like they are still capable of deciding for themselves, but fat parents have fat children for a reason; children emulate authority figures and environment.

I wish I could make it not happen, but I can't. At least if I have children someday, I'll let them choose for themselves. =)

1. metaphoric*
2. Yes, evidence is no proof, just bringing it closer to proof.

1) Sarcastic* Humoring you. Metaphoric would imply I was speaking in riddles, that I was not.
2) Proof of what, that you exist? I never claimed to have that... But hopefully you can make the logical decision on that one.

1. I was metaphoric, not you.
2. In common, not specifically to anything that was said here.

You can deny it, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Denial is refusal to accept despise strong evidence, I am saying there is no over balance in evidence, in fact, there is close to none. You can deny that you have actually showed enough evidence, but that doesn't make it true

You mean the entire Christianity is not evidence enough to prove a little point?! Oh geez...
 

So you need a disproval that Kuran is not a copy from the Bible? Then I can claim God to be real as long as you don't disprove it. That was an own goal, Saucy.

That doesn't own me Blizz... How many times do I have to repeat myself? You cannot disprove a negative. There is a reason why you don't believe in Santa Claus (well, at least I hope you don't) and that certainly isn't because you have evidence he doesn't exist. You just owned yourself.

No, I didn't. Let me rephrase it: "You cannot prove that that Kuran is a copy of the Bible." This time without the two negations to not confuse you.

You cannot disprove, there for you believe? That truly is a naive way to live. But, you can believe what ever you like (doesn't make it true ).

It doesn't make it true that God doesn't exist. I don't believe, because I cannot disproce, because I had to believe in Kuran and Hinduism and Buddism and Satanism and etc as well then. I believe, because I want to.

Can you limit virtual reality? Yes you can. See my point? God can limit us in any wa yhe wants. That's what I was trying to say.

Yeah, but the difference is that the VR AI we make, isn't self aware nor can it question.

Why is there a difference?! If we would give it the power of self-awareness, it would question it. So are we humans doing. We are questioning if there is a creator.

Since everybody is saying he's eternal and we are not, he must've limited us.

Everybody is saying that?

My bad, I meant Christians.

He limited us how? So that we can naturally find logic to his non-existence backed by what we "consider" evidence just so we can be punished in hell for eternity for not believing?

How am I supposed how he limited us withint time?! You don't get into hell for non-believing. I am starting to understand why your faith was weak.

Everything is just theory before it gets proved. Most of the science's achievments started as wild claims. =P

No they started with observation. From how I recall it Darwin said there must be some design for evolution, and then observed the surroundings to show it. I don't recall him yelling on the streets with a cardboard sign that says "N.S." before concluding it by evidence... Main stream theories are based on some form of observation, not people wildly claiming BS without the slightest evidence.

Quantum physics didn't start as observation. The first thought of atoms didn't start with observation. I'll leave it at those two examples.

I have read your post very well and there is just stuff I don't have anything to say to. What's supposed to be wron about this? This doesn't make me ignorant. Actually if I had replied and started going against it, this would be ignorance.

Things you can't respond to... Does this mean you had to question your position?

No, it means I have nothing more to add. I have said my stuff, you yours and that was already it. I accepted your view even if I may not agree with them. If you really want me to reply to something specifically, give me that piece, I can't bother going to search for it half an hour.

The Bible was NOT written by God. I have all the rights to doubt it and you have to do so as well. Divine inspiration or not, every human could have claimed that and just added what he wants. It's important to understand the Bible for what it represents, not for what is written in it.

Christianity is about accepting the Bible as word of Yahweh, if you don't then you are not Christian according to what other Christians, and their leaders say.

Your making your own religion based from Christianity, that is all...

What have I said that goes away from Christianty?! There is no part in it where it says "Believe the Bible blindly", there is no part where it says "God is just there since forever. Fuck you, you are not allowed to spectaculate how!"
Humans wrote the Bible. You truly think I would blindly follow the words a human being has written, a being inperfect and corruptable, a being that could have easily added whatever it wanted an passed it off as God's word?! The TRUE Bible is not a written book. It's the true meaning of those words.

You obviously have no idea what the word God means by definition.

You asked for my definition. I gave you my definition.

Yes, I did. You DO realize you're far from close to the real definition, do you?

It's not a fear. It's non-apathy. I care for what gets of me. And if you just have to see it as "fear": Fear is natural. There is nothing wrong with it.

You where simply projecting, if you weren't then you would not have claimed that I had a fear of Satan, and you would not have said that in the end, my life has no meaning. Projection of yourself.

Did I say that it's unnatural to fear Satan? Wake up, I was mocking you for being weak.

It affects people if they have money or not, regardless if like it or not. If you have everything to your disposal without having to work your ass off for it it's different. I know, I was once "wealthy", now I'm not. I know both sides of the medal, I know how it is, I know what I am talking about.

Then don't put your faith in unfounded things (in your famous words:) "because life has shit on you".

Oddly enough, most people tend to become non-believers when they "don't need God anymore", because they live a good life.
With me it was always different. When it was the worst case, I would break down and say there is no God, how could God be so cruel. But then it got better, everything solved itself like a miracle. It was like if there really is a God, he didn't let me down when it was the worst and I even lost my faith. I am sorry, but if something like this happens too often (I stopped counting at 12...) during your entire life gives, it you something to think about... Yes, "life has shit on me" several times and each time something pulled me out again, even if I lost my faith. Do you understand now why I believe?! It happened way too often as if it would be JUST coincidence. I don't know what it was, but I have the right to believe it was God.

It surely is not a tool. I never said that. I said that religion and science go hand in hand. They are two sides of a medal. They should co-operate instead of fighting each other. What's not factual about what I just said?!

Really, this doesn't sound like harmony and peace to me:

God is the definition of origin, he isn't necessary to explain origin. Religion is used to bring origin closer, science to explain it. Well, we didn't get so far with science so far, lol!

In other words science is used to explain the origin of religion.

I am sorry if you misunderstood. I didn't mean to say science is supposed to explain RELIGION'S origin, but origin in common. It doesn't have to be a "god".

Fact is that energy can change its shape into anything: temperature, kintetic energy, mass, etc. It IS omnipotent.
The rest of the conclusion is made due to "induction" and "logic". If you don't know what that is, look it up.

Being metamorphic in ability dose not alone imply omnipotence. Perhaps you don't know what the word means..?

My point is that EVERYTHING is energy.

As to the rest: Right-o, so you made it up by your  idea of logic, rather then complete fantasy. You can deny that it is baseless, doesn't make it true

Yeah, ok. It's not baseless, but I am aware that its very original. That's what people always fails at: Originality. They get an idea an are lazy to move on. I am merely stating "Hey, it could've been that way. It sounds very reasonable to me. At least more reasonable then Adam and Eve... >_>"

You never used the word void, I only said it like that not to have to write out your full sentence. Here is a piece that tells me "It's void" right in my face:

Quote from: Deliciously_Saucy on Today at 03:10:26 AM

And yes, you did "make up" a deep, foolish sounding theory

Right, and yet that was replying to your theory on parallel universes and not your religious beliefs... Way to misquote.

I didn't make up a theory, it was just supposed to be a satyr at your post before. -_-

I stated also numerous time that he is energy. Energy is not foreign. You are using it right now to read this post. And it means outsider. He surely is not an outsider if he's "everything and everywhere all the time".

Knowing just about energy and knowing your god in depth {EDIT: is different and} does not show any real signs of an inner knowledge. If your god was not an outsider, then I would see his effect past things that can be naturally explained. If your saying god is nature and energy, then I refer you to the "sun worship" remark again. Your god can't be supernatural and natural at the same time, the two are contradictory.

Absolute naturality IS supernatural. That was my point.

Energy IS omnipotent.

Ok, perhaps we are referring to different types of energy then. Unless you say that your referring to some sort of supernatural energy, and I don't think you are, then you are making a accusation on religious assumption.

Read above.

How can you be sure it's not intentionally? Now you are saying to understand the "thoughts of a god".

I don't believe energy to be god, you do. I'm going on scientific thought, not going on the assumption of energy being accepted as god because you think it is omnipotent.

Again, energy is omnipotent. Why are you saying something about natural energy AND supernatural energy? Now you're the one who makes wild claims. There is no evidence of supernatural energy like you would say.

It was a metaphorical statement, not a question, not an answer. Not my bad if you replied without understanding and twisted my words in your head.

Either way, as said, you successfully avoided my question.

And that was...?

Time has make it seem unfounded. Let's assume Jesus did exist, then today you'd still have a problem with that evidence of yours. Let's assume he didn't. Well, did anything change...? There is no evidence that it is unfounded. Maybe it was very valid back then...?

Not at all, if Jesus really went to all those places, then there would be more separate, differently viewed people, linking evidence.

Gosh, it's 2 thousand years ago. People didn't have organized databases before the 18 century. What do you expect?!

What I believe in is not your problem. I am not telling you all the time "Oh yes, he is!", I am expecting you to stop saying "No, he's not!", especially since you answer wouldn't make any sense if I hadn't said it first.

I'm afraid it is your answers, that are showing to be a simple repetition. I have answered all showing backed scientific ideas, you have shown faith and you have ignored the hard questions you can't get an answer for.

You are asking all the time the same question. What am I supposed to do except for telling you a hundred times that I don't know?!

You were attacking my faith as I stated above. All in all, you DID start it. Yes, I have a blindfold on, because I didn't YOU attacking my FAITH (NOT MY RELIGION, as you always seem to confuse one with each other...).

Yes, you can have faith without the religion, but faith is a word with two meanings in modern English, one of those connected deeply to ones religion. I am obviously not attacking the point that you actually believe all of this on some level, I am debating your religion, a faith.

You are not anymore (I think...). I don't want to debate my religion as I don't care wht you think of it. This topic might die very soon...

I am right. But that doesn't automatically make my beliefs right. You said that, not me.

I said you where right?

You started it. You admited that already. What's so wrong with this?

How many times do I have to repeat I am not trying to convince anybody, I am merely stating what I believe in.

Just stating what you believe means you would not post a rebuttal, you are fighting for your statement, making it a debate.

You were attacking me, what else could I do then defending myself. (this is not a question)

You are the one who are constantly saying "It's void." and saying again that I am trying to convince somebody here.

If that where true, you would not be replying! If you didn't realise, this is in the debate section WERE YOU MOVED IT. Did you move it here to not defend your statements??

My bad. I'll move it back right away.

If it's that what you still think, even though I have said NUMEROUS times that it isn't then you should stop posting here.

Saying it doesn't make it true, I am going by your actions, not your words.

What are you talking about?! This was the part you've taken this from:

No matter what you say to convince us otherwise, you know you are right, and will justify anything you have to in order to make your religious beliefs correct.

... If it's that what you still think, even though I have said NUMEROUS times that it isn't then you should stop posting here. ...

What?!

I am merely saying "Yeah, this is how I look at things.". All I expect is for you to say "Ok, I accept it. I understand.

Right. Again, this is in the debate section. What great debates we would all have if the only response was, "Ok, I accept it. I understand. I don't agree with you, but I can see your point". If you did not want replies like this, then you should have not moved it to a section with debate  in the title.

When you continued attacking me, I took it over here, since you weren't stopping. Don't cover behind the title.

This DOES make it very personal. I thought you would stop with that after our chat yesterday.

In the little chat I initiated the other day, I said it would certainly not be worth losing this friendship over a debate, if you can't handle what I'm saying then I won't reply. You said you could handle it without taking it personally. Changed your mind?

You are offending me for what I believe in, not THAT what I believe in. How am I supposed to not take it personal?

Don't believe everything you read on the internet. =P
Somebody without religion can still have faith. I can have faith in my parents to succed in financing me through college. That doesn't make it religion. Faith is belief while religion is more of an organization. A very often made mistake. As I see, in the online dictionary as well...
OH WAIT! That's exactly what I said:

Quote
: a degree of conviction of the truth of something esp. based on a consideration or examination of the evidence —compare KNOWLEDGE, SUSPICION

Own goal. =P

Perhaps you should read more carefully. No "own" as of yet. That quote of yours is the definition of "belief" not faith. Faith does not mention based on evidence, it's also in modern English a word tied heavily to religion, belief is not. The two are not the same, you did not own me, and perhaps you should accept that it is my first language. Faith is a word tied to religion, ask any of my English speaking buddies around here.

Odd. As I was taught which is which, it seemed pretty much to me that faith is the exact translation for "vjera".

Am I not allowed to defend myself when you attack me or what?! I didn't attack you. If you strike me with a sword and I defend, it doesn't automatically make me strike you with my sword as well.
Because you continued attacking me, I was forced to counter back.

1) Of course you can defend you side, but not if your not participating in a debate.

Ok.

2) You don't have to attack me to participate in this debate. Defending your faith, is participating in this debate.

Defending my faith? Believe me, this is my last post here. I'm not interested in defending my faith.

3) You where not forced into countering back, you made a choice to. BTW, some more English: "Counter back" means attack. 

I know what it means. But not countering back could have resulted in "death".

6.   a statement or action made to refute, oppose, or nullify another statement or action.]

Pretty much what I was trying to do: To stop you attacking me.

You defined the context already when you said I would be calling you a liar. If you can't remember your own words, don't blame me.

I'm afraid defending your faith, and calling me a liar really has no difference. Have faith, I don't care, just don't claim it as fact unless you have something to back it with. Your religion is entering sciences territory, not the other way around.

Right, what truth? I didn't say you initiated this...

Gosh, that again... You said "I didn't attack you first!", I said "Oh yes, you did.", you said "No, I didn't! Are you calling me a liar?!", I said "Yes.", you said "What yes?".

I might have missed it, but it's included in a quote, so it's not gone. I thought I split that as well. Sorry, I'm just human.

This is not my problem, I go by what I can see.

It's in a quote, end of story.

2nd piece: Kuran.

Already addressed.

Not my fault that you asked for another source than Bible.

"The God Delusion" You said it gave you an erection, didn't you?

Of course, it was a very good book.

Argh, that other piece of the post is missing. -_-

But what if the monster is invisible?!

Refer to why I'm glad not to entertain possibilities without evidence.

Now, THAT'S naive. "I can't see it, it's not there."

Intelligence is nothing. All that counts is wisdom, a little bit knowledge and skills. Intelligence is a mere curse. I said, I wished it wasn't so. Being arrogant includes me laughing at him, because he isn't which I did not.

You claimed to be smarter then him, without actually knowing him! Arrogant!

[1.   making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud: an arrogant public official.]

Again, something's missing. =/ You must've been posting while I was still editing my post to fit. =(

Why? Energy is omnipotent, time is there. Energy obviously is trapped within time, since it can't get "away" or "come back" (refering to the fact that energy can be destroyed or created). Since time is a limitation of eternity, there should be energy outside of time.

Because you said the magical word again, I'll give you a basic definition;

Omnipotent: Having unlimited power, and unlimited knowledge.

You can't claim energy to have that without it being a religious statement.

Omni doesn't mean "unlimited", it means "all". Having ALL power and ALL knowledge would be correct. =P

Then don't say they are there. Sure, you can say they might be there, but don't say they ARE if you have no evidence.

Oh? Go back and read what I originally said on the matter; I don't currently believe this, I will not quote you reference because I don't believe it but it is a more simple explanation then an omnipotent god (referring to Acehms Razor). Yeah that sounds like I said it was a known science

Ok, misunderstanding.

The familiy is poor, I didn't say the father has no job or he's a drinker. My family isn't wealthy, you now that, yet they managed to get me through college so far. You fail to see my point.

You fail to see mine. I was showing you that people have different points of view...

Stuff missing again. (>.<) And no, I know people are having different point of views, but you didn't state that, you only stated your point of view.

Hating the unreal is even worse than loving the unreal. You have proven your point, but at which price?!

Making a sarcastic point to show someones error, does not seem a big price to me.

What's sarcastic about my post? I wasn't kidding. Better to love God than to hate "an imagined friend" of yours.

You said, they hated him. This is very different from being a prophet. But yeah, I know you apologized already for being wrong on this matter.
I told you how I reply to posts in ID, didn't I? I press quote and reply to each part. Often I forget to go back and fix stuff.

I didn't apologise. That was more sarcasm shown by the points below it. I successfully defended the accuracy of what I was saying.

But you are wrong, they didn't hate him.

Those religions are called sects. Nobody forces you to become a Christian.
Don't get me wrong, there will always be idiots  of missionaries who will go on your nerves, but this is blasphemy. Jesus said "Spread the message.", not "Enforce the message!". Too many people fail to understand this. =/

And Jesus is the one who brought on the idea of hell. Sounds like they're spreading his message to me.

Better knowing there is one and that you can avoid it, then not knowing. But that's just me.

As an ex-Christian you should actually know that God is offering his love and friendship to anybody who is willing to accept it. If you don't want to, you don't go to hell. Live a good life and be a good human. With this you accepted God's offer already. There is no need to become Christian. You should know this as well.
BUT! If you already are a Christian, you are supposed to stay one. Being a Christian is like giving a promise that you'll be good.

Perhaps they teach a different version of Christianity in Croatia?? I was never told that. I, at the many different churches I went to was told that if you don't accept Jesus, you go to hell. That's what mainstream Christianity teaches.

Stuff missing again.
But no, it doesn't. O_o Where did you get THAT from?! Islam is the only religion that teaches that you go to hell if you don't believe in them. If you never heard of Jesus or don't know about him, it's unfair if you would go to hell for that.

I might stop posting here, I'm wasting too much of my time.

I agree, your posts have been becoming weaker, you are ignoring questions, you use the un-debatable "it's a god what could you know?" and have been shown quite wrong on many occasions without admission of defeat. Your not just wasting your time, you are wasting mine.

You are ignoring my answers as well. I have like like half a dozen times the same thing, yet you keep posting the same questions. To some of them I have said "Look above, what I said about this and that.", for some I said "I simply don't know.", but NO, you ask again.


But yeah, this is my last post as I don't give a shit about what you think of religion and since I don't care, I'm not defending here anything anymore.

And yeah, nice try, you made me defend Christianity by attacking me. Good job on that. This ends here.

And don't say you were not attacking me. From where I come from, calling people naive fools, puppets and marionettes, insane, ignorant, arrogant, etc., telling them to be dumb because they believe in something and calling them liars isn't how you "not attack" them.
And on top "You can't handle it.". You were asking me about Christianty, I told you I wouldn't care to answer as I'm not defending Christianity, but myself. That's why you say "You posts are getting weaker." Odd, I was just about to say that to your posts.
Yes, I realize a lot of this now. Thank you very much. I was a naive fool, but not for believing in something.

And don't say you were not attacking me. From where I come from, calling people naive fools, puppets and marionettes, insane, ignorant, arrogant, etc., telling them to be dumb because they believe in something and calling them liars isn't how you "not attack" them.

No you heard wong.

Nice guy - not naive fools
Puppy - not puppets
mario -  not marionettes

BOE, if just read her last recent post you will see her calling me naive. One of the examples.

Alright, last post. I surprised you didn't simply post reconciliation to my post then lock the topic. Same thing really...

There are a few things I'll just clear up as you have truly misread my replies;

1) I'm not attacking your right to believe, why you believe, or that you actually believe. I am attacking your religion, and the claims that it is correct.

2) You did call Silverline less intelligent then you, I will show you your quote in case your memory is that bad.

No, it's logic. You can be stupid like a brick and yet understand it. It's not my fault, that I have more intellect than other people. It's a curse, not a bless. I have to live with it, you don't. Be happy.
If I could have chosen, I would have chosen to be normal, like everybody else.

   

Of course this being a reply to a post made by Silverline. I believe you have called me arrogant in the past, and I am, but luckily unlike you, I would not show it in a way like this.

3) I go back and read your old posts, there are parts cut out when I read and replied to them? Is this a problem with RMRK? Or are you adding after I have replied?

4) That whole "brainwashed" remark was there to show you that what you said, would provoke a response from me whether you said "don't reply" or not. I was simply showing you in an over done way, what you did to me, and continued with "you didn't have to reply".

5) Not once did I refer to Christianity as a branch from Buddhism. Read the post, it has a full stop (".") separating the two sentences. You read it heavily wrong.

6) My faith was quite strong, and I'm sure the Christian me would have accused you of going to hell (I don't, just Christian BS talking).

7) I never claimed the existence of supernatural energy, nor did I imply that it exists. You don't read my posts correctly in the heat of things.

8.) You do realise that every post I made was responding to one of yours. If I wasn't stopping, you weren't either. Hypocritical to claim otherwise, why should I be the one to stop if you keep replying to what I say? Don't reply to this, you will see that I don't either.

9)

Right, what truth? I didn't say you initiated this...

Gosh, that again... You said "I didn't attack you first!", I said "Oh yes, you did.", you said "No, I didn't! Are you calling me a liar?!", I said "Yes.", you said "What yes?".

I'm sorry, but that looks like I said, you DIDN'T attack me first?? Maybe I need an English lesson??

1)) It's naive to need evidence before assuming invisible monsters are under my bed? Believing something is there with no showings would be my interpretation to being naive...

2))

But no, it doesn't. O_o Where did you get THAT from?! Islam is the only religion that teaches that you go to hell if you don't believe in them. If you never heard of Jesus or don't know about him, it's unfair if you would go to hell for that.

Right, going by your assumption, not what your religion says. Your religion, and the bible states that non-believer go to hell. You may think this is wrong, you may think it is not true, but this is what they say. No, they did not include a definition of those who have never heard of Jesus, it's not there! "If you do not accept Jesus as your personal saviour, you will burn for eternity in the lakes of sulfur".

3))

And yeah, nice try, you made me defend Christianity by attacking me. Good job on that. This ends here.

Right, yet you follow that with another post..? Again, me attacking your religion, and me attacking you are different, although I certainly attacked your debating skills.

There's no need to reply to any of my questions, I'm not looking for a response, just clearing the many things you misread in that last post of yours. By moving this to spam, you really have shown me quite a lot about you and your coping skills.

@MA~ I really couldn't be bothered to reply to all of that, but Albert Einstein wasn't religious, and certainly wasn't Christian. Here;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnp_EiSLqBs

Just keep in mind that many of these "famous Christians" where living in a time in which they would of been killed for saying they where not Christian.

Why has one of the most interesting, (mostly) sensible and well-written debates I've ever seen here been moved to spam? =o

I have no reason to lock it. Why should I?! Every time I say it's done, you keep posting and reviving it. This only shows who's here the one to keep this topic alive. It's all the time like this: You post, I respond. Here is my respond to your hopefully last post.

Silverline less intelligent than me? Yes, I called him that. What's the big deal? I don't care about this. It's not that I said I was better than him. Intelligence is nothing to me. If Silverline was and maybe he is more intelligent than me, I wouldn't react differently than telling he's more intelligent than me. Since he seems to have no idea that it's fucked up to be intelligent, I assumed he isn't as intelligent as me. I know, even when I read it, it sounds arrogant, but I assure you, it isn't. It would be arrogant if I said, I was a better human just because of an unfair advantage I might have.
Actually I think Silverline is pretty much a better human than I am.

You are the one who is calling me naive and stupid for my beliefs. YOU are telling ME that you are better.

I was still editing my post while you were replying, haven't you read what I said in the post before?

Your post with Buddism had a double meaning. There was NO indication that you refered to Judaism, stop claiming it.

Strong faith? You?! You obviously didn't know big parts of your religion. As far as I know it's mostly the non-knowledge about your own religion is what makes you doubt it.

You were the first one to start a debate while it was still in spam. I said it was a translation mistake, which is a neutral post, then YOU said he didn't exist. I replied to your post. Every of my posts is a response to your posts, not the other way.

I didn't say you initiated this...

Oh yes, you fucking did:

Actually I do, as you are stating he was a real figure of history. I have full right to ask for proof of this. I don't have a problem with anyones faith, but if Christians want Jesus to be shown as a "real little boy" then they better damn well better be able to back it.

I have NEVER shown him to be real. I merely said to show me that he isn't real. As long as you don't do it, I have all the right to believe he was real.

And an interpretion of naive is to believe everything is just alright and fine.

2))

But no, it doesn't. O_o Where did you get THAT from?! Islam is the only religion that teaches that you go to hell if you don't believe in them. If you never heard of Jesus or don't know about him, it's unfair if you would go to hell for that.

Right, going by your assumption, not what your religion says. Your religion, and the bible states that non-believer go to hell. You may think this is wrong, you may think it is not true, but this is what they say. No, they did not include a definition of those who have never heard of Jesus, it's not there! "If you do not accept Jesus as your personal saviour, you will burn for eternity in the lakes of sulfur".

I was taught different. You obviously didn't know your religion well. Stating that God loves ALL his creations pretty much is an inclusion of those who have never heard of him. If you never heard of Jesus, you can't accept him. We are all equal in his eyes, it's not fair to let those burn in Hell who were having a righteous like, but just didn't know about God. This would make us NOT be equal in his eyes.

3))

And yeah, nice try, you made me defend Christianity by attacking me. Good job on that. This ends here.

Right, yet you follow that with another post..? Again, me attacking your religion, and me attacking you are different, although I certainly attacked your debating skills.

Now you are calling me a liar.

Actually I do, as you are stating he was a real figure of history. I have full right to ask for proof of this. I don't have a problem with anyones faith, but if Christians want Jesus to be shown as a "real little boy" then they better damn well better be able to back it.

I told you already, I have never claimed him to be real, you made that up.

There's no need to reply to any of my questions, I'm not looking for a response, just clearing the many things you misread in that last post of yours. By moving this to spam, you really have shown me quite a lot about you and your coping skills.

And if I don't respond you're starting with all of your provoking "You didn't answer this, you didn't answer that!".
I can't see anything intelligent about an argument, that's not even a debate. And it was YOU who told me to move it back. Here you go. Happy now?

Once more, since you seem to have a short memory:
You were attacking me for my faith and all the way along my faith as well. I realized that at the end that you have just tricked me into defending my faith while defending myself. Yeah, good job.

You are pretty being pretty obnoxious to me all the time (now I get what arl meant with that), mocking me for being different, mocking me for believing, mocking my faith the way along and calling me naive, ignorant and a mindless and brainwashed puppet while I have explained to you in what I believe after you started attacking me. I have never mocked you for believing (or not believing) and I have never called you a mindless puppet, regardless of what I think. If not anything else then you are being arrogant to not be able to admit you are attacking me. It's also being obnoxious, ignorant and naive to flame somebody for what they are and think they won't take it personal. Half of this "debate" is you calling me a weakling, a fool, insane, saying I wouldn't answer your question where I was either stating to look a the other answer or I simply didn't know and told you that numerous times. But no, you kept asking the same questions in one part of your posts while in the others you continued attacking me.

The only thing I was naive into believing was believing you were my friend. I am done with this. Keep posting as much as you want, I don't care.

@Silverline: This is more of flaming than a debate. And it's surely not intelligent. At least not that I have seen any intelligent post here without being just cloaked flame or defending. It's a mere personal argument from what I have seen so far with a few little side aspects. This is surely not the interesting, (mostly) sensible and well written debate I. It's lightyears away from it.
And I'm sorry if you maybe felt offended by me calling you less intelligent than me. Even if you were more intelligent or are more intelligent than me, this wouldn't ever change my mind about you. I respect you for your achievements and what you have earned yourself, not for any advantages you or anybody else couldn't choose to have. You should know me long enough to know that I'm not like this, that I'm not arrogant.

@MA~ I really couldn't be bothered to reply to all of that, but Albert Einstein wasn't religious, and certainly wasn't Christian. Here;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnp_EiSLqBs

Just keep in mind that many of these "famous Christians" where living in a time in which they would of been killed for saying they where not Christian.

That wasn't even the part of my post that was on topic... In any case, Einstein was Jewish and believed in God, though I suppose I will accept that believing in God is not the same thing as being religious. Either way, it still shows that belief in God does not equal "can't think on their own", which was the point of that part. And that last part of your post is just another conjecture, with no evidence. I know that Newton, for one was kind of crazy and went looking through the bible trying to figure out the "bible code" (which I think is stupid and does not exist).  In any case, I think this topic is probably dead, and since you said you wouldn't post anymore, I guess I will stop since you are unlikely to respond to the part of my previous post that was on topic. Probably unlikely to respond regardless...

The christian god does have a name.

HINT: It's not "God".

This is EXACTLY what I am talking about! Intolerance! And then you criticize Christians and thier beliefs. Would you like to be offended and said that you're utterly wrong, and that what you believe is not correct? What if you're offended for being atheist? Are you going to stay calm or not feel offended? If so, congratulations, for it means that you don't care for what other people say. But otherwise, stop offending other people's points of view and grow up.

This topic was started in spam. Bio was making a (crude) joke.

Bio sometimes seems to make crude jokes, then. In spam or not, it means the same to me.
But I must admit that I did something wrong there. I replied in a rude manner.

Do you gain something from offending Christians? Other than perhaps self-satisfaction. How long does the satisfaction last or how this satisfaction makes you happier, I do not know. It would be you who is supposed to tell me if you want to.

Then again, all I want is that people can finally respect each other someday soon. Forget about damn religious beliefs. I am talking about every war in this world. Internal and external wars. Tragedies and suffering. Almost %100 of them are due to the same thing: intolerance.

First: I’m offended by Christians on a daily basis. I ask you the same thing, in fact this is directed at all Christians;

Do you gain something from offending Atheists, other than perhaps self satisfaction? How long does the satisfaction last or how does this satisfaction makes you happier?

Second: I believe many wars where started by the Christian’s intolerance for others beliefs, no? How many people did they murder for not believing in their god?

First: I cannot tell, because I am not that type of Christian. And no, I am not talking about all Christians. I am talking about true Christians. Those who do not limit to going to Church during Sundays. Those who love and respect God and all of His creations, including men, regardless of the differences between each other.
So therefore, I do not gain anything from offending Atheists, or people without faith. Many of my friends are Atheists, and I love them as much as I'd love anyone else. I do not make distinctions based on that.

Second: I don't care about the "past Christians", simply because only a few of them were truly Christian. A true Christian would respect and tolerate others, regardless of the belief or faith. A true Christian would respect life itself, and therefore would never take a life. Then again, I repeat, I don't believe in Popes or Priests. I believe in faith, not religion.

I am sorry if you are offended on a daily basis. When you are offended for being Atheist, ask them which is their definition of "Christian", and if they can honestly answer: Can you apply this definition to yourself?

But people don't understand that many do actually feel more realized in their lives when they have something to follow, something to believe in. This makes them feel more confident, more secure. Like there is someone watching you and protecting you. I feel that every single thing that happens to me, good or bad, is necessary.

So instead of trying to change your life you move in the wind like a puppet? If it’s all necessary, then it’s really nothing more then predestination, meaning you have no, if not little, control over your life. That, is pointless.

Wrong. I simply live my life within the limits of what I believe is good or wrong, just like ANYONE else. I control my every move, or so I want to believe. We all were given free will, as you should know. I do not get driven by things such as fashion or society. I am myself, and only myself. Even so, I try to respect God, and that means to respect everyone. Even if I can say "I hate <someone>", I can't truly feel so, simply because I am not capable of hating. I can feel anger, but that's it. I can love and forgive. But over all of this, I decide my life. I decide whether to believe in something or not. My faith is just a the way I decided to live my life. Just because I follow a code of conduct, it doesn't mean that I can only do what I am told to.
Therefore, the answer to your question is no.


I am just defending my point of view, which is exactly the same you are doing. The difference is that I try to think the way others do instead of closing my mind and judgement. Sometimes I do not succeed, simply because I am too angry or lacking concentration for x reason. But most of the time, I try to understand others.
However, I think you're limiting yourself to read what you want to read and interpret it in a comfortable way. You need to open your mind when you debate a subject where many points of view confront each other. You can't simply judge everyone according to what you think is correct. You need to understand that it's not only you. We all have different opinions, and so, we should try to think the way they do before replying to their messages.
If you noticed, many members have felt offended by your answers. You are defending your belief so much that you don't get what they are trying to tell you.
I don't want you to feel offended for what I just said. I want you to analyze it, if possible, and consider it. If you simply don't agree with me, that's fine and I'll understand it.

Let's try to make this debate comfortable for everybody. That's all I want.


(But I am already imagining a very long reply from her. )

Lol, you fail to see my point again. (-_-') Of course I didn't mean that LITERALLY. You atheists always have to take things literally. You guys tend to get like that when you get backed in a corner. Wink
Now to the part with God. So, let's forget all what we know about God, Jesus, etc. It is WELL KNOWN that energy cannot be created nor destroyed. So we couldn't have just started to exist without any special reason. Obviously there IS something that created everything. Well, this is what I call God. You have a problem with that? Want me to prove it? Simple:
We are here and we DO exist. If we don't then I wouldn't even bother explaining. Since we could not just start to exist there HAS TO be an origin. End of story. I don't care how we were created, I don't care when we were created, I don't care by whom we were created, I don't even care if the creator still exists. The point it that there is one. And I pay my damn respect to my creator by at least praying every night even if he isn't there. When my parents die one day, I will go to their grave and I will talk to them as well and pay my respect. That's why I Believe. There IS or WAS something that created us all.
I don't care what the Bible says in this matter, I don't care what people say in this matter. By all logical means there is a God. Even if it's maybe far from what the Bible teaches, there has to be one. We all wouldn't exist if there is none.
Now, why I accept the Bible and Jesus in general is a different story. Whether Jesus exited or not, this wouldn't make any difference today. We don't know, we never will. Jesus' principles are what gives life a sense. For one thing it's the stuff with having a sould and hell and heaven, blahblah. EVEN IF all of that is just made up, I would rather enjoy my life by being a good person than just killing of myself. I mean, what's the point of life if there is nothing beyond?! Let's just go and kill us all, it's pointless to live anyway.

Blizzard, I just wanted to say that I agree with you in many points. But there's something...
Since I was very little, I always tried to close my eyes and imagine that NOTHING existed, and then I asked myself, "So if we didn't exist, if the Universe didn't exist... What would lie in their place?" Deliciously Saucy said something that is similar to the answer I usually had. "If God created us, who created Him? And who created whoever created God? And so on..." It is something we will never learn. This world is too mysterious, and that is what I love about it. I don't have to find an answer to every question in order to live my life entirely.
Still, I really respect your point of view, because it is similar to mine. I believe in a creator, whoever He is, and wherever He is.