Top 10 Christian fails 2013

[Blake]

Who said there is no Santa? In fact there are 1000s of them on every city block durting xmas You need photos?

Oh look. A lame joke to sidestep the point.

And xmas loved it of course.

Lol

[spurraider21]

How does anyone define the indefinable? No one has even an infinitesimal conception of Him in the first place IMHO.
I do not have a problem with "understanding" either, so that makes two of us.
However our "opinions" may differ, and that is fine with me because I, like you, am only human, with our human limitations to deal with.
I say this to you with respect for your intelligence to discuss a topic without the need to cuss or make false accusations about my possible difference of opinion about it since it is a worthy topic that merits discussion.

if it can't be definable and thus you don't even know what it is, how can you claim you believe it exists?

[mouse]

Oh look. A lame joke to sidestep the point.

And xmas loved it of course.

Lol

You claim there is no Santa I proved different how is that a joke, who is sidestepping the point now?

[mouse]

if it can't be definable and thus you don't even know what it is, how can you claim you believe it exists?

By putting it in the text books

[Blake]

You claim there is no Santa I proved different how is that a joke, who is sidestepping the point now?

great, then when you sit on Santa's lap this year, you can ask him why he didn't bring you a better life last Christmas.

[mouse]

great, then when you sit on Santa's lap this year, you can ask him why he didn't bring you a better life last Christmas.

I don't support Xmas plus I already like my life I find educating you and others online makes my life even more enjoyable

[RandomGuy]

Leaving all the BS aside in order to sincerely answer your latest question, yes, it is possible that the inability to logically define something indicates that thing doesn't really exist. This is why in youth I was an atheist for a while.
Yet the paradox is that it can also exist even though it may not be definable logically. That is not the same as saying it is illogical however. It just means it is a paradox and undefinable at this point in time. One premise does not as a necessity follow another.
Your other question is easier to answer. And that is, I have no definable proof, pure and simple.
My faith that God exists is a very very "subjective" thing that came about through "inner" revelations that happened over time and during introspective periods of my life.
This is why I always caution to those looking for proof, to quit looking up in the sky or around yourself, but rather look within yourself because that is where you will find and know God for yourself.
This is also another reason God cannot be proved, it lies within each individual and will be made known to each in God's own way.
This is the best I can give you. I have my own "inner" proof gifted to me, that no one can give to you, but God Himself. And I am thankful and unshakable.
The adage, look and ye shall find, is the truth if you are "sincerely" seeking the existence of God and not just goofing and spoofing around. It will be made known to you.

Believing in something without evidence is irrational.

That thinking sounds eerily like way people delude themselves about all sorts of conspiracy theories.

If the proof about God cannot be demonstrated to others, then it cannot be distinguished from an active delusion.

There are people just as convinced that the voices in their head are Satan, and so forth. They have found all sorts of inner evidence about what "God" wants.

Personally, I think you are confusing a sense of wonder about existence itself with the existence of some concept of God.

The universe is far more wonderful and awesome and doesn't really need any concept of God, defined or undefined, to be wonderful.

That is my take, and probably where we could reasonably end our conversation. It seems about as far as we can reasonably go.

[xmas1997]

Believing in something without evidence is irrational.

That thinking sounds eerily like way people delude themselves about all sorts of conspiracy theories.

If the proof about God cannot be demonstrated to others, then it cannot be distinguished from an active delusion.

There are people just as convinced that the voices in their head are Satan, and so forth. They have found all sorts of inner evidence about what "God" wants.

Personally, I think you are confusing a sense of wonder about existence itself with the existence of some concept of God.

The universe is far more wonderful and awesome and doesn't really need any concept of God, defined or undefined, to be wonderful.

That is my take, and probably where we could reasonably end our conversation. It seems about as far as we can reasonably go.

Not even close to being true.
You believe in love don't you? What evidence do you have of that?
You believe in hope, don't you?
You believe the earth's core is molten lava. Show me proof.
You believe in the earth's magnetic field, yet you specifically can't show evidence of it.
You probably believe in the theory of evolution, or that the moon controls the tides, or that your body is composed of over 90% water.
And you probably believe the universe is expanding.
What evidence can you show me of all of those?
Just because you cannot provide evidence of something does not mean it does not exist.
You should know this.
Your rationale is a bit faulty IMHO.

[mouse]

Believing in something without evidence is irrational.
.

I agree

[Blake]

Not even close to being true.
You believe in love don't you? What evidence do you have of that?
You believe in hope, don't you?
You believe the earth's core is molten lava. Show me proof.
You believe in the earth's magnetic field, yet you specifically can't show evidence of it.
You probably believe in the theory of evolution, or that the moon controls the tides, or that your body is composed of over 90% water.
And you probably believe the universe is expanding.
What evidence can you show me of all of those?
Just because you cannot provide evidence of something does not mean it does not exist.
You should know this.
Your rationale is a bit faulty IMHO.

spaghetti monster

Lol you're an idiot.

[xmas1997]

I agree

You would, we know your stance on evolution, and if we didn't before, we do now.
But that is cool.

[mouse]

You would, we know your stance on evolution, and if we didn't before, we do now.
But that is cool.

what is my stance?

[xmas1997]

what is my stance?

You make that pretty clear, you think it preposterous, right?

[RD2191]

I agree

[RD2191]

Doesn't mouse believe in intelligent design?

[mouse]

You make that pretty clear, you think it preposterous, right?

Birds fish and insects evolving to adapt to their surroundings is a form of "micro" evolution just as dogs in Alaska have thick coats and polar bears have white fur to blend in the snow. But "macro" evolution which is pure bull and is taught in the text books is when you get a fox from a fish, a dinosaur from a bird and a man from a snail. And that I don't support.

[xmas1997]

Birds fish and insects evolving to adapt to their surroundings is a form of "micro" evolution just as dogs in Alaska have thick coats and polar bears have white fur to blend in the snow. But "macro" evolution which is pure bull and is taught in the text books is when you get a fox from a fish, a dinosaur from a bird and a man from a snail. And that I don't support.

Like I said, that is cool.

[mouse]

Like I said, that is cool.

As in cool but not really accepted in your mind?

[xmas1997]

As in cool but not really accepted in your mind?

No, I understand what you're saying and it makes logical sense to me.

[mouse]

No, I understand what you're saying and it makes logical sense to me.

But your a religious man and you are skeptical of my beliefs? (which is not a bad thing just need to know) if i'am to believe your replies.

Kinda like you may ask a person what is a P38 before you listen to his 12 minute rant about serving in the military.

[xmas1997]

But your a religious man and you are skeptical of my beliefs? (which is not a bad thing just need to know) if i'am to believe your replies.

Kinda like you may ask a person what is a P38 before you listen to his 12 minute rant about serving in the military.

Actually I have claimed many times that I am not religious, rather I am spiritual.
I believe in God, yes, but I have friends of all persuasions.
I try not to judge.
Everyone has their own particular path to travel.

[mouse]

Then how do you feel about using Alien made contraceptives?

[TDMVPDPOY]

remember when the bible only had a few clowns in it giving their POV

now with every year new editions they always add some new clown to the bible who we never heard of

so all these clowns in the bible where were they when jesus was nailed to a cross?

[mouse]

remember when the bible only had a few clowns in it giving their POV

now with every year new editions they always add some new clown to the bible who we never heard of

so all these clowns in the bible where were they when jesus was nailed to a cross?

The Bible could be the universe's top fairy tails of all time which is even more reasons to read it..the facts still remains it was written over 2000 years ago, it was here long before John Smith and Bill Nye and Google if it was written today it would be on Oprah's book of the month.

You want clowns? try reading the in your kids school texts books

[RandomGuy]

Birds fish and insects evolving to adapt to their surroundings is a form of "micro" evolution just as dogs in Alaska have thick coats and polar bears have white fur to blend in the snow. But "macro" evolution which is pure bull and is taught in the text books is when you get a fox from a fish, a dinosaur from a bird and a man from a snail. And that I don't support.

Meh. If I thought you understood any of it, I might bother responding more in-depth.

The only difference between "micro" and "macro" evolution is time.

If you accept that microevolution exists, you accept macroevolution exists, and, by extension the theory of evolution.

BTW, you got the dinosaur/bird thing backwards.

LOL too incompetent to even get a decent strawman argument together.