Does it matter if God exists?

None of your quotes directly assert and explain in detail the science you think they demonstrate. For all we know, it probably just sounded best to say the circle of the Earth.
 
No?

Romans 3:21-26

21But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement,[i]

through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice,

because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand

unpunished— 26he did it to

demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the

one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

I am well aware of the fact that I sin. I lust, I curse, I look at pr0n on the interwebz. I also know that my belief in Christ leads to a process of sanctification whereby I feel bad for the things that I do and desire to do them less and less.

I recognize that the only thing which totally and completely justifies me is my belief that the life of Jesus Christ and His Grace is enough of a sacrifice to atone for my sins.

 
lulz. And your wonderful scientific theory called it flat for centuries.

Feel free to continue to pick the fly shit out of the pepper.

When you are ready to talk for real about salvation and the fallen nature of your soul, I'm sure that Wikipedia has a great list of the churches in your town. You're very adept at using it so you should have no problem there.
 
You are very good at deflecting questions about the scientific evidence in support of God's existence. You should be a politician.
 
Romans 2:17-24

17Now you, if you call yourself a Jew; if you rely on the law and brag about your relationship to God; 18if you know his will and approve of what is superior because you are instructed by the law; 19if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark, 20an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of infants, because you have in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth— 21you, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? 22You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23You who brag about the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? 24As it is written: "God's name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you."[b]
 
Hey idiot, this is from the bible too.

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in." Isaiah 40:22, see also Isaiah 44:24-35;Genesis 1:10,16-18; Psalms 136:7-9; Proverbs 8:27; Luke 4:5.[12]
Sounds like a flat earth theory to me, Parmenides and Pythagoras both believed the Earth to be spherical, and that was 600 years before Jesus existed. It's not a new theory, the bible pulls on common knowledge at the time and attributes it to God.
 
Still further proof that you don't bother to read what anybody else posts before attempting to contribute meaningfully to the discussion.

I quoted that verse on this page or the last.

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth." More effectively translated from the original Hebrew "He sits, enthroned above the roundness of the earth."

Do you even bother reading what other people have to say, or to you just randomly hate on people who don't agree with you?
 
Can you read Hebrew? No, so how do you know that's what it says? You believe every single word of the Bible, but never think to question who wrote it, or translated it?

You don't know if that's the more proper translation, or just one that you found on a Christian science(the term makes me shudder) website and took as truth.

in The Life of Charlemagne, the original language was translated improperly to make it sound like Charlemagne decapitated 3000 enemy soldiers, when in actuality the original translation said he exiled them, the word that was mis-translated changed the entire passage, and made Charlemagne seem like a monster.
 
Honestly. You can't take the gospels word for word. The earliest Gospel was written about 90 years AFTER JESUS DIED. They never wrote anything down. Everything was word of mouth.

Now imagine you are trying to tell the life story of your great grandpa. You think you'd be able to tell his life to so much detail? Its about impossible. Don't get me wrong. The gospels can have great teachings and guidance in it. But to religiously follow it as the truth and believe it all word for word is not too logical.

I think Family Guy sums it up best

 
exactly my point sir.... I believe that stuff happens, I just think there is a creator somewhere out there that let it happen.
 
But surely you understand that there is no need for there to be a creator for any of this to occur right?

Once again, it is a matter of Occam's razor, which states that "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity." Which means that if you have 2 similar theories, the one with the fewest new assumptions is correct. Your theory is essentially the same as the one i hold, except you attribute everything that happens to a supernatural being, which is not a necessity.
 
Well, the bible is like a book with a lot of fairytales for adults, that we can relate too. It's like teaching children good moral, ethics and such when reading stories for them, were there is something good and something bad. The texts in the bible shouldn't be interpreted litterally, because a man walking on water is as unlikely as a horse, a dog, a cat and a bird playing music together in Bremen.
 
maybe not a necessity to you... but for me i need something to believe in, and its proven its worth enough for me to atually believe it.
 
science dissproves religion... and religion disproves science. both have different laws and logic and so both are wrong according to the other and never will be proven otherwise because they will always naturally dissprove each other. /thread
 
no, its true.... no matter what we say there is no conclusion. god cant exist with science and science cant exist with god. what isnt a scientific fact ( scientifically impossible) is considered truth by religion since faith is reliable evidence to beleivers.their faith can also dissprove science because they "are correct about god existing" (based on their faith) therefore science which dissproves it, is incorrect to their reality. both have seperate and conflicting realities and the result is that there will never be an answer.... so what do we do? we all fuck off with the arguing unless someone makes an atack on our beleifs and tries to convert us. this is why I understand the religious people in this thread being angry and responding even if I dissagree with their beleifs.
 
DUDES. STOP SAYING SCIENCE IS RIGHT. will someone PLEASE google something about scientology (how ever you spell it) and how they cant prove it anymore. if your an athiest GTFO cause your just aeorgant and have never heard a word of Christ ever. so i see where your comming from, you dont hear/heard anything so why believe. ok try this. ANYONE who has never heard a LEGITEMEMNT word about Christ. go to younglife. just once. its amazzing. normal kids. itll change your life, or at least make you question what you think/believe...

and

10 page...cmon guys we all know Christ/God is real. theres NO POSSIBLE WAY TO DISPROVE IT. just sit there in your wrongnes and be wrong.
 
theres also no possible way to prove it. so there goes that argument.

also, if you're gonna argue for god, i'd recommend not using the whole he doesnt like people who don't believe in him thing. cause like, god is supposed to be perfect, and if he was perfect he wouldnt hate people for not believing in him. and saying god sends anyone to hell who doesnt believe in him also tells me god has a whole lot of pride. which, i think, is the deadliest of the 7 deadly sins. which makes god a hypocrite. which, again, is a quality of an imperfect being. which god is not.

anyways...as far as i can tell no one in the thread has really debated whether or not it matters if god exists yet. just sayin.
 
I want you to go and live inside a whale for one week. If you come back alive, I will start believing in God and will vehemently argue with every single atheist i encounter.

Oh and pics or it didn't happen.
 
oh for fuck's sake. scientology is irrelevant to atheism you twat. use the dictionary. (arrogant SP!?!?!?1?1?1?1?1?1?1?1??) no wonder you people are so sickening. you're all just dumb.

science can also prove jesus wasn't white, so eat that for breakfast.
 
Scientology=/=Science you nitwit.
Generalizations generally make people upset, and you generalizing about atheists makes me upset, in the same manner us disproving the illusion that is the Bible makes you upset. I am probably more knowledgeable of the Bible than you will be ever, simply based on the fact I'm probably 4-5 years older than you.
We do know that Christ existed, they found his ossuary, but we do not know if he was the Son of God. There is no possible way to disprove the Flying Spaghetti monster, so just sit there in your wrongness and be wrong.
I'll end this on a quote.
"Arrogance on the part of the meritorious is even more offensive to us than the arrogance of those without merit: for merit itself is offensive. "
Friedrich Nietzsche

 
Are you secretly an atheist posing as a Christian trying to make Christians look stupid? If not, you just won the argument for the atheists.
 
haha yea. after my last post on this thread i was like "there is no way anyone can be that retarded and to spell that badly."

i looked through his threads and all his other threads or normal, so yea lol. he trolled the shit out of this thread.

i'm embarrassed
 
i'de say that there is more evidence to prove theres a god, than there is to disprove a god, again there are hundreds of prophecies that are beingfulfilled even now, in current times.
 
this may be true. but it still doesnt make it a good argument either way. and jibber was trolling i guess, so bravo to him.

 
The bible also states that Job lived 140 years after he was 'restored'.

and that Methuselah was 969 years old.

The bible steadily loses credibility throughout the course of this thread.
 
The jackass who started this thread must be real content with himself now. He knew this would be a shit show. NS is full of total idiots.
 
well since the mods deleted my posts, I 'll post one of them again.... Kind of gets me upset that people delete my posts, amd I ruining the argument with my wisdom or what?

The prophet Moses foretold (with some additions by Jeremiah and Jesus)

that the ancient Jewish nation would be conquered twice and that the

people would be carried off as slaves each time, first by the

Babylonians (for a period of 70 years), and then by a fourth world

kingdom (which we know as Rome). The second conqueror, Moses said,

would take the Jews captive to Egypt in ships, selling them or giving

them away as slaves to all parts of the world. Both of these

predictions were fulfilled to the letter, the first in 607 B.C. and the

second in 70 A.D. God's spokesmen said, further, that the Jews would

remain scattered throughout the entire world for many generations, but

without becoming assimilated by the peoples or of other nations, and

that the Jews would one day return to the land of Palestine to

re-establish for a second time their nation (Deuteronomy 29; Isaiah

11:11-13; Jeremiah 25:11; Hosea 3:4-5 and Luke 21:23-24).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top