Proof God Exists

---

"What business does a man, a dwarf, and an elf have in the Riddermark? Speak quickly!" - Eomer"Give me your name, horsemaster. And I'll shall give ye mine." -Gimli"I would cut off your head, dwarf, if it stood but a little higher from the ground." -Eomer"You would die before your stroke fell!" - Legolas....

mmmm legolas.

oh btw. i love lotr!

mmm legolas is right! insert schoolgirl laugh lolit's nice to meet a fellow lotr fan... who is a GIRL! and yes I know papi, but the fact you responded to mention you were ignoring makes me all warm and fuzzy inside! lol

you didn't get that?Im referring to him STARTING to learn about christianity.

And all of the sudden he has the answers? Give me a break...

wow....

Damien's 4328th unpopular post

Wow. First of all, it continually baffles me how easily some folks get "offended". Like they're looking for things to take offense to. I don't know anywhere...the constitution, the Bible, playground rules...anywhere where I've ever been given the right not to be offended. It's an overused word. When someone says something you don't like, or you disagree with, that's hardly an offense. I suggest folks get some perspective.

Secondly...man this pisses me off...heaven forbid a kid get a little zealous about some knowledge he's coming into. Some of you folks act like you are so frikkin mature and have all gifts of wisdom and how to conduct a mature conversation. But if you were really wise and really mature, you would honor this kid's quest for knowledge. You would be willing to ask questions to challenge him, point out things you disagree with, and even call him on his faux paxs without humiliating him. Have you never been zealous about something? Feeling like you've discovered something and you don't know why others don't get it? It's okay if you did. We've all been there. It's part of the process.

As for the defense of "we warned him"... I kind of get that, and I think (for at least a couple of you), that came from a good place. But is that really what you want for him? Just because you've had that discussion before and "finished" it, he hasn't. Is it fair or in any way in his best interest to advise him not to have the kinds of conversations that are going to help him flesh out his beliefs. Seriously, you guys here that call yourselves atheists or agnostics or whatever...you can really have a positive impact on guys like cooldawg. If you chose to engage him politely...in a MATURE and gracious manner...you could have possibly offered a real service to him. INstead you chose to put him on the defensive and then make fun of him when he decided to vamoose (a decision I don't blame him for a bit).

I'm all for discussions and disagreements and passionate debates. And, as I said before, I don't think it helps to take offense too easily. But I also believe, like doctors, we should first do no harm. Is the negative impact we had on him really worth the chance to win a pissing contest?

Okay...now you can hate me.

I think that's a very good post, damien.

Enlighten me please because I just don't get it.  Quote:First of all, it continually baffles me how easily some folks get "offended".Whether you agree if "offended" is the right word or not, when the OP asked why can't atheists believe in God, it seriously rubbed me the wrong way. And not only that, it was a pretty poor point. What did you expect to happen when something like that is asked? If I asked a devout Christian why can't you believe there is a chance that there's no God, wouldn't they react in such a way?The OP wanted to open up a discussion on his views. But to say something like that isn't exactly the smartest thing to do when the whole point is to get people to listen to you, not piss them off. Yes, he did say it was flawed, but even if he knew that, then why say it? What was the point?  Quote:Secondly...man this pisses me off...heaven forbid a kid get a little zealous about some knowledge he's coming into.I'll say it again: that's fine. He found an interest in reading the Bible. Good for him. But how does that make him an expert telling everyone here that Christianity is valid and everything else is absurd and unbelievable? He said he wasn't going to put his ideas on us, but surprise surprise, he tried to do the opposite. And when the questions came pouring in, he leaves. Oh yeah, that's real mature.He left because he was upset, so what? He wanted to open up a discussion, it was his choice. Excuse me for playing a part in it by challenging him. That's what a discussion is. As far as I'm aware, no where did I feel like I crossed a line or anyone else. No one stooped to name calling or being rude or whatever. But please, if you think otherwise, point it out.  Quote:If you chose to engage him politely...in a MATURE and gracious manner...you could have possibly offered a real service to him. INstead you chose to put him on the defensive and then make fun of him when he decided to vamoose (a decision I don't blame him for a bit).Again, point out to me where anyone was rude or condensending to him before he left. I just don't see what you're seeing. As for putting him on the defensive, what did you think was going to happen? He opened a topic and people with different ideas came and threw them in. It seems like he didn't like these different ideas and left.---I wasn't egging on this kid for believe in God. What I was doing was trying to make sense of what he was saying because clearly I have a learning problem! And I don't see what was so cruel about this discussion. Maybe I'm too much of a hard ass to see it. But the OP knew what he was doing and saying, which is why it's hard for me to feel bad because he left.But like I said, enlighten me and maybe my human side will understand better. By the way, I don't hate you.

Originally Posted By: Rad Originally Posted By: thor Originally Posted By: RadAgain:There were no springs back then for them to view?You indicated there were none. None at the bottom of the sea...those viewed seen to be sources of water, with the ocean viewed as a collected body of water. The ocean a result of rainfall and unnumbered rivers emptying into it...not as a source for a stream or river like all known springs viewed. Do I need to draw a picture? There was no indication of "at the bottom of the sea" in that.The rivers and the rain was all at the top.Yes. Start drawing. It makes little sense so far, unless you s t r e t c h it.Springs are as easily seen as the rain & rivers and, I'm sure, in places where shallow & clear, even on the ocean bottom. Nevermind. I won't bother wasting my time with the drawing. You'll continue to...ahem...see what you want to.

Originally Posted By: Rad

But, he said springs came as a surprise to modern man when found.

Only those at the bottom of the ocean, my silly man.

Based on what is observable outside of the ocean (and without something such as an aqualung), no rational person would expect to find a spring at the bottom of the ocean...which is why mention of it in the Bible would indicate the knowledge of such existance by an entity other than men. Clear as mud?

Originally Posted By: JapanFan14"What business does a man, a dwarf, and an elf have in the Riddermark? Speak quickly!" - Eomer"Give me your name, horsemaster. And I'll shall give ye mine." -Gimli"I would cut off your head, dwarf, if it stood but a little higher from the ground." -Eomer"You would die before your stroke fell!" - Legolas.... OK...you probably got me beat with quotes. But I'll trounce you with trivia anyday, young lady.

Maybe you should ask them if they ever saw a spring at the bottom of the ocean and traveled all the way to the Middle-east to be sure it was included in the Bible. Then ask them how they knew to do that, and how they managed to sail to somewhere that they didn't even know existed. Maybe they had faith?

amusing? You laugh at christians who would like to discuss their faith?? Amusing (not laughing)... yes. Don't put me on the same bandwagon as many others on this board. I'm a Christian and believer.I think it's quite commendable that he is reading/learning AND it make him feel good. BUT... it's still amusing that he thoght that a passage(s) in the Bible are proof and that this is good enough to convince/convert nonbelievers. It was a non-starter.

Originally Posted By: RadI'm quite sure they saw springs, both on the land and in the ocean.But, why not answer the question?Polynesians weren't the only people able to dive without artificial means, I'm sure.Even looking over the side of a boat, one can observe things under the ocean, even without a glass bottom boat. And how could one determine the existance of a spring under water by just observing, please? It's not like you can see water coming out into the ocean, you know.

Originally Posted By: Rad

I'm sure you can see a spring's different currents, see the different marine life surrounding it, taste that the water is not as salty as other areas, etc.

You might know the life is different through observation, but you wouldn't know for sure why as you wouldn't know there's a spring there yet. As for taste (or temperature)...not unless you can get down there and take a sample.

Originally Posted By: RadYeppers! Seems like they knew there were springs in the ocean. Nothing to tell that anybody knew these were springs several thousand years ago, is there? Besides, it's not big enough to walk into like the ones at the bottom of the ocean that the Bible speaks of.Job.38[16] Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth?Perhaps you could search harder and longer to find mention somewhere in a history book of somebody finding a spring down underneath the water big enough to walk (or go) into?

Originally Posted By: RadI remember you saying, not that they weren't there, but that they didn't see them....because the ones in question are at the bottom of the ocean...the ones big enough to enter into. We (or at least I) don't even know for sure any of the ones pearl-divers of thousands of years ago have noticed (if they even noticed any at all) are big enough to go into. Knowing what I know about geology, I doubt it.

Originally Posted By: Rad

I'm sorry thor, but you didn't mention "ones big enough to enter into" or " on the bottom of the ocean".

You simply said they couldn't see "springs".

I assumed you read the referenced portion of the Bible in question. My bad. But I did say they could see springs on land that are at the head of streams and rivers. Such springs close to the beach (as you linked to a picture of) would at some point in the past, when the water level was lower, been above water. Such would also be the assumption of anybody running across one and recognizing it as a spring. The idea of springs at the bottom of the ocean big enough to enter into would most likely never have occured to anybody.

Virtual - I can understand why his comments rubbed you the wrong way, and I agree that his tactics weren't the smartest we've seen. But I don't think that negates my statements. My post really was a statement on the tone of the whole discussion. I certainly wasn't meaning to respond to any one person in particular. I just think it's one thing to be right. It's another thing completely to be gracious.Rad - I don't think my post was harsh at all. But that's all perception, huh? I will say that you were one of the exceptions I indicated in my parenthetical phrase.Anyway...I spoke my heart. Carry on.