I forgot to say good bye to you.

You are, I am sure, a good guy. So let's leave it at that.

Have a good day, Dutch

Generally I will say that Christianity will supplant all religions now existing, even atheism. This will take one thousand years.

Perhaps Dutch fancies himself the next Obadiah?

I did get a bit off-topic, sorry.

I am about to leave, and I didn't want to leave on a sour note. I initially came here and other atheist sites for some book research. I will include some of what I have learned about atheists and how they think in dialogue among the characters within my book. With very few exceptions, you and most people on your site have been decent. I understand what I have written is unusual, but I am not alone. Our church is called Reveal2, and there are many others at the fringes of truth. A while back, I google searched 2 words, "earth and hell" just to see if anyone out there understands. Lo and behold, there are many which are beginning to understand.

This atheist site, in fact, all atheist sites, as well as most Christian sites use a carnal, literal interpretation of The Bible. The verses you quote above are a literal interpretation. I have vainly tried to show you otherwise; to no avail.

To Mrnaglfar,

"What predictions about the world do you think "goddidit" should give us that is useful for understanding the world"

I am not into predictions about "the world," at least not specifically. Generally I will say that Christianity will supplant all religions now existing, even atheism. This will take one thousand years. As much as Christianity misunderstands The Bible, they are closer to the truth, indeed all you have to look at is Christian based society - generally they are more advanced societies. You might want to take a look at Europe. As Islam supplants Christianity, Europe will decay into chaos, if not outright war. Anyway, everything in its season.

It has been a great, albeit at times frustrating dialogue.

I bid you adieu, Dutch

The "Rosetta Stone" is The Bible, I know, "circular reasoning." You're right, no matter how much Biblical proof I show, it will not convince anybody. If you saw a bearded fellow walking on water, you'd probably start looking for David Copperfield.

This is an evasion. We are talking about interpretation of the Bible. How do you know that your interpretation is correct? The "rosetta stone" comment was in regards to how you can know that your interpretation of the Bible is correct, not whether it is correct in some interpretation.

God is "the all in all." Very simple isn't it; "Occam's Razor."

Except that invoking god violates Occam's Razor because what you've essentially done is added on the most complex layer possible to a problem that simply does not need it.

Apparently, the universe does not follow occam's razor as it created itself from a finite point of total simplicity, and since the moment of the big bang, has become increasingly more complex. It may well be that the "double-helix" is the most complex thing in the universe.

I'm sorry, but has it been shown that the singularity was a point of total simplicity? Also, the progression of natural law to create complex structures is NOT a violation of Occam's Razor. Additionally, I'd like to ask what your definition of "complexity" is.

I would suppose that when an atheist dies and comes into the presence of God, he will probably say, "there must be a logical reason for this phenomenon, a natural explanation for what is going on." More of David Copperfield's tricks perhaps.

I'd like to say that I'd question god's actions and motives for killing people, being cruel, his capriciousness, etc. Realistically, I'd just be scared at having to face a genocidal lunatic.

God is "the all in all." Very simple isn't it; "Occam's Razor." :)

Well that makes it easy. Every answer on physics tests can now be "god" or "god did it and he works in mysterious ways", even if it's slightly more wordy.

What predictions about the world do you think "goddidit" should give us that is useful for understanding the world?

How would you propose the theory be falisible? Remember, if it's not falisifible, it's approximately 0% useful.

The "Rosetta Stone" is The Bible, I know, "circular reasoning." You're right, no matter how much Biblical proof I show, it will not convince anybody. If you saw a bearded fellow walking on water, you'd probably start looking for David Copperfield. For atheists, a literal, carnal interpretation works in attacking His Word. For Christianity, a literal, carnal interpretation causes confusion and strife, but Christianity is the closest to the real thing - it is only a matter of time when we grow in The Word.

Atheists really like "Occam's Razor;" so do I. Maybe it's the words, they have a nice ring to them - kind of rolls of your tongue. Physics is currently trying to engulf, the weak nuclear force, the strong nuclear force, gravitation, and the electromagnetic force into a "unified field theory," thus applying Occam's Razor(which is basically KISS). God is "the all in all." Very simple isn't it; "Occam's Razor." :)
Apparently, the universe does not follow occam's razor as it created itself from a finite point of total simplicity, and since the moment of the big bang, has become increasingly more complex. It may well be that the "double-helix" is the most complex thing in the universe.

I would suppose that when an atheist dies and comes into the presence of God, he will probably say, "there must be a logical reason for this phenomenon, a natural explanation for what is going on." More of David Copperfield's tricks perhaps.

It's late, I didn't think dreams and visions would set well with you, it was more of an endeavor to see if anyone musing about this website might well come back in a day or two and experience a dream or vision that will leave him or her somewhat awed.

Everyone dreams, and sometimes those dreams are intense. That doesn't mean squat though, considering that we understand how the brain works. Dreams are just our unconscious working through things, not messages from god.

I will come back and give you the correct interpretation of one of the Bible verses Ebon used in this article.

What will it be based on? Where is the "rosetta stone" that one uses to get the "correct" interpretation? How will you show that it is more authoritative than Ebon's interpretation?

Do atheists claim to know that God doesn't exist?

Most atheists claim that theists have not shown that any god exists - there is no evidence for god - so there is no reason to believe in any sort of god. Furthermore, the world operates quite well, thank you very much, without this god so far as we can tell, so there is no need to insert god into our thinking in violation of Occam's Razor. I do not - nor do most atheists - presume that I can prove a negative however.

It's next to impossible to disprove a negative, especially when that negative is believed to have all sorts of super powers that can keep him hidden from those who don't believe. I have all sorts of great reasons to tell my kids why they can never actually see Santa Claus putting the presents under the tree, no matter how hard they try.

The second problem with your position is that it is no different than that of believers of other religions who also claim special knowledge and visions that support their faith. Who's right?

It is late. Go to bed, dude, and we can all continue later. And sweet dreams! ;)