4
MotivatedCheese 4 points ago +10 / -6

i know how it works.

earth is a flat plane

3
MotivatedCheese 3 points ago +3 / -0

beat me to it

1
MotivatedCheese 1 point ago +1 / -0

you must go deeper, (((who))) controls the banks

by pkvi
1
MotivatedCheese 1 point ago +1 / -0

u got me m8 good job, now keep doing this in like literally every thread, enjoy wasting your life.

i seriously hope your a bot and not an actual person that wastes so much time doing this.

by pkvi
1
MotivatedCheese 1 point ago +1 / -0

didnt read lmao

by pkvi
2
MotivatedCheese 2 points ago +2 / -0

ayh

retard

by pkvi
1
MotivatedCheese 1 point ago +1 / -0

i remember that one time someone that actually knew etymology made you look like the retard you are

by pkvi
2
MotivatedCheese 2 points ago +3 / -1

ayh think you should kill yourself

1
MotivatedCheese 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm not looking to debate and I'm not looking to call names. I'm just looking to talk. I'm sorry if I came off that way. I was just trying to explain some of my personal history coming from being an ex-atheist myself, because I've been there before. I'm absolutely not trying to say that I am any better than you.

I'm not necessarily like... "for" or "against" the idea of "god" existing. I've just come to believe that thats how the "world" works from what I've researched and observed. I'm not really sure how to even make the argument. I usually prefer more of a Q n A type of thing where I'd be asked questions and respond to them with how I think things work. "God" is a vast topic because I believe that God is all things, including you and me and the rocks and the trees. I think I might try to list off some things I believe and see if we can go from there.

This is going to be word salad, but what I mean by "God" is that there is some overarching interconnected consciousness / intelligence. I don't believe that "God" is some bearded dude sitting in a chair watching you masturbate. I believe that we are all parts of God experiencing himself in infinite because God is all things. I think that God is all things because I can see reflections of everyones experiences in everyone and everything else. We all experience the same things, only in different circumstances, different amounts.

We humans experience things of a higher order than other entities because we understand more. An animal still feels emotions, its just doesn't really understand them. Its pure experience. There have been experiments on plants that show that they experience emotions as well. If even things without brain can experience emotions, where can we really draw the line with whats "living", whats conscious?

I could say more but I think thats enough for now, I'll see what you have to say to this and see if we can go anywhere from here. Thank you for your talk and making me use my brain for once.

-1
MotivatedCheese -1 points ago +1 / -2

I'm allowed to have personal beliefs man. Its not like I don't have logical arguments for it. Its not like I haven't had experiences that lead me to believing God is real. But demanding "proof" like I can just cite you a paper and prove it just kinda makes you sound like a fedora tipping redditor. I guess I used to be a fedora tipping redditor myself back when I was 20 too.

Closest thing I think I can get to some sort of direct "proof" is this book.

Spiritual Science PDF - https://files.catbox.moe/47j3l4.pdf

Spiritual Science Audiobook - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mwlxr-xcjs

If you'd like to actually have a discussion on why I believe God is real I'm all for that. I don't mind having my beliefs challenged. What doesn't kill me makes me stronger sort of thing.

-1
MotivatedCheese -1 points ago +1 / -2

You know thats something I'm not going to be able to "prove" to you like that. Come on. The biggest thing that personally turned me towards God after being an atheist was learning about evolution. Or rather how evolution is a lie.

-1
MotivatedCheese -1 points ago +1 / -2

Religion is a cult, but spirituality is not. God is still real even though groups, religions, manipulate people with the idea.

2
MotivatedCheese 2 points ago +2 / -0

Undeniable Historical Evidence for the Existence of Jesus (Dr. Gary Habermas) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKcWgqsqJGg

So the only actual claim made is that Paul was supposedly an eyewitness to the eyewitnesses. The other claims are that there are supposedly 15 independent sources for it and an appeal to authority about an accredited specialist.

The documentary I posted covers the topic of Paul heavily, I doubt you actually watched it if this is part of your rebuttal. Try watching it again.

Did Jesus Exist? Searching for Evidence Beyond the Bible https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/jesus-historical-jesus/did-jesus-exist/

Tacitus’s last major work, titled Annals, written c. 116–117 C.E., includes a biography of Nero. In 64 C.E., during a fire in Rome, Nero was suspected of secretly ordering the burning of a part of town where he wanted to carry out a building project, so he tried to shift the blame to Christians. This was the occasion for Tacitus to mention Christians, whom he despised.

Whom he despised? Thats not what Tacitus wrote, thats a compeltet mischaracterization. Thats some mighty fine language manipulation there. Nero blamed the Christians because, as Tacitus said, everyone already hated them anyways. Sounds like jews to me! Tacitus himself call christians a "class hated for their abominations" and "the evil." Tacitus also says they pleaded guilty to "hatred of mankind". Also notice how the quote doesn't say "Jesus Christ" only "Christus", a title meaning "the anointed one" which could have easily been given to Ra or Mithras or literally anyone else.

Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind.

Josephus

The documentary I posted also covers the topic of the Josephus too. I doubt you actually watched it if this is part of your rebuttal as well. You're bringing up points that they literally countered already, and was basically the first part of the documentary, after the intro of course.

https://youtu.be/ZftML6pAv7E?t=476

Archaeology Confirms 50 Real People in the Bible https://www.baslibrary.org/biblical-archaeology-review/40/2/4

The claims made are not that the setting of the story didnt exsist (the kings and pharos this source cites). The claim is that the line of adam didnt exist. If your argument is a misrepresentation of whats being said then I doubt you actually watched the documentary. At best you might have skipped around some.

I invite anyone actually reading this to watch the documentary themselves to get both sides of the argument. u/Vlad_The_Impaler has done a good job of posting sources representing his side, check out the documentary to get a good overview of the other and make up your own mind on the matter.

1
MotivatedCheese 1 point ago +1 / -0

If you can’t post links of just straight information, you’re retarded or shilling. I’m not gonna engage in 20 questions like you’re some Operation Trust agent.

Post info or fuck off

3
MotivatedCheese 3 points ago +4 / -1

I’ve thoroughly researched both sides and he’s never been proven to exist. feel free to watch the documentaries i’ve already posted about it.

1
MotivatedCheese 1 point ago +1 / -0

its all relavant you're just a retard.

the jews are at the top of the cartel, they created the masons

https://odysee.com/@EricDubay:c/GlobalismFreemasonryJudaism:a

like I said, lurk more or go back to your operation trust containment board

1
MotivatedCheese 1 point ago +1 / -0

lurk more, I already responded to the general "not all jews" line of thinking here

https://communities.win/c/Conspiracies/p/15K6lWR8U9/high-def-kanye-is-just-crazy-the/c/4Of0jSSMcFe

if someone calls themselves a jew, they're evil.

also

The average Jewish person has as much jewish privilege as the average white has white privilege.

this is 100% not true, the image proves this. The people in this image are all "average" jews. nobodies.

by pkvi
1
MotivatedCheese 1 point ago +1 / -0

what are your thoughts on jews pkvi?

by pkvi
2
MotivatedCheese 2 points ago +2 / -0

no he literally just thinks it sounds better

4
MotivatedCheese 4 points ago +4 / -0

There are not exceptions in this case. To call oneself a jew is calling oneself a liar because of what jews believe and what jews practice. See my reply to the comment below.

10
MotivatedCheese 10 points ago +10 / -0

looks like you dont know anything about jews fren. being jewish means you are a liar, by their own practices, customs and interpretations of the torah.


Practices based in decit:

Eruv - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eruv They hang wires around a community to re-interpert what a "home" is in order to try to circumnavigate their own religion, which is them deceiving God.

Kol Nidre - "All vows we are likely to make, all oaths and pledges we are likely to take between this Yom Kippur and the next Yom Kippur, we publicly renounce. Let them all be relinquished and abandoned, null and void, neither firm nor established. Let our vows, pledges and oaths be considered neither vows nor pledges nor oaths." https://i.imgur.com/N25BvOl.png - https://files.catbox.moe/wnig5g.png - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kol_Nidre - http://archive.is/81Fup

Kapparot - The Jewish ritual of killing chickens - "This chicken shall go to death and I shall proceed to a good, long life and peace" - https://i.imgur.com/GQHk22C.jpg - https://files.catbox.moe/6ev1m3.jpg - http://archive.is/iesls

Pilpul - "As Soloveitchik states, the Ashkenazi rabbis were less concerned with promulgating the Law transmitted in the Talmud than they were with molding it to suit their own needs. Pilpul was a means to justify practices already fixed in the behaviors of the community by re-reading the Talmud to justify those practices. " - http://archive.is/D1nrE - http://archive.is/a76ZW

Shabbos goy - A person hired by Jews to do work that is against their religious beliefs - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shabbos_goy - http://archive.is/CEzgR


Rabbinical scripture interpretations of deceit:

'Where a suit arises between an Israelite and a heathen, if you can justify the former according to the laws of Israel, justify him and say: 'This is our law'; so also if you can justify him by the laws of the heathens justify him and say [to the other party:] 'This is your law'; but if this can not be done, we use subterfuges to circumvent him. - http://www.come-and-hear.com/babakamma/babakamma_113.html - http://archive.is/MbuIB

If one finds therein19 a lost object, then if the majority are Israelites it has to be announced, but if the majority are heathens it has not to be announced. - http://www.come-and-hear.com/babamezia/babamezia_24.html - http://archive.is/fsasO

Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel: The property of a heathen is on the same footing as desert land; whoever first occupies it acquires ownership. - http://www.come-and-hear.com/bababathra/bababathra_54.html - http://archive.is/F1zQD

His lost article is permissible, for R. Hama b. Guria said that Rab stated: Whence can we learn that the lost article of a heathen is permissible? Because it says: And with all lost thing of thy brother's: it is to your brother that you make restoration, but you need not make restoration to a heathen. - http://www.come-and-hear.com/babakamma/babakamma_113.html - http://archive.is/MbuIB

For murder, whether of a Cuthean by a Cuthean, or of an Israelite by a Cuthean, punishment is incurred; but of a Cuthean by an Israelite, there is no death penalty' - http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_57.html

Raba stated: With reference to the Rabbinical statement that [legally] an Egyptian has no father,2 it must not be imagined that this is due to [the Egyptians'] excessive indulgence in carnal gratification, owing to which it is not known [who the father was], but that if this were known3 it is to be taken into consideration;4 but [the fact is] that even if this is known it is not taken into consideration. For, surely, in respect of twin brothers, who originated in one drop that divided itself into two, it was nevertheless stated in the final clause,5 that they 'neither participate in halizah nor perform levirate marriage'.6 Thus it may be inferred that the All Merciful declared their children to be legally fatherless,7 for [so indeed it is also] written, Whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses.8 - http://www.come-and-hear.com/yebamoth/yebamoth_98.html - http://archive.is/XXuUA

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›