The Existence of God

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But none targeted to the degree that Christianity is on this forum.

So are you just defending your particular Christian God? Do you think other Gods are real, too?

The most hated God is the Christian God.

John 3:19

And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

OOOOHHH I just received this lovely heartfelt bible quote in my birthday card from an ultra religious friend! Such a warm, touching sentiment, right? Time to rethink this friendship as I see where it's going. I'm a project that needs to be saved now.

The most fantastical thing written in this thread is that you have a friend.

Are you Christian, PP? that was not a very Christian thing to say.

I am not a Christian.

You are correct in noting that Christians don’t say such things as a rule, especially in this forum.

However, Chritians do tell lies on forums like this and in general, really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, this is a discussion in which the parameters force participants to accept a relativistic view of God. That’s not a very open discussion on the existence of the Absolute, is it?

No, this discussion is not concerned with the existence of God.

It’s centered on the fact that each person has an individual opinion on the topic of God’s existence, and should be respected.

It also is concerning the fact that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of God.

If someone thinks they are God, should that perspective be respected too?

This is God. You must follow exactly as I say... if only I had given clear, explicit instructions on an indestructible medium so that there would be no doubt of my truth and existence :roll:

Christians believe that is called a Bible.

The point of the thread is you do not have to believe that, and that Christians can choose to believe that.

Why do you think your opinion is superior?

The Bible is none of those things. It is not clear, explicit and undoubtedly the word of God.

It is an amalgamation of stories that originated through oral tradition and were eventually written down. Those texts were then subject to individual styles, copy edit errors, and translations into various languages. Even which books compose the Bible as canon were selected by a voting process.

That does not meet even the most basic definition of being clear and explicit. That is fact, not opinion.

While it is commonly believed that the Bible's canon was determined through a voting process, particularly at the Council of Nicaea, there is no historical basis for this idea.

Instead, the process of selecting the books that compose the Bible, both the Old and New Testaments, was a more complex and gradual development.

Here's a breakdown of how the canon was formed:
Old Testament Canon:
Emergence of the Torah: The first five books of the Bible, known as the Torah or Pentateuch, were recognized as authoritative relatively early in Jewish history.
Gradual Acceptance of Texts: Successive books like historical records, prophetic writings, and wisdom literature were added over time based on their perceived spiritual authority and coherence with existing scriptures.
Pharisaic Canon: By the first century CE, the Pharisees held to a canon of twenty-two or twenty-four books, which eventually became the basis for the Rabbinic Jewish canon.
No Single Jewish Council: Ancient Jews did not have a council in the same way Christians did to decide the canon.

New Testament Canon:
Apostolic Origin: Writings were considered canonical if they were directly related to or under the supervision of the apostles, Jesus' closest followers.
Recognition by Churches: If churches widely accepted a book as authoritative, it was more likely to be considered for inclusion.
Apostolic Content: The content of the book had to align with the doctrine the apostles taught.
Response to Heresies: The emergence of heretical movements in the early church necessitated the definition of a clear set of authoritative writings.
Increased Reliance on Writings: As the apostles died, their oral teaching became less familiar, leading to increased reliance on their writings and those of their associates.
Formal Affirmation by Councils: Regional councils like the Council of Hippo (393 AD) and the Council of Carthage (397 AD) affirmed the canon that was already generally accepted by the churches.
In summary, the formation of the biblical canon was not a single event determined by a vote, but rather a long process of divine inspiration, community recognition, and affirmation by church councils, especially regarding the New Testament.

And none of this refutes the notion that the development of the Bible was clearly a human process.

It is not an undoubted document written in adamantium with clear language that all people can understand written by God. You know, the same entity that's supposedly the creator of all, but he can't or didn't create this? :roll:

Adamantium is a fictional, nearly indestructible metal alloy, primarily known for its appearance in Marvel Comics.

Do you believe the Bible was written in a fictional metal from a Marvel comic book? Or something to that effect?

Poster knows that its fictional. Just like the Bible.

However, you are distracting from their premise. An entity capable of creating the universe could have created something - anything - that provided its rules for its creation to follow that was unambiguous and clear for ALL of humanity to follow.

Instead, we have the esoteric writings of various groups of people over various periods of time in various languages with various interpretations of what it all means.

You think God should have written the Bible in American english at a time when nobody in the world spoke American english? And because He chose to have the authors write the Bible in languages they themselves knew, He doesn’t exist?

That is your opinion. You are welcome to hold your opinion as valid. It is the correct opinion for you.

It is not the opinion of everyone else on earth, or even on this discussion forum.

Other people should allow you to hold your own opinions, and you should in turn allow others to believe as they wish about the Bible.

It’s really quite easy in our country to do this.

For example, right now you are on a voluntary discussion forum discussing religion. That’s freedom. You aren’t being forced by anyone to be here discussing religion, you are choosing to come here and discuss your own opinions about religion. You can log off at any moment and go do non-religious activities and discuss other topics that do not involve religion.

But because we live in a free society, you can choose to come here and discuss religion whenever you feel like talking about religion.

You should respect the opinion of others.

You don’t have to insist everyone who doesn’t hold your opinion is wrong.

It’s entirely possible God doesn’t exist because He didn’t write the Bible in American English and the Bible was written in the languages that were common at the time they were written.

Scholars generally recognize three languages as original biblical languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek.

Wow - you sure do know your Bible. I bet you go straight to heaven.

Christians don’t go to heaven because they know the Bible.


In Christian belief, getting to heaven is achieved through faith in Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice for sins. This involves acknowledging oneself as a sinner in need of forgiveness, believing that Jesus died for those sins, and accepting his offer of salvation. While good works and adherence to religious laws are seen as important aspects of the Christian life, they are not the basis for salvation, which is considered a gift from God received through faith.

Some Christians get to heaven as described above. If you're a Catholic Christian, however, there are lots of rules, like missing mass and going to confession, etc., that determine whether or not you get to heaven. It really depends on the type of Christian you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But none targeted to the degree that Christianity is on this forum.

So are you just defending your particular Christian God? Do you think other Gods are real, too?

The most hated God is the Christian God.

John 3:19

And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

OOOOHHH I just received this lovely heartfelt bible quote in my birthday card from an ultra religious friend! Such a warm, touching sentiment, right? Time to rethink this friendship as I see where it's going. I'm a project that needs to be saved now.

The most fantastical thing written in this thread is that you have a friend.

Are you a Christian? I ask because that wasn't a very Christian thing to say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But none targeted to the degree that Christianity is on this forum.

So are you just defending your particular Christian God? Do you think other Gods are real, too?

The most hated God is the Christian God.

John 3:19

And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

OOOOHHH I just received this lovely heartfelt bible quote in my birthday card from an ultra religious friend! Such a warm, touching sentiment, right? Time to rethink this friendship as I see where it's going. I'm a project that needs to be saved now.

The most fantastical thing written in this thread is that you have a friend.

Are you Christian, PP? that was not a very Christian thing to say.

I am not a Christian.

You are correct in noting that Christians don’t say such things as a rule, especially in this forum.

You are a Christian. Why? Because I say so. People can say anything on the internet -- and some people will believe it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, this is a discussion in which the parameters force participants to accept a relativistic view of God. That’s not a very open discussion on the existence of the Absolute, is it?

No, this discussion is not concerned with the existence of God.

It’s centered on the fact that each person has an individual opinion on the topic of God’s existence, and should be respected.

It also is concerning the fact that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of God.

If someone thinks they are God, should that perspective be respected too?

This is God. You must follow exactly as I say... if only I had given clear, explicit instructions on an indestructible medium so that there would be no doubt of my truth and existence

Christians believe that is called a Bible.

The point of the thread is you do not have to believe that, and that Christians can choose to believe that.

Why do you think your opinion is superior?

The Bible is none of those things. It is not clear, explicit and undoubtedly the word of God.

It is an amalgamation of stories that originated through oral tradition and were eventually written down. Those texts were then subject to individual styles, copy edit errors, and translations into various languages. Even which books compose the Bible as canon were selected by a voting process.

That does not meet even the most basic definition of being clear and explicit. That is fact, not opinion.

While it is commonly believed that the Bible's canon was determined through a voting process, particularly at the Council of Nicaea, there is no historical basis for this idea.

Instead, the process of selecting the books that compose the Bible, both the Old and New Testaments, was a more complex and gradual development.

Here's a breakdown of how the canon was formed:
Old Testament Canon:
Emergence of the Torah: The first five books of the Bible, known as the Torah or Pentateuch, were recognized as authoritative relatively early in Jewish history.
Gradual Acceptance of Texts: Successive books like historical records, prophetic writings, and wisdom literature were added over time based on their perceived spiritual authority and coherence with existing scriptures.
Pharisaic Canon: By the first century CE, the Pharisees held to a canon of twenty-two or twenty-four books, which eventually became the basis for the Rabbinic Jewish canon.
No Single Jewish Council: Ancient Jews did not have a council in the same way Christians did to decide the canon.

New Testament Canon:
Apostolic Origin: Writings were considered canonical if they were directly related to or under the supervision of the apostles, Jesus' closest followers.
Recognition by Churches: If churches widely accepted a book as authoritative, it was more likely to be considered for inclusion.
Apostolic Content: The content of the book had to align with the doctrine the apostles taught.
Response to Heresies: The emergence of heretical movements in the early church necessitated the definition of a clear set of authoritative writings.
Increased Reliance on Writings: As the apostles died, their oral teaching became less familiar, leading to increased reliance on their writings and those of their associates.
Formal Affirmation by Councils: Regional councils like the Council of Hippo (393 AD) and the Council of Carthage (397 AD) affirmed the canon that was already generally accepted by the churches.
In summary, the formation of the biblical canon was not a single event determined by a vote, but rather a long process of divine inspiration, community recognition, and affirmation by church councils, especially regarding the New Testament.

And none of this refutes the notion that the development of the Bible was clearly a human process.

It is not an undoubted document written in adamantium with clear language that all people can understand written by God. You know, the same entity that's supposedly the creator of all, but he can't or didn't create this?

Adamantium is a fictional, nearly indestructible metal alloy, primarily known for its appearance in Marvel Comics.

Do you believe the Bible was written in a fictional metal from a Marvel comic book? Or something to that effect?

Poster knows that its fictional. Just like the Bible.

However, you are distracting from their premise. An entity capable of creating the universe could have created something - anything - that provided its rules for its creation to follow that was unambiguous and clear for ALL of humanity to follow.

Instead, we have the esoteric writings of various groups of people over various periods of time in various languages with various interpretations of what it all means.

You think God should have written the Bible in American english at a time when nobody in the world spoke American english? And because He chose to have the authors write the Bible in languages they themselves knew, He doesn’t exist?

That is your opinion. You are welcome to hold your opinion as valid. It is the correct opinion for you.

It is not the opinion of everyone else on earth, or even on this discussion forum.

Other people should allow you to hold your own opinions, and you should in turn allow others to believe as they wish about the Bible.

It’s really quite easy in our country to do this.

For example, right now you are on a voluntary discussion forum discussing religion. That’s freedom. You aren’t being forced by anyone to be here discussing religion, you are choosing to come here and discuss your own opinions about religion. You can log off at any moment and go do non-religious activities and discuss other topics that do not involve religion.

But because we live in a free society, you can choose to come here and discuss religion whenever you feel like talking about religion.

You should respect the opinion of others.

You don’t have to insist everyone who doesn’t hold your opinion is wrong.

It’s entirely possible God doesn’t exist because He didn’t write the Bible in American English and the Bible was written in the languages that were common at the time they were written.

Scholars generally recognize three languages as original biblical languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek.

Wow - you sure do know your Bible. I bet you go straight to heaven.

Christians don’t go to heaven because they know the Bible.


In Christian belief, getting to heaven is achieved through faith in Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice for sins. This involves acknowledging oneself as a sinner in need of forgiveness, believing that Jesus died for those sins, and accepting his offer of salvation. While good works and adherence to religious laws are seen as important aspects of the Christian life, they are not the basis for salvation, which is considered a gift from God received through faith.

Yeah - being a Christian is easy. All you have to do is say that you believe in Jesus Christ and you go straight to heaven! What a. great deal.

Who taught you that? That’s incorrect.

According to Christian teachings, Jesus does judge the heart. While humans often judge based on outward appearances, God is believed to look at a person's intentions and character, which are reflected in their heart. This is a core concept in many Christian denominations, emphasizing that true righteousness comes from a transformed inner life.

So no, Christians can’t just say a few words and go to heaven.

You can have your own opinion on Christianity, but you don’t get to define what it means to be a Christian.

Christians do not just say a few words and go to heaven.

There are so many people who don’t understand the very basic concepts of Christianity here.

There are lots of different Christian beliefs. Roman Catholics, for instance, can say a few words right before death and ensure their place in heaven.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, this is a discussion in which the parameters force participants to accept a relativistic view of God. That’s not a very open discussion on the existence of the Absolute, is it?

No, this discussion is not concerned with the existence of God.

It’s centered on the fact that each person has an individual opinion on the topic of God’s existence, and should be respected.

It also is concerning the fact that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of God.

If someone thinks they are God, should that perspective be respected too?

This is God. You must follow exactly as I say... if only I had given clear, explicit instructions on an indestructible medium so that there would be no doubt of my truth and existence :roll:

Christians believe that is called a Bible.

The point of the thread is you do not have to believe that, and that Christians can choose to believe that.

Why do you think your opinion is superior?

The Bible is none of those things. It is not clear, explicit and undoubtedly the word of God.

It is an amalgamation of stories that originated through oral tradition and were eventually written down. Those texts were then subject to individual styles, copy edit errors, and translations into various languages. Even which books compose the Bible as canon were selected by a voting process.

That does not meet even the most basic definition of being clear and explicit. That is fact, not opinion.

While it is commonly believed that the Bible's canon was determined through a voting process, particularly at the Council of Nicaea, there is no historical basis for this idea.

Instead, the process of selecting the books that compose the Bible, both the Old and New Testaments, was a more complex and gradual development.

Here's a breakdown of how the canon was formed:
Old Testament Canon:
Emergence of the Torah: The first five books of the Bible, known as the Torah or Pentateuch, were recognized as authoritative relatively early in Jewish history.
Gradual Acceptance of Texts: Successive books like historical records, prophetic writings, and wisdom literature were added over time based on their perceived spiritual authority and coherence with existing scriptures.
Pharisaic Canon: By the first century CE, the Pharisees held to a canon of twenty-two or twenty-four books, which eventually became the basis for the Rabbinic Jewish canon.
No Single Jewish Council: Ancient Jews did not have a council in the same way Christians did to decide the canon.

New Testament Canon:
Apostolic Origin: Writings were considered canonical if they were directly related to or under the supervision of the apostles, Jesus' closest followers.
Recognition by Churches: If churches widely accepted a book as authoritative, it was more likely to be considered for inclusion.
Apostolic Content: The content of the book had to align with the doctrine the apostles taught.
Response to Heresies: The emergence of heretical movements in the early church necessitated the definition of a clear set of authoritative writings.
Increased Reliance on Writings: As the apostles died, their oral teaching became less familiar, leading to increased reliance on their writings and those of their associates.
Formal Affirmation by Councils: Regional councils like the Council of Hippo (393 AD) and the Council of Carthage (397 AD) affirmed the canon that was already generally accepted by the churches.
In summary, the formation of the biblical canon was not a single event determined by a vote, but rather a long process of divine inspiration, community recognition, and affirmation by church councils, especially regarding the New Testament.

And none of this refutes the notion that the development of the Bible was clearly a human process.

It is not an undoubted document written in adamantium with clear language that all people can understand written by God. You know, the same entity that's supposedly the creator of all, but he can't or didn't create this? :roll:

Adamantium is a fictional, nearly indestructible metal alloy, primarily known for its appearance in Marvel Comics.

Do you believe the Bible was written in a fictional metal from a Marvel comic book? Or something to that effect?

Poster knows that its fictional. Just like the Bible.

However, you are distracting from their premise. An entity capable of creating the universe could have created something - anything - that provided its rules for its creation to follow that was unambiguous and clear for ALL of humanity to follow.

Instead, we have the esoteric writings of various groups of people over various periods of time in various languages with various interpretations of what it all means.

You think God should have written the Bible in American english at a time when nobody in the world spoke American english? And because He chose to have the authors write the Bible in languages they themselves knew, He doesn’t exist?

That is your opinion. You are welcome to hold your opinion as valid. It is the correct opinion for you.

It is not the opinion of everyone else on earth, or even on this discussion forum.

Other people should allow you to hold your own opinions, and you should in turn allow others to believe as they wish about the Bible.

It’s really quite easy in our country to do this.

For example, right now you are on a voluntary discussion forum discussing religion. That’s freedom. You aren’t being forced by anyone to be here discussing religion, you are choosing to come here and discuss your own opinions about religion. You can log off at any moment and go do non-religious activities and discuss other topics that do not involve religion.

But because we live in a free society, you can choose to come here and discuss religion whenever you feel like talking about religion.

You should respect the opinion of others.

You don’t have to insist everyone who doesn’t hold your opinion is wrong.

It’s entirely possible God doesn’t exist because He didn’t write the Bible in American English and the Bible was written in the languages that were common at the time they were written.

Scholars generally recognize three languages as original biblical languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek.

Wow - you sure do know your Bible. I bet you go straight to heaven.

Christians do not go to heaven simply by reading the Bible. While the Bible is considered God's word and is a valuable resource for Christians, salvation (going to heaven) is primarily attained through faith in Jesus Christ.

Salvation is a gift from the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

The atheists and anti-theists here are an embarrassment to atheists, anti-theists, agnostics, humanists, etc.

I am not a Christian. No matter how hard I try, I don’t believe in God.

However, I completely understand why more people embrace Christianity and believe in God.

The atheists posting here, excuse my language, are dumb as dogshit when it comes to understanding Christianity.

It’s so embarrassing, I can’t believe that they believe anyone would read their posts and think hmmm, that’s who I want to hang out with.

Christian music makes me want to pour molten lava in each ear, and I would rather listen to Christian music at a table of simpering Christians who have some sense of knowledge and humanity in their heads than spend any time with the dogshit dumb atheists here who recycle the same old words and tropes every g-ddamn day.

You wish you could believe, though. You say you're not Christian, but maybe you are and you're just lying on line. People do it all the time. Christians too. Lying for Jesus!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, this is a discussion in which the parameters force participants to accept a relativistic view of God. That’s not a very open discussion on the existence of the Absolute, is it?

No, this discussion is not concerned with the existence of God.

It’s centered on the fact that each person has an individual opinion on the topic of God’s existence, and should be respected.

It also is concerning the fact that science cannot prove or disprove the existence of God.

If someone thinks they are God, should that perspective be respected too?

This is God. You must follow exactly as I say... if only I had given clear, explicit instructions on an indestructible medium so that there would be no doubt of my truth and existence

Christians believe that is called a Bible.

The point of the thread is you do not have to believe that, and that Christians can choose to believe that.

Why do you think your opinion is superior?

The Bible is none of those things. It is not clear, explicit and undoubtedly the word of God.

It is an amalgamation of stories that originated through oral tradition and were eventually written down. Those texts were then subject to individual styles, copy edit errors, and translations into various languages. Even which books compose the Bible as canon were selected by a voting process.

That does not meet even the most basic definition of being clear and explicit. That is fact, not opinion.

While it is commonly believed that the Bible's canon was determined through a voting process, particularly at the Council of Nicaea, there is no historical basis for this idea.

Instead, the process of selecting the books that compose the Bible, both the Old and New Testaments, was a more complex and gradual development.

Here's a breakdown of how the canon was formed:
Old Testament Canon:
Emergence of the Torah: The first five books of the Bible, known as the Torah or Pentateuch, were recognized as authoritative relatively early in Jewish history.
Gradual Acceptance of Texts: Successive books like historical records, prophetic writings, and wisdom literature were added over time based on their perceived spiritual authority and coherence with existing scriptures.
Pharisaic Canon: By the first century CE, the Pharisees held to a canon of twenty-two or twenty-four books, which eventually became the basis for the Rabbinic Jewish canon.
No Single Jewish Council: Ancient Jews did not have a council in the same way Christians did to decide the canon.

New Testament Canon:
Apostolic Origin: Writings were considered canonical if they were directly related to or under the supervision of the apostles, Jesus' closest followers.
Recognition by Churches: If churches widely accepted a book as authoritative, it was more likely to be considered for inclusion.
Apostolic Content: The content of the book had to align with the doctrine the apostles taught.
Response to Heresies: The emergence of heretical movements in the early church necessitated the definition of a clear set of authoritative writings.
Increased Reliance on Writings: As the apostles died, their oral teaching became less familiar, leading to increased reliance on their writings and those of their associates.
Formal Affirmation by Councils: Regional councils like the Council of Hippo (393 AD) and the Council of Carthage (397 AD) affirmed the canon that was already generally accepted by the churches.
In summary, the formation of the biblical canon was not a single event determined by a vote, but rather a long process of divine inspiration, community recognition, and affirmation by church councils, especially regarding the New Testament.

And none of this refutes the notion that the development of the Bible was clearly a human process.

It is not an undoubted document written in adamantium with clear language that all people can understand written by God. You know, the same entity that's supposedly the creator of all, but he can't or didn't create this?

Adamantium is a fictional, nearly indestructible metal alloy, primarily known for its appearance in Marvel Comics.

Do you believe the Bible was written in a fictional metal from a Marvel comic book? Or something to that effect?

Poster knows that its fictional. Just like the Bible.

However, you are distracting from their premise. An entity capable of creating the universe could have created something - anything - that provided its rules for its creation to follow that was unambiguous and clear for ALL of humanity to follow.

Instead, we have the esoteric writings of various groups of people over various periods of time in various languages with various interpretations of what it all means.

You think God should have written the Bible in American english at a time when nobody in the world spoke American english? And because He chose to have the authors write the Bible in languages they themselves knew, He doesn’t exist?

That is your opinion. You are welcome to hold your opinion as valid. It is the correct opinion for you.

It is not the opinion of everyone else on earth, or even on this discussion forum.

Other people should allow you to hold your own opinions, and you should in turn allow others to believe as they wish about the Bible.

It’s really quite easy in our country to do this.

For example, right now you are on a voluntary discussion forum discussing religion. That’s freedom. You aren’t being forced by anyone to be here discussing religion, you are choosing to come here and discuss your own opinions about religion. You can log off at any moment and go do non-religious activities and discuss other topics that do not involve religion.

But because we live in a free society, you can choose to come here and discuss religion whenever you feel like talking about religion.

You should respect the opinion of others.

You don’t have to insist everyone who doesn’t hold your opinion is wrong.

It’s entirely possible God doesn’t exist because He didn’t write the Bible in American English and the Bible was written in the languages that were common at the time they were written.

Scholars generally recognize three languages as original biblical languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek.

Wow - you sure do know your Bible. I bet you go straight to heaven.

Christians do not go to heaven simply by reading the Bible. While the Bible is considered God's word and is a valuable resource for Christians, salvation (going to heaven) is primarily attained through faith in Jesus Christ.


The atheists and anti-theists here are an embarrassment to atheists, anti-theists, agnostics, humanists, etc.

I am not a Christian. No matter how hard I try, I don’t believe in God.

However, I completely understand why more people embrace Christianity and believe in God.

The atheists posting here, excuse my language, are dumb as dogshit when it comes to understanding Christianity.

It’s so embarrassing, I can’t believe that they believe anyone would read their posts and think hmmm, that’s who I want to hang out with.

Christian music makes me want to pour molten lava in each ear, and I would rather listen to Christian music at a table of simpering Christians who have some sense of knowledge and humanity in their heads than spend any time with the dogshit dumb atheists here who recycle the same old words and tropes every g-ddamn day.

Salvation is a gift from the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.


Is it, though? Did Jesus actually die? He was both god and man. The omnipotent, omniscient being that it was that was here before all and will continue on after all of his existence is gone - ie, its eternal - can't "die"

Was it really a sacrifice? Or a facade?

Also, since it knows what's going to happen according to its plan for everything, didn't it know that Lucifer would betray it, its creation would succumb to temptation in the garden, that they would continue to disobey and be wicked (thus the great worldwide flood), and then they continued to be disobedient necessitating the need to "sacrifice itself/son".

What a story... ... ... ... of BS.

The more plausible answer is that it appears to be the beliefs of old middle Eastern cultures who didn't know a lot about the world.

Just like the Council of Nicaea voted on biblical books to be included in the bible, right?

Embarrassing. You don’t have the sense to be embarrassed, or you just lie as a practice without shame.

Either way, the atheists here are embarrassing.

Nice laughing emoji, it’s the mark of shame. Haha, you laugh at your ignorance.

There are better atheists out there, somewhere. There must be.

Yes - fear not, my child. There are better atheists out there, somewhere. Right here, actually!.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody knows if God exists, or doesn’t exist.

It’s a popular topic here. Everyone can have their own opinion about God.

The existence of God is a question of personal belief and faith, with strong arguments both for and against. There is no scientific or universally accepted proof that definitively proves or disproves God's existence.

The existence of God is a subject of debate in the philosophy of religion and theology.


Whether God exists is one of the most basic and important questions any person can consider. Most people have an opinion about what they believe about the existence of the Christian God or other gods.

People should have their own opinions about God or gods.

But nobody can claim definitively if God exists, or if God doesn’t exist.

That’s a personal belief or disbelief, not a statement of fact.

Science cannot prove or disprove the existence of God.

Science focuses on studying the natural world through observation and experimentation. God is outside the realm of the natural world.

Religious belief involves faith and supernatural forces, which are not within the scope of scientific inquiry.


Science relies on empirical evidence, testable hypotheses, and the scientific method to understand the universe. It cannot address questions about the supernatural or metaphysical.

So: if you believe in God, great.
If you don’t believe in God, great.

Your belief or disbelief is your opinion, and each person has their own valid opinion on this matter.

There is no scientific evidence that can prove or disprove God. If you are looking for scientific evidence that proves or disproves God, you won’t find it.

Science requires proof, religious belief requires faith.

Scientists don't try to prove or disprove God's existence because they know there isn't an experiment that can ever detect God.

Be grateful we live in a country that allows us to believe or disbelieve whatever we wish. Many people are not so fortunate.

It's your second to last sentence that you got wrong. It is mostly believers trying to force non-believers into their viewpoint. If they let me alone, I'd leave them alone. The statement is correct in principle but not in practice.

100 percent

Pp won’t answer, will you? How have people not left you alone and tried to force you to believe what they believe?

Is someone forcing you to come to a religion forum, or are you choosing to come to a religion forum?

I've never had atheists come to my door with flyers.

You find that going online at a religion forum is the best way to be atheist?

You can tell people no thank you if they come to your door. I don’t answer my door if someone I don’t know knocks on it.

Not disagreeing with you, but my point is, atheists don't go out of their way, going door to door to convert people. This is a counter thesis to the question about, how do Christians try to force their beliefs on you. Well, they enshrine it into law, they approach you at your homes, they protest healthcare policies.

These are ways Christians try and force their beliefs on non-Christians. It's just an answer to your question.

Grow up. Life isn’t about you pretending to be a martyr because someone came to your house with flyers.

again: I’d rather sing hymns with cardigan wearing Catholics than listen to an atheist whine incessantly about someone bringing flyers to their house.

Are you an adult that can communicate verbally? Say no thanks or fugg off and move the fugg on with your day/life.

Miserable @ss embarrassing people.

You sound really upset to hear people don't like unsolicited Christianity. Maybe you'd be happier if you let the flying spaghetti monster into your heart?

A case in point: lame and embarrassing. You might as well put a colander on your head and chant pasta pasta pasta and march about waving a can of tomato paste. That’s exactly what people see when you rear your magnificent brain into the forum, a total imbecile.

I see no difference between this and Christianity. Except for not touching children, we leave that to Christianity. But you can still join the flying spaghetti monster and sing hymns and wear cardigans if you want. Even mixed fibers.

No one asked you to post your headshot!

Says the genius who can’t post simple images.

Butthurt Christian. If this upsets you so much, stop letting the priest inside your back end.

Using sexual abuse victims as the punchline to a joke doesn't reflect well on you.

Not all Preists are sexual abusers, but no priests should be. The fact that some priests use their authority to harm children is horrible.

[Anonymous]

“ Science focuses on studying the natural world through observation and experimentation. God is outside the realm of the natural world.”

says who? isn’t that just your own personal opinion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“ Science focuses on studying the natural world through observation and experimentation. God is outside the realm of the natural world.”

says who? isn’t that just your own personal opinion?

No, it's not pp's personal opinion. Religious people know that God is outside the realm of the natural world. God, for instance, if you believe in him, offers eternal life in heaven. Meanwhile, people who don't believe in God, or don't follow his rules, go to hell, according to people who believe in God (maybe it's just the Christian God who sends non-believers to hell, dunno.) People who don't believe in God, think they just die and go back to the earth the way all other animals do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ Science focuses on studying the natural world through observation and experimentation. God is outside the realm of the natural world.”

says who? isn’t that just your own personal opinion?

No, it's not pp's personal opinion. Religious people know that God is outside the realm of the natural world. God, for instance, if you believe in him, offers eternal life in heaven. Meanwhile, people who don't believe in God, or don't follow his rules, go to hell, according to people who believe in God (maybe it's just the Christian God who sends non-believers to hell, dunno.) People who don't believe in God, think they just die and go back to the earth the way all other animals do.

God may be outside the scope of science, but stories in the Bible about things that supposedly happened in the natural world are testable, or at least can be shown to not be true.

Where is there any archeological evidence for giants or a global flood? How about science shows that it would have been impossible to not only load two of every species on earth on an ark, but that populations would recover from such a reduced breeding pair? And, how did they make it to the South America and Australia?

It's more like a court case. The jury has to weigh all the evidence presented and make a judgement. In this case, the votes should be unanimous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ Science focuses on studying the natural world through observation and experimentation. God is outside the realm of the natural world.”

says who? isn’t that just your own personal opinion?

No, it's not pp's personal opinion. Religious people know that God is outside the realm of the natural world. God, for instance, if you believe in him, offers eternal life in heaven. Meanwhile, people who don't believe in God, or don't follow his rules, go to hell, according to people who believe in God (maybe it's just the Christian God who sends non-believers to hell, dunno.) People who don't believe in God, think they just die and go back to the earth the way all other animals do.

God may be outside the scope of science, but stories in the Bible about things that supposedly happened in the natural world are testable, or at least can be shown to not be true.

Where is there any archeological evidence for giants or a global flood? How about science shows that it would have been impossible to not only load two of every species on earth on an ark, but that populations would recover from such a reduced breeding pair? And, how did they make it to the South America and Australia?

It's more like a court case. The jury has to weigh all the evidence presented and make a judgement. In this case, the votes should be unanimous.

"how did they make it to the South America and Australia?" Right - it doesn't make sense, but that doesn't stop people from believing it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ Science focuses on studying the natural world through observation and experimentation. God is outside the realm of the natural world.”

says who? isn’t that just your own personal opinion?

No, it's not pp's personal opinion. Religious people know that God is outside the realm of the natural world. God, for instance, if you believe in him, offers eternal life in heaven. Meanwhile, people who don't believe in God, or don't follow his rules, go to hell, according to people who believe in God (maybe it's just the Christian God who sends non-believers to hell, dunno.) People who don't believe in God, think they just die and go back to the earth the way all other animals do.

God may be outside the scope of science, but stories in the Bible about things that supposedly happened in the natural world are testable, or at least can be shown to not be true.

Where is there any archeological evidence for giants or a global flood? How about science shows that it would have been impossible to not only load two of every species on earth on an ark, but that populations would recover from such a reduced breeding pair? And, how did they make it to the South America and Australia?

It's more like a court case. The jury has to weigh all the evidence presented and make a judgement. In this case, the votes should be unanimous.

Answersingenesis has already answered these questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“ Science focuses on studying the natural world through observation and experimentation. God is outside the realm of the natural world.”

says who? isn’t that just your own personal opinion?

No, it's not pp's personal opinion. Religious people know that God is outside the realm of the natural world. God, for instance, if you believe in him, offers eternal life in heaven. Meanwhile, people who don't believe in God, or don't follow his rules, go to hell, according to people who believe in God (maybe it's just the Christian God who sends non-believers to hell, dunno.) People who don't believe in God, think they just die and go back to the earth the way all other animals do.

God may be outside the scope of science, but stories in the Bible about things that supposedly happened in the natural world are testable, or at least can be shown to not be true.

Where is there any archeological evidence for giants or a global flood? How about science shows that it would have been impossible to not only load two of every species on earth on an ark, but that populations would recover from such a reduced breeding pair? And, how did they make it to the South America and Australia?

It's more like a court case. The jury has to weigh all the evidence presented and make a judgement. In this case, the votes should be unanimous.

Answersingenesis has already answered these questions.

Nope. Try again bible thumper. Most of Genesis has been debunked. Only the crazies believe any of it is true.

[Anonymous]

I wonder why anyone loving god would standsby calmly watching genocides and natural disasters but becomes active with threats of hell if individuals miss one step.