come on does no one have an answer? What about you Kantor?

Jesus the bible has definately been changed. There is absolutely no denying that. Why do you think there is a King James bible, old testament, new testament, etc.

Unfortunately for joelcool, he doesn't write or enforce the site rules. I would judge that many moderators have seen this thread, myself included, and judged that it is not flamebait or trolling.

If you feel otherwise, report and move on. If we could trust users to moderate each other, we wouldn't need a moderation team.

So, get back to discussing whatever weak vestiges of the intended topic remain and stop discussing moderation. The latter, interestingly, is against forum rules.

Maybe you should read my entire posts before addressing them. I never ever said it was offensive to question my beliefs or any other users. I said how you created this thread was offensive. You specifically said you didn't want the educated and intellectual responses which obviously acknowledge you can't prove God exists. You specifically wanted people to say things that you have the upper hand against. Not a intellectual discussion at all you rigged the thread. Also your comments about Christianity being "Archaic" and such do not make this an open discussion. Every comment you have made thus far has shown you are not interested in an intellectual debate. Your comments abound other users, instead of responding specifically to their evidences you say their sources are biased and such, they may be but you didn't respond to their actual evidence.

Alright, you make all these devine claims that heaven is not real and God doesn't exist, prove it? You can't and if you think you can you need serious help. You already know nobody can prove it just like you can't and your not open to hearing their opinions.

Look at your weak knowledge of the Bible for example. 7eyes made a comment about how actions don't get you into heaven and talked basic Biblical knowledge. You then said you wanted proof, lol anyone with basic knowledge of the Bible knows what he said is biblical.

As I said earlier your bold claims have just as little proof to back them up then Dr.Glass and Rainbird. You say God doesn't exist wheres your proof? You want to call people's beliefs out, on what grounds? You want others to show you proof to support their beliefs when your whole belief system is based on faith in science without a basic foundation in science.

I have never said I want proof, I already know it doesn't exist. If it did I would believe differently. Your refering to me proving your point but as I said right above your proving your own point.

Also as I said anyone with basic scientific knowledge knows that science cannot prove or disprove the existance of God. I have nothing against science infact I took Biology in University for a year. I also believe in some scientific theories that have been proven such as Micro Evolution. I have yet to see a single peice of scientific evidence that disproves anything I believe in, any theories that do are unproven and usually take more faith to believe in then the existance of God.

Also some users here both athiests and believers have misquoted basic facts. A major one I noticed is the claim that the Bible says the earth is 6,000 years old. Now we have generic time lines in the Bible which do indicate that humans haven't been around millions of years. However the Bible itself never says 6,000 years old, that is a deduction a group of scholars have come to and while it is interesting it is not 100% fact.

Also the Bible doesn't specify how God created the earth, infact it doesn't even say how long it took. God could have very well used evolution their are several theories as to how he created earth and such. Such as the mature earth theory where he created a mature earth.

As I said science isn't at war with faith. It doesn't prove or disprove faith and nobody who has basic education will try to claim otherwise. There are thousands of Christian scientists and once you throw in scientists of all the other faiths their are more faith believing scientists then athiest scientists.

So please start respecting other users, if you want to question beliefs go ahead but do so in a respectful manor.

Well, science has yet to disprove God, so I guess we're at a stalemate.

There is also an enormous mountain of evidence in favor of God's existence. You seem to accept evolution based solely on logical deductions, yet you reject the idea of a God when similar logical deductions could be made to prove that theory. Your bias appears to be based only on your feelings towards organized religion. 

Many of the greatest philosophers and scientists in history believed in God. Galileo and Newton were devout christians. Albert Einstein believed and even Darwin accepted the possibility. Were all these guys idiots?

1) Stop quoting yourself

2) Because science back then was a lot more developed than you used to think, particularly in what is now Arabia and India. And what makes you think Muhammad wrote the Qu'ran? Moreover, if you're intent on finding science in anything, you can find it. People find science in the Bible, too. Did the Qu'ran speak of relativity or quantum mechanics? How can the all-knowing God not understand these things?

Santa Claus is real, he came down the chimney and took pictures of me naked, told me I wouldn't get any presents if I told my parents.

Another religion debate. This is sad.

Galileo and Newton grew up in a time before atheism was even a real thing. The fact that Darwin was a Christian shows that God is not at odds with evolution. And by no reasonable definition was Einstein a Christian.

Once again, there is nothing wrong with belief in God in itself, just what comes of belief in God. What is God? It is a word made up by mankind. How do you even define it? A creator? An omnipotent being? A piece of cheese lying in my fridge? Disproving god would be like disproving "wibbleflurble". Neither is a clearly defined concept. The problems come when you say that he is a creator and omnipotent being, start assigning him a personality and morality, and say that we have to listen to him.

it doesn't matter how scientifc or not the quran, bible, etc. is. My main question is how was some so illterate able to produce it? He actually recited it and the only people who could write at the time wrote it. And no science was not as developed either. Arabia was pretty much at the bottom of the food chain in the day of Mohammad. Kind of like the dark ages of europe. Pretty much no one could have known and put the quran together in such an organized manner.