"If the alleged reality of this cannot be systematically *transferred* from a believer to a receiving skeptic (because of missing "senses"), it's useless to the receiver."
I should add that this failure to receive (due to missing senses) also makes the receiver *unaccountable* to the alleged God the godmonger asserts. So much for pistol-w…
"If the alleged reality of this cannot be systematically *transferred* from a believer to a receiving skeptic (because of missing "senses"), it's useless to the receiver."
I should add that this failure to receive (due to missing senses) also makes the receiver *unaccountable* to the alleged God the godmonger asserts. So much for pistol-whipping many of the thinking non-believers into compliance post-Enlightenment, the way it had been done successfully prior to that time.
John 3:16. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son ... "
The entire premise that there is some great "loss" to the all-powerful creator of the universe, one that binds people to "owe" him or otherwise pay the price, is simply insane. Yet I understand it is the most quoted Biblical phrase. Who knew he was such a bean-counter? It conjures up those pagan gods always looking for human sacrifices to throw into the fire pit.
As Hume pointed out (thru a dialog character), "It is an absurdity to believe that the Deity has human passions, and one of the lowest of human passions, a restless appetite for applause”
It's also preposterous that many Christians seem to be awed by mid-second-millennium English. As if it has magical powers to sound like "God's voice", rather than being completely an accident of time and place, and a translation to boot.
"If the alleged reality of this cannot be systematically *transferred* from a believer to a receiving skeptic (because of missing "senses"), it's useless to the receiver."
I should add that this failure to receive (due to missing senses) also makes the receiver *unaccountable* to the alleged God the godmonger asserts. So much for pistol-whipping many of the thinking non-believers into compliance post-Enlightenment, the way it had been done successfully prior to that time.
John 3:16. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son for part of a weekend."
“For all addicted religious person who lights a candle for me, then verily it shall be immediately bloweth out by me.
I didn't ask for your candle to be lit for me.
I don't want it.
I don't need it.
Please have your Candle back thank you very much.” – the great atheist Cristopher Hitchens
John 3:16. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son ... "
The entire premise that there is some great "loss" to the all-powerful creator of the universe, one that binds people to "owe" him or otherwise pay the price, is simply insane. Yet I understand it is the most quoted Biblical phrase. Who knew he was such a bean-counter? It conjures up those pagan gods always looking for human sacrifices to throw into the fire pit.
As Hume pointed out (thru a dialog character), "It is an absurdity to believe that the Deity has human passions, and one of the lowest of human passions, a restless appetite for applause”
Re thee, thou, [verb]-eth, verily, etc.
It's also preposterous that many Christians seem to be awed by mid-second-millennium English. As if it has magical powers to sound like "God's voice", rather than being completely an accident of time and place, and a translation to boot.