Sheshonq

1. Does he? Prove it.

2. Which doesn't help your argument anyhow. Babylon failed; if Alexander were the intended conqueror, why does Ezekiel identify the wrong person?

3. Alexander also failed to fulfill the prophecy, by the way.

[irrelevant cut-and-paste preaching from an unsupported website mercifully deleted]

arnoldo

Do you have proof God doesn't exist? If so, prove it.

gregor

I'll do that [prove Yawhew's non-existence], right after you prove that Odin does not exist.

Johnny Skeptic

Since skeptics are not the claimants, it is not encumbent upon them to reasonably prove that God does not exist. Since I am agnostic, I never argue that no Gods exist, but I sometimes argue that the God of the Bible probably does not exist.

If the God of the Bible does not exist, that explain why humans have to do what God ought to be doing much of himself. Why would God frequently mimic the way that things would be if he did not exist, thereby needlessly causing doubt and confusion?

If the God of the Bible does not exist, there would be suspicious an unexplainable statistics regarding why people believe what they believe. Kosmin and Lachman wrote a book that is titled 'One Nation Under God.' Billy Graham endorses the book on the cover or on one of the inside pages. The book is well-documented. The authors show that the primary factors that influence religious beliefs in the U.S. are geography, family, race, ethnicity, gender, and age. The evidence shows that in the U.S., the percentage of women who are Christians is a good deal higher than the percentage of men who are Christians. I forget what the exact percentage is, but I can find it if I need to. As far as I recall, the percentage difference is over 7%. It is important to note that every year, the percentage of women who are Christians is a good deal higher than the percentage of men who are Christians. That is quite suspicious.

The authors show that elderly skeptics are much less likely to change their worldview than younger skeptics are, and that elderly Christians are much less likely to become skeptics than younger Christians are. If God exists, this means that he discriminates against elderly skeptics and younger Christians. If God does not exist, that explains why elderly people are much less likely to change their worldviews than younger people are. Again, if the God of the Bible exists, it is quite odd that he mimics that way that things would be if he did not exist.

If the God of the Bible does not exist, that explains why the Gospel message was distributed entirely by humans. If God does exist, he is more concerned with HOW people hear about the Gospel message than he is with THAT they hear the Gospel message, and with mimicking the way that the Gospel message would be spread if he does not exist. No loving, rational God would ever act like that.

We have a similar case regarding the distribution of food. James says that if a man refuses to give food to a hungry person that his faith is dead, but God has refused to give food to millions of people who died of starvation. If God does not exist, that explains why all distribution of food is done by humans. If God does exist, then he is more concerned with HOW people get enough food to eat than he is with THAT people get enough food to eat, and with mimicking the way that food would be distributed if he does not exist. No loving, rational God would ever act like that.

Obviously, your convenient "God frequently uses men and nations for his own purposes" argument is fraudulent, and is exactly what would be the case if the God of the Bible does not exist.

You have still failed to explain why God would frequently choose to mimic the ways that things would be if he did not exist, thereby undermining his attempt to reasonably prove that he exists. No loving, rational God would ever go out of his way to mimic the ways that things would be if he did not exist. If a loving God exists, there is no way that it could be predicted that every year, the percentage of women in the U.S. who are Christians would be a good deal higher than the percentage of men who are Christians, and that the percentage of elderly skeptics who become Christians would be much smaller than the percentage of younger skeptics who become Christians, and that the percentage of younger Christians who become skeptics would be much larger than the percentage of elderly Christians who become skeptics. If a loving God exists, the odds against those things being the way that they are are astronomical. If the God of the Bible does not exist, that explains why the primary factors that determine why people believe what they believe are geography, family, race, ethnicity, gender, age, and time period.

In another thread, in response to those arguments, you said:

However, if the God of the Bible does not exist, that is exactly what we would expect to find. No loving, rational God would ever go out of his way to mimic the ways that things would be if he did not exist, thereby needlessly creating doubt and confusion.

arnoldo

So you basically accept that you have faith in your belief system too, right?

Johnny Skeptic

No they haven't. This all started when Abraham wrongfully stole land from the Canaanites.

The partition of Palestine allowed the Jews to control Jerusalem, and an unfairly disproportionate amount of land based upon land per capita, and yet you claim that the Arabs have always stated the wars. A much more equitable solution would have been joint control of Jerusalem, or dividing Jerusalem in half.

The most important war is the unfair and unnecessary war that God wages not only against skeptics, but also against Jews and Christians. Why would God give Jews parts of Palestine and kill them by various means such as parasites and cancer viruses?

Australia has a very small population, and it is very large. Most of the population lives near the ocean. Now what better place could there have been for God to set up a Jewish nation than in the middle of Australia, with no hatred, and not bloodshed?

The only reason that Jews and Arabs have ever had any problems is because God made sure that they were in the same places at the same times. This is analogous to the detestible, unlawful practice of cockfighting. Cocks would not fight unless humans put them in the same places at the same times.

Why do animals injure and kill each other in disputes over food, territory, and mates? Obviously, because God unfairly and unnecessarily puts them in the same places at the same times.

Now are you going to tell us that if Jewish and Palestinian history had been reversed, and Hitler and other parties had persecuted Palestinians instead of Jews, that the U.S. would have approved of the Palestinians getting control of Jerusalem and a grossly disproportionate amount of land based upon the amount of land per person? The Partition of Palestine is a bona fide example of a self-fulfilled prophecy.

arnoldo

I'll do that after you prove Israel does not exist.

arnoldo

I guess Tyre is also a self-fulfilled prophecy, no wait, it was written after the fact,right? :wave:

Sheshonq

You have it backwards. I don't have to prove anything about God.

You're the one making the claim. He who claims, has the burden of proof. That would be *you*, not me.

Sheshonq

No one disputes that a state called Israel exists. What you have yet to prove, however, is that this is a fulfillment of any prophecy.

Supporting claims is hard work. No wonder you're backpedaling.