(July 4, 2012 at 1:08 pm)Annik Wrote: Hey, guys! The Bible is true because the Bible says that the Bible is true! So God! Yeah! God-Squad!


EDIT: I combed back over OP... I felt insulted, lol. We know what gods are (we also have dictionaries and the internet, wow!). We don't need you to try and baby-feed it to us like we're in primary school.

I disagree. You do need it. If you are going to post in a public forum on the subject of God as an atheist, which is completely stupid in the first place, then you can expect to be called out and re-instructed from time to time until all of the theists are banned from doing so.

That's just the way it goes.

A god can be anything or anyone, so atheism is nonsensical.

Well, I'm done for the day.
At least in this thread. I Can't take you seriously.




.....
Witches...

---

BTW:
If you want the simplest way to show why atheism is a useful term, look around you. A large majority, at least 80%, of the world believes in God as an all powerful, all knowing, and righteous entity. It says so in your Bible as well, so your quotes from the Bible are in contradiction with the ones referencing God as the all powerful creator.

(July 4, 2012 at 1:12 pm)The Theist Wrote: Witches. The Bible, like it or not, is the most accurate history known to mankind. It mentions witches.

Are you a Poe? or are you really this stupid.

The bible as "the most accurate history known to man".

You do know the flood never happened.
That there was no Adam and eve.
That the moon didn't stand still.
That there is no evidence for an exodus.
That the pyramids weren't built by slaves.

I could go on and on.

Oh and what about witches, lets see all the evidence for witchcraft actually working.

---

(July 4, 2012 at 1:15 pm)The Theist Wrote: A god can be anything or anyone, so atheism is nonsensical.

Can I be god now then?

Quote:Given the highly interpretive nature of archaeology

And what? Your fucking bible is the LITERAL TRUTH? There is little interpretation needed for archaeology which shows that at a time when your fucking bible claims that "Jerusalem" was the capital city of a vast empire it was, in fact, nothing more than a one-horse little shithole of a village.

If you want to believe in bullshit, be my guest. But don't pretend it is anything more than your own desperate desire to trust in nonsense, pal.

Maybe you should ask yourself why you are so fucking insecure?

(July 4, 2012 at 1:17 pm)Skepsis Wrote: Well, I'm done for the day.
At least in this thread. I Can't take you seriously.

That's a pity. I had so much hope for you when I seen the far more intellectually honest and thoughtful title of anti-theist instead of the nonsensical atheist.

(July 4, 2012 at 1:17 pm)Skepsis Wrote: .....
Witches...

Have you ever heard of the term "Zombie?" Not the atheistic zombie on a stick, nor the similar Hollywood version, but the real zombie? Someone who is poisoned to have such faint vital signs to thought to be dead, and so buried. Then, if not sufficiently dosed they are, reanimated, so to speak, and never quite the same - freaking people out?

Matthew was the only one to mention dead people emerging from their graves upon Jesus' death. It is assumed that these resurrected dead were walking around.

The omission of the dead people emerging from the graves by the other writers does not, of course, mean anything. Matthew was the first gospel to be written. In De viris inlustribus (Concerning Illustrious Men), chapter III, Jerome says: "Matthew, who is also Levi, and who from a publican came to be an apostle, first of all composed a Gospel of Christ in Judaea in the Hebrew language and characters for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed." So this (Matthew having been the first gospel) might be a reason for the others having not included the dead people emerging from their graves.

Any serious scholar of the Bible could tell you that at Matthew 27:52-53 the Greek egeiro means simply raised up rather than resurrected back to life, and in addition to this "they" (meaning the bodies that were walking around) is a pronoun, and in Greek all pronouns have gender and "they" is masculine whereas bodies" (the bodies that were lifted up) is in the neuter. They are not the same.

Adam Clarke: "It is difficult to account for the transaction mentioned in verses 52 and 53. Some have thought that these two verses have been introduced into the text of Matthew from the gospel of the Nazarenes, others think the simple meaning is this: - by the earthquake several bodies that had been buried were thrown up and exposed to view, and continued above ground till after Christ's resurrection, and were seen by many persons in the city."

Theobald Daechsel's translation: "And tombs opened up, and many corpses of saints laying at rest were lifted up."

Johannes Greber's translation: "Tombs were laid open, and many bodies of those buried there were tossed upright. In this posture they projected from the graves and were seen by many who passed by the place on their way back to the city."

That's sort of how it is with theist / anti-theist debates.

I say witch and you think Halloween illustration. And you are the one amused?!

(July 4, 2012 at 1:17 pm)Skepsis Wrote: BTW:
If you want the simplest way to show why atheism is a useful term, look around you. A large majority, at least 80%, of the world believes in God as an all powerful, all knowing, and righteous entity. It says so in your Bible as well, so your quotes from the Bible are in contradiction with the ones referencing God as the all powerful creator.

Show me where the Bible says that Jehovah God is all knowing, all powerful and explain what that really might mean even if it were true.

(July 4, 2012 at 1:15 pm)The Theist Wrote:

(July 4, 2012 at 1:08 pm)Annik Wrote: Hey, guys! The Bible is true because the Bible says that the Bible is true! So God! Yeah! God-Squad!


EDIT: I combed back over OP... I felt insulted, lol. We know what gods are (we also have dictionaries and the internet, wow!). We don't need you to try and baby-feed it to us like we're in primary school.

I disagree. You do need it. If you are going to post in a public forum on the subject of God as an atheist, which is completely stupid in the first place, then you can expect to be called out and re-instructed from time to time until all of the theists are banned from doing so.

That's just the way it goes.

A god can be anything or anyone, so atheism is nonsensical.

You're a special kind of stupid, aren't you? We don't believe in woo. That's all. You're twisting definitions to try and make a point, but there is a reason there are multiple definitions for multiple words. Additionally, dictionaries only report usage of words.

(July 4, 2012 at 1:20 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: Are you a Poe? or are you really this stupid.

Why does everyone keep calling me that, Stimpy? Poe! What the hell is a Poe?

(July 4, 2012 at 1:20 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: The bible as "the most accurate history known to man".

That's correct.

(July 4, 2012 at 1:20 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: You do know the flood never happened.
That there was no Adam and eve.
That the moon didn't stand still.
That there is no evidence for an exodus.
That the pyramids weren't built by slaves.

I could go on and on.

You could - because you have not read my article on The Historicity Of The Bible in which all of those points are successfully refuted.

(July 4, 2012 at 1:20 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: Oh and what about witches, lets see all the evidence for witchcraft actually working.

I didn't say it worked, I said the Bible indicates there are witches. What is a witch? Bene Gesserit? Pointy hat, big nose, hairy wart, broom and cat? Not necessarily. Broaden your mind to include reality outside of your preconceived superstitions. You have to see the entire picture, Pointy hat, Endor, Bene Gesserit, and modern day Pagan priestess.

(July 4, 2012 at 1:20 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: Can I be god now then?

Yes. Anything can be a god. Most gods are probably phallic. Any dick can be a god. Its just a word.

---

(July 4, 2012 at 1:44 pm)Annik Wrote: You're a special kind of stupid, aren't you? We don't believe in woo. That's all. You're twisting definitions to try and make a point, but there is a reason there are multiple definitions for multiple words. Additionally, dictionaries only report usage of words.

I don't know what woo is, but I'm not twisting definitions. Lets look at the facts.

1. Atheism denies the existence of gods.

2. A god can be anything or anyone.

3. Atheism is stupid.

And if you don't believe dicks are gods... Atheist.

(July 4, 2012 at 1:52 pm)The Theist Wrote: You could - because you have not read my article on The Historicity Of The Bible in which all of those points are successfully refuted.

Successfully refuted? Wow! I bet you're looking forward to receiving your Nobel prize.

(July 4, 2012 at 1:52 pm)The Theist Wrote: I don't know what woo is, but I'm not twisting definitions. Lets look at the facts.

1. Atheism denies the existence of gods.

2. A god can be anything or anyone.

3. Atheism is stupid.

1. Atheism is the non-belief in a god or gods.
2. A god is highly unlikely to exist.
3. There is no evidence for such gods.
4. Your logic is a step below stupid.