Atheists who attack Christianity

Billybob maybe you could take a look at my post to Kevn about Matthew 27:3-8 vs Acts 1:18.

I would like to point out that I am really not trying to be disrespectful with this question. I genuinely would like to know how a devout Christian can reconcile the obvious conflict of these two verses with the claim that the Bible is infallible. I have asked Kevn in the past and he just brushed me off. However, I get the impression that you are a more reasonable person than he is.

I would honestly like to know what you think of these verses. Please answer in PM if you don't want to post your answer in this thread (for obvious reasons.)

I hope from our past exchanges you know that I won't ridicule or belittle you no matter what your answer it. I am genuinely interested in what your opinion is, so you can't give a “wrong” answer (although I might ask more questions about your answer).

I am displeased with this statement, as it appears to possibly be sexist and misogynistic. Please explain how it is acceptable to speak to a woman this way and how you'd feel if someone said this to your mother, sister, daughter, or wife.

~Ulrika~

I could have sworn that a couple of days ago you said in a post that you would believe differently if someone were able to prove to you that your god did not exist.

Am I mistaken?

If not, I don't see how you could be so open to change when you are fueled by faith.

Briana Dawson

I happen to have said in a post that my husband was hung like a mule.

Billybob has since implied sterility, and what he said above.

I think it was the christian thing for him to say.

Briana Dawson

I believe you can find your answer here. I believe it's somewhere around the middle of the post. (not defending anyone here, just giving where he came up with that)

Come to it, I second her sentiment. What exactly do you believe justified such an assinine remark, Billy?

Technically, we can't prove his god doesn't exist.

Exactly as we also can't prove that Strawberry Shortcake and the Care Bears don't really exist.

So he has essentially said, "I know there's no evidence, no valid reason whatsoever to believe it, but I believe in Strawberry Shortcake anyway because I want to."

And that's where we find ourselves.

Thanks for the source. I see that there are extenuating circumstances. I retract the accusation of misogyny. Instead it is simply a tactless and insulting remark. Yuck.

~Ulrika~

i give this thread 4 stars for comedic relief.

****

Wait'll you see what we have planned for an encore.

The level of hypocrisy from Ulrika complaining about a tactless and insulting remark is truly amazing.

for god's sake ! stop calling yourself christians like you were the only true christians !

Christianity is a general term for monotheists occidental religions which includes roman catholicism, protestantism, orthodoxy and all the other branches you can think of.

here's a nice graph of the reality.


so please be precise and call yourself protestants, catholics or whatever but stop calling yourself christians !

and for those seeking knowledge just have a look at this page

*now waits for the flaming*

A faithfull Atheist

The next time you post scripture, please post all of the relevant information as well, so that it makes sense.

If you had posted the few lines that came before this verse, this would not have seemed quite as random.

"If you had posted the few lines that came before this verse, this would not have seemed quite as random."

Are you saying that killing 42 children is justified in certain circumstances, such as the circumstances possibly shown by the context Alastair's quote sits in?

Musuko.

I don't make the Bible an idol by suggesting it's infallible. It's very accurate for what it is, a historical/devotional collection of books. If you get the impression I brushed you off it was because I told you this very information and you ignored it.

Because I accept what can be proven with logic or science, and accept that I am fallible. I've been proven wrong about things before. I've also proven other people wrong about things before. On this point, I believe what I believe, and cannot change that - but I also accept that it is a belief, not a fact.

To call myself a Christian is accurate.

Believe it or not, despite your chart, it's a little more complex. A lot of people simply identify themselves as Christians, and don't worry about the denomination. It's called being non-demoninational.

There are also a boatload more branches than your little picture dreams of.

More or less. More less than more, but more or less.

Ahem... Jesus also said that we were to follow all the commandments of God. That would be every single commandment in the OT.

The new covenent was in no way a change to the Laws that we have to follow, but was simply a change in how we know about them. The Old Covenent was based on us being taught them while the New Covenent is based on the Laws being written on mens hearts.


So... stop ignoring the OT. You're going against the teachings of Jesus when you do.

I think the Romans might have disagreed with you on that one...

of couse maybe they were on to somethig with the whole purina lion chow program.

The disciples said ....

36Master, which is the great commandment in the law?


Jesus said...

37Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38This is the first and great commandment.
39And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

That's not right...

Luke 23:46And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

See, Jesus never said "It is finished" as his last words... so I guess tho old laws are still in effect.



*waits for the "but maybe Luke was wrong" argument... and the chance to point and laugh at someone who's just proven that the Bible can't be used as proof for anything.*

"His god". That would be the deity of Abraham, yes?

One can in fact prove that his deity does not exist. It's called a Categorical Impossibility. One compares what he (and everyone in his cult) claims of his deity, and compare it to reality.

Simply, it works this way: I know that there are no ravens in my mailbox.

How can I know this for sure? How can I prove this "negative"?

Ravens are a large, black, flighted avian with complex social structures and problem-solving skills.

My mailbox is digital and is hosted on GMail.com.

See how that works?

Strawberry Shortcake - a cartoon depicting an animated doll/fae creature battling a pieman. How does one prove that there is no actual independent entity that this cartoon depicts? One asks the animators, story writers, voice actresses/actors. They will tell you: It's a work of fiction. Beyond that, we know that dolls do not spontaneously gain life, and that there is no magical pastry realm. Categorical Impossibilities.

Same thing for Care Bears.

Same thing for the Deity of Abraham.

The followers of the Deity of Abraham - especially the ones that live in the Southern United States, and in the Middle East - would like to make believe that their deity accomplished a long list of ridiculous things, such as:

Creating the universe/solar system/planet/life/humans in the span of a week;
Breathed life into a clay sculpture;
Flooded the entire planet;
Established light refraction as a symbol of a covenant;
Planted fossils in order to trick humans;
Did we mention stopping the sun - which apparently revolves around a flat planet, according to these followers - in the sky? Burning bushes speaking? Parting the red sea?

Categorical impossibilities. The deity of Abraham doesn't exist. It's a story - a very compelling story, one which many people had a hand in creating and carrying forward. It hooks into human needs and desires, but is /nothing more than fiction/.

Their deity does not, in fact, exist.

The followers will claim "Oh, but in order to make this claim, you'd have to know /everything/ - and search the /entire universe/." - Bullhockey. The followers make the claim that this deity and its' actions are prevalent throughout human - EARTH - history. One merely needs to limit the search to Earth.

Guess what? Chinese history, as well as lake varves, tree rings, fossils, geology, morphology, biology, DNA analysis, physics, medicine, psychology - the entire slew of human knowledge disciplines - demonstrates that the claims of these followers are /merely mythological in nature/.

These same followers have wasted countless amounts of our resources, time, money, and oppressed the civil liberties of countless people in order to force forward their superstition as fact, and effectively crippled public education, science education, civil involvement, and our very government as a consequence.

Want to practice your religion on yourself and your family? Fine. You're still beholden to the law of the land, and when/if you abuse your children (and how many of the followers actually know what the criteria for abuse are? And why do they know these criteria?) - don't cry "religious oppression" when your children are taken from you and given to someone who doesn't /whip/ a /nine-month-old/ for /crying/ because she's /cold/ or /hungry/.

Want to build houses of worship? Go ahead. Do it on your own dime. Don't expect to be able to turn around and run a business out of that house of worship, don't expect to be able to turn around and use the pulpit therein as a political tool, don't expect to be able to turn around and use the very fact that you hold that land in that place as a way to force people /you don't agree with/ to be unable to hold land or run a business near you. And don't cry "Religious oppression" because you're prevented from trodding the rights of others.

Want to believe that your imaginary deity created you and your ancestors? Fine. Don't try and push your supersitious ignorance on me or my child, when I know that my parents had me through sexual reproduction and that your deity was no part of that - don't try to hijack my child's biology courses to push your religion, don't cripple my child's biology classes so that she fears her own body because of your silly superstitions. And don't cry "religious oppression" because your three-thousand year old myths are demonstrably wrong.

And that in no way says that they will be the ONLY commandments... just that those two are the greatest.

Please go back and re-read what it says in the Bible... the entirety of the OT is STILL to be obeyed.