BADecker: Is the only proof the people need that bible is shit. Just read BADeckers posts.. no truth, no evidence, no proof, just shite spoutin from the most un-educated bible basher in history. Someone needs to tell him we're only entertaining him to see what more shite he'll spout about his jewish diety.. imagine.. a christian jew.. wow.. he's prob got a cross with a photo of himself stuck to jesus's face just to remind himself of his one fatal flaw.. he's a fuckin idiot, As his 'evidence' proves. Yeah BADecker, we know you are.. now hurry up and crucify yourself, saves us doing it for ya..
I know, I know. Now that we have figured out that God most certainly exists, you simply want to argue some about His attributes.
The only thing we've figured out today is that you've secretly been an atheist all along.
Nobody has complete faith in the existence of God. And one must have some faith just to live. The question is, do I have enough faith that God can use it to save me? I hope and trust that He will hold my faith strong enough that I will be saved. Why? Certainly I don't want the pain of damnation. But more importantly, I don't want to miss out on living in the New Heavens and the New Earth, with God, forever beholding the Greatness and Wonderfullness that He is.
What's this got to do with my last statement? Your rambling.
Do I have to literally spell it out for you?
Atheism suggests there is no God. Nobody living has complete faith in the existence of God. Therefore everybody lives with at least a touch of atheism in him/her. Because of this, since I am living, there is a part of me that holds to atheism just like there is a part of you that holds to God. Secrecy has nothing to do with it... except that, though you seem to write the language very well, you don't seem to be able to understand much of what anyone says.
Nothing wrong with that. Your field of expertise simply lies elsewhere.
Hold on. You've give us the green light to manipulate the definition of words! You can't have your cake and eat it BADecker.
Either:
A) We all stick to the standard definition of words.
B) We are all allowed to change the definition of words
We can't have one rule for some and other rules for others.
So what's it going to be? A or B?
Wow! You make reasonable sense here. And you are asking me to be your leader by making this choice for all of you?
No. What I'm saying is if you choose to manipulate the definition of words such as 'scientists' and 'atheists' which you have endlessly here on the forum, you cannot protest when others do the same.
Not meaning to change the definitions of words. Simply explaining some details about the people who claim that they are what those words express.
EDIT: However, if it takes a redefining of the words to do it, why not? I mean, it's about time that people stop hiding behind a bunch of deceitfulness.
Changing words about for your own gain is in itself deceitful.
