Quote# 55197

You want proof for the existence of God, here are a few:

1. Israel - God said that they will always be a people once He brought them into existence and they have been. They are here today even though many atheists have tried to destroy them (Stalin as one example).

2. The over 300 Old Testament prophecies (some written 1500 years before His birth) of the first Advent of Jesus Christ. Could not be a coincidence because we do not have a number large enough to show the odds against all of them being fulfilled in One person.

3. The resurrection - yes the one with Christ Himself but also the one that I experienced. I was spiritually dead in my sins (a slave to sin) and God brought me to life (changed my life and set me free from slavery to sin).

Three real proofs, now go ahead and hit your knees in repentance (agree that God is right and you are wrong).

By the way God does not hear the prayers of non-Christians (with the exception of their first prayer of repentance).

Erik Brewer, Dangerous Intersection 122 Comments [12/31/2008 6:55:23 PM]
Fundie Index: 15
Submitted By: King Crusader

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 2 3 4 5 | bottom

The Duelist

"@ The Duelist
The same list from SAB, already disproved :)"

Then I'm sure you won't mind linking to a methodical refutation of these contradictions, most of which are obviously valid to the rational.

I'm waiting. Or perhaps you'd prefer if I went into some of these myself?

4/3/2011 3:06:19 PM

The Duelist

"Funny, do not murder finds it way into secular law. Unless you agree with murder, you follow the teachings of the 10 commands"

Secular law(s) does not include "worship no other gods", or "graven images"(thanks to a little wonder called "freedom of religion").


4/3/2011 3:16:16 PM


Just because something has something coincidentally in common with another concept does not mean the two concepts are one and the same, Erik. Even a child can grasp that concept. Or do you suppose a motorcycle is a truck because they both have wheels. Is a phonebook on par with the Bible because they both have Jesus in them somewhere (It is after all an awfully common Hispanic name). And unlike your obsolete ten commandments (See my earlier points as to why)? Secular law at least examines the gravity of an offense rather than attempting to blanket the whole thing with "Drag the bastard out back and stove in their head with a rock".

Also, just in case you needed another reminder, Erik, you're still an atavistic moron with a severe logic deficit.

4/3/2011 3:21:50 PM


So, has anyone mentioned yet that pretty much all cultures with a concept of "law" have legal prohibitions against murder and theft?

Just thought I'd get that out there.

4/3/2011 3:25:34 PM

The Duelist

By the way, Eric, the Hebrews were not the first ones to have a written code forbidding murder, among other acts of immorality; ever hear of Hammurabi?

4/3/2011 3:37:49 PM


"Drag the bastard out back and stove in their head with a rock"."

more proof that you have no idea about what is actually written in the Bible

4/3/2011 3:59:29 PM


Ever hear of Cain and Able?

"ever hear of Hammurabi"
No, thank you for being the first person to point out this Hammurabi person to me. (sarcasm)

4/3/2011 4:00:32 PM

The Duelist

"Ever hear of Cain and Able?"

"Able"? Yuck; sounds like gay porn.

I was just pointing out that morality existed long before the bible was written, even by "heathens".

4/3/2011 5:00:21 PM


"bible was written"
But in existence before being written.

4/3/2011 5:28:00 PM


Yes. And The Odyssey was in existence before being written. So what?

4/3/2011 5:34:54 PM

The Duelist

"But in existence before being written."

Riiight. Got any evidence? No? Then stop insulting my intelligence with your drivel. BTW, the Iliad existed before it was written. Prove that wrong.

See the point?

4/3/2011 5:56:42 PM


1) The British sent them there.

2) Some were written after the fact, some never happened. For example, the "prophesy" of the temple's destruction was actually written after the temple was destroyed.

3) It's all in your head.

You really are brainwashed, Erik. Stop swallowing everything your pastor tells you, hook, line, and sinker, and try using your own brain for once.

4/3/2011 6:04:35 PM

Professor M

@ ErikBBrewer --

Unless you agree with murder, you follow the teachings of the 10 commands

Unless you agree with murder, you're following the Bodhisattva Precepts. Clearly, you must now accept that secular law is based on Buddhism...

Seriously, do you even bother to think about these things? Do you really expect anyone to think that a prohibition on murder could only possibly arise out of Hebrew doctrinal law?

4/3/2011 8:15:30 PM

The Duelist

"Do you really expect anyone to think that a prohibition on murder could only possibly arise out of Hebrew doctrinal law?"

Well, there is his response to my point about Hammurabi... ;)

4/3/2011 9:05:31 PM


All of Erik's ramblings simply boil down to "the Bible is true because the Bible is true."

This is pretty much inevitable, because it is essentially the only argument that fundies can have. There is simply no real evidence of the existence of god other than what is written in the Babble, and any idiot can write anything and pretend it's true.

As for the 10 commandments, they have indeed been superseded by secular law. They reflect the social mores of the times they were written, so even thousands of years ago people knew that killing and stealing were bad things. The laws of today are merely an updated version fit for today, but while some of the commandments therefore have merit and complete relevance to this day, there is still absolutely nothing in them to prove the existence of a divine being. Nothing at all.

4/4/2011 2:06:31 AM


I will focus simply on one thing of Eriks and ask him to either provide it or shut the fuck up.

Multiple reports from sources outside the bible of holy people rising from their tombs and walking into the city after jesus's resurrection as told in
Matthew 27:53

Jerusalem was a major city. I'm pretty sure there would be more than a few literate chroniclers around who would of written down "verily, zombies!" if it had occured.

4/4/2011 5:23:25 AM

1: The land would always be there.

2: Those 'prophecies' are so ephemeral and vague, they could mean anything to anyone at any time.

3: There is no proof, and even your own stories in your NEW testament contradict each other about this 'resurrection'.

No proof, just more allegory and fables. Try again.

4/4/2011 5:43:26 AM


Hi Erik
your case seems to hinge on the Gospels so I thought I'd introduce you to the problems of Gospel authorship and accuracy.

Gospel introduction.

Luke probably wrote the Gospel of Luke but that's not saying much. Luke based most of his Gospel on Josephus & the Gospel of Mark. Unfortunately Luke doesn't seem too concerned about the accuracy of his reports. eg. In Luke we read that Jesus was born when Herod reigned [1:5] & Quirinius was govenor of Syria [2:1]. But Herod died 4 BCE & Quirinius became governor of Syria in 6 CE. A gap of 10 years!?

If Matthew was written by a former tax gatherer why did Matthew need to borrow so much of his material & even his wording from Mark who wasn't one of the 12? Why did Matthew make stupid mistakes like calling Pontius Pilate Procurator when he was the Prefect of Judaea?

If the Gospel of Mark was written by John Mark why'd he make so many mistakes concerning geography, the people & the language? He'd lived in the area all his life.

If the Gospel of John was written by John the Galilean fisherman then why did he leave out EVERY event in which John was supposedly an eye witness? John even starts out his gospel with a quote from Parmenides' the way of truth. Did John study Greek philosophy while he was waiting to pull the nets in? :)

Continued in 2nd post

4/4/2011 6:23:56 AM


continued from previous post...

How about the accuracy of the Gospels regarding the crucifixion. Was it the 3rd hour as Mark 15:25 declares? Or was it the 6th hour as John 19: 14, 15 says?

Concerning the resurrection - No two gospels agree on who found Jesus' empty tomb first.

Mark: 3 women go to the tomb first & see a young man [not an angel].

Matthew: 2 Mary's approach the tomb first, when an earthquake occurs, an angel rolls away the the stone blocking the entrance & sits on it.

Luke's women on the other hand already find the tomb empty & two [not one] men in shining robes.

While in John, Mary Magdalene is the first to find the tomb empty & she finds it ALONE.

They can't all be correct. By definition there can only be one first witness to a unique event. So which account is correct?

I'll leave it to fundie gymnatics to do summersaults and avoid the obvious. But consider this. If these mistakes existed in any other historical text you'd have no problem saying they were sure signs that the work was merely myth and history intertwined. Why can't you do the same for the Gospels?

4/4/2011 6:25:43 AM



"PRO 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

PRO 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit."

'The only way to combat ridiculous proposistions is through mockery'

-Thomas Jefferson

And a book that claims to be the literal 'Word of God' that has a talking snake therein is the most ridiculous proposition in said book.

'We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes.'

-Gene Roddenberry

And he came up with a storm of a story: "Star Trek".

4/4/2011 7:19:21 AM

The Duelist

"more proof that you have no idea about what is actually written in the Bible, because I'm just going to pretend that all those verses about stoning people to death don't exist."


BTW, your blog is a piece of crap and anyone who believes it is a moron.

4/4/2011 11:04:08 AM

Crimson Lizard

What kind of asshat links to his own blog as "proof" of his bullshit?

6/24/2013 9:12:42 PM

1 2 3 4 5 | top: comments page