Bible has some shocking 'family values' - Finally, Some Sensible Writing

[Anomalocaris]

WHAT!!?!?! On the other topic thread you were saying the opposite.

I swear GC, you lie so much you cant even keep up with your own bullshit.

Hey, give him a break, his one working neuron already has to hold 3 pages' worth of biblical crap already, where would he find the space to catalogue and keep track of his own lies?

[JudgeDracoAmunRa]

People who have actually read the bible - learn quickly that the god of the bible is by far one of the most evil and demented fictional characters ever developed in literature.

THe bible says that the son is NOT resposible for the sins of the father.

I'd like to address both these points.

From my time within Christendom, it's true to say that the God of the old testament does indeed appear to be some kind of psycho. However, the God of the new testament is rather different. God the Father (who tears up pretty much everything and everyone in the old testament) appears to be into hate-crimes, while God the Son ( hippy Jesus) is into peace and love, and is available to do magic tricks at your kid's bar mitzhvah.

Your second point. Yes, the bible does say what you say it does. However, this is one of those verses that Christians and atheists alike like to cherry-pick. There are a number of verses within the bible that actually say the opposite.

In any case, that quote you've given was something God said after he drowned all the little children and their cute little pet puppies and kittens. So I guess God would say that's not really something you could use against him in evidence.hock:

[ElDinero]

So the Bible contradicts itself, who knew!

[Aegrus]

The killing of INNOCENTS is simply a definition of murder. SO -= if the great flood had happened - it would represent BY FAR - that largest mass murder of Innocent children and babies who could not have done anything to deserve being drowned. This is simply mass murder on a giant scale. THe bible says that the son is NOT resposible for the sins of the father - and one cannot say that these children WOULD HAVE done something wrong -because they would never have had the chance to do so. THE flood - of it had happened - is simply a mass murder by the god.

A Christians rebuttal is simple here. god sent the flood at the right time; somehow by miracle of god there were no babies on earth at the time of the great flood.

Remember, if they can use a fairy tale book as hard evidence of existence of god, above rebuttal is nothing for them.

You are incorrect, there were many children when God sent the flood. God in his omniscient and omnipresent ability saw that none of those children would grow up to be any better than their parents.

How very religious of you, blaming the children for the sins of the parents.

Seriously, I'm cataloguing the stupid shit that religious people say when desperate. That way, when I'm writing for my extremist characters, I'll have real fundy arguments to use, and no one will be able to say that theists aren't that stupid.

[Minimalist]

However, the God of the new testament is rather different.

Er...it is xtian nitwits who say that they are the same "god."

It is too late in the day for men of sincerity to pretend they believe in the Platonic mysticisms that three are one, and one is three; and yet that the one is not three, and the three are not one . . . But this constitutes the craft, the power and the profit of the priests. Sweep away their gossamer fabrics of factitious religion, and they would catch no more flies. We should all then, like the Quakers, live without an order of priests, moralize for ourselves, follow the oracle of conscience, and say nothing about what no man can understand, nor therefore believe.

--Thomas Jefferson