WTH! Warning! 10 Days Until Impact (Video)

I guess you didn’t read what I said to you on the other board. Or you did read it and you just don’t care.

What do I owe you, Sicko? Why do you keep demanding something from me? Am I in your debt? What is this proof you keep asking for? Because you’ve been swimming in proof from your time as a small child, yet somehow you’re numbered among the people who cannot recognize proof for what it is; who have failed to rightly discern the nature of what they see with their own God-given eyes.

Consider the eye. Consider how it works, better than any camera man has been able to invent. Consider our stereoscopic vision and how it enables us to rightly discern the dimensional nature of our physical world. Consider the hide of the zebra; how it was specifically crafted to thwart the visual acuity of the lion, which is the natural predator of the zebra. (This last piece of information is impossible for evolutionists to explain.) Consider language. Consider reproduction. That’s right. Sexual reproduction is only possible via a transmission of information and information always has one ultimate source: Intelligence. There is no intelligence behind the theory of evolution, so there cannot be an intelligent source of information. The transmission of information, without which you would not exist to deny the source of that information, is not possible without a Creator of All Things.

There is your proof for God. One simple paragraph.

But you still see nothing through your God-given eyes as you should see. You will still pretend that neither information nor the Source of information has no bearing on your little willfully constricted vision of the Real.

*better acuity our eye are actually pretty lame as far as a sense organ goes.

“The eyeball is proof of “god”…”

If you took the time to consider the eye, with all of its component parts and how it functions as a whole, it would become manifestly apparent to you that the eye is a created apparatus – it is not the final product of a long time wallowing in primordial sauce.

“…if “god” was gona knock out something awesome how is it the eye ball in some other animals has been acuity than ours?”

Mind your sentence construction, Sicko. You’re getting sloppy. God made our eyes what He made them so that we would not become over-reliant on that single sense for all of our learning about the world we live in. He made sure our vision was limited as it is, because He wants us bringing ALL of our senses to bear when we consider our surroundings – not just the one. He wants us to use our minds as well as our eyes and He has created us so that we function at our most efficient when we utilize all of our powers of observation and comprehension in tandem. We are not to walk by sight alone, for if we do then we risk winding up where you are, thinking that a thing doesn’t exist simply because we can’t see it with our eyes.

“Try harder, show me “god” quantify and measure it, show me via the scientific method, i’ll wait…”

Why do you consistently harass me with this dim-witted nonsense? Why don’t YOU break out your tape measure and tell me the length of the cosmos? Or, how about you whip out your scales and give me the precise weight (in pounds) of all the water in the oceans? How many stars are there, Sicko? I’ll wait while you count them and I expect a precise answer. Or perhaps you’ll leave off this asinine line of childish behavior.

“…*better acuity our eye are actually pretty lame as far as a sense organ goes.”

Lame in comparison to what? The eyes of other animals? Cameras man can engineer? We can MAGNIFY with technology much more powerfully than we can with our eyes. But magnification is only one aspect the camera. Our visual quality is another. And our visual quality works in tandem with inner ear function and with our hand-eye coordination as well as hand-eye-brain ‘interface.’ If we’re going to get specific, then let’s get specific. The eye is but one member of the body and the members cannot function apart from the other members, as even you yourself suggested above.

“If anything sited as a “source” comes from the babel than it is no source.”

Why is it that you, who knows nothing about the Bible, gets to discredit the entirety of everything written therein as nothing worth? What sort of logic is that? What do you know about the Bible or about its authors? What do you know about its transmission over the millennia or about its ancient languages? What do you know about how to test it and how to search for the tokens of its authenticity? You know none of these things, Sicko. So why on Earth should anyone accept your preposterous assertion that everything written within the pages of Scripture is to be rejected – merely because YOU suggest it should be rejected? What sort of fractured logic is that?

“I would like to site (sic) the authors and the time of commitment to paper and peer reviews. Ohh but the babel doen’t have any… no one know who the hell wrote it and when…”

This is precisely the sort of ignorance you traffic in. Why do you think we can’t determine when the Books of Scripture were written? Of course we can make that determination. And we have. Even famous atheists like Bart Ehrman (who has actually studied the Scriptures, by the way) admit that we know when they were written. In fact, we can make a number of simple determinations along those lines, and we will find every time that the determinations we make will line up perfectly with the very claims recorded in the Bible by the authors themselves. And if that’s the case, which it very well is, then why should we discount other aspects or claims contained within those same pages, such as the identities of the Book’s authors?

“…what version is correct and so forth…”

No translation is perfect. That’s why prudence dictates that we ourselves learn the languages which the Bible was originally written in – namely Hebrew and Greek. This way, we need not be beholden to the personal doctrines and beliefs of the translators when we read the Scriptures.

“…the entire books is corrupt and useless from the word go.”

That’s an assertion for which you have provided not one single shred of supportable evidence or proof. Rather, all evidence and proof stands in direct contradiction to your assertion.

“Even the scrolls they can find are not originals…”

We have copies of the originals – and some of those copies are more than 2300 years old. We have all of the material written, as it originally existed. It is all available to us, Sicko. That’s why we’ll each be held accountable for how we respond to that material. Will we reject it, as you have done, even without ever honestly examining the material? Or will we actually take the time to learn for ourselves whether or not the Scriptures are the work of men or the Word of God.

Just take the time to think this through and imagine how you’ll wind up if you get it all wrong because you were hasty and because you were imprudent. This matter is deserving of far more care and consideration than you’ve given it.

And I told you I would give you your proof AFTER you answered MY questions.

So?

Do you dare?

speaking in circles or excessive use of hyperbole (in other words your answer wasn’t an answer, nor your question a legit question) SHOW me tangible, quantifiable proof of a “god” it can not come from passive sources such as “faith” or from a “holy” book it must meet all criteria of the scientific method.