Pros and Cons of Proving God Exists?

[Elok]

Let me get back to you on that when I have the time to read the entire Bible front-to-back and tally up the number of times "obedience" is mentioned in each and every book. I don't really have that kind of spare time. Nor, I suspect, do you. You basically pulled that "more times in the NT than the OT" thing right out of your caboose. However, in the unlikely event that you have actually read the whole thing and remembered the precise incidence of that one idea, it still doesn't mean much since you've already established in this thread that you'll gladly "interpret" an idea not present in the original text if it suits your ideological slant.

[Kidlicious]

Let me be clear. I was a communist when I read the Bible. I came to believe in thinking existentially from reading the Bible and reexamining the world in the light of what I read. I read Kierkegaard later and saw that he thought similar to the way I do. But you will twist and spin everything to try to make me look bad. You and Imran talk like politicians and lawyers, not holy men. You're like a pack of vicious bloodthirsty wolves.
I simply refer anyone to the Bible itself if they are wondering what the truth is.

[Elok]

Er, IIRC, Imran IS a lawyer. I'm not a politician, though, and if I were any canid I think I'd prefer to be a dingo, just because of the funny name. Try saying it: "dingo dingo dingo." Hee hee!

[Kidlicious]

Well so be it. But I fear not. I'll remain to refute such bull**** as, "God is not some rule maker." And you are free to continue to spread and defend such crap.

[Elok]

That was Imran, not me. I'm not an existentialist by anyone's definition (though, as I said, I do like Dostoevsky). Certainly I'm not a "post-modern Christian," or a post-modern anything. I'm just here to flout your hypocrisy.

[Kidlicious]

Then people should assume that you believe everything that you argue against. Since that is most often the case, atleast when you are arguing with me. Good. That's something to keep in mind the next time you exercise what you claim as your God given right to argue against the truth so that you can eat someone alive.

[Elok]

1. I don't believe in "God-given rights." Rights are an Enlightenment concept, not a Christian one, as I've said on here more than once.
2. I'm also not a cannibal, and if I were I think I would prefer people cooked rather than "eaten alive." I understand we taste like pork.
3. I've never argued against the truth, merely refuted your profoundly ****ty arguments which, if they supported the truth, only did so by coincidence.
4. You suck at logic.
5. Also reading comprehension.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I was a communist when I read the Bible.

This explains a lot.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I'll remain to refute such bull**** as, "God is not some rule maker."

And yet you call yourself a follower of Kierkegaard?! Also, have you ever heard of Luther's condemnation of "works righteousness" (not that I fully agree with him - I am more with N.T. Wright and other Protestant thinkers who believe that one can be sanctified after justification)?

Oh, and for the record, John Calvin, who you seem to channel a lot, WAS a lawyer (not that I'm anything close to a Calvinist).

[Elok]

If you're going to argue with Kid seriously instead of just poking and laughing like I do, you might also mention Romans and its many variations on mankind not being saved by obedience to the Law, which exists only to condemn, not to save.

[Kidlicious]

Imran, when are you going to admit that you're full of **** like Elok admits that he is? As he says, YOU are the lawyer, not him.

[Elok]

Imran, when are you going to admit that you're full of **** like Elok admits that he is? As he says, YOU are the lawyer, not him.

I never said I was full of ****. I did say, and have said repeatedly, that you're bad at both logic and reading comprehension. Need I say it again?

[Kidlicious]

You said you weren't being serious. Then I said you are full of ****. Then you said you aren't full of **** and I can't read.

Yeah, I get it. Ok.

I'll wait for Imran to do the same thing.

[Kidlicious]

You said you weren't being serious. Then I said you are full of ****. Then you said you aren't full of **** and I can't read.

Yeah, I get it. Ok.

I'll wait for Imran to do the same thing.

[Elok]

I said I wasn't seriously arguing with you (ie, making a futile attempt to have a sensible discussion with someone who's comfortable making up "interpretations" out of whole cloth and ignores points when they don't suit him). That doesn't mean I was lying.