God doesnt exist

Your definition of god covinietly describes whatever it was which caused the universe to come into existance. If your "god" is limited to your description then I believe in that too. Now do it properly and define, clearly and specifically, exactly what you think this god is beyond a flacid catch-all description which would apply to amy cause.

You seem to have forgotten what your claim was. It was that all unprovable claims are equal. The claims don't have be similar except in the fact that they are unprovable. Now disprove that Santa exists or cast away your disbelief.

See I always knew this would happen and was why I accused you of it early on. You want the claim that a god exists to be given special treatment not afforded to other ridiculous assertions, like the assertion that Santa exists, and you want it to be given special treatment for no other reason than that it's an assertion that a god exists.

 

Again Stox, you are spewing the same old venom that is coming out from your leader Christopher Hitchens, who probably wrote his book the missionary position while he was completely drunk. You claim she ammassed great money. Show me the proof. In reality She had no money and neither did her sisters in charity. She worked in some of the poorest areas on earth in calcutta. Lets see you or anyone else try to setup a hospital in that area with money just from donations in the worst areas in calcutta that no atheist has tried to help. Seems like the drunk leader of the atheists john hitchens is good at making accusations with no facts in his books. If she had so much money why did her saree cost 1 dollar and all of the sisters in her order were getting by on donations alone. Liek your leader your good at making accusations with no facts at all. Stox , instead of judging a woman the whole world loves why dont you take a trip down to calcutta urself and help 1% of the people she has helped. You wouldnt last 1 hour.

When there was a famine in ethiopia who do u think spread the word to president Reagan and convinced him to send supplies to the country. Dude you can say what you want about her but I think the whole world knows her better than you and your leader. Instead of focusing on a woman who did nothing but love and help others why dont you sent hitchens an email and teach him how to insert footnotes and citations in his book. Its really no good to write abook when he is drunk is it?

I guess you conveniently skipped that part of the book because you just have too much faith in hitchens and his rambling opinions based on no facts whoatsoever are good enough to be accepted by you on faith alone.
The guy sells alot of books but even a first grader would know better to insert citations into his book. What do you expect from the leader of the atheists lol. I have so far convinced 2 friends to look into theism this week just be showing them hitchens book alone.
God bless christopher hitchens. Id toast the guy but I think hes had enough drinks lol.

 

true, because the catholic church is one of the poorest organisations on the planet. i heard the pope only has 7 solid gold chairs, the poor bastard.

Of course Hitchens wasn't the only person to expose this poisonous little scumbags abuse of dying children. Michael Parenti, Aroup Chatterjee and the entire Vishva Hindu Parishad have also called her out on her bullshit, Not to mention medical journals who have criticised the way she spent all her billions without actually increasing the welfare of the children unfortunate enough to be "cared for" by this filthy old wretch who thought what sick children needed was a shitty little rat infested shack to die in and a prescription of damp rags and prayer.

Of course, her actions speak louder than my words ever could. when she got ill she jumped on the first plane to California. That certainly is some great medical care she provides in her grotty little shack, not to mention an embarrassingly low amount of faith in the treatment she so routinely prescribed to children who are sick and poor enough to be used as a publicity tool.

 

Like I said, you are bringing up 4 people compared to the whole world. Your starting to sound like those conspiracy theory loons. So your basically telling me the whole world is wrong and your atheist leader and 4 others are right? Chris Hitchens, the guy that gets drunk at the bar so much who conveniently forgot to put citations or anything leading to proof to everyone else that knew her. Now your also bring the gold at the vatican into this? That is really another subject isnt it?, but then again Stox your very good at changing the suect when you have been proven wrong or not having any solid proof whatsoever. By the way I agree with you about the gold at the vatican, so stop lumping up all catholics into one category. If you have no proof against mother teresa , i have to take your word for it and the leader of the atheists who doesnt even know how to write a book better then your average 12 years old? Sounds like your going on faith again, but this is really reaching stox. By the way, now that we have established that you have absolutely no proof at all against mother teresa at all what are you going to change the subject to?

Next time youll think twice before bringing up a book that has allready been rediculed as something written by a drunken biased atheist that is just a slight bite prejudiced against not only theists but against women, as he also claims that women arent as funny as men.
Christopher hitchens is a racist, bigot and a sexist and this is who the neo-atheistic movement looks up to?

Like I said many times before I have many atheist friends but they are moderates who use reason when they talk and never spew hatred like Hitchens does with no proof at all. I just hope that when our country has to make another important decision that effects us all that he makes up his mind about what he believes in. He was a socialist, marxist, liberal and now a neocon looooool I think he should take a long vacation and get to know himself a bit better.

 

Pong you are just trying to justify the fact that you bought in to the hype. Show us the well equipped hospital she funded with her billions or refrain from denying the obvious. It's put up or shut up time, where is the hospital?

Her empire was based on poverty and suffering. She needed children to be poor and she needed them to suffer, that's how she made her money. If what she done was done for any other reason she was have been arrested on charges of child neglect.

You are simply doing what you do every time evidence contradicts the reality you have fabricated in your head, you simply ignore it. They certainly have you well trained, I'll give them that.

 

I think I answered your question my buddy, but then again all of thefacts you have against her have been reduced to this one because you seem to believe that there is a bit of vague evidence here against her. Like i said before she did the best she could do with volunteer money and she made every dollar stretch. What has your drunken atheistic leader christopher hitchens done for others? Thats right, abolsutely nothing. His contribution to our society is getting drunk and trying to ruin peoples names which are un-ruinable, but I must thank you again stox as you are the one who brought hitchens' name to my attention , and his book is actually helping me to turn people away from atheism. lol

Can you do me a favor and bring a few more expert authors to me that dont know what a citation is?

The only hype that anyone bought in was the hype that christopher hitchens wasnt drunk or probably stoned when he wrote that pathetic attempt at a book.
Im off this debate as it is way too easy to slam dunk it.
God bless you stox

 

Still not found the well equipped hospital she funded? Aww nevermind, I'm sure she was still a lovely person even though she had some kind of sadistic fetish for the suffering of children. Keep looking pong, it will give you something to do, much like chasing a tail does for dogs.

 

Eh, it was you that asked for my definition. I gave it. Now if you want, you can redefine you defintion of Santa. Honestly, I don't mind. But you're presently attempting to argue that a belief in tables is equal to a belief in oranges - they cannot be equal given the common attributes of both. I was correct in pointing out that in the absence of proof that they were both of course simply beliefs. Its your own addition that all beleifs are equal, not mine.
I simply asked you to provide your basis for saying all beliefs were equal. How exactly again are you equating oranges and tables? Tis good for a laugh.

I never said any such thing. If you want, you can go back and find where I said it! I said all theories, in the absense of proof are simply beliefs. I never said all beliefs were equal -that was your statement. I asked you to provide a basis for claiming such an absurdity and you've failed to.

In which case they are both beliefs - but to argue that all beleifs are equal is nonsense. A belief that a table is in the next room is not the same as a belief that an apple is in the next room. Arguing that a table is equal to an apple is absurd. Again, if you want to equate apples and tables, by all means go ahead. But you will look crazy.

Why?All I said was the statements that 'God exists' and 'God does not exist' are beliefs. In the absence of proof both are equally without merit if judged on a scientific basis. The only difference is the atheism delusion that there is any scientific foundation for their statements. At least the religious are connected enough to reality to admit their statements are founded on faith, i.e. belief. If you want to disprove my assertion, go right ahead. All you have to do is provide one, simply one fact to back up your assertion that 'God does not exist'.

Rubbish. You assert 'God does not exist' and yet you want your belief to be given special treatment not afforded other ridiculous assertions. In the absence of your providing any proof for your assertion 'God does not exist' we can only treat it as your personal belief, rather than anything grounded in scientific fact. Your derision of religious people for their belief looks idiotic given your own belief in an unsupported assertion. Do these words mean anything to you: Pot. Kettle. Black? You could be pot. The pope could be kettle. Either way, you're both black.

 

What we need here is the expert opinion of john hitchens on god and citations. Just wish the guy would put down his whiskey and write a good book for once.

 

By page 20 all I see now is "blah blah blah blah blah!" "blah blah blah blah!" "blah you!" "blah you too!" *mind wanders off to more important things*

I don't care about Hitchens, I don't care about Dawkins, I don't care about the Pope, I don't care about Fred Phelps, and I certainly don't care about someone else's opinion that is supposed to be mine because I have no faith.

This thread needs a reboot. Badly.

Here is the opener:
God Does Not Exist.

Well damn, can't debate a statement that well. Maybe a question would have been better. I'm going back to sitting under my rock in the "Does God Exist?" thread... since it is a real question and not a statement. Yes yes, there was a theory in the first topic about what happens - and then the mess about lightbulbs which I still maintain is a shit example of how the human brain works in death-mode. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_death

Yadda yadda yadda ya, whatever, over and out.

 

if god does not exist, then create another 'earth' ..

we want to see whether the 'great people of the century' can create Earth

God exist ..that's it

the more you think, the more Satan will manipulate mankind in order to make people think, God does not Exist...

God create life and end life ..and God will create life again after all is dead

and there will be the 'judgement day' ..told you, atheist watch TV too much lol

and, show me the smartest man in the world that lives forever and never dies

God does not die..

The existing world only lasted a little but yet, too many were 'dead' already

i'm blessed living in a great world, created by god ,,,

and give me just a teaspoon of scientific facts or teorem that can challenge the art and science of living creation ...

Take a look at Darwin Theory : Man is from Ape

look aroun.,..why todays ape doesn't 'evolve' and be man ?

does this evolving and revolving needs time and space ?

and yet, we mankind still think that we're the most superior ...

just take a look at the world today, H1N1 ... this is just a small 'test' given to human..

 

Really? Thanks.

 

I'm with you. I'm at the zoo connected through wifi and I've been staring at this ape for an hour without blinking and nothing is happening.

 

IMO there is a God. Someone must have created the Universe and everything we know.

It's just too much that we can't understand how the Universe started, etc etc.

Imagine: The earth is just one of the planets in the solar system. In the Milky way galaxy there are billions of formation of planets surrounding a star. In the entire universe there are billions of galaxies.

It's beyond human comprehension.

And for me believing God exists is inspiration for my existence. But that's just me.

 

Information like this is half true for me, I believe in the existence of one superior high being, & whatever is the right term to use. I believe in the existence of a GOD, CREATOR that's my opinion

 

Everybody will check out your theory one day. I hopeful you are wrong.

 

I would like to tell twoexamples:

Take water. It has no colour, odour and even taste. But nobody can live without it. Why it is created as precious as 'Live giving water' to every living being in the universe. It is the wisdom of God. Do youthink you and me could ever make that precious water that is useful to everybody?

secondly take the air. The earth is comibination of gas, water, fire, snow etc.
Do you think anybody can live without air? No. You cannot see, you cannot catch, you can not run behind it. Only you can feel it. It is God's wisdom.
He blow the air into the Clay man, and he became live. That was Adam, according Scripture.

This is how it goes.

What other examples you need? I cannot explain more than this to believe that God exists in the world, everywhere. You must believe in the Wisdom of God.

Ezhil_09

 

The water and air wasn't created because we need it, we evolved to make use of it because it's abundent.

Now i need you to think hard before answering this next question, it could spell the destruction of any shred of integrity you have.

Do you really believe god blew air in to a clay man and made him come to life? Yes or no?

 

last statement is what I have been trying to say for 1 year. He is good at passing out judgments to people and rediculing others, but when I pointed out that his beliefs are also just that "beliefs" he wont admit it. I also pointed out that no rational person would use chris hitchens books as facts, stox then suddenly shifts his focus away from hitchens. I laugh the same way at extremist religious people that judge atheists and poke fun at them. They both should not do this.

Stox has turned into the same type of personality he so hates in religious extremists and that is the sad part.

 

Atheist is the type of people who thinks they're right and no religion can be 'righter' than them..so , these Atheist will never believe in God because they think, everything in this world is created by Men, after all, men created vast civilization after all these years...

but when i read all the Atheist 'reasoning' and 'debating' level, i cannot say more than this ...Atheist are just moron, a bunch of people who does not believe in god and religion ..and they just can't justify life after death..

so how they can justify the beginning of life ??