To make this comparison truly as stupid as religion, you would have not only say germs are fake, but that god is doing it. Germs make no sense, therefore...God. That is exactly what people thought before germ theory.Thing about it all is that believing that your race is the greatest because you can't prove that there is anything else out there, is as stupid as saying germs are fake because you have nothing to view germs.
Before we knew about germs people believed god brought sickness to those who displeased him. The gaps that require god for an explanation shrink daily.What we know about germs is that we get diseases, sicknesses, and other formations, smells, ect...
This is only evidence of God to you. The rest of us recognize that these thing have natural explanations.What we know about God: he is all powerful.
The evidence can be: That we are alive, that we speak, that we think, that we can reject sin, ect..
Germ theory is thoroughly testable and can be conclusively demonstrated without the use of a microscope. God can not be tested or demonstrated no matter how powerful and advanced the equipment. Also, the bible does nothing to prove God, so we don't have anything to prove, or any reason to even suspect his existence.But because we don't have anything to prove he exists besides the bible, some of us deny he exists; just like we would deny germs if we were born without a microscope even though we get sick, and the evidence is still there.
The bible has all the attributes of being written by ignorant mortals, and none of the attributes we would assign to divinity. The bible advocates rape, murder, slavery, prejudice and cruelty, these are the scriptures you revere as knowledge, but it's good to know you don't think it's lying.We weren't born with Jesus Christ in our century, but we were born with the book telling us he was here and it even has words that he spoke of which he said himself have eternal life. Which is why I choose to believe in the book, because you know a lie when you see one. Lies lead to more lies, and if you read the book it is all new knowledge each and every page, and those scriptures where are more or less the same as other scriptures support the truth.
Do you ever re-read what you have written and apply thought? How about reading what others say and applying thought? I read a book that said Santa Clause exits...do I need to explain why that is not sufficient evidence to form a conclusion? How is it that you can believe something is true simply because a book says so? What malfunctioning part of your brain tells you it's a good idea to call someone stupid if they do not feel words in a book are proof of god? If that is the sort of conclusions your thought process leads you to, how is it that you did not choke to death on a bag of marbles as a kid? To me the fact that you are alive and able to type on a computer is more evidence of guardian angels than the bible will ever be, you should start using that as your example.Also the fact that its stupid to not believe in God after you read a book which tells you God exists, and Jesus Christ is our savior that died in the flesh of man on earth, and also the book that which increases your intelligence and tells you exactly what to do if you want to reject sin, be safe, and handle situations, ect...
As long as people like Marlboro exist and post on public forums, this will never end.FFS are we still on with this? God exists in your mind or you wouldnt have asked the fucking stupid question in the first place.
Saying that God exists only because we can't explain something on earth is an other way of making you and God look bad, because your telling me that he exists only because you can't figure something out.To make this comparison truly as stupid as religion, you would have not only say germs are fake, but that god is doing it. Germs make no sense, therefore...God. That is exactly what people thought before germ theory.
I almost never criticize someone for their spelling or grammar errors, but I can not extract any meaning from this block of text. It's not at all clear what you are trying to say. Slow down and articulate your point. Sloppiness is part of what got your mind into such a mess to begin with.Saying that God exists only because we can't explain something on earth is an other way of making God look bad.
Because once you figure out what you said you can never figure out(which you knew you would in fact find out eventually just to say God is false again),you will claim that your athiest or any other religion that denys Jesus Christ(Everything except Christian).
Your trying to prove that germs exist and live naturally in the world.I almost never criticize someone for their spelling or grammar errors, but I can not extract any meaning from this block of text. It's not at all clear what you are trying to say. Slow down and articulate your point. Sloppiness is part of what got your mind into such a mess to begin with.
The problem here is that you perceive you have some sort of advantage or authority that makes your belief correct. You pretend as if the answer is clear and anyone should see it, but when asked to explain that clarity you can't even come up with the first word. You believe because you want to, that is all you can show. That is a fine thing to say, but you do not leave it at that. You want all the righteousness that comes with belief in God, of which you deserve none. You seek the comfort of opinion while avoiding the discomfort of thought, and chastise others for not displaying the same petty half-witted behavior as you.
:grabs popcorn and waits for EPIC reply!:Your trying to prove that germs exist and live naturally in the world.
You cant for some reason or an other, so then you say God exists.
20years later, we find out germs are naturally on earth.
You then say there is no evidence for God's existance anymore, therefore making God fake.
My problem with it is that you couldn't prove germs existed.
How can you prove that God is fake because you proved germs existed later on?
To make this comparison truly as stupid as religion, you would have not only say germs are fake, but that god is doing it. Germs make no sense, therefore...God. That is exactly what people thought before germ theory.
Your trying to prove that germs exist and live naturally in the world.
You cant for some reason or an other, so then you say God exists.
20years later, we find out germs are naturally on earth.
You then say there is no evidence for God's existance anymore, therefore making God fake.
My problem with it is that you couldn't prove germs existed.
How can you prove that God is fake because you proved germs existed later on?
You misunderstand. What I am saying is, when you can't explain something, there is no reason to attribute it to god. To say "Disease makes no sense, therefore God", is wrong. That is what people did before we knew a micro-world exists. This mystery and so many others that used to be attributed to god have instead been explained by science. Now that we have an explanation, it is even more wrong to attribute it to god.Your trying to prove that germs exist and live naturally in the world.
You cant for some reason or an other, so then you say God exists.
There has never been any sort of evidence for God.20years later, we find out germs are naturally on earth.
You then say there is no evidence for God's existance anymore, therefore making God fake.
My problem is that you somehow think things like speech and and thought not only prove God, but prove it to the point of being certain of specific instructions and ideology. You profess to not only know god exists, but to precisely know what he expects out of us. You use this ideology to judge others without the slightest justification for your ideas. You need to take responsibility for the things you say, admit that you have nothing but faith, and stop making propositions that you haven't thought through. This is what it takes to be a man, to have strength in your convictions, and to gain self-integrity. It's fine to have religious ideas, it's not okay to use those ideas to cover for cowardice, repugnance and intellectual sloth.My problem with it is that you couldn't prove germs existed.
There is no point to this argument if your going to try to deceive me.You misunderstand. What I am saying is, when you can't explain something, there is no reason to attribute it to god. To say "Disease makes no sense, therefore God", is wrong. That is what people did before we knew a micro-world exists. This mystery and so many others that used to be attributed to god have instead been explained by science. Now that we have an explanation, it is even more wrong to attribute it to god.
There has never been any sort of evidence for God.
My problem is that you somehow think things like speech and and thought not only prove God, but prove it to the point of being certain of specific instructions and ideology. You profess to not only know god exists, but to precisely know what he expects out of us. You use this ideology to judge others without the slightest justification for your ideas. You need to take responsibility for the things you say, admit that you have nothing but faith, and stop making propositions that you haven't thought through. This is what it takes to be a man, to have strength in your convictions, and to gain self-integrity. It's fine to have religious ideas, it's not okay to use those ideas to cover for cowardice, repugnance and intellectual sloth.
Nice way to redirect my statement about your statement.You misunderstand. What I am saying is, when you can't explain something, there is no reason to attribute it to god. To say "Disease makes no sense, therefore God", is wrong. That is what people did before we knew a micro-world exists. This mystery and so many others that used to be attributed to god have instead been explained by science. Now that we have an explanation, it is even more wrong to attribute it to god.
I do not afford you such courtesy when your mistakes include homophobia and foster stupidity. The deception you sense comes from your own mind, do not blame the messenger.There is no point to this argument if your going to try to deceive me.
Im not calling you out on every mistake specifically so that I won't be making fun of you the whole time.
Nice way to redirect my statement about your statement.
Do you think they tell the messenger the truth? Or do you think they deceive him so that those that him he informs perceives the messanger as knowledgable but in reality he is the one that was deceived to deceive in the first palce.I do not afford you such courtesy when your mistakes include homophobia and foster stupidity. The deception you sense comes from your own mind, do not blame the messenger.
I can't agree nor disagree.Yes, I redirected it back to the area of accuracy. How mean of me to deny you your strawman.