Addressing Misconceptions of Christianity on PWI

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

You guys keep sex education down, a proven indicator for fighting teen pregnancy and STDs based on this book[/quote]

And you want to force it into public schools.

No, I prevent the legalization of any marriage besides that of one man and one woman. State recognition of gay marriage is unjust discrimination.

[quote]You guys distort attitudes towards human sexuality in society based on this book.

So a better question is, why would you expect us not to care about what the Bible says? [/quote]

Not our values that’ve doomed this country into a nearly total segegration of have’s and have nots, with different religiosity and adherence to family and social norms. We didn’t demographically doom the very nanny state your distorted sexual attitudes require, via nothing less than your distorted sexual attitudes.

[/quote]

My point was that you guys make these decisions based on your religious views and that’s why I care about what the Bible says.[/quote]

Well since my quote fix didn’t stick, I explain this to you here. If you want to know what the bible says, there’s only one way to know for sure and that’s to read it.
I don’t think you are interested in the bible at all, your interested in perceived religious takes that irk you.
You’ll find that a lot of beliefs people attribute to the bible aren’t actually in there. When you read it, the great fog of misconception lifts.
A lot of the things you think we get from the bible aren’t in there.

82

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

I listened to the video and Matt is setting up a straw man(go watch the first video I posted in this thread to find out why).[/quote]

I’m at work, I’ll watch the video when I’m home.

But before I do, why don’t you explain the strawman so I can look for it.

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

Secondly I find it very telling how Matt and his buddy are quick to make moral pronouncements when their worldview cannot account for such a thing even though there are such things as clear and distinct moral perceptions.

Thirdly think of why some evils are wrong.[/quote]

He explained how he gets his moral perceptions.

“I get my limits from a rational consideration of the consequences of my actions. That’s how I determine what’s moral. I get it from a foundation that says “My actions have an effect on those people around me, and theirs have an effect on me.” And if we’re going to live cooperately and share space, we have to recognize that impact. My freedom to swing my arm ends at their nose. And I have no right to impose my will over somebody elseâ??s will, in that type of scenario. I get them (morals) from an understanding of reality, not an assertion of authority.”
[/quote]
1.He presents the christian position as if God’s commands are morally arbitrary when they are not, they flow from his unchangeable eternal nature which morality gets its foundation from.
2.His do as i say don’t do as I do analogy doesn’t work. If I take your life it is wrong on the Christian view because your life isn’t mine to take while not so for God who sustains the universe and our existence in being.
3. Pragmatism cannot be the basis for objective moral values since the basis for it is how one should behave for their own benefit, however in practice this gives no normative means of how one should behave across society. For example say you have a janitor on this view it makes sense for him not to rob a bank since it would most likely end most unwell for him, but now consider a CEO who steals from the shareholders runs the company into the ground, gets the government to bail the company out and retired with a multimillion dollar bonus. On this view there is no rationally impelling force for him to act otherwise. Lets think about one of the most genetically successful men in history Genghis Khan, regardless of his actions benefiting him greater genetically than other men. I know objectively that what he did was wrong even if he concurred the world and left such a legacy that everyone though he was a great man.
Secondly one cannot get an ought from an is, one of the greatest atheist philosophers in history expounded on this Is–ought problem - Wikipedia

83

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Considering the OP’s original topic; seems to me that the four horsemen (Hitchens, Harris, Dawkins, & Dennet) have been addressing Christianity’s misconceptions very well for quite a while.

There is no god.[/quote]
I partly created this thread with you in mind considering your complaint about that no one was going to explain the “atrocities” in the bible, although you could have researched and read up on what Christians say about it, I made it even easier in that all you have to do is listen for a bit and if you are interested afterwards point you to some resources you can look into yourself.

Those four hun, do you like debates?

84

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Considering the OP’s original topic; seems to me that the four horsemen (Hitchens, Harris, Dawkins, & Dennet) have been addressing Christianity’s misconceptions very well for quite a while.

There is no god.[/quote]
I partly created this thread with you in mind considering your complaint about that no one was going to explain the “atrocities” in the bible, although you could have researched and read up on what Christians say about it, I made it even easier in that all you have to do is listen for a bit and if you are interested afterwards point you to some resources you can look into yourself.[/quote]

What I normally get from most christians when cornered on this, are basically two responses. One, is the stance that those stories are metaphors and such, that they’re meant to teach a lesson, and that they’re not to be taken literally. The other stance is usually the "God is GOD! And you can’t question him no matter WHAT he does! This is usually where christians will further position that if god directs his believers to murder, rape, pillage and make war; then it’s okay.

I say bullshit. The bible is looaaddeedd (in Ron White voice) with murder, rape, child sacrifice, pillage, etc. All of it god approved. This is something that I’ve already pointed out in great length in another thread. Christians will always try to double talk and squirm around the fact, but the fact remains. It’s disturbing the wat that christians try to rationalize the bible atrocities as something other than what they are.

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
Those four hun, do you like debates?[/quote]

I like particularly the debates where Hitchens rips apart with authority, Dinesh D’souza.

85

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Considering the OP’s original topic; seems to me that the four horsemen (Hitchens, Harris, Dawkins, & Dennet) have been addressing Christianity’s misconceptions very well for quite a while.

There is no god.[/quote]
I partly created this thread with you in mind considering your complaint about that no one was going to explain the “atrocities” in the bible, although you could have researched and read up on what Christians say about it, I made it even easier in that all you have to do is listen for a bit and if you are interested afterwards point you to some resources you can look into yourself.[/quote]

What I normally get from most christians when cornered on this, are basically two responses. One, is the stance that those stories are metaphors and such, that they’re meant to teach a lesson, and that they’re not to be taken literally. The other stance is usually the "God is GOD! And you can’t question him no matter WHAT he does! This is usually where christians will further position that if god directs his believers to murder, rape, pillage and make war; then it’s okay.

I say bullshit. The bible is looaaddeedd (in Ron White voice) with murder, rape, child sacrifice, pillage, etc. All of it god approved. This is something that I’ve already pointed out in great length in another thread. Christians will always try to double talk and squirm around the fact, but the fact remains. It’s disturbing the wat that christians try to rationalize the bible atrocities as something other than what they are.

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
Those four hun, do you like debates?[/quote]

I like particularly the debates where Hitchens rips apart with authority, Dinesh D’souza. [/quote]

Again, this wasn’t addressed to me but could you please show me just the scriptures showing God-approved child sacrifices. I don’t want you to have to repeat everything you said before, but if you could present those references, I will prepare a rebuttal. (note: by me requesting just that one does not in any way mean that I think God approves of the rest of those acts.)

86

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Considering the OP’s original topic; seems to me that the four horsemen (Hitchens, Harris, Dawkins, & Dennet) have been addressing Christianity’s misconceptions very well for quite a while.

There is no god.[/quote]
I partly created this thread with you in mind considering your complaint about that no one was going to explain the “atrocities” in the bible, although you could have researched and read up on what Christians say about it, I made it even easier in that all you have to do is listen for a bit and if you are interested afterwards point you to some resources you can look into yourself.[/quote]

What I normally get from most christians when cornered on this, are basically two responses. One, is the stance that those stories are metaphors and such, that they’re meant to teach a lesson, and that they’re not to be taken literally. The other stance is usually the "God is GOD! And you can’t question him no matter WHAT he does! This is usually where christians will further position that if god directs his believers to murder, rape, pillage and make war; then it’s okay.

I say bullshit. The bible is looaaddeedd (in Ron White voice) with murder, rape, child sacrifice, pillage, etc. All of it god approved. This is something that I’ve already pointed out in great length in another thread. Christians will always try to double talk and squirm around the fact, but the fact remains. It’s disturbing the wat that christians try to rationalize the bible atrocities as something other than what they are.

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
Those four hun, do you like debates?[/quote]

I like particularly the debates where Hitchens rips apart with authority, Dinesh D’souza. [/quote]

Again, this wasn’t addressed to me but could you please show me just the scriptures showing God-approved child sacrifices. I don’t want you to have to repeat everything you said before, but if you could present those references, I will prepare a rebuttal. (note: by me requesting just that one does not in any way mean that I think God approves of the rest of those acts.)[/quote]

You mean other than the enthusiastic sacrifice of his own son?

87

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Considering the OP’s original topic; seems to me that the four horsemen (Hitchens, Harris, Dawkins, & Dennet) have been addressing Christianity’s misconceptions very well for quite a while.

There is no god.[/quote]
I partly created this thread with you in mind considering your complaint about that no one was going to explain the “atrocities” in the bible, although you could have researched and read up on what Christians say about it, I made it even easier in that all you have to do is listen for a bit and if you are interested afterwards point you to some resources you can look into yourself.[/quote]

What I normally get from most christians when cornered on this, are basically two responses. One, is the stance that those stories are metaphors and such, that they’re meant to teach a lesson, and that they’re not to be taken literally. The other stance is usually the "God is GOD! And you can’t question him no matter WHAT he does! This is usually where christians will further position that if god directs his believers to murder, rape, pillage and make war; then it’s okay.

I say bullshit. The bible is looaaddeedd (in Ron White voice) with murder, rape, child sacrifice, pillage, etc. All of it god approved. This is something that I’ve already pointed out in great length in another thread. Christians will always try to double talk and squirm around the fact, but the fact remains. It’s disturbing the wat that christians try to rationalize the bible atrocities as something other than what they are.
[/quote]
I call your bullshit. Yet another biblical scholar whose never read the thing. How do you know what it says if you haven’t read it?
Do you often find yourself qualified to comment and scrutinized material you don’t read? Is there a class on studying things you don’t read.
The bible is not “looeeeddeedd” with any of that shit. Your taking ancient texts of an ancient people, out of context and scrutizing it with a 21 century America paradigm and passing judgement on something you don’t know about taking somebody elses word on it.
I am starting to lose my patience with this, “I never read it, but I know what it says” mentality.
Since when has it become the fad to pass judgement on things you don’t have any knowledge of?

Number 2, even if the bible were bullshit, it still wouldn’t mean that God doesn’t exist. Most of the atheists I run across are wonderful at tearing down strawmen. “Christians beleive _____, and that’s wrong!” Uh, no we don’t.

Wow he really ripped apart an unimportant person who most people have never heard of?! WOW! He must be a genius!
I find the faith you put in this atheist author a rich irony.

[quote]
Again, this wasn’t addressed to me but could you please show me just the scriptures showing God-approved child sacrifices. I don’t want you to have to repeat everything you said before, but if you could present those references, I will prepare a rebuttal. (note: by me requesting just that one does not in any way mean that I think God approves of the rest of those acts.)[/quote]

Yeah, me to. Let’s see these scriptures where God, not approves, commands child sacrifice.

88

Arrrg! Damn quote tags…

89

… Crap.

90

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

You mean other than the enthusiastic sacrifice of his own son?[/quote]

Oh brother…

91

Edit:

Quote thingy’s are killing me tonight

92

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

You mean other than the enthusiastic sacrifice of his own son?[/quote]

Oh brother…[/quote]

Bigflamer, Jesus was a full grown adult, not a child. Did you have another example in mind?

93

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
What I normally get from most christians when cornered on this, are basically two responses. One, is the stance that those stories are metaphors and such, that they’re meant to teach a lesson, and that they’re not to be taken literally. The other stance is usually the "God is GOD! And you can’t question him no matter WHAT he does! This is usually where christians will further position that if god directs his believers to murder, rape, pillage and make war; then it’s okay.

I say bullshit. The bible is looaaddeedd (in Ron White voice) with murder, rape, child sacrifice, pillage, etc. All of it god approved. This is something that I’ve already pointed out in great length in another thread. Christians will always try to double talk and squirm around the fact, but the fact remains. It’s disturbing the wat that christians try to rationalize the bible atrocities as something other than what they are.
[/quote]

I call your bullshit. Yet another biblical scholar whose never read the thing. How do you know what it says if you haven’t read it?
Do you often find yourself qualified to comment and scrutinized material you don’t read? Is there a class on studying things you don’t read.
The bible is not “looeeeddeedd” with any of that shit. Your taking ancient texts of an ancient people, out of context and scrutizing it with a 21 century America paradigm and passing judgement on something you don’t know about taking somebody elses word on it.
I am starting to lose my patience with this, “I never read it, but I know what it says” mentality.
Since when has it become the fad to pass judgement on things you don’t have any knowledge of?[/quote]

You assume that he’s never read it. I’m quite sure that Hitchens had read the bible in his day; more than likely he had a greater familiarity with it than you, or most other Christians for that matter did. If you knew anything of Hitchens, you’d know that he was very familiar with the bible, especially the KJV; a fact that those who’ve debated him know quite well.

[quote]Pat wrote:
Number 2, even if the bible were bullshit, it still wouldn’t mean that God doesn’t exist. Most of the atheists I run across are wonderful at tearing down strawmen. “Christians beleive _____, and that’s wrong!” Uh, no we don’t. [/quote]

I do believe you’re right, lol.

Most Christians, even if their holy book was proven to be factually and without question a falsehood, would scramble to cling at the scraps of their faith. Of that I have no doubt.

[quote]Pat wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
Those four hun, do you like debates?[/quote]

I like particularly the debates where Hitchens rips apart with authority, Dinesh D’souza.[/quote]

Wow he really ripped apart an unimportant person who most people have never heard of?! WOW! He must be a genius!

I find the faith you put in this atheist author a rich irony.[/quote]

As far as I know, Hitchens has never turned down a chance for “scruffy debate”, as he always referred to it, with anyone. He’s debated with just about everyone there is on the subject of religion and theism in general. Google it and you’ll see for yourself.

On the second point, you mistakenly assume that I’m a man of faith; quite the contrary. Faith is the willful suspension of reason and logic in an effort to believe in fairy tales that are in no way based in evidence. The opposite of reason is faith.

Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and … know nothing but the word of God. -Martin Luther

Reason is the Devil’s greatest whore; by nature and manner of being she is a noxious whore; she is a prostitute, the Devil’s appointed whore; whore eaten by scab and leprosy who ought to be trodden under foot and destroyed, she and her wisdom … Throw dung in her face to make her ugly. She is and she ought to be drowned in baptism… She would deserve, the wretch, to be banished to the filthiest place in the house, to the closets. -Martin Luther

[quote]Pat wrote:

[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
Again, this wasn’t addressed to me but could you please show me just the scriptures showing God-approved child sacrifices. I don’t want you to have to repeat everything you said before, but if you could present those references, I will prepare a rebuttal. (note: by me requesting just that one does not in any way mean that I think God approves of the rest of those acts.)[/quote]

Yeah, me to. Let’s see these scriptures where God, not approves, commands child sacrifice.[/quote]

I’ve already addressed this at great length in the previous thread, if you’re unsure as to which thread that is I’ll point you in the right direction.

94

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

You mean other than the enthusiastic sacrifice of his own son?[/quote]

Oh brother…[/quote]

Bigflamer, Jesus was a full grown adult, not a child. Did you have another example in mind?[/quote]

You’re right, Jesus WAS the grown child of god at the time of his torture and execution. That would just be regular murder and torture…of your son. My bad. lol

But seriously, even though I’ve had this discussion at length already in another thread, I’m happy to revisit it.

Now, in the case of Abraham, he was not only ordered to sacrifice his son by the knife, but he was also to BURN him in a pyre. An act that Abraham, according to christian mythology, was more than willing to do. Crazy shit, right!? But in the end, god was all “PSYCH!..I was just fooling around to test your faith, man! Now burn me a ram!!” LOL

“Take your son, your only son - yes, Isaac, whom you love so much â?? and go to the land of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains, which I will point out to you.” (Genesis 22:1-18)

Then we have the story of Jephthah:

[i]"At that time the Spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah, and he went throughout the land of Gilead and Manasseh, including Mizpah in Gilead, and led an army against the Ammonites. And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD. He said, “If you give me victory over the Ammonites, I will give to the LORD the first thing coming out of my house to greet me when I return in triumph. I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.”

“So Jephthah led his army against the Ammonites, and the LORD gave him victory. He thoroughly defeated the Ammonites from Aroer to an area near Minnith â?? twenty towns â?? and as far away as Abel-keramim. Thus Israel subdued the Ammonites. When Jephthah returned home to Mizpah, his daughter â?? his only child â?? ran out to meet him, playing on a tambourine and dancing for joy. When he saw her, he tore his clothes in anguish. “My daughter!” he cried out. “My heart is breaking! What a tragedy that you came out to greet me. For I have made a vow to the LORD and cannot take it back.” And she said, “Father, you have made a promise to the LORD. You must do to me what you have promised, for the LORD has given you a great victory over your enemies, the Ammonites. But first let me go up and roam in the hills and weep with my friends for two months, because I will die a virgin.” “You may go,” Jephthah said. And he let her go away for two months. She and her friends went into the hills and wept because she would never have children. When she returned home, her father kept his vow, and she died a virgin. So it has become a custom in Israel for young Israelite women to go away for four days each year to lament the fate of Jephthah’s daughter.” (Judges 11:29-40 NLT)[/i]

And I still contend that the example of Jesus is valid, regardless of the age of the child sacrificed. According to christian mythology, he sacrificed his child. I don’t think that age is relevant, do you?

Now, these are a few examples of child specific sacrifice. There are many other examples of murder, rape, torture, slavery, and other such shenanigans in the christian good book. Google it.

95

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

You mean other than the enthusiastic sacrifice of his own son?[/quote]

Oh brother…[/quote]

I know, right?

It’s such an obvious example of child sacrifice that it gets overlooked. But there it is…

96

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

You mean other than the enthusiastic sacrifice of his own son?[/quote]

Oh brother…[/quote]

Bigflamer, Jesus was a full grown adult, not a child. Did you have another example in mind?[/quote]

You’re right, Jesus WAS the grown child of god at the time of his torture and execution. That would just be regular murder and torture…of your son. My bad. lol

But seriously, even though I’ve had this discussion at length already in another thread, I’m happy to revisit it.

Now, in the case of Abraham, he was not only ordered to sacrifice his son by the knife, but he was also to BURN him in a pyre. An act that Abraham, according to christian mythology, was more than willing to do. Crazy shit, right!? But in the end, god was all “PSYCH!..I was just fooling around to test your faith, man! Now burn me a ram!!” LOL

“Take your son, your only son - yes, Isaac, whom you love so much â?? and go to the land of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains, which I will point out to you.” (Genesis 22:1-18)

Then we have the story of Jephthah:

[i]"At that time the Spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah, and he went throughout the land of Gilead and Manasseh, including Mizpah in Gilead, and led an army against the Ammonites. And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD. He said, “If you give me victory over the Ammonites, I will give to the LORD the first thing coming out of my house to greet me when I return in triumph. I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering.”

“So Jephthah led his army against the Ammonites, and the LORD gave him victory. He thoroughly defeated the Ammonites from Aroer to an area near Minnith â?? twenty towns â?? and as far away as Abel-keramim. Thus Israel subdued the Ammonites. When Jephthah returned home to Mizpah, his daughter â?? his only child â?? ran out to meet him, playing on a tambourine and dancing for joy. When he saw her, he tore his clothes in anguish. “My daughter!” he cried out. “My heart is breaking! What a tragedy that you came out to greet me. For I have made a vow to the LORD and cannot take it back.” And she said, “Father, you have made a promise to the LORD. You must do to me what you have promised, for the LORD has given you a great victory over your enemies, the Ammonites. But first let me go up and roam in the hills and weep with my friends for two months, because I will die a virgin.” “You may go,” Jephthah said. And he let her go away for two months. She and her friends went into the hills and wept because she would never have children. When she returned home, her father kept his vow, and she died a virgin. So it has become a custom in Israel for young Israelite women to go away for four days each year to lament the fate of Jephthah’s daughter.” (Judges 11:29-40 NLT)[/i]

And I still contend that the example of Jesus is valid, regardless of the age of the child sacrificed. According to christian mythology, he sacrificed his child. I don’t think that age is relevant, do you?

Now, these are a few examples of child specific sacrifice. There are many other examples of murder, rape, torture, slavery, and other such shenanigans in the christian good book. Google it.

[/quote]
I will address the Jephthah story, first of all it does not describe what you think it does. I had the same misconception for most of my life as well but it actually turns out that because of that vow that his only child his daughter was not to be married and thus was consecrated(set apart) to the Lord and thus no one to carry on his name and his daughter obtains his inheritance after he dies. This is strongly supported by the text you just quoted(the bewailing of her virginity). This vow would have been made by the city gate so that it would have been public knowledge even such that his daughter most likely knew about this before hand.

Secondly just because the bible records some things doesn’t mean that God approves of such acts.

The Son and the Father were in one accord. Ive already explained to raj that what makes taking a life wrong for us is that it is not ours to take. With Jesus being God I don’t see the problem.(John 10:17-18 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.)

97

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
pat wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
What I normally get from most christians when cornered on this, are basically two responses. One, is the stance that those stories are metaphors and such, that they’re meant to teach a lesson, and that they’re not to be taken literally. The other stance is usually the "God is GOD! And you can’t question him no matter WHAT he does! This is usually where christians will further position that if god directs his believers to murder, rape, pillage and make war; then it’s okay.

I say bullshit. The bible is looaaddeedd (in Ron White voice) with murder, rape, child sacrifice, pillage, etc. All of it god approved. This is something that I’ve already pointed out in great length in another thread. Christians will always try to double talk and squirm around the fact, but the fact remains. It’s disturbing the wat that christians try to rationalize the bible atrocities as something other than what they are.

I call your bullshit. Yet another biblical scholar whose never read the thing. How do you know what it says if you haven’t read it?
Do you often find yourself qualified to comment and scrutinized material you don’t read? Is there a class on studying things you don’t read.
The bible is not “looeeeddeedd” with any of that shit. Your taking ancient texts of an ancient people, out of context and scrutizing it with a 21 century America paradigm and passing judgement on something you don’t know about taking somebody elses word on it.
I am starting to lose my patience with this, “I never read it, but I know what it says” mentality.
Since when has it become the fad to pass judgement on things you don’t have any knowledge of?

You assume that he’s never read it. I’m quite sure that Hitchens had read the bible in his day; more than likely he had a greater familiarity with it than you, or most other Christians for that matter did. If you knew anything of Hitchens, you’d know that he was very familiar with the bible, especially the KJV; a fact that those who’ve debated him know quite well.
[/quote]
Actually I was calling you out on reading the bible. I don’t know much about Hitchen’s other that he was a hard drinker and smoker (stating fact, not passing judgment. I approve of both activities), that he was an author, and that his best friend happened to be a evangelical preacher.

There are historically inaccurate things in the bible, but that doesn’t make it false. Factually the bible isn’t that badly errant. The fact there are historical errors doesn’t make the bible an errant book. It’s not a history book. If it were, it would be a bad one as it’s heavily biased toward Hebrews and what would come to be called Christians. History is a mere vehicle for the bible. It’s used to communicate about and with God and in that facet it is not errant. Difficult maybe, but errant, no.
You cannot take a few quotes out of context, with no basis in fact, and prove the whole bible wrong. A supposition like that only would prove you don’t understand what your talking about.

If you really understood faith and logic, you would understand that every second of your every existence, your relying on faith. Unless you know everything about everything, you are relying on faith. If you under stand logic and reason, you understand there is little you can know. Most is taken on probability and familiarity. Further, if you understand, reason and logic, you understand that the only thing that can be proven true, is deductive truths. That empirical appearance relies on probability to establish potential causation.
It doesn’t matter what you think, it only matters what you can prove. Do you really think your atheism can stand up to scrutiny. Do you think you can prove there is no God once I do establish there is? Can you prove me wrong?
I will cut to the chase, I am baiting you. I don’t need a stitch of scripture or a shred of faith to do it.

I am no evangelical. I know why Martin Luther wrote that, and I know he meant in context. Faith is based on reason. You atheists think that faith is based on old stories told long ago. Which is a misunderstanding in many ways, but I will focus on one. It faith didn’t work and the words of scripture did not render what they say they render, then people would not believe. It’s a mistake to believe this is something that occurred long ago and dumb people follow it with their tongues hanging out.
You atheists are on a mission to slay many strawmen. You out to destroy Christianity because of what you think it believes in, not what it actually does. It’s this error as to why most people won’t take you seriously. You think you walk in reason while you are walking in faith, and hope like fucking hell, you’re not wrong.

Link away…

98

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

You mean other than the enthusiastic sacrifice of his own son?[/quote]

Oh brother…[/quote]

I know, right?

It’s such an obvious example of child sacrifice that it gets overlooked. But there it is…
[/quote]

Gee, I didn’t know a 33 year old could be counted as a child.
Even in the most liberal of societies 33 is still counted as an adult.

99

I truly miss Hitchens. The world is poorer in intellect after his passing for sure. Thankfully he was a damn fine writer, and he lives on in his writings and videos such as these.

Enjoy.

100

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]bigflamer wrote:

You mean other than the enthusiastic sacrifice of his own son?[/quote]

Oh brother…[/quote]

I know, right?

It’s such an obvious example of child sacrifice that it gets overlooked. But there it is…
[/quote]

Gee, I didn’t know a 33 year old could be counted as a child.
Even in the most liberal of societies 33 is still counted as an adult.[/quote]

On the other hand, 33 is very young when one has an infinite lifespan.