Anti-Christianity Thread

[kal-el]

Cmon, you dont give a rats ass what God does to other people once they die.

First off, prove god exists, second off, this statement, "God does to other people once they die" is utterly nonsensical. You are not making complete sense here.

You are just hiding behind that skirt cuz you dont want to confront your own shortcomings, and you dont want to have to change your hedonistic ways.

Wow, quite the judgemental Christian, aren't we. I believe it was your very own savior who said the same measure you use to judge others, it will be measured to you. Do you always blatanly disregard your dead carpenter's teachings?

 

[kal-el]

Hell, man - what do you want - a deity whose ass you can kick? A milquetoast? A wimp? He gives you a commandment, and you tell him to shove it? And he shuffles his feet and says, "Ummm....ok....er, ah, perhaps you could provide some input on these commandments...."? You want God to be a Democrat - is that what you're saying?

What I'm saying is the god of the bible is depicted as an utterly and complete imbecile, who has no idea of what he is doing. I can't believe intelligent, reasonable people would worship such a bloodthirsty, homicidal diety. Where in my paragraph, do you see the word Democrat?

 

[no1tovote4]

First off, prove god exists, second off, this statement, "God does to other people once they die" is utterly nonsensical. You are not making complete sense here.



Wow, quite the judgemental Christian, aren't we. I believe it was your very own savior who said the same measure you use to judge others, it will be measured to you. Do you always blatanly disregard your dead carpenter's teachings?

There is not scientific proof of a God, you know this already. That is why it is called a Faith. Attempting to take a Faith and then ask people to prove a personal belief is simply disingenuous.

Calling the Deity they believe in 'Sky Pixie' is simply disrespectful and unnecessarily 'trollish', it is meant to draw emotion and anger, not common ground or actual debate. When you post such disrespectful and truly derogatory nonsense about another's beliefs without evidence of your own to deny that Deity's existence you are attempting to evoke a solely emotional response.

The very definition of 'troll'.

I have explained to you that your neg rep doesn't have anything to do with what you are saying, it has everything to do with how you say it I am not kidding you.

Respect them and their beliefs and they will respect yours and you can intellectually debate. But if you only come here to anger 'the Christians' then you probably don't have a long half-life on the site.

 

[kal-el]

God. There's an interesting character.

Yea, you're telling me.

Personally, I don't believe that God wrote anything.

He didn't. It was all written and assembled by fallible men, o, and it's "supposedly" the word of god. If he was so perfect, as Christians wish to pretend, then why didn't he pick out more competent writers to portray his word, opposed to intolerant, violent, primitive people.

He didn't scribe the 10 Commandments, he had nothing to with the Bible (except inasmuch as the Bible represents the attempts of ancient men to explain things, including God and their own natures).

I think most Christians would beg to differ here. But while we are on the subject, which bible are we talking about here? The Hebrew Bible (OT), the Protestant bible (66 books), or the Catholic bible (66 books, and the 14 of the Apocrypha). I assume you're talking about the Christian bible. Like I said, the bible was assembled by men, and they had the choice of what to include/not include if it didn't fit their worldviews.

Like the Deists of the 18th century, I believe God created things, then let them unfold as they will. While I believe that God exists, I think the "God of Abraham" is almost entirely an invention, created in the image of the Sons of Abraham. God was a convenient scapegoat for the atrocities of man, especially the atrocities of the authors of the Bible (better to blame an elusive all-powerful deity than to take personal responsibility for evil of genocide). On the positive side, God was also a wonderful tool for rallying the masses behind a cause, or for keeping the masses under control. Hence, the biblical (and every other kind) God eventually took shape.

Yep. It is possible that "a" god exists, but I would say it is logically impossible for the bible god to exist.

God didn't write the 10 Commandments, men did. God didn't write the Bible, men did. God didn't order the genocide of the enemies of Israel, men did. God didn't order dozens of children murdered for laughing at a bald man, men did. God wasn't responsible for the defeat of Hitler, men were. God wasn't responsible for the fall of the Berlin wall, men were. God didn't tell GWB to go to war in Iraq, men did. God didn't send the tsunami to punish the heathens, or Katrina to punish the wicked city of New Orleans, those were just normal (though catastrophic) acts of nature.

So true.

One of the funniest attributions I've seen people give to God was when some of the right-wing nutjobs like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, et al, claimed that Katrina was sent to punish the wickedness of New Orleaneans. God must have lousy aim, because he missed Bourbon Street altogether!

Yea, those Christian fundies are sure whackjobs. Hey, I bet if Manson were to claim that he turned around, and has found god, that the likes of George bush would pardon him!

 

[kal-el]

please provide a link to the list of people god killed?

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html

please provide a link to the memo where he requests that a book be wrtitten about him?

Where do you see the word "request" in my statement?

please provide a link to god's posistion paper where he states that he stands for hatred, intolerance, barberity, and violence.

Just read the bible.

please provide a link to a list of people he has punished and why?

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/inj/long.html

you seem awfully worked up about a sky pixie that you know does not exist.

Not really, it's just I get a little irritated when people constantly spout utter nonsense.

me thinks you need a 5150

What?

 

[no1tovote4]

What I'm saying is the god of the bible is depicted as an utterly and complete imbecile, who has no idea of what he is doing. I can't believe intelligent, reasonable people would worship such a bloodthirsty, homicidal diety. Where in my paragraph, do you see the word Democrat?

The 'homicide' of that Deity ended when the New Covenant was brought to bear through the sacrifice of the Son. That you misunderstand this is evident.

The Old Covenant expected obedience and perfection, neither of which were possible, thus rules of cleansing and the strict obedience and expectation of belief. The Deity would then punish when the behavior walked too far from the lines drawn, the Plumb Line. That was no longer necessary when the New Covenant was fulfilled and cleansing could be worked through more direct forgiveness provided from the perfect sacrifice. A new Plumb Line was drawn as taught by the Son.

I too grew up as a Christian and chose a different Path, but this doesn't make me deride others who may believe in that religion.

It is unnecessary to insult and make fun of people, and it makes true intellectual debate impossible.

 

[kal-el]

Maybe you could find the words "Sky pixie" in the Bible? I am having a hard time find reference to that particular person.

Well, I feel rather uncomfortable calling a bloodthirsty, utterly clueless, intolerant, violent entity that has not been proven to exist "god."

First, as I'm sure you know, there is plenty in the Bible about how humans should live, in view of God's attributes of love, justice, mercy, grace, etc.

Yep.

But frankly, since God is at once eternal, omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, and Love personified,

Blatant falsehood. It is logically impossible to be bestowed with all of the omni abilities.

then He would be the one Being in the universe worthy of praise.

I don't believe such a despotic, stupid entity deserves to be praised, why should a "perfect" entity want to be praised? Ego problem?

Really? Whom does God hate? Who is He intolerant of? Hint: The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance. (2 Peter 3:9)

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/int/long.html

Should God leave sins unpunished?

"Sins" are all a concept of one's mind. If you do something wrong, it could be considered good to someone, then to another, it could be totally wrong. Just look at this Anglo-American war. There's alot that think it was good and the right thing to do, while at the same time, others think it was morally wrong.

Should God say, 'I know I'm the Almighty God of the universe, but if you broke my commandments, oh well.'? What kind of sissy God is that? Not one I would respect?

So, you respect a god who kills youths for the trivial reason of mocking a prophet's baldness?

But God offers repentance to all people, so that all people may have eternal life.

I would love to see evidence supporting such an outright lie.

 

[kal-el]

*yawn*

Most atheists and agnostics don't read enough of the Bible to understand its context or its meaning.

Wow, that's quite a claim. Do you have any proof that most atheists and agnostics don't read enough of the bible to understand it, or are you being less than honest here?

I'm sure your website is written/maintained by one of them.

Can I have a link for your "sureness?"

 

[kal-el]

Originally posted by Pale Rider
Hell, I only know of one, and that's the one mentioned in the Bible.

Dude, I would refrain from spitting out any more rabid un-truths, if I were you. Do you have any proof for such a place? A great plan of attack would be to actually travel to hell, and ask everyone why they are there, and how to get out, take a camera, or the very least a cell phone camera. O, and take a thermometer, as I'm very curious as to the temparuture of such a place!

If you can dig up more than one reference to different hell's in the Bible, then just lump them all together, and I'm thinking of that one. Is that good enough for you?

That's the problem, the bible is proof of nothing. The bible must be proven accurate. If a man is accused of murder, he is innocent, until proven guilty.

 

[kal-el]

I believe I've experienced a miracle.

That's fine, you can believe that, but you have no proof, so once you announce it, you are obligated to prove it, or else admit to being dishonest.

One I prayed to Jesus Christ for. It's a rather lengthy story, but I've told it here before.

I'm very curious as to what you can possibly spring on an all-knowing entity, that it doesn't already know!

So my belief in the Lord is unshakable by these ill tempered heathens.

That's fine.

I believe they're being led around by Satan, and they don't even know it.

You mean the satan that god himself created. When he created satan, he knew he would turn, yet he hasn't yet put an end to him? He sounds not omnipotent, but impotent.

Little heathen sheep condemned to an eternity burning in hell.

Actually, hell seems like a pretty cool place to hang out. Satan is portrayed as a cool guy, not some douchebag with all sorts of emotional insecurities like this "god" fellow.

 

[no1tovote4]

That's the problem, the bible is proof of nothing. The bible must be proven accurate. If a man is accused of murder, he is innocent, until proven guilty.

The Bible must be proven? Once again, you suggest proof of a Faith, this gets inane and repetitive. The only 'evidence' that any person could provide would be anecdotal, not scientific, it is why it is called a Faith.

 

[kal-el]

There is not scientific proof of a God, you know this already. That is why it is called a Faith. Attempting to take a Faith and then ask people to prove a personal belief is simply disingenuous.

Faith is the wild claim that someone has to believe something without evidence. Actaully, it's the rejection of the very need to justify beliefs. So when one says, "I don't need facts, I have faith" It means, "I don't have any reason to believe it, but I continue to do so, because I want to." To admit to the truth would be rather embarresing.

Calling the Deity they believe in 'Sky Pixie' is simply disrespectful and unnecessarily 'trollish', it is meant to draw emotion and anger, not common ground or actual debate. When you post such disrespectful and truly derogatory nonsense about another's beliefs without evidence of your own to deny that Deity's existence you are attempting to evoke a solely emotional response.

And your point of that diatribe was? You're preaching to the choir, I already know this.

The very definition of 'troll'.

I have explained to you that your neg rep doesn't have anything to do with what you are saying, it has everything to do with how you say it I am not kidding you.

Respect them and their beliefs and they will respect yours and you can intellectually debate. But if you only come here to anger 'the Christians' then you probably don't have a long half-life on the site.

That's fine. Ban me if you like. Isn't is rather unfair to ban someone for voicing their opinion? What about my free speech right? Just because I lack a belief in a god, I guess that makes me a bad person?

 

[kal-el]

The Bible must be proven? Once again, you suggest proof of a Faith, this gets inane and repetitive. The only 'evidence' that any person could provide would be anecdotal, not scientific, it is why it is called a Faith.

Uhh, you are failing to grasp a very simple idea. The bible is the source of the unfounded claim that god exists, so it can't be used as evidence to support itself. You can sling all types of bible quotes till your blue in the face, that still doesn't prove that god is anymore than a character in a book.

 

[no1tovote4]

Faith is the wild claim that someone has to believe something without evidence. Actaully, it's the rejection of the very need to justify beliefs. So when one says, "I don't need facts, I have faith" It means, "I don't have any reason to believe it, but I continue to do so, because I want to." To admit to the truth would be rather embarresing.

Or it means that they have a personal understanding of something for which there is no scientific evidence. Much like there is no scientific evidence that can prove the non-existence of a Deity.

There are many different things that a person could take as evidence, that still would not be scientific evidence. However Logic does not come from science nor does all knowledge.

And your point of that diatribe was? You're preaching to the choir, I already know this.

It was a warning. Attempting to evoke emotion and anger is not the aim of people who look for debate, it is the goal of a troll. If that is your goal it is unlikely that you will have long at the site. I, for one, like new people to bring differing views and would like you to stay a bit longer. I hope you take some of this under consideration.

That's fine. Ban me if you like. Isn't is rather unfair to ban someone for voicing their opinion? What about my free speech right? Just because I lack a belief in a god, I guess that makes me a bad person?

I cannot ban you, nor do I want to.

There is nothing wrong with voicing your opinion, just in such a way that it is meant to evoke an emotional response rather than to invite debate. Nor do you have a right to 'free speech' on a site owned privately by an individual that has set rules that you agreed to follow when you became a member. It is a request that you take higher ground so that you can hang longer and keep posting your opinion.

Or is it really your intention to come here just to mock others?

 

[no1tovote4]

Uhh, you are failing to grasp a very simple idea. The bible is the source of the unfounded claim that god exists, so it can't be used as evidence to support itself. You can sling all types of bible quotes till your blue in the face, that still doesn't prove that god is anymore than a character in a book.

You are also failing to grasp a very simple idea, the difference between Faith and Knowledge.

You have an unfounded claim that God does not exist. Begin proving it. So far your evidence is that God is mean, that you don't believe it, and there is no proof that he does exist. You have no scientific evidence to back up your claim, yet you seek scientific evidence for another claim that is based on faith and has been stated to be based on faith. They are not being disingenuous, they will tell you directly that their belief is based on faith, you however attempt to say your denial is based on knowledge, knowledge that cannot be proven nor even one iota of evidence to support it has been found.

You are the one attempting to deny other's beliefs because they are based on faith. You came here to announce that God doesn't exist, it is your assertion that must be proven, you brought the charges.

 

[kal-el]

Or it means that they have a personal understanding of something for which there is no scientific evidence. Much like there is no scientific evidence that can prove the non-existence of a Deity.

There are many different things that a person could take as evidence, that still would not be scientific evidence. However Logic does not come from science nor does all knowledge.

Look, when we go to buy a new car we check it out by kicking the tires, checking the belts and hose, looking under the hood, test drive it, etc. That's logic. Would a parent respect a child if they just bought a new car without asking questions, test driving it, nothing? The child just buys it on faith. If this is considered irrational, then why isn't the same said for having faith in god?

It was a warning. Attempting to evoke emotion and anger is not the aim of people who look for debate, it is the goal of a troll. If that is your goal it is unlikely that you will have long at the site. I, for one, like new people to bring differing views and would like you to stay a bit longer. I hope you take some of this under consideration.

Yep. I do not have a hidden agenda. I do not say to myself, "How can I belittle this person today" rather, my responses are impromtu, it's just my way of operating, no offense.

I cannot ban you, nor do I want to.

O, ok.

There is nothing wrong with voicing your opinion, just in such a way that it is meant to evoke an emotional response rather than to invite debate. Nor do you have a right to 'free speech' on a site owned privately by an individual that has set rules that you agreed to follow when you became a member. It is a request that you take higher ground so that you can hang longer and keep posting your opinion.

Ok, I'll try and tone it down a little.

Or is it really your intention to come here just to mock others?

Negative.

 

[kal-el]

You are also failing to grasp a very simple idea, the difference between Faith and Knowledge.

Yes, that is abundantly clear. Faith does not rest on proof: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=faith

You have an unfounded claim that God does not exist. Begin proving it.

Uhh, did you ever see anywhere where I made the claim that a god doesn't exist. I consider myself a "weak" ahteist. Only a strong atheist would assert that.

So far your evidence is that God is mean, that you don't believe it, and there is no proof that he does exist. You have no scientific evidence to back up your claim, yet you seek scientific evidence for another claim that is based on faith and has been stated to be based on faith. They are not being disingenuous, they will tell you directly that their belief is based on faith, you however attempt to say your denial is based on knowledge, knowledge that cannot be proven nor even one iota of evidence to support it has been found.

Lack of evidence is evidence itself.

You are the one attempting to deny other's beliefs because they are based on faith. You came here to announce that God doesn't exist, it is your assertion that must be proven, you brought the charges.

I did not assert that. I might have said "the god of the bible" cannot exist, but I'm not outright saying that a god doesn't exist. You are being untruthful.

 

[no1tovote4]

Look, when we go to buy a new car we check it out by kicking the tires, checking the belts and hose, looking under the hood, test drive it, etc. That's logic. Would a parent respect a child if they just bought a new car without asking questions, test driving it, nothing? The child just buys it on faith. If this is considered irrational, then why isn't the same said for having faith in god?

Because they have a perceived relationship with the entity and personal experiences to back up their faith. I cannot deny their personal experiences, as they are not scientific, and say you need to prove it before you can believe it.

They look at the Universe and are told it was simply always there by science, that an explosion, for which there is no explanation other than hypothetical, started it all and wonder "Why?". They look for logical explanations and the most logical that they can see is that the stories they were told as children are true, that there is a Deity and He created it all for a purpose. To say, "There is no scientific evidence so you must not believe" takes just as much faith as to say "It is there I see His presense all around me".

Science doesn't deny the existence of a Deity, it doesn't deal with that subject at all. It cannot disprove it, it cannot observe it, it is not designed to answer that question at all, it bases all of its observations on the natural, and none on the supernatural. Asking for scientific evidence of something that science itself was not designed to find an answer for is illogical.

The scientists that I know that are religious say things like, "I see science as the way we discover HOW the Deity did it, like a great mystery novel."

Yep. I do not have a hidden agenda. I do not say to myself, "How can I belittle this person today" rather, my responses are impromtu, it's just my way of operating, no offense.

I take no offense, it is not my objective to prove to you that a Deity exists, it is not part of my philosophy. While I am a Deist, not all Buddhists are and many are atheist or better described as non-theist as Theravada Buddhism does not deal with the Deity. Theravada Buddhism deals with your actions in this life, not with a Deity, or with reincarnation.

O, ok.



Ok, I'll try and tone it down a little.


Negative.

Cool, I'd like to see you around for quite some time. New angles are always welcome in my opinion.

 

[no1tovote4]

Lack of evidence is evidence itself.

Lack of evidence is not evidence. Before there were telescopes we had no evidence of moons around Jupiter, that didn't mean it was evidence and it certainly didn't prove that they didn't exist.

 

[kal-el]

Lack of evidence is not evidence. Before there were telescopes we had no evidence of moons around Jupiter, that didn't mean it was evidence and it certainly didn't prove that they didn't exist.

Ok, well tell me something. Surely you deny the existence of a mermaid because of the abundant lack of evidence for such. Of course you don't believe in the memaids, hence you would be "amermaidist". The prefix "a" doesn't tell us anything about what the amermaidist believes, only that they don't.