.

[-XXIII-]

The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...

Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

[Moloch]

The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...

Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company

[-XXIII-]

The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...

Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company

You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid.

[Moloch]

The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...

Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company

You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid.

You said you could DISPROVE Santa

You don't know the origins of the Santa myth... nobody does

Now you are just looking (more) foolish

[-XXIII-]

The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...

Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company

You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid.

You said you could DISPROVE Santa

He's dead, I win.

[Moloch]

The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...

Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company

You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid.

You said you could DISPROVE Santa

He's dead, I win.

So is God, I win

[-XXIII-]

The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...

Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company

You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid.

You said you could DISPROVE Santa

He's dead, I win.

So is God, I win

How can you say this when you can't prove he ever existed?

[-XXIII-]

The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...

Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company

You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid.

You said you could DISPROVE Santa

He's dead, I win.

So is God, I win

How can you say this when you can't prove he ever existed?

Didn't your God died on the cross?

No, that would be God's begotten Son. Don't get it twisted.

[-XXIII-]

The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...

Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company

You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid.

You said you could DISPROVE Santa

He's dead, I win.

So is God, I win

How can you say this when you can't prove he ever existed?

Didn't your God died on the cross?

No, that would be God's begotten Son. Don't get it twisted.

Who is one with his Father.  Son/Father/And Holy spirit, you forgot the mantra.  They all died on the cross.

You misunderstand: God created the angels, Jesus was one of them, he sent Jesus to Earth, we crucified him.

[Moloch]

You misunderstand: God created the angels, Jesus was one of them, he sent Jesus to Earth, we crucified him.

You misunderstand your own dogma

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity defines God as three consubstantial persons, expressions, or hypostases: the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature".

[-XXIII-]

You misunderstand: God created the angels, Jesus was one of them, he sent Jesus to Earth, we crucified him.

You misunderstand your own dogma

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity defines God as three consubstantial persons, expressions, or hypostases: the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature".

By that same article: "According to this central mystery of some Christian faiths," which means, some, not all.

[Moloch]

You misunderstand: God created the angels, Jesus was one of them, he sent Jesus to Earth, we crucified him.

You misunderstand your own dogma

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity defines God as three consubstantial persons, expressions, or hypostases: the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature".

By that same article: "According to this central mystery of some Christian faiths," which means, some, not all.

Name a denomination that does not believe in the Trinity

[Moloch]

You misunderstand: God created the angels, Jesus was one of them, he sent Jesus to Earth, we crucified him.

You misunderstand your own dogma

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity defines God as three consubstantial persons, expressions, or hypostases: the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature".

By that same article: "According to this central mystery of some Christian faiths," which means, some, not all.

Name a denomination that does not believe in the Trinity

He is frantically searching...What a bozo?  Jesus was an angel, WTF?  That is a new low, even for a Christian.

Why do the Atheists always prove they know Christianity better than the Christians?

Christians are so eager to spout bullshit that they look foolish

[-XXIII-]

The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...

Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company

You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid.

You said you could DISPROVE Santa

He's dead, I win.

So is God, I win

How can you say this when you can't prove he ever existed?

Didn't your God died on the cross?

No, that would be God's begotten Son. Don't get it twisted.

Who is one with his Father.  Son/Father/And Holy spirit, you forgot the mantra.  They all died on the cross.

You misunderstand: God created the angels, Jesus was one of them, he sent Jesus to Earth, we crucified him.

What Christian denomination are you?

Jesus was God's son and God himself.  Holy trinity (son+father+holy spirit) that is what Roman Catholics thought me.

So according to their twisted logic, the whole trinity died on the cross.  Like three Musketeers.  One for all, all for one.

You misunderstand: God created the angels, Jesus was one of them, he sent Jesus to Earth, we crucified him.

You misunderstand your own dogma

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity defines God as three consubstantial persons, expressions, or hypostases: the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature".

By that same article: "According to this central mystery of some Christian faiths," which means, some, not all.

Name a denomination that does not believe in the Trinity

I have no denomination, but I believe in righteousness and have a strong moral code. What you folks are doing is purely hateful, calling out others for the sake of attacking them and their beliefs.
I'm ashamed to share this forum with you.

[Moloch]

I have no denomination, but I believe in righteousness and have a strong moral code. What you folks are doing is purely hateful, calling out others for the sake of attacking them and their beliefs.
I'm ashamed to share this forum with you.

Nobody asked you to come in here and make a fool of yourself... you did that voluntarily

[electronicash]

I became Atheist reading first few verses

No you didn't.  

If you had good reasons, you wouldn't have to lie.

I'd start with the light (big bang) if I were him.

If this creation story does make sense to you, you are clueless:

Day 1: He created Earth (formless and empty) and heaven in the dark.  Spirit of God was covering waters, Then he created light
Day 2: He separated sky (the vault) from the water  (some magic water that did not freeze)
Day 3: He created dry land (after he created Earth) and plants
Day 4: He created Sun and other stars (poor plants, they had to wait for Sun to show up)
Day 5: Created animals
Day 6: Started farming (no industrial revolution, no science, no Internet?  Why not?)
 

Genesis 1New International Version (NIV)

The Beginning
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.

11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
    in the image of God he created them;
    male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.

31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

i might be wrong but a day of God might not be just 24 hours just like what we have. remember he has his own world and that he lives in the 7th heaven, god knows where it is. so basically he didn't create the world in seven days like monday to sunday.

[-XXIII-]

I have no denomination, but I believe in righteousness and have a strong moral code. What you folks are doing is purely hateful, calling out others for the sake of attacking them and their beliefs.
I'm ashamed to share this forum with you.

Nobody asked you to come in here and make a fool of yourself... you did that voluntarily

It takes a fool to know a fool.

[-XXIII-]

The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...

Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company

You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid.

You said you could DISPROVE Santa

He's dead, I win.

So is God, I win

How can you say this when you can't prove he ever existed?

Didn't your God died on the cross?

No, that would be God's begotten Son. Don't get it twisted.

Who is one with his Father.  Son/Father/And Holy spirit, you forgot the mantra.  They all died on the cross.

You misunderstand: God created the angels, Jesus was one of them, he sent Jesus to Earth, we crucified him.

What Christian denomination are you?

Jesus was God's son and God himself.  Holy trinity (son+father+holy spirit) that is what Roman Catholics thought me.

So according to their twisted logic, the whole trinity died on the cross.  Like three Musketeers.  One for all, all for one.

You misunderstand: God created the angels, Jesus was one of them, he sent Jesus to Earth, we crucified him.

You misunderstand your own dogma

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity defines God as three consubstantial persons, expressions, or hypostases: the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature".

By that same article: "According to this central mystery of some Christian faiths," which means, some, not all.

Name a denomination that does not believe in the Trinity

I have no denomination, but I believe in righteousness and have a strong moral code. What you folks are doing is purely hateful, calling out others for the sake of attacking them and their beliefs.
I'm ashamed to share this forum with you.

Good for you.  So do I.

You might have a strong moral code, but that code is not from the Bible.  It is based on what you as a person believe is producing least suffering.  That is what most normal people use as basis for their moral code.  There are of course cultural influences as well.

Again nothing to do with a bronze age story book.  At least I hope you are not getting moral code from it.

We are not hateful, we are just pointing out the obvious nonsense.

You can't sit there and assume you know my upbringing. I've come to learn my moral code is pretty damn close to the bible, and whether or not that's true is irrelevant. What you are doing is hateful, like calling someone "nonsense". That's an attack. You're a shit-disturber, nothing more.


Edit: RE: your edit

"PS. I suspect you did not actually read the whole Bible.  I suggest you do.  By the time you get to the end, you'll be an Atheist. "

By your own admission, you haven't either, so I suggest you shut the fuck up.

[-XXIII-]

The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...

Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company

You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid.

You said you could DISPROVE Santa

He's dead, I win.

So is God, I win

How can you say this when you can't prove he ever existed?

Didn't your God died on the cross?

No, that would be God's begotten Son. Don't get it twisted.

Who is one with his Father.  Son/Father/And Holy spirit, you forgot the mantra.  They all died on the cross.

You misunderstand: God created the angels, Jesus was one of them, he sent Jesus to Earth, we crucified him.

What Christian denomination are you?

Jesus was God's son and God himself.  Holy trinity (son+father+holy spirit) that is what Roman Catholics thought me.

So according to their twisted logic, the whole trinity died on the cross.  Like three Musketeers.  One for all, all for one.

You misunderstand: God created the angels, Jesus was one of them, he sent Jesus to Earth, we crucified him.

You misunderstand your own dogma

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity defines God as three consubstantial persons, expressions, or hypostases: the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit; "one God in three persons". The three persons are distinct, yet are one "substance, essence or nature".

By that same article: "According to this central mystery of some Christian faiths," which means, some, not all.

Name a denomination that does not believe in the Trinity

I have no denomination, but I believe in righteousness and have a strong moral code. What you folks are doing is purely hateful, calling out others for the sake of attacking them and their beliefs.
I'm ashamed to share this forum with you.

Good for you.  So do I.

You might have a strong moral code, but that code is not from the Bible.  It is based on what you as a person believe is producing least suffering.  That is what most normal people use as basis for their moral code.  There are of course cultural influences as well.

Again nothing to do with a bronze age story book.  At least I hope you are not getting moral code from it.

We are not hateful, we are just pointing out the obvious nonsense.

You can't sit there and assume you know my upbringing. I've come to learn my moral code is pretty damn close to the bible, and whether or not that's true is irrelevant. What you are doing is hateful, like calling someone "nonsense". That's an attack. You're a shit-disturber, nothing more.

Of course it is an utter nonsense.  Is is not an attack, it is stating the obvious.
It is a bronze age stories, very vile stories.  Read it all the way to the end.  By the time you are done, you'll be an Atheist.

Why does it offend you?  Why you think it is hateful?  I don't understand.  The book was written by 40 bronze age cave dwellers over the course of 1500 years.  Look it up.  Why would you think it is anything else?  The vile verses are in the OP.  Read them for yourself in your own copy.

Hey, listen. What if people would just randomly start posting some bullshit about you personally? Would you be pissed? The audience you're targeting here is everyone who believes in the bible, denominations aside. You're personally targeting users on this forum telling them that they're fucking retarded and disgusting vile human waste.

For what? What the fuck do you benefit from this? Some sick fucking pleasure, you're just as bad as those priests.

[rogie07]

----------------------
Crazy shit Bible says
----------------------

Kings 6:29 - cannibalism
Judges 11:29-40 - human sacrifice
Leviticus 25:44 - slavery
Deuteronomy 13:12-15 - genocide
Leviticus 10:6 - you will die if you rip your clothes
Leviticus 19:19 - breeding cattle is illegal
Leviticus 21 - some bat crazy rules for priests, do not fuck young boys should be somewhere there....
Leviticus 20:10 - killing of adulterers
Leviticus 20:9 - killing children who dishonor mother or father
Leviticus 24:16 - stoning people if they say God's name
Deuteronomy 28:53 - more cannibalism
Genesis 19:8 - prostituting your virgin daughters
Leviticus 19:19 - not mixing two kinds of material for clothing :-)
Deuteronomy 22:20-21 - more stoning for not being a virgin
Exodus 31:14-15 - killing of people who work on Sabbath
Deuteronomy 25:11-12 - cutting off hands
Deuteronomy 23:1 - you'll not go to heaven if your testicles are damaged
Leviticus 19:27 - no haircuts of any kind
Leviticus 19:28 - no tattoos, or else
Leviticus 11:7-8 - eating pork is forbidden


Matthew 5:29 - plucking out eyes
Matthew 5:30 - cutting off hands
Matthew 10:34 - waging wars by a sword
Corinthians 14:34-35 - women should be quiet and obey
Mark 10:11-12 - only marry once otherwise check Leviticus 20:10 for remedy
Luke 19:26-2 - genocide
Romans 1:20-32 - killing sinners
Revelation 2:5 - more killing
Revelation 2:23 - killing children
Psalm 137:9 - killing babies

Crazy things Bible says, #1:
----------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrWslruLvPo

Crazy things Bible says, #2:
----------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tT0TXzeUbAE

Crazy things Bible says, #3:
----------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkl_PefewXc&index=3&list=PLlWVv7VJx45a57Qu74jPvikH78wleNTmd

Crazy things Bible says, #4:
----------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adzi_XbxcPE

Crazy things Bible says, #5:
----------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6cb0GNc1WY

....


--------------------------
Crazy shit Christians say
--------------------------


Pat Robertson: Quit Your Job Over Voodoo doll:
---------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X65odgRN6FM

Are you atheist? or a satanist?