The Atheism Thread - Part 7

[rodhulk]

I don't think many casual onlookers would be looking into this thread for answers about god. This is a superhero website, not a religious one.

I do have a question. If I were to believe in your god, would I need to believe every word of the bible as truth? Such as treating women as inferior to myself?

''I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.''

In the same way, it's not an atheist website, it's a superhero one. But many have an interest outside of just comics and so I say what I say for those who are interested.

As for the woman issue you brought up, it seems best to interpret this as roles (in the same way the Bible says the gospel is to the Jew first, but equally to all), in the future, things will not be like this. If a woman performs her role (serves God more faithfully) better than a man in this earthly life, the woman will be more blessed in the future. Same with a Jew and Gentile.

 

[rodhulk]

He called anyone who disagrees with his interpretations EVIL.

Also, dear onlookers, if you disagree that Job 8:9 refers to the big bang? You are a FOOL, according to Rodhulk.

And for all the onlookers:


I called anyone who denies the Bible, the word of God, (and so who denied God) as being "fools" but that being a reference from a scripture that used the word "fools." It's Not necessarily my interpretations that I said people are "fools." Many here have shown that they believe the Bible got things wrong and/or just deny the scriptures and God. That is what I am speaking about.

And let it be clear that I never said that that anyone who disagrees that Job 8:9 is speaking of the big bang is a "fool." Rather, I said that the Bible does "not" speak of the big bang exactly as the science theory says of it but that the general idea (before you add all the science as to why) of the big bang, the Bible says the same thing as the big bang, that there was an expansion or spreading out.

 

[The End]

I'm still waiting waiting for you to show me just one place where I am wrong.

Oh for crying out loud.

Job 9:8!! It's simply too big a leap, there are simply too many assumptions, in believing that 'stretching out the heavens' is a reference to the big bang, and believing in that over other interpretations with less assumptions is a big fat fallacy in thinking.

Just because you won't acknowledge your mistakes, doesn't mean you haven't made any.

The point I've been trying to make is, if you can't recognize the flaw in your thinking with Job 9:8, you're not going to recognize the same flaw when you talk about end time prophecies or anything else in the bible. You'll keep on thinking that you're correct, no matter how big the leaps in logic you make.

And I mentioned why I listed the end times reference in a post to another poster, if somebody doesn't come to Christ before, then perhaps they will if we are indeed in the end times as they will see the Biblical signs as they continue to occur as proof that the Bible really could be correct.

Give me a time frame for the end times. 10 years? 20? 50? 100?

Can enough time pass that you'd consider you could have been wrong about this being the end times?

In 50 years, will you STILL be saying we're in the end times? It's easy to be vague about prophecies of the end times, that way you don't have to be held to it when it doesn't occur across the decades.

People have been saying the same thing for centuries, man.

 

[The End]

Failed prophecies of the bible.

http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Failed_prophecy_in_the_Bible

As a punishment for killing Abel, God says Cain will be "a fugitive and a vagabond." Genesis 4:12 Bible-icon.png Yet in just a few verses (Genesis 4:16-17 Bible-icon.png) Cain will settle down, marry, have a son, and build a city.

God promises Abram's descendants the land of Canaan from the Nile to the Euphrates. Genesis 15:18 Bible-icon.png But according to Acts 7:5 Bible-icon.png and Heb 11:13 Bible-icon.png God's promise to Abram was not fulfilled.

God promises to cast out many nations including the Canaanites and the Jebusites. Exodus 33:2 Bible-icon.png But he was unable to fulfill his promise.

"If there be a prophet among you, I the LORD will ... speak unto him in a dream." Numbers 12:6 Bible-icon.png Now there's a reliable way to communicate with someone!

God promises to cast out seven nations including the Amorites, Canaanites, and the Jebusites. Deuteronomy 7:1 Bible-icon.png But he was unable to fulfill his promise.

God promises to give Joshua all of the land that his "foot shall tread upon." He says that none of the people he encounters will be able to resist him. Joshua 1:3-5 Bible-icon.png But later we find that God didn't keep his promise, and that many tribes withstood Joshua's attempt to steal their land.

James quotes a scripture that says, "The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy." James 4:5 Bible-icon.png But there is no such verse in the Bible.

Peter believed that he was living in the "last times." 1 Peter 1:5 Bible-icon.png, 7 Bible-icon.png, 20 Bible-icon.png

Jesus himself is convinced of his earthly return and take-over within the lifetimes of his audience on two occasions in Matthew. Matthew 16:28 Bible-icon.png, Matthew 23:36 Bible-icon.png

John expects to live to see Jesus return. 1 John 3:2 Bible-icon.png

John quotes Jesus (1900 years ago) as saying, "Behold, I come quickly." Revelation 3:11 Bible-icon.png, Revelation 22:7 Bible-icon.png, 12 Bible-icon.png, 20 Bible-icon.png

"And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth...." Revelation 6:13 Bible-icon.png To John, the stars are just little lights a few miles away that can easily fall to the earth.

More on prophecies.

http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index....r_7:_The_Bible.27s_100.25_Accurate_Prophecies

Response: None of these prophecies are significant or convincing. There are several mundane ways in which a prediction of the future can be fulfilled:
Retrodiction. The "prophecy" can be written or modified after the events fulfilling it have already occurred.
Vagueness. The prophecy can be worded in such a way that people can interpret any outcome as a fulfillment. Nostradomus's prophecies are all of this type. Vagueness works particularly well when people are religiously motivated to believe the prophecies.
Inevitability. The prophecy can predict something that is almost sure to happen, such as the collapse of a city. Since nothing lasts forever, the city is sure to fall someday. If it has not, it can be said that according to prophecy, it will.
Denial. One can claim that the fulfilling events occurred even if they have not. Or, more commonly, one can forget that the prophecy was ever made.
Self-fulfillment. A person can act deliberately to satisfy a known prophecy.
There are no prophecies in the Bible that cannot easily fit into one or more of those categories. The prophecies from Daniel were written after the event took place, but it is inevitable that civilizations arise and fall. Finally, Ray is pleased to present that Isaiah 23 was fulfilled when Alexander t Great conquered it. The sad thing is Ezekiel 26 predicts that Nebudchadnezzar would destroy Tyre and make it "as a bare rock". Best of all, biblical scholars are in agreement that this book was written hundreds of years before Tyre was destroyed. Yet we know from history that it was Alexander the Great, not Nebudchadnezzar, who destroyed Tyre.

Vagueness....

You won't be held to a specific time frame for prophecy because the prophecies are too vague.

 

[regwec]

Since Sodom was smited for its eponymous sexual norms, shouldn't every city in the world also be razed to the ground?

 

[The End]

Any time there's a hurricane or an earthquake, there's idiots that think its god displaying his anger at the 'immorality' of society.

 

[regwec]

How come there is never an earthquake in Amsterdam?

 

[KevanG]

Cause everyone loves Amsterdam bro.

 

[SV Fan]

Unless the world could prove God doesn't exist or at least as per the Bible (which it absolutely doesn't and I've shown why in previous posts), I seek to please my master in heaven rather than the master of the world.

Going by your standards of evidence, we couldn't prove the Quran or Book of Mormon are false, so does that mean their gods are real as well?

 

[Marvolo]

Going by your standards of evidence, we couldn't prove the Quran or Book of Mormon are false, so does that mean their gods are real as well?

Technically they are all the same God. The Qur'an repeatedly says the God of the Hebrews and Christians is Allah. Hebrews and Christians just went astray from him and or assigned Gods beside him. The Arabic word Allah, Aramaic word Elaha, Syriac word Alaha, and Hebrew word Elohim are all cognates and mean the God and refer to the Judeo-Christian-Islamic God.

 

[SV Fan]

Technically they are all the same God.

But who is to say the Mormons or Islam version of god is not the correct one. Using creationist reasoning "Were you there?"

 

[Marvolo]

But who is to say the Mormons or Islam version of god is not the correct one. Using creationist reasoning "Were you there?"

Well if you look at it from their perspective they are all the same God so there is no different versions only differing opinions of Him. They don't differ very much once you strip it down to just God. They all created the universe. Do what they say or be punished.

 

[The End]

The Dear Leader Can Read Minds - North Korea Brainwashing

[YT]f5jHJVrKHaM[/YT]

She thought Kim Jong-Il was a god and she'd be punished for having negative thoughts about the regime in North Korea?

Sounds similar to something else... can't quite place it...

 

[SV Fan]

Well if you look at it from their perspective they are all the same God so there is no different versions only differing opinions of Him. They don't differ very much once you strip it down to just God. They all created the universe. Do what they say or be punished.

While technically they came from the same God, there are many differences between the 2 religions and christianity in general, so since we can't prove any of them are false, which one is correct?

 

[Marvolo]

While technically they came from the same God, there are many differences between the 2 religions and christianity in general, so since we can't prove any of them are false, which one is correct?

Whichever details you believe are the correct ones.

Spoiler

See what I did there.

 

[The End]

Very poignant video.

Why Atheists are worse than rapists to some...

[YT]ZtNLDdA42SE[/YT]

 

[Alex_Spider]

Very poignant video.

Why Atheists are worse than rapists to some...

[YT]ZtNLDdA42SE[/YT]

Very well made video

 

[chaseter]

You claim to be a Christian but your posts tell me you love the world.

You are the reason Christianity is dying. Enjoy your inclusive country club religion while the walls get closer and closer from the encroaching revelations of science and the anger over the intolerance you preach. People like you have more hate and judgmental attitudes than heathens that are "burning in hell" like Gandhi. It should be no surprise to anyone why faith is fleeting worldwide. Jesus rose from the dead so that you could hate the gays and be against Universal Healthcare.

 

[KevanG]

rodhulk, you can't just say someone claims to be a christian because they think differently than you. That's just being a bigot. You've said that you don't want to talk to people who have spoken to you intolerantly but you're willing to just throw that out there just to irritate others.

 

[The End]

I love how you love the world is supposed to be an insult.

 

[KevanG]

There's nothing wrong with loving the world, unless it's a literal interpretation then it's going to be strictly one way.

If more people were willing to see beyond borders and embrace each other to work problems out then the world would be a far better place.

 

[Shikamaru]

So loving the world is now supposed to be a degrading statement .

 

[DarkSovereignty]

Yeesh, and I thought SM was the worst. At least he doesn't attack his fellow Christians for being less Christian than him.

 

[Doctor Evo]

To address a point I made earlier in this thread (Thundercrack85 might take notice here):

I think I may have been overzealous when I stated that a Chihuahua and a Great Dane should be considered functionally separate species. This would be true if you didn't have intermediate morphologies that exist concurrently with those two breeds. As it stands, they are able to maintain gene flow between the two breeds, even if indirectly. If those intermediate morphologies were to disappear, however, and if facilitation by humans were not a factor, THEN the claim of reproductive isolation would be appropriate.

Just thought that was worth an addendum/correction.

 

[regwec]

Yeah. I once had a really tall girlfriend, but we still used protection.