ChatterBank0 min ago
Which God Are You A Witness?
88 Answers
The atheist of today, thinks that in this modern nuclear, space age it has become old-fashioned to believe in an invisible god.
Yet today every worshiper who claims to have a atheist god is challenged to act as witness for his god. In fact, all the gods, who are worshiped as gods are challenged to produce their witnesses to prove that they are gods or are the one living and true God.
Every reasonable person will agree that there is no use in worshiping and serving a false god.
Yet today every worshiper who claims to have a atheist god is challenged to act as witness for his god. In fact, all the gods, who are worshiped as gods are challenged to produce their witnesses to prove that they are gods or are the one living and true God.
Every reasonable person will agree that there is no use in worshiping and serving a false god.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by goodlife. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Mibs, Noah's Ark? Noooooo! Pay attention. Goodlife said this....
//you better do what Bible suggests. Ask the very beasts, and they will teach you; ask the wild birds—they will tell you; crawling creatures will instruct you, fish in the sea will inform you.”—Job 12:7- 8,//
See? Birds and fish. That's what men copied to make planes and submarines. Clever, eh? ;o)
Goodlife, you've lost the plot.
//you better do what Bible suggests. Ask the very beasts, and they will teach you; ask the wild birds—they will tell you; crawling creatures will instruct you, fish in the sea will inform you.”—Job 12:7- 8,//
See? Birds and fish. That's what men copied to make planes and submarines. Clever, eh? ;o)
Goodlife, you've lost the plot.
How could a god prove to a mortal being that they are God? A good magician or illusionist can walk on water or levitate.
However if such a god could bring my dead relatives to life and show them to me what conclusion should I draw? Namely that I am dreaming or halucinating.
The Virgin Mary, as God's advocate, appeared to Bernadette in Lourdes. Only Bernadette could see the "lady"; the numerous onlookers could see nothing other than a misguided girl making a fool of herself.
Is absolute proof ever possible for a human ?
However if such a god could bring my dead relatives to life and show them to me what conclusion should I draw? Namely that I am dreaming or halucinating.
The Virgin Mary, as God's advocate, appeared to Bernadette in Lourdes. Only Bernadette could see the "lady"; the numerous onlookers could see nothing other than a misguided girl making a fool of herself.
Is absolute proof ever possible for a human ?
Another scientist says that practically all the fundamental areas of human technology have been opened up and utilized to advantage by living things . . . before the human mind learned to understand and master their functions,and he adds, In many areas, human technology is still lagging far behind nature. So you lot got a to learn.
Goodlife, YOU are my god. I worship thee.
Thanks to your rambling nonsense I have seen the light. I now realise that for far too long I have been wasting my Time and energy reading the words of Greenfield, Dawkins, pinker, jones, Darwin et al. These evil professors have been subtly brainwashing me with the age old tactics of intelligence, reason, meticulous study, logic and common sense.
But no longer will I be fooled. Your posts have shown me that no thought is necessary at all. Delusion and contradiction are the way forward. Thank you goodlife, for armed with these skills that you have taught me i feel ready to go out and preach your word.
Tommorow I will stand in the high street handing out prints of your teachings and I will shout your word until they listen and as a mark of respect to you my god I will only wear one shoe.
I now am wed to the holy trinity. The goodlife. The cut and the paste.
Thanks to your rambling nonsense I have seen the light. I now realise that for far too long I have been wasting my Time and energy reading the words of Greenfield, Dawkins, pinker, jones, Darwin et al. These evil professors have been subtly brainwashing me with the age old tactics of intelligence, reason, meticulous study, logic and common sense.
But no longer will I be fooled. Your posts have shown me that no thought is necessary at all. Delusion and contradiction are the way forward. Thank you goodlife, for armed with these skills that you have taught me i feel ready to go out and preach your word.
Tommorow I will stand in the high street handing out prints of your teachings and I will shout your word until they listen and as a mark of respect to you my god I will only wear one shoe.
I now am wed to the holy trinity. The goodlife. The cut and the paste.
naomi24
Mibs, Wasn't he a slithering one rather than a crawling one? And as far as I recall he didn't slither before he invited Eve to dinner and ended up completely legless! :o)
The crawling ones are a matter of speculation. ;o)
16:41 Thu 28th Feb 2013
Naomi, I might not be as fluent as you concerning religious myths but at least I can say, "Asp in the grass" three times, really fast . . .
"Asp in the grass asp in the grass grasp in the as-" . . . D'oh!
Oh, nevermind!
Mibs, Wasn't he a slithering one rather than a crawling one? And as far as I recall he didn't slither before he invited Eve to dinner and ended up completely legless! :o)
The crawling ones are a matter of speculation. ;o)
16:41 Thu 28th Feb 2013
Naomi, I might not be as fluent as you concerning religious myths but at least I can say, "Asp in the grass" three times, really fast . . .
"Asp in the grass asp in the grass grasp in the as-" . . . D'oh!
Oh, nevermind!
@goodlife - Posting once, somewhere, that occasionally you cut and paste from Watchtower does not count as attribution. When offering your cut and paste screed at the very least, for each one, you need to offer the attribution.
So you either try to pass off the work of others as your own, ie intellectual dishonesty, or fail to check the origin of a quote you find on the Watchtower - ie lazy and credulous reposting. Which fits you better?
And then we get this other content free post of yours -
"Another scientist" - Well, which scientist?
"says some blather about fundamental areas of human technology being utilised" .. well where did he say it? when did he say it? which technologies was he allegedly on about?
Its just empty, meaningless words without attribution or more content, goodlife.
And in some areas human technology is lagging behind nature.. well what point do you think you are making with that comment? Nature has had around a 3.5 billion year head start. Science studies, observes, experiments and brings understanding, from which applications can be developed. Faith and religion brings a shrug of the shoulders, a nod to a mystical benevolent (non) entity an sore knees.....
So you either try to pass off the work of others as your own, ie intellectual dishonesty, or fail to check the origin of a quote you find on the Watchtower - ie lazy and credulous reposting. Which fits you better?
And then we get this other content free post of yours -
"Another scientist" - Well, which scientist?
"says some blather about fundamental areas of human technology being utilised" .. well where did he say it? when did he say it? which technologies was he allegedly on about?
Its just empty, meaningless words without attribution or more content, goodlife.
And in some areas human technology is lagging behind nature.. well what point do you think you are making with that comment? Nature has had around a 3.5 billion year head start. Science studies, observes, experiments and brings understanding, from which applications can be developed. Faith and religion brings a shrug of the shoulders, a nod to a mystical benevolent (non) entity an sore knees.....
Modeller@ No, I don’t believe in Santa Claus nor do I believe in the Tooth Fairy.
Lazygun@ As I have said time and time again I cannot attribute my posts to anyone person. All contributions to the WT, except life stories, are anonymous. As the WT attributes its writings to the Bible, then I do too. The Bible was written long before you and I, and any of your other so called intellectuals were born. Some of your comments, whether you like it or not, are from others. How do we learn? Only by listening, copying and retaining the information given to us by others. So every word we speak, every word we write, is attributed to someone else in the beginning.
Lazygun@ As I have said time and time again I cannot attribute my posts to anyone person. All contributions to the WT, except life stories, are anonymous. As the WT attributes its writings to the Bible, then I do too. The Bible was written long before you and I, and any of your other so called intellectuals were born. Some of your comments, whether you like it or not, are from others. How do we learn? Only by listening, copying and retaining the information given to us by others. So every word we speak, every word we write, is attributed to someone else in the beginning.
goodlife #Modeller@ No, I don’t believe in Santa Claus nor do I believe in the Tooth Fairy.#
Good for you, goodlife at last you have answered a straight question .
It wasn't all that difficult , was it. ?
OK ! So you believe in an invisible ,imaginary God.
But you dont believe in an invisible , imaginary ,tooth fairy.
And you dont believe in an invisible ,imaginary Father Christmas.
Good for you, goodlife at last you have answered a straight question .
It wasn't all that difficult , was it. ?
OK ! So you believe in an invisible ,imaginary God.
But you dont believe in an invisible , imaginary ,tooth fairy.
And you dont believe in an invisible ,imaginary Father Christmas.
goodlife, here's a flowchart:
1) Did you copy and paste it from elsewhere?
If Yes, got to 2) If No, got to 3)
2) Provide the URL from which you C&P'd it.
3) Is it a quote from a book or publication that is not already identified?
If Yes, got to 4) If No, got to 5)
4) Name the book or publication from which you're quoting.
5) Is it a quote from a mainstream scientist disputing evolution?
If Yes, got to 6) If No, got to 7)
6) Google the quote; it's got a high probability that it's being used out of context by an unscrupulous creationist*. Quote it correctly or not at all.
7) Is the person making the quote named?
If No, got to 8) If Yes, got to 9)
8) Find out who said it, and name them.
9) Hit submit.
* tautology?
1) Did you copy and paste it from elsewhere?
If Yes, got to 2) If No, got to 3)
2) Provide the URL from which you C&P'd it.
3) Is it a quote from a book or publication that is not already identified?
If Yes, got to 4) If No, got to 5)
4) Name the book or publication from which you're quoting.
5) Is it a quote from a mainstream scientist disputing evolution?
If Yes, got to 6) If No, got to 7)
6) Google the quote; it's got a high probability that it's being used out of context by an unscrupulous creationist*. Quote it correctly or not at all.
7) Is the person making the quote named?
If No, got to 8) If Yes, got to 9)
8) Find out who said it, and name them.
9) Hit submit.
* tautology?
@goodlife - Follow McFroogs flowchart - admirably laid out and easy to follow.
It is not enough for you to say, once, somewhere in one of your many postings, that you use WT as a reference.
Each time you cut and paste without quotation marks, without attribution, then a first time reader may believe that your post is your own work. Those of us who regularly read and contribute here know differently. Continuing to post in this fashion, after the repeated requests and explanations why it would be helpful is just arrogance, and the charge of intellectual dishonesty persists..
Summarise your point in your own words, then provide a link to the original source or text or quotation! It is not that difficult, and at least thatway you could escape the charge of intellectual dishonesty, drive -by proselytising, plagiarism or cherry-picking/ quote-mining / out of context referrals.
It is not enough for you to say, once, somewhere in one of your many postings, that you use WT as a reference.
Each time you cut and paste without quotation marks, without attribution, then a first time reader may believe that your post is your own work. Those of us who regularly read and contribute here know differently. Continuing to post in this fashion, after the repeated requests and explanations why it would be helpful is just arrogance, and the charge of intellectual dishonesty persists..
Summarise your point in your own words, then provide a link to the original source or text or quotation! It is not that difficult, and at least thatway you could escape the charge of intellectual dishonesty, drive -by proselytising, plagiarism or cherry-picking/ quote-mining / out of context referrals.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.