Where did God come from? A dream, a lie, and an explanation

Another weak opening statement made by Pro. 'If all you *yawn boring boredom bores a boring bore* are going to do is repeat what I state and then put in your remarks, well I may as well go to sleep during the next nuclear war water horse from which this horse can drink of my well funded spit.' Mr. Xtian or ex-Xtian provincial "person", this site goes by the name Debate.org; a debate person A makes an argument and person B makes a counter argument. In the last round you repeatedly made these irrational, illogical ad hominem arguments. I quoted your none sense bringing specific evidence to prove my charge that your arguments - from beginning to end - "trash in trash out [remember?] - stood upon the absurd none argument of ad hominem silliness. Next refutation in this debate. "Now here"s how I run things" if there is the slightest hint of you inventing excuses from something in which you clearly know nothing about, especially when its the subject in which you claim to professing you have knowledge upon, namely this one, and you really don"t, and yet you pretend that you do by coming up with invented excuses and or flat out lying, I will insult you with my brand of insults that are original, funny, stupid, deranged and walls to the ball insane, unless those excuses are so far fetched that they are clearly pulled off from your groin to be a groin pull from the gold-i-lox area to keep scientists looking for other planets, then all bets are truly off and I may end the debate right then and there because I DO KNOW my stuff, whereas most don"t." Debates hav rules. You do not set the rules but rather obey the rules of the game. If you play chess and move your king as if he existed as a knight, no body would play with you. It appears to me, based upon the above quotation of what you expressed as an argument? [The above has nothing to do with the subject of the debate: Where did God come from? A dream, a lie, and an explanation. Consequently, it appears to me that the expression of your egotism "I" "I" "I", can not qualify that you have a stuttering problem. My knowledge about you, limited strictly and only to this "debate" LOL. But it appears, based upon your third response, that you assume the role of God: Judge, Jury, and Prosecution. This "debate" LOL, occurs on a public forum. "Still no proof? My patience is wearing thin as cheese whiz to blow a tin can across the cow chirps of the squatted universe eve searching for big black blank holes." May the readers on this "debate" bear witness, that Mr. Pro does not appear to approach this forum with respect. He demands proof for the existence of the Gods. My refutation: Only belief systems require proof for the existence of God A, B, C or D etc. The Torah brit faith - not subject to personal belief, based upon the premise that all belief systems begin with the egotism of "I". Torah faith stands in contrasts with the idolatry of Xtianity and Islam; the latter two belief systems contrast the Torah oath brit concept of faith. Specifically where does the God of Israel live vs. where do the Gods of Xtianity and Islam live. The latter live in the Heavens together with the Cestellations of the other Greek and Roman Gods. The former, based upon fidelity of Jews keeping the oath brit alliance, the Spirit of HaShem's Name lives within the dedicated place within our hearts and souls. Hearts, plural, learned from how the Torah misspells the word heart. Recall that Mr. Pro declared that misspelled words invalidate an argument. The Torah teaches otherwise. This refutation of Mr. Pro's pompous declaration stands clear vindicated - not by my own self important declarations, but rather by the language of the Torah itself. It seems clear to me now that Mr. Pro does not wish or choose to follow debate procedures. So I shall hence forth ignore the rest of his 3rd round self righteous and self centered nonesense, and return addressing the logical holes in the New Testament and the Koran, as found in the first round of my opening refutation of Mr. Pro's spacious opening argument. Understanding, by the way i learn the Torah, means "separating like from like". The language of the Talmud: "learning a matter from another matter". In my freshman year in college, literaure 101 my professor taught that a thesis statement requires 2 or 3 particulars. Being Jewish, [I find it really funny that Mr. Pro did not even know the word T'NaCH! Its all a matter of perspective and experience, but his total ignorance of the Jewish faith so reminded me of the saying about Americans. Speak 3 languages -- trilingual. Speak 2 languages -- bilingual. Speak 1 language -- American.], my rabbis taught me Torah in Hebrew, not English. Being Israeli, my limitations for writing in English, please accept my apologies if i misspell a word here or there. I really have no excuse, I learned History at Texas A&M, with an English minor. Still, the American experience, I made aliya to Israel in 1991 and except for my wife's daughter's marriage and the birth of my daughter have never returned back to the US. Having made this digression of an introduction of myself, let me return to the logical holes in the Xtian Bible and the Arab/Muslim Koran. My Con premise stands on the foundation that the Gods worshipped by Xtians and Arabs/Muslims live has separate and distinct Gods from the God whom the Jewish people worship. By the oath brit faith, if we maintain and honor the oath swore by Avraham, Yitzak and Yaacov, the fathers of the Jewish people, the nation of Cohonim, then the Spirit of HaShem lives within our hearts and souls. בראשית\ב' ראשית, The Xtian translation of the first word of the Torah as "In the Beginning" contrasts with the reading of 2 Beginnings. The Creation stories, the Torah brings 2 Creation stories, the Jewish people understand as the mussar of HaShem [That's a transliteration of the unpronouncable Name. Why does the Torah forbid pronouncing the Name of God according to its 4 letters? The sin of the Golden Calf. There, some of my people translated the Name of HaShem into a word. The Name of HaShem lives as a spirit NOT a word. Pronouncing the Name, according to the grammer of the 4 letters, profanes the Name which lives as Spirit into a word]. That both the new testament and koran make the exact same error of the Golden Calf, proves that the worship of these Gods violates the 2nd Commandment of the revelation of the Torah at Sinai ... do not worship other Gods. Mr. Pro demands proof of the existence of the Gods. I bring the planets named after Greek and Roman Gods, as proof that Greeks and Romans worshipped these planets as Gods. A people worships a God, if for only the people who worship that God, obviously they believe that that God exists and lives. Does that God really exist and live? For the people who believe in this or that God, this question stands as utterly absurd. Of course this or that God really exists and lives!!! The Church murdered millions of other Xtian believers because they did not believe the way that the Popes dogmatism proclaimed that they should believe. "It is computed, that eleven thousand persons have, at several times, suffered death, rather than submit to break their eggs at the smaller end." Jonathan Swift (1667-1745), Dean of St Patrick's, Dublin, Gulliver's Travels The distinction between schism and heresy, heresy is the denial of a Christian dogmatism; schism:the withdrawal from the authority of the Church. Jews reject altogether the belief in Jesus son of Zeus. The Xtian belief in messiah has no T'NaCH basis in fact. The stugy of all literature learns by way of making comparisons and contrasts. Talmudic Common Law makes a "measured" comparison and contrast of different Case Law rulings. This disciplined manner of learning Case Law stands upon the basis of "learn the Torah by way of proofs". The comparison of proof of Gods with proof of Case Laws ... if A brings a precedent learned from an earlier Case Law, A does not prove the validity of that particular case law. Bringing a precedent to a Case Law assumes that the Case Law has validity. Parlieamentary Constitutional Law differs from laws passed by Congress. The English Common Law courts do not have the power to declare a law passed by Parlieament as not Constitutional. The Supreme Court, by contrast has the Constitutional power to declare a law passed by both Houses of Congreass as being unConstitutional. Mishnaic Law and English Law, both Courts systems operate on a Common Law system which requires bring precedents. Its interesting that the Church, throughout history, has denounced the Talmud; and yet the English court system models the Talmudic Common Law legal system! I shall now compare two separate cases. The revolt made by Korach against Moshe; the revolt made by Yero'vam made against king Shlomo. The common denominator by which both cases stand, both rejected the House of Aaron and the anointed "Moshiach" ראש בית\בראשית - Head of House. The Torah defines HOLY - that which a person dedicates to HaShem can not later be replaced by something other. King David was anointed as king. Did this replace the House of Aaron as the Head of the House Moshiach? No. King David commanded his son Shlomo to build the Temple. The holy brit faith, the Spirit of HaShem's Name lives within the hearts and souls of the brit people. HaShem has no oath brit to live in a building made of wood and stone. The Hebrew calls this logic משל\נמשל...parable/interpretation of the parable. Therefore the building of the Temple by king Shlomo served to proclaim the house of Aaron as Moshiach.