![Anti-Patrick_Ewing_Evolution_Image[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/1bmCi0c.jpg "Anti-Patrick_Ewing_Evolution_Image[1].jpg")
>le evolution is real
Then why are there still niggers?
creationists: 1
atheists: 0
>>73479098
because the environment in which they live didn't require niggers to evolve in order to survive
>>73479098
Are you implying that G-d wants niggers?
>>73479098
Well thats a good question - if god created humans in his image, why are there any niggas at all??
Cucks: 0
Atheists: 1
Go kiss some big black dirty feet, cucktians.
>>73479247
At least my God is worshipped by people who know how to use a toilet.
>>73479187
Italy bro has a good point, we don't require niggers to evolve in the U.S, we just blame ourselves and give them more welfare.
BLM! BLM! BLM!
Niggers have already cucked white people in America, we should have just picked our own cotton, god dammit. Could have avoided all this shit, we'd probably have a utopia by now.
>>73479098
Also, niggers exist ONLY because of evolution you stupid faggot; reproduce, reproduce, reproduce, that's what threatened and impoverished populations do. It increases their odds of survival.
>>73479481
so you're saying when they still shit, their just using the opportunist strategy of survival--reproduce and have as much offspring as possible, with out ever evolving any skills.
>>73479481
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_fertility_rate
Literally top 20 are African
>>73479612
Essentially, yes, that's what you have to do in that case. Until you develop some skill or figure out a niche in nature that you can flourish within.
>>73479247
>why are there any niggas at all??
sin
>>73479776
so you're saying they're literally a different species..
>>73479098
>implying humans at our current state are the epitome of evolution
>>73479821
>implying no variations within species
Have you ever met a smart nigger? If you have, then doesn't that prove they're just a product of their conditioning/environment?
If you haven't then doesn't that at least lead to the point that maybe they are different species?
I've met smart niggers, and can name some famous ones.
So the question is, why are "niggers" inherently bad? If at all? You basically made this claim in your post >>73479098
>>73479098
Researchers "can't find" the missing link because pointing it out is racist and will get them fired.
>>73480224
>>implying no variations within species
Yes, that is what i'm implying. in biological evolution, at least to my knowledge, there is no such thing as a species in which some use one strategy of survival, and some use another. A species is either opportunistic, like mosquitos and insects, or they're not- honestly forget what they're called but species like bears n shit. instead of reproducing as fast as possible and having as many offspring as possible, they have one or two cubs and do their best to take care of those cubs. and niggers aren't actually "opportunistic" in that way. that was a joke. if they were, they'd have thousands of offspring and they would have no genetic predisposition to take care of their young. degeneracy aside, humans, including niggers, are not biologically opportunistic species. that just doesn't exist in biological evolution.
>>73480281
>Researchers "can't find" the missing link because pointing it out is racist and will get them fired.
they can't find the thousands of missing links that should exist because there are none.
>le punctuated equilibrium, or rapid evolution in bursts
is their excuse. now why don't atheists regurgitate that shit?
>>73479098
>>le creationism is real
>Then why are there niggers? you saying god is a nigger lover?
>creationists: 0
>atheists: 1
>>73480624
>you saying god is a nigger lover?
I think God loves who people could be, m8.
>>73480508
>if they were, they'd have thousands of offspring and
They have millions of offspring, and millions get aborted, thankfully.
>they would have no genetic predisposition to take care of their young
They don't, see: Black single motherhood
Niggers are entirely opportunistic, see: Welfare
>>73480281
>>73480588
>still falling for the missing link meme
It's like Google doesn't even exist to you people.
>>73481145
you, uhh, you saying they all exist, m8? You gonna post a link to thousands fossils of Lucy's homies, m8?
>>73479247
>Why are there niggers?
Your telling me Lucifer's children arent allowed to have sex with humans for the purpose of soiling the genepool of humanity?
Thats really offensive and bigoted anon
P.S also Kuk is a green nigger not a frog why do you think he liked that name? Kuk=cuck like the autistic people that worship him(cucking the old egyptians)
>>73481230
>are you saying they all exist
There's about 30 of them found so far, so yeah.
>you going to post up thousands of intermediate species
Where the fuck did you get that number? Hominids related to us are less than 300,000 years old. Do you think evolution is magic or some shit? How the fuck would thousands appear when it took millions of years for everything else?
>>73482014
He still beliefs in the lucy meme
>>73482195
>beliefs
>Lucy is the only fossil found ever, and we don't have piles of other bones and fossils
Are you retarded?
>>73479247
>Buddha
>a deity
Love this meme
>>73482014
>There's about 30 of them found so far, so yeah.
I think you may have a numbers problem, m8.
>Where the fuck did you get that number? Hominids related to us are less than 300,000 years old. Do you think evolution is magic or some shit? How the fuck would thousands appear when it took millions of years for everything else?
Let's be generous and assume that only 0.00001% of transitional hominids would have eventually become discovered fossiles. 30*100000=30,000,000. So only 3 million transitional hominids would have had to existed in order to produce modern humans? About 55.3 million people die per day, today. So what obscenely low percentage do you have to come up with, in order to excuse 30 missing links (assuming they are real and that they exist) to account for human evolution? Not to mention there would necessarily have to be a plethora of transitional forms to show any kind of progression. Of those 30 "missing links" how many of them show different states of evolutionary progression? Also, source, not that it's particularly that relevant if the number is so low.
>>73482510
>>73482014
oh and
>Hominids related to us are less than 300,000 years old
nigga, every species prior to use in our lineage is related to us since the abiogenesis meme. Much more than 300,000 years needs to be accounted for.
>>73482687
30* million
can't into numbers right
>>73482510
>Are you retarded?
are you ?If one is a hoax why would the others be real, i grew up with the lucy meme the missing link in evolution . Look at it, it does not even have hands
ITT: People who still believe in le epin Dog maymay.
Magic is not real guys, grow the fuck up.
I mean, when was the last time that epic almighty loving god did anything good for you?
>>73479098
if god is real, why would he create niggers?
>>73483259
>Magic is not real guys
redundant. "magic" is defined as being non-existent. Why don't you come up with an actual argument, kid?
>I mean, when was the last time that epic almighty loving god did anything good for you?
Allowed me not to be a retarded idiot who denies His obvious existence.
And the meme actually goes:
>Believe on me and you will be saved
>>73483324
he did not niggers created them self trough inbreeding and decay of sin
>>73483399
My argument is as follows:
If there is an omnipotent deity that created universe, what proof do you have that it is actually truth?
+ Bonus question: How come is it exactly the God of your religion, boy.
Also, I didn't asked any gods permision to exist, neither Im aware of any gods approval. Another bonus question, if there was a gods approval, how come Im not aware of it. Also, how come it was yours god and yours only.
I mean, come on man, you can't trust things just because someone told you so. Or can you?
>>73481021
Listen, you fucking retard. As I already touched on in this
>>73480508
post, niggers aren't "opportunistic" in that way.
there is a difference between being "opportunistic" by stealing a VCR, and a species being biologically opportunistic. Sorry it sucks, but niggers are people to, according to biology anyway, and thus, they are not an opportunistic species.
Now if you want to argue they're literally, biologically not human, fine. But that still wouldn't make them technically, biologically opportunistic.
>>73483705
oh boy the most standart 4 chan strawmans
>what proof do you have muh burden of proof bla bla
>>73479098
>>73483929
How are niggers not opportunistic in that way? I provided you with examples, you provided me with gibberish.
>>73483705
If there is an omnipotent deity that created universe, what proof do you have that it is actually truth?
Something being "is," as in being, implies it is true that it is, as in, there can be no false thing that is. But assuming you mean so ask "What proof do you have that God exists?" you are the one making the truth claim that He doesn't, and then attempting to shift the burden of proof. If your assertion is that God does not exist, you are the one who needs to show proof He doesn't exist.
>How come is it exactly the God of your religion, boy.
What religion?
>Also, I didn't asked any gods permision to exist, neither Im aware of any gods approval.
One obviously needs pre-existence in order to ask for such a thing. What you're implying as a contention is logically absurd.
>Another bonus question, if there was a gods approval, how come Im not aware of it.
Well, I would argue that if God exists, it would be impossible to exist without his approval, so again, what you're implying is logically absurd. Even if it weren't, why would you necessarily need to have awareness of it?
>hurr, see: asking for approval of existence
What is this? Are we on acid?
>Also, how come it was yours god and yours only.
I didn't claim ownership of God, m8.
>I mean, come on man, you can't trust things just because someone told you so. Or can you?
First somewhat sane thing you've said.
If you want to do a bit of research on arguments for the existence of God though, instead of just being a faggot anti-God cuck on 4chan, here are some:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Arguments_for_the_existence_of_God
>>73484114
>How are niggers not opportunistic in that way?
Well, one, they're not classified in biology as such. They're classified as humans.
And two, if they were opportunistic by the biological classification of types of species definition, they would produce thousands of offspring per nigger.
and three, not a single one of them would take care of its thousands of children.
>>73484401
>>73483935
Classic theist bullshit. You have nothing except for a fuzzy warm feeling of belonging.
Fuck you and fuck your feels. There is no god and you are living a lie.
Have a nice day, boys.
>>73485234
So burden of proof and all the arguments for God are bullshit? Please explain, emotional kid who wants so badly for God not to exist that you probably preach it more than the most religious of people..
>>73479387
That's not what he meant but okay
>>73485315
I will not react in a reasonable way to an unreasonable arguments.
I'm asking for a simple proof. In that wiki link you posted was even a "God of gaps" as an argument for the existence of god, which is actually argument against it. Did you even looked at that link, my young gullible friend?
I mean, of course all arguments for the existence of god are bullsht, because, you know, there is no god as there is not a chines teapot orbiting jupiter.
If there is a God, allmighty and allknowing, then I double dare him to strike me by lighting right here where I sit comfy in my chair.
Well, nothing is happening.
So much for a omnipotence...
Atheists: 2
Cucks: 0
But I bet you will go to terrible mind-crushing mental loops to defend this... Well, you can't free fools from the chains they revere.
Also, reminder that this exists:
http://bibviz.com/
If bible is a holy word of allmighty, allknowing god, how come it is full of shit?
Atheists: 3
Cucks: 0
Your turn, theists.
>>73485752
>I'm asking for a simple proof
what about the holy fire in jerusalem?
every easter my country broadcasts it on TV and this year i think i heard they had scientist over there havent heard anyone disprove it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Fire
>tldr
>fire that doesnt burn faithful christians on easter
also
>If there is a God, allmighty and allknowing, >then I double dare him to strike me by lighting >right here where I sit comfy in my chair.
careful because you might end up like
>pic related
>>73485918
>>73485752
This is too much.
>I will not react in a reasonable way to an unreasonable arguments.
I myself have no problem responding to idiots, as you can see.
>I'm asking for a simple proof.
You're making the assertion that God doesn't exist and asking for proof He does?
> In that wiki link you posted was even a "God of gaps" as an argument for the existence of god,
That link only attempts to document arguments for God's existence, obviously regardless of their being good or bad. The "god of the gaps" argument is an atheist contention of an argument they think theists are making, thus the presence of the link. I explicitly provided it for further research.
>I mean, of course all arguments for the existence of god are bullsht, because, you know, there is no god as there is not a chines teapot orbiting jupiter.
And you were talking about unreasonable arguments? Are you suggesting that because Russel's teapot is presumably not orbiting the sun, that God necessarily does not exist?
>If there is a God, allmighty and allknowing, then I double dare him to strike me by lighting right here where I sit comfy in my chair. Well, nothing is happening. So much for a omnipotence...
So you're saying God doesn't exist because he doesn't snuff your feable existence out with a bolt of electricity when you triple dog dare Him too?
>But I bet you will go to terrible mind-crushing mental loops to defend this
I'm flattered that simple folk might see rational people this way
>If bible is a holy word of allmighty, allknowing god, how come it is full of shit?
Fuck, you got me.
>>73479387
It seems people forget what we accomplished before nogs were free. Slavery gets shit done and they served a purpose where many other races failed. They're work horses and you can't deny that America is where it is today because of all of the free hard labor. Liberals are to blame, not nogs. Liberals set them free and allow them to exist without evolving. We bred them for work, it worked out until they were set free. Never forget that.
>>73486334
You have literally made no arguments
Refuting other people's fallacies (which are ultimately based off of christian fallacies) don't count.
>>73486807
I have no such obligation. Refuting their absurd arguments is enough to show they have no valid reasons for asserting God doesn't exist, and thus should be agnostic, rather than emotionally pushing atheism. But if you must have one, here's one I made, as not to copy-paste one of the plethora of good arguments for God's existence that already exist >hurr where? Why do you think William Craig never loses? >durr he's good at debate doesn't mean God exists:
1) You're aware.
2) You're conscious.
3) Consciousness exists.
4) If God doesn't exist, then the only thing in existence that could create consciousness would be some interaction between any or all of the four fundamental forces of the universe.
5) If God exists, then He can create consciousness.
6) There is no empirical evidence that any interaction between any of the four fundamental forces of the universe could possibly create consciousness.
7) There are no mathematical posits that show how any interaction between any of the four fundamental forces of the universe could possibly create consciousness.
8) There is no reason to believe that any interaction between any of the four fundamental forces of the universe could possibly create consciousness.
9) It is unreasonable to believe that any interaction between any of the four fundamental forces of the universe could possibly create consciousness.
10) Therefore, God exists.
>>73487393
admittedly, it could be better. but it's the only one I have saved and I don't think its underlying point is at all bad.
>>73486300
Lol at holy fire is one of the longest hoaxes in humanity. Wake up, or praise my flying tuna fish monster too.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/1311064/Mystery-of-Jerusalems-Holy-Fire-comes-to-light.html
https://onthewaytoithaca.wordpress.com/2010/10/19/the-holy-light-of-jerusalem-debunked/
Atheists:124757292746583
Religion: -1
>>73487731
>Atheists:124757292746583
I get it; it's funny, sort of. But if you were so sure, why would you exaggerate your rightness so much? This is more of a question than a contention.
>>73487393
>>73487590
even if it showed that god exists, how would you know god is personal rather than impersonal? and if you can show god is personal, how can you show that god is a particular person (e.g., the god of abraham)?
>>73488178
>how would you know god is personal rather than impersonal?
I'm in destroy retarded atheists mode. To show that God is personal would take a different (though that doesn't mean invalid or non-existent) line of reasoning than I'm one right now. Such an argument would require arguing about purpose, meaning, and the actual Christian God, rather than just this vague notion of God and "God's" existence. Honestly, I'm busy getting drunk. I like this stuff, but I'm honestly not the greatest of christfags, hence it being easier to debate an ominous God, rather than specifically the Christian God (again, that doesn't mean He doesn't exist or than it's not true).
I'm sure other christfags could do much better than I at that.
>how can you show that god is a particular person
Personally, I don't think that notion of personhood or personality could adequately describe such a bing as "God."
>>73483935
>what proof do you have muh burden of proof bla bla
i guess adding 'muh' and 'bla bla bla' to a sentene somehow makes it less true
>>73487393
The lack of evidence for one thing is not evidence for another thing.
>>73489637
True. I just think it's a true dichotomy and that cosnciousness being a product of any interaction between the four physical, fundamental forces of the universe is inconveivable. The argument (and again, I know it's not perfect) is alluding to the impossibility of consciosness as a product of material interactions, as an a priori truth.
>>73479187
There's no goal of evolution. They adapted to wander around Africa and catch easily available animals. The environment didn't require them to become more creative or intelligent to deal with a harsh or variable climate, scarce resources, etc. I imagine it's the same for abbos.
>>73479247
because that's subversion.
the true creator created our spirits in his image. the flesh cages are the product of el, or satan, and are just vessels that we get forced into when we're born, and get out of when we die.
when you get into a car you don't suddenly become a car, and then claim the car was made in your parent's image.
>>73490819
>There's no goal of evolution.
by "require" i don't think he manes "goal." It's the same concept you're talking about.
>>73481458
>behold, satan falls from heaven
>"second coming"
>christians think it's jesus coming down, not satan falling from heaven
>satan gets imprisoned
>christians think the next 1000 years will be a cakewalk
>satan really gets imprisoned on earth, not in hell, and thus becomes its king
>1000 years of satan's rule
>christians think they'll rule together with jesus, not that the nwo will rule for 1000 years together with the false trinitarian counterfeit "jesus", or zeus, son of el, or kronos, who is really satan.
>>73491310
But that was 2000 years ago...
>>73491411
that prophecy extends for 3000 years. each of the seven symbols symbolizes big events in a millennium.
the seven seals were from 70 ad to 1070 ad.
the seven trumpets are from 1070 ad to 2070 ad.
the seven vials are from 2070 ad to 3070 ad, which is also called "the millennium".
after that, the age of satan, or kali yuga ends and golden age begins.
there is war in heaven. satan loses and falls to the earth. jesus says behold! but nobody beheld it.
there is a "second coming" event that's said that everyone on earth will behold it. catholics are now preparing for something to arrive to earth, observing it with their telescope.
it didn't happen yet. therefore it wasn't 2000 years ago, but may happen in our lifetimes.
>>73491264
Yeah, rereading his post you're right
>>73491622
>the seven seals were from 70 ad to 1070 ad.
>the seven trumpets are from 1070 ad to 2070 ad.
>the seven vials are from 2070 ad to 3070 ad, which is also called "the millennium".
Can you explain where you got this?
>jesus says behold! but nobody beheld it.
beholds what?
>there is a "second coming" event that's said that everyone on earth will behold it.
>it didn't happen yet. therefore it wasn't 2000 years ago, but may happen in our lifetimes.
Is this the crux of your argument? What do you think "behold" in the bible means?
>>73480508
r/k selection theory is what you are referring to
>>73479098
>"le"
Fuck off back to Le Red Dit, fagit.
>>73492048
thanks m8
>>73491802
the events tied to the first two sets of symbols match up with real world stuff. that was the original protestant interpretation of the revelation too before the subversive version of "lel israel and jews and antichrist obama" we have today became popular.
behold. watch and see. observe.
this second coming has been described in several cultures, not just christianity. ancient jews also had that prophecy, for them it was jehovah, not jesus. ancient babylonians also had that prophecy, for them it was anu, not jehovah nor jesus.
hollywood is furiously pushing the "omg, aliens came to earth" narrative in their movies recently. vatican also "leaked" some info that something is coming to earth.
second coming = aliens = nephilim return (as it was in days of noah) = annunaki return (sumerian gods, same as jewish elohim) = satan falls from heaven
he is imprisoned for 1000 years on earth to be judged, and in the meantime wages war on humanity and enslaves it, then after 1000 years he is released from earth to receive judgement, attacks heavens again, judgement is passed onto him and his people, the elohim/annunaki and all are banished to "hell", the state of eternal separation from the source, permanent exile.
and since we have the canaanite tablets, dead sea scrolls, sumerian tablets, nag hammadi library and such (knowledge has increased), we now know that the El from the torah is the golden calf, or kronos, anu, satan. thus, his son, the "jesus" of trinitarian doctrine is really zeus, enlil, the antichrist (pseudo christ, substitute christ).
i came and you received me not. he will come, him will you receive.
so if the guy who comes down says "i'm really jesus guys, now bow down to me!" you'll know who he is, unless you get deceived.
>>73479247
Actual answer. There are 100 mutations which involve the loss of information in our code every generation. We diversified because we are falling apart slowly but surely from our original creation.
>>73491310
>christians think it's jesus coming down, not satan falling from heaven
>1 antichrist
Nigga the real antichrist are 3 people Satan doesnt even care:
1 is the thinker
1 is the speaker
1 is the prophet
when these 3 meet each other(they dont know their destiny and will never accept it no matter how much you point it out to them or present them with facts) it would signal that a few months have passed after all the "true" christians or "sheep"(whoever they are) have passed away there are now only left "goats" there wont be a rapture only corruption of the church so im pretty sure the antichrist the "Illuminated" branch of masonry is pushing is actualy a lost but neutral guy who is their last enemy and test (one eyed false prophet with Cain's mark on his forehead(which gives him immense spirtual power) who would oppose Muhammeds teaching that is islam(religion made by jewish Kabbalah mages)) after the defeat of this hero the caliphate will spread globally but they will end up nuking each other. The survivors will pick up the teachings of the light and establish the real NWO which would not last very long before Armageddon also no amount of timetravel will reveal the date when exactly the world will end because that knowledge is somehow the only thing not obtainable in existance all that can be known is that it will be happening all around the multiverse and all of creation like a room full of mirrors
i dont care if anyone believes me or not im just posting this so i dont feel guilty later
>>73492455
>he is imprisoned for 1000 years on earth to be judged
Where does it say this? Does the bible not talk of Michael casting satan into hell for 1000 years in past tense, and that he now roams the earth?
>i came and you received me not. he will come, him will you receive.
What verse is this? Actually, where are you getting any of this?
>so if the guy who comes down says "i'm really jesus guys, now bow down to me!" you'll know who he is, unless you get deceived.
this is similar to how in revelation, it says to be watch out for people who come out and say they are the Christ, because they are surely an anti-christ. But Jesus never demanded anyone bow before him.
What you need to do, if you want to be convincing, is show a an irrefutable continuity in your position. Half of what you've said comes off as bullshit speculation, at face value. So, if you honestly believe what you're saying is true, explain your entire line of reasoning.
>>73479098
Pure racism; the poster.
Evolution doesn't work that way, and neither does Creationism, for that matter.
>>73492687
Dude, too true. It's devolution, not evolution.
>>73479320
Its is an act of humility. (You may have to look that up, I know. Evidence of evolved humans, too.)
>>73487393
>1) You're aware.
>2) You're conscious.
>3) Consciousness exists.
>4) If God doesn't exist, then the only thing in existence that could create consciousness would be some interaction between any or all of the four fundamental forces of the universe.
>5) If God exists, then He can create consciousness.
>6) There is no empirical evidence that any interaction between any of the four fundamental forces of the universe could possibly create consciousness.
>7) There are no mathematical posits that show how any interaction between any of the four fundamental forces of the universe could possibly create consciousness.
>8) There is no reason to believe that any interaction between any of the four fundamental forces of the universe could possibly create consciousness.
>9) It is unreasonable to believe that any interaction between any of the four fundamental forces of the universe could possibly create consciousness.
>10) Therefore, God exists.
this one is pretty good
>>73486786
I don't imagine crazy people CAN forget their crazy notions. Don't they get them refreshed via the mind-radios every night?
>>73487393
What is an emergent property?
>>73492730
meh, i feel you brev
>>73493241
a property that somehow emerges from its parts. the definition itself begs the question.
>>73492730
i meant the son of perdition antichrist, not a generic antichrist. a spiritual being, not material man.
the final one who will be received in place of the real jesus, who will enter the temple (human heart) and declare himself as god, who has been advertised by the corrupt roman bible that both catholics and protestants use.
the one from trinity, son of el, known by many names, first one being babylonian anu, and his son, the pseudo "jesus", enlil who is now worshiped as a god. spiritual mystery babylon.
i know there will be no literal "beam me up jesus" rapture. it'll be a removal of those who have christ-like qualities (anyone with righteousness and goodness in their hearts, not idolators who worship jesus's name), aka persecution and death, likely by muslims, atheists and leftists.
after all, the flesh is corrupt and has to be removed first if the soul is to be saved and "clothed in light", which symbolizes a new body of pure light/energy, no flesh.
>>73492926
satan is the god of this world. everything in this world has been manipulated/created by him. what makes you think your catholic-sourced bible wasn't?
if you can look at it through the spirit's eye, not with a beast's literal mind, and aren't ignorant to reject outside knowledge you'll see the book of genesis in an entirely new light, realizing El, the guy who "clothed adam in animal skins", which symbolizes trapping the spirit in "evolved ape" flesh was none other than satan, deceiving mankind, then causing the fall of man.
our flesh is satan's creation, and this is repeated in many other religions as well. everything in this material world is satan's.
but our souls and spirits don't exist in this satan's world, and can't be measured, seen or touched. they are the true "created in father's image" part, not the flesh.
they're outside of satan's control, that's why he can only deceive us, and why people commonly believe demons need your permission or contracts to deal with you.
>>73494355
Haven't even read everything you've said yet, but I feel like everything you've said is a blatant rejection of the holy spirit, which is the ultimate proof of Jesus as Christ. In order to accept the holy spirit's existenct and tell me that I follow satan at the same time, you would have to show me how what I experience as the holy spirit isn't real or true, and further, how what I experience is evil--that either love of God is evil, or it's not what I know it is.
I'm curious as to where you're getting what you're saying, because it seems to me that, if anything, you're the anti-christ here.
>>73494709
didn't the bible say that the proof of having the holy spirit is doing works greater than christ? i don't think you can walk on water, turn water into wine or heal the sick with your touch.
you only think you have the spirit because you recited a "dear jesus, i accept you into my heart" style magic spell and feel good about it, but you have no works such as jesus's or apostle's exploits to prove it.
you follow the same jesus catholics do since both came from the same bible, not jesus of nazareth, who the gnostic bible speaks of much more accurately. rejecting catholic traditions doesn't suddenly change the protestant jesus. he's still the same, even if his birthday is different or his mother is a human, not a goddess.
catholic jesus is enlil. even the catholics admit it through their symbolism.
>>73495351
>didn't the bible say that the proof of having the holy spirit is doing works greater than christ?
No
Am I supposed to keep reading after that? Tell me where you're getting all of this retardedation, then maybe I'll entertain you.
>>73495446
try reading more stuff than just your catholic-corrupted bible. try reading the gnostic christian bible to see jesus. check out sumerian tablets to learn of anu and enlil, the prototype for jehovah. look into dead sea scrolls for more expanded christian myths. check out canaanite tablets to learn about the jewish El, or jehovah.
if you're still just going to go "i won't read what you write", then stop replying. you obviously want an echo chamber.
>>73495678
>doesn't what you believe say this?
No
>try reading this other shit because this is a valid point
I've asked you two or three times, and you still haven't answered: Where are you getting your information. What is your source and inspiration for saying what you've been saying? Be specific and, if you can, conceptual.
>>73495789
did't i list them?
the sources that show similarities between the old testament's god and other religious gods, and their common links to satan.
if that proves the bible was tampered with (and catholics had over 1000 years to tamper with it before protestants got their hands on the catholic scripts recovered from istanbul when it fell), it shows that it can no longer be trusted.
>>73495678
>gnostic christian bible
14. Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life."
Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."
From the gospel of thomas
>>73496228
so, you're saying you meant to but didn't post zeitgeist shit that's already thoroughly been shown to be false to the point of being a hoax? Or do you mean something else?
>>73496362
wtf
>>73495678
does not the dead sea scrolls proof that the bible is untouched
>>73479098
Stop comparing apes to niggers.
You'll offend the apes.
>>73496589
>18I testify to everyone who hears the words of prophecy in this book: If anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19And if anyone takes away from the words of this book of prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
I think it's relatively clear that if God exists, He wouldn't allow His word, that it the true meaning of His word, to be altered.
>>73496362
>gospel of thomas
>another guy's word of how jesus was
yeah.
then there's its own version of genesis, where the corrupt, demented spirit, jehovah/satan creates the world to imprison human spirits within it, and torment it with suffering.
>>73496589
all that proves is that romans didn't change the old testament much (they still did. changing names, removing names and such), which was already changed by the time of babylonian captivity.
>>73496399
anything can be painted a hoax to make unsuspecting people dismiss it.
>how does poison work
>99% food, 1% poison
that's why you need discernment, to find the poison within that and discard it. same with the bible. find poison (el worship, el is the god, trinity doctrine which is a repainted babylonian pagan worship with changed names) and discard it.
>>73496760
the bibles keep getting changed even today, with dozens of new versions every year. nobody who does that gets plagues.
satan is the god of this world, and he doesn't care. all he cares about is installing demonic qualities such as fear and division in his followers.
any religion or god that promotes that (fear of god etc) is demonic.
>>73497292
>the bibles keep getting changed even today, with dozens of new versions every year. nobody who does that gets plagues.
Are you purposely misunderstanding?
>satan is the god of this world
>any religion or god that promotes that (fear of god etc) is demonic.
Satanist or troll confirmed.
Fourth time I will ask and last time: Sources, my surely sincerely righteous friend?
>>73497541
>Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don't believe.
>2 Corinthians 4:4
>The time for judging this world has come, when Satan, the ruler of this world, will be cast out.
>John 12:31
>Judgment will come because the ruler of this world has already been judged.
>John 16:11
>how do i google
>>73497809
none of those are valid points. Must I seriously go through them? am arguing with an apparent schizophrenic. wat do?
>>73497809
>2 Corinthians 4:4
4The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers so they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
obviously talking about idols when mentioning "gods." could be interpretated as satan too, but that doesn't make satan "god"--two different meanings of "god," neither of which are "God. Jeez, that's one. thanks for wasting my time.
>>73497292
>>another guy's word of how jesus was
are you kidding me
34. Jesus said, "If a blind person leads a blind person, both of them will fall into a hole."
35. Jesus said, "One can't enter a strong person's house and take it by force without tying his hands. Then one can loot his house."
compare these verses from the gospel of thomas
with any sayings jesus uses in the bible, pro tip he made them hard to understand so people really have to think about it.
why would you even belief that the gospel of thomas showed how jesus was
My theory is that niggers evolved from apes, but White people were created by God in the Garden of Eden. Explains the HUGE difference between humans and niggers.
>>73498822
Then explain blues, jazz, and ebin gospel music.
>>73492687
Sure, but the first men were niggers
>>73498357
god is a being with overwhelming power over others.
that's why gnostics don't call the Source god. the original creator and the father, but not a god, because god implies iron fist rule, and a father is not a dictator, but a caretaker.
doesn't help that the jewish god is a portrait of seven deadly sins like wrath, pride, greed etc.
>>73498552
jesus always spoke in parables obviously. thomas is someone who followed him, then reported on what he heard. we have to take his word the same as with paul or peter, and trust nobody felt like changing the words to match an agenda.
i meant the "cosmology" of him, arriving from outside this world, from the source to deliver light to this dark, material world and open people's eyes.
the blind man one is a perfect representation of this thread. we're all blind, each of us believes he is right and everyone else is wrong, but in the end we all stumble in the darkness, blindly.
we'd have to open our eyes (third eye, mind's eye, chakra stuff) to start grasping at the true reality, but it's nigh impossible unless you embrace extreme asceticism, which the western style fast paced world makes extraordinarily hard to do.
it doesn't help that all authority figures actively discourage it through deception, knowing those who do will no longer obey them.
>>73499100
It's adam and eve, not kalifa and sharifa, faggot.
>>73495351
Pierdol się oszołomiona kurwo.
>>73499178
m8, until you start posing actual arguments rather than unsupported assertions, there's no reason to listen to you whatsoever.
>>73499370
>being this mad because someone doesn't share his beliefs
are you going to blow yourself up next?
>>73499489
then stop replying. you said you didn't even read my arguments because i'm "the antichrist".
>>73499636
but they're not arguments. I'm replying asking you to show a source or logical reasoning, or... something. You seem to be refusing to do that.
>>73499489
>m8, until you start posing actual arguments rather than unsupported assertions
The irony...
>>73499831
fuck off beaner
>>73499759
i gave a bunch of sources, and my conclusions from trying to find an order in the chaos of all of those.
you don't expect me to give you a "here, i got all my thinking from this article" type thing, do you?
that's not logic or thought, it's just parroting someone else who did the work.
>>73479098
evolution isn't forward
>>73499895
Mad bro? You better pray some more to your idol.
All this arguing and no one realizes that Agnostic theism is the most logical position to hold.
>>73500001
I expect you to show an actual line of reasoning. You didn't give "a bunch" of sources. In fact, I'm not sure you gave any at all.
Show a line of reasoning. It might help if you number you arguments premises, and it might help to show you that you don't really have any that logically connect.
>>73500057
jajajajajajaja
>>73500110
There is literally no proff that God exists, much less that Christian god exists. Atheism is the only logical and rational position.
I don't have any problems with christian fags, but dont expect me to take you guys seriously in intelectual matters
>>73500110
I wish i could agree, but that's not even a rationally existent 'position'. nor is any combination of gnosticism and agnosticism.
>>73500192
>>73500252
>>73500290
I see where you're coming from. But I like the position of "Is there a God? I don't know, maybe?"
>>73500252
>There is literally no proff that God exists, much less that Christian god exists. Atheism is the only logical and rational position.
This is something an idiot would say. What were you saying about "intellectual matters?"
>>73500252
agnosticism is logical. atheism is illogical.
agnosticism says "there may or may not be something, i don't know". atheism says "there is nothing out there, i know for sure", while you don't actually know, because you never were there.
>>73483500
>Dutch
>Religious
Disgusting bro, how does it feel that your kind is dying out?
>>73500381
that's agnosticism bruv, not "theistic agnosticism" nor "atheistic agnosticism." What you want to be true doesn't get attached automatically to what you actually believe. Lel, tell that to all the intelligrent 'agnostic' atheists on here.
>>73500423
brev, am gnostic agnostic atheist. that is to say, i know about how i don't know but I "know" kind of that God doesn't exist. feel meh?
>>73500381
> But I like the position
And i like fried potatos. But this is not a taste matter
>>73500415
>This is something an idiot would say.
Then show me the proofs. And no, that post is not proofs. God of the gaps is not proof of God existence.
>>73500423
>there is nothing out there, i know for sure
We have no proofs of god existence, ence it's only logical to dismiss god as folk tales. If we were proven wrong, and god exists, then it would be ilogical to continue claiming god doesn't exist
>>73500423
Bullshit.
Atheism is just a total lack of belief coming from absolute lack of evidence supporting the existence of God.
>>73479098
Evolution takes a long time to change anything.
>>73500774
>Then show me the proofs.
>There is literally no proff that God exists, much less that Christian god exists. Atheism is the only logical and rational position.
If you mean "therefore," you're obviously, logically wrong. Assuming there is no proof that God exists, that doesn't show atheism is true, hence it being something an idiot would say.
>>73500734
Do you actually believe in OP pic or just pishing for attention?
>>73500774
lack of proof of existence is not proof of nonexistence.
that's why agnosticism follows logic while atheism doesn't. only a fool rejects something just because there's no evidence for it being there.
that's how many scientific discoveries were made. people kept prodding into something there was no evidence for until finding it.
there was no evidence for higgs boson, but people didn't say "there's no evidence therefore it doesn't exist", and then they discovered it.
only an idiot says that with absolute certainty.
>>73479098
Because god made them food for all the animals in Africa , they didn't need to evolve , just breed and be somewhat elusive . why do you think they look already cooked.
>>73500872
lack of belief is agnostism, m8. In epistemology, lack of belief is non-belief is not knowing.
I'm sorry Dawkins and your new atheist friends lied to you.
>>73501039
> Assuming there is no proof that God exists, that doesn't show atheism is true,
Yes it does. If there is no prof that god exists, we can safely say that god does not exist. This is science 101. If you claim anything without supporting evidence, then i can dismiss it without making any argumentation or counter proof.
>>73501072
>phishing for attention
says the tripfag?
>>73501078
m8, your being rational is disconcerting considering you're an obvious loon.
>>73501314
>If there is no prof that god exists, we can safely say that god does not exist. This is science 101
Stopped reading there. Come back when you actually know what you're talking about.
>>73501314
there was no proof for higgs boson to exist either, therefore it didn't exist.
oh, wait. they discovered it now. now there is proof.
science is the constant pursuit of knowledge. to a real scientist there is no such thing as "i know it's impossible". there is only "i don't know how it yet".
it may not be possible for your limited brain, but a more advanced one with better understanding of things could eventually solve it.
to 10th century people flying humans were completely unimaginable and there was no evidence of that being possible. now we have airplanes.
i wonder how would atheists react if one day the globalists disappeared and someone actually found evidence for the existence of souls without it being suppressed for going against the luciferian narrative.
>>73501607
if i were to start writing my rationalization this thread would go offline before i went through even half of that. it took me months of meditating on the subject.
>>73501078
>lack of proof of existence is not proof of nonexistence.
Yes it is, you retard. Lol, the kind of double thinking and mental gymanastics you guys do.
>only a fool rejects something just because there's no evidence for it being there.
lol wut?
>people kept prodding into something there was no evidence for until finding it.
lol, no. Science is not a snipe hunt. They are not mixing things in tubes hoping to bump in anything. You are so uneducated it hurts.
>there was no evidence for higgs boson, but people didn't say "there's no evidence therefore it doesn't exist", and then they discovered it.
Read the wiki page. I knew before hand you would say the Higgs Boson.
The Higgs Boson was a prediction made by Higgs, based on some formulas and stuff i don't understand. Up until some years ago, Higgs Boson was like God : It fulfilled many gaps in theories, but there was no proof.
But the existence of Higgs Boson wsa supported by a huge number of mathemathical equations, there was science behind it. Where is the science behind God?
>>73501883
wasn't asking for your rationalization on anything, m8.
> this thread would go offline before i
and jeez, don't fucking flatter yourself so hard. you'll hyperextend your manhood
>>73501967
>Yes it is, you retard. Lol, the kind of double thinking and mental gymanastics you guys do.
m8, stop. You're embarrassing yourself. Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence is simple logic, widely accepted, contemporary logic.
>>73502131
i meant it would take me hours to organize and compile my thoughts on that, and without any input this thread will go offline in some 10-15 minutes or so.
i also tend to digress a lot.
>>73501351
You got me there.
>>73501806
Typical christian. Can't argue, so he calls othrs retards. At least you have not used the hat maym.
>>73501883
>there was no proof for higgs boson to exist either
There were educated predictions. If the Higgs Boson was proven not to exist, we would most likely have to drop everything we know about Physics and start again from scratch.
>oh, wait. they discovered it now. now there is proof.
And God?
>to a real scientist there is no such thing as "i know it's impossible".
Lol, wut? Too many Youtube videos, bro. You have a childlike view on science.
I don't even know why i am answering to your drivel.
>>73502387
m8... are you currently b& from your favorite call of duty server or something?
>>73502286
>Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence
Source? I googled it and found the exact contrary,that "Absence of evidence is evidence "
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Absence_of_evidence
>>73502670
So when will you present evidence of God existence?
>>73502387
there is no evidence now. how about in 100 years? in 1000 years? how can you be so certain we won't discover something new tomorrow or a year from now? can you see the future?
and then you probably take the entire bible literally like some mindless brute, unable to read symbolism, parables or allegories used by people who wrote those down, unaccustomed to seeing things they didn't understand, having to describe them.
you go after the christian god, who is an old babylonian god in new clothes. babylonian gods could very easily be alien or extradimensional beings.
they're theorizing now that cern may be able to contact other dimensions. how do you think a 11 dimensional being would look to a 3 dimensional mind? like a god perhaps?
>>73502836
rationalwiki is an atheists website, that arguably isn't at all dedicated to unbiased logical interpretation of anything.
I think wikipedia might be a little more accurate:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
Believing something is true because there isn't evidence for the supposed contrary is by definition, an argument from ignorance, and is thus, fallacious thinking.
And yes, kid, but to assert "There is no God because there is no evidence!" is an exemplary example of this fallacy.
>>73502894
Well, I tried, earlier in this thread. I would try further, even using my own rationale, if I thought you were actually willing to accept that your views are wrong, but I don't.
>>73502935
>there is no evidence now. how about in 100 years? in 1000 years?
Then until then i will be able to say that god does not exist. If God is proven, then i will repent and you will laugh at me.
>how can you be so certain we won't discover something new tomorrow or a year from now?
I'm not. I'm not closed to new discoveries. But until then...
>and then you probably take the entire bible literally like some mindless brute
>I read the bible
lol
>unable to read symbolism, parables or allegories used by people who wrote those down
there you go:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesop%27s_Fables
> babylonian gods could very easily be alien or extradimensional beings.
And i am super man.
>they're theorizing now that cern may be able to contact other dimensions.
lol
>>73503088
>Believing something is true because there isn't evidence for the supposed contrary is by definition, an argument from ignorance, and is thus, fallacious thinking.
lol the irony. Aren't you the ones that say that god exists without any sort of evidence? You guys fit very well in there.
> assert "There is no God because there is no evidence!" is an exemplary example of this fallacy.
No it's not. I'm not making any claim. I am just dismissing your unsuported claims. Very different things. Christian mental gymnastics is someting of another world
>>73503211
>Well, I tried, earlier in this thread. I would try further, even using my own rationale, if I thought you were actually willing to accept that your views are wrong, but I don't.
>I could, but i won't
lolol
This thread is precious
>>73503719
I think gargling Hitchens' mayonnaise has made you a bit weary, m8.
>>73504057
I don't even know who Hitchens is, apart from some pics i see here and the occasional bideo i saw him debating muslims.
But keep embarassing yourself.
So is life going alright? What job do you have?
>>73504264
You can't hurt my feelings. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
>>73504500
>What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
This is what i have been saying this whole thread. Since God is being asserted without proofs, then i can dismiss it without proofs
>>73504735
Oh fuck
>>73504867
So you have been arguing for a position you don't believe? You roleplayed as a christian for 60 posts?
>>73505090
I honestly think you should take a logic/critical thinking class, no offense.
>What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
What is the difference between that statement and
>What can be asserted without evidence should be dismissed?
>>73505290
Nice moving the goalposts,
>>73505404
wat
>>73505481
You have been moving the goalposts this whole thread. You never adrees the points. I asked you multiple times for evidence of God existence. You failed to produce them. Then you posted
>>73504500
>>73503088
>>73505693
desu, i'm only talking to you in hopes other people will respond. how have i been moving goalposts? how have i not been addressing points? I posted a whole logical argument like 80 posts ago, what more do you want? and m8, just answer the question: what is the difference between those two statements?
>>73505909
>I posted a whole logical argument like 80 posts ago
That is not proof, and you know very well it is. Using god to cover gaps in our knowledge is not a proof of his existence
> what is the difference between those two statements
Why do you care? If you tink i'm gonna enter in soome semantics discussion you are very wrong
>>73506294
>Using god to cover gaps in our knowledge is not a proof of his existence
I agree, but to assume that all that is possible, we will discover, and therefore God doesn't exist, is even more absurd. And I was arguing that it could be known, a priori, that consciousess must necessarily be immaterial, basically, and that therefore God exists.
>Why do you care? If you tink i'm gonna enter in soome semantics discussion you are very wrong
Because Hitchens was an idiot, and I want to see you realize it, particularly because your philosphy seems to be based on what he thought, guy who doesn't know him.
>>73493060
No thats not humility thats outright submission.
