Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Hold up everyone! Stop what you are doing! Drich knows what the true nature of the Christian god is! Please tell us. We will probably disagree but thats expected from atheists. The funny thing is, a thousand different denominations of Christianity may well disagree with you too.
'The more I learn about people the more I like my dog'- Mark Twain
'You can have all the faith you want in spirits, and the afterlife, and heaven and hell, but when it comes to this world, don't be an idiot. Cause you can tell me you put your faith in God to put you through the day, but when it comes time to cross the road, I know you look both ways.' - Dr House
“Young earth creationism is essentially the position that all of modern science, 90% of living scientists and 98% of living biologists, all major university biology departments, every major science journal, the American Academy of Sciences, and every major science organization in the world, are all wrong regarding the origins and development of life….but one particular tribe of uneducated, bronze aged, goat herders got it exactly right.” - Chuck Easttom
"If my good friend Doctor Gasparri speaks badly of my mother, he can expect to get punched.....You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others. There is a limit." - Pope Francis on freedom of speech
Drich if you can't even know what proof of god looks like then how do you prove god?
Especially when the bible can be proven false.
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
September 15, 2013 at 7:59 pm (This post was last modified: September 15, 2013 at 11:47 pm by Cyberman.)
He's not going to tell us anything specific about his god. The best we can expect is obscure rhetoric about seeking our own answers, almost certainly with a warmed-through dollop of that stupid A/S/K shit on top.
And Drich? My morality certainly trumps that of your bible god. It definitely pisses all over its 'righteousness'. I've never gone out of my way to harm anyone, I've certainly never killed anyone, I've never ordered the taking of slaves and in fact would oppose anyone who did, I've never created a species deliberately imperfectly and then blamed them for not matching up to my standards, I'd never even consider hiding all trace of my existence from such a species and then condemn them for not trying to look for me, neither would I let something else I created cause chaos amongst that creation without doing something to destroy it and I certainly wouldn't blame my creations for falling victim to it...
Etc...
Etc...
Etc.
As for what constitutes 'proof' of your god claims; that's your problem, not ours.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
(September 15, 2013 at 7:59 pm)Stimbo Wrote: He's not going to tell us anything specific about his god. The best we can expect is obscure rhetoric about seeking our own answers, almost certainly with a warmed-through dollop of that stupid A/S/K shit on top.
And Drich? My morality certainly trumps that of your bible god. It definitely pisses all over its 'righteousness'. I've never gone out of my to harm anyone, I've certainly never killed anyone, I've never ordered the taking of slaves and in fact would oppose anyone who did, I've never created a species deliberately imperfectly and then blamed them for not matching up to my standards, I'd never even consider hiding all trace of my existence from such a species and then condemn them for not trying to look for me, neither would I let something else I created cause chaos amongst that creation without doing something to destroy it and I certainly wouldn't blame my creations for falling victim to it...
Etc...
Etc...
Etc.
As for what constitutes 'proof' of your god claims; that's your problem, not ours.
Thank you Stimbo. You took the words out of my mouth. The d-bag can't seem to get it through his head that no one here gives a shit about his absurd ramblings meant to defend the ridiculous scribblings of people that had even less education than he does.
September 15, 2013 at 10:50 pm (This post was last modified: September 15, 2013 at 10:52 pm by Ryantology.)
(September 14, 2013 at 2:32 pm)Drich Wrote: To say your version of god does not exist because he is a contradiction of how God is portrayed in the bible is an absolute no brainer! OF COURSE HE DOES NOT EXIST, YOU MADE HIM UP!!!
HOW DARE YOU MAKE UP A GOD WHICH ISN'T LIKE THE GOD MADE UP IN THE BIBLE
(September 15, 2013 at 6:03 pm)Faith No More Wrote:
(September 15, 2013 at 1:43 pm)Drich Wrote: I noticed you hid your anti God thread in the safety of the atheist only section of the website, and now what?
We don't have an atheist only section.
Area 69 isn't a place you want the Lord knowing you look at.
(September 15, 2013 at 2:54 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Because you never make any points. You simply babble on about your vision of your fucking god as if you are some sort of expert. What you are is a believer in your own bullshit. You have no evidence to back up your absurd claims.
When you find some I will take you seriously but I sure as hell am not going to hold my breath.
I always do. Your "sources" are always ten pounds of shit in a five-pound bag.
[/quote]
Omf he actually post's a source with huge errors in it.
Story of jesus']
Herod ruled from around 37 BC until his death in 1 BC. This is the HEROD who was on the scene at the time of the birth of Jesus.
[/quote]
Well thats bullshit, and here is the encyclopedia britannica
[quote=Britannica]
Herod, byname Herod the Great, Latin Herodes Magnus (born 73 bc—died March/April, 4 bc, Jericho, Judaea), Roman-appointed king of Judaea (37–4 bc), who built many fortresses, aqueducts, theatres, and other public buildings and generally raised the prosperity of his land but who was the centre of political and family intrigues in his later years.
[/quote]
here's another bit from the story of jesus
[quote=Story of jesus Wrote:ARCHELAUS was the eldest son of Herod the Great. This Herod ruled after his father died and is only mentioned once in the biblical account. In the gospel of Matthew it is recorded that after Joseph had been told that Herod was dead and that he could return home he learned that Archelaus was now ruling over Judea and was afraid. Joseph was warned in a dream not to return to Judea, and so he settled his family in Galilee. So Jesus was born in Bethlehem but grew up in Galilee.
here is the error, archelaus was not herods oldest anitpater was as stated in britannica here.
Britannica Wrote:in his last years Herod suffered from arteriosclerosis. He had to repress a revolt, became involved in a quarrel with his Nabataean neighbors, and finally lost the favour of Augustus. He was in great pain and in mental and physical disorder. He altered his will three times and finally disinherited and killed his firstborn, Antipater.
Now drich this really hurts your argument, because if your sources can't handle such basic information then it calls all the conclusions you make off that information into question as well as the information itself.
Also this same site makes two assertions with zero evidence.
"Story of jesus Wrote:Herod the Great - Met with the Wise men from the east. Killed all the babies under 2 years old in Bethlehem in an attempt to kill Jesus.
We have zero evidence to back up these claims and good reason to believe that no such attempt was made on the children of Bethlehem, as hero was a client king of Augustus, and a out of favor one at that after a unauthorized war. So given that he only rule with Augustus blessing in his last year such a infanticide is way beyond out of character for Augustus and was not noted by any historian in the golden age of Latin literature. That includes people like Livy, Seneca, both Pliny's and Tacitus. none record infanticide, even Josephus.
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
(September 15, 2013 at 3:09 pm)max-greece Wrote: "The God of the bible does indeed get angry, He does seek vengeance, He is wrathful ,and He is righteous, which means He will punish the wicked, and not be sorrowful or apologetic about doing it. How can a perfect God be these things? don't these negative emotion mean He is not perfect? No. Then why is it wrong for us to display these emotions. In short these emotions are reserved for God. They are reserved for one who can rightly and with out question or doubt discern who is righteous and who is not. the reason it is wrong for us to display these emotions, is because we do so out of a sense of selfrighteousness, and not out of a sense of absolute righteousness."
So basically - God is perfect, God bashes babies heads against the wall for the crimes of their parents - therefore that's OK - but it wouldn't be OK for anyone else to do it.
And God gets angry, seeks vengeance, is wrathful and isn't sorrowful or apologetic - you could add proud and vain to get a majority of the 7 deadly sins - enough to convict anyone else - but God is perfect and therefore its OK but it wouldn't be for anyone else.
And you wonder why we don't get it?hock:
Oh, I get it. You all feel that your 'morality' somehow trumps God's morality/righteousness.
Therefore God is not worthy of worship.
Close?
(September 15, 2013 at 5:45 pm)Maelstrom Wrote: Drich sure is great at describing a lunatic deity.
Be wary of those who claim to know the nature of god, for it most often mirrors their own twisted desires..
Spicoli you have made yourself an excellent example of a person who has created a straw god.
Because your idea of god is so much different than the God of the bible, you can't help but identify the God of the bible as a monster.
But again because in your heart you have created your straw god, you know he can not possibly exist, especially when you start to compare him to the God described in the bible or the harshness of the real world.
(September 15, 2013 at 5:48 pm)Maelstrom Wrote: By the very fact that it cannot.
How do you know if the only thing you have ever tested is if your straw god has ever existed.
I'd say pretty much spot on rather than close. If my morality were as bad as that displayed by God in the Bible then I would be writing this from prison.
(September 15, 2013 at 3:09 pm)max-greece Wrote: "The God of the bible does indeed get angry, He does seek vengeance, He is wrathful ,and He is righteous, which means He will punish the wicked, and not be sorrowful or apologetic about doing it. How can a perfect God be these things? don't these negative emotion mean He is not perfect? No. Then why is it wrong for us to display these emotions. In short these emotions are reserved for God. They are reserved for one who can rightly and with out question or doubt discern who is righteous and who is not. the reason it is wrong for us to display these emotions, is because we do so out of a sense of selfrighteousness, and not out of a sense of absolute righteousness."
So basically - God is perfect, God bashes babies heads against the wall for the crimes of their parents - therefore that's OK - but it wouldn't be OK for anyone else to do it.
And God gets angry, seeks vengeance, is wrathful and isn't sorrowful or apologetic - you could add proud and vain to get a majority of the 7 deadly sins - enough to convict anyone else - but God is perfect and therefore its OK but it wouldn't be for anyone else.
And you wonder why we don't get it?hock:
Oh, I get it. You all feel that your 'morality' somehow trumps God's morality/righteousness.
Therefore God is not worthy of worship.
Close?
look at that - he can be taught
Whats even better is that you actually think that admitting your god has some unexplainable immunity to being labeled an immoral being will somehow satiate those who call him out on his atrocities.
If there was ANYONE on this site who was teetering on the edge of accepting your bogus messiah, you've definitely put an end to that.
You should be glad Jesus isn't real, he'd be pissed as fuck at you by now.
Ah.... "the god of the bible" card... Any divinity we make up that goes against the god described in the bible is not "the god of the bible"... "the god of the bible" is the one and only...
That expression reminds me of "the emperor of star wars", or "the headmaster of harry potter"...
The bible is a book written by people for people. All the words in it came from people and, as such, represent the way those people viewed their society. I'm glad our society doesn't work like theirs.
Perhaps that society was a necessary evil in order for us to get here... but still... I don't envy those who lived back then... nor those who live like if they were back then, like those poor folks under sharia law.
![[Image: facepalm.gif]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i1118.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk619%2Fjcincain%2FEmoticons%2520Insults%2520and%2520Kudos%2Ffacepalm.gif)
![[Image: Evolution.png]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i1118.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk619%2Fjcincain%2FPublic%2FEvolution.png)
hock:
