You've missed the point... again. Whether you like it or not, your religion is directly related or even down right responsible for a lot of wrong-doing in this world. That was my argument and you're indeed acting as if your Protestant version of Christianity changes that entirely. It doesn't.



Can you prove God is not limited by weight and mass? Heck no!

If you'd follow the logic of simple cause-event chains, you should realize God would very likely have to be limited by weight and mass in some way for it to be able to influence it.

"Is God limited by weight or mass? No."

That's really just another one of those billions of claims religious people make about their God all the time. The actual conceptual definition of God is a pure figment of human imagination.

I really don't agree that "spaghetti too green for God to eat" is a good analogy to the "stone to heavy to lift, even for God". It's about the almightiness, not God's taste which would be a mere choice anyway.

I shouldn't have to explain this as it's overly obvious... but.. Aren't you the one who believes God is able to influence all things with it's almightiness? And even (potentially) create? Well if it can create and both influence things with it's almightiness without any limits as is often said, then one would assume it can A. create a stone too heavy to lift for God and B. that would then instantly conflict with the common assumption that God in it's almightiness would be able to lift anything, everything and always, without limits as well.

I know either one of those has to be false, but that's not the point. It does however clearly show how an argument without evidence backing it up, is pretty much irrelevant altogether. Saying God is not disproved by science (or even possible to be disproved by science), hence he must exists, is equally as stupid as saying God doesn't have to be proven by facts, as all you need for it to 'exist' is faith.

Apparently you're having a hard time to grasp the logic and sense behind all of this. I'm not attacking you here, it makes sense as you're convinced of your belief and that's why you look at that in an entirely different way.



You see, this is why I called you ignorant before when it comes to Christianity throughout the world. Reality check; organized religion defines the content of the Bible or the interpretation of the texts. There's a whole lot in the Bible that still justifies plenty of very outdated ideas.

It's too easy to hide behind the idea that you or your local religious community interprets the Bible differently and therefore beliefs it doesn't justify what happens elsewhere.

In most if not all cases religious people just interpret the Biblical texts however they see fit.



Specific to a distinct subset of Christians? Yeah, right. You're just pretending wrong-doing in name of Christianity in whatever way doesn't happen anywhere near you.

I'm not evangelizing atheism at all, I'm attacking deism, in particular organized Christianity, but really also religion in general. When it comes to my own world view I'm really much more agnostic and somewhat of a pantheist actually. As said many times on this forum, I tend to go with what we do know, facts and knowledge. Yes, however relative. But not blind faith and the usual ignorant sheep behavior.



No not at all the same. You're saying I can not think of rock music as bad, because there's also a special kind of rock within the main genre that according to you is so great and wonderful that I can not think of rock music as bad. Thát's what's up here. And I obviously do not agree with that.

In fact, to stretch the analogy a bit further and explain my view; I am sort of arguing here that the main rock music genre is bad by definition, because it always comes with guitar riffs in it and screamy vocals.