Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

[ding]

BLUF: This is an argument for "free will." It essentially gives the Supreme Being a free pass for any and all manufacturers defects in humanity and angelic creatures.

That is one way to look at it, but I don't believe it is the correct way of looking at it. That way of looking at it is a textbook example of an external locus of control whereby one transfers his control and power to an external source by blaming that external source for one's failure in accomplishing a task. In this case, the task of doing the right thing, the right way for the right reason. It's not God's fault when you fail to do he right thing, the right way for the right reason. It's your fault. But wait, it gets worse. When one fails to accept accountability he can't learn from his mistakes because he doesn't acknowledge he made a mistake. Let's take Adam for example. When God asked if he ate the fruit from the tree of knowledge Adam blamed God for his disobedience by saying the woman you made gave it to me. This is the real moral of that story. Not that man discovered good and evil but that man disobeyed God and rationalized he didn't. That was the real test. It wasn't that he disobeyed God it was that he couldn't see it was his fault which is the same thing you are trying to do now. Blame God for man's mistakes.

IF the Supreme Being wanted all the creations to act accord to divine inspiration, THEN all the Deity has to do is "Will it." IF such a being exists THEN we act according to its WILL... IF I am evil, it is because the Supreme Being engineered the operation of my brain to drive me to evil. I can only act according to the "Algorithm of my brain" - a divine creation.

It has never been about God wanting his creation to act according to divine inspiration. It has always been about God wanting man to choose to do the right thing, the right way for the right reason. And when he doesn't, to acknowledge that he failed, learn from his mistakes and move forward armed with that new knowledge. Isn't that what intelligence is all about anyway? To experience reality and learn from it?

So your model for what God is supposed to be is seriously flawed.

 

[Indeependent]

There is no evidence for a global flood in the last 10,000 years. Splitting the land causes earthquakes, not the other way round. No evidence for that either.

Which scientists are you quoting?
The earthquakes caused the flood.

My college professors. If it was a supernatural event, we can agree to differ. If you believe it obeyed natural laws, you're wrong. Plain and simple. Or can you provide a source?

Oh! College professors...
No wonder you won’t look at a verse.
A source?
Are you that much of an idiot or lazy?
Google “Earthquakes causing floods”.

You may know your scripture but I know my geology. Whichever verse you are citing is not supported by science.

You have a BS, MS or PhD in geology?

 

[Indeependent]

I wasn’t interested in whether they could cross the Atlantic. I’m only interested if they had boats that could navigate their waters. Is that likely?

It is certain, we've found a good number of examples. The Atlantic came up in relation to Noah's Flood myth.

Prove it’s a myth.

There is no evidence for a global flood in the last 10,000 years.

Quote me the verse stating a Global Flood.
God states explicitly that the flood is to wipe out the human race and whatever they used to further their perversion.
Prove to me that the entire earth was inhabited by humans.

Humans were in the Americas and Australia by 10,000.

The Malbim would agree with this.
The earthquakes that caused the flood spilt the land into continents.

There is no evidence for a global flood in the last 10,000 years. Splitting the land causes earthquakes, not the other way round. No evidence for that either.

Wow!
One Google on earthquakes causing floods showed how full of shit you are.

Earthquakes can cause floods, yes. Earthquakes can split the land into continents in less than 10,000 years? Not a chance.

I like that reply...
“I was wrong so I will make yet another assumption.”

 

[alang1216]

True, and I can't control that. I can only control myself. Just like you can only control yourself. So you can choose to see these literally and dismiss them or you can look for the truth in them. Your call.

We're on the same page. I read the Bible as theology not as history or science. I've always considered many ethical teachings in the NT to be myths but truths. Like GW and the cherry tree, the story is made up but the idea of GW being honest is true.

 

[alang1216]

There is no evidence for a global flood in the last 10,000 years. Splitting the land causes earthquakes, not the other way round. No evidence for that either.

Which scientists are you quoting?
The earthquakes caused the flood.

My college professors. If it was a supernatural event, we can agree to differ. If you believe it obeyed natural laws, you're wrong. Plain and simple. Or can you provide a source?

Oh! College professors...
No wonder you won’t look at a verse.
A source?
Are you that much of an idiot or lazy?
Google “Earthquakes causing floods”.

You may know your scripture but I know my geology. Whichever verse you are citing is not supported by science.

You have a BS, MS or PhD in geology?

Yes.

 

[Indeependent]

True, and I can't control that. I can only control myself. Just like you can only control yourself. So you can choose to see these literally and dismiss them or you can look for the truth in them. Your call.

We're on the same page. I read the Bible as theology not as history or science. I've always considered many ethical teachings in the NT to be myths but truths. Like GW and the cherry tree, the story is made up but the idea of GW being honest is true.

You never studied the verses; you scanned a summary and wrote the report your Atheist professor commanded you to submit.

 

[alang1216]

I wasn’t interested in whether they could cross the Atlantic. I’m only interested if they had boats that could navigate their waters. Is that likely?

It is certain, we've found a good number of examples. The Atlantic came up in relation to Noah's Flood myth.

Prove it’s a myth.

There is no evidence for a global flood in the last 10,000 years.

Quote me the verse stating a Global Flood.
God states explicitly that the flood is to wipe out the human race and whatever they used to further their perversion.
Prove to me that the entire earth was inhabited by humans.

Humans were in the Americas and Australia by 10,000.

The Malbim would agree with this.
The earthquakes that caused the flood spilt the land into continents.

There is no evidence for a global flood in the last 10,000 years. Splitting the land causes earthquakes, not the other way round. No evidence for that either.

Wow!
One Google on earthquakes causing floods showed how full of shit you are.

Earthquakes can cause floods, yes. Earthquakes can split the land into continents in less than 10,000 years? Not a chance.

I like that reply...
“I was wrong so I will make yet another assumption.”

I stand by what I wrote, it was 100% accurate not speculation. Have someone translate the English into your native language.

 

[Indeependent]

There is no evidence for a global flood in the last 10,000 years. Splitting the land causes earthquakes, not the other way round. No evidence for that either.

Which scientists are you quoting?
The earthquakes caused the flood.

My college professors. If it was a supernatural event, we can agree to differ. If you believe it obeyed natural laws, you're wrong. Plain and simple. Or can you provide a source?

Oh! College professors...
No wonder you won’t look at a verse.
A source?
Are you that much of an idiot or lazy?
Google “Earthquakes causing floods”.

You may know your scripture but I know my geology. Whichever verse you are citing is not supported by science.

You have a BS, MS or PhD in geology?

Yes.

You have a PhD in geology?
What does one do with that to earn a living?

 

[Indeependent]

I wasn’t interested in whether they could cross the Atlantic. I’m only interested if they had boats that could navigate their waters. Is that likely?

It is certain, we've found a good number of examples. The Atlantic came up in relation to Noah's Flood myth.

Prove it’s a myth.

There is no evidence for a global flood in the last 10,000 years.

Quote me the verse stating a Global Flood.
God states explicitly that the flood is to wipe out the human race and whatever they used to further their perversion.
Prove to me that the entire earth was inhabited by humans.

Humans were in the Americas and Australia by 10,000.

The Malbim would agree with this.
The earthquakes that caused the flood spilt the land into continents.

There is no evidence for a global flood in the last 10,000 years. Splitting the land causes earthquakes, not the other way round. No evidence for that either.

Wow!
One Google on earthquakes causing floods showed how full of shit you are.

Earthquakes can cause floods, yes. Earthquakes can split the land into continents in less than 10,000 years? Not a chance.

I like that reply...
“I was wrong so I will make yet another assumption.”

I stand by what I wrote, it was 100% accurate not speculation. Have someone translate the English into your native language.

Read your own post...
You made a statement that was easily proven to be incorrect and then attempted to divert with an ad hominem.

 

[alang1216]

True, and I can't control that. I can only control myself. Just like you can only control yourself. So you can choose to see these literally and dismiss them or you can look for the truth in them. Your call.

We're on the same page. I read the Bible as theology not as history or science. I've always considered many ethical teachings in the NT to be myths but truths. Like GW and the cherry tree, the story is made up but the idea of GW being honest is true.

You never studied the verses; you scanned a summary and wrote the report your Atheist professor commanded you to submit.

So what did I get wrong? I never discussed religion with my professors and you should not discuss science with your rabbi. Worlds apart.

 

[Indeependent]

True, and I can't control that. I can only control myself. Just like you can only control yourself. So you can choose to see these literally and dismiss them or you can look for the truth in them. Your call.

We're on the same page. I read the Bible as theology not as history or science. I've always considered many ethical teachings in the NT to be myths but truths. Like GW and the cherry tree, the story is made up but the idea of GW being honest is true.

You never studied the verses; you scanned a summary and wrote the report your Atheist professor commanded you to submit.

So what did I get wrong? I never discussed religion with my professors and you should not discuss science with your rabbi. Worlds apart.

Earthquakes causing floods...
You got it wrong.
What do you do for a living?

 

[alang1216]

Read your own post...
You made a statement that was easily proven to be incorrect and then attempted to divert with an ad hominem.

I did and if it was easily proven to be incorrect why didn't you prove it?

 

[alang1216]

Earthquakes causing floods...
You got it wrong.
What do you do for a living?

I wrote:

There is no evidence for a global flood in the last 10,000 years. Splitting the land causes earthquakes, not the other way round. No evidence for that either.​

​

I see nothing about earthquakes and floods.

 

[Indeependent]

Read your own post...
You made a statement that was easily proven to be incorrect and then attempted to divert with an ad hominem.

I did and if it was easily proven to be incorrect why didn't you prove it?

An article on the Internet isn’t good enough for you when that’s exactly how you try to prove your points?
And don’t tell me you were too occupied to take 5 seconds to Google what I Googled.

I hope you weren’t on a Debate Team because you suck at debate.

 

[Indeependent]

Earthquakes causing floods...
You got it wrong.
What do you do for a living?

I wrote:

There is no evidence for a global flood in the last 10,000 years. Splitting the land causes earthquakes, not the other way round. No evidence for that either.​

​

I see nothing about earthquakes and floods.

You’re very close to making a complete ass out of yourself.
You are purposely quoting all the posts you made and not my responses showing you’re intellectually dishonest.
Now go back and read the last 30 posts in sequence because anyone reading this Thread already knows you’re an idiot.

 

[alang1216]

Read your own post...
You made a statement that was easily proven to be incorrect and then attempted to divert with an ad hominem.

I did and if it was easily proven to be incorrect why didn't you prove it?

An article on the Internet isn’t good enough for you when that’s exactly how you try to prove your points?
And don’t tell me you were too occupied to take 5 seconds to Google what I Googled.

I hope you weren’t on a Debate Team because you suck at debate.

Your strawman would be unacceptable on any Debate Team

 

[Indeependent]

Read your own post...
You made a statement that was easily proven to be incorrect and then attempted to divert with an ad hominem.

I did and if it was easily proven to be incorrect why didn't you prove it?

An article on the Internet isn’t good enough for you when that’s exactly how you try to prove your points?
And don’t tell me you were too occupied to take 5 seconds to Google what I Googled.

I hope you weren’t on a Debate Team because you suck at debate.

Your strawman would be unacceptable on any Debate Team

How old are you?

 

[alang1216]

Earthquakes causing floods...
You got it wrong.
What do you do for a living?

I wrote:

There is no evidence for a global flood in the last 10,000 years. Splitting the land causes earthquakes, not the other way round. No evidence for that either.​

​

I see nothing about earthquakes and floods.

You’re very close to making a complete ass out of yourself.
You are purposely quoting all the posts you made and not my responses showing you’re intellectually dishonest.
Now go back and read the last 30 posts in sequence because anyone reading this Thread already knows you’re an idiot.

I'm afraid none of your responses showed my intellectual dishonesty, only your lack of reading comprehension.

 

[alang1216]

Read your own post...
You made a statement that was easily proven to be incorrect and then attempted to divert with an ad hominem.

I did and if it was easily proven to be incorrect why didn't you prove it?

An article on the Internet isn’t good enough for you when that’s exactly how you try to prove your points?
And don’t tell me you were too occupied to take 5 seconds to Google what I Googled.

I hope you weren’t on a Debate Team because you suck at debate.

Your strawman would be unacceptable on any Debate Team

How old are you?

Why?

 

[Indeependent]

Read your own post...
You made a statement that was easily proven to be incorrect and then attempted to divert with an ad hominem.

I did and if it was easily proven to be incorrect why didn't you prove it?

An article on the Internet isn’t good enough for you when that’s exactly how you try to prove your points?
And don’t tell me you were too occupied to take 5 seconds to Google what I Googled.

I hope you weren’t on a Debate Team because you suck at debate.

Your strawman would be unacceptable on any Debate Team

How old are you?

Why?

Either you’re a young schmuck or you’re entering into dementia.