I Know That God Does Not Exist

No.No.No.You're still only considering two items. You'd need to consider EVERY contribution that a person makes, as I keep saying.It isn't possible to make that calculation.(Note Jesus' example of the lady who gave two mites. You're making the same mistake that the disciples made.)

Psychotropic drugs, for one thing.Edited by ringo, : No reason given.

I don't need any. My only claim is that you can't tell how good a person is by their religion. It has nothing to do with income. It isn't all about cash, as I keep saying. Jesus' point was that you can't determine "how much" a person gives from a simple sum of dollars and cents.

Those drugs alter the way the brain thinks, which - news flash - indicates that the brain works by chemistry.

Well, it's a start to the explanation, which is what you asked for. The investigation does not include looking behind the car for a spook pushing it. But we know what the intelligent cause of the engine is. We don't need to speculate about unknown possibilities like leprechauns.And we wouldn't expect an intelligent cause for chemical processes any more than we would expect an intelligent cause for a rock falling down a mountain.

Or maybe God is using me (us) to show you how wrong your arguments are.

Don't you get it? It was God who said we are as Gods.

Well, that has nothing to do with what I said.

Oh, that's all I'm doing, is it? Just quoting the only source you have for your Jesus? That's all? It says what it says. You're making up "meaning" that fits your pre-ordained theology. Or more to the point, you're repeating what apologists and commentators have told you to believe. And you're flat-out contradicting what the book actually says.

I have no belief to push. We could be talking about Holden Caulfield or Tom Joad. I have no belief in those fictional characters either, and no vested interest in what their stories say. The difference between you and me is that I respect the literature and I will not twist it to fit any beliefs. But I am just quoting the book. Show us where I have made any claims that are not in the book.

You did invent your definition of "know". If I define "dog" as an animal with wings and feathers, I can draw conclusions from that definition that are entirely within logic and rationality - but they will have little value.

You have been known to contradict yourself on that point though, haven't you? You're too soft hearted to see billions and billions of people roasting in Hell for eternity, so when it suits you you like to tell us that everybody will change their mind. Strictly speaking, Jesus didn't do a census on the sheep and goats. He made no mention of which was the more numerous. Just because the road that leadeth to destruction is wider doesn't necessarily mean that it has more traffic than the straight and narrow.

It doesn't matter whether He changes His mind or not. The point is that you can't have your "few are chosen" and not have the remaining many go to Hell. If God is giving us many opportunities to repent, you have to drop your, "The Bible makes it quite clear that not everyone will in fact know or believe," ploy.

"This" is about Phat wanting to have his cake and watch unbelievers roasting in Hell while he eats it. Your position is cute and cuddly and all but unless you're arguing that most will never believe, you're on a completely different page.

That has nothing to do with what I said.I said that EITHER you can have your "few are chosen" doctrine AND have millions suffer in Hell - OR you can have your benevolent God giving people chance after chance after chance until they believe. You can NOT have both.