Christians absolutely btfo

Fuck off back to kikebook

Okay, thanks for admitting you have absolutely nothing to back up your claims of the nonexistence of an entity that billions of people have believe in for millennia.

Okay, thanks for admitting you have absolutely nothing to back up your claims of the existence of any entity that billions of people have believe[d] in for millennia.

Okay, thanks.

wait people still believe in god?

Are you guys even trying anymore?

There is evidence you stupid fuckwad. There have been stigmatics examined by atheist physicians that can't explain how the wounds appear and how they can lose so much blood daily without dying or how the wounds don't ever become infected.

1. I have no idea what wounds your talking about.
2. Assuming this is true, how does it prove that God exists?

I'm not shocked, there is a whole realm of information you have no idea about

There is no assuming, I met this man in person years ago when he visited my church when I was a kid. I put my finger in his wound and everything. His name is Francis and toured all over tgd country shutting up faggots like you.

First of all it proves science is shit at answering unknown phenomena. It proves there is a supernatural element to reality. Evidence that this is attributed to the christian god is the wounds only appear on devout christians, are always in same spots as Jesus' wounds, and accompanied by miracle working.

I have submitted evidence to you. No you can't say "something submitted without evidence can dismissed without evidence". Here is my evidence, now you submit your evidence debunking mine.

The first one proves your ignorance, the second, well, imagine you have a tribe in the deepest part of australia, they worship a man that has a big pennis and fucked all their girls, check budhism, they are theists yet they are atheists and its more probable than the first cause exists that autism is right. Atheism is just a perspective about what exists, it doesnt prove or disprove anything, it isnt science and it isnt science owner, thats american propaganda, now what you call atheism is just retardation, most modern western atheists says that x thing doesnt exists because they said that, a lot of eastern atheists pay respect to superstitions just in case, they dont deny anything that they cant disprove, not because they are retards, but because they rejected cultural marxism.

First of all, Romans nailed people through the wrists, not the hands.
Disregarding this fact though, you mentioned physicians examining these wounds, care to provide a link where I could see this? Preferably not from bible.com or a similar type of website. A peer reviewed scientific journal would be preferable.
I meant in regard to the supernatural aspect, no shit people can get stabbed through the hands.

also
actually thats the entire point of science, to explain the unknown. considering how much it has explained, i think it's a bit harsh to say it's shit at it

Neat

They didn't always do it that way and Jesus was never said to be crucified in the typical way.

Its not a fact

The atheist doctor that examined Padre Pio was named Dr. Amico Bignami. There were others, Idont know if they were atheists though, Luigi Romanelli, chief physician of the City Hospital of Barletta. Dr. Giorgio Festa, a private practitioner, Dr. Alberto Caserta and Dr. Romanelli. You can verify all of this.

I gave you a kink filled with citations and the names. You can take it from there a find what source best suites you.

It's a fact, that these are not stab wounds. These are symmetrical wounds with smooth edges. Also not only in just the hands but also the feat and a wound on the side of the abdomen. There was a boomwrutten in 1919 that was parroted by the media claiming he used acid to cause these wounds because if the fact that these are impossible to be stab wounds. This book was debunked after an attempt at a medical "cure" effectively ruled out chemical agents.

Gotta disagreed with you there. It's propoganda. The gender lie kinda ruined science for me. It's all about social control.

I think its an under statement

I hope you know how citations work. You gotta click the little numbers
caccioppoli.com/6 Examinations of the wounds.html

Typos my fault im on a faglet

Specifying this
Stop Proofrooster
therefore they can not be created by a smooth knife

Ruskie go home your orthodoxy is showing.

bruh… you click a link, it goes to the reference list. you click something in the reference list, it goes to where it referenced it in the article… there are no sources. as i said, dont link me to a christian opinion piece, link me to a scientific source. i doubt you even read that article before sending it to me.
you do know that science isn't a hive mind right? bill nye doesnt represent the scientific community? wtf did they teach you science was in russia?

oh wait, i found the reference list, they cited it weirdly. they're all in spanish though, and dont have links to the articles. considering we're talking in english, i thought it would be obvious that the sources should be in english? or did you not read the article first before telling me to read it?

The same paid by jews… read about kitos war, what you call "scientific journals" are just propaganda, ask watson and check facts, not who is saying what is happening.

The same problem again because people just shitpost (check flag) atheism isnt science and it isnt science owner, stop spreading propaganda please.

Yeah dude, sure, a kosher study will go supporting christianity, aka going full torquemada mode, learn a bit of history please shitposter.

Atheist have a lower IQ than people that follow a religion. They also are more prone to having a mental illness, depression and to commit suicide.

because the bible or some random spic website which looks like it was made in the early 2000's is a much more reliable source, right? i also dont remember claiming science in the name of atheism, but even if i had done, why would you care, if it's all just funded by jews anyway?

is your god omnipotent?
is your god always good?
can your god ever be evil?
youtube.com/watch?v=Bj4ax1BRPqo

I mean, that particular Christian was BTFO because he was a moron.

is pretty accurate. Can't make you all believe it, but if they thought of burning alive for eternity scares you, consider >>>/christian/

Atheists, everyone.

lol

how about this, stop worrying about religion, its influence was destroyed decades ago,
start worrying about preserving culture

Culture and race. You kike.

This guy is a fucking baka. People saw Jesus do it, and documented it. Enough people watched it happen for it to be written down and remembered for over 2000 years; it's not like some blokes in a dusty tent sat down one day and said "hey lets write a book about a guy who does magic tricks and shit lol"

not in america, nor in the muslim world, nor in asia…oh wait. you were joking, right?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracles_of_Muhammad
This guy is a fucking baka. People saw Muhammad do it, and documented it. Enough people watched it happen for it to be written down and remembered for over 1000 years; it's not like some blokes in a dusty tent sat down one day and said "hey lets write a book about a guy who does magic tricks and shit lol"

Nobody doubted muhakmed nailed 12 year olds in his nasty tent user, pretty much every mudslime has been doing that even before mahhasheed's story was made.

There is something called "timeline" just check what happened in the sixties in the vatican and what happened with a lot of history books.

Muh sides, and i am talking about talmudism, aka, zionism.

The problem with muh ham mad isnt about historicity, but about why he did exactly the same character depicted in Revelations centuries ago as the bad guy, he is the proof of Revelations being right.

I would berate you for shitposting, but you appear to be australian so I'll let it go
regardless, this is a fucking hilarious read. My personal favourites are the palm tree that was upset, and the use of pocket sand to blind a pair of soldiers

I'm not checking, you can feel free to explain it though if you think it will backup your point. I also don't care what a few Catholics think about the Pope.

Not really shitposting if I can replace a few words from the user's post and use it to prove the Quran, assuming the same standard of evidence which they allowed for the Bible to be proven true is sufficient. Then it's called making a point.

it may be making a point but it's still shitposting

So much proof so much evidence

I knew you would do this. This why I encouraged you to google the names and what information I gave you to start you on your own research and find a link or source that best suites you. If you want a peer reviewed paper you're probably not going to find it. But the absence if much peer reviewed paper doesn't disprove anything. When you're dealing with a Christian topic of course most of the sources are going Christian sources. You have the basics of the story nothing is syoping you from translating the page with one click and doing just like 5 minutes of follow up research not hard. But you aren't interested in that are you? You're going to reject anything that is poeesented to you.
You have your evidence now debunk it

Only Americans still believe in Christian god.

I actually specifically asked not for something from a Christian website, yet you went ahead and gave me exactly that. You also didn't answer whether or not you had read the site yourself, and the silence in that regard speaks for itself.
Now, final chance; pick one of those sources they cited, make sure it's scientific in it's analysis of the situation, and present it to me. The burden of proof is on the claimant, so you telling me to do it myself is essentially an admission of defeat - I'm not going to do your research for you - you're the one who needs to find sources to backup your claim, not me.

Also, don't just say "here, debunk." Make sure you explain what it's about and why it's accurate/proves you right, so that I know you went to the time to read it yourself. There's no point me trying to refute an article you don't even understand yourself.

...

well it is the only one sanctioned by God Himself

whatever tooth-paste

that's not a shitpost. i'm impressed, straya. now gimme a ciggy cunt.

christians want me to believe that the universe was created from a god that came from NOTHING. until christcucks can prove to me that god exists, i'll stick with EVIDENCE AND RATIONAL THINKING

...

RATIONAL THINKING ™️

After WWII they changed history books, the pope didnt like that, the pope was changed and second council was made, the joke is that you are repeating the same propaganda forced after WWII without knowing.

more rational than starving your own citizens, soviet vodka man

First, in this case the word is God, not god(s), i dont remember any polytheist in this thread, second, if it wasnt caused by something not caused then it isnt caused, so again, you are rejecting anything eternal, but at the same time you said that the solution is something eternal.

Hypocresy, the thing is tipping your hat as hard as you can.

whose they, what books, what second council, what propaganda. is it really a joke if you're the only one who gets it

actually forget i asked, i dont care about your catholic mumbo jumbo. this started out with you trying to prove god exists, and now you're probably preparing to give me a history lesson of the catholic church.

Why is it that so many popular Atheists turn out to be feminists?

because they are all brainwashed libtards on the inside

because popular belief = true belief, right?

That means soon Islam will be the true belief.

it is for you already, isn't it?

Except that that isn't how truth works.

Already talked about the first cause and noticed your hypocresy allowing or rejecting arguments according to your needs.

jews have nothing to do with proving god real or not. there is no hypocrisy, just an attempt to stop you derailing the topic of conversation.

The Immaculate Assumption Of The Big Bang
Start a church faggots. You're going on faith just as us.

Just read The 39 Articles in The Book of Common Prayer… all of your questions will be abswered satisfactorarily.

See this please:

1. I have no idea what wounds your talking about.

Then a lot of anons tried to tell you something, but you just rejected everithing, we tried showing you why are you wrong and you just keep posting and the same happened in another thread, there is a reason why a lot of atheists minus the ones paid by media, stay away from fedoras like you and no, this is not an ad hominem, is the reality, they forced something into your mind and you just keep protecting it, all of this happened after the big war.

nice new name.
EWWW

this is why most people dont bother to argue with christians - a quick summary of this thread:
you claim god exists, i ask for proof, you begin to channel the conversation away from evidence, towards supernatural things like magic holes appearing in peoples hands (who all just so happen to be christians). i ask for proof of this, and am referred to a website written by a christian, as opposed to a scientific article documenting the supposed phenomena. next thing you know, you're talking about the history of the church, because your method of argumentation relies on deviating from the original topic as much as possible and drawing it toward something you feel comfortable talking about which has nothing to do with the existence of god.

It's simple

Christians can't prove there is a God
Non believers can't prove there isn't

Arguing the subject is pointless and gets you nowhere. So I stay out of it and keep my beliefs to myself, unless someone asks me.

Here's some proof god exists
Go look at the life of Lee Strobel or just watch the movie "case for Christ" if you want an easy way out
I don't expect to convince you of the existence of a god through a random Holla Forums post, but the evidence exists; go find it and with common sense, logic and reasoning you'll figure out a conclusion for yourself.
Also I've seen just as many atheists take the route of >muh emotions
and yet they conveniently ignore that evil would have no objective definition under a society which would espouse those beliefs

> if they thought of burning alive for eternity scares you, consider >>>/christian/
The existence of Hell is not compatible with a benevolent God.
On a related note, this is a really good (free) story. I expect you'll really enjoy it if you like geeky religious stuff:
unsongbook.com/
I'm not religious and I still enjoyed it a lot.

The only reason they beleive that is to be edgy

There is no evidence that the big bang occurred. Only a theory that can never be proven. The only way it can be proven is if someone creates time travel and goes back to witness the big bang. Otherwise, it is a theory, and people have so much faith in that theory that it's basically a religion.

The book Cold Case Christianity is also a good read.

Obviously it's impossible to actually know anything for sure. Even things you observe yourself can't be trusted because they could just be illusions created by an evil demon.

It might help if I explained why scientific theories like the big bang are believed. Broadly speaking, our current scientific "knowledge" is a huge tree of interlinked observations, conclusions, and implications. At the root of the tree are the most basic experiments - things like showing that light travels in straight lines and how the different colors of light combine into white. Those kind of observations are taught early on in school and are pretty much undisputed. Built on to of those are a series of basic mathematical models. Those mathematical models are supported by a vast array of very simple observations and all fit together quite neatly, so we trust them. They are tested every time you get in a car, turn on the TV, or check your phone. On top of those basic mathematical models are build another layer of much more complex experiments designed to probe more extreme situations, and from those experiments we can construct another more complex set of models. These more complex models are again trusted because they match the predictions of the well-tested simpler models under normal situations, but also unify them and explain results from the more extreme experiments. At the very top of the tree are the "weird" predictions of these more complex models such as the big bang. They are supported by some evidence directly (eg. the uniformity of the cosmic microwave background), and we trust them because of the vast array of evidence for the models which predict them. That evidence spans every discipline and has been gathered by millions of people working together. The models might not be perfect - the simplest ones weren't, after all - but we have a very good idea of how far we can trust them. We don't know exactly why the big bang happened, but we can be 99.999% sure it did happen.

...

i dont believe somebody 2000 years ago saying that they saw someone come back to life. also, it makes perfect sense that a society would not be ok with murder - empathy is an evolved trait which allowed us to function better as groups, and as for evil being objective, i dont believe in objective morality, so your barking up the wrong tree here

I tell you to go beyond surface level analysis and you go ahead and just make an ebin troll post
You're an imbecile. Do you think there was more empathy 50 years ago, or less for the common man and your fellow brother? And I'm not talking about faked empathy for attention.
Then define evil. Is it what you, a fickle and implicitly biased human, think is wrong? Then what makes your definition of evil any more valid than another human being's definition of evil, which for all intents and purposes, let's say you being allowed to live is a great evil to them.
Answer me that.

i'm not going to 'go beyond surface level' for the same reason that i havent just told you to read a bunch of atheist books and watch a bunch of atheist documentaries. both of us have better uses of our time. you can feel free to repeat the evidence in those docos though.
i wouldnt know, i wasnt alive 50 years ago
what do you think the relevance of this is exactly?
evil is subjective to every individual, my definition will differ from the next persons. not really sure where you're trying to go with this whole evil thing, you're doing the typical christian trailing off into abstract concepts when the original topic was about the existence or non-existence of a god.

This is textbook laziness
This is all assuming a nonexistence of a god as its context you imbecile
Then what makes anyone's definition valid. Do you not under-fucking-stand this?
I'm taking the position of "let's assume you're right", since you refuse to look into any evidence for the existence of a god, nor intend to apply common sense towards a historical document with verifiable manuscripts from objective 3rd party sources like roman historians; this doesn't even include what the apostles' impacts have done despite in the bible THEM NOT BELIEVING JESUS WOULD RESURRECT AS WELL, and FLEEING like COWARDS after he'd died

Guess what they all did afterwards? Suddenly they all had the boldness to be martyred to spread the faith to near every continent and area on the friggin' planet; Saul was a documented jew who witnessed the stoning of Steven yet he becomes the 13th apostle on the road to Damascus, a complete 180 from his original position of
Anyways I'm done with this conversation; I'm getting the vibe you're acting willfully obtuse at this point, since no atheist has yet to have the credibility of the Bible, and they all know it. Voltaire is dead, Nietzche died a mad man, and Dawkins is complicit in atrocities with his relativism. He'll die the same way they did. But at least he's praised by reddit. I'm sure that'll help him when his atoms fade away :^)

It's a bit cyclical, giving birth to itself from time to time.

and you're perspective isn't assuming the existence of a god? remember, what is stated without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. i'm still waiting on the evidence.
nothing, i dont think the concept of evil is overly useful anyway, it's based too heavily in emotion. morality is a better concept imo.
no, you're not
because all you're doing is saying "there is evidence" and if i can even get the evidence out of you, its not the right kind of evidence. some guy 2000 years ago can say whatever the fuck he wants, if its making the extraordinary claim that someone can be brought back to life, it sure as fuck better be repeatable/observable, or im dismissing it. you're literally taking some guy from 2000 years ago at his word, you know how much shit would be true if that was a valid standard for evidence?

I can make the same argument for proof that muhammad is divine, i can point to hadiths which saw him split the moon in half, doesnt mean that it's true though. until you have more evidence than some dusty books saying that it happened, i'm not interested. scientific, repeatable under experimental conditions, etc.
extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence

I think that the creation/existence of the entire universe is a supernatural event itself. It's quite a miracle that anything at all exists.

Some people find natural causes to be the most rational theory, while others find creationism the most rational theory. But either way, both point to a supernatural event. Your existence can also be seen as a supernatural event too.

Shit dude, not being ignorant of science is like the one thing our small, dirty, poor country has over the US. Get it together!

You mean how illness is a demon that has to be stoned out of people?

Good thing we have plenty of God-believing immigrants to 'enrich' us. ;)