If you can define god he can be disproved. Just like a square circle can. The problem is no can define him. Therefore he does not exist. Especially if he is worshipped as Yahweh/Jesus!
The internet period & Amazon was a great idea, well executed & the
I unblocked you because I missed your absurdity and banalities.
They did not rule he was allowed to discriminate, they did not cover that at all and in fact stated "No business or organization open to the public should hide their discriminatory practices behind the guise of religious liberty."
Let's talk about happiness, and Bhutan. I'm not sure of the best way to structure this, but I'm going to try Bhutan first and happiness second, and you can let me know if the end result makes sense.
A spontaneous invention of language also suggests a god or at least some guiding force that would influence events otherwise language would never spontaneously invent itself.
So you got nothing then.
if its a kind of indoctrination and "its fine"
"Science does not determine if things are real or imaginary."
I disagree. Not knowing how something works doesn't mean that it looks like a god is doing it.
Lol yup, these hypocrites not only aren't recycling -- they're forgetting that developed nations are experiencing a baby drought and need more children to help replace the graying population (if robots don't take over by then but I'm getting waaay off topic now).
lol. you think America's influence is eroding? you need to prove that is occurring before I need to defend anything.
Gave yourself a vote! Ha, ha!
You're supposed to drink it, not take Little TeeJ for a dip in it.
IhavI seen his interaction w/military, children, coal miners & the black
You'd have to be in your late 60's or early 70's for any difference in age to be significant.
From what I can see it's the exact opposite of what you are saying.
Then its at problem with all antiquated historical data. This problem is not unique to the Bible the difference being the preponderance of evidence to support the Biblical narrative. How many witness do we have for Homer, Plato, Aristotle, and Euripides? The answer is none most accounts of these men were written several hundred years after the fact. The four gospels along with Paul's letter were all written within the life time of the witness. All were most likely written before AD 70. History is impossible to prove we can never test it but we can use logic and reason to deduce the most likely narrative to the events based on the available evidence. So it boils down to you have looked at the evidence and determined it to be lacking so be it. I on the other hand look at it and draw a different conclusion. Your conclusion is not better than mine as is mine is not better than yours. Mine has 2000 years of scrutiny and critique and your has about 150 years. The more archeological evidence that is uncovered the more my case is strengthened and yours is weakened. The evidence is not swinging the way of myth it is swinging the way of historical account.
You keep pointing to this book that you claim shows this god of yours exists, and he MUST exist, because it says so in this book that was written by this god.
Deleting as inappropriate. As with my comment to exnav, let's keep things civil, please.
That's to say not all, you two-bit fraud.
This from a discussion on Sam Harris' podcast with the psychologist Paul Bloom (author of the book Against Empathy) about empathy: