Why won't God heal amputees?

[nkb]

stuff wrote

I have to say that my short experience at Raving Atheist has been a disappointment. I figured in a board called "Atheist vs. Theist" there would be some logical, polite back and forth on the issue.

Logical back-and-forth requires logic from the initiator of the discussion. Show me where you have used any logic (regurgitating mindless Christian dogma just doesn't cut it).

stuff wrote

While I did get some intelligible comments I would say that about 90% of the comments where just embarrassing.

If you're talking about your own posts, I would estimate closer to 100%.

stuff wrote

Don't you guys have any pride in your views? Being rude is not a argument. But most shockingly you guys have the balls to mock God and Jesus.

Would it shock you that we mock Thor, Zeus and Santa as well?

stuff wrote

Even when I was a cocky atheist I never had the balls to make fun of God, just in case I was wrong.

Then you weren't an atheist, genius.

stuff wrote

Even as a theist I accept Dawkin's argument that it is almost impossible to prove a negative.

It's not Dawkins' argument, it's standard logic, and it is actually impossible to prove a negative.

stuff wrote

I cannot prove that the flying spaghetti monster does not exist. Just like you cannot prove that God does not exist.

I think we all agree on that.

stuff wrote

The difference is there is no good reason to believe in the flying spaghetti monster but there is plenty of evidence to believe Jesus existed and was resurrected.

You were so close to talking sense, until that.

stuff wrote

If you would take the time to look you would see that there are many non-biblical sources (Josephus, Tacitus, Pliny that Younger etc) that verify his existence. Along the fact that 11 out of 12 EYEWITNESS apostles died as martyrs in his name, there was an empty tomb verified when the Jews claimed Christians stole the body, Along with the conversion of Paul and James etc, etc, etc, etc, etc

And this is the root of all the derision you have received, stuff. Do you really think that we haven't heard all of this (disproven) nonsense and mind-numbingly faulty logic before?

stuff wrote

Lets put it this way even if you argue against all of what Christians say can you REALLY say you are 100% sure. I can see rejecting his love, he gives you that choice, but to mock him??? You guys are crazy.

Yes, I am 100% sure that your God (and his alter ego, Jesus) are fabricated myth invented by superstitious people 2000+ years ago.

stuff wrote

Sartre1 if you know you of any other Atheist websites where the participants do more than post pictures an insults please let me know. I am not afraid to learn more about what intelligent atheist have to say.

Bullshit! You are terrified of actually learning what intelligent atheists have to say. That's why you come into a forum like this, regurgitate your plagiarized crap, then stick your fingers in your ears and pretend to listen.

Go back and educate yourself (and by that, I mean, not from Christian apologetic sites). I won't be holding my breath.

[dogpet]

Could someone who has the ear of the snoremonger, please explain to it why it should only speak for itself or its army.

[Tenspace]

stuff wrote

I have to say that my short experience at Raving Atheist has been a disappointment. I figured in a board called "Atheist vs. Theist" there would be some logical, polite back and forth on the issue. While I did get some intelligible comments I would say that about 90% of the comments where just embarrassing.

Don't you guys have any pride in your views? Being rude is not a argument. But most shockingly you guys have the balls to mock God and Jesus. Even when I was a cocky atheist I never had the balls to make fun of God, just in case I was wrong. Even as a theist I accept Dawkin's argument that it is almost impossible to prove a negative. I cannot prove that the flying spaghetti monster does not exist. Just like you cannot prove that God does not exist. The difference is there is no good reason to believe in the flying spaghetti monster but there is plenty of evidence to believe Jesus existed and was resurrected. If you would take the time to look you would see that there are many non-biblical sources (Josephus, Tacitus, Pliny that Younger etc) that verify his existence. Along the fact that 11 out of 12 EYEWITNESS apostles died as martyrs in his name, there was an empty tomb verified when the Jews claimed Christians stole the body, Along with the conversion of Paul and James etc, etc, etc, etc, etc

Lets put it this way even if you argue against all of what Christians say can you REALLY say you are 100% sure. I can see rejecting his love, he gives you that choice, but to mock him??? You guys are crazy.

Sartre1 if you know you of any other Atheist websites where the participants do more than post pictures an insults please let me know. I am not afraid to learn more about what intelligent atheist have to say.

Hey Stuff, wanna talk evolution? You seem like a nice, decent young earth creationist.

[Kate]

nkb wrote

It's not Dawkins' argument, it's standard logic, and it is actually impossible to prove a negative.

Yes, I am 100% sure that your God (and his alter ego, Jesus) are fabricated myth invented by superstitious people 2000+ years ago.

Bullshit! You are terrified of actually learning what intelligent atheists have to say. That's why you come into a forum like this, regurgitate your plagiarized crap, then stick your fingers in your ears and pretend to listen.

Go back and educate yourself (and by that, I mean, not from Christian apologetic sites). I won't be holding my breath.

Alright at least you are putting up a fight.

Ok, you just stated that it is impossible to prove a negative. Then you said you are 100% sure that Jesus is a myth. Another way of stating that is you are 100% sure he did NOT exist. How is that not faulty logic?

Alright I get it you have heard the apologetic stuff before. So my question to you is there anything a historian could tell that you would believe? If so what standard did the other historical documents pass that ones in the link below do not meet?

http://www.rationalchristianity.net/jesus_extrabib.html

Tenspace wrote

Hey Stuff, wanna talk evolution? You seem like a nice, decent young earth creationist.

Absolutely, I will give the option of picking whatever topic you most confident in. Fire away.

[Kate]

[calpurnpiso]

stuff wrote

I have to say that my short experience at Raving Atheist has been a disappointment. I figured in a board called "Atheist vs. Theist" there would be some logical, polite back and forth on the issue. While I did get some intelligible comments I would say that about 90% of the comments where just embarrassing.

Don't you guys have any pride in your views? Being rude is not a argument. But most shockingly you guys have the balls to mock God and Jesus. Even when I was a cocky atheist I never had the balls to make fun of God, just in case I was wrong. Even as a theist I accept Dawkin's argument that it is almost impossible to prove a negative. I cannot prove that the flying spaghetti monster does not exist. Just like you cannot prove that God does not exist. The difference is there is no good reason to believe in the flying spaghetti monster but there is plenty of evidence to believe Jesus existed and was resurrected. If you would take the time to look you would see that there are many non-biblical sources (Josephus, Tacitus, Pliny that Younger etc) that verify his existence. Along the fact that 11 out of 12 EYEWITNESS apostles died as martyrs in his name, there was an empty tomb verified when the Jews claimed Christians stole the body, Along with the conversion of Paul and James etc, etc, etc, etc, etc

Lets put it this way even if you argue against all of what Christians say can you REALLY say you are 100% sure. I can see rejecting his love, he gives you that choice, but to mock him??? You guys are crazy.

Sartre1 if you know you of any other Atheist websites where the participants do more than post pictures an insults please let me know. I am not afraid to learn more about what intelligent atheist have to say.

Please answer these questions:

Is there such a thing as DNA & the genom, which are instructions to create our bodies?...then, don't our brains, a product of random mutations by DNA over 1/2 billion years of evolution, produced our thoughts belief in imaginary friend like god & other delusions or does this organ picks them up from the divine like a radio picks up waves?

If the latter is true why are we born lacking belief ( aka atheist). Don't forget while there is evidence of the former there is non of the latter.

Also what's the difference between the Imaginary Friend of a Schizophrenic who reassures him/her with soothing inner voices of his existence guaranteeing salvation from flying monsters and an imaginary friend named Jesus ( whose existence lacks any archaeological evidence) who also guarantees salvation from inherited "sin" of disobedience committed by a mud-man & his rib-woman when they accepted a forbidden fruit from a talking snake?

Are those beliefs planted during its creation then surfacing later at the age of reason or at a later date?. When is the data gathered by the forming brain, during the imprinting period or when the imaginary friend ( Jesus or whoever) blows the "soul" during conception?

Tell me, do the stork bring babies or are they the product of a resurrected god-head's offerings at the cave of Venus-Genetrix ( life-giver) as the creators of Christianity once thought? Do you know?

Let's stick with facts backed up with evidence, just like the fact that 2+2=4 and not any other number, shall we, for we are in the 21st Century & not the 12th. Today we have lots of evidence, the FIRST been that we created god with our brains.

Tenspace wrote

Hey Stuff, wanna talk evolution? You seem like a nice, decent young earth creationist.

calpurnpiso wrote

Please answer these questions:

Is there such a thing as DNA & the genom, which are instructions to create our bodies?...then, don't our brains, a product of random mutations by DNA over 1/2 billion years of evolution, produced our thoughts belief in imaginary friend like god & other delusions or does this organ picks them up from the divine like a radio picks up waves?

If the latter is true why are we born lacking belief ( aka atheist). Don't forget while there is evidence of the former there is non of the latter.

Also what's the difference between the Imaginary Friend of a Schizophrenic who reassures him/her with soothing inner voices of his existence guaranteeing salvation from flying monsters and an imaginary friend named Jesus ( whose existence lacks any archaeological evidence) who also guarantees salvation from inherited "sin" of disobedience committed by a mud-man & his rib-woman when they accepted a forbidden fruit from a talking snake?

Are those beliefs planted during its creation then surfacing later at the age of reason or at a later date?. When is the data gathered by the forming brain, during the imprinting period or when the imaginary friend ( Jesus or whoever) blows the "soul" during conception?

Tell me, do the stork bring babies or are they the product of a resurrected god-head's offerings at the cave of Venus-Genetrix ( life-giver) as the creators of Christianity once thought? Do you know?

Let's stick with facts backed up with evidence, just like the fact that 2+2=4 and not any other number, shall we, for we are in the 21st Century & not the 12th. Today we have lots of evidence, the FIRST been that we created god with our brains.

I am glad you brought up DNA. DNA is a clear indicator of an intelligent designer. As you know every cell is controlled by DNA and it depends what part of the DNA is activated that makes our cells a liver or a pancreas cell, for example. Where did that information come from? If an orchestra "evolved" it can still do nothing without an intelligent designer (composer) to orchestrate it all. Our cells can do nothing without the intelligence in our DNA. The DNA had to be there first. People keep saying that we have "junk" DNA to invalidate this but the more they learn the more that theory gets weaker and weaker.


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071025112059.htm'


Since our Genome is actually depleting our DNA gets corrupt just like a computer program We have never seen in all that time NEW information to our genome. Every generation is more corrupt than the next. That’s correct it is a fact that all species are heading towards extinction. (examples, you may notice cancer and fertility problems). This is a fact and is believed by evolutionist (quoted in the book below). The lowest estimate is that we have 100 mutations for generation. The most liberal is 6000. Here is a link for an article on the web but the book "Genetic Entropy" by Dr. J.C. Sanford is the best source to read about this. Again he uses evolutionist data to make his case. He invented the Gene Gun (so he invented Genetically Modified Food). Think he knows something about DNA??

http://www.trueorigin.org/mutations01.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Sanford

The fact that we are a copy of a copy of a copy that gets corrupt every generation and we still work is a testimony how great the original program was. Heck there is even COMPRESSION in DNA. Example

AGCI
CTAG

In the above example the CI in the first line and the CT in the second line is information. But the CI can still be used in the first line and the CT can still be used in the second line.

Since I do not believe in evolution, than I not sure you want me to get into your Schizophrenic argument

[Choobus]

stuff wrote

Even when I was a cocky atheist I never had the balls to make fun of God, just in case I was wrong.

Sounds like you weren't intellectually honest then. Nothing has changed.

ps, Jesus sucks cocks in hell while his dad watches

[Kate]

stuff wrote

I am glad you brought up DNA. DNA is a clear indicator of an intelligent designer. As you know every cell is controlled by DNA and it depends what part of the DNA is activated that makes our cells a liver or a pancreas cell, for example. Where did that information come from? If an orchestra "evolved" it can still do nothing without an intelligent designer (composer) to orchestrate it all. Our cells can do nothing without the intelligence in our DNA. The DNA had to be there first. People keep saying that we have "junk" DNA to invalidate this but the more they learn the more that theory gets weaker and weaker.


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071025112059.htm'


Since our Genome is actually depleting our DNA gets corrupt just like a computer program We have never seen in all that time NEW information to our genome. Every generation is more corrupt than the next. That’s correct it is a fact that all species are heading towards extinction. (examples, you may notice cancer and fertility problems). This is a fact and is believed by evolutionist (quoted in the book below). The lowest estimate is that we have 100 mutations for generation. The most liberal is 6000. Here is a link for an article on the web but the book "Genetic Entropy" by Dr. J.C. Sanford is the best source to read about this. Again he uses evolutionist data to make his case. He invented the Gene Gun (so he invented Genetically Modified Food). Think he knows something about DNA??

http://www.trueorigin.org/mutations01.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Sanford

The fact that we are a copy of a copy of a copy that gets corrupt every generation and we still work is a testimony how great the original program was. Heck there is even COMPRESSION in DNA. Example

AGCI
CTAG

In the above example the CI in the first line and the CT in the second line is information. But the CI can still be used in the first line and the CT can still be used in the second line.

Since I do not believe in evolution, than I not sure you want me to get into your Schizophrenic argument

stuff wrote

I am glad you brought up DNA. DNA is a clear indicator of an intelligent designer a clear sign that your head is broken. As you know every cell is controlled by DNA and it depends what part of the DNA is activated that makes our cells a liver or a pancreas cell, for example. Where did that information come from?if your answer is a magical cross fairy, where did THAT come from? If an orchestra "evolved" it can still do nothing without an intelligent designer (composer) fuck sake jr...may as well break out the watch maker cry...just as flawedto orchestrate it all. Our cells can do nothing without the intelligence in our DNAand you honestly believe that dna is "intelligence"? so monkeys really are our cousins...their dna is almost as intelligent as ours....tool. The DNA had to be there first. People keep saying that we have "junk" DNA to invalidate this but the more they learn the more that theory gets weaker and weakersee spleen/cocyx/your family genome.


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071025112059.htm'
uh oh, another google warrior. pasting a link shows laziness or the inabilty to grasp basic concept.

Since our Genome is actually depleting our DNA gets corrupt just like a computer program We have never seen in all that time NEW information to our genomeif downs syndrome was a favorable trait for prolonged existance in our world, we'd all be waterheads.. Every generation is more corrupt than the nextit's called linear evolution ding bat. That’s correct it is a fact that all species are heading towards extinctionis that a fact? site a reference...jesus doesn't count. (examples, you may notice cancer and fertility problemsall are problems that have been nurtured by modern medicine...we're combating our own evolution. is this the only example you have? cause it stinks of dead wrong). This is a fact and is believed by evolutionist (quoted in the book below). The lowest estimate is that we have 100 mutations for generation. The most liberal is 6000. Here is a link for an article on the web but the book "Genetic Entropy"I guess god fucked up worse than i imagined when he created man....say, when does this omnicent being of yours begin show a little divinity? He certainly makes a lot of mistakes by Dr. J.C. Sanford is the best source to read about thisyou mean it's the best source to ramble on about your point which is moot at best...have you tried reading anything contrary to your wacky beliefs? or is that a bubble you'd rather not pierce?. Again he uses evolutionist data to make his casealmost in the same mannor that hundreds of people use only the bible to make their case against god...you're still displaying a gross inability to think for yourself. He invented the Gene Gun (so he invented Genetically Modified Food). Think he knows something about DNAdo you think this makes him the expert on evolution...do you honestly believe he has all the facts? or are you clinging to his theory and praying to cheezums that he knows what he's talking about???

http://www.trueorigin.org/mutations01.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Sanford

The fact that we are a copy of a copy of a copy that gets corrupt every generationlike the bible... and we still work is a testimony how great the original program wasexcept we're doomed to extinction along with every other creature on earth...that's a testimony to how fucked up the original program was.. Heck there is even COMPRESSION god was a techy?in DNA. Example

AGCI
CTAG

In the above example the CI in the first line and the CT in the second line is information. But the CI can still be used in the first line and the CT can still be used in the second line.

Since I do not believe in evolution, than I not sure you want me to get into your Schizophrenic argumenti strongly doubt anyone is on edge about you...if nothing else we can all learn from your patchy thought process

read the red

[Mog]

Stuff, if DNA is clearly evidence of an intelligent designer, what would we be made of if we weren't intelligently designed? And our DNA is one big molecule, where exactly is the "intelligence" in that? And you talk about cells being there after DNA, but thats common knowledge. We know cells are just a better way for DNA to protect itself better.

And you talk about the genome not getting new information, but isn't the so called corruption itself new information?

I also find it interesting that you are using the programmer analogy with all this science, but isn't it interesting how when dealing with the topic of free will, you abandon it for the more crude father analogy? If you continue the programmer analogy, you have the problem of having to blame the god for our mistakes, just as you have to blame the programmer for the program's mistakes.

Mog wrote

Stuff, if DNA is clearly evidence of an intelligent designer, what would we be made of if we weren't intelligently designed? And our DNA is one big molecule, where exactly is the "intelligence" in that? And you talk about cells being there after DNA, but thats common knowledge. We know cells are just a better way for DNA to protect itself better.

And you talk about the genome not getting new information, but isn't the so called corruption itself new information?

I also find it interesting that you are using the programmer analogy with all this science, but isn't it interesting how when dealing with the topic of free will, you abandon it for the more crude father analogy? If you continue the programmer analogy, you have the problem of having to blame the god for our mistakes, just as you have to blame the programmer for the program's mistakes.

oh oh ask him what Adams mitochondrial dna consisted of....that should be fun