Are Atheists Delusional?

[ding]

Being attracted to the same gender is not a sin. Acting on it if it distances you from God is.

The attraction isn't the sin. One has to avoid temptation. That said, it could lead to the sin of homosexuality which you seem to like to argue for.

It only seems that way to you because I rebuked your behaviors.

Again, God says homosexuality is a sin. One can't get around it. It causes STD, leads to death, and problems for society -- Homosexuality Concerns & Issues - LGBT Health - HealthCommunities.com. Your comments show that you judge me while I do not judge you. I'm just telling it like it is in the Bible and society. Good luck being a closeted gay.

Wrong. I judged your behaviors. I didn’t judge you the person.

Honest men can make honest mistakes.

You took things out of context, but that's besides the point.

If you are just attracted to the same sex, then it's not a big deal. You can overcome it like avoiding temptation for drugs, alcohol, other women, etc.

If you're active in the behavior, then it's more difficult. You will have to change your thinking about it first, but you sound like you won't and are defending your choice. It is a choice and not something you were born with or something innate. That's not something I am saying, but what the Bible says and it is inerrant.

Men wrote the Bible and men aren’t inerrant.

If you recall what Jesus said about divorce you will realize that not every law in the Bible is the way God intended it.

 

[james bond]

Hahahahahahaha. You have no evidence to back up what you claim. Like I said, you are a simpleton. Are you gay? Why did Satan make you gay? At least, it doesn't take millions of years for that haha.

Ok, Mr Skeptic, I'm going to prove evolution to you in 3 ways:

1 - Look at houses and clothes from 200 or 300 years ago. They both point to humans being shorter back then. Meaning that as time goes on, we are evolving to be taller beings.

2 - Look at knowledge. 2000 years ago, man didn't know all that much about the world around him. 2000 years later we know about all kinds of things that we didn't know back then, Medicine, space, math, science... you name it, we know more now than we used to. So our intelligence is increasing over time. And our brain size has been increasing as well. That's evolution.

3 - I used to be a meat eater, but over time my thinking evolved towards a healthier lifestyle, and now I'm a vegetarian.

1. It's better nutrition and medicine, but part of natural selection which is creation science.

2. The same as #1 and it's part of creation science.

3. Ditto.

What does it have to do with ToE? Why did evolution make gay people? Why did evolution make people deformed? Why did evolution make cancer? Evolution made the universe and everything in it right? Why did it make things that suck? How is that getting better?

What is creation science?
Natural selection is part of evolution. When humans, for whatever reason, get taller over time, that's what we call evolution. Now you know.

So you have no answers to my questions regarding cancer, heart attacks, strokes, deformity, and basically anything that sucks. If evolution is so great, then why no results from Miller-Urey type experiments? I want my money back for my parakeet because it doesn't act like a dinosaur. Why can't my monkey walk bipedal? Why is the ozone hole getting bigger when CFCs were reduced to zero? Now, you want us to believe reducing CO2 will help our climate when its fine as is except for some air pollution. How stupid are evolutionists anyway?

Creation science had all the great scientists of all time before the 1850s. These are people who invented the scientific method, astronomy, physics, mathematics, etc. Today's atheist scientists cannot hold a candle to them -- Creation scientists - creation.com. Who do you have? Fake scientists Bill Nye lol?

Evolution s what it is, it isn’t trying to be popular like your god.
Climate science and evolution aren’t the same thing.
What questions about the things that suck?
Real science has disproven creation “science”.

I already answered your questions as it is what it is from the creation viewpoint and provided evidence using the scientific method. You can't just say it happened when nobody was there to witness it. You can't even explain what happened so people here and I can evaluate because you are a simpleton Thus, you are a colossal fail.

 

[james bond]

You took things out of context, but that's besides the point.

If you are just attracted to the same sex, then it's not a big deal. You can overcome it like avoiding temptation for drugs, alcohol, other women, etc.

If you're active in the behavior, then it's more difficult. You will have to change your thinking about it first, but you sound like you won't and are defending your choice. It is a choice and not something you were born with or something innate. That's not something I am saying, but what the Bible says and it is inerrant.

Men wrote the Bible and men aren’t inerrant.

If you recall what Jesus said about divorce you will realize that not every law in the Bible is the way God intended it.

First, what you said isn't true. The Bible is God's word transcribed by men through the Holy Spirit. It is like someone dictating their autobiography to someone who can write. If there is an error, then someone who knows that person can challenge it and refute it. No one has been able to contradict God's word. Otherwise, the Bible would have been contradicted centuries ago and would not be worth a hill of beans..

You don't sound like someone who knows the Bible. Otherwise, you would be able to quote the Scripture. Certainly, I'm not one who can recall instantly chapter and verse because my memory isn't that good anymore and I only been Christian since 2012. I've studied the science (Genesis) in the Bible, but avoided the people parts in the beginning since it just confused me. The Psalms are easy because it provides good advice. Now, I am getting into John, Matthew (the hardest), Timothy, and some OT. How long have you been Catholic and how long have you studied the Bible?

The only thing I can say to you is you need to trust God, including Jesus. They do not condone homosexuality like they do not condone adultery. Both are abominable sins. However, it does not mean that is all. One can repent and be forgiven. It's isn't just doing Penance and confessing to the priest. It isn't just abstaining from gay sex. One has to believe that homosexuality is a sin and believe they can change. If you can do this, then you should be able to overcome your sin through the help of God. You were born heterosexual. God is very willing to forgive one's sins if they are sincere and they believe what they are doing. All things are possible through Jesus, but you have to believe first. They believe what is wrong and a sin in their lives and thinking. They vow to change this. It works because it is through Jesus. There may be backsliding and what not once you begin, but if you keep at it, then you will succeed with God's help. There should be people at your church who can help you through this. Certainly, you are not first, nor last, believer who is involved in sin. Like you said, none of us is perfect and we live in a fallen world.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

you will realize that not every law in the Bible is the way God intended it

Oh yeah? Which ones? And, for those, what, precisely, DID god intend? And how do you know?

See ding, you go and make these lofty claims because they please your own ears, without giving a thought that you are actually just making shit up that you can only support by making more shit up.

 

[ding]

you will realize that not every law in the Bible is the way God intended it

Oh yeah? Which ones? And, for those, what, precisely, DID god intend? And how do you know?

See ding, you go and make these lofty claims because they please your own ears, without giving a thought that you are actually just making shit up that you can only support by making more shit up.

Read what Jesus said about divorce.

It’s not lofty when you can back it up.

 

[BreezeWood]

would that be him speaking for himself - or in sympathy ... surly the latter.

What he is saying is that people who have a preference for an outcome are not apt to hear anything counter to that outcome.

.

What he is saying is that people who have a preference for an outcome are not apt to hear anything counter to that outcome.

Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given ... The one who can accept this should accept it.”

but only those to whom it has been given ...

that was the very minimum of what could have been actually said in print acceptable to the 4th century, it is not stated as a preference but a reality that is implying should remain in the closet (4th century translation) that falls short of the actual spoken truth and is a political remedy. that in modern times has blown up.

there would not have been a 1st century were bond's view the appropriate religion being already the prevailing dogma - greed is what motivates the op in nearly all their religious views as dogma satisfies their narrow worldview personal quest comfort zone.

Your preference for an outcome is obvious.

.

Your preference for an outcome is obvious.

oh, what might that be ... not all priests "celibate" by dogma. that's the road you paved bing.

Your outcome you prefer is the subordination of Christianity. Everything you see is skewed to that outcome.

.

Your outcome you prefer is the subordination of Christianity. Everything you see is skewed to that outcome.

you got that from the previous post ...

your train of thought is in reverse, the 4th century's attempt to subordinate the 1st - so maybe you are on the right track even if you haven't figured that out which is rather remarkable.

the 1st century is an affirmation of the religion of antiquity prescribed by the Almighty - the triumph of good vs evil - the crucifixion was the unjustifiable concluding scene yet to be reconciled and made enshrined by the christian 4th century bible. forgeries and fallacies. not their interpretation but a messiah by death.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Read what Jesus said about divorce.

It’s not lofty when you can back it up.

Of course, thats you emplying what is your favorite, dishonest charlatan tactic, the bait and switch. As anyone can see, you made claims about lots of gods rules, not just the one. And then you employed your second favorite dishonest charlatan tactic, by calling something self evident instead of actually providing evidence. Sell much snake oil today, ding?

 

[ding]

Read what Jesus said about divorce.

It’s not lofty when you can back it up.

Of course, thats you emplying what is your favorite, dishonest charlatan tactic, the bait and switch. As anyone can see, you made claims about lots of gods rules, not just the one. And then you employed your second favorite dishonest charlatan tactic, by calling something self evident instead of actually providing evidence. Sell much snake oil today, ding?

First address the one I have mentioned and then go from there. It’s logical to establish precedence and Jesus is the final authority on Christianity.

 

[ding]

What he is saying is that people who have a preference for an outcome are not apt to hear anything counter to that outcome.

.

What he is saying is that people who have a preference for an outcome are not apt to hear anything counter to that outcome.

Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given ... The one who can accept this should accept it.”

but only those to whom it has been given ...

that was the very minimum of what could have been actually said in print acceptable to the 4th century, it is not stated as a preference but a reality that is implying should remain in the closet (4th century translation) that falls short of the actual spoken truth and is a political remedy. that in modern times has blown up.

there would not have been a 1st century were bond's view the appropriate religion being already the prevailing dogma - greed is what motivates the op in nearly all their religious views as dogma satisfies their narrow worldview personal quest comfort zone.

Your preference for an outcome is obvious.

.

Your preference for an outcome is obvious.

oh, what might that be ... not all priests "celibate" by dogma. that's the road you paved bing.

Your outcome you prefer is the subordination of Christianity. Everything you see is skewed to that outcome.

.

Your outcome you prefer is the subordination of Christianity. Everything you see is skewed to that outcome.

you got that from the previous post ...

your train of thought is in reverse, the 4th century's attempt to subordinate the 1st - so maybe you are on the right track even if you haven't figured that out which is rather remarkable.

the 1st century is an affirmation of the religion of antiquity prescribed by the Almighty - the triumph of good vs evil - the crucifixion was the unjustifiable concluding scene yet to be reconciled and made enshrined by the christian 4th century bible. forgeries and fallacies. not their interpretation but a messiah by death.

No. I got that from everything you have ever posted. You are very consistent.

You are an odd duck. As near as I can tell you are a Gnostic Christian.

 

[Taz]

Ok, Mr Skeptic, I'm going to prove evolution to you in 3 ways:

1 - Look at houses and clothes from 200 or 300 years ago. They both point to humans being shorter back then. Meaning that as time goes on, we are evolving to be taller beings.

2 - Look at knowledge. 2000 years ago, man didn't know all that much about the world around him. 2000 years later we know about all kinds of things that we didn't know back then, Medicine, space, math, science... you name it, we know more now than we used to. So our intelligence is increasing over time. And our brain size has been increasing as well. That's evolution.

3 - I used to be a meat eater, but over time my thinking evolved towards a healthier lifestyle, and now I'm a vegetarian.

1. It's better nutrition and medicine, but part of natural selection which is creation science.

2. The same as #1 and it's part of creation science.

3. Ditto.

What does it have to do with ToE? Why did evolution make gay people? Why did evolution make people deformed? Why did evolution make cancer? Evolution made the universe and everything in it right? Why did it make things that suck? How is that getting better?

What is creation science?
Natural selection is part of evolution. When humans, for whatever reason, get taller over time, that's what we call evolution. Now you know.

So you have no answers to my questions regarding cancer, heart attacks, strokes, deformity, and basically anything that sucks. If evolution is so great, then why no results from Miller-Urey type experiments? I want my money back for my parakeet because it doesn't act like a dinosaur. Why can't my monkey walk bipedal? Why is the ozone hole getting bigger when CFCs were reduced to zero? Now, you want us to believe reducing CO2 will help our climate when its fine as is except for some air pollution. How stupid are evolutionists anyway?

Creation science had all the great scientists of all time before the 1850s. These are people who invented the scientific method, astronomy, physics, mathematics, etc. Today's atheist scientists cannot hold a candle to them -- Creation scientists - creation.com. Who do you have? Fake scientists Bill Nye lol?

Evolution s what it is, it isn’t trying to be popular like your god.
Climate science and evolution aren’t the same thing.
What questions about the things that suck?
Real science has disproven creation “science”.

I already answered your questions as it is what it is from the creation viewpoint and provided evidence using the scientific method. You can't just say it happened when nobody was there to witness it. You can't even explain what happened so people here and I can evaluate because you are a simpleton Thus, you are a colossal fail.

Creation science is an oxymoron. You're just a moron.

 

[james bond]

Creation science is an oxymoron. You're just a moron.

You need to get a better dictionary. An oxymoron is a combination of contradictory words. Creation science fits together beautifully like hand and glove. It is REAL science because it is observable and one can do experiments. Evolution has nothing but failed experiments. It sounds like evil solution.

 

[Taz]

Creation science is an oxymoron. You're just a moron.

You need to get a better dictionary. An oxymoron is a combination of contradictory words. Creation science fits together beautifully like hand and glove. It is REAL science because it is observable and one can do experiments. Evolution has nothing but failed experiments. It sounds like evil solution.

What color is the sky in your world?

 

[Hollie]

Creation science is an oxymoron. You're just a moron.

You need to get a better dictionary. An oxymoron is a combination of contradictory words. Creation science fits together beautifully like hand and glove. It is REAL science because it is observable and one can do experiments. Evolution has nothing but failed experiments. It sounds like evil solution.

Sorry, no. Creation science is religious quackery.

 

[badger2]

post #1. It is impossible for time to start and space to begin. Both always were.

 

[ding]

post #1. It is impossible for time to start and space to begin. Both always were.

Time is just a convenient measure for the expansion of the universe. It doesn’t really exist.

 

[ding]

Before space and time there was nothing except consciousness.

Rather than being a late outgrowth of space and time mind has always existed and is the source or matrix of the material world.

 

[ding]

Red pill or blue pill?

Choose wisely.

 

[ding]

The laws of nature existed before space and time.

 

[ding]

If atheists aren’t delusional then why do so many of them reject inflation theory which explains how the universe was created?

 

[Nia88]

Religious people believe in an invisible being in the sky. Yet somehow atheist are the delusion ones?