Over the years, I have noticed something that makes me wonder why Christians preach love but most of the time displays racial abuse. I was born( still) a Christian( Roman Catholic to be precise). When I was a kid, I used to attend Block Rosary. We have a lot of children book. I used to enjoy reading such stories a lot. Though those days, I don't ask much question and I have to admit that I believe everything in the book. There is one thing I noticed. All the bad angels are mainly black people. Satan is also portrayed as a black man.

One day I came across a story about Lucifer(Satan) when he was still an angel. On the picture Lucifer was a white man. Along the line, he disobeyed God and was thrown out of heaven. The next picture now portrayed him as a black man with Angel Gabriel(a white man) standing on his head.

Most of the time, you will see pictures of little angels, adult angels, with all being white people (no latino,black,asian,arab,etc). If that is the case, we do we have to accept a religion that prove to practice such act. Why should we allow our children to read such stories that in somehow tells them that being black is evil.Is that the way God put it. Why have our Rev. Fathers, Pastors, etc believe in such stories without debating on the issue. What are your own view?

Please someone should correct me if I am wrong.

1. You can always find an excuse to abandon your faith or leave Christianity but racism is a cheap sell. Whilst the intent of certain persons who had influence over the spread of Christianity might be unknown (because it happened thousands of years ago), non-the-less we can let the bible speak for itself.

2. The bible calls/describes the presence of God (heaven) as LIGHT. Whilst describing hell or the non-dwelling presence of God as HELL or Darkness.

3. Considering the age that the literature was revealed to you, how can u depict this biblical illustration using images that kids would understand?

4. unless you suffer from inferiority complex, depicting those in the LIGHT as white and those in darkness as BLACK for little kids to understand has no racist undertone.

5. Just to pre-empt ur question . . . No I am not a white person.

To be fair, Dawkins book has been relatively boring, hence I have been unable to finish it up.

Nonetheless, the arguments remain valid. There is insufficient evidence, logic or argument to dispute the notion that the material world which we live in could have kicked off without a designer who is super-intelligent. It is inconceivable that the world would have sprung up by chance.

Typical examples abound . . . cars, jets, ships, tv sets, buildings et all . . .these are intelligent designs that were conceived by more-intelligent beings (in this case man). Therefore, how can we then dismiss the fact that man, the planets, solar system, ecosystem, animals, air, oxygen gasses and many more could not have been created or conceived by a more intelligent being (this time God).

I remain baffled at the illogicality of the atheist argument.

nice topic, but the owner of NL simply lacks imagination.

NL should be a lot bigger by now. why not let users develop profiles and interact more.
sticking to the original idea of being a forum is not ideal . . we are in a fast transcending and growing world/industry . . u either grow or become outdated.
NL is fast becoming outdated.

davidylan:


Deepsight and noetic16 - una welcome back oh!

uncle dafidi . . . longest time

mazaje:

Here is a video that answers all the questions you asked.  .It is titled Gods do not exist, I hope you find time to watch it. . ,

[flash=400,400]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwjAX_r2kIU[/flash]

how about posting the transcript?

Kay 17:


@noetic16

You are confused. Aren't you suggesting there are other Gods other Yehovah??

If you have no proof for your god, what is it you believe??

Besides why is belief so important? The Truth need not be accepted with faith but proof.

The confusion here is yours. Mazaje denies the scope of existence of any Yahweh. So my question was, a god able to communicate to its followers, would such be said to not-exist? what then is mazaje's definition or understanding of existence?
Not only does Yahweh exist, but the manifestations of local gods like IFA suggest the existence of an immaterial world beyond the scope of our present senses.
To state that Yahweh does not exist is the height of ignorance. No true intellectual or scientist can/would deny the possibility of an event/existence whilst dismissing prevalent facts.

OLAADEGBU:

@noetic16, welcome back to the battle front.

thanks Ola, I have been enjoying ur posts so far . . . ,

mazaje:

I fully affirm that Gods like Yahweh, Allah, Zeus, Ra,  Vishnu do not exist, they are simply a creation of men and their superstitions, but for the deist concept  which is about the universe having a creator or creators who simply created and have no role with their creation, I will say its possible, that such an entity or entities exist. . . .Even if they exist no body knows what they are, who they are, why the created the universe or what they want. .  .I am not a deist and I also do not believe in that concept mainly for lack of evidence, but I believe its possible that such an entity or entities exist. . .   

1. whats the basis of this affirmation? considering that you are yet to produce any empirical evidence to suggest that Yahweh does not exist? how do you explain the esoteric personal experiences of millions of people the world over, who attest to the existence of Yahweh? To state that Yahweh is a man-made creation acknowledges His existence, what differs is the cause of His existence.

2. You are being unscientific and superstitious here. Within the limits of science we can analyse IFA, the yoruba god of divination. Through the penchant ability of its adherents to seek its counsel about future events or the causes of present events or solutions to problems. We can hence, assert that IFA exists because it adherents (babalawo) are able to communicate its (IFA) thoughts to us, many of these communication is personalised and hence true in individualistic sense. By all rationality, IFA exists and so does Yahweh.

3. However, you are free to choose to disbelieve the existence of Yahweh. All I ask is . . . .Where is your evidence that supports your assertion?

4. Why the universe was created is quite different from who created it. perhaps if we can agree that the universe if the product of superior-intelligence then we can infer that it does have a creation. what are the chances that a jeep has no manufacturer?

^^^^ mazaje, i hail oooo

Deep Sight:

^ Excellent! I af removed my email in my post now. Now my repertoire of NL people that I get to know in real life is growing! Am so happy, I have been waiting for you for a long time, wetin do u na? U don escape NL finally? Hast thou been debating with thy old nemesis - Mazaje?

NL can be quite exhilarating. Nothing trumps actually meeting up with a mind that one admires though - and I must say you have been one of the most worthy NLders i have ever comes across on the forum. God willing, one day, we meet up, as I have done with others.

Why I love this forum is the fact that in writing only, one sees the mind better even, than close relatives tend to do sometimes - for one sees the inner annoymous conviction.

I am humbled lol . . . You retain deep admiration from myself.

I am hoping to debate with mazaje again on this forum, and hopefully expose his ignorance repeatedly

Its good to be back.

Habinger:

Most people think that anyone who makes a prediction that manifests is a prophet, but this is not true. There are many magicians, astrologians, witchdoctors, occultists, shamans and African traditional healers who can accurately predict an event (Act16:16). There are certain qualities that are supposed to be seen in the life of a true prophet of God. Consider a few of these qualities.

I do agree that there many sons of satan disguising as prophets of God, but your definition, is fallacy on its own.

The call: A prophet must receive his call and gifts from God, not anointed by another prophet or receive his gift by other spiritual means (Ephesians4:11).

Samuel anointed David. David was the only OT prophet who saw the hill of God and saw Christ along with the father. by your definition is David a false prophet?
Elijah anointed Elisha, does that make Elisha a false prophet? The apostles laid hands on all those who believed the gospel, many of whom later became prophets, does that make them false prophets? There is no one way through which God calls prophets.

Training:  A prophet must be properly trained, experienced and mature in the word of God (1Timothy3:6)

who trained 17 year old Joseph in the art of prophecy? who trained David? who trained Daniel?
The only training u need is at the feet of God. That explains why Christ promised believers the holy spirit to teach them all things.

Evidence of the Fruits of the Spirit: Despite the accuracy of one’s prophecies or predictions, if that person does not have the character of Christ,  if he is not bearing the fruits of the Holy Spirit which are love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control  etc (Galatians5: 22). That person is not a true prophet of God (Mathew7:16, 20).

Elisha prayed that a lion consume 40 kids, Moses prayed that hundreds of thousands should die a miserable death (they died by earthquake), David killed 200 phillistines as a bride price to kind saul, Jeremiah and Isaiah cursed the inhabitants of Israel for disobeying God . . , .does this make any of them a false prophet, even though these actions are not fruits of the spirit? . . . . .true prophets do the will of God and God only . . . The will of God is NOT always pleasant.

Humility: A prophet must be extremely humble, for the secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant (Psalm25:14). The fear of the LORD means to hate evil: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth (Proverbs8:13). God cannot reveal his secret to a proud person! Moses was very humble—more humble than any other person on earth. (Number12:3).

uhmn . . . . Moses was humble only in God's opinion . . . humility is subjective.

Does not contradict the Word of God:  A t true prophet's words will be in absolute harmony with the written words of God; for instance, a true prophet cannot proclaim peace to the wicked when the Lord has spoken through the prophets of old that there shall be no peace unto the wicked. The scripture reads…To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, they have no light  in them(Isaiah8:20).

in the days of Jeremiah, all other prophets said that Israel would not go into captivity as long as the Lord lives . . . Jeremiah stood out by saying that this captivity is the will of God. God is not a robot, He says new things everyday. The word of God is not static.

Fearlessness:  True prophets are fearless; they don’t compromise the word of God, but always willing to die for the truth (1kings22:10-51).

read your bible carefully and show me one prophet who did not have fear or doubts at the beginning or during his ministry?

Doesn’t prophesy at own will: A true prophet does not prophesy any time he wishes, or any time people consult him. A prophet prophesies only when the Holy Spirit moves him (2Peter1:20). You can’t pay a prophet and ask him to prophesy to you.

Actually prophets do seek God and hear from Him ANYTIME . . holiness is the requirement.

Not Money conscious:  A true prophet is not money conscious (Daniel 5:13-17, 2Kings5:14-19,1Timothy 3:3). He does not ask people for an offering before he prophesies, or asks people to “sow a seed” in order to claim their prophecies.

the priests and sons of levi were materially conscious, they asked for offerings from the remaining tribes as God commanded. They were not to work but to live on the gifts of the other 11 tribes. This was the commandment of God, that they do no work, except to feed of the sacrifices and gifts in the temple.

just emailed u . . lol

^^^^

longest time deep sight . . .how af thou been?

Joagbaje:

The scripture you quoted is wrongly applied here. So did Jesus sell all? . How come he didn't allow them to sell the perfume? Expensive perfume? How did Jesus feed, and housed himself?

You are busy talking about what someone else' should do with what he has ,I asked you a question. Do you give?  Have you sold all ? According to you. You should not read the bible criticise another person. You rather should study it to do it.

1. You have absolutely no understanding of the life that Jesus lived. He sold all that He had. And with regards to how his basic needs were met, we can refer to two different stories in the bible
mathew 27 tells us of how his tax needs were met.
24 After Jesus and his disciples arrived in Capernaum, the collectors of the two-drachma temple tax came to Peter and asked, “Doesn’t your teacher pay the temple tax?”
25 “Yes, he does,” he replied.

When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. “What do you think, Simon?” he asked. “From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes—from their own children or from others?”

26 “From others,” Peter answered.

“Then the children are exempt,” Jesus said to him. 27 “But so that we may not cause offense, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours.”
The feeding of the 5,000 and the 4,000 also illustrates how these needs were met. does these passages suggest that he had any reason to accumulate material wealth?

2. The problem with your doctrine is that, it cannot be reconciled with the life that Christ lived. Your attempts to make this reconciliation is laughable, what would Christ have sold to meet the immediate needs of 5000 men, considering that he had encouraged the rich dude to sell all for the sake of the gospel?

brilliant . . .I hope and pray his passion does not die out like the many who came before him.

mazaje, why have u stayed away from the God delusion thread?

jayriginal:

I do not know of any such thing. Therefore, I do not believe. My non belief has no effect on whether such a thing exists.
However, Mazaje has had a revelation details of which he gave here. As it is a subjective revelation, it is proof only for himself and not for others.

You cannot use the word BELIEF for a subject you are ignorant about . , . . . ,

^^^

In a situation whereby this is the case for hundreds of millions of people all over the world. How then can anyone dismiss the case of there being a supernatural existence?

^^^ 

So you see, your belief is from knowledge

jayriginal:

@Noetic the above statement of yours is wrong. Reconsider the statement.

okay . . .do u believe in the existence of mamajubajingi?

jayriginal:

Just passing by. The burden of proof lies only on the theist to prove the existence of God. The christian (for example) cannot prove his God because he has hidden him and made him incapable of detection. This invisibility of God is ironically celebrated as proof of his presence. All that is required to know God is faith. As anyone knows, faith is an unreliable argument because it is subjective. That same faith is what the muslim uses to prove his God which the christian doesnt believe in. That same faith is what the traditional worshiper uses to hold on to his God which the the christian does not believe in either. Some muslims have enough faith to blow themselves up with other innocents, expecting the promise of heaven and certain pleasures.
When a christian calls his God a spirit, and says he cannot be understood by human reasoning, neither can he be seen with the eyes, nor heard, when the christian is asked to prove his faith and he tries to avoid it, he is only hiding his God. In reality, the christian in making an honest attempt to prove his God will only end up disproving him.
We all know God used to talk to people and Moses saw God and spoke to him face to face as you would a friend (many have tried to deny this passage) Ex 33:11. God doesnt seem to do these things anymore.

Back to the burden of proof, the atheist does not believe in God as you have presented him. It is a case of saying I cannot believe in this so-called God you speak about. How do you then ask someone to prove that something he does not believe in does not exist ? You assert that he exists and so the onus is on you to prove it. It is sad that many folks are trying to distort the meaning of atheism, but it simply is a lack of belief in God(s). The cure for atheism is proving the existence of God.

Lets use the analogy of Russel's Teapot.Asking someone to disprove an entity he sees no evidence for is unreasonable. On a humorous note, the next quote is from the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy by Douglas Adams. It shows what logic can do to God.

1. Your attempt to lay the burden of proof at the feet of the theist constitutes intellectual LAZINESS. Anyone with the guts to make an assertion should also be able to defend such assertions. This is commonsensical in lieu of the fact you are making known your own position known that perhaps a super intelligence does not exist . .  .  .you are as guilty as the theist who claims that God exists without providing any corresponding evidence.

2. Faith is essential in knowing God, but it is not the only truth herein. The beauty of nature around you and the intelligence and order of our collective existence primordially suggests the work of a more intelligent being. This is not an assertion, it is just the product of primary logical foundation  to reason, such that implies that intelligence begets intelligence.

3. You demonstrate no understanding of faith. Contrary to your illusion above, faith is not an abstract mechanism that serves as a vehicle to reach God. Faith is an important seal in the relationship between man and God. take for instance a dog has faith in his master that he will be fed on a daily basis. The same way many residents in the western world exercise faith in the judicial system.
If you study the teachings of Christ with regards to faith, you would realise that before he asked anyone to live by faith, he first taught them the essence of a relationship with God, informing them of their primary expectations. Faith is established only once a relationship is established.
Abraham was called by God to leave his father's house to the unknown. That could not have been the first time he would hear God's voice.

4. It is absolutely LAME to impugn bible teachings. The bible was clear on what face to face meant. . . . . .God appeared to Moses in the form of a CLOUD (Exodus 33:9-10). do some reading on the bible and educate yourself.

thehomer:

I've been backing up my claims for a while now but it seems you wish to run from what you're supposed to do. e.g If I see no reasons to believe in leprechauns or Shiva, is it not up to you who believes in them to tell me why you do? When you keep on vomiting the notion of a super-intelligence creator, please describe this creator you're talking about.

You miss the point completely.

If I believe in Shiva or leprechauns, I would consider it a measure of competence to tell you the basis of my belief.
IF I dont believe in Shiva or leprechauns, I would also consider it a measure of competence to tell you the basis of my disbelief.

If however I have no idea as to who Shiva or leprechauns is, then I would neither believe nor disbelieve.
By disbelieving in the plausibility of the material world being a product of super intelligence, you are postulating a presumably informed opinion. why are you not neutral? if you disbelieve in something, there must be cogent reasons for such.

I just gave it to you. Or isn't it enough? If you think that isn't good enough for the mighty FSM, then realize that your God too fails woefully.

and u think that its just okay to say that FSM is ultimate? . . . . . .I am disappointed. . . . .this is a new low for u.

No, you're running away from what it means to be omnipotent and what it means to love someone. I've answered your poor questions but you seem to have failed to understand my examples and their questions.
Here they are again. Please take the time to understand the examples and answer the questions. Don't run away.

I already answered your question. God is omnipotent, but He aint a robot. This implies that He has a mind of his own to do things according to His plans. Are u able to see the bigger picture? what if there is a better life awaiting the hospitalised person? what do u know of the supernatural?

and please stop evading my question ,  . . .if you dont walk from lagos to kano, does this mean you are disabled?
If God chooses not to heal a sick person, does this mean He is not omnipotent?

No, this was what I said word for word. You may go back and read it.
I never said he was good to all of mankind but that he is supposed to be good to them since he is supposed to love them.
It seems the trap you set has managed to ensnare you.

ridiculously LAME. stop making assertions you are ignorant of. The truth is you know next to nothing about God or the bible. Do some reading, get informed and then come back for a debate.

That is not needed because no one is making an argument from authority. You need to address the actual arguments rather than trying to address someone who isn't present.

On the contrary, I've made multiple arguments along multiple lines which pretty much destroy your poor attempt at criticizing the book. You may join the queue of those who have failed woefully in their attempted criticism of the book.
You want me to care about the ontology of your Christian God when you're unable to address the ontology of the FSM?
If you really want a super-intelligent creator, I give you the Holy Flying Spaghetti Monster.

I know that but it is more on you than myself at least until you're able to identify the God you're talking about. The word God refers to so many deities that I simply want you to pick the one you're referring to here.

. . . . . okay

zataxs:

@noetic16
maybe you have not heard of Bertrand Russell, Ayn Rand,
or even more relevant , Carl Sagan
Just google Carl Sagan. That's is a nice start.

I have actually, . . . . but thanks for the reminder.

1. "when your primary concern should be His ontology." By discussing his ontology you are already assuming his exists. This is a fundamental flaw in your argument.

This is NOT a flaw. I know he exists, based on secrets deduced from personal experiences and revelations. unlike you, I am NOT guessing.
do u have any evidences that suggest that God does not exist?

2 "Plausibility of the material world having a super-intelligent creator"
Onus is on both sides, that I agree, but you also need to talk a walk further into this intellectual path. Let me contextualize it

I say Santa exists and you say no.
What happens next?
A. I will provide evidence he exists e.g. gifts during christmas, my mother says he exists etc
B. you on the other hand, will disprove *my* claims. e.g. gifts are from your parents not Santa, mothers lie sometimes etc

The Onus is on both of us. But We are in point A. at the moment.

So where is your evidence that God does not exist?

you seem to be an intelligent man, in spite of everything you say here,
when you go to the doctor, and he tells you something you question it, for how long? no but last time I was given drug X why are you giving me Y, etc,
you research. and find alternative viewpoints and you think about them.
the difference here is that , we are applying the same analytical effort when it comes to religion. you are not. simple. if you applied it. we would not be having this debate.

have you questioned your own belief systems? why do u in spite of the enormous flaws in the atheistic doctrine continue to subscribe to the notion that the universe was uncreated? where is your evidence or superior argument?

globexl:

@noetic16

My case, along with other athiests is that the idea of god is created and dwells in the cozy realms of the human mind.

This is the fallacy of the ignorance displayed in many atheist arguments. How do you explain the esoteric nature of Christianity? how do you explain the personal experiences that people have with God? how do explain the role of dreams and visions that describe a future event, and these events subsequently come to pass? How do u explain the fact that it is impossible for the human brain to generate such information on unlikely and unprecedented future event?

You can scream repeatedly for all I care, but the fact remains that there are numerous minute of suggestive evidences that illustrate the existence of a realm beyond the physical. . . .a realm that postulates the existence of God.

You are ignorant of these things , my friend.

Joagbaje:

Yes , he becomes the righteousness of God

How can a man be the righteousness of God?

It's a christian that can confess sin if he commits any. A sinner needs a new life. A sinner is a man who hasn't recieved eternal life. He has a sin nature. It is not the bad thing that he does that makes him a sinner. It is the nature in him . So if he never did any thing bad . He is still a sinner . Because of the nnature and sin inherited through Adam .

This is a new/strange doctrine to my ears . . , . .is this supported by the bible?

If I sin against Peter I will go to him and make things right . If I sin against God I will go to God.

really?

thehomer:

Good.

I'm granting your propositions for us to progress in the discussion.
No I do not subscribe to the notion that a super intelligence created the material world we live in because I see no reasons to make that assumption.

Any idiot could have said the above.
So please display some elements of intellectualism and give cogent reasons and arguments to back your claims. After all, you pose around claiming to be intelligent. why are u of this opinion? what are your arguments? Give me your best 3 reasons for this belief.

Power is measured in the way the power of other Gods are measured. The basis of comparison is the other Gods. He is also outside of space and time, eternal and loving.

Rubbish.

what is the ontology of your spaghetti deity?

The question is pointless because if I were in a situation that necessitated any of them, then I'll do it but your God who loves people and is omnipotent does nothing to help them as my example demonstrated.

This is called ESCAPISM and typically salivating at the prospect of having your ignorance exposed. Your answer to the question explains the omnipotent posture of God, not just to you but to other atheists and ignoramuses around. , . . .So I will repeat the question . . . . and please have the courage to answer it.
you can walk, why have you not chosen to walk from lagos to kano? You can eat, why have you not chosen to eat a life-lizard? you can swim, why have you not chosen to swim a deep sea infested with sharks? you can sleep, why have you not chosen to live in the same room with an untamed lion?

How about the popular John 3:16? Let me quote it here since you seem to have forgotten your Bible.

I knew u would fall for that

John 3:16 describes an action of God for mankind, influenced by LOVE.
You claimed that God is GOOD to all of mankind . , . . , Its unscriptural.

Once again, we see that the religious one when unable to make good arguments or support their arguments, they shift to fallacies such as shifting the burden of proof which is what you're doing above.
You then wield Dawkins' name as some sort of talisman. You really need to learn to support you arguments. After all, you're the one reading the book yet you're unable to tackle any of the arguments in it as I've shown above.

1. I wield Dawkins name because Dawkins wrote the book and by and large, he is the most prominent atheist evangelist.

2. You have been unable to make just ONE meaningful argument to support your position. You keep running round discussing the identity of God, when your primary concern should be His ontology. did he create the world? what evidences support your position? Like many others, I find it absolutely ridiculous that you keep taking about the existence of several gods to ignore the bigger question on the plausibility of the material world having a super-intelligent creator. If we can agree on that, then perhaps.

3. Contrary to your assertion, the burden of proof lies with both parties, except of course this discussion has stopped being an intellectual exercise. IF you say that there is no God, present us with your proof and evidences. If you say that the material world we see could not have been produced by a super-intelligence, provide us with your proof and evidence. The onus lies with both sides.

Deep Sight:

Can we stop the notion of this or that "god" and simply address the cosmological question to wit: what caused teh universe to be.

That is, after all, the question we all seek to address.

The very same question which leaps into the minds of even little children as soon as they can think.

EXACTLY , , . , This was the original idea. Looking at the bigger picture, IF God is not reputed to have created the world, I doubt there would be any debate on His existence. Can these guys get off the highway and let us debate the plausibility of this creation. . . . . , they need to stop bringing in side arguments to derail the debate.

Martian:

Deep Sight's God is just as real as your bible God. The only difference between your God, DS' God and Scientologists' God is the amount of believers they have. Jenwitemi also has his own idea of "God" and he can defend it just as well as you defend yours but that doesn't mean you'll believe him just like he finds yours absurd.  If DS suddenly decided to be L Ron Hubbard and gained a sustantial following, he's followers will be arguing with you too.

Whatever the bible says doesn't matter because words don't mean anything in discussions like this. If they did, Dianetics should be enough proof for the existence of Xeno.

The bible god is the basic idea that christians use to build their own image of God, just like different kids will create different models from a box of legos.

You live in a world of your own imaginations. At your convinience you make ignorant assertions just to suit your arguments.
Have u ever thought about analysing the ontology of the three different gods/God you listed? perhaps there are still many truths you are ignorant of.

globexl:

Yes there is. There is a good intellectual argument. It was made by you. So I'm just quoting from your wisdom.
" The holy spirit is the active spirit of god that dwells in the BELIEVER."

and how does this support your assertions?

@OP

Atheist claim God does not exist . .yet they spend a lot of energy discussing, debating and attacking His personality.
Its the other way round.

Martian:

The fact that people's idea of who god is, what he allows, who he loves and hates tend to coincide with the desires of the person talking about him.

All god's are created by men. Deepsight as an example has created one he calls the oneness of infinity or the infinite mind and gave it whatever attributes he wanted.  You have said the path to your God is Esoteric and I'm certain that there is a Christian on this board who would say that God's message is apparent,easy to understand  and meant for everybody.


You are god because he has the same feelings and desires as yourself.

very convenient escapism , . ,

I am talking about the bible God. . .DS is talking about an imaginary deist god.

@OP

please give the money to the brother in need . . ,