Magus55

I didn't expect that it would be. Most walls are more receptive than you. Lets just agree to not reply to each other anymore, k?

Magus55

Why, because you need an ego boost? "haha, see the theist isn't perfect. God obviously isn't real cause the theist isn't perfect!"

Tenek

If God doesn't want people to break the laws, he should give them a means of figuring out what the laws are. Ignorance is no excuse, but when the judge/jury/executioner refuses to tell you what you're not allowed to do, you'd think a bit of leeway would be allowed.

Hyndis

He's a slippy one, but you got him pinned good.

In that "nonreligous" catagory...none, agnostic and secular humanist all sound rather atheistic. Lots of different words meaning more or less the same thing; and those terms do not mean having a religion.

Its kind of like Christians. There's Catholics, Protestant, and Eastern Orthodox. But they're all Christian, despite the different names for them. Same thing with that nonreligious catagory; various shades and names of atheism, but its all sort of the same thing in the end.

Magus55

You can read the laws... Do not murder. Do not steal. Do not commit adultery. Do not commit fornication. Do not covet. Unless you are illiterate, He did give a means of figuring them out.

Ad Astra

No, because you were wrong and you refuse to acknowledge that.

I've said nothing of the sort, I don't intend to. Please don't put words in my mouth.

Ad Astra

The Bible, right? Please provide evidence that the Bible is the work of you god. Thanks.

Err, sorry about the successive posts.

Queen of Swords

The conditions spelled out in the bible threaten people with hell.

We assume for the purposes of hell-discussion that he exists. Therefore, it is a threat.

I think I know more about what it takes to frighten me than you do.

neh. right.

The scenario you described was all about belief through fear. It said nothing about admiration or love; here, you're backtracking.

Illogical and non sequitur.

When a law is demonstrated to be wrong, and when people protest it, a reasomable and fair government changes that law. Ever hear of civil rights, Magus? Or Gandhi?

Too bad god didn't apply that law about murder to himself. Especially when it came to the murder of all life (except a few carefully chosen non-evil humans and non-evil animals and non-evil birds) during the flood.

Might does not make right. Reason makes right.

Indeed they're not. Humans are better, because firstly, there's evidence that they exist.

Probably not the same place you come up with your loads of crap.

His morality, or lack thereof, is inferior to that of humans.

Well, as I recall, they had to make some changes in the document later. It wasn't graven in stone. So maybe that wasn't the best example you could have come up with.

Someone's expecting me to be hurt. That's just too bad. Hope they don't mind being disappointed.

Nah, I have more control of my life than a (probably non-existent) god does.

(I love playing this game, by the way! Keep 'em coming!)

He's pointing a bazooka instead?

We assume that god exists for the purpose of hell-discussion.

Nah, I'm separated from him already. And he is crying his eyes out at the loss, I tell ya.

Magus55

Um, agnostic is no more like atheism, than theism is. Secular humanism doesn't require being an atheist. And there is also the "etc.". You can technically be nonreligous and still believe in God. I'd probably put Einstein in this category. He certaintly wasn't atheist, but He hardly acted religious either.

Gospelog2

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...37#post1640637

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showpost.php...&postcount=147

Here is your evidence