because you didn't provide scientific evidence until later

naw, narcissists never do

OK @Grenade123 tell you what: I don't see it your way and you don't see it mine, so why don't we call it even, apologize to ech hother, and start over?

you know what? i will accept that.

I just retracted my last comment

I apologised and you doubled down on your insults. Just because a general trend is followed doesn't mean it's true in all cases. I'm not a "butthurt baby". I'm just concerned that a self-professed Christian sees fit to repeatedly and zealously mock other people instead of act politely. Ironically I'm acting more morally than you

@Stefan Payne i think you're conflating philosophy and religion. Someone can ultimately come to a value system symmetrical to a religious value system, without a theistic basis. Does that make both a religion?

@Vigil I dispute your telling of events, but I'll make you the same offering I made Grenade

What makes a religion cohesive is the same thing that makes religion dangerous when unchecked.

We can all apologize and start over, if you like.

No. I will not accept your blatant lie for the sake of pacifying you. I am not a pushover. I have already apologised. You will apologise or I am done engaging a fake Christian

Are you a sheep or a goat, Max?

@Stefan Payne I agree with you completely that you can construct a philosophical system symmetrical to a religious value systemk--although no one's ever successfully done it without invoking God in some way. Never.

@Vigil I did not lie. S

Max, you linked the wrong person

https://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/23/world/pope-atheists-again/index.html

@Vigil are you a Christian?

I am an agnostic who follows the principles of Christ

I was raised as a Roman Catholic

@MaxKolbe as a show of good faith, i will concede that you didn't direct an insult at Cipher directly until after i had asked for your evidence.

However I do not follow Jesus as a deity

@Vigil Well, you're also a liar, so I don't think I can believe anything you claim about your background either. No apologies for you at all, liar.

Wewlad.

it was only after you accused all atheists in chat of being fatherless

@Grenade123 polease show context, as I continue to dispute your telling of events.

I'll meet you halfway between Sodom and Gomorrah, mind the brimstone on your feet when you get down there Max

@Grenade123 See, you aren't 4really giving up, you're continuing to want to tell your version of events. I didpuste your version, sorry.

You also said his direct referencing of scripture was "an idiotic way" to read the bible

Despite the fact that it's actually what scripture says, and there's already a theological way around it

fucking, someone else use the the search function please? yesterday, 4:18, atheists are fatherless/have father issues, followed by me asking for evidence, 4:18 replying with evidence, 4:23 then using that evidence to attack cypher

pages like 5 or 6

IE rather than actually address the issue of the absolutely ridiculous and strict old testament rulings, you went after your opponent

"For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their deeds."
-2 Corinthians 11:13-15

all those EST times

And this was a few messages into the conversation

Now @Beemann continues to lie about what happened. Apologies withdrawn

Lol go back and look

At least I can *read* the Bible. Go buy it, all my points are addressed there, Max.

I did. You lie sir.

Anyone go search from @MaxKolbe and idiotic

"@CipherDown Reading the Bible in a shallow idiotic manner like that doesn't win you any points with Christians who are as smart as you or smarter, sorry."