Something to tell a creationist.

[binny]

My husband and I were doing our usual morning thing, me zoning and drinking coffee and he reading the paper. He started talking about these two guys at work having an argument over the earth being 6000 years old and all that other crap those creationists spew. When the creationist started talking to my husband he said the perfect thing that made that guy stop. My husband said to him "Shut up and go away." And the creationist guy did. I wish I could do that.

[Edwardo Piet]

LOL that's fucking awesome.

How come God doesn't give them the strength to stand up for themselves when they're told to shut the fuck up and fuck off lol!

(I'm stereotyping of course!! lol )

Thanks for sharing (that story) hehe

EvF

[tackattack]

How come God doesn't give them the strength to stand up for themselves when they're told to shut the fuck up and fuck off lol!

EvF

Jesus teaches to turn the other cheek.

[Samson]

Jesus teaches to turn the other cheek.

He also made up rules on how to beat your slaves and for any "Non-Christian" slave you owned, there were no boundaries.....

Should I also mention how much he..."Hated" throughout Revelation...?

Please take your ignorance somewhere else, where people have lost the capabilities of thinking for themselves....

If there was a "Jesus" and he did state, "Turn the other Cheek"...He sure as hell didn't invent that statement... There are a couple of people off hand, that was stating this 500+ years before a "Jesus" was ever a twinkle in a Dictators eye......

[tackattack]

not ignorance meerly looking to get a stir in the populace, unfortunately only one biter. Sorry the bait wasn't as flamboyant as fr0d0's .

1.If you're referring to the flogging parable in Luke 12:45-48 then read verse 41 as well which clearly states it's a parable and if read in it's entirity clearly shows the message of being patient and ready.

There was obviously slavery at the time, but I am not aware of any instance where Jesus had payed slavery much thought other than using day-to-day life as a parable for the people.

2. Revelations is a post Apostolic piece of literature. John Patmos’ “Revelation” is a hallucination he received while in a trance. It is a detailed prediction of the future. It was debunked early in the church by Eusebius in his detailed history of the Christian Church (c. AD 324; see his comments on "Revelation" at Eusebius 3.25). It's a large contradiction on all of the previous books before it which all (fairly uniformly) teach similar values to the accepted one's of modern Christianity. Revelations speaks heavily of salvations through works and actions, which is direct opposition to the Christian doctrine.

3. Are you reffering to the historical texts of the Vedic religion, talking about Ahisma, dated to 8th century BCE? I know of no earlier references. If you have some please site references. I don't believe their phraseology(?) is the same so if you can site references of someone earlier stating to "turn the other cheek" again please cite.

[Shinylight]

2. Revelations is a post Apostolic piece of literature. John Patmos’ “Revelation” is a hallucination he received while in a trance. It is a detailed prediction of the future. It was debunked early in the church by Eusebius in his detailed history of the Christian Church (c. AD 324; see his comments on "Revelation" at Eusebius 3.25). It's a large contradiction on all of the previous books before it which all (fairly uniformly) teach similar values to the accepted one's of modern Christianity. Revelations speaks heavily of salvations through works and actions, which is direct opposition to the Christian doctrine.

So the hallucination of one Biblical figure is held in an unsavoury way, but the hallucinations of many others are thought to be the word of God.

Please explain to me how you can debunk something that can't be 'bunked' in the first place, and why when people debunk(quite accurately) the bible Christians suddenly assume that it was metaphorical?

[tackattack]

---

2. Revelations is a post Apostolic piece of literature. John Patmos’ “Revelation” is a hallucination he received while in a trance. It is a detailed prediction of the future. It was debunked early in the church by Eusebius in his detailed history of the Christian Church (c. AD 324; see his comments on "Revelation" at Eusebius 3.25). It's a large contradiction on all of the previous books before it which all (fairly uniformly) teach similar values to the accepted one's of modern Christianity. Revelations speaks heavily of salvations through works and actions, which is direct opposition to the Christian doctrine.

---

So the hallucination of one Biblical figure is held in an unsavoury way, but the hallucinations of many others are thought to be the word of God.

Please explain to me how you can debunk something that can't be 'bunked' in the first place, and why when people debunk(quite accurately) the bible Christians suddenly assume that it was metaphorical?

No, the hallucination of one biblical figure is held in a humanistic way and disagrees with the combined ideas of all (to my knowledge) of the other NT Biblical figures. And if you define "suddenly" as since the age of enlightenment then I guess we'll have to accept that we (Christians) "suddenly" believed the bible was all metaphorical.

Any comments on 1 and 3? I genuinely would like to see any references you have for 3 before I get home for bed.

[Edwardo Piet]

Jesus teaches to turn the other cheek.

Hey dude - way to shit all of my joke LOL

The thing is though... why did the Christian need shutting up in the first place?

EvF

[Shinylight]

there are many contradictions in the new testament, most prominent is probably the birth of jesus. The accounts of which were written after Jesus' death. in fact, many cases of NT writings were altered to suit the needs of the writer or the church. so these hallucinations that 'combine' may not have done so at the time of their conception.

when i was talking about sudden change i was referring to it in a time period of 2000 years, suddenly within that could be anything below 60 years in my opinion.

i have nothing to say about 1 and 3, they do not interest me.

[tackattack]

---

there are many contradictions in the new testament, most prominent is probably the birth of jesus. The accounts of which were written after Jesus' death. in fact, many cases of NT writings were altered to suit the needs of the writer or the church. so these hallucinations that 'combine' may not have done so at the time of their conception.

when i was talking about sudden change i was referring to it in a time period of 2000 years, suddenly within that could be anything below 60 years in my opinion.

i have nothing to say about 1 and 3, they do not interest me.

---

I wasn't talking about condratictions in the Bible (there are tons unless you're a fundamentalist) , just contradictions in his teachings (which you still haven't cited reference)

So today - age of enlightment <=60 years?

Your dismissal is as obvious as you lack of reference.

---

Jesus teaches to turn the other cheek.

---

Hey dude - way to shit all of my joke LOL

The thing is though... why did the Christian need shutting up in the first place?

EvF

I'll work on adding more smarminess (?sp) and wit to my future witless repartee. Isn't it obvious, shit in shit out.