Gosh you are about the stupidest person ever, huh? For starter, it's JEWISH not judaist idiot, second what rule says that as a Christian, the original language does not matter to me? Is this another rule you made up on the spot so that your strawman can stand?

Ju·da·ist
n.
One who believes and practices Judaism.
What more can be said??

So I have to be a Jew for the original writings to matter? Oh gosh... so you made up another rule on the spot Stevie? Oh knower of everything, why is that? Because you know your strawman does not refute my beliefs, so you'd rather make up some rules on the spot. Explain why Christians can't hold to the original scriptures as being inerrant.

No, you have to believe IN the original writings, I don't care if you're a Martian!!
No rule here, just showing your errant nature. Your beliefs lay in a book that is full of errors and only a derision of the original wording. So by definition, you are not true to yourself by believing in an errant book.
If you truly believed in the OT, yuo would need to follow it AS IS. But you don't.

Already answered again and again... why is their a talking snake?

Somebody had to tell Eve to eat the apple, isn't it funny how it was the woman who was fooled!!

That says nothing of plagiarism... Gosh... wrong again... poor Stevie... can never get a break.

Gee, if something is written first and then somebody copies it say 1000 years later, is that plagiarism????

Prove me wrong?

Where's the link so I can???

That's about all the space you get... try again Stevie... we both know you lack answers and love to show us all you're an idiot...

Crystal

Crystal quoted "And in closing, my entire argument is that you're an idiot".

Don't worry Crystal, one day they won't hold you back in school anymore and you'll be able to advance to prep!!

Not my challenge. My challenge is that miracles are possible. It is not that they are yet actual. That's the way these arguments work.

Of course, you're too scared to engage me without knowing my arguments.

Odd. Earlier you said you didn't have enough time. Now you're saying you'll come if I'll tell you what you hear in advance.

It doesn't mean much to me if you don't come. That lack of response at the sign-up sheet area is testimony enough.

As to you're saying I can't prove God's existence and you can't disprove it, I think I can give enough pro arguments for to keep your head spinning, not like I need them vis a vis Alvin Plantinga

So you want me to come to your ring and continue to call me gutless, but you can't meet a simple request??
Sounds like to me!!

So go ahead and attempt to prove God exists, this should be good for a laugh.
And while you're at it, where did God come from, Mr and Mrs god??

Do you know what the most interesting part of the word THEORY is??

Originally posted by stevec

So you want me to come to your ring and continue to call me gutless, but you can't meet a simple request??
Sounds like to me!!

So go ahead and attempt to prove God exists, this should be good for a laugh.
And while you're at it, where did God come from, Mr and Mrs god??

Do you know what the most interesting part of the word THEORY is??

I'm going to first off point out that I am under no obligation to give evidence in order to believe God exists (Although I have plenty) for such would be accepting the presumption of atheism. Now if you want me to go into the arguments, I will gladly do so.

The reason is simply that even if I give every argument I have and someone refutes them all, it does not prove that God does not exist. It just shows my reasons for believing such were faulty.

Now as for where God came from, your point about Mr. and Mrs. God is not only childish, but fallacious. It represents a misunderstanding of the cosmological argument. We do not say that everything that exists has a cause, but rather everything that begins to exist. God is not a being in time the same way we are and thus, being outside the space-time continuum, is not caused.

Why do I say such for God but not the universe? The reason is that the universe is connected with space and time. For the universe to be here an infinite amount of time as we know it would violate the Law of Noncontradiction by creating an infinite regress. Also, considering our universe is heading towards a cold death by a loss of usable energy, had the universe been here an infinite time, it would have died an infinite amount of time ago.

Now I can go into further arguments for God's existence, as I have plenty, but I would first like to know why you think I should accept the presumption of atheism.

Then I'd like to see you actually develop a backbone and face me one-on-one. Your cop-outs to do so fool no one.

Originally posted by stevec

Ju·da·ist
n.
One who believes and practices Judaism.
What more can be said??

Wow, he got something right. Maybe your IQ is above that of a box of pudding (too bad this is the only thing you got right).

No, you have to believe IN the original writings, I don't care if you're a Martian!!
No rule here, just showing your errant nature. Your beliefs lay in a book that is full of errors and only a derision of the original wording. So by definition, you are not true to yourself by believing in an errant book.

I do love how you reason that way! Please show us the logical steps you took to reach that conclusion. What's the problem Stevie, too hard for you to learn my position so you'd rather attack a strawman?

If you truly believed in the OT, yuo would need to follow it AS IS. But you don't.

I do? Oh great Stevie, how did you read that conclusions? Pull that out of thin air by chance or did the little green men tell you?

Somebody had to tell Eve to eat the apple, isn't it funny how it was the woman who was fooled!!

Yet again he says something stupid. Could it be that the snake represents to us humans a creature that is a bottom dweller. (Kind of like modern day terms such as, "He's a snake in the grass." ) Never look at obvious conclusion when an idiotic one is avaible.

Gee, if something is written first and then somebody copies it say 1000 years later, is that plagiarism????

Oh yeah... kind of like how Barns and Nobes 'plagiarized' classic liturature (such as Jane Austin's Pride and Prejudice). So, do have a better way of preserving liturature or letting people read this stuff then copying it? If so, I'm all ears.

Where's the link so I can???

www.google.com . Do you have issues that prevents you from using the search engine properly?

Crystal quoted "And in closing, my entire argument is that you're an idiot".

Too bad Stevie missed where I answered him. It appears to me he's too busy saying stupid things to go look up answers for himself. What's the problem, too dumb to use the Google search engine?

Don't worry Crystal, one day they won't hold you back in school anymore and you'll be able to advance to prep!!

You love to say stupid things huh? What was your adverage in high school? I got a 3.2 GPA (based upon 4.0 being an A and 3.0 being a B) and didn't really try. Shoot, I got the second highest score (92.2%) in my tech school and didn't study once. How about you?

Crystal

Originally posted by Sir Stevie Stoopid a Lot

It's your book. I'm just showing you what it says.
{2:6} But there went up a mist from the earth,
Looks like it says UP to me.

GOOD NIGHT YOU ARE STUPID!

He probably thinks water that comes "up" out of a fountain doesn't go DOWN again!!!

Do you know the definition of WHOLE??

Yeah! Do you know the definition of "proportion"???? Are you so stupid as to think that mist provides a uniform saturation coverage???

Don't need it, we aren't arguing in Hebrew here, we are arguing in ENGLISH.

Which of course is what Genesis was written in, RIGHT, MORON???

That's where the info for the assembly came from, so take it up with them

THEY don't claim Consty abused his power, ya lame dipsrick!

Of course you aren't able to produce a copy of the bible as it is today pre-constantine, are you??

Catch yer own fart and paint it green!

So, are you able to explain away dinosaurs yet and your YEC garbage??

In a thread about Constantine, when after 44 pages we STILL can't get something out of you to worry about???

Stevie, you are now Too Stupid to Reply To. I have travel upcomingm so hereafter every message to you will read:

"Name ONE thing Constantine changed in the NT and provide evidence for the change."

until you ANSWER. Which you never will.

Originally posted by jpholding

In a thread about Constantine, when after 44 pages we STILL can't get something out of you to worry about???

Please JP. 50 pages.

Originally posted by sunflash

Please JP. 50 pages.

Oh, sorry. I have my settings so that it looks like only 14 pages and I was estimating.

By the way, when he says "200 people" he doesn't mean the voices in his head. He means the herd of cows he works with. We're to picture Stevie sitting in the middle of this herd all day, punching away on his computer while the cows "moo" at him. He thinks they're saying, "Wow, what a genius!"

This is why every one of his posts, you see, is full of bull dust.

Originally posted by jpholding

Oh, sorry. I have my settings so that it looks like only 14 pages and I was estimating.

By the way, when he says "200 people" he doesn't mean the voices in his head. He means the herd of cows he works with. We're to picture Stevie sitting in the middle of this herd all day, punching away on his computer while the cows "moo" at him. He thinks they're saying, "Wow, what a genius!"

This is why every one of his posts, you see, is full of bull dust.

Good point.

I'm going to first off point out that I am under no obligation to give evidence in order to believe God exists (Although I have plenty) for such would be accepting the presumption of atheism. Now if you want me to go into the arguments, I will gladly do so.

You ARE under that Exact obligation. You give sermons, right?? And your sermons are for what purpose?? To 'spread the word'?? Now, spreading the word and giving sermons is a way of relaying teachings onto the next generations, and has been for the complete existence of our race.
So by default you DO have to justify the existence to the people you are trying to convince, so it's no use pouting and saying 'I don't have to prove anything to you'. Now I can't speak for your country, but it isn't non-believers who go around knocking on the doors of people trying to push THEIR beliefs onto people. Nor do we drive around with little fish stickers on the back of our cars, and we don't post BIG signs in our front yards like the church does professing the 'glory of god', so I'd say the burden of proof IS on you and every other religious sect on this planet.

The reason is simply that even if I give every argument I have and someone refutes them all, it does not prove that God does not exist. It just shows my reasons for believing such were faulty.

OK. This I agree with.

Now as for where God came from, your point about Mr. and Mrs. God is not only childish, but fallacious. It represents a misunderstanding of the cosmological argument. We do not say that everything that exists has a cause, but rather everything that begins to exist. God is not a being in time the same way we are and thus, being outside the space-time continuum, is not caused.

No, it's not childish, and it's not a fallacy. Put aside the cosmological argument for the moment and look at ONLY the existence of 'God'. Some of the common problems with the belief that God exists are simple ones. He exists as 3 entities, all presumably of male denomination, God is presumed to be male, reasoning is that he created Adam first, then eve, but named all of the species 'man'. Not people. The holy ghost is also presumed to be male, although no one seems to be sure why, and the son, well it's pretty obvious what the gender is there.
But he didn't exist as 3 entities in the beginning, only one. Moses doesn't make mention of the holy ghost or the son. Only 'God'. Now we are supposed to be made in his 'image'.
The universe as it exists is, if what you say about pre-creation is true, like a bug in a bottle to 'God'. It exists within his realm. So what is his realm outside the bottle of the universe like??
And why do we 'assume' that we are created in his image. Does he need to sit down to rest, does he require some form of solid material to stand upon, and is he of physical mass??
Does he need oxygen and food to survive?? Does he need to go to the toilet??
Take the above questions and then relate them to us being created in his 'image'.
From what you have said, he does not require any of these things, he wouldn't require a mouth for food, or a nose to breath, reproductive organs and the like, no need for legs or arms either.
And I'm sure he didn't go to the local hardware store to get the materials to build the universe.
So what DO they mean when they are talking about 'image'??
If you want to start another thread to talk about this stuff, let me know, because there is a whole range of problems just with that very subject. You say he is not a being in time the way we are, yet you believe we were created in his image.

Why do I say such for God but not the universe? The reason is that the universe is connected with space and time. For the universe to be here an infinite amount of time as we know it would violate the Law of Noncontradiction by creating an infinite regress. Also, considering our universe is heading towards a cold death by a loss of usable energy, had the universe been here an infinite time, it would have died an infinite amount of time ago.

OK. The universe is connected with space and time. No argument there.
The universe has only been here for a finite amount of time, it has had a beginning, but not an end as yet. Now the cold death you speak of is interesting in itself. The universe is ever expanding, but what is it expanding into, you know, it's a bit like a sponge soaking up water, to expand it requires an area to grow into, without that it can't get any bigger, and if it is expanding, where are the materials for that expansion coming from??
The belief is that most of the universe is based on hydrogen. Hydrogen is highly flammable, so why doesn't the sun burn the universe in one big fiery ending?? Not enough oxygen in space to do so. So while we have a beginning, we don't have an end, which is the next interesting point.
What happens to the universe when it reaches that point??

Now I can go into further arguments for God's existence, as I have plenty, but I would first like to know why you think I should accept the presumption of atheism.

I have said all along that I'm not an atheist. Atheist, theist and all the other words described to argue out belief are man made words. So don't presume me to be something I'm not.
And I don't expect any such thing of you. What I would like to see is some clear and level headed arguments to why we exist.
If 'God' loves us so much, why create a realm for us that will extinguish itself within a period of time and leave us with no hope of surviving on as we do now??
You have said yourself that the universe as we know it will become a dark and cold place, so if the realm of heaven exists, where does it exist??

Then I'd like to see you actually develop a backbone and face me one-on-one. Your cop-outs to do so fool no one.

Like I said before, there is nothing that can't be typed here that can be there.
Why don't the others just go quiet here for a while and we'll debate here.
I don't have a problem with that, I can't be bothered going to another part of a forum to discuss things, and besides, the blokes at work would lose track of the conversation.
I wouldn't want to deprive them of small joys in their life.

Please show us the logical steps you took to reach that conclusion.

You answer the questions I ask one by one and you'll see how the conclusion is reached.

Who wrote the OT and when??

Originally posted by stevec

Unfortunately you clowns try to read things into this stuff that JUST ISN'T THERE!!
Moses was a simple man, and the bible clearly shows this.

I do not think you're terribly qualified to make the jedgment that that stuff "just isn't there" given that you have not put a great deal of study into the subject.

I think I'm going to go with Biblical scholars on this one. You know, nodding to their superior experience instead of your lack of it. Just like in any other field, really.

GOOD NIGHT YOU ARE STUPID!

He probably thinks water that comes "up" out of a fountain doesn't go DOWN again!!!

Actually, some of it goes up and stays up, the rest comes back down as rain, fog and the like.
Haven't you heard of evaporation. It's a simple theory really, the water gets to a certain temperature and goes up and up and up and then it comes back down again as rain when the conditions are right, I thought someone of your mental ability would know that.

Yeah! Do you know the definition of "proportion"???? Are you so stupid as to think that mist provides a uniform saturation coverage???

Yep, it's entirely different to the definition of WHOLE or COMPLETE if you'd rather. And mist DOES provide uniform coverage in case you weren't aware, that's why they invented spray heads, to give UNIFORM coverage. Lift your game JP, your starting to look stoopid.

Which of course is what Genesis was written in, RIGHT, MORON???

No, but it's the English version you choose to believe, which is errant.
The Hebrew version has a whole different meaning, which you pointed out on your Moronics web page.

THEY don't claim Consty abused his power, ya lame dipsrick!

Big deal, it still amounts to the same thing, and who was more powerful than Constantine at that time??
Me:-
Of course you aren't able to produce a copy of the bible as it is today pre-constantine, are you??

Him:-

Catch yer own fart and paint it green!

I didn't think you'd be able to come up with anything of any use.

In a thread about Constantine, when after 44 pages we STILL can't get something out of you to worry about???
Stevie, you are now Too Stupid to Reply To. I have travel upcomingm so hereafter every message to you will read:
"Name ONE thing Constantine changed in the NT and provide evidence for the change."
until you ANSWER. Which you never will.

Yeah you did, I told you Constantine influenced the bible and had it collected, collated and assembled into A SINGLE volume, and you haven't produced evidence to the contrary, so until you do, it's BYE BYE Flap Jack, see you in another life.

That's OK Sunflash, you could give him 5,000,000,000,000 pages and he still wouldn't come up with any answers and plenty of insults, but if you read up on him under his real name, you'll find more than just me have suffered the same kind of nonsense that he hands out, and he certainly isn't doing Christianity one little bit of good.

• Edited by a Moderator •

Moderated By: TheAnalogman

You gave no reference or indication that this was not your own work. That is called plagiarism. It is not tolerated on TWEB. ***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.*** Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publically complain or whine, please take it to the Psychotherapy Room unless told otherwise.

Originally posted by stevec

That's OK Sunflash, you could give him 5,000,000,000,000 pages and he still wouldn't come up with any answers and plenty of insults, but if you read up on him under his real name, you'll find more than just me have suffered the same kind of nonsense that he hands out, and he certainly isn't doing Christianity one little bit of good.

Y'know, it's funny. I have read up on him under his real name. And guess what? I find the stuff written about him (especially by the likes of Jimbo and Farrell Till) to be absolute bunk. I've been around the block with JP once or twice. That you uncritically swallow anything you read that agrees with you is no skin off my nose.

Originally posted by stevec

You don't NEED to be qualified in any field to study, for knowledge comes with study and that is something that everyone on this forum is missing. If you ONLY study the biblical scholars and do not look at the holistic view, you will ONLY believe one side of the story without the knowledge to be able to make an independent decision, so while I HAVE claimed that I have no qualifications in these fields, I am able to study them and reach a conclusion.

Translation: "I disagree so Christianity is wrong." Yep, another reason you're an idiot. Tell us oh great one, why is it that these 'independent scholars' always agree with you? (even if they all come to different conclusions, but we have to ignore that because that proves you uncritically swallow anything you hear.

Here's just a few questions that your scholars can't answer:-

Of course, none of these things prove Christianity as false... but who cares about that right?

What is hell like? During my "eternal damnation", will I be able to remember my mortal life as well as I can now? Will I be able to remember new things that I think of while in hell?

So since people are not sure what hell is like Christianity is false? Hummm how did you arrive at that conclusion? Sounds like an excuse to me.

What is heaven like? During your (presumed) "life everlasting", will you be able to do the things I asked about me doing in Hell?

More excuses, how does this prove Jesus didn't rise from the dead?

Will you have a material body in heaven? If so: Will you need to eat and use the bathroom?

Again, how does this prove Jesus didn't rise from the dead?

If there are scarcities, then: What are the economics of heaven? Is there an official currency?

How does this prove Jesus didn't rise again?

What is the biology of heaven? Are there plants and animals, or are the gardeners and pet-lovers and bird-watchers and equestrians out of luck?

How does this prove Jesus didn't rise again?

When you're scholars can answer these, I'll come shake your hand in church.

Sorry, everything above is just an excuse. If you can not tell me how things may turn out when we die, you are wrong. How does that work? How does anything you ask above prove Jesus did not rise again? When you're done questioning begging and making excuses, we can try this again, ok?

Crystal