Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

Atheist_Scathe
Posts: 69
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

Ran across this little gem from

http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/perfectproof.htm

and thought it deserved special mention as the pompous sack of shit that it is, probably THE most pompous sack of shit. Haha this is SERIOUSLY a gas:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 Easy Steps that Prove God of the Bible

The Perfect Proof for God of the Bible: These basic 4 steps have not changed since the beginning as certain clarifying words have been adopted out of courtesy to help the many who have tried desperately to disprove this awesome proof.

If you would like to make an attempt to disprove this Perfect Proof, there is a forum where you can do so. $10,000 U.S. has been provided and is being offered to the first person who can disprove this proof. Hundreds have tried, but failed. Since I am a child of God and thus, set before God with authority in His kingdom, bound for heaven as opposed to hell bound, no better arbitration can be provided than the Holy Spirit indwelling in my spirit in agreement with the Word and members of the body of Christ:-which the Proof bears out!

Quick Summary

Be clear on this. The Proof has always been known. Moses knew it. Abraham knew it. And Abel knew it. What did they know? They knew what Cain knew, Adam knew and what Judas knew, except these latter three don't care and preferred to self-exalt themselves above God.

Step 1 - If there had been an eternity of the past of cause and effect, we would have had an eternity to be perfected without sin, but since we still sin, we know there was not an eternity of the past of cause and effect. And thus we were created by God of the Bible, given Christ. Psychological studies can be done to verify in just these past 6000 years the exponential progression of the conscience of mankind, that it will not take another 6000 years to reach sinlessness in the saved: e.g. God works in long transitions from the OT period of 4000 years to the dispensation of grace of 2000 years to the millennium of 1000 years. Do you notice anything? This is an exponential progression.

Step 2 - Nothing in nature and time happens all by itself. It always has a cause. Therefore, since it must have a cause, always, we know God did it, given Christ. Don't let the cunning try to deceive you by saying what is true of Newtonian and Einsteinian physics is not true of quantum physics just because of its complexity. That's called snake oil. You can catch a person in the act when they tell you puff-the-magic-dragon stories.

Step 3 - If you wish to try to disprove this Proof, do not try to disprove some god, but keep your issues directed at God of the Bible, given Christ.

Step 4 - Just as Step 1 treats the natural, there is also the supernatural, in which there could not have been an eternity of the past of cause and effects of gods creating gods; otherwise, you would have had an eternity to be perfected to be without sin. Ergo, God did it, given Christ.

All queries are answered in the details of the Proof itself.

Conclusion: Most people are going to Hell because they want to. You're "without excuse" (Rom. 1.20).

The Proof

Introduction: Pay careful attention to note this Proof does not go directly to the Scriptures first to begin Step 1, but directly applies logic with the problem of sin into the equation - two things man is quite fond of -; and for you to understand this, requires you have at least a partially working conscience (which all men and women do). Therefore, to not understand this is not because of intelligence or lack of intelligence, but the choice to be impatient and willfully possess a corrupted conscience and darkened mind.

We don't need to analyze the cosmos till the cows come home with grand theories. We can understand that God created in 4 easy steps (by logic and intuitively known). There are other ways to prove God, many in fact, in taking the total of the evidence, but this is one strictly based on logic delivered by a renewed mind in Christ. Inordinate analysis and mental gymnastics are total vanity to make the case that God created. The reason we study the sciences is not to find out if God exists but for the sake of furthering understanding of scientific phenomenon to glorify God. In our understanding of certain facts to fulfill His will for our lives and His greater purpose, He afford us this ability to know these certain things by grace for believers (and even common grace too all for the benefit of believers) to reach on towards the new city in the new earth. His aim is to be with believers in eternity.

Analyzing the universe falsely and overassuming are just the lame excuses for refusing God's salvation because of preferring sin, selfishness and independency from God by emulating Satan. Do not be afraid to let go of your flesh when reading this. We are all made in God's image (Gen. 1.26,27) with a spirit of God-consciousness and all intuitively know God of the Bible is God, except many choose to not receive His saving grace. Smokescreens, which are intellectually dishonest, to cover up underlying motivation to remain in sin are easily exposed. Those in the kingdom of heaven are not free of blame either. Many in Christendom have said there is no Proof for God and must be taken on blind faith. In Christ, faith is not blind. Atheism, agnosticism and any other religion are on blind faith. There is more than one Proof for God, but I find what you are about to read is the very best one, which has never been challenged at all since the dawn of man.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Step 1 - Why is eternally evolving in the past of cause and effect (do not confuse this with the limitedness of evolution, the physical science, since the amoeba or prokaryote) NOT TRUE, in the physical realm (material nature), biologically or non-biologically, organically or non-organically; that is, in its more encompassing meaning? Simply stated, If for eternity things have been evolving (biologically or non-biologically, etc.), by this very definition of evolving (in causes and effects, before or after the amoeba, even before or after the big bang), you would have had an eternity to be perfected (without sin) irrespective of when you personally started in the evolving chain according to calculus where the approximation of eternity is taken as eternity.

Evolution (the limited definition of the physical development since the amoeba) is NOT towards perfection for evolution is just a limited way of man understanding some things for it does not address or make treatment of the spiritual and the soulical, since these other two components are beyond its scope; but, evolving (a different term relating to cause and effect over a greater time frame) has a more encompassing and expansive meaning. If such evolving (of causes and effects) was going on for an eternity of the past (which it has not, of course), we easily would have been perfected by now, having ample time to do so.

Let us not be so restrictive in the petty self or vague with words by generalizing (being unspecific) so as not confuse the definitions of evolving and evolution differentiated that were provided for the sake of clarity. Nor should we behave legalistically like a bad lawyer or bear false witness against what is said here since that would be deflecting and circumventing. Let us not be belligerent or obstinate by misreading this most excellent first step.

The assumption by many unsaved souls (thus, a good place to commence the 4 Step Proof for God) is that the universe has always been going on in the past for eternity (many unsaved cosmologists and evolutionists believe this, either biologically or non-biologically, as they have told me so). Therefore, what must follow, is that you have also had an eternity to be perfected and since you are not (since you are still a sinner and make mistakes), this proves that such evolving eternally in the past is incorrect. As proof of this, we can see in just a few short years (approximately 6000 years ago) since the first Adamic man (the first man with God-consciousness), we have changed and matured in leaps and bounds; thus, we will not need another 6000 years to be perfected (speaking of those who have God's uncreated life). We do not need to know all that entails being perfected, only that it is without sin. And, since we know we jail people for crimes, we know there is this sin that has consequence, and the mention of it does not presume God first, since notice I did not mention God first. This throws a wrench in lots of atheists'/agnostics' ideology.

Note: this proof is not referring to nature merely reacting, but to man made in God's image, and only those men who are being perfected because they are born-again or saved. We are referring to only man, not animals, and only those men and woman who are saved. One observes an exponential curve in our development, not just technologically, but also in our conscience, historically and scientifically undeniable. For example, it is no longer common practice, except in Islam, to sacrifice children on altars to their god or gods. In a very simple way we can say it this way: we will not keep killing each other for millions of years.

The pre-endemic or pre-adamic period is considered the "dust" of the ground (Gen. 2.7). It will do nothing for your spirit and your life in Christ for it can not explain first cause, and that is where it will always fall short of the glory of God since man can not know all God's ways, nor does God need you to know all the aspects of the "dust" to be saved. If you knew everything, then you would be God and would not need to be saved, but God gloriously saves without you needing to know all things. And only the smart people would be saved if you needed to know so much, but recall "that God is no respecter of persons" (Acts 10.34).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Step 2 - If, in response, an unsaved evolutionist, cosmologist, atheist or agnostic (thinly veiled atheism since a non-choice is still a rejection of God because it is not an acceptance) comes to you and says the big bang (or other natural means) is the beginning, again, that is false also since material (nature) doesn't happen all by itself. There is always a cause to the effects in nature. Nothing in nature happens all by itself. Material (or the smallest of particles) only knows how to react to the elements and its environment (or other small particles, waves, strings, quarks, even smaller). It does not make a choice. But God does choose, and He chose for a reason.

Some are quick to misread Step 2, carelessly making illogical statements such as: "the fact that parts of nature have causes does not mean that the universe as an aggregate has a cause. You have to prove this by showing that the property of causality is not relational." This claim is false. First, Step 2 does not say "parts of nature," since ALL the splendors of nature have causes, given the fact that not even one thing in nature is known to be without a cause. This would put the probability against the atheist/agnostic greater than a trillion to one, since there are more than a trillion things that have a cause, but not even one without a cause. Scientifically and logically we may conclude Pascal's wager holds true, that there are lots of gamblers out there who prefer to be independent of God just like fallen Lucifer.

Second, if the universe and time are without a cause and continued to exist in the eternity of the past in causes and effects, then this simply reverts us back up to Step 1 which shows why there can not be an eternity of the past of causes and effects. God therefore must be uncreated and the uncaused cause. And given the nature of God, He is God of the Bible shown forth in the life of Christ, which none can compare. Moreover, it does not stand to reason to say you have to show "causality is not relational," for all causality is relational, and there is no reason to suspect otherwise. The burden of the proof would lie on the person trying to disprove this. Remember in the Matrix when the Merovingian made the profound statement all things have a cause and effect (how true this statement was! even evil knows this): this is relational as the effect is in relation to the cause and the cause is in relation to the effect by causing it from whichever composition or perspective you view from. If this were not true, you would have at least some shred of evidence to suggest otherwise rather than self-exalted proclamations (that which evil generalizes in vagaries).

Understand, the evil spirit in the spirit of unsaved men to reject God's love will just self-declare mindlessly, "you have to prove...causality is not relational." No, we do not! I thought it would be helpful to point out this error in thought because it shows the lengths of absurdity in mindless self-declarations that the unregenerate will go to. Why is this illogical? Simply, by proving two things are not relational (that there would be causes outside the composition and causes inside a composition, with nothing outside the composition which would be the cause for the causes in the composition, and no mention of how the causes in the composition came to be eternally existing), still does not prove something particularly, except that within and without are not relational upon first inspection, and certainly would not be the requirement for "the universe as an aggregate has a cause." Quite the contrary, because if the composition of causes within and without were unrelated, then you could NOT say the universe has a cause because that which was outside the composition was deemed not to be the cause.

Therefore, there is no requirement to show the laws of cause and effect in a composition are uncaused by the nature outside the composition. And, if you could show this hypothetically speaking (which you can not), not only would it not help the atheist/agnostic as was shown, but you are still left with the problem of an eternity of the past of causes and effects in the composition, which reverts you back to Step 1 that shows why there can not be an eternity of the past of causes and effects. Let me say it again! We should not forget Step 1, nor should we misread Step 2 by saying, only "parts of nature have causes" are "the facts," since ALL of nature has causes and effects! Nothing in nature is without a cause and effect.

This false premise, claiming only parts of nature have causes, produces the faulty argument: it "does not mean the universe as an aggregate has a cause," yet if this were true, then there would be an eternity of the past of cause and effect within the composition which reverts the reader of this Proof back to Step 1, because man has not had an eternity of the past to be sinless, otherwise he would not still sin (see Step 1 for the proof of why this is so). Do you see how well Step 1 and Step 2 work together like a fine precision instrument in agreement with the Word of God "sharper than any twoedged sword" [sword here means the Spirit of truth] (Heb. 4.12)? The unregenerate will continue to make odd-ball self-declarations without basis or foundation in truth (reality). Their false fruit is not of God, but of self and the evil spirit, for which only Hell can appropriate them according to God's will to allow them to have a sovereign-will free to make the choice to be eternally separated from God. How truly sad for them!

Part fact and part assumption in the desperate accusation of a fallacy of composition by the atheist or agnostic (the unregenerate trying to convince himself that cause and effect do not apply in what preceded the creation of the universe) to accuse Christians is used as an intellectually dishonest smokescreen to surmise that there can possibly be such a thing as a Godless "causelessness" outside the known composition of the evolving universe of cause and effect - which is false, but there is a tinge of truth in this statement, as it pertains to God who is uncreated, that is, the One Whom is, in fact, Causeless. Since cause and effect in what we observe as a law has never been violated, we may humbly accept it is a greater guiding principle, and it would be quite the fantasy life to leap to the conclusion that there is no such thing as a cause. It would be like saying reindeer could fly, yet never once has a deer ever been seen to fly except in story tales. The atheist/agnostic should then discard their notion in a puff the magic dragon scenario existence happened all by itself.

The misapplied use in accusing of a fallacy of composition leads us, ironically, to the conclusion that God created since there is no first cause that is causeless for the creation of the universe except that which is outside the composition, rendering God the uncreated causelessness; He chose to create out of His glory. His glory is distinct, since only God of the Bible fulfills this condition as revealed through Christ being sinless and giving His life as the only begotten Son of God for forgiveness of sins and giver of eternal life. We may then render the reasonable conclusion the fallacy of composition is being committed by the atheist/agnostic since it is not possible for the composition of the universe to existing eternally in the past, nor can they even have an inkling to suspect another law that would supersede cause and effect in the kingdom of God. Each dispensation, the leading conscience on the planet has always been what God of the Bible has revealed ever since Adam and Even in written record when the Holy Spirit came upon Moses (this can be detailed further by comparisons and is not necessary to go into here; but, do state it as fact for your own examination). This leading explanation, conscience and mind of God reveals how the universe came to be, why, and what the purpose is for us. None can compare to these answers.

The Bible says if you seek God with all your heart, then you will surely find Him. It's the person who wants to know God that God reveals Himself to. And if a person doesn't want to know God: - well, God has created the world and the human mind and human spirit in such a way that he doesn't have to know God, live for God or His kingdom. The choice is a free-choice to receive God's grace to live in Christ by the Holy Spirit for the kingdom of God or for the god of this world, to be controlled by the world, with a foretaste of hell.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interjection: Step 1 and Step 2 are perfect in their presentation that there is no such thing as an eternity past of evolving, a puff the magic dragon of our existence, or a causelessness paradigm (apart from God Himself) outside the laws of cause and effect we see in creation (and certainly pseudo-science is goofy, which says an effect comes before a cause...but then this no longer is an effect, because by definition, a cause always comes before an effect). There is not a single iota of evidence for such a claim by the unsaved in their overassuming, without humility. Fantasies and myths do not count here! We ought not to shut our minds down to this fact. Ergo, God chose to create.

I like to use the famous quote of Spock on Star Trek, "when all possibilities are impossible, the impossible is the only possibility!" God did it! When an unregenerate self-declares selfishly there is no God or God of the Bible is not God, without a valid reason, know their spirit is dead to God, they are without basis, and they are on the road to perdition, which is an eternal separation from God - that is their choice! It is their choice to have this attitude towards Jesus Christ who died on the cross to forgive sins and regenerate our spirit with eternal life.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Step 3 - The next trick that a charlatan evolutionist, cosmologist, atheist or agnostic (as apposed to a regenerated one), being intellectually dishonest with themselves, tries to pull over your eyes (as well as their own in the might of their flesh) is through the question, "why can't God have a creator?" Because, by definition that no longer makes God uncreated, now does it? The subject matter, God of the Bible, of the 4 Step Proof then changes. By definition, God IS the Great I AM and is uncreated (as proven in Step 1 and Step 2). The subject is God uncreated, not as a god able to be created. Do not speak of God, then redefine Him, while remaining calling Him God or calling him a god. You would then be trying to disprove something else, which is misreading the 3rd Step. Not only is this disrespectful, but cunning, unethical and coy. Be "not doubletongued" (1 Tim. 3.Cool. It is important to realize when you draw a false conclusion based on a misreading of Step 3, all that stems from your misreading is flawed and considered of no account since you are operating from false premise by misreading.

Instead of making the mistake of trying to disprove something else that is not God, why not stay on topic BY NOT misreading Step 3 when you try to disprove some god or idolatry you speak of by his or its name which is not God. Simply do not bring this misreading into your attempt to refute this Proof since then you would be talking about oranges, while the proof is talking about apples. For example, don't arbitrarily self-declare Step 3 is about why bad things happen in the world (this is your idol thought), since this is not the point of Step 3 at all. Don't presuppose the third step in the Proof means something this or something else nonsensically, for I assure you, I wrote it, because it is a legitimate question to ask only if asked correctly (which, if asked correctly, takes you immediately to Step 4 to ask correctly).

However, do note why bad things happen, because man is fallen, sin came into the world, and Adam was locked out of the garden, the one sure and safe place for man that was given to him by God. This fact flows from the fact that God created as proven in the 4 Steps which are revealed through Christ, the Word whom came to redeem the world and man; or if you prefer, the 4 Step Proof agrees with the Word as the Proof does not specifically utilize the Word directly, so as not to be blamed for assuming God existed first.

But, praise God, He will not let atrocities go on forever (even though to us it sure seems like it has been going on for a long time in man's tiny perspective, but in the backdrop of 13.7 billion years, a couple thousand years is less than a grain of sand on earth). Ergo, Hell is awaiting those who refuse His salvation. Nothing is by chance. Only we say it is by chance, because we can't fathom the cause and effect relationship, even after it happened, because it is beyond our current capacity to know the cause. We know nothing in nature happens all by itself (the proof of Step 2), so there is a cause which is God given, in the truth and light of Christ, who was the perfect and sinless sacrifice to atone for the sins of the world and the forgiveness of the sins of man.

I have God's uncreated life in my spirit which affords me eternal life - His life. You may speak of gods or idols or other mechanisms, but debasing God has eternal consequences, since God is, by the definition of the word, Uncreated when referring to God of the Bible as so many verses in the Scriptures testify across 1500 years by 40+ spiritual writers in agreement. You can not make the argument that someone or something created God since then you would no longer be speaking about God, but perhaps a god or idol or something in your imagination. We are speaking about the definition of the only God who is Eternal and has perfect clarity, wisdom, righteousness and holiness, in His omnipotent, IMMUTABLE (unchanging) transcendent, omniscient immensity. He is incapable of sinning. Not once has He ever sinned in the 66 books of God's Word. He is God the Father, God the Son, God the Spirit: the Trinity or Triune Godhead above all.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Step 4 - But there is yet another and final twist to the demented, unregenerate (that I was one once) evolutionist and cosmologist, atheist and agnostic mind that is hostile towards and independent from God. If this question must be asked, there is a correct way to ask the question. So let the unregenerate ask, "Ok, so a lesser god created, so why can't he have a creator, and a creator create that creator?" This is not possible either. Why? Good question. It is because this presupposes an eternity of the past of creating gods and other supernatural in causal relationships, one following after the other. This reverts us back up to Step 1, which if there was an eternity past of this evolving process (not speaking of evolution), then you would have been perfected by now, yet you are not (see proof for this in Step 1), because you still sin.

Make note this Step 4 is not redundant with Step 1 or even Step 3, but needs to be said to bring together Step 3 and Step 1 by showing that God we are addressing (in Step 3) who is uncreated can not be a god created, otherwise, you would be perfected by now (similar to Step 1). While Step 4 deals with the supernatural (of spirits, gods and other ethereal unknowns), Step 1 deals with the material nature of the universe (even those things we consider chance that still have causes). God's creation includes the heavens above (Paradise 1st Heaven, and 2nd Heaven), the universe (3rd Heaven) and timeless unawares (Hades, Sheol) below. Hades is not considered heaven. The good side of Hades, once called Paradise, is in fact, Abraham's bosom. Christians will experience the Judgment Seat before the 1000 years, when we are resurrected from the good side of Hades. The bad side of Hades is where the unsaved go when they die who will, then, be resurrected to the Great White Throne to be judged and cast into hell after the millennial kingdom.

I know the atheist/agnostic question is if God is uncreated why can't something else, anything else, be uncreated? But, if you ask this, then you have to be intellectually honest with yourself, and do a comparison to this "anything else" with Jesus Christ. There is no comparison. Christ wins hands down every time given His nature and conduct. The worse thing you can do at this point is to shut your mind down belligerently and make some self-declaration like: "no one yet has made sense of the incarnation". If you say something retarded like this, then you should ask yourself, why is it that those who are saved, understand so well the atonement? One simply can not overlook the understanding God gives by revelation through grace.

Spiritually, even psychologically, we know sin needs atonement and is not allowed to go unchecked; we see this every day in the world. There are consequences in the laws of cause and effect. For example, if you murder someone, you go to jail. Thus, the only absolute atonement to prevent the second death (spiritual separation from God) is the perfect sacrifice that is Christ who broke into the world to be our propitiation or substitute for our sins. Sin leads to death because the flesh is utterly corruptible and can not be fixed or refined, though we try. We know it must now die because sin entered. Sin not absolved and the spirit not regenerated (quickened) with God's life, leads to the second death (eternal separation from God), which is countered by the new birth (born-again) or second birth (spiritual birth) which brings us into the new creation and out of the old creation of the first Adam's fall, even to the place that Adam never attained in the garden since he never ate of the tree of life which typifies Christ.

The first God-conscious man was the first Adam. Jesus is the second Adam or the last Adam. Unto Him perfection is attainable; He is the firstfruits of many who will be pillars in the New City of the New Earth without sin (may these questions help you grow in Christ). To be included in God's new creation, first you will need give up your self-centered directed life for the leading of God's will for your life which the Holy Spirit will show you after you first receive the gift of eternal life and grace which is promised to all who would receive Him (John 3.16,18). Only then can you begin to grow in spiritual life as a spiritual man or woman. You can see the need for Hell to keep those who are going there away from God's own. The perfect sacrifice could only be God Himself in His Son. Thus, before the foundations of the world, God set out His plan in His infinite foreknowledge through the way of the Lord. You will know no greater peace, love, joy, patience and comfort: "the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control" (Gal. 5.22,23).

We are grateful to God through His wisdom and revelation for this 4 Step Proof for God that not only proves God exists, but undeniably points to the Trinity of God the Father, God the Son and God the Spirit in the 66 books of the Word of God (the Bible). History shows over 100 secular and non-secular documents (not including the Bible itself) from the first century that point to the historical Jesus being claimed to be the Jesus of faith. Of the many secular documents, seven of them pointed to the resurrection of Jesus Christ (see The Case for Faith and The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel). Not only this, but the Proof clearly shows us, like Pascal's Wager, not to believe in Christ is fatal: fatal meaning, eternal separation from God, though, not annihilation of the soul since God has made us all in His image. To annihilate the image of God is not possible, nor righteous. It would be unholy to do so. So, again, you can clearly see Hell is needed to separate the bad people from the good people: those who do not love God from those who came to the cross as helpless sinners to receive Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Addendum: Some have tried to surmise God being eternal, since He existed in the eternity of the past, would have ended up creating man at some point which would approximate eternity of the past of man's creation. But, they say the implications of this are as follows: even though man is not perfect (because of sin still present), still it must mean there is no God since man was created in the proximity to eternity of the past as calculus states is the equivalent of eternity. The truth of this mistaken assumption is that since it is God's prerogative, His will, and His righteousness that dictates when to have made man in His image, man is bound by His timing and the creation of time itself for man only exists in time.

Therefore, the laws for man are laid out by His impetus alone, otherwise then, God would not be defined by God alone, but He would be defined by man's condition. We know we as men did not create God. At the very least we know our Creator preceded us as even the universe which is 13.7 billion years old preceded the first Adamic man into creation, though God did make man before the foundations of the world and the universe.

Additionally, you can't have it both ways. If you say man was created in the approximate eternity of the past, then therefore, you can not claim man did not have an eternity to be perfected. And, since man still sins, he has not had an eternity to be perfected. Ergo, man was created by God of the Bible according to Step 1. [this addendum was not included in the body of the 4 Step Proof because it is obvious that man did not precede God; but to be courteous and helpful, it is included here].

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Concluding Thought: In the kingdom of heaven, God's way of salvation we may term OSAS arminian, while in the kingdom most calvinists would be unsaved (considered the "tares," Matt. 13). Ultimately, at the end of the day, the reason why unregenerates outside the kingdom of heaven can't sense or reason out that these 4 Steps are true is because God has not given it to them to be able to understand. God will not enter a man who willingly puts a wall up between himself and God. The intuition, communion and conscience of their spirit is dead to God by their own volition, full of excuses and intellectually dishonest smokescreens: e.g. accusing Christians of being afraid of death when most Christians never even come to Christ thinking of death.

An unregenerate is unable to know he has a sin nature because he is lost in his fallen nature of his old man due to the fact that he wants to remain in the old creation. As the One says in the Matrix (to help you relate by a movie), "the problem is CHOICE". That's what they whom take the red pill say. They don't realize it fully until they come out of the Matrix. Those who remain in the matrix of their sin nature and the world (Satan is the god of this world), have this "unspoken, subterranean motivation", The Case for Faith by Lee Strobel, p. 244. If you would like to study other aspects, though not necessary to be given here, read The Case for a Creator, The Case for Faith and the Case for Christ by Lee Strobel. Gary Habermas records 39 ancient source of Jesus Christ, citing 100 facts. 7 of those sources are secular. Finally, read The Spiritual Man by Watchman Nee. Then read the Bible. Anyone who deeply studies these 5 sources, in this order (from outer to inner), and still refuses Christ are truly bad people. I would tell you to just read the Bible first as it was originally intended, but that is like moving a mountain. What man cannot do though God can do!

Fallen man, still unregenerate, is so arrogant, he acts and thinks as though he created himself and is the center of the universe. This is the pride of life! Pride begets the fall. What strange faith this is to believe in atheism/agnosticism, yet have no basis or valid reason for doing so. Isn't that called blind faith? All those who are born-again had the same blind faith before accepting the way, the truth and the life (Jesus Christ) to receive God's uncreated life by His merciful saving grace. I too was once like you before going through that door that remains open to all who could receive no greater love!

Pre-Endemic Animals

Animals are cursed (Rom. 8.19-22) by man's sin in the world. Man was responsible to rule over the whole world and all the animals, but Adam was disobedient and became fallen. We are not speaking of pre-endemic animals that merely adapt to their environment and go extinct as the climate changes. Such beasts are overrun by other creatures due to the sin in this period, influenced by fallen Lucifer and his fallen angels that ruled over demons and cities and creatures. Instead, we are speaking of man made in God's image (Gen. 1.26) whom God created with God-consciousness in his spirit and self-consciousness in his soul. He will raise man with a resurrected body on the last day just as was Christ was witnessed to have been raised from the dead with a newly clothed spiritual body. We shall receive the same who are in Him.

Animals today kill because of man's sin. This cause is even greater and more pervasive than Satan's working in the pre-endemic period before Adam. Animals kill to survive. The only difference is now, if man were still obedient to God, the killing committed by animals would not be the responsibility of man, but would be stemming from earth's earliest ages of sin. Now that man is awakened by the tree of knowledge of good and evil when he was not suppose to eat of its fruit, he has misused his place in creation, pillaging the earth, and aggravating the existing flow of the food chain. Could it be said that animals were possessed since the serpent was entered into by a demon in the garden? Yes. When God split the firmament in day two, it was not considered a good day like the others, because up from the deep disembodied demons came to inhabit the bodies of human or animals. When God restored creation in the 6 days (these are representative "summary days"Eye-wink, it was not possible for animals to avoid those demons. And so this is why animals kill.

Man was brought into this restoration around 6000 years ago, yet could have remained obedient, in being tested, by rejecting the serpent's offer; and man could have eaten of the tree of life too, gaining God's life right there and then. Now that man chose to rebel there has to be put in place a redemptive design. Eventually Christ's finished work on the cross will lead us to the millennial kingdom in which the lamb will crouch next to a lion and the lion will eat grass (Isaiah 11.6-9).

Non-Annihilation

God will never extinguish the soul of man, not even in hell, because once God created man, He gave the ability of God-consciousness. He would never be unholy by annihilating that man after giving Him this ability, for He would never treat us as merely instrumental value. Righteously, we are considered of intrinsic value to God because God wants to walk with us one day after we have been raised up. This is what God longs for and what His whole purpose is: the new city in the new earth and what is to occur after that too for eternity.

He created us because we are to Him for His good pleasure, created out of His glory to be subjected to His authority in perfect harmony. This is revealed to us by His Holy Spirit and the power of eternal life, which is His uncreated life. He has entered into their regenerated spirits to lead us through to such truths and simple knowing. We have new life which is the same new life that those under the law received, except that the Holy Spirit did not reside in them, but came upon them and moved them. The veil was not yet rent. The indwelling Holy Spirit did not commence until Christ was raised to the right hand of the Father, then gave the Holy Spirit to dwell each man who believed according to John 3.16. For we have become a royal priesthood and no longer bring our prayers to the intermediary priesthood of the Levites. The experience of Israel under the law was to show us we are utterly incapable of keeping the law which points us to Christ, the One who was able to keep the law and fill it up.

Men will come with many rationalizations claiming their logic is better (masking their self-exaltations before God). Many have tried to overturn this proof. Eventually the sun and all stars should die out but the universe will never collapse on itself for scientist today agree that dark energy is a greater force than dark matter and matter itself. Dark energy, scientifically proven, pushes outwardly expanding the universe at an exponential rate in spite of the pervasive force of gravity pressing in. It turns out that this great force of gravity ironically is weak, and also is (tentatively) the avenue through which we are raised "to the throne" (Rev. 7.9). Only God could create such a vast complexity. Scientists say this great force is dissipated as gravitrons escape through the universe to the heavens.

Troy Brooks


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

Oh yeah, we're well aware of this twit from the IG forums. Essentially any refutation he recieves is simply ignored. Pretty typical. I've been banned from his forums about a dozen times for offering any sort of criticism.

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7530
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

Oh yes, we know him and his 25 screen names well.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


DrFear
Posts: 248
Joined: 2006-07-09
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

yyyyyyyyyyyyyeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeshhhhhhhhhh.........
i can't help but bring up the random pop-culture interjections, the matrix, star trek, bill and ted's excellent adventure (most excellent)....i also enjoy the use of the word cunning to describe us....i don't know anyone who doesn't take being called cunning as a compliment...
hey...just to use a movie for reference...i think we might need another Munich....just change the faiths around a bit.....
i'd also like to know who exactly posed the question "why can't god have a creator?"....you're just setting yourself up for a fall with that one....

Fear is the mindkiller.


JB_Montag
JB_Montag's picture
Posts: 68
Joined: 2006-07-27
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

I made it to the part about god and stopped.

A factual argument is made of testable premises. God is untestable, therefore an invalid premises. If were not arguing fact, then we are arguing opinion.

Opinions are like assholes, we all have them. Xtians seem to have a few more assholes. Just my opinion.

The paper read yesterday, the earth exploded, nobody noticed the passing of this hapless planet.


Anonymous
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

heheh. I love the way Troy's proofs read like a bitter history of his poor debating performances...

Quote:
Instead of making the mistake of trying to disprove something else that is not God, why not stay on topic BY NOT misreading Step 3 when you try to disprove some god or idolatry you speak of by his or its name which is not God.


LCQuerido
Posts: 9
Joined: 2006-07-28
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

Animals are cursed (Rom. 8.19-22) by man's sin in the world.

Poor souls. Laughing out loud


Crazybassist03
Crazybassist03's picture
Posts: 22
Joined: 2006-07-16
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

They just don't seem to get it. You CAN NOT provide proof that god exists. Any proof you provide, there is another explaination. Even Christians say this themselves. That's why they call it FAITH. It's almost unchristian to try to prove that he exists. Because you're acknowledging people who question god. You are providing answers for something you are never supposed to do, which is question.


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

*resists urge...to...reply...ugh*


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

^^^^ Right there with ya buddy.

I'll just hit the faulty logic bits. Not a long reply with corroborating evidence or anything.

Step 1
Since we're not perfect then we were created.
If god is perfect and we are not and god created us then god is not perfect and thus not god. (My punctuation is missing.)
Adamic man????? god-consciousness???? Is this a new sect? Gimme a break. Sooooo, we were created but then evolved? This is exactly what 'intelligent' design wants to teach our children. Class is three minutes long and no pencil required.

Step 2
My mac at work crashes for no reason, all by itself. If I were to look deeper into the problem then perhaps I would see something mechanically wrong. Instead, I should just blame god for losing last years gross operating profit reports. Don't let the ignorant sell you 'christ the magic messiah' stories either.
The matrix was a movie. It was entertaining but not a source for a religion. If you wish to rely upon 'stories' and fairy tales rather than empirical evidence then using logic is like trying to fuck a flatworm in the ass. You're not going to find it.

Interjection ? ? "all that stems from your misreading is flawed and considered of no account since you are operating from false premise by misreading. "
Nice disclaimer. Did you get that from Paul, John of Patmos, or Moses?

Step 3
Using the bible to refute the existence of god is WWWAAAYYYY easier than one would think. One would only need read it in order to understand this. The god of the bible had better hope that he doesn't exist. lol. Otherwise, he's got some 'splaining to do. I'd track my roots all the way back to Noah and I want reparations.
Somebody really liked the puff the magic dragon story. He refers to it yet again.
I get tired of this.... For the next to last time ever: There is no holy spirit. Did you hear me? I deny the belief in a holy spirit because it has/is/will not/ever be/been evidenceable(sp?).

Step 4
EVERYTHING has a cause, you said. Refer to Step 2's rambling idiocy.
Rest of Step 4
Is step 1. n'est ce pas?

If half of the gods, bible, and jesus shit had been removed then more people would have read your post. Throw some humor in there. Oh and Neverending Story was better than Puff the Magic Dragon, lamer. Oh sorry. Mr. Brooks.

Do you write disclaimers for the drug companies or DOW chemical??? You're really good at it. Perhaps a career change was correct for you from science to preaching. Let me know how that works out for ya.

darth_josh (Oh Star Wars was better than the matrix too.)

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


LeftofLarry
RRS local affiliateScientist
LeftofLarry's picture
Posts: 1199
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

I didn't read the whole thing because frankly the absurdity of it was too much to bear. So I'll say this. This is all refuted by a simple statement: BASELESS AND FAULTY FUNDAMENTAL FOUNDATION OF HIS LOGIC. Within his logistical paradigm, he makes a case, however, that paradigm in itself is faulty due to the assumption that there is a God to begin with, therefore he cannot use his made up logic to prove his own theories. It's kinda like one of those street magicians that you bet money to find the right card..you will loose ever time. To the ignorant and gullible he may seem smart..to the others who think...well..it's a different story..but we can never win, because we wold have to shoot down his argument witht he assumption god exists, that right there is a logical impossibility. Clever and pompous he is, yet still a dumb theist.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server which houses Celebrity Atheists.


stOneskull
Posts: 32
Joined: 2006-07-29
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

if you called the universe, god..

then would god exist?


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7530
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

stOneskull wrote:
if you called the universe, god..

then would god exist?

No, a guy who was muddying the waters, that didn't understand the definition of universe and god would exist.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


stOneskull
Posts: 32
Joined: 2006-07-29
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

there is only one definition of god?

none include the universe being god?

damn.. write that in cos that's how i see god.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

Only if you consider the universe itself to have intelligence. That would make you a Pantheist.


stOneskull
Posts: 32
Joined: 2006-07-29
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

well yeah a part of me is pantheistic, part of me is dualistic,
a little monotheistic and a little atheistic.
i have theistic parts not included in the official list,
and atheist parts not included.
and i guess that i just don't know.

little guy can't handle the impossibility!
there there.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

You really can't be all that at once, unless you are psychotic or have MPD.


stOneskull
Posts: 32
Joined: 2006-07-29
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

i guess disorder can be no order
as well as being against order, eh? heh.

i have one personality but it also journeys the fourth dimension,
unfortunately my aging body only goes one direction along it.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

All that is almost like someone saying they are a little bit hetero, but also a little bit gay, and a little bit bisexual, but also a little bit asexual, and a bit promiscuous. Puzzled:

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


stOneskull
Posts: 32
Joined: 2006-07-29
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

a little bit. except sexuality is pretty certain,
you're somewhere.

i know i am about 95% hetero on a homo---bi---hetero scale.
and about 70% on an non-sexual---highlysexual scale.

i guess i could say i'm 50% theistic on a theistic-atheistic scale
and out of the 7 official types of theism i could give them a percentage.

but really i'm no ism. not even a nihilist.

i just like the paradox of labelling myself a nihilist.

re: the god of the bible.

you would first have to seperate the books out of the canon.

there are different authors, expressing different things.

in general god, especially jesus of the new testament, is the Sun.

look up during the day for proof of the god of the bible.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

The sun is simply a ball of gasses producing nuclear fusion. Hardly a god.


stOneskull
Posts: 32
Joined: 2006-07-29
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

i agree..

yet to people who were yet to understand what solar systems were,
it was god.

it gives it's life so we can live,
it provides the light and energy we need..

the sun has the whole world in his hands.

the story of the sun's life has been written for centuries.

the jesus story, like the noah's ark story are mirrored thru the major religions..

the astrology story based on those twinkly things you wouldn't know what they were either.. and you wouldn't have a tv.. so you start mapping them and giving them stories.

from earth,
you can go up to the light of the sun,
or go down into the fire of the sun,
but what's the difference?

the sun has the whole world in his hands.


Anonymous
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

stOneskull wrote:
but really i'm no ism. not even a nihilist.

i just like the paradox of labelling myself a nihilist..


You sound like every postmodernist I know, who of course deny all labels, none more so than the label postmodernist. The willful inconsistency, the proud and deliberate self-contradictions, the lack of a stance on anything (e.g. neither theist nor not-theist), the pretense of originality (every postmodernist believes himself the sole inventor of postmodernism) are the fashionable and mainstream attitudes of the age, at least in my country.


stOneskull
Posts: 32
Joined: 2006-07-29
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

i never mentioned post-modernism.

i'm not into that.

is this the general operation of this site?

attack a new member from the onset,
making them in a worse and worse mood til they get p'd off?

i'm sorry i don't want to join your religion.

i don't care if you say you're with us or against us,
i'm neither.

i thought it would be interesting discussions,
but i'm seeing another 'blind faith'.

if you're a theist and say there is a possibility of there not being a god,
it's the same as an atheist saying there is a possibility there is a god.

neither one is 100% then.

are you 100% atheist?


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7530
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

stOneskull wrote:

is this the general operation of this site?

attack a new member from the onset,
making them in a worse and worse mood til they get p'd off?

It's the intent of the regulars here to respond to the irrational. You are acting somewhat irrational in some of these posts. I personally hope for more from you, but recognize that not all people smart enough to figure out that Yahweh is myth are rational people.

Quote:
i'm sorry i don't want to join your religion.

See there you go being irrational again. We don't have a religion here.

Quote:
i don't care if you say you're with us or against us,
i'm neither.

Nobody said you're with us or against us. More red herrings.

Quote:
i thought it would be interesting discussions,
but i'm seeing another 'blind faith'.

Feel free to point out which "blind faith" that is, rather than make a charge with no proof, something we're used to exposing as illogical/irrational.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


stOneskull
Posts: 32
Joined: 2006-07-29
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

maybe later i'll reply with them.

have you read e-prime?

the lack of that is bothering me in itself.

i do think there are two main types of atheist.

if you want to keep attacking me over semantics go ahead.

i'm talking about an opinion, an observation,
and you want to treat me like an idiot with a little exercise in the definition of atheism.. the way you use 'we' .. the condesecending anti-hypocrisy hypocrisy that 'you' (the 'us' you mention [MPD?]) have used like a little power game or something.

ooh, well done.. way to point out that a baby can be considered atheist..

did you miss that i said i see two MAIN types of atheist,
and like i said before i mean as in people who would and could say 'i am an atheist'. nothing to do with babies.. and not excluding any other types of atheist.

i only see that as a way for you to have some fun with me,
disrespecting and disregarding my point of view,
labelling it as 'incorrect'.

well, i am not a toy. and i have the right to my opinions without being hit over the head for them.

i do not want to join 'you' and think exactly like 'you'.

i am me, and i am free. i blow on your false axioms,
and watch your false logic house of cards falls down.

when you're tagging king solomon's temple,
don't forget to bring the UV light.

i was there already and have left a secret message.

adios.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7530
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

stOneskull wrote:

i only see that as a way for you to have some fun with me,
disrespecting and disregarding my point of view,
labelling it as 'incorrect'.

You think it's fun to get top point out to a person who appears to be an atheist, that they are being foolish? I'm sorry man, it's not fun at all. This is the burden that is my life though, it's who I am.

Quote:
i do not want to join 'you' and think exactly like 'you'.

When did anyone here say we want you to be exactly like us? Being proven wrong on a point doesn't mean I advocate being exactly like me. In fact I'd advocate the exact opposite. I would however recommend taking a lesson from me on honesty in debate, but that's just me I guess.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Anonymous
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

stOneskull wrote:
i never mentioned post-modernism.

I never said you did.

Quote:
i'm not into that.

Of course you aren't.

Quote:
is this the general operation of this site?

attack a new member from the onset,
making them in a worse and worse mood til they get p'd off?


Just calling a spade a spade. And you turned up here with an axe to grind, judging by the 'immature' nature of your posts (by your definition of someone uncomfortable with themselves).

Quote:
i'm sorry i don't want to join your religion.

Oh me! Oh my! He called me religious!

Quote:
i don't care if you say you're with us or against us,
i'm neither.

Says the guy who denies postmodernism.

Quote:
i thought it would be interesting discussions,

So long as you blame everyone else and don't reflect on your own presentation skills, that's the main thing.

Quote:
but i'm seeing another 'blind faith'.

Gasp! Horror! He says I have faith!

Quote:
if you're a theist and say there is a possibility of there not being a god,
it's the same as an atheist saying there is a possibility there is a god.

neither one is 100% then.


Help! Police! He's saying I'm no different to a theist!

Quote:
are you 100% atheist?

Atheism is a qualititative attribute.


Anonymous
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

stOneskull wrote:
adios.

We need some decent theists for balance on these forums and what do we get? A hit and run wishy-washy tantrum-thrower.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7530
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

rickyroma wrote:
stOneskull wrote:
adios.

We need some decent theists for balance on these forums and what do we get? A hit and run wishy-washy tantrum-thrower.

I like Adam Ryan. I'm actually thinking of making a forum called "Killin' em with kindness." It would be a atheist vs. theist debate forum with strict rules, moderated by Adam Ryan (theist) and the most dedicated, patient, polite atheist I can find.

Anyone have any interest on the atheist side? It's a serious job, as you would be responsible for making sure the rules were adhered to and equally fair for both parties.

Adam, are you reading this?

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


LCQuerido
Posts: 9
Joined: 2006-07-28
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

LeftofLarry wrote:
..but we can never win, because we wold have to shoot down his argument witht he assumption god exists, that right there is a logical impossibility

There are no impossibles to God. Laughing out loud

Seriously, it took me a long time to see they play a rigged game. And that's why they're so difficult to corner.

Belief is the idiot's Wisdom.


Anonymous
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

Sapient wrote:
rickyroma wrote:
stOneskull wrote:
adios.

We need some decent theists for balance on these forums and what do we get? A hit and run wishy-washy tantrum-thrower.

I like Adam Ryan. I'm actually thinking of making a forum called "Killin' em with kindness." It would be a atheist vs. theist debate forum with strict rules, moderated by Adam Ryan (theist) and the most dedicated, patient, polite atheist I can find.

Anyone have any interest on the atheist side? It's a serious job, as you would be responsible for making sure the rules were adhered to and equally fair for both parties.

Adam, are you reading this?


Is Adam a poster here?

That's a splendid idea, old chap. Go for it without delay.

I think a Christian moderator on bible forums would be great too, though someone would be difficult to find. However, this being a new forum you could consider approaching (non-member) theists from other on-line communities who are interested in getting involved in an 'outreach exercise'. But perhaps I'm barking up the wrong tree with all this.


stOneskull
Posts: 32
Joined: 2006-07-29
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

nah, i get it now.

you aren't just atheist.

you're anti-theist.

atheists who have a mission to convert theists to atheism.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7530
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

stOneskull... you're dense like a rock. I can see how you came up with the screen name.

You're anti-perspicacious.

You don't just lack observation skills and a clear head, you're actually on a mission to convert others to your religion of dense mindedness.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


stOneskull
Posts: 32
Joined: 2006-07-29
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

ad hominem.

(that's how you respond)


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

One of my greatest wishes is that people would learn what the fuck logical fallacies like ad hominem mean before they throw them out, typically misusing them, thinking they've made or won some point.

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


stOneskull
Posts: 32
Joined: 2006-07-29
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

me too!

i would usually just respond.. but that's how this guy responds and i felt like responding that way.

i'm not dense. i think dualistic games are dense.

i think after reading about logic then e-prime and fuzzy logic are worth reading too.

edit: to sarcastic ricky -

if i'm holding an apple am i holding an apple or not holding an apple?

what if i take a bite out of the apple?

am i still holding an apple?

after two bites?

until there is no apple left and i am not holding an apple?

i am saying that after the first bite, i am now holding 90% of an apple.
after two bites, i'm holding 80% of an apple.

that's fuzzy logic.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7530
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

Yellow_Number_Five wrote:
One of my greatest wishes is that people would learn what the fuck logical fallacies like ad hominem mean before they throw them out, typically misusing them, thinking they've made or won some point.

Yeah it's weird how people think an ad hominem is any time they are made to look foolish. I can see the misunderstanding, but it does happen a little too often.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


stOneskull
Posts: 32
Joined: 2006-07-29
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

so..
if you're off my back..

can i discuss more about what i know about the god of the bible?

mainly i know the jesus story and the same story is used through lots of other religions.

the new testament is highly 'masonic' with double and then triple meanings. the first, literal meaning, for the general public.

(the old testament is actually a lot different - with a belief in a real deity in many parts.. a lot about their god being superior to any other gods but does still have stories from older religions within - for example the noah's ark story is directly taken from the babylonian 'epic of creation' which is a great example of how the zodiac story has been turned into a literal story).

there are two main stories about the sun's journey.

first is the year. the earth orbit.. the solstices and the equinoxes,
and the astrology of the year.. the zodiac.

the life of the sun through the year, through the seasons - solstices and equinoxes - was important for crops and plants and warmth throughout the year.

this is the main story used to depict the sun in religion.

second is the great year.. divided into 12 astrology houses as well,
each house being about 2000 years.

this painting shows the priory of sion member leonardo da vinci painting in the story of the great year.

the time of 'adam n eve' is called the 'age of gemini' the twins.. the triple meaning being the fruit of knowledge (magic mushrooms), our awakening.. the beginnings of recorded history (knowledge) that's the first of the air signs.

then it goes around to the first of the earth signs.
this is horus the bull.. which is the 'age of taurus' and represents the egyptians and their time.

then it goes around to the first of the fire signs.. that is aries, moses blowing in the ram-horns.. the age of aries


michelangelo's moses

after aries comes the first sign of water - the fish.. that is jesus.. the age of pisces..

then it goes around to the second of the air signs - the age of aquarius.. the water bearer.

that's where it gets a bit weird. aquarius is ganymede the little boy that zeus (jupiter) came down from the heavens and took the boy as his lover, putting him the sky as his personal lover boy who carries the trays of nectar around. the elite pedophiles used this story as a justification for pedophilia and still do secretly.

there is a 13th sign of the zodiac which is left out. that is ophiuchus - the healer (snake-holder) - but that is a whole other subject in itself.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7530
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

:roll:

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


DrFear
Posts: 248
Joined: 2006-07-09
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

keep right on discussin'. hell, it's got me away from the tv, chappelle's got nothin' on you. Smiling


stOneskull
Posts: 32
Joined: 2006-07-29
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

cheers man..

wouldn't you say explaining the real stories..

is REALLY cleaning the bullshit?

you gotta get right down to the axioms of what people believe.
and why.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7530
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

stOneskull wrote:

you gotta get right down to the axioms of what people believe.
and why.

Right, and Christians love The Last Supper painting and believe in God because Aquarius is Ganymede and all the apostles are constellations. :roll:

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


stOneskull
Posts: 32
Joined: 2006-07-29
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

no..

most don't even understand the real story.

the real story clears bullshit..
(if they're willing to listen of course)

if you want to watch videos on the jesus myth,
and the stories of messiahs being born to virgin mothers,
and crucified for mankind.. then there are some great ones..

The Jesus Myth:
http://opposingdigits.com/vlog/?p=290

and the Pharmacratic Inquisition
http://www.pharmacratic-inquisition.com/

mind blowing material for theists and atheists alike.


Anonymous
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

stOneskull wrote:
nah, i get it now.

you aren't just atheist.

you're anti-theist.

atheists who have a mission to convert theists to atheism.


Great summary of "we'd like some theist moderators for balance".


Anonymous
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

Yellow_Number_Five wrote:
One of my greatest wishes is that people would learn what the fuck logical fallacies like ad hominem mean before they throw them out, typically misusing them, thinking they've made or won some point.

Emotional pleading. Eye-wink


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7530
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

rickyroma wrote:

Is Adam a poster here?

Yup.

Quote:

That's a splendid idea, old chap. Go for it without delay.

Just got off the phone with Adam, and he likes the idea. He's in. Smiling

I need an atheist moderator now. Do you want the duty?

Quote:
I think a Christian moderator on bible forums would be great too

I have a trust issue there. And Rook isn't around enough to monitor the actions in that forum. Maybe in the future.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


photog
photog's picture
Posts: 6
Joined: 2006-08-02
User is offlineOffline
Proving the god of the bible (you guys will LOVE this one!)

I loved the way he only accepts responses from thsoe that would accept his premise of how he views the universe. It is apparent that he has been faced with quantum physics and didn't understand the concepts, I am no expert by any means but I have had it explained to me elementary.

Regardless, a person like this only thinks that people that believe in his view of god will get to have the big prize.

I feel sorry for closed minded people like that.

I believe in science. Imagine that.


Apokalipse
Apokalipse's picture
Posts: 210
Joined: 2006-08-27
User is offlineOffline
4 Easy Steps that Prove God

"The Perfect Proof for God of the Bible: blah blah blah blah blah blah this argument is infallible blah blah blah...."

Step 1 – the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. Modern mankind evolved about 100,000 years ago. We have not had an eternity to become perfect.
Furthermore, perfection is a concept. Just like infinity is. It doesn’t actually exist.

Step 2 –
Baseless Presumption: “Nothing in nature and time happens all by itself.”
Baseless Presumption: “It always has a cause.” – does this include your god?

“Therefore, since it must have a cause, always, we know God did it, given Christ.”
Baseless Presumption: god was the cause
Still, does that mean god was caused?
If so, by what?
If not, then everything doesn’t has a cause. And the argument is invalid.

Step 3 – “If you wish to try to disprove this Proof, do not try to disprove some god, but keep your issues directed at God of the Bible, given Christ.”
Implies that the god of the bible is the only god, even though there is no evidence to support that claim.

“Step 4 - Just as Step 1 treats the natural, there is also the supernatural, in which there could not have been an eternity of the past of cause and effects of gods creating gods; otherwise, you would have had an eternity to be perfected to be without sin. Ergo, God did it, given Christ.
more baseless assumptions: “there is also the supernatural”
“there could not have been an eternity of……”
And regarding the last one… this still leaves a gaping hole.
Is god caused?
If so, by what?
If not, then everything doesn’t have a cause. And the argument is invalid.

“you would have had an eternity to be perfected to be without sin.”
Perfection is a concept. Infinity is a concept. They don’t actually exist.

Baseless, Presumptuous Conclusion: Most people are going to Hell because they want to. You're "without excuse” (Rom. 1.20).

"The Proof"

Introduction: blah blah blah blah…

blah blah god exists blah blah blah blah..."

“Analyzing the universe falsely and overassuming are just the lame excuses blah blah….”
My irony meter just blew up.

Blah blah blah atheism is based on faith blah blah”
baldness is not a hair colour.
You don’t “have faith” that santa claus does not exist…..

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“Step 1 – blah blah blah repeat of step 1 blah blah….”

“Evolution (the limited definition of the physical development since the amoeba) is NOT towards perfection for evolution is just a limited way of man understanding some things for it does not address or make treatment of the spiritual and the soulical, since these other two components are beyond its scope; but, evolving (a different term relating to cause and effect over a greater time frame) has a more encompassing and expansive meaning. If such evolving (of causes and effects) was going on for an eternity of the past (which it has not, of course), we easily would have been perfected by now, having ample time to do so.”
traditional evolution deals with living organisms that actually exist


bigbang
Posts: 1
Joined: 2007-01-10
User is offlineOffline
Why does everything in

Why does everything in life need to have some kind of evidenceable, (your word), proof. As for proof in a persons life change, niether you are I can say what caused it. People try to look into a serial killers mind, heart, and soul to see why he did what he did, but only he knows the real reason. Some things that happen in life, are not seen on the outside.


American Atheist
American Atheist's picture
Posts: 1331
Joined: 2006-09-03
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote: All that

MattShizzle wrote:
All that is almost like someone saying they are a little bit hetero, but also a little bit gay, and a little bit bisexual, but also a little bit asexual, and a bit promiscuous. Puzzled:

ROTF