How do you know God isn't dead?

[Statler Waldorf]

Finally. Agreed.

I think we agreed on that the whole time and were probably talking past one another.

Show me the money.

What money?

See how pointless this was anyways? We're at square one.

It was not pointless at all; we both agree that God is not dead and that the original post was rather silly to begin with.

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

Yup, that’s why I hold the view I hold.

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

A fallacious appeal to authority is not an effective challenge to my view.

I barely met you, and yet I know and can predict your every move.

There’s a simple explanation for that, unbelievers are unable to postulate a logically cogent view of reality, so of course all attacks upon Christianity are going to suffer from some form of irrationality, I am just here to point that out.

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

Maybe it’s time to start caring…

And yet here I am, unscathed!

More Biblical ignorance proudly displayed.

Because your delusions have no bearing whatsoever on me.

God’s existence does though.

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

There’s no such thing as an unconscious concession. Do you really want to go back to pointing out typos? I’ll be glad to point yours out to you if you’d like.

Premises are assumed to be true unless otherwise refuted, that’s basic logic; I am not surprised you were unaware of that fact though.

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

Worthwhile is one word.

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

Pointing out that you were committing the fallacy of erecting a straw-man argument is not a weak comeback at all; your utter disregard for rationality is troubling.

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

You asked an irrelevant question, the Mods do not care whether you credit someone with the quote or not, if you use the quote function you must use it appropriately, stop whining about it.

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

If you do it again I will, I cut you some slack since you’re new here.

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

You omitted a “you” in that sentence I believe because it doesn’t make any sense. Being biased is not a mental illness; it’s the natural condition everyone holds.

You are so clever, you got me!

‘twas not hard to do.

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

Yup, and how do you know if a Christian is doing good deeds or not?

You don't know my position.

I know it’s logically incoherent, and that’s all I need to know about it.

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

You’re not calling out to the Lord, you’re challenging Him.

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.

Yup, and since it’s based on inductive reasoning it only deals with probabilities and never deals with what is impossible. You’re just scientifically ignorant.

You stand corrected.

Such ignorance, are you really going to assert that scientific knowledge is infallible?

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

There are no inconsistencies in scripture; there are numerous inconsistencies in your superficial understanding of scripture.

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

That depends on which Joseph you are referring to.

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

We already addressed this issue in the conflicting statements thread, Matthew is referring to Mary’s father Joseph here, the English translation made an error here; the Aramaic text correctly renders it as her father Joseph son of Jacob. No conflict.

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…

Yup, Jesus’ adopted father Joseph was son of Heli. You see, it was all because of your ignorance and lack of understanding! If you had done some actual studying rather than pulling this off of some second rate atheist website you’d know that the term in Matthew should have been translated as “father” and is used that way in the ancient Aramaic texts.

Who is Joseph's father? Jacob or Heli?

Both had sons named Joseph, so I guess that depends on which Joseph you are referring to.

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.

If premises were not assumed to be true beforehand then why would the term “false premise” be needed? If they were indeed assumed false that would be a completely redundant term. You’re so small time.

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

Yup, you have not mocked God.

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

So?

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.

Yup.

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

God knows what He’s doing.

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

Pointing out a misrepresentation is a valid response, if you had even a rudimentary understanding of basic logical reasoning you’d know that, but then again you are the guy who ascribes to verifcationism.

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

Good? How do you determine what is good?

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

Yup.

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.

You’re not using the term omnipotence correctly. Being all powerful only means that God can do all that is logically possible since both His actions and the laws of logic themselves directly derive from His character. Please stop misrepresenting the Biblical position; it makes you look so ridiculous.

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

Sure it can, you persist on carrying it on even though other atheists on here are even now starting to call you out on your mistakes. You’re whipped.