Bible verse by verse

[_subgenius]

I have a relationship and not a belief.

In what explicit and specific ways is your relationship with God different to that of someone who has an imaginary friend?

just that you would ask this question accentuates your inability to realize any answer that would be provided.

Much like if you had asked, in all seriousness, how dining with one's family is different than watching a cartoon.

as usual

The absurdity is in your question, not the answer.

[_LittleNipper]

Excellent question! Much more concise and direct than what I asked.

I agree--excellent question.

Nipper, would you also please explain why your imaginary friend (Yahweh) is real, but everybody else's imaginary friends (Allah, Krishna, etc) are fake?

What makes your mythology better than everybody else's mythology?

Do you believe that Joshua had an imaginary friend or did Joshua have a real friend that would even stop the sun and moon? God already sent His Son, and presently Christians are comforted by the Holy Spirit that leads them in their daily walk. I don't see Christians as being crazy or odd, at least not in terms of how accepting they are of others no matter how unloved they may be by the worldly. Do you enjoy making friends with the poor, the mentally challenged, people you do not agree with, and those that people might consider physically repugnant or social outcasts? This now is the real proof that God is real. He sends His true believers to be His witnesses. The Christian learns to be like Christ and the outcast learns that God is love. Does the Moslem love Jews? Do they work to change the thinking of people by speaking to others openly about religion? Or do the seek to control and manipulate the population to live as they deem correct? Christianity is an inward change that cannot be legislated, but can be taught if a allowed public forum. Those that hate Christianity always seek to try to silence it and limit its accessibility.

[_Bazooka]

I have a relationship and not a belief.

In what explicit and specific ways is your relationship with God different to that of someone who has an imaginary friend?

Bump for Nipper

[_The Erotic Apologist]

Do you believe that Joshua had an imaginary friend or did Joshua have a real friend that would even stop the sun and moon?

Do you believe Mohammad had an imaginary friend, or did Mohammad have a real friend who performed similar miracles?

Do you believe Joseph Smith had an imaginary friend, or did he have a real friend who also performed divine miracles?

God already sent His Son, and presently Christians are comforted by the Holy Spirit that leads them in their daily walk.

Mormons also find comfort in their beliefs...therefore Mormonism must be "true".
Islamists also find comfort in their beliefs...therefore Islam must be "true".
Hindus also find comfort in their beliefs...therefore Hinduism must be "true".
Jainists also find comfort in their beliefs...therefore Jainism must be "true".
Scientologists also find comfort in their beliefs...therefore Scientology must be "true".

I don't see Christians as being crazy or odd, at least not in terms of how accepting they are of others no matter how unloved they may be by the worldly.

That's nice.

Do you find Mormonism "crazy or odd"?
Do you find Islam "crazy or odd"?
Do you find Hinduism "crazy or odd"?
Do you find Jainism "crazy or odd"?
Do you find Scientology "crazy or odd"?

Do you enjoy making friends with the poor, the mentally challenged, people you do not agree with, and those that people might consider physically repugnant or social outcasts?

I know plenty of atheists who enjoy making friends with the poor, the mentally challenged, people you do not agree with, and those that people might consider physically repugnant or social outcasts.

Therefore atheism must be "true".

This now is the real proof that God is real.

Which is also why Mormonism must be "real".
Which is also why Islam must be "real".
Which is also why Hinduism must be "real".
Which is also why Jainism must be "real".
Which is also why Scientology must be "real".

He sends His true believers to be His witnesses.

Which is why Mormons must also be "His" witnesses.
Which is why Islamists must also be "His" witnesses.
Which is why Hindus must also be "His" witnesses.
Which is why Jainists must also be "His" witnesses.
Which is why Scientologists must also be "His" witnesses...notwithstanding the fact that Scientology places less emphasis on the role of a supreme being than other religions.

The Christian learns to be like Christ and the outcast learns that God is love.

Mormons also learn that "God" is love.
Islamists also learn that "God" is love.
Hindus also learn that "God" is love.
Jainists also learn that "God" is love.
Scientologists also learn that "God" is love...notwithstanding the fact that Scientology places less emphasis on the role of a supreme being than other religions.

Does the Moslem love Jews?

Some do. Some don't.

What about Christians? Did Martin Luther love the Jews?

Do they work to change the thinking of people by speaking to others openly about religion?

Mormons work to change the thinking of people by speaking to others openly about religion...therefore Mormonism must also be "true".
Islamists work to change the thinking of people by speaking to others openly about religion...therefore Islam must also be "true".
Hindus work to change the thinking of people by speaking to others openly about religion...therefore Hinduism must also be "true".
Jainists work to change the thinking of people by speaking to others openly about religion...therefore Jainism must also be "true".
Scientologists work to change the thinking of people by speaking to others openly about religion...therefore Scientology must also be "true".

Or do they seek to control and manipulate the population to live as they deem correct?

I know of many Christian institutions that seek to control and manipulate the population to live as they deem correct.

Christianity is an inward change that cannot be legislated, but can be taught if a allowed public forum.

Mormonism is an inward change that cannot be legislated, but can be taught if allowed public forum...therefore Mormonism must also be "true".
Islam is an inward change that cannot be legislated, but can be taught if allowed public forum...therefore Islam must also be "true".
Hinduism is an inward change that cannot be legislated, but can be taught if allowed public forum...therefore Hinduism must also be "true".
Jainism is an inward change that cannot be legislated, but can be taught if allowed public forum...therefore Jainism must also be "true".
Scientology is an inward change that cannot be legislated, but can be taught if allowed public forum...therefore Scientology must also be "true".

Those that hate Christianity always seek to try to silence it and limit its accessibility.

Those that hate Mormonism also seek to try to silence it and limit its accessibility...therefore Mormonism must also be "true".
Those that hate Islam also seek to try to silence it and limit its accessibility...therefore Islam must also be "true".
Those that hate Hinduism also seek to try to silence it and limit its accessibility...therefore Hinduism must also be "true"..
Those that hate Jainism also seek to try to silence it and limit its accessibility...therefore Jainism must also be "true".
Those that hate Scientology also seek to try to silence it and limit its accessibility...therefore Scientology must also be "true".

Nipper, why do you insist your imaginary friend (Yahweh) is real, but everybody else's imaginary friends (Allah, Krishna, etc.) are fake?

Why is your mythology better than everybody else's mythology?

[_huckelberry]

What is the fuss, Nipper already linked to a proof that god does not exist and the Bible is wrong.

this is from his link discussing Joshua and the battle of Jericho,

'The central issue from their perspective is that of inerrancy of the Bible. God wrote in verse 13 that the “sun stood still and the moon stayed.” God either meant what he wrote, or he did not. There is no excuse for God because he is the God of truth; therefore all things he says and does must reflect that fact. So God cannot utter an untruth and we must conclude that the Bible teaches, in Joshua 10:13 and else where, that the universe rotates around the earth once per day, carrying the sun, moon and stars with it, regardless of what introductory astronomy texts may say. We shall see later that the advanced texts belie the introductory texts on the matter of the rotation of the earth. For the time being, the choice is either the Bible or the introductory astronomy texts: which do you believe?

Is there something more to be said?

[_huckelberry]

I do not need proof; however, there does exist some interesting considerations to ponder.
Please consider: http://www.geocentricity.com/astronomy_ ... index.html

I think this site is blasphemy. I do not know if that is a result of a serious confusion or direct authorship by the devil. How are we to tell which?

[_LittleNipper]

I do not need proof; however, there does exist some interesting considerations to ponder.
Please consider: http://www.geocentricity.com/astronomy_ ... index.html

I think this site is blasphemy. I do not know if that is a result of a serious confusion or direct authorship by the devil. How are we to tell which?

I believe that the website above makes an honest attempt to look at a subject from various perspectives. What it ultimately presents is that there is recorded history from various cultures of a long day. And one must either accept this, or reject that this event actually happened based on speculation. But whatever one chooses to believe, there is the reality, that if it happened, it had to be a miracle. You may wish to reread the entire article from that perspective.

[_LittleNipper]

What is the fuss, Nipper already linked to a proof that god does not exist and the Bible is wrong.

this is from his link discussing Joshua and the battle of Jericho,

'The central issue from their perspective is that of inerrancy of the Bible. God wrote in verse 13 that the “sun stood still and the moon stayed.” God either meant what he wrote, or he did not. There is no excuse for God because he is the God of truth; therefore all things he says and does must reflect that fact. So God cannot utter an untruth and we must conclude that the Bible teaches, in Joshua 10:13 and else where, that the universe rotates around the earth once per day, carrying the sun, moon and stars with it, regardless of what introductory astronomy texts may say. We shall see later that the advanced texts belie the introductory texts on the matter of the rotation of the earth. For the time being, the choice is either the Bible or the introductory astronomy texts: which do you believe?

Is there something more to be said?

I believe that you are taking what is being said out of context. Read the entire article.

[_LittleNipper]

When the army of Israel had finished slaughtering all the men outside the city, they went back and finished off everyone inside. So the entire A.I. population of 12000was wiped out that day. Only the cattle and the loot were not destroyed, for the armies of Israel kept these for themselves. So A.I. became a desolate mound of trash and was this even to the day the book of Joshua was compiled. Joshua hanged the king of A.I. on a tree until evening, but as the sun was going down, he took down the body and threw it in front of the city gate. There he piled a great heap of stones over it, which can still be seen even to the day of the writing of the book of Joshua.

That the Old Testament describes and clearly approves of violent atrocities like this is one of the main reasons I find it impossible to take seriously the notion that a just and benevolent God had anything to do with inspiring or leading the Israelites or inspiring the writers who chronicled these atrocities. As I have said repeatedly, I cannot believe in, much less worship a God as cruel and vindictive as that described in the Judeo-Christian Bible.

The Israelites replied to these Hivites, “How do we know you don’t live nearby? For if you do, we cannot make a treaty with you.” They replied, “We will be your slaves.” “But who are you?” Joshua demanded. “Where do you come from?” And they told him, “We are from a very distant country; we have heard of the might of the Lord your God and of all that he did in Egypt, and what you did to the two kings of the Amorites—Sihon, king of Heshbon, and Og, king of Bashan. Our elders and people instructed us, ‘Prepare for a long journey; go to the people of Israel and declare our nation to be their servants, and ask for peace.’ This bread was hot from the ovens when we left, but now as you see, it is dry and moldy; these wineskins were new, but now they are old and cracked; our clothing and shoes have become worn out from our long, hard trip.”

Joshua and the other leaders finally believed them. They did not bother to ask the Lord but went ahead and signed a peace treaty. And the leaders of Israel ratified the agreement with a binding oath. Three days later the facts came out—these men were close neighbors. The Israeli army set out at once to investigate and reached their cities (named Gibeon, Chephirah, Beeroth, and Kiriath-jearim) in three days. (The cities were not harmed because of the vow which the leaders of Israel had made before the Lord God. The Israelites were angry with their leaders because of the peace treaty. These leaders replied that they have sworn before God that they will not harm them, and must let them live. If an oath is broken, the wrath of God will come.

Given what these Hivites knew about the horrible atrocities that the Israelites perpetrated on the people of A.I. and Jerico, who can blame them for using any means they could think of to avoid suffering the same fate? And why should their proximity to the Israelites have anything to do with whether the Israelites should be willing to accept a treaty of peace with them? Were the Israelites in the Old Testament forbidden to "love their neighbors as themselves" as preached by Christ?

Then you cannot worship a Creator who judges sin. You likely find that sending the likes of "Hitler" to hell repulsive, or do YOU simply pick and choose candidates to feel sorry for? God knows your intentions, and I imagine that that thought haunts and scares you. But the reality is that either one will spend an eternity with God or an eternity without God. How long someone lives on this planet has very little to offer when one measures such against ------------- eternity. And if someone chooses to live without God throughout this life, that one is simply digging for himself a deeper and deeper pit for himself in hell...

[_huckelberry]

What is the fuss, Nipper already linked to a proof that god does not exist and the Bible is wrong.

this is from his link discussing Joshua and the battle of Jericho,

'The central issue from their perspective is that of inerrancy of the Bible. God wrote in verse 13 that the “sun stood still and the moon stayed.” God either meant what he wrote, or he did not. There is no excuse for God because he is the God of truth; therefore all things he says and does must reflect that fact. So God cannot utter an untruth and we must conclude that the Bible teaches, in Joshua 10:13 and else where, that the universe rotates around the earth once per day, carrying the sun, moon and stars with it, regardless of what introductory astronomy texts may say. We shall see later that the advanced texts belie the introductory texts on the matter of the rotation of the earth. For the time being, the choice is either the Bible or the introductory astronomy texts: which do you believe?

Is there something more to be said?

I believe that you are taking what is being said out of context. Read the entire article.

I assure you I read the whole article. It is true it contained some other comments I would find no objection to. Your observation that the long day actually happening would be a miracle is true enough. But speaking of context you should consider the name of the site, geocentricity. You do remember Galileo perhaps?

Now I believe it is entirely possible that the site is a result of people combining good intentions with a lack of understanding of physics and astronomy.

On the other hand it could be a site by people wanting to train followers not to think very much so they can be easily led . That could be done with various intentions not all of them necessarily good.There have been Christian leaders with hungry pockets. followers who mistrust questioning may more quickly feed those pockets than people who use discretion.

Frankly I found myself wondering if it is a site by young atheists seeking to make fun of Christians. I admit to maintain such an appearance of earnestness would be more work than it would be worth.I figure this possibility is less likely than the previous ones.

The devil? I think the site is corrosive to Christian faith. Even so, direct involvement from scratch I think would be the least likely source.