How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You?

[MarkDuffy]

>>
Actually I think the Bible is full of claims that Jesus was sent specifically to be crucified for our original sin (That WE did not commit!)

So my question becomes, why was Judas a bad guy for doing what he was told by God to do?

Now here's the weird part. Since we have been saved from original sin by the cross, why do women still suffer pain during childbirth?

Sounds like a double-cross to me<<

Claims? As in science? You are wrong. The Bible isn't a science book, but science does back up the Bible.

Why do atheists and their scientists go so wrong?

>>why do women still suffer pain during childbirth?

Sounds like a double-cross to me<<

Huh? You're all over the place.

So if Jesus was sent to die why did my priest tell the bullshit story about how God sent his son to preach the word of love and we killed him? As if god was hoping we would do the right thing. This story is all over the place.

It's a book of parables and allegories. Based on a lie. Moses and Jesus

So if Jesus was sent to die why did my priest tell the bullshit story about how God sent his son to preach the word of love and we killed him? As if god was hoping we would do the right thing. This story is all over the place.

It's a book of parables and allegories. Based on a lie. Moses and Jesus

You do not have the proper understanding of the Bible. I mentioned Ben-Hur (1959). Maybe you should read up on the author and how his writing the story, albeit fictional account of a true story, influenced him. One start is the link I posted. As for Moses, there is the The Ten Commandments movie. I'm not as familiar with his story.

Why are these "parables and allegories" a lie? How do you know it's a lie? There are many who claim this, and their claims are investigated and found to be disproven or lack merit. Today, we have those who write scientific arguments and the like, and their claims are also rebutted.

Sadly, I see lack of evidence on the atheist's claims. They to seem to make things up or base it on wrong science and think they are right. I think if one investigates these people who make the counter claims, one will find that they are wrong. One of the things about the Bible is that it cannot change, so if any of these counter claims against hold merit, then the stories would have been destroyed long ago as false instead of individual claims of disbelief.

The bottom line is one has to answer the questions whether this life is all there is and all there will be for themselves? Also, whether one will be judged for their actions in the current life. If someone is lucky enough to avoid punishment for their sins such as murder, thievery or false witnesses (lies) against their fellow human and get away with it, then there is no justice in this life.

That's right. No justice. When the wolves kill the coyote for being in their territory there is no justice for the coyote and no hell for the wolves.

>>That's right. No justice. When the wolves kill the coyote for being in their territory there is no justice for the coyote and no hell for the wolves.<<

I don't think it happens like that. What usually happens is that we, i.e. the majority, are punished for the sins of the few. Isn't this true everywhere? Isn't this the big deal with original sin? It may be different in one area to another, but the laws are usually written this way by humans. This is evidence that God thinks like humans and his laws follow the ones we make. Our justice is his justice, so there is evidence for some kind of final judgment.

If it helps to provide any clarification or perspective, I was taught that "original sin" doesn't refer to a specific act, by us or by Adam and Eve. It refers to the basic sinful nature of humanity, the predisposition to commit sins. THAT is why we end up bearing the brunt of original sin.

Your God created man with #1 goal to commit sin against the Creator and you worship him for this massive failure?

 

[sealybobo]

So if Jesus was sent to die why did my priest tell the bullshit story about how God sent his son to preach the word of love and we killed him? As if god was hoping we would do the right thing. This story is all over the place.

It's a book of parables and allegories. Based on a lie. Moses and Jesus

You do not have the proper understanding of the Bible. I mentioned Ben-Hur (1959). Maybe you should read up on the author and how his writing the story, albeit fictional account of a true story, influenced him. One start is the link I posted. As for Moses, there is the The Ten Commandments movie. I'm not as familiar with his story.

Why are these "parables and allegories" a lie? How do you know it's a lie? There are many who claim this, and their claims are investigated and found to be disproven or lack merit. Today, we have those who write scientific arguments and the like, and their claims are also rebutted.

Sadly, I see lack of evidence on the atheist's claims. They to seem to make things up or base it on wrong science and think they are right. I think if one investigates these people who make the counter claims, one will find that they are wrong. One of the things about the Bible is that it cannot change, so if any of these counter claims against hold merit, then the stories would have been destroyed long ago as false instead of individual claims of disbelief.

The bottom line is one has to answer the questions whether this life is all there is and all there will be for themselves? Also, whether one will be judged for their actions in the current life. If someone is lucky enough to avoid punishment for their sins such as murder, thievery or false witnesses (lies) against their fellow human and get away with it, then there is no justice in this life.

That's right. No justice. When the wolves kill the coyote for being in their territory there is no justice for the coyote and no hell for the wolves.

>>That's right. No justice. When the wolves kill the coyote for being in their territory there is no justice for the coyote and no hell for the wolves.<<

I don't think it happens like that. What usually happens is that we, i.e. the majority, are punished for the sins of the few. Isn't this true everywhere? Isn't this the big deal with original sin? It may be different in one area to another, but the laws are usually written this way by humans. This is evidence that God thinks like humans and his laws follow the ones we make. Our justice is his justice, so there is evidence for some kind of final judgment.

If it helps to provide any clarification or perspective, I was taught that "original sin" doesn't refer to a specific act, by us or by Adam and Eve. It refers to the basic sinful nature of humanity, the predisposition to commit sins. THAT is why we end up bearing the brunt of original sin.

What a despicable, evil idea that is.

Leaving aside the ironic humor of you hubristically presuming to label the word of God as "evil", why do you find that despicable and evil?

What free will? Follow me or burn in hell

 

[BreezeWood]

.

It refers to the basic sinful nature of humanity, the predisposition to commit sins.

their 4th century book they worship is the only sin they will ever have to make to exclude themselves from the Everlasting forever. they just want to bring everyone with them.

self survival is a test, minor deviations are correctable the takeoff can occur for anyone.

 

[hobelim]

I do not belong to any religion. I just told you that I do not believe the same things that you do not believe and for the same reasons. The only difference is that I found deeper meaning hidden in those fantastical stories like a priceless treasure.

You can't say that its not there. I have shown it to you. You can't say that you heard it all before. No one has.

What religion teaches that the drink my blood ritual is a curse spread throughout the Roman empire deliberately to "smite the nations"? What religion teaches that kosher law is not about food? What religion teaches that Jesus healing the blind was a healing of perception not sight? What Christian, Jew or Muslim even knows that the dispute between Jesus and the religious authorities was about what was the only right way to understand and comply with divine Law that leads to eternal life here and now? What religion teaches that Jesus appeared to his disciples in dreams after the crucifixion?

Who has ever said anything like any of that ever before?

You really need to pay closer attention.

I think the Lord will forgive me in fact he may even reward my intelligence. I mean our intelligence because you agree with me

You don't need to be forgiven. Not believing what the stories are not about is not a sin.

To discover what the stories are actually about, take another closer look.

Remember what Jesus said? One must humble himself like a little child to enter the kingdom of heaven..

Take his advice mr smarty pants.

Read scripture again as if you were a little child knowing the stories are like fairy tales teaching something hidden that is not necessarily directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

Then, if you have the intelligence, you will indeed be rewarded beyond anything that you have ever imagined in your wildest dreams....Not in some distant future and not after you die, but in the very day that you do it.

Oh I get the messages in the stories

If that was true you wouldn't be trashing it all as superstitious nonsense.

I will tell you a little secret.

Some things, like understanding a foreign language, just can't be faked.

The more I look into it the more confident I am my conclusions are right.

But I do admit that complex life is probably very rare. And I can see that intelligent life is even more rare. To have the moon, the way we are tilted just right, just the right distance from the sun, no dinosaurs, the entire story of the universe and how it led to humans. Truly amazing. I don't mind giving all that thanks. Whatever did it. Thanks.

Be as confident as you like when you say that you understand the teachings of scripture out of one side of your mouth while trashing it all as superstitious nonsense out of the other side of your mouth.

You still sound just as irrational and confused as the believers that you enjoy deriding for being irrational and confused..

You escaped from a tomb only to build your own prison..



You really need to go back to the drawing board.

 

[sealybobo]

I think the Lord will forgive me in fact he may even reward my intelligence. I mean our intelligence because you agree with me

You don't need to be forgiven. Not believing what the stories are not about is not a sin.

To discover what the stories are actually about, take another closer look.

Remember what Jesus said? One must humble himself like a little child to enter the kingdom of heaven..

Take his advice mr smarty pants.

Read scripture again as if you were a little child knowing the stories are like fairy tales teaching something hidden that is not necessarily directly connected to the literal meanings of the words used.

Then, if you have the intelligence, you will indeed be rewarded beyond anything that you have ever imagined in your wildest dreams....Not in some distant future and not after you die, but in the very day that you do it.

Oh I get the messages in the stories

If that was true you wouldn't be trashing it all as superstitious nonsense.

I will tell you a little secret.

Some things, like understanding a foreign language, just can't be faked.

The more I look into it the more confident I am my conclusions are right.

But I do admit that complex life is probably very rare. And I can see that intelligent life is even more rare. To have the moon, the way we are tilted just right, just the right distance from the sun, no dinosaurs, the entire story of the universe and how it led to humans. Truly amazing. I don't mind giving all that thanks. Whatever did it. Thanks.

Be as confident as you like when you say that you understand the teachings of scripture out of one side of your mouth while trashing it all as superstitious nonsense out of the other side of your mouth.

You still sound just as irrational and confused as the believers that you enjoy deriding for being irrational and confused..

You escaped from a tomb only to build your own prison..



You really need to go back to the drawing board.

Maybe Thor was the right God or juju. Or Mohammad or Joe Smith or Moses. I've studied enough to know your religion is no different than the rest. So I'm not interested in studying any of them more

I say you haven't looked into Hindu enough. If you did you'd be a devout Hindu. You just happen to be born on this side of the world.

 

[Cecilie1200]

.

It refers to the basic sinful nature of humanity, the predisposition to commit sins.

their 4th century book they worship is the only sin they will ever have to make to exclude themselves from the Everlasting forever. they just want to bring everyone with them.

self survival is a test, minor deviations are correctable the takeoff can occur for anyone.

Hey, wow, what a completely pointless burst of vitriol. Thanks for sharing.

 

[BreezeWood]

.

It refers to the basic sinful nature of humanity, the predisposition to commit sins.

their 4th century book they worship is the only sin they will ever have to make to exclude themselves from the Everlasting forever. they just want to bring everyone with them.

self survival is a test, minor deviations are correctable the takeoff can occur for anyone.

Hey, wow, what a completely pointless burst of vitriol. Thanks for sharing.

.

Hey, wow, what a completely pointless burst of vitriol. Thanks for sharing.

always willing to help a sinner ...

 

[Cecilie1200]

.

It refers to the basic sinful nature of humanity, the predisposition to commit sins.

their 4th century book they worship is the only sin they will ever have to make to exclude themselves from the Everlasting forever. they just want to bring everyone with them.

self survival is a test, minor deviations are correctable the takeoff can occur for anyone.

Hey, wow, what a completely pointless burst of vitriol. Thanks for sharing.

.

Hey, wow, what a completely pointless burst of vitriol. Thanks for sharing.

always willing to help a sinner ...

Given that you don't believe in sin, I can't imagine what level of help you think you could offer, unless it's how to be as amoral as you are. I'll let you know if I ever want that.

I'm always amused by people arrogant enough to believe they can teach others to practice beliefs they themselves don't share.

 

[BreezeWood]

.

It refers to the basic sinful nature of humanity, the predisposition to commit sins.

their 4th century book they worship is the only sin they will ever have to make to exclude themselves from the Everlasting forever. they just want to bring everyone with them.

self survival is a test, minor deviations are correctable the takeoff can occur for anyone.

Hey, wow, what a completely pointless burst of vitriol. Thanks for sharing.

.

Hey, wow, what a completely pointless burst of vitriol. Thanks for sharing.

always willing to help a sinner ...

Given that you don't believe in sin, I can't imagine what level of help you think you could offer, unless it's how to be as amoral as you are. I'll let you know if I ever want that.

I'm always amused by people arrogant enough to believe they can teach others to practice beliefs they themselves don't share.

.

Given that you don't believe in sin, I can't imagine what level of help you think you could offer, unless it's how to be as amoral as you are. I'll let you know if I ever want that.

It refers to the basic sinful nature of humanity, the predisposition to commit sins.

evil (sin) exists as that does occur the process to maturity is not a specific predisposition as you believe it exists, sin though a state may in some form exist for some individuals of various degrees but not sin by religion. your 4th century religion remaining primitive would be referred to as a misdirected predisposition dictated through print.

I'm always amused by people arrogant enough to believe they can teach others to practice beliefs they themselves don't share.

it is you who believes you share the thoughts of the 1st century, nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[james bond]

.
to attest Jesus exists without the bible as in the above spoken, fluent religious discourse provides the true understanding through time the events of past history inclusive the differences that may arise. and as those events left unrecorded who are biblicist to say otherwise. there is no doubt Jesus represented the spoken religion over any other means. the means over time to determine the unknown, proper conclusion.



then the stories would have been destroyed long ago as false instead of individual claims of disbelief.

the bible has been changing since it was first introduced and always for the better. where is it etched in stone a bible was ever meant to be written or one is necessary or supersedes the spoken religion over time not from Jesus for one. if nothing else, Jesus represented in the 1st century life as a Free Spirit.

What was your number on the scale?

I think you're asking sealybobo whom I think started out as an agnostic, but has gone the other way. I was indoctrinated as Catholic, but rebelled around 13 years old and became agnostic-weak theist. I probably became weak-defacto theist around college age. I even studied evolution from the college I went to and believed in it so that made me weaker. Now, I'm a strong theist since starting to read the Bible, understand it better and compared what it said versus what evolution said around 2012. The history has not been about "science," but of politics and atheist vs religious beliefs.

How about you?

I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist

>>I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist<<

No one would mistake you for a strong theist which would put you in the liar category if you claimed that. Instead, I'll give you the benefit of a doubt as being a weak theist since you attended church a few times. I would guess your beliefs are based on someone or something providing the evidence of the existence of God. However, there is no evidence good enough to convince one who states that except for pain and suffering. If the believers are the ones being truthful, then this becomes another Biblical prophecy fulfilled.

If the churches I attend hooked me up to a lie detector I would have to admit I'm not buying it.

But could there be a creator? Sure. People contemplated that long before Moses claimed he spoke to him. So just like people back then agreed there might be a creator I agree now. But everything beyond that is man made. Virgin births, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, talking snakes, lazarith, Noah, parables, allegories, ramblings, Revelations, covenants, Adam, Jonah, Luke, old and new testament.

Do you see that I am right? I may have said that you were a weak theist, but that was in your past. I thought you were more agnostic before or having an open mind and suddenly you're more well, show me the evidence. That path will not lead you to God or truth. For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.

So what did God say how old the earth actually is?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

What was your number on the scale?

I think you're asking sealybobo whom I think started out as an agnostic, but has gone the other way. I was indoctrinated as Catholic, but rebelled around 13 years old and became agnostic-weak theist. I probably became weak-defacto theist around college age. I even studied evolution from the college I went to and believed in it so that made me weaker. Now, I'm a strong theist since starting to read the Bible, understand it better and compared what it said versus what evolution said around 2012. The history has not been about "science," but of politics and atheist vs religious beliefs.

How about you?

I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist

>>I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist<<

No one would mistake you for a strong theist which would put you in the liar category if you claimed that. Instead, I'll give you the benefit of a doubt as being a weak theist since you attended church a few times. I would guess your beliefs are based on someone or something providing the evidence of the existence of God. However, there is no evidence good enough to convince one who states that except for pain and suffering. If the believers are the ones being truthful, then this becomes another Biblical prophecy fulfilled.

If the churches I attend hooked me up to a lie detector I would have to admit I'm not buying it.

But could there be a creator? Sure. People contemplated that long before Moses claimed he spoke to him. So just like people back then agreed there might be a creator I agree now. But everything beyond that is man made. Virgin births, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, talking snakes, lazarith, Noah, parables, allegories, ramblings, Revelations, covenants, Adam, Jonah, Luke, old and new testament.

Do you see that I am right? I may have said that you were a weak theist, but that was in your past. I thought you were more agnostic before or having an open mind and suddenly you're more well, show me the evidence. That path will not lead you to God or truth. For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.

"For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.""


haha, good one. Yes, folks, evidence will not lead us to truth. Water is not wet, and down is up. we're ALL mad, here. You, sir, are a master of witty sarcasm.

 

[sealybobo]

What was your number on the scale?

I think you're asking sealybobo whom I think started out as an agnostic, but has gone the other way. I was indoctrinated as Catholic, but rebelled around 13 years old and became agnostic-weak theist. I probably became weak-defacto theist around college age. I even studied evolution from the college I went to and believed in it so that made me weaker. Now, I'm a strong theist since starting to read the Bible, understand it better and compared what it said versus what evolution said around 2012. The history has not been about "science," but of politics and atheist vs religious beliefs.

How about you?

I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist

>>I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist<<

No one would mistake you for a strong theist which would put you in the liar category if you claimed that. Instead, I'll give you the benefit of a doubt as being a weak theist since you attended church a few times. I would guess your beliefs are based on someone or something providing the evidence of the existence of God. However, there is no evidence good enough to convince one who states that except for pain and suffering. If the believers are the ones being truthful, then this becomes another Biblical prophecy fulfilled.

If the churches I attend hooked me up to a lie detector I would have to admit I'm not buying it.

But could there be a creator? Sure. People contemplated that long before Moses claimed he spoke to him. So just like people back then agreed there might be a creator I agree now. But everything beyond that is man made. Virgin births, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, talking snakes, lazarith, Noah, parables, allegories, ramblings, Revelations, covenants, Adam, Jonah, Luke, old and new testament.

Do you see that I am right? I may have said that you were a weak theist, but that was in your past. I thought you were more agnostic before or having an open mind and suddenly you're more well, show me the evidence. That path will not lead you to God or truth. For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.

So what did God say how old the earth actually is?

Really?

 

[sealybobo]

I think you're asking sealybobo whom I think started out as an agnostic, but has gone the other way. I was indoctrinated as Catholic, but rebelled around 13 years old and became agnostic-weak theist. I probably became weak-defacto theist around college age. I even studied evolution from the college I went to and believed in it so that made me weaker. Now, I'm a strong theist since starting to read the Bible, understand it better and compared what it said versus what evolution said around 2012. The history has not been about "science," but of politics and atheist vs religious beliefs.

How about you?

I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist

>>I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist<<

No one would mistake you for a strong theist which would put you in the liar category if you claimed that. Instead, I'll give you the benefit of a doubt as being a weak theist since you attended church a few times. I would guess your beliefs are based on someone or something providing the evidence of the existence of God. However, there is no evidence good enough to convince one who states that except for pain and suffering. If the believers are the ones being truthful, then this becomes another Biblical prophecy fulfilled.

If the churches I attend hooked me up to a lie detector I would have to admit I'm not buying it.

But could there be a creator? Sure. People contemplated that long before Moses claimed he spoke to him. So just like people back then agreed there might be a creator I agree now. But everything beyond that is man made. Virgin births, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, talking snakes, lazarith, Noah, parables, allegories, ramblings, Revelations, covenants, Adam, Jonah, Luke, old and new testament.

Do you see that I am right? I may have said that you were a weak theist, but that was in your past. I thought you were more agnostic before or having an open mind and suddenly you're more well, show me the evidence. That path will not lead you to God or truth. For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.

"For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.""


haha, good one. Yes, folks, evidence will not lead us to truth. Water is not wet, and down is up. we're ALL mad, here. You, sir, are a master of witty sarcasm.

I know right? Let's humor him

 

[james bond]

I think you're asking sealybobo whom I think started out as an agnostic, but has gone the other way. I was indoctrinated as Catholic, but rebelled around 13 years old and became agnostic-weak theist. I probably became weak-defacto theist around college age. I even studied evolution from the college I went to and believed in it so that made me weaker. Now, I'm a strong theist since starting to read the Bible, understand it better and compared what it said versus what evolution said around 2012. The history has not been about "science," but of politics and atheist vs religious beliefs.

How about you?

I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist

>>I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist<<

No one would mistake you for a strong theist which would put you in the liar category if you claimed that. Instead, I'll give you the benefit of a doubt as being a weak theist since you attended church a few times. I would guess your beliefs are based on someone or something providing the evidence of the existence of God. However, there is no evidence good enough to convince one who states that except for pain and suffering. If the believers are the ones being truthful, then this becomes another Biblical prophecy fulfilled.

If the churches I attend hooked me up to a lie detector I would have to admit I'm not buying it.

But could there be a creator? Sure. People contemplated that long before Moses claimed he spoke to him. So just like people back then agreed there might be a creator I agree now. But everything beyond that is man made. Virgin births, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, talking snakes, lazarith, Noah, parables, allegories, ramblings, Revelations, covenants, Adam, Jonah, Luke, old and new testament.

Do you see that I am right? I may have said that you were a weak theist, but that was in your past. I thought you were more agnostic before or having an open mind and suddenly you're more well, show me the evidence. That path will not lead you to God or truth. For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.

"For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.""


haha, good one. Yes, folks, evidence will not lead us to truth. Water is not wet, and down is up. we're ALL mad, here. You, sir, are a master of witty sarcasm.

Yes, I'm witty and can do sarcasm but unfortunately we will not know the answer to this question. The age of the earth will not be revealed as God has stated in the Bible. Thus, we can only argue the method of how one comes up with their answer. I would use radiocarbon dating or other estimates which YEC scientists have put forth* while atheist scientists will use radiometric dating.

* - The 10 Best Evidences from Science that Confirm a Young Earth

 

[james bond]

I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist

>>I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist<<

No one would mistake you for a strong theist which would put you in the liar category if you claimed that. Instead, I'll give you the benefit of a doubt as being a weak theist since you attended church a few times. I would guess your beliefs are based on someone or something providing the evidence of the existence of God. However, there is no evidence good enough to convince one who states that except for pain and suffering. If the believers are the ones being truthful, then this becomes another Biblical prophecy fulfilled.

If the churches I attend hooked me up to a lie detector I would have to admit I'm not buying it.

But could there be a creator? Sure. People contemplated that long before Moses claimed he spoke to him. So just like people back then agreed there might be a creator I agree now. But everything beyond that is man made. Virgin births, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, talking snakes, lazarith, Noah, parables, allegories, ramblings, Revelations, covenants, Adam, Jonah, Luke, old and new testament.

Do you see that I am right? I may have said that you were a weak theist, but that was in your past. I thought you were more agnostic before or having an open mind and suddenly you're more well, show me the evidence. That path will not lead you to God or truth. For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.

"For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.""


haha, good one. Yes, folks, evidence will not lead us to truth. Water is not wet, and down is up. we're ALL mad, here. You, sir, are a master of witty sarcasm.

I know right? Let's humor him

>>I know right? Let's humor him<<

Ha ha, but my retort is the one who laughs last, laughs best. You'll hear my Joker laugh after seeing who was right in the end. OTOH, if the atheist belief is right, then neither us will know or care. There will be no consciousness.

 

[sealybobo]

I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist

>>I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist<<

No one would mistake you for a strong theist which would put you in the liar category if you claimed that. Instead, I'll give you the benefit of a doubt as being a weak theist since you attended church a few times. I would guess your beliefs are based on someone or something providing the evidence of the existence of God. However, there is no evidence good enough to convince one who states that except for pain and suffering. If the believers are the ones being truthful, then this becomes another Biblical prophecy fulfilled.

If the churches I attend hooked me up to a lie detector I would have to admit I'm not buying it.

But could there be a creator? Sure. People contemplated that long before Moses claimed he spoke to him. So just like people back then agreed there might be a creator I agree now. But everything beyond that is man made. Virgin births, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, talking snakes, lazarith, Noah, parables, allegories, ramblings, Revelations, covenants, Adam, Jonah, Luke, old and new testament.

Do you see that I am right? I may have said that you were a weak theist, but that was in your past. I thought you were more agnostic before or having an open mind and suddenly you're more well, show me the evidence. That path will not lead you to God or truth. For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.

"For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.""


haha, good one. Yes, folks, evidence will not lead us to truth. Water is not wet, and down is up. we're ALL mad, here. You, sir, are a master of witty sarcasm.

Yes, I'm witty and can do sarcasm but unfortunately we will not know the answer to this question. The age of the earth will not be revealed as God has stated in the Bible. Thus, we can only argue the method of how one comes up with their answer. I would use radiocarbon dating or other estimates which YEC scientists have put forth* while atheist scientists will use radiometric dating.

* - The 10 Best Evidences from Science that Confirm a Young Earth

Sorry but those are 10 very bad/weak arguments.

 

[sealybobo]

>>I was never strong theist. I was weak theist then agnostic then atheist now agnostic atheist<<

No one would mistake you for a strong theist which would put you in the liar category if you claimed that. Instead, I'll give you the benefit of a doubt as being a weak theist since you attended church a few times. I would guess your beliefs are based on someone or something providing the evidence of the existence of God. However, there is no evidence good enough to convince one who states that except for pain and suffering. If the believers are the ones being truthful, then this becomes another Biblical prophecy fulfilled.

If the churches I attend hooked me up to a lie detector I would have to admit I'm not buying it.

But could there be a creator? Sure. People contemplated that long before Moses claimed he spoke to him. So just like people back then agreed there might be a creator I agree now. But everything beyond that is man made. Virgin births, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, talking snakes, lazarith, Noah, parables, allegories, ramblings, Revelations, covenants, Adam, Jonah, Luke, old and new testament.

Do you see that I am right? I may have said that you were a weak theist, but that was in your past. I thought you were more agnostic before or having an open mind and suddenly you're more well, show me the evidence. That path will not lead you to God or truth. For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.

"For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.""


haha, good one. Yes, folks, evidence will not lead us to truth. Water is not wet, and down is up. we're ALL mad, here. You, sir, are a master of witty sarcasm.

I know right? Let's humor him

>>I know right? Let's humor him<<

Ha ha, but my retort is the one who laughs last, laughs best. You'll hear my Joker laugh after seeing who was right in the end. OTOH, if the atheist belief is right, then neither us will know or care. There will be no consciousness.

I looked up radocarbon dating. Lots of flaws with that method. Ironically nuclear testing and coal/oil have ruined the results. Very unreliable. Yet that's what you use.

More recently, accelerator mass spectrometry has become the method of choice

Any addition of carbon to a sample of a different age will cause the measured date to be inaccurate. Contamination with modern carbon causes a sample to appear to be younger than it really is

What???? So you are using a bad method buddy.

Radiocarbon dating is generally limited to dating samples no more than 50,000 years old, as samples older than that have insufficient 14
C to be measurable.

Do you understand what that means? That means your method is only good for measuring a young earth. It's completely ineffective measuring things older than 50,000 years. Did you know that? Of course you did not.

 

[MarkDuffy]

If the churches I attend hooked me up to a lie detector I would have to admit I'm not buying it.

But could there be a creator? Sure. People contemplated that long before Moses claimed he spoke to him. So just like people back then agreed there might be a creator I agree now. But everything beyond that is man made. Virgin births, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, talking snakes, lazarith, Noah, parables, allegories, ramblings, Revelations, covenants, Adam, Jonah, Luke, old and new testament.

Do you see that I am right? I may have said that you were a weak theist, but that was in your past. I thought you were more agnostic before or having an open mind and suddenly you're more well, show me the evidence. That path will not lead you to God or truth. For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.

"For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.""


haha, good one. Yes, folks, evidence will not lead us to truth. Water is not wet, and down is up. we're ALL mad, here. You, sir, are a master of witty sarcasm.

I know right? Let's humor him

>>I know right? Let's humor him<<

Ha ha, but my retort is the one who laughs last, laughs best. You'll hear my Joker laugh after seeing who was right in the end. OTOH, if the atheist belief is right, then neither us will know or care. There will be no consciousness.

I looked up radocarbon dating. Lots of flaws with that method. Ironically nuclear testing and coal/oil have ruined the results. Very unreliable. Yet that's what you use.

More recently, accelerator mass spectrometry has become the method of choice

Any addition of carbon to a sample of a different age will cause the measured date to be inaccurate. Contamination with modern carbon causes a sample to appear to be younger than it really is

What???? So you are using a bad method buddy.

Radiocarbon dating is generally limited to dating samples no more than 50,000 years old, as samples older than that have insufficient 14
C to be measurable.

Do you understand what that means? That means your method is only good for measuring a young earth. It's completely ineffective measuring things older than 50,000 years. Did you know that? Of course you did not.

Radiocarbon dating works, but you have to be very careful. It also only works for a few thousand years for dating actual history of man. The error rate is too large for older samples. The half-life of carbon 14 is only 6k years

 

[sealybobo]

Do you see that I am right? I may have said that you were a weak theist, but that was in your past. I thought you were more agnostic before or having an open mind and suddenly you're more well, show me the evidence. That path will not lead you to God or truth. For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.

"For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.""


haha, good one. Yes, folks, evidence will not lead us to truth. Water is not wet, and down is up. we're ALL mad, here. You, sir, are a master of witty sarcasm.

I know right? Let's humor him

>>I know right? Let's humor him<<

Ha ha, but my retort is the one who laughs last, laughs best. You'll hear my Joker laugh after seeing who was right in the end. OTOH, if the atheist belief is right, then neither us will know or care. There will be no consciousness.

I looked up radocarbon dating. Lots of flaws with that method. Ironically nuclear testing and coal/oil have ruined the results. Very unreliable. Yet that's what you use.

More recently, accelerator mass spectrometry has become the method of choice

Any addition of carbon to a sample of a different age will cause the measured date to be inaccurate. Contamination with modern carbon causes a sample to appear to be younger than it really is

What???? So you are using a bad method buddy.

Radiocarbon dating is generally limited to dating samples no more than 50,000 years old, as samples older than that have insufficient 14
C to be measurable.

Do you understand what that means? That means your method is only good for measuring a young earth. It's completely ineffective measuring things older than 50,000 years. Did you know that? Of course you did not.

Radiocarbon dating works, but you have to be very careful. It also only works for a few thousand years for dating actual history of man. The error rate is too large for older samples. The half-life of carbon 14 is only 6k years

Do you think James looked into it that deep? I doubt it. I think his preacher told him what to say and he said it.

 

[MarkDuffy]

"For example, the earth and universe is young in the 6K - 10K years old range and they're the same age, but you think I'm the one gravely mistaken.""


haha, good one. Yes, folks, evidence will not lead us to truth. Water is not wet, and down is up. we're ALL mad, here. You, sir, are a master of witty sarcasm.

I know right? Let's humor him

>>I know right? Let's humor him<<

Ha ha, but my retort is the one who laughs last, laughs best. You'll hear my Joker laugh after seeing who was right in the end. OTOH, if the atheist belief is right, then neither us will know or care. There will be no consciousness.

I looked up radocarbon dating. Lots of flaws with that method. Ironically nuclear testing and coal/oil have ruined the results. Very unreliable. Yet that's what you use.

More recently, accelerator mass spectrometry has become the method of choice

Any addition of carbon to a sample of a different age will cause the measured date to be inaccurate. Contamination with modern carbon causes a sample to appear to be younger than it really is

What???? So you are using a bad method buddy.

Radiocarbon dating is generally limited to dating samples no more than 50,000 years old, as samples older than that have insufficient 14
C to be measurable.

Do you understand what that means? That means your method is only good for measuring a young earth. It's completely ineffective measuring things older than 50,000 years. Did you know that? Of course you did not.

Radiocarbon dating works, but you have to be very careful. It also only works for a few thousand years for dating actual history of man. The error rate is too large for older samples. The half-life of carbon 14 is only 6k years

Do you think James looked into it that deep? I doubt it. I think his preacher told him what to say and he said it.

I actually went to the link he posted. I laughed! LOL