Feed on Posts or Comments 23 September 2014

Christianity &Islam &Judaism Thomas on 15 Oct 2010 12:08 am

Bill Maher opposes the Mosque at ground zero, along with all mosques, churches and synagogues

Bill Maher opposes the Mosque at ground zero, along with all mosques, churches and synagogues. Hear what he has to say with Jay Leno:

The question left unanswered is: why do billions of people want to “worship” imaginary people and retell ridiculous stories created by goat hearders from thousands of years ago?

174 Responses to “Bill Maher opposes the Mosque at ground zero, along with all mosques, churches and synagogues”

  1. on 16 Oct 2010 at 5:06 pm 1.A said …

    Christians don’t worship men full of hatred and intolerance. We worship the creator, sustainer and redeemer of the universe. I truly sympathize with men like Bill who are so frustrated and full of hate. It truly is a tragedy.

  2. on 16 Oct 2010 at 6:12 pm 2.godisamythdealwithit said …

    To A:
    And you don’t believe God himself is “full of hatred and intolerance”? Have you actually READ your Bible?

  3. on 16 Oct 2010 at 10:03 pm 3.kathryn said …

    Quite frankly I’d be afraid to let those words even leave my lips let alone think them….God is beautiful even if in the end its really a “story” and there is different cultures and isnt kinda funny how the whole world believes there is a higher power of somesort….

  4. on 16 Oct 2010 at 10:30 pm 4.3D said …

    3.kathryn said …

    Quite frankly I’d be afraid to let those words even leave my lips let alone think them….God is beautiful even if in the end its really a “story” and there is different cultures and isnt kinda funny how the whole world believes there is a higher power of somesort….

    The whole world believed in slavery, too. Then evolution happened and most of us got civilized and moved on.

  5. on 17 Oct 2010 at 12:21 am 5.Maineac said …

    Most of today’s “progressive” Christians tend to de-emphasize the old testament god of righteous anger. While their fundamentalist brethren are more inclined to assist their lord in carrying out his judgement. By doing things like blowing up family planning clinics or storming into a Unitarian Churches shooting liberals.

    The danger of “progressive” Christians is, although they avoid the more inhumane aspects of their religion, they still teach the miraculous aspect of their god and belief. Their conscripts, once convinced of the infallibility of their god need only read the old testament and fall under the influence of their fundamentalist fellow believers to join their ranks.

    If we are to advance as a society we need to let our current myth go the way of the myths of the early Romans, Greeks, Norsemen and others.

  6. on 17 Oct 2010 at 2:32 am 6.Boz said …

    “By doing things like blowing up family planning clinics or storming into a Unitarian Churches shooting liberals.”

    (sigh), the old lame tired arguments. Ok, I’ll take the bait. How may times has these events happened in 20-30 years? How many were killed? How many Christians praised these acts?

    While you research this on google, look up how many times scientist have killed human beings in order to advance science or even simplify falsify results. Look up how many Christians were killed by your atheists brothers throughout the world just this year.

    I bet you still use science. Therefore, you logic is fallacious as is typical of the liberals.

  7. on 17 Oct 2010 at 1:33 pm 7.Maineac said …

    I am not aware of anyone any time who was killed by an atheist because the person killed would not accept the atheist’s beliefs. I stumbled on this blog while searching for any such events. If you know of any I would appreciate you illuminating me.

    You seem to have adopted the idea that if the killer does not claim to be killing in the name of their god they are killing in the name of atheism. You also seem to assume that all scientist are atheists therefore everything a scientist does is done in the name of atheism. All three of these are illogical assumptions to make.

  8. on 17 Oct 2010 at 2:10 pm 8.Boz said …

    Maineac

    You never did answer the question.

    OK, Red China murders anyone caught praying, possessing a Bible of meeting as Christian because the regime is atheist. We can go back to the USSR to see the same. lets not forget N Korea. Atheism – the state religion. Follow along or die.

    Its funny, Christians typically will admit terrible thing have been done in the name of religion. Atheist refuse to admit their own evil.

  9. on 17 Oct 2010 at 5:23 pm 9.Anti-Theist said …

    People are not killed in the name of Atheism. Atheism is not a belief to be followed or adhered to. Atheists simply do not believe in deities.

  10. on 18 Oct 2010 at 1:27 am 10.Maineac said …

    [quote Boz]…How may times has these events happened in 20-30 years? How many were killed? How many Christians praised these acts?[/quote]

    It would take a lot of research to come up with a definitive answer to these question. Wikipedia list 7 murders, 6 attempts at murder of abortion providers since 1993, but doesn’t attribute the cause to religious zealots. [link]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence[/link]

    A Google search of “crimes committed in the name of god” produce 8.7 million results. Certainly enough reading to keep you busy for a long time and enough results to indicate that it does exist. It is probably fair to assume that most of these people were not mentally stable at the time the acts were committed.

    Your second question would be even harder to answer. So I’ll take just one event, the murder of Dr. George Tiller on May 31, 2009. He was shot in the eye by Scott Roeder while ushering in his church. You can read up on it at [link]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_George_Tiller[/link]. Here are a couple of quotes from the article, “David Leach, publisher of Prayer & Action News, a magazine that opines that the killing of abortion providers would be justifiable homicide…”, “Leach published the Army of God manual, which advocates the killing of the providers of abortion …”. I could not find any statements from avowed Christian Leaders praising Mr. Roeder’s actions and I seem to recall that, at the time, more centrist Christian leaders expressed disapproval of his actions.

    This is not to say that religious terrorism is limited to anti-abortion groups. The motto on the Ku Klux Klan’s website is “Bringing a Message of Hope and Deliverance to White Christian America! A Message of Love NOT Hate!”. I don’t know if they have truly changed their “Message” recently, but you can ask any of the unfortunate people of color who were on the receiving end of their “Message” in the past, it was not love!

    Look up “Christian Terrorism” in Wikipedia. There is a long article complete with references. Look up “Atheist Terrorism” in Wikipedia. There is no page!

    I am not an atheist, I’m a humanist. I believe there is value in religion and in churches particularly as a social institution. The problems we all have with at least two of the worlds major religions, Christianity and Islam, is that they are based on myth, they require the suspension of rational thinking and, at their core, the call on their believers for the destruction of those who disobey their ideology.

    You bring up some totalitarian regimes and state that they are atheists because they punish people who disobey their rules. I think that is called “pretzel logic”. Most of these types of governments establish a state church in which the leaders of the government are revered as gods. This is not atheism. Furthermore, it would be no more accurate to refer to China as Atheist than it would be to refer to the United States as Christian.

    You ask questions that are hard to give a short answer to. I have asked a simple question to which I prefer a simple answer. Are you aware of any avowed atheist, sane or otherwise, who took the life of another human being for the expressed reason that the person would not accept atheism as their belief?

    I’ll leave you with a nice bible verse:

    “God is jealous, and the Lord revengeth; the Lord revengeth and is furious; the Lord will take vengeance on his adversaries, and he reserveth wrath for his enemies.” – Nahum chapter 1 verse 2.

  11. on 18 Oct 2010 at 2:52 am 11.Felipe said …

    How to be tactful here, Yeah you are full of crap. The best I could do to respond to such stupidity. Take a look at some facts.

    The Crusades, the Inquisition, some of the religious wars of the Reformation and the Salem witch trials, on the other hand, were more theological. Even so, the record is not as grim as many make it.
    Thousands of witches were not burned at the stake in America; the Salem witch trials resulted in 19 executions before they were stopped by Christians. The Spanish Inquisition involved thousands and the Crusades tens of thousands, not millions.
    Of course, it’s tragic when even a handful of innocent lives are taken. Injustice isn’t justified because the numbers diminish. But an accurate accounting does put things in perspective, especially when you consider the alternative: Has atheism fared any better?

    The greatest evil has resulted from the denial of God, not the pursuit of God. In this (20 th) century alone, more innocent people have been murdered, tortured and enslaved by secular ideologies — Nazism and communism — than by all religions in history.”
    Grab an older copy of the Guinness Book of World Records and turn to the category “Judicial,” subheading “Crimes: Mass Killings.” You’ll find that immense carnage resulted not from religion, but from institutionalized atheism.

    Guinness reports: “The greatest massacre ever imputed by the government of one sovereign against another is the 26.3 million Chinese killed during the regime of Mao Zedong between 1949 and May 1965. The Walker Report published by the U.S. Senate Committee of the Judiciary in July 1971 placed … the total death toll in China since 1949 between 32.25 and 61.7 million.”
    In the former Soviet Union, Nobel Prize winner Alexander Solzhenitsyn estimated that state repression and terrorism took more than 66 million lives from 1917 to 1959.

    The worst per-capita genocide happened in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge. According to Guinness, “More than one-third of the 8 million Khmers were killed between April 17, 1975, and January 1979. The greatest evil does not result from people zealous for God. It results when people are convinced there is no God to whom they must answer
    Nothing in Christian teaching mandates forcible conversion or coerced adherence to biblical doctrines. The teachings of Christ do not lead logically to wanton bloodshed. In fact, Christ and his followers have been the greatest force for good in history.

    Consider William Wilberforce, who helped abolish slavery in the British Empire 200 years ago; Mother Teresa, who ministered to the poor of Calcutta; and William Booth, who worked tirelessly to alleviate human suffering with the Salvation Army.
    The list goes on and on. And for every well-known servant of Christ to the poor and downtrodden, there have been millions more who served quietly, unnamed and unnoticed.
    This is Christianity’s real record — not a history of evil, violence but a legacy of radical transformation for good.

  12. on 18 Oct 2010 at 4:13 am 12.Hell Yeah said …

    Believers of God versus non-believers of God, who killed more in their name? Who cares. Both killed and kill. By saying non-believers killed more, doesn’t mean God exists.

    By saying more people believe in God than don’t doesn’t make God exist.

    A 2000 year old book talking about God existing doesn’t mean God exists.

    Just because we are the smartest and most advanced of living creatures, doesn’t mean we as a species go to an afterlife in heaven or hell while all other living things don’t.

    Just because we don’t exactly know how the universe was created, doesn’t mean a God had to create us….who or what created God then?….can’t we just cut out the middle man (God) then?

    Everyone used to think the Earth was flat and that the Earth was the center of the universe. What?… a mass majority was proven wrong by science and evolution of the mind? God is just a replacement for the knowledge gap. In the next decade science will be even more advanced and the lesser a God will be needed to explain the unexplained. Remember when people used to believe in the Sun God and the God of Thunder? Is it a coinsidence they don’t exist anymore since we know what the sun is and how thunder is produced?

  13. on 18 Oct 2010 at 5:53 am 13.Severin said …

    6 Boz
    “I bet you still use science.”

    You don’t?
    When you are sick, you probably only pray god to heal you, or what?
    Instead of using the phone, you scream? Instead of using a plane, you walk…..
    How can you be such a hypocrite?

  14. on 18 Oct 2010 at 6:23 am 14.Severin said …

    8 Boz
    “Follow along or die.“
    The sentece so typical for ALL religions, from thousands of years ago to today.
    Christianity DID it for many centuries.
    Islam is doing it today.

    Or, are muslims atheists?

    „Its funny, Christians typically will admit terrible thing have been done in the name of religion.“
    What do we have from their admitting?
    Just imagine: A powerfull organization which did massive crimes for milleniums „admits“ its crimes! Sorry, they say! Nothing terrible happened! We just lost our way for a while (and killed Giordano Bruno and many thousands of other innocent people).
    Why, then not to allow to nazis and to communists to just admit, forgive them, and let them rule further?
    They did crimes, of course, but for MUCH shorter historical period than religions! Easier to forgive!

    You neglect the FACT that highly religious populations elected (Hitler!) or supported (Lenin, Mao) nazis and communists to get power!
    Do you want to say that Germany, China and Russia were atheist countries at the time those regimes took power?
    NO, they took power THANKS to religious masses, which sobered up when it was too late to do something!
    Unlike (stupid) churches, those regimes promissed paradise on earth, not after death, and “cought” ignorant (and poor) masses to their promissing ideologies.
    Religious masses ADORED Lenin and Stalin, at the beginning.
    Those regimes did NOT do crimes in name of atheism, but in name of twisted ideology.
    Atheists are not so stupid.

    Communism = fascism = religion!
    No differences!

  15. on 18 Oct 2010 at 6:32 am 15.Severin said …

    Boz,
    “OK, Red China murders anyone caught praying, possessing a Bible of meeting as Christian because the regime is atheist.”

    Red China (if?) is killing everyone possessing Kur’an, as well?
    “Green” muslim regimes kill everyone possesing the Bible.
    Christian regimes used to kill everyone oposing the church any way. They would do it todey, if they only could!

    Are muslims atheists? Are christians atheists?
    What logic are you using: ones who kill people possessing Bible are atheists. So, muslims are atheists.
    Christians killed each toher for possessing “wrong” Bibles. So some of christians were atheists, too.

    What a logic!

  16. on 18 Oct 2010 at 3:23 pm 16.Boz said …

    Good one Felipe.

    Actually who kills more has been Anti’s, Maniacs and yours all along HY. Are you recanting now? This is a favorite tactic of the atheists. You killed, here , there and therefore God doesn’t exists. I am delighted to see you have come around.

    In 20 years you came up with about 7 possible murders on abortion doctors and not all related to their occupation. They way atheist wail you would have though it was thousands. I knew the number all along and it again makes another great point.

    To ease you mind about another fallacy. I don’t think the earth is flat. The Bible does not state the earth is flat. Actually ancient scientist and sailors and most human beings thought the earth was flat due to the horizon.

    Now, would you get atheist in Red China to stop killing Christians because they read a Bible? That is so uncool.

  17. on 18 Oct 2010 at 5:09 pm 17.Hello21 said …

    “OK, Red China murders anyone caught praying, possessing a Bible of meeting as Christian because the regime is atheist.”

    This is just hilarious ignorance of recent historical events. Go here:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_China
    and read up on modern history.

    As you’ll read the Chinese have had freedom of religion since the 1980s. The only people who really believe that people are murdered in China for their beliefs are fear-mongering fundamentalists and their slower Christian brethren who listen to the ignorant lies they spout.

  18. on 18 Oct 2010 at 5:50 pm 18.Severin said …

    16 Boy
    “Now, would you get atheist in Red China to stop killing Christians because they read a Bible?”

    Christians killed for milleniums in name of religion, then stopped.
    Muslims killed for religon for centuries, and did not stop yet.

    What is the difference?
    Only timing!

    Oh, yes: MUCH more atheists in christian societies today, than in muslim societies!
    Atheists (or hidden atheists, or people who developed critical reasoning and, at least, saw and understood lunacy of religious techings) stopped killing in name of religion by imposing more moral laws.

    Muslims will reduce their killing for religion as soon as atheistic morality prevails in their societies.

    As simple as that!

  19. on 18 Oct 2010 at 5:58 pm 19.Severin said …

    16 Boz,
    “Now, would you get atheist in Red China to stop killing Christians because they read a Bible? That is so uncool.”

    As I said (but you do not comment it!): Someone in Green Afganistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq,…also kills people reading Bible!

    Are atheists doing this?

  20. on 18 Oct 2010 at 7:44 pm 20.Xenon said …

    “Reports of sporadic persecution against such Christians in Mainland China have caused concern among outside observers.[104]”

    From your own wiki article—-Hello! Anyone who relies on wiki is bound to be uninformed. Anyone who would listen to Chin’s propaganda is even more ignorant.

    http://www.loyola.edu/amnesty/chinapers.htm

    Read some real information.

  21. on 18 Oct 2010 at 7:49 pm 21.Hello21 said …

    “Religious leaders who do not follow the Chinese Communist Party are imprisoned or sent to labor camps. Christians, Buddhists, and Muslims are all persecuted. ”

    From your own article. Notice the first sentence. Those religions and leaders that don’t support the communist party. So this is more about politics than anything else. There are official supported Christian groups in China, as much as you’d like to believe otherwise. Christian groups that don’t support the communist party are the ones persecuted. This is not about Christianity or religion, its about politics.

  22. on 18 Oct 2010 at 8:04 pm 22.Susan said …

    The question is not who has the bigger pile of bodies, religion or atheism. The question is why does religion have a pile of bodies at all?
    (Oh yeah, I forgot, it’s because those Chrisitans weren’t real Christians. They didn’t have your interpretation of the “scriptures.”
    And why do liberal Christians keep those stories of the immoral, genocidal god of the old testament in the holy books that they carry around? Why don’t they tear them out of the books and proclaim they don’t worship such an evil god?

  23. on 18 Oct 2010 at 9:00 pm 23.Biff said …

    From Hello21 “Those religions and leaders that don’t support the communist party.”

    Yeah, these atheist kill anyone who do not not follow their arrogant ways. Sure, that makes it much better if the atheist just wnat power from everyone.

  24. on 18 Oct 2010 at 9:07 pm 24.Observer said …

    Biff- “Yeah, these atheist kill anyone who do not not follow their arrogant ways. Sure, that makes it much better if the atheist just wnat power from everyone.”

    You really are quite (a)simple(ton).

  25. on 18 Oct 2010 at 11:27 pm 25.Hell Yeah said …

    Boz said, “Actually who kills more has been Anti’s, Maniacs and yours all along HY. Are you recanting now? This is a favorite tactic of the atheists. You killed, here , there and therefore God doesn’t exists. I am delighted to see you have come around.”

    Boz, re-read my post. I never claimed one kills more than the other. I was simply stating that it shouldn’t matter because both did it. No one really knows the numbers on this, just the fact that both have done it and that the real discussion should be if God exists or not. But aren’t atheists only 4% of the population?…which leads me to my next point……………..

    ————-

    Boz said, “To ease you mind about another fallacy. I don’t think the earth is flat. The Bible does not state the earth is flat. Actually ancient scientist and sailors and most human beings thought the earth was flat due to the horizon.”

    Boz, re-read my post again. Where does it say present people believe the earth is flat? Where do I say the bible says the earth is flat? (The bible does though say light was created before the sun was created – LOL). My point I was trying to make is that the majority of people believed in something at one point in time and they were proven wrong based on new knowledge. You guys on here keep claiming that atheists are only 4% of the population so they must be wrong. And yes, most thought the earth was flat due to the horizon since there wasn’t any knowledge beyond that type of thinking, and just like most people think God exists due to the bible, which is an ancient mythical book. Get the idea now?

    ————-

    By the way, you guys keep bringing up China as an atheist country. Isn’t China the most populated country in the world? Hmmmm…..adding all those, um, Chinese atheists, shouldn’t the percentage of atheists be more than 4%? Just a thought…..and by the way, China is driven on communism, not atheism. Last I knew they didn’t equal each other.

  26. on 18 Oct 2010 at 11:39 pm 26.dxt said …

    Such an evil god Susan? You might want to labor over the scriptures again. God is Holy, God is just and God is loving and merciful. Here is the real question Susan, why would a Holy and just God choose to redeem any of us?….and while we were yet enemies of God by nature? He took it upon Himself through the crucifiction His Son to atone for the sins of the believing. He took the heavy burden of the Law and nailed it to the cross. He made our yolk easy and our burden light so as to remember our infinately offensive sins no more. The Old Testament law was not to show us how good we should be but rather to show us how good we COULDN’T be. It pointed to Christ. Here is another question, would you lay down your life for your enemy who has infinately offended you? And that doesn’t even come close to the perspective of Gods Holiness and the offensivness of sin. We should be humbling ourselves and putting our efforts into praying for forgiveness and mercy and not in hating God.

  27. on 19 Oct 2010 at 12:01 am 27.Hell Yeah said …

    dxt said, “Such an evil god Susan? You might want to labor over the scriptures again. God is Holy, God is just and God is loving and merciful.”

    I love how Christians only pick and choose things out of the old and new testaments that they want to hear and skip over the rest. Of course your priest in your church isn’t going to read versus that show God as evil. I heard of a study recently that has shown that non-religous people know more about the bible than religous people do.

  28. on 19 Oct 2010 at 12:09 am 28.Observer said …

    dxt- That the execution of a Jew in Palestine two millennia ago should evolve into some sort of sacrifice fetish appealing to sacrifice crazed pagans, and for that matter Jews in the day, is not news. What is news is that folk, such as yourself, in this day and age still cling to such crude and vulgar beliefs.

    As to your question, would I lay my life down for an enemy? Hell no. And it was not that some rabble rousing Jew was going to take on the might of the Roman Empire either. He was executed by the Romans, and if the story is true that he turned himself in, he was probably so deluded with the God bullshit that he thought he was going to be saved from the Romans by the Man-in-the-Sky. There had to be a mythology to cover over this inconvenient fact, otherwise folks would not talk about the character.

    The non-religious on this blog don’t hate God anymore than they hate the Easter Bunny; it is all fiction. I suspect the brighter religious folk hate God as they see what a load of rubbish it is and feel like fools, but can’t quite get to the point of chucking the nonsense. Some of the rational folk on this site may hate religion, and some may even hate the more toxic of those who call themselves religious.

  29. on 19 Oct 2010 at 12:47 am 29.dxt said …

    Hell Yeah said, “I love how Christians only pick and choose things out of the old and new testaments that they want to hear and skip over the rest.”

    Its no suprise to me you just did that yourself. Could it be your cherry picking Scripture and dropping them without any knowledge of an all powerful just and Holy God?
    I dont have a preist, I am not religious and there are no verses of Scripture that show God as evil.
    So If the study you heard of is correct, then tell me about the Holiness of God and the offensiveness of sin. Tell me about the doctrine of substitution or the Sovereignty of God. Repent and believe is not a suggestion, its a command. I would suggest it, then earnestly seek to know God.

  30. on 19 Oct 2010 at 1:03 am 30.dxt said …

    Observer said, “The non-religious on this blog don’t hate God anymore than they hate the Easter Bunny; it is all fiction.”

    Maybe theirin lies the problem. What relevance does the easter bunny have with God? Thats your error. You cant bring a Sovereign God down to the level of a childhood fairy tale and equate it all to fiction.

  31. on 19 Oct 2010 at 1:14 am 31.Hell Yeah said …

    dxt, by pointing out that the bible shows God as evil as well as good is considered cherry picking?Cherry picking is only seeing one side when there are two sides, which you have done by saying he is only good.

    “I dont have a preist, I am not religious and there are no verses of Scripture that show God as evil.”

    If you aren’t religous then why are you pointing out things that religous people believe in? You sure there are no versus that show God as evil? Just do a searh on the internet and you will easily find them. Try evilbible.com for starters.

  32. on 19 Oct 2010 at 1:26 am 32.Hell Yeah said …

    “What relevance does the easter bunny have with God? Thats your error. You cant bring a Sovereign God down to the level of a childhood fairy tale and equate it all to fiction.”

    Yeah, but the easter bunny brings us chocolate and candy. Did God ever leave chocolate and candy for you? In all seriousness, though, they are both similar because they are drilled into people’s heads when a child, the only difference is that the parents still believe in God so in turn can’t tell their children that God doesn’t exist like they can with the easter bunny. If you tell kids that the easter bunny will bring them neverending chocolate and candy when they die then they will keep believing in the easter bunny as an adult until they die. Or until they gain enough common sense to see reality that none of it is true. I sure wish those 72 virgins when I die would come true, though, like one rediculous religion believes. Try telling those who truly believe that it won’t happen. No different than non-believers of God and heaven telling believers that it isn’t real.

  33. on 19 Oct 2010 at 2:26 am 33.dxt said …

    Hell yeah said, “by pointing out that the bible shows God as evil as well as good is considered cherry picking?Cherry picking is only seeing one side when there are two sides, which you have done by saying he is only good.”

    What 2 sides? To say that is to not understand the origin or the problem of evil. God allows it but He Himself is not evil nor the author of it. Scripture is clear about that. Evil emanates from the sins of the fallen nature. God is sovereign over it and it will by no means thwart His plans. He works all things according to His plans.

  34. on 19 Oct 2010 at 2:42 am 34.Hell Yeah said …

    dxt,
    I take it you didn’t check out evilbible.com. It pulls quotes from the bible.

    http://www.evilbible.com/Murder.htm

  35. on 19 Oct 2010 at 2:51 am 35.dxt said …

    Hell yeah said, “Yeah, but the easter bunny brings us chocolate and candy. Did God ever leave chocolate and candy for you? In all seriousness, though, they are both similar because they are drilled into people’s heads when a child, the only difference is that the parents still believe in God so in turn can’t tell their children that God doesn’t exist like they can with the easter bunny.”

    Are you serious? Did the easter bunny leave behind 66 books written in 3 different languages over a period of 1500 years by 40 different authors? And all of which blend seamlessly together. Did the easter bunny claim or fulfill any of the mulititude of prophecies that were fulfilled in Scripture? Or maybe the flying spaghetti monster or dawkins favorite tea pot did that. Maybe zeus or vishnu might have left something behind that holds its own under centuries heavy scrutiney. I could go on with the errors in your logic. There is no comparison.

  36. on 19 Oct 2010 at 3:16 am 36.Horatio said …

    Observer (aka Buster) has problem with fallacious arguments. Easter bunny not being real has zero to do with God. Then again his claim of god is not real is baseless as well. We still love our little Buster.

  37. on 19 Oct 2010 at 3:17 am 37.Hell Yeah said …

    “Did the easter bunny leave behind 66 books written in 3 different languages over a period of 1500 years by 40 different authors?”

    The way these vampire books, movies, and shows are popping up, pretty soon Dracula will be our God.

    ———

    “Maybe zeus or vishnu might have left something behind that holds its own under centuries heavy scrutiney.”

    The Greek Gods lasted a very long time, didn’t they? But they aren’t around anymore. The same will happen with Christianity before the turn of the century.

    And you do realize that similar stories of Jesus, for example, virgin birth son of a god, etc, have been around a long time before the story of Jesus, right?

  38. on 19 Oct 2010 at 5:44 am 38.Maineac said …

    Dxt, you are obviously devoted to your belief and I commend you for your devotion.

    Hell Yeah, I took a quick look at the evilbible site, there are a lot of anomalies in the bible, most Christians today just gloss over that stuff and focus on “what a great God we have …”

    One of the things I have never understood is the story of Joshua and the Israelites taking the city of Jericho. It’s a fascinating story with all the blowing of trumpets and marching around, then the walls fall down. The part that bothers me though is verse 6:17, “And the city shall be accursed, even it, and all that are therein, to the Lord:…” And again in verse 21, “And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox and sheep and ass, with the edge of th sword.”. Now, I know the story of Sodom and Gomorrah and how Lot, his wife and two daughters were the only ones to escape God’s wrath as he annihilated every man, woman and child in those two cities because of their wickedness (Gen 19:24 – 25). But why were the inhabitants of Jericho destroyed?

  39. on 19 Oct 2010 at 11:28 am 39.Lou said …

    Maniac and HY

    You are willing to visit evibible but why won’t you visit godandanswers? I think the reason is quite simplistic as are your arguments. You don’t desire knowledge but only to support your already erroneous beliefs. Its OK, just admit you are close minded and full of fallacious arguments (quite lame and old I must say). I’ve been where you are and there is hope for you.

  40. on 19 Oct 2010 at 11:44 am 40.Hell Yeah said …

    Lou,
    Maybe you should give a site that actually exists first. There is no site godandanswers.com. And how can you call someone closed minded and not wanting to desire knowledge when all they are doing is pointing out that the bible shows God as evil as well as good, but the person who only thinks God is good isn’t closed minded? You people don’t make sense. Knowledge is what atheists seek, apparently you believers are the ones who don’t look past anything but to only try to come up with anything to support your rediculous claim that God exists. You people are in denial, so all you do is make shit up along the way to try to ease your mind. If there is real knowledge out there that supports God exists, then I am all ears. Until then, I can tell the difference between reality and bullshit.

  41. on 19 Oct 2010 at 12:07 pm 41.dxt said …

    Hell yeah says,

    “The way these vampire books, movies, and shows are popping up, pretty soon Dracula will be our God.”

    “The Greek Gods lasted a very long time, didn’t they? But they aren’t around anymore. The same will happen with Christianity before the turn of the century.”

    “And you do realize that similar stories of Jesus, for example, virgin birth son of a god, etc, have been around a long time before the story of Jesus, right?”

    I do hope you realize how bankrupt these comments are.

  42. on 19 Oct 2010 at 12:29 pm 42.Observer said …

    32 Hell Yeah- Frankly, I have always found virgins to be a bit boring. I would prefer 72 highly trained Ottoman courtesans.

    35 dxt- We may have uncovered a cure for what ills you. Go to a suburban bookstore in early March. There you will find hundreds of titles by and of the Easter Bunny.

  43. on 19 Oct 2010 at 12:31 pm 43.Observer said …

    dxt- If you are, or get out of the South or are in Austin, you will have a chance of finding a research library. Give it a try.

  44. on 19 Oct 2010 at 2:38 pm 44.dxt said …

    Observer, dont be so deceived. The Bible is the anvil that has worn out many skeptics hammers. You talk about research, have you done any unbiased research on the Bible yourself? Have you earnestly sought out your questions? Is it intellectually inconceivable for you to believe that their is a one true God or is it rather that you dont want a Sovereign, Holy and Righteous God as Judge over you? If He is inconceivable to you then you deceive yourself because it is the Law that is written on every mans heart, the very Law you will be answering to. Take a long hard look at the Scriptures observer because if you dont, the outcome is devastation beyond words. Is this not in your best interest? Stop following these blind guides that claim they are wise but in the end are all the greater fools for it.

  45. on 19 Oct 2010 at 6:46 pm 45.Lou said …

    HY

    Do you see why you are so silly? My website is on an example. There are websites galore answering all the questions you ask. You just don’t desire to learn, only prop up your preconceptions. As well, the fact you don’t like the Bible in no way disproves God. You are just full of fallacies.

    Educate yourself…

  46. on 19 Oct 2010 at 7:41 pm 46.Hello21 said …

    OMG you mean I CAN’T prove that your god doesn’t exist???!! That means he MUST exist!! I CAN’T prove that Zeus doesn’t exist either!!! That means Zeus MUST exist!! Santa Clause YES!! Odin YESS! I must inform the world that everything they can’t prove doesn’t exist must exist! Tell your friends, tell your neighbors, tell Randy Gonzalez! I’m comin.

  47. on 19 Oct 2010 at 8:08 pm 47.Severin said …

    26 dxt
    “God is Holy, God is just and God is loving and merciful.”

    Which is clear from next (and many other) verses from the Bible:

    Jeremiah chapter 49, verse 20:
    “Therefore hear the plan which the LORD has made against Edom and the purposes which he has formed against the inhabitants of Teman: Even the little ones of the flock shall be dragged away; surely their fold shall be appalled at their fate. At the sound of their fall the earth shall tremble; the sound of their cry shall be heard at the Red Sea.”

    Hosea chapter 13:
    “Samaria shall bear her guilt, because she has rebelled against her God; they shall fall by the sword, their little ones shall be dashed in pieces, and their pregnant women ripped open.”

    Numbers chapter 31:
    “Moses said to them, “Have you let all the women live? Behold, these caused the people of Israel, by the counsel of Balaam, to act treacherously against the LORD in the matter of Pe’or, and so the plague came among the congregation of the LORD. Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man by lying with him. But all the young girls who have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.”

    Deuteronomy Chapter 3:
    “Next we turned… The LORD said to me, “Do not be afraid of him,….” So the LORD our God also gave into our hands Og king of Bashan and all his army. We struck them down, leaving no survivors… At that time….
    We completely destroyed them, as we had done with Sihon king of Heshbon, destroying every city—men, women and children. But all the livestock and the plunder from their cities we carried off for ourselves.”

    Loving and merciful!

  48. on 19 Oct 2010 at 8:17 pm 48.Lou said …

    HY

    You so silly (and fallacious – look it up)!

    When you get from recess maybe you can have a lollypop! LOL

    See ya!

  49. on 19 Oct 2010 at 9:09 pm 49.Horatio said …

    OMG, OMG, OMG, OK, OK, OK, Hold on, we got a live one!!!

    H-Y,

    So prove to me the first single cell organism ever existed. I, of course believe it, however you would have much difficulty it seems?

    I can’t PROVE it ever existed so it must have existed or not existed???

  50. on 19 Oct 2010 at 11:06 pm 50.Hell Yeah said …

    dxt said, “I do hope you realize how bankrupt these comments are.”

    You should elaborate on that more, because you sound like you just don’t want to think more deeply the reason behind them and just want to shut out any kind of rational thinking. For example, I used the vampires as a modern day popularity because you pointed out to the bible as being written by many and having many writings. All that just shows that the wishful thinking is and was popular. And the Greek Gods as well as many other Gods existed in peoples minds for a very long time. I am sure during that time period there was no way that they thought they could not be real. And the story of Jesus wasn’t a first of it’s kind when the story of Jesus came about.

  51. on 19 Oct 2010 at 11:12 pm 51.Hell Yeah said …

    dxt said, “The Bible is the anvil that has worn out many skeptics hammers. You talk about research, have you done any unbiased research on the Bible yourself?”

    So how does looking at the whole bible, stories of evil god and good god being biased? You are actually the biased one by only knowing and thinking the god in the bible is only good. Do you just refuse to research the other side of God since you are afraid what you might find out? It is not made up stuff that is being pointed out about your God and the bible. And by the way, I was a Christian who beleived for a large part of my life, so it is kind of hard to be biased when I have been on both sides.

    Oh, and the bible, which was written by man 2000 years ago, shouldn’t be your only knowledge base.

  52. on 19 Oct 2010 at 11:18 pm 52.Hell Yeah said …

    Lou said, “Do you see why you are so silly? My website is on an example. There are websites galore answering all the questions you ask. You just don’t desire to learn, only prop up your preconceptions. As well, the fact you don’t like the Bible in no way disproves God. You are just full of fallacies.”

    Since when does posing questions in a sarcastic way mean I am wonderin what the answer is? They are being asked that way to see how you will answer them. And obviously there is a lot of websites out there like what you were trying to point to, and they do not answer the questions in true reality. And I don’t desire to learn? Hmmm….being on both sides of the ball, isn’t that the best way to have learned? And the bible is only one of many things that contradict God and one of many things that point to God not being real.

  53. on 19 Oct 2010 at 11:23 pm 53.Hell Yeah said …

    Lou said, “When you get from recess maybe you can have a lollypop! LOL”

    You do realize that when you guys make comments like this all the time it just shows that you are backed into a corner and it’s the only thing you can resort to.

  54. on 19 Oct 2010 at 11:32 pm 54.Hell Yeah said …

    Ah, and finally we have Hor who said, “So prove to me the first single cell organism ever existed. I, of course believe it, however you would have much difficulty it seems? I can’t PROVE it ever existed so it must have existed or not existed???”

    So we are coming around full circle with this again. How about you go back to previous posts when we had this discussion before. And now you actually say you believe it? I guess that is great that we can agree the first single cell organism existed since we are made of cells and cells self replicate. Using many scientific observrations like that and put them together to point to what likely is the case. See, that is how reasoning happens. Using proofs to point to other things. Kind of hard to do that with God when there aren’t any proofs that can actually point to him existing. Now if we were made of pixie dust, then there may be something to talk about. But we know magic really doesn’t exist, and it didn’t exist during the days of the bible stories either.

  55. on 19 Oct 2010 at 11:45 pm 55.Hell Yeah said …

    dxt said, “Take a long hard look at the Scriptures observer because if you dont, the outcome is devastation beyond words. Is this not in your best interest?”

    Really? How about babies and young kids that die and never get a chance to believe? Do they get eternity in hell? Or what about those that were raised not to believe? (By the way, I am not actually wondering the answers to these questions, I am asking them sarcastically to make a point.)

    Don’t you find it strange that something that happens during finite times creates an outcome for infinity?

  56. on 20 Oct 2010 at 12:49 am 56.Horatio said …

    “I guess that is great that we can agree the first single cell organism existed since we are made of cells and cells self replicate.”

    I asked where the proof is and you go on a tangent of what we see today. That is not proof it is speculation. You wouldn’t want us to excuse you of using Christian techniques of reasoning would you?

    OMG! Next you claim that life formed without a Creator. C’mon provide the evidence.

  57. on 20 Oct 2010 at 1:19 am 57.Hell Yeah said …

    In the natural sciences, abiogenesis, or origin of life, is the study of how life on Earth could have arisen from inanimate matter. It should not be confused with evolution, which is the study of how living things change over time. Amino acids, often called “the building blocks of life”, occur naturally, due to chemical reactions unrelated to life. In all living things, these amino acids are organized into proteins, and the construction of these proteins is mediated by nucleic acids. Thus the question of how life on Earth originated is a question of how the first nucleic acids arose.
    Some facts about the origin of life are well understood, others are still the subject of current research. The first living things on Earth are thought to be single cell prokaryotes. The oldest ancient fossil microbe-like objects are dated to be 3.5 Ga (billion years old), just a few hundred million years younger than Earth itself.[1][2] By 2.4 Ga, the ratio of stable isotopes of carbon, iron and sulfur shows the action of living things on inorganic minerals and sediments[3][4] and molecular biomarkers indicate photosynthesis, demonstrating that life on Earth was widespread by this time.[5][6]
    On the other hand, the exact sequence of chemical events that led to the first nucleic acids is not known. Several hypotheses about early life have been proposed, most notably the iron-sulfur world theory (metabolism without genetics) and the RNA world hypothesis (RNA life-forms).

  58. on 20 Oct 2010 at 1:26 am 58.Hell Yeah said …

    There, does that describe enough evidence for you? How about that fossil record they have? You claim of a need of exact evidence, but you also think God is real. Please tell me how there is evidence of God? And don’t say because we had to be intelligently designed. That just means you don’t understand most of science very well. If you did, you would realize that random elements mixed together over a Billion years can do a lot of things. In small chances, order can appear to happen. Then you add in evolution, which is another step in creating what is thought to be designed intelligently. This also then brings up the very important question then, if an intelligent God has to exist then who or what created this intelligent God? God is just the middle man of the equation according to your intelligent design equation, so therefore if he is cut out he isn’t needed. Is that too much for you to take in?

  59. on 20 Oct 2010 at 1:27 am 59.Hell Yeah said …

    There, does that describe enough evidence for you? You claim of a need of exact evidence, but you also think God is real. Please tell me how there is evidence of God? And don’t say because we had to be intelligently designed. That just means you don’t understand most of science very well. If you did, you would realize that random elements mixed together over a Billion years can do a lot of things. In small chances, order can appear to happen. Then you add in evolution, which is another step in creating what is thought to be designed intelligently. This also then brings up the very important question then, if an intelligent God has to exist then who or what created this intelligent God? God is just the middle man of the equation according to your intelligent design equation, so therefore if he is cut out he isn’t needed. Is that too much for you to take in?

  60. on 20 Oct 2010 at 1:35 am 60.dxt said …

    Severin, Stop clicking and pasting Scripture. Im not one of those supposedly “ignorant” christians. Do yourself a favor and pick up a good commentary. That way you will maybe begin to see WHY there is such carnage in the OT. God is constantly dealing with wicked, obstinate and disobedient people despite warnings of wrath or promises of blessing. In short, DO NOT TRIFLE WITH GOD! REPENT AND BELIEVE! If you think wicked, obstinate and disobedient people were dealt with harshly in the OT then I can conclude you haven’t read the book of Revelation. The OT pales in comparison. The prophetic clock is ticking my friend. Your in a high stake gamble with eternity, so double check those cards your holding in your hand before its too late to fold.

  61. on 20 Oct 2010 at 2:00 am 61.Hell Yeah said …

    dxt, you just brought up a big reason why most believers believe. It is because they are tricked into believing that they feel threatened if they don’t believe. Fear. Kind of clogs up the mind to think rationally.

  62. on 20 Oct 2010 at 2:04 am 62.Horatio said …

    H_Y

    Stop pasting and cutting from other websites. Geez! Yes, well all know about several hypothesis. Those are not proof. Can you provide proof or are you just another hypocrite? You do believe in this first cell with the complexity comparable to a city?

    We have also seen the fallacy of digression you attempt to impute. You can stop with that as well.

    http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html

  63. on 20 Oct 2010 at 3:00 am 63.dxt said …

    H Y says,

    “Oh, and the bible, which was written by man 2000 years ago, shouldn’t be your only knowledge base.”

    The Bible is not my only knowledge base. I prefer the Scriptures because they have held their own for centuries. They are divinely inspired and written through the hands of men. They are autoritative and sharper than any double edged sword. They are meant to cut when you use them. I would like to get to your other posts but im going to bed now. I will touch on some tomorrow my friend. By the way, your comment about “who created the creator” you have broken a fundamental rule of philosophy. You dont need an explaination of the explaination to come to a plausible conclusion. Its called circular reasoning. Untill tomorrow my friend.

  64. on 20 Oct 2010 at 3:08 am 64.dxt said …

    H Y says, “you just brought up a big reason why most believers believe. It is because they are tricked into believing that they feel threatened if they don’t believe. Fear. Kind of clogs up the mind to think rationally.”

    The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.
    (Proverbs 9:10 NASB)

  65. on 20 Oct 2010 at 3:36 am 65.Maineac said …

    I guess this is how most of these arguments end up… One side has their faith in things they can’t prove, the other side logic and reasoning which won’t take into account mystery.

    I believe Atheism is a religion. And knowledge is the god of the Atheist.

    12 H-Y, you got it backwards, “God is just a replacement for the knowledge gap.” Knowledge is the replacement for god when you begin to question your beliefs.

    While the man (or woman) of faith can rest comfortably, knowing they have the right world view with no need to question it.

    39 Lou, “I’ve been where you are and there is hope for you.”

    I’ve been where you are and I’m not certain there is hope for you.

  66. on 20 Oct 2010 at 11:15 am 66.Horatio said …

    ?One side has their faith in things they can’t prove, the other side logic and reasoning which won’t take into account mystery.”

    I really value knowledge so I am glad to encounter you. Maybe you then can answer the question H_Y cannot? Prove that first cell existed.

  67. on 20 Oct 2010 at 12:38 pm 67.Observer said …

    #45 Lou- You have a website? Please give us that website.

  68. on 20 Oct 2010 at 1:55 pm 68.dxt said …

    #51 H Y,

    Im curious to learn of your conversion to atheism. Im also curious to learn what sort of teaching you were under and did you study the Word yourself. Im reluctant to think you did any of the latter for the simple reasons, through reading your posts, that your even seemingly missing the “milk” or “elementary” teachings of the Word. It seems you weren’t able to recieve any “meat” and able to mature. Scripture warns of seeds falling among “thorns” or seeds being trampled under foot. Read the parable of the sower in Luke 8. What kind of “soil” were you? I ask you to reconsider. Put off your atheism for awhile, repent and ask God for forgivness. Study on your own and get yourself under some solid teaching.

  69. on 20 Oct 2010 at 2:24 pm 69.dxt said …

    #50 H Y says, “You should elaborate on that more, because you sound like you just don’t want to think more deeply the reason behind them and just want to shut out any kind of rational thinking. For example, I used the vampires as a modern day popularity because you pointed out to the bible as being written by many and having many writings. All that just shows that the wishful thinking is and was popular.”

    You completely missed what I said about the Bible, Go back and read again. Its more than just “many people writting many things”. I would like to hear your refutation on just the composition of the Bible alone. How would this be possible for man to accomplish? Again, your vampire theory is understatedly left wanting.
    —————————————————-

    “And the Greek Gods as well as many other Gods existed in peoples minds for a very long time. I am sure during that time period there was no way that they thought they could not be real.”

    This sounds more like a plausible argument for the “teapot” theory. Again, Where is the comparison? Where are these ancient documents that made it through scrutinies firery furnace?
    —————————————————–

    “And the story of Jesus wasn’t a first of it’s kind when the story of Jesus came about.”

    Actually research this one for yourself and then let me know why honest historians reject that the Gospels were “cleverly devised fables”

  70. on 20 Oct 2010 at 2:58 pm 70.dxt said …

    #55 h y says,

    “Really? How about babies and young kids that die and never get a chance to believe? Do they get eternity in hell? Or what about those that were raised not to believe? (By the way, I am not actually wondering the answers to these questions, I am asking them sarcastically to make a point.)
    Don’t you find it strange that something that happens during finite times creates an outcome for infinity?”

    And what point is it that you are trying to make? I do not find your last question strange. The Word of God reveals this to us. Do you question God? Well then, as an atheist, God has a few questions for you and it starts a little something like this…….

    Job 38:1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind and said,
    Job 38:2 “Who is this that darkens counsel By words without knowledge?
    Job 38:3 “Now gird up your loins like a man, And I will ask you, and you instruct Me!
    Job 38:4 “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding,
    Job 38:5 Who set its measurements? Since you know. Or who stretched the line on it?

  71. on 20 Oct 2010 at 3:04 pm 71.Severin said …

    45 Lou
    “As well, the fact you don’t like the Bible in no way disproves God.”

    Do you claim god exists?
    Then, please, prove it finally!

    Atheists do NOT claim god exist.
    Nothing to prove!

  72. on 20 Oct 2010 at 4:56 pm 72.dxt said …

    Rom 1:19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
    Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

    Rom 2:14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves,
    Rom 2:15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,

    Severin, the fact that we still bicker to this day about the origin of creation, the countless unanswered questions of evolution along with its fanciful theories………Does this not testify to the Scriptures? Romans 2:15 is your answer to the moral debate. We prove God through creation and origin of morality that is intrinsic to our human nature. You bear the burden of proof to say there is no God. You cant prove it because you have nothing.

  73. on 20 Oct 2010 at 6:02 pm 73.Maineac said …

    #68-dxt I cannot speak for H-Y, but I was raised a Southern Baptist. I started college as a Religion major having accepted a call to preach. My brother, two sisters, and parents still attend the SB church. My brother and father have both been deacons in the church and one of my sisters is married to SB pastor. So you might say the ground I fell in was full of manure :)

  74. on 20 Oct 2010 at 6:32 pm 74.Maineac said …

    66 – hor – “Prove that first cell existed.”

    Correct my logic if I’m wrong.
    Cells reproduce by division => Cells have a single parent => there can be no cell without a parent!

    By definition the “first” cell has no parent therefore there can be no “first” cell!

    The problem in my logic, as I see it, is in the first statement, “Cells reproduce by division”. This statement assumes that they can only come into being by division. So, is it possible for a single cell organism to come into being through any other means? I don’t think you can give a definitive “yes” or “no” to this, even if there is no evidence that it has happened, that doesn’t preclude the possibility that it could happen.

    The alternative is that cells predate everything including the idea of god. Perhaps cells are god! Or, stated another way, life is god. Before you can go down that path you have to answer the question “What is god?” If you begin with preconceived notions from 2000+ year old stories you will never come up with a different answer.

  75. on 20 Oct 2010 at 6:33 pm 75.Anonymous said …

    dxt- “Im not one of those supposedly “ignorant” christians.” I hate to go back to this, but if English is your first language, you appear woefully ignorant of how it is used. And as for dispelling your suspected ignorance, please share with us your take on Kierkegaard.

  76. on 20 Oct 2010 at 11:37 pm 76.Hell Yeah said …

    “You bear the burden of proof to say there is no God. You cant prove it because you have nothing.”

    Actually, it is the opposite. YOU bear the burden of proof because you are the one claiming God exists. You are claiming something is there when there is no proof. Another way of looking at it is if I told you I can fly and say to you to prove I can’t……you would then say prove you can fly.

    —————–

    “your comment about “who created the creator” you have broken a fundamental rule of philosophy. You dont need an explaination of the explaination to come to a plausible conclusion. Its called circular reasoning.”

    Actually, who created the creator is relevant in this case. Believers, such as yourself, think that because the universe is complex that it had to be intelligently designed and therefore a creator must exist. We all agree that something can’t come from nothing, so something had to always exist. So if God had to intelligently design the universie because it is complex, then who intelligently designed him since he is complex? God couldn’t have come from nothing, right? And God couldn’t have always existed, otherwise how did he gain his complex intelligence? Using your complexity can’t come from nothing, where did God’s complexity come from then? So thinking all that through, what is wrong with matter and energy always existing in some form and with Billions of years of random events, some complexity forms through chance? At least we can prove matter and energy exists.

    —————-

    “Where are these ancient documents that made it through scrutinies firery furnace?”

    This is regarding other Gods throughout history that lasted a long time. How do you think we know about these Gods? Egyption Gods are written all over the pyramids, etc. So what are you trying to prove? And you do realize that these other religions that lasted a long time died out just as the Christian religion was nearing it’s formation, so I’d say there is enough documention out there for something that hasn’t been around in a very long time.

    —————–

    “honest historians reject that the Gospels were “cleverly devised fables””

    You do realize that real historians don’t consider the bible to be true historical events, right?

  77. on 20 Oct 2010 at 11:52 pm 77.Hell Yeah said …

    “Prove that first cell existed.”

    Other than the scientific observations that are put together that I pointed out to you, the only other way is to get a time machine for both of us to go back into the past and then go search for it. Which brings up another good point I just though of. You are claiming God exists now, right? I am not claiming the first cell still exists. If I did claim that, then I would have to prove it by showing proof that it is out there, for example, finding it and showing it to you. The realm that you claim your God exists in today doesn’t even prove to exist, but cells do prove to exist today. Getting a better understanding now? But, of course, you said you do believe the first cell existed, so it must no be an unreasonable claim. Also, hasn’t there been an experiment recently where scientists did “create” a form of life from non-life?

  78. on 21 Oct 2010 at 12:23 am 78.dxt said …

    #75, Thank you for the english lesson. The comment was sarcastic towards how I commonly hear it used. Thats why it was “in quotation marks”. I appreciate the effort to dispell my ignorance though. I like that, I would like to hear more from you anonymous. As for Kierkegaard, I dont have an opinion. Im not familiar with his works.

  79. on 21 Oct 2010 at 1:18 am 79.dxt said …

    H Y #76,

    Your first comment is astounding! Do you read these posts? Do you realize what you just refuted? You just told me that you have no objective set of intrinsic moral values and you deny the exsistence of what has been created around you. Now I could follow up with some questions for you that would have immense implications according to what you just said. But, I will refrain from doing so and allow you to clarify. Im not so sure, as to the relevance, of what I posted earlier has anything to do with proving you can fly. If you told me you could fly, I most certainly wouldnt say “prove you CAN fly” as if that were my only option. I would say(or think) your probably suffering from bad head trauma and say “humans CAN’T fly”, just like evolution CANT prove the origin of life. So again, the burden is on you.

  80. on 21 Oct 2010 at 1:41 am 80.Horatio said …

    “Getting a better understanding now?”

    Crystal Clear. You can’t prove the first cell existed yet you BELIEVE it did. Why? By what you see today.

    I believe in God. Why? Because of of complexity, design and intelligence in the universe. That only comes about by a desiber, creator or GOD if you like.

    Now you get the point.

  81. on 21 Oct 2010 at 1:47 am 81.Horatio said …

    “You do realize that real historians don’t consider the bible to be true historical events, right?”

    You don’t say? LOL, which ones are “Real”. Which feild of historians are you pigeon-holeing her?

    I have read many historians who believe the Bible is historically accurate. Maybe you could share some historical facts that are not accurate?

  82. on 21 Oct 2010 at 2:12 am 82.dxt said …

    #76 H Y,

    The second part of your post has a whole lot of tail chasin’ going on. You will never be able to come to a plausible conclusion if you persist in needing to give an explaination of the explaination. He is GOD. He is a spaceless, timeless, immaterial, personal and powerful creator. Philosophy was the queen of science. It could not have got that status by circular reasoning. Its nonsense, and its nonsense to believe that matter and energy, by chance, created the biological complexity we see today. And thats just one of the many examples. You see, the cards are just stacked too deep against macroevolution. The intelligence we see on the microscopic level far out weighs the causal abilities of random matter and energy. It boggles my mind why people would believe the extreme far reaches of this possibility, if any at all, but cant possibly believe it just might have been intelligently created….of which it shows evidence for. Science can only get us so far….thats where philosophy and theology come in.

  83. on 21 Oct 2010 at 2:38 am 83.Observer said …

    dxt- The Kierkegaard comment was from me- I neglected to fill in the header. To eliminate one’s ignorance on a topic, study it. Read Kierkegaard. He is a stepping stone to bigger and better things.

  84. on 21 Oct 2010 at 2:56 am 84.dxt said …

    #76 H Y,

    For the third part of your post I would like to say that im NOT saying that people never believed in these gods. What I am saying is where is the “staying power” after they have been scrutinized and held up against what we know today. We know them to be idolatrous myths especially when held up to Scripture. Scripture claims authority and still has authority and is the measuring rod against which all others are compared.
    The Christian faith struggled early in its formation because of heavy, violent persecution. Which, by the way, is one of the proofs in defense of Scripture. Myths, are why geek mythology was dying out.

  85. on 21 Oct 2010 at 3:00 am 85.dxt said …

    #76 H Y,

    The fourth part of your post I believe was answered by #81.

  86. on 21 Oct 2010 at 3:28 am 86.dxt said …

    Observer, I will take a closer look at his works. However, I am slightly skeptical already of his theology by skimming his popular quotes, though I do not know the context. I will give him the benefit of the doubt though, unless he badgers me with reckless interpretations. I hold no literature up to Scripture and declair it as bigger and better. It obviously wont be an exhaustive study of the man but I will give’em a fair hearing. I thank you for the reference.

  87. on 21 Oct 2010 at 4:13 am 87.Hell Yeah said …

    “im NOT saying that people never believed in these gods. What I am saying is where is the “staying power” after they have been scrutinized and held up against what we know today.”

    So what do we know today that prove your scriptures, aka made up shit by man, is real and totally different than these other Gods? They lasted a couple thousand years and so far your religion has lasted a couple thousand years. And so you mention about what we know today. Good point, since science has gained the most amount of knowledge over the last hundred years and more importantly over the last decade than ever before. So that is why I say before the turn of this next century, your belief in God will be less than the no belief in God. The numbers are rising as we speak.

  88. on 21 Oct 2010 at 4:23 am 88.Hell Yeah said …

    “Now I could follow up with some questions for you that would have immense implications according to what you just said.”

    Please do so. And do so without using phrases from man made scripture shit.

    ——————

    “If you told me you could fly, I most certainly wouldnt say “prove you CAN fly” as if that were my only option. I would say(or think) your probably suffering from bad head trauma and say “humans CAN’T fly”

    Hmmmm…..now take that analogy and relate it to how non-believers think of your belief in an invisible man in the sky.

    By the way, this brings up another good point that I just thought of. Let’s just say a God did create the universe for arguments sake since it is complex. How does that translate to a current God that send people to an eternal afterlife if they believe? And again, do not quote stupid man made scriptures.

    —————-

    “You can’t prove the first cell existed yet you BELIEVE it did.”

    Yes, using things that exist today and from scientific observation of those things, it is stupid to believe something such as the first of what makes us up existed. Such stupidity! But because of that, an invisible man in the sky that has never been proven to be real based on magic that really doesn’t exist is actually more of an applaudable belief. Keep wishing.

  89. on 21 Oct 2010 at 4:29 am 89.Hell Yeah said …

    “Maybe you could share some historical facts that are not accurate?”

    If it is a fact, then it is accurate, duh.

    So a man living in a whale, a talking snake, a man parting the sea, a man building a boat and collecting every species in the world because of a flood that covered the entire earth even though there isn’t enough water to do so, then returned all those species while they didn’t eat each other or harm him and he returned all of them to their original spot in the world…….and those are historically accurate? And those are only a few points from the bible.

  90. on 21 Oct 2010 at 4:31 am 90.Hell Yeah said …

    “I believe in God. Why? Because of of complexity, design and intelligence in the universe. That only comes about by a desiber, creator or GOD if you like.”

    But isn’t God complex and intelligent, so that means he was created by something as well, right?

  91. on 21 Oct 2010 at 4:39 am 91.Hell Yeah said …

    Fellow Atheists, am I not making sense in all my posts? I just don’t get how what I am saying isn’t reasonable to these believers. Are they just that blind in the faith of wishing God was real, that they will have too hard of a time if they ever found out the truth that God isn’t real and that there is no afterlife? (I still don’t get how that a creator of the universe somehow equals an afterlife for humans.)

  92. on 21 Oct 2010 at 7:18 am 92.Severin said …

    72 dxt
    “You bear the burden of proof to say there is no God. You cant prove it because you have nothing.“

    So I bear the burden to prove wrong any single idiotic claim anyone brings to public!?
    What a logic!

    I have to prove there is no Allah, no Christian gods, no Qutzalcoatl, no Zeus, no Santa, no Ra, no Tooth Fairy, no Superman….

    I think the green tea pot orbiting Jupiter was an allmighty who created universe.
    Can you prove it wrong?
    (Of course I do not think it seriously, but, can you prove it wrong? By your logic, the burden of proof is on you!)

    Anyone claiming something has to give some support to his/her claims.

    I do not claim anything! I even do not claim there is no god, which does NOT make you right! I just DO NOT BELIEVE your or anyone’s claims without evidences. If you want to be right, you prove yourself!
    When you provide some evidences for your claims, you might attract my attention.

  93. on 21 Oct 2010 at 9:26 am 93.Severin said …

    Dtx, Boz, Lou,…
    To put things on their places, and to stop your arrogant requiring of evidences for each word someone puts on this blog, let me explain what atheists DO think and say:

    WE (atheists) do NOT claim there is no god!
    What we say is: we do not BELIEVE you, or anyone, claiming there is one. We do not believe it without evidences.
    We do not believe ANYTHING without evidences.

    So, gentlemen, if you claim there is a god, you better support your claim with some evidences, if you want to attract our attention and to persuade us.
    We (atheists) have nothing to prove, as we do not claim anything!

    Moreover, we find your unproved claims dangerous for society!
    Just imagine: form time to time a group of people invents a new god and establishes a new religion, (Ra-ism, Qutzalcoatl-ism, Christianity, Islam…)and expects other people to jst BELIEVE their idiotic claims, unsupported by any evidences!
    If people do not believe, they torture and kill them!

    We find religions (ALL of them!) based on unproved claims retrogressive for human society: such lunatic beliefs (very different among each other), imposed by brutal force, stops science and stops progress of human society.

    So, genlemen, again: if you have something to tell us, please DO NOT expect us to just trust you, if you do not provide evidences for your claims!

    Provide evidences!

  94. on 21 Oct 2010 at 10:48 am 94.Severin said …

    76 HY
    (For dxt, Lou, Horatio, etc)
    “So thinking all that through, what is wrong with matter and energy always existing in some form and with Billions of years of random events, some complexity forms through chance?“

    It is, of course, right way of thinking, but Iwill be free to give one small comment to this, to close it to people like dxt et al:

    Matter/energy has its own immanent intelligence: natural laws.
    NOTHING happens against, or beside those laws.
    „Behaviour“ of matter and energy is precisely ruled by natural laws.
    Those laws precisely determine what is possible to happen under specific conditions, and what is not possible to happen at all.
    For example: hydrogen and oxigen WILL produce water UNDER CERATIN CONDITIONS. They will NEVER FAIL to produce water if they „meet“ under those specific conditions! It is IMPOSSIBLE TO AVOID their reaction to make water under those specific conditions!
    But, they WILL produce hydrogen peroxide under other conditions. They will NEVER FAIL to give peroxide under proper conditions! And, they will NEVER produce water under conditions under which they produce peroxide!
    They will NOT FAIL, EVER, to react the same way under same conditions, and, they will never make any reaction under other conditions.
    So, they will NOT REACT RANDOMLY, but RULED BY NATURAL LAWS, with NO EXCEPTION, UNDER RIGHT CONDITIONS!

    We can NOT talk „readiness“ of elements and compunds to react as something „random“! Their „radiness“ to react under certain conditions is given by natural laws that never fail!
    We can only talk CONDITIONS as to be randomly imposed by nature!

    In billions of years and in trillions of different „situations“ imposed by different climates on earth, on different spots on earth, there obviously were many oportunities for chemical reactions to occur! Elements and simple compounds only „waited“ for proper conditions to INEVITABLY go to reactions, ruled by natural laws.

    Nothing so much „randomly“ that we should wonder!

    No god necessary!
    In case YOU need god, you HAVE to explain its origin!

  95. on 21 Oct 2010 at 12:06 pm 95.dxt said …

    Severin, I would like to hit some of your other posts buy im in a bit of a hurry this morning. Your matter and energy post I agree with except, however, creating peroxide, hydrogen, oxygen etc. is far far far from its ability as a causal agent for LIFE. There has yet to be found among all of our scientific technology the right combination for it to create such a thing. The underlying issue here, especially for Hell Yeah, is mans understanding of God. He has put the evidence out there and we, as natural men, question His divine nature? Romans 9:20 “Who are you o’man that answers back to God” We are but men, who in our best estate is VANITY being mutable and are a sinful fallen creature, obnoxious to the wrath and displeasure of God for our sins and dare to open our mouths against Him? Man is born poor, foolish and ignorant, born as a wild ass’s colt without understanding.And you will take it upon yourself to question Him? We need to humble ourselves my friend.

  96. on 21 Oct 2010 at 12:14 pm 96.Horatio said …

    “Yes, using things that exist today and from scientific observation of those things, it is stupid to believe something such as the first of what makes us up existed. Such stupidity!”

    Stupidity? No, it is a revelation! You believe in something that cannot be proven. You are using the present conditions and making an assumption of the past. I do the same. I have never witnessed anything, ever, that is complex, obviously designed as the infrastructure of the universe. Therefore I conclude a designer is involved.

    The first time you can demonstrate amazing complexity taking place by random chance, then we can revisit the issue. Even men, with great intelligence cannot reproduce such events even in a lab.

  97. on 21 Oct 2010 at 2:54 pm 97.Severin said …

    95 dxt
    “Your matter and energy post I agree with except, however, creating peroxide, hydrogen, oxygen etc. is far far far from its ability as a causal agent for LIFE.“

    It is not far at all!
    “Complex” chemistry is equally subject of natural laws exactly the same way as “simple” chemistry is. In fact, there is NO such a thing as „simple“ or „complex“ chemistry, except in our understanding of it. Chemistry is chemistry, and both water and its ingredients, and a molecule of a protein, and its ingredients, rule in accordance to the SAME natural laws.
    NO special laws for water and for proteins!

    Chemistry of building of very complex organic molecules iz LESS depending of random events than chemistry of building less complex molecules. Why? Because less complex molecules already CONSIST of elements and chemical groups and react as one, ALREADY complex unit, not as single atom. So, you have recations among big groups of atoms, which are MORE prone to some natural order, not less!
    Try to compose a puzzle of small single elemnts. Then try to compose it using already composed parts that have some sense.
    So, when you, after a few billion years of „random“ chemistry, finally have complex molecules, it is to logically expect QUICKER building of more complex ones.
    One conglomerate of complex organic molecules finally (and expectedly) showed firsst signs of „living“: taking food, „shitting“ and, of course, dying.
    However, being „alive“ or not, it was still a chemistry, nothing more and nothing less!

    Life is nothing more than chemistry.
    There is no other „causal agent“ for life but chemistry: laws of attraction and repulsion, and chemical bonding of atoms and groups of atoms (molecules), under given conditions, rule the life.

    When chemistry stops working the way we prefere it to work, and starts working other way (because conditions changed!), we die.
    When chemistry changes its „direction“, all living creatures die: plants, spiders, microorganism, mice, primates, humans…

    Do primates (or mice) go to paradise or hell when they die?
    If you say no, it is vrey strange, because chemistry of thier living is EXACTLY the same as chemistry of living of humans!

    Life is a „collateral benefit“ of chemistry!
    Like light is „collateral benefit“ of heating of a wire in a bulb!

    And, dying is chemical process just as living is.

  98. on 21 Oct 2010 at 3:11 pm 98.Severin said …

    91 HY
    “Fellow Atheists, am I not making sense in all my posts?”
    You are making sense!
    “I just don’t get how what I am saying isn’t reasonable to these believers.”
    You are reasoable! Everything you say is logical and in accordance to common sense and science.

    “Are they just that blind in the faith of wishing God was real…,”
    They are! They are THAT blind!
    It is hard to believe to an individual with no more than average intelligence, that such people exist!
    I, personally, am not trying to persuade anyone of them that I am right. They are too much brainwashed (or just stupid) to expect it.

    I debate here for some time hoping that a child will sometimes read it, and, at least, start to DOUBT and start to POSE QUESTIONS.

    I will be happy if a child under pressure of early brainwashing starts to THINK.

    THAT is why I keep debating here.

  99. on 21 Oct 2010 at 3:32 pm 99.Severin said …

    81 Horatio
    “I have read many historians who believe the Bible is historically accurate. Maybe you could share some historical facts that are not accurate?“

    Are you trying to tell us that „reading many historians“ is evidence for something?

    By saying it, you make us much easier to debate here!
    We are able to say (and, unlike you, to list them and to cite them) MANY more historians who believe the Bible was NOT historically accurate.

    Do you, in lack of arguments, start debating with „arguments“ whose father is bigger and stronger, and who can piss further?
    You came to those branches?

    Sad!

    If you want an event that is not historical fact, it is very simple: resurrection!

    I do not need witnesses for it. It is biologically (chemically) impossible!
    So it just COULD NOT HAPPEN, so it CAN NOT be historicaly accurate.

    As the whole christianity hangs on such a bullshit, waht can we conclude?

  100. on 21 Oct 2010 at 4:21 pm 100.Severin said …

    96 Horatio
    “Therefore I conclude a designer is involved.“

    O.K., Horatio, let us follow some logical steps, for the (about) 1000th time:

    You see the complexity of universe and you conclude it must have been created by a creator.
    Creator who created such a complexity MUST have been at least of the same complexity as universe (his/its creation). Could you agree? You might say (as expected) that it (god) was even MORE complex than its creation (the universe), and I would agree.
    Everything logical till that point, no complaints: a complex creator creatd the complex universe!

    Now you HAVE to tell us where that creator came from!
    You HAVE to explain how was he “started to exist”!

    Who created him/it. Who created the creator of him/it? Who created the creator of the creator of god?

    If you tell us now NO ONE/NOTHING created god, you are, in fact, telling us that something VERY complex was possible to “just exist”, without being created!

    When we say the same for matter energy, you say it is impossible?

    WHY?

    It was YOU who imposed a paradox that says:
    some complex things (universe) MUST have been created, another complex things (god) HEVE NOT to be created.
    So it is YOU who owe us explanation of this paradox.

    Why something needs a creator, and something else does not need a creator?

    WHY, Horatio?

  101. on 21 Oct 2010 at 6:55 pm 101.Ben said …

    “Now you HAVE to tell us where that creator came from!
    You HAVE to explain how was he “started to exist”!”

    Wouldn’t you in turn HAVE to tell us where the universe came from! and explain how IT started to exist? You have never done so and theories are a dime a dozen. We need concrete facts, since it MUST be natural.

  102. on 21 Oct 2010 at 11:41 pm 102.Horatio said …

    “Now you HAVE to tell us where that creator came from!”

    Not a problem there, I just use scientific principles. Have you ever studied scientist who support ID? They are real and EVERYTHING. Well never mind. You also realize a majority of scientist do believe in a Creator, right? Hmm, it doesn’t prove anything but does make you go Hmmmmm.

    The answer how was He created? He always existed (sort of like your theory on matter).

    How did He create? I don’t know but we will one day. See how nicely a Creator fits into science!

    Now if you could support your theory as Ben suggested we will compare the two.

    Since we must have intelligence to create, God is our best theory.

  103. on 22 Oct 2010 at 4:01 am 103.dxt said …

    #97 Severin,

    So, in your fantastic shpeel you have just given me, you are asking me to accept, not only the probabilities of chemistry creating life, but to compound the probabilities of this effect, over billions of years to get to where we are today….and do it through randomness…….???? I dont know what to say…..Where does “information” come into this theory? The information for properly sequencing the amino acids that make up the proteins…..which is defined by the sequence of the gene…….which is made up of DNA? Dont ask me to compound the random probabilities of these. These are only the beginnings of the mass of probabilities or I should say improbabilities. What about the extremely delicate invironment needed to even form one single amino acid?…..of which there are 20 of them needed! Chemistry equals life? HOW?…..where do you see that?…No special laws needed for water or proteins??……As if that settles the case!! These probabilities are just too fantastic for me my friend. As one has said, “that would be like a tornado ripping through a junkyard and assembling a fully funtional 747″

  104. on 22 Oct 2010 at 4:57 am 104.Severin said …

    101 Ben
    “Wouldn’t you in turn HAVE to tell us where the universe came from!”

    That is your typical, but poor tactic: trying to replace burden of proving of YOUR claims to someone else. YOU claim something, without arguments, without logic, then expect me/us to explain something “in turn”.
    In turn to WHAT?

    Rotten!
    Typical for believers having no debate culture. Or better to say having no debate morality.
    In any debate club you would not “survive” more than one single question!

    I did not claim anything, you did!
    I never claimed matter comes from anywhere, or matter was created!
    It was YOU who claimed a creator created universe. It is quite normal and logical to expect YOUR answer for simple question: where that creator comes from?
    It is quite fair to explain why the very same criterion is valid for one thing (matter) and is not valid for another one (god).
    VRY simple: WHY was matter created, and god was not?

    Besides, if you claim a creator created universe, could you kindly tell us WHICH ONE?
    Was it Ra? Allah? Quetzalcoatl? One of many christian gods? Zeus? Maguayan? Marduk? P’an Ku? Odin (etc…)?

  105. on 22 Oct 2010 at 5:19 am 105.Severin said …

    102 Horatio
    “Now if you could support your theory as Ben suggested we will compare the two.”

    WHAT theory, Horatio?
    Where did you see my theory to be supported?
    Please quote my theory that I have to support!?

    Lies again?
    It seems that lies and cheating are the only tool you are able to use in debates!
    “I say something and challenge others to prove me wrong”, THAT is your rotten tactics!
    No, gentleman, such games do not pass here. If YOU claim something (god created universe), YOU support it!
    Do not expect me/us to support your idiocies.

    It was YOUR “theory”, gentleman, that god created universe.
    I only posed some logical questions on which you (finally!) answered you had NO ANSWERS:
    “How did He create? I don’t know …”

    Why are you trying to say something you do not know it?
    Isn’t it arrogancy?

    You are a blind and arrogant ignorant. If I was one, I would honestly admit it and ask someone to teach me better than I already know.
    Of course, I am doing it my whole life: I LEARN!

  106. on 22 Oct 2010 at 5:48 am 106.Severin said …

    103 dxt
    I am not asking you to accept anything!
    I only gave a plausible review of steps how life most probably started and developed on earth.
    Unlike you and your like-minded ones, I do not expose theories, just opinions.
    Tose opinions are based on our today’s state of knowledge and do not opose logic.

    You are, of course, free to believe “less fantastic” stories about a god picking mud and making man from it, then making woman from his rib.
    I let you trust Biblical story about “multiply and fill the earth” by incest.
    You just enjoy biblical stories about masacring of babies, and worship your lunatic god.

    Can you, perhaps, support the creation theory that you obviosly expose, by telling me/us, who, the hell, created the creator?
    If the creator was not created, can you tell us why, the hell, something is valid for god (god was not necessary to be created) and is not valid for matter/enrgy (matter/energy must have been created)?
    How can you explain double criterions you obviously involve in your theory?

    Can you tell us WHICH creator created universe?
    So many “creators” were exposed to public during the history of human race, that it makes big confusion.
    How can I be certain christian god was the creator, if 3,000 yers before Christ someone told it was Ra?
    And 2,000 years before Ra, someone told us it was some Chinese or Persian god?

    Please enlighten us!

  107. on 22 Oct 2010 at 12:00 pm 107.dxt said …

    #106 Severin,

    How is your theory plausible when it has been shown and proved an utter failure! The Miller-Urey experiment shows how IMplausible this is. They produced a few amino acids, right handed and left handed…far far short of the 20 CORRECT aminos needed, because the right handed aminos are useless for life. All they made was a useless tar substance.
    like I said before, after science has extended its arm as far as it possibly can, in present, one then turns to philosophy and theology to continue to ponder what science has given us. In order to come to a conclusion, you need a plausible explaination, when you have reached that explaination(such as a creator God) you dont need to explain your explaination. Its a fundamental rule in philosophy. If I saw a pile of complex machinery on the backside of the moon, I can conclude that something intelligent put it there. I dont need to explain how the intelligent got the intelligence in order to prove the complex machinery. HE IS GOD! As for the Christian God as creator…show me another source of authority comparable to the Bible. Where is ra’s authoritative sources, or any other supposed gods? Again, GOD is just that, GOD. He is spaceless, timeless, immaterial, powerful and personal creator. God is not bound by the laws of the natural world, He is infinately above His creation…thats why I said in my previous post that it is impossible for the natural man to fully comprehend Him. He has revealed Himself through the Scriptures…….Yet you keep chasin’ your tail wondering “Who created the creator”, round and round you go.

    Proverbs 3:5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart And do not lean on your own understanding.

  108. on 22 Oct 2010 at 12:06 pm 108.Hell Yeah said …

    “These probabilities are just too fantastic for me my friend. As one has said, “that would be like a tornado ripping through a junkyard and assembling a fully funtional 747?

    The probabilities of life in the universe are a low chance, but over Billions of years of elements moving around, a very tiny part of the universe got lucky, and it is called earth. There may be other planets out there similar to earth, but since we are so tiny compared to the rest of the universe, those planets are too far away. Most planets are just random rocks floating in space that didn’t get so lucky. And all those asteroids. So you see, the small chance did occur. Why would God create a universe where 99.999999 of it is wasted objects and space? Scientists just found a planet that is too far away that would take 2 generations to get to, but it is about 4 times the size of earth, but it doesn’t rotate so one side is too hot and the other side is too cold, but the middle is similar to earth. Why would God create such a retarded planet? And our sun, just like other stars, is going to die out someday far in the future and life on earth will be no more, so what happens to this great creation of God if life is no more?Please use that logic to understand. And also keep in mind, the first life form was quite a bit simpler than we are today and it took billions of years of adapting to the environments through building blocks and evolution to get to where we are today.

  109. on 22 Oct 2010 at 12:10 pm 109.Hell Yeah said …

    “As for the Christian God as creator…show me another source of authority comparable to the Bible. Where is ra’s authoritative sources, or any other supposed gods?”

    So when one makes up a religion and realizes that all the other religions are dying or have died out, what is the best way to make this new fresh idea click with everyone and last? It is to make up a god that is too powerful not to want to believe in.

  110. on 22 Oct 2010 at 1:44 pm 110.Horatio said …

    Oh Sev and HY

    It is like talking to a wall. Severin on this site you have made claims that matter has always existed, chemicals reacted, lightning struck and life formed then random chance took over. All this with no creator I might add!
    You have never supported your beliefs other than the claim “believe me”. Mathematics alone refutes your efforts. Now you claim “I have no theory”, That is true but you have made claims.

    You are a hypocrite since you claim nature is all that exists yet you have no theory that fits that mold. I on the other hand have never made such claims. Therefore you have boxed yourself in to that realm yet your claims do not fit within your self-imposed restrictions.

    I now point you back to post #102. Read it carefully and learn. Anyone with common sense can understand the rationality.

  111. on 22 Oct 2010 at 1:47 pm 111.Horatio said …

    HY

    ROTFL, did you just refer to the planet as retarded? I felt like I was reading a Jr High child’s paper. What are you like 12? Wow!

  112. on 22 Oct 2010 at 7:12 pm 112.Severin said …

    107 dxt
    “The Miller-Urey experiment shows how IMplausible this is. They produced a few amino acids, right handed and left handed…far far short of the 20 CORRECT aminos needed,….“
    In only ONE WEEK! Nature had some 150 – 200 billion weeks to do the job.
    Do you have any idea about the difference between 200 billion and one?

    „like I said before, after science has extended its arm AS FAR AS IT POSSIBLY CAN (my bold!)..“
    That is the typical way churches speak in their retrogressive role in human society, and religious people accept. The same reason was present when christian church burned G. Bruno and almost burned G. Glilei: WE (church) said science finished its job, and YOU dare to opose our conclusions. So we will burn you!
    Fortunately for human society, scinece told us many more news, and is still capable to tell us much more.

    „In order to come to a conclusion, you need a plausible explaination, when you have reached that explaination(such as a creator God) you dont need to explain your explaination.“
    So, in order to come to conclusion you like, you knead filosphy and logic to fit your conclusion!
    You just say: god created universe, and you have nothing to add! Everything is perfectly clear and O.K.!
    Please!
    Do you really take me(us) for idiot(s)?

    „…show me another source of authority comparable to the Bible.“
    Kuran!
    Both, Kuran and Bible are the same BS for me, but how can YOU, from your position, negate Kuran in favour of Bible? WHAT is wrong in Kuran, and is not wrong in Bible?

    „He is spaceless, timeless, immaterial, ….“
    In one word: nothing.

    „Where is ra’s authoritative sources, or any other supposed gods?“
    You forget that Ra was the source of authority for much longer period of time than christian god!. Then he dissapeared.
    Christianity was only a few centuries old when it started falling apart to many different churches. Which one is the right one? How can we recognize it?
    They will all dissapear in the next few hundred years, probably even earlier than that, just as many and many other religions dissapeared. People living in times of Ra would never believe Ra could dissapear! Yet, no more Ra!

  113. on 22 Oct 2010 at 7:49 pm 113.Severin said …

    107 dxt
    “Proverbs 3:5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart And do not lean on your own understanding.”

    All religions play the same music: trust us, do not use your brain.
    At least in that point, all religions are EXACTLY the same. No exceptions!
    The less you know, the easier will they do to you and with you what they want.

    That sentence (verse) is the ESSENCE of all religions and it is TERRIFYING!
    That is the verse that stopped science and caused brilliant, ingenious people to hide their thoughts, or to be burned in case they did not shut their mouth.

    Do not expect me ever to join this terrible world of obedient idiots.
    I like to use my brain.

  114. on 22 Oct 2010 at 8:09 pm 114.Severin said …

    110 Horatio
    “Severin on this site you have made claims that matter has always existed, chemicals reacted, lightning struck and life formed then random chance took over. All this with no creator I might add!”

    Please trace my posts back as far as you wish, and you will find NO claims of the sort.
    I was too cautious to claim anything, because, unlike you, I do NOT think that I am educated enough to pose scientific theories.
    Yes, I tried to explain some things my way, using always words like “might”, “probably”, or posed questions which could suggest the answer.

    I was even fair enough to NEVER negate existance of “higher being”! I said many times in this blog: I do not believe it personally, BUT I can not prove it, so I leave this possibility no matter how badly it fits logic, science and reality.

    So, please, Horatio, do not keep lying to justify your misery in debating.
    Try to be honest!

    YOU claimed god exists, I did not.
    YOU claimed god created universe, I did not!
    Give some support to your claims, if possible without trying to put someone else in your own shit.
    If you can not, keep swimming there!
    Without me!

  115. on 22 Oct 2010 at 9:12 pm 115.Hell Yeah said …

    “ROTFL, did you just refer to the planet as retarded? I felt like I was reading a Jr High child’s paper. What are you like 12? Wow!”

    LMFAO, well since there are two meanings of the word retarded:

    - underdeveloped: not fully developed
    - mentally challenged: an offensive term meaning intellectually or emotionally challenged

    ……I obviously can’t say a planet is mentally challenged for obvious reasons, but the underdeveloped part of the definition suits it well.

    So before you claim I am a 4 year old, and now 12? You don’t have any other comeback to make than to act like a 12 year old?

  116. on 22 Oct 2010 at 9:29 pm 116.Hell Yeah said …

    For those of you who believe in a God had to create the universe because of its complexity, then why do some of you believe there is an afterlife that humans go to? How does that relate?

  117. on 23 Oct 2010 at 12:14 am 117.MrQ said …

    Horus (#102)

    You also realize a majority of scientist do believe in a Creator, right?

    According to who? Most certainly not the P(h)ew Forum site, right?

    The answer how was He created? He always existed

    How did He create? I don’t know but we will one day. See how nicely a Creator fits into science!

    Yet again, wrong on all counts, Cleatus. How did you decide that this “Creator” has a dick? You seem to suggest that it is a he. WHAT DIFFERENCE is there between a “Creator” and a “God”? Nothing, in your addled mind.

    You are attempting to suggest what science will find a “Creator” one day. The gods which were ubiquitous and interactive 2000+ years ago and invisible today will re-appear? Will they pull a rabbit out of a hat? Rain fireballs and lightning bolts upon us? Raise the dead? What does the science tell YOU?

  118. on 23 Oct 2010 at 4:28 am 118.dxt said …

    #112 Severin,

    “IN ONLY ONE WEEK”…In only one week, miller-urey only produced FAINT TRACES of amino acids. It wasn’t untill other scientists, through hundreds of replications and modifications using the miller-urey model, that they were able to produce a few of the SIMPLE amino acids needed for life….the rest of the 17 amino acids needed require much more complicated synthesis. So much for abiogenesis…..I know, I know…your gonna tell me billions of years are needed right? You can add all the time you need…its your world, we’re just livin in it.

    I know the difference between 200 billion to 1…if you add a few more zeros to it, it would describe a fraction of the mathematical possibilities that abiogenesis would happen.

    My comment about science extending it arm, was in no way meant to conclude science has ended. It was to simply show at any specific time in past history, we may take science, as far as it has reached for us at that specific time, and apply it to philosophy and theology.

    I say “God created it” because HE declared it! Read Genesis! All of nature attests to it(thats in the Bible, really)….but you say yet you have no proof. All of our scientific technology we have today has yet to refute 1 ancient book in the Bible. This is only one source of many as to its consideration of authority. I would take “And God created……” as authoritative thus far. Now, wouldn’t you agree….? Of course not, thought you would say that….so, I guess we need more proof for a creator huh? Your earlier post about “chemicals=life” and us having the same exact chemical make up as rats, mice, spiders etc……where then can we insert moral agency into this long chain? How do you propose we got this, if we are chemically no different? And your comment about rats, mice, spiders going to paradise or hell……do rats, mice, spiders,etc blaspheme God, or shake their paws or legs at the sky and demand proof for His existence? Are they morally responsible for their actions? Do they murder, or steal, or covet? Thats how silly your comment was. Are we not head and shoulders above, and distinct from, every other living creature? HOW’D THAT HAPPEN? Do YOU realy take me(us) for idiot(s)?

    Whats wrong with the kuran……well, 3 centuries after Christianity already has been well established, along comes muhammad and claims Jesus is not God He was just another prophet. Muhammad claims he is the last of the line of prophets and claimed he gets direct revelation from allah. Muhammad writes these revelations down into what is known today as the kuran. By this, muhammad then fills yet another prophey by Christ. Scripture was already closed and cannonized by the time of muhammad. The kuran contradics itself as to who was the first to visit mahammad, and there are 4 different statements for that. I wont go further on this but if you want to know more, study it yourself. Its a false religion.

    Im going to bed now. Untill tomorrow my friend.

  119. on 23 Oct 2010 at 6:06 am 119.Hell Yeah said …

    “I say “God created it” because HE declared it! Read Genesis! All of nature attests to it(thats in the Bible, really)….but you say yet you have no proof. All of our scientific technology we have today has yet to refute 1 ancient book in the Bible.”

    God created it because a book made by man says so. Huh? And where do you guys get the idea that the bible hasn’t been proven wrong?

    ————

    “Are we not head and shoulders above, and distinct from, every other living creature?”

    We descended from a similar ancestor as the ape and our brain developed more rapidly which gave us the ability to think critically. All other animals either know that it is in their nature to die and have no need to question it or they either don’t realize that they will die until it happens.

    ————–

    Afraid to answer my question as to why believers think there is an afterlife just because they think a creator had to create the complex universe?

  120. on 23 Oct 2010 at 7:12 am 120.Severin said …

    118 dxt
    “I know the difference between 200 billion to 1…if you add a few more zeros to it, it would describe a fraction of the mathematical possibilities that abiogenesis would happen.”
    You obviously have no idea about probability theory.

    Probability theory says that probability somehing to happen, expressed as number (percentage), or a ratio of numbers (fraction), is “number of benefitial events” divided by “number of possible events”.
    Probablity to get tail when tossing a coin is 50% (or ½), because the number of benfitial events is 1 (only 1 tail on the coin) and the number of possible events is 2 (2 sides of the coin).
    If we had 2 tails on the coin, our probability to get a tail would be 100 %
    If we want to get 20 sequentional tails from normal coin, it is much more probable to get them if we toss the coin 100 years, than if we do it for 5 years!
    So, dear dxt, the bigger the number of years (benefitial circumstances), the bigger the probability something to happen. Then, when you add as benefitial circumstances billions of places where such things could happen on earth (seas, lakes, vulcanos, caves.., trillions of atoms and molecules present, chemical afinity among them (laws of chemistry), you can see that it would be a miracle if life did not happen!

  121. on 23 Oct 2010 at 7:17 am 121.Severin said …

    118 dxt
    “I say “God created it” because HE declared it! Read Genesis!“

    And I am god, because I declare it. Read this post (previous sentence)!
    What a logic!
    What an “evidence”!

    You, dxt, are so boring!
    Why are you pushing me all the time to find confirmation for your claims in the Bible?
    Why not in Kuran? Odyssey? Harry Potter? Maya stone writings in S. America? Persian clay plates?

    All gods somehow „declared“ they created universe. Why would I trust your god and not Maya’s god, or Allah, or Persian gods who declared their divinity on clay plates?
    Please!

  122. on 23 Oct 2010 at 7:23 am 122.Severin said …

    118 dtx
    “Whats wrong with the kuran……”

    The same as with the Bible.
    But, if you do not see that, why aren’t you a muslim?

    Yuo have just pointed the essence of all relgions: they ALL the same BS!
    They were invented to keep people obedient, in ignorance, to make upper society classes easier to rule them and to rob them.

  123. on 23 Oct 2010 at 8:45 am 123.Severin said …

    118 dxt
    “where then can we insert moral agency into this long chain?“

    Morality is natural category imosed by evolution.
    For very primitive species, everything that was good for an individual, was moral. Even to eat their fellow individuals, from the same species.
    Then those species which „accepted“ different behavior, for example NOT to eat other individuals from the same species, survived. Other ones dissapeared.

    Higher species have highly developed moral rules: they collected them in their genes through hundreds of millions of years of evolution.
    EVERYTHING is submitted to survivaal if species, including „morality“. So „morality“ is nothing more than a tool of survival of species.

    You can see evolution in action watching development the human race!
    Primitive humans (physically NOT different from today’s humans!), invented blood thirsty gods and applied „their“ (god’s) laws in practice.
    They killed and massacred and punished using dramatic and painfull methods, very frequently massively (extermnating of whole towns).
    Just look at Biblical laws: kill, stone, stone, kill, masacre, kill children, rip pregnanat women…

    We DO NOT have such laws today! Humans did not change physically, but understood that Biblical laws could cause extermination of the race.
    So they changed their laws!
    In favour of survival of species, again!

    Moreover, although humans did not change physically, they did change mentally!
    Most human individuals FEEL killing of other people (especially babies) as something very wrong, without „rational“ explanation! Most people COULD NOT kill another man or baby.
    It was NOT the case only a few thousand yers ago, when, obviously, majority of people did not FEEL killing of babies as something wrong!

    Evolution in action, in only a few 1000 of years!

  124. on 23 Oct 2010 at 9:08 am 124.Severin said …

    118 dxt
    „Are they morally responsible for their actions? Do they murder, or steal, or covet? Thats how silly your comment was. „
    Of course they are responsible for their actions!
    If they do not act properly in a situation, they will be eaten, or their youngs will be killed!
    That ARE moral rules imosed by evolution, that all animals obey!
    Do not pretend you did not know how bravely animals defend their own lives and, especially, lives of their youngs. WHY?
    Beacause they HAVE moral rules „built in“ their genes.
    An elephant will never defend a hypopotamus, but will die for his/her youngs! That ARE moral rules!

    Do they murder, steal, or covet?
    Of course they do!
    They murder fo food (individuals from other species), BUT they also murder fo mating (individuals from their own species). That is the part of THEIR moral rules.

    They steal! Don’t you know anything about behaviour of animals? They steal even from each other, inside the same group!
    They covet! They covet for food AND they covet for mating, very, very strongly!

    What is it with you, man? Is the Bible the only book you ever read?
    Did so many killing of baies and masacring of pregnant women, and stoning, and robbing and stealing, and burning… there (in the Bible) twisted your mind so much that you do not see reality?

  125. on 23 Oct 2010 at 8:20 pm 125.dxt said …

    #119 H Y,

    Tell me how or where the Bible has been PROVEN wrong, that which we Christians follow so blindly? Im not talking about the copyists small insignificant errors either like grammar or wheather solomon had 40,000 stalls of horses or 4,000. These are well known and understood. Im talking about errors within the text itself that are either doctrinal errors or errors, taken in their proper context, that CLEARLY contradict what we know to be ABSOLUTE fact today.
    —————————————————-
    It seems that there is no end of ASSUMPTIONS that are made by evolutionists that NEED to be made in order to reconcile difficult issues within the theory itself to keep it valid……despite any evidence. It just takes billions of years…yeah, I got it.
    —————————————————–
    Im not afraid to answer any of your questions H Y. The after life we christians claim rests on the authority of the creator God of the bible. The authority of the Scriptures comes from the historical reliability of such documents. With what we know today, these ancient scriptures are verified in various fields such as hydrology, archeology, paleontology, astronomy, meterology, biology, anthropology, geology, and physics. We have no reason to distrust its claims. The bible is not meant to be intructions for science but rather is verified by these fields. Scripture claims authority and has yet to be proven otherwise. The afterlife is a glorious promise for those who believe. This is just one area is to why I believe the scriptures are true. I know of no other accurate ancient document of this caliber. Does this answer your question?

  126. on 23 Oct 2010 at 8:55 pm 126.dxt said …

    #120 Severin,

    I like how you equate coin tossing probabilities with the creation of life. Its far from that simple. I shouldnt have to elaborate to show how ridiculous this is. This isn’t about the probabilities of one single event happening in the past, this is about much much more than that. I need not say more.

  127. on 23 Oct 2010 at 9:06 pm 127.dxt said …

    #121 Severin,

    Im sorry you think that I am boring. I encourage you to double check what I say. I appreciate that my friend. I believe I answered your post in my last to H Y. If you would like more, let me know and I will try to condense all of it the best I can without it being extremely lengthy.

  128. on 23 Oct 2010 at 9:24 pm 128.dxt said …

    #122 Severin,

    Kuran VS Bible……No comparison as to JUST the historic reliability of the Scriptures. Look it up.

  129. on 24 Oct 2010 at 1:00 am 129.dxt said …

    #123 Severin,

    I could write a book on the faulty assumptions of your posts so I will just hit on a few.
    You have, ever so conviently, decided to use “murder” interchangeably with the act of killing to support your view. Murder, is to UNJUSTLY and UNLAWFULLY take another PERSONS life. When a lion eats a cub, he does not “murder” it, he kills it……for various reasons. When a monkey eats another breed of monkey and cracks his head on a tree he does not “murder” it, he kills it. When a shark, forcibly copulates with a female shark, he does not “rape” her, he just forcibly copulates with her. That is nature and thats simply how it works my friend. Do you know any lawyers among monkeys or courtrooms among lions? Animals are not moral agents. Mother bear protects baby bear not because she is “morally” obligated but because it is instinctive to do so and does not therefore provide proof of evolution in action. If evolution were true, we would have NO BASIS on which to condemn the actions of others. Right and wrong would be morally neutral and completely subjective, in fact right and wrong wouldn’t even exist.
    Most people dont “feel” murder is wrong, murder IS wrong. Murder is not a subjective issue in the sense you put it in. Jeffrey Dahmer may have “FELT” murder is right, but doesnt make it so. Morality is intrinsic to humanity, not nature.
    The Biblical laws did not threaten humanity, but rather preserved it. For example, homosexuality, in ancient times, was punishable by death because it literally shattered the hopes for human civilization. We are today, fortunately, living under the age of Grace. The OT laws, rituals and sacrifices for sin were to point to the cross, the coming messiah, to atone once and for all the sins of the believing. Christ was delivered over by the predetermined plan of God and the perfect sacrifice was made to God. “It is finished” I believe, were the words of Christ on the cross. Hellelujah!! Time to ask for forgiveness!

  130. on 24 Oct 2010 at 1:44 am 130.Hell Yeah said …

    “Tell me how or where the Bible has been PROVEN wrong, that which we Christians follow so blindly?”

    So if I took a book on the history of the United States and threw in and mixed in supernatural events, then hundreds of years down the road people can claim that those supernatural events must be real because Martin Luther King Jr and John F. Kennedy were real people and Texas, Florida or any other state is a real state that exists? Now relate that back to the bible. The supernatural isn’t real, so anything in the bible that talks about the supernatural is WRONG. The people or places might have existed, but anything added that talks about the supernatural isn’t real.

  131. on 24 Oct 2010 at 1:47 am 131.Hell Yeah said …

    “The afterlife is a glorious promise for those who believe.”

    Ah, so something that someone does during their short finite life gives them eternity of something else. Right. How about babies that died and didn’t get a chance to believe? How about kids who were raised by us horrible atheists? Do you see the flaw in your thinking?

  132. on 24 Oct 2010 at 2:32 am 132.dxt said …

    #130 H Y,

    I fthe supernatural does not exist, then explain to me how Christianity endured immediate heavy persecution? Either Christ was supernaturally raised from the dead or He was not. If He was not, then do you really think that multitudes would pay the ultimate price to believe a lie? Including all of the disciples??? Or would it make more sense that Jesus was indeed supernaturally raised? I will share with you what individuals endured for not renouncing the risen Christ:

    St. Stephen
    St. Stephen suffered the next in order. His death was occasioned by the faithful manner in which he preached the Gospel to the betrayers and murderers of Christ. To such a degree of madness were they excited, that they cast him out of the city and stoned him to death…………About two thousand Christians, with Nicanor, one of the seven deacons, suffered martyrdom during the “persecution that arose about Stephen.”

    James the Great
    The next martyr we meet with, according to St. Luke, in the History of the Apostles’ Acts, was James the son of Zebedee, the elder brother of John, and a relative of our Lord;……..The account given us by an eminent primitive writer, Clemens Alexandrinus, ought not to be overlooked; that, as James was led to the place of martyrdom, his accuser was brought to repent of his conduct by the apostle’s extraordinary courage and undauntedness, and fell down at his feet to request his pardon, professing himself a Christian, and resolving that James should not receive the crown of martyrdom alone. Hence they were both beheaded at the same time.

    Philip
    Was born at Bethsaida, in Galilee and was first called by the name of “disciple.” He labored diligently in Upper Asia, and suffered martyrdom at Heliopolis, in Phrygia. He was scourged, thrown into prison, and afterwards crucified, A.D. 54.

    Matthew
    Whose occupation was that of a toll-gatherer, was born at Nazareth. He wrote his gospel in Hebrew, which was afterwards translated into Greek by James the Less. The scene of his labors was Parthia, and Ethiopia, in which latter country he suffered martyrdom, being slain with a halberd in the city of Nadabah, A.D. 60.

    James the Less
    ………He was elected to the oversight of the churches of Jerusalem; and was the author of the Epistle ascribed to James in the sacred canon. At the age of ninety-four he was beat and stoned by the Jews; and finally had his brains dashed out with a fuller’s club.

    Matthias
    Of whom less is known than of most of the other disciples, was elected to fill the vacant place of Judas. He was stoned at Jerusalem and then beheaded.

    Andrew
    Was the brother of Peter. He preached the gospel to many Asiatic nations; but on his arrival at Edessa he was taken and crucified on a cross, the two ends of which were fixed transversely in the ground. Hence the derivation of the term, St. Andrew’s Cross.

    St. Mark
    Was born of Jewish parents of the tribe of Levi. He is supposed to have been converted to Christianity by Peter, whom he served as an amanuensis, and under whose inspection he wrote his Gospel in the Greek language. Mark was dragged to pieces by the people of Alexandria, at the great solemnity of Serapis their idol, ending his life under their merciless hands.

    Peter
    Among many other saints, the blessed apostle Peter was condemned to death, and crucified,….. By this, Peter, perceiving his suffering to be understood, returned into the city. Jerome saith that he was crucified, his head being down and his feet upward, himself so requiring, because he was (he said) unworthy to be crucified after the same form and manner as the Lord was.

    Paul
    Paul, the apostle, who before was called Saul, after his great travail and unspeakable labors in promoting the Gospel of Christ, suffered also in this first persecution under Nero. Abdias, declareth that under his execution Nero sent two of his esquires, Ferega and Parthemius, to bring him word of his death. They, coming to Paul instructing the people, desired him to pray for them, that they might believe; who told them that shortly after they should believe and be baptized at His sepulcher. This done, the soldiers came and led him out of the city to the place of execution, where he, after his prayers made, gave his neck to the sword.

    These are quoted from “Fox’s book of myrtyrs” There are tons of these in his book. Does this sound like the ressurection didn’t happen? Christ says “take up your cross” which only meant one thing back then. Scripture admits:

    1Co 15:17 and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins.
    1Co 15:18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.
    1Co 15:19 If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied.

  133. on 24 Oct 2010 at 2:39 am 133.dxt said …

    #131 H Y,

    What flaw in my thinking??? These questions you pose about babies and children I have seen multiple times here by you! Are you looking for these answers or do you think these are legit arguments. If you dont know just ask and get on with it already. Your giving me a headache!

  134. on 24 Oct 2010 at 2:08 pm 134.Ben said …

    “How about babies that died and didn’t get a chance to believe?”

    I though atheists knew all about the Bible? David speaks of his baby who dies in II Samuel and the scriptures state David will say the baby who dies in heaven.

  135. on 24 Oct 2010 at 11:14 pm 135.Observer said …

    #134 I thought the OT did not apply to you pig eating Christians! Maybe Jewish babies go to heaven, but Christian babies are cast into hell forever where they variously are writhing in burning pools of oil, and can never suckle, yet see divine God-created teats (God created Hell too)to torture them with hunger and insecurity.

    Then again, it could all be a big bullshit story and we either live or die. I vote for latter.

  136. on 25 Oct 2010 at 2:46 am 136.Horatio said …

    Observer you so silly! You don’t get a vote I know, you are special (and I mean special) however your vote still means nothing Much like the coming elections!
    What will be will be and you are on the losing end. I suppose you are use to that but you better make sure you get this one correct for once.

    Ben

    I believe you refer to the age of accountability I would imagine such a theology would vary based on the awareness of the individual.

  137. on 22 Nov 2010 at 12:41 pm 137.God is a Delusion said …

    Theists,
    You might want to start reading books such as the God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. If you don’t feel like reading the whole book, just pick out a chapter or two on the topic you would like to know most about.

  138. on 22 Nov 2010 at 2:59 pm 138.Rostam said …

    GID,

    Yeah yeah, heard it all before read dawkins, hitchens, harris blah blah blah. Dawkins book has been debunked numerous times as a bitter atheist looking for a platform to practice his horrible theology. There is nothing to support his delusion theory. Name one concrete proof he provides? Just one.

    Why don’t you try reading books that doesn’t support your own conclusions. Scared?

  139. on 22 Nov 2010 at 4:50 pm 139.Severin said …

    138 Rostam
    “There is nothing to support his delusion theory. Name one concrete proof he provides? Just one.”

    Why dont’t you give us one single proof that god exists?
    I instantly start to believe in god!
    Before that…we just do not believe!

  140. on 22 Nov 2010 at 5:02 pm 140.Anonymous said …

    Burden of proof is on theists.
    Just reminding everyone.

  141. on 22 Nov 2010 at 5:08 pm 141.dxt said …

    Severin,

    Start with this.

    Some 400 years before crucifixion was invented, both Israel’s King David and the prophet Zechariah described the Messiah’s death in words that perfectly depict that mode of execution. Further, they said that the body would be pierced and that none of the bones would be broken, contrary to customary procedure in cases of crucifixion (Psalm 22 and 34:20; Zechariah 12:10). Again, historians and New Testament writers confirm the fulfillment: Jesus of Nazareth died on a Roman cross, and his extraordinarily quick death eliminated the need for the usual breaking of bones. A spear was thrust into his side to verify that he was, indeed, dead.

    (Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 10 to the 13th power.)

    There are hundreds of these. I would be interested in hearing your rational explanation in the deconstruction of these messianic prophecies.

  142. on 22 Nov 2010 at 5:25 pm 142.Anti-Theist said …

    The burden of proof rests with anyone making a statement, theist or otherwise. That’s why I don’t recommend starting a debate with the delusional. The only way to destroy theism is through education, which by the way is destroying religion more and more every day. It’s hard to be patient but cultural evolution can’t be stopped; even by the very primitive.

  143. on 22 Nov 2010 at 6:44 pm 143.Rostam said …

    “Burden of proof is on theists.”

    The same old atheist cop out. Then why should I read Dawkins if he cannot prove God is a delusion? It sounds like a waste of time?

    When you make a claim someone is delusional, you must provide the proof.

    Delusion:
    1. a false belief or opinion: delusions of grandeur.
    2. Psychiatry . a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact: a paranoid delusion.

    Anti Theist,

    I am willing to listen. I spent 28 years in my academic pursuits. What education can you provide to destroy my theism. Contrary to you delusion, there are more theist today than in any point in time. Since I used the word delusion, I have no need to support the assertion. The onerous is on you.

  144. on 22 Nov 2010 at 8:21 pm 144.Severin said …

    141 dxt
    “(Probability of chance fulfillment = 1 in 10 to the 13th power.)”

    ha, ha, ha…
    Do you know anything about numbers?
    Are you familiar with probability theory?
    It must be that some mathematically illiterate priest told you such a BS.

    To predict a death on cross in times of Romans, was the same as predicting a death in a car accident today.
    Romans used this penalty on regulary basis, every single day, for centuries, especialy in colonies.
    If I say now that someone will die in New York, in a blue car, in 5th Avenue (if there is one in NY), and without broken bone, shall we have to wait for 400 years to really see it? Maybe we would wait it for 400 years, if I specify it will be some Mohammed in a blue car, and it will happen about 5 pm at the specific corner. But it will happen! In the next 100, 200 or 400 years, some Mohammed will die in a blue car in 5th avenue in NY.
    But if I specify the wictime as “Bill” or “John”, without specifying the corner and part of the day, it will happen within a few months or a year (probably less than that!).

    Such predictions are ridiculous!

  145. on 22 Nov 2010 at 8:27 pm 145.Severin said …

    143 Rostam
    “Contrary to you delusion, there are more theist today than in any point in time.”

    You are right! When I went to elementary school, some 60 years ago, there were some 4.2 billion people on earth.
    Today we have some 6.5 billion or more.

    But, the percentage of atheist is rapidly growing as education comes to each corner of the world.

  146. on 22 Nov 2010 at 8:32 pm 146.dxt said …

    Severin,

    “Rational” was the key word there. You failed.

  147. on 22 Nov 2010 at 9:16 pm 147.Boz said …

    “Romans used this penalty on regulary basis, every single day, for centuries, especialy in colonies.

    May I interject here?

    No Severin, this was only used on the most vile of criminals much as capital punishment today. It was rare. To predict this with over 300 other prophecies was phenomenal.

  148. on 22 Nov 2010 at 9:19 pm 148.Boz said …

    Rota,

    When a small percentage of the populace attempts to call the large majority delusional you have what is called a cult. You can’t reason with cults. They are …well for lack of a better term….delusional.

  149. on 23 Nov 2010 at 12:10 am 149.Hell Yeah said …

    “Some 400 years before crucifixion was invented, both Israel’s King David and the prophet Zechariah described the Messiah’s death in words that perfectly depict that mode of execution…… historians and New Testament writers confirm the fulfillment……

    So, let’s get this straight….a story that was created at some point in history has a timeline in it and at the beginning of this fable timeline there was a prediction of what is going to happen in this fable’s future….and that is proof? LOL So I guess that means Superman is real since when he was a baby there was the prophecy that he was going to grow up to be Earth’s savior.

    ————-

    “Jesus of Nazareth died on a Roman cross, and his extraordinarily quick death eliminated the need for the usual breaking of bones.”

    So when he was nailed, the large nails didn’t go through any bone? LOL Right.

    ————–

    By the way, dxt, why did you answer the point I brought up last time I posted on here about why it says in the beginning of the bible that God created light one day and the sun the next? You had asked if you should answer. Of course, you should answer it! I suppose you are going to give some made up BS answer like that light poured out of the heavens when he went back in for a bathroom break before he came back and finished the rest. LOL

  150. on 23 Nov 2010 at 12:14 am 150.Hell Yeah said …

    ……I meant to say why didn’t you answer….

  151. on 23 Nov 2010 at 1:12 am 151.dxt said …

    #149 HY,

    Your reply lacks so much research and is not even worthy of a response.

    As for your “light” question, get out your Hebrew lexicon and re-read Genesis 1.

  152. on 23 Nov 2010 at 1:16 am 152.Lightning Boy said …

    Yeah

    Hebrew is an ancient language spoken by Jews or Hebrews and a lexicon is a book containing an alphabetical arrangement of the words in a language or of a considerable number of them, with the definition of each.

  153. on 23 Nov 2010 at 1:32 am 153.Hell Yeah said …

    How can he create Light and darkness before he created the sun. He created light and darkness on the 1st day, and the sun on day 3. And how can he create plants before the sun. Surely the plants need sunlight to survive!

    Genesis

    1 First God made heaven & earth 2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. 3 And God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. 6 And God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” 7 And God made the firmament and separated the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament. And it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day. 9 And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good. 11 And God said, “Let the earth put forth vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, upon the earth.” And it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening and there was morning, a third day. 14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth.” And it was so. 16 And God made the two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth, 18 to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good.

  154. on 23 Nov 2010 at 1:38 am 154.Hell Yeah said …

    “Your reply lacks so much research and is not even worthy of a response”

    What dxt really means is that he has no comeback since what I said does make sense.

    The bible is just a bunch of stories created over time and edited to form one book. Just like as if over time people wrote down all the stories they heard and over hundreds of years they all got warped into one edited book to make it seem like it all fits together. People have always been good manipulators. Look at Fox News as an exmaple in today’s world. Just listen to the way they word things. They make you think something is true or not true when it may not be the case. They are good at convincing people to think like they do, even if it may not be correct.

  155. on 23 Nov 2010 at 1:49 am 155.Hell Yeah said …

    “When a small percentage of the populace attempts to call the large majority delusional you have what is called a cult.”

    First of all, look up the definition of a cult. Second of all, so when Christianity first formed and they were the small percentage, then they were a cult then, correct? So this could mean that this original cult just spread for numerous reasons. Promising an afterlife, I mean, come on, why would you want to pass up on that thought?

    And when you say a large majority believe, there is more to that which needs to be disected. First of all, how do you know? Did someone survey every person? Also, there are different levels of belief. There are the hardcore believers like you guys, which can easily be considered a small percentage of the believers. Then you have people that say they believe, but really haven’t sat down and really thought about it. They just say they do because that is how they were brought up. Do they go to church or pray like true believers do? No. They don’t really follow much of what a true believer should do. They only believe because they grew up taught that way and like the idea of “relief” that there could be a heaven waiting for them so they don’t have to worry about turning to nothing when they die. So, believing and not believing, when comparing the two you can’t look at it as grey and white. People are too busy in their lifestyles to really think about everything. I bet you that if more people were involved in our discussions, especially the ones in the middle, the more people would sway the way of the non-believer.

  156. on 23 Nov 2010 at 3:24 am 156.dxt said …

    Hy,

    No, what I really meant to say is that declaring Jesus as a fable is historically absurd. Only a devout atheist who insists on constantly denying the facts would believe such a thing. Since you fit that profile, why would I waste my time sharing the evidence? Your response makes no sense at all HY and hasn’t even a hint of rationality. We are the delusional ones? I see the whole light thing has you perplexed? I also see you are having an elementary reading issue. This is why you should not be judging the Scriptures HY, you already stumbled at the very onset.

  157. on 23 Nov 2010 at 4:16 am 157.Hell Yeah said …

    dxt,
    Denying what facts? What “facts” are out there that show Jesus wasn’t a fable? I think you are backed in a corner now and that is the only response you have. And you still haven’t answered why God created light and plants before the sun. Dodging? Or are you trying to say it doesn’t say that even though it does?

    You do agree that there are many, many fables, myths, tall tales, however you want to call them, out there. How can you honestly think that the bible isn’t just another one of those?

    Christianity could have been created by man for many reasons. It was 2000 years ago, so who knows the exact reason. But history has proven that everything you think you know isn’t accurate. For example, Christopher Columbus discovering America. Not true. There are many other examples in history that are inaccurate, and that is just the last couple hundred years. Now just imagine a few thousand years ago. The time of kings and queens being rich ruling over the poor. Here is one example of how the bible could have been created: The poor were killing and stealing from the rich people in control. Something had to be done so one king sent someone to find someone from another land to bring them back and pay them to preach about made up stories to try to get the poor to stop doing bad things. This preacher told made up stories and maybe even threw in some real people and places to mix in with it. Those stories got written down by either those who believed this preacher or maybe even the preacher wrote them down himself either on his own or the king told him to. This worked and eventually other kingdoms/towns got wind of this and did something similar. And that is how the “prophets” formed. All the writings eventually got put together into one by an editor years later. And bam, you have the start of a religion. This is just one of many scenarios that could have taken place back then.

  158. on 23 Nov 2010 at 4:21 am 158.Hell Yeah said …

    ………and how about the Mormon religion? You think that is crazy, right? And look how they claim it formed. How can the bible be any different?

  159. on 23 Nov 2010 at 8:10 am 159.Severin said …

    147 Boz
    „How common was crucifixion in the ancient world? Quite common, at least among the Romans. Though Roman law usually spared Roman citizens from being crucified, they used crucifixion especially against rebellious foreigners, military enemies, violent criminals, robbers, and slaves. In fact slaves were so routinely crucified that crucifixion become known as the “slaves’ punishment” (servile supplicium; see Valerius Maximus 2:7.12). Appian tells us that when the slave rebellion of Spartacus was crushed, the Roman general Crassus had six thousand of the slave prisoners crucified along a stretch of the Appian Way, the main road leading into Rome (Bella Civilia 1:120). As an example of crucifying rebellious foreigners, Josephus tells us that when the Romans were besieging Jerusalem in 70 A.D. the Roman general Titus, at one point, crucified five hundred or more Jews a day. In fact, so many Jews were crucified outside of the walls that “there was not enough room for the crosses and not enough crosses for the bodies” (Wars of the Jews 5:11.1).“

    „There appear to be a number of misconceptions regarding the Crucifixion of Jesus. Jesus was NOT the first nor the only person to be crucified. The Romans had used that method of execution for at least 70 years before Jesus was Crucified. In around 40 BC, in Rome, a historian recorded that 2,000 people were crucified in a single day, for the entertainment of Quintilius Varus! About 40 years after Jesus’ Crucifixion, the Romans crucified around 500 per day in 70 AD.“

    „There are historical records of mass crucifixions took place in 71 B.C. when Spartacus led a slave rebellion against Rome. He ultimately failed, and the 6,000 captured slaves were crucified.“

    „The Jews knew of crucifixions even before Roman rule, for around 87 B.C. the Jewish king Alexander Janneus had 800 rebellious Pharisees crucified. Josephus, who witnessed the crucifixion of his fellow Jews during the siege of Jerusalem (A.D. 66-70), called it “the most wretched of deaths.” It continued to be the punishment for high crimes until the time of Emperor Constantine, when it was finally abolished.“

    Etc

  160. on 23 Nov 2010 at 8:15 am 160.Severin said …

    148 Boz
    “Rota,
    When a small percentage of the populace attempts to call the large majority delusional you have what is called a cult. You can’t reason with cults. They are …well for lack of a better term….delusional.”

    When a small percentage of the populace (one or two people, like G,. Bruno, G. Galilei, Copernicus..) attempts to call the large majority delusional, the large majority kill them (or punish them, or tries to punish them).

    Then, it turns that “a small percentage” was right!

  161. on 23 Nov 2010 at 8:25 am 161.Severin said …

    143 Rostam
    “Delusion:
    1. a false belief or opinion: delusions of grandeur.”

    So, believing in witches, fairies, Zeus, Allah…, without any evidences they ever existed, are “false belief or opinion”. A delusion.

    Believinh in another god or supernatural beings, without any evidences he/they ever existed is – what?

    Idiocy?

  162. on 23 Nov 2010 at 12:26 pm 162.Rostam said …

    I hear a lot of dislike for the Bible. However nothing on God. I ask again:

    I am willing to listen. I spent 28 years in my academic pursuits. What education can you provide to destroy my theism. Contrary to you delusion, there are more theist today than in any point in time. The onerous is on you since I was asked to read Dawkins and this website.

    No cop out. Real information.

  163. on 23 Nov 2010 at 12:50 pm 163.Hell Yeah said …

    “there are more theist today than in any point in time.”

    On a quick note, are you describing total numbers or percentage? First of all, how do you know? Did someone ask everyone in the world? Second of all, you do realize that the world’s population is at it’s highest it has ever been, which has been multiplying at a faster rate in any time in history. I guess you can say that there are more atheists today than in any point in time then if you take that into consideration. And if you look at it percentage wise, I bet you atheists are at an all time high.

  164. on 23 Nov 2010 at 2:07 pm 164.Rostam said …

    Again, I am willing to listen. I spent 28 years in my academic pursuits. What education can you provide to destroy my theism. Contrary to you delusion, there are more theist today than in any point in time. The onerous is on you since I was asked to read Dawkins and this website.

    No cop out. Real information.

    For theist percentages consult studies all over the World Wide Web! You numbers are tiny.

    But hey you could have one more! Give me what I ask.

    But alas, is this your way of saying you have no information?

  165. on 23 Nov 2010 at 2:16 pm 165.Severin said …

    162 Rostam
    What do you expect?
    If you say you have a pink cat with 6 legs, singing a hymn every morning at 5am, using voice of Maria Calas, to just trust you?
    If you say you have a god who created universe (by “pop” method), you also expect normal people to just trust you?

    Atheist (most of them) do NOT claim such things do not exist.
    They just do not believe, as you, probably, don’t believe in Santa.
    If someone insisted Santa existed, you would ask for proves.

    I am willing to listen! More than that: I am willing to instantly accept god at the very moment I see reliable proofs.

    I am waiting!

  166. on 23 Nov 2010 at 4:52 pm 166.Rostam said …

    Severin please don’t answer for others. The claim has been made.

    No God,
    Delusional,
    Read Dawkins,
    Education is the answer

    All claims by atheist and by this site. Isn’t this site here to promote No God? I simply have asked for this information. If you cannot help no need to chime in.

  167. on 23 Nov 2010 at 7:57 pm 167.Severin said …

    Sorry,
    I thought it was a public blog

    And, education is the answer!

  168. on 23 Nov 2010 at 8:40 pm 168.dxt said …

    #157 HY,

    “Denying what facts? What “facts” are out there that show Jesus wasn’t a fable? I think you are backed in a corner now and that is the only response you have.”

    Too much to list on a blog. Here is a link to a scholarly and reasonable look at the evidence.

    http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5207

    “And you still haven’t answered why God created light and plants before the sun. Dodging? Or are you trying to say it doesn’t say that even though it does?”

    I assure you HY, im not dodging the question. I just would like to know how you have studied the Bible that you come to your “fable” conclusion, thats all. You tell me how it is since you know all about the Scriptures.

    “You do agree that there are many, many fables, myths, tall tales, however you want to call them, out there. How can you honestly think that the bible isn’t just another one of those?”

    I agree there are alot of fables out there. The Bible is not one of them. It is a fantastically unreasonable idea to assert that.

    “Christianity could have been created by man for many reasons. It was 2000 years ago, so who knows the exact reason. But history has proven that everything you think you know isn’t accurate. For example, Christopher Columbus discovering America. Not true. There are many other examples in history that are inaccurate, and that is just the last couple hundred years. Now just imagine a few thousand years ago. The time of kings and queens being rich ruling over the poor. Here is one example of how the bible could have been created: The poor were killing and stealing from the rich people in control. Something had to be done so one king sent someone to find someone from another land to bring them back and pay them to preach about made up stories to try to get the poor to stop doing bad things. This preacher told made up stories and maybe even threw in some real people and places to mix in with it. Those stories got written down by either those who believed this preacher or maybe even the preacher wrote them down himself either on his own or the king told him to. This worked and eventually other kingdoms/towns got wind of this and did something similar. And that is how the “prophets” formed. All the writings eventually got put together into one by an editor years later. And bam, you have the start of a religion. This is just one of many scenarios that could have taken place back then.”

    This is an example of a fantastically unreasonable assertion to the beginnings of Christianity. You are forgetting alot of crucial elements.

  169. on 24 Nov 2010 at 12:09 am 169.dxt said …

    HY,

    Sorry, you might have to register to get access to the link. It only takes a few seconds, then try the link again.

  170. on 24 Nov 2010 at 8:00 am 170.Severin said …

    168 dxt
    “This is an example of a fantastically unreasonable assertion to the beginnings of Christianity.“

    What is less „fantastic“ are facts, which you never say:
    „The sources for the history of ancient Israel and Judah can be broadly divided into the biblical narrative (essentially the Hebrew Bible, but also Deuterocanonical and non-biblical works for the later period) and the archaeological record.”
    “The books of the Hebrew bible are a compendium of myths, legends, folktales, sagas, history and much else, almost all of them by anonymous authors, “the whole being woven into a composite, highly complex literary fabric” around the 2nd century BCE.”
    “The religion of the earliest Israelites, c.1200 BCE, as suggested by some authors, was based on the cult of the ancestors and the worship of family gods, especially El and Baal. This allegedly changed with the emergence of the monarchy in Israel: the king allegedly promoted his own family god, Yahweh, as the god of the kingdom, and the Exodus narrative as a national charter myth. The destruction of the Israelite kingdom c.721 BCE meant the end of both the Israelite state religion and of family religion; their place was taken by a national religion and personal devotion. The key group in this transformation were the Deuteronomists, an intellectual and religious movement based in the prophetic tradition of Israel. Moving to Judah after the fall of Samaria, they introduced sweeping reforms in Jerusalem which declared illicit the forms of traditional religion, centralised worship in a single national Temple, and promoted worship of one god through the Law.[61]
    “In the earliest stage, Yahweh was one of the seventy children of El, each of whom was the patron deity of one of the seventy nations. This is illustrated by the Dead Sea Scrolls and Septuagint texts of Deuteronomy 32:8–9, in which El, as the head of the divine assembly, gives each member of the divine family a nation of his own, “according to the number of the divine sons”: Israel is the portion of Yahweh.”
    “Between the eighth to the sixth centuries El became identified with Yahweh, Yahweh-El became the husband of the goddess Asherah, and the other gods and the divine messengers gradually became mere expressions of Yahweh’s power.”

  171. on 24 Nov 2010 at 8:09 am 171.Severin said …

    168 dxt, cont.
    “Yahweh is cast in the role of the Divine King ruling over all the other deities, as in Psalm 29:2, where the “sons of God” are called upon to worship Yahweh; and as Ezekiel 8–10 suggests, the Temple itself became Yahweh’s palace, populated by those in his retinue.”
    “Because many of the passages involved appear in works associated with either Deuteronomy, the Deuteronomistic History (Joshua through Kings) or in Jeremiah, most recent scholarly treatments have suggested that a Deuteronomistic movement of this period developed the idea of monotheism as a response to the religious issues of the time.”
    “The second major factor was the rise of the neo-Assyrian and neo-Babylonian empires. As long as Israel was, from its own perspective, part of a community of similar small nations, it made sense to see the Israelite pantheon on par with the other nations, each one with its own patron god – the picture described with Deuteronomy 32:8–9. The assumption behind this worldview was that each nation was as powerful as its patron god. However, the neo-Assyrian conquest of the northern kingdom in ca. 722 challenged this, for if the neo-Assyrian empire were so powerful, so must be its god; and conversely, if Israel could be conquered (and later Judah, c. 586), it implied that Yahweh in turn was a minor divinity. The crisis was met by separating the heavenly power and earthly kingdoms. Even though Assyria and Babylon were so powerful, the new monotheistic thinking in Israel reasoned, this did not mean that the god of Israel and Judah was weak. Assyria had not succeeded because of the power of its god Marduk; it was Yahweh who was using Assyria to punish and purify the one nation which Yahweh had chosen.”
    “By the post-Exilic period, full monotheism had emerged: Yahweh was the sole God, not just of Israel, but of the whole world. If the nations were tools of Yahweh, then the new king who would come to redeem Israel might not be a Judean as taught in older literature (e.g. Psalm 2). Now, even a foreigner such as Cyrus the Persian could serve as the Lord’s anointed (Isaiah 44:28, 45:1). One god stood behind all the world’s history.”

  172. on 24 Nov 2010 at 8:17 pm 172.Severin said …

    168 dxt
    To conclude my „short history of Christianity“:
    The books of the Hebrew Bible are a compendium of myths, legends, folktales, sagas, history and much else, almost all of them by anonymous authors.
    As the OT = Hebrew Bible, what is it? „A compendium of JEWISH (and pre-Jewish!) myths, legends, folktales…written by anonimous JEWISH authors.

    JHWH, who became the „only“ Jewish “mono-god”, later also „the only“ Christian „mono-tri-god“ was in fact nothing more but one of 70 (seventy!) sons of El, one of many Jewish (and pre-Jewish) gods, from the previous, polytheistic period!
    Your god, the „creator of universe“, had a father! His father was a “barbaric” god from a polytheistic religion!

    It was obvious, as it happened in all human societies, through the entire history of human race, and in ALL parts of the world (and is happening today), that gods were CREATED by humans, according to their (humans’) needs. If circumstances demanded to make changes in religions, mighty rulers did so, and relatively quickly: they „stole“ gods, they „combined“ them, they „canceled“ them, they (humans!) CREATED RELIGIONS.
    Monotheism became predominant in Jewish lands as late (for Jews), and as early (for Christians, who did not exist at that time!), as from 8th to 5th century B.C., because it WAS CONVENIANT (more practical, more profitable, better) FOR RULERS OF Jewish lands. If they decided polytheism were better for their position, then, you would probably worship El, or some of his sons, today (which, in fact, you do, because YHWH, your actual god, was identified with El, later, only by „decision“ of some highly positined priest, or group of priests and kings).

    Christianity started as „internal“ Jewish matter! Does „Christianity“ beginns with Jesus? No way! It was only NAMED by Christ! Who baptized Jesus, and who, the hell, was a „Christian“ before Christ himself?
    In „boiling“ Judea, many groups separated from the „mainstream“ politcal body and „mainstream“ religion, and started to „preach“ different things. John was one of them (one of many!), but not clever enough to keep the main position for long. One way or another, Jesus (or someone named “Jesus” later!) took him the leading position (probably by preaching things that people liked to hear), and became the „god“ through further legends, which were also modeled by mighty MEN, according to THEIR interests.

    Christianity is the same BS as religions in China, Japan, Pre-Columbian America, pre-christian Europe….
    Gods were repalced by other gods according to interests of rulers.

    WHY do we have so many “christian” religions today (and not much less muslim ones, too)? The reason is the same as always: interests of groups of humans!

  173. on 24 Nov 2010 at 8:24 pm 173.Severin said …

    168 dxt
    I forgot: your god (YHWH) was even married!

    You are worshiping a barbaric, polytheistic god!

  174. on 24 Nov 2010 at 9:38 pm 174.dxt said …

    Severin,

    This whole shpeel is honestly, shameful. Whats even worse, is you wasted every one of your God given breaths while you wrote this nonsense. This shameful explanation does not even attempt to reasonably answer any crucial questions as to how Christianity got its driving force on the heels of heavy persecution. This is joke, matter of fact, its worse than a joke and I honestly feel sorry for you if you believe this severin.

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply