I can't really read your mind because you never say anything about the real world, just all this doctrinal sophistry incredibly removed from life on this earth with nothing behind it but: "Well, it's one of the religions. And instead of just the one word 'kindness' that is needed, take a gander at this high flying supra doctrinal bullshyt that I can spiel and feel like I'm Yahweh's gift to theology, which itself is chimerical, but precisely because it is so unbelievable we need bukoos of layers of astounding sophistry to bamboozle ourselves and our prey into being impressed enough to convert."

Maybe I can read your mind.

Ok, kindness. Let’s go with that. Kindness is the highest truth. Lip service doesn’t count. It only matters what is embodied through action, including behavior on this forum.

I'm not in the religion. Those who are fail utterly at this on this forum. Almost as if the whole religion was lip service.

You are the one who proposed that kindness is the “one word needed”. In your mind, kindness should be the highest value for others but not for you? Am I understanding you correctly?

In my opinion, trying to "understand" Fella-Gaga is a fool's errand. I recommend just enjoying his random rants, and moving on to more fruitful endeavors.

It's all a religion needs. I'm not religious.

Behold ... a liar to maintain the indoctrination. Imagine that.

You rant and rave all over this forum about how theists should stop behaving like children, and then your suggestion to fix religion is to infantilize it further. Got it.

The type of person who doesn’t consider the personal or relational version of God to be all powerful shouldn’t be categorized as a theist. It’s more accurate to describe them as a non theist. The non theist uses faith + direct experience to undermine theism when they are in its domain and uses blind faith to undermine atheism when they are in that domain.

The major difference is not between the theist and the atheist, since both are static and both are motivated by the same truth of pain avoidance. The meaningful distinction is really between the non theist (dynamism) and the static theist/atheist dichotomy.

In response to the thread title, “Do you believe in God?” The non theist, through embodiment, answers with yes and no simultaneously.

I don't believe that a theist necessarily has to believe that God is omnipotent. But a theist does have to believe that God is personal.

Describing someone as a non-theist isn't very informative, as that would include deists, agnostics, atheists, polytheists, and animists, and on and on.

How come the so-called fine tuning constants, values, ratios, etc. ... are not revealed in the Bible?? Everybody knows the answer to this question. Some need to act like they don't to support their belief system. And this is the deviousness of being religious.

I suspect that most thinking people know the answer to your question: Because God determined that an explication of "fine-tuning ratios" wasn't sufficiently relevant to His purpose in providing us with His Word.

So like it, or any of a million other such scientific details, wouldn't have aided in garnering believers?

"Thinking" is a funny choice of words you use there. Let's get real: illiterate, pre-scientific people didn't quite know the universe's arcane numbers. Just like they didn't know infections were caused by microscopic germs. The omniscient didn't know it.

God only knows (literally!).

Thinking is fun. I would encourage you to try it at some point in you life.

Illiterate people wrote the Bible? I would like to encourage you to try to engage your brain before typing. It should significantly enhance the quality of your posts.

In any event, thanks for ranting! It isn't edifying, but it is entertaining for me.

Yeah they were illiterate. They wrote it in tongues, not even knowing what they were writing or that it was from the almighty. You know, that thing you believe in will hound you until you stop. To wit: magic.

I've about been defeated by the apologetic line of attack. Recently I've learned that Genesis isn't about the creation, that Christianity isn't one of the religions, that killing every child, baby and fetus on earth is loving and righteous and A-okay with believers, that killing trillions of animals because of mankind's transgressions is good with Christian animal activists, and that if the Bible says 2+2=5 a pastor will "believe it with all his heart."

I would encourage you to seek help for your meth addiction, or whatever it is that is contributing to your bizarro posts. If you PM me, I can give you contact information for a ministry that helps folks with problems like that.

In the last few weeks apologists have literally resorted to the following when their defenses and rationale for believing got threatened:

1. Genesis isn't about creation.
2. Christianity isn't a religion or one of the religions
3. Killing every child and fetus on earth is fine, moral, righteous, holy and loving, and just fine with the faithful/pro-lifers
4. Killing trillions of animals in the flood for man's transgressions is cool with Christian animal rights activists
5. A pastor said that if the Bible said 2+2=5 he would believe it with all his heart.

So when these same people believe in miracles, ghosts, witches, supernatural stuff ... you can see that they have a little credibility problem. They are miming anything that defends their pathetic default in the realm of morality, reason and metaphysics.

Nothing you've ever said has "threatened" my rationale for belief.

Two of the fifty chapters in Genesis are about creation. So, 96% of Genesis isn't about creation.

I don't recall anyone in this thread claiming that Christianity is not a religion. Please cite the relevant post(s). Thanks.

All experience physical death, while some will experience spiritual death and some escape spiritual death. Your choice with respect to spiritual death.

Not sure about trillions of animals being killed. And it's problematic to assert that animals have rights. Might make for an interesting thread.

What pastor said that? Thanks.

This conclusion does not logically follow from points one thru five. Hence, your argument is without merit and should be rejected by all lovers of truth and reason.

I think I'll just sit tight with my lack of reason on the subject. The true believers excel so mightily in that regard that it reaches a point of no return to witness the infection in their consciousness dangerously blathered into the ether.

The Bible also foretells of the roominess of vehicles made by Honda

“Jesus and the disciples were all in one accord”. 😀

Smoking cigarettes is also mentioned:

And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and when she saw Isaac, she lighted off the camel. - Genesis 24:64

Let's not forget the big balls and world-class cum shot:

"There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses." - Ezekial 23:20

That's the holy book that solves the mysteries of the universe, existence, life, cosmology, morality, human meaning.

Pretty much this!!!

1. The Bible solves the mystery of the origin of the universe/cosmos.

2. The Bible solves the mystery of how humans got here and what our existence means.

3. The Bible solves the mystery of what constitutes righteousness and what constitutes sin.