No god would require the use of faith

Oh absolutely not. The entire bible is about god and his frail fragile ego. So that right there SCREAMS to the proof that the number one thing preached in the bible is faith. If god were genuine in any way, he couldn’t care less about his ego and love would be the number one thing preached in the bible. “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully. Those of us schooled from infancy in his ways can become desensitized to their horror.” - Richard Dawkins - I don’t mean to be snide here but Richard Dawkins does happen to know a lot more about religion, god and the bible than you. So that leaves the NT. Now JC is a false prophet to begin with because he broke many of god’s laws, rules and regulations without god’s consent such as working on the sabbath which was a requirement to be stoned to death, so JC couldn’t have gotten far by breaking god’s laws, rules and regulations. So christianity is false, JC is false and the NT is false. Btw, there’s a whole lot more faith given unto JC than love given back by JC and god to the people in the NT. Again I’m not trying to be snide, but try reading the bible just to see how bloated these characters ego’s truly are and what crybaby’s they are when they don’t get their ways. If god doesn’t get his way, things of violence, anger, wrath, vengeance, rage, fury, evil, especially killing/ murder happens. Boo hoo. You are right I did not explain how its faith that is preached more in the bible than any other thing because I wanted you to set yourself up for utter failure. That’s what a good debate is. You did that marvelously by guessing and thus inventing an excuse because I knew that you didn’t know. But now you know because I proved it. Also most of the bible cannot be proved, especially god. So it takes faith to believe in god as YOU previously proved. Are you kidding me? Ab-so-lu-te-ly the number one thing preached in the bible is faith. Now let’s move on… No supreme deity would ---ever--- have the want the need, the desire for faith. After all what supreme deity would use faith instead of evidence? What supreme deity would use faith when they can simply talk to us? So all of your reasonings go flying out the window. The bible is NOT evidence.“We have to rely on copies of copies of anonymous authors with no originals and the textural testimony to a miracle for example, there’s no amount of reports, anecdotal reports that is sufficient to justify in believing that actually happened as reported. And anything that would qualify as a god would clearly understand this and if it wanted to clearly convey this to people in a way that is believable would not be relying on ---TEXT--- to do so. And this to me is the nail in the coffin for christianity. The god that christians believe in is amazingly ---STUPID---!!! If it actually wants to achieve its goal by spreading its word to humanity by relying on text, by relying on languages that die off, by relying on anecdotal testimony, that’s not a pathway to truth. And anything that would qualify for a god would know this.which shows either god does not exist or doesn’t care enough about the people to understand the nature of evidence to actually present it. Now which of those two possibilities is accurate?” Matt Dillahunty“If god is all knowing and he knows the future of all events and he wrote a book that can only be interpreted as if it endorses slavery and if its heinous violence against your children against your neighbors… how could a god be that omnipotent and devise a book where we can’t distinguish between the law of Israel and god’s law? I mean their interwoven where we have metaphor and fact and nobody can distinguish the two. We don’t know what we’re supposed to take figuratively. We don’t know what we’re supposed to take literally. Was it actually a tree? I mean come on. How can anyone distinguish this. I mean come on. It doesn’t make any sense. It doesn’t matter how its translated. It doesn’t matter what version. If it was written by an omnipotent being there would be ONE VERSION. And there would be only ONE WAY to interpret it because it would be written well.” Amon Ra Actually it wouldn’t be written at all. What’s wrong with your god comin’ down and talking to people? ‘Hey you know some of that stuff that’s in the book? I’m here to correct it.” Matt Dillahunty “Why would you believe anything on faith? Faith isn’t a pathway to truth. Every religion has some sort of faith. If faith is your pathway you can’t distinguish between christianity, Hinduism, judaism, any of these others. How is it that you use ---reason--- in every of the other endeavor in your life and then when it comes to the ultimate truth, the most important truth your’re saying that faith is required and how is that supposed to reflect on a god? What kind of a god requires faith instead of evidence?” Matt Dillahunty “IIf you care about something is true, faith has no place. Your faith is indistinguishable from the faith of the people’s of those who disagree with you. Its not a path to truth. Faith is accepting something. Faith is gullibility. Faith is the reason, the excuse people give when they don’t have a good reason. I’m talking about how do we find a good reason. And if your only answer is ‘well the bible says so, or you just have to have faith’, then you’ve demonstrated that you are not actually concerned whether its true.” Matt Dillahunty “I’m sorry. The age of your claims nor the number of people who believe them nor the strength of their convictions has any bearing at all on whether or not those claims are likely to be true. And there are claims that are OLDER than the book you are pointing to by the way and you disregard those as the matter of fact, and you disregard EVERY OTHER CLAIM BY EVERY OTHER RELIGION AND YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO GROUNDS FOR DOING SO. You make a special case for the religion you believe and you only want to justify it by appealing to faith. That’s not somebody who’s interested in something that’s true.” Matt Dillahunty The opening of my 3rd round was merely countering a statement you made. Nothing more or less. But you are correct it has nothing to do with the debate which is something I accused you of so that’s my bad in which I should slit my wrists with a sharpened piece of yodeling grunge yeast infection and I need to make sure that it gets right in there nice and deep. But your point is taken. “God cares what people think about him,” Yeah he does especially if its bad. But then again I hate god, and its the ONLY thing I truly hate because of how he truly hates children. But I’m still here. “and he gives them the gift of faith…” nope… no god would do as such without a trace of evidence. And this god could simply talk to us. If he talked to his prophets and freely admitted to deceiving them, then he can talk to us. But since he freely admitted to deceiving his prophets, how are we as man supposed to know what is true coming from this god and what is false? Ezekiel 20:25-26 “Wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live; 26 And I polluted them in their own gifts, in that they caused to pass through the fire all that openeth the womb, that I might make them desolate, to the end that they might know that I am the LORD.”And what about children? After all EVERYBODY, no exceptions, is born an atheist. So how does someone gain belief in an unproved god?“On the contrary, most of what you've said deserves to be ignored” then why didn’t you? “but if God requires faith” ah yes the feeding frenzy. If you don't feed god your faith, he dies.