Atheism Is Not A Religion!!!

[Hollie]

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

It's really a fine example of your complete befuddlement. You hoped to sidestep the absurdities of nature delineated in the bibles: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., because accepting such literal events is a fool's paradise, (or a religious zealot's fantastical imagination). So don't sidestep, obfuscate and backstroke. Tell us about those talking snakes.

I've always wondered if the fundamentalists know about the two creation stories, or if they just carry that book for show???

I would say "no" to the multiple creation tales and suggest that the books are used as props to hold in one hand - thump with other hand. Being at the business end of a fundies furiously wagging finger is a laughable joke.

It's rare that that the fundies have more than a middling knowledge of the tales and fables they were hammered into them as children. In this case, the FIQ( Fundie in Question), creates for himself a genuinely unsolvable dilemma. He claims there are source materials (the various bibles), that delineate the belief system. He claims this source material has a level of "believability" and functionality which supports that belief system as well. How it is that talking snakes, 350 year old men, a 6,000 year old earth are believable is never addressed. He further claims that a book, which we know was written by men, somehow conveys the direction and intent of some alleged supernatural entity who the believers acknowledge is beyond human understanding is, if course, never addressed.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yes they are definitions of religion which does not include atheism. If there was a way for me to contact Webster's about the error of their definition on their definition I would.

You don't know how to write a letter?

That pathetic excuse dealt with, what makes them wrong? Keep in mind that your arrogant assumption you know more than they do is not evidence they are wrong.

 

[sealybobo]

Also, if you do not believe me, does that mean your skepticism is a belief? So then it's a religion?

if it is something which can neither be proven or disproven and I make a choice about whether or not to believe it, regardless of the fact that it can be neither proven or disproven, then obviously yes......if that belief is elevated to the point that one takes extraordinary steps to uphold that belief, such as filing law suits and arguing them up to the supreme court, or even logging on daily to argue what you believe with those who don't agree with you, then yes......it can become a religion.......

on the other hand, I may believe you don't have a penis.......given that I devote little or no time contemplating that belief, that belief would not be elevated to a religion........

Why is it a religion if we argue against what your religion is doing all the way up to the Supreme Court? If it went that far, clearly your religion is doing something unconstitutional. Do you not get that?

Maybe this will help you understand. Lets say Muslims get a law passed to impose Sharia law on everyone in Dearborn Michigan? Dearborn is the Muslim capital of America so they have the votes.

If you lived in that city and sued the school district, would you being against what they are trying to do be considered a religion?

We aren't against Churches doing anything they want as long as it's Constitutional. You do understand that, right?

 

[sealybobo]

Do you agree, understand and admit that if you grew up on an island and never heard of the idea of god(s), you not believing in god(s) is not a belief?

logical error.....atheism is ignorance, but all ignorance is not atheism........the person on the island would also not be denying the existence of deity.......

He'd be agnostic, because he'd see no proof either way for or against a god. The only logical position to hold.

I think no......if he grew up on an island and never heard the idea of god(s) and you asked him if he believed in god(s) he would not say he'd seen no proof either way.....he would say "huh?".......

What if after you told him the Adam, Eve, Moses, Jesus & Jonah stories and he said you were making it all up, stupid, a liar or crazy?

then he would be choosing what he believed.....

Would him not believing in this god you talk about make him an atheist?

obviously not.....him saying "there is no god" would make him an atheist......

Remember as far as organized religions go, we are all atheists.

not true....I believe that a god exists.....

I just happen to not believe in one more god than you.

which logically makes you an atheist and me a Christian.....(you see why I consider atheists to be ignorant and illogical?).......

Wait a minute. If I've never heard about god(s) before and a Christian walks up to me and tells me their story and I don't believe it, they aren't going to consider me an atheist? I guess you are right. If I said I was a Muslim they wouldn't consider me an "atheist". Good point.

But remember, Christians don't believe in the Muslim's version of god or a generic god either. Remember, you are an athiest too. You just happen to believe in one more god than I do. Do you believe in the Greek Gods?

You're saying I first have to hear and reject every person on earth's version of god before I can honestly be called an athiest? I guess that is true too. A person who believes in generic god isn't considered an atheist. Ok, you got me.

I've heard the Jew, Muslim, Mormon & Christian stories and I don't believe any of them. Maybe there is a spin on god I will like but just haven't heard it yet? Maybe that's why we say Agnostic Atheism is the most rational position.

 

[sealybobo]

Yes they are definitions of religion which does not include atheism. If there was a way for me to contact Webster's about the error of their definition on their definition I would.

You don't know how to write a letter?

That pathetic excuse dealt with, what makes them wrong? Keep in mind that your arrogant assumption you know more than they do is not evidence they are wrong.

We all assume we know more than you.

 

[PostmodernProph]

Do you agree, understand and admit that if you grew up on an island and never heard of the idea of god(s), you not believing in god(s) is not a belief?

logical error.....atheism is ignorance, but all ignorance is not atheism........the person on the island would also not be denying the existence of deity.......

You're suffering from the debilitating disease of religious extremism. There is nothing ignorant or illogical about rejecting appeals to superstitious fears.

but there is something ignorant and illogical about saying you are opposed to believing in something without proof while believing in something without proof.......

That's a steaming hot pile of crap. Is it ignorant to not believe in the tooth fairy?

I googled it.....I find no where that atheism is defined as 'those who deny the existence of tooth fairies'........

 

[PostmodernProph]

Of course you can. You A-theistic belief regarding the gods of others.

if you do, it is out of foolishness......I do not say there are no gods......I choose to believe in he who is God....I therefore cannot be described as an atheist......

Of course you can. You are A-theistic belief in regards to the other gods. You most certainly are an atheist.

obviously not....I do not deny the existence of deity......I believe in a God......the fact I have chosen to not believe in Zeus does not make me an atheist......it makes me someone who has chosen not to believe in Zeus......

Obviously yes. Being A-theistic regarding belief in Zeus makes you an atheist.

I'm sorry, that is obviously an ignorant conclusion......believing in a god, I could not possibly be an atheist......

Your ignorance is of your own making. Believing that gods other than your gods do not exist is A-theistic belief. Therefore, your are an atheist with regard to the gods competing with your gods.

in actuality, my 'ignorance' is only of your imagination.....look at the structure of your sentence......"Believing that gods other than your gods do not exist is A-theistic belief"....if I have gods I am by definition NOT an atheist.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

Of course you can. You A-theistic belief regarding the gods of others.

if you do, it is out of foolishness......I do not say there are no gods......I choose to believe in he who is God....I therefore cannot be described as an atheist......

Of course you can. You are A-theistic belief in regards to the other gods. You most certainly are an atheist.

obviously not....I do not deny the existence of deity......I believe in a God......the fact I have chosen to not believe in Zeus does not make me an atheist......it makes me someone who has chosen not to believe in Zeus......

As far a Zeus is concerned, you are an atheist. Also, as you and others put it you believe Zeus does not exist, therefore it is a belief.

its simply silly to argue that someone is a partial atheist......yes, you are right.....I believe Zeus does not exist......can I prove Zeus does not exist?.....no.....I choose to believe Zeus does not exist......however, to claim that therefore I am someone who denies the existence of deities is illogical, as I specifically proclaim a belief in one deity......

If you had Zeus pounded into your head, you'd be a firm believer in Zeus.

I know, right?....that's why Seally isn't really an atheist......he can't be, because he was raised by Christians and nobody is allowed to think for themselves, right?......

 

[PostmodernProph]

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

It's really a fine example of your complete befuddlement. You hoped to sidestep the absurdities of nature delineated in the bibles: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., because accepting such literal events is a fool's paradise, (or a religious zealot's fantastical imagination). So don't sidestep, obfuscate and backstroke. Tell us about those talking snakes.

nothing but atheist evangelism......Hollie,. seeking sainthood in the atheist church......

 

[PostmodernProph]

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

It's really a fine example of your complete befuddlement. You hoped to sidestep the absurdities of nature delineated in the bibles: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., because accepting such literal events is a fool's paradise, (or a religious zealot's fantastical imagination). So don't sidestep, obfuscate and backstroke. Tell us about those talking snakes.

I've always wondered if the fundamentalists know about the two creation stories, or if they just carry that book for show???

four.....Genesis 1:1 is seperate from Genesis 1:2......and the book of Job....

 

[PostmodernProph]

they aren't going to consider me an atheist?

is your response "There are no gods" or is your response "I'm confused, what are you talking about?".......

 

[PostmodernProph]

Also, if you do not believe me, does that mean your skepticism is a belief? So then it's a religion?

if it is something which can neither be proven or disproven and I make a choice about whether or not to believe it, regardless of the fact that it can be neither proven or disproven, then obviously yes......if that belief is elevated to the point that one takes extraordinary steps to uphold that belief, such as filing law suits and arguing them up to the supreme court, or even logging on daily to argue what you believe with those who don't agree with you, then yes......it can become a religion.......

on the other hand, I may believe you don't have a penis.......given that I devote little or no time contemplating that belief, that belief would not be elevated to a religion........

Why is it a religion if we argue against what your religion is doing all the way up to the Supreme Court?

it demonstrates how passionately you hold your beliefs.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

Yes they are definitions of religion which does not include atheism. If there was a way for me to contact Webster's about the error of their definition on their definition I would.

You don't know how to write a letter?

That pathetic excuse dealt with, what makes them wrong? Keep in mind that your arrogant assumption you know more than they do is not evidence they are wrong.

We all assume we know more than you.

not your first mistake.....

 

[Carla_Danger]

Of course you can. You are A-theistic belief in regards to the other gods. You most certainly are an atheist.

obviously not....I do not deny the existence of deity......I believe in a God......the fact I have chosen to not believe in Zeus does not make me an atheist......it makes me someone who has chosen not to believe in Zeus......

As far a Zeus is concerned, you are an atheist. Also, as you and others put it you believe Zeus does not exist, therefore it is a belief.

its simply silly to argue that someone is a partial atheist......yes, you are right.....I believe Zeus does not exist......can I prove Zeus does not exist?.....no.....I choose to believe Zeus does not exist......however, to claim that therefore I am someone who denies the existence of deities is illogical, as I specifically proclaim a belief in one deity......

If you had Zeus pounded into your head, you'd be a firm believer in Zeus.

I know, right?....that's why Seally isn't really an atheist......he can't be, because he was raised by Christians and nobody is allowed to think for themselves, right?......

Some people are able to develop critical thinking skills, some aren't.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Do you agree, understand and admit that if you grew up on an island and never heard of the idea of god(s), you not believing in god(s) is not a belief?

logical error.....atheism is ignorance, but all ignorance is not atheism........the person on the island would also not be denying the existence of deity.......

You're suffering from the debilitating disease of religious extremism. There is nothing ignorant or illogical about rejecting appeals to superstitious fears.

but there is something ignorant and illogical about saying you are opposed to believing in something without proof while believing in something without proof.......

That's a steaming hot pile of crap. Is it ignorant to not believe in the tooth fairy?

I googled it.....I find no where that atheism is defined as 'those who deny the existence of tooth fairies'........

That's funny, because all over this thread I've been told that a non belief is really a belief, and therefore a religion.

 

[Carla_Danger]

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

It's really a fine example of your complete befuddlement. You hoped to sidestep the absurdities of nature delineated in the bibles: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., because accepting such literal events is a fool's paradise, (or a religious zealot's fantastical imagination). So don't sidestep, obfuscate and backstroke. Tell us about those talking snakes.

nothing but atheist evangelism......Hollie,. seeking sainthood in the atheist church......

There's no such thing.

 

[Hollie]

Of course you can. You are A-theistic belief in regards to the other gods. You most certainly are an atheist.

obviously not....I do not deny the existence of deity......I believe in a God......the fact I have chosen to not believe in Zeus does not make me an atheist......it makes me someone who has chosen not to believe in Zeus......

Obviously yes. Being A-theistic regarding belief in Zeus makes you an atheist.

I'm sorry, that is obviously an ignorant conclusion......believing in a god, I could not possibly be an atheist......

Your ignorance is of your own making. Believing that gods other than your gods do not exist is A-theistic belief. Therefore, your are an atheist with regard to the gods competing with your gods.

in actuality, my 'ignorance' is only of your imagination.....look at the structure of your sentence......"Believing that gods other than your gods do not exist is A-theistic belief"....if I have gods I am by definition NOT an atheist.....

Within Christianity, you have three gods. How many other gods do you believe in?

 

[Hollie]

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

It's really a fine example of your complete befuddlement. You hoped to sidestep the absurdities of nature delineated in the bibles: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., because accepting such literal events is a fool's paradise, (or a religious zealot's fantastical imagination). So don't sidestep, obfuscate and backstroke. Tell us about those talking snakes.

I've always wondered if the fundamentalists know about the two creation stories, or if they just carry that book for show???

four.....Genesis 1:1 is seperate from Genesis 1:2......and the book of Job....

So many tales and fables for you book worshippers to keep track of.

Tell us about the talking snake and why your gods lied in the genesis tale.

 

[Hollie]

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

It's really a fine example of your complete befuddlement. You hoped to sidestep the absurdities of nature delineated in the bibles: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., because accepting such literal events is a fool's paradise, (or a religious zealot's fantastical imagination). So don't sidestep, obfuscate and backstroke. Tell us about those talking snakes.

nothing but atheist evangelism......Hollie,. seeking sainthood in the atheist church......

What a shame. You've been given multiple opportunities to resolve the errors, inconsistencies and falsehoods in the bibles, yet, with each opportunity, you sidestep, obfuscate and backstroke.

 

[sealybobo]

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

your beliefs in absurdities of nature: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., are demonstrably false, yet you must believe those absurdities or acknowledge that your religious beliefs are of fear and superstition.

Yet, you define as irrational anyone who reaches supportable conclusions about your delusions and irrationality. You pre-define the supernatural (including god(s), Jinn, miracles) as "excused" from any verifiable standard and then proceed calmly and "reasonably" inside that paradigm. At your level, it's "religious belief". At another level, it's utter delusion. Both are the same break from reality, the only difference is in degree and in overt harm it might cause.

a fine example of atheist' dogma.......I can picture the rest of the atheists shouting "Amen!" "Hallelujah!" and "preach it Sister Hollie!"..........

It's really a fine example of your complete befuddlement. You hoped to sidestep the absurdities of nature delineated in the bibles: talking snakes, global floods that never happened, Arks that don't exist, a 6,000 year old (flat) earth, 350 year old men, spirit realms, etc., because accepting such literal events is a fool's paradise, (or a religious zealot's fantastical imagination). So don't sidestep, obfuscate and backstroke. Tell us about those talking snakes.

And I was watching TCT religious tv this weekend and the preacher flat out lied when he said that the people who wrote the bible were eye witnesses who saw it. We all know that is a bald faced lie.