Sure we know Jesus and it's not just from a book. The book/bible only lets you know about Jesus. Getting to know Jesus is a daily walk with him.

I'm well aware of that. Do you believe in all of those stories? If not, why not? How do you determine which ones are true and which ones aren't? Please note that I am not saying that spirit beings do not exist. I don't know whether they do or not. However, since there is a dearth of actual evidence for such a widely attested phenomenon, my default position on it is that there are probably other explanations for what people are seeing.



My point was that not everyone believes in apparitions. You strongly implied that we all believe in such things to make your case.



This comparison does not support your earlier statement. You said:



As I said, just because many people believe in spirit beings, it does not automatically prove that there must be one who rules over them. Do you see the point? The second part of your statement is a non-sequitur. As for your example, yes, there are rulers, or pack leaders, in every group of people or animals on the planet, but there is no ONE leader over all the sub-groups. And that's what you were saying, because you're trying to prove God's existence.



As a loving father, I certainly wouldn't drown my children, and all their pets, as a form of punishment. And I certainly wouldn't punish one child for the misbehavior of another child.



Sorry, but I HAVE researched this topic, and continue to do so. And you know what I have found? So far, every supposed miracle worker has either failed to be able to produce any "miracles" when put in a situation where the phenomenon could be observed and/or recorded scientifically, or their "miracles" have been exposed as sleight-of-hand tricks.

Also...do you not see the conflict in your own statement above? Let's lay it out. You assert that:

1. In Africa, there is a show of supernatural powers.(Definite statement.)
2. God exists, because you have seen him at work when his name had been invoked. (Also a definite statement.)
3. You don't think that these things happened by chance. (Not a definite statement. A speculation. Why the sudden uncertainty?)
4. God has been called upon to counter supernatural powers, etc. (Another definite statement. Your evidence for this assertion, please?)
5. You have seen it, and you believe. (You "believe." A declaration of faith, not certainty.)

See what I mean? You don't seem to be 100% convinced of your own assertions, first of all. Second, some of your assertions are dependent upon things for which there is no tangible evidence. Something to think about.



Okay. I'm glad to see that you are able to admit that even the question of whether or not God has a gender is unknown. Perhaps the term has no meaning when it comes to God. Who knows? That's my point. It's pretty difficult to forge a close relationship with a being about which we can't even know something so basic as its gender.

Or, prove its very existence.

If it weren't for the Bible, most of us would never have even heard of Jesus. And, as we have already seen, I can methodically and logically demonstrate that the Bible is not a reliable source of information, while you can revert back to claiming that God/Jesus talks to you every day. (Something I cannot disprove, no matter how much I point out just how unlikely that is.)

So, let's skip that part. Tell me this:

Are you absolutely certain that it is God/Jesus that you are talking to? It could be another spirit being, tricking you.
What does Jesus look like?
Does he speak to you in English?
If so, why didn't he just skip the Bible, with its many translation issues, and talk directly to all of us, in our native language, in the first place?
Why does he speak to you, and not the rest of us? What makes you so special? (I don't mean that as an attack. It's a legitimate question.)

Like Lazarus, I agree with this. I have many times said that, if God exists, he/she/it is the one entity who could settle this debate once and for all. So far, I'm still hearing crickets. But, I, too, am waiting to see whether or not God ever speaks up.

Come on, God! Could we get a couple of Damascus Road Experiences over here?! And hold the blindness, please!

"Whenever I see a man possessed with such certainty, I always think he's trying mostly to convince himself"

Had to mention that quote, just heard it while watching Gotham but I must say it certainly rings true with the religious types.

That's a good one, all right. That is true in many cases. It's all that cognitive dissonance.

BTW, I've heard that Gotham is a good show, but I've never seen it. Would you say that it's a pretty good show, Lazarus?

It's got a batman flavor to it and the city imo is done better than the one in the (recent) movies. The characters are not quite what you'd expect though (especially the penguin - it's a huge stretch from the danny devito penguin for sure...). I find it entertaining though, just don't expect to see batman anytime soon.

Gotcha. Well, it does sound interesting. I enjoy it when writers manage to find new ways to present established characters.

When it's done well, of course!

Gender only has any importance to our physical self. Spiritually speaking gender has absolutely no bearing, meaning, or importance.

- Yes I'm absolutely sure it is God talking to me.
- Irrelevant what he looks like
- Yes he speaks English, along all or any other variables of communication.
- The bible is a put together comglomeration of various letters, messages, or "epistles". It wasn't God himself that put the bible together. It was man, but in an attempt to bring us closer too knowing God.
- God speaks to everyone. Listen and you will learn :). Just most of us automatically/naturally block out God. Because the world/society has taught us such.

That's a very definite statement. You know this how?
If it has no "bearing, meaning, or importance, why does the Bible always refer to Yahweh and the angels as being males? Why not refer to them with gender-neutral descriptors?

-How can you be so certain? Does the voice tell you that it's God?
-Why is it irrelevant? I'm curious what it looks like. Besides, we identify fellow humans by differences in appearance, so the appearance of whatever is talking to you could be useful in determining if it really is God.
-Well, that doesn't surprise me, seeing as how God supposedly created all the languages in the first place. Of course, there are older legends that say that Enki/Ea was the god who "confused" the language of humans. Are you sure it isn't Enki that's talking to you? He was the one that saved Utnapishtim from the big flood that his brother Enlil caused, too. So, he has shown a definite interest in humans before. :)
-I never said that God put the Bible together. However, he supposedly "inspired" it. As the Bible itself says:

2 Timothy 3:16

"16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"

At the time this passage was penned, the NT didn't exist yet. So, the writer no doubt had in mind either the Tanakh, or perhaps the Septuagint. (Interestingly, many of the scriptural quotes in the NT are from the Septuagint, and the Septuagint includes a few books that didn't make it into the final canon. Once again..."God's Word." Right.) So, there's no reason to assume that any of the NT books were "inspired" of God, other than wishful thinking. Therefore, why should we assume that the NT is of any value as far as teaching us about God? It's just the opinions of men.

Furthermore, what we have here is a passage written by a man, that does not claim to be inspired of God, telling us that the Tanakh or the Septuagint is inspired of God. What possible reason exists for us to take this author's word for it, and assume that either of those books is of any value for learning about God?
-Whoa! "God speaks to everyone?!" Right!! I have heard lots of people, both in person and on forums, who were believers in God, who nonetheless admitted that God had never talked to them. Again, what makes you so special, that he/she/it speaks to you? And, every day, no less.
Finally:



I'm sorry, Sir, but you have it totally "***-backwards" there. As children, we have no concept of God whatsoever until someone plants the notion into our brains. Furthermore, while the percentage of people who self-identify as "atheist" or "agnostic" has grown in the last several years, we are still very much in the minority. Again, you have it backwards. If anything, societal pressure tries to mold our collective thinking into accepting the idea of God, despite the lack of evidence.

Just one quick example that comes to my mind...good luck in seeking a Presidential nomination here in the US if you are an atheist, regardless of your qualifications. Ain't gonna' happen.

"Gender" is important in the "breading" or (spreading) form. Outside of that, especially in a spiritual "gender neutrality" area, what benefit would it have?

I'm not saying that it has any benefit. My point is that you made a very definite statement about the gender of God and the angels-



-and I'm asking how you can be so certain about this? Especially since the Bible always refer to Yahweh and the angels as being males, rather than referring to them with gender-neutral descriptors.

This might seem a trivial point, but it really isn't, for it speaks to a larger point, which is that there is much that you state with similar certainty, that is actually not supported by any solid evidence.

Also have to keep in mind context of things and or when they were written. In the day and age the scriptures were written, the male was the dominate factor. So therefor our mortal eyes/society, God and the angels are presented as "males". 1 Gender has no real relevance too either. 2. God being the main authority, the ruler, ect was presented as male to have dominance. But again sexuality has no point or reason beyond that as again no reproduction was done in that fashion.

While I agree with you on the first part, Atheist culture is growing largely in developed countries. While in countries like Africa and Asia and many others, god/religion are still very common belief, countries like Canada and the US are much more enlightened. There is still way more religious people than there should be, I'd say give it another 50-100 years and religious people in developed countries will be very much in the minority. People are tired of giving their lives to someone/something that gives them nothing in return besides an after-death promise. It's like those terrorists that offed themselves and all those other people because of the promise of 72 virgins. That is just the prime example of how gullible people can be when it comes to religion, like lambs to the slaughter.

On a side note, them virgins only gonna be virgins for not even the first year, a few thousand years down the road it'll be like a hot dog down a hallway.

Ask an ye shall receive?

Matthew 7:7

7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:


Matthew 21:22

22 And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive

After-death promises you state?

Is the Bible the Word of God, or isn't it? I contend that, if it is, then the factors you mention are irrelevant, for God (According to the Bible) is the same yesterday, today, and forever. And, if gender has no meaning when it comes to God, then perhaps he should have made a point to tell his ghostwriters to stop portraying him as a "him." After all, this could have prevented some misconceptions, such as the idea that, since God is a "he," then men are somehow superior to women. Of course, my thought on this is that the reason men are elevated in these primitive stories is NOT really a result of God creating man in his image, but rather man creating God in his image, and going from there.

This conversation actually ties in well with another situation that supports Lazarus' contention that God is NOT a loving god; the misogyny that is obvious throughout the OT. Apologists always try to "paper over" that by using the same excuse you are using here, i.e. "that's just how things were back then." That's total BS. We're talking about GOD here. You know...GOD!! Creator of the universe! Phenomenal cosmic power! Yet, we're supposed to accept that this All-Powerful entity who droned on for page after page detailing who we could and couldn't boink with (With a MUCH higher ratio of "couldn't" than "could."), didn't dare rock the boat by correcting some of the primitive behavior and mistaken notions about him on the part of his fans? He didn't dare tell them, for instance, that owning another human being is wrong? Or that women should be treated with respect, as equals, rather than like cattle? Was he THAT concerned that they might "Unfriend" him on "Facescroll?"

Sorry, I'm not buying it. If he didn't hesitate to bore the living daylights out of everyone with his many restrictions on an activity as wildly popular as SEX, then I have no doubt that he wouldn't have hesitated to speak up about these other issues, too. Yet again, I give God more credit than that.

Of course, I contend that the REAL reason that God never corrected his minions on any of those topics is because he more than likely doesn't even exist, and all those restrictions on sex were just the deluded rantings of some jealous, crusty, old farts who were pissed off because they weren't gettin' any, and therefore didn't want anyone else gettin' any, either.



And, AGAIN, I am asking you how you know this? This is a very definite statement about a very nebulous topic. HOW do you KNOW this?

I agree with you, Lazarus. And, I am just as hopeful as you that the current trends will continue, and our species will eventually outgrow the need for superstition. However, we aren't there yet. So, I was using the situation as it stands right now to refute Cowboy's statement about society molding our thinking into blocking out God. At present, it is still more a matter of society forcing us to at least pretend that we believe, for there are still at times some negative consequences that come from openly stating that one doesn't believe in God. Even here, in the "somewhat enlightened" US.

As a side-note, I'd like to comment on your statement about the 72 virgins. It seems that the Bible doesn't have a monopoly on translation issues, as the virgins in question might actually be "raisins."
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/04/opinion/martyrs-virgins-and-grapes.html?_r=0

Imagine the crushing disappointment many of these martyrs will feel when they awaken, expecting 72 Ultra-hot "Untouched-ables," but getting a plate of dried grapes, instead.

This ties in perfectly with Cowboy's reply to you, so...





You're missing Lazarus' point, Cowboy. Sure, there are some wonderful after-death promises in most religions. But, promises are often unfulfilled. And, given the dearth of solid evidence that any of these promises are ever fulfilled, (Or that these promises are even translated correctly in the first place.), more and more people are deciding to make the most of the ONE life that they know for CERTAIN that they have; This one. One of the ways they do this is by refusing to allow the Spokesmen/Spokeswomen for God/Jesus/Allah/Yahweh, etc. to dictate to them how they should live their lives.