I give up. The world is doomed.

[EvilNed]

Some christians are the f*cking dumbest people to ever have walked this planet. F*ck some of them. I hope some of them rot.

I just had a discussion with two christians. We discussed several topics.

First, I pointed out that the bible isn't really a reliable source. Infact it's constantly contradicting itself and tells of ludicrious and fantastic tales. They said that this was because it was written by man. I then said, why are you following the word of man? They said they weren't, they were following the word of God. I wondered what part of the bible that was, and they said everything in it. I wondered if this included the passages about killing disobedient children and stoning people who work on sundays. They said no, that is the old testament and Jesus refuted that. I said that he did not, and there are infact passages in the New Testament where he says that the Old Testament (called "The law") should be obeyed and never altered. He states this several times. I then said that you should stone kids and people who work on sundays, and I wondered why they did not.

One of them said:

Because we're not perfect, but Jesus died for our sins.

Just listen to that. What a f*cking retarded answer is that? To add insult to injury, the other guy slapped the first guy on the back saying "That is a great answer, that showed him!" (or something to that effect) yet without realizing that his answer had not really dealt with anything I had asked! It was just a way for them to quickly get out of a theological discussion they couldn't handle.

Now one of them said that you needed faith to believe in the Bible, and equated it to Evolution or Gravity and that these things were not proven EITHER, and thus he held the events in the bible with the same credibility as Gravity and evolution. I then said that there is stone hard proof of micro-evolution going on, and it is irrefuteable and that gravity is no longer a theory, it's a law (I believe, at least, I kinda made that up). This caused them to change subject and say that even Darwin was a christian.

I said nope, he wasn't. And it's true he wasn't. One of them said he recanted on his deathbed, and I told him that that was a lie invented by the church at that time, and that the only person with Darwin on his deathbed refuted that he had said this. Some of you may also know that in his letters, Darwin calls himself agnostic and I pointed this out.

Now THEY attacked ME, saying that his daughters testimony was unreliable and that someone like me who couldn't accept the word of the bible was a hypocrite for believing in her but not the bible.

What the hell? Yet another completley retarded turn! How can you compare The Bible, which is full of tales and prophecies, with a simple statement made by Darwin's daughter that he did not turn to christianity on his deathbed! Which is also SUPPORTED by his letters! But at this time I gave up, just saying that they were some of the most ignorant and dumbest people I had ever had the pleasure of meeting.

JESUS, I hope you had a miserable time on that cross because of the pain you caused me today, you son of a bitch!

[AcesandEights]

***EDITED for happiness***

I understand where you're coming from Ned. I really do, but not a god (<---wow, almost typoed that word for good...Freudian slip, ftw!) way to start a productive thread (though I sympathize with your need to vent).

[coma]

Here's an idea, as per that sort of conversation
Dont Bother.
If someone has determined they already know the answer a true dialouge is impossible regardless of what position or point of view one may have

[EvilNed]

I edited the opening line so that it at least does not include all christians...

[bassman]

Dude.....while I understand where you're coming from, all the hatred isn't really necessary. Not here, anyway.

In some way, you seem to have not done any better than they did. You had your point of view, they had theirs, and none of you could just accept that and go about your ways? Why try so hard to change someone's opinion? Agree to Disagree. Don't go straight for the throat.:p

[AcesandEights]

Agree to Disagree. Don't go straight for the throat.:p

Exactly, man. Ned, you represent the Red Menace...be sneaky & nefarious about your ways and means for chrissakes! Save the shoe-beating for Capitalism! ;)

PS--Edited out my quote.

[coma]

A response like this may be nice for once
"While I see the point with your argument regarding inconsistencies my religion is based on faith and to maintain that faith I have to dismiss the inconsistencies. The Bible was written by God and translated by Man and thats where the inconsistencies come from"
But dont hold your breath.:)

[AcesandEights]

A response like this may be nice for once
"While I see the point with your argument regarding inconsistencies my religion is based on faith and to maintain that faith I have to dismiss the inconsistencies. The Bible was written by God and translated by Man and thats where the inconsistencies come from"


Well, that would seem to be a Christ-like response...

[Yojimbo]

Thank you EvilNed. I couldn't say it better myself.

I have never run across a group more intolerant of opposing viewpoint -- with perhaps the exception of the die hard jihadists -- than Christians.

My only suggestion is that you not let it get to you. Easier said than done, to be sure, since logic frequently does not come into play with ture believers.

It has been pointed out to me-- by born again christains no less -- that a lot of their belief system has to be do with the "mystery of faith" What exactly that means, however, I would venture to guess has a lot to do with the individual you are speaking with.

I myself have read the bible, and this is something that I cannot say all Christians can state as a matter of fact. There is a lot of contradictory stuff inside of there, a lot of exciting stories, and a lot of sex and violence. Some of the stuff (Song of Solomon comes to mind) would probably be banned by christian censors if given the chance. There are some good concepts and good philosophy and some that clearly do not make any sense. I suspect it would be such with nearly any religion one chose to scrutinize.

You will never "win" a debate with a true believer. It would be better to adopt a Buddhist point of view: The only way to win that argument is not to participate in the argument in the first place. You will never change the mind of a true believer and the "mystery of faith" operates in a realm outside of logic.

[AcesandEights]

I have never run across a group more intolerant of opposing viewpoint -- with perhaps the exception of the die hard jihadists -- than Christians.

Dude, to be fair--at least in my experience--there are die-hard, close-minded people in all religions/creeds/belief structures. It's just that the larger and more institutionalized it gets, the more self-reinforcing it becomes and then it can get widespread and turn into a tidal wave of blind zeal just like any other mob-mentality.

[MissJacksonCA]

I almost never say this Ned... okay okay I'll be honest for a sec... I've never said this ... there, there... it's all going to be okay ... you'll live...

[Yojimbo]

Dude, to be fair--at least in my experience--there are die-hard, close-minded people in all religions/creeds/belief structures. It's just that the larger and more institutionalized it gets, the more self-reinforcing it becomes and then it can get widespread and turn into a tidal wave of blind zeal just like any other mob-mentality.

Aces, you raise a very true and valid point in that there are close minded die hards everywhere, not just with Christians and Muslims, and as it the case with true believers most are very loud and spew their rhetoric tirelessly.

The size of the organization, it is true, can sometimes determine the size of their trumpet, which in turn determines how loud a noise they can make.

In this regard, I am singling out the Christians and the Muslims because they are more prominent and in this way easier to single out than other groups, (It is hard to miss such a large-ass target) and maybe unfairly so. Therefore, maybe a diehard Christian is no more intolerant than a diehard Wiccan.

Let's face it, die-hards are annoying all around. When religion becomes involved-- regardless of what religion they represent-- they can be even more annoying. And intolerance of other's beliefs just magnifies the entire annoyance factor.

[Maitreya]

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g313/0mirror1mirror0/science-fair.jpg

[Yojimbo]

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g313/0mirror1mirror0/science-fair.jpg

Sadly, that is pretty much the argument that a lot of Christians give in support of the claims against evolution. Another one I like is "Were you there?" when any reference to dinosaurs is made.

[mista_mo]

so anouther anti christiananity thread eh?

[MissJacksonCA]

I think its not anti Christian so much as its against people that believe despite evidence... people who in a sense have blind faith for God...

[mista_mo]

Christian means christ follower

when someone insults jesus it insults christianity as he is the literal head of our faith, and insults us.

[MissJacksonCA]

There is much debate over Christianity... and Jesus, etc... so are you saying those of a different belief are an affont to Jesus and therefore it hurts you and all Christians? I dont think so at least... I accept all views... if I believed in God its what he'd want me to do... I just dont believe in everyone elses view...

[mista_mo]

no, the way things are said. I hoenstly do not care if such and such isn't christian or not. It's not my problem, and i will not go and try and enforce my beliefs on someoen else.

but acting like a dick (not you) about christians in general is what pisses me off. All these threads devolve into is a big ol' flame against christians, and sorry, but it's bs.

[Terran]

But what if someone said...."other than the bible is there any evidence that someone named "Christ" even existed"?(there are many familiars)


Once that question is asked?.....which of the many possible fictional dieties would one pray to?



The christian sway to these questions just reflect the western culture that dominates....

[EvilNed]

There is evidence that Christ existed. There's no evidence that he preached or walked on water, just that there was a guy called christ, who was crucified. And I stand by everything I said. Every civil rights movement has been opposed by these same ignorant christians who I spoke with yesterday. Think about it.

Oh, and about the dinosaurs. With one of the guys I had a small discussion about Saint Geroge. I was equating lots of the stuff in the Bible to the legend of Saint George, saying how Saint George never fought a dragon and that was of course just embellishment of his lifes story. I said the bible was like that: Mostly embellishment. He then argued that perhaps there had been some kind of monster, or surviving dinosaur (65 million years on it's own, my calculations, not his) that Saint George must have fought. But elsewhere he disapproved of evolution, so I don't know. Maybe it had survived the flood in his book!

[Danny]

theres a big difference between christians world wide though ya know and even if i think its bollocks a christian IS going to argue the whole creationism thign cus its pretty much disproving the literal depiction of the bible, so yknow thats defending there faith ,so its just human nature, the one thing that pisses me off personally is out of all my freinds, including a hindu and a muslim guy, theres this old school english christian guy, hes a great guy but a while back i was moving conrete blocks with them as a favour to my grandad and i dropped one on my foot, so naturally i yell into the sky "JESUS CHRIST ALLMIGHTY!!", as you would when a bigass concrete slab lands on your foot, and he got red faced and threw a **** fit about me calling blaphemes.
i know thats nothing to do with christians on a personal level, but being raised in a prodmoniantly chrisitian country icve picked up curses lie "bloody hell" and the like, so if im dropping something made of concrete onto my person i dont think it matters if i blaspheme in pain fueled rage for a minute as much as it was made out by him to be a big deal.

[Terran]

There is evidence that Christ existed.

Evidence and documentation other than the bible....?.... You should look that up youll be surprised at what you find....

Or maybe see the movie The God Who Wasn't There (2005)
http://www.amazon.com/God-Who-Wasnt-There/dp/B000CAPZBC/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-5813242-8504665?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1187449833&sr=8-1
http://www.thegodmovie.com/luigicascioli/
Heres a good clip from it
JMiAwe6TAYM
See the other parts if this interests you .....because its pretty damning and I havent heard any retalitory claims....
From the "The Heirophant's Proselytizer Questionnaire".....



According to the Gospels, from the Christian standpoint, Jesus was the most important person to ever live. From the Roman standpoint, Jesus was a huge pain in the ass because of his political activities. Explain why nothing was written about his life for over thirty years after his death, and nothing except the Gospels was written until the third century CE.

Explain why you believe a person whose life is so poorly documented was even ever born.

Why is it that the life of Jesus was so similar to the lives of pagan Christs, particularly Herakles, Dionysios, and Asklepios?

[Danny]

to be fair how often has your life been "documented" or mine, or anyones?
and we live in a world were our techonlogical development is unbelievable from the standpoint of that time.

i dont belive in god or the devil but it aint impossible the guy existed. just not as a mistical avatar but as a person with unqiue world views, for the time i mean.

[Terran]

i dont belive in god or the devil but it aint impossible the guy existed. just not as a mistical avatar but as a person with unqiue world views, for the time i mean.

Did you watch the clip?....

I guess we should be saying...it is not impossible that Hercules existed....or Zeus in human form or any of those mythical people....just as plausible as jesus....

When you start examining the myth of Jesus in detail it really starts to fall apart...


Heres part 3
aP0x81L3vmk

[kortick]

To respond to your original post ned

they were correct in saying that jesus refuted the do not work on
sundays

in the new testament it is where he is in a town called bethesda
and there is a healing pool that stirs every so often
and the lame would lie on thier mats near the pool
but on sundays they could not pick up thier mats and
carry then too the pool (natural spring) and soak in it
because moving the mat would be considered work

when jesus came upon this and saw the law keepers
were not allowing this under the reasoning it was against gods will
he spoke "take up thy mats and walk"
(if you are a pink floyd fan you will now realise where the
title to the song "take up thy stethocope and walk" came from)

so yes jesus did in the bible refute the no work on sunday

i understand your not being a person of faith
and that is your choice
and maybe these people were not too bright on things

but dont rule out things you dont understand completely

terran you love your science
you know i admire your intellect
there is also a human factor too
dont lose sight of that
no matter what your belief in a god is
science doesnt have all the answers
neither do some sad old men on you tube

notice i am not trying to make people believe or disbelieve
that is up to you

and mo hang in there buddy
i understand

[EvilNed]

kortick, then jesus, like the rest of the bible, is a hypocrite. For he also said, and I quote:

"It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." Luke 16:17 NAB

Or maybe he did not say this, or maybe he did not order them to move their mats. Perhaps this is just embellishment on part of the writers. But still, this is what Jesus did according to the bible.

Terran, that was quite an interesting clip. I was almost certain I'd heard that Jesus cropped up in a few roman tax records, but after a brief (I admit, brief) search I found nothing to suggest that he actually did. He might still, I'll look further.

[kortick]

Ned
I am not trying to get you to change your beliefs about anything

do you even know what laws jesus meant when he said that?

you quote the new testament so you should know what he was referring to

if so how does this make him a hypocrite?

your anger towards someone who is the embodiment of pure love
and sacrifice for others isnt sensible

wheter you beleive or not isnt for me to try to influence

you have to admit that jesus was not a figure for evil
maybe religions have used him in ways that he never wanted
but they will have to pay for that
jesus is not the enemy, quite the opposite
it is man who is , just as it has always been

i am not going to quote scripture to you
that is too much like charles manson

belive what you want
but have peace in your life
no matter where you get it from
thats all i really want for you

[Yojimbo]

no, the way things are said. I hoenstly do not care if such and such isn't christian or not. It's not my problem, and i will not go and try and enforce my beliefs on someoen else.

but acting like a dick (not you) about christians in general is what pisses me off. All these threads devolve into is a big ol' flame against christians, and sorry, but it's bs.

If I am one of those that has insulted you, please accept my apology. What I said was not meant personally against you, only against those who are intolerant of opposing viewpoints and philosophies.

I concede that there is a great deal of good in the Christian religion, as there is good in practically all the religions that exist.

I understand what you mean about threads pertaining to religious arguments easily devolve into an insult fest. Certainly that is not productive and does nothing but anger people on both sides. I could be wrong, but with all due respect it would seem to me stating that it is bs and that people are acting "like a dick" is similarly counterproductive as well, and perhaps without that sort of rhetoric these threads would not devolve into an insult fest.

Believe me, I do understand where your anger comes from. You feel that this thread is worthless and you feel that it is an attack on your belief system which you, rightly or not, consider as a personal attack. In that circumstance, I certainly can understand why you would lash back (it is an honorable thing to defend one's beliefs)

Perhaps this is why we have been taught to never discuss politics or religion. They are both subjects that carry with them a high emotional charge and at the core if someone has an opposing viewpoint it is easy to become personally offended.

On some level, it is sad that we really cannot discuss these issues. How will we ever find common ground if we cannot have this sort of rhetoric without it turning into a tit for tat exchange of punches?

All things considered, my apology still stands and no personal offense was meant.


Here's an idea, as per that sort of conversation
Dont Bother.
If someone has determined they already know the answer a true dialouge is impossible regardless of what position or point of view one may have

Coma, those are words of wisdom!

[Terran]

A few years ago I was more than willing to concede that a Jesus of the bible existed... I was still an atheist but I basically assumed that a portion of it was true...

Essentially I believed that a man named Jesus lived....went around preaching stuff ....had followers ....upset the factions of the government and society....and was put to death by romans....


It was not until I was having a debate with a believer about the miracles of Jesus that I thought anything contrary to this... I started looking for information about that time period that was outside of the bible.... And I was essentially alarmed that there was nothing about a person named Jesus.... In fact what happened was the more and more I looked around the more evidence I found that not only the miracles appeared to be a complete myth, the actual existance of the man appeared to be fiction...


Stuff like this....


Notable omissions in extant contemporary records
Some of the strongest evidence against the historicity of Jesus lies in the fact that no mention of him or the events of the New Testament can be found in any of the numerous contemporary and near-contemporary records of the day.


Philo (20 BCE - 40 CE)
By far, the most notable omission is Philo's. Philo was a Hellenized Jew who lived in Alexandria, Egypt. He visited the Temple in Jerusalem, and corresponded with family there. He wrote a great many books on religion and philosophy which survive to this day, and mentioned many of his contemporaries. His main theological contribution was the development of the Logos, the "Word" that opens the Gospel of John. Yet Philo not once mentions Jesus, anybody who could be mistaken for Jesus, or any of the events of the New Testament. His last writings come from 40 CE, only a few years after the end of Pontius Pilate's reign, when he was part of an embassy sent by the Alexandrian Jews to the Roman Emperor Caligula.




Plutarch (ca. 46 - 127)
Plutarch wrote, about the same time as Josephus, about contemporary Roman figures, oracles, prophesies, and moral, religious, and spiritual issues. A figure such as Jesus, whom the Gospels portray as interacting with Roman figures, making prophecies, and giving sermons on novel religious and spiritual issues, would have been of great interest to him.


Justus
{{disputed-section}}

Justus of Tiberias wrote, at the end of the first century, a history of Jewish kings in Galilee. As the Gospels record Jesus as having significant interactions with the Jewish political and religious leaders, as well as the highest-ranking local Roman officials, one would expect Justus to have made mention of those events. Not all of his writing has survived intact to this day, but none of what does exist makes mention of Jesus. Further, no mention is made--especially by early Christian apologists--of such a reference, even by writers who would have had access to his complete works.


Josephus (ca. 37 - ca. 100)
For those who reject the authenticity of both the Testamonium Flavanium and the xx.9 reference to James, Josephus would belong on this list. Naturally, those who accept the authenticity of one or the other, in whole or in part, see Josephus as providing evidence for an historical Jesus and thus would object to Josephus's inclusion. As the only first-century non-Christian to perhaps write of Jesus, the two brief mentions to be found in Antiquities of the Jews (written ca. 94) are the subject of often-heated debate.


Others
There are a number of other sources that survive from the period in which it would not have been unreasonable to find mention of Jesus, though in no particular case would one be surprised to find mention of Jesus lacking. However, Jesus is missing from all of them.

These include: Damis, who wrote of Apollonius of Tyana, a philosopher and mystic who was a contemporary with Jesus; Pliny the Elder, who wrote, in 80 CE, a Natural History that mentions hundreds of people, major and minor; Juvenal, Martial, Petronius, and Persius, Roman satirists who favored topics similar to Jesus's story; Pausanias, whose massive Guide to Greece includes mentions of thousands of names, including minor Jewish figures in Palestine; historians Epictetus and Aelius Aristides, who both recorded events and people in Palestine; and Fronto who, in the second century, scandalized rites about Roman Christians without ever mentioning Jesus.

Other writers and historians of the time who did not mention Jesus include Dio Chrysostom, Aulus Gellius, Lucius Apuleius, Marcus Aurelius, Musonius Rufus, Hierocles of Alexandria, Cassius Maximus Tyrius, Arrian, Appian, Marcus Fabius Quintilianus, Lucius Annaeus Florus, and Marcus Annaeus Lucanus.


Genealogy
Matthew 1:1-16 traces Jesus's lineage from King David's son Solomon through to Joseph's father, Jacob. Luke 3:23-31 traces a completely different lineage from King David's son Nathan to Joseph's father, Heli. Christian apologists traditionally explain this discrepancy by suggesting that one records a patrilineal genealogy while the other a matrilineal one, but both identify different fathers for Joseph and neither mentions Mary. Further, there is no historical precedent for indicating a matrilineal genealogy for a first-century Jewish man, and especially not to establish that man's royal heritage.


Early childhood
According to Matthew 2:13-16, Mary and Joseph fled with the infant Jesus to Egypt in order to escape Herod's slaughtering of "all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under." The family does not return until the end of Herod's reign. In Luke 2:39-40, the holy family returns directly to Nazareth from Bethlehem, traveling to Jerusalem every year for the Passover feast. No mention of any acts of infanticide is made.

The trial
According to Matthew 26:18-20, 26:57-68, 27:1-2, Mark 14:16-18, 14:53-72, and 15:1, Jesus's initial hearing was at night on the first evening of Passover; in the morning, he was taken to Pontius Pilate. Luke 22:13-15 and 54-66 record the hearing as having taken place in the morning, and in John 18:28 and 19:14 it happened the day before. This is especially significant as the first evening of Passover was and is one of the holiest days of the year for Jews, a day on which conducting business of any kind would be anathema.

In Matthew 26:59-66 and Mark 14:55-64, Jesus is tried by the entire Sanhedrin, the Jewish high court. In Luke 22:66-71, there was no trial, but only an inquiry held by the Sanhedrin. In John 18:13-24, Jesus was never brought before the Sanhedrin at all; Jesus only had private hearings before Annas and Caiphas.

Matthew 27:11-14 reports that Jesus maintained a stoic silence at his hearing before Pilate. According to John 18:33-37, Jesus answered all the charges eloquently and at length.

The chief priests and elders persuade the people to demand the release of Barabbas in Matthew 27:20, whereas in Mark 15:11 only the chief priests are responsible, and in Luke 23:18-23 the people seem to decide for themselves without prompting from leadership.


If anyone has any additional information about the "Jesus Myth" either supporting it or refuting it I would be excited to hear about it so I could look at it....I dont want to go around like an ass and say "Did you know that Jesus is a mythical character that never existed" when it turns out that there is undenialable evidence sitting out there somewhere that this person once existed....

[EvilNed]

Ned
I am not trying to get you to change your beliefs about anything

do you even know what laws jesus meant when he said that?

you quote the new testament so you should know what he was referring to

if so how does this make him a hypocrite?

He was referring to the "Law", i.e. the old testament. I can quote more passages if you like, where he says the same thing?

As I said, this does perhaps not mean that Jesus (if he's real, I an in the grey zone right now, I guess) was a hypocrite because we don't know if he actually DID those things. But his chronicles seem to have had conflicting views on what ideology Jesus should represent and thus embellished their writings in that direction.

[_liam_]

NEWSFLASH

Today in mother sweden, acclaimed red scientist Nedvar evilovski made a startling discovery - Religious fundamentalists are not entirely rational people!

This news has sent tremors through human society

seriously though, i believe the bible was a good code for living up until about 40 or 50 years ago. it's time to move on now.

i believe in a grand architect of the universe, although his judging me eventually is something i personally tend to disbelieve.

i think jesus is a bit like king arthur. there probably was a person, but the modern day myth is in fact probably stories & aspects of many different people, mixed in with a bit of exaggeration and posthumous deification etc.

[Ivarr]

My wife tought me the best way to deal with situations like this...

Just smile kindly and say "you know, you might be right". And move along.

Best to stick to things that don't cause bloodshed when its really not needed. Life is too short.

[_liam_]

My wife tought me the best way to deal with situations like this...

Just smile kindly and say "you know, you might be right". And move along.

Best to stick to things that don't cause bloodshed when its really not needed. Life is too short.

you know, if the whole world took that advice, millions might not be dead

[Danny]

*nods ni agreement*

besides everyone knows christians aint jack on the crazy-o-metre compared to scientologists:

"so you believe in ghost aliens called thetans humping you legs invisibly?"

"yes"

"what have you been smokin'?!?"

"crack"

[DjfunkmasterG]

Some christians are the f*cking dumbest people to ever have walked this planet. F*ck some of them. I hope some of them rot.

I just had a discussion with two christians. We discussed several topics.

First, I pointed out that the bible isn't really a reliable source. Infact it's constantly contradicting itself and tells of ludicrious and fantastic tales. They said that this was because it was written by man. I then said, why are you following the word of man? They said they weren't, they were following the word of God. I wondered what part of the bible that was, and they said everything in it. I wondered if this included the passages about killing disobedient children and stoning people who work on sundays. They said no, that is the old testament and Jesus refuted that. I said that he did not, and there are infact passages in the New Testament where he says that the Old Testament (called "The law") should be obeyed and never altered. He states this several times. I then said that you should stone kids and people who work on sundays, and I wondered why they did not.

One of them said:

Because we're not perfect, but Jesus died for our sins.

Just listen to that. What a f*cking retarded answer is that? To add insult to injury, the other guy slapped the first guy on the back saying "That is a great answer, that showed him!" (or something to that effect) yet without realizing that his answer had not really dealt with anything I had asked! It was just a way for them to quickly get out of a theological discussion they couldn't handle.

Now one of them said that you needed faith to believe in the Bible, and equated it to Evolution or Gravity and that these things were not proven EITHER, and thus he held the events in the bible with the same credibility as Gravity and evolution. I then said that there is stone hard proof of micro-evolution going on, and it is irrefuteable and that gravity is no longer a theory, it's a law (I believe, at least, I kinda made that up). This caused them to change subject and say that even Darwin was a christian.

I said nope, he wasn't. And it's true he wasn't. One of them said he recanted on his deathbed, and I told him that that was a lie invented by the church at that time, and that the only person with Darwin on his deathbed refuted that he had said this. Some of you may also know that in his letters, Darwin calls himself agnostic and I pointed this out.

Now THEY attacked ME, saying that his daughters testimony was unreliable and that someone like me who couldn't accept the word of the bible was a hypocrite for believing in her but not the bible.

What the hell? Yet another completley retarded turn! How can you compare The Bible, which is full of tales and prophecies, with a simple statement made by Darwin's daughter that he did not turn to christianity on his deathbed! Which is also SUPPORTED by his letters! But at this time I gave up, just saying that they were some of the most ignorant and dumbest people I had ever had the pleasure of meeting.

JESUS, I hope you had a miserable time on that cross because of the pain you caused me today, you son of a bitch!


Ned, this is exactly why I stopped going to church. I don't feel you need to believe in the bible to believe in a higher power. I don't even know if there is a god, I have just accepted that something with more power than any lifeform is capable of having is responsible for all of this we see every day.

Getting into biblical discussions is a waste of time and energy. The party in support of the bible will always result to BS Hyporcritcla rhetoric in defense of someone questioning the morals of the biblical palate.

[kortick]

Ned

Like I said
Im not gonna quote scripture
that is too charles manson

i am not disagreeing with the possibility the
people you encountered were fools

believe what ever makes you feel complete
i am not interested in converting anyone for or against christ

and Mo dont take it personally
you of all people should know that is not the way


i will never argue with any of you over anything
be it religion or politics or anything
in all the time i have been here i never had a fight with anyone
and i intend to keep it that way

i enjoy discusssions with intelligent people
which i am able to find here
and hope to continue to do so
but malice is not my thing anymore

so I hope you didnt take my posts as insulting
I dont think you did
but just want to make sure...

[flyboy]

Some christians are the f*cking dumbest people to ever have walked this planet. F*ck some of them. I hope some of them rot.

I just had a discussion with two christians. We discussed several topics.

First, I pointed out that the bible isn't really a reliable source. Infact it's constantly contradicting itself and tells of ludicrious and fantastic tales. They said that this was because it was written by man. I then said, why are you following the word of man? They said they weren't, they were following the word of God. I wondered what part of the bible that was, and they said everything in it. I wondered if this included the passages about killing disobedient children and stoning people who work on sundays. They said no, that is the old testament and Jesus refuted that. I said that he did not, and there are infact passages in the New Testament where he says that the Old Testament (called "The law") should be obeyed and never altered. He states this several times. I then said that you should stone kids and people who work on sundays, and I wondered why they did not.

One of them said:

Because we're not perfect, but Jesus died for our sins.

Just listen to that. What a f*cking retarded answer is that? To add insult to injury, the other guy slapped the first guy on the back saying "That is a great answer, that showed him!" (or something to that effect) yet without realizing that his answer had not really dealt with anything I had asked! It was just a way for them to quickly get out of a theological discussion they couldn't handle.

Now one of them said that you needed faith to believe in the Bible, and equated it to Evolution or Gravity and that these things were not proven EITHER, and thus he held the events in the bible with the same credibility as Gravity and evolution. I then said that there is stone hard proof of micro-evolution going on, and it is irrefuteable and that gravity is no longer a theory, it's a law (I believe, at least, I kinda made that up). This caused them to change subject and say that even Darwin was a christian.

I said nope, he wasn't. And it's true he wasn't. One of them said he recanted on his deathbed, and I told him that that was a lie invented by the church at that time, and that the only person with Darwin on his deathbed refuted that he had said this. Some of you may also know that in his letters, Darwin calls himself agnostic and I pointed this out.

Now THEY attacked ME, saying that his daughters testimony was unreliable and that someone like me who couldn't accept the word of the bible was a hypocrite for believing in her but not the bible.

What the hell? Yet another completley retarded turn! How can you compare The Bible, which is full of tales and prophecies, with a simple statement made by Darwin's daughter that he did not turn to christianity on his deathbed! Which is also SUPPORTED by his letters! But at this time I gave up, just saying that they were some of the most ignorant and dumbest people I had ever had the pleasure of meeting.

JESUS, I hope you had a miserable time on that cross because of the pain you caused me today, you son of a bitch!




i was baptised in the name of jesus, and i think your rant is a little offensive ned-no dis-respect to you tho.i class my self as a christian, albeit not a good one, but one all the same.everyone to there own.

i sometimes pray to jesus asking for his help and the like,and i like to read the bible occasionly,it gives me a sense of calm knowing i have jesus/god on my side.i can remember times-many many times walking down the road and coming towards me a group of pissed up 16-18 yr olds shouting abuse at anyone and everyone, yes i got/get scared and just look to the sky and ask god to protect me from evil and what happens? the group of teenagers just walk str8 past me not giving me a second look. i have been attacked in the past i might add before i belived in god.im not preaching, but god is good.:)yes your probly thinking that those kids not attacking me is just pure chance.i think not.