NO AFTERLIFE (Page 16)

TheismIsUntenable: The things you say prove to me that you're basically borderline retarded. No different than BS or zeffur. Just a brain-dead religious dogmatist who has no education at all.

Zanjan: If you continue to use verbal abuse, this conversation is over between us.

TheismIsUntenable: It's been over for a long time. You're just too dumb to learn.

GeraldtheGnome: There are so many mistakes in this forum. God is a name someone came up with after the 597 AD mission to convert 'heathens' about a god of The Bible (that the missionaries named Deus because they used Vulgate Latin) who they falsely claimed was around then and that he had no origin. A god of no origin is an imaginary god no matter what the name is used for that one. So no love wasn't used as power to create the universe from nothing because no one created the universe. Then there's the issue that in reality Christianity and every religion that is based on it and Judaism are polytheist religions. Zanjan has to prove how a god is around right now and has no origin. If she can convince us that an Alien God of that sort is around due to something that myself and many others overlooked then myself and others will then believe her. It is for her to answer rather than just shifting the burden of proof. There's no need for a smart arse jibe about that there maybe no love in someone's life.

No one has proven that anyone has telepathy. Get the caps lock off. What is meant by there isn't any accidents by random chance ? Does that mean what I think it does in order to go against the theory of evolution ?

Either scientific evidence was asked, maybe it wasn't, maybe it wasn't and she doesn't realize it or maybe she is lying. How can it be proved that she is lying ? That is not another false claim like the type that Bob, Zeffur, TheismIsUntenable and some others do is it ?

She has made false claims though, like that I have insulted her at times, I haven't unless she's way too easily insulted and if that is the case then it's a false claim, kind of. No one has said anything on this text based forum. What's with the dashes ? I can't stand the word empirical, they should just use the word evidence, it doesn't improve a sentence. Souls are made up, that is so. The Jesus of The Bible was never born, a virgin birth never happened. Words people, words. A thesaurus while provide a better alternative to the word suppositions, I prefer to use the word existing in relation to life forms only.

The Bible is evidence of a fantasy story. Steven Hawking himself went on and on about Black Holes thinking that what he originally came out with was alright, they were scientific papers after all, later on he admitted that he did make errors in regards to a certain bit about what he claimed was true about Black Holes.

To TheismIsUntenable. You really do place too much importance in scientific papers. There's no guarantee that all scientific papers are right after all. You are both proving to everybody that you're every bit as dumb as Blackshoes and Zeffur in regards to certain things.

To Zanjan. Don't use so many question marks.

To TheismIsUntenable. It's stupid to ask someone who is being stupid how stupid she is. None of the things that are pure fantasy are even close to being as good as most scientific papers. Some forms of science are religious like and are absolute rubbish due to that. Doomsday science for example. There's no need to insult her though. Another thing, stop making false claims about all of them no matter what they still don't understand.

To Zanjan. It is text based, no one had a conversation with anyone on here. You both have been too dumb about certain things to learn from the mistakes that you both make. I hope that changes soon for both of you. When you both aren't being silly about things I can get on with both of you very well. You should both be like you are when we get along best with each other, I like that and I miss it. Bring it back both of you.

Winterson: "God" is not a name, and no one "came up" with it after 597 AD. It is simply the noun in English meaning a deity. English was in its early stages in the sixth century, but a form of the same word existed then in the languages to which English was related, and had long done so. Translating the Latin word "deus" into the English "God" was not inventing anything, it was simply identifying the equivalent term.

GeraldtheGnome: You just made so many mistakes right there. God is a name, god isn’t a name. God is a name dreamt up after 597 AD as a replacement name for Deus. No one ‘inevented’ anything, I agree there. English indeed was in the early stages in the sixth century, however before the mission originally to the Isle of Wight and to Kent even Latin was not used by everyone within Britain and since the mission was brought to Pagan territory Deus the name and deus the word weren’t used in Pagan areas. Despite some misleading information the name God and the word god weren’t used by anyone until probably in the seventh century because the mission was by Latin speakers. There was one exception though before 597 AD because the Queen of Kent came from what is now France where people used Latin then.

Each religious god is imaginary and no one can prove that there is an afterlife and no one ever will prove it either.

edenspeak: Learn about Revelation's forbidden fruit @ www.docdroid.net/1K2XvAX and you will better understand salvation after life.

GeraldtheGnome: The word inventing was used the wrong way and the new clown who has come on here wants us to be brainwashed by a myth about forbidden fruit and another myth that is claimed to be proof of salvation after life. No one knows what happens when people kark it and no one ever will.

Winterson: I would be interested to see any evidence whatever, anything from the historical or written record, that proves that "the name God and the word god weren’t used by anyone until probably in the seventh century". That is obviously untrue. The word God, whether you capitalize the G or not, is a Germanic word as old as Germanic languages. A form of it existed in all the antecedents to English, just as a form of it exists in all the modern languages that are related to English.

The fact that Christian missions to Britain used Latin does not mean that no one in Anglo-Saxon Britain was speaking their own language, and their own language was quickly adopted and used to express Christian beliefs, first by missionaries, then by the natives. The word for divine being in that language became the word for the divine being preached by Christianity.

And while that word gets used as if it were a name, it is itself nothing more than a nominative designator for a specific idea, namely, that of a divine being. It can designate either a pagan divine being from polytheistic belief, or it can designate the universal divine being of Judaism and Christianity. It is not a name. The name of the God of the Bible is Yahweh.

GeraldtheGnome: When I used the words 'the name God and the word god weren’t used by anyone until probably in the seventh century' it is because there are so far as I've seen and I have looked more extensively than I want to admit is because there literally is nothing around at present that I know of that shows that it was used before then, so even though it's a possibility you have to factor in that everything before that in the earliest known place that used the name God and the word god are places where the presently known earliest Christian literature that is still around were in Latin. So no, what you claim to be false is something that you can claim to be false with absolute certainty. Yes the name God in some of the earliest Christian literature in English was with the the lower case g. I fell for the belief that the name God was used before then, Wikipedia has that the Arians first used the name God in 600 AD. I went and looked through every site until I saw a photographed copy of the earliest still available Gothic/Germanic Bible and the name used was not God. That shocked me because before that I was certain that it was until I challenged my own thoughts. Each Germanic language before a certain point, if the translations are right, did not use God or god in any way shape or form, sure similar names if the translations are correct were around before that which obviously led to the God and god that we now know. The name God and the word god are not just used in English, I agree with you there.

I never claimed that those in Britain didn't use their own language, however certain Latin names for the gods in The Bible were used for a while. When exactly the change happened is unknown, so at present only what the first writing in Britain with the likes of when the name God or as god and when the word god that is currently available is all that anyone can go off. Sure, it was most likely spoken before it was written, no one knows for sure when it was first used in any way. A comma should not be used before the word and or even before the word or at all. Christianity never preached, preachers preached instead. Do not use the word and at the front of a sentence. The nominative designator for a specific name is just you using words that really mean sweet bugger all. Judaism, Christianity and so on are all polytheistic beliefs based on Pagan religions that came before them. It is a name, Lord and every language equivalent is a title, in religion it is designated to a divine being/god. The name of the god, not God of the Bible is possibly Yahweh or that of any other Hebrew name. The thing is as I now realize is that no one actually knows what the original name for the main imaginary god is. Now with the Yahweh bit about the name of him in that then you possibly are right, but then again the thing is that we don't really know. Anyway back onto the subject. No one knows if there is an afterlife or not and it's possible that no one will ever know either.

Winterson: "I went and looked through every site until I saw a photographed copy of the earliest still available Gothic/Germanic Bible and the name used was not God."

What word WAS used? An antecedent to the modern English word, right?

GeraldtheGnome: I should have been more specific with you since not every Gothic/Germanic group was Arian and not every single group used the name God or any name that it derived from. Either I will go and find that site again or I will just look at the forum of mine where I showed the name and admitted that I was wrong before that because I got misled by the Wikipedia site and several other sites. There is no reason to use the word antecedent and there is no need to use the word was solely in capitals.

No one has evidence to prove that there is an afterlife.

GeraldtheGnome: lexilogos.com/english/gothic_dictionary.htm

That's one of the sites about Gothic, basically no one knows how the words were pronounced, the original letters of the earliest still intact writing has what they claim is Gup or gup for the name god and the word god, they really don't know and even the pronunciation is guessed. Anyway they also believe that Gps, Gups and/or gps and gups were used for God's, gods (with the inclusion of the Christian and jewish god) and ansus as the word for gods when the Christian and Jewish god is excluded. Iesus for who you refer to as Jesus and goddesses was represented by the word gudeinja. I never saw what they claim is the word for goddess. Anyway that is what they guess it all means. Maybe they are right and maybe they are wrong, no one will ever know. For the original letters of the original alphabet look at the site I showed on here.

Some have gudan rather than anything else for the Gothic name for who you name God and the word god, I find it unlikely though. For more information about that and The Silver Bible look up Wikipedia and any other site under it's Latin name Codex Argenteus. Anyway I have not seen any evidence that proves that anyone has been resurrected or even that of someone going on to have an afterlife.

Winterson: You know, Gerald, no one called the God of the Bible "Jumala" until the Bible was translated into Finnish. That doesn't mean that the God named Yahweh isn't meant by that word. No one called the God of the Bible "Isten" until the Bible was translated into Hungarian. But that doesn't mean that the God named Yahweh isn't meant by that word. Each language simply uses its own word: Jumala, Isten, Bog (Russian), Theos, Deus, Dio, Dieu. Add a few yourself.

GeraldtheGnome: I forgot to mention that even though they guessed what the Gothic writing meant some also think that they used gudis or guda both in lower case or in both for what is now the standard English name for God, possibly also the word for a god and possibly that it means gods. They guessed that because it looks similar to the Norse Runes and other Norse writing that they guessed about. If you look at it it’s also similar to Modern German, other Germanic writing, Byzantine Greek (mainly to Byzantine Greek) and to Latin mainly because the idea was to make it not look too different than that of Byzantine Greek and that of the Latin used in what is now Italy where it was possibly written, most likely in Ravenna since it was The Dark Ages after all.

Here’s what you won’t like about Arians, they considered the father and the son to be two different gods, they believed in the resurrection even though it’s never been proved and they didn’t believe in the holy trinity, nor do I. In fact even though Arians, Goths (of that sort) and Arianism in a way died out there were Arians around and possibly still are even though the now possibly completely wrong translation of the writing and language is gone.

First of all it’s the god of The Bible, not the God of it. So in standard English the god of it is named God and if the original name used for that god was indeed Yahweh or El or any derivative of either is unknown, we only really now what Modern Hebrew is about and current Jews really only know modern Hebrew. So maybe every translation is right and so too every transliteration, but no one knows, it’s a guess and everyone might be completely wrong about all of the former writing from everywhere around the world. I like that song by the way, Around the world. However each name for each god, not God, named that is supposed to be about that god is not the original name. If you were born in a country then your name is the same wherever you go no matter if your name is used differently in another country. If your name was John and you decided to France you’d say that your name is John, not Jean even if you were great at French, the same kind of thing if you went to where Johanne was used and so on. So even if they named you whatever the local version of your name is you still would use the name for yourself that you usually use if if the case is that you have the linguistic skills of a Roman Catholic Pope.

In English God is a name, god and so on are words except possibly or certainly in some early cases and Yahweh and other names for any gods are names not words in a sense. Sure I can add a few, anyone can. Each religious god, including the one named Jesus in standard English is made up, there is now evidence to prove that any resurrection and/or any afterlife example has been proven to be true.

GeraldtheGnome: No one knows if there is an afterlife or not. Should we all convince ourselves that there certainly is one when it is unknown if that is true even though I myself wish for it to be true or do we just possibly think that it's true or do we think that there is not one at all ? How about we just all make the most of the here and now, every second of it awake used in the best way ? This possibly is it and there is nothing after this after all.

edenspeak: Actually, the term 'God' is a title; not a name. Christians and jewish people often use 'God Almighty' when referring to Yahweh Jehovah.

One's level of education has little to do with their belief system. However, it does have a great deal to do with Greeko-Roman mythology, astrology, education, politics and most everything else we consume in this modern-day world in which we live.

The Bible tells us that the meek will inherit the earth, not the well educated (many of whom enjoy using capital letters when citing GOD as a reference to their trio of pagan gods, or 'the gods', if you will).

The Bible can be difficult reading, at times, and like any other book, it's sometimes necessary to read the last chapter of the book to better understand the narrative, which you may do here ...

Revelation's Forbidden Fruit @ www.docdroid.net/1K2XvAX

GeraldtheGnome: You made some mistakes there, like with a comma before the word or for example and with other things such as too many full stops.

God is a Medieval name for the main Hebrew god, it is not a title, Lord is a title. The god is named many names in Hebrew and so on. What the original name was for that god is unknown. Who brought up someone's level of education ? I didn't. The Bible is a book, it literally tells us nothing, they are words that are in text form, they are not spoken words. The gods is okay, if it was 'The GOD'S' or 'The GODS' or 'The Gods' then I would agree with you. Please don't use the word narrative. The way The Bible has it there were gods around is the first claim, in fact it's the entire claim of the first chapter of the entire Bible, they, not he came from nothing and he was around before the beginning is the next claim in it and then the next contradictory bit is where the claim that there was a spirit of the gods went over the flat Earth after it was created from nothing.

Elohim is mistaken to be about a god, it's actually about gods and the spirit bit is about the wind going over the Ocean, most people think that it's about a Ghost. Also the first chapter of The Bible is about Gods and Goddesses since there is the reference of a Male and a Female being made 'in their image', that they were created from nothing, now I can think that it's about something other than that but it is not. The whole entire chapter is about Gods and Goddesses being formed from nothing, everything mentioned in that chapter being created from nothing including life forms until they bred. It's also the wind that many think is about Ghosts or a Ghost since the anonymous author got confused and made it about gods whilst claimed that it's about a god. But anyway from that some anonymous authors later on that used Greek thought that it was about one ghost which later led to the confusing and impossible to be real holy trinity belief. But it also led to the unproven belief that each living person has a soul and that it then becomes a kind of Ghost entity after everyone dies. How can anyone prove that anyone has a soul and that there is an afterlife ? No one can. Each religious god, including one that some people name Jesus, is made up.

GeraldtheGnome: A lot of Christians think that just because there is a story that tells of a guy told hundreds that the meek will inherit the Earth that it means that there really was someone who once said that to hundreds therefore he was around then. Once again it’s the false belief that all of it is true by those that think that what is in The Bible proves that what is in The Bible is true. The same goes with the resurrection and afterlife being true, nothing has shown that either of those things are true and nothing ever will.

Even anyone who claims that right now there is a soul inside us cannot explain why no one has ever been found living with a soul inside them. There was even once a failed experiment to find out how much a soul weighed and where the location of the soul inside someone is.

youarewell2: There is a life and an existence after death.

TheismIsUntenable: Well golly gee, some random on the internet said so must be true.

GeraldtheGnome: No one bloody knows.

youarewell2: THEISMISUNTENABLE

Well, you are asking people on the internet so that is why you are getting people on the internet answering you back.

GeraldtheGnome: Technically none of us said anything on this text based site, but that's another story. Does that one think that this is a documentary ?

youarewell2: GERALDTHEGNOME

I am not really looking at any of your videos to be honest. So, I don't know what your videos are about.