---

Quote: from nigeltheoutlaw at 4:37 am on July 12, 2008

---

Usually I do, but I'm sick of responding to you. It ends up going in a circle.  

 Besides, the only proof in favor of your cloud nanny is the bible, which can not possibly be taken as any evidence. And, if god talks to you, then you're crazy with schizophrenia or some other mentla disorder. The proof against it is only the lack of.

 We have been through this. I will state it as fact whenever I want, or I will state it as a personal belief if I so choose.

---

When you state it as fact, you need a source for that. If you want to be childish, be my guest.  

And if you're sick of responding to me, then don't.

---

-------
I made it rain on my hoes.Then god smote me for trying to play god.

---

Beleaf in existance does not make bad english ok.
Names are capitalized other wise people can't tell what god you are talking about.

---

God is the only god who is called god. The others have names, such as Zues, Shiva, etc. Therefore, there shall be no confusion.

-------
I made it rain on my hoes.Then god smote me for trying to play god.

---

Quote: from Shogun villimax at 7:39 pm on July 12, 2008

---

Beleaf in existance does not make bad english ok.  
 Names are capitalized  other wise people can't tell what god you are talking about.

---

God is the only god who is called god. The others have names, such as Zeus, Shiva, etc. Therefore, there shall be no confusion.

---

The god most people bother to believe in today is Zeus without the personality, the lightning bolts and the clothes and the name.
It's stripped of any attribute that cannot bend around criticism.
It's RAW concept. It's a thought experiment honed through thousands of years into being one of the most dodgy, slippery, bendable, unfalsifiable, little concepts the human mind has conceived of.
That's why it's around people's minds today.
That's why people still suck it into their minds as something worthy of having in their minds.

It's sad, really...

---

Quote: from exceedinglyrare at 5:30 pm on July 11, 2008

---

No. We are debating the historical authorship of the Bible. Can you provide a single shred of historical evidence that what you say is true? Can you provide a single scholar who agrees with your viewpoint?

---

Provide me proof that it wasn't written by a madman. Then we have an argument. Until then the logical evidence is still in my favor.

It's a debate, prove me wrong.

---

No. You. Idiot.

In a debate, the person who makes the positive assertion ("The Bible was written by a madman") is the one who has the burden of proof. It is not the job of the person who makes the negative assertion ("No it wasn't") to prove that person wrong. As we have been discussing over the last SEVEN PAGES of this topic.

Burden of proof is on you. Bring me historical evidence and scholars to prove your position or admit that you were incorrect.

-------
Let yourself be enchanted,
You just might break through
To ever ever after

---

Well why cant you just say "The Christan god"
That's proper use of the lower case "g".

---

Because it's implied and I'm not going to go out of my way to do what you want if you can't be bothered with proper spelling, punctuation, and grammar half the time.

-------
I made it rain on my hoes.Then god smote me for trying to play god.