Fuck the Catholic Church and anyone that supports them.

I'm asking you that question.

What kind of evidence would you require to believe that God and Jesus of the New Testament were pretty much as detailed there?

 

Well, "scientist" is a collective term use to denote all kinds of scientific roles. It's not a professional qualification.

Most lawyers who don't practice in either commercial or academic circles are generally referred to as non-practicing lawyers.

How about "non-practicing teacher"?

 

No, you weren't asking me a question. You made a clear statement that I would never be satisfied and that I was hiding the fact.

Why would I never be satisfied?

 

Oh, I'll help out here.
Before I can even begin to define and accept proper evidence for your God, you have to define your God in a consistent and coherent manner that all other Christians can agree on.
That's a basic step one.
That's not asking for you to climb the Himalayas for a magic flower that blooms for five seconds every 30 years.
Given that there are so many sects, you guys clearly haven't even managed this yet.
It should have been easy.
You guys can't even get that done.

 

Why should that be required for you to define the terms of the evidence you will accept?

 

You and others here are being very foolish. You know I'll get another teaching job. I have before. Repeatedly.

Why not simply address me by my username?

You're still annoyed about me putting lawyer in quotation marks when addressing you it seems.

 

Did you not refer to yourself as a professional educator? Yes or no?

If so, what are you getting upset about? Because you displayed ignorance of language of a level below that which one would expect from someone normally responsible for teaching children and I pull you up on it?

As for knowing you will get another job. I agree with you. I have no doubt you will. I also have no doubt that you will last in it no more than 2-5 years and in that time will likely make the same mistakes as your made before and either fall out with colleagues, parents or face proceedings over your competence, or perhaps even all three.

 

We'd probably be less inclined to go off on this tangent if you didn't divert the conversation to yourself in the first place by refusing to address any and all of the on-topic points put to you.

 

Like I've said. I'm not going to spend all my time addressing each paragraph written by ten different people who disagree with me. ]

One argument by one or two different people maybe. But not all.

 

But you don't even address the one argument.

 

Bullshit. You're perfectly content to get involved in multi-page discussions based around personal insults and accusations.
But when it comes to answering serious issues, you cop out with your "do not cast pearls before swine" excuse, and others.

 

You're wrong.

I routinely post serious responses. Of course then you (and others) jump in with insults and denigrating comments. Comments about my work background for example that have no bearing at all on the discussion.

 

Total lies. I purposely left out insults for an extended period. In response you carried on using insults against others. When caught out on that you then started refusing to respond on that you didn't have to respond to non-Christians, and when they was bullshit you fell back on the pearls before swine excuse.

@RickDeckard is 100% correct, you've always got an excuse lined up come what may. All it shows is intellectual cowardice.

 

I haven't insulted you since I got out of the hospital.

And I note you resort to name calling in the last line.

Refusing to respond to non Christians is not an insult nor is the "pearls before swine" reason. That is flat out from the New Testament.

Are you still bitter than I consider Christians better than nonChristians? Not sure why you get so up in arms over that.

 

Yes you have, on multiple occasions.

What name calling???

Demonstrably false. I've already posted the excerpts previously that demonstrates this is a complete lie.

No. But I think that when pretend you don't insult people you're just being a hypocrite, because that's an insult matey. Plus, I look upon that attitude with pity. It shows that you have no good in your heart. It shows that you don't understand the concept of good. That good for you is just doing what you think are Biblical rules and otherwise believing that gives you a license to act like an arsehole.

Like I say, it's an insult, and every single Christian I have ever encountered aside from you would likely tell you as much.

 

So what this amounts to El Chup is that if YOU consider what I've said an insult then I have in fact insulted you.

I don't see it that way. As far as I'm concerned the "offended does not get to determine if something is offensive"

 

If you call someone inferior, which you have done over my religious status, my ethnicty and my nationality, do you not suppose that is insulting?

 

If I've offended you over your ethnicity or nationality I apologize.

I didn't think atheism or agnosticism qualified as a "religious status".

 

So you're saying that anyone here is entitled to say what they like about you, your beliefs, your actions, or your family as they see fit, and you have no right to find offensive? Because what you said above does not follow what you have stated below. If you don't like it, then complain to the Invisible Sky Man.

 

^I'm not following what you're saying Ed

 

You've made several statements that you find something offensive, but according to you, you can't decide if it's offensive. You're contradicting yourself.

 

Perhaps irreligious status is the correct term. You are incapable of offending me by what you post on here, but that isn't what I put to you. The question I asked was, do you not suppose telling someone they are inferior is insulting?

 

5 years! Cool! A new record!!!

 

No. I'm allowed to determine if something offends me. That doesn't apply to the rest of you.

Sorry if you find that offensive.

 

I don't know whether to laugh or cringe over this post. I choose the former out of charity.

 

Sorry, what is this? Where in the Bible does it say that non-Christians have no capacity for offense or self determination???

 

That's inconsistent. Reduction ad absurdum.

 

It's not inconsistent for a bigot...

 

No one's surprised by this.

 

Some actions don't have to be justified with the Bible