Anti-Christianity Thread

[no1tovote4]

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.

How about, I misunderstood rather than was untruthful?

It seems that the argument throughout the thread was that they shouldn't worship a Deity because they cannot prove that He exists, scientifically. This lead me to believe that your assertion was that this Deity doesn't exist at all and without proof their beliefs should disappear as they were illogical.

I presented many different ways that one could logically come to the conclusion that those stories they heard as children were true, or that they might convert to such a belief when there was none before. I asserted that personal experience could be one, then you asserted they must provide anecdotal evidence at the same time you demanded scientific evidence of the supernatural (for which science was not even designed to answer it hasn't the tools for such documentation).

I then asserted a certain logic to their belief as they perceive that the 'answers' of science have so far been totally absent as to the cause of the creation, except that suddenly there was an explosion for which we can divine no cause, we can only guess, the scientific version of a SWAG. For this you have yet to answer.

I have shown that your original assertion of a 'default' state of atheist was incorrect according to current scientific study and theory, to which you said you would write e-mails to tell those who did the studies how wrong they were and how right you were with no scientific evidence to back up such an assertion of psychological theory, or any known proof of your actual expertise in such an arena. Shoot one of the studies was done by an atheist, it appears you chose not to research into that interesting subject matter at all. You would rather believe you were right than to actually read evidence that you were wrong.

 

[no1tovote4]

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.

I do not. One cannot scientifically say that something doesn't exist because of the lack of evidence. I can say there is no scientific evidence of such a creature, but I cannot use that lack of evidence to prove that they do not exist. How would I be able to tell whether or not the creature lived in deeper areas of the ocean to which our observations could not yet reach? Or might they live on another planet? I could not, with certainty, make any such assertion based on the lack of evidence. The only accurate statement I could make is that such a creature has not been scientifically observed.

 

[kal-el]

How about, I misunderstood rather than was untruthful?

Ok, I'll try saying that. But bare with me, sometimes I get on edge from people blatantly portraying things they know cannot be proven, as facts, and I am accustomed to calling them on it.

It seems that the argument throughout the thread was that they shouldn't worship a Deity because they cannot prove that He exists, scientifically.

IMO it is rather asinine to worship something because a book says it exists. I can use a dc comic to try and prove Superman exists.

This lead me to believe that your assertion was that this Deity doesn't exist at all and without proof their beliefs should disappear as they were illogical.

Well, noone can disprove Superman. Do you consider it logical to worship him? And what about Thor? We still have thunder and lightning, so Thor must be alive and well.

I presented many different ways that one could logically come to the conclusion that those stories they heard as children were true, or that they might convert to such a belief when there was none before. I asserted that personal experience could be one, then you asserted they must provide anecdotal evidence at the same time you demanded scientific evidence of the supernatural (for which science was not even designed to answer it hasn't the tools for such documentation).

Well if they cannot provide a shred of evidence in the least, they're supernatural experiences are laughable, and carry no weight.

I then asserted a certain logic to their belief as they perceive that the 'answers' of science have so far been totally absent as to the cause of the creation, except that suddenly there was an explosion for which we can divine no cause, we can only guess, the scientific version of a SWAG. For this you have yet to answer.

What? The big bang? I am unfamiliar with the direct cause of it, alls I know is it was an explosion in space, nothing more, nothing else.

I have shown that your original assertion of a 'default' state of atheist was incorrect according to current scientific study and theory, to which you said you would write e-mails to tell those who did the studies how wrong they were and how right you were with no scientific evidence to back up such an assertion of psychological theory, or any known proof of your actual expertise in such an arena. Shoot one of the studies was done by an atheist, it appears you chose not to research into that interesting subject matter at all. You would rather believe you were right than to actually read evidence that you were wrong.

I do not believe I am wrong here. If one lacks a reason to believe in god, why believe in him? Christians claim god doesn't need to be proven to exist. If god doesn't need to be proven, then it's possible for Ra, Osiris, Zeus, and others to exist. This says it's possible for any number of gods to exist. The moral of the story is Christians support polytheism. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=polytheism

 

[no1tovote4]

Ok, I'll try saying that. But bare with me, sometimes I get on edge from people blatantly portraying things they know cannot be proven, as facts, and I am accustomed to calling them on it.

Call away.

IMO it is rather asinine to worship something because a book says it exists. I can use a dc comic to try and prove Superman exists.

They don't worship something because a book says it exists, they worship something because they believe in it and use the book as a guide to their beliefs.

Well, noone can disprove Superman. Do you consider it logical to worship him? And what about Thor? We still have thunder and lightning, so Thor must be alive and well.

DC comics make no assertion that Superman is God. AS for Thor still existing, or his existence in the past....It's possible. It cannot be disproven. Ever read Douglas Adams?

Well if they cannot provide a shred of evidence in the least, they're supernatural experiences are laughable, and carry no weight.

As I stated, that would be your answer to their anecdotal evidence, while it might be exremely real to them and extremely convincing to them personally.

What? The big bang? I am unfamiliar with the direct cause of it, alls I know is it was an explosion in space, nothing more, nothing else.

Exactly. Thus they look outside of the medium which can provide no answers and seek other logical explanations.

I do not believe I am wrong here. If one lacks a reason to believe in god, why believe in him? Christians claim god doesn't need to be proven to exist. If god doesn't need to be proven, then it's possible for Ra, Osiris, Zeus, and others to exist. This says it's possible for any number of gods to exist. The moral of the story is Christians support polytheism. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=polytheism

Because it is hardwired. You continue to believe something on simple faith for which there is direct scientific evidence to say that you are wrong. They are experts, you are not.

Just because it is possible for a number of gods to exist does not mean that they do exist. Christians do not support polytheism as their beliefs run directly in opposition to that, they believe in a certain specific Deity. The moral of the story is that your assertion that christians support polytheism is in error.

 

[007]

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.



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



That's fine.



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.



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.

You know... you really are intense with your hatred of the Christian God. I don't think there's any real debate on this issue with you. You're off the chart against Christianity and God, so why should anyone waste their time explaining anything to someone who's already made up their mind, and in such a bitter, acute, burning, shrill, excessive, all-consuming way that you have?

You need to get back on those meds before you hurt yourself, or someone else filled with that kind of hate.

 

[007]

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.

For whatever reason, I dug this up to show you. I don't think for second it will convince you there's a God. But it'll make me feel better knowing, that now you know, I'm not liar, and I don't enjoy being called one. And now you'll also understand why all the vile, caustic, shrill hatred you puke out here about God won't affect my belief. What you say here only reinforces my belief that satan is here and now, and working his evilness through empty headed morons like yourself.

There was plenty of "PROOF", for all to see, including DOCTORS, who normally believe in science over religon....

OK... I'm running kind of short on time, but I can't help but tell this since I saw this thread.

When I lived in Tampa, my wife (ex) and I got a Siamese kitten from a friend. It got a little older, so we took it to this local vet clinic and had it checked over, and got it's shot's. Well, the next day my wife called me at the base and said Jaz was really sick. So I took off early and hurried home. I found my cat in pretty bad shape. So we called the best damn animal hospital in all of Tampa, and they told us that some shots to pure bread cats, ESPECIALLY Siamese can be TOXIC. They recommended the faster we get her up there, the better her chances of recovery would be. So we rushed her up to the hospital. They took her in and said they'd do everything they could for her. We found out that she had a "blood parasite" caused by one of the shots the other clinic had given her, just as they'd suspected. As the days passed she got sicker, and sicker, and weaker. Her white blood cell count was over one hundred times what it should be normaly, fighting off the blood infection. On the seventh day we went to see her, the doctor said for my wife to go into the room with Jaz, and he wanted to talk to me. He told me that she had lost too much ground, that she was very, very weak, and they didn't expect her to last the night, and how did we want to dispose of her. With a huge lump in my throat, I made arrangements for her to be creamated. When I went into the room with my wife, she was holding Jaz and crying. Our little cat had her arm shaved, and she had an I.V. in it. I asked for Susan to hand her to me. As I took her, her head wobbled as she looked up at me, and she gave a feeble little meow as to say, "help me Paw, I don't feel so good". Tears welled up in my eyes and I cuddled her close to me. Then without even thinking, I looked up and began to pray... I said "Lord, this little girl has given us nothing but unconditional love and companionship, we love her to pieces, and she's really sick, Lord, please reach down and touch her, she really needs your help". We didn't want to leave that night, but we made ourselves go home. I reluctantly went to work the next day, and it wasn't too long before I got a phone call. It was the hospital. The vet started out by saying, "I just want to tell you now, that we don't know what happend", and I didn't know what he was getting at, but he then said, "your cat was up this morning meowing like crazy, she was hungry and ate like a horse". But then he said "what we don't understand, and more importantly, can't EXPLAIN, is the fact that her white blood cell count is NORMAL!!! He said the length of time it took to get as high as it did, it should have taken that long AT LEAST to go BACK DOWN. He said, "basically, THERE'S NOTHING WITH HER"! You can take her home. Then he said "but, I'd like to ask your permission to keep her one more day, just so we can watch her, because we don't undertand what's happened to her, and can't explain it either".

RIGHT THEN AND THERE, I KNEW MY PRAYER TO JESUS HAD BEEN ANSWERED.

But did I bother telling the doctor that? No. I knew he'd never believe it. But the thing is, I'd prayed to the Lord before to show me he was there, and that if he did, I'd never doubt him, and THAT is why I'm a Christian, and will never denounce my Lord God, Jesus Christ.

As I live and breathe, I swear to God this story is true.

 

[Nightwish]

While the story of your cat is inspiring (I'm a major cat lover), it doesn't offer much testimony to the miraculous. The elevation of the white cell count was testimony that the cat was already fighting the illness. The doctor was mistaken about it taking as long to bring the cell count back down as it takes to build it up. That's not true at all. Leukocyte production is responsive to a number of stimuli in the body. If those stimuli cease, so does the elevated cell production. It can be a very quick process, or it can be a drawn-out process, depending on what they were fighting in the first place. If they were fighting an ailment that was intrinsic to the body's own biology, it will take a lot longer for the production to go down, because it reduces in proportion to the body's own healing process. But if they are fighting a foreign presence, like a virus or parasite, it goes down much quicker, according to how quickly the foreign presence is extinguished. Bravo for your cat's recovery, but it doesn't suggest that prayer saved her, it only suggests that she had more life in her than y'all thought.

 

[listopencil]

*yawn*

Most atheists and agnostics don't read enough of the Bible to understand its context or its meaning. I'm sure your website is written/maintained by one of them.

Translation: You didn't look at the website and are unwilling to contemplate anything that conflicts with your belief system no matter how logical it is or how well it is represented.

 

[listopencil]

Such a caustic personality you are. It's obvious you have no religon. When was the last time you were in jail?

Heh, how far do you have to bend your tongue to speak out of both sides of your mouth? Does it hurt much, or are you used to it? I've never done it and obviously you know how.

 

[007]

While the story of your cat is inspiring (I'm a major cat lover), it doesn't offer much testimony to the miraculous. The elevation of the white cell count was testimony that the cat was already fighting the illness. The doctor was mistaken about it taking as long to bring the cell count back down as it takes to build it up. That's not true at all. Leukocyte production is responsive to a number of stimuli in the body. If those stimuli cease, so does the elevated cell production. It can be a very quick process, or it can be a drawn-out process, depending on what they were fighting in the first place. If they were fighting an ailment that was intrinsic to the body's own biology, it will take a lot longer for the production to go down, because it reduces in proportion to the body's own healing process. But if they are fighting a foreign presence, like a virus or parasite, it goes down much quicker, according to how quickly the foreign presence is extinguished. Bravo for your cat's recovery, but it doesn't suggest that prayer saved her, it only suggests that she had more life in her than y'all thought.

I KNEW one of you heathens would try and explain this away as something as common as doing yesterdays laundry.

I know what I saw. I know what happened. And I know what the VETERINARIAN'S told me, and that ISN'T what you're purporting. In a matter of HOURS a cat that had steadily gotten sicker by the day for over a week, and well within the throws of death, FULLY RECOVERS, and the vet's want to KEEP HER to OBSERVE HER, because THEY CAN'T EXPLAIN IT, and you ho hum it away with your less than professional opinion. What the fuck ever make-a-wish. You believe what you want to believe, and don't EVER think that MIRACLES might happen.

I was beginning to think that maybe you weren't that bad. Now I see you're just another heathen liberal here to tell us Christian conservatives how damn stupid we are.

Fuck that. Now I know how to deal with you in the future.

 

[007]

Heh, how far do you have to bend your tongue to speak out of both sides of your mouth? Does it hurt much, or are you used to it? I've never done it and obviously you know how.

Oh please... you're hurting me with this stinging retort... *yawn*

 

[listopencil]

Oh please... you're hurting me with this stinging retort... *yawn*

Wow, you actually considered whether a remark on a message board would hurt you or not? Pretty childish. But I'll try to wussify my remarks in the future so as not to upset your delicate sensibilities Suzy.

 

[Abbey Normal]

...But I'll try to wussify my remarks in the future so as not to upset your delicate sensibilities Suzy.

You're saying that about Pale?

:rotflmao: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

 

[LuvRPgrl]

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

My my my, a bit judgemental arent we??

Well, let me make this as plain as possible. you are a damn fool

IF the God of the Bible is real, to call him such things is also arrogant. His knowledge of truth, justice and everything else would be so far superior to yours.

There could be reasons he did what he did that you could never fathom.

Your arrogance is only surpassed by your bitterness and outright anger.

Im not sure what you are trying to prove or do, but I doubt it you are accomplishing either. You are abrasive, rude, thoughtless, arrogant, suffer from a inferiority complex, and have some need to express your writhing anger at God.

Now, on the other hand, if the God of the BIble isnt real, then its a waste of time calling Him names, eh?

 

[5stringJeff]

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

I know that no1tovote4 has told you this, but I'll repeat it: your tone, to include using euphemisms like "sky-pixie," makes you look vindictive and intolerant - ironically, the very traits you curse God for supposedly having. So it's your choice: use vindictive language, look like a jerk; use a bit of decency in your posts, receive some respect in return.

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

Well, then I'm sure that you won't have a problem logically proving your proclamation.

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

Here's what your link says about 2 Peter 3:7:
"God will set the entire earth on fire so that he can burn non-believers to death."

Maybe you should reread Revelation, which references that God will destroy the present heaven and earth after the final judgment, then create a new heaven and earth (see Rev. 21). Non-believers will, unfortunately, have already been sent into judgment by then.

"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.

Really? Cold-blooded murder could be considered the morally right thing to do? Infant rape for pleasure's sake could be considered the morally right thing to do? By whom? And under what circumstances?

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

Actually, for mocking the prophet's authority - and the prophet's ultimate authority is none other than God Himself.

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

I already posted it. Your refusal to believe it is your issue.

 

[kal-el]

My my my, a bit judgemental arent we??

How is that judgemental? In the bible, you're man in the clouds is portrayed as a sadistic, bloodthirsty, mass murderer entity, whether you want to deny it or not.

Well, let me make this as plain as possible. you are a damn fool

Wow, and I am the one being threatened with being banned? I think the mods need to look no farther here. You're belligerencey is abundantly apparent.

IF the God of the Bible is real, to call him such things is also arrogant.

Yes it is, but that's taking a huge gamble. I think you have a better chance of being struck by lightning, then for the god of the bible to be real.

His knowledge of truth, justice and everything else would be so far superior to yours.

Yup, and he is hardly the entity worthy of dictating morals to us.

There could be reasons he did what he did that you could never fathom.

O geese, here we go again with that blind postulation of "he had his reasons, and you can't uderstand them". You're less than honest arguments continue to blow me away.

Your arrogance is only surpassed by your bitterness and outright anger.

What? Would you like fries with that cup of stupid?

Im not sure what you are trying to prove or do, but I doubt it you are accomplishing either. You are abrasive, rude, thoughtless, arrogant, suffer from a inferiority complex, and have some need to express your writhing anger at God.

I am not angry at the god of the bible, rather the people who worship such a sadistic entity, and portray what they are saying as factual.

Now, on the other hand, if the God of the BIble isnt real, then its a waste of time calling Him names, eh?

I guess if he isn't real, it's time well spent worshipping him, living by rules, going to church, and being the "good samaritan" in order to acess some place.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

O geese

?

??

?????

 

[kal-el]

I know that no1tovote4 has told you this, but I'll repeat it: your tone, to include using euphemisms like "sky-pixie," makes you look vindictive and intolerant - ironically, the very traits you curse God for supposedly having. So it's your choice: use vindictive language, look like a jerk; use a bit of decency in your posts, receive some respect in return.

Wow, how insightful.

Well, then I'm sure that you won't have a problem logically proving your proclamation.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theodore_drange/incompatible.html

Here's what your link says about 2 Peter 3:7:
"God will set the entire earth on fire so that he can burn non-believers to death."

Maybe you should reread Revelation, which references that God will destroy the present heaven and earth after the final judgment, then create a new heaven and earth (see Rev. 21). Non-believers will, unfortunately, have already been sent into judgment by then.

This post proves that Christians are apparently incapable of refuting perfectly logical, rational arguments without resorting to liguistics from a book of contradictions.

Really? Cold-blooded murder could be considered the morally right thing to do? Infant rape for pleasure's sake could be considered the morally right thing to do? By whom? And under what circumstances?

Well, since your name is GOP, you are most likely for this bloodshed in Iraq, military soliders are guilty of murder by some, and seen as heroes to others. Why is it considered the right thing to kill people simply because they are wearing a different uniform? Ifant rape? Dude, that's all in one's culture. In some places, right or wrong is inapplicable. Things like sex with minors, beasteality, etc. is considered morally acceptable, via their culture. Many people think it's ok to kill animals and eat them, while others think it's despicable. Killing and flesh-eating happen in nature, so which is "right" and which is "wrong"? All you did was arrogantly state your own culturely defined beliefs.

Actually, for mocking the prophet's authority - and the prophet's ultimate authority is none other than God Himself.

Uhh, how did they mock the prophet's authority?

2 Kings 23-24
From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some youths came out of the town and jeered at him. "Go on up you baldhead!" they said. "Go on up you baldhead!" He turned around, looked at them, and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then 2 bears came out of the woods and mauled 42 of the youths.

Once again, did you fall of your rocker. It's rather irrelevant exactly why god killed them (or sent bears to do the dirty work), it's still remains trivial.

I already posted it. Your refusal to believe it is your issue.

Posted??? Evidence supporting the existence of a god? Ha I'm still waiting for this "god" dude to actually speak for himself here, as I'm growing fatigued of Christians acting like his secretaries.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Ha I'm still waiting for this "god" dude to actually speak for himself here, as I'm growing fatigued of Christians acting like his secretaries.

Kal: simple question.

Please list all the ways in which God could prove his existence to you.

I'll start the list for you, based on what I've gathered:

1. Must speak directly to Kal-el

what else? (I'm being entirely serious, I want to know what constitutes proof to you, since everything that has been offered has been deemed inconclusive by you.)

 

[dmp]

Kal: simple question.

Please list all the ways in which God could prove his existence to you.

I'll start the list for you, based on what I've gathered:

1. Must speak directly to Kal-el

what else? (I'm being entirely serious, I want to know what constitutes proof to you, since everything that has been offered has been deemed inconclusive by you.)

2. Must also provide notarized transcript and two forms of ID.