If there is no God. Then someone explain life.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Wrong.  The answer depends on replicatable data and observations.

I think aaron2016 meant "acceptable answer". So folks need an answer that's "true to my beliefs" rather than just "true".

[PickelledEggs]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcITeGy-U6w

[widdershins]

I will start with the first statement. No I don't think you understand the bible. Not one bit. How can you understand it? Everything you have said about it is wrong.You read it at face value not ever knowing its worth.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

Again, what an arrogant thing to say.  And it's not even true.  EVERYTHING I say about the Bible is wrong?  So it does NOT say, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."?  And "Thou shalt have no other god before me" IS a law in the US?

Besides, you actually just proved me right.  You KNOW I'm wrong because I disagree with you, but you have no idea how I'm wrong, just that I must be.  That's why you're response was just, "You're wrong and stupid!

I used to be Pentecostal.  I used to believe the same bullshit you do right now.  I used to have faith for days.  I KNOW where you are coming from.  I know what you believe.  I know how super-special you think your view of the Bible is and I know why you think that.  And I know it's all in your head.  I know you've simply accepted the shit that's been sold to you because it sounds fucking good.  After I die I'm going to live forever!  I'll get to thank Grams for that fat inheritance she left me and see her again when she's young and strong and she's going to bake cookies and we're going to sit on God's porch and drink lemon aide forever!  You have the mind of a child and you do so by choice.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

If there is no God. Then why is my grammar so poor.

[g2perk]

Wrong.  The answer depends on replicatable data and observations.

Replicatable data observation is for  science.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[PickelledEggs]

Replicatable data observation is for  science.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

And science is the process of observing and testing the world around us. AKA: if it contradicts what the process of observing and testing the world around us finds, it's not real.

[g2perk]

Again, what an arrogant thing to say.  And it's not even true.  EVERYTHING I say about the Bible is wrong?  So it does NOT say, "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live."?  And "Thou shalt have no other god before me" IS a law in the US?

Besides, you actually just proved me right.  You KNOW I'm wrong because I disagree with you, but you have no idea how I'm wrong, just that I must be.  That's why you're response was just, "You're wrong and stupid!

I used to be Pentecostal.  I used to believe the same bullshit you do right now.  I used to have faith for days.  I KNOW where you are coming from.  I know what you believe.  I know how super-special you think your view of the Bible is and I know why you think that.  And I know it's all in your head.  I know you've simply accepted the shit that's been sold to you because it sounds fucking good.  After I die I'm going to live forever!  I'll get to thank Grams for that fat inheritance she left me and see her again when she's young and strong and she's going to bake cookies and we're going to sit on God's porch and drink lemon aide forever!  You have the mind of a child and you do so by choice.

I don't care if you said that you were a bible thumping christian, Pentecostal, Baptist or any other religion. Not everyone that reads the book understands. Don't take offense , its not personal. You read it and all you see is horrible things that God has done. I read it and I hear nothing but love from God. The killings that you speak of that comes from the old testament is true. God is not a punk, if they did not obey they were killed, and of story. Now the reasons that these things happened in history is all for a reason. 



Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[g2perk]

And science is the process of observing and testing the world around us. AKA: if it contradicts what the process of observing and testing the world around us finds, it's not real.

So are you into scientology.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[g2perk]

If there is no God. Then why is my grammar so poor.

You have no conversation I see. You must be young and single....lol

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[g2perk]

That class didn't change my opinion of the Bible. It set me on a path of reasoning. When you start to see that most of your beliefs about the Bible, and God, are based on circular reasoning, and rationalizing, it gets harder to justify your faith. You have to question those"truths" in such a way, that allows for the possibility you have been wrong, all along. It takes some serious self examination.

Let me ask you, were you always into science and wanting proof for everything around you.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[g2perk]

Yeah, some people believe that everything was created with the hand of God, some think that it's the matter of evolution. And people have tried to find the answer for thousands years. I think the answer depends on your faith.

I agree with you on that one. But some here base there life on science. Science only gets you have way there. They need to take notes from Mr. George L.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You have no conversation I see. You must be young and single....lol

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[spoiler][/spoiler]

[widdershins]

So you have been where I am. In that logics class what exactly made you change.

If you only understood what you sound like to someone capable of logical, reasoned thought you wouldn't have to ask that.  Let's look at the argument that you have to believe in God to understand the Bible and understanding the Bible proves that God is real.  Ask yourself, what must come FIRST in this argument?  What is the GOAL?  Look at this argument honestly and logically and you will find that those questions are actually not easily answered.  Let's try.

What comes first?  Believing!  I have to believe so that I can understand the Bible.  I have to understand the Bible so that I can see evidence of God.  Seeing evidence of God leads to belief in God...which I need to understand the Bible...which I need to do to see the evidence....which I need to believe in God...which I need to do to understand the Bible...  What comes first?  ALL OF IT!  Every single part MUST come before every other part.

What is the goal?  Believing!  So, what comes first and the goal are EXACTLY THE SAME?  In order to get to the goal I have to START by reaching the goal.  The ENTIRE ARGUMENT is pointless because the beginning and end are the same place.

An argument is made up of one or more premises and one conclusion.  This argument has two premises, that you have to believe in order to understand the Bible and that once you understand the Bible you can see evidence for God.  The conclusion is that God is real.  But the first premise and the conclusion are essentially exactly the same thing.  This argument is essentially stating "Accepting that God is real, the Bible proves that God is real."  You can't "prove" a conclusion by starting with a premise that the conclusion is correct.  That's not an argument, it's a statement, and a dumb one backed by nothing.

This is just a tiny sample of how logic can easily tear to shreds the things you believe, not because they're necessarily wrong, but because the way in which you think to maintain those beliefs is ignorant.  You say stupid things and think them wise and logic would make you see through your own BS that you currently believe to be wisdom.  Of course that does nothing to prove your actual beliefs are wrong.  What it does is shine a light on the stupid reasons you have for believing, which, let's face it, all boil down to one; because someone says it's true.

[g2perk]

[spoiler][/spoiler]

[emoji15] [emoji38]

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

[PickelledEggs]

So are you into scientology.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

Not sure if troll or actually that ignorant on what scientology is... and the rest of what you're saying.