The fear of this site being religious
The fear of this site being religious
You cannot have it both ways - to argue that life cannot come anything inorganic, yet base your belief on the idea that man was made from a handful of dust, with a bit of magic.
The fear of this site being religious
FourPart;1496117 wrote: You cannot have it both ways - to argue that life cannot come anything inorganic, yet base your belief on the idea that man was made from a handful of dust, with a bit of magic.
Are you suggesting that dirt is inorganic?
Are you suggesting that dirt is inorganic?
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
The fear of this site being religious
FourPart;1496117 wrote: You cannot have it both ways - to argue that life cannot come anything inorganic, yet base your belief on the idea that man was made from a handful of dust, with a bit of magic.
Well your point is well taken, you make a good argument on that. What I am saying is that God made man through an instantaneous creation, I disagree that the human body created itself over a number of years in the millions. How God did it, and how and why he used dirt, I just don't know. I don't see how in the world, dirt has anything to do with the human body, so your point must be considered with merit. Conversely, I don't see how in the world of reason, that a human body could construct itself and over a period of time, construct a heart, a liver, intestines, a brain, eyes and a nose, legs and a chest, toes and fingers, a digestive system, lungs and a stomach; and then self create and become conscious is a real leap in that magic you are hinting at.
Its the same logic that wants to get away with saying that a ford pick up truck could create itself over a period of time , without there being someone to create it in a matter of days. Same thing; same expectation, except the human body is more complex. You are calling for an extreme revolution in thinking and reasoning when you claim things can create themselves. And in my view, you cannot have it that way.
Well your point is well taken, you make a good argument on that. What I am saying is that God made man through an instantaneous creation, I disagree that the human body created itself over a number of years in the millions. How God did it, and how and why he used dirt, I just don't know. I don't see how in the world, dirt has anything to do with the human body, so your point must be considered with merit. Conversely, I don't see how in the world of reason, that a human body could construct itself and over a period of time, construct a heart, a liver, intestines, a brain, eyes and a nose, legs and a chest, toes and fingers, a digestive system, lungs and a stomach; and then self create and become conscious is a real leap in that magic you are hinting at.
Its the same logic that wants to get away with saying that a ford pick up truck could create itself over a period of time , without there being someone to create it in a matter of days. Same thing; same expectation, except the human body is more complex. You are calling for an extreme revolution in thinking and reasoning when you claim things can create themselves. And in my view, you cannot have it that way.
The fear of this site being religious
Dust, not dirt. Not quite the same thing.
I also find it difficult to understand why most Creationists find it so difficult to concede that perhaps God might have intended life to evolve from the Primordial Slime he placed there. As for the true origin of that Primordial Slime, well that would be another question, but with the overwhelming evidence to support evolution, why are Creationists so opposed to the idea that God might have planned it that way? When an artist buys a palette, canvas, paints & brushes, he doesn't know what the end result will be. Many artists will never even quite consider their work as being finished. As with evolution, it can continue to be improved upon.
I also find it difficult to understand why most Creationists find it so difficult to concede that perhaps God might have intended life to evolve from the Primordial Slime he placed there. As for the true origin of that Primordial Slime, well that would be another question, but with the overwhelming evidence to support evolution, why are Creationists so opposed to the idea that God might have planned it that way? When an artist buys a palette, canvas, paints & brushes, he doesn't know what the end result will be. Many artists will never even quite consider their work as being finished. As with evolution, it can continue to be improved upon.
The fear of this site being religious
I think it depends on the thing being considered, I think God did intend on some things to evolve , such as pupi to butterfly; but not humans. The only thing I believe evolves in humans is consciousness. I don't see how Atheist concede that consciousness created itself ; that is incredible assumption. How can you make the case that conscious decided before it was conscious, to one day become conscious inside of a human body that created itself, then they decided to join in a cohesion and community together! As if consciousness made an incursion on reality, and decided on the unexisting side of nothing, to place itself into reality and do so inside of a human body that grew itself! Thus now we must say from that point, that neuro-science planted itself inside of empty nothing, and then exploded into this side of reality, with all the seeds and roots of anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, molecular biology of nerves and nervous tissue, and preplanned on its unexisting side, to now come out into life and help the human body and enter into relation with its behavior and learning, and from that came your claim to continue to be improved upon.
I don't agree with that. That is not creative justice, its incredible assumption.
I don't agree with that. That is not creative justice, its incredible assumption.
The fear of this site being religious
Conciousness is a relative concept. At which level does conciousness become recognisable as such? The very basis of conciousness lies in the instinct to survive. Plants evolve to create defensive thorns & toxins to provide for their survival. They evolve specific flowers to attract specific types of insect for pollination. That, in itself is a basic form of an instinct for survival. Then come things like corals & other basic shellfish, which draw inward at the slightest threat of attack. And so on, up the scale. Then you start coming to the predators such as the big cats, who watch & analyse their prey, planning their attack. Then there are dolphins / killer whales who work together on hunts, not only as a team, but they actually train their young in the techniques. They are also recognised as having the most intricate level of communication in the natural world. Chimps & Gorillas have been taught to communicate in sign language - some have even been known to tell jokes, as well as doing practical jokes (like tying someone's shoelaces together & then signing "chase me"). How do you define conciousness? At what level does it become so? Do you believe that the Gorilla does not have a conciousness, despite referring to itself as 'me'?
As far as I'm aware, the only difference between the conciousness of humans & the rest of the animal kingdom is that humans are the only species that make up stories to try & explain what they don't understand. Animals just accept that they don't understand it.
As far as I'm aware, the only difference between the conciousness of humans & the rest of the animal kingdom is that humans are the only species that make up stories to try & explain what they don't understand. Animals just accept that they don't understand it.
The fear of this site being religious
I don't believe plants, cats , dolphins or whales evolved, they were created as is. Nor do I view the instinct of chimps as consciousness. Consciousness is self awareness on a human level, you know your name, your parents name, you know what city you are in , what street you live on, what school you went to. You know what race you are, how tall you are, what language you speak, how many fingers you have. You know you are Theist or Atheist, you know how to dress yourself, you are aware of what year it is, what day it is. Animals don't have that. You are aware of your behavior. You can explain things, animals cannot explain anything.
And someone has seriously misled you, Gorillas cannot speak.
And someone has seriously misled you, Gorillas cannot speak.
The fear of this site being religious
Mickiel;1496157 wrote: I don't believe plants, cats , dolphins or whales evolved, they were created as is. Nor do I view the instinct of chimps as consciousness. Consciousness is self awareness on a human level, you know your name, your parents name, you know what city you are in , what street you live on, what school you went to. You know what race you are, how tall you are, what language you speak, how many fingers you have. You know you are Theist or Atheist, you know how to dress yourself, you are aware of what year it is, what day it is. Animals don't have that. You are aware of your behavior. You can explain things, animals cannot explain anything.
And someone has seriously misled you, Gorillas cannot speak.
You are the one who has been misled.
And someone has seriously misled you, Gorillas cannot speak.
You are the one who has been misled.
The fear of this site being religious
FourPart;1496297 wrote: You are the one who has been misled.
This is really sad; you are believing myths and fables, if you think monkeys can speak.
This is really sad; you are believing myths and fables, if you think monkeys can speak.
The fear of this site being religious
Mickiel;1496311 wrote: This is really sad; you are believing myths and fables, if you think monkeys can speak.
1 Gorillas are not monkeys.
2. Did I ever say they spoke? I said they communicated.
3. Did you actually watch the video? It demonstrates just how well gorillas CAN communicate, not only with use of grammar & context, but creatively, devising signs for new words that they hadn't been taught (eg "Scratch-Comb" for "Hairbrush", and "Browse" for in-between meal snacks). This wasn't just a matter of tricks having been learned, but actual communicative language.
None so blind... I provide the proof. You deny it. Typical M.O. of a Creationist.
1 Gorillas are not monkeys.
2. Did I ever say they spoke? I said they communicated.
3. Did you actually watch the video? It demonstrates just how well gorillas CAN communicate, not only with use of grammar & context, but creatively, devising signs for new words that they hadn't been taught (eg "Scratch-Comb" for "Hairbrush", and "Browse" for in-between meal snacks). This wasn't just a matter of tricks having been learned, but actual communicative language.
None so blind... I provide the proof. You deny it. Typical M.O. of a Creationist.
The fear of this site being religious
FourPart;1496318 wrote: 1 Gorillas are not monkeys.
2. Did I ever say they spoke? I said they communicated.
3. Did you actually watch the video? It demonstrates just how well gorillas CAN communicate, not only with use of grammar & context, but creatively, devising signs for new words that they hadn't been taught (eg "Scratch-Comb" for "Hairbrush", and "Browse" for in-between meal snacks). This wasn't just a matter of tricks having been learned, but actual communicative language.
None so blind... I provide the proof. You deny it. Typical M.O. of a Creationist.
As I said, Gorillas cannot speak; there is no video that shows them speaking. And your strength of will cannot display what there is absolutely no evidence of.
2. Did I ever say they spoke? I said they communicated.
3. Did you actually watch the video? It demonstrates just how well gorillas CAN communicate, not only with use of grammar & context, but creatively, devising signs for new words that they hadn't been taught (eg "Scratch-Comb" for "Hairbrush", and "Browse" for in-between meal snacks). This wasn't just a matter of tricks having been learned, but actual communicative language.
None so blind... I provide the proof. You deny it. Typical M.O. of a Creationist.
As I said, Gorillas cannot speak; there is no video that shows them speaking. And your strength of will cannot display what there is absolutely no evidence of.
The fear of this site being religious
Mickiel;1496322 wrote: As I said, Gorillas cannot speak; there is no video that shows them speaking. And your strength of will cannot display what there is absolutely no evidence of.
I never said they can speak either. I said they can communicate. Your assertion would also apply to someone who is deaf & dumb. Does that mean they can't communicate either? Or do you have the same contempt for those who are unable to speak as you clearly do for intelligent primates?
I never said they can speak either. I said they can communicate. Your assertion would also apply to someone who is deaf & dumb. Does that mean they can't communicate either? Or do you have the same contempt for those who are unable to speak as you clearly do for intelligent primates?
The fear of this site being religious
FourPart;1496326 wrote: I never said they can speak either. I said they can communicate. Your assertion would also apply to someone who is deaf & dumb. Does that mean they can't communicate either? Or do you have the same contempt for those who are unable to speak as you clearly do for intelligent primates?
I have no contempt for primates, I just hold no illusions about them either. Why should I waste my time trying to equate apes with humans? Why make a monkey out of man?
I have no contempt for primates, I just hold no illusions about them either. Why should I waste my time trying to equate apes with humans? Why make a monkey out of man?
The fear of this site being religious
Mickiel;1496328 wrote: I have no contempt for primates, I just hold no illusions about them either. Why should I waste my time trying to equate apes with humans? Why make a monkey out of man?
So did you actually watch the video?
So did you actually watch the video?
The fear of this site being religious
FourPart;1496337 wrote: So did you actually watch the video?
The video is not the news here, your mind really believes that apes can speak; that is the news. That is the witness I am screaming, and its why I cannot be Atheist; because it wraps the mind into fantasy.
The video is not the news here, your mind really believes that apes can speak; that is the news. That is the witness I am screaming, and its why I cannot be Atheist; because it wraps the mind into fantasy.
The fear of this site being religious
What made god?
The fear of this site being religious
gmc;1496354 wrote: What made god?
I think God made parts of himself. That's all I know.
I think God made parts of himself. That's all I know.
The fear of this site being religious
Mickiel;1496357 wrote: I think God made parts of himself. That's all I know.
On other words you don't know but choose to make something up. The difference between a theist and an atheist is that the former doesn't know but chooses to believe in an obviously made up story while the latter also doesn't know but does not choose to believe in an obvbiously made up story.
On other words you don't know but choose to make something up. The difference between a theist and an atheist is that the former doesn't know but chooses to believe in an obviously made up story while the latter also doesn't know but does not choose to believe in an obvbiously made up story.
The fear of this site being religious
gmc;1496369 wrote: On other words you don't know but choose to make something up. The difference between a theist and an atheist is that the former doesn't know but chooses to believe in an obviously made up story while the latter also doesn't know but does not choose to believe in an obvbiously made up story.
I told you what I know, God made parts of himself.
I told you what I know, God made parts of himself.
The fear of this site being religious
Mickiel;1496370 wrote: I told you what I know, God made parts of himself.
What you said was
posted by mickiel
I think God made parts of himself. That's all I know.
You don't knowthat he did you think that he did, in other words you have decided to believe that he made parts of hinself. how did you arrive at that concluscion?
What you said was
posted by mickiel
I think God made parts of himself. That's all I know.
You don't knowthat he did you think that he did, in other words you have decided to believe that he made parts of hinself. how did you arrive at that concluscion?
The fear of this site being religious
gmc;1496373 wrote: What you said was
posted by mickiel
You don't knowthat he did you think that he did, in other words you have decided to believe that he made parts of hinself. how did you arrive at that concluscion?
From different hints in the bible of course, such as in Job 40:10, where God was describing to Job things he had done and can do. One thing of interest that I noticed was verse 10, where he was telling Job to do the things he had done, "Deck now thyself with majesty and excellency, and array yourself with glory and beauty." In other words, these were actually things that God had done to himself, or created within himself. And I figure if he did that much, then he created other parts of himself as well.
posted by mickiel
You don't knowthat he did you think that he did, in other words you have decided to believe that he made parts of hinself. how did you arrive at that concluscion?
From different hints in the bible of course, such as in Job 40:10, where God was describing to Job things he had done and can do. One thing of interest that I noticed was verse 10, where he was telling Job to do the things he had done, "Deck now thyself with majesty and excellency, and array yourself with glory and beauty." In other words, these were actually things that God had done to himself, or created within himself. And I figure if he did that much, then he created other parts of himself as well.
The fear of this site being religious
So, it is quite acceptable to believe the word of a story book, thousands of years old, put together by bits & pieces of various scraps of folklore, with no logical sense whatsoever & claim that you know something to be true on the basis of that as 'evidence', but you consider up to date video documentary evidence charting the life story of a gorilla & how she came to learn how to communicate with sign language, using full grammar & syntax. Not only that, but another one who was somewhat older when he was adopted, but still picked up the language.
Again, it seems apparent that you have refused to watch the evidence, as if you had you wouldn't be able to deny its validity. No, gorillas can't speak. I never said they could. You're the only one who has made that claim. I have only said that they can communicate. Speech is the modulation of sound, which gorillas are incapable of. That doesn't mean they can't communicate.
Do you really get how ridiculous you sound by putting folklore above video evidence?
Again, it seems apparent that you have refused to watch the evidence, as if you had you wouldn't be able to deny its validity. No, gorillas can't speak. I never said they could. You're the only one who has made that claim. I have only said that they can communicate. Speech is the modulation of sound, which gorillas are incapable of. That doesn't mean they can't communicate.
Do you really get how ridiculous you sound by putting folklore above video evidence?
The fear of this site being religious
FourPart;1496380 wrote:
Do you really get how ridiculous you sound by putting folklore above video evidence?
There is no video evidence that Gorillas can speak. And there is no video evidence that humans are from the bloodline of non speaking apes!
Do you really get how ridiculous you sound by putting folklore above video evidence?
There is no video evidence that Gorillas can speak. And there is no video evidence that humans are from the bloodline of non speaking apes!
The fear of this site being religious
Mickiel;1496382 wrote: There is no video evidence that Gorillas can speak. And there is no video evidence that humans are from the bloodline of non speaking apes!
Have you watched the video? I doubt you have. You are arguing on the basis of something you know nothing about.
Also, you have changed the subject. You don't seem to understand evolution either, it seems. If you have a tree which has a Red flower on one branch and a Yellow one on another, the Red one didn't evolve from the Yellow one (or vice versa). However, they both originate from the same stock. Like it or not, humans are just another genus of Ape. We share a common ancestor. That much has been proved in countless DNA research demonstrations. It is beyond doubt. Denying it in the face of all evidence won't change that fact. In the same way as you deny that gorillas can communicate, while refusing to even watch, let alone accept the video evidence, you are also denying terraquads (and growing) of Scientific proof, simply because it goes against what your story book says.
Have you watched the video? I doubt you have. You are arguing on the basis of something you know nothing about.
Also, you have changed the subject. You don't seem to understand evolution either, it seems. If you have a tree which has a Red flower on one branch and a Yellow one on another, the Red one didn't evolve from the Yellow one (or vice versa). However, they both originate from the same stock. Like it or not, humans are just another genus of Ape. We share a common ancestor. That much has been proved in countless DNA research demonstrations. It is beyond doubt. Denying it in the face of all evidence won't change that fact. In the same way as you deny that gorillas can communicate, while refusing to even watch, let alone accept the video evidence, you are also denying terraquads (and growing) of Scientific proof, simply because it goes against what your story book says.
The fear of this site being religious
All animals can communicate, but only man has a spoken language. Humans alone can verbally speak in different languages and then write out those words on paper. We, and we alone are conscious in those manners.
And I know that just irritates you. But its nothing you can do about it. Humans are not continuous with the idiot bloodlines of non speaking apes.
And I know that just irritates you. But its nothing you can do about it. Humans are not continuous with the idiot bloodlines of non speaking apes.
The fear of this site being religious
This is how I see it;
Humans aren't monkeys. We aren't apes, either. · john hawks weblog
Humans aren't monkeys. We aren't apes, either. · john hawks weblog
The fear of this site being religious
Once again, you are trying to say that I have said something I haven't. I have never said ANYTHING about gorillas, or any other kind of animal speaking VERBALLY. I referred ONLY to a gorilla COMMUNICATING using SIGN language. It is a SHARED language between Gorilla & Human.
It's seems strange that a Gorilla seems to have more ability to communicate a point using sign language than I am having with you in plain written language.
It's seems strange that a Gorilla seems to have more ability to communicate a point using sign language than I am having with you in plain written language.
The fear of this site being religious
Once again, you are trying to say that I have said something I haven't. I have never said ANYTHING about gorillas, or any other kind of animal speaking VERBALLY. I referred ONLY to a gorilla COMMUNICATING using SIGN language. It is a SHARED language between Gorilla & Human.
It's seems strange that a Gorilla seems to have more ability to communicate a point using sign language than I am having with you in plain written language.
It's seems strange that a Gorilla seems to have more ability to communicate a point using sign language than I am having with you in plain written language.
The fear of this site being religious
FourPart;1496392 wrote: Once again, you are trying to say that I have said something I haven't. I have never said ANYTHING about gorillas, or any other kind of animal speaking VERBALLY. I referred ONLY to a gorilla COMMUNICATING using SIGN language. It is a SHARED language between Gorilla & Human.
It's seems strange that a Gorilla seems to have more ability to communicate a point using sign language than I am having with you in plain written language.
Well bring the Gorilla to the thread.
It's seems strange that a Gorilla seems to have more ability to communicate a point using sign language than I am having with you in plain written language.
Well bring the Gorilla to the thread.
The fear of this site being religious
Mickiel;1496395 wrote: Well bring the Gorilla to the thread.
I did - in the form of a video - but you refuse to watch it.
I did - in the form of a video - but you refuse to watch it.
The fear of this site being religious
FourPart;1496397 wrote: I did - in the form of a video - but you refuse to watch it.
Well I don't see in the video what you see; I don't see in life what you see. I can get no more from that video than you could from the bible.
Well I don't see in the video what you see; I don't see in life what you see. I can get no more from that video than you could from the bible.
The fear of this site being religious
Mickiel;1496395 wrote: Well bring the Gorilla to the thread.
If he did you'd probably declare it to be unnatural and have it stoned to death or something.
posted by mickiel
From different hints in the bible of course, such as in Job 40:10, where God was describing to Job things he had done and can do. One thing of interest that I noticed was verse 10, where he was telling Job to do the things he had done, "Deck now thyself with majesty and excellency, and array yourself with glory and beauty." In other words, these were actually things that God had done to himself, or created within himself. And I figure if he did that much, then he created other parts of himself as well.
Why do you think the bible is any kind of authority? Apart from you wanting to believe itto be so there is no evidence that it is the word of god or is nothing more than a collection of stories some with a factual content most clearly made up like for instancde the genesis myth in all it's variations.
Job is a bad example your everloving god let's satan kill his children in order to prove ro satan hiw faithful he wuld remain. bit hard on the chuildren don't you think? What kind of sadistic god is ity you worship/
If he did you'd probably declare it to be unnatural and have it stoned to death or something.
posted by mickiel
From different hints in the bible of course, such as in Job 40:10, where God was describing to Job things he had done and can do. One thing of interest that I noticed was verse 10, where he was telling Job to do the things he had done, "Deck now thyself with majesty and excellency, and array yourself with glory and beauty." In other words, these were actually things that God had done to himself, or created within himself. And I figure if he did that much, then he created other parts of himself as well.
Why do you think the bible is any kind of authority? Apart from you wanting to believe itto be so there is no evidence that it is the word of god or is nothing more than a collection of stories some with a factual content most clearly made up like for instancde the genesis myth in all it's variations.
Job is a bad example your everloving god let's satan kill his children in order to prove ro satan hiw faithful he wuld remain. bit hard on the chuildren don't you think? What kind of sadistic god is ity you worship/
The fear of this site being religious
gmc;1496405 wrote: If he did you'd probably declare it to be unnatural and have it stoned to death or something.
posted by mickiel
Why do you think the bible is any kind of authority? Apart from you wanting to believe itto be so there is no evidence that it is the word of god or is nothing more than a collection of stories some with a factual content most clearly made up like for instancde the genesis myth in all it's variations.
Job is a bad example your everloving god let's satan kill his children in order to prove ro satan hiw faithful he wuld remain. bit hard on the chuildren don't you think? What kind of sadistic god is ity you worship/
In my view, you are not a true Atheist. A true Atheist would not insult a god they do not believe exist. By your insulting a god you claim does not exist, you give him existence; why insult an imaginary being?
I long for the old school Atheist, that I used to debate ; they were the true Atheist, in my view. You modernday Atheist are all too easy; no challenge to the mind at all. You make too many foolish mistakes.
posted by mickiel
Why do you think the bible is any kind of authority? Apart from you wanting to believe itto be so there is no evidence that it is the word of god or is nothing more than a collection of stories some with a factual content most clearly made up like for instancde the genesis myth in all it's variations.
Job is a bad example your everloving god let's satan kill his children in order to prove ro satan hiw faithful he wuld remain. bit hard on the chuildren don't you think? What kind of sadistic god is ity you worship/
In my view, you are not a true Atheist. A true Atheist would not insult a god they do not believe exist. By your insulting a god you claim does not exist, you give him existence; why insult an imaginary being?
I long for the old school Atheist, that I used to debate ; they were the true Atheist, in my view. You modernday Atheist are all too easy; no challenge to the mind at all. You make too many foolish mistakes.
The fear of this site being religious
Mickiel;1496426 wrote: In my view, you are not a true Atheist. A true Atheist would not insult a god they do not believe exist. By your insulting a god you claim does not exist, you give him existence; why insult an imaginary being?
I long for the old school Atheist, that I used to debate ; they were the true Atheist, in my view. You modernday Atheist are all too easy; no challenge to the mind at all. You make too many foolish mistakes.
You're dodging tne question as usual. Why do you believe the bible is any kind of authority? Do you believe it is the word of god if so why?
If you can't answer it's either because you have no good reason for believing it to be the word of god, you don't believe it is the word of god or you've never actually thought about it and just believe what you have been told.
I long for the old school Atheist, that I used to debate ; they were the true Atheist, in my view. You modernday Atheist are all too easy; no challenge to the mind at all. You make too many foolish mistakes.
You're dodging tne question as usual. Why do you believe the bible is any kind of authority? Do you believe it is the word of god if so why?
If you can't answer it's either because you have no good reason for believing it to be the word of god, you don't believe it is the word of god or you've never actually thought about it and just believe what you have been told.
The fear of this site being religious
gmc;1496431 wrote: You're dodging tne question as usual. Why do you believe the bible is any kind of authority? Do you believe it is the word of god if so why?
If you can't answer it's either because you have no good reason for believing it to be the word of god, you don't believe it is the word of god or you've never actually thought about it and just believe what you have been told.
You actually think your questions are so profound, that I need to doge them?
I like the bible, that is reason enough for me. It speaks to my consciousness and gives me living insights to reality. It opens me like no other book.
It is the only book that has 40 authors; none of whom compared notes, they wrote it over a span of 1500 years, in 3 different languages , and it ended being one of the first books ever printed in modern times. Its been a best seller for over 400 years, simply incredible! Its the most shop lifted book in history. The only book used to swear in Kings and Presidents. The only book used as part of the Hotel industry in their room planning. Its the one book Atheist fear. And its why you question me about the book, because it threatens your consciousness. The bible is a living book and has influenced humanity and history like NO OTHER book! That's why its a shadow looming over you.
No, I won't answer your questions, I'll doge them because I would rather you think with your mind, and not with mine. I have answered those common questions for years here, and all the answers do is drip down the Atheist back like water on a duck.
If you can't answer it's either because you have no good reason for believing it to be the word of god, you don't believe it is the word of god or you've never actually thought about it and just believe what you have been told.
You actually think your questions are so profound, that I need to doge them?
I like the bible, that is reason enough for me. It speaks to my consciousness and gives me living insights to reality. It opens me like no other book.
It is the only book that has 40 authors; none of whom compared notes, they wrote it over a span of 1500 years, in 3 different languages , and it ended being one of the first books ever printed in modern times. Its been a best seller for over 400 years, simply incredible! Its the most shop lifted book in history. The only book used to swear in Kings and Presidents. The only book used as part of the Hotel industry in their room planning. Its the one book Atheist fear. And its why you question me about the book, because it threatens your consciousness. The bible is a living book and has influenced humanity and history like NO OTHER book! That's why its a shadow looming over you.
No, I won't answer your questions, I'll doge them because I would rather you think with your mind, and not with mine. I have answered those common questions for years here, and all the answers do is drip down the Atheist back like water on a duck.
The fear of this site being religious
No, I won't answer your questions, I'll doge them because I would rather you think with your mind, and not with mine. I have answered those common questions for years here, and all the answers do is drip down the Atheist back like water on a duck.
posted by mickiel
I like the bible, that is reason enough for me. It speaks to my consciousness and gives me living insights to reality. It opens me like no other book.
was that so hard?
Now do you think it is the word of god?
PS have you read any other books?
posted by mickiel
I like the bible, that is reason enough for me. It speaks to my consciousness and gives me living insights to reality. It opens me like no other book.
was that so hard?
Now do you think it is the word of god?
PS have you read any other books?
The fear of this site being religious
gmc;1496446 wrote: posted by mickiel
was that so hard?
Now do you think it is the word of god?
PS have you read any other books?
Well I never said I would not pick on you.
I do think the bible is the actual word of God to mankind. A message for humanity that was God inspired.
I have read two books recently; " Pagan Christianity", by Frank Viola, and " The Origin of Consciousness, breakdown of the bicameral mind", by Julian Jaynes.
was that so hard?
Now do you think it is the word of god?
PS have you read any other books?
Well I never said I would not pick on you.
I do think the bible is the actual word of God to mankind. A message for humanity that was God inspired.
I have read two books recently; " Pagan Christianity", by Frank Viola, and " The Origin of Consciousness, breakdown of the bicameral mind", by Julian Jaynes.
The fear of this site being religious
If you had watched the video you would have seen that the single focus is on how Koko was raised from a baby to learn to communicate using sign language. That was to sole topic of the documentary. It's not just what I saw in it - it's what the entire documentary was about.
Just because you like a book doesn't mean you have to believe in it. I might like the books of Hans Christian Anderson, or the Brothers Grimm. They tell some good & inspiring stories. I don't believe them to be true either. It's the same with the Bible - just a collection of some good & inspiring stories. You claim that none of the authors interacted with each other. Hardly surprising, seeing they lived 100s of years apart, yet all claim to be eyewitness records of things taken verbatim. Word for word records of incidents where there was no 3rd party to take notes (eg The Temptation, Moses & the Talking Bush), the things that God said before anything else existed (And God said... Says who?). It is not a fear that Atheists have for the Bible - it's a contempt of it & the idiots that not only believe in it, but continue to brainwash their children & anyone else they can into believing in it. As for being the most shoplifted book - that says a lot, doesn't it? So much for "Thou shalt not steal". It just shows the hypocrisy in it.
Just because you like a book doesn't mean you have to believe in it. I might like the books of Hans Christian Anderson, or the Brothers Grimm. They tell some good & inspiring stories. I don't believe them to be true either. It's the same with the Bible - just a collection of some good & inspiring stories. You claim that none of the authors interacted with each other. Hardly surprising, seeing they lived 100s of years apart, yet all claim to be eyewitness records of things taken verbatim. Word for word records of incidents where there was no 3rd party to take notes (eg The Temptation, Moses & the Talking Bush), the things that God said before anything else existed (And God said... Says who?). It is not a fear that Atheists have for the Bible - it's a contempt of it & the idiots that not only believe in it, but continue to brainwash their children & anyone else they can into believing in it. As for being the most shoplifted book - that says a lot, doesn't it? So much for "Thou shalt not steal". It just shows the hypocrisy in it.
The fear of this site being religious
FourPart;1496458 wrote: If you had watched the video you would have seen that the single focus is on how Koko was raised from a baby to learn to communicate using sign language. That was to sole topic of the documentary. It's not just what I saw in it - it's what the entire documentary was about.
Just because you like a book doesn't mean you have to believe in it. I might like the books of Hans Christian Anderson, or the Brothers Grimm. They tell some good & inspiring stories. I don't believe them to be true either. It's the same with the Bible - just a collection of some good & inspiring stories. You claim that none of the authors interacted with each other. Hardly surprising, seeing they lived 100s of years apart, yet all claim to be eyewitness records of things taken verbatim. Word for word records of incidents where there was no 3rd party to take notes (eg The Temptation, Moses & the Talking Bush), the things that God said before anything else existed (And God said... Says who?). It is not a fear that Atheists have for the Bible - it's a contempt of it & the idiots that not only believe in it, but continue to brainwash their children & anyone else they can into believing in it. As for being the most shoplifted book - that says a lot, doesn't it? So much for "Thou shalt not steal". It just shows the hypocrisy in it.
I like the Brothers Grimm myself, and I like this:
Scientific Facts in The Bible
Just because you like a book doesn't mean you have to believe in it. I might like the books of Hans Christian Anderson, or the Brothers Grimm. They tell some good & inspiring stories. I don't believe them to be true either. It's the same with the Bible - just a collection of some good & inspiring stories. You claim that none of the authors interacted with each other. Hardly surprising, seeing they lived 100s of years apart, yet all claim to be eyewitness records of things taken verbatim. Word for word records of incidents where there was no 3rd party to take notes (eg The Temptation, Moses & the Talking Bush), the things that God said before anything else existed (And God said... Says who?). It is not a fear that Atheists have for the Bible - it's a contempt of it & the idiots that not only believe in it, but continue to brainwash their children & anyone else they can into believing in it. As for being the most shoplifted book - that says a lot, doesn't it? So much for "Thou shalt not steal". It just shows the hypocrisy in it.
I like the Brothers Grimm myself, and I like this:
Scientific Facts in The Bible
The fear of this site being religious
Mickiel;1496459 wrote: I like the Brothers Grimm myself, and I like this:
Scientific Facts in The Bible
Nothing in that link has anything to do with Scientific "Facts", rather than grasping at straws - changing words in order to change the context & to change the meaning. Claiming that "Singing Stars" refers to the radio waves emitted by the stars? Please! Air & water have weight? Well, duuhh! The Egyptians were using hydraulics to move great weights thousands of years before the Bible is supposed to have existed. They used sails on boats. "Giving weight to the wind". That's no great revelation of Scientific fact. The fact that Newton formed his Gravitational Theory was not that big a deal. People knew that things fell to the ground long before he conceived the idea. Surprisingly there are even a few references to things falling in the Bible. I suppose you can add that to your list of Scientific Facts - that the Bible mentions things falling to the ground. The page refers to stars that are distances like 300 million light years away - yet we can see them. They could see them in Biblical times as well. That means that they were seeing the light given out by those stars 300 million years previously. Wait a minute, though. That can't be so, can it? The Bible says that the entire Universe is less than 6000 years old.
It refers to things "which cannot be seen", and uses that as evidence that the Bible was talking of the sub-atomic. Is this really supposed to be a serious website, or is it a parody of Creationism?
Scientific Facts in The Bible
Nothing in that link has anything to do with Scientific "Facts", rather than grasping at straws - changing words in order to change the context & to change the meaning. Claiming that "Singing Stars" refers to the radio waves emitted by the stars? Please! Air & water have weight? Well, duuhh! The Egyptians were using hydraulics to move great weights thousands of years before the Bible is supposed to have existed. They used sails on boats. "Giving weight to the wind". That's no great revelation of Scientific fact. The fact that Newton formed his Gravitational Theory was not that big a deal. People knew that things fell to the ground long before he conceived the idea. Surprisingly there are even a few references to things falling in the Bible. I suppose you can add that to your list of Scientific Facts - that the Bible mentions things falling to the ground. The page refers to stars that are distances like 300 million light years away - yet we can see them. They could see them in Biblical times as well. That means that they were seeing the light given out by those stars 300 million years previously. Wait a minute, though. That can't be so, can it? The Bible says that the entire Universe is less than 6000 years old.
It refers to things "which cannot be seen", and uses that as evidence that the Bible was talking of the sub-atomic. Is this really supposed to be a serious website, or is it a parody of Creationism?
The fear of this site being religious
FourPart;1496461 wrote: . That can't be so, can it? The Bible says that the entire Universe is less than 6000 years old.
?
The bible nowhere states that the universe is less than 6,000 years old; that is what a misinformed Atheist is claiming it says.
?
The bible nowhere states that the universe is less than 6,000 years old; that is what a misinformed Atheist is claiming it says.
The fear of this site being religious
Mickiel;1496465 wrote: The bible nowhere states that the universe is less than 6,000 years old; that is what a misinformed Atheist is claiming it says.
I have a Bible here that has the dates based on the generations - Date of Creation (right on the first page, funny enough) = 4004 B.C. I know different scholars have different opinions (which says something in itself about the incongruities in what should be a simple mathematical equation), but MY Bible says 4004 B.C. Therefore, the Bible DOES say that, and if you like I can even scan it & prove it to you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dating_creation
I have a Bible here that has the dates based on the generations - Date of Creation (right on the first page, funny enough) = 4004 B.C. I know different scholars have different opinions (which says something in itself about the incongruities in what should be a simple mathematical equation), but MY Bible says 4004 B.C. Therefore, the Bible DOES say that, and if you like I can even scan it & prove it to you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dating_creation
The fear of this site being religious
FourPart;1496468 wrote: I have a Bible here that has the dates based on the generations - Date of Creation (right on the first page, funny enough) = 4004 B.C. I know different scholars have different opinions (which says something in itself about the incongruities in what should be a simple mathematical equation), but MY Bible says 4004 B.C. Therefore, the Bible DOES say that, and if you like I can even scan it & prove it to you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dating_creation
The bible does not give a creation date; John 1:1-2 gives the oldest time set; it says, " In the beginning." This predates Genesis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dating_creation
The bible does not give a creation date; John 1:1-2 gives the oldest time set; it says, " In the beginning." This predates Genesis.
The fear of this site being religious
Mickiel;1496465 wrote: The bible nowhere states that the universe is less than 6,000 years old; that is what a misinformed Atheist is claiming it says.
Actually it wasnj't a misinformed atheist who claimed the earth was less than 6,000 years old it was a highly respected biblical scholar bishop usher.
https://answersingenesis.org/bible-time ... n-4004-bc/
he wasn't an idiot but if you only read one book and accept it as the infallible word of god you come to some very strange world views.
posted by mickiel
I do think the bible is the actual word of God to mankind. A message for humanity that was God inspired.
Why?
Actually it wasnj't a misinformed atheist who claimed the earth was less than 6,000 years old it was a highly respected biblical scholar bishop usher.
https://answersingenesis.org/bible-time ... n-4004-bc/
he wasn't an idiot but if you only read one book and accept it as the infallible word of god you come to some very strange world views.
posted by mickiel
I do think the bible is the actual word of God to mankind. A message for humanity that was God inspired.
Why?
The fear of this site being religious
gmc; wrote: .
Why?
Its not easy to get in God's head, but I will explain my theory. I think God actually exist in another dimension; a very powerful being. I think one day long ago, he actually gave birth to Jesus, called " The Word" then. I then believe these two began an incredible expansion in their reality and they created all kinds of beings, I think millions of them; some of which we know as angels. I think God was so pleased with how Jesus turned out, it made him want more actual children; and that is when he thought of humanity being the beginning phase of that incredible birthing process. I think the entire universe is just the incubator of humanity being brought through this great process.
Of course God did not have to key humanity in on this, he could have left us completely blind to it. But he decided to actually bring Jesus into our reality for a short time, and to have a written testimony of his plans given to humanity. Kind of like an announcement. And I think that is what the bible is. God announcing why we exist, and his plans for our future. Why God decided to do it this way, I have just a few ideas.
But the bible reveals that we all are in his plans; all of us will be in his kingdom, and we will be with him forever.
And that is the best thing I have ever read about humanity. The bible explains how we got here, why and what's in our future.
Why?
Its not easy to get in God's head, but I will explain my theory. I think God actually exist in another dimension; a very powerful being. I think one day long ago, he actually gave birth to Jesus, called " The Word" then. I then believe these two began an incredible expansion in their reality and they created all kinds of beings, I think millions of them; some of which we know as angels. I think God was so pleased with how Jesus turned out, it made him want more actual children; and that is when he thought of humanity being the beginning phase of that incredible birthing process. I think the entire universe is just the incubator of humanity being brought through this great process.
Of course God did not have to key humanity in on this, he could have left us completely blind to it. But he decided to actually bring Jesus into our reality for a short time, and to have a written testimony of his plans given to humanity. Kind of like an announcement. And I think that is what the bible is. God announcing why we exist, and his plans for our future. Why God decided to do it this way, I have just a few ideas.
But the bible reveals that we all are in his plans; all of us will be in his kingdom, and we will be with him forever.
And that is the best thing I have ever read about humanity. The bible explains how we got here, why and what's in our future.
The fear of this site being religious
Mickiel;1496474 wrote: Its not easy to get in God's head, but I will explain my theory. I think God actually exist in another dimension; a very powerful being. I think one day long ago, he actually gave birth to Jesus, called " The Word" then. I then believe these two began an incredible expansion in their reality and they created all kinds of beings, I think millions of them; some of which we know as angels. I think God was so pleased with how Jesus turned out, it made him want more actual children; and that is when he thought of humanity being the beginning phase of that incredible birthing process. I think the entire universe is just the incubator of humanity being brought through this great process.
Of course God did not have to key humanity in on this, he could have left us completely blind to it. But he decided to actually bring Jesus into our reality for a short time, and to have a written testimony of his plans given to humanity. Kind of like an announcement. And I think that is what the bible is. God announcing why we exist, and his plans for our future. Why God decided to do it this way, I have just a few ideas.
But the bible reveals that we all are in his plans; all of us will be in his kingdom, and we will be with him forever.
And that is the best thing I have ever read about humanity. The bible explains how we got here, why and what's in our future.
Why do you think the bible is the word of god? Do you just choose to believe it or do you have any resons for believing it to be so.
Of course God did not have to key humanity in on this, he could have left us completely blind to it. But he decided to actually bring Jesus into our reality for a short time, and to have a written testimony of his plans given to humanity. Kind of like an announcement. And I think that is what the bible is. God announcing why we exist, and his plans for our future. Why God decided to do it this way, I have just a few ideas.
But the bible reveals that we all are in his plans; all of us will be in his kingdom, and we will be with him forever.
And that is the best thing I have ever read about humanity. The bible explains how we got here, why and what's in our future.
Why do you think the bible is the word of god? Do you just choose to believe it or do you have any resons for believing it to be so.
The fear of this site being religious
gmc;1496482 wrote: Why do you think the bible is the word of god? Do you just choose to believe it or do you have any resons for believing it to be so.
I don't think it will satisfy you for me to answer the question again, the first answer evades you, a second will only do the same.
I don't think it will satisfy you for me to answer the question again, the first answer evades you, a second will only do the same.
The fear of this site being religious
Mickiel;1496531 wrote: I don't think it will satisfy you for me to answer the question again, the first answer evades you, a second will only do the same.
I'm not trying to score points off you or anything like that nor is it a question of who is right or wrong. You post endless ramblings about your own interpretation of god and you use the bible as the source of all this wisdom but yet are incapable of explaining why you belive it to be the word of god yet it is the bible that you claim proves the existence of god.
I think God made parts of himself. That's all I know
From different hints in the bible of course, such as in Job 40:10, where God was describing to Job things he had done and can do. One thing of interest that I noticed was verse 10, where he was telling Job to do the things he had done, "Deck now thyself with majesty and excellency, and array yourself with glory and beauty." In other words, these were actually things that God had done to himself, or created within himself. And I figure if he did that much, then he created other parts of himself as well.
I like the bible, that is reason enough for me. It speaks to my consciousness and gives me living insights to reality. It opens me like no other book.
It is the only book that has 40 authors; none of whom compared notes, they wrote it over a span of 1500 years, in 3 different languages , and it ended being one of the first books ever printed in modern times. Its been a best seller for over 400 years, simply incredible! Its the most shop lifted book in history. The only book used to swear in Kings and Presidents. The only book used as part of the Hotel industry in their room planning. Its the one book Atheist fear. And its why you question me about the book, because it threatens your consciousness. The bible is a living book and has influenced humanity and history like NO OTHER book! That's why its a shadow looming over you.
No, I won't answer your questions, I'll doge them because I would rather you think with your mind, and not with mine. I have answered those common questions for years here, and all the answers do is drip down the Atheist back like water on a duck.
I do think the bible is the actual word of God to mankind. A message for humanity that was God inspired.
You haven't answered the question all you've said is I believe in god the bible tells me so and proves he exists but it's just something you want to believe and you can't justify the belef to anyone but yourself. That's fine if that's good enough for you but it's not good enough for anyone else. Why are you going on a discussion forum posting so much and them complaining that not everyone agrees with you. If your god exists only in your own mind then he doesn't exist for anyone else and the feeble answer that you believe and that should be enough is just that, feeble.
It's been the mantra of the religious since the beginning of time I believe and you should as well and no one should be allowed to disagree. You see the results of that attitude in the spanish inquisition and in modern times in isis and in the US where christian fundemantalists would establish a theorcracy if they could. you see it in India, malaysia and pakistan where religious fundamentalists are attacking those of otherv faiths or none. That's why atheists are fascinated by religion they realise if left alone the chaos it will bring to the world will affect everybody but the religious can't live and let live.
you get angry on this forum because you are being asked questions and made to think about things you prefer not to so you stamp your little foot and keep talking to yourself in the corner of the forum convincing your self no one else can understand. . This is a discussion forum with a religious section that is quite active, mainly that section consists of the rligious talking to themselves with the occasional non-believer metaphorically poking them with a stick to see if they are aware of the ouitside world yet. The only argument you have is "I believe it so it must be so".
If one person believes in an imaginary being we judge them insane if millions do we call it religion and non beliivers watch the madhouse around them with despair.
I'm not trying to score points off you or anything like that nor is it a question of who is right or wrong. You post endless ramblings about your own interpretation of god and you use the bible as the source of all this wisdom but yet are incapable of explaining why you belive it to be the word of god yet it is the bible that you claim proves the existence of god.
I think God made parts of himself. That's all I know
From different hints in the bible of course, such as in Job 40:10, where God was describing to Job things he had done and can do. One thing of interest that I noticed was verse 10, where he was telling Job to do the things he had done, "Deck now thyself with majesty and excellency, and array yourself with glory and beauty." In other words, these were actually things that God had done to himself, or created within himself. And I figure if he did that much, then he created other parts of himself as well.
I like the bible, that is reason enough for me. It speaks to my consciousness and gives me living insights to reality. It opens me like no other book.
It is the only book that has 40 authors; none of whom compared notes, they wrote it over a span of 1500 years, in 3 different languages , and it ended being one of the first books ever printed in modern times. Its been a best seller for over 400 years, simply incredible! Its the most shop lifted book in history. The only book used to swear in Kings and Presidents. The only book used as part of the Hotel industry in their room planning. Its the one book Atheist fear. And its why you question me about the book, because it threatens your consciousness. The bible is a living book and has influenced humanity and history like NO OTHER book! That's why its a shadow looming over you.
No, I won't answer your questions, I'll doge them because I would rather you think with your mind, and not with mine. I have answered those common questions for years here, and all the answers do is drip down the Atheist back like water on a duck.
I do think the bible is the actual word of God to mankind. A message for humanity that was God inspired.
You haven't answered the question all you've said is I believe in god the bible tells me so and proves he exists but it's just something you want to believe and you can't justify the belef to anyone but yourself. That's fine if that's good enough for you but it's not good enough for anyone else. Why are you going on a discussion forum posting so much and them complaining that not everyone agrees with you. If your god exists only in your own mind then he doesn't exist for anyone else and the feeble answer that you believe and that should be enough is just that, feeble.
It's been the mantra of the religious since the beginning of time I believe and you should as well and no one should be allowed to disagree. You see the results of that attitude in the spanish inquisition and in modern times in isis and in the US where christian fundemantalists would establish a theorcracy if they could. you see it in India, malaysia and pakistan where religious fundamentalists are attacking those of otherv faiths or none. That's why atheists are fascinated by religion they realise if left alone the chaos it will bring to the world will affect everybody but the religious can't live and let live.
you get angry on this forum because you are being asked questions and made to think about things you prefer not to so you stamp your little foot and keep talking to yourself in the corner of the forum convincing your self no one else can understand. . This is a discussion forum with a religious section that is quite active, mainly that section consists of the rligious talking to themselves with the occasional non-believer metaphorically poking them with a stick to see if they are aware of the ouitside world yet. The only argument you have is "I believe it so it must be so".
If one person believes in an imaginary being we judge them insane if millions do we call it religion and non beliivers watch the madhouse around them with despair.
The fear of this site being religious
gmc;1496543 wrote: I'm not trying to score points off you or anything like that nor is it a question of who is right or wrong. You post endless ramblings about your own interpretation of god and you use the bible as the source of all this wisdom but yet are incapable of explaining why you belive it to be the word of god yet it is the bible that you claim proves the existence of god.
I
You haven't answered the question all you've said is I believe in god the bible tells me so and proves he exists but it's just something you want to believe and you can't justify the belef to anyone but yourself. That's fine if that's good enough for you but it's not good enough for anyone else. Why are you going on a discussion forum posting so much and them complaining that not everyone agrees with you. If your god exists only in your own mind then he doesn't exist for anyone else and the feeble answer that you believe and that should be enough is just that, feeble.
It's been the mantra of the religious since the beginning of time I believe and you should as well and no one should be allowed to disagree. You see the results of that attitude in the spanish inquisition and in modern times in isis and in the US where christian fundemantalists would establish a theorcracy if they could. you see it in India, malaysia and pakistan where religious fundamentalists are attacking those of otherv faiths or none. That's why atheists are fascinated by religion they realise if left alone the chaos it will bring to the world will affect everybody but the religious can't live and let live.
you get angry on this forum because you are being asked questions and made to think about things you prefer not to so you stamp your little foot and keep talking to yourself in the corner of the forum convincing your self no one else can understand. . This is a discussion forum with a religious section that is quite active, mainly that section consists of the rligious talking to themselves with the occasional non-believer metaphorically poking them with a stick to see if they are aware of the ouitside world yet. The only argument you have is "I believe it so it must be so".
If one person believes in an imaginary being we judge them insane if millions do we call it religion and non beliivers watch the madhouse around them with despair.
Well again, I think it is meaningless for A theist explain to an Atheist, why they believe the bible to be the word God. If there is a God , he can only contact humans person to person, or through of written form; God actually did a bit of both. From as far as I can count, God has only visited earth only twice. God only personally wrote the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone that got destroyed. All other biblical book were written by men and women. They wrote what they were inspired to write.
I believe in " Inspiration to write"; its a real motivating spirit, not limited to just religion. All writers know what I am talking about; something comes over you, you are full of ideas and motivation, and you can just go for hours. And you can be very profound in what you write; or what your consciousness has seen. Writers don't need a God to experience this, but when God does actually get involved in the motivation to write, when it is he who is motivating the human to write, its incredible, and that is how we got the bible.
I have written things before, went back and read it again, and I just knew that came out of a part of me that had motivation from somewherelse. Its the same way with " Spiritual understanding and Knowledge"; you just know it was not you who put those thoughts there. A spirit put it in your consciousness, and I can read others, and what they wrote, and can tell they were motivated to write as well. The biblical authors were motivated; its obvious to me, because I have experienced that spirit which complels you to write or talk. Even to live a certain way.
I
You haven't answered the question all you've said is I believe in god the bible tells me so and proves he exists but it's just something you want to believe and you can't justify the belef to anyone but yourself. That's fine if that's good enough for you but it's not good enough for anyone else. Why are you going on a discussion forum posting so much and them complaining that not everyone agrees with you. If your god exists only in your own mind then he doesn't exist for anyone else and the feeble answer that you believe and that should be enough is just that, feeble.
It's been the mantra of the religious since the beginning of time I believe and you should as well and no one should be allowed to disagree. You see the results of that attitude in the spanish inquisition and in modern times in isis and in the US where christian fundemantalists would establish a theorcracy if they could. you see it in India, malaysia and pakistan where religious fundamentalists are attacking those of otherv faiths or none. That's why atheists are fascinated by religion they realise if left alone the chaos it will bring to the world will affect everybody but the religious can't live and let live.
you get angry on this forum because you are being asked questions and made to think about things you prefer not to so you stamp your little foot and keep talking to yourself in the corner of the forum convincing your self no one else can understand. . This is a discussion forum with a religious section that is quite active, mainly that section consists of the rligious talking to themselves with the occasional non-believer metaphorically poking them with a stick to see if they are aware of the ouitside world yet. The only argument you have is "I believe it so it must be so".
If one person believes in an imaginary being we judge them insane if millions do we call it religion and non beliivers watch the madhouse around them with despair.
Well again, I think it is meaningless for A theist explain to an Atheist, why they believe the bible to be the word God. If there is a God , he can only contact humans person to person, or through of written form; God actually did a bit of both. From as far as I can count, God has only visited earth only twice. God only personally wrote the Ten Commandments on tablets of stone that got destroyed. All other biblical book were written by men and women. They wrote what they were inspired to write.
I believe in " Inspiration to write"; its a real motivating spirit, not limited to just religion. All writers know what I am talking about; something comes over you, you are full of ideas and motivation, and you can just go for hours. And you can be very profound in what you write; or what your consciousness has seen. Writers don't need a God to experience this, but when God does actually get involved in the motivation to write, when it is he who is motivating the human to write, its incredible, and that is how we got the bible.
I have written things before, went back and read it again, and I just knew that came out of a part of me that had motivation from somewherelse. Its the same way with " Spiritual understanding and Knowledge"; you just know it was not you who put those thoughts there. A spirit put it in your consciousness, and I can read others, and what they wrote, and can tell they were motivated to write as well. The biblical authors were motivated; its obvious to me, because I have experienced that spirit which complels you to write or talk. Even to live a certain way.
The fear of this site being religious
Writers, composers, painters - anyone who creates something will be inspired by things. Think how many songs / books / paintings are inspired by (romantic) love. The same can be said for travel, colours, moods, etc. Many people may get the same inspiration, but what comes of that inspiration is purely in the mind of the person who creates it. It doesn't mean that anything has been 'revealed' to them. It's just an inspiration. A trigger. Whatever it is that starts it off, the rest is pure imagination.