Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
There are volumes of believers post how they belief there is a god and basically have themselves convinced of it.
If God were to appear on the earth, do the obligatory world tour and perform miracles on his way, it is impossible for any one to deny him his existence. Not even me. But since that hasn't happened we are left with the status quo.
That leaves believers with no evidence of anything just like me.
I know there are some who say they have visions and interactions but that is false also. Delusions at beat.
So here we both are, me worshipping nothing because I have no evidence of any God, and we have believers worshipping the same nothing and still with no evidence.
Is my belief in nothing any less credible than a believer who also has nothing but faith, I.e. no evidence.
Yet they get insulted when challenged about it. I would suggest it would be 90% of the debates are started by believers.
That's fine but in other threads, when a statement is made, the poster is required to link it and right ty it so. Not so with believers. Its appears grossly improper to question anyone about religion.
They can condemn atheists, communists, democrats etc and never support it with evidence. They want to be excluded from scrutiny because of their religious beliefs as if they have proof of what they believe but never produced it.
Again. The subject of God is common. Try this. Has anyone ever imagined what a God would look like. Do you have a vision if what he could look like?
If he did return, a spirit whisking through the sky is not acceptable. It must be in human form, but not necessarily, or something which can be identified and touched.
Any thoughts.
I'm a big believer that matters of faith can never be proven either true or false, and that depth and sincerity of conviction do not magically transform belief into fact. That doesn't mean that our religious beliefs are necessarily false.
I'm a big believer if I can't see the evidence or see the proof something exists, like electricity, it doesn't exist.
What can be asserted without evidence can dismissed without evidence.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Believe what you but that won't make it fact.
The colorful Satan thinks miracles. That being will do lying miracles, had that being show up. The church wants Satan to talk through people, acting like that is not the case. The battle is in the unseen. The battle is for the mind., I am in the process of changing how the church thinks.There are volumes of believers post how they belief there is a god and basically have themselves convinced of it.
If God were to appear on the earth, do the obligatory world tour and perform miracles on his way, it is impossible for any one to deny him his existence. Not even me. But since that hasn't happened we are left with the status quo.
That leaves believers with no evidence of anything just like me.
I know there are some who say they have visions and interactions but that is false also. Delusions at beat.
So here we both are, me worshipping nothing because I have no evidence of any God, and we have believers worshipping the same nothing and still with no evidence.
Is my belief in nothing any less credible than a believer who also has nothing but faith, I.e. no evidence.
Yet they get insulted when challenged about it. I would suggest it would be 90% of the debates are started by believers.
That's fine but in other threads, when a statement is made, the poster is required to link it and right ty it so. Not so with believers. Its appears grossly improper to question anyone about religion.
They can condemn atheists, communists, democrats etc and never support it with evidence. They want to be excluded from scrutiny because of their religious beliefs as if they have proof of what they believe but never produced it.
Again. The subject of God is common. Try this. Has anyone ever imagined what a God would look like. Do you have a vision if what he could look like?
If he did return, a spirit whisking through the sky is not acceptable. It must be in human form, but not necessarily, or something which can be identified and touched.
Any thoughts.
You know nothing about what your silly God thinks. You're delusional at best.The colorful Satan thinks miracles. That being will do lying miracles, had that being show up. The church wants Satan to talk through people, acting like that is not the case. The battle is in the unseen. The battle is for the mind., I am in the process of changing how the church thinks.
All things that die, will die, when God who is life shows up as he is. It will look like a strange act. God needs to wipe the chalk board clean. God needs to make all things new. I can tell who is true or false by seeing or hearing what a person says, regarding a vison or interaction. I can test their spirit. Ask and receive world wide would require great faith. Money is seen. Faith is not required. There is no truth in a person who condemns people. Faithless pastors and priests pervert Jaime's 1:26 - 27, kjv, making people think that religon is many. God looks like us. God's feet look like brass refined in the fire. God has hair looking like wool. God face shines like the sun. A sword of light comes out of his mouth. God's eyes are a flame of fire. God hides his power in his hands. God looks like Sardine and jasper stone in his Glory. That is a red orange color. That is Jesus visually seen. Jesus can be touched, even as Thomas, who touched Jesus.
Hush Satan.You know nothing about what your silly God thinks. You're delusional at best.
Hush Satan.
I know a lot more than you think. Proverbs 1:5, “A wise man will hear, and will increase learning: and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels.” Be wise. God's mind is in my mind teaching me as time passes. This is what Satan looks like. There were no earthly kings in the garden of Eden.
13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.
14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.
15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.
16 By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.
17 Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.
18 Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.
19 All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.
And yet you are arguing about it some 2000 years plus laterThat is what is understood by the Godbotherers, you're correct. The truth is exactly the opposite.
You're factually wrong and contradict yourself by assuming Joseph was the father. Wasn't it that devious holy spirit who crept into the womb and sprinkled his magic sperm? If that is true, why is he not attributed as the father?
In fact, there is scant evidence he ever existed other than the believers who want it to be true. At the time there were thousand of prophets profiting from their conjuring and taking money from gullible followers. Your Jesus was without doubt on them, if he existed, and the government crucified them as fast as they appeared.
Religion of any persuasion is about money, preying on fools to part with it and expecting eternity as a reward.
Fear of death and superstition is what drives it. It always has.
The numbers of churches built is not proof that a God existed. It's a facility for gullible fools to congregate and all discuss one if the greatest con jobs ever inflicted on society.
Do you believe your car will start when you begin the ignition format/ritual? Why? Because its a fact that your car has started in the past and thus you believe (have faith) that it will start today. Narcissism would be to ignore that truth can be realized in a prima facie manner (that you are superior to the forces that created you, the created is greater than the creator, the math does not ad up).....and that prima facie evidence builds/constructs FAITH. Scriptural faith is based upon evidences not blind faith. In order for that faith to become TRUTH........it takes action/works. Faith without works is dead.I can see you're desperate for a rebuttal but narcissism is also irrelevant.
Great storytellers make bad witnesses.
The whole society then was basically illiterate and to recall an event 60 years prior if they were alive is absurd.
You believe in immaculate conception and virgin births, talking snakes, resurrections, dead men walking, parting if The seas, turning a woman into salt yet you expect me to believe you when you say every thing in the bible is factual????
There is little doubt now that the big bang is the most plausible cause if the universe. If you refuse to research mass and energy because you think heaven awaits, You're very mistaken. You've been conned.
Let's examine your beliefs.
How old is the universe according to your religion.
From what did God create it from.
Where exactly is heaven.
If the big bang didn't occur, why is the universe expanding at the speed of light.?
It's seems futile God would make it disappear into space after inventing it all.
You have a lot of explaining to do if you rely on a 2000 year old book to make references for today's knowledge of the universe.
You probably inherited your silly beliefs and never had the courage to research anything different. But religion relies on not questioning anything.
But the real sorrow is how that rubbish is taught to kids as if fact. Threaten them with sin and hell to deliberately shape their vulnerable minds is tantamount to child abuse.
So comrade, you'll have to have something more substantial if religion is to get any credibility from society.
The bible is no different to Moa's little red book.
Do you believe your car will start when you begin the ignition format? Why? Because its a fact that your car has started in the past and thus you believe (have faith) that it will start today. Narcissism would be to ignore that truth can be realized in a prima facie manner......and that prima facie evidence builds/constructs FAITH. Scriptural faith is based upon evidences not blind faith.
If that's the case, put your irrefutable evidence of any gods existence here and now.
I know you can't so you're all mouth and delusions.
Talk like Jesus: Jesus will be in your mind had you admirer this, and talk and behave like this. The natural man hates this.Comrade, you wouldn't know shit from sugar. I've seen less nuts in an almond orchard. Go away.
The car is seen in a fallen world. Our past and present still has sin in it. Things still rust and break. How is that denied? Faith waits for what is not seen, that will change all that is seen. I would be able to make our sun to last forever never dying had I be equal than the creator. I would be able to make elements to change from what they are. The works that we do is Christ in our mind doing good works through us. Good works will not consist of A priest boasting about casting out devils, not doing that at all. Good works will not consist of terrifying naked people, zoophilia and Pedophilia with fear giving laws. People are exceedingly proud of those fear giving laws. God hates a proud look. People are proud of money with how miserable people are who don't have it. People think they did a good work, having the world to use it.Do you believe your car will start when you begin the ignition format/ritual? Why? Because its a fact that your car has started in the past and thus you believe (have faith) that it will start today. Narcissism would be to ignore that truth can be realized in a prima facie manner (that you are superior to the forces that created you, the created is greater than the creator, the math does not ad up).....and that prima facie evidence builds/constructs FAITH. Scriptural faith is based upon evidences not blind faith. In order for that faith to become TRUTH........it takes action/works. Faith without works is dead.
Just like starting your car........you might have faith that it will start, but it will not start until you act upon that belief.
Christian faith is nothing short of a deep, abiding trust and confidence in God, your belief that the record found in the scriptures is true because no has proven them to be untrue. The scriptures remain unbroken with the promise that the word of God would outlast the world. Thousands of years and counting. That's prima facie evidence.
This is sooo funny. LOL. Somthing good, that Jesus did not expect, is going on in here. People are waking up, seeing evil as it is in people. FBI caught Muslims who snuck in, wanting to do mayhem.
A blasphemer speaks through you. Jesus, who is not a fallen being placed himself into a Human woman. No one could kill him. He had to lay his life down. The Unseen Father had to face Satan's prison. Satan would have taken the throne that Jesus sits on had Jesus sinned. The Unseen Father would have been cast into that prison, to never get out of that prison. 1 Peter 3:19 - 20. Faith is waiting for what is not seen. Faithless devils beleive and tremble. Liars pacify demons as to when they think Jesus will show up, and meditate on what they see as the signs of the times.There is no more truth in that than a murderers plea of innocence.
Your Jesus wasn't even from a virgin, not from an immaculate conception. He most definately was not the son of any God. If faith is all you have, you have nothing.
Nearly all of your "eye witnesses" were illiterate. The bible was written approximately 60 years after the crucifixion. They would all be dead by then.
You know in your own heart miracles a complete myth. The same for resurrections and talking snakes. You cannot expect rational people to believe that.
The world has waited 2000 years for your God to make a physical appearance but still nothing. You can't go on forever telling us it will happen. Its not and you know it.
What can be asserted without evidence can dismissed without evidence.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
That's where religion makes a compete ass of itself.
A blasphemer speaks through you. Jesus, who is not a fallen being placed himself into a Human woman. No one could kill him. He had to lay his life down. The Unseen Father had to face Satan's prison. Satan would have taken the throne that Jesus sits on had Jesus sinned. The Unseen Father would have been cast into that prison, to never get out of that prison. 1 Peter 3:19 - 20. Faith is waiting for what is not seen. Faithless devils beleive and tremble. Liars pacify demons as to when they think Jesus will show up, and meditate on what they see as the signs of the times.
Jesus talks through people. I wish I could hear Jesus when I see what you type. It was not a snake. Church liars are not depicting it properly. Those liars made you to be twice the child of hell or twice the child of death. God wants to see himself in others. God is long suffering not wanting anyone to perish. They that have God in their mind will be with him when they finish their course, dying. The church makes an ass of itself when they don't know their own book. Jamies 1:26 - 27, KJV, is not a church name.
So many questions suggested by your little screed, but the first one that pops up is who would have cast your unseen father into prison? I thought he was supposed to have overall authority over everything.A blasphemer speaks through you. Jesus, who is not a fallen being placed himself into a Human woman. No one could kill him. He had to lay his life down. The Unseen Father had to face Satan's prison. Satan would have taken the throne that Jesus sits on had Jesus sinned. The Unseen Father would have been cast into that prison, to never get out of that prison. 1 Peter 3:19 - 20. Faith is waiting for what is not seen. Faithless devils beleive and tremble. Liars pacify demons as to when they think Jesus will show up, and meditate on what they see as the signs of the times.
Jesus talks through people. I wish I could hear Jesus when I see what you type. It was not a snake. Church liars are not depicting it properly. Those liars made you to be twice the child of hell or twice the child of death. God wants to see himself in others. God is long suffering not wanting anyone to perish. They that have God in their mind will be with him when they finish their course, dying. The church makes an ass of itself when they don't know their own book. Jamies 1:26 - 27, KJV, is not a church name.
There are volumes of believers post how they belief there is a god and basically have themselves convinced of it.
If God were to appear on the earth, do the obligatory world tour and perform miracles on his way, it is impossible for any one to deny him his existence. Not even me. But since that hasn't happened we are left with the status quo.
That leaves believers with no evidence of anything just like me.
I know there are some who say they have visions and interactions but that is false also. Delusions at beat.
So here we both are, me worshipping nothing because I have no evidence of any God, and we have believers worshipping the same nothing and still with no evidence.
Is my belief in nothing any less credible than a believer who also has nothing but faith, I.e. no evidence.
Yet they get insulted when challenged about it. I would suggest it would be 90% of the debates are started by believers.
That's fine but in other threads, when a statement is made, the poster is required to link it and right ty it so. Not so with believers. Its appears grossly improper to question anyone about religion.
They can condemn atheists, communists, democrats etc and never support it with evidence. They want to be excluded from scrutiny because of their religious beliefs as if they have proof of what they believe but never produced it.
Again. The subject of God is common. Try this. Has anyone ever imagined what a God would look like. Do you have a vision if what he could look like?
If he did return, a spirit whisking through the sky is not acceptable. It must be in human form, but not necessarily, or something which can be identified and touched.
Any thoughts.
Again. The subject of God is common. Try this. Has anyone ever imagined what a God would look like. Do you have a vision if what he could look like?
Ifhe(they) did return, a spirit whisking through the sky is not acceptable. It must be in human form, but not necessarily, or something which can be identified and touched.
I'm a big believer that matters of faith can never be proven either true or false, and that depth and sincerity of conviction do not magically transform belief into fact. That doesn't mean that our religious beliefs are necessarily false.
Columbus didn't base his voyage on faith. He based it on the best science of the day. It had been newly proven that the world was round, and since he had no idea yet how big the world is, he thought he might find a shorter rout to India. That's why he called the indigenous people in the new world Indians. He based his trip on science. Incomplete science at the time, but science nonetheless.oh, whatabout columbus - and those that cross the void to find land on the other side - - faith is the means for fruition, or, maybe, imagination without foundation.
Columbus didn't base his voyage on faith. He based it on the best science of the day. It had been newly proven that the world was round, and since he had no idea yet how big the world is, he thought he might find a shorter rout to India. That's why he called the indigenous people in the new world Indians. He based his trip on science. Incomplete science at the time, but science nonetheless.
