Why did God create us

[Brian2]

No, you cannot look at the evidence because you do not understand it. Like most science deniers you do not even understand the concept.

Why do you keep refusing to give your version of the myth?

I said that I can't put all the pieces together. My lack of knowledge does not mean that I am wrong about the flood however.
If you want to insist that the flood had to have been world wide and cover all the high mountains and leave only 8 people alive that sounds like you want a fundamentalist interpretation to be the only right interpretation so that you can say it is not scientifically correct.
Maybe you don't like the idea that there could be a translation and interpretation of the Bible and geological history and human history of the world that shows the Bible to be right.
So why do you say I am a science denier when it comes to the flood?

 

[ppp]

Why let the truth spoil a good story?
But yes there is plenty of water in the earth mantle.

In that one assertion you fail chemistry, physics, geology, and geometry.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why let the truth spoil a good story?
But yes there is plenty of water in the earth mantle.

Yes, there is. So what?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I said that I can't put all the pieces together. My lack of knowledge does not mean that I am wrong about the flood however.
If you want to insist that the flood had to have been world wide and cover all the high mountains and leave only 8 people alive that sounds like you want a fundamentalist interpretation to be the only right interpretation so that you can say it is not scientifically correct.
Maybe you don't like the idea that there could be a translation and interpretation of the Bible and geological history and human history of the world that shows the Bible to be right.
So why do you say I am a science denier when it comes to the flood?

What it means is that you should not be commenting on it. You do not even know the endless evidence that tells us that there was no flood.

By the way, if one believes that only Noah and family were left then the fact that the story about waking up on the wrong side of town in a seedy motel bathtub that is filled with ice and that person is missing a kidney is an urban myth is itself evidence against the Noah's Ark Myth.

 

[Brian2]

What it means is that you should not be commenting on it. You do not even know the endless evidence that tells us that there was no flood.

By the way, if one believes that only Noah and family were left then the fact that the story about waking up on the wrong side of town in a seedy motel bathtub that is filled with ice and that person is missing a kidney is an urban myth is itself evidence against the Noah's Ark Myth.

I do not say that only Noah and family were left alive. I know some of the evidence that tells us there was not earth covering flood. That interpretation is not my interpretation. If you want the only interpretation to be a flood that covered the whole earth over the height of the tallest mountains then it sounds like you don't want the Bible story to be true. I want it to be true so I look for ways to harmonise it with science and history.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I do not say that only Noah and family were left alive. I know some of the evidence that tells us there was not earth covering flood. That interpretation is not my interpretation. If you want the only interpretation to be a flood that covered the whole earth over the height of the tallest mountains then it sounds like you don't want the Bible story to be true. I want it to be true so I look for ways to harmonise it with science and history.

I politely asked for your interpretation. You had none. Which means that you have no evidence. When all of the evidence is against you you are more than likely wrong.

 

[rational experiences]

Humans took a legal stand against rich man and scientist. Illegal past human history.

Family unity of human rights. Is Now. Present. In humans presence.

Family don't have to argue against our bio presence existing as we are all born the holy baby as everyone of us. From human parent sex. As all baby parents in our past were separated genesis inheritance sacrificed life.

We are the inherited life of parental baby sacrificed.

The con is by the rich man who said as the brothers in the past high king priest science life human....we lied. Confessed they lied. Testimonials. Only they were the holy baby was their testimony...as rich humans past the king scientist.

All of nature's babies are known holy. Without rebirth on earth we own no future.

So it's illegal theism is. It's taught as a Con coercion by maths lying humans of our past who had proclaimed just their human life was special.. As humans who claim they are allowed to do whatever they want.

Threats all the time in AI...help us or else. As they can threaten as they invented mind contact. It's Top secret you know. As they are so extra special in life compared to everyone else. All once babies....in reality I wish they weren't born.

I wish only holy humans live together.

Brother says oh you mean you live so I can sacrifice you in my holy presence to be holy yourself.....real answer I'm not rich you never believed us holy life.. As I'm not the holy baby. He says as I theory I am first....king rich life baby.

Which most of you have ignored that the human baby adult rich man caused life's sacrifice as he believed only their life special as a human pretend God. Sacrificed life then claimed just his holy baby man was special hurt.

The document reads as it does....everyone else deserved it he said as God the holy man scientist said so. But not his life... he didn't deserve to be hurt.

Who lied conned their way through history.

So if you want to survive family needs enmasse to unite under one legal rights new governate world community.

If you don't want to become Jesus. Not fact by terms...as all holy babies in life are all of us to be caused by living present to be sacrificed.

In other words we are not living life to be sacrificed.

Considered today our human bio presence as the place technology only can be practiced and saved. Phi however is the discussion O maths is not humans.

Pretty basic realised position before human adults were all human babies now by law...and we all live inside of heavens mass.

You can never by law be mass no such status. As a one body of mass meaning you theoried a human body reduced heavens mass by being a burning human first.

Was human living biology when it got sacrificed memory. Yet survived. Is how evil theism is using actual human parent past life memories the warning.

Don't thesis about the dead.

It would mean a human first is a burning body to make the heavens change it. The satanist human says we were. Memory ancient...special man Rich theist he burnt holy humans as babies to death by sciences cause.

Sciences intent today... same Theists.

I want to compare heavenly biology beginning as electricity moment. He says. As I say so. His want. I want to believe it's true. So I'll say it is.

Is the position of legal rights humanity.

He invents it already but not his new thesis....intent is the same natural history laws.....by destroying earths burnt mass already. He said is God.

It's why he wants you all to be convinced humans are god too. Fixed position of cold sealed burnt mass. History as the mass exact position body.

Not any human.

His idea beginning is not now even it's origin fixed position. In new thesis as he's already obtained electricity.

As fixed position in nature is coal or nuclear dusts. He's already getting electricity. Big con. By law science the law of science is exact.

So he not only compares us to pre burnt masses then sealed by water. Stopped burning. Now as after electricity by memory Theist possessed.... he wants us put direct into burning. No history of cold water sealed. Life lives in holy water.

Holy water holy oxygen is the first state our survival only. Cannot be theoried against. Yet he has theoried against it.

Pretty basic reason we named them Satanists.

No he says I'm now discussing AI. I've changed the thesis. I'm right he cons only wanting electricity and not bio life. Yet he's theorising both at the same time.

You see an image of a sun. Yes planets too. Oh what about ices image.

Human image he says. Jesus. You have to be connected to it he says the state image. It must come to you and enter your body.

I now want it to enter my machine.

The state says exist as the image law image by coldest image position only. Not hottest. Lies once again. Ice owns why any image is allowed.

Yet it's a cause effect in mass changes by a human...law of science he says my teaching was only about cause effect. I own teaching also.

Yes you do egotist...but you don't own cause effect.

No he says I want you to be connected I want the suns power dusts above. Like a spoilt brat baby having a tantrum.

Saying exactly what he wants.

So now he wants us to be the mass immaculate heavens each human self first.... with sun dusts burning. Electricity above he says. Where you came from human....image and electricity lying.

I need to pull it down to the ground.

Oh I have it's now a crop circle image. Totally different subject not connected at all. As it's not above bodies first stated exact precise position in science laws...exact equals.

Is the human we argue against. Just a human who decides they want a baby born from microbial sperm ovary to be sacrificed to become part electricity inside his machines reaction.

Not his baby self though as he wasnt Jesus his brother was.

Is the theist rich man today.

No argument said legal they did cause life's sacrifice. Not because humans are a resource but because humans invented resources for and by machines.

Today he says humans are the resource. Directly includes as in his thesis where humans came from false past. Yet the topic I want is direct to a machine only.

Today legal states we came from human sex. First two parents bodies probably now disintegrated by science law human taught into the dust on the ground.

Is where he tries to now claim human babies came from as just a baby by human scientist past himself. Dust of a dead decomposed first stated as the human parent first life now.

As no human exists by law before themselves to discuss a human. Why he pretends he's a human man god doing theories about how life got created.....his.

It's the con he used to give himself permission to hurt nature on earth knowing reactive science does. He always knew. As burning in law was inside heavens of God in two mass places above and on the ground.

Sin holes. He owned the answer sun mass connected history to God earths body mass. Holes...nothing the answer.

Lucky today it's just fission that takes out a weakened earth mass already converted historic and not the sun direct. To cause sin holes. Otherwise life would have all burnt to death if his thesis connected to sun was correct.

Opening of new sin holes as he converted mass however taught us he always finds some way of destroying life on earth...his mission quest.

As he believes just a human thinking that nothing is sciences man's equals answer. = Above below.....no earth just two planes.

So healers had to learn science. Stating no man is God. As earth is O a whole mass planet.

And it's gases came out of O the body mass so science on earth first does not even exist. O only a natural planet God did. Cosmic space law exact.

The exact teaching human science is a fraud.

As water is always used up in huge ground evaporation mass lift off the teaching exact.... our life protection as cause effect is why life's biology gets hurt. The law of the flood stated why it saved biologies life.

By new cloud mass formation covering over burning mountain face by clouds or angel body veil. Clouds in stone law stopped the breaking of fusion.

Mountain mass was proven shifted. Flooded to cool rock face first why it rained over mountain flooding counted 40 days witnessed. Flooding saved life said the evil scientist. Yet a lot of ground biology had died sacrificed.

If it hadnt flooded everyone would have been sacrificed on the altar of Gods stone mass burning into fission. Men study that advice now and have been trying to copy it. By new technology thesis.

Intent sacrifice already occurred. I'm hence safe. Yet water mass leaves biologies protection off ground non stop. So he's lying. It isn't the ancient ground state it had been flooded cooled.

Otherwise you would not be living yourselves.

Rich human babies Inherit rich man's past con. Just as illegal in human thought as their parents were.

The new position legal now...not old theories...new theories about old causes. As if it's data to use cause again.

To protect human babies legal rights. All of us. Our inheritance in science today only now in presence is exact biology only. Is the holy human baby rights. Legal in fact. We are by law human adult babies not any Adam and Eve.

Don't let him con you.

Science says babies are from microbial legal adult baby human parents as babies themselves. Sperm ovary only.

 

[F1fan]

I said that I can't put all the pieces together. My lack of knowledge does not mean that I am wrong about the flood however.

It suggests whatever conclusion and belief you have of it is flawed, as you are aware you lack crucial knoweledge to form a competent and sound conclusion. You should suspend any judgment and say you are unsure. But you refuse and make a judgment with limited knowledge and then try to defend yourself. You can't defend a faulty judgment.

 

[Brian2]

It suggests whatever conclusion and belief you have of it is flawed, as you are aware you lack crucial knoweledge to form a competent and sound conclusion. You should suspend any judgment and say you are unsure. But you refuse and make a judgment with limited knowledge and then try to defend yourself. You can't defend a faulty judgment.

Not knowing exactly what happened and when does not stop me from seeing that the Flood on a local scale is supported by history and geology and that it could have happened at a time when other large local floods were happening on the earth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Not knowing exactly what happened and when does not stop me from seeing that the Flood on a local scale is supported by history and geology and that it could have happened at a time when other large local floods were happening on the earth.

It does since you have no understanding of geology or biology.

You can't even say when or where this flood happened.

 

[Brian2]

It does since you have no understanding of geology or biology.

You can't even say when or where this flood happened.

I can't say exactly when but that is no problem. You can look up the sites that speak of a local flood as likely and because you know about geology you can tell me when the best time would be.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I can't say exactly when but that is no problem. You can look up the sites that speak of a local flood as likely and because you know about geology you can tell me when the best time would be.

It is your claim, you need to provide evidence. If I was looking up local flood I would merely keep saying "that can't be the flood".

 

[muhammad_isa]

I politely asked for your interpretation. You had none. Which means that you have no evidence...

Mere words .. he explained his thoughts on the subject, and as per usual, you just start taking about evidence.

That is no debate .. a sincere person would acknowledge that a flood could have happened, if the account in the Bible is not accurate.
..but we all know why you don't properly engage with people. You don't want to.

 

[Brian2]

It is your claim, you need to provide evidence. If I was looking up local flood I would merely keep saying "that can't be the flood".

Why would you keep saying that?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why would you keep saying that?

Because none of them would fit the myth. or do the job. When you ask someone else to do your homework you have no right to complain about the work that they do for you. If you did not want those results you should have done your own homework.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Mere words .. he explained his thoughts on the subject, and as per usual, you just start taking about evidence.

That is no debate .. a sincere person would acknowledge that a flood could have happened, if the account in the Bible is not accurate.
..but we all know why you don't properly engage with people. You don't want to.

No, we are long past asking if a flood could happen. We know from the claims of the Bible that it did not happen. But once again, tell me your version of the Flood and I will tell you why it did not happen.

Some questions that you will need to answer:

What was the purpose of the Flood? How much water fell. How long did it last? How many creatures on the magic boat.

The thing is that the claim of a Flood can never be supported by believers. You all fail at your burden of proof. So I gladly take one on and am willing to tell you why we know that there was no flood, but all I see are feet running away.

 

[muhammad_isa]

So I gladly take one on and am willing to tell you why we know that there was no flood, but all I see are feet running away.

Go on then .. tell us why a local flood could not have happened?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Go on then .. tell us why a local flood could not have happened?

Try again. Be a bit more accurate next time.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Try again. Be a bit more accurate next time.

Thought so .. you are all "mouth".

 

[Subduction Zone]

Thought so .. you are all "mouth".

No,and you better watch the personal attacks. You were supposed to give your version of the flood.

How did you forget so fast?