Ask a simple question about proof of god get stonewalled with endless whataboutisms, and irrelevant preachy nonsense about how I am a bad person and I don't believe in God. No shit sunshine show the proof for magic and your "god" THEN we can talk. I don't care for your sermons, your excuses, irrelevant drivel about sin. I am here just for one thing, hard proof.

If you dont have it then kindly shut the fuck up thanks.

Now can any Christians other than the regular npcs provide some proof for the magic events and creatures including this "god" fellow talked about in the bible?

Remember you cant use the bible to prove the bible. Just like you cant use harry potter book to prove harry potter thats circular logic. Instead try anything like a video of a talking snake, maybe a demonstration how Jesus multiplied 5 loafs of bread and 2 fish to feed 5000 people? Maybe you can give us a tour of this magical garden of "Eden" and show us where this magical tree is?
You could replicate the feat elijah performed by surviving inside a stomach of a fish(whale) underwater for 3 days. Anything of that nature, should be easy peasy for you Christians?

If you going to say something stupid like god created you, then you better have evidence of that, show the how, provide the connection make a clear distinction of why it couldn't of been 1000's of other made up gods!

So which Christian is going to prove magic for us?

snake
noun
noun: snake; plural noun: snakes; noun: snake in the grass; plural noun: snakes in the grass; noun: the snake; noun: plumber's snake; plural noun: plumber's snakes
2.
a treacherous or deceitful person.

Bill Gates on depopulation with vaccines / Removed from YouTube

atheist chit science, here we go again boys
you ever wonder how they do it? how they dig in the dirt and find a monkey man fossil? well wonder no longer im gona splain it to you
what you need to find is a chit fossil. whats a chit fossil you ask? well its a fossil thats in shitty shape perhaps the chitter the better. thats when the magic can happen. atheist hocus pocus. another word for it is inference. these are the conditions needed for that atheist evolutionist imagination to go hog wild.........also remember hocus means hoax.

so we are going to talk about the 'greatest most indisputable (snicker) find ever. australopithecus afarensis also known as lucy.
old fossil remnants. no face no hands no feet. reconstructed with face of choice, human hands, human feet. awww?! isnt that convenient voila a monkey man (missing link)
HAHAHA HONK
theres more to the story of lucy we can talk about it and talk about it and talk about it and maybe we will
lucy, no face, no hands, no feet


awww isnt that cute. they put the white in her eyes like a human has. gazing upwards all thoughtful and stuff


This post was edited by TiStuff on Aug 12 2023 12:50pm

Those events are all metaphors and allegories

Every theologian worth their salt knows this. In fact it is only a very fringe section of Christians who believe those events are materially factually true. The vast majority of Christians understand these to be profound metaphors.

There's nothing to prove, if you cannot understand the metaphors, allegories and parables that's on your own lack of intellect

E.g. Jesus gave sight to the blind. This one is the most easy metaphor to understand. It doesn't mean he literally restored vision to these people, it's that he enlightened them to the truth of God, thus restoring their sight in a figurative meaning

i have received actual physical healing

I have as well, but not as extreme as having my vision restored after being blind

This is because physical health is very often downstream from mental health, modern science has come to understand this very well especially with regards to the placebo effect

Your mindset/how you think has a profound impact on your physical body and health

Great video.

Statistics and mathematics is proof in itself that there is/was an external force removed from the fundamental forces of gravity/electrostatics/nuclear force responsible for the creation of life

Anyone who truely understands the statistical nature of physics/chemistry/statistical mechanics knows that it is not a physical possibility for life to have been generated through random chaotic chance unless we let Time go to infinity. But we know that the universe is not infinite years old, we have actually calculated through physics an age of the Earth of around 14 billion years. Which is a tiny amount of time with respect to statistical formation of life.

what do you do with the "simulation hypothesis" ?

I think it's completely nonsensical, and is unfalsifiable either through physical scientific or ontological means

Same as the parallel universe stuff or whatever. It's nonsensical because there is absolutely no way to distinguish anything of any kind

To summarize: It means absolutely nothing thus it is a complete waste of time to even bother thinking about it