Christian Myths and Atheists Lies

[Violet]

You want proof of God?

What do you mean 'proof of God'?

That is obscure and presumptuous...

[tavarish]

*facepalm*

I was going to respond, but then I realised your post contained so much fail I was compelled to simply ban you. I've had enough of your trolling.

About bloody time...

Of course... that last post of him was amazing... simply and truly amazing... 0.o

Take Norway as an example. People are free to proselytize and practice anything they want. Yet they have an overwhelmingly atheist population. Having a secular society means the state doesn't favor one group over another. Representation is key. Keeping it to yourself doesn't mean not telling anyone, just not imposing on others' lives and rights.

I included all beliefs. It is not possible to not 'impose?' our beliefs on others if we are in a situation where said belief has an effect. Example being: It is my belief that blue is a nice color for the curtains at the event. I thus decide to buy blue curtains for the event. I have just done something because of my belief (that blue is a nice color)... and that while not necessarily 'bad' should be able to be questioned. Take now instead that I am not invited to the event, but i still have to buy the curtains for it. I choose blue because I think it is the ugliest color of curtain I can find. I have just done something because of my belief (that blue is an ugly color)... and while it is not necessarily 'bad' should be able to be questioned.

You cannot have a belief in a situation where it applies and it not make an 'impact' upon the situation in some way.

I'm talking about mainly religious beliefs and faith. While buying blue curtains can be inconvenient for some, it isn't impeding anyone from buying curtains of a different color. I'd take your example further - if blue curtains were outlawed because a certain group found them distasteful. An outright ban on blue curtains because it was written in a holy book that they were in some way detrimental to society.

I wholeheartedly agree that this should be questioned, and it's important to acknowledge that inconveniencing someone isn't imposing on their rights. Disallowing someone to perform an action on the sole grounds that it is religiously offensive is an inhibition of rights.

[Tiberius]

@Adrian: I wonder why they call them "random numbers" then :S

Coz they're as random as we can get.

[Violet]

I'm talking about mainly religious beliefs and faith. While buying blue curtains can be inconvenient for some, it isn't impeding anyone from buying curtains of a different color. I'd take your example further - if blue curtains were outlawed because a certain group found them distasteful. An outright ban on blue curtains because it was written in a holy book that they were in some way detrimental to society.

I wholeheartedly agree that this should be questioned, and it's important to acknowledge that inconveniencing someone isn't imposing on their rights. Disallowing someone to perform an action on the sole grounds that it is religiously offensive is an inhibition of rights.

It will prevent others from buying curtains of a different color if curtains were in the budget for the event (as I was assuming, though i should have mentioned). I understand that you were talking about mainly religious beliefs... but they are not so different from any other beliefs... especially in that all beliefs are capable of being questioned. My example of the curtains was only to present a "harmless" belief that nonetheless has an impact on others.

I don't disagree that beliefs like "I should drive this axe into your skull because your head is round" that have a greater impact upon society/people should be especially questioned... but it should still be noted that beliefs all have impact (if they apply to a situation).

---

@Adrian: I wonder why they call them "random numbers" then :S

Coz they're as random as we can get.

Without the use of quantum computers you mean?

[LEDO]

*facepalm*

I was going to respond, but then I realised your post contained so much fail I was compelled to simply ban you. I've had enough of your trolling.

Got a pretty hair trigger for banning. You could issue a warning.

[Tiberius]

He was quite evidently a troll. He didn't bring anything to the conversation at all.

[Ace Otana]

Please get serious!!
The UK is a great country for when it comes to freedom of speech and I find that disgusting! You all need to bend over and worship my god cos I'm a know it all brat ...you need more Delusion not less! The less influence Christianity has in Britain the more free and secular it is....can't you hear the sound of religion flushing down the toilet?
Maybe not because the sound of that other great free nation is flushing it's stupidity away on the other side of the channel is probably a distraction!

The further they move away from Christ the more England and France are becoming more free and secular with their former greatness out done by modern scientific developments and greater rights and freedoms!

I'm going to run around now while avoiding points and making a prat of myself.

Ah huh. Erm not that I want to make you look dumb but...the dark ages is that way. Looks like you are in the wrong age mate.

[leo-rcc]

*facepalm*

I was going to respond, but then I realised your post contained so much fail I was compelled to simply ban you. I've had enough of your trolling.

Got a pretty hair trigger for banning.

Far from it. I would have banned his ass on day one, but Adrian actually wanted to wait and see what develops.

[Laurens]

1. Christians are against education

One of the biggest lies perpetuated by atheists. It takes only a modicum of reading and intelligence to realize Christians founded Yale Harvard and Princeton, in fact most of the educational system of the United States was established by Christians.

I never assumed Christians were against education. Quite the opposite infact, they seem pro-education, sadly they are for the education of pseudoscience - which is the thing atheists tend to take issue with. Intellegent Design or whatever you want to label it is not a valid science and should not be taught to children and teenagers as though it is valid. If they did teach Intellegent Design in schools, I would be in favour of it, if they use it to make children aware of various forms of pseudoscience and how to spot someone who is propigating something unscientific.

2. Christians are against science

Many and in fact most scientists have been Christian. Here's a list of 10 I can post the names of at least 30 more influential Christian scientists with the bat of an eye


Nicole Oresme c. 1320-1382 inventor of scientific graphic techniques
Nicholas of Cusa 1401-1464 grappler with infinity
Georgias Agricola 1495-1555 founder of metallurgy
John Philoponus late 6th Century Aristotle's early Christian critic
Hugh of St. Victor c. 1096-1141 theologian of science
Robert Grosseteste c. 1168-1253 reform-minded bishop-scientist
Roger Bacon c. 1220-1292 Doctor Mirabiles
Dietrich von Frieberg c. 1250-c. 1310 the priest who solved the mystery of the rainbow
Thomas Bradwardine c. 1290-1349 student of motion
Johannes Kepler 1571-1630 discoverer of the laws of planetary motion
Johannes Baptista van Helmont 1579-1644 founder of pneumatic chemistry and chemical physiology

The latest date I can see there is 1644. Darwin's 'The Origin of The Species' was published in 1859. These scientists all lived in a time before science really had anything to say against the notion of a creator. Listing scientists who died before the theory of evolution was accepted is a rather pointless affair if you ask me.

Modern day Christians who go out of their way to dismiss evolution, with increasingly ever wackier "evidence" are anti-scientific and they are also morons.

3. Christians believed the world was flat

The myth that Christians in the Middle Ages thought the world was flat was given a massive boost by Andrew Dickson White's weighty tome The Warfare of Science with Theology. This book has become something of a running joke among historians of science and it is dutifully mentioned as a prime example of misinformation in the preface of most modern works on science and religion.
He finds himself grudgingly admitting that Clement, Origen, Ambrose, Augustine, Isodore, Albertus Magnus and Aquinas all accepted the Earth was a globe - in other words none of the great doctors of the church had considered the matter in doubt.
What can be stated categorically was that a flat Earth was at no time ever an element of Christian doctrine and that no one was ever persecuted or pressurised into believing it.

I never really heard that Christians believed the world to be flat. The Bible does occaisionally point to the fact that its authors thought so however.