There is more then enough evidence to prove God exists.

[Iti oj]

Have you read these five verses? Are you reading Exodus 21:2-6? Only what you are saying does not match that which has been written. The children came under the same laws as their parents, a seven year contract. Of course the children or the wife given whilst in servitude would remain the servants of the master after the man did his seven years. They were still under their seven year contract. I thought that was a given. Why would they set free the man and keep the woman forever? You are painting the Masters in an unsavoury light, we do not know that. That is pure conjecture and intended to taunt Christians rather then have honest debate.

No it's not. It is in the bible.

 

[Serenity7855]

No it's not.. Ours
It is on the bible.

But you do not believe in the bible or anything it contains, so what is your gripe?

 

[Iti oj]

But you do not believe in the bible or anything it contains, so what is your gripe?

Belief's are not insular. I have demonstrated that God and the bible are not good, as classically claimed, even if it is not evidence against God and the bible beign true.

 

[Serenity7855]

Belief's are not insular. I have demonstrated that God and the bible are not good, as classically claimed, even if it is not evidence against God and the bible beign true.

No you haven't. If that is what you think then you are deluding yourself. You have not proven a single solitary thing, nothing what so ever. Your rebuttals are fruitless and without any validity. Your motive is to stir up Christians by falsely accussing their God, and to think you have succeeded is laughable. We have been warned about you and your kind. We are well aware of what to expect, and your contribution is to fulfil prophecy, thank you. This area of debate was started by TheGunShoj who claimed that God condoned slavery in Exodus 21: 2-6 because he found it on some anti-theist site. It turns out that slavery is not even mentioned in those verses, so how can such a claim be valid. Your interpretations of wives and children have been proven as flawed and nothing more then your personal opinion. So what, many I ask, do you think you have proven?

 

[Iti oj]

No you haven't. If that is what you think then you are deluding yourself. You have not proven a single solitary thing, nothing what so ever. Your rebuttals are fruitless and without any validity. Your motive is to stir up Christians by falsely accussing their God, and to think you have succeeded is laughable. We have been warned about you and your kind. We are well aware of what to expect, and your contribution is to fulfil prophecy, thank you. This area of debate was started by TheGunShoj who claimed that God condoned slavery in Exodus 21: 2-6 because he found it on some anti-theist site. It turns out that slavery is not even mentioned in those verses, so how can such a claim be valid. Your interpretations of wives and children have been proven as flawed and nothing more then your personal opinion. So what, many I ask, do you think you have proven?

I agree that the verses spoke of servitude, but only for Hebrew men. You haven't dealt with the other issues. Nor have we revisited the murders and rapes condoned b God.

 

[Iti oj]

You call me dishonest and a militant atheist but you never intended anything differnt, After all the bible warned you about me.

 

[Bunyip]

Exodus 21:2-6 Does refer to slaves, the Hebrew word 'ebed' means a slave, servant, man servant or subject. There is no distinction in Hebrew between slave and servant.

 

[Serenity7855]

You call me dishonest and a militant atheist but you never intended anything differnt, After all the bible warned you about me.

My intentions are to defend God and his sacred words. I make no excuses for that. In doing so I am trying to expose those who do not know him yet, to the truth. That means that I have no alternative but to make manifest the falsehoods of the aggressive atheissts, I have been doing it for long enough to have confidence that no one is able to prove God as anything other then what he is. Pure Love.

 

[Sapiens]

My intentions are to defend God and his sacred words. I make no excuses for that.

There are no gods, thus there are no "sacred words." Your defending an empty room.

In doing so I am trying to expose those who do not know him yet, to the truth.

You're trying to expose people who know the room is empty to the empty room? That makes no sense what-so-ever.

That means that I have no alternative but to make manifest the falsehoods of the aggressive atheissts,

Most of the agression seems to be on your part.

I have been doing it for long enough to have confidence that no one is able to prove God as anything other then what he is. Pure Love.

Interesting contradiction between thought and action.

 

[Iti oj]

There are no gods, thus there are no "sacred words." Your defending an empty room.

You're trying to expose people who know the room is empty to the empty room? That makes no sense what-so-ever.
Most of the agression seems to be on your part.

Interesting contradiction between thought and action.

Well to be fair in did call him, his god and his beliefs vile a few pages ago.

 

[Apple Sugar]

You're arguing with an avowed worshiper of lucifer.
A fallen angel created by the very God they argue hasn't been nor can be proven to exist. (You know, so as to have then created....lucifer to later be worshiped by them?)
See what I mean?

No you haven't. If that is what you think then you are deluding yourself. You have not proven a single solitary thing, nothing what so ever. Your rebuttals are fruitless and without any validity. Your motive is to stir up Christians by falsely accussing their God, and to think you have succeeded is laughable. We have been warned about you and your kind. We are well aware of what to expect, and your contribution is to fulfil prophecy, thank you. This area of debate was started by TheGunShoj who claimed that God condoned slavery in Exodus 21: 2-6 because he found it on some anti-theist site. It turns out that slavery is not even mentioned in those verses, so how can such a claim be valid. Your interpretations of wives and children have been proven as flawed and nothing more then your personal opinion. So what, many I ask, do you think you have proven?

 

[Iti oj]

You're arguing with an avowed worshiper of lucifer.
A fallen angel created by the very God they argue hasn't been nor can be proven to exist. (You know, so as to have then created....lucifer to later be worshiped by them?)
See what I mean?

So you claim to know me and my beliefs? Because you don't.

 

[Apple Sugar]

So you claim to know me and my beliefs? Because you don't.

Well then you should edit your religious identity on the profile everyone reads.

 

[Iti oj]

Well then you should edit your religious identity on the profile everyone reads.

My title doesn't suggest that I worship any thing.

 

[Apple Sugar]

Well it suggests you need to label yourself as religious.

 

[Ouroboros]

Well it suggests you need to label yourself as religious.

Sorry for interjecting here, but I don't understand what happened here.

Did lti_oj ever say he was a worshipper of Lucifer and therefore somehow by some obscure law must be forced to change his label? I'm confused. Where did this strange demand come from? Just out of curiosity.

 

[Apple Sugar]

Yeah, you're interjecting yourself into something you don't understand and that was really not your concern in the first place. Which probably explains why you're clueless as to the body of the discussion between myself and iti.
Let's move on. I have.

 

[Ouroboros]

Yeah, you're interjecting yourself into something you don't understand and that was really not your concern in the first place. Which probably explains why you're clueless as to the body of the discussion between myself and iti.
Let's move on. I have.

Wow...

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Yeah, you're interjecting yourself into something you don't understand and that was really not your concern in the first place. Which probably explains why you're clueless as to the body of the discussion between myself and iti.
Let's move on. I have.

This is what's referred to as "being ridiculously defensive". All they did was ask you a couple of straightforward questions. This is an open forum, where anyone can read and respond to whatever they want to; that, in fact, is the whole point and the very difference between a private discussion and a forum. If you don't wish for people to chime in on discussions you are having with other posters, or to give you opinions or questions about a subject you are discussing, then I kindly suggest that you find another outlet for your opinions than a free-to-join internet discussion forum where the ability to do so is the entire point of the site, or at the very least move your discussion to private messaging.

 

[SkepticThinker]

And then gave us free agency to act for ourselves. Anything else is a cop out and a licence to sin without consequences.

So commandments from god are actually meaningless. Is that how it goes?
Nothing you're saying is making any sense.