Here’s an instant messaging conversation I had with a Christian:
Almightygod: if god told you to kill a baby, would you do it?
Christian: god wouldnt tell us to kil anything
Christian: thats a sin
Almightygod: he did tell people to kill babies in the Bible
Almightygod: you should really read it
Christian: no he didnt.. stfu
Almightygod: I’ll get the link for you, hang on
Christian: youre lying
Christian: no
Christian: i know there isnt any killing on gods hands in the bible
Almightygod: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Samuel%2015:3&version=31
Christian: oh, there was an exception there
Almightygod: lol
Christian: god was trying to wipe out everyone and start over from hypocrites like you
Christian: but it didnt work
Almightygod: whatever the situation, god asked someone to kill babies
Almightygod: so, if he asked you, would you do it?
Christian: you’re taking it the wrong way
Almightygod: you can call me names if you want, but that doesn’t help your case
Almightygod: what’s the right way to take it
Almightygod: that’s not even the only time it happened in the Bible
Christian: god was trying to start over is the right way
Almightygod: start over?
Almightygod: no, the Israelis were just seizing land from their neighbors
Christian: *slits your throat* jeez
Christian: you say youve read the bible
Almightygod: calm down. No need to threaten violence
Almightygod: I’m just telling you about your own holy book, since you apparently haven’t read it.
Almightygod: do you want me to show you some more passages?
Christian: YOU ARE GOING TO HELL
Almighty God 
Posted by Danny on June 2, 2009 at 11:34 am
Typical fundie reaction. They’re totally clueless with what’s in their own bible yet can readily make excuses for it.
Posted by traffician on June 4, 2009 at 9:50 pm
it’s always so difficult to gauge the age of theists online. this shithead could be fourteen or forty. it burns!!!
Posted by Raydra on July 2, 2009 at 5:39 pm
That is awesome! And typical.
Posted by Frank Pace on July 14, 2009 at 1:32 am
The Christen sounds like he may me one of those conservative, right wing, religious, Republican, Libertarian, extremists. Don’t you think?
Posted by Dan on July 28, 2009 at 4:02 pm
I don’t think they actually care what’s in the Bible. Christianity is just a framework for justifying existing beliefs. If the Bible contradicts their beliefs (which it so often does) they simply ignore or interpret around it. Or get angry. I so wish cognitive dissidence was physically painful.
Posted by p on August 10, 2009 at 4:03 pm
You know, it goes both ways. If you use the words of a self-proclaimed Christian who obviously has not read the Bible as a way to bash all Christians, you’re projecting an image as ignorant as the one you’re trying to dismantle.
The idea is that the Old Testament brutality was meant to set up a nation of hyper-religious people who didn’t actually believe in God or love God, but merely adhered to a set of rules. The rules made them good people (according to themselves). That mentality is what hung Jesus on the cross. That mentality continuing in the nominal, hateful Christians is what Jesus died to end. Just because a person calls themselves a Christian doesn’t mean they actually are, obviously.
Maybe it’s time to stop judging Christianity based on the most ignorant, uninformed, hateful people who pretend to be Christians?
Are Christians hypocrites? Sure. As are most people. Are Christians ignorant? Definitely. If they truly sought Jesus, they wouldn’t be so hateful. Nor would they be Bible thumpy. Jesus drew people in through love, compassion and by pointing out where He could help heal people.
Like Tim Keller says, if the way you’re preaching the Gospel isn’t angering the religious and drawing in the dregs of society, you’re not teaching it the way Jesus intended.
Posted by josip_broz_tito on January 5, 2010 at 12:08 pm
well, jesus didn´t intend anything of this. Jesus, too, is an invention of the christian church. For some time in historical science it was even disputed wheter he ever lived or was a mere phantasy. To discuss that he this and that out of love and so on is useless crap. You want us to judge christianity not on their most stupid individuals? Well, then lets judge nacional-socialism, too, not by Hitler and Goebbels, but by the many people who intended to do good.
Thats crap. If you produce weaponary, you cannot say this should be only viewed from the perspective of the sane users of your product. You have to see, that there are persons using them running amok. Thats why we have discussions about religions at all. I dont care wheter they waste their time praying to a wooden handcraft. They kill, thats the problem. Thats the important viewpoint, nothing else.
Posted by alysdexia on April 1, 2010 at 9:03 pm
p, you don’t know anything about intentions. Look up hate, cut, sword, worms, dogs, pigs/swine, rich, vipers/serpents, slay, and hell in NT. Also look up marry, children, and eunuchs. They were to love who they hated and hate who they loved, in order to do away with the world.
Posted by IndyDina on August 12, 2009 at 10:20 pm
You were so perfectly patient with that moron. But then, you’re God!
Posted by Larissa on August 17, 2009 at 1:53 am
Hahahaha very good
Posted by Gus Snarp on August 18, 2009 at 6:09 pm
You know the best part comes later in that bible passage. Saul happily killed the babies, but he just couldn’t bring himself to kill the sheep and cattle.
Posted by georigin on September 2, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Almightygod: if God told you to kill a baby, would you do it?
RealChristian: Yes if God asked me to I most definitely would, BUT knowing that God is an all loving God and that this is but a test of faith and he would not allow such an evil. In fact Abraham was confronted with the same exact dilemma, when God asked him sacrifice his son Read Genesis 22:1 – 24. Just so you know Isaac lived.
Almightygod: he did tell people to kill babies in the Bible
RealChristian: yes he did, please refer to comment by “p”. I would also like to add that the old testament is based on “an eye for an eye” but Christ erases this law and asks us be humble in the new testament – “But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other (cheek) also.”
————————————————————————————————————————————–
Posted by josip_broz_tito on January 5, 2010 at 12:13 pm
…so lets go one step ahead. from the old testament to jesus, from jesus to rationality. It will be this way, anyways, just a question of time. And there is no need to be proud of that giant leap from “eye for an eye” to the stupid idea of original sin. Its even worse. The jews, wich rely on the crap in the old testament mostly at least don´t believe that their new born babies are already so guilty that they would end up in hell if not our saviour would have died on the cross for us. What a great Idea: god makes man, god makes sin, god forbides to make sins but let us to, that he damns us for that and sent his son to earth so we can kill him and get rid of our sins…wtf, jez, wtf?
Posted by John on September 11, 2009 at 4:20 am
LoL – all these Christians are upset because they know the very same god in the old testament is in the new one and he’s a viscious blood thirsty ethnic cleanser. (Richard Dawkins comes to mind). There just is no amount of twisting they can do to justify killing babies. It doesn’t make sense to use it as a test if you’re not fooling your intended student/victim to believe that they really have to go through with it. The whole idea of the Isaac death test is supposed to prove that his father would even kill his own son to worship yahwah…but who would create a father to love his son and then order him to take his son’s life? – a sadistic, immoral bully- someone who obviously doesn’t deserve to be worshiped in the first place.
Posted by George on September 30, 2009 at 12:26 pm
@John
“he’s a viscous blood thirsty ethnic cleanser” Pray tell where in the new testament does it show this God? There is not justifying killing babies by Human hands! God was merely testing Abraham, Abraham believed Even if he did Kill his son that god, being GOD, would raise him from the dust! The new testament which the Real christians base their beliefs on is all about peace, tolerence and humbleness!
Posted by alysdexia on April 1, 2010 at 9:08 pm
No, so-called Kristians follow the words of Paul (his writs), not Krist (Gospels), or Jòannè (Revelation).
“Do not think that I have come to bring peace…”
Posted by George on April 7, 2010 at 7:57 am
Sorry, Autymn, Paul is referring to the spiritual persecution and spiritual warfare against evil, not physical warfare, please read the whole chapter. Matthew 10 talks about people being persecuted for being Christians.
Posted by alysdexia on April 12, 2010 at 12:18 pm
Farmer, why did Krist tell everyone to sell everything they own and buy a sword then?
Posted by George on April 12, 2010 at 1:08 pm
Autymn, Christ was metaphorically speaking! People say “ill kill you if you eat my muffin!!” but that doesn’t mean he/she will actually kill the muffin thief! (haha silly analogy) …
And besides lets just say that Jesus WAS asking his disciples to buy a sword, then why isn’t there any mention of the disciples getting into a fight with swords or the lack of it? In fact they all ( except John) were murdered and none of them put up a fight!
Posted by alysdexia on April 13, 2010 at 10:28 am
What a lame rationalisation—one is a outburst, and other is a bid for everyone. Petro had a sword and did as his lord said but was scolded for it, the ass. The apostols were so few they couldn’t go up against the Romans; their converts were to be covered in the later extrabiblical Histories—did you think they had only stones?
Posted by Alice on October 2, 2009 at 12:36 am
I’ve had similar conversations like this with comparatively open-minded Christians, who don’t threaten me with violence, but just laugh “peacefully” and tell me that I need to know more about the context and assure me that God is infallible.
If God is infallible, why would he do things like order Abraham to kill his own son, Isaac, just to see how obedient and cruel Abraham would be? Why would he be so pathetic as to have a bet with the Devil and let Job do the suffering for him? Why would he flood the world instead of telling people how to behave properly? (The genetic problems alone that would occur . . . !) Why were Adam and Eve forbidden to learn new things, and why is there so much about “God wants all these people wiped out” and “Kill every single member of X, and all their animals, except their women and girl children who you can keep for yourselves”?
The excuse of a far more open-minded Christian is “God took a special interest in the Israelites because other people were threatening their borders, and they were going to bring his message out”, and “yes, he did love all the people he killed”. Yet humans are expected to behave better than that.
Jesus preached against testing God, while God seems to be testing people all the time. A fair God would have sent “his message” out right from the start, not wait thousands of years for all those souls to presumably go to the wrong place before sending Jesus along.
If the New Testament is supposed to be this revolution and “real” Christianity, why is there always an Old Testament reading in church, and why is it written that anyone who shall subtract from the complete Bible shall go to hell?
Georigin: If God asked me to kill a baby, I would go to Hell and be forever blamed by all my fellow humans in order that my baby might live. That is far less selfish than Abraham. The fact that Isaac lived simply means God was a liar – and if he was all-knowing he should have known what choice Abraham would make, and not needed to find out for himself. In other words, it’s a pretty stupid inhuman sort of story, made up by people more interested in power than in their own families.
Posted by George on April 7, 2010 at 8:47 am
LEt me try to reply to all your questions –
1 – Christians know that God is a just, merciful, and loving god. Whatever he does he will never ever stray away from those 3 things. SO why did he order Abraham to Sacrifice his own boy? It was simply a test of faith. Abraham knew that even if he sacrificed his son, God could bring him back from death. Absolute Faith. But did Isaac die? Nope he went back home and later in life he gets the hottest chick that side of the world….
2 – Alice, It does not mean that because Jesus lived 2000 yrs ago that only people after 1 AD will get salvation! Even the Old testament God allowed outsiders to convert and to receive salvation. Eg Rahab.
3 – The new testament is the result of progressive revelation. For example, say i have a 5 year old daughter, and i tell her “Viera, never cross the road by yourself, always hold my hand” and she obeys; then we fast forward 12 years later, do i still expect her to hold my hand while crossing the road? No, she has the ability and the reasoning to cross the road safely. Progressive revelation….”Progressive revelation in Christianity means that the sections of the Bible that were written later contain a fuller revelation of God compared to the earlier sections.” – wiki “What at first is only obscurely intimated is gradually unfolded” – Charles Hodge.
4 – If God did ask you to kill a baby, you wouldn’t go to hell. Where does you value/priority lie Alice? ON God or that baby? Like i said before, a just and loving God would never hurt your baby, and in this hypothetical scenario, you must simply believe that the baby will be fine. Faith. But then again. faith does not go down too well with atheists….
My simple message is this – Read the bible, if you have read it , Read it again except this time read it with curiosity and with no preconceived notions. Read Luke and John.
Posted by alysdexia on April 12, 2010 at 1:12 pm
1: Readers know how fickel Gods had been in Tanac where Moshè, -abram, and other karacters could talk them out of dooman broad groups of men; it was a poor plot devise, not a show of mercy. They saw the same thing after Krist calld the Cànqhànijt a bitch. If one of the Gods happens to love [some], it doesn’t mean he doesn’t otherwise hate mankind.
2: It is the job of men—writers, speechgivvers, ministers, preachers, politicians—to invent and spread Gods and their doghma, as Gods can do nothing of their own. It doesn’t matter what a book says about a negexistent problem.
3: Progressive revelation would be fine if there had been conditions upon maturity, and not new laws and authorities which go against everything there had been. None of the church fathers would be arrested and convicted as crooks by their own kind, and there would be no hýpocritical forbidden human sacrifice. And if you look at the list of nicknames in the late Nev-ijm for màshjàk (There were a handful of contemporary persons who fit “anointed”; go search on http://net.bible.org.), they hardly or don’t match Jèsu’s person. The Gospels don’t fit the former God at all: http://google.com/search?q=%22Yeshu-HaNotzri%22.
4: But Gods did kill babies; you need to read the Buybull more instead of rely on your faketh. Your God kills babies everyday.
Posted by p on October 2, 2009 at 1:03 am
All of that implies God didn’t know what would happen, or God was surprised by the outcome. If God is all sovereign, he knows what has happened, what is happening and what is coming. If God is all sovereign, he would know our thoughts, which seems to be demonstrated clearly on several occasions in the Bible. So if God is really God and God is sovereign over all, if God created the universe, if God is love and God is good and finally, if God inspired the Bible- if all those things are true- then nothing was an accident, nothing was a risk, and nothing was meant for evil.
God took a special interest in the Israelites because that was the community of people he would use to fulfill the prophesies outlined in the OT with Jesus’ death. Jesus fulfilled the OT by becoming the sacrificed lamb, by becoming the ultimate sacrifice so there would no longer be a need for that kind of terribleness for us to be right with God. The only reason that terribleness occurred to begin with was such that we’d finally be led to understand that nothing we could do, no amount of religion and ritual could be performed, nothing by our hands could reconcile us with God. But for God’s grace are we reconciled with him, in spite of us consistently choosing independence over him. We would rather be our own God than to acknowledge that maybe the fact that we exist at all is beyond our realm of comprehension and beyond scientific discovery because scientific discovery is basically limited to the human capacity directly or indirectly. Why are you you? Why this body, this place, this time, this family, this person? Why this particular existence for you?
We would also rather not submit to anything we don’t like than to submit to something that takes away our immediate freedom in exchange for a seemingly empty promise of freedom for eternity all based on an intangible trust.
Basically, we’d rather create our own god(s) to satisfy our immediate needs than to acknowledge that something beyond ourselves is responsible for our being and perhaps that something knows us better than we do.
But hey, you can’t choose who you love, right? Some of us fall in love with abusive wife-beaters. Some of us fall in love with unsupportive baby-daddies. Some of us fall in love with regular, run of the mill broken men. And some of us fall in love with a Man full of empathy, justice, righteousness, and love. It’s just a heart thing. *shrug*
Posted by Alice on October 2, 2009 at 2:18 pm
I love the way this person seems to have time-travelled – my post might just as well have been answering every point made! 😀 However, since doubtless this person will not understand:
1) “All of that implies God didn’t know what would happen, or God was surprised by the outcome. If God is all sovereign, he knows what has happened, what is happening and what is coming. If God is all sovereign, he would know our thoughts” – Like I said, such a cruel test should not have been required!
2) “God took a special interest in the Israelites” – No good leader ever needs to take a special interest, but treats everyone kindly and equally. You haven’t answered my point about fairness, or about why so many deaths (which would have sent the souls to Hell) and so much cruelty was required.
3) “Why are you you? Why this body, this place, this time, this family, this person? Why this particular existence for you?” Why not? What’s the alternative? Why do some people spend a life suffering and never get to read the ruddy Bible in the first place, is that something a wise or just God would plan or allow? Do you really think science can’t answer that better than superstition? Sure, it can’t yet – science is still in progress, perhaps in its infancy. Facts always come out larger and stranger than fiction – the size of the Universe, for example. It’s an infinitely more thrilling and moving journey.
4) “And some of us fall in love with a Man full of empathy, justice, righteousness, and love.” Yes – and I don’t think this God of yours was one of them. I have met plenty of people with more empathy, justice, righteousness and love than that; and I’ve also read of people who made greater sacrifices and suffered more and helped more people than Jesus ever did.
By the way, if Heaven is freedom, it also means freedom to change things, and to love more freely than the Bible permits – if I was in Heaven and saw the problems on Earth, my helplessness would be pure torture. And I would not be cheered up by being in the presence of a God who allows so much wrong to take place, and asks for intangible trust, one of the things which allows atrocities to take place. No thank you!!!
Posted by prin on October 2, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Why is it that in your view, everything good is human and everything bad is God? Have you seen people? 😀 People always blame God for things like world hunger. Supposedly, we produce between 2500 and 4000 calories of food per person per day. The provisions are there, we just don’t share them.
1. The test showed Abraham how he felt about God. Tests are not meant to cause us to fall out of faith, but to draw us closer to God.
2. So.. you’re saying… a good leader is a communist? And for the second half, what is fair to us here right now is not necessarily fair in the big picture. Taking a bottle of poisonous cleaner from a two year old doesn’t seem fair to the two year old, but as an adult, we can see how harmful leaving it in the kid’s possession would be. Same for God’s relationship with us. The idea behind Christianity is that don’t see the big picture, but there is one.
3. If God is really God, it’s not religion or science, it’s both/and. The fact that gravity is a constant, that water is less dense frozen than liquid, that the Earth orbits around the sun at exactly the right distance and speed to allow for life here, and so on and so on, does not disprove the existence of a God. If God is truth and science is truth, then they should not only coexist but fit together. It’s not one or the other if God is really God.
4. Really? Even if Jesus is just a character in a novel, there really aren’t very many people who come close to his empathy. Even Mother Teresa had trouble with it. There are tons of people who are genuinely kind and empathetic who are not Christians, and there are probably more Christians who are not kind and empathetic, but the idea is if God is good, he can choose anybody to spread that good. Just because you don’t believe in God doesn’t mean that if there is a God, he stops existing.
How does the Bible not love freely? Luke Ch 6 says to love your enemies and to love those around you who are hardest to love for in that the value of love is discovered. In John 13:34, Jesus commands people to love one another as he has loved them. Add to that the whole loving your neighbor bit that everybody knows. Just because countless people (including me) misinterpret the Bible doesn’t mean the real message is wrong. Don’t let broken people (including me) damage your personal relationship with God. If there is no God, you have nothing to lose by exploring it. If there is a God, you have everything to lose by not.
In the meantime, God doesn’t “allow” all this atrocity to occur. Yes, there are natural disasters that occur that are devastating (and science can explain those, right? ;)), but the scope of casualty doesn’t compare to what we inflict on each other. We can’t control God, but we can control our own actions, so really, why not focus on that? Why not stop blaming God and start taking responsibility? And yes, that goes for the Christians too. Especially the Christians, really.
And earlier, you said, “A fair God would have sent “his message” out right from the start, not wait thousands of years for all those souls to presumably go to the wrong place before sending Jesus along.”
What exactly do you expect him to do? How do you expect him to get people to understand he exists? Maybe through things like breathtaking mountains? Or violent crashing ocean waves? Or the sunrises and sunsets that blow our minds? Or maybe through that instant love that occurs in childbirth? Or the fact that love exists at all? Or how about how in spite of survival of the fittest, we’re born with a sense of justice and are driven to protect the weak? Or maybe, as I said earlier, the fact that we were born here, now, seeing the world through these particular eyes, feeling each breath with this particular set of lungs, experiencing life with this particular soul?
When our hearts are closed to the possibility of God, there is no proof of God clear enough that we can’t use science to explain. That’s the problem.
Posted by Alice on October 2, 2009 at 10:25 pm
Ahhhh, so general fairness is communism; I bet you hate the UK health service my family work for, and work exceptionally hard, too, treating people because they are humans and in pain, not because of what is in their wallet. And wanting to work to improve things is blaming God and not taking responsibility. How do you know what I do about these things, what responsibilities I take? You might be rather surprised.
Unless there’s a real crisis, I never test people I love; that’s insulting and puts them through unnecessary pain. My point about Abraham is that however much he valued his son, he valued his own soul more. So it’s still selfishness in the end.
Are you putting genocide – ordering Israelites to kill all Amalekites, including their children, which is what I was talking about – on a par with taking away a bottle of poison from a two year old? The “big picture” is that if there is a dispute of land between the two tribes, they should work out a way to share, and get together to discuss their needs – maybe one side does need more than the other, but elimination of one surely isn’t required.
By the way, if Isaac was allowed to live after all (perhaps God COULDN’T bring him back from the dead?), and in dying horribly Jesus was making “the ultimate sacrifice”, then why is death supposed to take you to such a great place? It looks like it was too frightening for the godly, hehe! This isn’t proof that it doesn’t exist: I’m picking holes in human logic. My point is that this was really legends from a particular tribe to justify their hatred and wars with other tribes. No just and kind God would behave with such favour to one particular tribe; there are cleverer ways to tell the truth than to kill a bunch of people first. It’s just tribal self-justification. I’m sorry that I’m being impolite and unkind, probably hurting your feelings. But you choose to come to this website. Reason and imagination have both got people a long way. But what gets people furthest of all is depending on themselves, not on holding somebody else’s hand.
Yes, humans are wonderful! Goodness and justice and a love of each other and this world – those mountains etc you mention, something you find on every planet – certainly fits in with natural selection: they fit in with cooperation, with curiosity, with the urge to explore . . . Except in species who do better on their own, such as tigers, cooperation is the key – even these solitary creatures need mutual respect and cooperation in order to procreate. Anyone who knows animals or studies them in the wild know that animals love and have sometimes very complex ethics. (Take the case of a male lizard with a territory. Another lizard, a female, was painted with male markings and put near him. He ran towards her, thinking this was a male, to see off. When he realised his mistake, it was as if he had run into a glass wall – he couldn’t stop in time so he flung himself vertically upwards, that strong was the taboo against hurting her.) Yes, humans do pretty ghastly things too. And they do really ghastly things when set a poor example, when given bloodthirsty orders, when put in a position where others cannot ask for justice.
I don’t know as much as I should about Mother Theresa, which is embarrassing – but I do gather that she was frequently flown back home on a private aircraft for medical treatment, etc, and I think there are more empathic and self-sacrificing individuals. I suggest you look up Sattareh Farman Farmaian and Wangari Maathai. Beside the things that happened to them, and that they went on working for and giving to other people afterwards, death on the cross seems really pretty easy. But I don’t equate dislike with disbelief. I disbelieve because it’s a load of barbaric tribal legends which make their own tribe the heroes, and which has subsequently been dressed up in lace and frills to try and make them more acceptable to the general population . . .
In other words, it’s just people telling stories.
Posted by George on October 3, 2009 at 12:28 pm
@Alice
Let me clarify the Abraham – Isaac Story for you.
1 – God detests Child Sacrifice Read – Deuteronomy 12:31
2 – God has the right to take Human life, he created it thus he can take it. We humans can take life, but we cannot give life or bring back someone from the dead.
3 – Abraham went to do what God asked him to do, fully believing God will bring Isaac back from the dead, simply because God had promised Abraham that Isaac would have many offspring. He knew he was being tested.
“death on the cross seems pretty easy” ??! Compared to what Alice? Do you think you can take Roman Scourging (http://the-crucifixion.org/scourging.htm), carry 2 huge wooden pillars to your death while being whipped, rocks thrown at you, finally nailed secure and pierced with a spear? Yes it does seem pretty “easy”. Of course there were many people who probably suffered much worse! Take for example Peter who was crucified upside down (AD 69), or John who was boiled alive…
Alice, frankly you haven’t even skimmed the depth of Christianity (neither have I) i suggest you watch a few videos of Dr. William Lane Craig debating Christopher Hitchens or Richard Dawkins on youtube. Christianity is not what you think it is. It is the ONLY religion with serious archaeological proof, rationality, and truth. Read the New testament Alice, read it diligently and then decide whether it is Hogwash or truth.
CS Lewis on evil and cruelty –
“My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such a violent reaction against it?… Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if i did that, then my argument against God collapsed too–for the argument depended on saying the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my fancies. Thus, in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist – in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless – I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality – namely my idea of justice – was full of sense. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never have known it was dark. Dark would be without meaning.”
Posted by alysdexia on April 1, 2010 at 9:27 pm
#2 is wrong—we bring back men from the dead all the time. And Haitian witch-doctors, Indian yogis, and a unlucky Japanese guy who fell in the snow for weeks could all come back from the dead after days.
There is absolutely no arkæologhical or historical evidenty for the Gospels. It’s tough to confirm anything when all four can’t agree on the end details. The resurrection was clearly sett up as a maghic trick: accomplice with sponge, shoddy tomb in wall with round stone, and unknown length dead with no witnesses.
Posted by Alice on October 3, 2009 at 4:18 pm
I love the idea that I haven’t done these many things I’m being ordered to . . . I love watching Dawkins on youtube, and I have had literally weeks of my life wasted for me at school hearing Old and New Testament readings and since going to church to please friends and those closer than friends – plus reading the New Testament, yes – oh, not to mention hearing these silly claims about how much “proof” there is, without anyone clarifying WHAT such proof is. You are impressed and I’m not.
What is wrong with “the argument depended on saying the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my fancies”? You could read what I wrote about natural selection and how our feelings are developed to care about everybody’s good, which is also made clear by Dawkins, among many others. Of course you can accept injustice by saying that it’s God’s justice if you want to. Of course you can also sit back and watch injustice happen, too. Or starve, saying “God will provide”. The bulk of the Universe is a void, where nothing happens; where things do happen, the biggest picture is that stars are born – and die. You could call that unjust. But stars aren’t life; they don’t plan things, and therefore, there is no one to blame. But when people are starving, or doing those terrible things you think I judge so lightly, then yes, things are not right. That’s when you need your senses to come into operation. Well, if people who stone and nail others to the cross were made in God’s image, yes, that explains a lot. And people who approve of genocide were made in God’s image, yes, that excuses everything.
The fact that the Universe wasn’t made for or by anyone makes it no less wonderful; it simply means it doesn’t belong to you – but you’re still part of it. “If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning.” Er, why not? Are you saying consciousness needs a meaning? Where is your proof?
A little quote for you, George, if “meaning” is what you want. From Phililp Pullman. “I’m responsible, there is a meaning, and it is to work together and make things better for greater good and greater wisdom. That’s my meaning.” Mine too. Simply, I believe in people’s education, and being kind (I’m usually more kind than I am here, I hope), and working together – and not trying to force people to think of everything my way and join what I once thought innocuous and naive, but have since sadly discovered to be, a nasty snobby cult.
Posted by George on October 3, 2009 at 6:24 pm
@ Alice,
You want proof?
Josephus a first century Historian had this to say – “Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.” – Now remember that Josephus was a Jew and MAY not have believed Jesus was the Messiah, but he sure did mention Jesus Christ!
Here is another one, a black obelisk discovered by archaeologist Sir Henry Layard in 1846.where it mentions King Jehu of Israel from the Bible & Torah, it reads – “The tribute of Jehu, son of Omri: I received from him silver, gold, a golden bowl, a golden vase with pointed bottom, golden tumblers, golden buckets, tin, a staff for a king [and] spears.”This is for all those people who likens the bible to a fairy tale.
These are but 2 examples, i haven’t yet mentioned the Tel Dan Stele, The Mesha Stele and the Shoshenq Relief mentioning the House of King David OR the MANY MANY 70 – 150 AD pagan accounts of Jesus Christ.
“If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning.” This is exactly what it sounds like! If the Universe has NO meaning then we should never have any meaning attached to the Meaning! I am gonna make up a term here for you to understand better – META-Meaning.
I am not forcing you to think my way ALice! Nope i am only asking you to be Open Minded.
Only if you open your mind to the possibility of God will you actually find God. Just re-read the New testament and do me a favor and read it without any bias.
Here is another CS Lewis Quote I really like -” If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our present thoughts are mere accidents – the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds for the thoughts of the materialists and astronomers as well as for anyone else’s. But if their thoughts – i.e., Materialism and Astronomy – are mere accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give me a correct account of all the other accidents. It’s like expecting the accidental shape taken by the splash when you upset a milk-jug should give you a correct account of how the jug was made and why it was upset ”
Alice I want you to answer this one question – Do you believe in Absolute Truth?
Posted by alysdexia on April 1, 2010 at 9:43 pm
None of those accounts of Krist were historical.
If you check out the traces of “David”‘s monuments, you’ll find the dates are not consistent: 1000s, 900s, and 800s.
It’s easy to find traces for natural tales—that’s how novels start—but none for the supernatural or uncanny. Where were the million pounds of gold, arks, nepilijm, berg so tall [on a flat Earth] one could see all kingdoms, four shotes/wings of the Earth, skybowl to hold up the clouds and stars (or firmament), the seven heavens, Nazareth, captivity and ecs’hodos?
You may see my Twitter for where profèties had failed.
Posted by p on October 3, 2009 at 5:04 pm
So you love Dawkins. Your faith rests on one man because he validates your doubts and makes them intelligent.
Meanwhile, you claim you’re just and tolerant while you judge and look down on those of us who counter you.
I’m Canadian. And I do believe Canada is a little more socialist than Britain. “No good leader ever needs to take a special interest, but treats everyone kindly and equally,” is communism. Fairness, most politically educated people would argue, is not communism. Maybe it’s socialism- giving those in need what they need and letting the rest flourish to their utmost capacities on their own. But nobody would say communism is fair. Nobody, deep down, thinks we should be treated equally. Not even you, as you look down on us poor, moronic, unenlightened Christian doofs peddling our imaginary friend. Maybe if we picked up a Dawkins book, we’d stop being so ridiculous and full of hate, right?
Posted by Alice on October 3, 2009 at 6:05 pm
Dear p, you may put complete nonsense I have never said, hate I have never felt, and “resting” faith I do not have, into my mouth as much as you like. It won’t change the facts in the slightest. If of course it makes you feel better that doesn’t affect me but benefits you, so is a bonus of sorts, and not something I will try to prevent. So you would have it that a good leader treats people unkindly and unequally? No wonder you have no faith in the human race and need something imaginary instead. Poor you.
Posted by p on October 3, 2009 at 6:36 pm
lol! You just told me I was wrong about you and then repeated everything I said. How does that work?
Posted by Alice on October 3, 2009 at 8:30 pm
P: Yeah, I wrote down what you said. If you want some races “ethnically cleansed” and others sanctified and protected no matter what they do to others, go and help the Janjaweed kill people in Darfur.
George: Why should I obey orders from someone as rude as you? Have you ever examined your own bias? May I suggest you learn a little science? That would certainly explain CS Lewis’s self-obsessed narrow-mindedness as well as the dynamics of the fragments of the vase. Hmmm, no, I didn’t think you would.
A Christian very dear to me has learnt of this conversation and spoken in my defence; he’s currently searching Exodus for the order which decrees that all land belongs not to man but to God, and debts must be forgiven every 7 years, which he points out one could equate with Communism (no, he’s not a Communist). Jesus himself told the man who claimed to obey all 10 commandments perfectly that he must also give up his possessions. A beautiful Isabel Allende quote: “Sir, the Church is on the right, but Jesus Chris was on the left”.
Posted by George on October 4, 2009 at 4:31 am
@Alice By all means No! I have been replying with only a humble spirit, devoid of any bias. I’m sorry if my words seem rude!
Please read my COmments as if its being read by Gandhi…:-) . Again I am not ordering you at all, it is STILL upto you to read the bible, i am only asking you to!
I Did learn Science Alice, and when i am not learning i’m researching. Can you tell me where i was unscientific?
You think CS Lewis was narrow minded!! Alice have you heard RIchard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens?!!! Not to mention Richard Dawkins book The God Delusion? It is riddled with religious misconceptions and self pretentiousness; what about Christopher Hitchens snooty retorts filled with sarcasm in all his debates?, or Hector Avalos’ childishness in debates?! CS Lewis is by no means self obsessed and narrow minded. Have you read his books?, its the first time i have heard someone accuse CS lewis as self obsessed!
About God saying he owns the land does not equate it to Communism! He is GOD!! There is no Human communism for God ! It Simply means that God created the Earth and hence it belongs to him. God was saying that disputing over land is foolish because in reality they own nothing, God owns everything. Yes Jesus did say that ! Jesus was a radical during those times! He also Said “If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.”. HE was the epitome of humbleness. I wish you could visit some churches in India, you will see Jesus’ words illustrated there.
Dr William Lane Craig is someone you really have to listen to!
Posted by p on October 4, 2009 at 12:06 am
Exaggeration misleads the credulous and offends the perceptive. ~Eliza Cook
Posted by john on October 4, 2009 at 6:12 am
william lane craig? lol! lol! so an invisible disembodied mind with superhuman powers wished the universe into existence huh? it’s just childish, admit it- be a grown up and admit it you have no evidence, a bronze-age book with story after story- all of which or at least most of which defy the laws of physics – laws supposedly created by this magic weilding invisible person (not to mention the fact that it supposedly has all these qualities which are pretty contradictory) i know that only a brainwashed -infected- person would spout this bs- at least admit that objectively it sounds pretrty lame
Posted by George on October 4, 2009 at 6:50 am
@John huh? What are you on about John? What law of physics contradict God? I’m sorry you don’t seem to be clear. I just gave you some evidence of Christianity in my previous Comment. Also What do you mean by “william lane craig? lol! lol!” the rest of your comment has no relation with this line..!
Posted by john on October 4, 2009 at 2:33 pm
George, turning water into wine, walking on water, making the sun stand still -you name it- miracles absolutely must defy the laws of physics or else theyre not miracles- stop your pretending for just 5 seconds please.
Posted by George on April 8, 2010 at 6:07 am
John. just because miracles can’t be proven Empirically (or by the scientific method) doesn’t mean that it doesn’t happen!
There are many things that scientist assume to be true, with no proof whatsoever, and still base their arguements and research on them.
Posted by Livia on January 4, 2010 at 4:17 am
These debates are bound to end in chaos. The problem is that many Christians try to defend God to athiests in human terms, and that’s simply impossible. By those standards, God would be a self centered, neurotic and narcissistic, and anyone trying to deny that will end up looking ridiculous.
You can only really defend God’s actions as good if you accept a few other moral premises: 1) That God, as creater, has the right to give and take away human life at will and 2) God, being God, is more important than humans and should be placed above humans. If you take that view, then you can build a coherent worldview of God as good, and even unreasonably good. However, an athiest in our Western egalitarian society would not agree to these premises, so the conversation ends with everyone frustrated.
Posted by alysdexia on April 1, 2010 at 10:05 pm
Why can’t theists ever spell? (atheist, its, whose, their, lose, etc.)
The problem is not our standards—God fails his own standards and laws. He was the first liar in the garden: They didn’t die in the first day, and it was a oft empty threat. He hedges his threats by sayan J·s’ŕà-el would not fall if they were trustful and would so if they weren’t, but also he /always/ would be there to keep them from loss, but both outcomes came. He made many threats to wipe out groups in Cànqhàn, early (in Judges) and late (exile profèts), but had failed. Sin and evil are treated apart in Tanac—God was the sworn maker and doer of evil. And in Romans 1 are Paul’s list of 32 deadly sins for Man, but the Gods and their buddies were guilty of mest already.
All this talk about God is nonsense; monotheism is a mýth. There were 8 or 9 Gods in Tanac, 7 Gods in Vivli, and over 14 in Quran. Avesta has about 8.
Posted by George on April 8, 2010 at 6:17 am
Autymn, it’s the internet, people will make typos! And besides it’s “saying” not “sayan”, and it is “ON the first day” not “in the first day”. My point is let us not point each others spelling mistakes and grammatical errors, instead let us focus on the topic at hand.
God did not Lie in the Garden of Eden; God said that there is a tree that Adam and Eve must not eat off, if they did they would die. Now, why was the tree there in the first place? It was there because Free will existed! After all, evil did exist! And if God made everything Good then wouldn’t that be against free will? He gave us the free will to chose Evil OR good, we sadly chose evil…
Autymn, regarding the list in Romans 1, can you show an example of God doing any of those?
Posted by alysdexia on April 12, 2010 at 1:42 pm
Everything you “type” is a “typo”; you mean dýstýpes or mistaps or misstrokes, but I did not. They’re clear misspellings. -ing makes a gerund and -an makes infinitive; I don’t think primitive Qhibirijt made a distinction between on and in; even in Englisc there was no in but in Northumbria.
I never said he lied (He stode. :P); he liged about when they would die. And there were two trees they may not eat of; the other was the tree of life where they could eat and become gods lik them. In Ghen 3 it’s important you see the plural, and the plural in -ijjob, to see how the oldest texts had started out with many Gods, and how with propaganda of ministers later believers will say there has only been one God forever.
Read Krist’s sermon on good and bad trees and fruit, and his condemnation of the Prishàjim. How can sinners choose between good and bad (or holy and evil) if they’re sinners, and specifically need divine intervention to do anything good?
You could read the books where God was with Moshè and Aharon, or J·hoshuqh, or a good fitt of Psalms. I like how God hated the witchcraft of pagan Gods but deliberately used witchcraft to scare Parqhoh and scare and heal unbelievers in the wilderness. I also like how God tells them not to make molten/graven images on the stone tablets but then tells them to make molten/graven images for Temple. You already know about the two human sacrifices.
Posted by alysdexia on April 12, 2010 at 1:47 pm
(My guess is thas the prepositions went not in|out, but at|out and in|em; em was also spelt ym or ymb, Thewdish um.)
Posted by arse with a beard on March 9, 2010 at 10:48 pm
god is a dick.
Posted by George on April 8, 2010 at 4:20 am
Says the arse with a beard…..
Posted by Meli on August 31, 2010 at 7:45 pm
I’m pretty sure you would have a blast reading through the articles on this website:
Jerusalem Is God, The
Lord Is A Man, God Is Love,
The Lord Kills,
The Seven Spirits of God Are God,
The Throne, Heaven, and the Kingdom Are God.
http://www.atruechurch.info/lordkills.html
Posted by Haidi on October 25, 2011 at 2:49 pm
God kills indiscriminately and so shall we.
I think that’s the best quote to irritate that blind Christian all the more.