• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

There is more then enough evidence to prove God exists.

ScuzManiac

ScuzManiac

Active Member
Serenity7855 said:
Perhaps you could show me where I said children but not babies or toddlers. I was making it clear that it was you who introduced the accusation that babies, toddlers and children under 3 were slaughtered. Now you are wriggling and squirming to get out of it by misrepresenting me. I hold no malice though, after all, you are a anti-theist.
Click to expand...

He can't because you've edited 90% of your posts lol.

And by the way, possession isn't real. It's downright silly in fact.

I'm not judging you though.

I'm just saying that your views are mythological and much like a Harry Potter film.
 
Bunyip

Bunyip

pro scapegoat
Serenity7855 said:
Perhaps you could show me where I said children but not babies or toddlers. I was making it clear that it was you who introduced the accusation that babies, toddlers and children under 3 were slaughtered. Now you are wriggling and squirming to get out of it by misrepresenting me. I hold no malice though, after all, you are a anti-theist.
Click to expand...

LOL So when you said they all deserved it, you meamt only those over what age?
 
Blackdog22

Blackdog22

Well-Known Member
Serenity7855 said:
I didn't say that God was helpless in saving the people. He tried very hard to save them. They ignored him, or his prophet, Lot, and the natural law came into force and stopped the evil. It is consistent with all that I have said, but it is still anecdotal, just a very plausible and likely one. You see God is a reality and he is perfect in nature. He can only love, he cannot perform any evil, that is not debatable. So, God could not have killed anyone, that is a given. What we have to do is look for methods in which he overcame this dilemma, this is as good of a explanation as any, but it still remains anecdotal because you or I were not there. .

For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible. Stuart Chase.
Click to expand...

Okay, stop calling out natural law like it is something that transcends God. You clearly just said it doesn't. So natural law is God. He makes the law, he makes the rules, he is above the law. He sent the brimstone to kill them. God murdered them, there is no dancing around this.

I also realize this is anecdotal I am just following the rules of the story as its been described by you and you seem to have a literal take on the event so, either you believe the Bible or it lied.

For the bit about you not saying kids deserved it, are you saying no kids were in the city? Because you clearly said all in the city deserved it, and unless you are trying to argue there were zero kids in the city (which the story clearly states isn't the case) then you said kids deserve to die. Because using the word "all" encompasses all things in the city, including kids. You also clearly described the kids are something from the exorcist.

It appears you have edited almost every thing you said about killing kids, and how you are for it, but you did forget one snippet

Serenity said:
Yep, as I thought you would do. Paint a picture of a cute little toddler with an innocent face and then say that God killed these children for no reason. You are an open book. Totally predictable. All antitheists come up with exactly the same ploy to make a perfect being look filthy. But these children were not dissimilar to Regan MacNeil on the exercist. How Sweet and innocent was she. Your rebuttal is dishonest and deceptive.
Click to expand...

You wrote this in response to a guy saying that killing kids was wrong. Here you clearly tried to paint the kids as possessed by Satan. You even said, "God killed these children," and were bashing the poster you were responding to for considering kids innocent beings. I believe you are in too deep for your own good mate, I just exposed you.
 
Last edited:
ScuzManiac

ScuzManiac

Active Member
Blackdog22 said:
Okay, stop calling out natural law like it is something that transcends God. You clearly just said it doesn't. So natural law is God. He makes the law, he makes the rules, he is above the law. He send the brimstone to kill them. God murdered them, there is no dancing around this.

I also realize this is anecdotal I am just following the rules of the story as its been described by you and you seem to have a literal take on the event so, either you believe the Bible or it lied.

For the bit about you not saying kids deserved it, are you saying no kids were in the city? Because you clearly said all in the city deserved it, and unless you are trying to argue there were zero kids in the city (which the story clearly states isn't the case) then you said kids deserve to die. Because using the word "all" encompasses all things in the city, including kids. You also clearly described the kids are something from the exorcist.

It appears you have edited almost every thing you said about killing kids, and how you are for it, but you did forget one snippet



You wrote this in response to a guy saying that killing kids was wrong. Here you clearly tried to paint the kids as possessed by Satan. You even said, "God killed these children," and were bashing the poster you were responding to for considering kids innocent beings. I believe you are in too deep for your own good mate, I just exposed you.
Click to expand...

I wonder if he'll say you are attacking him instead of his beliefs?

:yes:
 
Serenity7855

Serenity7855

Lambaster of the Angry Anti-Theists
ScuzManiac said:
He can't because you've edited 90% of your posts lol.
Click to expand...
If you look at the time of the revision it is at the same time as the original post it almost all of my revisions. I use a tablet with predictive text instead of a spell checker. It invariably inserts wrong words and I make mistakes so I check it. That is why the revisions happen at the same time as the original post. What is very telling is that you would make such a false assertion. That you should look for it tells me that you are guilty of it yourself.

And by the way, possession isn't real. It's downright silly in fact.
Click to expand...
Even if you are right, and you are not, it is none of your business.

I'm not judging you though.
Click to expand...

Yes you are

I'm just saying that your views are mythological and much like a Harry Potter film.
Click to expand...

You do not possess what is needed to know different, so, you are more to be pitied the scorned.
 
Serenity7855

Serenity7855

Lambaster of the Angry Anti-Theists
Blackdog22 said:
Okay, stop calling out natural law like it is something that transcends God. You clearly just said it doesn't. So natural law is God. He makes the law, he makes the rules, he is above the law. He sent the brimstone to kill them. God murdered them, there is no dancing around this.
Click to expand...

You believe that there is brimstone. That is interesting. God is incapable of evil. He is incapable of murder. If he were then he would cease to exist.

I also realize this is anecdotal I am just following the rules of the story as its been described by you and you seem to have a literal take on the event so, either you believe the Bible or it lied.
Click to expand...

No, I believe the bible to be the literal word of God. A book of Commandments that can help us all gain life eternal with a loving God. I do not give it any real credence as a historical record.

For the bit about you not saying kids deserved it, are you saying no kids were in the city? Because you clearly said all in the city deserved it, and unless you are trying to argue there were zero kids in the city (which the story clearly states isn't the case) then you said kids deserve to die. Because using the word "all" encompasses all things in the city, including kids. You also clearly described the kids are something from the exorcist.
Click to expand...

I do not know if there was children involved. I am assuming that there were. The Bible does not make it clear. You are using semantics and colloquialism to entrap me. That is underhanded and dishonest. What I would expect from an anti-theist.

I did describe them as not being dissimilar to Regan from the exercist. That is not something that the bible claims as they did not have motion photography back then. It was clearly my belief, or opinion. It was, as I have said already, anecdotal.

It appears you have edited almost every thing you said about killing kids, and how you are for it, but you did forget one snippet
Click to expand...

That is a falsehood. Just because I use the editing facility does not indicate what reason for using it that I have. You are misrepresenting me with your lies and deceit. But, I expect that from anti-theists.



You wrote this in response to a guy saying that killing kids was wrong. Here you clearly tried to paint the kids as possessed by Satan. You even said, "God killed these children," and were bashing the poster you were responding to for considering kids innocent beings. I believe you are in too deep for your own good mate, I just exposed you.
Click to expand...

Would it please you to expose me? Is that why you are here, to use dishonesty to expose Christians? You continue to believe you exposed me, those of us who have an ounce of intellect have noticed your scam way back. You are twisting and manipulating, a trait of the anti-theists. You are putting words in my mouth.

Check out below to see that I have edited this.
 
Last edited:
Serenity7855

Serenity7855

Lambaster of the Angry Anti-Theists
Mestemia said:
Make up your mind.
Either your god is omnipotent or it is not omnipotent.


Saying your god is omnipotent and then presenting a list of things your god cannot do is rather asinine, don't you think?
Click to expand...

Not if you knew the definition of omniscient, that is, knowing everything that can be known. That means there are things that cannot be known.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MD
Serenity7855

Serenity7855

Lambaster of the Angry Anti-Theists
Mestemia said:
um...
And this is just a guess mind you...

Because you have already used it as an excuse to avoid addressing other points you are uncomfortable with?
Click to expand...

So, you are saying that when he said "wonder if he'll say you are attacking him instead of his beliefs?" says that I have used it as an excuse to avoid addressing others points. Doesn't really work does it. It sound like you are so desperate to insult other posters that you have tried to marry two events that just do not mix. Just debate the point instead of looking for the best fit insult.
 
McBell

McBell

Unbound
Serenity7855 said:
So, you are saying that when he said "wonder if he'll say you are attacking him instead of his beliefs?" says that I have used it as an excuse to avoid addressing others points. Doesn't really work does it. It sound like you are so desperate to insult other posters that you have tried to marry two events that just do not mix. Just debate the point instead of looking for the best fit insult.
Click to expand...

Except you have flat out avoided addressing points by whining about how you are not the topic...

Feel free to deny it all you like.
The fact is, you have done it numerous times in this thread alone.
 
ScuzManiac

ScuzManiac

Active Member
Serenity7855 said:
If you look at the time of the revision it is at the same time as the original post it almost all of my revisions. I use a tablet with predictive text instead of a spell checker. It invariably inserts wrong words and I make mistakes so I check it. That is why the revisions happen at the same time as the original post. What is very telling is that you would make such a false assertion. That you should look for it tells me that you are guilty of it yourself.


Even if you are right, and you are not, it is none of your business.



Yes you are



You do not possess what is needed to know different, so, you are more to be pitied the scorned.
Click to expand...

1. I'm guilty of what? I don't edit my posts.

2. It's none of my business? I didn't know possessions were only the business of certain people. I guess I don't fall into the category of being delusional or a filmmaker so excuse me. You're right. It's none of my business at all.

3. Who are you to tell me I'm judging you when I specifically said I'm not. I don't know a thing in the world about you other than the views you have expressed in this thread and that's all I've commented on. I haven't said a single thing about you as a person nor will I. You're the one putting words in my mouth, dodging questions, and constantly backtracking.

Not everyone here is out to get you but when you say one thing and then change it to something else, what do you expect people to think?

And then when someone brings this up, you just ask questions to avoid their questions or tell them that they are more or less picking on you.

This isn't high school. Either stand by what you say and debate or don't waste the time of others. It's a pretty simple concept, ya know?
 
Ouroboros

Ouroboros

Coincidentia oppositorum
outhouse said:
Bit stays hidden, and does nothing, and nothing can be attributed to it, at all..


Just as if it was ancient mythology and imagination.
Click to expand...

Yup.

There's no difference between a God who can do anything but doesn't, a God who can't do anything, and a God who doesn't even exist. The end result is all the same.
 
Serenity7855

Serenity7855

Lambaster of the Angry Anti-Theists
ScuzManiac said:
1. I'm guilty of what? I don't edit my posts.
Click to expand...

That is not a crime

2. It's none of my business? I didn't know possessions were only the business of certain people. I guess I don't fall into the category of being delusional or a filmmaker so excuse me. You're right. It's none of my business at all.
Click to expand...

You have a right not to believe in being possessed. You do not have a right to preach your belief to believers and tell them that their belief is silly. It is none of your business what we believe. That you have concluded that I am right is commendable for you to say.

3. Who are you to tell me I'm judging you when I specifically said I'm not. I don't know a thing in the world about you other than the views you have expressed in this thread and that's all I've commented on. I haven't said a single thing about you as a person nor will I. You're the one putting words in my mouth, dodging questions, and constantly backtracking.
Click to expand...

I am an individual who feels that you have mis-judged me. Mis-judged me by accessing me that I have edited my post in a dishonourable manner. I resent that judgement so I have expressed my displeasure.

Perhaps you could give me an instance where I have backtracked or refused to answer and inquiry of me. As I am constantly backtracking you should be able to pick an instance out at ease. It would also be appreciated if you could demonstrate where I have put words in your mouth. I tend not to do that.

Not everyone here is out to get you but when you say one thing and then change it to something else, what do you expect people to think?
Click to expand...

Words are empty unless you can substantiate them. You need to show me where I said one thing and then changed it to something else.

And then when someone brings this up, you just ask questions to avoid their questions or tell them that they are more or less picking on you.
Click to expand...

Where did this happen

This isn't high school. Either stand by what you say and debate or don't waste the time of others. It's a pretty simple concept, ya know?
Click to expand...

It is a concept that you would do well to heed. I stand by my beliefs, unless you can demonstrate otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top