Easy arguments against the Bible, and religion as a whole

[KichigaiNeko]

---

i find it amazing how some here say christians are closed minded but prove themselves to be closed minded. i hear ppl saying "they assume it's the word of god but it's not." that right there is assuming it's not the word of god. ppl saying it sounds rediculous but evolution and the big bang theory sounds equally if not more rediculous. it's basically saying a puzzle put itself together by random events and luck. that something more complicated than anything we have ever built just happened. the fact is evolution has no evidence other than what made darwin come up with the theory in the first place (which isn't really evidence) and no further evidence has been found. they say one inaccuracy or hoax of the bible means it's all fake but there have been so many evelutionary hoaxes it's not even funny but every time it happens it's ignored. when someone combines an ape jaw to a human skull and presents it as a missing link but later is discovered to be a fake is just what ever. you accuse christians of holding back science but apparently athiests do the same thing. dismissing the notion of a creator because "that's just stupid." well i think throwing away possibilities with no evidence to rule it out is "just stupid." i think coming up with theories and withholding evidence that doesn't support those theories is "just stupid." you should find out how carbon dating works before you use that as evidence cuz that's just bad science built on assumptions. that's what evolution is. just because animals adapt means that's how all animals came to be? a chain of trial and error without any proof that it's possible for a spicies to change to another? there's proof many different types of cats exist and can create other kinds of cats but there's no proof a cat can become a squirl or can become anything other than a cat.

what i also find astounding is you assume your science is right but science changes all the time. science used to think the earth was flat or dome shape but in the book of Isiah 40:22 it says "It is He who sits above the circle of the earth..." so the bible had it thousands of years before science could prove it how interesting. if it were wrong then that could be evidence against the bible but every time ppl try to prove the bible wrong they find it's facts entirely accurate, all the historical and scientific ones. but i must thank science cuz on the other hand if it weren't for those finding new evidence to support it accidently, i wouldn't appreciate it as much so thank you

---

[frankiej]

science used to think the earth was flat or dome shape

That isn't science. That was idiots who thought that.

Your moronic view of science and scientific theories astounds me... Go home and try again.

[LastPoet]

ppl saying it sounds rediculous but evolution and the big bang theory sounds equally if not more rediculous.

You may find it ridiculous, but there is a vast amount of evidence, mountains infact. As to your god or anyone else's: zip, nada, NOTHING.

it's basically saying a puzzle put itself together by random events and luck.

My advice to you, is to go and learn what those theories really say and not what your pastor says about them. This sentence shows that you know next to nothing about them. Study, use your brain, I promise it won't hurt.

they say one inaccuracy or hoax of the bible means it's all fake but there have been so many evelutionary hoaxes it's not even funny but every time it happens it's ignored.

Nope, it isn't ignored, science is a self correcting process. Its a honorable thing to be able to admit that some mistakes were made. And the bible doesn't only has innecuracies, the whole story is immoral, and the god in the bible is immoral. How do I know this? I would never put my kids in the basement forever for any finite wrong doing.

you should find out how carbon dating works before you use that as evidence cuz that's just bad science built on assumptions. that's what evolution is.

No, YOU should learn about it, as you clearly are just regurgitating nonsense learned in religious environmnents. Give yourself some credit and use your brain, Its just as functional as other people's brains. Besides, carbon dating isn't the only dating method, and guess what, they all point to the same conclusions.

there's proof many different types of cats exist and can create other kinds of cats but there's no proof a cat can become a squirl or can become anything other than a cat.

EVOLUTION DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY! [/morbo]

what i also find astounding is you assume your science is right but science changes all the time. science used to think the earth was flat or dome shape but in the book of Isiah 40:22 it says "It is He who sits above the circle of the earth..." so the bible had it thousands of years before science could prove it how interesting. if it were wrong then that could be evidence against the bible but every time ppl try to prove the bible wrong they find it's facts entirely accurate, all the historical and scientific ones. but i must thank science cuz on the other hand if it weren't for those finding new evidence to support it accidently, i wouldn't appreciate it as much so thank you Big Grin

Last time I checked the earth is a sphere (a little flattened in the poles OFC), not a circle. A circle is a two dimensional figure. And please give us the evidence for your god, we have been waiting for it. SCIENCE, it works bitches!

[Ace Otana]

EVOLUTION DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY! [/morbo]

Those who know nothing about evolution attack it the most.

[Minimalist]

i hear ppl saying "they assume it's the word of god but it's not." that right there is assuming it's not the word of god.

First you have to provide some evidence that your god ( or, why quibble, ANY god ) exists. Then you can move on to the notion that he wrote a terribly flawed book.

Your move, sonny.

[chi pan]

You may find it ridiculous, but there is a vast amount of evidence, mountains infact. As to your god or anyone else's: zip, nada, NOTHING.

i've looked at evidence why do you think i'm on this page if i don't look at both sides? there's not a vast amount of evidence there's almost no evidence for the big bang theory it's just a theory that can't possibly be proven cuz it happened "billions of years ago" it can't be recreated or traced.

My advice to you, is to go and learn what those theories really say and not what your pastor says about them. This sentence shows that you know next to nothing about them. Study, use your brain, I promise it won't hurt.

quotes from stephen hawking he said that "it seams highly unlikely but if done enough times you're bound to get a good result." it is random chance.

Nope, it isn't ignored, science is a self correcting process. Its a honorable thing to be able to admit that some mistakes were made. And the bible doesn't only has innecuracies, the whole story is immoral, and the god in the bible is immoral. How do I know this? I would never put my kids in the basement forever for any finite wrong doing.

actually there was a big story in the media about the discovery but when it was discovered to be a hoax most media outlets ignored it. and that's a bad metaphore b/c god doesn't leave us alone, he guides us when we ask for help.

No, YOU should learn about it, as you clearly are just regurgitating nonsense learned in religious environmnents. Give yourself some credit and use your brain, Its just as functional as other people's brains. Besides, carbon dating isn't the only dating method, and guess what, they all point to the same conclusions.

explination: carbon dating measures the amount of carbon 14 atoms in the organic substance. carbon 14 is a radioactive unstable iscotope of carbon that has a specific half life that i don't remember off hand. the carbon 14 atoms of an organic substance is the same as that of the atmosphere when it's alive b/c it's constantly replenishing it's supply, but when it dies, it stops getting new carbon 14 and what's left slowly decays. calculating the half life you can easily calculate how long it's been dead. the only problem is it's based on the assumption that the amount of carbon 14 in the atmosphere is the same now then it was then but this is not constant. it changes gradually as you can see on the news about the complaint of carbon emmissions into the atmosphere. this means the older the substance is the more inaccurate the measurment is and when it gets to thousands of years it can easilly be 10 times what it really is. don't believe me? look it up! i look at other things too which is why i'm here.

EVOLUTION DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY! [/morbo]

according to the theory all lifeforms today evolved from the simplist organisms so at some point they had to change species but there's no proof of that. that's the point not that literally a squirl becomes a cat.

Last time I checked the earth is a sphere (a little flattened in the poles OFC), not a circle. A circle is a two dimensional figure. And please give us the evidence for your god, we have been waiting for it. SCIENCE, it works bitches

---

---

actually the hebrew word most directly describes a sphere but back then they didn't differentiate between 2 dimentional and three dimentinoal shapes so it translated to circle. obviously the earth isn't 2 dimentional i thought i didn't have to explain that. still one up for the bible and if you read further into the passage it talks about how he expands the heavens (refering to the universe in case i have to dumb that up too) which is something only recently discovered. i'm not gonna quote it cuz i'm letting you look for it youself it's in the same verse so you know where to look.

---

i hear ppl saying "they assume it's the word of god but it's not." that right there is assuming it's not the word of god.

First you have to provide some evidence that your god ( or, why quibble, ANY god ) exists. Then you can move on to the notion that he wrote a terribly flawed book.

Your move, sonny.

the explination is simple. you don't see a building and think that building occured by a chain of complex random acts of nature putting it together piece by piece for millions of years, you assume it was build by a builder, well at least one. why should it be any different for life forms so complex we don't even fully understand them yet alone could create one on purpose. things we don't understand exactly how they work were put together by noone? you can't throw a puzzel at a wall a billion times and expect one of those times it will fall assempled. and no joke that would be way more likely than how evolutionists explain it happened and they know it it's deffinition insanity- "doing the same thing over and over expecting different results."

[Minimalist]

The watchmaker analogy consists of the comparison of some natural phenomenon to a watch. Typically, the analogy is presented as a prelude to the teleological argument and is generally presented as:

The complex inner workings of a watch necessitate an intelligent designer.
As with a watch, the complexity of X (a particular organ or organism, the structure of the solar system, life, the universe, everything) necessitates a designer.

In this presentation, the watch analogy (step 1) does not function as a premise to an argument — rather it functions as a rhetorical device and a preamble. Its purpose is to establish the plausibility of the general premise: you can tell, simply by looking at something, whether or not it was the product of intelligent design.

In most formulations of the argument, the characteristic that indicates intelligent design is left implicit. In some formulations, the characteristic is orderliness or complexity (which is a form of order). In other cases it is clearly being designed for a purpose, where clearly is usually left undefined.

The argument conflates the difference between the complexity that arises from living organisms that are able to reproduce themselves (and as such may change to become more complex over time) with the complexity of inanimate objects, unable to pass on any reproductive changes (such as the multitude of parts manufactured in a watch), the comparison breaks down because of this important distinction.

This particular bit of theistic lunacy has been demolished since William Paley around 1800. You are 200 years behind in your inanity...like most theist morons.

Paley wrote that if a pocket watch is found on a heath, it is most reasonable to assume that someone dropped it and that it was made by one or more watchmakers, and not by natural forces.

Grow up before you waste your life on your knees grovelling to your non-existent sky-daddy.

[Erinome]

i find it amazing how some here say christians are closed minded but prove themselves to be closed minded. i hear ppl saying "they assume it's the word of god but it's not." that right there is assuming it's not the word of god.

Most of us have actually fucking read it, and aren't just assuming. We're utterly disgusted by the piece of shit bible and if it is the word of god, then we can only assume that god is a prick who can go fuck himself. There's a fucking assumption for ya.

ppl saying it sounds rediculous but evolution and the big bang theory sounds equally if not more rediculous. it's basically saying a puzzle put itself together by random events and luck. that something more complicated than anything we have ever built just happened.

No, twit. What sounds ridiculous is the fucking earth and everything on it being formed in less than a week by a god who sounds suspiciously like an stone ax wielding goat herdsman with a political agenda. That sounds fucking stupid. It also sounds ridiculous when people who obviously don't know a goddamn thing about evolution dismiss it for their absurd, uninteresting, offensive little myths.

the fact is evolution has no evidence other than what made darwin come up with the theory in the first place (which isn't really evidence) and no further evidence has been found.

You're a fucking idiot. I just wanted you to know that. There is plenty of evidence for evolution. It's not even a theory anymore. It's a fact. Eat it.

they say one inaccuracy or hoax of the bible means it's all fake but there have been so many evelutionary hoaxes it's not even funny but every time it happens it's ignored. when someone combines an ape jaw to a human skull and presents it as a missing link but later is discovered to be a fake is just what ever. you accuse christians of holding back science but apparently athiests do the same thing.

Any proof of these claims? I have proof that you're an african ape, but no matter how many times I shove it in your face you won't believe it because you're a scared little sheep who is obviously too attached to idiot delusions to even try to understand things like science, facts, etc.

dismissing the notion of a creator because "that's just stupid." well i think throwing away possibilities with no evidence to rule it out is "just stupid."

It's a good thing nobody important (esteemed members of the scientific community) give a flying fuck what you think. Nobody dismisses the notion of a creator just because they think it's stupid with no evidence. It's dismissed because there is no evidence, whatsoever. Not a tiny little fragment of evidence to support your claim, yet you believe it. Now that's just fucking stupid.

i think coming up with theories and withholding evidence that doesn't support those theories is "just stupid." you should find out how carbon dating works before you use that as evidence cuz that's just bad science built on assumptions. that's what evolution is. just because animals adapt means that's how all animals came to be? a chain of trial and error without any proof that it's possible for a spicies to change to another? there's proof many different types of cats exist and can create other kinds of cats but there's no proof a cat can become a squirl or can become anything other than a cat.

You don't have a fucking clue. That's funny. What's sad is that you don't even want to know. Just in case you change your idiot mind:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYPapE-3F...plpp_video

what i also find astounding is you assume your science is right but science changes all the time. science used to think the earth was flat or dome shape but in the book of Isiah 40:22 it says "It is He who sits above the circle of the earth..."

Scientific method doesn't change. See the old ass video above.

Right... because a flat circle.. that's just ridiculous. Nobody would ever think a circle could be flat. Science changes as we learn more. Ya know, that thing you do when you find out more information that wasn't previously known. No, wait.. you wouldn't know. Sorry.

Unlike your set of irrelevant, unsubstantiated, ancient beliefs, science embraces it's theories being proven incorrect. The trouble for you is that no one who holds your stupid beliefs ever ever ever has proven anything that science has to offer incorrect.

so the bible had it thousands of years before science could prove it how interesting.

If that were true at all, it would be interesting, but it's not true... therefore, it's just drivel.

if it were wrong then that could be evidence against the bible but every time ppl try to prove the bible wrong they find it's facts entirely accurate, all the historical and scientific ones. but i must thank science cuz on the other hand if it weren't for those finding new evidence to support it accidently, i wouldn't appreciate it as much so thank you

There is tons of evidence against the bible, that's why know one with half a fucking brain in their skull takes it seriously. You're angry with science, I can tell. I know you want the bible to be true because if it's not then your whole shitty life is a pathetic, wasteful lie. Science doesn't give a fuck, so go whine about it, and express your incredibly redundant, ignorant, mindless, unthinking bullshit to a forum that just buys any old opinion that someone who speaks in text message language tries to sell them.

ByeBye.

[The Grand Nudger]

Meh, everything we have learned by the application of the scientific method is horribly wrong, at a fundamental level. Now that we're done with that, you can go ahead and explain how your "goddidit" theory is correct. We have two threads entitled "evidence for the existence of god", which is probably the best place to start, since god needs to exist before he actually does anything.

No amount of criticizing any given claim makes another correct by default.

[chi pan]

That isn't science. That was idiots who thought that.

Your moronic view of science and scientific theories astounds me... Go home and try again.

ok i'll give you that one but here are some examples of when science was wrong- alchemists (yes they were scientists) tried and tried to turn lead into gold thinking it was possible well not withought transmutation (changing the atomic structure). thinking heavier objects fall at a faster rate, and the whole idea of matter has changed dramatically from thinking no matter how small matter gets you can always cut it into smaller pieces to the theory of the atom (back then it was the smallest matter could be atom means uncuttable) to the more modern theory of the atom and the more recent change that electrons don't encircle the atom in orbits but clouds. my point is science, especially when it comes to comes to cosmoligy, changes all the time but the bible needs no correction to it's story of the origin of the earth. and it can't be ruled out without evidence to justify it.

---

---

i find it amazing how some here say christians are closed minded but prove themselves to be closed minded. i hear ppl saying "they assume it's the word of god but it's not." that right there is assuming it's not the word of god. ppl saying it sounds rediculous but evolution and the big bang theory sounds equally if not more rediculous. it's basically saying a puzzle put itself together by random events and luck. that something more complicated than anything we have ever built just happened. the fact is evolution has no evidence other than what made darwin come up with the theory in the first place (which isn't really evidence) and no further evidence has been found. they say one inaccuracy or hoax of the bible means it's all fake but there have been so many evelutionary hoaxes it's not even funny but every time it happens it's ignored. when someone combines an ape jaw to a human skull and presents it as a missing link but later is discovered to be a fake is just what ever. you accuse christians of holding back science but apparently athiests do the same thing. dismissing the notion of a creator because "that's just stupid." well i think throwing away possibilities with no evidence to rule it out is "just stupid." i think coming up with theories and withholding evidence that doesn't support those theories is "just stupid." you should find out how carbon dating works before you use that as evidence cuz that's just bad science built on assumptions. that's what evolution is. just because animals adapt means that's how all animals came to be? a chain of trial and error without any proof that it's possible for a spicies to change to another? there's proof many different types of cats exist and can create other kinds of cats but there's no proof a cat can become a squirl or can become anything other than a cat.

what i also find astounding is you assume your science is right but science changes all the time. science used to think the earth was flat or dome shape but in the book of Isiah 40:22 it says "It is He who sits above the circle of the earth..." so the bible had it thousands of years before science could prove it how interesting. if it were wrong then that could be evidence against the bible but every time ppl try to prove the bible wrong they find it's facts entirely accurate, all the historical and scientific ones. but i must thank science cuz on the other hand if it weren't for those finding new evidence to support it accidently, i wouldn't appreciate it as much so thank you

---

Thank you for speaking....you are closed minded

sorry i would comment on what you have to say but it looks like you don't have anything to say. this is how i do this, i post my thoughts see what comments i get see if i can argue my point as they argue theirs do some reasurch and learn in the process as both our ideas bounce back and fourth. how is that closed minded exactly? i'm listeneing and willing to learn but you don't seam to be helping so i guess this comment is a waste of time...