I Know That God Does Not Exist

Nice precision. I was born in the 2000s, 1952 to be precise.

One of our members has this in his signature:

quote:

---

Micah 6:8 He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?

---

The will of your Father is for you to do justly, love mercy and walk humbly with your God. You should follow that clue a little further. What does it mean to "believe"?Are you a True Believer if you mouth "Lord! lLord!"

quote:

---

Matthew 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

---

Apparently not.

quote:

---

Matthew 25:34-36 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

---

And

quote:

---

Matthew 25;40 ...Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

---

The ones who inherit the kingdom - i.e. the real believers - are the ones who feed the hungry, etc. not the ones who only profess belief.

What?

Are you suggesting that we should measure righteousness by body count?

quote:

---

Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

---

And to clarify, "hate" in this context is more of a willingness to give something up:

quote:

---

Luke 14:33 So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.

---

Similar to when He told the rich man to sell what he had and give to the poor - which you reject.

At least one of the verses is wrong. We already know, since Genesis 3, that God is capable of bending the truth. You really ought to read the Bible before you bumble into Bible discussions. Take your own advice.

So, is that Jesus' left-handed way of admitting that the serpent in Genesis 3 was right?

So can all of us. Bullshit is not hard to detect.

Intelligence can only work with existing processes.

Because it doesn't line up with any standards of reality or logic. That's an empty claim. Back it up or withdraw it. And you know damn well it is. You yourself are the first to say that Zeus and the Flying Spaghetti Monster are made up. And why wouldn't they? We know that's true because we are social animals. Yes, the Jesus character understood that we are social animals. And? There's no need to "substitute" anything. We can understand what it means to be social animals without spackling on a "God" layer. We already have that. It's called taxation. They had it in the Old testament. It was called tithing. Stop being such an asshole. You're turning into faith.I'm pointing out what Jesus fucking told you to do! You're spitting in His face.

Exactly. The only level of intelligence there is. If you're claiming that some entity has something "beyond intelligence", don't call it intelligence. Why not just call it magic? That isn't really much of a question - unless you have a canned answer that you're trying to sell. Of course there is no such thing as "absolute knowledge" - but no, Stile's view is not as subjective as yours. His view is based on what we objectively know. No, probability is not subjective. It's mathematics.

Well, it does. It throws the whole idea of intelligence out the window because intelligence is not what you're talking about. You're reducing the idea to something completely made up. I'm saying that the people who ask "why the processes exist" tend to be people who (think they) already know the answer. The rest of us have enough to do trying to understand the processes. Yes. Everything beyond there is subjective. That's a meaningless question. The concept of "God" doesn't add anything to the answer.

I didn't say a word about you not giving enough. I asked you not to call call me an "extreme socialist". Learn what the word means. We have only your self-serving word on that. The Church in Rome disagreed with you. (See Ananias and Sapphira.) The gospel of Luke says that Zaccheus offered half. It doesn't say he got away with it. Well, you quoted it:

quote:

---

"He who gathered much had nothing left over, and he who gathered little had no lack."

---

What part of "nothing left over" is confusing to you?And:

quote:

---

"... now at this time your abundance may supply their lack, that their abundance also may supply your lack -- that there may be equality."

---

sounds a lot like, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need," doesn't it? And both of you prove you're not. By their fruits ye shall know them. That's kinda like throwing away only one wheel on your car. It has the same effect as throwing all of them away.

Nonsense. It's as objective as anything we know. I agree - and it's an unimportant question. No we have not. I'm saying that Stile's position is objective and yours is not. My only disagreement with Stile is over the use of the word "know". I make more of a distinction between not knowing it's true and knowing it's false.

No. Read what you quoted. My only nitpick with Stile is over the use of the word "know".