Pages:
Author

Topic: Crazy shit Bible says, crazy shit Christians say - page 23. (Read 31242 times)

hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 722
The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

Quote
In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...
Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company
You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid.

You said you could DISPROVE Santa
He's dead, I win.

So is God, I win
member
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

Quote
In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...
Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company
You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid.

You said you could DISPROVE Santa
He's dead, I win.
hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 722
The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

Quote
In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...
Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company
You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid.

You said you could DISPROVE Santa

You don't know the origins of the Santa myth... nobody does

Now you are just looking (more) foolish
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
You have the same evidence for God as young kids have for Santa Claus.
You're comparing a belief in something that is known to be untrue, and something that is unknown to be untrue.

I'm comparing two fictional characters.  There is absolutely no difference.

What did God give you?
Free will, 'Pain, misery, wars, stake burning, chopping hands and feet, stoning, chopping heads off, etc.' are a direct result of said free will.

People chopped hands off, burn people alive because they thought Bible is a word of God.  Nothing to do with free will (not even sure what you mean).  It has everything to do with the God's legal advice.

There is no Santa Claus just like there is no God.
The existence of Santa Clause can be dis-proven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

God is not physically observable so by definition it does not exist.


God is the most vengeful, hateful, masochistic, misogynistic being ever invented by a human mind.
You're right, God is all things including loving, forgiving, and righteous; Anything the human mind can imagine was put there by God.

You have no proof our thoughts were put in our heads by God.  You want proof:  Burn the Bible.

I became Atheist reading first few verses when he created Earth in the dark, then created plants before creating the Sun and the Stars.
A plant can be created without it growing; seeds can sprout in darkness. Besides, you got that verse twisted, read "whose seed is in itself", meaning it hasn't grown yet.

You are twisting a bronze age dream to fit our current understanding of how the world was created.  1000 years ago people would not interpret this creation story the same way as you do today.  You are injecting your own bias.

There is no mention of physics behind the world creation which proves one thing:  it is a bronze age story.


If this creation story does make sense to you, you are clueless:
Day 1: He created Earth (formless and empty) and heaven in the dark.  Spirit of God was covering waters, Then he created light
Day 2: He separated sky (the vault) from the water  (some magic water that did not freeze)
Day 3: He created dry land (after he created Earth) and plants
Day 4: He created Sun and other stars (poor plants, they had to wait for Sun to show up)
Day 5: Created animals
Day 6: Started farming (no industrial revolution, no science, no Internet?  Why not?)
That's a pretty twisted way of reading Genesis. Here's my interpretation:

Day 0: Spirit of God gets an idea, the Earth and Heavens. Neither exist, thus void and formless and are referred to as "waters".
Day 1: God creates light, divides it from the darkness, calls it night and day.
Day 2: God "divided waters from waters" and separated matter from anti-matter, creating Earth and Heavens.
Day 3: Dry land and oceans formed, then the Earth brings forth plants, whose seed is in itself (so the plants didn't have to wait for sun cuz they haven't grown)
Day 4: Then God made the Sun and Moon, day and night, seasons, etc...
Day 5: Sea creatures and flying things.
Day 6: Land animals & Man in the likeness of God in Spirit.
Day 7: Sabbath
Day 8: God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. THEN, man started farming; industrial revolution came after.

and so on... To add to the confusion, 'heaven' seems to be used in place of 'sky', 'space', and 'heaven as in dimention'. 

PS: NIV is terrible, KJV or Tanakh in Hebrew or go home.

Except the Bible says he created Earth and Heaven on day 1.  The waters refers to actual waters.  The bronze age understanding of the world was that the heavens and Earth are separated by a dome surrounded by water.  This dome was enclosing a flat Earth that was supported by pillars.

I you are defending it, you are a despicable human being.
People do fucked up shit and a lot of that was recorded in the bible. In modern times, we keep our bullshit in what we call "history".

But you guys say Bible was inspired by God.  So the moral code was inspired by God as well, or you conveniently skip that part and only the nice (love your neighbor parts) are inspired by God?  That is what I would call an intellectual dishonesty.


I'd not even know how to twist these words.
Evil hearts spew evil from their mouths. Pointing out misunderstood bible verses is one thing, but you follow up with extremelt hateful speech:
"unless you are already a psychopath"
"a collective work of some sick, bronze age psychopaths"
"you are a despicable human being"
And I'm not even halfway through the thread yet.

You are a psychopath if you think the moral code in the Bible is the correct moral code to follow.  There is no question about it.
Check yourself to a mental institution because you might be a danger to other people.

Anyone who believes everything in the Bible is true and is word of God is either ignorant or dishonest.
Ok. Your blanket statements are starting to piss me off.
See: 2 Timothy 3:16
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness"
Inspiration does not equal fact. Ever watch a movie that states "inspired by a true story"? Same idea: take the moral, leave the details.

You are ignorant of modern moral code, modern legal systems and modern ethics.
You are dishonest because you ignore nasty parts of the Bible and concentrate on the nice parts.  That is dishonesty.  Deal with the vile parts first.  Reconcile those with modern times first, before you even read the rest of this vile book.

After I saw responses from the Christians on this forum, I have changed the title of this thread.
Why not include "crazy shit atheists say"? Everyone here is an asshole so why point one group out over another?

Atheist position is the most rational, most compatible with science position.  We are in the mists of the scientific revolution, if you care to notice.

Show us the wisdom of God.
Their silence is proof of wisdom. Wisdom to withhold the fuel that feeds the hateful fire you've started.

Your God is dick on wheels.  And he is imaginary.  How can you not see it?

Those aren't quotes, just some vague and inaccurate descriptions of a few verses.

And you copied and pasted them from Google anyway.

So go ahead and Google for answers if you're interested.

That is what I thought.  Ignorance is a bliss.
No, he's actually right. All you've done is copy+paste the most fucked up shit from the bible for the soul purpose of delivering hate. You're more evil than all the verses you've referred to.

What are you talking about.  It is your God inspired book.  I did not write it.


What I have problem is with people who try to tell me black is white.  Believe it or die.
I have a problem with shit disturbers like you. You've made absolutely zero points other than proof of hate for the bible. So what? Keep your shit to yourself, and if someone presses their white on your black then press back when it's appropriate.


I'm not lying, it says the Earth is flat with 4 corners, squared in fact:
Give me a shape with an end four squares and which is not flat!
Not in fact, you've added the squared part. What is fact is words sometimes have two meanings.
See here for the four corners and their corresponding ends:



I know, he thinks we are attacking his religion.
How are you completely blind to the fact that you are attacking religion?! Huh

I'm pointing out the craziness and irrationality of this myth.
member
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

Quote
In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...
Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company
You're right, I retract my statement. Santa Clause still does have an origin and story based off people who existed in time, my point is still valid.
hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 722
The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

Quote
In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...
Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company

Santa is 300+ years older than the Coca-Cola company
member
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

Quote
In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...
Santa was created by the Coca-Cola company
hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 722
The existence of Santa Clause can be disproven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

I'd love to see this proof... considering it's impossible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence#Proving_a_negative

Quote
In 1992 during a presentation at Caltech, skeptic James Randi said "you can't prove a negative". He claims that he cannot prove a negative (such as that telepathy does not exist), but he argues that an individual who claims telepathy exists must prove it...
hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 722
tl;dr

Anyone want to handle this schmuck?
member
Activity: 112
Merit: 10
You have the same evidence for God as young kids have for Santa Claus.
You're comparing a belief in something that is known to be untrue, and something that is unknown to be untrue.

What did God give you?
Free will, 'Pain, misery, wars, stake burning, chopping hands and feet, stoning, chopping heads off, etc.' are a direct result of said free will.

There is no Santa Claus just like there is no God.
The existence of Santa Clause can be dis-proven, but the existence of God can only be speculated.

God is the most vengeful, hateful, masochistic, misogynistic being ever invented by a human mind.
You're right, God is all things including loving, forgiving, and righteous; Anything the human mind can imagine was put there by God.

bible, koran and any other religious stuff says illogical things not just bible  but if someone believes these sayings of bible or other stuff's , we should respect to them..
This guy gets it.

Should I also respect someone who believes in unicorns, Zeus, Santa Claus, and the Tooth Fairy?
[...]
I draw the line with respect, when someone loses touch with reality... and then tries to force their delusion upon me
You already respect those people, and tolerate their traditions year after year. Matter of fact, their delusional belief of these lies have already been forced upon you, I assume you probably partake in their rituals.

I became Atheist reading first few verses when he created Earth in the dark, then created plants before creating the Sun and the Stars.
A plant can be created without it growing; seeds can sprout in darkness. Besides, you got that verse twisted, read "whose seed is in itself", meaning it hasn't grown yet.

Just ignore all the biblical quotes we keep posting
I would be curious to know how many of these quotes are taken out of context. Your quote from: Matthew 7:3-5 "the mote in your eye" is a good metaphor for telling someone "look at your own faults before accusing me of the same faults you have".

The Messiah must be a physical descendant of David (Romans 1:3 & Acts 2:30).  Yet, how could Jesus meet this requirement since his genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 show he descended from David through Joseph, who was not his natural father because of the Virgin Birth. Hence, this prophecy could not have been fulfilled.
Mary was also a descendant of David, as was Joseph who was very old when he was betrothed to Mary who was 15. Check out "The Forbidden Books of the New Testament" for more interesting shit like this.

The Jews wrote the bible!  It's called the HEBREW BIBLE
[...]
The question remains... why is a perfect God, so redundant?
You answered your own question before asking it. Man is imperfect.

The Israelites were forbidden from performing a pagan religious ritual which involved boiling a baby goat in its own mother's milk.
til...

If this creation story does make sense to you, you are clueless:
Day 1: He created Earth (formless and empty) and heaven in the dark.  Spirit of God was covering waters, Then he created light
Day 2: He separated sky (the vault) from the water  (some magic water that did not freeze)
Day 3: He created dry land (after he created Earth) and plants
Day 4: He created Sun and other stars (poor plants, they had to wait for Sun to show up)
Day 5: Created animals
Day 6: Started farming (no industrial revolution, no science, no Internet?  Why not?)
That's a pretty twisted way of reading Genesis. Here's my interpretation:

Day 0: Spirit of God gets an idea, the Earth and Heavens. Neither exist, thus void and formless and are referred to as "waters".
Day 1: God creates light, divides it from the darkness, calls it night and day.
Day 2: God "divided waters from waters" and separated matter from anti-matter, creating Earth and Heavens.
Day 3: Dry land and oceans formed, then the Earth brings forth plants, whose seed is in itself (so the plants didn't have to wait for sun cuz they haven't grown)
Day 4: Then God made the Sun and Moon, day and night, seasons, etc...
Day 5: Sea creatures and flying things.
Day 6: Land animals & Man in the likeness of God in Spirit.
Day 7: Sabbath
Day 8: God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. THEN, man started farming; industrial revolution came after.

and so on... To add to the confusion, 'heaven' seems to be used in place of 'sky', 'space', and 'heaven as in dimention'. 

PS: NIV is terrible, KJV or Tanakh in Hebrew or go home.

Quote from: Deuteronomy 13:15
Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword.
He says genocide, and that's how I interpret the passage... How do you interpret this verse?
Without knowing the context, to me it sounds like "The word of God shall smite all evil". 'Word of God' being 'sword' according to Ephesians 6:17

And, considering the ruler of the town does not condemn the act of cannibalism, the assumption is that he condones the behavior... I read the passage and there is no mention of any punishment for the cannibalism... it does not even imply that it was immoral or wrong... it implies that the woman who hid her son, after making an agreement to eat the child, was in the wrong... sooooooo evil
Holy shit!  How did I not know the bible condones cannibalism?
Well, yeah, but far from evil. When faced with starvation it's acceptable in many cases. v25:"And there was a great famine in Samaria"
You also missed the part where it was the King of Israel who agreed to eat his son with the woman first, then eat the woman's son after. When the woman hid her son, he tore his shirt pissed mad.

I you are defending it, you are a despicable human being.
People do fucked up shit and a lot of that was recorded in the bible. In modern times, we keep our bullshit in what we call "history".

There are generally 2 common themes among Christians... hypocrisy, and ignorance...
[...]
I'm still waiting to see a single Christian that can articulate anything that is actually in the bible
Yeah me too, so I stopped waiting and started articulating.

Why do Catholics believe in a different set of 10 commandments than protestant Christians?
Catholics do almost everything the Bible says not to do, including chanting and worshiping to idols on the first day of the week. Something about paganism or some shit I don't know...

Read the bible. Its the fastest way to Atheism. You find out what the book really says, and it's not pretty.
Reading the bible was the fastest way to confirm that humanity is fucked and God left us a long time ago after one of his angels betrayed Him and corrupted an entire species. He's been trying to get back in touch, but unfortunately we killed the messenger.

I'd not even know how to twist these words.
Evil hearts spew evil from their mouths. Pointing out misunderstood bible verses is one thing, but you follow up with extremelt hateful speech:
"unless you are already a psychopath"
"a collective work of some sick, bronze age psychopaths"
"you are a despicable human being"
And I'm not even halfway through the thread yet.

As for myself, I was indoctrinated as a child...

I went to church every Wednesday, and twice on Sunday (morning and evening) from the time I was born until I was 16

I considered myself a Christian until I was 12 and started reading the book for myself (oddly enough, I was forced to read it daily when I started going to a Christian school in the 7-9th grade)

After reading the bible, I could no longer believe it.  There were too many false statements, contradictions, poor morals, etc...
I truly feel for you, being brought up in a system designed to break away at the foundation of the gospel it preaches. You point out when "God hardened Pharaoh's heart", but don't understand what's being said is "Pharaoh became bitter". I couldn't find the other stories you mentioned, and would love to read them.

You know right from wrong because your emotions tell you this not books
'Right' and 'wrong' are moral viewpoints based on a preconditioned reactionary state which is constantly influenced by our perception. Whether this influence comes from a book or not is irrelevant.

Anyone who believes everything in the Bible is true and is word of God is either ignorant or dishonest.
Ok. Your blanket statements are starting to piss me off.
See: 2 Timothy 3:16
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness"
Inspiration does not equal fact. Ever watch a movie that states "inspired by a true story"? Same idea: take the moral, leave the details.

After I saw responses from the Christians on this forum, I have changed the title of this thread.
Why not include "crazy shit atheists say"? Everyone here is an asshole so why point one group out over another?

[...]but don't try to impose your craziness on others. You know how gay people are told that they can do whatever they want in the privacy of their own home?[...]
Yeah, they're told to keep it private, but still parade their faggotry through the streets imposing their craziness on others. I can hardly stand the hypocrisy.

Show us the wisdom of God.
Their silence is proof of wisdom. Wisdom to withhold the fuel that feeds the hateful fire you've started.

Those aren't quotes, just some vague and inaccurate descriptions of a few verses.

And you copied and pasted them from Google anyway.

So go ahead and Google for answers if you're interested.

That is what I thought.  Ignorance is a bliss.
No, he's actually right. All you've done is copy+paste the most fucked up shit from the bible for the soul purpose of delivering hate. You're more evil than all the verses you've referred to.

The fact is that plenty of intelligent people have studied the Bible and found no flaws or contradictions.  You are free to disagree, but you are also free to read thousands of commentaries online - if you were actually interested in answers.
Well dude I'd like to have the name of even ONE person matching this description xD
Jesus of Nazareth. And what did we do to reward his knowledge? Crucifixion.


What I have problem is with people who try to tell me black is white.  Believe it or die.
I have a problem with shit disturbers like you. You've made absolutely zero points other than proof of hate for the bible. So what? Keep your shit to yourself, and if someone presses their white on your black then press back when it's appropriate.


I'm not lying, it says the Earth is flat with 4 corners, squared in fact:
Give me a shape with an end four squares and which is not flat!
Not in fact, you've added the squared part. What is fact is words sometimes have two meanings.
See here for the four corners and their corresponding ends:



I know, he thinks we are attacking his religion.
How are you completely blind to the fact that you are attacking religion?! Huh

Did I say for you not to believe in this batshit crazy stuff?  I said any rational person should not.

skipping to the end of the thread,



This is proof of man's misinterpretation of scripture to push an evil agenda:

I think the bible is very clear about who was made in His image:

Gen.1:26 "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness...":

Image and likeness is defined as a "representation of the external form"; God was in Spirit [Gen1:2] going through the motions of creation, therefore the 'image of God' is Spirit creating other Spirits (i.e. Angels, Watchers, Nephilim, Sons of God, etc).

Human beings are created from "the dust of the ground" [Gen.2:7], which is why we're not 'invisible'.
sr. member
Activity: 293
Merit: 250
Yes, but that would be too easy. And religion's point is not to be easy, but to be hard and complicated. You must wreck your mind and body to really get to live forever.

Well not my fault if I don't have faith. God's fault!
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
★YoBit.Net★ 350+ Coins Exchange & Dice
Yes, but that would be too easy. And religion's point is not to be easy, but to be hard and complicated. You must wreck your mind and body to really get to live forever.
sr. member
Activity: 392
Merit: 250
Ok, I think I'm starting to understand...

God has been trying to exterminate all the Atheists for thousands of years... and keeps failing?

Note that if he ever did it's extremely stupid from him.

There is one safe and easy way to destroy all and every atheists in the world:
Just appear to the world ^^

Most atheists are essentially people without any faith. Hence they can't believe a god because without proof or faith... Hard to believe.
Just let the big daddy with his big barb appear to every one at the same time and you'll see it another way!
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
★YoBit.Net★ 350+ Coins Exchange & Dice
Finally thou hath finally understood(eth).
hero member
Activity: 798
Merit: 722
Ok, I think I'm starting to understand...

God has been trying to exterminate all the Atheists for thousands of years... and keeps failing?
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
★YoBit.Net★ 350+ Coins Exchange & Dice
So:
a) He destroyed them
b) He destroyed them numerous times
c) they are still there

He revealed Himself to these people that: a, b, c.

Totally makes sense.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Gloire à la Victoire !


God isn't invisible. He reveal himself to the meritous men. If you follow a decent life, without sins, you'll accept to the Heaven you'll see Him.

So we should all be invisible but to decent humans?

What did you try to mean ? I am sorry, but after tried more and more, I'm unable to understand what it does mean Undecided...

He meant that if humans are like God then we're all invisible to humans not living good and decent lifes, just as how God is ^^

Oh okay Cheesy ! No, I'm sure that God also revealed himself to the sinners that he destroyed numerous times but who are unfortunatly still there.
legendary
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1251


God isn't invisible. He reveal himself to the meritous men. If you follow a decent life, without sins, you'll accept to the Heaven you'll see Him.

So we should all be invisible but to decent humans?

What did you try to mean ? I am sorry, but after tried more and more, I'm unable to understand what it does mean Undecided...

He meant that if humans are like God then we're all invisible to humans not living good and decent lifes, just as how God is ^^
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Gloire à la Victoire !


God isn't invisible. He reveal himself to the meritous men. If you follow a decent life, without sins, you'll accept to the Heaven you'll see Him.

So we should all be invisible but to decent humans?

What did you try to mean ? I am sorry, but after tried more and more, I'm unable to understand what it does mean Undecided...
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 500
Join @Bountycloud for the best bounties!


God isn't invisible. He reveal himself to the meritous men. If you follow a decent life, without sins, you'll accept to the Heaven you'll see Him.

So we should all be invisible but to decent humans?
Pages:
Jump to: