Don't hate me but wouldn't be better to live by the bible than the waving of the next found information. Golden rule friend of sinners and tax collector's

Debate Room
141

Pithy.

@God30

I found it hard to remain polite in dealing with such egregious ignorance and industrial strength hubris.

IMO it’s despicable to go door to door telling people their beliefs are simply wrong if they are different from yours.

IMO It’s doubly arrogant to come to an atheist forum and quote the bible as if it’s some kind of authority/credible evidence.

I’ll try to explain; I don’t believe in gods. Therefore, I am therefore to believe in any divinely inspired works.

Finally; the historicity of Jesus has never been established, and is not the consensus among historians.

Over the last couple of years, I have been slowly reaching the conclusion that an historical Jesus probably did not exist. IE HE’S MYTH; THEY MADE HIM UP.

The Old Testament is the mythology of Judaism. I have seen no evidence which allows me to believe the New Testament is anything other than myth.

1 Like
142

Welcome to Atheist Republic’s Zork simulator!

It is nighttime. You are standing in an open field, just west of a building with a suspicious looking door.

>walk east_

You walk east to the building with the suspicious door.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.

>open door_

A grue surprises you and attacks you with it’s run-on sentence:

You take 5000 damage! You have died.
Would you like to play again?

>no_

1 Like
143

Shut the fuck up. One thing I read the vedas and I have no doubt god works with people through different religions and yes it’s a consensus despite mabe bill nye who I think doesn’t really understand physics.

144

No they fucking do not. There is no contemporary evidence at all for a jesus figure as described in the gospels. None.

Dont lie.

2 Likes
145

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/news/was-jesus-real-historical-evidence

146

Too late, he’s posting more false claims.

147

If someone told me historic claim A was true, and cited the History channel as evidence (like you just did @ God30). I would start with the assumption that the claim was false.

Why? Because the History channel is full of nonsense.

4 Likes
148

I don’t give two blue fucks what an edited anthology of primitive tales says.

I use the historical method…the “New Testament” is THE CLAIM…and is totally unevidenced. Therefore belief is utterly unfounded on any reasonable cause.
Numpty.

1 Like
149

There is no contemporary evidence for the historicity of Jesus. None. .

The passages of Flavius Josephus often quoted by Christians have been shown to be forgeries. Also, Josephus was born 37 ce, within a few years after Jesus’ putative death.

Apologist like to quote Jospehus’ Antiquities Of The Jews’ as proof of the existence of Jesus. Problem is the passage usually quoted has been well known to be a forgery for decades.

All claimed historical proofs Jesus’ existence are anecdotal. There is not one eye witness account of any aspect of Jesu’ birth life , death and resurrection. resurrection.
)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))0)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Do yourself a favour; Get hold of four bibles of the type you use. Open each one at the account of the resurrection ,and read them side by side. The contradictions are
absurdly contradictory.

2 Likes
150

@God30

Please read my posts properly, and offer an honest cogent response, but don’t bother responding with cryptic biblical references. I’ve no interest in reading the bible, since it doesn’t contain any objective evidence for your claims or for any deity.

2 Likes
151

According to Harry Potter wizards and wizardry are real, so what’s your point? Why should I care what your bible says if it can’t demonstrate any objective evidence for any deity? If you think it does then demonstrate it now.

I’ve already pointed out the bible endorses slavery, and stoning children, depicts a deity that commits and endorses genocide and ethnic cleansing, that tortured a newborn baby to death when angered it was conceived in adultery, and encouraged its adherents to indulge in sex trafficking female prisoners.

To name just a few…

2 Likes
152

Nonsense, you referenced a biblical verse, you couldn’t even be bothered to quote it, let alone explain its relevance to any topic.

Who is that disjointed irrelevant rant aimed at exactly, at least give us a clue?

2 Likes
153

@boomer47
@Old_man_shouts_at_cl
@Nyarlathotep
@Whitefire13
@David_Killens
@Daniel2
@Sheldon
@Fleeing_in_Terror

I think it is time we all just shut up as there’s nothing we can say to @God30 to get him to understand the difference between actual evidence and proof in a book which is fiction. There’s tons of so called proof but the problem is none of it is evidence. He keeps referring to the bible as his only source for evidence, but has no evidence of his own. I doubt he does any of his own research to try to back anything up, has the wrong idea regarding evolution and probably thinks his god created all things in six days.

If I am wrong about any of this I am always glad to be corrected. At least I am willing to learn as I go here, but I doubt @God30 has any desire to learn anything.

A couple years back I figured I would strengthen my faith by researching all resources I can find backing up my Christianity. What I found was only Christian websites backing up what I thought was fact. I found that any websites being honest about this were not backing up any kind of deity ever existing. I learned that the Big Bang happened god or no god. I found that one of my favorite websites for information wasn’t calling a god real either, as they list other beliefs other than Christianity and only calling them a belief for the most part.

God according to Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God

( In monotheistic thought, God is conceived of as the supreme being, creator deity, and principal object of faith.[1] God is usually conceived as being omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing), omnipresent (all-present) and omnibenevolent (all-good) as well as having an eternal and necessary existence. These attributes are used either in way of analogy or are taken literally. God is most often held to be incorporeal (immaterial).[1][2][3] Incorporeality and corporeality of God are related to conceptions of transcendence (being outside nature) and immanence (being in nature) of God, with positions of synthesis such as the “immanent transcendence”.)

Nowhere did I find any honest website calling any god fact.

3,400 religions worldwide they either all are somehow correct in some way, or none of them are correct.

According to a quick search there’s actually 10,000 of them.

Either way it is time for us to just ignore this troll as he’s got no desire to learn anything.

Wanted to mention everyone but it wont let me.

154

Like spegetti monster you put spegetti and monster together nothing new. Shit I had a good refute for spegetti monster.

155

I already said I believe in all religions. Aliens too. The moses story if you read.

156

Look man, there’s millions of so called gods.

None have any evidence, so just shut the F*** Up.

157

Are you aware the entire Moses story was made up? The Jews were not slaves to the Egyptians, and biblical scholars and archeologists have never found any trace of the event, despite the fact there should be lots.

3 Likes
158

I have to ask did you teach yourself to read and write? It’s astonishing to me how often theists who come here exhibit a poor even remedial level of literacy.

That aside, you claim to have a refutation to an argument, yet offer not one word of it, and appear not to see the irony in post after post where you do the same?

159

Well they are equally unevidenced, so it would be irrational to believe one and not the rest, however this does not make your position rational, or any less idiotic.

2 Likes
160

@anon14261619

I think your heart’s in the right place, but it’s not up to you to to tell other adults what to do .

I think god30 and old Jim boy come from opposite sides of the same coin. IE they are each egregiously ignorant and not very bright. Each has a simple minded and dogmatic world view.

Consequently, I’m doing my best to ignore the fools. However, there are others here who enjoy shooting fish in a barrel. No reason not to if they want.

2 Likes