Prove it. My mother's body made me.
If your mom and dad were the only ingredients, you would be a stillbirth (a corpse). The human being lives for 60+ years without incident, then decays within a month without outside help. This is because without a living body, the stomach, liver, and intestines literally create gas that explodes the body from the inside out.
During this bloating stage, the skin can slip and blister and marbling can occur, in which greenish-black blood vessels can be seen through the skin within about 24 to 48 hours of death, according to "Evaluation of Postmortem Change." Eventually, the bloat collapses, and in a process known as black putrefaction, the body's organs and tissues soften, and life forms such as insects and microbes eat the remaining soft tissues, leaving the skeletal remains.
In a very real sense, your spirit (btw, "breath" and "spirit" are synonymous in about half or more of human languages) is keeping your body from doing some very nasty things to itself. You stop breathing, the body autolyzes itself.
Stage One: Autolysis
The first stage of human decomposition is called autolysis, or self-digestion, and begins immediately after death. As soon as blood circulation and respiration stop, the body has no way of getting oxygen or removing wastes. Excess carbon dioxide causes an acidic environment, causing membranes in cells to rupture. The membranes release enzymes that begin eating the cells from the inside out.
Rigor mortis causes muscle stiffening. Small blisters filled with nutrient-rich fluid begin appearing on internal organs and the skin’s surface. The body will appear to have a sheen due to ruptured blisters, and the skin’s top layer will begin to loosen.
Stage Two: Bloat
Stage two of human decomposition consists of bloating to the body. Leaked enzymes from the first stage begin producing many gases. Due to the gases, the human body can double in size, giving it that bloated look.The sulfur-containing compounds that the bacteria release also cause skin discoloration. In addition, insect activity can be present.
The microorganisms and bacteria produce extremely unpleasant odors called putrefaction. These odors often alert others that a person has died, and can linger long after a body has been removed.
Stage Three: Active Decay
Fluids released through orifices indicate the beginning of active decay. Organs, muscles, and skin become liquefied. When all of the body’s soft tissue decomposes, hair, bones, cartilage, and other byproducts of decay remain. The cadaver loses the most mass during this stage.
Stage Four: Skeletonization
Because the skeleton has a decomposition rate based on the loss of organic (collagen) and inorganic components, there is no set timeframe when skeletonization occurs.
24-72 hours after death — the internal organs decompose.
3-5 days after death — the body starts to bloat and blood-containing foam leaks from the mouth and nose.
8-10 days after death — the body turns from green to red as the blood decomposes and the organs in the abdomen accumulate gas.
Several weeks after death — nails and teeth fall out.
1 month after death — the body starts to liquify.
It only takes one month for the body to start to turn into liquid after death. Something that didn't happen in 60+ years of living. Is that proof enough for you? Your mom birthed you. But God made you live.
If it was, you wouldn't be trying to resort to such crap.
You wouldn't be switching back and forth between trying to argue god exists and trying to argue god is good.
I'm responding to your own waffling assertions between "God does not exist" and "God is a tyrannical POS." Pick one!
Which means it could be good or bad.
More often in practice, prayer either does nothing or a good effect.
If for instance, some Muslim severed your arm, you would not pray for that. We as humans only pray to cure things that are conditions that can heal. That is, it may heal faster on its own, but we typically wouldn't expect a complete regrowth of an organ. Cancer has sometimes been known to go into remission, or even disappear. My dad once talked about how he felt led to make a prayer that was basically "Make this cancer gone," and it actually worked. The prayer doesn't tend to do certain things, but it can effect changes that the person praying wants to some extent. So only a person convinced that God is their enemy would believe that prayer's normal effect is to quickly get worse. The normal effect is to slowly get worse (that is, for nothing to happen). The exceptional effect is for the prayer to be answered. It would be an extremely exceptional event for the prayer to actually makes things actively worse.
The third party studies (of prayer) reported either null results, correlated results, or contradictory results in which beneficiaries of prayer had worsened health outcomes. For instance, a meta-analysis of several studies related to distant intercessory healing published in the Annals of Internal Medicine in 2000 looked at 2774 patients in 23 studies, and found that 13 studies showed statistically significant positive results, 9 studies showed no effect, and 1 study showed a negative result
In 23 studies, there was only one contradictory result, the majority had marked improvement, and the minority was no effect, contrary to my prediction that no effect would be the more common result.
No, you were talking about Christians that do what they please and then pray for forgiveness.
I was talking about how you very definitely have had a bitter experience with Christians.
Atheists also do what they want, and blame God for the results of atheism.
Hitler was a Christian, including during his rise to power.
Hitler called himself a Christian. I could call myself a Hindu, start killing Buddhists, then when I'm done my next goal would be to kill Hindus. There's a term for this. It's called a false flag. As in, I wave a flag, declaring myself part of one group, and gullible idiots believe it.
And if your evil POS did make us, why did it make us feel pain? Especially if there is the option to not feel pain?
About that.
Not feeling pain is only good if you have an immortal body. Otherwise, you get terribly hurt without realizing it. Like cutting your arm off, and not noticing it.
If that is part of God's plan, isn't it God's evil as well?
If God violated free will and forces someone to do something, isn't that God's evil?
The reason evil exists, is because God has made himself subject to our free will. God will not stop you if you gouge out ten people's eyes. But now there are a bunch of people walking around with severed eyes.
God allows us to do our purpose or betray it. But God's original plan involved dying on a cross on behalf of evil people. So that even you, after gouging those eyes out, might have some chance to make things right.
So I provide several examples, and you just ignore them all, not being able to explain why they are actually good.
Okay then, we'll look at the examples again.
Set up Adam and Eve to fail
Lie to Adam and Eve
Which gave us a real world where we can make choices instead of a protected dollhouse where we weren't able to defy God.
Not give a damn about the world, until he decides to flood it and murder countless people.
Allowing these humans to have perfect freedom, until the world actually became horribly polluted.
Choosing to save Job from the destruction of Sodom, while killing everyone else there.
Suppose you went to a prison, and pulled out someone for good behavior. The rest are murderers or serial rapists. That's what God did. He was not obligated to save the psychopaths. He could have, but not moral law on Earth demands that.
Choosing to turn Job's wife into a pillar of salt.
Weird choice of words. If a volcano erupts, or an avalanche hits, and instead of making your way to the exit, you go back to get your iPad, is it the volcano's fault you are dead? Or are you dumb enough to value your stuff over your life?
Cursing one of Noah's sons for merely seeing his father naked.
Making humans naked when it is a sin to see people naked.
The literally term for showing nakedness, again, is a euphemism.
"Lev 20:17 If a man has sexual intercourse with his sister, whether the daughter of his father or his mother, so that he
sees her nakedness and she sees his nakedness, it is a disgrace. They must be cut off in the sight of the children of their people. He has
exposed his sister’s nakedness; he will bear his punishment for iniquity."
To expose someone's nakedness does not mean to point and laugh, "hahahaha, Noah is naked." It means that while he is drunk, you remove his clothes, and have sex with him. The language of the Bible is filled with terrible euphemisms. Feet for instance, means genitals. And when they say Adam removed a rib, "rib" is
tsela also meaning side. Adam was originally a double-bodied man/woman. Men and women do not have different number of ribs.
Tormenting the Egyptians to show off.
Yes, because the Egyptians were poor suffering people. Wait no, God favored the Jews, who were being tormented for hundreds of years. The Egyptians killed their children. They whipped them. They forced them to make large bricks (sometimes without any straw) and then move them to make buildings. Their awful suffering was tolerated for years, until God had enough and put a stop to it. Tormenting them? No. There were ten distinct punishments with no torture involved.
Permitting rape and slavery, even encouraging it.
The entire world permitted slavery at the time these laws were made. An excerpt from a novel that a Jewish friend of mine wrote:
I showed him the text and he quickly read through it. When he finished, I asked "Since slavery is so evil, and this book shows how bad it is, why does it have all these laws about how to keep a slave? Why doesn't it just prohibit it, like it prohibits other common things?"
"In a world where slavery is common, what would happen if you abolish it outright? What is the effect of having all these rules about keeping a slave?" he answered my question with a question. I went
back to my room to think about it.
If one nation alone abolished slavery completely, it would draw the ire of all surrounding nations. If slaves kept escaping to it, sooner or later the other nations would ally against it and destroy it, and once it was destroyed, the idea of freedom would die with it.
On the other hand, all these rules required the master to provide his slaves with a minimum standard of living, give them a weekly day of rest, and prohibited more extreme punishments and abuses. The slaves would be happy that they were enslaved in this nation rather than in the neighboring nations, and in order to prevent slave uprisings, other nations would have to improve the way they treated their slaves. Moreover, it would force the masters to acknowledge that their slaves were people with dignity, and make slavery less profitable. Both would subtly discourage the practice of slavery.
Oh look, America and much of the West abolished slavery. What happened? Under the UN's open border system, human trafficking rises, and the sovereignty of America (and much of the West) begins to fall. Literally, the cause of Exodus and the Egyptians being "tormented" was mostly about slavery and abortion.
Demanding people mutilate the genitals of their children.
Which is strange, I'll admit. But these genitals, unlike victims of FGM, are actually functional. Also, if you've ever encountered a certain variety of clams, you have to peel off their foreskins, because they store grit and grime. The foreskin isn't that helpful.
And has done an incredibly poor job of it.
But a bigger question, why couldn't God start them like that?
Why did God need to go through such barbarity?
For the same reason that God doesn't start us all out as adults, but makes us spend time as children. Some things are a process. You who have never made any such progress, are you superior to them?
"But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it across their shoulders; then they walked in backward and covered their father’s naked body. Their faces were turned the other way so that they would not see their father naked."
In the process of having sex with his father, he stripped him naked. The Jews are prudes. The same friend earlier thinks that Western swimsuits are terribly immodest, and that these dorky things are sensible.
The act of sex is one thing, the stripping him naked is another. They didn't want to be complicit in their brothers actions, and wanted to return some dignity to him. That doesn't change the fact that Noah was fucked up the ass by his son.
Or was the problem in your dishonest BS that it was a male having sex with a male? Because your god seems fine with raping your father.
Women get cut all kinds of breaks. Of course that is fine.
A recursive paradox would be that God created God.
Saying that a different being created God gives an infinite regress.
That's a loop. A recursion is an infinite regress.
It doesn't actually matter whether the same person does something, or infinite number of different folk do it. It's the repetition of the event. It doesn't actually matter whether the same man does something, or infinite number of different people do it. It's the repetition of the event. It doesn't actually matter whether the same guy does something, or infinite number of different citizens do it. It's the repetition of the event.
Little details like changes in subject don't matter so much as that you heard the same thing three times.
And why can't we stick God in there instead?
According to you it is obvious that a god exists. And surely if you need a god to create something like Earth, you also need a god to create a god.
And according to you, the only two (clearly obvious) options are that nothing exploded and created everything, or that if I say a God created things, he cannot be self-existing, so we have to have an endless chain of sorta gods do one thing, to create the God who creates the universe. If they were only strong enough to create the next God before going poof into your imagination, what good are they? God exists, not because something had to make him, not because there was a time where he didn't exist. He exists because he always was, and is, and will be.
I'm sorry if this is too hard for you to understand.
https://www.gotquestions.org/who-created-God.htmlA common argument from atheists and skeptics is that if all things need a cause, then God must also need a cause. The conclusion is that if God needed a cause, then God is not God (and if God is not God, then of course there is no God). This is a slightly more sophisticated form of the basic question “Who made God?” Everyone knows that something does not come from nothing. So, if God is a “something,” then He must have a cause, right?
The question is tricky because it sneaks in the false assumption that God came from somewhere and then asks where that might be. The answer is that the question does not even make sense. It is like asking, “What does blue smell like?” Blue is not in the category of things that have a smell, so the question itself is flawed. In the same way, God is not in the category of things that are created or caused. God is uncaused and uncreated—He simply exists.
How do we know this? We know that from nothing, nothing comes. So, if there were ever a time when there was absolutely nothing in existence, then nothing would have ever come into existence. But things do exist.
You know that things do exist. But even if you didn't, there naturally would have to be an illusionist to convince you of their existence. This still demands a Creator, even though the world is now unreal.