How do you know God isn't dead?

[smax]

Thomas Jefferson is not a proper authority on such matters, so that’s just a fallacious appeal to authority.

Everything that opposes your view is fallacious, irrelevant, or nonsensical.

This is how you react to any and all arguments that effectively challenge your position.

I barely met you, and yet I know and can predict your every move. Be careful, I intend to demonstrate this fact conclusively before too long.

Let's continue with the fun....

Yup!

Thanks for the laugh.

Yes, you claim you have read it, but your displayed ignorance on the subject matter leads me to question that claim.

Here's how much I care what you think........

No…a creator who brings glory to Himself through the punishment of the rebellious creature.

And yet here I am, unscathed!

I can feel your blood boiling from here. LOL

How do you know you won’t? Are you planning on converting sometime soon?

Because your delusions have no bearing whatsoever on me. None.

They are powerless.

Yup. That in no way contradicts what I said, premises are assumed to be false until otherwise refuted at which point they become false premises, God’s existence has never been refuted.

A little Freudian slip there, heh!

Just like clockwork, my friend. You are in much more over your head than you would ever like to admit or think.

This is actually the second time you've unconsciously conceded an important point regarding your beliefs.

Don't let that discourage you, though, as you are finally working toward something truly worth while.

None of that applies to the God of scripture, so you just wasted your time.

I'll take that extremely weak, baseless, and unsupported comeback as a concession that were proven completely wrong.

First you stood on the fundamentals you THOUGHT applied to premise, and now that your perception has been proven to be false, it's just that "None of that applies to the God of scripture..."

LOL.

It doesn’t matter, you were quoting me and if you do it again I’ll have to report it, which I hate doing.

Proved you wrong again. I asked you a simple yes or no question, and you didn't answer. Deflection.

And, feel free to report the nameless quote and spare me any more of your threats.

I stand by the merits of my argument.

Why would I try to hold a position that is not possible? I am just intellectually honest and philosophically sophisticated enough to admit I am just as biased as you are. You’re the one being disingenuous by claiming to be objective when such a position is logically impossible to hold.

So you admit that are mentally ill and incapable of actually considering any other point of view. An illness you think has no cure.

Problem is, you've already demonstrated the opposite twice now.

I trapped you. You just refuted your claim that Christians do not really believe what they claim to believe because it’s all based upon your subjective opinion on how you think they ought to behave if they really did believe it. Thanks for that.

You are so clever, you got me! Oh wait, you didn't. Turns out I wasn't giving you my opinion about Christians and their actions. Observe and learn:

James Chapter 2:

14What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

And I can provide many other supporting scripture on this subject.

I didn't make the rules of your delusion, I'm just very familiar with them.

You might want to keep that in mind from here out. It's already causing you problems, and I wouldn't want this to be easy.

bwahahahaha!

That’s only because you cannot back up your position concerning that subject.

You don't know my position.

That’s only relevant if the personal God feels the need to comply with your silly request, there’s no Biblical support for God ever feeling that need, so that’s an irrelevant argument.

Sure there is, you just can't accept the support because of the implications.

Jeremiah 33:3, "Call to Me and I will answer you and tell you great and wondrous things you do not know."

Obviously not, or else you’d realize that science only deals with probabilities and therefore there is no such thing as a “scientific impossibility”.

Science: a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a

body of facts

or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences.

2. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.

3. any of the branches of natural or physical science.

4. systematized knowledge in general.

5. knowledge, as of facts or principles; knowledge gained by systematic study.

You stand corrected.

No, you’ve pointed out inconsistencies in your claimed understanding of the Bible, that only proves that you are fallible, which was never really something I doubted to be the case.

Hahaha! I gotta tell you, you blaming me for the inconsistencies in scriipture takes the cake, man! Just how much power do you afford me?

Okay, enough with the humor, let's tackle something basic. You know, we do have hundreds of inconsistencies to choose from.

Who is Joseph's father? And why the fuck does it matter in the first place?

Matthew 1:16: … and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called the Messiah.

Luke 3:23: Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his work. He was the son (as was thought) of Joseph son of Heli…

Next week on Maury.....

Who is Joseph's father? Jacob or Heli?

And how the fuck does it matter when it comes to the Virgin Mary and her baby Jesus?

You’ve not mocked God.

I know you are bad with definitions and terms, as evidence from your poor understanding of the use of a premise, but here's another one on me. No charge.

Mock:
1. To treat with ridicule or contempt; deride.

Depends on what you mean by effective. I find that prayer is very effective.

I know believers who have prayed for the safety and health of all newborn babies.

This prayer is completely consistent with the guidelines of prayer laid out in scripture, and yet newborn babies continue to suffer death and all kinds of diseases and defects.

Doesn't that just warm your cold, Calvanist heart?

You can toss out all the bad arguments you want, they don’t magically add up to a good argument.

Considering that you were conclusively proven wrong on each point, I'd say the opposite.

But hey, you still have your patented "That doesn't apply to the God of scripture" comeback.

Who knows, someone might actually think that's a valid and effective response.

Keep using it until you come up with something that's actually good.

Well even conceptually Yahweh cannot die, so whether you are speaking conceptually or existentially either way we know that God is not dead.

Omnipotent: Having unlimited or universal power, authority, or force; all-powerful.

If God cannot kill himsef, he is not omnipotent. If he is not omnipotent, then scripture lies. If scripture lies, you belief is a lie.

Smax didn’t seem to understand that.

The discussion is still going, therefore, it cannot have been "over before it started".

Duh!
[/quote]