How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You?

How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You?

  • Strong Theist

    Votes: 21 25.9%
  • De-facto Theist

    Votes: 3 3.7%
  • Weak Theist

    Votes: 3 3.7%
  • Pure Agnostic

    Votes: 14 17.3%
  • Weak Atheist

    Votes: 4 4.9%
  • De-facto Atheist

    Votes: 8 9.9%
  • Strong Atheist

    Votes: 16 19.8%
  • Other

    Votes: 12 14.8%

  • Total voters
    81
.
which is it - bond or

th


the joker ... it seems a case of mistaken identity.


without a continuous atmosphere they are just wasting their time, our Garden is all we have.

My use of the Joker is about who gets the "last" laugh. That is, what happens to us after death? I've learned more about hell as a final destination. It's not 24/7 of burning torture. Want to know? I can start a thread on it. I did't think you'd be interested in the Traveler's Guide to Heaven.


.
I've learned more about hell as a final destination.

that's obvious, you must have been a boyscout .... being prepared.


My use of the Joker is about who gets the "last" laugh. That is, what happens to us after death?

4th century deception is hardly a joke for those that are deceived, christian.

the 1st century is about the accomplishments before death, the Apex of Knowledge the Triumph of Good vs Evil during one's lifetime that allows the Spirit to be set free.

good luck being the cause for failure.


  1. The Biblical God is real.
    There is no evidence to support any of the claims made in the Bible concerning the existence of a god. Any ‘evidence’ proposed by theists to support the Bible’s various historical and supernatural claims is non-existent at best, manufactured at worst.

    The Bible is not self-authenticating; it is simply one of many religious texts. Like those other texts, it itself constitutes no evidence for the existence of a god. Its florid prose and fanciful content do not legitimise it nor distinguish it from other ancient works of literature.

    The Bible is historically inaccurate , factually incorrect, inconsistent and contradictory. It was artificially constructed by a group of men in antiquity and is poorly translated, heavily altered and selectively interpreted. Entire sections of the text have been redacted over time.

    Origins of the Bible: PBS Buried Secrets, CH4 Who wrote the Bible? (a must watch).

    “Properly read, the bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.” – Isaac Asimov

  2. Biblical Jesus was real.
    There is no contemporary evidence for Jesus’ existence or the Bible’s account of his life; no artefacts, dwellings, works of carpentry, self-written manuscripts, court records, eyewitness testimony, official diaries, birth records, reflections on his significance or written disputes about his teachings. Nothing survives from the time in which he is said to have lived.

    All historical references to Jesus derive from hearsay accounts written decades or centuries after his supposed death. These historical references generally refer to early Christians rather than a historical Jesus and, in some cases, directly contradict the Gospels or were deliberately manufactured.

    The Gospels themselves contradict one-another on many key events and were constructed by unknown authors up to a century after the events they describe are said to have occurred. They are not eyewitness accounts. The New Testament, as a whole, contains many internal inconsistencies as a result of its piecemeal construction and is factually incorrect on several historical claims, such as the early existence of Nazareth, the reign of Herod and the Roman census. Like the Old Testament, it too has had entire books and sections redacted.

    The Biblical account of Jesus has striking similarities with other mythologies and texts and many of his supposed teachings existed prior to his time. It is likely the character was either partly or entirely invented by competing first century messianic cults from an amalgamation of Greco-Roman, Egyptian and Judeo-Apocalyptic myths and prophecies.

    Even if Jesus’ existence could be established, this would in no way validate Christian theology or any element of the story portrayed in the Bible, such as the performance of miracles or the resurrection. Simply because it is conceivable a heretical Jewish preacher named Yeshua lived circa 30 AD, had followers and was executed, does not imply the son of a god walked the Earth at that time.

    The motivation for belief in a divine, salvational Jesus breaks down when you accept evolution:

    “Now, if the book of Genesis is an allegory, then sin is an allegory, the Fall is an allegory and the need for a Savior is an allegory – but if we are all descendants of an allegory, where does that leave us? It destroys the foundation of all Christian doctrine—it destroys the foundation of the gospel.” – Ken Ham

    “Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.” – Anonymous

.
sealy, there was nothing posted by you to quote ... the 4th century christian bible was the subject of your post, not sure why you did not chose a christian to address it to.

1st century Church of the Almighty is a spoken religion, Jesus was a mortal that accomplished the means for Admission to the Everlasting who likewise had faults, simply faults without evil.


I don't know if it was the 4th, 3rd, 1st or 16th century. The reason I posted that to you is because I thought you would find it interesting. Especially when you realize there is no contemporary evidence for Jesus’ existence or the Bible’s account of his life; no artifacts, dwellings, works of carpentry, self-written manuscripts, court records, eyewitness testimony, official diaries, birth records, reflections on his significance or written disputes about his teachings. Nothing survives from the time in which he is said to have lived.

All historical references to Jesus derive from hearsay accounts written decades or centuries after his supposed death and were constructed by unknown authors up to a century after the events they describe are said to have occurred. They are not eyewitness accounts.

The Biblical account of Jesus has striking similarities with other mythologies and texts and many of his supposed teachings existed prior to his time. It is likely the character was either partly or entirely invented by competing first century messianic cults from an amalgamation of Greco-Roman, Egyptian and Judeo-Apocalyptic myths and prophecies.

.
10/4 - though you have posted the article before.

the post is interesting however the 1st century was a surfacing of what would become an uphill struggle for humanities survival - the primary derailment came in the 4th with such an awful book whose depiction is the opposite of the basic principles necessary to accomplish the task. no Jesus is required whether they existed or not. certainly not to be worshiped.
 
4th century deception is hardly a joke for those that are deceived, christian.....
Wow. You seem as angry and self-righteous as the most devoted and prejudicial Christians.

How about "Religion is a tool toward spiritual enlightenment. Those who mistake the tool as the end goal instead of as a means to an end have a lot more to learn"?

...Or are you one of those "When you're dead, you're dead. Get real" types of people?
 
4th century deception is hardly a joke for those that are deceived, christian.....
Wow. You seem as angry and self-righteous as the most devoted and prejudicial Christians.

How about "Religion is a tool toward spiritual enlightenment. Those who mistake the tool as the end goal instead of as a means to an end have a lot more to learn"?

...Or are you one of those "When you're dead, you're dead. Get real" types of people?
When you're dead you're dead. You're lucky to have been born
 
When you're dead you're dead. You're lucky to have been born
A standard atheist belief.

I have no problem with this nor any other beliefs. Where I become concerned is when people, individuals or groups, seek to jam their beliefs down the throats of others. This I strongly disagree with as a matter of freedom.

Freedom is worth fighting for.
 
4th century deception is hardly a joke for those that are deceived, christian.....
Wow. You seem as angry and self-righteous as the most devoted and prejudicial Christians.

How about "Religion is a tool toward spiritual enlightenment. Those who mistake the tool as the end goal instead of as a means to an end have a lot more to learn"?

...Or are you one of those "When you're dead, you're dead. Get real" types of people?
.
4th century deception is hardly a joke for those that are deceived, christian.

Wow. You seem as angry and self-righteous as the most devoted and prejudicial Christians.


“I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me”.


your off the cuff comment DW is groundless as I have noticed about you in the past that though will have little lasting affect is as well a noted previous assessment.

their deception only insures a usefulness for as long as they are convincing after that their "religion's" lack of veracity becomes sadly complete in its fallacy.
 
4th century deception is hardly a joke for those that are deceived, christian.....
Wow. You seem as angry and self-righteous as the most devoted and prejudicial Christians.

How about "Religion is a tool toward spiritual enlightenment. Those who mistake the tool as the end goal instead of as a means to an end have a lot more to learn"?

...Or are you one of those "When you're dead, you're dead. Get real" types of people?
When you're dead you're dead. You're lucky to have been born
.
When you're dead you're dead. You're lucky to have been born


where you came from, the Everlasting is somewhere worth returning to for who may attempt to accomplish the feat.
 
....your off the cuff comment DW is groundless as I have noticed about you in the past that though will have little lasting affect is as well a noted previous assessment.

their deception only insures a usefulness for as long as they are convincing after that their "religion's" lack of veracity becomes sadly complete in its fallacy.
You think I've offended your beliefs? Interesting.

Belief as you wish, sir. As will I.
 
When you're dead you're dead. You're lucky to have been born
A standard atheist belief.

I have no problem with this nor any other beliefs. Where I become concerned is when people, individuals or groups, seek to jam their beliefs down the throats of others. This I strongly disagree with as a matter of freedom.

Freedom is worth fighting for.
We may try to jam it down your throats here but everywhere else it seems god is being jammed down our throats.

And aren't we free to talk?
 
When you're dead you're dead. You're lucky to have been born
A standard atheist belief.

I have no problem with this nor any other beliefs. Where I become concerned is when people, individuals or groups, seek to jam their beliefs down the throats of others. This I strongly disagree with as a matter of freedom.

Freedom is worth fighting for.
We may try to jam it down your throats here but everywhere else it seems god is being jammed down our throats.

And aren't we free to talk?
In the US, all are free to talk. According to the BBC, not every is free to talk. I saw two reports of blasphemy charges.

Still, when an atheist attacks a theist or a theist attacks an atheist, reasonable people know neither can prove their position, so why do they do it? Dick measuring exercise? A result of personal life frustrations acted out online in a form of "Kick the Cat" syndrome? It varies, but I've seen a few of those but what I look for are those who are truly dangerous. Those who want to kill Americans.

They don't just show up screaming "Allahu Akbar!" with a suicide belt emoji. They show up bitching about the United States and looking for like-minded souls to exploit. Under Obama, it would be RWNJ, but with Trump, the best recruiting territory is available. LWers have always been easier to convince than RWers. I think we'll see more terrorist attempts against the US over the next few years. Fine. Draw the fuckers out and cut them off at the knees.
 
When you're dead you're dead. You're lucky to have been born
A standard atheist belief.

I have no problem with this nor any other beliefs. Where I become concerned is when people, individuals or groups, seek to jam their beliefs down the throats of others. This I strongly disagree with as a matter of freedom.

Freedom is worth fighting for.
We may try to jam it down your throats here but everywhere else it seems god is being jammed down our throats.

And aren't we free to talk?
In the US, all are free to talk. According to the BBC, not every is free to talk. I saw two reports of blasphemy charges.

Still, when an atheist attacks a theist or a theist attacks an atheist, reasonable people know neither can prove their position, so why do they do it? Dick measuring exercise? A result of personal life frustrations acted out online in a form of "Kick the Cat" syndrome? It varies, but I've seen a few of those but what I look for are those who are truly dangerous. Those who want to kill Americans.

They don't just show up screaming "Allahu Akbar!" with a suicide belt emoji. They show up bitching about the United States and looking for like-minded souls to exploit. Under Obama, it would be RWNJ, but with Trump, the best recruiting territory is available. LWers have always been easier to convince than RWers. I think we'll see more terrorist attempts against the US over the next few years. Fine. Draw the fuckers out and cut them off at the knees.
Allah Akbar's are conservatives. They agree with the religious right this country is going to hell.
 
When you're dead you're dead. You're lucky to have been born
A standard atheist belief.

I have no problem with this nor any other beliefs. Where I become concerned is when people, individuals or groups, seek to jam their beliefs down the throats of others. This I strongly disagree with as a matter of freedom.

Freedom is worth fighting for.
We may try to jam it down your throats here but everywhere else it seems god is being jammed down our throats.

And aren't we free to talk?
In the US, all are free to talk. According to the BBC, not every is free to talk. I saw two reports of blasphemy charges.

Still, when an atheist attacks a theist or a theist attacks an atheist, reasonable people know neither can prove their position, so why do they do it? Dick measuring exercise? A result of personal life frustrations acted out online in a form of "Kick the Cat" syndrome? It varies, but I've seen a few of those but what I look for are those who are truly dangerous. Those who want to kill Americans.

They don't just show up screaming "Allahu Akbar!" with a suicide belt emoji. They show up bitching about the United States and looking for like-minded souls to exploit. Under Obama, it would be RWNJ, but with Trump, the best recruiting territory is available. LWers have always been easier to convince than RWers. I think we'll see more terrorist attempts against the US over the next few years. Fine. Draw the fuckers out and cut them off at the knees.
Allah Akbar's are conservatives. They agree with the religious right this country is going to hell.
Islamic Jihadists aren't the only terrorists.

If you want to claim all terrorists are theists, say so. I'd love to prove you wrong.....again. :)
 
When you're dead you're dead. You're lucky to have been born
A standard atheist belief.

I have no problem with this nor any other beliefs. Where I become concerned is when people, individuals or groups, seek to jam their beliefs down the throats of others. This I strongly disagree with as a matter of freedom.

Freedom is worth fighting for.
We may try to jam it down your throats here but everywhere else it seems god is being jammed down our throats.

And aren't we free to talk?
In the US, all are free to talk. According to the BBC, not every is free to talk. I saw two reports of blasphemy charges.

Still, when an atheist attacks a theist or a theist attacks an atheist, reasonable people know neither can prove their position, so why do they do it? Dick measuring exercise? A result of personal life frustrations acted out online in a form of "Kick the Cat" syndrome? It varies, but I've seen a few of those but what I look for are those who are truly dangerous. Those who want to kill Americans.

They don't just show up screaming "Allahu Akbar!" with a suicide belt emoji. They show up bitching about the United States and looking for like-minded souls to exploit. Under Obama, it would be RWNJ, but with Trump, the best recruiting territory is available. LWers have always been easier to convince than RWers. I think we'll see more terrorist attempts against the US over the next few years. Fine. Draw the fuckers out and cut them off at the knees.
Allah Akbar's are conservatives. They agree with the religious right this country is going to hell.
Islamic Jihadists aren't the only terrorists.

If you want to claim all terrorists are theists, say so. I'd love to prove you wrong.....again. :)
Not all. Just 85% of terrorists are theists.

Atheists Are 0.07% of the Federal Prison Population, Threatening Fact for Christian Fundamentalists
 
A standard atheist belief.

I have no problem with this nor any other beliefs. Where I become concerned is when people, individuals or groups, seek to jam their beliefs down the throats of others. This I strongly disagree with as a matter of freedom.

Freedom is worth fighting for.
We may try to jam it down your throats here but everywhere else it seems god is being jammed down our throats.

And aren't we free to talk?
In the US, all are free to talk. According to the BBC, not every is free to talk. I saw two reports of blasphemy charges.

Still, when an atheist attacks a theist or a theist attacks an atheist, reasonable people know neither can prove their position, so why do they do it? Dick measuring exercise? A result of personal life frustrations acted out online in a form of "Kick the Cat" syndrome? It varies, but I've seen a few of those but what I look for are those who are truly dangerous. Those who want to kill Americans.

They don't just show up screaming "Allahu Akbar!" with a suicide belt emoji. They show up bitching about the United States and looking for like-minded souls to exploit. Under Obama, it would be RWNJ, but with Trump, the best recruiting territory is available. LWers have always been easier to convince than RWers. I think we'll see more terrorist attempts against the US over the next few years. Fine. Draw the fuckers out and cut them off at the knees.
Allah Akbar's are conservatives. They agree with the religious right this country is going to hell.
Islamic Jihadists aren't the only terrorists.

If you want to claim all terrorists are theists, say so. I'd love to prove you wrong.....again. :)
Not all. Just 85% of terrorists are theists.

Atheists Are 0.07% of the Federal Prison Population, Threatening Fact for Christian Fundamentalists
So what do you propose? Stomp out religion like Stalin and Mao tried to do?
 
.



How Much of a Theist or Atheist are You?



I disagree that you find the response non sequitur to the subject of the thread, whether to respond to the content pertaining to the events of the 1st century from your post is not my concern.

Huh? Are you going space cadet, BW? I understand Mars will be ready for colonization in the 2030s ha ha.
.
Huh? Are you going space cadet, BW? I understand Mars will be ready for colonization in the 2030s ha ha.

which is it - bond or

th


the joker ... it seems a case of mistaken identity.


without a continuous atmosphere they are just wasting their time, our Garden is all we have.

My use of the Joker is about who gets the "last" laugh. That is, what happens to us after death? I've learned more about hell as a final destination. It's not 24/7 of burning torture. Want to know? I can start a thread on it. I did't think you'd be interested in the Traveler's Guide to Heaven.


.
I've learned more about hell as a final destination.

that's obvious, you must have been a boyscout .... being prepared.


My use of the Joker is about who gets the "last" laugh. That is, what happens to us after death?

4th century deception is hardly a joke for those that are deceived, christian.

the 1st century is about the accomplishments before death, the Apex of Knowledge the Triumph of Good vs Evil during one's lifetime that allows the Spirit to be set free.

good luck being the cause for failure.


  1. The Biblical God is real.
    There is no evidence to support any of the claims made in the Bible concerning the existence of a god. Any ‘evidence’ proposed by theists to support the Bible’s various historical and supernatural claims is non-existent at best, manufactured at worst.

    The Bible is not self-authenticating; it is simply one of many religious texts. Like those other texts, it itself constitutes no evidence for the existence of a god. Its florid prose and fanciful content do not legitimise it nor distinguish it from other ancient works of literature.

    The Bible is historically inaccurate , factually incorrect, inconsistent and contradictory. It was artificially constructed by a group of men in antiquity and is poorly translated, heavily altered and selectively interpreted. Entire sections of the text have been redacted over time.

    Origins of the Bible: PBS Buried Secrets, CH4 Who wrote the Bible? (a must watch).

    “Properly read, the bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.” – Isaac Asimov

  2. Biblical Jesus was real.
    There is no contemporary evidence for Jesus’ existence or the Bible’s account of his life; no artefacts, dwellings, works of carpentry, self-written manuscripts, court records, eyewitness testimony, official diaries, birth records, reflections on his significance or written disputes about his teachings. Nothing survives from the time in which he is said to have lived.

    All historical references to Jesus derive from hearsay accounts written decades or centuries after his supposed death. These historical references generally refer to early Christians rather than a historical Jesus and, in some cases, directly contradict the Gospels or were deliberately manufactured.

    The Gospels themselves contradict one-another on many key events and were constructed by unknown authors up to a century after the events they describe are said to have occurred. They are not eyewitness accounts. The New Testament, as a whole, contains many internal inconsistencies as a result of its piecemeal construction and is factually incorrect on several historical claims, such as the early existence of Nazareth, the reign of Herod and the Roman census. Like the Old Testament, it too has had entire books and sections redacted.

    The Biblical account of Jesus has striking similarities with other mythologies and texts and many of his supposed teachings existed prior to his time. It is likely the character was either partly or entirely invented by competing first century messianic cults from an amalgamation of Greco-Roman, Egyptian and Judeo-Apocalyptic myths and prophecies.

    Even if Jesus’ existence could be established, this would in no way validate Christian theology or any element of the story portrayed in the Bible, such as the performance of miracles or the resurrection. Simply because it is conceivable a heretical Jewish preacher named Yeshua lived circa 30 AD, had followers and was executed, does not imply the son of a god walked the Earth at that time.

    The motivation for belief in a divine, salvational Jesus breaks down when you accept evolution:

    “Now, if the book of Genesis is an allegory, then sin is an allegory, the Fall is an allegory and the need for a Savior is an allegory – but if we are all descendants of an allegory, where does that leave us? It destroys the foundation of all Christian doctrine—it destroys the foundation of the gospel.” – Ken Ham

    “Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.” – Anonymous


This is one of the things I learned from my NDE investigation. Atheists listen to other atheists. Thus, if you have to get someplace when you need to, then can you trust their directions?

However, it's not just after you die, but when you are living. Can you trust what BreezeWood is telling you ha ha? Sorry, I couldn't help but make that little joke hahahaha? Seriously, can you trust what other atheists here write?

When you come right down to it, that's what it comes down to. That's why I say, "Atheists are usually wrong."

Also, "Atheism leads to Communism." Karl Marx talks about the mind-body problem (no duality), materialism (no immaterialism) and all the stuff atheists here have brought up. Another Jew (Judaism) who says some weird things is Baruch Spinoza. I believe he preached a form of Pantheism without the sacredness. It could have been naturalism with God as nature. He was excommunicated from his Jewish community and almost stabbed as a heathen. He's interesting because he knows about the Bible better than most (not actually know the truth, but knows how explain it in a strange, persuasive manner). These people are others that atheists listen to besides other atheists.

Mind-Body Problem/Everything is Matter
Marxist Philosophy and The Mind/Body Problem

Fifteen Propositions
Baruch Spinoza (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

As for Christians, it's not easy to determine the truth either. I don't think one can know the truth by oneself just reading the Bible. It's not an easy book to read, there are several translations and even more interpretations. How can one find which one is true? Are the Catholics just trying to make me feel guilty? Are the Christians making me feel this way in order to get money? It helps to have someone to guide us. It helps not dwell on the correct interpretation and that we have to find it at this minute. There has to be some balance between your religion and your life.
 
Last edited:
A standard atheist belief.

I have no problem with this nor any other beliefs. Where I become concerned is when people, individuals or groups, seek to jam their beliefs down the throats of others. This I strongly disagree with as a matter of freedom.

Freedom is worth fighting for.
We may try to jam it down your throats here but everywhere else it seems god is being jammed down our throats.

And aren't we free to talk?
In the US, all are free to talk. According to the BBC, not every is free to talk. I saw two reports of blasphemy charges.

Still, when an atheist attacks a theist or a theist attacks an atheist, reasonable people know neither can prove their position, so why do they do it? Dick measuring exercise? A result of personal life frustrations acted out online in a form of "Kick the Cat" syndrome? It varies, but I've seen a few of those but what I look for are those who are truly dangerous. Those who want to kill Americans.

They don't just show up screaming "Allahu Akbar!" with a suicide belt emoji. They show up bitching about the United States and looking for like-minded souls to exploit. Under Obama, it would be RWNJ, but with Trump, the best recruiting territory is available. LWers have always been easier to convince than RWers. I think we'll see more terrorist attempts against the US over the next few years. Fine. Draw the fuckers out and cut them off at the knees.
Allah Akbar's are conservatives. They agree with the religious right this country is going to hell.
Islamic Jihadists aren't the only terrorists.

If you want to claim all terrorists are theists, say so. I'd love to prove you wrong.....again. :)

Not all. Just 85% of terrorists are theists.

Atheists Are 0.07% of the Federal Prison Population, Threatening Fact for Christian Fundamentalists

It's starting for you, isn't it? Are you giving in to the madness?

Another smart atheist who has gone mad is Stephen Hawking. I just finished reading his A Brief History of Time and A Briefer History of Time. Most of both of these books are great. However, he believes in multiverses and that we can build a time machine to time travel back to the past through a wormhole, so as a Christian and science buff, I think this guy has gone cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.
 
Last edited:
How much of a Thief or an Atheist are you?

What kind of question is that?
 
We may try to jam it down your throats here but everywhere else it seems god is being jammed down our throats.

And aren't we free to talk?
In the US, all are free to talk. According to the BBC, not every is free to talk. I saw two reports of blasphemy charges.

Still, when an atheist attacks a theist or a theist attacks an atheist, reasonable people know neither can prove their position, so why do they do it? Dick measuring exercise? A result of personal life frustrations acted out online in a form of "Kick the Cat" syndrome? It varies, but I've seen a few of those but what I look for are those who are truly dangerous. Those who want to kill Americans.

They don't just show up screaming "Allahu Akbar!" with a suicide belt emoji. They show up bitching about the United States and looking for like-minded souls to exploit. Under Obama, it would be RWNJ, but with Trump, the best recruiting territory is available. LWers have always been easier to convince than RWers. I think we'll see more terrorist attempts against the US over the next few years. Fine. Draw the fuckers out and cut them off at the knees.
Allah Akbar's are conservatives. They agree with the religious right this country is going to hell.
Islamic Jihadists aren't the only terrorists.

If you want to claim all terrorists are theists, say so. I'd love to prove you wrong.....again. :)
Not all. Just 85% of terrorists are theists.

Atheists Are 0.07% of the Federal Prison Population, Threatening Fact for Christian Fundamentalists
So what do you propose? Stomp out religion like Stalin and Mao tried to do?

Stomp out religion? Yes. Like Stalin and Mao? No.
 
Huh? Are you going space cadet, BW? I understand Mars will be ready for colonization in the 2030s ha ha.
.
Huh? Are you going space cadet, BW? I understand Mars will be ready for colonization in the 2030s ha ha.

which is it - bond or

th


the joker ... it seems a case of mistaken identity.


without a continuous atmosphere they are just wasting their time, our Garden is all we have.

My use of the Joker is about who gets the "last" laugh. That is, what happens to us after death? I've learned more about hell as a final destination. It's not 24/7 of burning torture. Want to know? I can start a thread on it. I did't think you'd be interested in the Traveler's Guide to Heaven.


.
I've learned more about hell as a final destination.

that's obvious, you must have been a boyscout .... being prepared.


My use of the Joker is about who gets the "last" laugh. That is, what happens to us after death?

4th century deception is hardly a joke for those that are deceived, christian.

the 1st century is about the accomplishments before death, the Apex of Knowledge the Triumph of Good vs Evil during one's lifetime that allows the Spirit to be set free.

good luck being the cause for failure.


  1. The Biblical God is real.
    There is no evidence to support any of the claims made in the Bible concerning the existence of a god. Any ‘evidence’ proposed by theists to support the Bible’s various historical and supernatural claims is non-existent at best, manufactured at worst.

    The Bible is not self-authenticating; it is simply one of many religious texts. Like those other texts, it itself constitutes no evidence for the existence of a god. Its florid prose and fanciful content do not legitimise it nor distinguish it from other ancient works of literature.

    The Bible is historically inaccurate , factually incorrect, inconsistent and contradictory. It was artificially constructed by a group of men in antiquity and is poorly translated, heavily altered and selectively interpreted. Entire sections of the text have been redacted over time.

    Origins of the Bible: PBS Buried Secrets, CH4 Who wrote the Bible? (a must watch).

    “Properly read, the bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.” – Isaac Asimov

  2. Biblical Jesus was real.
    There is no contemporary evidence for Jesus’ existence or the Bible’s account of his life; no artefacts, dwellings, works of carpentry, self-written manuscripts, court records, eyewitness testimony, official diaries, birth records, reflections on his significance or written disputes about his teachings. Nothing survives from the time in which he is said to have lived.

    All historical references to Jesus derive from hearsay accounts written decades or centuries after his supposed death. These historical references generally refer to early Christians rather than a historical Jesus and, in some cases, directly contradict the Gospels or were deliberately manufactured.

    The Gospels themselves contradict one-another on many key events and were constructed by unknown authors up to a century after the events they describe are said to have occurred. They are not eyewitness accounts. The New Testament, as a whole, contains many internal inconsistencies as a result of its piecemeal construction and is factually incorrect on several historical claims, such as the early existence of Nazareth, the reign of Herod and the Roman census. Like the Old Testament, it too has had entire books and sections redacted.

    The Biblical account of Jesus has striking similarities with other mythologies and texts and many of his supposed teachings existed prior to his time. It is likely the character was either partly or entirely invented by competing first century messianic cults from an amalgamation of Greco-Roman, Egyptian and Judeo-Apocalyptic myths and prophecies.

    Even if Jesus’ existence could be established, this would in no way validate Christian theology or any element of the story portrayed in the Bible, such as the performance of miracles or the resurrection. Simply because it is conceivable a heretical Jewish preacher named Yeshua lived circa 30 AD, had followers and was executed, does not imply the son of a god walked the Earth at that time.

    The motivation for belief in a divine, salvational Jesus breaks down when you accept evolution:

    “Now, if the book of Genesis is an allegory, then sin is an allegory, the Fall is an allegory and the need for a Savior is an allegory – but if we are all descendants of an allegory, where does that leave us? It destroys the foundation of all Christian doctrine—it destroys the foundation of the gospel.” – Ken Ham

    “Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.” – Anonymous


This is one of the things I learned from my NDE investigation. Atheists listen to other atheists. Thus, if you have to get someplace when you need to, then can you trust their directions?

However, it's not just after you die, but when you are living. Can you trust what BreezeWood is telling you ha ha? Sorry, I couldn't help but make that little joke hahahaha? Seriously, can you trust what other atheists here write?

When you come right down to it, that's what it comes down to. That's why I say, "Atheists are usually wrong."

Also, "Atheism leads to Communism." Karl Marx talks about the mind-body problem (no duality), materialism (no immaterialism) and all the stuff atheists here have brought up. Another Jew (Judaism) who says some weird things is Baruch Spinoza. I believe he preached a form of Pantheism without the sacredness. It could have been naturalism with God as nature. He was excommunicated from his Jewish community and almost stabbed as a heathen. He's interesting because he knows about the Bible better than most (not actually know the truth, but knows how explain it in a strange, persuasive manner). These people are others that atheists listen to besides other atheists.

Mind-Body Problem/Everything is Matter
Marxist Philosophy and The Mind/Body Problem

Fifteen Propositions
Baruch Spinoza (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

As for Christians, it's not easy to determine the truth either. I don't think one can know the truth by oneself just reading the Bible. It's not an easy book to read, there are several translations and even more interpretations. How can one find which one is true? Are the Catholics just trying to make me feel guilty? Are the Christians making me feel this way in order to get money? It helps to have someone to guide us. It helps not dwell on the correct interpretation and that we have to find it at this minute. There has to be some balance between your religion and your life.


So what does Christianity lead to? Does it lead to slavery? Because that is where it led to. How about mass murdering Indians? Yes Christians did these things. So is that where Christianity leads? Because if Atheism leads to murder, so does Christianity. Agreed? I don't.


Atheism inspired Nazism/Communism/Social Darwinism.
An ad hominem deflection which demonstrates a failure to understand that atheism is simply a lack of belief in god(s), with no inherit moral, political or philosophical baggage, and thus no line can be drawn from it to the aforementioned ideologies. In the same vein, democracy could be called atheistic. See also: Association fallacy, appeal to emotion and irrelevant thesis.

Hitler was religious and publicly decried atheism. See also: Nazism and Religion, Reductio ad Hitlerum.

Stalinism and Communism exercised gosateizm (state atheism) based on the ideology of Marxism-Leninism. Atheism was a means to an end, not a cause. See also: Soviet Union and Religion.

Social Darwinism and Eugenics supplant actual natural selection with an unobjective personal perception of ‘fitness’. They are based on bad biology (genetic variability is actually very important for a species) and are completely independent of atheism.

Darwin observed and described evolution the same way Newton did for gravity. It was simply a discovery of a fact about the world – not an engineered philosophy on how to behave. Just as we do not blame Newton for the fact that gravity is used as a tool in the deployment of bombs, we cannot blame Darwin for individually misguided applications of ‘natural selection’.

Note: Religion inspires theocracy.

Note: ‘Survival of the Fittest‘ does not simply mean fastest, strongest, or most violent. It is a measure of an individual’s adaptation to the local environment, which can often mean demonstrating cooperation, intelligence and compassion [2]. Humans are outmatched in many ways by animals, but are successful because of their social skills and tool use.

See also: Early Critics of Eugenics were biologists, Natualistic Fallacy, Evolution and Philosophy, Talkorigins: Hitler, Stalin, Social Darwinism.

“We were convinced that the people need and require this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.” – Adolf Hitler

priests-salute.jpg
 

Forum List

Back
Top