Are atheists destroying the US?

[Carla_Danger]

militant atheists are the equivalent of religious fundamentalists

Nope, you don't get to put us on the same level as your witchcraft and wizardry.

 

[hangover]

militant atheists are the equivalent of religious fundamentalists

Nope, you don't get to put us on the same level as your witchcraft and wizardry.

You're saying that only atheists can dictate...how narcissistic of you.

 

[Carla_Danger]

militant atheists are the equivalent of religious fundamentalists

Since you haven’t posted anything to suggest that you're capable of presenting anything but spam, I can only assume that your befuddlement is a chronic condition. At least others of the hyper-religious ailment are willing to let people know who and what they are and simply pre-announce their agenda. I’m left to assess you as just a pointless spammer and mediocre Internet crank.

Thank you for proving my point. Personal attack. No evidence that God does not exist.
You would make a great religious fundamentalist.

Do you believe in Bigfoot, Jake? There are books out on the subject, and there are lots of people who claim to have seen Bigfoot, with evidence to prove it.

 

[Carla_Danger]

militant atheists are the equivalent of religious fundamentalists

Nope, you don't get to put us on the same level as your witchcraft and wizardry.

You're saying that only atheists can dictate...how narcissistic of you.

I don't think I said that at all.

 

[hangover]

militant atheists are the equivalent of religious fundamentalists

Nope, you don't get to put us on the same level as your witchcraft and wizardry.

You're saying that only atheists can dictate...how narcissistic of you.

I don't think I said that at all.

What you said was that atheists can label believers "witches and wizards", even though they don't even "believe" in that stuff, which makes you a liar. That's the same level you put them on....being liars. So you put yourself on that level. But it's still narcissistic to say that only atheists can do the labeling.

 

[Carla_Danger]

militant atheists are the equivalent of religious fundamentalists

Nope, you don't get to put us on the same level as your witchcraft and wizardry.

You're saying that only atheists can dictate...how narcissistic of you.

I don't think I said that at all.

What you said was that atheists can label believers "witches and wizards", even though they don't even "believe" in that stuff, which makes you a liar. That's the same level you put them on....being liars. So you put yourself on that level. But it's still narcissistic to say that only atheists can do the labeling.

If you believe that a man lived inside of a whale, (cough, cough, I'm sorry, a big fish) Jesus walked on water, or in the miracle of faith healing, then you believe in witchcraft and wizardry....MAGIC!

Would you call someone who doesn't believe in Bigfoot a militant religious fundamentalist? Would you? Of course not. Simply not believing in Bigfoot does not put someone on the same level of those that do.

I find it amusing that theists seek to propagate the lie that atheism is a religion by attempting to portray those of us who are free from faith to be as irrational as theists.

I'm sorry, I'm not going to let you put me on the same shelf with crazy.

 

[BluePhantom]

militant atheists are the equivalent of religious fundamentalists

Nope, you don't get to put us on the same level as your witchcraft and wizardry.

You're saying that only atheists can dictate...how narcissistic of you.

I don't think I said that at all.

What you said was that atheists can label believers "witches and wizards", even though they don't even "believe" in that stuff, which makes you a liar. That's the same level you put them on....being liars. So you put yourself on that level. But it's still narcissistic to say that only atheists can do the labeling.

Well theists don't believe in that stuff now, but there are lots of accounts in the Old Testament where divining was employed. Numbers 5:12-31 describes the use of a potion to abort a pregnancy resulting from infidelity. The use of the Urim and Thummim was used to determine the will of God (essentially drawing between different stones). That can be found in Exodus 28 as well as other places. They also used dice to determine the will of God. (Proverbs 16:33) They did all kinds of stuff.

In Mark 8, for example, Jesus heals a blind man by rubbing spit and dirt into his eyes. He has to do it twice actually to make it work. When the story is recounted in other gospels, Jesus does it just by the power of His word because rubbing spit and dirt into someone's eyes to create a cure is stuff that magicians and sorcerers do. Later authors made sure to take that part out.

Now as I said....we don't believe in that kind of stuff now, but they did back then

 

[BluePhantom]

If you believe that a man lived inside of a whale, (cough, cough, I'm sorry, a big fish) Jesus walked on water, or in the miracle of faith healing, then you believe in witchcraft and wizardry....MAGIC!

I have walked on water many times. There was a lake by my house when I lived in northern Idaho and in the winter when it got REALLY fucking cold, we would walk over it on our way to school. There would be a whole line of us walking on water.

 

[Carla_Danger]

If you believe that a man lived inside of a whale, (cough, cough, I'm sorry, a big fish) Jesus walked on water, or in the miracle of faith healing, then you believe in witchcraft and wizardry....MAGIC!

I have walked on water many times. There was a lake by my house when I lived in northern Idaho and in the winter when it got REALLY fucking cold, we would walk over it on our way to school. There would be a whole line of us walking on water.

Hallelujah, "ice" is what some call it.

 

[Hollie]

militant atheists are the equivalent of religious fundamentalists

Nope, you don't get to put us on the same level as your witchcraft and wizardry.

You're saying that only atheists can dictate...how narcissistic of you.

I don't think I said that at all.

What you said was that atheists can label believers "witches and wizards", even though they don't even "believe" in that stuff, which makes you a liar. That's the same level you put them on....being liars. So you put yourself on that level. But it's still narcissistic to say that only atheists can do the labeling.

Well theists don't believe in that stuff now, but there are lots of accounts in the Old Testament where divining was employed. Numbers 5:12-31 describes the use of a potion to abort a pregnancy resulting from infidelity. The use of the Urim and Thummim was used to determine the will of God (essentially drawing between different stones). That can be found in Exodus 28 as well as other places. They also used dice to determine the will of God. (Proverbs 16:33) They did all kinds of stuff.

In Mark 8, for example, Jesus heals a blind man by rubbing spit and dirt into his eyes. He has to do it twice actually to make it work. When the story is recounted in other gospels, Jesus does it just by the power of His word because rubbing spit and dirt into someone's eyes to create a cure is stuff that magicians and sorcerers do. Later authors made sure to take that part out.

Now as I said....we don't believe in that kind of stuff now, but they did back then

Are you sure you've been duly authorized to speak on behalf of christian theists? Just asking because I never got the email.

Interesting that the writers of the bibles changed and edited the tales of Jesus. I've always thought that the strongest evidence against the existence of gawds was first, their propensity not to be in existence, and secondly, the human authorship of the various holy texts alleging these gawds with said gawds never having editing rights.

 

[hangover]

militant atheists are the equivalent of religious fundamentalists

Nope, you don't get to put us on the same level as your witchcraft and wizardry.

You're saying that only atheists can dictate...how narcissistic of you.

I don't think I said that at all.

What you said was that atheists can label believers "witches and wizards", even though they don't even "believe" in that stuff, which makes you a liar. That's the same level you put them on....being liars. So you put yourself on that level. But it's still narcissistic to say that only atheists can do the labeling.

If you believe that a man lived inside of a whale, (cough, cough, I'm sorry, a big fish) Jesus walked on water, or in the miracle of faith healing, then you believe in witchcraft and wizardry....MAGIC!

Would you call someone who doesn't believe in Bigfoot a militant religious fundamentalist? Would you? Of course not. Simply not believing in Bigfoot does not put someone on the same level of those that do.

I find it amusing that theists seek to propagate the lie that atheism is a religion by attempting to portray those of us who are free from faith to be as irrational as theists.

I'm sorry, I'm not going to let you put me on the same shelf with crazy.

You can't believe in talking snakes, but I bet you believe in cell phones, computers, pace makers, and doctors bringing people back to life whose hearts have stopped. Those that lived back when snakes talked, would probably think you believe in witchcraft and wizardry. And BTW, if you don't think that what keeps atoms together and gives them mass, isn't magic, I'm sure the scientists that found the "God particle" would like to hear your explanation.

 

[BluePhantom]

If you believe that a man lived inside of a whale, (cough, cough, I'm sorry, a big fish) Jesus walked on water, or in the miracle of faith healing, then you believe in witchcraft and wizardry....MAGIC!

I have walked on water many times. There was a lake by my house when I lived in northern Idaho and in the winter when it got REALLY fucking cold, we would walk over it on our way to school. There would be a whole line of us walking on water.

Hallelujah, "ice" is what some call it.

Well, ice is still water. It's just in a different form. However, it's pretty difficult to imagine that the Sea of Galilee froze over allowing Jesus to walk upon it, since it's in the middle of a desert. I don't know whether He walked on water or not. I wasn't there. I can say that if we try to duplicate the experiment, the odds that anyone will successfully walk on water are extraordinarily low. But, then again, that is what would make it a miracle, huh? Its certainly possible that it is an account that was exaggerated by oral tradition over several decades. But perhaps, it's not that He physically walked on water so much as it represents a metaphor. "Jesus can be the calm that gets you through the turbulent storms of life" so to speak. The Bible is full of stuff that is symbolic instead of literal.

In other words, maybe the question of whether Jesus walking on water was a historical event is not really what is important. Perhaps, it is what we can take from the story and apply to our lives in a meaningful way that is valuable

 

[BluePhantom]

Interesting that the writers of the bibles changed and edited the tales of Jesus. I've always thought that the strongest evidence against the existence of gawds was first, their propensity not to be in existence, and secondly, the human authorship of the various holy texts alleging these gawds with said gawds never having editing rights.

Well of course they changed them. Pick up a copy of the KJV and compare it to Codex Vaticanus or Codex Sinaiticus and you will see a lot of differences. Most of them are irrelevant but some are pretty significant.

 

[Hollie]

Interesting that the writers of the bibles changed and edited the tales of Jesus. I've always thought that the strongest evidence against the existence of gawds was first, their propensity not to be in existence, and secondly, the human authorship of the various holy texts alleging these gawds with said gawds never having editing rights.

Well of course they changed them. Pick up a copy of the KJV and compare it to Codex Vaticanus or Codex Sinaiticus and you will see a lot of differences. Most of them are irrelevant but some are pretty significant.

That's why I prefer Codex Homer's iliad'us. The perfectly preserved Iliad is for all time and all people.

 

[JakeStarkey]

militant atheists are the equivalent of religious fundamentalists

Nope, you don't get to put us on the same level as your witchcraft and wizardry.

That's your problem. The OP is asking whether atheists are destroying the U.S. The answer is no.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Do you believe in Bigfoot, Jake? There are books out on the subject, and there are lots of people who claim to have seen Bigfoot, with evidence to prove it.

We are talking about the nature of proof or life of it. You have not disproved that God exists.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Nope, you don't get to put us on the same level as your witchcraft and wizardry.

You're saying that only atheists can dictate...how narcissistic of you.

I don't think I said that at all.

What you said was that atheists can label believers "witches and wizards", even though they don't even "believe" in that stuff, which makes you a liar. That's the same level you put them on....being liars. So you put yourself on that level. But it's still narcissistic to say that only atheists can do the labeling.

If you believe that a man lived inside of a whale, (cough, cough, I'm sorry, a big fish) Jesus walked on water, or in the miracle of faith healing, then you believe in witchcraft and wizardry....MAGIC!

Would you call someone who doesn't believe in Bigfoot a militant religious fundamentalist? Would you? Of course not. Simply not believing in Bigfoot does not put someone on the same level of those that do.

I find it amusing that theists seek to propagate the lie that atheism is a religion by attempting to portray those of us who are free from faith to be as irrational as theists.

I'm sorry, I'm not going to let you put me on the same shelf with crazy.

You can't believe in talking snakes, but I bet you believe in cell phones, computers, pace makers, and doctors bringing people back to life whose hearts have stopped. Those that lived back when snakes talked, would probably think you believe in witchcraft and wizardry. And BTW, if you don't think that what keeps atoms together and gives them mass, isn't magic, I'm sure the scientists that found the "God particle" would like to hear your explanation.

I rest my case.


https://screen.yahoo.com/unfrozen-cave-man-lawyer-1-223412426.html

 

[Carla_Danger]

If you believe that a man lived inside of a whale, (cough, cough, I'm sorry, a big fish) Jesus walked on water, or in the miracle of faith healing, then you believe in witchcraft and wizardry....MAGIC!

I have walked on water many times. There was a lake by my house when I lived in northern Idaho and in the winter when it got REALLY fucking cold, we would walk over it on our way to school. There would be a whole line of us walking on water.

Hallelujah, "ice" is what some call it.

Well, ice is still water. It's just in a different form. However, it's pretty difficult to imagine that the Sea of Galilee froze over allowing Jesus to walk upon it, since it's in the middle of a desert. I don't know whether He walked on water or not. I wasn't there. I can say that if we try to duplicate the experiment, the odds that anyone will successfully walk on water are extraordinarily low. But, then again, that is what would make it a miracle, huh? Its certainly possible that it is an account that was exaggerated by oral tradition over several decades. But perhaps, it's not that He physically walked on water so much as it represents a metaphor. "Jesus can be the calm that gets you through the turbulent storms of life" so to speak. The Bible is full of stuff that is symbolic instead of literal.

In other words, maybe the question of whether Jesus walking on water was a historical event is not really what is important. Perhaps, it is what we can take from the story and apply to our lives in a meaningful way that is valuable

So, when one applies reason and logic, we can conclude that the Bible is full of historical events that never really happened. Thank you.

 

[Hollie]

Do you believe in Bigfoot, Jake? There are books out on the subject, and there are lots of people who claim to have seen Bigfoot, with evidence to prove it.

We are talking about the nature of proof or life of it. You have not disproved that God exists.

Others have disproved your gawds. You have not disproved that disproof.

 

[BluePhantom]

Interesting that the writers of the bibles changed and edited the tales of Jesus. I've always thought that the strongest evidence against the existence of gawds was first, their propensity not to be in existence, and secondly, the human authorship of the various holy texts alleging these gawds with said gawds never having editing rights.

Well of course they changed them. Pick up a copy of the KJV and compare it to Codex Vaticanus or Codex Sinaiticus and you will see a lot of differences. Most of them are irrelevant but some are pretty significant.

That's why I prefer Codex Homer's iliad'us. The perfectly preserved Iliad is for all time and all people.

Well we don't know that. There are far fewer ancient manuscripts of the Iliad (roughly 200) than there are of the Bible and the earliest are from around the 10th century CE. By comparison there are thousands of ancient Biblical manuscripts. When you increase the number, you obviously increase the chances of variation. No one knows what the original manuscript of the Iliad said, just like no one knows what the original manuscripts of the Bible said. The odds that the Iliad has been perfectly copied from first writing to what we have today, though, is extremely low.