A lot of Atheist and agnostics just don't get it

I'm just amazed at how many "believers" don't think that the bible is true. You yourself had to move the goalposts so it made sense to you.

No reason to be amazed. There is a huge difference noting that Bible stories are not all literal and saying one does not think the Bible is true. I note that all Bible stories are not literal deliveries of events and I still believe the Bible to be true. Try to keep in mind that textbooks, encyclopedias, and newspapers were unknown in Biblical times. Lessons and truths had to be conveyed in a memorable way to last through the generations. It is merely a matter of being open to and aware of cultural differences.
Geez, that sure was a lot of fartsmoke to try to explain why you don’t think that the bible is true, but that it is. Even for you.
Dude, you're just trolling. What you intend for evil, God is using for good.
The god you haven’t proven?
But I have. The laws of nature prove God's existence. Your existence proves God's existence. Your behaviors prove God's existence. The proof is all around you.
 
just don't get it
the Spirit that calls forth, comforts

It's a fucking cult.

There's some airheaded blonde or "spirited" feminist who offers "comfort" for some monetary consideration from male patrons.

The usual feminist trope about men who "just don't get it.

Some branch of Almighty Vice Lord Nation or something like that. Jeffrey Epstein and company. Robert Mueller the third, attorney general William Barr.

Boomers who refuse to quit booming. Retirees estranged from their spouses and children and alienated from their religion.
 
As a child, in Catholic School, we were taught that the Bible is the inspired word of God.
Which was a genetic accident of where and when you were born. Had you been born in a dofgerent place and time, you would have been taught that different religious claims were true.
 
I'm just amazed at how many "believers" don't think that the bible is true. You yourself had to move the goalposts so it made sense to you.

No reason to be amazed. There is a huge difference noting that Bible stories are not all literal and saying one does not think the Bible is true. I note that all Bible stories are not literal deliveries of events and I still believe the Bible to be true. Try to keep in mind that textbooks, encyclopedias, and newspapers were unknown in Biblical times. Lessons and truths had to be conveyed in a memorable way to last through the generations. It is merely a matter of being open to and aware of cultural differences.
Geez, that sure was a lot of fartsmoke to try to explain why you don’t think that the bible is true, but that it is. Even for you.
Dude, you're just trolling. What you intend for evil, God is using for good.
The god you haven’t proven?
But I have. The laws of nature prove God's existence. Your existence proves God's existence. Your behaviors prove God's existence. The proof is all around you.
Those things are only proven to you. You are free to accept things on bad evidence. Just don't presume that others will accept the same, bad evidence and argument. You will be disappointed.
 
Last edited:
I'm just amazed at how many "believers" don't think that the bible is true. You yourself had to move the goalposts so it made sense to you.

No reason to be amazed. There is a huge difference noting that Bible stories are not all literal and saying one does not think the Bible is true. I note that all Bible stories are not literal deliveries of events and I still believe the Bible to be true. Try to keep in mind that textbooks, encyclopedias, and newspapers were unknown in Biblical times. Lessons and truths had to be conveyed in a memorable way to last through the generations. It is merely a matter of being open to and aware of cultural differences.
Geez, that sure was a lot of fartsmoke to try to explain why you don’t think that the bible is true, but that it is. Even for you.
Dude, you're just trolling. What you intend for evil, God is using for good.
The god you haven’t proven?
But I have. The laws of nature prove God's existence. Your existence proves God's existence. Your behaviors prove God's existence. The proof is all around you.
That's not what real proof is.
 
No reason to be amazed. There is a huge difference noting that Bible stories are not all literal and saying one does not think the Bible is true. I note that all Bible stories are not literal deliveries of events and I still believe the Bible to be true. Try to keep in mind that textbooks, encyclopedias, and newspapers were unknown in Biblical times. Lessons and truths had to be conveyed in a memorable way to last through the generations. It is merely a matter of being open to and aware of cultural differences.
Geez, that sure was a lot of fartsmoke to try to explain why you don’t think that the bible is true, but that it is. Even for you.
Dude, you're just trolling. What you intend for evil, God is using for good.
The god you haven’t proven?
But I have. The laws of nature prove God's existence. Your existence proves God's existence. Your behaviors prove God's existence. The proof is all around you.
That's not what real proof is.
Sure it is. There is no direct evidence available except for communing with God, which you can't do. So the only evidence available for you is indirect evidence. It's all around you.
 
No reason to be amazed. There is a huge difference noting that Bible stories are not all literal and saying one does not think the Bible is true. I note that all Bible stories are not literal deliveries of events and I still believe the Bible to be true. Try to keep in mind that textbooks, encyclopedias, and newspapers were unknown in Biblical times. Lessons and truths had to be conveyed in a memorable way to last through the generations. It is merely a matter of being open to and aware of cultural differences.
Geez, that sure was a lot of fartsmoke to try to explain why you don’t think that the bible is true, but that it is. Even for you.
Dude, you're just trolling. What you intend for evil, God is using for good.
The god you haven’t proven?
But I have. The laws of nature prove God's existence. Your existence proves God's existence. Your behaviors prove God's existence. The proof is all around you.
Those things are only proven to you. You are free to accept things on bad evidence. Just don't presume that others will accept the same, bad evidence and argument. You will be disappointed.
No. It is not only proven to me. It is there for anyone to use.

What bad evidence? Most of what science uses in examining nature is indirect evidence. You don't actually believe they measure relativity do you?

I don't care if you accept it.
 
No. It is not only proven to me.
Yes, it is. You are making the personal choice, driven by faith, to lie and say you have been convinced by bad evidence. You are a fraud and you are lying your ass off. And you do this because you think it sounds better than, "because I have faith this is so". It doesn't sound better. It just embarrasses you.
 
No. It is not only proven to me.
Yes, it is. You are making the personal choice, driven by faith, to lie and say you have been convinced by bad evidence. You are a fraud and you are lying your ass off. And you do this because you think it sounds better than, "because I have faith this is so". It doesn't sound better. It just embarrasses you.
It is also proven to Bar Ilan University’s Professor Nathan Aviezer, author of the book In the Beginning. Who said, “Without addressing who or what caused it, the mechanics of the creation process in the Big Bang match the Genesis story perfectly. If I had to make up a theory to match the first passages in Genesis, the Big Bang theory would be it,”

Could New Scientific Discovery Support Creation?

Nathan Aviezer - Wikipedia
 
No. It is not only proven to me.
Yes, it is. You are making the personal choice, driven by faith, to lie and say you have been convinced by bad evidence. You are a fraud and you are lying your ass off. And you do this because you think it sounds better than, "because I have faith this is so". It doesn't sound better. It just embarrasses you.
It is also proven to Bar Ilan University’s Professor Nathan Aviezer, author of the book In the Beginning. Who said, “Without addressing who or what caused it, the mechanics of the creation process in the Big Bang match the Genesis story perfectly. If I had to make up a theory to match the first passages in Genesis, the Big Bang theory would be it,”

Could New Scientific Discovery Support Creation?

Nathan Aviezer - Wikipedia
So what? It is only proof to you. Just because someone else has made the same error does not mean it is good evidence. You're both full of shit, and,no doubt, both make the same stupid errors and contradictions.
 

Forum List

Back
Top