Anonymous wrote:I don't know why you guys are arguing about evidence. Proving God doesn't exist is just as hard as proving that God does exist. Now, some extreme forms of religion, that make ridiculous claims, like the earth being flat or that it will end in 1999 are falsifiable. But any religion that has survived a long time is not going to have such tripe. Also, I think before you fight, the atheist has to make sure he knows what kind of believer the believer is. Not point in making ridiculous arguments about the age of the earth if the believer is in a Christian group that long ago decided the early chapters of Genesis are a myth and openly say this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm not conflicted. I enjoy questioning people - even if they can't produce real answers.

I am perfectly comfortable with my beliefs. I have no fear of death and I know that I am serving humankind during this lifetime.

Truer words were never spoken by a troll.

Asking questions and producing evidence is troll-like behavior?

Please share.

At least I can reach BEYOND the bible for some possible answers. Most of you can't seem to do so, and then out of frustration, you respond with ignorant, empty posts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm not conflicted. I enjoy questioning people - even if they can't produce real answers.

I am perfectly comfortable with my beliefs. I have no fear of death and I know that I am serving humankind during this lifetime.

Truer words were never spoken by a troll.

Anonymous wrote:
I'm not conflicted. I enjoy questioning people - even if they can't produce real answers.

I am perfectly comfortable with my beliefs. I have no fear of death and I know that I am serving humankind during this lifetime.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:cleaning up the quoting mess

Ummm.... You're not "questioning" anything. You're completely sure you know all the answers. All of the answers.

You also said in another post that you "love verbal nit-picking." Which, translated, means snark and insults and the sort of childish semantics games that most of us got over in high school.

Tell us why this is any different from "trolling"???

love the mature use of "Ummm," as it set the tone for your response and turned off readers immediately
Learn how to lure people in before you begin with the childish insults. That's a tip.

I never said I loved "verbal nit-picking." Are you that obsessed with these threads that you're now memorizing posts?

Who's trolling?

With each response, I listed historical evidence proving that Jesus and Abraham didn't exist outside of Story Land. Furthermore, I did recently add that IF more evidence is discovered that contradicts anything I've researched, I'd gladly be open to it. But most of the evidence came from the bible - cyclical reasoning.

So I'm no troll, nor am I closed-minded.

Before scientific reasoning evolved, people created gods to explain natural phenomena. Monotheism (and monolatry) evolved from that line of thinking. There is evidence suggesting that the original god of the Jews was part of a pair.

Over the ages, religion was used to control people through rudimentary forms of government, as there was no separation of church and state. Public officials in ancient Rome also had religious roles. So lines were gray.

It's still used to control today, and that's apparent in these posts.

I prefer hardcore evidence, and when there are no credible resources outside of the bible proving Jesus' existence, I have a difficult time believing he was more than just a story. Furthermore, don't you think that his miracles would have captured the attention of many more people? Where are those accounts?

Hell, we have more information on ancient Greek theatre than we do on Jesus. And what came first?

ancient greek theatre accounts were all written by men with an agenda. Even the artifacts were produced fraudulently. Its a Greek Myth.

Anonymous wrote:cleaning up the quoting mess

Ummm.... You're not "questioning" anything. You're completely sure you know all the answers. All of the answers.

You also said in another post that you "love verbal nit-picking." Which, translated, means snark and insults and the sort of childish semantics games that most of us got over in high school.

Tell us why this is any different from "trolling"???

love the mature use of "Ummm," as it set the tone for your response and turned off readers immediately
Learn how to lure people in before you begin with the childish insults. That's a tip.

I never said I loved "verbal nit-picking." Are you that obsessed with these threads that you're now memorizing posts?

Who's trolling?

With each response, I listed historical evidence proving that Jesus and Abraham didn't exist outside of Story Land. Furthermore, I did recently add that IF more evidence is discovered that contradicts anything I've researched, I'd gladly be open to it. But most of the evidence came from the bible - cyclical reasoning.

So I'm no troll, nor am I closed-minded.

Before scientific reasoning evolved, people created gods to explain natural phenomena. Monotheism (and monolatry) evolved from that line of thinking. There is evidence suggesting that the original god of the Jews was part of a pair.

Over the ages, religion was used to control people through rudimentary forms of government, as there was no separation of church and state. Public officials in ancient Rome also had religious roles. So lines were gray.

It's still used to control today, and that's apparent in these posts.

I prefer hardcore evidence, and when there are no credible resources outside of the bible proving Jesus' existence, I have a difficult time believing he was more than just a story. Furthermore, don't you think that his miracles would have captured the attention of many more people? Where are those accounts?

Hell, we have more information on ancient Greek theatre than we do on Jesus. And what came first?

Anonymous wrote:cleaning up the quoting mess

Ummm.... You're not "questioning" anything. You're completely sure you know all the answers. All of the answers.

You also said in another post that you "love verbal nit-picking." Which, translated, means snark and insults and the sort of childish semantics games that most of us got over in high school.

Tell us why this is any different from "trolling"???

love the mature use of "Ummm," as it set the tone for your response and turned off readers immediately
Learn how to lure people in before you begin with the childish insults. That's a tip.

I never said I loved "verbal nit-picking." Are you that obsessed with these threads that you're now memorizing posts?

Who's trolling?

With each response, I listed historical evidence proving that Jesus and Abraham didn't exist outside of Story Land. Furthermore, I did recently add that IF more evidence is discovered that contradicts anything I've researched, I'd gladly be open to it. But most of the evidence came from the bible - cyclical reasoning.

So I'm no troll, nor am I closed-minded.

Before scientific reasoning evolved, people created gods to explain natural phenomena. Monotheism (and monolatry) evolved from that line of thinking. There is evidence suggesting that the original god of the Jews was part of a pair.

Over the ages, religion was used to control people through rudimentary forms of government, as there was no separation of church and state. Public officials in ancient Rome also had religious roles. So lines were gray.

It's still used to control today, and that's apparent in these posts.

I prefer hardcore evidence, and when there are no credible resources outside of the bible proving Jesus' existence, I have a difficult time believing he was more than just a story. Furthermore, don't you think that his miracles would have captured the attention of many more people? Where are those accounts?

Hell, we have more information on ancient Greek theatre than we do on Jesus. And what came first?

Ummm.... You're not "questioning" anything. You're completely sure you know all the answers. All of the answers.

You also said in another post that you "love verbal nit-picking." Which, translated, means snark and insults and the sort of childish semantics games that most of us got over in high school.

Tell us why this is any different from "trolling"???

love the mature use of "Ummm," as it set the tone for your response and turned off readers immediately
Learn how to lure people in before you begin with the childish insults. That's a tip.

I never said I loved "verbal nit-picking." Are you that obsessed with these threads that you're now memorizing posts?

Who's trolling?

With each response, I listed historical evidence proving that Jesus and Abraham didn't exist outside of Story Land. Furthermore, I did recently add that IF more evidence is discovered that contradicts anything I've researched, I'd gladly be open to it. But most of the evidence came from the bible - cyclical reasoning.

So I'm no troll, nor am I closed-minded.

Before scientific reasoning evolved, people created gods to explain natural phenomena. Monotheism (and monolatry) evolved from that line of thinking. There is evidence suggesting that the original god of the Jews was part of a pair.

Over the ages, religion was used to control people through rudimentary forms of government, as there was no separation of church and state. Public officials in ancient Rome also had religious roles. So lines were gray.

It's still used to control today, and that's apparent in these posts.

I prefer hardcore evidence, and when there are no credible resources outside of the bible proving Jesus' existence, I have a difficult time believing he was more than just a story. Furthermore, don't you think that his miracles would have captured the attention of many more people? Where are those accounts?

Hell, we have more information on ancient Greek theatre than we do on Jesus. And what came first?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Thanks for the extra large image from your google search.

I am quite content with my life, yes.

And I will continue to question . . .

The stagnant mind doesn't question.