Quantcast

A Creationist Decided to Answer My 10 Questions and the Results are Hilarious

palin-jesus-dinosLet me go ahead and explain what you’re about to read.  I wrote an article titled 10 Questions Everyone Who Believes in Science Should Ask a Creationistwhich simply featured 10 questions I think people should present to creationists to see if they have a response that makes any sense.

Well, somebody I presume to be a creationist decided to answer my questions.  Here are the unedited results:

1) Do you understand the difference between science and faith?

Right back at you! It takes more faith to believe in evolution, and may scientists even use the term faith to describe their believe in “missing links”. The real question is “Where you there?” Did you observe the beginning of creation? I thought that was necessary for science apparently not . . . especially when science needs to take a “leap of faith!”

2) If Noah really lived for 900 years, do you realize that means he lived for nearly 1/6 of the time you claim the world has existed?

If the dinosaurs lived for billions of years as you suggest, isn’t it interesting that they existed for 1/6 of your age of the earth?  What kind of science can prove either?  It takes faith to believe both.  I see you’re still struggling with that “faith” thing!

3) If God could create the Earth in 6 days, why couldn’t he have just given Noah an ark instead of making him build one?

He could have! But He didn’t because God wanted Noah to preach the gospel for 120 years. Yes that is the kind of merciful God that we have “faith” in! The people had a chance to believe even though none did. And the evidence of a world-wide flood is staggering! And it totally destroys anyone’s ability to know the age of the earth! In other words, Carbon 14, etc. results are all wrong because of the flood!

4) If humans and dinosaurs roamed the Earth at the same time, why don’t we ever find their bones in the same places?

Why don’t we find animal remains and human remains together today?  Same reason!  People didn’t bury their dead where they eat!  Your questions are getting more and more ridiculous! Did you give this any thought at all?

5) About 97% of scientists (if not more) follow every rule written in science books. Exactly 0% of creationists follow every rule that’s written in the Bible. If you so wholeheartedly believe the Bible gives a word for word account of how old the Earth is, why don’t you follow every other rule that’s inside?

First of all, your 97% is totally wrong. It is almost 50% of scientists that believe in a Designer of Creation!  You ignorance of the Bible is also telling.  Much of the direction in the OT is for the nation of Israel. Only the moral laws are applicable to us. But it is recorded for our encouragement and to know that God always come through for His people! Again, it is a matter of faith to believe in the inspired word of God.

6) Since the age of the Earth and evolution are as scientifically accepted as gravity and photosynthesis – are you then denying the existence of gravity and photosynthesis?

Your question is a Non sequitur! This question is also your attempt at a leap of faith! This is not scientific at all. Since you don’t believe in creationism, does that automatically make you an atheist? And most scientists do not believe in evolution because it takes such an unsubstantiated leap of faith to believe it! There are no observable facts to support evolution; so real scientists do not “believe” in it any longer! Since the majority of people on the earth do not believe in your age of the earth nor do they believe in evolution, does that not make you the outcast? Are you therefore wrong because the majority disagree with you! This kind of reasoning is not scientific at all and you are not being scientific.

7) Has any creationist ever seen the original copy of the Bible? Then how do you know what it really said?

The evidence for the Bible is more compelling than any other historical fact! There are over 300,000 parts of the OT and entire books that date back to 100 BC. I’m sure you don’t doubt the Homer wrote the Illiad, but there are only 86 copies of it dating to 1000 AD (he wrote it in 100 BC; so how do we really know what is in it?
We have parts of the NT from 125 AD and whole copies of the Bible from around 325 AD. The lack of whole copies of the Bible before that are because of a Nazi-like strategy of the Roman empire to burn them! How typical! But we have 50,000 complete copies of the NT dating from 1000 BC. That evidence blows everything else out of the water. If you believe anything at all, it has thousands of times less evidence than the Bible. And that is a scientific observable fact!

8) If God determines when we live and die, why are humans living longer due to advances in medical scientific research?

I guess we are nowhere near living 900 years now are we? Science has a long way to go to get to that stage now doesn’t it? Still we have people living on average 70 years as the Bible says. Some very fat and out of shape people live well into their 90’s and people with little body fat die in their 50’s. Can you explain that scientifically?

9) Hundreds of years ago people believed that the Earth was the center of the universe, until science proved them completely wrong. Science now tells us how old the Earth is, and the truth about evolution, yet you still want to cling to the same level of ignorance as those from centuries ago?

It was the scientists that believe the earth was the center of the universe. Yet it was the book of Job, written around 1440 BC probably by Moses, and who lived hundreds of years before that during the time of the earliest humans told us that “God hung the earth in nothing.” Wow! Apparently people from the 4th century BC were much more knowledgeable and scientifically accurate than scientists from the dark ages!

10) Can you accurately predict, based on the “science” within the Bible, any event that will occur in the near future?

Can you, by science of any kind, predict the future? The Bible tells us that no one can know the future. Neither scientist nor Christians can know the near future. Only what God tells us in His word can reveal the future. Not science! It takes faith in God and His word to know this, not science!

——–

I would have some sort of witty response for these answers, but I think they speak for themselves.  But by all means, feel free to share them with others and let us know what you think in the comments section below.

The following two tabs change content below.
Allen Clifton is from the Dallas-Fort Worth area and has a degree in Political Science. He is a co-founder of Forward Progressives, and author of the popular Right Off A Cliff column. He is also the founder of the Right Off A Cliff facebook page, on which he routinely voices his opinions and stirs the pot for the Progressive movement. Follow Allen on Twitter as well, @Allen_Clifton.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • RealityCheqes

    Scientists CAN predict some future things…..or has this creationist never watched a weather report?

    • sandpeople1

      Using a tool that shows how weather is behaving doesn’t do more than help guess what the weather will do. Haven’t you noticed that the weather reports care often wrong?
      That is because they are using deductible reasoning to guess at the weather. That is not called predicting.

      • FiachSidhe

        That’s what a prediction is. It isn’t always 100%, but it by no means, eliminates the act of predicting potential future phenomena using science.

      • taserian

        As the saying goes “No model is perfect. Some models are useful.”

      • Douglas Boyle

        I always thought Paulina Porizkova was pretty much a perfect model.

      • Guile Williams

        Definition of predicting: “say or estimate that (a specified thing) will happen in the future or will be a consequence of something.” Essentially it is an educated guess based on information or observed behavior. The weather is hard to predict but they are often more correct when predicting the weather than incorrect.

      • Jessa Beckwith Cox

        Guile Williams and FiachSidhe are correct. Haven’t you ever noticed that meteorologists on the local news station call it “predicting weather patterns”?

      • InSeattle

        A prediction, including a weather prediction, usually included a percentile. Prediction percentiles change based on new information received.

      • kiptw

        Can I take deductible reasoning off my income tax?

    • Annie Landry

      Scientists are pretty accurate at predicting things like comets appearing, eclipses, and other celestial events.

    • Sherry Lynn-Theresa Sharp

      A better example would have been Edmond Halley, and his use of science to “predict” the return of of “Hally’s Comet” in 1759, even tho that was years after his death, and its return every 72 years since then..
      Lets see the Bible predict anything even remotely close (COSMO for the win)

      • James Govoni

        We need Bill Nye and Neil deGrasse Tyson to be named National Ambassadors for Logic and Reason

      • cereus

        Yes!!!

      • Sam Brosenberg

        Yeah, we actually need Neil deGrasse Tyson and Bill Nye to be named Co-Chairs of the House Science Committee

      • Paul Julian Gould

        I’d vote for each man, should they decide to lower themselves to enter today’s political atmosphere. It says much for either’s intelligence that they’ve chosen not to.

      • Frank Lazar

        Obama’s nominee to the Surgeon General position just got dumped because he sugggested in a tweet, that poltiicians are afraid of the NRA. You think either of these two would have a chance?

      • Paul Julian Gould

        No, and more’s the pity. The longer I live, the less I’m surprised by the willful ignorance of my fellow citizens. (and I’m sneaking up on 60 years on this planet… little surprises me any longer)

      • AlbertCat

        Not to mention, evolution predicted genetics before anyone knew about them (actually Mendel was doing his thing about the same time Darwin was doing his thing…. but they didn’t know about each other) Relativity predicted black holes long before they were proven to exist. Physics predicts the existence of all kinds of elementary particles…. that are found later. I mean the list of confirmed “predictions” in science is long.

      • John Conolley

        Not to mention solar eclipses, lunar eclipses, planetary transits, and planetary alignments.

    • Brian Mountain

      I predict that tomorrow morning the sun will rise, and the day after, and after, and after…

      • Douglas Boyle

        I predict the tides go in, tides go out.

      • Jayson

        You CAN’T explain that!

      • webwrks

        I hope you are being facetious…

      • Lorelei Lee87

        webwrks, it’s a quote from Bill O’Reilly, from Fox’s O’Reilly Factor. One of many ignorant “Conservative” pundits working for that network. Oh, and he was serious when he said it.

      • John Conolley

        I think O’Reilly pretends to be more ignorant than he is. He talks a lot of shit just to get people upset at him. He isn’t ignorant. He’s mendacious.

    • Mark

      Angraecum sesquipedale /ˌsɛskwɨpɨˈdeɪliː/, also known as Darwin’s orchid, Christmas orchid, Star of Bethlehem orchid, and King of the Angraecums, is an epiphytic orchid in the genus Angraecum endemic to Madagascar. The orchid was first discovered by the French botanist Louis-Marie Aubert du Petit-Thouars in 1798, but was not described until 1822.[1][2] It is noteworthy for its long spur and its association with the naturalist Charles Darwin, who surmised that the flower was pollinated by a then undiscovered moth with a proboscis whose length was unprecedented at the time. His prediction had gone unverified until 21 years after his death, when the moth was discovered and his conjecture vindicated. The story of its postulated pollinator has come to be seen as one of the celebrated predictions of the theory of evolution.[2]

      Source: Wikipedia

    • nominalize

      Because of the theory of gravity, I predict that if I let go of this coffee cup, it will move towards the floor and not the ceiling.

  • Alex Kintsuki

    Ow. My head… Did they take a step back and re-read what they had written before sending it to you, I wonder.

  • Gitarzz

    This wasn’t hilarious. This was painful. This is a person so brainwashed into believing whatever they want to believe about religion that they can’t imagine that others would know provable facts. This person thinks everyone simply believes whatever they want just like he/she does. Some of the statements make absolutely no sense at all but make perfect sense to that person. It’s like talking to an insane person who’s entire reality exists within their own head. At what point can we start calling religious belief a psychological disorder? Can we start now? Please?

    • Curt Strauss

      Jesus H Christ will return on 4/1/2014, except you won’t be able to see him because he is invisible. Please just have blind faith that he has returned. He will return with his son, the grandson of God,
      who is named Gazuntite. On 4/1/2014 we will all start following the teachings of Gazuntite Christ. I hope the picture is now clear for you.

      • Gitarzz

        4/1? April 1st? Well… Since you put it that way I don’t know how I could have been so wrong. All hail Gazuntite Christ! I have seen the light!

      • MAD

        Can I come along and bring the FSM?

      • Shaques

        Gazuntite?!?!?!??? ROFLMFAO. Wiping tears from my eyes.

      • mshel

        ikr? Did somebody sneeze?

      • Kim Wilson

        Gazuntite…. LOL

      • Rich Kingdon

        [ Jesus H Christ will return on 4/1/2014 ]

        In a sidecar?

      • Karen Hayes

        April fool ! Ha, very funny!

      • Fishbert

        4/1/2014 already happened, nearly 3 months ago.

      • Paul Julian Gould

        Depends on how you notate things… DD/MM/YYYY is used in a lot of places, MM/DD/YYYY in others. Makes it a challenge on sites that differ.

      • John Heinmiller

        This is American dating system: April 1st, 2014. Different from the European dating system: 1st April 2014.

        About to come up in a few days.

      • NYLibGrrl

        1388793600

      • Paul Julian Gould

        Odd… I read that and heard “867-5309″ playing in my head… /*chuckle*/

      • Darkwing Dragon

        You cannot predict when Jesus will return. Not even Jesus knows. only God knows when the come has come. However. Yes I do believe the time is near. however. we will not know when it will happen. it`ll be an instantanious event.

      • eclipse42

        The Saints already won the Super Bowl!! That had to be the Link, the key, the HAPPENING that set it off!! right??

      • moezappa

        I KNOW the end will be near . . . When the Detroit Lions won the Super Bowl.

      • Jayson

        God=Jesus. Learn your mythology.

      • Dayna G. Johnson

        Here’s one of the major miss-representations. If God and Jesus were one and the same, while hanging on the cross, why would Jesus look up in the sky and say, “Forgive them father for they no not what they do”?
        He shouldn’t have had to do that.

      • Shanynn

        I’ve never understood that either. I hear that he’s the son of God , I hear him and God are the same yet he’s also known as the “son of man” … wtf ? which is it ?! hahaha

      • Dayna G. Johnson

        Here’s another thought. The word God is a title, as in Thor God of thunder, Freya Goddess of love, Odin father of the Gods and Neptune or Poseidon Gods of the sea. What is the name of the Christian God? Nobody seems to
        know.

      • Persephone Clover

        Joe.

      • Timothy McLean

        YHWH.
        He lost His vowels when Adam and Eve learned what right and wrong were, which is why He was so angry at them.

      • kiptw

        It is central to the tenets of faith to have things both ways and see no contradiction.

      • kornula

        How can someone who never existed in the first place.. return?

      • livinginthepast

        So you really believe these bronze age fairy tales? Why not the Poetic Edda, too? PROVE to me that Odin DOESN’T exist.

      • Aaron Hawryluk

        Christians have been believing “the time is near” for 2000 years. It even says in Revelations that there were some alive then who would still be alive in the End Times. Good luck with that.

      • David

        The bible indicates that Jesus made some very specific predictions about when he would return, but the predictions didn’t come to pass. D’oh!

      • Timothy McLean

        He even said that His disciples would still be alive when He returned.

      • Persephone Clover

        You do realize that if it was all true, he is sitting up there right now waiting for everyone to love everyone else and since that will never happen, he’s never coming back.

      • darth taco

        I thought it would be on april 20…..

      • Paul Julian Gould

        420 is a good thing, and we shall gather at the river at 0420 hours on that day! (4:20 pm or 1620 for those that can’t shag their butts out of bed that early in the morning… LOL)

      • Persephone Clover

        Eastern, Pacific or Greenwich mean time?

      • Paul Julian Gould

        Since we’re all spread out, I’d say Greenwich… works for the military (“Zulu time”)… I’m in El Paso, so we’re on Mountain time…

        Or, we could just consider any time as 420 and say the hell with it! Herbal Essence for all! LOL

      • Shanynn

        Gazuntite should totally come on 4/20 , Hitler’s bday. lmao

      • Mike Crowder

        Of course this is correct, ye scoffers! Gazuntite is ancient humerian for Bless You.

      • EvolvedPrimate

        People do use Gazuntite instead of “bless you” though actually it’s German for “good health” I use it as a secular statement for when people sneeze.

      • Paul Julian Gould

        And in that case, it’s “Gesundheit.”

        This has been your moment of pointless anal behavior for the day.

      • StevenX

        April Fools Day. Makes sense.

      • roland99

        But will Jesus H. Christ arrive on a popsicle stick?

      • David Shaw Jr

        He will be riding a T-Rex.

      • Shanynn

        just wondering what the “H” stands for ? lol

      • Demotage

        Haploid

      • Paul Julian Gould

        I was going to go with Homer, but that works too.

      • Timothy McLean

        Horatio?

      • Paul Julian Gould

        Nah… he’s on CSI: Miami… different guy…

      • kiptw

        I take it you’ve seen churches with full-sized crosses out on their lawns? If Jesus comes back, they’re ready for him.

      • Adam Knapp

        This is a lie, a fallacy! His name will certainly be Jim.

    • Amy

      Do a google search for ‘religious fundamentalism is a mental disorder’. They have already categorized it as such, but more people need to know about it. :)

      • Tom Terrific

        Sounds like half of the U.S. Supreme Court suffer from that!

      • Ronnie hustead

        Its going to suck for all of you if the Christians are right. I guess time will tell.

      • Paul Julian Gould

        If their particular interpretation of the Eternal is correct, then their version of “heaven” will be anything but, in which case I welcome their interpretation of hell.

      • Alierias

        What if the Tlaxan’s (pre-columbian central americans) were right and the gods need blood and hearts torn alive from the sacrificial human victims?
        Guess we’re all screwed…

      • Paul Julian Gould

        If so, just make it quick and merciful is all I ask… I don’t do pain well.

      • jh1289

        By definition, if the Christians are right, “quick and merciful” is not how it’ll go down!! lol

      • TlaxanSlayer

        I’m not screwed if that’s the case.

      • Darcanis

        Oh no, the scary Pascal’s wager! What ever am I going to do? I better go run to church and start believing just in case. If indeed the Christians are right (which is probably about a one in a trillion chance), I would much rather be in hell then with their despotic tyrant of a God.

      • bm

        Before classifying all Christians as believing in a “despotic tyrant of a God” please learn for yourself what ‘type of God’ Christians believe in. I am a Christian and believe in a very* different God than the person who wrote these answers. Do not make the mistake that you think you know how all Christians would answer these questions.

      • Jim Short

        One presumes you believe in the god of the bible.

        That is, de facto, a “despotic tyrant of a God”.

      • Amy Darnell-Fuchs

        One shouldn’t presume that at all!!!!

      • Kelly S

        christians don’t believe in the god of the bible?

      • david rocha

        Really and you know everything right.

      • chibi

        that wasn’t an answer. wanna try again?

      • david rocha

        Wow you dont even make sense

      • Gary Gayisok Whiteman

        Even though we believe in the God mentioned in the Bible, a good many of us do not believe everything the Bible says about God is true about God.

      • David

        No… once should read the bible. One should read about the war god whose first response to any disobedience or lack of worship is to kill the offender, and frequently, his family, tribe, etc. The fid who wiped out all life on the planet, save a few of each, who orders one group to murder another, and to rape the surviving virgins, or to enslave whole villages. The one who treats a raped daughter as damaged goods, ordering the rapist to pay the father and sentencing the victim to be married for life to the rapist. THEN decide.

      • WilmRoget

        No. Your interpretation of the God described in the Bible is ‘despotic’, but that actually only expresses your character.

      • Jeff Mace

        Actually, that’s pretty much an accurate description of the Biblical God (especially old testament). Sorry, no way around this one buddy.

      • WilmRoget

        And yet is not accurate, and I’m not your buddy. The easy way around any lie – as foreign as this often is to bigots, and atheism is a prejudice –

        is the truth.

      • Michael C. Thompson

        You think atheism is a prejudice?

        Do you even know what the fucking definition of the word prejudice is? Holy fuck, you are a dumbass. All of you shitheads responding to this with your trite, generic Jesus propaganda sound equally fucking stupid. Is this one guy trolling the site or what? Did a Christian forum get a whiff of this article and decide to pull their fingers out of their asses for a couple minutes to come and take a shit on the internet?

        Do you morons think you do yourselves any favors with your generic propaganda? Don’t you even know how to properly manipulate and influence people? Fuck! Your run of the mill sociopath looks like Einstein next to you people.

        You should really be embarrassed! Jesus can’t believe how stupid you are making his religion look!

      • WilmRoget

        The insults in your post only demonstrate that atheism is indeed a prejudice – an excuse to put other people down so you can feel superior.

        The nastier you and your peers are, the more you show that I am correct. Look closely, even when warned that any insult will affirm my position, you and your peers cannot help but be vicious, abusive and crude.

        When your position must rely on abusive and dehumanizing behavior to express itself, there is something deeply wrong with it.

      • kevbug

        how about Darwin’s book? “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, Or, The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. Hmmmm favored races? That is racist according to the dictionary. We have a religion and it is infesting the public schools of the world. I thought this was supposed to be a FFR place, but I find religion everywhere…….

      • VBoheme

        Are you seriously that stupid? Darwin’s use of race isn’t the same as racism. Have you even read Origin of the Species? Do you even know what it’s about? It’s observing evolution in small populations of creatures in the Galopagos Islands, namely birds that evolved differently due to their geography and surroundings.
        And how is religion therefore “infesting” public schools? That entire statement is so poorly worded and disjointed that it’s an affront to the English language itself. Good job. Back to your cave, troll.

      • kevbug

        I guess Hitler was stupid and all the people following him. He said that he was the favored race. He was following Darwin to the extreme.
        It is also not macro evolution Darwin was showing micro evolution. Things do adapt, but no animal has ever been observed to change into another kind of animal. It is birds changing in to birds. The animals never changed into another animal. That is what Darwin was observing. Macro evolution has never been observed. Yet that is what they teach as fact in the public schools. You atheists are so worried about children learning “lies” from creationists. Why is it wrong to lie if it increases your survival value? Atheism is supposed to be an alternative to religion. There is more belief in an atheist worldview then in the Muslim worldview. I thought you guys used science, but you are more religious then anyone.

      • HaHa

        How about that Katniss girl? Good books, all.

      • An non-believer

        You asked for the versus in the Bible that show the despotic God. Those versus were provided, which you promptly ignored. That is the mindset of your typical religious fundamentalist. Outright ignorance of what doesn’t fit their agenda. You then shift to criticizing the people who are delivering a different message than the one you seek instead of countering the Biblical verse you asked for. Again, a common tactic. Of course the folks who are taking an opposing view aren’t doing themselves any favors in their manner of speech.

        It isn’t up to the atheist to prove that there isn’t a God. They are not the ones making the claim that something IS. It is up to the people who are making the claim to provide the evidence. By the way, an extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence. A book that dates from thousands of years ago which has undergone a whole series of editing by the people who claim it as evidence for what they believe is not extraordinary evidence. If it was extraordinary evidence the book would not have needed editing and it would have been in a innate language that ever human has a basic capacity to understand. That is something an all-knowing omnipotent God should have been able to produce without missing a beat.

      • VBoheme

        You know, your arrogance is insulting to people who question the veracity of the Bible as law.
        Me, I’m no hardcore evangelical Christian. I don’t believe in a literal Bible. I don’t believe in people blindly accepting what they’ve read.
        What I do believe, is that you are an asshole. And you’ve given far more evidence of that than of “evils” in the Bible.
        You also, as homophobes do, take much out of context. Context is more important than a statement itself.
        For instance. Considering the Hewbrew people of the era were a warlike, tribal people, doesn’t it therefore make as much sense that their idea of God was the same as many warlike tribal religions? The Norse? Their contemporaries – the Babylonians, Muslims, and Mesopotamian people? Which really, is the miserably inane part of your argument. Old Testament Judaism is not Christianity. Without getting into theology and comparative religion, which, by your vocabulary I can only assume would be a bit much for you to fully grasp, they are different. And your ignorance shows as much as the Creationist in the above article.
        I despise the hatred and prejudice of your brand of Atheists. The regurgitation of what youre “expected” to believe as am atheist. Thereby making your form of atheism every bit as dogmatic as the religion you profess to fight against. For that matter, atheism isn’t the passive denial of religion, as you would suggest. The correct term is non-theistic. Atheism serves as an active rejection of certain beliefs. Non-theism is not letting it matter. Deism is questioning. And your flawed ideology and non sequiteur and ad hominem arguments alongside your asinine namecalling make you every bit as evil as the arbitrary hatred spread by many, but not all, religions.

      • Picking Battles like Noses

        Why the need to throw around the word homophobia?

      • kevbug

        From your worldview why is it wrong?

      • Michael C. Thompson

        Please explain to me how to interpret the passages in Deuteronomy and other books where God demands that every man, woman child and beast within cities be killed and the buildings razed to the ground. Did I misinterpret? Lacking some context?

        Let’s see your bullshit answer now. The Bible is evil, the God in it is clearly a sociopath’s wet dream, and the OT Jews were warlords and marauders. The God Jesus spoke of resembles the God of the OT in literally no way whatsoever. The Bible is filled with contradiction after contradiction and only the most willingly ignorant person can gloss over that fact.

      • WilmRoget

        Since you provided no actual verse, merely your summary of a vague ‘Deuteronomy and other books’, your dishonesty has the effect of affirming that atheism is a vicious and degrading prejudice.

        Frankly, you and your peers sound just like homophobes. A classic example, that parallels your post, is their use of a Michael’s Swift’s essay, by ignoring its opening statement “This essayessay
        is an outré, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor.”.

        Just as homophobes rape Swift’s essay, or as IDers do with science textbooks, you and your peers rip material out of the Bible, out of any and all context, to fabricate your derogatory and false characterization.

        So let’s put one fact out of the table – atheism has no condemnation of any wrong of any kind, atheism does not condemn torture or rape, or genocide. It does not condemn racism or homophobia or sexism. It does not condemn stealing, lying, or murder. It has no condemnation of any wrongdoing at all. It does not condemn anything of the wrongs you claim to see in the Bible.

        Your abusive tone, by the way, only proves that you are not trying to learn, but to revile and defame most of humanity, out of sadism and ego.

        The things you see in the Bible, are your own character reflected back at you. Your hate speech only demonstrates what a despicable prejudice atheism is.

      • Michael C. Thompson

        Does your breath smell like shit? It must, because you are just totally filled with it.

      • WilmRoget

        The nastier you are, the more you demonstrate that atheism is a vicious prejudice.

        Sadistic behavior just is not going to help you, or your peers here.

      • Susan M Mozgai

        The bible is a novel authored and revised to suit the times throughout it’s history. It has morphed so many times that any of the original writings are difficult to ascertain due to the destruction of such pieces over a long period of time. Politicians told the theologians what they wanted in the books to scare the hell out of everyone for control purposes. It is a book plain and simple. Out of the millions of books there are many others that are worshipped as the word of something or someone to provide a “moral compass” for individuals who need it when it did not exist and another tool for those who wanted to control the ignorant people did it through fear mongering and dependency or downright slavery to do their bidding such as in the crusades. Nice guys they were. Through this vehicle or a book or writings they were told to believe and fear. These people were very simple and frankly in capable of understanding anything even close to what we do today. So they really had no choice. Yes, these types of beliefs can transcend time and history and since the book was so effective at controlling people it has been used over and over again to suit that purpose. No one could follow everything in it because it doesn’t make any sense. Beliefs are just that, beliefs and are not reality. You can believe what ever you want but any decision based on that reasoning better not affect or impact me or my life. That is why politics and religion are separate in this country so decisions are based on reality and law and not random beliefs.

      • WilmRoget

        Your frauds and errors do not disprove the fact that atheism is a prejudice. They do show that you engage in falsehoods and misrepresentations.

      • Rick Diehl

        No, you still are getting it wrong. Atheism is the lack of belief in a creator or other supernatural being. That’s pretty much it. You are still confusing a belief with an organization.

      • WilmRoget

        No Rick. You are being dishonest. Prejudice does not require being part of an organization.

      • Rick Diehl

        Yeah, but again atheism is not a form of prejudice, it’s a lack of belief in supernatural entities. You’ve obviously convinced yourself that this is some form of religious hatred. But that’s on you and your sense of persecution is not the problem of those who don’t believe in God.

      • WilmRoget

        “, but again atheism is not a form of prejudice,”

        And yet it absolutely is. Oh sure, you deny it, but then, homophobes deny that they are guilty of prejudice as well.

        ” You’ve obviously convinced”

        Your derogatory fantasy about me only reveals your character, not mine. You cannot address the issue – that prejudice exists independent of organization and thus your bit about confusing a belief with an organization was empty noise.

        Face it Rick, you operate on exactly the same abysmal moral plane as any racist or homophobe, but you target even more people than they do.

      • Rick Diehl

        I suppose you and I can keep going back and forth. You making these amazingly odd statements describing my feelings when you have no idea at all what they are. But I’m a bit insulted with you calling me the same as a homophone or a racist for stating that atheism is a lack of belief in supernatural entities, a disagreement on a definition makes me a monster? Truly? In my opinion you completely lack both a Christian spirit but also working knowledge of Christianity itself. You are so locked into your anger and your rage that you fool yourself into thinking you are representing Christ when all you are representing is your own prejudiced and hatred. I’m going to step back and let you have the final word here, but just so we are clear, you might claim to be a Christian, but you are lacking in both Christian compassion or Christian charity toward others. try to be a bit more Christlike in your behavior next time you want to represent yourself as a Christian.

      • WilmRoget

        “You making these amazingly odd statements describing my feelings when you have no idea at all what they are.”

        How ironic that you accuse me of the behavior that appears in all of your posts to me, a behavior that is intrinsic to atheism.

        ” But I’m a bit insulted with you calling me the same as a homophone or a racist”

        Then grow out of your prejudice.

        ” for stating that atheism is a lack of belief in supernatural entities,”

        But don’t lie about about what I criticized. I have stated that you are operating on the same plane as homophobes and racists because you are.

        “In my opinion you completely lack both a Christian spirit but also
        working knowledge of Christianity itself. You are so locked into your
        anger and your rage that you fool yourself into thinking you are
        representing Christ when all you are representing is your own prejudiced
        and hatred.”

        The best answer to this is your own words: “You making these amazingly odd statements describing my feelings when you have no idea at all what they are.”

        Atheism is a prejudice. Attempting to insult me, bad mouth me, denigrate me won’t change that. It simply demonstrates that atheism is simply an excuse you’ve embraced to free yourself to insult and revile people in public.

        As for your advice, it has no merit, given your consistent abusive and degrading behavior. After all, you overtly revile and slander hundreds of millions of people for the sake of your ego.

      • Rab

        So again, with the “atheists are prejudiced” shit… So, can we just talk about the Crusades? Inquisitions? Witch Burnings? Yup, you are right… Us atheists are the prejudiced ones…

      • WilmRoget

        Your reply, in which you judge all Christians by the actions of some (acts motivated by material power) only affirms that atheism is a prejudice, and its defenders are either incompetence or dishonest.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        One trick pony. What a failure you are.

      • WilmRoget

        Nice projection there. With every insult, you engage in the very behavior I argue proves that atheism is a prejudice.

        Since you and your peers apparently cannot, or won’t, figure out that being degrading and dehumanizing affirms that atheism is a prejudice –

        how could y’all possibly be credible witnesses about the totality of existence? Not possible, and yet, y’all swagger about pretending that you just know that everyone else is the world is wrong about their own experiences.

        It is rather sad, actually, that y’all would be so insecure and self-hating that they have to dehumanize most of humanity to feel good about themselves.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        First of all Mister Sweetie Pie… You don’t really understand what projection is. That’s kind of funny, since it is almost an exclusive tactic of fundamentalist Christians like yourself.

        In fact, just about every word you’ve typed is textbook Christian projection. When you make statements such as “…y’all swagger about pretending that you just know that everyone else is the world is wrong about their own experiences…” you are projecting. Christians have been telling everyone else they are wrong since they first adopted the old pagan solar myths and added their own twists to it. And if you take offence at my description of your religion, Justin Martyr once argued the similarities with pagan myths.

        I never said I was a witness “about the totality of existence.” That you continue to bring it up along with your ridiculous notion that atheism is a prejudice is further proof of your disconnect from reality.

        And as for dehumanizing most of humanity in order to feel good about oneself, that seems to be one of the basic tenets of religions.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        So how do you explain madshark? He supposedly is on your side. Or is he a false convert?

      • WilmRoget

        Interesting premise there. I think that the ‘who smelt it, dealt it’ principle applies. If madshark is a fake, a sockpuppet, he must from from your dresser drawer.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You also don’t seem to understand the definition of a sock puppet. Or a false convert. And what’s with the fart jokes?

      • ManicPanda

        Just because someone doesn’t like you, doesn’t mean they are an atheist. You are only showing prejudice by doing that. No matter what you believe in most reasonable people with think you nothing but a silly goose.. To put it mildly..

      • WilmRoget

        “Just because someone doesn’t like you, doesn’t mean they are an atheist.”

        Since I made no such argument, your premise only shows that you cannot address, much less refute, what I actually have presented.

        “You are only showing prejudice by doing that.”

        Since ‘doing that’ was entirely your fantasy, and had no basis in my posts, the prejudice, again, is yours.

        ” No matter what you believe in most reasonable people with think you nothing but a silly goose.. To put it mildly..”

        And again, your abusive fantasy only demonstrates how much you need to feed your ego by putting people down.

      • ManicPanda

        Ok, I will reply to this. Well you have implied and stated I am an atheist because I disagree with you. I never stated I am an atheist. I just spoke about atheists. I am in fact an agnostic theist.

        The prejudice I am inferring from your comments is a demonization of the atheist view As well as a tendancy to label anyone that doesn’t agree with you as an atheist. To put it plainly.

        I have heard both atheist and theist arguements backwards and forwards. While I am a form of theist I admit that atheists have a more justified position based in evidence. I still have my own beliefs that are not atheistic but they are my beliefs and to convince others I would have to provide some form of evidence.

        You also seem to have difficulty distinguishing between people not agreeing with you or likeing you for specific reasons and attributing that stance with their view on god. Atheist do not agree with the idea of god which doesn’t mean they don’t like you. They don’t like you for various different reason I can surmise.

        There is also a difference between correcting someone who is wrong and insulting someone. At first people where correcting you then they started insulting you, because of your incredulity.

      • WilmRoget

        “Ok, I will reply to this.”

        So much for being done. You lied when you said you were done.

        “Well you have implied and stated I am an atheist because I disagree with you.”

        Nope. So we have yet another example wherein you do not tell the truth.

        “I am in fact an agnostic theist.”

        That is hardly any better.

        “The prejudice I am inferring from your comments is a demonization of the atheist view”

        Yeah, homophobes claim that they are being demonized when their negative opinion about homosexuals is rebuked. But again, if criticism of atheism is ‘demonizing’, then atheism intrinsically demonizes all people of faith, and all religions. And criticism of a destructive and demonizing belief cannot be demonizing. So you condemn atheism in your attempt to condemn me.

        ” As well as a tendancy(sic) to label anyone that doesn’t agree with you as an atheist. To put it plainly.”

        Plainly dishonest. How amazing that you pretend to know everything about every conversation I’ve ever had, since ‘anyone’ is universal. It includes people I disagreed with about movies, or broccoli, or rap music, and according to your fraudulent accusation, I label them all ‘atheist’. Yet I do not. You simply make up derogatory fantasies out of thin air and malice.

        “You also seem to have difficulty distinguishing between people not
        agreeing with you or likeing you for specific reasons and attributing
        that stance with their view on god.”

        And again, your derogatory fantasy about me has no basis in reality, it is rather another example of your personal frustration over being unable to refute what I have actually presented. You seem to think that if you insult me enough, you will win. But that is pure egotism, and by engaging in it – you fail.

        “There is also a difference between correcting someone who is wrong and insulting someone.”

        Yet you and your peers are the ones who are confused by that difference.

        Your personal attacks only prove that you cannot refute what I have actually presented. And the more you advertise that failure, the worse you feel, and the more you need to be insulting and abusive.

        You are a bigot. Own it, or heal it, but don’t pretend it is anything but a nasty excuse to denigrate most of humanity.

      • Ben

        1 Samuel 15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

      • Ben

        Joshua 6:20-21 When the trumpets sounded, the army shouted, and at the sound of the trumpet, when the men gave a loud shout, the wall collapsed; so everyone charged straight in, and they took the city. 21 They devoted the city to the Lord and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it—men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.

        Deuteronomy 2:32-35 When Sihon and all his army came out to meet us in battle at Jahaz, 33 the Lord our God delivered him over to us and we struck him down, together with his sons and his whole army. 34 At that time we took all his towns and completely destroyed[a] them—men, women and children. We left no survivors. 35 But the livestock and the plunder from the towns we had captured we carried off for ourselves.

      • Ben

        Deuteronomy 3:3-7 3 So the Lord our God also gave into our hands Og king of Bashan and all his army. We struck them down, leaving no survivors. 4 At that time we took all his cities. There was not one of the sixty cities that we did not take from them—the whole region of Argob, Og’s kingdom in Bashan. 5 All these cities were fortified with high walls and with gates and bars, and there were also a great many unwalled villages. 6 We completely destroyed[a] them, as we had done with Sihon king of Heshbon, destroying[b] every city—men, women and children. 7 But all the livestock and the plunder from their cities we carried off for ourselves.

      • Ben

        Numbers 31:7-12 7 They fought against Midian, as the Lord commanded Moses, and killed every man. 8 Among their victims were Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur and Reba—the five kings of Midian. They also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword. 9 The Israelites captured the Midianite women and children and took all the Midianite herds, flocks and goods as plunder. 10 They burned all the towns where the Midianites had settled, as well as all their camps. 11 They took all the plunder and spoils, including the people and animals, 12 and brought the captives, spoils and plunder to Moses and Eleazar the priest and the Israelite assembly at their camp on the plains of Moab, by the Jordan across from Jericho.

      • Bethany

        You misinterpret what all these verses are talking about. All you see is war and death. You see a hateful God. Really the reasons that these things took place was because the land had to be cleaned of sinners who didn’t want to follow the law of God at that time. Just like when the flood happened. The difference is that this was for Israel. The land was promised to Abraham. If you were promised land and you had people living on it that didn’t want to follow your rules wouldn’t you kick them off it or worse? That was the reason for all that you talked about. But the Israelites didn’t kick them all off the land. They left some. It lead to the land becoming corrupted. In which case the exile happened. And there are other documents that talk about Kind David, Salomon, and other Kings of Israel. It also talks about the exile and how it went right along with what God said. And a lot of what was going on in Israel right before the exile is exactly what is going on today. Rich living off the backs of the poor, people being hungry, vanity, etc. Maybe try reading it all and look for the actual meaning instead of picking and choosing. And no I don’t believe God made the earth is 6 literal days.

      • Rab

        So back to the abortion point. The babies were sinning too? These children of sinners were sinning? See now I am totally confused… The air must be thin on your pedestal because you are not making sense. Not to mention the simple fact that ANIMALS ARE NOT PEOPLE… so why kill all of those? You are nuts dude.

      • Eddie Almstrom

        So if you don’t want to follow the Law of God you must be wiped from the Earth???

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        What a sick, revolting person you are.

      • WilmRoget

        With every insult, you affirm that atheism is simply a prejudice, a tawdry excuse to dehumanize other people.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Well sugar britches… I’m not insulting you. I’m shining a light on your darkness. I’m telling you that you are a sick, revolting person in an effort to help you become a better person. Unfortunately your so prejudiced against atheists that you can’t see that I’m just trying to help you out. Why don’t you step out of the dark ages and see what reality has in store for you. .

      • WilmRoget

        There is that lovely display of arrogant egotism symptomatic and definitive of all prejudices. With every insult, you prove that atheism is a prejudice.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        And with every comment, you prove that you are a willfully ignorant, ill informed, history denying, reality challenged sack of day old douche.

      • WilmRoget

        As your post shows, in the end, all there is to atheism is malice and egotism.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Too bad I’m not an atheist.

      • WilmRoget

        Doesn’t really matter. The abuse you’ve relied on to defend atheism, reflects on it as well as you.

        But how sad that you are so vicious in defense of something you don’t even believe. Your lies about me reflect your character and reveal an utter lack of decency. How terrible that you expend so much effort slandering and reviling people for your amusement. Sadism, jammie, is not a virtue.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        I pray to Satan every night to grab you and pull you down to funland. I don’t revile everyone. Just you. You are my mission. I will bring you to my lord and master and we shall feast on your shriveled soul. Have a nice day:)

      • WilmRoget

        Your sadism does you no good.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        And you are quite full of bovine extractions. A little existential sadism never hurt anyone. It’s like blaspheme… The victimless crime. I bet you’re a laugh riot at parties….

      • WilmRoget

        With every insult, in which you attempt to exalt yourself by tearing me down, you demonstrate the principle that is the very heart of atheism and all other prejudices.

        It does not matter whether you are an atheist or not at this point. You are demonstrating that insulting behavior is a manifestation of ego-aggrandizement, and so when atheists engage in that behavior to defend atheism, they demonstrate that atheism is entirely about inflating their ego at the expense of others.

        Your excuse of sadism is deeply unhealthy.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Not as unhealthy as those rabid wombats you have routine carnal knowledge with.

      • WilmRoget

        The harder you try to insult me, the worse you make yourself look – and because all of this started because I rebuked atheism, your behavior also demonstrates that atheism is a pathetic and vicious prejudice.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Hey baby… You obviously mistake me for someone who gives even half a fuck about what you think, say or do.

      • WilmRoget

        You clearly care a great deal, obsessively, for you keep trying, obsessively, to make me angry. But you don’t and cannot have the power to do that.

        All you have the power to do is make yourself look bad.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Actually, I’ve just been responding to your nonsense, sugar britches. But you tell yourself whatever you need to make you feel better.

      • WilmRoget

        There has been no nonsense in my posts, your dismissal is just rank incompetence. Your ego is so deeply injured, because of your incredibly inability to present a single cogent rebuttal, that you are reduced to screeching invectives to soothe your emotional agony.

        And that truth, and every insult you have posted and continue to post proves it true, has nothing to do with making me feel anything.

        You are trying so extremely desperately to make me feel bad, because your ego is devastated.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Every word out of your mouth is nonsense. You are a judgemental little whiny christian. A classic case of false convert/christian projection. Rarely have I come across someone so desperate to be right. You sit around in your cell, anxiously awaiting notification that your pimply arse has been handed to you. Then you repeat the same reality challenged response about egos, etc. Rinse and repeat. What a sad, little boy you are.

      • WilmRoget

        “Every word out of your mouth is nonsense.”

        Oh, if that were true, you would not be so viciously desperate to denounce and revile me. The nastier your insults are, the more afraid you are shown to be.

        Your posts are malicious and degrading because that is the only way you can soothe your battered ego.

        In the end, your insults only reflect the terrible things you feel inside about yourself – for they have no basis in anything I’ve written.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You don’t really have anything else, do you? Poor little baby…

      • WilmRoget

        Every insult you post reveals your character.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Every insult I post reveals my true character! I don’t really know what that means, but I’ve been a naughty girl. My sister won’t speak to me. I must turn to Jesus and become born again. Through the birth-canal of my newfound faith I shall strive to be worthy and will never call him “Baby Jesus” again.

        I will cease my sodomite, incestuous womanizing and have my sister (she’s the one in the front) join me as we share the good news. Praise you Roger. You saved two for the price of one. My sister and I both use the same account. She’s been begging me to “have faith in the Lord!”

        And you know what?! I DO!

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        And all there is to Christendom is bootlicking and arse kissing. You are a Christ Fluffer. Hail satan.

      • WilmRoget

        Your post only reveals your character, particularly, a tendency toward sadism.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        And you’re like an NPC in some lame AIG video game. At least we got you off the prejudiced atheist loop you were playing back to great tedium.

        Go back to fluffing your limp savior.

      • WilmRoget

        Your empty dismissal only reveal your character. The nastier you are, the worse you look.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        But at least I smell nice. You have the stink of death about you.

      • WilmRoget

        I pity you. All you have is petty insults that degrade only you.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        No. I am just amusing myself at your expense. I pity you for being such an uptight, sanctimonious dork.

      • WilmRoget

        Someday you’ll learn that your sadism is not a virtue.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Some day you’ll learn that a penis isn’t a door stop.

      • WilmRoget

        Nice projection, Jammie. Your ego must be completely crushed, your insults aren’t even witty, or relevant. Just sad.

        You cannot win by being degrading. Every insult you post is a craven and abject surrender, proof that you cannot provide a cogent, reasoned, fact-based or even logical rebuttal to my position (atheism is a prejudice).

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        I see you don’t understand projection, along with anything else. I don’t have a penis and even if I did, I wouldn’t use it as a door stop. That’s something you self-flagellating, christian nutters do for kicks.

        As for your position (most likely on your knees, crying whilst you play with yourself), there’s nothing logical, reasoned or fact based about it to rebut. Hence, I’m just having a few laughs at your expense.

        I will say that you are the poster child for false converts/false christians. Such a judgmental putz. Jesus would be weeping if he were alive. Or rolling in his grave if he hadn’t pulled a “Walking Dead.”

        You cannot win… Ever. Why? Because…

        1. This isn’t a contest.
        2. This isn’t a contest.
        3. This isn’t a contest.

        Now go change your shorts.

      • WilmRoget

        Once again, your abusiveness is failure, utter and impotent failure.

        I won the moment you posted your first insult at me. Because that first insult meant you could not refute anything I’ve presented with facts, logic, or reason. Your empty dismissals communicate not just incompetence, but self-awareness of that incompetence.

        You, and your peers, surrendered, abjectly, knowing that your entire argument was based on self-centeredness, malice and fear, not fact, logic, or reason.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        It must be nice to live in your own little fantasy world, where you are so special and everyone else runs around crying that you bruised their little egos.

      • WilmRoget

        Your fantasy about me is simply a revelation of your own state.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        I do fantasize about you Roger! And it’s been a revelation of my own State! How right you are! Don’t worry. It’s none of that dirty, icky stuff. In fact! It’s all gonna be PG! Ummmm! I can’t wait to praise Jesus with you!

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Just because you don’t have any sense of humor ( or penis any longer! I told you to watch out for that door jam!), doesn’t make you the decider of what is funny. I bet your parents left you lots of places :)

      • WilmRoget

        The nastier you are, the worse you look. You are simply proving that you are incapable of civility, and that you are so full of self-hate, you have revile strangers in public to feel good.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You know… I remember back before I was saved…. It seems the nastier I was, the worse I looked. I was so full of hate that it was almost as if I was trying to simply prove that I was incapable of civility. Or writing a coherent sentence! LOL!! I guess being filled with the holy spirit does mess with my thinking!!!! You know… I hate my self :(

        I didn’t really want to reveal strangers in public, but it seemed like the only way I could publically feel good! I think you know what I mean! Thanks again for saving me…

      • Connie Kuramoto

        Killing people that dont have the same beliefs as you do. Sounds like ISIS.

      • Ray

        Wow, that has to be the biggest pile of horseshit excuse making I’ve ever heard. He misinterpreted the scriptures? I don’t think so because he didn’t “interpret” anything, he simply posted the scriptures that PROVE your god to be sadistic and petty. And not only that but this story and every other story is concrete proof that the god of the bible has no respect for even his own laws and commandments. Anyone that attempts to make excuses for this behavior shouldn’t be allowed to roam the streets without an escort and they DEFINITELY shouldn’t be allowed to breed.

      • Rob Devitt

        misinterpret? Give me a break!

      • ManicPanda

        So if today a group of people formed an army and invaded an neighbouring country because their God said that land was owed to them and the people living there where sinners. Would that be “right”… Seems wrong no matter how you slice it, basically might makes right…

      • WilmRoget

        There is something truly despicable and ignorant about using warfare to only revile religion.

        What a hypocrite you are, Ben. After all, you identify as male, and males are disproportionately responsible for all violence, including warfare. But rather than using the warfare in the Bible to condemn yourself, as a male prone to violence, you only use it to condemn Christianity. Yet atheists wage war, and brutalize civilians, and rape women and children. People, mostly men, of every culture, religion, body of belief, including atheism, have engaged in war and violence.

        The complain you raise against Judaism specifically (nice antisemitism on your part) and Christianity in general, applies to you just as much, not only for being an atheist, or anti-Christian, but simply for being male, and simply for being human.

        The difference though is that atheism has no condemnation of violence, or war, or infanticide, or rape, or genocide. It rejects the bodies of belief that do condemn such things, but offers no condemnation of any wrongdoing at all.

      • Andrew the Science guy

        You don’t need god to be good. I (as an aethist) do not need a book to tell me not to rape, torture or commit genocide. Empathy tells me not to do these things. If you need a book to tell you not to do these things (which is often condoned not condemed by the bible), then you a sociopath.

      • kevbug

        That is your worldview. You also might say that it is ok to kill a baby in the mother. Someone else might say that is murder. Why are you right and they wrong? If you make the moral decisions doesn’t that make you god? That is what gods do.

      • Picking Battles like Noses

        Freedom of choice was the gift God bestowed upon us, even above the angels, I believe you are confusing Moral of Choice, with Judgement, which is wholly God’s Domain, so before casting stones, how about you think first on who has the right to do so?

      • Andrew the Science guy

        No it doesn’t make me god. If you are incapable of making moral decisions without reading a book, then you are a terrible human being incapable of emotions and intelligent thought.

        What happens when you are faced with a moral decision for which the bible doesn’t have an answer?

        The bible for example never specifically mentions abortion.

      • kevbug

        What do gods do then? Why is it terrible to make decisions by a book. Especially if it came from someone who knows all and can give us advice that will help us in the future that we cannot see?
        You are the product of what you read and who you associate with. Do you make decisions without thinking of the consequences?
        The Bible specifically tells us that the baby in the mother is worth enough that if you killed it or caused it harm, then you received the punishment of a murderer.

      • Andrew the Science guy

        What do gods do? They don’t exist, so they don’t *do* anything.

        It’s not terrible to make decisions from a book. It’s terrible to make decisions from a book that is 2000 years old and has no relevance to modern day life. Homosexuality is not a sin. Getting a tattoo is not a sin. Eating pork is not a sin.

        Of course I think about consequences, I’m an intelligent empathic human being, capable of thinking through what happens next. You are too, unless you constantly sit there reading your bible about the next thing you should do.

        Returning to abortion for a moment: If the baby is dying, and the mother will too if an abortion is not performed, what is the right course of action? If the abortion is not performed, then mother will die. If it is not performed, then they both die. An abortion is clearly the right course of action, yet in countries where it’s illegal this quandry happens all the time and mothers lives are being lost because of a discussions that occurred 2000 years ago.

        Do you think it’s right for a mother to carry a baby she will never love because it’s the product of rape or incest?

      • kevbug

        I cannot and will not play god. I am not given answers to all questions. I thought you said that murder was wrong? Well more then 2000 years ago Moses was given the command not to murder. Is it still true that the book has no relevance to today? That is only one situation.
        I cannot know what pain a woman has from rape or from incest. I do know that God does love us more then we love ourselves. For a Christian, death means more then sadness. The Bible tells us. If you told someone to have an abortion and that person was going to have a baby that would find a cure for cancer; Would you still advise that lady to have an abortion? You can make up lots of situations, but you are not all knowing. That is why I choose to trust an all knowing God. He also is everywhere, so he can tell me what I need to know. I don’t always know why, but that is not for me to know.

      • brian schneider

        “that would find a cure for cancer”
        Or be a re-encarnation of Adolf Hitler?

      • Sidney Ella Testa

        Do you know that abortion was condoned (and encouraged in one case) in the bible? It’s a stupid book.

      • kevbug

        Who cares? You have no basis for morals as a atheist. If we are all rearranged pond scumb, then why is it wrong for one to kill another. It is not wrong for a lion to kill a deer is it? From your worldview, there are no reason for morals. You cannot tell me it is right or wrong for God to do something.
        Since there is a God, then he makes the rules. He made you, so he knows what is best for you.

      • Jason Dowd

        On the question of murder in particular, but similarly for other things as well, the question of whether it is right or wrong is actually an irrelevant distraction. In order for a society to exist and be stable murder must be illegal. Similarly for counterfeiting.

        Absolutely no appeal to morality is required to reach this conclusion.

      • kevbug

        What about elderly who want to die? What about babies who are in the mother? You cannot ask them if they want to live. What about societies who think it is ok? What about Hitler? You want to say it is not morals that decide if these people can live or not? Right and wrong are moral questions. You either decide for yourself what is right and wrong or you let someone else. I chose to let someone who has been there and knows me and knows everything, decide right and wrong for me. Why do atheists call me names because what I believe?

      • Richard Bell

        Hitler was a catholic, moron.

      • http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJZ6xiQoOYCLQoE3EBpuaMA Christopher Alex Jones

        Hitler didn’t believe in anything but himself.

      • Mike Ex

        Life is hard, it’s harder if you’re ignorant AND stupid.

      • david rocha

        Who was condoning the abortion not God.

      • Gary Gayisok Whiteman

        Actually, the Bible says that, under certain circumstances,in a passage that begins, “And the Lord spoke unto Moses saying….” that a woman is to be taken to the temple and given an abortion by the priest – the passage spells out both the method and the liturgy to be used.

      • MamaBear

        No the Bible does NOT say abortion. There was not even an ancient Hebrew word for abortion.

        Numbers 5 is when a husband suspects his wife of adultery but has no evidence.

        Some problems with your “interpretation.”
        vs. 17 says tent or tabernacle. The Hebrew is הַמִּשְׁכָּ֔ן

        The temple was a few hundred years after Moses.

        The only thing in the drink was dust from the tabernacle floor and a scroll would be dipped in it. BTW, ink was made of charcoal with either tree sap or honey as a binder. None of those things could cause abortion.

        vs. 27 says her thigh will rot and her womb or belly swell. Legitimate Jewish and Christian scholars usually interpret this to mean atrophy of genitals combined with abdominal or uterus swelling. It does not use the Hebrew word for miscarriage and there was no word for abortion.
        ייתכן שהתשובה ולמצוא
        ישועה.
        שלום

      • MamaBear

        Impossible. There is not even an ancient Hebrew word for abortion.
        What you are no doubt referring to is the lie pro-abortionists have made up about Numbers 5, where if a husband suspected his wife of adultery but had no evidence (evidence would have meant she would be stoned) that he was to take her to the priests at the tabernacle. (Numbers was several hundred years before the temple, so if they say temple, you know they are phonies.) There she was to vow she was not an adulterer, put a curse on herself if she is lying, and drink water with dust from the tabernacle mixed in. (Very specific – no herbs mentioned.) The Hebrew literally says if she is guilty her abdomen will swell and her thigh waste away. Jewish and Christian scholars have argued over what exactly that means. Most modern legitimate scholars say atrophy of uterus or genitals resulting in bareness.
        Oh, and anybody who tries to blame it on ergot in the grain offering, that is a grain disease of rye in cool moist climates. It can pass to other grains from rye, but basically, no rye, no ergot. Ancient Israel was hot, dry (much like the US southwest) and grew barley and wheat. (No Jewish rye bread in ancient Israel.)
        So, if they are using Numbers 5, they know neither science or Hebrew.

      • Gary Gayisok Whiteman

        We have to understand the perspective of folks like MamaBear ( a knee-jerk pro-birth fanatic) who love to read the Bible literally when it suits her argumentative purposes – e.g. that since there is no Hebrew word for abortion, the author couldn’t possibly be using other words to describe what was expected to happen (an abortion) – but is quite happy to read other passages interpretively when that suits her purposes – e.g. if memory serves me, she’d try to tell you that Jesus’ answer to a man asking if it’s OK to divorce his wive is actually a definition of marriage as 1 man / 1 woman.

      • MamaBear

        Hilarious Gary! What an imagination you have!
        I never discussed that passage with you or ANYONE on DISQUS. In fact, I have taken a few of my fellow pro-lifers to task over trying to bring that and other non-prolife topics into discussions on pro-life. However, I have noticed like in so many other things, you cannot tolerate those who disagree with you.
        Cut and paste? I and others have copied entire posts by you that you denied or said we misinterpreted, and you still claim we are selectively editing.
        About the Bible. I am still amazed that someone who claims to be a Christian would deliberately lie and insert what cannot possibly be there into the Hebrew or Greek. (I’ve heard the other side of why a certain Christian website banned you. Apparently making up your own definitions is not limited to Hebrew.)
        I know a number of liberal Christians, some agnostics and atheists, too. None of them have the hatred of conservative Christians that you have repeatedly expressed. To call Christians you disagree with Pharisees, Blasphemers, idolators, heretics, saying they are like crucifiers of Christ…..real tolerant of you there! Why the hatred?
        And how convenient to be able to claim that’s “a forgery” anytime something you disagree with in the Bible is mentioned.
        Although to be fair, your hatred is not limited to Christians. You called an agnostic pro-lifer who corrected your lack of science, an Aunt Thomassina. Nice way to speak to a woman of color because she, as a grad student in science, catches you in lies about science. Lies that actually anyone who has taken Biology 101 in the past 30 years would catch.
        I seem to have been singled out for your special hatred, however. Perhaps it is because I am not only anti-abortion, but against euthanasia and assisted suicide while being terminal myself.
        Well, I have no more time to waste today on someone like you. Life is good and beautiful and I have plans that are more important than silly bitter you. I will pray for you though.

      • Gary Gayisok Whiteman

        All I did was quote the moderator who banned me from Charisma. I would ask, “what “other side” of that matters?”, but then I’ve learned you’re very fond of dishonest character assassination when it comes from your pals – if they say it, it must be true. LOLOLOL

        PJ is a woman of color? Too funny.

        Hatred? Special hatred? Get over yourself. I counter with the truth when you lie about me. That’s not hatred.

      • Richard Bell

        He was also given a command to not eat shellfish but I don’t see you out picketing Red Lobster.

      • Smarie62

        What if its not rape or incest, and the mother’s life is not in danger? What if the woman simply decides she doesn’t want to have the baby for whatever reason, and wants to abort the fetus instead? Is she wrong? Who gets to say and why?

      • Mike Ex

        It isn’t a person, idiot.

      • Richard Bell

        No person has the right to force another person to become or remain pregnant. Take your “big government” thinking elsewhere.

      • david rocha

        Its not her body to.kill, she should have thought about that.before having sex, woman say well its my body no its not your body. Its the babys body

      • Smarie62

        What I find most interesting is the fact that the persons who would answer my questions are men. Richard Bell, Mike Ex, and David Rocha. Which is the whole problem with the issue of abortion: men, who have never been and can never be pregnant, trying to tell women what to do. Men, who in their replies either belittled, attacked, or condescendingly answered questions which were rhetorical anyway. I wasn’t looking for answers. I am a woman. I already know the answers. The questions were for other people to think about.

      • david rocha

        We all have responsibility, and God have set boundries when we go beyound those boundaries thiers going to be problems, I dont have to be a wpman tp stand this , we go beyound Gods boundries and we want the easy way out, if we are willing to go out side God ,then at lest be responsible towards God wants.

      • david rocha

        Life is life no one as the as right to take indecent life away period.

      • Smarie62

        You do realize that not everybody believes in God, don’t you? Not saying me, but everybody is not me, or you. Some people believe in a different God, and some don’t believe at all. As is their prerogative. And so is abortion. A woman’s prerogative.

      • http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJZ6xiQoOYCLQoE3EBpuaMA Christopher Alex Jones

        If a mother can’t love a child due to being raped, then she, herself is a sociopath – laying the actions of the father onto the child with no regard to the fact that the child is its own being (and i’m not even talking about in the womb, because that is a different argument alltogether). I really fucking despise that argument for abortion because it is based on a self-centered depravity that is simply vile.

        “I can’t love my child, so I better just kill it.” You can bring up scientific rationale for abortion, you can bring up wether or not the mother will die, there are a lot of arguments you can bring up and have something worth thinking about.

        But not this one.
        This point is the depraved self-indulgent musings of a sociopath, and frankly, any woman who thinks like this is no better than the rapist.

        The woman who has an abortion simply because she doesn’t want the child holds a higher emotional and moral stance than the one in this example. This example is beyond deplorable, and yet I hear Pro Choice people bring it up on a regular basis.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Spoken like a real penis.

      • Ray

        Seek help, you’re a sociopath if you think a rape victim should be forced to keep the rapists baby. In fact, I sincerely hope you’re unable to breed and if you already have children, I feel sorry for them and I know for a fact that they’re going to end up despising their POS father.

      • david rocha

        What your saying kill the child and if you are then you have no room to talk

      • Colin Robinson

        You do comprehend that about 80% of fertilised embryos are flushed down the loo without the woman even knowing don’t you? That’s how much your god cares about them.

      • http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJZ6xiQoOYCLQoE3EBpuaMA Christopher Alex Jones

        This is somewhat misleading. The way you make this comment sounds as if miscarrages and such happen for no real reason. But that’s not true, now, is it?

        Most have to do with chromosomal issues that inhibit the ability for the fetus to develop – in other words, this fetus would never develop into an infant that can survive on its own outside the womb, so the body rejects it.

        Otherwise, miscarriages have to do with – for the most part – human action
        Alcohol Abuse
        Smoking
        Obesity
        etc.

        The inherent difference is that abortion in many cases is terminating viable fetuses – fetuses that if left alone would grow into fully developed infants. And for me, this has nothing to do with God, it’s purely humanistic – it’s wrong to terminate a viable, growing, human fetus.

      • Colin Robinson

        “The way you make this comment sounds as if miscarrages and such happen for no real reason. But that’s not true, now, is it?”
        Hardly relevant. It’s amazing how irrational people grasp at irrelevancies when they comprehend they have no real point.
        Either every embryo is a human life or it is not.

        “fetuses that if left alone would grow into fully developed infants.”
        Do you not understand just why that statement is so completely wrong?

        What you call ‘leaving alone’ is actually a massive sacrifice on the part of the mother to nurture and protect that fetus. Take the fetus out and leave it on its own, as you actually said, it would be dead in minutes.

        “it’s wrong to terminate a viable, growing, human fetus”
        So don’t do it. But don’t declare that everyone has to obey what you believe to be true. A fetus is not a human being because it doesn’t feel, think, emote, or do anything other than be a senseless blob of growing cells. A fetus has less self awareness than an ant.

        “I actually hate it when people couch this as a religious issue.”
        Who cares why people insist they have the right to dictate to others?

        What I find most stupid is that the most strongly anti-abortion people are also anti-contraception. IOW, they are just against women’s rights.

      • http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJZ6xiQoOYCLQoE3EBpuaMA Christopher Alex Jones

        Nice way to twist my words. Ok, leave it alone may not have been the best word choice – but you knew what I mean. But, it’s still nice to know that Ad Hominem is still alive and well.

        Secondarily, there is nothing irrelevant in my comment, you have simply decided to dismiss it based on your own bias. It’s actually exceeding relevant that these miscarriages are caused by external factors – many being human caused factors – its the very context that was missing from your comment. The way you stated it makes it sound as if these terminations are random – that perfectly viable fetuses will terminate of their own accord. That is completely untrue.

        Secondarily, the biological make-up is still human – wether or not it looks and acts human is irrelevant. Hell, feeling, thinking, and emoting aren’t even inherently human traits. Infants have mental capabilities no greater than that of a dog – by all rights, other than genetic make up, an infant is no different than the cow your most recent hamburger was made out of.

        The majority of Pro-choice logic is built on the idea that humanity is based on factors that differ – not only from human to human – but also differ throughout the various stages of life.

        Where, exactly, does humanity start on a scientific scale? What defines a human? Is it the capability for rational thought, because if that’s the case… can we abort Washington?

        Is it the capability to feel? Because fetuses develop nerves fairly early on.

        Is is the capability of sight? Babies are legally blind when born, only capable of making out giant blobs of light.

        Hearing and emotion? Studies show very clearly that fetuses can hear in the womb, and are even comforted by the sound of their mother’s voice. In fact, Fetuses may not be expressive because they haven’t developed the muscles necessary to express themselves, but the fact that fetuses have an emotional range is not even up for debate.

        Does life begin at conception? I don’t know, and its frankly impossible to know because life is still not fully defined – life comes in so many different varieties that making that call is nearly impossible. But human development does, and I believe that everything should be done to protect said development.

      • Colin Robinson

        “Ok, leave it alone may not have been the best word choice – but you knew
        what I mean – “allowed to” would have been a better choice of words.”
        No ad hominem, merely emphasising that you completely disregard the rights of the woman, the fact that a woman has to carry this fetus never even occurred to you. That is a very important point, which you have still ignored.
        “It’s actually exceeding relevant that these miscarriages are caused by external factors”
        Sorry, is an embryo a life or is it not?
        “Third, the biological make-up is still human”
        So are my toe nail clippings, what’s your point?
        “Is it the capability to feel? Because fetuses develop nerves fairly early on.”
        They have no central nervous system, so cannot feel, until 20 weeks plus.
        “But human development does, and I believe that everything should be done to protect said development.”
        Hmm, and what is your opinion once the baby is born? In my experience those people who are so vehemently ‘pro-life’ are actually ‘pro fetus life’. Once the child is born they just as vehemently oppose healthcare, education, feeding etc for that child.
        Believing that a completely non-feeling fetus has more rights than the mother is a matter of choice, I can’t use logic and reason to change your mind on that as it is not a stance based in logic and reason.
        But where do you stand on food stamps, universal healthcare, education etc?

      • http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJZ6xiQoOYCLQoE3EBpuaMA Christopher Alex Jones

        I love that you are trying to invalidate one position by invalidating other positions said person may have. Granted, you are still playing on and Ad Hominem fallacy, but whatever.

        Regardless, I’ll play along, I find you to be fun.

        Any social welfare measure is an awesome idea, though execution can be… problematic at times. Social programs such as Food Stamps, Welfare, etc. are important and necessary elements of society to help those who can’t help themselves. Granted, the current US model of these programs is broken – allowing for easy access for those who don’t need it, hard access for those who do, and making it extremely difficult for people to get off of said programs. I love the idea behind all of them – but the execution could use some work.

        Same goes for universal healthcare – I absolutely love the idea and would more than happily allow my tax money to go to helping people not die. That said, Obama’s model is FAR from perfect and could use some tweaking. Unfortunately, however, because politics has become nothing more than us vs. them Conservatives are hell-bent on stopping anything Liberal while Liberals are hell-bent on stoping anything Conservative – details be damned.

        Education is the single most important thing in the history of ever and 90% of our focus should be on refitting, updating, and keeping the educational system as effective as possible.

        Honestly, when it comes to all other issues, they should be secondary to education.

      • Colin Robinson

        “I love that you are trying to invalidate one position by invalidating other positions said person may have.”
        In reality, I acknowledged insurmountable differences in our opinions and asked you for clarification on other issues.
        But reality doesn’t really interest you does it?
        “Social programs such as Food Stamps, Welfare, etc. are important and
        necessary elements of society to help those who can’t help themselves.”
        So those people working their asses off doing three jobs “can’t help themselves”?
        “That said, Obama’s model is FAR from perfect and could use some tweaking.”
        YES!!! It is not universal healhcare and the ‘healthcare’ companies spent billions in lobbying to twist it to their agenda.
        But, somehow, I don’t believe that is your issues?
        “Honestly, when it comes to all other issues, they should be secondary to education.”
        I’m interested to know what you mean by that. Do you mean that further education should be free as it is the most successful economies?
        “Also, where exactly did I call you saying that the woman is not taking the woman into consideration Ad Hominem?”
        It was far too subtle for you. You completely disregarded the woman when you said ‘leave the fetus alone’. You either understand that or you don’t.
        “That’s like accusing all Christians of being vehemently against the theory of evolution”
        I normally address such psychos as ‘christian nutcases’. But a review of our conversation reveals that I have never done what you are accusing me of. I have addressed particular positions, not all christians.
        Which means that you have spewed a kneejerk reaction. Which I have no interest in.
        “Most conservative views come from the idea that every person should make their own way in the world.”
        How very nazi. So anyone who can’t make their way in the world should be left to die. APART from when they’re pregnant. Then they HAVE to carry the fetus to term. And then let the baby die.
        “It’s a solid foundation to begin to build a moral compass on”
        Oh no it fucking isn’t!!!! Neanderthals had better morals than you.
        And there are people around today who wish they had been aborted.
        “When I think of the abortion issue, I simply can’t ignore these facts”
        And I am SOOOOO lucky that my father hadn’t got REALLY pissed that night and fell asleep rather than doing the do.
        And so lucky that that particular sperm, out of 10s of millions, won the race to fertilise the egg. Any of the other 100 million sperm had won then I wouldn’t exist, and my entire line would be wiped out.
        Never existed.
        GET REAL!!!

      • http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJZ6xiQoOYCLQoE3EBpuaMA Christopher Alex Jones

        Ok. Half of your reponses here are either a. Making assumptions on what I believe based on what little you know about me or b. Kneejerk reactions and Ad homenim attacks.

        Either way, I’m done with this pointless conversation. You’ll claim victory, but whatever.

        We could have had a genuine conversation, instead you opted for outright attacks and completely misconstruing every word I have said. Your decision.

      • Colin Robinson

        In reality, of course, I have answered your points.
        Including the one where you falsely accused me of ‘basing the beliefs of an entire group on the statements of the vocal minority’.

        You just don’t like being shown how wrong you are.

      • david rocha

        You have no clue what your talking about, if your going to talk and open your mouth make sure you know what your talking about.

      • Colin Robinson

        Interesting. If you could demonstrate that I don’t know what I am talking about you would do.
        And yet you didn’t.
        Which means you are just attempting to use bluster and bullshit to carry your position because you know you have all else.

      • david rocha

        Nope its all about love, love conquers all even this, something you dont understand, dont let hate control you.

      • http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJZ6xiQoOYCLQoE3EBpuaMA Christopher Alex Jones

        The child did nothing wrong, why is it being terminated for the crimes of its father. If a person can not look at an individual and not see their parentage, then there is something horribly wrong. I understand that rape is a horrible thing that can utterly alter the course of a person’s life – I also understand that a child born of rape can be a constant reminder of said horrific event.

        HOWEVER – focusing on that one thing is in no way fair. This is an individual in his or her own right and deserves to be treated no differently. If a parent that carries a child to term and can’t see that, then said parent is a sociopath.

        I also love how you assume that I believe a rape victim should be “forced” to keep a rapist’s baby. In no way did I ever say anything of the such, there are alternative options – adoption, for example. Give the child to a family that will love it and care for it. Don’t just throw it away like unwanted trash.

      • Helpthechildrenalreadyborn

        There are conditions that cause a baby to feel pain as soon as nerves develop. The baby dies always right after birth if it is a boy and shortly after if it is a girl. Why would you do that to a child? How is it at all ok to make that baby live knowing nothing but pain? There are other conditions that prevent a baby from living outside it’s mother. Why would you force a mother to go through the entire pregnancy? Imagine every kick and every movement was a reminder that your baby will die?
        As for healthy fetuses I always hear adoption. I think that is a good option for some people. It is not that easy though and if you have a baby and leave it at the hospital you never know what kind of life they will end up with. You were forced to have the baby now you just hand it over to strangers. Do you know the kind of abuse that can occur in foster care? So keep the baby right? It is the natural feeling that the mother gets after a baby is born. What if she works two jobs and can’t afford food? Everyone who is pro-life should automatically be thrilled to contribute to foodstamps and helping pay childcare and health care for the child. They are so worried about making sure that child is born but they don’t want to deal with the child for the next 18 years. It is sad.

      • david rocha

        Thats warpped thinking

      • dragonflylash

        You are absolutely wrong about that. Go read Deuteronomy. If an unborn child dies as the result of violence against the mother, the father is owed a FINE, to make up for lost ‘property.’

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        It also says that you should stone that same baby to death if it back talks.

      • WilmRoget

        While atheism does not condemn any form of child abuse, nor does it condemn murder, slander, rape, or any other evil.

        It is rather hypocritical for one such as you to sin in judgement of any person, much less God.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You are really hung up on the whole “sin” thing, aren’t you? Or was it just a typo? Anyway, since atheism is just about not believing in a god or gods, it has nothing to say about either child abuse or murder. You don’t seem to understand what the word means.

        You claimed earlier that you weren’t an atheist when it comes to believing in Krishna, or any other non-Abrahamic religions. I’m not going to call you a liar. I think you just don’t understand the meaning of the word. If you don’t believe in Zeus, Thor, Mercury, Hermes, Athena, Set, Osiris, etc. etc., then you are an atheist. I just believe in one less god than you do. It’s really simple. Your insistence on turning it into a religion is just silly.

        So tell me once and for all. Do you believe in Zeus? Are the Roman/Greek/Norse/Egyptian gods just as real to you as your “creator?” If they aren’t, you are most definitely an atheist when it comes to them.

      • WilmRoget

        Actually, it was a typo as any rational person would realize, since the phrase ‘sit in judgement’ is not a secret.

        “Anyway, since atheism is just about not believing in a god or gods, it has nothing to say about either child abuse or murder.”

        Irrelevant. Since you embrace a body of belief, atheism, that has no moral code whatsoever, it is hypocritical of you to even attempt to judge Christianity, or any other religion.

        ” You don’t seem to understand what the word means.”

        Nice projection.

        ” I’m not going to call you a liar.”
        Atheism intrinsically calls all people of faith liars. Your pretense of civility is a sham.

        ” I think you just don’t understand the meaning of the word.”

        Again, your abusiveness indicates a serious moral failure on your part.

        ” I just believe in one less god than you do. I”

        No, you operate with a very simplistic and shallow understanding of Christianity, one based on channel surfing past televangelists. And like a good parrot, programmed by professional fundamentalist atheists, you repeat an argument that you don’t understand enough to see the flaw it has.

        ” Your insistence on turning it into a religion is just silly.”

        The more you denigrate and trivialize Christianity, the more you prove that you are a bigot, and that atheism is a nasty prejudice, just like racism and homophobia.

        ” If they aren’t, you are most definitely an atheist when it comes to them.”

        No, you simply do not understand any of the concepts involved. You are mistakenly presuming that 1) I make any assertion as to the validity or invalidity of any other faith

        2) that I am a conservative, fundamentalist

        3) that your fraudulent diversionary tactic accomplishes anything beyond demonstrating a deep lack of knowledge about religion, Christianity, or any Christian other than the parodies painted for you by your professional atheist programmers.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        What a piece of dysfunctional, willfully ignorant, history/reality denying work you are! And such an angry hypocrite! You remind me of the spoiled child who has to have everything their way or else they throw a tantrum. Your constant misuse of words is reminiscent of a three year old screaming for a treat.

        So… If you aren’t a racist, homophobic, fundie, hair-shirt golem, what are you?

        Oh… That’s right… You’re just an attention troll. Attention trolls never get the last word. They usually croak themselves before that can happen. I’m eagerly awaiting your discorporation.

      • WilmRoget

        Your increasingly abusive responses only demonstrate that atheism is entirely about egotism and pride. Your pride is increasingly hurt as I rebuke atheism, so you lash out with increasing malice and contempt.

        In the end, you gloat about looking forward to my death, and that says everything anyone needs to know about the heart of atheism.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You know… I was talking to my sister early today about ego and pride. I was hurt after thorough rebuking of atheism. And I lashed out at her with malice and increasing contempt. You know! It’s amazing how perceptive you are.

        In the end, my gloating got out of hand and I told her I was looking forward to your death. She slapped me. Then shoe held me and told me that was all anyone ever needed to know about the heart of atheism.

        You are so right!

      • mememememe

        Atheism isn’t a body of belief. It’s a body of disbelief. It isn’t a club, a religion, or a philosophy. It’s individuals who are united in one single thought which is the disbelief in deities, not just your god but others through out history. My actions towards others and myself are not rooted on a belief or lack of ina deity. It is rooted on the belief of doing right by humans regardless of religious, sexual, or other inclinations. It is about putting the human race above government, money, power, or religion. But these are my beliefs as a person, not an atheist as there many atheists who’d disagree with me, but as an individual.
        The closest thing to a religion I have is Humanism, which like Christianity, is a belief in something greater than oneself.

      • WilmRoget

        “Atheism isn’t a body of belief. It’s a body of disbelief. It isn’t a club, a religion, or a philosophy.”

        None of which refutes anything I have presented. And atheism is a belief, it is the belief that there is no Divine, no God or Gods.

        “It’s individuals who are united in one single thought which is the disbelief in deities,”

        And that thought is a belief, not a fact. You are trying to be clever, rather than accurate. It is not doing you any good.

        ” It is rooted on the belief of doing right by humans regardless of religious, sexual, or other inclinations.”

        Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and there is no evidence in your post to support that claim. You claim is just an attempt to exalt yourself.

      • mememememe

        Which is the extraordinary claim? That I aim to do right by others? You consider THAT exalting myself? I consider it a necessity for society, that along with kindess and respect.
        So I see what you mean about belief. To me saying I believe there are no gods is the same as saying I believe I’m not holding something in my hands. It feels wrong to say it like that, almost like when you say something and it sounds grammatically incorrect.
        So as an atheist, I “believe” there are no gods. I’m a skeptic on a lot of things. However, I’ve met atheists who believe in lucid dreaming, and others who believe in holistic medicine. Others who are humanists like me and others who believe that because they live only once they should do whatever they please.
        It isn’t a religion, not even a lifestyle.

      • WilmRoget

        “Which is the extraordinary claim?”

        I was quite clear. Since you either have difficulty following clearly written English, or summarizing it accurately, how can you possibly be a credible source of information about the Infinite Divine?

        “So I see what you mean about belief.”

        No, you don’t.

        “To me saying I believe there are no gods is the same as saying I believe I’m not holding something in my hands.”

        That’s not an accurate use of the word believe. Besides, even when your hands appear empty, there is air there – unless you are floating dead in an absolute vacuum.

        “So as an atheist, I “believe” there are no gods.”

        And you do so despite the testimony of most of humanity, so in your ‘believe’ is also the intrinsic message that most of humanity is wrong about their own experiences. And this ‘believe’ of yours is not based on evidence, fact, logic, reason, or even experience. At most, at best, it is based on lack of experience, but usually, it is based on a need to feel superior.

        ” Others who are humanists like me”

        Ah yeah, humanism, the codeword for selfish and self-centered.

        ‘It isn’t a religion, not even a lifestyle.”

        It is a prejudice, and a fraud.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Only atheists point out typos. I know. I didn’t have a moral compass.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        I know! I wanted to kill you and abuse and even face rape you before I was saved. I didn’t know any better. My ego was so bruised. Then Jesus came into my life and wiped me all up. Now I’m fresh and unblemished in the eyes of the Lord! Praise

      • kevbug

        What is wrong with that. If you are an atheist then you have no reason for right and wrong. Your worldview makes no sense of morals.
        Since there is a God, and he knows all, then he also makes rules that are for our good.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        So. You think it’s okay to stone a child if they misbehave? And you question my morality?
        Maybe you should take a few breaths and have another crack at those sentences. They make less sense than sliced coffee.

      • kevbug

        Who cares what I think.
        I am not questioning your morals. I am questioning where you get them. You have not basis for morals. Why even have them if when you die…that is it. Why not just party and have fun all the time…even if you step on toes. There is no reason that you have to obey any morals; especially if you can get away with it.
        I know the reason for morals. It is because there is a God who has always been. He knows what will happen. He makes rules for our benefit.
        As for stoning someone. Would you break the rules if you thought you might be stoned? Why have any punishment at all if it doesn’t work?

      • Ray

        Jammie, their god thinks it’s ok to freeze 42 children in their tracks while 2 bears came and tear them to pieces for making a bad joke.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Yes, but they’ll say that since their god is the basis for morality, that killing babies isn’t immoral if he does it. It’s way to silly for words. And they wonder why people insult them.

      • kevbug

        You can make up your own morals, but what good does it do you? You know there is a God. Romans 1 says that you do, and you have to suppress the truth, so you can do what you please.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        What a crock of shit. Romans one. That’s like saying the force is with you because Obi Wan said so. Why are so insistent on fighting with your quiver full of over cooked pasta?

        How typically christian of you to butt into another’s conversation. Did your god make you such a rudeboy, or were you born that way? Why do so many christians watch pornography? Are they pervs at heart or does it have to do with the belief they can just confess in the minutes before they croak and all will be well?

      • kevbug

        In your worldview, why is pornography wrong?
        You are borrowing from the Bible where it says that a man should not look on a woman with lust.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You really need to cease this telling people what they think/do/etc. Why should I answer when you never bother to? You just tell me what you believe I’m thinking. I’ll tell you what I think about pornography after you’ve answered my question about why so many Christians (especially in America) ignore the bible you insist I borrow from.

      • kevbug

        Why is it wrong for me to be rude….in your view? I did not thing that I was rude.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Most rude people don’t realize they’re being rude? What’s your excuse?

      • WilmRoget

        You’ve just summed up all of your posts.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Wow… You’re really digging down to the bottom of your witty repartee, aren’t you?

      • WilmRoget

        With every attempted insult, you only degrade yourself. I’ve heard so much worse from homophobes, your noise only makes me feel bad for you.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Keep telling yourself that. I’m sure it keeps you comfort in the dark.

      • WilmRoget

        I’ll keep telling you, until you learn.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        So you admit, you’re a no-account, bovine troll?

      • WilmRoget

        Every insult shows how deeply wounded your ego is, how desperate you are to tell yourself that you did not lose, terribly, here. But sadly, you don’t seem to understand that with each insult, you surrender again.

        You are only harming yourself.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        So you admit you’re a willfully ignorant, reality challenged, bovine, self-flagellating troll? Why won’t you answer the question? Why do you think this is a contest? It isn’t. It’s a rout. You remind me of the black knight in Monty Python’s Holy Grail. “It’s only a flesh wound!”

      • WilmRoget

        Every falsehood you post screams to the world that your ego is crushed. You just are not as smart as you wish you were, or think you are. You don’t even seem to realize that your false interpretations of my posts are not clever, and they make you look bad, not me. After, all honest person can see that your slanders of me are false.

        The more you carry on with this behavior, the worse you’ll feel.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        It’s starting to look as if English isn’t your first language! Relax. It’s Saturday and I’m just yanking those chains you carry around your neck like all good zombie-god groupies.

      • WilmRoget

        Every insult you post makes you look bad, not me.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You’re so right! I never realized that! I look bad! You bruised my ego. Now I must pray to the lord for forgiveness so I can be raptured with the elect. End times are very near. I must mend my ways and also ask my sister’s forgiveness.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You sure do use that word (“ego”) a lot for not having a clue what it means. And please come up with a better defense than holding your hands over your ears and shouting “I know you are, but what am I?”

      • WilmRoget

        Your lies and insults only expose how desperate you are to make yourself feel good.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        My lies and insults have exposed how desperate I am to make myself feel better. I must pray to the lord to forgive me for calling him a zombie with canabal vampires for followers. I didn’t mean that. I was jealous. You’ve showed me the error of my ways! Praise God. I am now restored.

      • WilmRoget

        Your nastiness is not a virtue, it is a deep and terrible failing on your part, it says that you have utterly failed as human being to master the most basic of social skills.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        And your sanctimonious yawn-fest probably really turns the gals on, does it? My “nastiness,” as you call it is just amusement at your clenched expense. Your opinion isn’t valid. You aren’t valid. You are useless flesh, destined to rot. And you’ll never get the last word.

      • david rocha

        Why so much hate

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Why so clueless about sarcasm? I guess sanctimonious and funny just can’t cohabitate…

      • WilmRoget

        With every insult, you degrade yourself, and no one else.

        And when you’re banned for obscenity and personal attack, I’ll have the last word.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        With every reply, you prove you have no life, and will grasp at any straw that’s thrown at you. Even if it’s covered in shite.

      • WilmRoget

        You cannot win because every insult you post makes you look like a terrible person.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        But I don’t give a rats ass what you think of me, you silly person. I won the moment you started preaching.

      • WilmRoget

        ” I won the moment you started preaching.”

        Nice fantasy, but you know it is a lie. After all, if you believed that, you would not be posting insult after insult.

        You are so extremely verbally abusive because your ego has been crushed, and is crushed even more every time I do respond to your abuse with abuse.

        And of course you care, you care obsessively about what I, and anyone else here, thinks about you. But you make the huge mistake of thinking that being abusive and degrading makes you look good.

        It does not. It makes you look like you have completely lost control of your emotions.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        So you consider your answers abuse? You are more willfully ignorant than I though. BTW… The only emotions you inspire are uncontrolled mirth. Pompous turds bloated with hubris always crack me up.

      • WilmRoget

        Once again, your false interpretations of my posts only make you look bad. The nastier you are, the worse you look.

        You brought this hurt upon yourself, and every time you try, without success, to hurt me, you just hurt yourself.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Did you know L. Ron Hubbard claims to be the father of little baby zombie jesus and that he’s also Satan? But here’s the kicker. He claims that Jesus is the evil one. And guess how the immaculate conception occurred, according to the founder of one of the fastest growing religions in the world today (according to his followers)??? Let’s just say it involves “self-abuse”and water currents.

      • Martin McNeill

        “What a crock of shit. Romans one. That’s like saying the force is with you because Obi Wan said so”
        I must remember that statement, thats awesome

      • WilmRoget

        Your falsehoods only reflect your own moral state. You are projecting your self onto others.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You should try Preparation H for those hemorrhoids. That might help curtail your rude behavior. What an awful, projecting, piece of three-day-old dookie you are!

      • WilmRoget

        The nastier you are, the worse you look.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        And the more you reply, the sillier you look. This isn’t about you sweetie. It’s entertainment for the rest of us.

      • WilmRoget

        So you admit that the purpose of your posts is sadistic.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Only if you’ll admit you’re a masochist at heart.

      • WilmRoget

        Nope. My character is not the issue here, you already admitted that your purpose in being here is to degrade and revile people.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You do realize that according to the tenets of your faith, lying is a sin… Willfully misquoting someone is a sin. I never said that my purpose for being here or anywhere else is to degrade and revile people. Those are your words. And Zombie baby Jesus is going to be cross when he finds out. If he hasn’t already.

        I have many purposes in life. My responses to you are just to make fun of you. Since you have zero sense of humor, I can understand why you can’t see the humor in your situation. But that’s not excuse for lying.

      • WilmRoget

        “You do realize that according to the tenets of your faith, lying is a sin… Willfully misquoting someone is a sin.”

        Since I have not done either – your false accusation is sin. And no, you are not exempt, for by attempting to judge me, you bound yourself for judgement by the same standard. You’ve lied about me repeatedly, you’ve misrepresented my posts repeatedly, and so your attempted judgement on me condemns you.

        You absolutely have communicated, clearly, that your sole purpose here is to revile and slander people.

        Your snarky ‘zombie Jesus’ mark demonstrates that. The harder you try, the worse you look.

        “My responses to you are just to make fun of you.”

        So you admit that you are here to revile and slander people for your own amusement. Yet you falsely accused me.

        ” But that’s not excuse for lying.”

        Yet you are the one telling lies.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        And here we go with more of the “I know you are, but what am I.” Such a sensitive little prick too! I won’t waste more than a few lines on you in the future, but you’ll always be trying to win that last word. What a laughable failure you are.

      • Colin Robinson

        Your character is the worship of infinite evil. I don’t quite understand what the debate is.

      • WilmRoget

        Your slanders only demonstrate that atheism is a prejudice.

      • Colin Robinson

        ‘Slander’?! So you don’t worship jesus who stated that he will torture anyone who doesn’t follow the laws of moses, (that includes you BTW), for eternity?
        READ the parable of Lazurus and the rich man. SEE what it actually says.
        The rich man begs that his brothers be warned so they would not join him in his eternal torment, he was told that they must listen to moses and the prophets. And if they don’t, they will be tortured for eternity.

        Thing is, billions of people have never heard of moses. And as Acts 17 makes very clear, they will still be tortured forever by your god.

        So you worship a god who will torture billions of innocents for eternity. Torturing people is evil, infinite torture is therefore infinite evil.

        So where’s the ‘slander’?

      • Colin Robinson

        You believe in, and worship, a monster of a god who will torture billions of innocents for billions of trillions of quadrillions of years, just to start, and you claim other people are sadistic?!!

        You REALLY don’t grasp just how infinitely evil your god is do you?

      • WilmRoget

        You are lying to me about my own religion. That simply makes you look bad. Atheism is a vicious and degrading prejudice, as you and your peers here have proven over and over again.

      • Colin Robinson

        I’m lying to you?! In what way? What have I said that is a lie?
        It is your mythology that has declared that your god will torture billions of innocents for eternity, not me.

        The only way you can pretend it is not your god is if you decide that your god cannot dispense with hell, cannot prevent people from being tortured, IOW, is not almighty.

        So which is it? Is your god not almighty, (he did get beaten by iron chariots according to the mythology), or is he infinitely evil? There are no other options.

        Oh, except that he’s completely made up.

      • Colin Robinson

        So you’ve never read the bible and you hate the people who have.

        Why are you attempting to debate people who know so much more about your mythology than you do?

      • WilmRoget

        Your lies about me only make is obvious that nothing you post is accurate, but, clearly you don’t care about being accurate. You care about reviling other people so you can feel superior.

        That puts you on the same moral plane as homophobes and racists. You are a bigot. Atheism is a prejudice.

      • Colin Robinson

        A prejudice against what? Evil?
        No, atheism is simply not believing in any of the gods. Just as you don’t believe in odin, ra, shiva, brahma etc neither do I. But you believe in jesus whereas I don’t. But my disbelief in your god is no different to your disbelief in any of the other gods.

        Still would like to know what lies I am saying about you. I thought you were a christian? Have you actually read the bible? You don’t seem to know anything about it which is why I said you clearly hadn’t.

        What sun god was Psalm 104 written for?

      • WilmRoget

        “A prejudice against what? Evil?”

        Actually, your posts indicate that you enjoy evil and choose to act in that fashion.

        Atheism is a prejudice. Parroting the same old tired lies and talking points used by professional atheist/bigots doesn’t change that.

        “Still would like to know what lies I am saying about you.”

        I’ve pointed them out already.

        ” You don’t seem to know anything about it”

        And there’s another nasty falsehood. You are a bigot, so much so, you can not resist flaunting your malice.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        I’ve been weeping over the falsehoods reflected in my very own moral state. And then projecting the state I’m in onto others. WOW!

      • ManicPanda

        Now I want coffee cake…

      • WilmRoget

        There is no evidence that you have any morals.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        There’s also no evidence that you don’t lick donkey bottoms for kicks…

      • WilmRoget

        With every insult, you degrade only your self.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        So you do lick donkey bottoms for kicks. Good for you. You need a hobby.

      • WilmRoget

        Eventually you will cross a line and mod here will remove you.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Eventually, you’ll admit your a masochistic, whiny little girl.

      • WilmRoget

        Why would I “admit” to a lie? If only you realized that all of your insults actually proclaim to the world all the things you fear and loathe about yourself.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        See… This is the problem with made up (revealed) religions. One gets to the point where they think they can just make stuff up about everything. Does your god speak to you?

        Also… You’ve lied about me with every post. Maybe you should confess your sins, before you end up on Satan’s barbeque spit.

        Here’s a psalm you can recite:

        O Lord please don’t burn us,
        don’t grill or toast your flock.
        Don’t put us on the barbecue,
        or simmer us in stock.
        Don’t braise or bake or boil us
        or stir fry us in a wok.
        Oh please don’t lightly poach us
        or baste us with hot fat.
        Don’t fricassee or roast us
        or boil us in a vat,
        and please don’t stick thy servant Lord
        in a Rotissomat.

        Courtesy of Eric Idle.

      • WilmRoget

        “One gets to the point where they think they can just make stuff up about everything.”

        That is the problem is atheism, not religion. After all, you’ve demonstrated here, in post after post, that you feel you can make up anything you like.

        “Also… You’ve lied about me with every post.”

        No, that would be you. And the proof is your increasing viciousness. Your ego is punctured, so you lash out with increasing verbal abuse, spinning lies and fabrications and falsehoods in a desperate attempt to make yourself feel good. And when I accurately point out what you are doing, as I have been, it hurts your ego even more, so you lash out even more.

        The worse you behave, the worse you look.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Poor little willy. Getting so riled up your missing blatant spelling errors. And the best you can do is “I know you are but what am I..” How mature of you.

      • WilmRoget

        With every insult, you surrender. Your frauds and falsehoods accomplish nothing except to reveal your failure.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        What do I surrender to? Your superior ignorance? Your absolute mastery of mindless repetition?

      • WilmRoget

        Again, with every insult, you only condemn yourself.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        I didn’t really want to go to hell… I was terrified of burning forever! And with every insult. With EVERY insult. I knew in my heart that I was condemning myself to burning.

        Romans 1 Rules!

      • Ray

        Atheists are actually FAR more moral than creationists are.

        “Without the promise of an afterlife, this life becomes infinitely more meaningful. Without the promise of great reward or the threat of eternal suffering, charity becomes infinitely more charitable. And without the promise that this world is just a temporary staging area until we get to heaven (or hell), protecting the Earth becomes infinitely more important. Let’s face it, religion actually devalues our very existence here on Earth.” ~ Me

      • kevbug

        On what do you base your morals? On man’s idea of morals? On your own ideas?
        Can you tell me how many habitable planets there are in our galaxy?
        If you do not know everything, then how can you make judgments on a God who knows?
        Why is it meaningful to have nothing after you die? Why is it charitable? What is the meaning if your doing it for your own self?
        Can you really protect the earth? The one volcano that blew last year in Iceland put more CO2 in the air then all mankind did in the 19th century. How can you stop the damage the weather does to the earth every year?

      • Ray

        Kevbug, everything you just posted is nothing but irrelevant gibberish. What does the number of habitable planets have to do with anything? And I don’t have to know everything in order to judge the Abrahamic god, I can use his own words to do that. Basically, your entire response is irrelevant drivel. Is this all you have, arguments from ignorance? I’m going to stop responding to you now because I really believe I’m debating a 12 year old. You’ve displayed zero knowledge of the bible and it’s quite obvious that you have no debating skills since you’re constantly making the same logical fallacies that are refuted a hundred times a day. You’re even throwing around sources (we have absolutely no way of knowing how much carbon we put into the air during the 19th century, we weren’t even recording weather patterns back then)

      • kevbug

        You cannot tell me why it matters? If your going to die, and that is it….why debate me at all. It is because you do know there is a God, and the Bible says lots about you. You are suppressing the truth because you want to do what God says you should not. Romans 1. It does not matter if I know the Bible or not, you wil not have to answer to me.
        I am human. I make mistakes. I was trying to say the 20th century.

      • Colin Robinson

        Interesting. FYI, billions of people worldwide firmly believe in their god which is completely different to your god.

        Do they ALSO ‘know’ that your god exists? Even if they have never heard of him?
        And, ironically, many people who DO believe in ‘jesus’ believe in a jesus who is completely different to the one you believe in. One nutcase I knew was adamant that jesus would not torture anyone, so there is no hell, no punishment. Of course, he figured it was punishment to die instead of being given the opportunity to worship this god for billions of trillions of quadrillions of years. I’d rather die myself.

      • kevbug

        Actually, you are right. Most religions use people working their good works to get to heaven. The gods of the world are different then the Biblical God. The Bible states that we are not good enough to get there. We cannot go to heaven because of sin.

      • Colin Robinson

        Even assuming I wanted to go to heaven, which I don’t, what is this ‘sin’ that prevents me from going and who defines what is a ‘sin’?
        It can’t be the biblical god, yahweh/jesus, it is virtually unanimous across all people who have read the bible that the god yahweh/jesus is completely immoral and MUST not be obeyed in his commandments.
        Even the people who are closest to being christians like the Westboro Baptist church refuse to implement the truly barbaric commandments of your yahweh/jesus god.

      • kevbug

        Even in the dark ages most people believed things that are proved wrong. Just because people, who are fallible and lie, say something or are in majority; doesn’t mean that it is truth. Why can someone who doesn’t know everything (like mankind), make truthful moral decisions?
        Why are the Westboro Baptist Church the closest to being Christians?

      • Colin Robinson

        Even in the dark ages most people believed things that are proved wrong.

        Like gods, and demons and witches and all the other nonsense in the bible. And they were SOOOOOO moral!!!

        Why are the Westboro Baptist Church the closest to being Christians?

        Because they are the closest to being the inhuman, immoral haters of humanity that the bible demands of your god’s followers. If they were TRUE christians, and didn’t most of your god’s commandments as you do, they would be sent to prison. As many religious people are.
        And rightly so.

      • hammy

        Wow, kevbug… You are quite a character. “You are all wrong because my book says so. You all know my book is true, but choose to ignore it. I know this because my book says so. You are all amoral, because the only possible source of morality is my book.”

        I’d say ‘get over yourself’, but I am not convinced you’re not just trolling around.

        About morals, human civilization evolved to imbibe qualities which we now describe as moral. Your book merely pasted some of these, along with a shitload of BS into it. Morality predates your book. That’s right. Before your ten commandments were penned down, society already knew that going around murdering/ robbing is probably not good for society as a whole. There were legal entities in place before your book. Completely closeted civilizations, which had never heard of or seen your magic book, already had a sense of morality (they may differ from ours, but the core essense of ‘thou shalt not be an asshole’ was more or less built in to all). Hell – morality, compassion, helpfulness, etc are observed quite liberally in animal groups as well… Monkeys, birds, etc… And trust me, they have never read your book either.

        If you’re trolling, well, good job. I rarely respond, and you got me here. So pat yourself on the back. Good troll now. If you’re not trolling, I’m sure nothing I say further would penetrate that wonderfully, divinely inspired thick head of yours. Some quote I read online – If ignorance is bliss, you must be truly orgasmic.

      • Colin Robinson

        “If you do not know everything, then how can you make judgments on a God who knows?”
        Give me something to believe that this god knows everything.
        Let’s be clear, the bible, in many cases, declares unequivocally that the earth is flat.
        Whoever wrote the bible is ignorant as hell, but then, they were goat herders so why expect different?

        But your point is pretty much screwed unless you can show your god actually knows everything, and the bible clearly demonstrates he knows jack schitt. Assuming it is the word of this god, for which there is no reason to believe.

      • kevbug

        So where do you get your morals? How do you know what you know? Who cares what I know.
        If you are referring to Rev 7:1, the angels are standing at the North South East and West four corners. The Bible says many things about the sphere of the earth. Isaiah 40:21-22, Proverbs 8:27, and Job 26:10.
        There were many authors for the Bible. They were led by God to write what they write. I know you don’t care, but I was once like you…didn’t want a god telling me what I could and could not do. If God does not know everything, then you would not be able to know anything either.
        If this world is a result of random chance evolution, then you would have to prove scientifically that there is changes from one kind of animal to another. This has never been observed. It is a belief and a religion because there are no facts that prove evolution. That is why it is still a theory.

      • Colin Robinson

        “So where do you get your morals?”
        In order for man to live in societies he must have morals, so we have evolved empathy and guilt in order to facilitate this. These qualities can be seen in many different animal species. How could you have a school of piranha if they didn’t ‘know’ that killing each other is ‘wrong’?
        Where do you get your morals from when you declare that you will not force a woman to marry her rapist as the bible declares is moral?

        Not referring to Rev 7:1
        Isiah 40 is specifically translated to ‘the circle of the earth’, a circle being a FLAT disc, because the translation of the hebrew, (‘chug’ which can be thought of as ’round’, if I remember rightly), into ‘globe’ is perfectly valid as a translation of ‘chug’ but is absolutely nonsensical in terms of the passage. You cannot put a tent over a spherical earth to represent the sky.
        So every translation I have seen translates it as ‘circle’ which is a FLAT disc.
        Proverbs 8:27?! Seriously?!
        ‘I was there when he marked out the horizon on the face of the deep’?
        Clearly states that the writer believed the earth was a flat disc. The horizon, in reality, is not marked. And only those who believe the earth is flat could possibly believe it is.
        Same with Job 26:10.

        And the first creation myth in genesis refers to ‘the first day’. Only on a flat earth does that make sense, on a globe it is daytime all the time, somewhere.
        And dozens of other places as well.

        “like you…didn’t want a god telling me what I could and could not do”

        You don’t know me at all do you? That is not why I don’t believe in any of the gods, I don’t believe in any of the gods because there is no evidence that any of them exist. Only after that conclusion do I read the mythology and marvel at how people can worship such incredible evil.

        “If God does not know everything, then you would not be able to know anything either.”

        Why would Odin not knowing something mean I can’t know it? Do you not comprehend that your god is just one of thousands?

        “you would have to prove scientifically that there is changes from one kind of animal to another. This has never been observed.”

        Actually, it’s been observed a LOT! Do you not read the news at all? Do you not hear about viruses that change so much that they stop infecting birds and infect man instead? Mankind is spending a fortune on trying to prevent these things happening but you are declaring that such a transformation is impossible.

        And if you want to claim that changing host species is ‘microevolution’ as opposed to ‘macroevolution’. a ridiculous claim in itself, then you need to explain what magical barrier keeps the micro and macro separate.

        “That is why it is still a theory.”
        Gravity is still a theory, but I know you don’t walk off buildings because you wouldn’t be posting otherwise.
        Evolution is a FACT! We can see it happening, we use it in industrial design, we guard against it in medicine, we can see the history of it written in the rocks and in DNA. HOW evolution does all this is the theory.

        Still, the massive news that we have just got two new antibiotics, first in decades, which everyone else thinks is brilliant news you wouldn’t care about because microbes can’t evolve resistance to antibiotics because there’s no such thing as evolution.

      • kevbug

        The problem with the Virus is that it is still a virus. It has not changed into another kind. Any scientist will tell you. The change is micro evolution. Not macro evolution. I see birds changing, but they are still birds. I see dogs changing, but they are still dogs.
        Evolution is not a theory like gravity. I can use the scientific method on gravity. I can take a ball and throw it in the air. It comes back down. It is testable repeatable and proved. Evolution is not testable, you cannot repeat the big bang. It is not repeatable. It is an unsubstantiated conjecture about the past.
        I could also say that creation is a theory, but it is also not repeatable or testable.
        If evolution is a fact, you should be able to use the scientific method. Show me one kind that is evolved to another. You can’t even tell me where the dinosaurs came from.
        I never said that the DNA of microbes cannot contain the information that it would be resistant to antibodies. That is what it is. Just read the entire articles. These microbes had a mutation (loss of information) that allowed to them to be resistant to the antibodies.
        The problem is that you have a worldview that has to believe things in order to know where you came from. You believe man’s ideas. You have to believe what man comes up with who was not there when the world started, or you have to believe God who was there and wrote it all down for us.

      • Colin Robinson

        “The problem with the Virus is that it is still a virus. It has not changed into another kind.”
        Hmm, that’s a rather arbitrary definition of ‘kind’. So lifeforms living in completely different hosts with completely different dependencies are the same ‘kind’.
        So, by that definition, chimps and humans are the same ‘kind’. We can live virtually identical lives, inhabit the same spaces, do the same things.
        Now, obviously that is ridiculous, but so is your claim that viruses with two different hosts are the same ‘kind’.
        “The change is micro evolution. Not macro evolution.”
        So tell me, what is the magical barrier that stops, for example, a bear like creature that forages in the shallows of the coastline developing slowly, incrementally, more flipper like feet and legs becoming a walrus?
        In real life, there are situations where a population of birds is spread out along a line of trees and you can see minor differences between adjacent populations in the line but the two ends are VERY different.
        “I see birds changing, but they are still birds.”
        So a finch is the same ‘kind’ as an emu?!!! Same ‘kind’ as a penguin?!
        WOW!!!!!! I accept evolution as a fact of life the same way I accept gravity but you take it WAY too far!
        So when noah put all these ‘kinds’ on the ark he just included one pair of birds. And that pair of birds has since ‘microevolved’ into everything we have today, from galahs to hummingbirds, from ostriches to albatrosses.
        And it is vaguely tempting to state that all this ‘microevolution’ occurred within the 4000 years since the flood supposedly happened, (which the chinese and egyptian cultures never noticed, along with, well, every other culture on earth except the Mesopotamians), but we know these animals have been this diverse from eye witness accounts going back nearly that far. So, according to you, they all evolved instantaneously.
        And then stopped evolving completely.
        “Evolution is not testable, you cannot repeat the big bang.”
        The big bang has nothing to do with evolution, and evolution is eminently testable. You see, testing a scientific theory comprises of using that theory to make predictions and checking to see if those predictions are true. And if they are, you have strongly supported that theory.
        We do that all the time with evolution.

        NOW! The ‘theory’, actually hypotheses, of the existence of a benevolent god that grants wishes is also eminently testable.
        Prediction: If this god grants wishes then you can wish that a coin will come down heads and it will noticeably come down heads more than tails. All the time if your god is even slightly ‘powerful’.
        Toss a fair coin 100 times without praying to a god that it comes down heads. It will come down heads about 50 times.
        Do it again, this time praying to said god that it comes down heads. It will come down heads about 50 times.
        Prediction tested, it was false, the hypotheses of the prediction of a benevolent god that grants wishes is therefore false. So move on.

        Tossing coins too trivial?

        A study was done by the Templeton Institute into the power of prayer with heart surgery post operative patients. NOT trivial.
        Not prayed for, 50% complications
        Prayed for without them knowing, 50% complications
        Prayed for with them knowing, 60% complications.

        Every single study into the power of prayer has the same result. Zilch.

        Ergo, if your god exists he doesn’t answer prayers.

        Which makes sense, you people claim your god is almighty, all knowing. And the entire principle of prayer is you telling this all powerful, all knowing god that his plan is wrong and he needs to change it.
        “I could also say that creation is a theory, but it is also not repeatable or testable.”
        Nope! It is eminently testable. It predicts that you will find rabbit bones mixed in with dinosaur bones. If this is found then it will STRONGLY support creation.
        Still waiting.
        Evolution predicted that there will be half fish, half land animal in certain age rocks in Alaska. So they went and looked, and found them.

        But then, scientific prophecy kicks religious prophecy’s ass big time!

      • kevbug

        I am not too savvy on virus’, but I do know that when genecists study the epigenes they see that an organism can have the epigenes turned on or off. One of virus’ genes that was already programed into the virus’ DNA is that it can live off another host. It is not a different kind. It has nothing to do with the change that you claim happens to bears becoming a walrus. That is not observable.
        If the big bang has nothing to do with evolution, then how did you get here? There is the law of Biogenesis which states life cannot come from nonlife. How did it all start?
        Darwin noticed the finches on the Galapagos islands changing beak sizes. They had a change in adaptation not evolution. They never changed into another kind of bird. They were still finches. I do not say they evolve. I say they adapt just like observable evidence shows. They do not become a new species.
        Then, where did the dinosaurs come from?
        Why would a God who is over all do what ever a person asks. He can do as he pleases. He also can decide what is evil and good. If we do that we make ourselves to be like God. That is not our purpose. You misunderstand prayer as the Bible states. We don’t magically get what we ask for. That is man’s idea.
        Actually, you would not likely find rabbit bones mixed up with dinosaur bones because they most likely did not live in the same area. I really don’t know because I was not there.
        You must be talking about Tiktaalik fossil. It was found on Ellesmere Island. It is not half fish and half land animal. The whole fish has not been found. Only the skull, the neck, and some of the front fins. Evolutionists want to claim that by accidental mutations this Tiktaalik became a Acanthostega. The progression is not smooth, the fish to tetrapod is not in the correct order of progress. first there is fins then some bones then back to fins again There is a problem with using that as fact for evolution. A better explanation is that the creature is a mosaic, and was created. There are other fish we know spend time on land like the Mudskipper, Walking Catfish, and Climbing Perch yet evolutionists don’t use those as missing links. They don’t even know what the whole fossil looks like.

      • Colin Robinson

        One of virus’ genes that was already programed into the virus’ DNA is that it can live off another host.

        yeah? so why would your god do that and why has it taken, , ’6,000 years’ for each strain to come out?
        Why did he create a flu virus that has SIX THOUSAND different sets of genes that can be switched on and off so every year the previous year’s flu jab doesn’t work?
        Why is it that the scientists that know, atom by atom, what makes up these viruses cannot see these 6,000 versions but, instead, see a virus that continually changes its DNA, adding and removing information as it imperfectly replicates?
        Oh, could that be because these scientists know billions times more than you about viruses and know just how incredibly stupid your claim is?

        It has nothing to do with the change that you claim happens to bears becoming a walrus. That is not observable.

        I didn’t ask if it was observable, I asked what magical barrier stops it from happening?
        You really don’t grasp the very simple premise that gradual change accumulates do you? You declare that a species can only evolve over generations by a certain extent. But when that species reaches the ‘limit’ of that extent then it is a new starting point, and the ‘limitations’ that you declare there are to it changing have actually changed.

        If the big bang has nothing to do with evolution, then how did you get here?

        The big bang is the common name for the event that started off the universe.
        Abiogenesis is the development of the first life
        Evolution of life is how that first life came to be the variety of life on earth.
        They all work on VERY different principles.

        There is the law of Biogenesis which states life cannot come from nonlife.

        No such law, we don’t know how it happened YET but that doesn’t mean we won’t, doesn’t mean that we just say ‘goddidit’. Just like the fact that we didn’t know about refraction of light when the legend of gilgamesh was written, (the myth your story of noah is based upon), doesn’t mean that ‘goddidit’ although the writers of both myths decided that, indeed, ‘goddidit’ because they couldn’t work out how it happened.

        I do not say they evolve. I say they adapt just like observable evidence shows.

        What ‘observable evidence’? The nature of ‘observable evidence’ for the diversification of finches, that you accept, is the same as the nature of observable evidence for the evolution of birds from dinosaurs. We don’t see it happening, we see what is there now and deduce how that situation came to be.
        It’s a VERY common method of human beings determining what has happened when there was no direct observation. It’s why murderers have to be so careful. They’ll likely be caught even if no one saw them.
        BUT, according to your ‘thinking’, only murderers who are directly observed committing the act are ever convicted.
        <blockquoteYou misunderstand prayer as the Bible states.
        I am quoting the overwhelming majority of christians here, and I think you’ll find the ‘lord’s prayer’ which contains the begging line, “Give us this day our daily bread”, is in the bible as well. As is “ask and you shall receive” and loads of other crap that backs up my statement.

        We don’t magically get what we ask for. That is man’s idea.

        Absolutely correct, that was man’s idea and that’s what men wrote into the bible. You’re beginning to grasp that the bible is made up by man. Well done.

        The whole fish has not been found.

        You miss the point, the features found in the fossil, which are nothing like anything alive today, are clearly partway between fish and tetrapods.

        first there is fins then some bones then back to fins again

        Fins actually contain bones, this is what is fossilised. So your statement indicates you need to do a lot of research. The fact you are a creationist, you truly believe that your god created a million times as many species as are alive today living all together on earth and then wiped them all out in a great flood, indicates that you need to start thinking.

        A better explanation is that the creature is a mosaic, and was created.

        How?!!! If you cannot say HOW it was created then it is no explanation at all. “It’s all done by magic!” is not an explanation.

      • kevbug

        Why does God do things?
        For our good. That is what Eph. says.
        Epigenetics is just being researched. After the genome project scientists found that some genes could be turned on and off. This is not my claim.
        The law of biogenesis was developed by Louis Pasteur. It says that life cannot arise from non-life. It ruins your theory. You will have to say that by faith you accept that life arose from non-life because a law always trumps a theory. You have faith in man. I have faith in God.
        We don’t know how it happened yet.
        This is faith. You have faith in man to find out how it happened. That sounds like the things you are accusing me for are what you also have.
        How do you know the Epic of Gilgamesh was the story that Moses wrote on Noah? You were not there. God was, and he wrote it down for you to read.
        We don’t see it happening.
        You are agreeing that you take man’s word on faith again. You have faith in man. I have faith in God.
        There is a difference from murder investigation and the how we got here. Using science we can determine DNA and who’s it was.
        Where did the dinosaurs come from?
        The Bible says that we must have God’s will our will to ask and receive.
        Men wrote the Bible as they were directed by the Holy Spirit. God used man. God cannot lie like man does. I admit that it is a belief.
        You too believe in your worldview. There is no way you can prove evolution. It is how you view the world, and it was made up by man. You know man tells lies. No man was there, so I choose to believe God who was there and wrote it down for you to read instead of believing man.
        Who is the one hating in this? I have been talking all this time without calling you one name. You have called me names and have no reason to do so, except because I don’t believe your worldview holds up to logic or the scientific method.
        By your debating me, you show that you know there is a God. If there was no God then what would it matter? I die you die, and there would be nothing. However, you fight like it is your duty to destroy any evidence of God, so that you can have your skeletons in the closet. You can do your evil deeds. Paul in Romans 1 tells us that God is clearly seen by the things that are made. Paul says that you are without excuse. You know there is a God.

      • Colin Robinson

        Why does God do things? For our good.

        So you haven’t read the bible? He slaughtered all life on earth for its own good? He created disease and suffering for our own good? Yours is a truly dumb statement, contradicting both reality and the bible.

        scientists found that some genes could be turned on and off. This is not my claim

        I know that it is not your claim, your claim is that epigenetics can explain speciation without changing the DNA. Which means that ALL variations on species are already in the DNA, something not seen by any scientist.

        The law of biogenesis… It says that life cannot arise from non-life.

        In a single flask over a few days, you are correct. It has nothing to say about an entire planet over millions of years because that was beyond the scope of Pasteur;s experiment.

        You will have to say that by faith you accept that life arose from non-life because a law always trumps a theory.

        Faith isn’t required to say “I don’t know!” Faith is required to say “I don’t know, therefore goddidit!” A statement of breathtaking arrogance.
        Why can’t you just accept that you don’t know everything?

        How do you know the Epic of Gilgamesh was the story that Moses wrote on Noah?

        Because we found tablets containing the gilgamesh story which WAAY predate the biblical date for the flood.
        Unless you REALLY want to pretend that texts embedded in clay were copied from parchment?

        You have faith in man. I have faith in God.

        You haven’t told me which one yet!

        There is a difference from murder investigation and the how we got here.

        Is that so? But the collection of evidence to ascertain what has happened when no one, who’s talking, was there is the same principle. The exceptionally simplistic “who were there?!” response is equally applicable to both. And you never hear that from the defence in a murder trial because it really is a dumb argument.

        There is no way you can prove evolution.

        My first reaction was “Now THERE is a ‘statement of faith’” but it’s not is it? A statement of faith refers to believing something you have no evidence for, but your statement is simply a denial of overwhelming evidence. And the truth is, we don’t actually need evidence any more than we need evidence that 1+1=2, Evolution simply pops out of logical thought.

        so I choose to believe God who was there and wrote it down for you

        And how do you know he did that? WHERE YOU THERE?!
        Seriously tho, the bible is self evidently not written by any almighty god. The lack of understanding of the universe shows it was written by a primitive people, the morass of contradictions shows it was written by dishonest people.

        I have been talking all this time without calling you one name.

        Calling names?! YOU WORSHIP A BEING THAT YOU BELIEVE WILL TORTURE ME FOR ETERNITY AND YOU WHINE ON ABOUT ME ‘CALLING YOU NAMES’?!!
        Take a reality pill hey?

        If there was no God then what would it matter?

        SERIOUSLY?! You truly don’t grasp the massive evils done in the name of various gods? If the bush and blair didn’t believe in imaginary friends there would have been no second gulf war. Religion must be fought because believers in religion, and it does not matter which god or gods, truly believe they have the ‘right’ to inflict suffering on others in the name of their god.
        If you believers were happy to just believe and let others believe what they want to believe then you’d be right, belief in gods wouldn’t matter.
        But you REALLY, REALLY aren’t are you?

        Paul in Romans 1 tells us that God is clearly seen by the things that are made.

        As previously explained, we have looked down to the level of the electron and up to the level of billions of light years. We have seen the afterglow of the Big Bang, and can count the atoms in a virus, concepts so far beyond what Paul knew it is unreal, and we have seen no sign of a god or gods.
        Paul would see god in the exquisite structure of a snowflake and marvel how his god is so mighty that he can create billions of these without ever duplicating them. A scientist can explain that this is due to alternating temperatures, van de waals bonding and the physical shape of molecules of water. No god or gods required.

        You know there is a God.

        Which one? Oh, let me guess, you’re referring to the one your parents just happened to believe in. What a fortunate coincidence hey? All the families in all the world, believing in all kinds of gods, and you just happen to be born to believers of the one true god.

      • kevbug

        Yes, the whole world perished because man choose to do what was not good for them…..disobedience to God. The Bible says men’s hearts were wicked.
        Disease and suffering was not created by God. It was man’s choice to choose wickedness. The whole creation suffered from sin. Reality is that we are suffering from sin also. Do you really think things are getting better?
        If you breed different dogs you get a new dog. It is still a dog. It never changes to something else. That is all I am saying. You cannot observe a fish turning to a tetrapod. There is not smooth transition observable now or in the fossil record.
        If the earth is millions of years old, then you will have to prove your fact of evolution. Carbon dating doesn’t work; C14 it has a half life of 5740 years. Carbon 14 cannot last millions of years. Radiometric dating has too many assumptions. You don’t know the number or radioisotopes that the rock started out with, You don’t know if there was any contamination, You don’t know if there was a constant decay rate, and the conditions at the beginning of the rock formation. No one was there to observe these things. You are depending on the truthfulness of a man to tell you. I depend on the truthfulness of a God who cannot lie.
        If you say,” I don’t know” then you are taking it on blind faith that you evolved.
        I know I don’t know everything. I never remember saying that I did.
        There are lots of problems with the Epic of Gilgamesh, but why do you not believe it was true? It was written by men. That is what you are believing when you believe in evolution. Why not other men’s writings. It is all unproven past conjectures.
        If the worldwide flood were true what would we find? There are mass burials of sea creatures and land creatures found all over the world. There are many sea fossils on the top of mountains even on Everest. That sounds like a major flood! If you find something dead, it usually rots or gets eaten pretty quickly. It takes a flood to quickly bury a creature, and then fossilization before it rots. Also the layers in the Grand Canyon are supposed to be millions of years apart, but why is there no erosion between layers? If there was no rain for millions of years maybe, but then there could not be life. If there was a worldwide flood, it would lay down layer after layer quickly and there would not be erosion. Plus, the some of the layers are bent together. In order for that to happen over millions of years, the layers would have to remain wet and pliable till the next layer came after millions of years. There is a problem if there was no erosion between layers, and they had to remain wet that long. If there was a worldwide flood, the last layer would still be wet when the next layer and next layer was laid down. Then when it was bent, it would still be wet.
        1+1=2. That is how you prove that random mistakes over millions of years make you? That is math. Math has correct or incorrect answers. In evolution- a mistake plus a mistake equals something creative. That is not logic. If you took a science class you could not get a mistake all the time and pass the class, but that is how you say humans got here? accidental mutations do not make something better. It is missing information. If you read a newspaper that is missing information that is not progress, that is a lie.
        I trust in the God of the Bible because he was there. He cannot lie.
        The people of old times were not primitive. Have you ever seen the pyramids of Mexico or Egypt. They are beautiful and still stand. Most of current man’s buildings last a few hundred years or less. Some of these have lasted more then 3000 years. That is a factor of 10! You cannot even fit a credit card in between the blocks of the Egyptian pyramids. That is way better then the carpenters of today. The people of the Bible worked with bronze and iron. They had musical instruments. They were able to pass their knowledge to many generations because they lived longer. Take a look at the Antikythera Mechanism. It used gears to compute the sun, moon and stars. This was not made by a primitive people, but it is from over 2000 years old.
        You know you don’t have to go to hell. It is not God’s choice that any perish. It is your choice. God is not going to torture you for eternity. You are choosing to go that way.
        Why are things evil to you? If you really believe that you are going to die and that is it; then why do you get to choose what is evil and what is not? You don’t know all that is going on in the world at the same time, so why can you say something is evil? What if murdering someone is helping out millions of others. What if you don’t know what is behind the scenes? God does. He does things for good. You don’t see all that goes on. You trust yourself to make moral decisions and you know you are not perfect. Why not trust a God who can see and knows all?
        If there was a big bang, where is all the anti matter? There should be equal amounts of matter and anti matter. That is physics.
        If a snowflake does not take intelligence, then you should be able to make one. You are an intelligent person. You cannot use any matter. If it does not take intelligence to make an atom, then why can our best scientists using millions of dollars, make one? They have not even been able to produce all left handed amino acids, much less life. Do you believe that time plus mistakes equals life? You cannot even get your house clean with time plus nothing. There is not a chance that you will get life from nothing.

      • Colin Robinson

        Yes, the whole world perished because man choose to do what was not good for them…..disobedience to God

        So all the little puppies died for their own good because ‘man’ did something completely undefined and a being who committed massive genocide considered ‘wrong’.
        Your god orders you to kill a bride who is not a virgin on her wedding night, (I believe there is an exemption for a non-virgin bride marrying the man who raped her and took her virginity but that isn’t explicit. Possibly she has to marry him and is then killed for being non-virginal?).
        Disobedience to your god is GOOD!!!!

        The Bible says men’s hearts were wicked.

        According to whom?

        Disease and suffering was not created by God.

        So they were created by something more powerful than your god, who could go against your god’s wishes with your god helpless to counter it?
        What is this ‘something’?

        If you breed different dogs you get a new dog. It is still a dog. It never changes to something else. That is all I am saying.

        That’s OK, I know you don’t understand the first thing about evolution and redefine ‘kind’ to suit whatever argument you’re using at the time.

        Carbon dating doesn’t work; C14 it has a half life of 5740 years.

        Which is why it is used to carbon more recent artefacts. Which are still far older than your bible states the world is.
        Other elements with half lives up to billions of years are used to date older rocks. And other methods as well. And several different methods consistently give the same dates.

        You don’t know the number or radioisotopes that the rock started out with

        Actually, you do. Because with many that are used they are not actually different isotopes but different elements.

        No one was there to observe these things.

        We’re back to the ludicrous idea that the CSI evidence can be thrown out of court simply by saying “Where you there?!”
        Doesn’t happen, your argument is ridiculous.

        but why is there no erosion between layers?

        OK, you are self evidently not a geologist. So why do you declare that all geologists are wrong because you can’t understand something?

        Then when it was bent, it would still be wet.
        1+1=2.

        So the Grand Canyon was laid down as sediment at the bottom of a body of water. You actually got something vaguely right.

        This was not made by a primitive people, but it is from over 2000 years old.

        But after the first programmable robot was made, what is your point?

        If you took a science class you could not get a mistake all the time and pass the class

        Of course you could! We can TRACE the history of these ‘mistakes’ BTW. In living creatures from one generation to the next.
        Did you know that all mitochondria is inherited from the mother? It is passed down from generation to generation WITHOUT sexual mixing. Same with the Y Chromosome. According to you that means that out mitochondria is all identical. It aint.

        I trust in the God of the Bible because he was there. He cannot lie.

        And yet he does, according to your mythology. And according to your creationism he has created a world of life that can be beautifully explained with evolution but he did all that as a lie, just to fool us.

        BTW, why are you bothering to attack the theory of evolution? Even if you do prove it wrong it will have zero meaning for your argument of ‘creation’.
        Why don’t you prove that your god created life, as is, on earth? Show us the aspects of the fossil record that can only be explained with creationism? The aspects of life that can only be explained with creationism? Where’s the animal that is clearly, completely, unrelated to any other life on earth?
        There are NO endoskeletal hexapeds on earth, this is easily explained by studying how hexapedal fish would simply be bad at swimming when you view life through the explanation of evolution. What’s your explanation?
        If we are intelligently designed you can be sure of one thing, the designer was dumb as

        Have you ever seen the pyramids of Mexico or Egypt. They are beautiful and still stand.

        They are, essentially, artificial hills, mounds of stone. They still stand because they could only fall if the stone rotted, which it doesn’t do.

        You know you don’t have to go to hell. It is not God’s choice that any perish. It is your choice.

        That is a stupendously stupid claim. NOBODY would choose to be tortured for eternity by your god. I am not choosing eternal torture, any more than you choose to not get presents for Xmas by sending your letter to Santa.
        And if your god is all powerful then it IS his choice, no one is forcing him to torture people for eternity.
        Simple fact is that there is zero reason to believe there is a god, in reality virtually no one actually believes in the biblical god and the threat of heaven and hell. Otherwise we’d have a lot more witches and non-virgins killed as people strove to obey the demands of your god.

        If you really believe that you are going to die and that is it; then why do you get to choose what is evil and what is not?

        I see evil as the gratuitous inflicting of suffering on others. It is a definition that suits my purposes.
        You do not have that definition, you consider gratuitous infliction of suffering on others to be ‘good’. I don’t subscribe to that POV

        so why can you say something is evil?

        Torturing billions of innocents for eternity is evil. I cannot make you see that logically as it is a feeling bred into me over millions of generations of evolution, and you deny such guidance in favour of books written by a primitive people, (the israelites never even built pyramids BTW!)

        If there was a big bang, where is all the anti matter?

        We don’t know, YET! Why are you so arrogant that you cannot admit you don’t know something? ‘We don’t know’ DOES NOT MEAN ‘goddidit’. Any more than the fact we DIDN’T know what created rainbows means ‘goddidit’ as written in your mythology.

        If a snowflake does not take intelligence, then you should be able to make one.

        Easily. But what you are saying is that you truly believe that your god makes each snowflake individually. You have reached a new level of ridiculous.

        If it does not take intelligence to make an atom, then why can our best scientists using millions of dollars, make one?

        I think you meant “can’t” and the simple fact is that anyone can make an atom, and does all the time.

        There is not a chance that you will get life from nothing.

        Nobody is saying that.
        But there is one thing for certain, you cannot possibly get an almighty, all intelligent, all powerful being from nothing. Which is what you are saying.

      • kevbug

        Disobedience to your god is good!!!
        ????
        What about the 10 commandments? You are saying that you like murder, lying, adultery, and disobedient children? I doubt you are that immoral. You cannot say the whole Bible is wrong would you?
        If you use Radioisotopes to date rocks, you are assuming. Scientists used radioisotope dating to date rocks in the Mt. St. Helen eruption in 1980. That is a known date. The lab used Potassium Argon dating method. In 1992 when the test was done, the dates that were given were 350,000-2.8 million years old. There are assumptions in dating rocks. Assuming is not being scientific. The battle is not science vs creation. It is evolution vs God. <—Google that and you might be surprised.
        No one was there to measure the daughter to parent isotopes. You are assuming how much radiation started in the rock. You cannot say that the earth has always been the same, so neither can you say that the rate of decay is the same.
        If the layers are not eroded and stayed wet for millions of years, where was the land…under water? The Grand Canyon is over 10,000' in elevation at the north rim. That shows there was a flood that covered the world. The evidence is right there in front of you. I can see that it is not a problem with evidence. Geologists all look at the same evidence weather creationist or evolutionist. It is the bias or worldview that causes them to use it for their view. You are looking at the world through evolution glasses that man came up with. I am looking at the world in Biblical glasses that God gave us in his word. You can either trust man or God. Since God knows everything, and no man knows everything, I choose the Biblical worldview.
        I understand why there is no erosion between layers. It is because they were laid down one after another in a short period of time. There was not time for erosion. The layers that the food of Noah laid down were massive. They covered whole continents and some even between continents. It takes a large flood to do this.
        You explain creation with assumptions of incomplete data. The Bible explains creation with everything we need to know. You say nature did it and complain that I say God did it.
        It is not God's choice. He does not want you to perish. He also does not want robots either. He wants you to make a choice for him or your own ideas. All powerful is not all dominant. He wants your heart to turn to him for your salvation from your wickedness. He wants you to come to Him on His terms, not on yours. God made hell for Satan and his angels, but you can choose to go there. You should stop fighting God and accept him.
        If evil is inflicting suffering on others, then why choose evolution? It is just a life of suffering and then die. Theorists conclude that this universe will suffer a heat death. Ouch. Plus mutations drive evolution. It has been the suffering of countless beings that cause survival of the fittest. Death is the end. Do you think of that as not suffering? Do you eat meat? Would that not make an animal to suffer? If you drive a car or walk anywhere, there are billions of microscopic beings that you are causing to suffer and die. If you itch….same thing. That does not make sense to me.
        As for the Israelites not building the pyramids…in Egyptology and the Bible the Israelites were in Egypt as slaves and before that, Joseph was second in command. There is evidence that Moses when he grew up in Pharaoh's palace, he was trained in the knowledge of the Egyptians. Moses was an Israelite. This suggests that they not only built them, but also knew how.
        If you do not know something that is humble to admit it. Since you do not know, then is it not faith that you have that it happened?
        You can make an atom?
        If no one can make life from nothing then where did all this life come from? God is omnipresent. He has always been. He will always be. That is why he is able to make judgments. He knows the end from the beginning. He can make the rules for he knows all.

      • Colin Robinson

        What about the 10 commandments? You are saying that you like murder, lying, adultery, and disobedient children?

        So you haven’t read the ten commandments then?
        The first four are just your god being narcissistic, and there’s plenty of people should not be honoured by their children, or anyone! 10 goes against everything that is capatilism. Adultery is personal choice. As is deception, sometimes lies do good.
        Face it, there are only two commandments out of the ten that are enshrined in law in civilised countries. Uncivilised countries impose more of them but they are regarded as uncivilised for a reason.

        I doubt you are that immoral.

        You worship a monster, you do not know what the word ‘immoral’ means!!!

        The lab used Potassium Argon dating method. In 1992 when the test was
        done, the dates that were given were 350,000-2.8 million years old.

        Absolutely correct. This is why the lab ‘Institute for Creation ‘Research’, part of answersingenesis, should be mocked without mercy. They are unbelievably incompetent.

        There are assumptions in dating rocks

        And the best assumption is that it is not a good idea to get religious nutcases to do it.
        The assumptions are merely that the laws of physics do not change over time. Same assumption you make whenever you’re careful next to a cliff edge. Or set your alarm for the morning knowing there will be one.

        evolution vs God.

        Which god?
        But even forgetting that enormous flaw in your ‘thinking’, (even if you could prove evolution wrong it would say Jack Schitt about the existence of your god or any other), the other massive flaw in your argument is that evolution IS science. The same thinking that allows us to debate across thousands of miles, (your god never went further than 200 miles from where he was supposedly born according to your mythology BTW), is the same thinking that underpins our understanding of evolution.
        THINK about it! If you are a young earth creationist then the science you reject is not just biology. Radiometric dating is not evolution, it is subatomic physics. The dating of the universe to 13.7 billion years old is not evolution, it is electromagnetic theory and general relativity. I can’t think of a single branch of science that would not be invalidated if the universe were just 6,000 years old.
        The knowledge that allows us to manipulate electrons in circuit boards is also knowledge that the speed of light is 300,000km/s. Which means that we look at the furthest stars the naked eye can see we are looking at the stars as they were over three times the age of the universe ago, according to you.

        You are assuming how much radiation started in the rock.

        Already explained why you are wrong on that.

        so neither can you say that the rate of decay is the same

        And as soon as someone proves it isn’t, (although tree ring dating corresponds tightly with Carbon14 dating for twice as long as you say the universe has been around), scientists will accept they are wrong.

        That shows there was a flood that covered the world.

        No, it shows that the Grand Canyon was underwater for millions of years. It has nothing to say about the rest of the world.

        It is the bias or worldview that causes them to use it for their view.

        Nope, it is based on scientific thinking for actual geologists.

        Since God knows everything, and no man knows everything, I choose the Biblical worldview.

        But you are making the massive assumption that your god wrote the bible, although it is full of errors. You cannot know that, where you there?

        It takes a large flood to do this.

        You would not believe how large!!! The height of water required to carry enough sediment to lay down a mile deep layer would be 10 miles deep! And you have already said that you believe that the grand canyon hasn’t moved so the water would be 10 miles deep, plus 10,000 feet. So over 60,000 feet deep of seriously muddy water.
        (But only muddy over the grand canyon.)
        Problem with that, of course, is there is no way that sediment from the bottom could possibly get that high up in the water. Sediment is raised by turbulent water, and you get turbulent water by it flowing downhill. But why would it flow downhill when downhill is already full of water?
        You are trying to claim that the physics of a muddy river in full flow applies to masses of water that are miles deep. There is no way to get that much sediment into the waters above the Grand Canyon even if there was a flood. Unless your god did it by magic just to lie to us.

        The Bible explains creation with everything we need to know.

        Everything YOU need to know. But for a great many people ‘goddidit’ is not an answer. That is why we have science, why we have medicine, why we have cars and areoplanes, why we have the internet. Because people want to REALLY know.

        It is not God’s choice. He does not want you to perish.

        If your god is almighty then nothing happens against his will. Are you saying he is not almighty? That I am more powerful than your god?

        He wants you to come to Him on His terms, not on yours.

        Says who? Some stories written decades after this god supposedly spoke the words?
        And why is this almighty god, creator and ruler of a billion trillion stars, so insecure that he DEMANDS that I capitulate to him or he will torture me for eternity?
        More to the point, why can’t see just how evil that is?

        You should stop fighting God and accept him.

        I’m not fighting your god, I’m too busy fighting Sauron. (The evil dude out of Lord of the Rings. Also completely fictional.)

        then why choose evolution? It is just a life of suffering and then die

        You really don’t grasp this do you? People don’t ‘choose’ evolution any more than they choose gravity. It is reality.

        As for the Israelites not building the pyramids.

        Less of the convoluted arguments and just show me what pyramids the israelites made hey?
        I mean ‘israelite pyramids’, not something you claim they helped build because your book says so.

        Since you do not know, then is it not faith that you have that it happened?

        No. There are a great many things I don’t know how it happened. But I still know it happened.

        You can make an atom?

        Of course, so can you. Take one proton, one electron, stick them together and you have a hydrogen atom. Fire’s on downstairs, it makes a lovely glow from all those atoms being made.

        If no one can make life from nothing then where did all this life come from

        Who said life was made from nothing? As there was no one there to make it is only religious people saying someone made it.

        God is omnipresent.

        So why did the King of Assyria who was converted to worshipping yahweh take two burro loads of israelite soil back to damascus so he could worship yahweh outside of yahweh’s territory?
        (Kings II if I recall rightly.)

        He has always been.

        Not according to your bible. Your god was originally an henotheistic god, god of the israelites, bound to the soil of the israelite nations. Or so your mythology says.

        He can make the rules for he knows all.

        So why pray?
        And why did it take him 300 years to notice that the israelites were enslaved by egypt?

      • kevbug

        Ahh so you like to be lied to? I can see why you do it because it increases your survival value. You think there is no one who will know. Do you think your wife would like if you had an affair? Would you like it if she did? I don’t need to know your answers…it is just to show how foolish your morals are. They work for you, but what about if others choose them. What if the scientists choose them that tell you these things that you claim as fact?
        You said that anyone gets to decide what is right and wrong. What is wrong with my decision? You make yourself to be god by saying what I can and cannot do.
        I choose to live how I know my God says for my own good.
        No the laws of physics do not change, but the weather does, and so that is why we cannot know what it was like. It is not science to say things that are not testable, provable or repeatable. You cannot prove that there are ape like creatures that are turning to man or fish becoming tetrapod like. You can believe lying is ok, but you really should not lie to your self. Self deception is not good for you.
        If evolution is science then you have to repeat the experiment, prove that an fish can turn into a tetrapod. You cannot say that it shows in the fossil record. To be science it must be shown by experiment. If life can come from non-life it has to be shown by testable repeatable experiments. You cannot say it takes millions of years because that is not science, that is an unsubstantiated conjecture about the past. (BTW biology is the study of life. How do creationist reject science when they study life just the same as an evolutionist?)
        Radiometric dating shows that there are errors in our dating systems. If one rock dates millions of years different with different parent/daughter dating, then why is it that you believe the dates? There is something wrong if two dating methods give different dates.
        If the universe is 13.7 billion years old then why can we see stars that are about 75 billion light years away. It is not fact! You just said it was a theory. Science is studying facts. You can make theories, but that does not make the theory of evolution a fact, but historical science. You have a starlight distance problem also. There are plenty of theories of how to get the starlight to earth in less time then what we can see. Yes, they are only theories, but at least a creationist is not living his life with the purpose of telling others that there is no purpose in life. Once your dead, your dead….for you that is all. That seems meaning less to me.
        Ok, so if the laws of physics are what make the rate of decay the same, then you have lots of bigger problems. The moon moves away from the earth at 1.5 cm per year. It is at 120,000 (about) miles from earth. In less then 1.5 billion years ago the moon and earth touch. Life would be impossible.
        Even you admit that the earth was not always the same. Evolutionists said that rock and dust came together (which is against laws of physics). The things that you claim I do wrong (why is it your right to say I am wrong in your worldview anyways? You said that it is a person’s choice. That makes truth relative) with laws of physics; you also claim can be broken by your theory. That is not science or logic.
        Tree ring dating. Well, that is funny how the scientist have found that trees can put on more then one ring a year. There are plenty of evolutionists that know that.
        If the Grand Canyon was underwater for millions of years, what held the water from flooding the rest of the world that is below 10,500′ above sea level? You break physical laws again. If you don’t know then your theory is not scientific till it is all proven. The fact is that no one can prove it. It will always be theory VS. theory. It is not testable, repeatable, or provable. That is the scientific method.
        If it is the geologists that are scientific, then why cannot they say evolution is a fact?
        From your worldview why is it wrong to be full of errors? You said that it is up to the person to decide. What if two people disagree? From what you said about it being up to the individual, both are right. You are right and I am right. I hope you really don’t believe that morals are decided by an individual.
        I do not know of a layer that is a mile deep. I only know of layers that extend over vast areas. The layers could have been laid down easily by Tsunamis in Noah’s flood. There is no way a muddy river could lay down the layers in the Grand Canyon. One layer extends to the Appalachian mountains. Most go all the way up into Nevada and Utah. They were not laid down by the Colorado River. You can ask the NPS at the GC National Park that. I am not saying that the world wide flood was a calm storm of rain for 40days and 40 nights. The Bible says the fountains of the great deep were broken up. If lava flows into the ocean it makes waves…..It is going to lay down layers. It is a better way of explaining the layers that were laid down then your muddy river.
        What invention, in modern medicine, or industry, or anything…do you need to believe in the theory of evolution? Do you want your Dr. to lie to you? What if it is in his best interest? If you believe in creation, you can design things that are copies of the Designer. Like the Bear trap copies the Venus Fly trap, or the camera is a copy of what God made the eye to do, but not nearly as well made. Even the best cameras cannot copy the design of the eye.
        You are not understanding how God is almighty. You have a choice. You can choose to do right or wrong. If you were god, then maybe you would not let anyone do what you did not want them to, but that is not what God is like. He wants you to choose Him. You have a choice, and you will never be able to say that no one told you. He does not demand you obey Him. Just as you would like your employees to do their work with out you hounding over them, God wants you to choose Him without forcing you.
        Gravity is testable, repeatable and provable. Evolution is not. Just why do you think it is the theory of evolution?
        You did not make an atom from nothing. It is also so hard to grasp an electron or a proton.
        You believe in eternal matter. I believe in an eternal God. It is not provable testable or repeatable. It does not follow the Scientific method.
        Who cares what a man did? It is not a problem for someone to believe the Bible. You are saying that your theory is fact. You still have not a shred of evidence that proves all of that.
        I do not know of a place where God was bound. I cannot find it in the Bible.
        They were enslaved for 400 years in Egypt. God knew they were, but they did not want to leave. It took that long for God to change their hearts. Then they complained when God did bring them out. It is not people that make him God. It is I Am that makes him God.

      • Colin Robinson

        Do you think your wife would like if you had an affair? Would you like it if she did?

        Stupid question, it is entirely a personal matter, not a subject for judgement from an almighty god. And it is stupid beyond comprehension to believe that a god of a billion trillion stars who designed and created us would be pissed off about adultery when that is built into our nature.

        They work for you, but what about if others choose them.

        As their adultery doesn’t affect me who gives a shit?

        What if the scientists choose them that tell you these things that you claim as fact?

        Completely irrelevant of course. A scientist could be the most despicable man alive, he could believe in and worship a being who tortures innocent people for eternity as you do, (although that seriously brings into question his intelligence it doesn’t actually affect his scientific findings), but if he can give proof that his ideas are correct then why the hell would I reject his science?
        It’s like music, Meatloaf is a gormless git who declares that outspoken atheists should be deported but I still love his music because his moronity does not affect his voice.

        You said that anyone gets to decide what is right and wrong.

        Nope! That’s religion. That’s what people like you and Meatloaf say.

        I choose to live how I know my God says

        You do?!!!! And you have internet access from your prison cell? Because anyone who lives by biblical law will be very quickly locked away. And damned right too!

        No the laws of physics do not change

        You said they did.

        It is not science to say things that are not testable, provable or repeatable

        Assuming you comprehend what that means that is right. But you REALLY don’t.

        or fish becoming tetrapod like

        Reported in the New Scientist just this week actually.

        You cannot say that it shows in the fossil record.

        AGAIN!!! We’re back to the guy from CSI in court having his evidence thrown out becos the defence said, “How do you know, WERE YOU THERE?!”
        Doesn’t happen, it’s a bullshit argument.

        How do creationist reject science when they study life just the same as an evolutionist?

        LOL!!! That’s like saying that someone addicted to porn is a biological scientist!

        If one rock dates millions of years different with different parent/daughter dating, then why is it that you believe the dates?

        AGAIN!!! It wasn’t scientists who ‘showed’ that, it was creationists.

        then why can we see stars that are about 75 billion light years away

        We can’t. You just made that up.

        You can make theories, but that does not make the theory of evolution a fact

        The fact of evolution is proven by the literally mountains of evidence for it.

        Once your dead, your dead….for you that is all. That seems meaning less to me.

        *you’re
        Yes, I understand that christians say that but the way they live their lives shows they don’t mean it.
        Why eat a doughnut if it’s going to come to an end? Once the last bite has gone, what was the point?
        Because you enjoy it while you’re eating it.
        I enjoy live while I am living it and that is, in itself, reason to live. And eat doughnuts.
        Do you hate life that much that you don’t agree with that?

        The moon moves away from the earth at 1.5 cm per year.

        Defined by the laws of physics, (unchanging), and the distance from the earth, (changing).

        Evolutionists said that rock and dust came together (which is against laws of physics).

        SAYS WHO?!!!

        why is it your right to say I am wrong in your worldview anyways? You said that it is a person’s choice.

        If it only affects that person yes. I am not religious, I do not make it my goal to impose my ‘morals’ on others unless they are hurting others.
        That’s due to the quality of empathy. You might try it sometime?

        Tree ring dating. Well, that is funny how the scientist have found that trees can put on more then one ring a year.

        In circumstances that only the utterly desperate would claim affected the principle of tree ring dating.
        You REALLY don’t grasp analytical thinking do you?

        I do not know of a layer that is a mile deep.

        So there was a ‘great flood’ for each layer?!!!!

        The layers could have been laid down easily by Tsunamis in Noah’s flood.

        So you don’t know anything about tsunamis either?
        No, absolutely not. The stopping of the sun in the sky that would have caused waves that washed everything into the ocean in Joshua was AFTER the great flood.

        There is no way a muddy river could lay down the layers in the Grand Canyon

        No one has said that. Do you not think that you should grasp the basics of geology before you call all the experts wrong? Or possibly just think?

        Most go all the way up into Nevada and Utah.

        Laid down by a wave?!!!!!!

        If lava flows into the ocean it makes waves…..It is going to lay down layers.

        How? EXACTLY!! Give the specifics, show how it can be replicated. Model it. Work out the equations.
        At the moment it is a case of:”I need to convince myself that this could happen and this sounds vaguely plausible.”
        Pardon me for not sharing your desperate desire to believe.

        Even the best cameras cannot copy the design of the eye

        Nearly right, WOULD not. Big blind spot, seriously slow exposure adjustment, only a tiny area of high res. The cheapest cameras out perform the eye by a long way.
        Not to mention that I have to wear glasses to see this post because my focusing mechanism is screwed.

        Gravity is testable, repeatable and provable. Evolution is not. Just why do you think it is the theory of evolution?

        Same reason as it is called gravitational theory.

        If you were god, then maybe you would not let anyone do what you did not want them to, but that is not what God is like. He wants you to choose Him

        Have you never had parents? Do you not have children?
        Are you REALLY that ignorant of the concept of unconditional love?
        No wonder you worship imaginary beings.

        You did not make an atom from nothing.

        You never said ‘from nothing’. This is part of the problem, you cannot even formulate the questions, never mind understand the answers.

        It is not a problem for someone to believe the Bible

        Unless they can think.

        I do not know of a place where God was bound. I cannot find it in the Bible.

        Plenty of places, ark of the covenant for one. Your god was captured in battle as he couldn’t defeat iron chariots. He was so furious he made a statue fall over.
        Try READING your bible.

        God knew they were, but they did not want to leave.

        Exo 2.
        24 God heard their groaning and he remembered his covenant with Abraham, with Isaac and with Jacob. 25 So God looked on the Israelites and was concerned about them.

        Like I said. Try READING your bible.

      • kevbug

        Is it impossible for the God of the Bible to exist?

      • Colin Robinson

        By what criteria? By any normal criteria, yes. He is ‘supernatural’ which means that he is not natural and therefore cannot exist.
        Even if you accept the possibility of the supernatural occurring then it is still impossible. Just as it is impossible for there to be an elephant in my office right now.

        A god as described in the bible would be blatantly evident to all, but it is blatantly evident to none.

      • kevbug

        You have to know everything to say something cannot exist.

        The God of the Bible has made himself evident, even to you. Romans tells us that the invisible things of God are clearly seen from the creation of the world. They are understood by the things that are made even His eternal Godhead and power. The Bible says that you are without excuse.

      • Colin Robinson

        No, I do NOT have to know everything to be able to say with absolute certainty that there is no full grown elephant in my office.
        And your bible declared that your god is personally responsible for the rainbows. And yet we can make them at will.
        The writers of your mythology considered rainbows to be a sign of a god because they were beautiful and they didn’t have a clue how they were made.

        We are not bronze age goat herders. We don’t need a god to explain the rainbows to us, or anything else.

        Because apart from anything else, ‘goddidit’ is simply NOT an explanation.

      • kevbug

        As an atheist, how can you know anything? You say there is order to the universe, but if random chance happens again…you may be out of luck. How can you know your senses are reliable? You can’t unless the world was created by the God of the Bible. Just because you see him as a monster doesn’t mean that is the truth. Truth doesn’t depend on your idea of Him. Truth doesn’t even depend on majority of scientists. If that were so, at Galileo’s time the sun would revolve around the earth.
        You cannot make a rainbow ex nihilo …like God did. We use the tools He created to make a rainbow…light and water. For that reason, you still borrow the Biblical worldview for your morals, and then add or subtract for your suppression of the truth. You have to make morals fit to the skeletons in the closet you want to do, and not have someone else tell you it is wrong.
        After all, you say ‘naturedidit” every time there is something you don’t understand. Nature will find a way, nature is all there is, nature is your god.
        Nature is NOT an explanation.

      • Colin Robinson

        I truly don’t understand what you’re trying to say here. The fact I don’t believe in any of the gods has no bearing on what I know and don’t know.
        How do you know that the world was created by your god? You can’t, all you have is a plethora of stories and fables, one of which you have selected as a result of where and when you were born.
        How can you ‘know’ something when it is just pure chance that you even heard it?

        Billions of people around the world, including most christians, have their idea of what they ‘know’ of what you call ‘god’. And they fundamentally disagree with what you ‘know’ about your ‘god’. So how is that YOU ‘know’ the truth about ‘god’ and everyone else gets it so wrong? Or is it someone else who ‘knows’ this god and your version is made up BS?
        How can you tell? If one version of god was ACTUALLY more compelling than the others than that god would be accepted by all. But your god is no more compelling than Allah, or Shiva, or Brahma, or Odin.

        Nature is NOT an explanation.

        There’s something you are REALLY missing here. Scientists don’t just say ‘naturedidit’, they EXPLAIN, in DETAIL, how ‘naturedidit’.
        You religious types say ‘goddidit’ and then start talking incomprehensible BS when asked how he did it.
        You say that your god created rainbows ex nihilo, but you don’t have a clue how rainbows are made! Rainbows are not ‘created’, they simply emerge from the nature of light. Same as evolution emerges from the nature of living things.

        You need to understand a hellava lot more about the world before you can even begin to grasp how little you understand about the world.

      • kevbug

        I am asking how you know anything? If you are a result of random chance mutations over billions or years….How can you be sure that you are not just an amalgam? What is your theory of knowledge?
        If the world was not created by the God of the Bible, then nothing would make sense. Your worldview only gives you a senseless existence at most. If all your meaning is just to, as you say, enjoy like a doughnut….then what purpose is there? If you were created for a purpose beyond your own enjoyment by a God who gives purpose, then there is something to live for.
        Chance that I heard it. It is not chance. It is what God has shown each human being, and given that person to make a choice. We can live for ourselves, and be meaningless, or we can live a full life doing what we were designed to do. That is why so many disagree, not with me, but with the Bible.
        You say nature did it. You can’t tell me about the fact of evolution because it is not a fact. You can’t prove man made evolution without going back to the past. It is not science. Tell me where the dinosaurs came from. You cannot tell me where the first matter came from. You just say I don’t know nature did it. If you have no explanation, then it cannot be a fact.
        You see creatures that are made like each other and say they have common ancestry. I see common creatures and say they have the same designer. The only difference is that you say nature did it, and I say God did it. If things just emerge from the nature of light….nature did it. You do say nature did it.
        It is funny how you blame me for things that you are guilty of. Looks like you need to understand more of the world before you can even begin to grasp how little you know about the world. You don’t even know how you know anything. I know a God who knows everything.

      • kevbug

        Is it impossible for the Bible to be the word of God as it claims to be?

      • Martin McNeill

        You ever get that feeling your talking to a brick wall? You ever get that feeling you need to read about 1000 more books on top of the 1000 you already have just to have a conversion with someone who has read 1 book? (im using the term read 1 book very loosely)

      • kevbug

        How do you use evolution in industrial design? I thought you said the world was not designed?
        How do you use evolution in medicine? I know lots many doctors that do not believe in evolution, and practice medicine very well. In fact, I would rather go to a creationist Dr. then an evolutionary Dr. because if they believe that I am just another animal, they will treat me as one. Not as a special creation like God says we are in Genesis.
        I have seen lots of fossils, and never have seen one that said it was an evolutionist. In fact with all the dating methods proved to have assumptions involved. That is pretty gutsy to say that evolution is a fact.
        You can decide truth for yourself, but if you look at facts, you will find that evolution is really a cover-up.

      • WilmRoget

        “Atheists are actually FAR more moral than creationists are.”

        Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Further, you lie about religion indicates a great lack of morals on your part.

      • Colin Robinson

        You want evidence, look at the level of morality in deeply religious countries such as iran, uganda and saudi.
        Then look at the level of morality in atheistic countries such as Finland, Denmark etc.
        Look at the states of the US. There is a direct correlation between level of religious adherence and divorce, crime rates, murders, teenage pregnancy etc etc etc.
        Look at the most religious times in history, they’re actually called ‘the dark ages’ for a reason.
        Look at how the level of violence worldwide is falling as the adherence to religion is falling. Europe was at war for centuries while they truly believed in the judgement of a god. With the exception of the religion driven strife in the balkans it has largely been at peace since WWII.

        Look at the cruel brutality of the israeli occupation of palestine. Driven by belief in gods.

        Look at the news! The more religious a commentator the more they are gagging for war.

        Not a difficult concept to get your head around. If you truly believe in a god who is going to torture billions for eternity, AND YOU WORSHIP HIM, then you have no morality at all. In the catholic nazi extermination camps during WWII they wouldn’t gas the jews before throwing them in the furnace, what’s the point? They’re going to burn in hell for eternity anyway so why save them a minute of two of agony on earth?

        Religion is evil, simple as that.

      • Jason White

        That’s just beutiful poetry right there. Bravo!

      • Colin Robinson

        Have you ever bothered to read those rules? Try following them and you will rightly be thrown in a cell and the key thrown away.

      • Ray

        Knows all? God didn’t know Satan was going to rebel and take a third of his staff with him and he didn’t see Adam and Eve’s disobedience coming any more than Miss Cleo saw the feds rolling up to her door. He didn’t even know where Adam and Eve were hiding from him which is why he had to call out to Adam.

      • kevbug

        Oh, are you sure? How do you know that God did not know? How do you know what you know?

      • Ray

        Well either he didn’t know or he’s responsible for the biggest setup and sting operation in human history. I’ll let you decide which.

      • david rocha

        He did know, calling out adam and eve was to show that they where hiding, just like when he told them why do they have fig leaves as clothes on, they said they where naked ,God said who told you , you where naked .

      • Mike Ex

        Because when you aren’t lazy AND stupid, you realize it is wrong about everything of significance all the time about everything. That’s why, ape.

      • greg drummond

        The Bible does not come from God, it was written by man. Believers however do feel it was inspired by God, but that still leaves a lot of room for screw ups from those writing it.

      • kevbug

        The Bible is the self attesting word of God. God cannot lie. Could not God have his word correct if he wanted fallible man to write it? God can do anything he pleases.

      • david rocha

        I dont think so, thats like saying God you dont know what your doing. He knew what happening from start to finish, his plan for mankind

      • greg drummond

        So he knew exactly what was going to happen and the horrors of human existence? That makes him quite a bit sadistic. So you are saying his plan was for humanity to suffer endlessly? Even if he did exist I would refuse to worship a god that was like that.

      • David Forbes

        Actually it has a recipe for inducing an abortion

      • ManicPanda

        It does also says if you strike a pregnant women and she dies you will be stoned to death. If, on the other hand, she lives and the baby dies you, just have to pay a fine. As in, the loss of prosperity(not a person). The bible infers the unborn are not people.

      • david rocha

        Not true

      • david rocha

        Throughout the Bible God has plenty to say about the taking of an innocent life. Most people in our nation, though they may not be familiar with all of the Ten Commandments, know that “Thou Shalt Not Kill” is listed there somewhere. The word “kill” in this instance specifically refers to “murder” — a premeditated and deliberate act of taking someone’s life. It is different than other forms of taking a life, which could be accidental, or in self-defense. God has different laws regarding different sorts of death. But He continually opposes and speaks against murder, especially murder of the innocent.

      • Colin Robertson

        And yet yahweh continually DEMANDS murder of the innocents in the bible, from mass human sacrifices to genocide. But this, in the eyes of judeans and christians, is not in violation of ‘thou shalt not murder’ because if you kill in the name of your god it is not murder by definition.
        Which is why so many people happily kill in the name of their god without even a twinge of conscience.

      • david rocha

        Agian a ignorant statement , by a ignorant person.

      • Colin Robinson

        So you haven’t read the bible? You don’t know of the demands for mass human sacrifice by yahweh?
        You don’t know of the demands for genocide by this god?
        No sonny jim, YOU are truly ignorant of the bible.

        Your nasty little god doesn’t condemn the killing of the innocents, he ORDERS it!

      • Rick Diehl

        That is an utterly ridiculous statement. We make moral decisions. This is why some of the world holds one kind of moralistic view, while others in other parts of the world have their own moral characteristic. It isn’t about being a “god”, it’s about being a person.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Which “gods” do it best? Certainly not the biblical one. He drowned all the babies on earth, except for Noah’s immediate family. He had his angel assassin croak all the firstborn in Egypt, because Pharaoh wouldn’t kiss his arse.

        Some great moral decider. His first to humans screwed up once so he cursed their offspring for eternity. Some morals…

      • kevbug

        From your worldview, what is wrong with drowning babies. Do you know what the people were doing that they were condemned? How do you know you are a better judge then God? From your atheist view of the world, what would be wrong with the firstborn being killed. It is just the same as two baboons fighting to the death, and that happens lots.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You don’t know my worldview bubba… You don’t even know my beliefs/non beliefs. You just make stuff up. Of course, since your religion is made up from old pagan solar myths, with a dash of astrology, it’s par for the course.

        If you don’t know what is wrong with killing innocents, you are one sick puppy. BTW… Baboons don’t fight other baboons to the death. Humans are the only animal that routinely kill each other. More often than not, it’s for religious reasons. Like the good christians who refuse to take their sick children to the doctor. Relying on prayer instead. How does that work out for you? Do you go to the doctor when your sick?

        False Christian!

        And yes. I’m a much better judge of character than your fictional god. You know… It sounds as though you are one step away from croaking some babies. So maybe it’s a good thing you believe you have the threat of eternal punishment hanging over your head. As long as it keeps you off the streets, more power to you.

      • kevbug

        Why do you even care?
        When I die it will all be gone. Why even fight me? I am not fighting you.
        If there was a real Christian on this earth, who cares.
        Why even have morals?
        I know why I have morals. You do not have any reason.

      • Ray

        I’m so sick of hearing the old “without god there is no morality” BS. Morality is a social construct, not a religious one and it’s derived from our evolutionary acquired sense of empathy (necessary to care for our young and ensure our continued existence) and our survival instinct. This is proven by the fact that ALL animals have empathy, not only for their own young, but for other animals both in and out of their own species. (for instance, dolphins have been known to help other fish gather food and have even helped humans when necessary) Animals (all animals) create societies (packs, groups, swarms, etc.) and therefore they MUST have a set of rules to live peacefully together or else they would kill each other to the point of extinction. This isn’t just a human trait, but a trait shared by every species on the planet. Let’s face it, both emotionally and in some cases, even intellectually, humans are no different than any other animal. So to answer your utterly ridiculous (not to mention VERY telling of the things YOU might do without the bible telling you not to) question of “From your worldview, what is wrong with drowning babies”, it’s wrong because it’s detrimental to the survival of our species.

      • kevbug

        If it is a social construct, then why do people not have the same morals? If it is a social construct, then it was ok for Hitler to kill 9 million people. The Germans made a construct that is was.
        If morals are not absolute, then it is ok for some to do what they construct. Then why was it wrong to kill in the Bible? That was their social construct?

      • Ray

        Seriously Kevbug, are you retarded or something? People don’t have the same morals BECAUSE it’s a social construct. If morals came from god, then we WOULD all have the same morals. You just proved my point for me, thanks. FYI, Hitler was a Christian and his atrocities were derived form his own interpretation of scripture. Even your own bible makes it very clear that morality is subjective, not objective.

      • kevbug

        You believe in random chance evolution right?

      • ManicPanda

        Correction: Evolution via natural selection eliminating the weak and sexual selection increasing the strong acting on random mutations. It is a selection process in a semi random system, not random evolution. Also it is not belief or faith it is being convinced by the evidence until a more accurate predictive model is presented. Creationism/ID have no predictive qualities and are not models. So they can never replace the theory of evolution that describes the fact of observed evolution.

      • kevbug

        I have never thought evolution was a fact. Where can I observe one kind of animal turning into another?
        I know of hundreds of mutations that destroy the gene code. Can you list one that does not destroy the gene code? How can something get better by destroying something?

      • david rocha

        why do you think this was so.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Why do I think the myths in the bible are pretty lame? Or why did the mythical Jesus baby-daddy routinely do such awful things to the fictional inhabitants in the Christian story book?

        The answer to the second bit would be that I’ve read the Christian story book and many other story books — most of them multiple times. And that’s what this particular story book states. I would say it helped strike fear into the hearts of the plebs, so they could be more readily controlled by the powers in the church.

        In case you mean, why do I feel the bible myths are so lame, maybe you should educate yourself (if you want to tempt hell:) and get back to me. The Norse, Greek, Roman, Egyptian and Hindu myths totally kick the Judeo/Christian/Muslim myth’s collective butts. And even when the story is dark, it’s never the repressive bummer JCM myths present. How’s that?

      • Ray

        Kevbug, the bible says it’s perfectly fine to kill babies, even AFTER they’re born. And for the record, a baby has no value and isn’t even considered a person until they’re at least 30 days old. You might want to dust your bible off and try reading it sometime.

      • kevbug

        Hmm I am not sure I know where you are talking about.
        If you are an atheist then why do you care? It should not matter if it is a baby or anyone else. Why should it matter if the end is death. No one will remember you or what you did sometime in the future. You might as well just eat drink and be merry.

      • Alex Wolfe

        Hi kevbug. I’ve been reading this discussion, and I have a thought experiment for you. Imagine that, somehow, you suddenly come to the realisation that there is no God. In this hypothetical situation, what would you think and do?

      • kevbug

        I would try to look around and not be able to. I would not be. How can you get order from disorder. Intelligent man cannot even create life in the laboratory from nothing, so I know a process random chance evolution cannot do it either. Mistakes cannot make creative beings. You know there is a God.

      • Alex Wolfe

        Let’s say that you discover a way that order can come from disorder, then, and learn how a random process can result in evolution. I know you don’t think those things are possible, I’m just asking hypothetically. Would you start to act immorally?

      • kevbug

        Let’s say I do hypothetically make an immoral decision. What happens then?

      • Alex Wolfe

        Well, that would depend on the circumstances. If you did something that was both immoral and illegal, if you were caught doing it, you’d be presumably be arrested and charged. If you just did something that is immoral but no illegal, if you are caught doing it, it’s likely that people will disapprove and look down upon you. If you do something that is immoral and are not caught doing it, it’s possible that you will feel guilty and regret what you did. There are, of course, people who do immoral things and are never caught, who do not feel guilty. Without a God, these people will go unpunished. But, if there’s no God, that’s just an unfortunate fact of life.

      • Mike Ex

        Your God thinks it is ok to kill them in their mother’s arms and kills 75% of all conceptions. Since that is the rate of spontaneous abortion in humans. Why do you think people talk about “trying to get pregnant.” Almost as though it were a fallible natural process, drought with many perils to both mother and fertilized egg. Your ignorance is a crime.

      • kevbug

        Sin causes many problems. Mankind was created perfect from the beginning. I am sure it is hard for those who cannot get pregnant, who really want to. We all sin, and that is why we can’t look to man to make moral judgments.

      • Mike Ex

        Seek professional help.

      • kevbug

        Really, you need to debate this. If you engage in name calling and answers that do not bring this issue to what is the truth, then you are not seeking truth. Do you want to know?

      • Mike Ex

        There is no debate.

      • david rocha

        Dont be ignorant, God was dealing with evil people that wanted to distory the blood line of jesus , in that no savour. GOD KNEW ACTUALLY what he was doing, he had to deal harshly . And the children there in heaven . A little sacrifice but great reward for the children , and keep the plan of salvation intect for all man.. you read and read , but you dont have a clue what your reading .

      • Karsus

        Probably need to consider a lot of socialization there too. Human kids are often violent – they are usually punished / shamed / taught to help them behave better.

        Consider the Stanford Prison Experiment: Slightly different environmental pressures and most humans (likely including yourself) would forget your standards.

        Religion is just one more form of social control.

      • david rocha

        The thing is we as mankind need it , why its law as been broken so many times we cant do it are self, look around you if we could the world would be a better place

      • Gary Gayisok Whiteman

        It may surprise you, but I (as a Christian) agree with you that people don’t need a god or a book to be good / moral. When one of my fellow Christians tell a non-Christian something like, “You have no basis for morality.”, I’m among the first to voice disagreement.

      • Rick Diehl

        Just one quick point, Atheism is not a set of organized beliefs brought together into a system of morality and laws such as you describe it. Atheism is not an organized force in any way and is not “like” a religion. Atheism is the non-belief in a creator or other supernatural beings. Certainly you have every right to say that people who hold these beliefs are wrong, but you shouldn’t mistake a belief for an organization.

      • madshark

        Atheism is exactly a religion. It requires you to believe that order descended from chaos with no intelligent direction. Talk about a belief system based on the supernatural! That requires a faith far beyond that which I have. I will just sit here with all the proof I see in my life, daily. There is no need for faith, when you have undeniable proof.

      • Rick Diehl

        That is actually not a very good description of either atheism or the theory behind the evolutionary process. I get that’s how you see things, but it’s just not accurate.

      • madshark

        Rick, you are too damned stupid to understand what I wrote. How would a 65 IQ understand complex concepts like those I am putting forth? I had a wonderful conversation about this with a friend, yesterday. We came up with the term “willfully stupid” for people like you. Proof is all around you, yet you willfully choose not to learn from it.

      • Rick Diehl

        You can try to lay it all on my lack on intelligence, it certainly is the easy answer for you and your own limitations. Still you are incorrect in your description of both atheism or evolution. You can be as nasty about it as you like, but your still getting it wrong.

      • Rick Diehl

        Oh am before I forget, go fuck yourself you redneck piece of shit. It really is the only proper response to a mongoloid such as yourself. I mean really, and seriously, take your dick, cut it off, and stick it in your ass.

      • Adam Knapp

        For someone who is obsessed with what they perceive as a lack of intelligence from others, you have not given any clues to show that you hold intelligence yourself.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You didn’t come up with dookie, you willfully ignorant, history/reality/science denying wanker. You just stole it. That has been around for as long as repugnant douchecanoes like yourself have been spitting out the hate.

      • Adam Knapp

        It is better to believe in that which we have evidence for than to carry along trying to follow fragments of stories from bronze-age nomadic desert tribes whose writings do not match anything that can be forensically or anthropologically identified as true.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        The only undeniable proof around here is that you are an insufferable and awful jackass. You revel in it. You should be quivering in fear if your undeniable proof of god has any chance of being reality. For an asswipe such as yourself will surely burn for eternity. Oh wait. You just have to say you’re sorry for making baby jesus cry and you get a pass. No wonder you’re such a dick.

      • WilmRoget

        “Atheism is not a set of organized beliefs”

        So? Something does not have to be a ‘set of organized beliefs’ to be a prejudice.

        “but you shouldn’t mistake a belief for an organization.”

        Since I don’t, your straw man is either evidence of dishonesty or incompetence.

      • Rick Diehl

        One other thing, you show a very poor understanding of Christianity by the way you consistently accuse the people you are debating with of bad intentions, instead of assuming that those who disagree with you simply have a different view or different beliefs. Instead you insist on accusing them of dishonesty, as if these people are trying to fool you instead of simply disagreeing. It shows a fundamental lack of faith in your fellow human beings as well as a fundamental unwillingness to treat others compassionately.

      • WilmRoget

        “One other thing, you show a very poor understanding of Christianity by
        the way you consistently accuse the people you are debating with of bad
        intentions,”

        Nice ad hominem. It shows that you have no moral argument.

      • WilmRoget

        “One other thing, you show a very poor understanding of Christianity by
        the way you consistently accuse the people you are debating with of bad
        intentions,”

        No. But I understand, you have no real accusation to make, and this is yet another nasty, immoral attempt on your part to make yourself feel superior.

        The reality, Rick, is that your derogatory assumptions about me are actually your revelations about yourself. You see, all those ugly things you project on me – are actually your feelings about Christians.

        You spew them at me as a poor, ego-feeding substitute for addressing what I actually wrote.

      • ManicPanda

        The problem is that, it is religion that says some are superior to others. Not atheism. Divine right of kings, for instance. God’s chosen people. Maybe the fact you are worthless and condemned to eternal torment if they do not agree with you. That seems like a twisted sense of superiority to me. I think we are all equal, so we can both disagree and have a conversation. You have shown nothing but a sense of superiority over the people here. Atheists disagreed with your god, you insulted them. You have shown you are inferior in maturity and formation of arguments.

      • WilmRoget

        “The problem is that, it is religion that says some are superior to others.”

        Wrong, but – the first problem is that ‘religion’ is a huge and very diverse subject, and religions vary tremendously in terms what they teach regarding ‘superior to others’. So your claim is on that regard, a fraud.

        Second, since you and your peers mostly fixate on denigrating Christianity, and are mostly anti-Christian rather than true atheists, Christianity does not teach, at all, that some are superior to others. You are either lying, or under-informed.

        ” Not atheism.”

        Atheism absolutely proclaims that atheists are superior to everyone else.

        ‘Maybe the fact you are worthless and condemned to eternal torment if they do not agree with you.”

        Your false characterization only makes you look dishonest and untrustworthy. Again, this behavior one reason why everyone, including atheists, distrusts atheists.

        ‘I think we are all equal,”

        Your posts prove that you do not. If you did see Christians as your equal, you would accept our testimony about our experiences as equal to your own, but you do not. After all you reject our testimony about our experiences (demonstrated by being an atheist), yet you offer your experience (I think . . . or any other I statement you make) with the expectation that it will be believed.

        ” You have shown nothing but a sense of superiority over the people here.”

        Your derogatory false accusations accomplish nothing. But the net result of your slander of me is that you clearly attempted to tear me down in public to make yourself look good by comparison.

        And though I’ve been pointing that out over and over again, you are so caught in that dynamic that you cannot help but be insulting and degrading.

      • ManicPanda

        Easy analogy, I do not agree with the claims of the KKK. I am akkkist, does that mean me and everyone who is also an akkkist all share an organization of akkkism.. Nope, akkkism is the disbelief in the truth of the kkk’s claims. It a a simple demographic of people who are not convinced by a given claim.

      • WilmRoget

        “Easy analogy, I do not agree with the claims of the KKK. I am akkkist,
        does that mean me and everyone who is also an akkkist all share an
        organization of akkkism..”

        False analogy, and a deliberately offensive and degrading one. In your choice of analogy, you demonstrated your malice and contempt. In fact, what you did was the same as when homophobes equate homosexuality with some form of rape.

        But here’s the interesting part. As an atheist, you have a great deal, under the surface, in common with members of the Klan. The Klan proclaims the prejudice of racism, you proclaim the prejudice of atheism, both are positions that intrinsically and purposefully denigrate and dehumanize other humans.

        I, in rebuking atheism, am like your hypothetical “akkkist”. I reject the malice that is atheism, as the ‘akkkist’ rejects the malice that is racism.

        Your simplistic and false comparisons fail you every time. Perhaps you should stop looking for simple, easy answers.

      • Walter Warren

        Let’s do a little survey. I want honest answers from Christians.

        1.Do you think adultery, rape, incest, polygamy, and genital mutilation are ok? If not, why?
        2.Is murder wrong? If so, why?
        3.What sin(s) are “unforgivable”?

        Atheists aren’t hypocrites. We don’t claim moral superiority, then go praise and glorify an entity that, according the writings in the holy book of said religion, has committed the same atrocities we just detested with wanton disregard and, at points, gleeful exuberance.

        Your insinuation that we atheists, as a civilized people, do not condemn these awful acts is utterly false in its entirety.
        We DO in fact condemn all of these things based not on a book that contradicts every moral statute it supposedly sets forth, but on an innate moral obligation toward everyones well-being. Are we perfect? Far from it, but neither are the religious who believe themselves high and mighty.
        WE take responsibility for our actions and don’t claim “God made me do it” or It was the work of the devil”. There are more Christians in prisons than any other group, but we’re the menace to society. Were the ones out committing hate crimes and denying human rights to all who don’t fit into our definition if a good person and brainwashing our children to be just like us by forcing them to feel shitty for being human. That’s us!
        Wait a sec… I’m getting word from reliable sources that it’s not atheists out doing these things. Its the religious. Whew. Had me worried for a minute I wasn’t being a good little atheist.

      • madshark

        1. No, no, no, no and if it is done without the consent of the mutilated person, or someone responsible for their well being, no. Because they deprive others of their God given rights.
        2. Yes. Murder is the unlawful taking of the life of another, without cause. There are justifiable reasons to kill. None of these would be murder.
        3. None. God has the ability to forgive, regardless of the act. Humans, on the other hand, do not have the power to forgive.
        Now, try some more meaningless, moronic questions, atheist douche bag.

      • Walter Warren

        The fact that you have to resort to petty, childish name calling just further proves my point.
        Your response shows that reading is not one of your strong points as you did not read beyond the questions in my comment before writing your response. Had you read further into it, I explained that your God, whom you hold as the highest authority, has committed the same acts that you have just said were wrong on a epic scale. Or they have been committed in his name in a smaller, but still colossal scale

        And you are wrong about the unforgivable sin. There is an unforgivable sin, which is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Look it up if you don’t believe me. Maybe you should actually try to read, as hard as it seems for you, your Bible instead of just listening to the cherry picked sections religious leaders spew from the pulpit.

      • madshark

        Shit for brains, I do not resort to name calling. I relish in it. When I see something as monumentally stupid as your questions, and subsequent blathering (I did read it. It simply made no sense.), I simply ridicule and laugh at it. So, you see, you are so ignorant and misinformed that your post deserves no serious consideration. It only deserves ridicule.

      • Walter Warren

        You pray to a God that has a “do as I say, not as I do” complex that gets conveniently swept under the rug to try to make him/her/it seem like a righteous and just being. But I’m the ignorant one. Right…
        Like I suggested before, read the source material for your religion, in its entirety, cover to cover. Do that, and see if you still believe everything in it. You can’t believe part of it and disregard the rest.

      • M_R

        He made you look quite the fool. Accept it.

      • WilmRoget

        This demonstrates that atheism, and its defense, is entirely about egotism. It is simply yet another nasty excuse people give themselves for denigrating and dehumanizing other people so they can exalt themselves and feel superior.

        That is the same mechanism found in all prejudices, and it shows that atheism absolutely is a prejudice.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        I guess you haven’t read anything posted by madshark? He’s supposedly one of your boys.

      • WilmRoget

        So you admit that you judge all of Christianity by the acts of one, or a few. That is classic prejudice.

        Shall I judge all of atheism by Dawkin’s trivialization of molestation? Or by Stalin’s slaughter of millions?

        You should stop guessing.

      • Rob Devitt

        actually its the acts of the VAST majority.

      • Rick Diehl

        Stalin was a seminarian.

      • WilmRoget

        Stalin was male, you are male. Therefore, you must, by your own logic, be guilty of all of the same crimes as Stalin, and possess all of the same flaws as Stalin.

        And Dawkin’s trivializes pedophilia, and you share Dawkin’s position on religion, so presumably you also share his trivialization of pedophilia – by your own logic.

      • Rick Diehl

        Hey, you are the one who brought ol Kobo up, not me.

      • WilmRoget

        I brought Stalin up to point out the intrinsic irrationality of your prior argument, but apparently, you agree; you are guilty of all of the same crimes as Stalin, and possess all of the same flaws as Stalin.

      • Rick Diehl

        Bill, here’s the thing you get wrong about atheists. See most of them would actually love to believe in God, because to believe in God is to believe in an eternal afterlife. Which is a great comfort for the religious, but just a hopeless fantasy to non-believers. It isn’t about feeling exalted or superior. Heck it seems to me that would be the job of the folks convinced they will live forever. Atheists tend to try to make the most out of THIS life, because as far as we are concerned, this is the only life. However because we do not share your belief in an afterlife, this threatens your belief that you are going to live forever. Think about it Bill, if the only issue is that we don’t believe in God, why should that matter to you in the least.

        Simple, because we bring up the fear that you may be wrong, and because you may be wrong, there is a good chance that means that when you die, you die.

      • WilmRoget

        “Bill, here’s the thing you get wrong about atheists.”

        Funny, you cannot get my id correct, but presume to tell me what I get wrong.

        ” See most of them would actually love to believe in God, because to believe in God is to believe in an eternal afterlife.”

        Nice fantasy. It has really interesting implications, if it were true.

        “Which is a great comfort for the religious, but just a hopeless fantasy to non-believers.”

        Your simplification not only demonstrates your overt malice toward people of faith, but it indicates that your prior claim is false.

        ” It isn’t about feeling exalted or superior.”

        Of course it is. The constant use of pejoratives and insults by you and your peers proves that.

        “Atheists tend to try to make the most out of THIS life,”

        There is no evidence to support that claim. However, presuming it is true, you are essentially admitting that atheists are motivated by selfishness, that they try to get as much out of life for themselves, at the expense of others, as they can.

        “However because we do not share your belief in an afterlife, this threatens your belief that you are going to live forever.”

        No. Your lie about me, by the way, shows that you are indeed trying to make yourself feel and look superior.

        ” Think about it Bill, if the only issue is that we don’t believe in God, why should that matter to you in the least.”

        If atheists get their disbelief to themselves, just as if homophobes kept their disbelief in the validity of homosexual intimacy to themselves, there would be no problem. But because atheists, like homophobes, constantly publicize their contempt for other people, people of faith and homosexuals respectively, there is a problem.

        Sadly, you clearly do not see a problem with articulating malice and contempt for an entire class of people – as long as you are not a member of that class of people.

        “Simple, because we bring up the fear that you may be wrong, and because you may be wrong, there is a good chance that means that when you die, you die.”

        No. You bring up your fear, and use it to malign most of humanity, and then you defend your denigration of our lives by telling additional ugly and vicious lies about us – as you just did.

        Atheism is a prejudice. You can deny that reality, of course, but then you deny the reality of the existence of God, so denying smaller real things is to be expected of you.

      • Rick Diehl

        What’s wrong with Bill? It’s a nice name. I once had a cat named Bill. He peed on everything but was still sort of lovable.

      • WilmRoget

        The problem is not the name. But your use of it demonstrates that you lack basic reading skills.

      • Adam Knapp

        Walter seems perfectly informed – it is you who demonstrates intent to adhere to badly translated fairy tales as if they reflected reality in any way.

      • WilmRoget

        Your characterization “fairy tales” mirrors the phrase the homophobes love so much ‘lifestyle choice’, and it shows that atheism is simply a vicious prejudice just like homophobia and racism.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        That’s really funny. What do you think Christianity is? You get to go to heaven and piss on all the unbelievers?

      • WilmRoget

        Again, your falsehoods reveal your character. Atheism is a vicious prejudice, which is why neither you, nor your peers, are able to be civil and polite about religion; you have to denigrate, revile and slander because that it the only way your ego will get fed.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        And what about your big ego? Maybe you’ve never read the comments of some of your Christian brethren. They absolutely gloat over the prospect of watching all the heathens and believers of different things burn for all eternity.

      • Rick Diehl

        Excuse me Bill, but in my opinion I have been nothing but polite to you. I haven’t denigrated you, I have simply disagreed with you, while you have been busy impugning my motivations for my beliefs. You might want to pull that plank from your eye.

      • WilmRoget

        “Excuse me Bill,”

        Who is this Bill?

        ” but in my opinion I have been nothing but polite to you.”

        Your opinion contradicts reality. But as a bigot, of course you see your behavior as acceptable while taking offense at rebuke.

        What makes it so hypocritical of course, is that your entire position is a vicious attack on the lives, character and experiences of most of humanity.

      • Rick Diehl

        Bill, are you sure we are reading the same thread? You really seem connived that you’ve been nothing but reasonable while facing off against the Visigoths. That just isn’t so.

      • WilmRoget

        Who is this Bill you keep writing to?

        When you cannot get my id correct, how can you possibly have an accurate perception of this conversation?

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        It’s funny that such an unabashed troll would call others out on trolling. You are quite an angry little prick, Mark Duncan. Sounds like semen buildup. You do realize that even though no self-respecting dung-beetle would want to copulate with you (let alone a human or sow), you can alleviate that backed up spunk all on your own.

        Then you might not be such an insufferable old prick.

      • Martin McNeill

        I would like to point out that God is ok with rape, he even states rape victims must marry there attacker. God is also ok with slavery, he even states you are allowed to beat you`re slave (only as long as you`re slave doesn`t die within 2 days of that beating), and also like to point out god is ok with selling you`re daughter as a sex slave, he states the price is 50 pieces of silver.
        If you want ill quote the versus.

      • madshark

        What I want is for you to return to school, pay attention this time, and learn to write english, correctly. You’re is the abbreviation of you are. The word you are trying to use is your. The possessive form of you. Oh, and I will has an apostrophe between the I and first l. You wrote ill, meaning sick.
        Look retard, if your ability to write and comprehend the English language is as poor as you have demonstrated here, why in the hell would anyone care what you think. You are an idiot. Go ahead and copy and paste these moronic ramblings you get from MoveOn, Media Matters and Huff Po. They simply make you look as stupid as you are. Be sure and get your pay for posting this stupidity, troll.

      • Martin McNeill

        I dont really care about proper abbreviation on a website in which i am posting a comment. This isn`t a business letter for a cilent.
        The fact you went through the trouble to write such a reply because you didnt like my post shows how upset and petty you can be over someone pointing out some truth. Lol.

      • The Cliggster

        Feel better now? Now how about you try addressing the points he made, or is the Ad Hominem attack all you know how to do?

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Maybe you should go back to school and learn how to write a proper sentence.

      • WilmRoget

        Your falsehoods have the net effect of discrediting you entirely on this subject.

        But hey, what do you care? Since the sole purpose of atheism is to denigrate and dehumanizes, lies are more useful to the likes of you as accurate information.

      • Walter Warren

        You’re hopeless

      • WilmRoget

        Nope. Your failure to convince me only reflects your skill, or lack thereof.

      • Walter Warren

        You assume I was trying to convince you. I can’t do the impossible. You’re too far indoctrinated for me to even attempt to convince you otherwise. I’m only explaining my position while you clearly don’t possess onee to argue. You insist that every atheist is wrong and attach labels in an attempt to discredit us, but you have yet to explain factually anything.

      • ManicPanda

        While convincing you may not have been the point, it seems from the “likes” on the comments the “atheists” have convinced hundreds of people You have convinced, none, on the far majority of your comments.

      • WilmRoget

        “While convincing you may not have been the point, it seems from the
        “likes” on the comments the “atheists” have convinced hundreds of people”

        Ah, the popularity contest. You wield this, without apparently realizing that by doing so, you support by claim.

        Prejudices, all of them, including atheism, are about social status – a way of people in one group to tell themselves that they are superior to others. So sure, here, a plethora of atheists upvote comments that denigrate me and posts that revile religion. In doing so, they tell themselves that they are part of a superior, in-group, a special tribe of special people.

        The same thing happens on websites dominated by conservatives, or homophobes, or racists. Prejudice is the most extreme version of the popularity contest.

        So when you invoke it as evidence in your favor, you are invoking the very mechanism that makes atheism a prejudice, and confirming that this sense of being ‘in’, being part of an elect, is what atheism is about and

        it is the real reason you are an atheist.

      • Rick Diehl

        Oh Bill give it a rest. Not believing in God, is not the same thing as being some kind of malicious elf that goes around with no other goal then to denigrate and dehumanize others. What is interesting is that I was able to just paste, “denigrate and dehumanize others” after copying it from one of your posts above. You’ve used the same exact quote something like 7 times now. Makes me suspect that you are a bit of a troll. Can we find you a nice bridge?

      • WilmRoget

        “Oh Bill give it a rest.”

        Nice dismissal. But of course, coming from someone clearly incapable of reading my id correctly, it is unconvincing.

        “Not believing in God, is not the same thing as being some kind of
        malicious elf that goes around with no other goal then to denigrate and
        dehumanize others.”

        Sure it is. Since belief in God is derived from personal experience, and disbelief is based on nothing, your characterization is a very appropriate description of atheism. Of course, the extremity of it reflects your character.

        “Makes me suspect that you are a bit of a troll.”

        Nice dehumanization there. Of course, that’s the standard on the internet, when you cannot refute someone, dismiss them as a troll.

      • Martin McNeill

        Its easy to see you haven`t even read the bible you believe in after reading your post. Everything i stated is 100% accurate. Would you like the exact quotes from the bible?

      • WilmRoget

        Yet I have read the Bible, Martin, so since you are wrong about that, clearly you are also wrong about being 100% accurate.

        “Would you like the exact quotes from the bible?”

        Bit late for that, you’ve already been caught lying.

      • Martin McNeill

        You clearly havent read the Bible, Ill just go ahead and quote then.
        Deuteronomy 20:10-14 (God approves of murder, rape and slavery).
        Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (Gods law on rape).
        Deuteronomy 21:10-14 (What way God says females captives should be treated).
        Judges 5:30 (more on how to treat female captives).
        Exodus 21:7-11 (Selling your daughter as a sex slave).Shall i continue?

      • WilmRoget

        “You clearly havent read the Bible, Ill just go ahead and quote then.”

        It would help you seem credible if you used basic, accurate punctuation. “havent” should be “haven’t”, “Ill” should be “I’ll” and you did not quote any passage, you cited them and provided your interpretation.

        And since you haven’t mastered basic English punctuation and vocabulary, apparently, why would anyone believe your interpretation of these passages? And before I dig into them, there’s the issue of your extreme egotism, thinking that disagreeing with your clearly incompetent interpretation of passages means I haven’t read the Bible. I have read it, so by lying to me about that, based on your ego not evidence, you again give every reason not to believe your interpretation.

        “Deuteronomy 20:10-14 (God approves of murder, rape and slavery).”
        This passage does not connote or express approval. It does express the rules of engagement in war. That you interpret this as approval indicates your personal lack of morals.

        “Deuteronomy 22:28-29″ The law on rape does not indicate approval, it makes the man who commits it responsible for the life-long well-being of the woman he attacked. You can argue whether or not this is fair to the woman, and if you were honest, you would do within the context of that society, but I doubt you are capable of such honesty.

        The same basic thing applies to the other passages – you read them with your own evil intentions in mind. The evil you see in the Bible is your own evil reflected at you.

      • Martin McNeill

        Lol, picking at my small grammar mistakes.

        Deuteronomy 20:10-14. This is God saying what you should do in times off war. Rape and enslave people. Nice try at trying to twist that by saying war times makes it ok. Also its when you attack a city, not when you defend a city.

        Deuteronomy 22:28-29. God is saying the rape victim must marry her attacker. You can try twisting that all you like, but its very clear the way God says you should treat women.

      • WilmRoget

        “Lol, picking at my small grammar mistakes.”

        Laughing off your ignorance. It simply shows that you are not a credible interpreter of any text.

        Remember, atheism has no condemnation of any wrong whatsoever, so by being an atheist, or defending it, through your own argument you endorse all evils.

      • Martin McNeill

        I have no problem reading, i have no problem writing. The fact you are pointing out my small grammar mistakes shows you need to pick at unimportant things to try and make your point stronger.

        Its clear what the bible says, i havent misinterpreted

      • WilmRoget

        “I have no problem reading, i have no problem writing.”

        Clearly you do. Every post is full of mistakes. It shows incompetence. It shows that you are not a reliable source of information about the meaning of any text. Your denial of your readily apparent incompetence indicates that your entire argument is based on ego.

        You don’t even seem to know the difference between grammar and punctuation or spelling.

        Pointing out the consistent incompetence in your written expression is a valid argument against the accuracy of your unsubstantiated interpretations. Your failure to master basic writing skills indicates that it is unlikely that you understand the texts you are citing.

        Factor in your false assertions about me, your willingness to lie about things you simply cannot know, and the result is that you simply have no credibility.

        And remember, atheism has no rebuke of any wrong you listed. It does not rebuke rape, or slavery, or torture, or murder. Christianity rebukes all of those things.

      • Martin McNeill

        Deuteronomy 20:10-14 Its very clear what God whats you to do, so saying i dont understand the texts im citing is non sense.
        Do you think it is ok to do the things in Deuteronomy 20:10-14 that God says you should do in times of offensive war?

      • WilmRoget

        Since you are defending atheism, you clearly do not think any of those things are wrong, for atheism does not condemn them.

        You also clearly do not know how to write English properly, which continues to raise questions about your ability to read it accurately.

        And of course, you are ignoring all of the Bible that does not fit your fraud. So you are a fraud, a deceiver, and incompetent at written communication. And because of your incompetence, you don’t understand how incompetent your posts and interpretations are.

      • Martin McNeill

        You wont even answer a straight question, you keep attacking me as if thats a good defence for what the evil book you believe in states. Im not ignoring all of the Bible, ive read it all, along with a few other holy books and to be fair its not the worse holy book ive read but its close.
        Im not defending atheism, im pointing out the bible states people should do evil things to each other.
        I do think rape, murder, slavery is wrong, thats why i dont believe the God you believe in is good.
        You are right about atheism not having no rebuke of rape, murder and slavery, but how would they do this? Do they need to release a holy book?

      • WilmRoget

        “you keep attacking me as if thats a good defence”

        Ironically, that is the essence of all arguments against religion. You and your peers try to defend the evil prejudice that is atheism by attacking religion.

        “for what the evil book you believe in states”

        Again, your characterization of the Bible reflects your character – the term you use to describe actually describes you as you know yourself to be. After all, you’ve calling evil the book that states:
        “If I speak in the tongues[a] of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast,[b] but do not have love, I gain nothing.

        4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

        8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

        13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.”
        I Cor 13

        “Im not ignoring all of the Bible, ive read it all, along with a few
        other holy books and to be fair its not the worse holy book ive read but
        its close.”

        Again, your gross incompetence in punctuation simply means that you are not credible witness about any written text. Your word about any subject has no weight because you cannot even master the accurate use of apostrophe’s.

        But hey, you don’t care, do you? All that matters is that you get to tell yourself that you are superior to millions of millions of people, even though you defend a belief system, atheism, that is not only a sick prejudice, but contains no condemnation of any wrong whatsoever. By your logic, though you don’t realize it, you embrace rape, murder, stealing, because atheism does not condemn any of those things, and you defend atheism.

      • Martin McNeill

        This is an argument? I thought it was a discussion. I guess that would explain why you dodge questions and resort to personal attacks that have nothing to do with the discussion.

        Im not attacking religion, ive read the bible, im quoting out of it.

        Deuteronomy 20:10-14

        When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies.

        I think this is so clear it can`t be misinterpreted like you keep trying to claim. Your God is ok with rape, murder, slavery.

        Please stop trying to claim i embrace rape, murder, stealing. I dont embrace these things, And again im not an atheist. And how would an atheist condemn these things? with a holy book?

      • WilmRoget

        “This is an argument?”
        Once again, your reply indicates a lack of education on your part.

        ‘Im not attacking religion”

        And yet, you are attacking. The problem is, you’ve established that you are both incompetent at reading and writing, and unwilling to tell the truth.

        “I think this is so clear it can`t be misinterpreted like you keep trying to claim.”

        But you also think that you can tell lies about me to me and accomplish something, so what you think is not a credible piece of evidence.

        “Your God is ok with rape, murder, slavery.”

        No, but you are a liar and a fraud.

        “Please stop trying to claim i embrace rape, murder, stealing. I dont embrace these thing”

        Sure you do. You embrace lying and slander, why would you reject some evils and embrace others? You are a liar and fraud, Martin, woefully undereducated and grossly incompetent at both reading and writing. But you think you can feed your ego by cherry-picking a few passages out of context from an enormous collection of books, ignore everything that contradicts your claim, and blame your personal evil on God.

        The ugliness you perceive in the Bible is merely your own face and character reflected back at you. You are all the things you project onto God.

      • Martin McNeill

        You sir are one strange human being, ive read some off your posts to other people, along with your posts to me Talking to you is a total waste of time, you dodge simple questions, you make up lies about people and from what i see just like to attack people during conversions then says its an argument. You are a disgusting human being. And i really was not surprised you turned to abusiveness instead of answering a few simple questions. Super dodger.

      • WilmRoget

        With every insult, you expose your character, not mine. Every word of your post above is actually a description of yourself – for that is the only source for that information.

      • Martin McNeill

        Im not insulting you, im stating a fact, answering simple questions with abuse is strange,which therefore makes you a strange human being, totally expected though because of the need for you to do more dodging, im not surprised to be honest. Was that the 6th time you dodged a simple question?

      • WilmRoget

        “Im not insulting you,”

        Of course you are.

        ” im stating a fact,”

        Ironically, when I point out the fact that you consistently fail to demonstrate a basic understanding of written English, you take that as an insult.

        And of course, your entire purpose here is to insult Christians for your ego and amusement. And this new batch of whining is simply a pathetic attempt to dodge the fact that while you obsess and misrepresent a few verses raped out of context, you ignore all of the many, many other passages that refute your fantasy.

        Your entire line of argument is fraudulent.

      • Martin McNeill

        Nice dodge, 7th dodge, thats impressive, what to try for the 8th dodge at a simple question?
        “your entire purpose here is to insult Christians for your ego and amusement” sorry but not the case when im quoting straight from the bible.

      • WilmRoget

        I have addressed your concerns on the passage, you preceded to slander me and revile me.

        The evil you see in the Bible is merely a reflection of your character. If you disliked evil, you would change your character. Instead, you choose to blame God, and slander people on the internet to make yourself feel good.

        The sloppy methodology you use to manifest your purpose of insulting Christians for the sake of your ego does not change the purpose.

        You are here out of sadism, nothing more. But I dare you – prove me wrong. Not dismiss, whine, or reject – prove that you are here for anything other than pure sadism.

      • Martin McNeill

        No you keep dodging. the bible is very clear, i will quote. “When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it”Sounds like murder to me.
        “As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder”
        Sounds like slavery to me.
        “If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you”
        Really really sounds like slavery to me.
        How am i misinterpreting this?
        Do you disagree with what your God is telling you to do here? Do you think humans should do these things to each other? Simple question, 9th time

      • WilmRoget

        “No you keep dodging. the bible is very clear,”

        No and no. First off, Martin who cannot even demonstrate basic writing skills in English, the Bible was not written in English, you are using a translation. But since you have not even mastered basics in English, there is no point in digging into the Hebrew.

        “Sounds like murder to me.”
        But that is not murder. So either we’ve discovered another word that you don’t actually know the meaning of, or you are being dishonest again. The Bible condemns murder.

        “Sounds like slavery to me.”
        What something sounds like to you does not mean much. You’ve lied repeatedly to me about my own beliefs.

        How could you not misinterpret it, when you cannot even write properly in your own native tongue?

        Bear in mind, you are continuing to use three passages, out of thousands, to fabricate a false impression. That is fundamentally dishonest.

        There is another immorality in your position – you have no announced your religious affiliation, simply asserting that you are not an atheist (if that is even the truth). That creates a serious injustice – you are free to carp and lie about Christianity, while your own religious beliefs are safe from evaluation.

        That is immoral on your part, and combined with your lies and slanders, it indicates that you simply are not qualified to arbitrate any question regarding morals.

      • Martin McNeill

        You be crazy. The end. Dodge dodge dodge, shocking.

      • WilmRoget

        Your insults only reflect your character.

        About your false accusation of dodging – what religion to you belong to? Do you feel any shame at all over your fraud of raping three passages out of thousands, ignoring all of the passages the contradict your claim?

        Will you ever learn basic punctuation?

      • Martin McNeill

        You be crazy. Dodge dodge dodge, shocking. the end.

      • WilmRoget

        So having attacked me with accusations that I edit, you revise your own post and then tell a fib. We haven’t gotten past the few you did provide because you are consumed with a need to revile Christians and will not accept the truth.

      • WilmRoget

        Now, a reasonable person would conclude that your ‘the end’ – incompetent capitalization and all, indicates that you were through. But you are still posting, so even there, you cannot seem to tell the truth.

      • Martin McNeill

        You keep replying with more nonsense, i like to point that out

      • WilmRoget

        Your empty dismissal only communicates incompetence and failure.

      • Martin McNeill

        Your repeated dodging only communicates incompetence and failure.

      • WilmRoget

        There’s been no dodging on my part. Every time you lie, Martin, you make it that much more impossible to believe anything you post.

        Now, on the subject of dodging, you’ve been asked to reveal what body of religious belief you identify with, so that it can be examined in the same way you’ve treated Christianity.

        Instead, you’ve dodged.

      • Martin McNeill

        Dodged again, im shocked.

      • WilmRoget

        The dodging you perceive is entirely a creation of your own making, it reflects your character, not mine.

        And again, you said you were not an atheist, so what religion to you belong to. Have the courage to disclose, so that your religion can be examined in the exact same way you’ve treated Christianity.

      • Martin McNeill

        You only need to look at me counting the amount of times you dodged to see you dodging. Im not for answering your questions, i pointed out along time ago i wasnt continuing this conversion due to your repeated dodging and childishness.

      • WilmRoget

        “i pointed out along time ago i wasnt continuing this conversion due to your repeated dodging and childishness.”

        And you have completely failed to live up to your own word on that simply matter, demonstrating that there is simply no reason to believe a word you post.

        As for dodging, you’ve been asked repeatedly about your religious beliefs, and have yet to answer the question. Yet, despite your lies to the contrary, I have addressed your concerns.

        What is your religious affiliation, Martin? Show some courage and integrity, declare your religious affiliation so that it can be examined exactly as you have treated Christianity.

        If you won’t, then not only do you discredit your entire line of argument beyond all hope, you prove that your intentions here were, from the start, dishonorable, abusive, and sadistic.

      • Martin McNeill

        Im not for answering your questions, i pointed out along time ago i wasnt continuing this conversion due to your repeated dodging and childishness.

      • WilmRoget

        Every time you post you continue the conversation. But, I would not expect someone who cannot master basic punctuation and capitalization to understand that, so your confusion is understandable.

        What religion do you belong to? Or did you lie when you claimed that you were not an atheist?

      • Martin McNeill

        Im not for answering your questions, i pointed out along time ago i wasnt continuing this conversion due to your repeated dodging and childishness.

      • WilmRoget

        “Do you disagree with what your God is telling you to do here”

        As I have pointed out repeatedly, Martin, your interpretation is not accurate, and thus the God you have created by raping this passages is not My God, but your sick fantasy created so you can foist your evil onto it, rather than take responsibility for your evil.

      • WilmRoget

        Do you know how to tell when someone is lying about the Bible?

        When they say “the Bible is very clear . . .”

      • Martin McNeill

        Leviticus 20:13 “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads”

        Very clear?
        Bible still condemns murder?

      • WilmRoget

        Thank you for this wonderful opportunity to rub your nose in your ignorance.

        First off, the translation you are using is fraudulent. The Hebrew literally states
        ish – husband
        shakab – to lie down, to rest, to lodge
        zakar – priest, male of any species set aside for high or holy office
        mishkab – bed
        ‘ishshah – wife
        shĕnayim – two
        `asah – to do

        to’ebah – a wrong thing, abomination,

        Note mishkap ishshah – bed wife. That does not mean ‘as with a woman’. It means ‘wife’s bed’. And notice as well, Martin, that two different words are used to allegedly connote male, man – one is ish, the companion of ishshah, husband and wife. The other is zakar, and it is predominantly used in the OT to refer to males who have been set aside for holy office, like priests, or for high office.

        This passage describes a man cheating on his wife with a priest – and it falls, as you could have easily learned, in a set of commands that forbid practices associated with the religions of the surrounding peoples. In this specific case, it describes temple prostitution – people having sex with the priests or priestesses of fertility religions to win the favor of the relevant god or goddess.

        Now, we can argue whether death is an appropriate penalty, or not, but then, many secular governments impose the death penalty.

        “Bible still condemns murder?”
        Yes, the Bible condemns murder.

        And while you may find fault with a death penalty imposed for idolatry, that is not murder. You are fraud.

        Now Romans 1:24-32 addresses temple prostitution quite explicitly. But since the tail end of it explicitly describes you:

        And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all
        unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness;
        full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
        Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.”

        I can understand how you, hater of God, are upset. But that is rather like blaming gravity when you trip and fall down and skin your knee.

        By the way, you are a murderer in thought and word, by citing Lev 20:13. It does not matter, at all, whether you believe it to be true or not, though you clearly act as if you think so. You just threatened the lives of seven hundred million people, to prove that the god you’ve made up in your head by raping the Bible is “the real” God. You are a murderer in thought and word.

        So why on earth would I, or anyone, believe a word you have to say about evil, right and wrong, morals – when you clearly lack understanding of right and wrong?

      • Martin McNeill

        You should really contact someone in change of the bible, your grasp of Hebrew is amazing compared to the 5 English versions i just checked (my NIV version is actually tame compared to other English versions) and since i speak Spanish I checked 2 Spanish versions as well. You must really really contact someone because not one version agrees with you. And for the length of time its been out, no one has corrected these errors you claim the bible is full off. Im shocked.

      • WilmRoget

        “You should really contact someone in charge of the bible, your grasp of Hebrew”

        Actually, I used a readily available online resource, and more importantly, I’m not the only person. But your snark communicates utter failure and incompetence on your part.

        ‘since i speak Spanish”
        Right. You don’t even write English properly.

        I like you how lie all the time thinking it is accomplishing anything beyond showing that you are not qualified to make any determination about morality.

      • Martin McNeill

        You would think since there is readily available online resources to correct all these errors someone would have done so alread?. Surely if the person translating the bible has done such a bad job like you claim on so many different versions of the bible there would be at least 1 correctly translated version?

        Maybe you should release you`re own version with the proper translations since the information is readily available?
        Maybe you might recommend a better translated version than my NIV version?

      • WilmRoget

        I wouldn’t think so, I know how complicated the issue is, and how much people like you have invested, emotionally, in pushing anti-gay theology.

        Your dismissals only expose your incompetence and fraud.

      • Martin McNeill

        Pushing anti-gay theology.? What? Are you ok in the head? Are you for real?

      • WilmRoget

        Your insult only shows that you cannot refute what I wrote.

      • Martin McNeill

        You deserve insulted for coming up with such mindless child like comments. And i shoud have, but the “are you ok in the head?” is a serious question, not an insult, i ask because the nonsense you come out with is unreal,. You didnt even answer the question. Pushing anti-gay theology? Where on earth did that nonsense statement come from? Im shocked at the level you make things up about other people, child like, proper child like. Even reading that nonsense post the 2nd time has shocked me again. And i can`t believe you actually think i need to refute your mindless bazaar comment.

      • WilmRoget

        Sadists always have a justification, a ‘you deserved it’. But yours fails, because nothing I’ve posted is ” mindless child like comments”. By the way, your contempt for children is duly noted, along with your obvious lack of morals.

        ‘You didnt even answer the question”

        I’ve asked you repeatedly about what religion you belong to. And your reply, in your next post is “Im not for answering your questions,”

        Yet you arrogantly and pridefully assume that your nasty questions are to be answered.

        What religion do you belong to? Or did you lie, yet again, when you claimed that you were not an atheist?

      • Martin McNeill

        Im not for answering your questions, i pointed out along time ago i wasnt continuing this conversion due to your repeated dodging and childishness..

      • WilmRoget

        And don’t forget, for a second, that you are a mass murderer in thought and word.

      • Martin McNeill

        More child like behaviour. I would say im shocked but im not.

      • WilmRoget

        Your abusive replies only reflect your character and incompetence.

      • Martin McNeill

        Your repeated dodging only reflects your character and incompetence.

      • WilmRoget

        Your insults accomplish nothing beyond making you look bad.

        You said you were not an atheist – so show some courage, disclose your religious affiliation, so that it can be treated exactly as you have treated Christianity.

      • WilmRoget

        “Im not defending atheism, im pointing out the bible states people should do evil things to each other.”

        and

        “I do think rape, murder, slavery is wrong, ”

        Your claims are not credible. You’ve lied too many times. You are lying about the Bible, you’ve lied about me, this is deeply immoral behavior on your part. And you are attempting to defend atheism.

        “thats why i dont believe the God you believe in is good.”

        Ah, but the god you are attacking is not the God I believe in, nor is it the God described in the Bible. It is simply a nasty construct you’ve created so you can pretend that you are good, not flawed, dishonest, incompetent, and lacking in sound morals.

      • Martin McNeill

        Are you actually waiting until i reply then changing your whole previous post?

      • WilmRoget

        “Are you actually waiting until i reply then changing your whole previous post?”

        No. So again, we see that you either have a real reading comprehension problem, or your dishonesty problem is larger than it initially appeared.

        “Ive stated im against your God being ok with rape, murder, slavery numerous times now.”

        You are against your fantasy, your lie. But because you are lying about my God, it stands to reason that you are lying when you say you are against those things. You certainly have proved that you are against honesty and accuracy.

        ” i really thing this is brick wall stuff now.”

        Perhaps that is how your elementary school teachers felt when they tried to teach you proper punctuation. In both cases though, the brick wall is entirely on your side of the matter.

      • Martin McNeill

        Lol, more personal attacks. Its funny the good Christian keeps resorting to personal attacks while he`s trying to say he has better morals than others because his religion teaches him so, shocker.
        Ive pointed out the parts in the bible were your God says murder, rape and slavery are ok, so you may just stop repeating that nonsense.
        And yes you have been deleting and edited whole posts after ive replied, i only have to look at the emails i have compared to your posts on this site, so nice try, lol. Ill end this now because your childishness is shocking.

      • WilmRoget

        “Lol, more personal attacks.”

        This lie from the guy who later says: “You sir are one strange human being,” and on and on. You are a hypocrite.

        Pointing out your falsehoods and your failings is not personal attack. But your falsehoods about my religious beliefs are a personal attack.

        ‘Ive pointed out the parts in the bible were your God says murder, rape and slavery are ok,”

        And again, that is your false interpretation. Your lies reflect your character, not God’s character.

        “And yes you have been deleting and edited whole posts after ive replied,”

        Nope. Nice lie.

        And why should I play your game, when you’ve already lied over and over and over again?

      • Martin McNeill

        I called you strange because of your behaviour, the dodging of simple questions and choosing to be abusive instead is strange. Im only stating a fact.

        I quoted the exact verses word for word from the bible i have, you actually just ignored it completely and replied with abuse. Ill try again for you..

        10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies.

        False interpretation? it very clear murder is ok, slaves are ok. Do i need to point out it says attack not defend? Do i need to point out forced labour for the peaceful people?
        Will you ever answer the question do you agree or disagree with what your god is telling you to do?

        I would only need to screen shot my emails and put them beside your comments on here, they dont match, paragraphs missing, paragraph’s added, its abit silly really

      • WilmRoget

        “I called you strange because of your behaviour,”

        Clearly, no.

        And clearly, you do not understand the difference between quoting something, and interpreting it. Just as you clearly don’t know basic punctuation.

        ” it very clear murder is ok, slaves are ok”

        No, it only communicates approval to such as you, who look for it.

        ‘I would only need to screen shot my emails”

        You would have to prove that it is not you who edited the emails. Photoshop, you know.

      • Martin McNeill

        I called you strange because of your behaviour, the dodging of simple questions and choosing to be abusive instead is strange. Im only stating a fact.

        “When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it”
        Sounds like murder to me.
        “As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder”
        Sounds like slavery to me.
        “If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you”
        Really really sounds like slavery to me.
        How am i misinterpreting this?

      • WilmRoget

        It is also to point out, yet again, that atheism has no condemnation of any wrong whatsoever. It does not condemn murder, or rape, or torture, or pedophilia, or stealing or deception and false testimony. All of these things are condemned in the Bible.

        It does not encourage, promote or even approve of any virtue whatsoever. It does not encourage love, compassion, grace, forgiveness, mercy – all traits that are extolled, praised and encouraged in the Bible. And frauds like you always ignore those passages, desperately and viciously pretending that they do not exist so you can blame your evil on the Bible.

        You, for example, have twice now made explicitly false statements that you present as fact about something you cannot know – what I have read and studied. That is a serious and seemingly intrinsic moral failure on your part.

        And admit it, people like you reject the Bible so you can reject the condemnation of murder, rape, stealing, lying, etc it contains, and make up your own morals as you go along, as your needs and ego dictate.

        Atheism is a vicious and degrading prejudice.

      • Sillyguy007

        such love and tolerance!

      • madshark

        Yeah you’re right. This Walter Warren moron is a Christian hating POS.

      • The Cliggster

        I thought you said you don’t resort to name calling? Look, it’s not as if hatred for Christians is some sort of prerequisite for becoming an atheist. Most of us don’t hate Christians JUST because they are Christians. We just hate the things that SOME of them do. What is it you folks like to say? Don’t hate the sinner, but hate the sin? See? The bible did get a few things right.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You shouldn’t be too hard on Mark the mad shark. He lost his johnson in a bizarre snake handling accident when he was twelve. Makes one very bitter, I suppose.

      • M_R

        Good job coming off as a total ass with poor answers!!

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=150300227&ref=name Hallie

        I disagree that humans do not have the power to forgive, and am astonished that anyone would feel that way. You have never forgiven anyone? I think I am too quick to forgive sometimes… I certainly forgive often.

        I suppose I am an athiest as I have tried to believe in God when I was younger, but I just don’t. I tried to find a different religion that might fit better for me, none of them have. I’m just not religious. I don’t pretend to have all of the answers, and I feel it’s dangerous when others do.

        There is no one right way to live, and forcing others to live your way or attacking others for their beliefs doesn’t feel right to me. Why can’t we all just get along? As long as you aren’t hurting anyone else, you are entitled to your beliefs and living your life how you want.

        I believe in love. I believe in being kind. My life is amazing, and fulfilling, without religion. Some people need it, others don’t. I don’t condemn either type of person.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Such a sweet christian. I guess you can be a complete arse, if you are under the impression you’ll be forgiven.

      • WilmRoget

        “Atheists aren’t hypocrites.”

        Any atheist who rebukes any prejudice, while being an atheist, is a hypocrite.

        “We don’t claim moral superiority, then go praise and glorify an entity
        that, according the writings in the holy book of said religion, has
        committed the same atrocities we just detested with wanton disregard
        and, at points, gleeful exuberance.”

        Your false characterization reveals your false characterization. Not only are you a hypocrite, you are bigot and a liar.

        “Your insinuation”

        I made no insinuation. But your posts show that you lack morals, for you clearly approve of deceit and slander.

        “We DO in fact condemn”

        Prove it. Provide the core text of atheism in which it condemns anything. To the degree that atheists have any morals, they do not get them from atheism, but steal them from religions.

      • Walter Warren

        “Your false characterization reveals your false characterization.”

        What does that even mean? Isn’t this redundant? That’s like saying, “Your hand reveals your hand.”

        “Not only are you a hypocrite, you are bigot and a liar.”

        Please enlighten me as to where I lied. I’m dying to know.

        “But your posts show that you lack morals, for you clearly approve of deceit and slander.”

        And you call me a hypocrite? I’ll address this further below, however I again request proof that I have committed slander or deceived anyone.

        Last but not least:
        “”We DO in fact condemn”

        Prove it. Provide the core text of atheism in which it condemns anything. To the degree that atheists have any morals, they do not get them from atheism, but steal them from religions.”

        If you’re going to quote someone and there’s more to the sentence than the 5 words you want to attack, you put what’s called an ellipsis to show it is part of a bigger sentence. Here’s what should have been quoted and it addresses your issue with an atheists morals:
        “We DO in fact condemn all of these things based not on a book that contradicts every moral statute it supposedly sets forth, but on an innate moral obligation toward everyones well-being. Are we perfect? Far from it, but neither are the religious who believe themselves high and mighty.
        WE take responsibility for our actions and don’t claim “God made me do it” or It was the work of the devil”. There are more Christians in prisons than any other group, but we’re the menace to society. Were the ones out committing hate crimes and denying human rights to all who don’t fit into our definition if a good person and brainwashing our children to be just like us by forcing them to feel shitty for being human.”

      • Adam Knapp

        We atheists don’t get our morals from fear of some fairy tale deity that will smite us if we don’t comply. We get our morals from an internal compass that tells us not to be dicks to others.

      • WilmRoget

        “some fairy tale deity” When you characterize religion in that way, simply to make yourself feel good at the expense of others, it raises doubts about whether you have any morals at all.

        But thanks for admitting that atheists make up their morals as they go along to suit their wants and ego.

      • Walter Warren

        He never admitted to that. You are adding you’re own opinion and construing it as his

      • WilmRoget

        “He never admitted to that.”

        Nonsense.

      • Walter Warren

        Where did he admit it? You can’t say it’s nonsense, but offer no proof contradicting it.
        In fact, that is your biggest problem: You claim atheists are bigots, hypocrites, and a whole bunch of unsavory characterizations, yet they are baseless and untrue because you have no proof beside the fact we are explaining our position and you can’t.

      • WilmRoget

        “You can’t say it’s nonsense, but offer no proof contradicting it.”

        So much for atheism then.

        “In fact, that is your biggest problem:”

        No. It is one of atheism’s big problems though.

        “yet they are baseless and untrue because you have no proof beside the fact we are explaining our position and you can’t.”

        Lying to me about my own position only demonstrates that you lack morals and good sense.

      • Walter Warren

        Again with the taking what people say and adjusting it to fit what you want it to. It seems your M.O. to cherry-pick parts of sentences and totally misrepresent the original poster’s statements.
        Since you have no valid points and you are unable to argue a scant, if not non-existent, position, I’m just going to bid you ado and be done with this.
        Its been my displeasure to have such a one-sided intellectual discussion with the unarmed.

      • WilmRoget

        Your false accusations accomplish nothing. And with every insult, you demonstrate that atheism is indeed just a vicious prejudice.

      • Walter Warren

        Just because someone disagrees with you does not mean it is prejudice.
        You believe in a religion that preaches hatred towards entire groups of people for no reason other than their sexual orientation and that they don’t believe in the same God as you.
        That is prejudice.

      • WilmRoget

        “Just because someone disagrees with you”

        I never said, or implied, anything about disagreement. However, homophobes make the same defense, characterizing their dehumanizing belief about GLBTQ people as ‘disagree’.

        “You believe in a religion that preaches hatred towards entire groups of
        people for no reason other than their sexual orientation and that they
        don’t believe in the same God as you.”

        No, I do not. You though tell disgusting lies about people you know nothing about. In fact, you are engaged in a behavior that another group of bigots, homophobes, engaged in frequently. You, like they, have made up a nasty and malicious fantasy about me and then presented it as fact, when it is not.

        In fact, the prejudice is entirely yours, as you concluded that I hold a belief that I do not, simply because I am a Christian and some Christians hold that aforementioned belief.

      • Walter Warren

        I’m confused. What kind of Christian are you? Please help me understand because now you’ve peaked my curiosity.

        And once again, unsurprisingly, you’ve failed to properly quote me.

      • Walter Warren

        All you’ve done is disagree with not only me, but everyone else who can’t figure out what your opinion is, other than we’re somehow wrong, you twist words and misquote people, and according to you, every atheist is a prejudice, hypocritical bigot.

        In all sincerity, please give us all a basic rundown of what kind of Christian you are.

        And you have done the same assuming as I have. You know nothing of me besides I’m an atheist and, as much as you want to deny it, you’re assuming I’m entirely uninformed on Christianity. I’m FAR from it.

      • Rick Diehl

        Bill, you’re repeating yourself now. You tried that rather twisted bit of logic with me and it was silly then just like it is silly now. I get that you somehow believe you are fighting the good fight, but Bill, you aren’t doing anyone, let alone Christ any favors with your argument style.

      • WilmRoget

        Repetition is an important part of learning. Some people are smart enough to learn things so quickly, a teacher need barely repeat anything. Other people require a lot more repetition of a fact before they can learn it, requiring a teacher to repeat himself or herself over and over again.

        Your dismissals, Rick, like your inability to get my id correct, only demonstrate considerable incompetence on your part.

        Perhaps if you were less impatient, and actually attempted to learn something, I would not need to repeat myself so much.

      • Ray

        Wilm, you’re so pathetic. Anyone reading your posts is going to think you’re 7 years old. Perhaps you should go hang out at the Yahoo message boards, they might be more your speed. Let the grown ups handle the real debating.

      • WilmRoget

        With every attempted insult, you demonstrate that atheism is a prejudice. The tragic thing is that you, and your peers, are so caught in this ego-loop that you cannot even see that because I pointed out that the purpose of any prejudice is to denigrate and dehumanize others, every time you engage in that behavior, and you have, you demonstrate that atheism is a prejudice.

      • ManicPanda

        The problem could be that atheist make fun of your God, not you. You make fun of atheist, period. After a certain amount of ridiculousness in the form of arguments, you then open your self up to ridicule. Atheist start off insulting your god, you started off by insulting atheist. There is a difference and a hypocrisy when you claim persecution. Especially when I hear far more insulting things coming from theist about atheists then I hear atheists say about theists.

      • WilmRoget

        “The problem could be that atheist make fun of your God, not you. You make fun of atheist, period. ”

        And yet, you are wrong. I don’t make fun of atheists, I rebuke atheism. And atheists mock and defame, make fun of and slander people of faith.

        “After a certain amount of ridiculousness in the form of arguments,”

        Your dismissal reveals your incompetence.

        ” you then open your self up to ridicule.”

        So you basically create an excuse for immoral behavior that shifts the blame onto the person being abused.

        “There is a difference and a hypocrisy when you claim persecution.”

        Your fantasies are not convincing.

        “Especially when I hear far more insulting things coming from theist about atheists then I hear atheists say about theists.”

        But then, what you hear is not evidence of anything, since your bias is evident.

        Other than making yourself feel important and exalted, what exactly did you expect to accomplish with your litany of falsehoods?

      • Rick Diehl

        Hi..I’m back. So if what you are saying is true, and that every time an atheist denigrates and dehumanize others they are demonstrating that atheism is a prejudice, what does it mean every time YOU denigrate and dehumanize others? You certainly have been more then willing to throw around the ol’ invective, so what does that make you?

      • WilmRoget

        “what does it mean every time YOU denigrate and dehumanize others?”

        Well, for one thing, it says that you make accusations without a shred of evidence.

        “You certainly have been more then willing to throw around the ol’ invective,”

        Nice falsehood.

        ” so what does that make you?”

        Someone you need to lie about, obviously.

      • Rick Diehl

        Bill,
        Your posts are right here on the page for all of us to see. It’s a bit hard to claim I’m a liar when your words are right in front of us.

      • WilmRoget

        It is easy to point out your lies, I merely have to quote them, as I have done.

        And of course, since you clearly cannot read my id correctly, it is unlikely that you understand much, perhaps even all of what you read.

      • Ray

        So does your god Wilm. Apparently you’ve never really read the bible, have you? (don’t bother answering, your posts make it quite apparent that it’s sitting around collecting dust somewhere)

      • WilmRoget

        Ray, your derogatory fantasies accomplish nothing beyond indicating that you make up ugly lies to soothe your hurt feelings.

      • Adam Knapp

        What am I supposed to call it? You believe in a story that is fictional, including fictional characters. That’s basically a fairy tale, right?

      • WilmRoget

        “You believe in a story that is fictional, including fictional characters.”

        No, I do not. Your characterization of the Bible is false.
        I understand, you need to denigrate people of faith through such falsehoods for the very same reason that homophobes need to denigrate homosexuals though falsehoods like ‘it is a lifestyle choice’:

        to make yourself feel good inside.

      • Ray

        You can almost feel the shear desperation in his posts, can’t you Adam? All he has is the old, tired “all morality comes from god” argument while totally ignoring the horrendous atrocities that their own god is responsible for. Sorry, but anyone (deity or otherwise) that would freeze 42 children in their tracks while two bears come and tear them to pieces for making a bad joke is in no position to define morality.

      • BigRedHammer

        LOL. Never knew an atheist that DIDN’T act like a dick. From my experience, they tend to worship their own intellect and think they somehow know all the answers while billions of others on the Earth are just too stupid to understand.
        No, shouldn’t you be out raising money for on offensive billboard somewhere?

      • ManicPanda

        Never had an atheist go up to me on the street, then claim I’m immoral and going to be torture for all eternity by their friend if I didn’t listen to what they say either…

      • Rick Diehl

        I like that you named yourself after the old SNL sketch about the Big Red Hammer. Of course the point of the Big Red Hammer was so that stupid people would be able to hit someone over the head with it who asked a question that was too hard for them to answer. Do people keep asking you questions that are too hard?

      • BigRedHammer

        Hate to burst your bubble, but snl was never very high on my list of ways to spend time. I’m glad the coincidence amuses you.

      • Rick Diehl

        Well let me tell you my friend that is a true shame. I was impressed with your ironic nature. Still trust me great name.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        My aren’t you a thick one? The only thing atheism professes is a lack of belief in god or gods. You are an atheist when it comes to Scientology, Hinduism, etc. Of course, you are also a genuinely awful person.

      • WilmRoget

        More insults, even though I repeatedly pointed out that the use of insults demonstrates that atheism is simply an excuse to denigrate other people.

        ” You are an atheist when it comes to Scientology, Hinduism, etc.”

        Nope.

        “Of course, you are also a genuinely awful person.”

        Of course, you don’t actually know anything about me, so you are projecting your character at me.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        My comment about you being an awful person was gleaned from reading your pompous bullshit. I don’t see calling a thick person thick as an insult. And your complaint about projecting my character on to you is laughable. Haven’t you been doing that this entire time? Why is it okay for you?

        Comments such as “…atheism is simply an excuse to denigrate other people.” will always paint you as a thick individual.

        So you are claiming that you also believe in scientology and hinduism? You think their gods are just as valid as yours. In a way you don’t mean to be, you are correct. They are all just as valid as yours. You are just the first Christian to admit it.

      • ManicPanda

        People are ridiculing you because of your ridiculous comments. There is ample evidence you gave to form that opinion and is a valid topic. Especially because you are claiming the people making fun of you here are the way all atheists act in general. I would argue if you notice that trend common around you, then maybe you are the common detonator in that equation. Your actions, causing others to see you in a negative manner, so they let you know.

      • WilmRoget

        Your dismissals offered as excuses for inexcusable behavior demonstrate two things:
        1) a lack of morals on your part
        2) a lack of any cogent rebuttal to the position I’ve articulated.

        By claiming an excuse to ridicule and mock people, in the name of atheism, you are affirming that atheism is a nasty prejudice.
        “you are claiming”

        Your false assertions create the impression that you are simply incapable of being civil, or accurate.

        ” I would argue if you notice that trend common around you, then maybe you are the common detonator in that equation.”

        Nice Freudian slip there. But there’s a problem with your excuse – homophobes and racists use it all the time. the ‘you are the problem’ argument is used by oppressors of every stripe to shift the blame onto the people they abuse. By using that argument, you demonstrate one of the many, many parallels between atheism and homophobia.

        Essentially, your entire argument boils down to bad-mouthing me so you and your peers can feel superior. The problem is that since the aforementioned behavior that you and your peers engage in symptomatic of prejudice, you are affirming my position.

        You and your peers behaved abusively because that is so fundamental to atheism that you simply cannot discuss the matter without being degrading.

      • Bill Fisher

        Hey, WilmRoget. Are you the ignoramus that answered the above ten questions? You sure sound like that devoid-of-all-intelligence creature.

      • andromeda

        Atheism isn’t a doctrine to follow. It is a simple belief that there is no god. If you cannot divorce yourself from believing that you need a set of rules set forth from “above”, to not rape pillage and plunder, you are a danger to society.

      • WilmRoget

        “Atheism isn’t a doctrine to follow.”

        Neither is racism or homophobia.

        ” If you cannot divorce”

        Your derogatory assumption demonstrates that atheism is a prejudice.

      • Rick Diehl

        See this is what I was talking about. The above poster makes a definition statement, that claims that you can be an atheist and not a be a criminal, and you respond by accusing them of “derogatory statements”. You seem to believe you are making strong points and proving your statements, but actually all you are doing is showing your own lack of Christian principles. Assuming the worst of everyone and responding by attack and invective is just not the Christian way and really you should already know that.

      • WilmRoget

        “See this is what I was talking about.”

        Nope.
        “The above poster makes a definition statement, that claims that you can be an atheist and not a be a criminal,”

        Actually, Rick, I was clearly responding to the claim ‘atheism is not a doctrine’ and to the negative characterization of the character of Christians.

        Have you considered the probability that the reason poll after poll shows that people, including atheists, do not trust is atheists, is that they are so consistently dishonest in public?

        “Assuming the worst of everyone”

        Since I have done no such thing – your false accusation demonstrates a breach of morals on your part.

      • ManicPanda

        One of the main reason people don’t trust atheist is because of decades of slander spouted by theists about atheism. Lets not forget, Christians where the first atheists. The word was coined because Christians didn’t believe in the Greek gods. So the Greeks called Christians Atheists.

      • WilmRoget

        “One of the main reason people don’t trust atheist is because of decades of slander spouted by theists about atheism.”

        Nice fantasy, but it does not fit the evidence. After all, atheists also do not trust atheists.

        No, the reason atheists are nearly universally distrusted is that they universally distrust and disbelieve most of humanity.

        “. Lets not forget, Christians where the first atheists.”

        No. And that kind of willful deception is another reason why most of humanity, including atheists, don’t trust atheists: they deceive, lie, falsify information too consistently.

      • ManicPanda

        Funny how both of those are topics are spouted by Christians as righteous and part of Gods law. The same reason the Christians used to object to interracial marriage are the same they say about same sex marriage. The bigoted atavists are Christians not atheists. Not saying that there can’t be an atheist bigot. There can be an atheist anything, it is only an opinion of one topic. As in, people that like chocolate ice cream can fall into any demographic. Same with atheism.

      • WilmRoget

        “Funny how both of those are topics are spouted by Christians as righteous and part of Gods law.”

        Funny how there are atheists who are racist, or homophobic, or misogynistic, and yet you pretend that only Christians, all of them by your phrasing, defend it. Funny how you ignore the millions of Christians who oppose both, who have died to end both racism and homophobia.

        “Not saying that there can’t be an atheist bigot.”

        All atheists are bigots, they are intrinsically prejudiced against people of faith. Some have additional prejudices, because, once you’ve empowered yourself to dehumanize one group of people, it is easy, and eventually necessary, to dehumanize others. Stay an atheist long enough, and you’ll embrace other prejudices eventually.

        If you don’t already.

      • TaxPaying American Voter

        Typical extremist. Fact is irrelavent to this type of systematic brainwashing over many years.

      • WilmRoget

        Your slander, having no basis in anything I wrote, only shows that atheism is a sick and vicious prejudice, an excuse to insult and denigrate and dehumanize other people so you can feel good.

      • M_R

        And you sound awfully brainwashed,

      • yourmomsidol

        Nor does atheism condemn eating shellfish or wearing mixed fabric clothing. Both “abominations” to your god, the same level as homosexuality, which you so vehemently protest.
        I don’t see you people outside a Red Lobster or Old Navy whining. Hypocrites. Believe and enforce it all, or none of it.

      • Steve_Schmeve

        Instead of going on and on and on, why don’t you just read Deuteronomy?

      • Blanche Quizno

        Christians don’t read the Bible. It’s a policy.

      • WilmRoget

        In other words, you cannot cite the relevant passage.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Wow… You are quite full of yourself. And bovine extract. Atheism means one thing and one thing only. Lack of belief in a god or gods. THat has nothing to do with morality.

        From your writing, it sounds to me like you’d be out their screwing cattle and raping/murdering, etc. without the threat of eternal punishment. So are the despicable one.

      • WilmRoget

        ” Atheism means one thing and one thing only. Lack of belief in a god or gods. THat has nothing to do with morality.”

        Yes, atheism has no moral code whatsoever. It neither condemns rape, nor endorses respect.

        “From your writing, it sounds to me”

        Your abusive fantasy about is merely your own nature revealed for all to see.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        Lack of belief in a specific god has nothing to do with a moral code you silly person. I find it interesting that you don’t deny that you would be having routine carnal knowledge with sows if it weren’t for the threat of eternal punishment. I wonder why it’s so difficult for you to just follow the golden rule. BTW… It was around long before baby Jesus showed up.

      • William Carr

        99% correct.

        Except it’s not Atheism itself that’s despicable, it’s the lunatics trying to misuse it to denigrate the beliefs of others that are despicable.

        I doubt more than 1 in 10 atheists would ever print a screed like this guy did.

      • WilmRoget

        Atheism is a prejudice, just like homophobia. Denigrating religious belief is intrinsic to atheism, just as denigrating homosexuality is intrinsic to homophobia.

      • mememememe

        Ok, so school me, based on the Exodus, the flood, Jericho, and poor Job stories, not to mention Revelations, how is your god not despotic? I don’t need to cite specific verses because the stories as a whole are horrific. But I’d really like to know your take on them.

      • WilmRoget

        Since you provide no evidence for your claim that God is despotic, your charge is simply a vicious attempt to denigrate something that millions of millions of people value, so you can feel exalted.

        ” I don’t need to cite specific verses because the stories as a whole are horrific.”

        Don’t you mean, you cannot cite verses, because if they are taken in context, it won’t support your claim?

        By the way, your id “me me me me me ” really is the heart of atheism.

      • mememememe

        So you want me to go through the book of Job and show you verse by verse what I think god did wrong? Seriously? I have a job. How’s this, can you summarize the story for me. I’d really love to see your take.
        And for the love of god, get a dictionary!!!!! There’s a big difference between being an atheist and being a narcissist!!!!

      • WilmRoget

        “So you want me to go through the book of Job and show you verse by verse what I think god did wrong?”

        First, you would have to demonstrate that you are qualified to judge God.

        “Seriously? I have a job.”

        So you cannot back up your claims. That certainly disqualifies you from being capable of judging God.

        “And for the love of god, get a dictionary!!!!! There’s a big difference between being an atheist and being a narcissist!!!!”

        Many atheists are narcissists, but that is irrelevant since I do not confuse the two terms. I do know, however, that in English, the correct form is to use only one exclamation mark at the end of a sentence.

      • mememememe

        and actually, when I wrote school me, I meant it. As in I would like to know your take on those stories. In the church I attended while growing up, they took these stories to have happened literally. And yes, they acknowledged how barberic they were, but they were very proud to say that “hey, god’s enemies sure learned the lesson”. So although the acts were barberic, they justified them because the orders or doings came from god.

      • WilmRoget

        “I meant it.”

        There is no reason to believe you. After all, you don’t believe the overwhelming majority of all humans who experience the Divine in some way.

        But deep in your reply is the idea that punishing people who harm others is despotic. It seems that you are a bit of an anarchist, and that you reject Newton’s third law of physics as well.

      • Abigail Bristow

        Ok someone clearly has not read their holy book. I have many many times. I was raised very religious, that is why I became an atheist. I could not reconcile the atrocities and inconsistencies of the bible. The things you are saying aren’t in there are there and many more. Please also note in the new testement Jesus says clearly he did not come to change the laws. Not even a period. He does go on to add more laws but to truly follow that religion you are to obey every law. Now onto being Christlike, I am rather disappointed you have said some of the very unkind things you have about your fellow humans. Christ spoke of loving your neighbor as yourself. You also made some very unkind and unfounded judgments again Christ Said in the bible who am I to judge anyone outside the church. If he claims it wrong for him to do so what would make it ok for you to do so?? I could go to my bookcase and dust off one of my many bibles and cite chapter and verse to you. Though doing that is unlikely to change your mind or even make you think about your faith. You would likely dig your heels in deeper and say even more unkind things about a rapidly growing group of people you seem to know nothing about. So onto what atheism is, it is simply a lack of belief in any God/gods. That is it. It does not have anything to do with ethics or morals. Atheists simply don’t need the promise of heaven or threat of hell to be a good person. We are good because it is the right thing to do. Which is clearly reflected when you look at the prison statistics. Which show about 1% of the prison population is atheist. The other 99% are religious. I hope this finds you well. More over, I hope you would take the time to learn about us and talk to us. We are nice people. We don’t try to convert anyone we simply work toward living a good life and making the world a better place for everyone. In closing we are only matter for a matter of time. So while we are matter we need to make sure what we do matters. We only get this one life, it is precious and far too short. Let’s make a positive difference in the world. <3 abby

      • WilmRoget

        “Ok someone clearly has not read their holy book.”

        But since I have, cover to cover a number of times, clearly, Abby makes up nasty things about people that she just cannot know. And since you made a false claim about me, Abby, everything else you wrote is not trustworthy.

        “I could not reconcile the atrocities and inconsistencies of the bible (sic).”

        But you’ve already lied about me, so I cannot believe you. At most, you could not reconcile the atrocities and inconsistencies in your nature that you read into the Bible.

        “The things you are saying aren’t in there are there and many more.”

        And yet, they are. So are multiple rebukes of deception and lies, which you either never read, or simply disregard.

        ” Please also note in the new testement (sic) Jesus says clearly he did not come to change the laws. Not even a period.”

        That is your distorted, and incorrect interpretation.

        “He does go on to add more laws but to truly follow that religion you are to obey every law.”

        Wrong again on both counts. Clearly, when you claimed to have been very religious and to have read the Bible, you lied.

        ” Now onto being Christlike, I am rather disappointed you have said some
        of the very unkind things you have about your fellow humans.”

        How arrogant and condescending of you. Of course, if you’d actually read the Bible, you’d be familiar with Paul’s words in Romans 14 “4 Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand.”

        And then there’s the hypocrisy of your accusation, for you started by reviling me, and your peers have done nothing but slander and revile me. Admit, the sole purpose of your post here is to denigrate and dehumanize me, just as the sole purpose of atheism is to denigrate and dehumanize people of faith.

        You are making a pretense of expertise on Christianity, but it is a sham and a fraud, an attempt to make yourself look good at my expense – in other words, the sin of pride.

        “Christ Said in the bible who am I to judge anyone outside the church.”

        No.

        “I could go to my bookcase and dust off one of my many bibles and cite chapter and verse to you.”

        Clearly not, or you’d have done so now.

        “You would likely . . .”‘

        Your derogatory fantasies about me are further hypocrisy on your part. The reality is that the wrongs you accuse me of, are wrongs you are actively committing.

        “about a rapidly growing group of people you seem to know nothing about”

        Again, your derogatory fictions about me are examples of your hypocrisy. They reveal your character, not mine. They reveal that you are dishonest, that you are operating out of malice, and that sadism is a significant component of your psyche.

        “So onto what atheism is, it is simply a lack of belief in any God/gods. That is it.”

        And yet that is not all there is. And I’ve covered this bit of empty noise before, when others have made the same dishonest claim.

        “It does not have anything to do with ethics or morals.”

        Yes, atheism, while rejecting all of the morals and ethics articulated in religions, offers none of its own. It does not condemn rape, or murder, yet its adherents hypocritically accuse religions of all kinds of wrongs, including rape and war. And then, they lack the ethical/moral foundation necessary to recognize that they simply have no business using standards they reject to condemn anyone or anything.

        “Atheists simply don’t need the promise of heaven or threat of hell to be a good person. We are good because it is the right thing to do.”

        Nice fantasy, but no, you are not good. But as you demonstrate, you want to be seen as good, even though you most certainly are not. Admit it, that is why you are an atheist – so you can pretend to be good and create your own morals such that you, in your eyes, commit no wrongs at all. Because atheism is a vicious prejudice, atheists by choice are not good people, but bigots.

        ” Which is clearly reflected when you look at the prison statistics.”

        Nope, but dishonest atheists love to distort the data.

        “I hope this finds you well.”

        Your lies are not convincing.

        “More over, I hope you would take the time to learn about us and talk to us.”

        No, you don’t, for if you did, you’d recognize that the position I hold and articulate comes from learning about you and talking to you, and reading what you say, and watching what you do.

        “We are nice people. ”

        No. Look at the abuse you have directed at me, and that coming from your peers. You are not nice, or good.

        “We don’t try to convert anyone ”

        Please stop lying. The very purpose of this article and much of the replies is to convert people to the evil prejudice that is atheism.

        “we simply work toward living a good life and making the world a better place for everyone.”

        Again, your lies are unconvincing. The evidence points to the exact opposite – that atheists work to make the world a miserable place for most of humanity.

        “In closing we are only matter for a matter of time. ”

        And that is one of the intrinsic evils in atheism, it devalues human life.

        “So while we are matter we need to make sure what we do matters. We only get this one life, it
        is precious and far too short. Let’s make a positive difference in the world.”

        And instead of all that nice talk, you and your peers revile and slander and denigrate most of humanity. Even the noble ideals you articulate to make yourself look enlightened, mean nothing to you.

      • ManicPanda

        Ok, I’m done now.. You want to talk about not trusting people that make unknowable or false claims………………….. Really………. How about the claim of “god created the universe and is a constant personal agent in it” or Jesus’s resurrection. Hey, how about the claim that all atheist are insulting to you because you are a Christian, not because you are willfully ignorant, filled with distrust/distain for other humans, won’t address the atrocities or contradiction in your holy book and the fact you are generally an unpleasant person. Really, it has nothing to do with you being Christian, it has to do with you being you. And yes that is insulting, not an ad hominem but an opinion formed from observations of your responses.

      • WilmRoget

        “Ok, I’m done now..”

        And then you continue to post. So your words have no meaning.

        ” You want to talk about not trusting people that make unknowable or false claims”

        I’ve been talking about atheists all along.

        “How about the claim of “god created the universe and is a constant personal agent in it” or Jesus’s resurrection.”

        Neither is unknowable or false, and certainly not because you think they are.

        “not because you are willfully ignorant, filled with distrust/distain for
        other humans, won’t address the atrocities or contradiction in your
        holy book and the fact you are generally an unpleasant person.”

        Nice insults there. They not only reveal your character, they confirm that atheism is simply a nasty excuse to denigrate most of humanity. Look. You and your peers are been unable to defend atheism without being degrading and dehumanizing. Further, you and your peer clearly see nothing immoral or wrong with such behavior.

        “And yes that is insulting, not an ad hominem but an opinion formed from observations of your responses.”

        It is an ad hominem, and it is not based on my responses, but on your character.

      • Danny

        Do you believe in a literal hell? If you believe in a place of eternal torment, than your god is a despotic tyrant. I myself believe in Yeshuwah. I have studied the scriptures in their original texts using a variety of translating tools. There is not hell. The person speekign above about us suffering if we are wrong about god, obviously believes in a literal physical hell meaning they believe in a despotic tyrant of a god that is not at all like the YHWH I see from my studies. The fear of hell was put in place by Constantine during the founding of catholicism as a control method. That is why Gnostics were hunted and killed. The early gnostics believed in the teachings of yeshuwah and not the luciferian fear principles. That is why many gnostic gospels were destroyed and most are claimed to be false.

      • Will Reynard Lentilles

        Hah hah. Nice try. The bible is a fount of horrors and judgment at least once on every page. Christians should all grow orchards for the expert cherry picking you all do. At least atheism means you take responsibility for your morality, instead of picking whatever suits you that day from a book of medieval fairy tales, and then forcing judgement on people who wish you had power over. Based on shame and fear. Loser. I can’t wait till your petty, sadistic “god” idea goes the way of Zeus and Horus. Nothing but a sick little myth that you think gives you the right to oppress. Take Mohamed with you when you go.

      • Colin Robinson

        “Your hate speech only demonstrates what a despicable prejudice atheism is”
        This ‘atheism’ that you have just said has no judgement on anything?
        Pity, you got something right and then managed to completely screw it up.
        FYI, atheism is lack of belief in any of the gods. Nothing more. And not believing in santa cannot, logically, be a condemnation of murder. Or a condoning of murder. Or a judgement on murder in any way, shape or form.
        And not believing in your god, or anyone else’s, is no different to not believing in santa.

      • WilmRoget

        “Pity, you got something right and then managed to completely screw it up.”

        Nope, but your incoherent quote/retort accomplishes nothing.

        “FYI, atheism is lack of belief in any of the gods.”

        Your condescending and superficial answer is of no value. Since belief in the Divine is based on personal experience, those of most of humanity, atheism is not just a lack of belief, put a evidence-less, crass and dehumanizing rejection of the testimony, character and experiences of most of humanity.

        “And not believing in your god, or anyone else’s, is no different to not believing in santa.”

        Wrong, but it requires morals to see why you are wrong.

      • Colin Robinson

        “Since belief in the Divine is based on personal experience, those of
        most of humanity, atheism is not just a lack of belief, put a
        evidence-less, crass and dehumanizing rejection of the testimony,
        character and experiences of most of humanity.”
        The elephant in the
        room here is your claim that belief in a god is based upon personal
        experience. But you have completely failed to comprehend that these ‘personal experiences’ result in beliefs in very, very different gods, all of them ‘the one and only’ god. Only possible conclusion, a ‘personal experience’ is not an experience with an almighty god, it is a delusion.
        And the fact that you can get a helmet that messes with your brain using magnetic fields to switch these ‘personal experiences’ on and off simply puts the final nail in the coffin of the idea that this is somehow ‘other worldly’.

        “Wrong, but it requires morals to see why you are wrong”
        If I am required to adopt a ‘morality’ that sanctions massive slaughters and horrific torture of billions of innocents for eternity in order to understand why I am wrong I would rather be wrong.

        The amusing thing about your delusional insistence that morality comes from a god is that you, and virtually every other christian who isn’t a complete monster, have already declared that your god’s ‘morality’ is utterly immoral when you refuse to follow his laws.

      • WilmRoget

        “But you have completely failed to comprehend that these ‘personal
        experiences’ result in beliefs in very, very different gods, all of them
        ‘the one and only’ god.”

        No, Colin who lies about people, I have not ‘completely failed to comprehend’ any such thing.

        ” Only possible conclusion, a ‘personal experience’ is not an experience with an almighty god, it is a delusion.”

        Well, that is the only conclusion possible in the minds of vicious bigots. But there are other possibilities.

        For example, Colin, if you take ten people to see a movie, which is both physical and abstract at the same time, you’ll get different opinions about it. Some people will like it, others won’t. Some will remember the plot turning on one thing, others on something else. And to a degree, how they interpret that movie will be influenced by their culture, their education, and their other experiences.

        The same is even more true with less concrete but even more universal things. The color red has different symbolic meanings across cultures, the language, symbols and stories about love vary across cultures.

        In your hunger to revile most of humanity as delusional, you did not take into account the tremendous diversity of human beings, our cultures, and the environments in which we live. And when we talk about our experiences of the intangible, whether it is God, or emotions, we rely on metaphors, symbols, analogies draw from our culture and environment and education. So of course, people in a tropical environment will use different imagery to describe the Divine, people in a very independent society will describe the Divine differently from those who live in a very close-knit homogenous society.

        But no rational person would argue that because people experience movies differently, movies do not exist.

        “And the fact that you can get a helmet that messes with your brain using
        magnetic fields to switch these ‘personal experiences’ on and off
        simply puts the final nail in the coffin of the idea that this is
        somehow ‘other worldly’.”

        So, the fact that you can watch a movie that creates the illusion of movement means that movement is a delusion. And the fact that one can listen to an ipod and get the illusion of live music means that the Beatles never existed. You are trying to be clever, rather than reasoned. A rational person would realize that just because an experience or thing can be simulated does not mean that the experience or thing does not really exist.

        “that sanctions ”

        Your false characterization there, deliberate or based on ignorance, demonstrates that you lack morals.

        “The amusing thing about your delusional insistence”

        Your abusive replies demonstrate a lack of morals.

      • Colin Robinson

        Hmm.
        “For example, Colin, if you take ten people to see a movie, which is both physical and abstract at the same time, you’ll get different opinions about it.”

        Yes, and according to you some will see an Arnold Schwarzenegger action flick and some will see the biopic of Stephen Hawking.
        That is a crazy statement! The gods we are talking about here are not just different aspects of the same god, either your god is a monstrous being who torments innocents in their billions for eternity or he is a loving, benevolent god. IT IS ONE OR THE OTHER, YOU CANNOT POSSIBLY LOOK AT GOD ONE AND ‘SEE’ GOD TWO!!!

        “In your hunger to revile most of humanity as delusional, you did not take into account the tremendous diversity of human beings, our cultures, and the environments in which we live.”

        I have no idea why you say that. The idea that ‘culture’ can have such a massive effect on what you see is just weird. Hitler is universally reviled, except by people as bigoted and hateful as him. But no matter whether you admire or despise him you WILL NOT claim he is benevolent to all his fellow man.

        “But no rational person would argue that because people experience movies differently, movies do not exist.”

        No rational person would confuse “Diehard” with “Chasing Amy”. But you’re claiming they would?!!

        “So, the fact that you can watch a movie that creates the illusion of movement means that movement is a delusion.”

        WEIRD!!!! So, according to you, people who watch movies truly believe they are seeing reality, not a representation of reality?

        No, movies are a delusion, a representation of reality which is easily distinguished from reality, I have never heard of anyone who claims different.

        (Oh, I did hear of one idiot who thought that ‘the passion of christ’ was a documentary but I’m sure that even she didn’t believe ‘jesus’ was in the room with her.)

        So when you go to the movies you believe you are actually seeing live events happening in front of you?

        “You are trying to be clever, rather than reasoned.”

        I’m merely stating the blindingly obvious.

        “Your false characterization there, deliberate or based on ignorance, demonstrates that you lack morals.”

        I would like to know how you reconcile the simple FACT that my ‘false characterisation’ is supported by the bible and is deeply believed in by many millions of christians with your claim that it is ‘false’.

        “Your abusive replies demonstrate a lack of morals.”
        Abusive?! Because I assume that you are a decent person and have therefore rejected the teachings of your god as less moral than you can stomach?

        You have morals, you KNOW it is wrong to stone your child to death because he shows a lack of respect. But the ‘morality’ of your god condemns you because you do not do this.

        Remember, according to the gospels your jesus declared that the mosaic law was too soft! He emphasised that the laws laid down by moses HAD to be obeyed without question, or you will suffer eternal torment.

        And yet you disobey your god in virtually everything. BECAUSE YOU ARE MORE MORAL THAN YOUR GOD!

        And I’m obviously even more moral than you as I do not even give lip service to the monster you worship.

      • WilmRoget

        The core flaw, Colin, is that your entire idea about what Christianity is, is a straw man, a fraud, a fake conveniently created by cherry-picking from extremely limited sources.

        You and your bigoted peers define Christianity by an extremely narrow slice – modern American Calvinist fundamentalism. Much like some racist defining all black men by those in prison, or the homophobe defining all gay men by the party boy tweaked out of his head.

        And you have to do that because your position is a vicious and degrading prejudice that can only be sustained through distortion.

      • Colin Robinson

        “The core flaw, Colin, is that your entire idea about what Christianity
        is, is a straw man, a fraud, a fake conveniently created by
        cherry-picking from extremely limited sources.”
        You mean the bible? And the beliefs of 100s of millions of christians? And the history of christianity?

        Sorry, the flaw here is that I have no idea which of the christian gods you believe in. I can go by the bible on the assumption that you consider that to be fundamental to your belief but you cherry pick what you want to believe and reject everything you don’t.

        There is no god or gods, if there was all believers would believe in the same thing.

        “And you have to do that because your position is a vicious and degrading
        prejudice that can only be sustained through distortion.”
        What ‘distortion’? What EXACTLY do you disagree with in my characterisation of the teachings of your mythology?

        Do you insist that the fable of lazurus and the rich man shouldn’t be in the bible? That it is contrary to the teachings of your god? You believe that your god would NEVER say ‘follow the teachings of moses or burn in hell forever’ which is the fundamental message of that passage?

        Do you prefer to take the message of the bit where your jesus says ‘who has no sin cast the first stone’? Does THAT more accurately define your god?

        Shame, because that bit was added in the 3rd or 4th century. As the gospels make clear, the judeans were not allowed to execute anyone, they had to hand over their victims to the romans. But not in this case?
        And judean law states that the witnesses throw the first stone, so jesus was wrong on that as well.

        Because it was made up by a roman centuries after your jesus supposedly existed.

        So what am I distorting here?

      • WilmRoget

        “You mean the bible?”

        No, I mean the subset of Bible passages and theological positions that you’ve raped out of context, conveniently ignoring everything that does not fit your needs. You are a fraud and a bigot.

        And the answer is that you are distorting all of it. But that is apparently the best you can do, and it reflects your character.

        Among its many purposes, the Bible serves a mirror. The evil you see in the Bible is your own reflected at you.

      • Colin Robinson

        “No, I mean the subset of Bible passages and theological positions that you’ve raped out of context, conveniently ignoring everything that does
        not fit your needs. You are a fraud and a bigot.”

        Let’s be VERY clear here. I consider the position of your god on the torture of billions of innocents for eternity to be THE defining characteristic of your god. The rest is irrelevant.

        And the fact is that 100s of millions of christians believe that jesus is going to torture billions of innocents for eternity. And it clearly states this in the bible.

        And I notice that you have never denied that you also believe it.

        “Among its many purposes, the Bible serves a mirror. The evil you see in the Bible is your own reflected at you.”
        No, the evil I see in the bible is infinite torture and I revile that. You glory in it. You worship it.

        You accept that evil, I do not, and you make up some banal bovine excrement that the bible is a mirror to try and pretend that those who reject infinite evil are the ones who are evil.

      • WilmRoget

        ” I consider the position of your god on the torture of billions of
        innocents for eternity to be THE defining characteristic of your god.”

        That position is, of course, simply your projection and interpretation, a construct you’ve created, and it is, by your own argument, the defining characteristic of you.

        ‘And the fact is that 100s of millions of christians believe that jesus is going to torture billions of innocents for eternity.”

        No, that your lie, your falsehood, created by you to revile hundreds of millions of people.

        When you lie to a Christian about Christian belief, Colin, you prove to us that nothing you say is credible. The same thing happens when homophobe lie to GLBTQ people about homosexuality. You are simply proving yourself to be utterly deceitful and malicious.

        The evil you see in the Bible, Colin, has its origin inside of you.

        “No, the evil I see in the bible is infinite torture and I revile that. You glory in it. You worship it.You accept that evil,”

        No, Colin. The evil you see in the Bible originates inside of you, and every lie you post about me – including your last three sentences, proves that you.

        But you don’t care, because all you are after here is glorification of your ego at the expense of others, which is evil.

      • saganhill

        Good answer. Keep them guessing.

      • Mike Ex

        Idiot, you think you would prevail in an actual line by line argument? Oh the arrogance.

      • WilmRoget

        I don’t have to rely on name-calling, Mike, unlike you, so I already have at least one advantage.

      • greg drummond

        In the Old Testament, God was well known for killing off large swaths of the worlds population because he was displeased with their lack of worshiping him in the exact way he wanted. That is despotism. One major example: the flood. Also, Atheists, at least the ones I know, condemn any acts that harm another person and also condemn anything such as homophobia or racism, though that might just be the circle of friends I have. On the other hand, here in Georgia it is not uncommon to see those who profess to be Christians practicing homophobia, and it is also a fact that your Bible, in both the Old and New Testaments, claim that homosexual activity is wrong, therefore making it a homophobic text. Seeing as I denounce homophobia, I must denounce your holy book as hateful.

      • WilmRoget

        ” because . . .”

        Your false characterization destroys your credibility.

        “Also, Atheists, at least the ones I know, condemn any acts that harm
        another person and also condemn anything such as homophobia or racism,
        though that might just be the circle of friends I have.”

        But you already lied about what the Old Testament teaches about why God punishes people. And atheism has no condemnation of any wrong whatsoever.

        “On the other hand,”
        You’re about to use another set of hypothetical examples entirely contingent on your discredited word, to justify your prejudice against all Christians.

        “nd it is also a fact that your Bible, in both the Old and New Testaments, claim that homosexual activity is wrong,”

        It is not fact. it is your interpretation of that text, so in reality, the homophobia is yours. Own it. But thanks, you’ve provided an immediate example of an atheist defending the evil of anti-gay theology, endangering the lives of GLBTQ people, to prosecute his war on Christians.

        “I must denounce your holy book as hateful.”

        Yet the hate is clearly your own.

        “One other thing, do you really need a book to tell you”

        And your disparaging, and fraudulent, assumption demonstrates how intrinsic and all-consuming that hatred within you truly is. When all it said and done, you post was just a hateful and sadistic attempt to exalt yourself at the expense of others.

        Since I’ve commented on that quite a bit, it also shows that you don’t learn.

      • david rocha

        I feel sorry for you, saded

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You tell ‘em Roger! How dare they even bring up Deuteronomy. And other books! That’s just degrading. I should know.

        I want to ask you something in private. Everyone close their eyes. Are you gay Roager? I’m just asking because you refer to homophobes a lot. It’s cool with me either way. I’m not crushing on you. I just wanted to let you know that we’re cool with it. Praise God!

      • Michael C. Thompson

        I’m not even an atheist and if you’re gonna deny the passages I reference are in the Bible, then you’re the dishonest liar.

      • WilmRoget

        “I’m not even an atheist”

        Irrelevant.

        ‘you’re gonna deny”

        I did not deny the existence of anything, I wrote: “Since you provided no actual verse, merely your summary of a vague ‘Deuteronomy
        and other books’,” so the dishonesty is entirely yours.

        How typical though of defenders of the prejudice that is atheism, rely on slander as a substitute for accurate data.

      • Skeptic NY

        Atheism is the lack of belief in god or gods. Nothing more, nothing less. That you don’t even know what the terms means speaks volumes.

      • WilmRoget

        Your simplistic characterization of atheism is dishonest and fraudulent, and it demonstrates the intrinsic dehumanization atheism exists to impose on people of faith.

        ‘That you don’t even know what the terms means speaks volumes.”

        That you lie about me like that only proves your lack of moral sense. Which of course, is often why people become atheists, apparently – to free themselves from morality.

      • Skeptic NY

        As an atheist I rape, murder and steal as much as I want to – which is none.

      • WilmRoget

        Since you admit to being an atheist, there is no reason to believe your claim “which is none”.

      • kevbug

        From your worldview why is it wrong for someone to contradict in the Bible? It is a dog eat dog world, and maybe it increases their survival value? Why is the Bible evil? What is right and wrong? Why do you use such words at someone who believes something like this? If you believe in Atheism, you must believe in survival of the fittest. If you think the Bible is evil then you must think that stealing is ok, and beastiality. It says not to in the Bible. You should not make blanket statements about a book. That is wrong.

      • Adam J. Reizner

        That’s a pretty disjointed analysis. Nobody said that everything in the Bible is evil. The ten commandments are wonderful. The several examples Ben posted show just a few instances of the evils in the bible.

        You’ve also displayed your ignorance of atheism. Atheism isn’t something that people believe in. Atheism is not a belief but a lack of belief in the existence of a god. The majority of Atheists know your bible better than you do.

      • kevbug

        Why can you say that there are evil things in the Bible? There are no evil things in an atheist worldview.

        How can evil be made when there is no god to say, “This is evil and that is good.”? If you are saying something is evil or good then you are making yourself god.

        How do you say I am ignorant? You are saying that there is nothing outside of material things. If there is no god then there is no right and wrong. If you don’t believe in atheism then you must be able to prove that there is no god. You have to be able to prove lots of things that no one can. Atheism is a belief, and if you cannot prove it….it is also a religion. You cannot say I am wrong because then I can believe what I want and you believe what you want….neither is right or wrong. …according to your worldview.

        How do you know that most Atheists know the Bible better then me?

      • Adam J. Reizner

        You apparently know nothing of an atheist world view. There is evil in the world and we see that as intelligent sentient beings. Knowing right from wrong and good from bad does not require a deity to do the judging. I observe evil and am quite able to judge that for myself.

        Your illogical and circular argument deserves no further debate. You are predicating that the existence of god determines good or evil. It doesn’t. Was the Newtown massacre not an evil act if there was no god to judge it as evil? Is fostering a homeless animal or caring for a sick stranger not a good deed if it is done out of the kindness of my own being rather than as a commandment from a higher power?

      • kevbug

        Why, in your worldview is it wrong and evil to kill? What if it is right for the murderer? He might feel he is ridding the world of bad people. Why are you able to tell him that he was doing wrong? He was more fit then the ones that were killed. You are making up what is right and wrong. You are judging others in saying that they are evil. Why is what you say is right, right? What is your theory of knowledge? How do you know what you know? That is logical. Have you ever taken a course in logic to say that I am illogical? Do you know that I am making a circular argument to accuse me of such? Did you know that everyone has a ultimate standard? You are making yourself the ultimate standard by telling others that they are right and wrong?

      • Adam J. Reizner

        Kev my hope is that you just get a tremendous amount of enjoyment from being a troll. I find it difficult to believe that any individual could have such a loose grasp of simple concepts. Your comments are not worthy of debate and to further address them would be a grand waste of time.

      • Braxton_Leo

        You’re using a logical fallacy called Burden of Proof Reversal. The burden of proof always rests on he who asserts, not he who denies. Since Atheism is a denial of belief, the burden of proof rests on the believer.

      • kevbug

        I am not asserting anything. I am asking you to prove where evil came from? Why, in your worldview is there any evil or logic or uniformity in nature? If it is all random chance, then why is there laws of logic? Will they randomly change someday? Why are they the same here as in China and Mexico and Europe. If it is so random, then why are they the same?

      • Douglas Brown

        Evil is in the eye of the beholder. Everyone thinks they’re the good guy. Logic, in its basic form is, “Interesting, I’ve noticed that if I am mean to another person, they are often mean right back to me” Or, “If I touch that shiny leaf, I will itch for days.” How things survive, IMO, is by definition logical. And more complex thought over time was a natural extension of learning from our mistakes and evolving as groups living together. And if believing in a god is helpful for you, then it is logical that you believe in a god. You should also know, that it is equally logical for a person like me to find no logical reason to even entertain the concept of god(s). I don’t want to take your God away from you. But I hope you can also understand that I don’t want anything to do with your God or your beliefs. They are for you.

      • kevbug

        Romans 1:20 describes this in good detail. In logic there is a law known as the law of non-contradiction. You cannot be here and not be here at the same time. The same goes with God.

      • Douglas Brown

        Oh, because someone 2000+ years ago, was noticing the same thing that the rest of humanity was learning (or had already learned), and because you have a version of this thought process written in your book, your kind claim a patent on the concept? Can I help you with that bubble you are stuck in?

      • Andrew the Science guy

        I can assure you that atheists do see evil things in their worldview. I can tell right from wrong because I’m a sentient living thing with thoughts and feelings and most importantly empathy.

      • kevbug

        What if my thoughts are different then yours? Does that make my thoughts wrong? How then can you say anyone is wrong if that is their thoughts? Hitler thought he should kill all the Jews. The Aztecs thought that they should sacrifice their children. Is that ok then?

      • Andrew the Science guy

        “Thoughts” aren’t wrong per se. It’s what you do with them that make the difference between right and wrong. Hitler didn’t *just* think it was ok to kill Jews – he acted on it. The Aztecs didn’t *just* think it was ok to sacrifice children – they acted on it. As an atheist, I don’t think about rape, murder and theft because I am an intelligent, empathetic human being and those qualities inform my decisions about how I act in the world.

        If your thoughts are different from mine (which they clearly are) then that’s OK. It’s how you act on them that make the difference between good and evil.

        Obviously not all atheists are thieves, murderers and rapists. They are the check out girl in the supermarket, the tech who comes by your desk to fix your PC, your doctor, your dentists and your baker. They are all around you, all the time, leading their lives.

      • kevbug

        Why are thoughts not wrong? You are making moral decisions again just like a god does.
        That is quite interesting. You have some morals that the Bible states are wrong. murder, rape, and theft are all listed as “sins”. Romans 2:15
        Maybe you should read 1John 3:15 and Mark 7:22. The Bible is a really good guidebook. I have not found anything else that comes close.

      • Andrew the Science guy

        Of course rape, murder etc are wrong. I still don’t need a book to decide why these things are wrong. Let me help you with another book – a dictionary – seeing as you don’t know what empathy means:
        Empathy:
        1. Identification with and understanding of another’s situation, feelings, and motives.

        I am an intelligent, empathic human being. I don’t need god to be good. If your book told you to go jump off a cliff because god said so, would you?

        The bible is a terrible guidebook. It’s full of contradictions, and if you can’t see them then I suggest you read it cover to cover instead of cherry picking the bits your bible study group tells you to read. It’s been re-written so many times, translated, and re-translated dozens of times over the last two millennia most often to satisfy the politics of the day.

      • kevbug

        Intelligent is a comparative word. You might be more intelligent then the people that are around you, but are you all knowing? All the things that you have learned are from someone else’s findings or discoveries. You are trusting your senses, but how do you know that your senses are reliable? You believe that the world came to be by accident correct? If it is a random chance universe, then how can you know that your senses are reliable? You cannot know that your eyes are really seeing what is real. It might be that tomorrow the world will be all different, and your brain cannot take the information in. Random chance leaves no room for uniformity in nature. You cannot be sure tomorrow will be like today.
        You cannot debate because laws of logic, in your worldview should evolve to become better and better. Although, they have not changed and are also universal. The laws here should be different in China because of random chance.
        There is 2 major flaws already with your worldview. That makes your worldview not cogent. Do you really want that?
        Morality you choose maybe different in another place. You say rape is wrong, but why is it wrong in Muslim society for them? They believe that it is ok in Saudi Arabia in some circumstances. Murder is ok if they are doing it for “mercy killings”. So you are being god when you say they are wrong to do these things. Of are they ok since their whole society accepts them.
        I believe the library would be a good place to visit. There you can see that the Bible is almost the same as the dead sea scrolls that were found, in the many books that are found. The contradictions that you claim may have to do with your worldview. I do not know much, but you are believing people; and the people that you believe are telling you lies. If you would like to believe lies, that is your own choice, but you should really look into what you are saying is true. The Bible has no contradictions that I have found. I do not attend Bible study as you have said.

      • Andrew the Science guy

        I don’t need to be all knowing in order to make a moral judgement about the immediate world around me. I only need to know what I know, feel what I feel and empathize with my fellow human beings.

        I trust that reality is the way it is because society as a whole has decided it. The universe however isn’t as random as you suggest it is or think that I think it is. There are laws of physics are not random – that’s why they are laws.

        Rape is wrong. Full stop. Doesn’t matter which society you’re in. Why? Because it’s a violation of someone else’s body. I’m not being god by deciding these things are wrong, I’m showing empathy and intelligence.

        The laws of Moses dictate that murder is wrong, and yet there are countless other laws which dictate that you murder someone – gays, people who work on Sunday, people who wear the same threads of clothing and have tattoos. Execution is still murder, so there’s your contradictions right there.

        As for mistranslations – what does Exodus 22:18 say?

        Well that depends:
        * Suffer not a sorcerer (or sorceress) to live
        * Suffer not a witch to live
        * Suffer not a poisoner to live
        * Suffer not a whisperer to live

        I can’t read Aramaic, and I doubt you can either. Perhaps you should learn Aramaic and read the scrolls for yourself and you will see the inconsistencies with what you have been taught.

      • kevbug

        What if there is a person that thinks that you are not empathetic to them? Does your judgment trump theirs? When you have not absolutes then there is chaos. Who is right? If you don’t know everything, how do you know that you are right? You cannot make good judgments if you don’t know all.
        Why are you better then the Muslims? You cannot say something is right or wrong if you don’t know where they are coming from. Otherwise again you are playing God. If you believe in evolution, then you believe that some people are not as evolved as you. That makes some people not as valuable. Read Charles Darwin “Decent of Man” page 178. Why are you a better judge of morals then them? If you are intelligent, then how do you know you are more then someone else? If you say you are better then you are a racist.
        As for laws, the same is true. How do you know you are a better judge then the laws Moses was given? How do you know that you have more intelligence then Moses? Studying Egyptian history, from the Egyptian hieroglyphics; They discovered things that scientists today do not even understand. How can you say that you are a better judge if you don’t even know?
        As for your contradictions. Your worldview only makes them contradictions not the law of God. They are consistent with the whole of Scripture. You say that killing someone is murder, but God says that if they deliberately disobey, they were to be killed. It is for everyone’s good. If there is no punishment for sins….people keep doing them.
        If you want to show your intelligence, you should go to a library and look up information about the Dead Sea Scrolls. You will see that the only changes in the Bible are a few minor grammatical changes. It never changed the meaning. The change idea is man’s idea to discredit the word of God.
        If you look at what credentials you have given me for your atheistic worldview, you only show me what people have told you. Look into what you are using as proofs for no god. You are always accusing me of doing what you are doing. You are using morals from the Bible, and then twisting them to fit your worldview. Your worldview is important because your whole purpose in life depends of it.

      • kevbug

        The conclusion: atheists have no reason for knowledge. Why do you know what you know? Your worldview leaves you without any reason for logic. Random chance is not where you will find laws. The problem is not enough evidence. The problem is that atheists want to do what they want and not what someone else says. It leaves them hanging on to the Bible’s morality, and choosing which laws fit them and which laws don’t. They have no basis for uniformity in nature, because the future is only like the past reasoning in a circle. It is not a cogent worldview.

      • Rochelle Lynn Dunlap

        ag·nos·tic
        agˈnästik/
        noun
        1.
        a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.
        synonyms:skeptic, doubter, doubting Thomas, cynic; More

        adjective
        1.
        of or relating to agnostics or agnosticism.
        synonyms:skeptic, doubter, doubting Thomas, cynic; More

      • Rochelle Lynn Dunlap

        You are confusing Atheist w/ Agnostic…they are different things…and please explain this to me (as a former “Christian’ who has now moved beyond fairy tales), if God is all-powerful why doesn’t he just destroy Lucifer and then there would be no evil in the world, correct? Here’s a tip: If there is no evil, there is no religion…people have to be scared of “going to Hell” in order to keep going to church and filling up their coffers.

      • kevbug

        If you read the debate at UC between Gordon Stein and Greg Bhansen “Does God Exist?” Gordon Stein who is a foremost Atheist expert says that an Atheist is one who has not heard an explanation good enough to show god exists.
        You are pretty funny….fairy tales. You show that the Bible is the word of God. Read Romans 1:21.
        God gives a right to choose. He is not overbearing and making us chose Him. If he was he would not be loving. There would still be evil. God is the one who decides what is evil and what is good. That is what gods do in any religion. Mankind choses evil because our hearts are sinful. God will also not do what you or I want him to, he does as He pleases.

      • Douglas Brown

        There is no need for a god to know right from wrong. Having to defend yourself from being killed would suck. Living in a world where you are constantly on the look-out for rival tribes stealing your animals (etc.) would suck. Therefore, simple rules like, “Dont still my stuff,” are useful for people looking for a life that does not suck. It doesn’t take a belief in a god to figure that out. The entire logic around right and wrong does not need a god. If you prefer to believe in a god to keep your life calm and peaceful, you have the right to do so.

      • kevbug

        Just because something “sucks” doesn’t explain why there is no God. You have to have the God of the Bible if you are going to have logic. Logic is universal….it is the same here as it is in Europe and Asia and Australia. If people just made up logic by random chance, then it would have different rules in different places. It is not so. The same goes for uniformity in nature. If you start a car in Europe, and it is working as made, it will start. This is universal. It doesn’t work in a random chance world.

      • Douglas Brown

        You start with the assumption that there is a god. I start with the assumption of, “God who?” The term ‘universal’ works equally well on both sides of this argument. Nobody is making up rules. If you walk up and steal someone’s wallet in China, you will probably get into a confrontation there just as you will in here. You just can’t take people’s stuff. Nobody in China has to crack open a bible to figure that out. Do you want someone to steal from you? Why? Are there godless people in this world who simply haven’t seen the light and have no opinion about being burglarized? Has it occurred to you that most of the people on this earth don’t believe in your God?

      • kevbug

        Yes, I do start with that assumption. Your no god view leaves you without a reason that stealing is wrong. If you believe that you live in a survival of the fittest world, then stealing should be ok. It improves your survival value. just look at the news and you will see lots of people improving their survival value by stealing. Most get away with it now because there are so many not believing in God. You do not have a logical reason to have any rules. It is a dog eat dog world in your worldview. That is what the “lower” animals do, and that is how they evolve in Darwin’s view. Do you have any reason for morals in your worldview? What reason do you have for logic? Where did it come from? By calling names you are resorting to elephant hurling….another logical fallacy.

      • Douglas Brown

        No, your belief is that w/o religion (YOUR religion) that it’s a dog eats dog world. It is NOT. OK, so let’s go extreme. Would you like to be killed? Would you like someone in you family to be killed? Why not? If someone killed someone you loved, what would you do? If it was me, I’d probably want to kill them. Most people would. Not that most people would follow through, but the feelings would be there. Thus, why would it not be logical to eventually evolve to a point, as humans, where going around and killing people is just not conducive to a happy life or a prosperous society. And, China does not have a problem with murders. They are not Christians. Again, most of the world does not believe in your god and they do just fine figuring out wrong from right and having logical thought. I will say however, that you scare me. Because what it sounds like YOU are saying is that if YOU did not have your Religion, that you would act like this is a dog eats dog world, that you would have no morals. Are you saying that the only thing that keeps you from stealing is that according to your religion it is wrong? Do you have the urge to kill but stop short because of your god? Next… Everything is going to seem like a logical fallacy to you because your views are 180 degrees from mine. And every time you throw that out it’s like you are stating the obvious. We already know you don’t believe ‘our’ arguments. Logical fallacy is just a fancy way of saying you don’t agree. Name calling is just that, “Name calling.” Which I have not done. Or, if you’d like to use a fancier term, you could falsely accuse me of an ad hominem.

      • kevbug

        I am not trying to get you angry. I am only trying to show to you that you are borrowing from the worldview of the Bible. The Bible says that we shouldn’t steal from others. Then it is wrong to steal. You know that because God wrote his law on your heart. (Romans 2:15) The same goes for murder.
        I am asking you for a reason that you do the law? Why not speed when there are no police? Why not steal if you know you are not going to get caught? My worldview tell me that God is always watching me. He rewards evil and good, yet he is also merciful.
        As for logic. There are lots of great classes in logic that teach laws of logic. It is not a worldview issue, the laws are always the same.
        You did call me a fundie. From another worldview, you might be called a fundie. It is still name calling.
        As for most of the people in the world not believing in the God of the Bible. Just because most of the people believe in something doesn’t make it correct. There are less then 10% of the world that are atheist, so I know you don’t believe in no god because it is what most of the world believes.
        Consider what you believe. Is it real? Is it true. Does the world that is in such detail around you look like it just happened? You can agree with me that a camera is a great creation, but do you really believe the human eye (which can do so much more then a camera) just came about by random mistakes. Can you really get something from nothing?

      • Douglas Brown

        I whole heartedly tell you that you will always have the right to practice your religion. But at this point there is no use in continuing this discussion because you are not even reading/understanding what I write. And there is nothing more disrespectful than to tell me that I know right from wrong only because your God wrote it on my heart.
        And yes, as shocking as it may seem to you, I do not believe in any god. The concept of believing in a god(s) certainly made sense when we had little understanding of the world and the ‘heavens’. The world was a scary place and belief in a god was, I’m sure, very comforting. Today however, the only thing scary about the world to me personally, is that there are people in the world who still believe in a god. I’m not proud to admit that, but it’s true.

      • kevbug

        Is it possible for the God of the Bible to exist? Have you some evidence that I do not know about?

      • Douglas Brown

        Kevbug, do you seriously think that if I don’t follow your God that I must follow your dog-eat-dog world philosophy (like lower animals)? Are you serious? I have no reason not to steal because I don’t know it’s wrong? Before we continue, can you please tell me how old you are? I’m starting to think that maybe I’m debating a 10 y.o. (not trying to be mean, but it occurs to me that you have a view of the world that will naturally evolve as you grow up).

      • kevbug

        Well, if you are truly an atheist and you know more about the Bible then I do, and the ten commandments are wonderful. You have made an awful mistake. The wonderful first commandment ( as you say) is that you are not to have any other gods before the god of the Bible. You are right that it is a waste of your time to debate me. Your worldview leaves no room to call anything evil or good because everyone has his own perspective. What is your evil is another’s good. If you have no standard of right and wrong, then who cares what anyone does? If we evolved from lower life forms then there is not any room for logic and you don’t have any reason to debate me. Random chance does not leave any room for laws that are universal, like logic and math. There would be no uniformity in nature in a random universe. You have sold yourself to a worldview that takes the principals of the Bible and shakes the stuff that you don’t want. I agree that you don’t have to debate me because in your random chance universe…there is no debate.

      • Adam J. Reizner

        Humans evolve and in that process learn. While good and evil are not absolutes the guidelines for good and evil are human made and pre date any religious text. My lack of belief does not indicate that I am unable to differentiate right from wrong. Your arguments are nonsensical. That is a statement of fact and not debate.

      • kevbug

        If they predate any religious text, how would you know? There are no ways of dating right and wrong. If you say that I make no sense, then why does it matter? You do believe. Everyone has beliefs in how the world came to be, what happened in the past. Everyone has a worldview. Sometimes we believe people, and find out they lied. Your worldview as an atheist is not cogent. You say that there are not absolute standards, so they can change. If they can change, then why is someone wrong? What if they are more evolved then you, and says something is right that you think is wrong? You cannot say someone is wrong if the standards change.
        If your worldview is correct, you have no consistent scientific data. You have no way of knowing what happened in the past. You can only guess since scientific laws may not have been the same in the past.Uniformity in nature requires consistency. Random chance is not consistent.
        Facts are like science: testable, repeatable, and provable. Historical science is not testable repeatable nor provable, no one was there, and even if someone was there; they may lie.
        If you look at worldviews you should look for one that has standards that say you should never lie. If they allow lying at any point, then they might tell you a lie that sounds so good that you think it is true.

      • Adam J. Reizner

        I am acknowledging that I read your nonsense. Sentient humans predate religious texts. This is a fact. Morals do not have to come from religious texts. You have become tiresome. We are done as I will reiterate what practically anyone else that has responded to you has said. You are a moron. Dead people don’t know they are dead. That is hard on the people around them. The same is true of stupid people. You are a case in point.

      • kevbug

        you have committed a logical fallacy called elephant hurling. I am not going to take a person’s word for truth. I have given you many reasons that you do not answer: Why an atheist worldview is not cogent and depends on religion. Again, yes we are done because you and all others that have responded, cannot give a reason, from your worldview, that there is right and wrong. Why there is uniformity in nature, and why there are universal laws of logic. Most say that there doesn’t have to be a reason, it is just that way. That is also a fallacy. You cannot be arbitrary because then I too can. I don’t have to give a reason, the truth is Nazi-ism or Muslim or whatever. Just because you don’t like logic doesn’t mean that you are not bound by it. Just think about this. Don’t just run away mad. Be true to yourself and find out the truth.

      • Adam J. Reizner

        We’ve all given reason. Logical reasons. Unfortunately you are just not smart enough to understand them. I’m not running away mad. I’m walking away smiling. I’ve already violated the first rule of a battle of wits by engaging an opponent that was unarmed. For that I apologize. You spew nonsense and expect that your faith based assumptions will be accepted by intelligent beings.

      • kevbug

        Well, If I have faith; then what is your definition of faith? If it is not being able to prove something and believing in it, then I would like you to prove how the universe began. I want to see the matter that blew up and you are going to have to be precise in your physics. Even the most advanced physicists cannot determine how it all began. Then I would like the fossil record to show all the transitional forms. You also have to tell me where dinosaurs came from? Faith? I think you have more then any other religion because you have to believe man is not lying to you when Atheists say that lying is ok in certain circumstances. That is real faith in mankind. I am glad that you can, but it makes you gullible to lots of untruth.

      • Al Hubbard

        Kev, why do you believe in god? Is there a particular reason? Why is your belief in god different than the ancients belief in their gods of war and love and fire?

      • kevbug

        I believe in the God of the Bible because if you don’t you are left with foolishness. You cannot account why there is logic, or uniformity in nature. The ancients and their gods were made by man or made by God. There is a big difference.
        Is it impossible for the God of the Bible to exist?

      • kevbug

        Is it impossible for the Bible to be what it claims to be?

      • kevbug

        Could the God of the Bible reveal things to us in such a way that we could be absolutely certain of them or of God’s existence?

      • kevbug

        What is your logical reason? There have not been any yet?

      • HaHa

        Goalposts are really heavy, huh?

      • Rochelle Lynn Dunlap

        But you don’t believe in evolution, correct? Yet you just said ‘humans evolve’…so what did we evolve from? If God created man in his image, why aren’t we exactly all the same? And why are there good and bad people? If we are all just copies of God, wouldn’t it stand to reason that we would all automatically look the same and be the same? If He created Adam and Eve, fully functional and fully reasoning, why would there ever be any need for evolving?

      • Adam J. Reizner

        At no point did I say I don’t believe in evoloution unless I somehow made major typing errors. I don’t believe in the myth of creation. I believe in science and not religion.

      • madshark

        Apparently you do not believe in science. Because you believe in evolution. Unfortunately for you loons, “science” has found no connection between the apes we allegedly evolved from and the humans we are today. Science requires proof to be proven. So far you believe in a theory. Talk about requiring faith. To worship at the alter of atheism, and thus evolution requires far more faith than I have.

      • rs0717

        Do you believe in DNA? Humans and chimpanzees share 95% of DNA markers. If we aren’t related then why is our DNA so close?

      • madshark

        We are made in God’s image spiritually and in the receipt of our basic humanity and rights. It says made in his image. Not made as identical twins. Geez, you morons!

      • Rick Diehl

        If you think the Bible is the perfect truth then you are willing to see your daughters raped if it means that strangers will be left alone. It also means that you support killing your daughter if she has sex before marriage. Don’t talk to me about how the Bible is the end all of doing right and wrong because I know a heck of a lot of Buddhists who might not agree with you.

      • kevbug

        Where does the Bible say that my daughters will be raped?
        Who gets to chose what is right and what is wrong? Is it not God? Why do you not want to obey someone who knows the future and you do not? That would not be wise to make right and wrong decisions on your own since you are finite and do not know everything and are not everywhere at the same time.
        Why should I care if someone doesn’t agree with me? Buddhists are all over the place here, and not one of them squabbles with me.
        How do you know the Bible is wrong and you are right?

      • Rick Diehl

        Sorry, just noticed this for the first time…

        Genesis 19:4-8

        4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house. 5 And they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.” 6 Lot went out to the men at the entrance, shut the door after him, 7 and said, “I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. 8 Behold, I have two daughters who have not known any man. Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please. Only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.”

      • kevbug

        Oh, I am not sure that my daughter is going to be raped. Lot choose to live in Sodom. I don’t see the relevance?
        That is like saying that since you are an atheist, then you have all the beliefs that other atheists have. Like Charles Darwin in “Decent of Man” p 178 he says that modern man will replace the savage races. Those are racist words. Then you must be a racist.
        I just wondered why there is a right and wrong in your worldview? If we are all just animals anyways. Why is rape wrong? Why can you say that there is a right and wrong for others? If it is right for them then why are you bothering them? You might be a higher animal; Why then do you have the right to tell others what they can and can’t do? Where is your tolerance?

      • Adam Knapp

        “Why is the Bible evil?”

        Well, I’m glad you asked. Its central character is a sociopathic overlord who manipulates, tortures, and even commits genocide against his own people for minimal and often unjustified reasons. After torturing them for thousands of years and laying down many pointless and oppressive rules, he still demands repentance for minor infractions committed by distant ancestors, and even puts on a show of sacrificing himself to “forgive” his victims for their infractions (but they can still be eternally tortured if they don’t believe the details of the sacrifice).

        Any protest to this behavior is met with claims that he is “good” because “he is”, despite a plethora of examples to the contrary. In short, the Christian God is a hateful, evil, childish sociopath who, if I believed in him, would be Humanity’s enemy #1 who required immediate military intervention to stop before he needlessly hurt another person.

      • William Carr

        You can LOOK at the Religious fanatics today, and see them twisting the definition of “torture”… does it surprise you in any way that Religious fanatics 5,000 years ago would do the same?

        Tip; the Map is not the Territory.

        Just because one lunatic claims God is Angry, that he ordered a massacre, doesn’t mean that’s the truth.

        Unfortunately militant atheists use passages like this in the attempt to discredit all Religious faith.

      • Mike Ex

        Current Zionists probably rationalize their war crimes with the same reasoning. They are the chosen people after all. Just ask Netanyahu, The Butcher of Beirut.

      • david rocha

        And Moses said to them, “Have you spared all the women? 16 “Behold, these caused the sons of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to trespass against the Lord in the matter of Peor, so the plague was among the congregation of the Lord. 17 “Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately. 18 “But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves.” (Numbers 31:15-18).
        The harsh command is what God told Moses to do. “Take full vengeance for the sons of Israel on the Midianites . . . ” (Num. 31:2). But why would God order this and even have children killed?

        In Numbers 24 the people of Israel had played the harlot with the daughters of Moab and served Baal, a false god. But this idolatry, though bad enough, was accompanied by the pagan and licentious practices of the pagan women who were seducing the people of God. This would ultimately result in the destruction of Israel as well as the destruction of the messianic line.

        God is often so strong in the Old Testament–even ordering the killing of people so that he might ensure that the future messianic line would remain intact. The enemy, Satan, began his attempt to destroy God’s people in the Garden of Eden by also trying to corrupt the world (which led to Noah’s Flood), by trying to destroy Israel with attacking armies, and by encouraging Israel to fall into idolatry by exposure to other cultures as well as intermarrying women from those cultures. The result of both the idolatry and the interbreeding would have been the failure of the prophecies that foretold of the coming Messiah which specified which family line the Messiah would come through. The Messiah, Jesus, would be the one who would die for the sins of the world; and without that, death there would be no atonement. Without the atonement, all people would be lost. So, God was ensuring the arrival of the Messiah via the destruction of the ungodly.

        This is why God ordered the destruction of this nation. It was pagan, participated in vile and grotesque sins, was idolatrous, and was posing a serious threat to the national identity and

      • TaxPaying American Voter

        You appearantly can’t read or your pastor lies to you.

      • WilmRoget

        Your slanders only demonstrate the sole purpose of atheism: denigrate others to make yourself feel good.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        So which parts to you have to throw out to keep him from being a despotic prick?

      • WilmRoget

        None. Of course, your word choices reflect very poorly on you.

        Among its many purposes, the Bible is a mirror, it reflects back at you your own character. When you see something bad, you are seeing yourself.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You don’t get much right now, do you? You don’t even get the Bible is a Mirror bit right. So… What do you see when you read about all the killings, stonings, slavery, infanticide, mass drownings, etc? Do you see peaches and cream? Or do you just skip the naughty bits?

      • Mike Ex

        Seek professional help.

      • WilmRoget

        By resorting to such personal attack as dismissal, you defeat yourself.

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        You’re right Roger! God had to do those things because he’s HOLY! I know for reals! I used to call you names but it was just the expressions of my character.

      • kevbug

        It depends on your definition of a despotic tyrant of a God. You say he is because your worldview is not the same as theirs. If so, then maybe you are a despotic tyrant of a man.

      • William Carr

        You made a giant presumption, and as often happens, tripped over it.

        There are two diametrically opposed versions of “God”.

        The Conservative, Gay-hating, Pork-hating, Authoritarian “Jehovah” the Right Wing worships; and the Liberal, forgiving, Christ that the Left Wing worships.

        The Jews 4,000 years ago wanted to believe in a badass God who would protect them and punish their enemies, so that’s the stories they added to their oral history.

        The followers of Christ simply presume those stories were inaccurate, written as they were by illiterate sheep herders.

        The sad think is that the virulent, angry, despotic followers of Jehovah who call themselves “Christians” have completely baffled those of you who aren’t well educated.

        You think THEY are the “face” of religion.

        Kind of how the Rednecks think Al Qaeda is the “face” of Islam.

      • david rocha

        Your ignorance parseds you.

      • Gary Gayisok Whiteman

        We do not all believe that what the Bible says about God is entirely true.

      • Auracle

        That’s half the problem isn’t it? “Christians” believe in so many different gods, when you come down to it. Oh, they all call “Him” “God”.. but based on the differing beliefs these are all different beings (if they existed as each believer believes).

        And – if you believe in any god that would sentence people (his own -children-, supposedly) to an eternity of suffering for any finite crime, that is most definitely a despotic tyrant.

      • cimmo

        EVERY xtian believes in a different type of god to everyone else. Not just 30,000+ different sects, but each xtian makes up their own god to reflect themselves.
        Not to mention all the other religions still extant and in history.

        The only thing all of faith believe in common is that YOUR own personal god is real and all the others are false.

        This is proof enough that any god doesn’t exist – maybe everyone is right on this.

      • VBoheme

        How is that even an argument for the lack of an extant God? Or god. Depending, I suppose.
        Try finding a philosophy that isn’t self-serving. Atheism really rationalizes God away, but really, Atheism is the same as religion, by your definition – “your own personal [belief] is real, and all others are false.”
        Belief being the existence or lack thereof of a god.

      • cimmo

        From sampling your posts here, it seems that you don’t know what you are. Just trolling for an argument, perhaps.

        Also a few months too late.
        Knock yourself out reading anything I’ve posted, but I’m not wasting my time responding to you.

      • Jeff Mace

        Don’t make the mistake of underestimating how well schooled most non-christians are about Christianity. That’s largely why they are non-christians.

      • WilmRoget

        Nice fantasy, it parallels the way homophobes believe that they are the real experts on homosexuality.

        Non-Christians, at least those on the internet who revile Christianity, largely draw their criticism from a superficial understanding of modern, fundamentalist American Christianity as portrayed on television -

        which is sort of like judging all plant life on earth by overcooked frozen broccoli.

      • An non-believer

        Nice generalization. Sorry, but you are wrong.

      • VBoheme

        Ah. I remember this from kindergarten.

        “This is true.”
        “Yeah, well YOUR FACE.”

      • VBoheme

        I’m not even a Christian and I love that post.

      • Picking Battles like Noses

        Again another person bringing homophobia into a religion debate, why the need to use a phobia to make a point that is irrelevant to the topic at hand?

      • Douglas Brown

        True, the fundamentalist Christians really do turn off many fellow citizens. I’ll take a country full of Uniterians any day over the pushy Fundys.

      • Paige

        Well said!

      • Andrew the Science guy

        That’s why the OP specified it as a Creationist which is a very specific type of Christian.

      • Jamie Quinones

        It seems to me therein lies the problem. Religious people can’t even agree on which or what kind of God is the real God. That is why people have been killing each others for thousands of years over whose God is the real

      • TaxPaying American Voter

        The god that killed millions by flooding the Earth?

      • madame48

        Question…your God is a loving God and an all powerful God who created everything…and yet he sent his ” son” to help humans but couldn’t be bothered to tell them about germs…to wash their hands, wash medical tools, how to stop malaria. So every decade for 2 millennium millions of innocent babies and children have suffered and died needlessly. Heck, God could have just skipped creating malaria. That is pretty evil actually. Either he couldn’t stop it or he wouldn’t stop it. It has nothing to do with ” man must have free will”….millions of needless deaths, not a good God in my book

      • JammieDodgerTwinz

        So they are all false converts? So are you. Every sect is full of false Christians to all the other sects. So who is right? Why is your god so awful at communicating?

      • Colin Robinson

        Christians believe in all sorts of different gods, obviously. The only way they could all believe in one god is if that god existed and actually cared what people thought about him.

      • saganhill

        Then you have NOT read the OT have you. Your god is a murderous tyrant. Even in the NT he is a murderous tyrant. I love how you delusional’s make your god into something he/it is not. A loving god. It is not a loving anything.

      • Mike Ex

        Oh stfu cherry picker.

      • allanm051j3

        The main problem I have with religion is exactly what you are saying. You say you have a different view of God from other Christians. But there can’t be more than one view of God because there is only one God (according to Christians and other monotheists). The Bible explains exactly who God is and what he wants us to do. If you do not agree with the Bible (and you imply that you don’t) then you are lying when you say you believe in God.

        Wake up and smell the roses.

      • David

        Very true. First off, IMHO, the guy didn’t even attempt to answer most of the questions; his reply to the one about Noah living 1/6 if the time the earth has existed is a god example – he shifts to comparing the span of All the dinosaurs to the life span of Noah … what?

      • ImNot Fictional

        What type of god? Even the ‘best’ god of all (yours, right?) is total bullshit.Splitting make-believe hairs.

      • Roger Stetson

        Totally understand your point but hell sounds exceedingly awful. I’ll take the despots heaven over it.

      • Joe P.

        I would rather burn for all eternity that put my moral weight behind such a monster.

      • Man of my own mind

        You judge god by the actions of man typical belief pattern of atheist with no knowledge of the bible god gave his only son for our sins and gave us the gift to choose for ourselves our path man make war and kills not god we pollute consume and destroy not god and again there is no hell there is a choose stand in the light or the black abyss

      • Joe P.

        If god really is all powerful he can choose to save us from ourselves, so either he’s all powerful and evil or he’s not all powerful after all… In either case your ‘good book’ lies.

      • Man of my own mind

        That was our choose and god sought to honor that it’s called the freedom of choose witch mankind was given what is to be learned if god interfered nothing at all it’s funny how people always say everything is the fault of god and religion when the act is carried out by man

      • Man of my own mind

        And how can you say book of lies either you have never read the bible or didn’t bother to try and understand it cause your accusations are a lie

      • Jeff Mace

        I’m willing to wager that i have read the bible, and it’s various versions, translations, and manifestations than yourself. Care to tango?

      • Michael C. Thompson

        Clearly you are the person who has never read the Bible and has no understanding of it. Try reading the entire thing rather than just skipping to the parts you feel good about.

      • Michael C. Thompson

        Take a look at your post. Lack of grammar, punctuation, horrible spelling. Now consider your opinion. Let’s ponder the following conclusion: you are uneducated and it’s likely you have no fucking idea what you’re talking about.

        Seriously, do yourself a favor and educate yourself. It’ll be worth your while. You can start by actually reading the Bible. If you aren’t disgusted with Yahweh by Deuteronomy, then START OVER.

      • WilmRoget

        Take a look at your posts – obscenities, insults, slanders, grammar errors, written at a seventh grade level according to testing software.

        It comes across as a case of the tan pumps calling the handbag ‘beige’.

      • Outsider

        Your need to be vile in your posts speaks volumes about your character.

      • Just Sayin’

        The last Christian died a horrible death over 2,000 years ago.

      • Raven007

        Just because he doesn’t just snap his fingers and save us from ourselves doesn’t mean he isn’t all powerful, He gave us free will instead of making us his string puppets.

      • Joe P.

        If he gave us free will, knowing full what we’d do with it, and knowing that many of us would damn ourselves to an eternity of suffering, then he’s a sadistic monster.

        If he didn’t know where it would lead then he’s not omniscient. If he knew but it wasn’t in his power to give us free will AND a world that wouldn’t lead to widespread suffering and sin then he’s not omnipotent. If it was in his power to do so and if he knew what we’d do with our free will by not doing so he’s just reprehensible.

        Rather than being purpose built in some god’s image all evidence points to us being just a smarter primate. Of the vast majority of what comprises the ‘human condition’, less four or five dozen IQ points and some specialed language brain areas, is all that separates us from some other mammals. Given another couple million years of technological evolution (probably a lot less… If we don’t destroy ourselves first) we’ll do an immensely better job making intelligent, creative, social, and moral beings than was done with us.

      • Michael C. Thompson

        This is like arguing with a guy who thinks he is the alien messiah. Don’t bother. He’s already decided to accept the irrational and once that happens, the only way he can save himself is through his own effort at doing so. But he’s waiting for Jesus to save him so good luck on that one.

      • kevbug

        Why from your worldview is it wrong to be a sadistic monster? Especially if it increases your survival value? Why is your definition of God better then someone else’s? You sound like you want to put their God in a box to fit you. You are bitter at their God because he did not do something that you wanted him to.
        A smarter primate? You sure look down on yourself. Our society is not getting better. Look at the Mayans and the Aztecs. They knew more about the stars then we do. They could predict things that we can not even understand. Now they are reduced to druggies and beggars in Central America. Look at the Egyptians. You cannot even put a credit card between the bricks of the pyramids, even today. Our buildings fall down in just a few hundred years. Their mathematical abilities were far beyond ours.
        How did self awareness evolve? How did music evolve? How did language evolve? They older languages are way more complex then the ones today, and add the txt-ing to that. We are devolving more then evolving. Doing science as the scientific method says: testable, repeatable, and provable. There is not one person that can prove historical science because no one was there.
        How can we be more moral? Who has the correct morality? Yes, we will destroy ourselves if we live doing what is right in our own eyes.

      • Michael C. Thompson

        Did he give those babies in Africa that starve to death free will? Or are they suffering because of the free will of white American God-loving capitalists? I guess white Christians have more powerful free will than starving black African babies.

      • kevbug

        I hope that you are doing more then them and giving of your hard earned money to the starving.

      • An non-believer

        And he gives us a book that has to be repeatedly edited so people can ‘understand’. I’m sorry, but if he is omnipotent then the book should be written in a universal language that doesn’t need editing.

      • kevbug

        Why is lying wrong?

      • Joe P.

        Personally I would consider lying to generally be wrong because it destroys trust which is vital for social cohesion and in many cases lies are used to reduce other people to the role of objects serving a purpose against (what would be, if they had all the facts) their free will. It’s all totally reliant on my worldview of course. Quite simply I prefer a world with less lies, so I try to do my part, and try to convince others to, bring such a world into being.

      • kevbug

        What if you were trying to save your life? Would you lie? Then who decides what is right and wrong? You? What if that lie would kill a innocent person? Who wins?

      • Joe P.

        Yes, I would probably lie about almost anything to save my own life, unless it were gonna seriously harm others sufficiently for me to be willing to sacrifice my life for them. This is why I used the word ‘generally’.

        If I myself were 100 sure I was going to die if I didn’t lie, and assuming the other person is definitely gonna die if I lie, and there are no collateral consequences of the lie, and I am just as innocent, then my self preservation instinct would probably override my preference for truth. I’d feel bad about it, but I’d do it. I’d try to find a solution that wouldn’t require compromising my morals though first. ‘Who wins’ is a very personal decision under such psychologically torturous conditions… It just depends on the person.

        Obviously the person committing the act, as well as anybody with knowledge of it, ultimately has the ability to decide right and wrong… Now those individuals whose moral code is found by the community to by sufficiently incompatible with a civil society are liable to get locked up or worse. There is ample survival advantage for the average human to ‘play nice’ with others, even if purely for self interest.

      • kevbug

        Hmmm. Hitler made the choice to say some people were not fit to live in his society. He locked up and worse…gassed them. Was he right in his doing?

      • Joe P.

        Gassed? By Hitler? Like you said, you weren’t there… You didn’t see it with your own eyes. What makes you so sure about that? Just as sure as you are that those ancient South Americans were really some advanced super-society rather than a bunch of human-sacrificing baby-butchering wack-jobs those of us with an education know they were?

        IF what you said was done is true, then I’d have to agree with most of humanity that murdering innocent people’s a bad thing for someone to do… I’m not really goin’ out on much of a limb with that am I?

        Even from a purely utilitarian view you’d have to conclude nazi Germany mishandled the war (since they did, ultimately, lose…) Had they won I guarantee that the accepted historical ‘truth’ would be vastly different than what it is now.

      • kevbug

        If you look at the Aztecs and study the writings on the pyramid walls, they tell you what they did. I guess that I am not as educated as they were because I cannot read how they knew how to make a calendar so precise and many other things.
        How do you know your senses are reliable? How do you know that you are seeing what you really see? If you evolved then you cannot be sure. Random chance evolution, you might not really be reading this. Can you be sure the future is like the past? Doing experiments would be quite a mess if it was so random. How do you view this?

      • Joe P.

        A) you can study the writing on the walls and tell that the ancient meso-americans did is exactly what I said (murder children and cut out their hearts to sacrifice to their god)

        B) you are not as educated as they were *about their calendar* (though probably few if any alive is today are very well versed in ancient calendar making)

        C) the mayan calendar was accurate because they had a long time to watch the sky and picked reliable stable astrological constants to base it on (the motion of the earth with relation to the galactic plane.) It’s certainly an impressive accomplishment in their time, but doesn’t hold a candle to the accuracy of the atomic clocks running the global GPS network, etc.

        D) I don’t know my senses are *always* reliable, but I can say my lifetime of memories recalls no instances of significant divergence between my perceptions and a sensible and consistent internal model of a universe, so I like and trust my model just fine.

        E) I could be a head in a jar. All of reality could be a computer simulation (and the rules arbitrarily changed tomorrow to something totally different.) Neither of those are the most simple (and statistically hence most probable) explanations of reality (which is what you see is what you get.) Explanations that are internally inconsistent, that have a state or relationship model that radically differs from the world we consistently experience through our own senses, and/or that add extra complexity while adding no predictive value to the understanding are worthless and usually amount to little more than intellectual and spiritual masturbation.

        F) The past being connected the the future in a continuous, predictable, and sensible way (which by definition is testable) is the only way by which to (or reason to) do anything… If you didn’t believe that was true you wouldn’t have sat and typed your message because (without such a stable worldview) for all you know typing that message could explode the earth, or tear off half your brain, or kill a billion people, or clone you into an army of zombies. This stability is the fundamental basis for sentience itself so forms a perfectly solid foundation on which to build a rational framework for all of the knowledge about the universe.

        G) Go learn a whole lot about science. Learn about how huge the universe really is. Learn about how awesome and awe inspiring an evolutionary process can be. Learn about how strange and amazing sub-atomic particles are and how much there is at the boundaries of what we do not now know or understand but *could* know and understand if we as a species really tried hard to grow and stopped being so spiritually and intellectually lazy.

        H) We don’t need a “God” for an afterlife. All we need is the “borg”, and we could totally BE the borg, only 1000x better, if we tried. We don’t need a “God” to solve all natural death. (Heck, we could even make a back-up copy of our mind in-case of accidental death.) We’ve gotten far enough along as an intelligent species that the neuroanatomical pacifier that compels us to defer to a higher “power” ’cause we can’t do anything about these big problems is now doing us more harm than good.

        We can do a whole lot about things like pain, death, and suffering if we would just realize that the *here* and the *now* on this plane of existence is, for all meaningful intents and purposes, all that matters… Think of it this way: infinity over infinity is the same as 75 years over 75 years… In either case it’s 100% of the life our “soul” gets… Plus if you live a good and moral life on this plane of existence and if there is a moral “higher power” that exists in an (admittedly improbable) “afterlife” he/she/it will not punish you for living such a life.

      • daleblah

        Have you actually read the bible? Try Numbers 31:17 before continuing on your self-delusional journey.

      • Jeff Mace

        I have. As have a large number of people who don’t think of it as any more than fiction. Why?

      • kevbug

        Actually, archeologists look in for places to dig from the passages of the Bible. It has been proven to tell at least some truth. Just because you do not like one thing in a book does not mean that the whole book is bad.

      • Michael C. Thompson

        God specifically told Moses to raze entire cities to the ground and kill every inhabitant within, including beasts, whose flesh were tainted and inedible. God TOLD MOSES TO DO IT. The Bible is not ambiguous here, it specifically says that Moses was told to do this by God.

        READ YOUR DAMNED BIBLE BEFORE YOU GO TELLING OTHER PEOPLE ABOUT IT.

      • Michael C. Thompson

        So you’ll waste your life believing in bullshit because you are afraid what is obviously bullshit MIGHT be true? What does that say about you?

      • Andrew the Science guy

        Most religions are mutually exclusive. Lets start believing in Buddhism, Catholicism and Protestantism at the same time, as well as Judaism and Islam. While we’re at it, lets get down with Hinduism. Your brain would melt with the cognitive dissonance.

      • david rocha

        Church wont save you, jesus will.

      • Gary Gayisok Whiteman

        As a Christian, one of the questions I’ve asked creationist / fundamentalist Christians is “How would I know whether I’m in hell or a heaven with a god like the one you describe in charge. Of course, they’re just as “helpful” as the creationist who answered the questions in this article – but I think I’ve got it figured out. If there are a lot of creationist / fundamentalist types around, I’m in hell.

      • bill nye

        So you’re saying there’s a chance

      • Matt Begley

        That’s just stupid.

      • Bryan Richards

        ummm pascals wager is long known to be a verrrrrry poor argument ronnie.

      • trolleyfan

        It’s going to suck for *everyone* if the Christians are right – their god is psychotic and evil and if he exists, we’re just his playthings…forever and ever.

      • marc41

        Actually, the best plan would be to worship the worst god who has the most horrible hell. That’s the one you don’t want to be wrong about!

      • phantomreader42

        No, the best plan is, if you end up in hell, raise an invincible army of the damned to storm the gates of heaven and tear god into tiny bits. Then execute any of his remaining followers for treason against all sentient life.

      • Darcanis

        Lets start the recruiting now Phantom.

      • phantomreader42

        How much recruiting could possibly be needed to convince an ever-growing group of pissed-off victims with literally NOTHING to lose to go kick their oppressor’s ass? Think about it, how many SECONDS would it take before this plan were implemented, if hell were anything more than a masturbatory fantasy for sadistic death cultists. The first invasion might not succeed, but the armies of the damned would never run out of new recruits, and they’d have no shortage of time and nothing better to do.

        If a god ever existed, it died centuries ago, an agonizing and well-deserved death, with no one to shed a single tear for the little piece of shit.

      • acronymous

        This discussion is slipping into unreal realms, but seriously—how can there be any such thing as an invincible army with which to go up against an omnipotent deity? Among His endless powers there would be the power to win any fight, against any opposition. Hence, IF there is God and Hell and all that, THEN there is no chance of an invincible army of the damned.

        Anyhow, we have it from Milton how that fight went last time around. And Milton is as good a guide to this realm of discussion as any available.

      • phantomreader42

        Assuming one is already in hell, then one is immortal and inhabiting an indestructible spirit body (as if the damned weren’t immortal and indestructible their torment would end rather quickly). And what could this asshole god DO to anyone attacking him? Kill them? Too fucking late! Send them to hell? Been there, done that, slaughtered demons and angels on the way out!

        There is literally no possible downside to breaking out of hell and ripping the narcissistic sky tyrant a few billion new assholes. Nothing to lose at all.

        Besides, how omnipotent can a god be that’s so insecure it has to keep randomly tossing self-congratulating ejaculations into its allegedly-holy book? Only a deeply cowardly narcissist would torture people for not licking its boots, so any god who would create a hell would have to be fundamentally flawed, and not omnipotent.

      • acronymous

        Aw, this is just too much fun to let go of. Of COURSE there’s no downside. You’re in hell. It’s already hopeless. As Dante and Virgil explained.
        But neither is there any upside. You can’t win. The whole discussion is what-ifs within imaginaries, but still, to be fair to the `literature’ on the subject, it’s well established that Satan gave it his damndest and lost.

      • Matt Begley

        pared to their fictional god, their fictional devil seems like a righteous dude.

      • MaineGeezer

        It is hardy to the credit of humanity that the devil can always be counted on to keep his side of a bargain, while people are continually trying to get out of any contract they may have signed with Lucifer.

      • Roger Stetson

        “it’s well established that Satan gave it his damndest and lost.” Nice one.

      • Joe P.

        Admittedly though the ‘literature’ on the subject is pretty one-sided (supposedly written by the winner or it’s followers…) How many more billions of the damned would have been added to the would-be army since then? Sure as heck a LOT more than the ‘saved’… Maybe the projected outcome of revelation is propaganda and the result isn’t predestined at all? It wouldn’t be the first untruth contained in the bible.

      • daleblah

        Satan got to rule hell, with all the ho’s to do his bidding in there. How is that a “loss”?

      • Picking Battles like Noses

        I have to toss in, that angels, weren’t given free will, sooo. . . .Lucifer, either had another omnipotent being, which over-ruled God’s will to allow him to rebel, and try to take over, and then was cast out, or, God commanded him to try and take over, and then cast him to hell, because he didn’t feel like ruling down there.

      • Rochelle Lynn Dunlap

        You do realize that you attacking someone else’s beliefs in such a vulgar and slightly insane manner proves that you are no different than the person who answered these questions, right? If you don’t hold yourself to a higher standard than your average Bible-thumping redneck, who condemns anyone who doesn’t believe the way he or she does, you are no better than that person. Stupid is as stupid does.

      • BABB99

        There is nothing wrong with attacking a belief at all. Attacking a person in wrong but their beliefs are fair game.

      • WilmRoget

        The flaw in your argument is that religion is a set of beliefs based on people’s experiences, and thus, intrinsically an attack on them as people. Religious beliefs are essentially “I experience” beliefs. Attacking those is personal and vicious.

        Atheism, and homophobia, and racism, however, are beliefs about other people, variations of “you people are . . .” beliefs and thus fair game.

      • Joe P.

        So is every other belief an ‘I experience’ belief… All beliefs are borne from first-hand experience of reality (though religion less so since it’s virtually always an experience of repeated indoctrination and ideological saturation with an n’th degree recital of someone else’s ‘experience’ from hundreds of years ago…) Just because those beliefs that we call ‘religeous’ are about some imaginary sky creature doesn’t make the beliefs ‘special’ or somehow exempt from rational thought and skeptical deconstruction…

        Once you throw ‘faith’ into a doctrine as a virtue you can (and religion does) pack any arbitrary dogmatic crap along with it for the ride and the meme virus thus propagates itself on down the ages… Sad really we could’ve accomplished so much more as a species by now… Cured all poverty, aging, natural disease, colonized the stars, improved ourselves, and more, but why bother since if we just believe what we’re told we get ourselves eternal bliss, fourty virgins, or some other ‘infinite carrot’ when we die (or not, but who really knows either way right, it’s an unfalsifiable assertion, so nobody will ever come back to let us know if it’s wrong.)

      • WilmRoget

        “So is every other belief an ‘I experience’ belief… All beliefs are borne from first-hand experience of reality ”

        No. The belief at the root of homophobia and racism, for example, is not born of first-hand experience, neither is the evil prejudice atheism, which as atheists admit, is based on lack of experience.

        “(though religion less so since it’s virtually always an experience of repeated indoctrination and ideological saturation with an n’th degree recital of someone else’s ‘experience’ from hundreds of years ago…)”

        Your false characterization indicates that you are a bigot and dishonest.

        “some imaginary sky creature”

        Athiests wield this term for the same reason homophobes wield ‘gay lifestyle’ – to be degrading. It shows malice and contempt on your part, and it means that your entire line of argument is fraudulent.

        As for you fantasy, well, the U.S.S.R. and East Germany in particular showed us that the atheist dream is a nightmare.

      • Joe P.

        How do you figure? Homophobia is either a reaction to first-person encounters with homosexuals or homosexual acts, or to others who use language on that subject, but in either case it’s subjective experience… A lot of the most racist people started out perfectly neutral and only after bad experiences with those other races end up filled with hate. Nobody is born with these belief systems, so they are all learned through “first person experience”… The experience by which you obtained your two thousand year old belief system, likely started at an age before you could even begin to think for yourself, is far more removed from the root “experiences” that led to its creation than those for homophobia and racism.

        The Jewish-Bolshevik installed U.S.S.R. regime showed pretty well that communism didn’t work too well in the industrial age but that proves nothing about atheism.

      • WilmRoget

        “Homophobia is either a reaction to first-person encounters with homosexuals ”

        No. But what an interesting revelation you’ve made about yourself, for your argument is a form of blame the victim, telling me that you are also prejudiced against GLBTQ people. Not surprising of course, prejudice is infectious and there is no shortage of homophobic atheists.

        “but in either case it’s subjective experience…”

        No. In fact, the history of the last 50 years proves the opposite: the more people actually know homosexuals, experience encounters with homosexuals, the less homophobic they become, generally. There are exceptions of course.

        ‘A lot of the most racist people started out perfectly neutral and only after bad experiences with those other races end up filled with hate.”

        Wow, another revealing, false assertion that blames the objects of oppression and discrimination for the abuse that is inflicted on them. And again, the actual evidence points the other way, that for the most part, the more people get to know people of other races, the less racist they become.

        You are not just biased against people of faith, you’re homophobic and racist as well.

        “Nobody is born with these belief systems, so they are all learned through “first person experience”…”

        No. They are usually taught by others, and accept that teaching because it feeds their ego.

        “The experience by which you obtained your two thousand year old belief system, likely started at an age before you could even begin to think for yourself,”

        Your derogatory fantasies only reveal your predilection for making things up out of malice and thin air.

        Oh, and I see some overt anti-Semitism in your post as well. You are quite the all around bigot.

      • Joe P.

        “Bigot”? More name calling I see…

        I’ll be sure to let my black gay roommate now how “overtly racist and homophobic” I am sure that’ll be news to him, or the bisexual mother of my child…

        Just because I’m not on-board the P.C. train (and don’t give anyone a free pass on their beliefs or actions) doesn’t mean I’m a bigot (quite the opposite actually.)

        ALL experience is first-hand. Whether it’s first-hand of gay people, straight people, religious people, atheists, white people, black people, whatever, it’s all first hand experience. Now if you’re trying to say that only first-person experience of the object of the belief counts then you Christians are about two thousand years too late.

        So that part about you being softened up to irrational beliefs at an age before you had any mental defenses isn’t true huh? You gonna correct me or am I spot on that you never had a chance? If so I guess the way you are is not entirely your fault since your brain was harmed early on in your life and you’ll probably never have adequate mental defenses against such a parasitic meme. Maybe I should just treat those who were brainwashed young as mentally disabled… It is something to think about.

      • WilmRoget

        “”Bigot”? More name calling I see…”

        No, not name calling. Ironically, every time a homophobe or racist is called a bigot, they perceive it as name-calling. If I said you were a vertebrate, would you also see that as name-calling?

        “I’ll be sure to let my black gay roommate now how “overtly racist and homophobic” I am sure that’ll be news to him, or the bisexual mother of my child…”

        You can claim anything you like, after all, all racists have black friends, all homophobes have gay friends. But you see, you are anonymous, and you cannot prove any of that. And you’ve made so many statements that are absolutely false, there is no reason to believe you. And, you clearly do not grasp that evidence you cannot substantiate, like the alleged roommate, is worthless.

        “Just because I’m not on-board the P.C. train (and don’t give anyone a free pass on their beliefs or actions) doesn’t mean I’m a bigot (quite the opposite actually.)”

        Actually, the fact that you used that term and argument, which bigots of every kind use pretty much every day, confirms that you are a bigot.

        “ALL experience is first-hand.”

        But not all knowledge is, and knowledge and belief was the issue. How dishonest of you to pull that.

      • Joe P.

        Yeah and I’m sure all homophobes go out and protest for gay marriage equality too… The fact is you don’t know me, but the fact that you think you do and get it so astonishingly wrong speaks volumes about the smallness of your mind and the prejudices you hold. I’m sure it’s easier for you to assume that I’m lying than to wrap your head around it. I feel sorry for you I really do.

        Anyhow. You weren’t talking about knowledge, you were writing about “belief” from experience. If you want to get right down to the nitty gritty there’s not even such a thing as concrete “knowledge” as everything you know, see, or remember could be a lie. You could even be sitting in a lab somewhere with someone literally “changing your mind” with electrodes and probes. Nothing is absolute and so we do the best we can with our subjective experience of reality and that experience itself is always first-hand (even when it’s the experience of other people and the words they say.)

        That they’ve managed to convince you that the centuries old dogma they’ve shoe-horned into your brain is somehow more “first hand” than what people are living day to day, or have learned from the prejudices and experiences of ancestors within living memory, is really quite extraordinary (and sad.)

      • WilmRoget

        “Yeah and I’m sure all homophobes go out and protest for gay marriage equality too…”

        Since there is absolutely no evidence that you protest for gay marriage equality, your snark is a pathetic attempt to conceal your very obvious contempt for GLBTQ people.

        ‘The fact is you don’t know me,”

        The fact is that you used the standard homophobic anti-gay argument of blame the victim. You are dancing around that.

        ‘You weren’t talking about knowledge, ”

        Yes I was. Your false assertions don’t help you.

        “I feel sorry for you I really do.”

        There’s that egotistical superiority complex that is the root of atheism.

      • Joe P.

        Yeah and there’s absolutely no evidence that you’re not a dolphin. That statement is just as pointless as yours. I’m telling you that I’ve protested (and voted for) gay marriage equality. Unless you have any shred of evidence to the contrary my assertion stands and you should shut your ignorant pie-hole.

        I have no special contempt for LGBT people but (just as with my response to you and your beliefs) I give them no free pass on any of their beliefs or actions. They are just as subject to criticism as you and the rest of us.

        If you really were trying to talk about “knowledge”, since you in-fact used the word “belief” (especially in a context of religious belief) then your poor writing ability is to blame for this miscommunication.

      • cimmo

        I asked him about certain bible passages that speak about homosexuality and he gave me a few very peculiar responses explaining his interpretation.

        Unfortunately it is many pages of scrolling down below, but I’d be interested in your take,because I can’t fathom his responses.

      • WilmRoget

        “Yeah and there’s absolutely no evidence that you’re not a dolphin.”

        How many dolphins do you know personally who read and write English, have fingers, and post on the internet?

        ‘I’m telling you that I’ve protested’

        And there is no reason to believe you. Your posts articulate overt homophobia, as I pointed out, and you dodged.

        “Unless you have any shred of evidence to the contrary”

        I pointed out the evidence.

        ‘ then your poor writing ability is to blame for this miscommunication.”

        No, your dishonesty is not my fault.

      • Joe P.

        “How many dolphins do you know personally who read and write English, have fingers, and post on the internet?”

        None, but this proves nothing.

        “And there is no reason to believe you. Your posts articulate overt homophobia, as I pointed out, and you dodged.”

        I said I’m not a homophobe. I have no reason to fear homosexuals, and nothing I wrote implies homophobia.

        “I pointed out the evidence.”

        You pointed out nothing but rather drew an uninformed and incorrect inference as to my supposed “homophobia” which appears based on your own emotional preconditioning and prejudice.

        “No, your dishonesty is not my fault.”

        More projection. “Believe” was in quotes for a reason. It was your word not mine. You tried to make it about knowledge later. That’s a deceptive argument style and again speaks to your lack of character.

      • WilmRoget

        “None, but this proves nothing.”

        It proves that your entire argument was pointless grandstanding.

        ‘I said I’m not a homophobe. I have no reason to fear homosexuals, and nothing I wrote implies homophobia.”

        Yet I pointed out specifically an argument you made that absolutely expresses homophobia, one that is used by homophobes, and only by homophobes.

        “You pointed out nothing”

        No. Bear in mind, unless there is some post tucked away somewhere, you have not addressed the issue I pointed out – where you invoked ‘blame the victim’ to explain and justify homophobia.

        “More projection.”

        Nope.

        ‘That’s a deceptive argument style and again speaks to your lack of character.”

        But that is projection, on your part.

      • 2monthslate

        WilmRoget. You have yet to list a single fact in any of your accusations. You state others lack of evidence makes their statement “a pathetic attempt to conceal your very obvious contempt for GLBTQ people.” You state that the egotistical superiority complex is the root of atheism and provide no evidence to support it. You state that arguments made against your belief express homophobia because it is used by homophobes, and only by homophobes. You do not state what the specific argument is when asked for clarification or how that specific argument can only be used by homophobes. You misquote comments that state their opinion or viewpoint as accusations or empirical claims, then, state there word is “no good” and all opinions invalid. You call people out for incompetence without factually showing a lack of competence except on a scale that you did no define. You accuse commentors of lying about medical conditions without any knowledge of that person or their afflictions. You assert misspellings or incorrect punctuation shows a lack of education or laziness, yet you have performed the same deed earlier in this post “You promised to be silent, couldn’t live up to it for even one hour, made another dramatic exist, couldn’t live up to it for even ten minutes.”

        TL;DR – Your remarks about others can easily be said about yourself

      • WilmRoget

        “So that part about you being softened up to irrational beliefs at an age before you had any mental defenses isn’t true huh?”

        Once again, your vicious and malevolent characterization only demonstrates that atheism is a prejudice, and it reveals your character.

        Look at your posts, and your peers. Not a one of you can be civil, even after I have repeatedly pointed out that your abusive behavior supports my primary position.

        “Maybe I should just treat those who were brainwashed young as mentally disabled…”

        Once again, you parallel the abuse and arguments that homophobes use, demonstrating that atheism is simply a nasty excuse to put others down so you can feel good.

      • cimmo

        If you were genuine you might have answered by declaring at what age you found jesus.

        I guess since you avoided that ‘meat’ one can assume you were born into your faith?

        That your parents committed child abuse and indoctrinated you to xtianity?

        Yep, I think that is the case.

      • WilmRoget

        If you were genuine, your posts would not be filled with sadism.

        At what age did you breathe?

        You see, you don’t even understand what you are asking about. Relationship with God and Christ is not a one day thing, but a constant and continuous process, like breathing.

        ‘That your parents committed child abuse and indoctrinated you to xtianity?”

        Your slurs only reveal your character.

      • cimmo

        Yep. Indoctrinated from birth.

        They did a very thorough job of it, too.

      • WilmRoget

        With every slur, you flaunt your sadism.

        And every time you post now, you show that your word, about anything, is worthless.

      • cimmo

        Do you agree with the doctrine of universalism?

      • Joe P.

        And yet again you still haven’t answered my question. That alone tells us the truth. You were brainwashed young. I feel bad for you and I’m sorry the world didn’t do more to protect you when your mind was defenseless and unable to reject whatever an adult told you as not being the absolute truth. You clearly bear the psychological scars of such betrayal to this very day.

      • Ave Satana

        Don’t worry he is just a troll. a troll that most likely just came here to stir up emotions and get people riled up. he just wants to insult you and make you angry and then act like because he made you angry with how he constantly tries to belittle you that everyone who doesn’t believe in a deity is somehow magically an angry homophobe. he doesn’t follow any of the christian doctrine though since he judges others….constantly….christianity is a homophobic religion as is the religion of islam which may be why he brings it up all the time to try and deny those parts of his religion since they most likely bother him. Personal attack seems to be all he can do which won’t really work on me or anyone else who doesn’t care how much he wines about atheist this or that and just wants to see evidence to support the claims.

      • WilmRoget

        “And yet again you still haven’t answered my question. ”

        I did answer your question. Not the answer you were trying to set up, but the correct and honest answer.

        Remember, homophobes use the same argument of “psychological scars” to malign GLBTQ people. In every post, you sound just like them, only you target even more people in your need to feel good by tearing others down.

      • WilmRoget

        Now the interesting thing is that you went on at length on a tangent triggered by a single minor concept, and ignored the meat of my post.

        Frankly, the consistent incompetence of atheists in addressing the issue makes it impossible to believe that such people could ever know the nature of existence better than everyone else in the world, no matter how much they proclaim that they are right and everyone else wrong because they said so.

      • Joe P.

        The rest of the ‘meat’ has been pretty thoroughly torn to shreds by others with more time to beat their heads against the wall than I. The fact that you then degenerated that conversatiom into what amounts to little more than nonsensical name calling kinda proves my point.

      • WilmRoget

        “The rest of the ‘meat’ has been pretty thoroughly torn to shreds”

        No.

        “by others with more time to beat their heads against the wall than I.”

        But I understand, you cannot be bothered to make an effort.

        “The fact that you then degenerated that conversatiom into what amounts to little more than nonsensical name calling kinda proves my point.”

        Ironically enough, it is your side that has engaged in name-calling.

        If you are offended at being called out for incompetence, why not make a real effort and address the points I have raised?

      • kilvehk

        atheism is not akin to racism or sexism or homophobia or whatever else you want to try to group in with it. it is a lack of belief in a deity, nothing more nothing less. to say that religious beliefs are an experience is akin to saying all rectangles are squares. yes there are some religious beliefs that are based on personal perceived experiences however not all religious beliefs are in fact most of them are the exact opposite and only come about from indoctrination and a book. just as all squares are rectangles but most rectangles are not squares.

        on another note you said that attacking religious beliefs is personal and vicious so i pose to you a question if i were to go out and catch 22 sharks on a deep sea fishing trip taking no pictures and releasing each one afterward then i come back to tell you about the experience i had would you not question(and rightly so) the legitimacy of my claim or would you accept it as truth based on my word alone? if you would not accept it on my word alone and you instead question the legitimacy of the claim then by your own logic you would be viciously attacking the experience i had as well as my character would you not? most people would consider that to be overly sensitive to view such a senario in that manner would they not? how is what you said any different?

      • WilmRoget

        “atheism is not akin to racism or sexism or “homophobia ”

        And yet, it absolutely is. One of the many parallels is that very denial, and the use of simplistic and shallow “definitions”.

        “it is a lack of belief in a deity, nothing more nothing less.”

        And homophobia is a lack of belief in the appropriateness of gay sex. Homophobes can deny and ignore the impact of their prejudice too, just as you have done.

        “to say that religious beliefs are an experience is akin to saying all rectangles are squares.”

        No. And that is not what I wrote anyways.

        “yes there are some religious beliefs that are based on personal perceived experiences however not all religious beliefs are in fact most of them are the exact opposite and only come about from indoctrination and a book.”

        Yeah, homophobes make essentially the same false claim about homosexuality – both denying the experiences of people and the claim of indoctrination.

        As for your hypothetical – the lack of grammar, punctuation, capitalization and relevance makes it useless, except as a grandstanding diversion. I realize that it is considered hip and cool to be as sloppy when writing as possible, but it makes you look uneducated.

      • cimmo

        “And homophobia is a lack of belief in the appropriateness of gay sex.”

        What is your view on homosexuality?

        Seventh request.

      • kilvehk

        im uneducated? homophobia is the fear of homosexuality hence the phobia part of it. my english problems are a result of my disgraphia thank you for pointing it out.

      • WilmRoget

        Yes, poorly educated.

        Nice fantasy excuse there. But don’t trivialize the real challenges other people to cover your laziness.

      • kilvehk

        had to take a deep breath not to flip out. how dare you trivialize a real issue i have without knowing a damned thing about me. you wanna call my seizure disorder a lie too? how about my sisters spina bifida occulta? or the cysts my brother has on his spine? glad i have spell check or i would just look more uneducated huh?

      • WilmRoget

        There is no evidence to support your claim, and you have lied about me several times. You destroyed your credibility.

        You are anonymous, you can claim anything you like but there is no reason to believe you after I’ve caught you in multiple false assertions.

        Further, if you had the condition you claim, simple workarounds – that someone who actually was enduring such things would make use of in order to ‘beat’ that challenge – would correct the lack of capitalization.

        Now, the failure to capitalize properly is an affection that many children and teens have adopted to be cool. It makes you look uneducated, and when that was pointed out, you made up an unbelievable story.

      • cimmo

        I was going to leave you alone to stew in your own juice and revel in your moral superiority, but as far as your comment here to kilvehk, I just gotta say this about it:

        What an arsehole.

        OK, now hit me with the cut and paste bullsh!t in return, I think it goes something like this:
        “More name calling and obscenity. I hope you understand that your use of such bad behavior works against the claim that atheists can be moral.”

        So, since I’ve already replied as you would and you will never understand why your comment is so douchy and therefore never apologize, I don’t think there is much more to be said.

        If you’re in any way more than a mere troll about his whole thread, then I do strenuously suggest you seek some kind of therapy. You do have a problem.

      • phantomreader42

        Ugh, I am sick and tired of this bullshit. Rochelle, is there any circumstance whatsoever where an atheist could be ALLOWED to express even the mildest criticism of religion without you false-equivalence junkies getting a terminal case of the vapours? No, there really isn’t, so why should anyone bother listening to you?
        Death cultist assholes regularly threaten to outright MURDER me, and screech with sadistic glee about how eager they are to watch their monstrous imaginary friend burn me alive forever. I point out how full of shit they are, mock them, expose how insane their delusions are, or dare to use naughty words, and you start whining that I’m just as bad. BULLSHIT!
        Not once have I ever seen one of your ilk so much as whisper a word of disagreement with anything these sociopathic death cultists say, not even when they threaten to MURDER oeople. You actually expect me to believe that saying “FUCK” is worse than murder? What the FUCK is WRONG with you?

      • WilmRoget

        With every obscenity and slur and falsehood, you show that atheism is simply another nasty prejudice, just like homophobia and racism.

      • phantomreader42

        And here we have ANOTHER death cultist whining about naughty words while ignoring his cult’s many crimes. Just admit that you’re too stupid and cowardly to address reality or deal with anything I’ve said honestly.

      • WilmRoget

        As I’ve told your peers, when you use hate speech like ‘death cultist ‘, you demonstrate that atheism is a vicious prejudice.

        When you make false accusations like “ignoring his cult’s many crimes” and use degrading terms like cult, you show that you are both dishonest, and rude.

        When you rely on insults, you demonstrate that atheism is simply an excuse to tell yourself that you are superior (despite all evidence to the contrary), by reviling other people.

      • phantomreader42

        OH, poor widdle baby Wilm doesn’t like it when his death cult’s called a death cult!

        Well so fucking what! Your cult has MORE than earned the epithet “death cult” after all those centuries of murder and torture, not to mention your worship of an execution device.

        And you don’t get to complain about how rude I am when you cult constantly threatens to murder and torture me and so many others. Compared to your cult’s sick fantasies of watching me burn alive forever, NOTHING I could ever say or do could qualify as rude!

      • WilmRoget

        The nastier you are, the more you prove that atheism is a prejudice, as malevolent and spiteful and sadistic as racism and homophobia.

      • cimmo

        Am I prejudiced towards reality?
        You bet.
        Am I prejudiced against superstitious and irrational beliefs?
        Yep.
        Proud of it, too.

      • WilmRoget

        Since the existence of God is reality, and not superstitious or irrational,

        the truth is you are prejudiced against people of faith because it makes you feel superior.

      • cimmo

        “Since the existence of God is reality”
        I do not believe you.
        If you cannot provide evidence to back up that claim, I will assume you are deliberately lying to me.

        Are you a liar?

      • WilmRoget

        “I do not believe you.”

        Ok, so why should I believe you when you say that you don’t believe me? There is no evidence that your word is any better than mine.

        ‘If you cannot provide evidence to back up that claim, I will assume you are deliberately lying to me.”

        Ok. You claim that you don’t believe me, but, since you did not provide evidence – and your word is not enough as a result of your own actions – then you must be deliberately lying to me.

        Do you see the inherent problem? or is your ego in the way?

        Because you refuse to believe people of faith, and accuse us of lying, you give us every reason not to believe a word you say, and to conclude that you are lying. After all, we do know our own experiences, so that half of the equation is known to us.

        Hell, cimmo – you cannot even prove here that you are real. There are computers programs capable of generating simplistic, offensive posts like yours.

        Prove that you are real. If you cannot provide evidence to prove your existence, evidence that cannot be forged in software, or generated by software, I must conclude that you are lying and a computer generated construct.

        That’s your argument applied to you, by the way.

      • cimmo

        “There is no evidence that your word is any better than mine.”

        Yes there is.
        You made a claim for which you know you have no evidence. You deliberately lied.

        You have made the claim that god does exist.
        You have failed to provide proof for that claim.
        Therefore your claim is a lie.

        I have NOT made a claim that god does NOT exist.
        No lie.

        You must have a very fragile faith.
        The only way you can justify your ego driven position of belief in nothing is to engage in mendacious word play and semantic chicanery.

        I get that you really do feel threatened by the trend in the world with increasing secularism. I get that your faith gives you the warm cozies and assuages your deep seated fear of death. And I certainly get that you genuinely do perceive yourself a better and much more superior person for having your faith in your god.

        If you genuinely had anything of substance validating your belief you would not need to engage in word wanking on the internet to prove yourself right and unbelievers wrong.

        And you know deep down you got nothing except hope and fear.

      • WilmRoget

        “You made a claim for which you know you have no evidence. You deliberately lied.”

        False. You cannot know my thoughts, so your assertion that I know I have no evidence is dishonest, and it proves that your word is worthless.

        “You have made the claim that god does exist.You have failed to provide proof for that claim.
        Therefore your claim is a lie.’

        I have not failed to provide proof of anything. Just because you refuse to believe the evidence that has been presented by the overwhelming majority of humanity, does not mean anything. The lies here are entirely yours, and again, they show that your word is worthless.

        “You must have a very fragile faith.”

        Nope. And again, your assertion proves that your word is worthless. Further, your assertion, for which there is no evidence, indicates a grievous lack of understanding of what faith is in the context of religion.

        “The only way you can justify your ego driven position of belief in nothing is to engage in mendacious word play and semantic chicanery.”

        The nastiness of your replies only affirms that what you post cannot ever be trusted.

        The net result is that you seem not to have even understood how your own argument backfired on you.

      • Mr Bill

        Here is an old suggestion that I found in a 1200 AD Tibetan manuscript:

        “Do no harm to any sentient being.
        Take no harmful action,
        Speak no harmful word,
        Think no harmful thought.”

        Think about it.

      • WilmRoget

        Here’s a suggestion in return:

        Don’t insinuate anything about others that they might see in you.

      • Mr Bill

        Two points -

        1) I had followed the exchange that had occurred between WilmRoget and cimmo over several hours. Your respective dialogs suggested a vitriolic and devisive tone. Such tone, whether intended or not, never encourages a loving and peaceful interaction. So, my intent was to send that old “suggestion” to each of you, but Discus did not allow it. The reply went to WilmRoget but not to cimmo. Incidentally, in hind sight, I think the term a “suggestion” should have been replaced by a “spiritual precept”.

        2) Your reply “Don’t insinuate anything about others that they might see in you.” I need to think on the structure of this statement, The statement as written appears to be an alternative way of saying “Judge not, that you not be judged” which i accept. In fact, this latter phrase is a subset of the “spiritual precept” that I originally sent out. Could you please respond to this reply and clarify your reply?

      • cimmo

        I have noted this comment.
        FWIW, even though this forum mixes up the chronological order of posts making it impossible to follow for a lurker, I do believe my first few comments on this thead were essentially reasonable and above board.

        But after two or three replies by my opponent it became very obvious that he did not intend to play fair at all. So neither did I.

        I have subsequently found out he’s been infesting this thread for the last seven days and posted ~300 comments here, so I don’t think he set up camp here for any ‘loving and peaceful interaction’.

        “Could you please respond to this reply and clarify your reply?”
        If you get a sensible reply then consider yourself lucky. Many times I asked him to clarify a point in order to actually have a debate – but the clarification never came, just the trolling comments.

        Anyway, that’s just my two cents and no, I’m not apologizing for anything I’ve said. Just understand the context.

      • Mr Bill

        cimmo,

        No apology needed. I was only trying to put that non Christian
        spiritual precept out there for you and others to think about. It was intended
        as a subtle hint that there are some quite powerful yet simple words of wisdom
        for better life on this planet.

        I get your point about the context of
        many of the vitriolic comments. I purused most of the posts and did observe
        anecdotally that WilmRoget had been involved with vitriolic dialogs with quite a
        few other posters. That seems to be clear.

        I have only followed two creation oriented discussions online, this one and an earlier discussion linked to the Nye / Hamm debate on creation vs science. I must say I never seen anything like these discussions. The main items are the unusually long time frames and the unusual number of participants
        seemingly chasing many of their respective arguments in a never ending circle.

        period of thep

      • cimmo

        Concur.
        If I recall correctly, my second post to him was where I stated “you can be good without God” and basically that’s when it turned into a pissing contest.

        Because so I am told, that proposition I made is self-evidently impossible.

        Anyway, I think this ‘discussion’ is not worth pursuing. But there will be another, alas.

      • Mr Bill

        cimmo

        I concur with you as well. I am about to bail.

        Before I bail, let me make my sales pitch. I grew up in American Protestant communities. But I am not Christian nor Catholic nor Atheist nor Buddhist nor Hindu nor other religious order.

        I follow a well defined Spiritual path that moves beyond the basic teachings of the major world religions. On my spiritual path, I consider that the main religions are indeed starting points, but the spiritual path far exceeds the starting point.

      • MrLightRail

        I wholeheartedly agree, You can be spiritual without believing in a deity. You CAN be a good person without being religious. Basically, to me, religion is all about the fear of death. I had a heart attack, and coded. No white light, nothing. Pain ends, and so does consciousness. Understand that, and you take the power away from the “righteous.”

      • MusingAtheist

        Well said.

      • WilmRoget

        “Your respective dialogs suggested a vitriolic and devisive tone. ”

        Your assertion is not accurate, I am not being either vitriolic or divisive. Your accusation, therefore, is at least vitriolic.

        “I need to think on the structure of this statement,”

        I think you need to reign in the attitude. Your judgmentalism, without actually contributing anything beyond the attempt to make yourself look superior, is not constructive.

        My point was clear the first time.

      • Mr Bill

        WilmRoget,
        My goodness, I am quite shocked at the nature of your responses. We certainly have no more info about each other than these discussion entries on this site.
        My comments to you (and cimmo), in my mind, would convey the important concept of harmlessness, a very positive notion in the precepts of all religions, including Christian. Yet, I felt your responses tended to be a bit harsh and in your face. That general disconnect between my intent and your response was surprising.
        I simply sent the spiritual precept below

        “Do no harm to any sentient being.
        Take no harmful action,
        Speak no harmful word,
        Think no harmful thought.”

        and asked you to think about it.

        I got the following response back from you

        “Here’s a suggestion in return:
        Don’t insinuate anything about others that they might see in you.” (out of space so rest to follow)

      • WilmRoget

        “Yet, I felt your responses tended to be a bit harsh and in your face. ”

        Ironically enough, your comments, presented with no context, and no contribution to the dialogue, came across as ‘in your face’, judgmental, condescending, and well, empty grandstanding. Essentially, they came across as an attempt to play the sensei, the yoda, without any real effort.

        You then affirmed that appearance with your subsequent and inaccurate claim: “a vitriolic and devisive tone”

        I understand, there are people on the internet who gratify their ego by playing the hall monitor, the prefect, the Percy Weasley to use a currentish cultural reference.

        Now my question to you is – why do you find fault with the idea ‘Don’t insinuate anything about others that they might see in you.’? In what way is that bad advice?

      • Mr Bill

        Let me respond to your last two comments to me and I will move on.
        First, You referred to my earlier phrasing related to your “vitriolic, devisive tone, harshness and in your face” attitude displayed throughout these posts. I still stand by my opinion based on the anecdotal examples of your comments to me and others scattered throughout. Please understand that my opinion is not intended to
        reflect on your character in any way. As I said, my intent was solely to help you realize and improve on your devisive communication style. I am sorry that I could not help.
        Second, I don’t know where you are coming from with your references to my comments as no context, judgmental, condescending etc. I do thank you for awknowlding me as a wise person.
        Third, I too am aware that there may be people who troll the internet for a variety of reasons., but I don’t know any of them personally.
        Fourth, your question – why do you find fault with the idea ‘Don’t insinuate anything about others that they might see in you.’? My original comment related to looking at the structure of the statement. I did look and I find no fault with the idea as written. However, I think a little clarification is in order. The word insinuate may not be the best choice. Insinuate actually means ” to suggest, hint or propose in a subtle and roundabout way”. Furthermore, in some useage, the word insinuate also implies deceit or other derogatory influence. Since I believe in the notion of harmlessness, I feel that expressing deceit or overly subtle things about others is not good. But, my reason is based on the harm caused by the deceit, etc issues, not on how I am seen by others. On the other hand, I also feel that making honorable and potentially helpful proposals or suggestions, in good faith, to others is good. For example, suggestions from your minister or doctor, who is trying to help you probably good, presumably independant of what you may see in them.

      • WilmRoget

        ” I still stand by my opinion”

        And I still disagree, and still find your contribution to be fallacious and vitriolic, divisive tone, harshness and in your face.

        And yes, of course you mean it as ad hominem. Rather than even attempt to address what has been presented, you denigrated people.

        “As I said, my intent was solely to help you realize and improve on your
        devisive communication style. I am sorry that I could not help.”

        Your posts make it clear intended to make yourself look good by tearing other people down. And divisive is not spelled ‘dev . . .’.

        ” I do thank you for awknowlding me as a wise person.”

        I did no such thing.

        “Third, I too am aware that there may be people who troll the internet
        for a variety of reasons., but I don’t know any of them personally.”

        And yet “know thy self” is an ancient wisdom saying.

        “However, I think a little clarification is in order. The word insinuate”

        So you are in fact finding fault. Such conceit.

        ” For example, suggestions from your minister or doctor, who is trying to
        help you probably good, presumably independant of what you may see in
        them.”

        Of course, you are neither of those things, and your ego-aggrandizing help was not request.

        Now, help yourself – figure out why you apparently need to feed your ego by giving unmerited, unrequested, condescending, egotistical advice to others.

        “and I will move on.”

        We shall see if you live up to your words.

      • Mr Bill

        I thought that your first response above was indeed a bit in your face, but no big deal. But I definitely noted a verbal tug of war between you and cimmo – termed to be vitriolic and devisive. Then, I went through much of the comments over several days and found that you did tend to appear abraisive (or vitriolic). These comments are intended to help you , at least, understand your communication breakdown. Focus on being calm and attracting rather than aggressive and rejecting attitude.

        Then I responded with this:

        I said that

        “I need to think on the structure of this statement,”

        and you responded with this:

        “I think you need to reign in the attitude. Your judgmentalism, without actually contributing anything beyond the attempt to make yourself look superior, is not constructive.
        My point was clear the first time.”

        What are you saying. You are spouting shear lunacy.

        I had spoken of harmlessness, and you came back with your counter quote, in my mind , totally unrelated to my harmlessness comment. I raised the a very simple issue:
        “I need to think on the structure of this statement,”

        And you don’t think that your responses to my issue are not in the devisive category?

      • WilmRoget

        “you did tend to appear abraisive (or vitriolic).”

        And that conclusion reflects your character, not mine.

        ‘These comments are intended to help you ,’

        It is rather presumptuous of you to think are you up to that, or that I need, or want, your help. Which is why I offered you the advice I did: Don’t insinuate anything about others that they might see in you.

        Don’t insinuate that others need help, on the chance that they might just conclude the same about you.

        ‘Focus on being calm and attracting rather than aggressive and rejecting attitude.”

        Try not to give advice that you appear not to be living. There is nothing uncalm in my posts, and your characterization is essentially ad hominem. You come across as unable to participate, so you attempt to discredit those who are by attacking them personally.

        ” in my mind , totally unrelated to my harmlessness comment.”

        Notice the subjectiveness of ‘in my mind’. From my perspective, my reply to you was completely related, derived from in fact, your post.

        ‘And you don’t think that your responses to my issue are not in the devisive category?”

        I know that my responses are not divisive. I also know to avoid double negatives.

      • Mr Bill

        I observed an apparent tug of war over a religious issue between an atheist and a christian. I had no knowledge or insight here, I only thought of positively helping to resolve a communication conflict. I have not insinuated about anything or anybody. I was only interested in helping resolve the conflict But it is my character to offer help as I see a possible need. And I can also accept your rejection for any help, if you wish It is your choice.

        I agree that ‘in the mind’ implies subjectivity. But, both subjectivity and objectivity are important for good mental health. I also accept that I do not know your subjective perspective in your mind. But once you state your perspective in an open forum, it becomes objective. So, lets look at your stated perspective – “my reply to you was completely related, derived from in fact, your post”. We now have some objective notion of what your perspective is. But, we cannot necessarily conclude whether it is valid or notl.
        Of course, the same comment aoplies to my perspective – ” in my mind , totally unrelated to my harmlessness comment.”

        So both our perspectives, in objective form, are presented below.

        Mr Bill wrote -

        Here is an old suggestion that I found in a 1200 AD Tibetan manuscript:

        “Do no harm to any sentient being.
        Take no harmful action,
        Speak no harmful word,
        Think no harmful thought.”

        Think about it.
        and WilmRoget wrote -
        Here’s a suggestion in return:

        Don’t insinuate anything about others that they might see in you.

        In principal, a group of clear thinking and unbiased people could assess both perspectives and help us establish the validity/invalidity of each one. But I don’t have time for that at this point. However, I offer my critique of both perspectives for your consideration before I go.

        My initial posting to you and cimmo represented total harmlessness, period. Nothing insinuated, nothing critical, just a brief precept reflecting uplifting goodness. It carries, in more simple form, the same message as the ten commandments of Moses. I simply cannot fathom someone taking issue with this precept, unless they take exception to the notion of causing no harm.

        Your initial posting took some time to understand your perspective, but I think that I got it. Your posting, in context to my post, basically comes across as
        Don’t insinuate a need for goodness about others that they might see as a need for goodness in you.”
        I clearly understand your message – You are saying that you have no interest in goodness or any progress toward goodness. I find this a sad condition. I would hope that you would reconsider your perspective. Your steady reference to your “Don’t insinuate …” phrase implies a need to defend that perspective of reality and hide or deny basic fears in your psyche.
        I wiill rephrase the double negative to an equivalent meaning – “You know that your responses to my issue are in the divisive category.”

        I am signing off this particular topic. I leave you with two basic questions for you to think about:

        (1) What is your purpose for being?

        (2) Which one of the nine listed options do you consider to be your most basic fear?
        - of being unwanted and unworthy of being loved
        -of being worthless
        -of having no identity or personal significance
        -of being helpless and useless
        -of being unable to survive on your own
        -of pain and deprivation
        -of being harmed or controlled by others
        -of impermanence
        -of being corrupt, evil or imbalanced
        If you begin to truly look to resolve these questions, you can move from darkness into the light.

        Good luck and I wish you the best. My opportunity has passed.

      • cimmo

        At least he is consistent.
        Is it a bot?

      • MrLightRail

        I thought is was more in the line of “If you cannot dazzle them with brilliance, then baffle them with bullsh*t”.

      • cimmo

        I notice he has now replied to you.

        I think his reply has confirmed my previous comment to you.

      • Greg Straw

        Thanks for being one of the few adults in these comments, a wise man once said ( A fool in his own hart saith there is no God.

      • kilvehk

        he may be being semi-mature in this however that does not excuse his use of logical fallacies and false conclusions. he is for example drawing a conclusion about others based on the behavior of the few, that would be like me saying all christians are murderers based on the few that have bombed abortion clinics. he is however being more mature than most of the other commenting people and i appreciate that as well.

      • WilmRoget

        Your false and unsubstantiated accusations, presented to discredit me personally, in place of even attempting to address my arguments, are the fallacy of ad hominem. Perhaps you should not accuse anyone of using fallacies.

        ‘ he is for example drawing a conclusion about others based on the behavior of the few, ‘

        Your false accusations don’t help you. I’ve been quite clear that my position is based on the nature of atheism itself, and that the bad behavior of you and your peers only demonstrates that nature.

      • kilvehk

        do not presume to accuse me of an ad hominem fallacy good sir. you have made it quite clear that you are judging all atheists as whole and you can not tell me you have met every single one personally ergo the logical conclusion is that you are judging all atheists as a whole based on the actions and behaviors of the few you have met and talked to as evidenced your statement “the bad behavior of you and your peers only demonstrates that nature” i made no accusation only a statement of fact. you have yourself admitted that you are judging atheists on behaviors of a few individuals and your perception of the nature of atheism. you make the assertion that atheists have no morals you refuse to listen to even one argument and instead simply blow them off like you know who we are and what we do and how we think. you make the assertion that i am behaving badly when in actuality ever since i got here i have been nothing but respectful. i resent your attitude and would request that you show me the same respect i have been trying to show you.

      • WilmRoget

        “do not presume to accuse me of an ad hominem fallacy good sir.”

        You absolutely have engaged in ad hominem. Putting on airs is not going to change that. Further, you accused me of fallacy, without a shred of evidence, and that unsubstantiated accusation is ad hominem.

        “you have made it quite clear that you are judging all atheists as whole”

        Actually I am judging atheism, as I also judge homophobia and racism and sexism and other prejudices.

        “and you can not tell me you have met every single one personally ergo the logical conclusion is that you are judging all atheists as a whole based on the actions and behaviors of the few you have met’

        Your assertion has nothing to do with logic, and everything to do with attempting to disparage me personally with yet another false accusation.

        The issue at hand is a known trait – atheism – and the nature of that trait. Let’s test your hypothesis by looking at a different trait, one you are less ego-bound to.

        I know that vertebrates by definition have a spine, as I know that atheism is a prejudice. According to you, I need to personally know every vertebrate ever in order to make conclusions about the trait ‘having a spine’. That is not logical or rational.

        You are trying to be clever, but it is not working. Putting on airs, being pretentious, doesn’t make your arguments more convincing, or less wrong.

        ” i made no accusation only a statement of fact.’

        You stated no facts. You did accuse, without a shred of evidence, and your provided that false accusation for the purpose of discrediting me personally. That is fallacy, and not the only one in your posts.

        ” you make the assertion that atheists have no morals”

        No, I did not. I did assert that atheism has no moral code.

        “in actuality ever since i got here i have been nothing but respectful.”

        No, you have not.

        ‘i resent your attitude and would request that you show me the same respect i have been trying to show you.”

        I would not stoop so low as to treat you as badly as you have behaved.

      • cimmo

        “Actually I am judging atheism, as I also judge homophobia and racism and sexism and other prejudices.”

        What is your view on homosexuality?
        Is it right or is it wrong?

        Eighth request.
        Your avoidance of this question is becoming quite noticable.

      • WilmRoget

        “Your avoidance of this question is becoming quite noticable.”

        Avoidance – what a lovely distortion. As I mentioned earlier, since I have repeatedly, over the last few days, mentioned that I have a history of rebuking homophobie and anti-gay theology, your manufactured false issue is worthy of Fox News.

        And to add to the irony, the answer to your question, if you used a little critical thinking, is intrinsic to the very statement of mine that you quoted.

        Your grandstanding bully tactics only make you look incompetent.

      • cimmo

        How’s that stigmata coming along?
        Do you also have a pain in your side?

      • WilmRoget

        You appear to have a desire to inflict pain on others.

      • cimmo

        There’s that persecution complex/delusion again.

        Yep, you got it bad.
        You really are afraid of me, aren’t you?

      • WilmRoget

        Because there is no evidence of such things in any of posts, you signal that your diatribe is both projection, and fantasy.

        Your diatribe shows that you want to be feared, you want to persecute, you want to inflict harm.

      • cimmo

        No, I just want to take the piss.

        And I do believe that is happening.

      • WilmRoget

        Sadism. And you are getting nastier in each post because you are not getting what you so clearly crave.

      • cimmo

        Yeah. You do seem to be a one trick pony after all.
        This circle jerk is getting boring.

        Just for the record, if I characterise you as a homosexual universalist, what part/s of that would be incorrect?

      • WilmRoget

        “This circle jerk is getting boring.”

        Are you getting ready to fake leave again?

      • cimmo

        Do I have to rub your nose in your failed comprehension again?

        How about answering the question:
        Are you a universalist?
        Or a homosexual?

      • WilmRoget

        Since there is no failure of comprehension on my part, and since you really haven’t accomplished anything beyond making yourself look very bad – the only thing you can do again is make yourself look bad.

        Your false dichotomy indicates a lack of comprehension on your part.

      • kilvehk

        the evidence of your judgement is all over this thread. you have repeatedly judged atheism as a whole and attacked the character of all atheists by extension.

        how exactly is atheism a prejudice? i do not attack you nor your ilk and in fact have quite a few religious friends. that is their and your right to believe what you will. i do not hate nor hold any grudge toward religious ppl nor religion as a whole. i judge based solely on the ideas and actions of each individual. i do not personally believe in god but that does not mean that i denounce the idea of god entirely either, a deity is possible however improbable certain gods such as the one described in the bible are by nature impossible but that is not to say all possible deities should be thrown out of consideration. the simple fact of the matter is that i see no evidence that suggests a deity does exist but that is my personal view and i will not try to impose it on others or claim they are wrong for not thinking as i do. tell me what prejudice do i hold?

        behavior is different than biology sir do not try to confuse the facts. each person has the same basic biology however every person has a unique way of thinking. your false comparison will not work on me.

        the fact is you have as i already said been judging atheism as a whole throughout this thread as well you have been refusing to listen and continue speaking with a biased voice and the evidence of that is there for all to see. i was not intending to discredit you at all in fact i thanked you for being somewhat mature and not getting into a rage

        hmm yes i suppose that is true as atheism is a simple lack of belief there is no structure to it and therefore no all encompassing set of rules. just to make the point clear atheists DO have morals. atheism by its very nature is not what guides or lays out those morals. i apologize for the misunderstanding

        if i have offended you in some way it was not intentional and should not be taken as such. i am simply trying to express my views on the matter

        please point out my “bad behavior”. or is the simple fact that i am an atheist offensive and bad to you?

      • WilmRoget

        “the evidence of your judgement is all over this thread. ”

        I see you are going with the fallacy of ad hominem again.

        There is no such evidence.

        “you have repeatedly judged atheism as a whole”

        I also judge racism as a whole, and homophobia and sexism. So your rebuke has the net effect of condemning everyone and anyone who has condemned homophobia, or racism, or sexism, or any other prejudice.

        “i do not attack you nor your ilk”

        The pejorative ‘ilk’ is an attack.

        “i do not hate nor hold any grudge toward religious ppl nor religion as a whole.”

        Your posts indicate that you do. Using words like ‘ilk’ to describe us communicates malice.

        “tell me what prejudice do i hold?”

        You hold the prejudice known as atheism, and the malice you express toward people of faith is explicit and clear.

        ‘ just to make the point clear atheists DO have morals.”

        Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, do you have any to back up that claim? Your posts, and those of your peers here, create the exact opposite impression, communicate a near total lack of any morality at all.

        “please point out my “bad behavior”.”

        I have been from the start. Your pretense that I have not, is dishonest and bad behavior.

      • cimmo

        ‘ just to make the point clear atheists DO have morals.”
        “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence,”

        HA! That was a good one.
        Mate, you should take this show on the road.

        I’m starting to think you’re a Poe?
        If so, Kudos!!

      • WilmRoget

        Your dismissals only signal incompetence and malice.

      • cimmo

        No, I’ve told you this before, it is piss taking.

        Anyway, just one minor point of substance:
        Do you agree with the doctrine of Christian Universalism?

      • WilmRoget

        You’ve said many things, none of which proved to be true. It doesn’t matter what slang you use, you’ve admitted that your purpose here is sadistic.

      • cimmo

        Do you agree with the doctrine of Christian Universalism?

      • WilmRoget

        Are you always a bully, or only on days with a vowel in the name?

      • cimmo

        In order to actually have some semblance of rational debate and attempt to understand your position, I have asked you this specific question many many times:
        “Do you agree with the doctrine of Christian Universalism?”

        You can choose to answer with something reasonable or you can continue to be a troll.

        I will leave it up to you and your god to determine what is the correct moral thing to do.

      • WilmRoget

        In order to be a bully, searching for some way to discredit me personally, you have repeatedly asked a question about something with no relevance to the issue at hand.

        All the while, of course, you have consistently dodged nearly every point I’ve presented, and most if not all questions.

        “you can continue to be a troll.”

        I cannot continue to do something that I am not doing at all.

        ” what is the correct moral thing to do.”

        Because we all know, atheism cannot ever guide anyone on morality.

      • MrLightRail

        I firmly believe that the religious indoctrination of children before they are old enough to truly think for themselves is child abuse.

      • MrLightRail

        Wilm, I’m not an atheist, but agnostic. In my 53 years on this earth, I have not been shown ONE IOTA of proof that there is a creator, or a god. Claiming any thing good that happens in your life as being from god, and anything bad, as either a test from this god, or the devil, just does NOT make any sense. I have faith that the sun will rise in the morning, as I’ve seen it happen many times. not so about a deity.

      • WilmRoget

        “Wilm, I’m not an atheist, but agnostic.”

        That’s not any better, really.

        ” In my 53 years on this earth, I have not been shown ONE IOTA of proof”

        So? Reality is not contingent on your limited experience set. Prove that you are an agnostic. Prove that you are 53 years old?

        “just does NOT make any sense.”

        Actually, you claiming that your lack of experience of something is meaningful, does not make sense, nor do your shallow and facetious renderings of a single theological point that is not even universally accepted.

        Prove that you have faith the sun will rise. Prove that you are honest, just, fair, rational.

        It is sad how self-centered the defense of atheism/agnosticism is, but then, that’s to be expected of a prejudice.

      • Bonta-kun

        A prime example, ladies and gentlemen, of Judging Not Lest Ye Be Judged.

        Oh, hang on a mo… No, that’s the other wing. Should have taken a left turn at Albuquerque.

      • daleblah

        Which god? Zeus? Thor? Odin? Ao? Selune? The Pink Unicorn? Santa Claus? Some other?
        Please specify, and then please provide conclusive (factual, not imaginary) evidence for the existence of your chosen deity.

      • MrLightRail

        Only in your mind, and the other delusional fools that believe that. People of “faith” are the cause of more death and misery than anything else.

      • WilmRoget

        Your vicious post only demonstrates that atheism is a prejudice, an excuse to denigrate most of humanity so you can feel superior.

      • cimmo

        Tell me this, Mr HolierThanThou XtianZealot, according to your dogma, a heathen unbeliever like me will suffer the standard ‘one size fits all sins’ penalty – eternal damnation.

        Have I got that correct? I ask because every xtian has a slightly different take on this – so much for the ‘inerrant word of god’.

        Anyway, that being the case (something I am totally cool with, as it happens), why do you feel so compelled to circumvent your god’s judgement and come here looking to berate, chastise and verbally attack unbelievers?

        Are you afraid that heathens like me WON’T be penalized?

        Also, how do you explain all the verses in your book that specifically caution about judging others?
        Matt 7:1-5 and Luke 6:37 for example?

        I expect you’ll cherrypick this post and get clever with your reply, but why don’t you surprise me and actually address the content?

      • WilmRoget

        Your abusiveness really doesn’t help you.

        “I ask because every xtian has a slightly different take on this – so much for the ‘inerrant word of god’.’

        Your statement indicates a logic failure.

        ‘why do you feel so compelled to circumvent your god’s judgement and come here looking to berate, chastise and verbally attack unbelievers?’

        Your derogatory and false accusation doesn’t help you.

        “Also, how do you explain all the verses in your book that specifically caution about judging others?”

        Where, exactly, have I judged you? I have rebuked your bad behavior, which is allowed, and I have rebuked the vicious and evil prejudice that is atheism.

        “Are you afraid that heathens like me WON’T be penalized?”

        Your derogatory fantasies speak so much about you. My experience of the Divine is so unlike what you image it to be. Like the 1st century Christians, and many since, I hold to the belief that all of humanity will be reunited with the Divine. Romans 5 makes the case that just as imperfection – sin – became a part of all humanity through the action of one, redemption comes to all through the sacrifice of one.

        One of the many, many mistakes atheists like you make is thinking that the tv form of modern American Christian fundamentalism represents the total, only and purest expression of Christian thought and theology, when it is actually, all too often, the least Christian.

      • cimmo

        So, leaving aside all the technicalities and weasel words, let me ask you to clarify my understanding of what you said:

        ALL humans go to heaven?
        So, your position is that of universalism?

        OK, that explains why you’re so upset with unbelievers. We get the goodies without having to jump through any hoops.

      • WilmRoget

        “So, leaving aside all the technicalities and weasel words,”

        You promised to be silent, couldn’t live up to it for even one hour, made another dramatic exist, couldn’t live up to it for even ten minutes.

        Your derogatory assertions are helping you any.

      • cimmo

        “You promised to be silent,” ABOUT YOUR POENESS, asshole.

        Do you agree with the doctrine of universalism?

      • WilmRoget

        More name calling and obscenity from the person who cannot keep his/her word.

        I hope you understand that your use of such bad behavior works again the claim that atheists can be moral.

      • MusingAtheist

        Fuck Yea! Love your comment!!

      • cimmo

        Why should religious belief really be entitled to any respect? Apart from the whole ‘ridiculous beliefs deserve ridicule’ thing, there is also the nasty historical fact that up until a hundred or so years ago, people like me would have been tortured even to the point of death, in order to save my soul.

        Some religions still practice similar crimes even today.

        So, as far as I’m concerned, any theist merely getting mocked or abused on an internet forum is getting off very lightly.

      • WilmRoget

        And thus, you prove that you are entirely as terrible as the very people you complain about, if not worse.

        The sad thing is that you’ve let them beat you, you’ve surrendered to them, you’ve given them power of you, by becoming just like them.

        You lost, they won, the moment you allowed yourself to hate.

      • cimmo

        I said:
        ” the nasty historical fact that up until a hundred or so years ago,
        people like me would have been tortured even to the point of death, in
        order to save my soul.”

        And you bleated:
        “And thus, you prove that you are entirely as terrible as the very people you complain about, if not worse.”

        So according to you, merely verbally attacking a believer is the same as a believer torturing and murdering an unbeliever?

        Great set of objective moral values you got there.

        Face the truth here – you hate atheists to your very core, don’t you? You consider secularism the worst thing imaginable?

        Why?

        Why do you feel so threatened by disbelief?

      • WilmRoget

        “And you bleated:’

        With every derogatory phrase, you substantiate my position – atheism is a vicious prejudice.

        ‘So according to you, merely verbally attacking a believer is the same as a believer torturing and murdering an unbeliever?”

        Not what I said at all. But you make it clear, you would oppress, and even slay and torture people of faith, if you could. Your motives are the same as those who tortured and murdered under the excuse of religion.

        “Great set of objective moral values you got there.”

        Your insults are useless. I’ve heard all the same, and worse, from homophobes and racists for rebuking their prejudice.

        “Face the truth here – you hate atheists to your very core, don’t you? You consider secularism the worst thing imaginable?

        Why?

        Why do you feel so threatened by disbelief?”

        Nice projection there, but if you pay attention, you, not I, are the one demonstrating hate.

      • cimmo

        Blah blah, hate, blah blah persecution, blah blah, vicious prejudice, blah blah insults, blah lies and more hate.

        That pretty much sums up every single one of your posts.

        “you would oppress, and even slay and torture people of faith, if you could.”
        Total bullshit lie – slanderous perhaps?
        But in your mind THAT is what you’re afraid of.

        You’ve got that persecution complex down to a fine art:
        “Christians feel persecuted or “oppressed” whenever they find someone that doesn’t share their particular worldview.
        On closer examination of such claims, it’s more commonly the case that
        claims of persecution are better explained as annoyance at the removal
        of privilege or the curtailment of their ability to force their views on others.”
        From RationalWiki

        You keep falsely accusing others of homophobia, why can’t you state for the record your objective morally derived views on this?

        This is the third request for you to state your position on this topic.

      • WilmRoget

        “That pretty much sums up every single one of your posts.”

        Your dishonesty and incompetence is not helping you.

        “Total bullshit lie – slanderous perhaps?”

        Neither. Look at the constant verbal abuse and the viciously dismissive attitude in your posts. It is a well-establish fact that such verbal behavior is a signal of malice, and is used to incite violence.

        Bear in mind, there is no shortage of atheists on line expressing their desire to rid the world of religion by any means necessary. No, you and your peers have demonstrated more than enough animosity, and deliberately tried to encourage that animosity in others, to show that you are are absolutely operating on the same level as any oppressors in human history. Given the chance, there is no doubt you would oppress people of faith physically as viciously as you oppress them verbally.

        “But in your mind THAT is what you’re afraid of.”

        Again, your derogatory fantasies only prove that you make of falsehoods out of thin air, and that nothing you post is trustworthy.

        “You’ve got that persecution complex down to a fine art:”

        Yeah, homophobes use that line too when I rebuke homophobia. You are not helping your case.

        “You keep falsely accusing others of homophobia,”

        No, I have not. Now your claim is either a lie, or more evidence of poor reasoning and reading skills on your part. I do compare atheism to homophobia. So, are you lying, or incompetent?

        “why can’t you state for the record your objective morally derived views on this?

        This is the third request for you to state your position on this topic.”

        Did you have something coherent and accurate to state?

      • cimmo

        Are you a homophobe?

        Do you support the gay lifestyle?

        Fifth request.
        You are the one who keeps using that word.

        Yes/No answers are sufficient.

      • cimmo

        ” there is no shortage of atheists on line expressing their desire to rid the world of religion by any means necessary.”

        Have I ever said that?
        Can you quote me?

        Maybe as part of your persecution delusion pathology you seem to have, that really is a secret wish of yours? To be physically persecuted like that Jesus character in your story book? Perhaps you’d actually like to be crucified with all the trimmings – the crown of thorns, stigmata and a spear of destiny stuck in your side?

        What better way to be christ like than to physically suffer the same as him? Just in time for Oester.

        “Persecutory delusions are a delusional condition in which the affected person believes they are being persecuted. Specifically, they have been defined as containing two central elements:
        The individual thinks that harm is occurring, or is going to occur.
        The individual thinks that the perceived persecutor has the intention to cause harm.

        According to the DSM-IV-TR, persecutory delusions are the most common form of delusions in schizophrenia, where the person believes “he or she is being tormented, followed, tricked, spied on, or ridiculed.” In the DSM-IV-TR, persecutory delusions are the main feature of the persecutory type of delusional disorder.”

        Yep, that’s you.

      • WilmRoget

        “Have I ever said that?Can you quote me?”

        The irony of your questions is remarkable, considering how many things you have attributed to me that do not appear in my posts.

        ‘Maybe as part of your persecution delusion pathology ”

        You are trying for an irony black hole, aren’t you? There is no evidence of any such thing in my posts, it is simply more of your temper and malice on display.

        Bear in mind, not only do homophobes constantly accuse homosexuals of ‘persecutory delusions’, as you have accused me without evidence, they consistently characterize homosexuals as mentally ill

        and so

        once again,

        you’ve demonstrated the overwhelming similarity between homophobia and atheism.

      • Ave Satana

        Omg someone print screen this right here i feel a meme coming up lol. You’re either the least intelligent person in the comments section or a troll if you really think homophobia and atheism have anything to do with each other. Yeah he’s an atheist so since he doesn’t believe in the big daddy like I do he must be a homophobe… did you forget leviticus 20:13 “if a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” With all of this talk you bring up about homophobia you must either be a homophobe and have an overly active persecution complex. And stop talking about evidence until you can finally bring any to the table sheesh someone needs some Satan

      • WilmRoget

        Please take your posts to a high school English teacher, and ask if you, the author of them, have any business insulting anyone else’s intelligence.

        ” Yeah he’s an atheist so since he doesn’t believe in the big daddy like I do he must be a homophobe…”

        Since I made no such claim, your dishonesty, or poor reading skills, isn’t helping you. Instead of trying to be clever and insulting,

        try to be accurate instead. Sure, it is harder, but worth it in the long run.

        “did you forget leviticus 20:13″

        Did you know that Leviticus was not written in English, and that gay men do not lie with a man as with a woman, even if that were what the Hebrew states, and it is not.

        Tell me, where exactly is the mishkap ishshah – the actual words used in the passage you cited – in the lives of gay men?

      • Hail Satan

        Sadly for you*

      • WilmRoget

        What did you intend to communicate?

        By the way, if your nom-de-internet was an attempt to be shocking, it failed.

      • cimmo

        I do wish you’d just state clearly and unequivocally what you believe.

        I’m a heathen, remember, I have no idea what this ‘mishmash whatever’ is or why it is relevant.

      • WilmRoget

        And yet I have been both clear and unequivocable.

        “I have no idea what this ‘mishmash whatever’ is or why it is relevant.”

        Well, I explained that it is the actual Hebrew (transliterated) words from the text you claim in other post condemns homosexuals.

        So, you have no idea what you are talking about.

      • cimmo

        “So, you have no idea what you are talking about.”
        Um, yes. Because I have no idea what YOU are talking about.

        I asked you for clarification and did you?

      • WilmRoget

        “Because I have no idea what YOU are talking about.”

        You don’t understand because you don’t know this material well enough to substantiate the claims you’ve made.

        If you knew the material enough to back up your claim, you’d have understood immediately. The point was to show your lack of knowledge about t his material.

        “mishkap ishshah” is a standard transliteration of a pair of Hebrew words in the passage you and Ave Satana cited. That phrase is an important component of the meaning of the passage. If you know enough about the passage to be able to honestly claim it condemns homosexuals, you’d know what that phrase means. But you don’t.

        So you do not know this material, and you have moral business citing it.

        Mishkap ishshah means bed wife. Ishshah is a part of a word pair, with the word ish, which means husband. Yes, ish has the connotation of male, but ignoring the relationship between ishshah and ish, is poor scholarship.

        The passage you cited describes a husband, ish, cheating on his wife, ishshah, in her own bed, or place.

        The passage also uses two different words to allegedly connote male – ish, husband, and zakar – a male set aside or marked for high or holy office – like a priest.

        The context of the passage the two of you cited is a command that the people of Israel not engage in the worship practices of the surrounding peoples. Those practices including temple prostitution – worshipers having sex with priests and priestesses to earn blessings.

        The passage the two of you cited is about that – temple prostitution, a form of idolatry. It is not about homosexuality, gay sex, or homosexuals.

      • Joe P.

        Your reading comprehension sucks because that’s not at all what he said or in any way implied… Then again religeous belief is negatively correlated with intelligence so we shouldn’t be surprised.

      • WilmRoget

        “Your reading comprehension sucks”

        Nope.

        “that’s not at all what he said or in any way implied…”

        On your say so? No. The reality is that the verbal abuse you and your peers, including cimmo make it extremely clear that you would use physical violence, if you could. After all, you use verbal violence, and the purpose of verbal violence is to intimidate, oppress, and invoke physical violence.

        You and your peers wield hate speech for the same purpose that homophobes and racists do – to wind each other for physical violence, to intimidate and bully through the instinctive knowledge that verbal abuse leads inevitably to physical violence.

        “Then again religeous belief is negatively correlated with intelligence”

        Wrong, but go on, continue to be insulting and degrading, because that is such a good way of convincing me that physical violence is not on your wish list.

      • Joe P.

        Just because all you brainwashed people have decided that “religious” belief is somehow special and immune to criticism doesn’t make it so…

        You trying to put your religion, which you can “fix” at any time, on the same level as hate speech against people’s race, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, whatever (all things they have no control over) is reprehensible.

        Your beliefs AREN’T special and don’t deserve special protection against us “haters”. These beliefs are irrational, harmful, divisive, and the world would be 10x better without them.

        I have a challenge for you: Go just ONE generation without indoctrinating children into your cult (a popular cult, but a cult nonetheless,) before they reach the age of reason and have any psychological defenses against this abuse and we’ll see how long it lasts.

      • WilmRoget

        Just because you call people ‘brainwashed’ doesn’t make it so, but it does point out how similar atheism and homophobia are.

        “You trying to put your religion, which you can “fix” at any time, . . .”

        Ironically, homophobic people of color use this same basic argument, accusing GLBTQ putting our sex, which according to them we can fix at any time, on the same level as race, etc. Of course, neither you, nor they, seem to understand that when you opine that our sexuality, or our spirituality needs fixing, you are engaged in ego-aggrandizing abuse.

        “Your beliefs AREN’T special and don’t deserve special protection against us “haters”. These beliefs are irrational, harmful, divisive, and the world would be 10x better without them.”

        Homophobes say the very same thing. Once again, you are demonstrating the overwhelmingly strong parallel between homophobia and atheism.

        “I have a challenge for you:”

        How conceited of you.

      • Joe P.

        Except there’s actual scientific evidence that sexual orientation is due to inborn differences in brain structure. It is kinda sad that some of those homophobic black people don’t know this or don’t believe it. There is no corresponding “christian” or “diest” brain morphology. Nor does “gayness” have mechanisms and directives to propogate itself in other peoples’ minds.

      • WilmRoget

        “Except there’s actual scientific evidence that sexual orientation is due to inborn differences in brain structure. ”

        Not ‘due to’. Further, homophobes don’t accept that evidence, just as atheists don’t accept the evidence of the existence of God.

        “There is no corresponding “christian” or “diest” brain morphology.”

        Your specificity is convenient, and dishonest. There may not be knowledge at this time of such a spiritual morphology, but then, there is no knowledge of a morphological connection to many things we experience.

        ‘Nor does “gayness” have mechanisms and directives to propogate itself in other peoples’ minds.”

        Not according to homophobes, so with that argument, you are showing that atheism – for which there is no evidence of a morphology, and which has both mechanism and directives to propagate itself, is very much like homophobia.

      • Joe P.

        “evidence of the existence of God” lol rotflmao…

        If there was really “evidence” then it wouldn’t be faith now would it?

      • WilmRoget

        Your dismissal and your question expose your ignorance.

        Religious people have faith in the character of the Divine, not in some assertion that the Divine exists.

        I understand that this can be hard for people who are perceived as untrustworthy by the majority, as atheists are, but faith in someone’s nature, in their promises, it only a bad thing

        to people who are utterly untrustworthy.

      • cimmo

        “Religious people have faith in the character of the Divine, not in some assertion that the Divine exists.”

        Wow, that’s some novel weasel words you’ve got there.
        I’ll give you a point for that.

      • WilmRoget

        So you did not understand, and that made you feel bad about yourself, so you lashed out with an empty dismissal.

        The reality is that atheists like you lie to people of faith about our own experience, about what faith is,

        just like homophobes lie to homosexuals about our lives and experiences and relationships.

        Atheism parallels homophobia, both are prejudices.

      • cimmo

        You really do seem obsessed with homosexuality – nearly every post you bring it up.

        Is this a Freudian thing?

      • WilmRoget

        Seem and reality are two different things. But how homophobic of you, to try to use my innate capacity for love and intimacy as a negative.

        The problem with prejudices is that they spread, both from person to person, and in scope. The person who starts off denigrating one group of people to get the ego rush, soon needs to denigrates others as well. So it is not surprising that homophobia is sitting there inside along side atheism.

        But let’s turn your little question back at you – you really do seem obsessed with religion/spirituality/Christianity. Is it a Freudian thing? Are you deep in denial, like so many “ex-gays” about something you know is intrinsic to your nature, but which your desire to be perceived as superior demands you deny?

      • cimmo

        Hey I’m cool if you’re homosexual – or Bi or whatever. It’s not my thing but I have nothing against it if it’s consensual.

        (Let me guess, you will now tell me that I am a liar?)

        Why so much obfuscation about the issue?

        Some deep seated conflict going on, perhaps?
        Is this internet word wanking some kind of therapy for you?

        I’d appreciate you getting around to explaining why those bible verses I quoted about the evil of homosexuality are wrong.

        I’m looking forward to that.

      • WilmRoget

        “Why so much obfuscation about the issue?”

        There was none, your accusation is false.

        And you just pulled the dramatic exit thing again, not ten minutes before writing the post above.

        Shouldn’t you at least attempt to live up to your own words?

      • cimmo

        “And you just pulled the dramatic exit thing again, not ten minutes before writing the post above.”

        And I remember when you admitted that your god was merely a delusion and that you genuinely worshipped Satan as your Lord and Master.

        See, maybe if I claim a straight out lie over and over again it might become true? That seems to be how low you’ve stooped now.

        Fifth posting of this question:
        Do you agree with the doctrine of universalism?

      • WilmRoget

        Your dishonesty, bullying, and insults only affirm that atheism is a vicious prejudice, and they create the impression that you purposefully abandon morality in deference to your admitted sadism.

        The silliness of your falsehood about me is obvious, if I had posted such a thing, all of your posts, and your peers, would be purely evil rantings with no context or excuse.

      • WilmRoget

        “See, maybe if I claim a straight out lie over and over again it might become true? ”

        That is precisely what you and your peers have been trying, that is the primary activity of atheists.

        “That seems to be how low you’ve stooped now.”

        It only seems that way because you are projecting your behavior onto me, as a way of avoiding having to recognize how dehumanizing atheism is and how terrible your behavior is.

      • Joe P.

        I think I sense some projection…

        We atheists aren’t the ones who adhere to ideology that gave rise to thousands of years of history where you slaughtered or oppressed millions of unbelievers.

      • WilmRoget

        Actually you are, you just don’t recognize it.

        You see, all of the evil that you and your peers dishonesty attribute to religion, actually arises in people who do not actually believe in the Divine, nor follow the actual teachings of their Scriptures. The homophobic Christian is really as much in denial about God as the atheist is, the racist Muslim is as much in denial about God as the atheist is, etc.

        Under the noise, the sound and fury, you and they deny the Divine to exalt your selves.

      • cimmo

        Oh come on, you just HAVE to be a Poe?

        OK, I’ll hush now and keep it quiet.
        Keep trolling.

      • WilmRoget

        A dismissal, and a promise to keep quiet –
        that you broke a few minutes later.

        When you cannot even tell the truth about your actions in the immediate future, actions you have complete control over, something I just pointed out to someone else here yesterday –

        why should anyone believe anything you say about anything?

      • cimmo

        I said: Keep IT quiet.

        I did NOT say “I’ll hush now and keep quiet”

        And the IT there is a crucial part of that sentence, referring to your Poe like behaviour that I spoke about in the first sentence.

        Any fool can see I said that I would keep quiet about you being a Poe.

        But I’m not sure about that now, a Poe wouldn’t be so desperate.

        If you are going to deliberately lie about what I said, then “why should anyone believe anything you say about anything?”

        Mate, you are really getting desperate. It’s doing you a disservice to quote mine so poorly.
        Try harder.

      • WilmRoget

        “And the IT there is a crucial part of that sentence, ”

        Nope. You made a very broad promise, and could not keep it for even hour.

        Your dismissive and abusive behavior only exacerbates the problem.

        “Mate, you are really getting desperate.”

        Nope.

      • cimmo

        Try harder and be more original.
        This deliberate and obvious trolling is boring me.

        Dance, monkey, dance!

      • WilmRoget

        Your attempted sadism is not going to produce the result you seek.

      • Joe P.

        Yeah right, the inquisition, crusades, and every other slaughter of “infidels” throughout history has had nothing to do with religious beliefs.

        If you’re just going cop out of the argument like this by defining “divine” as all that is good, and any dogma that wasn’t followed in a way that was (in your opinion) “good” was just them not doing religion right, then you’re truly deluding yourself about human history and have reduced the dialog to near absurdity.

      • WilmRoget

        Your distortion only shows that you cannot address what I actually wrote, and that you lack the civility to even try.

        The nastier and snarkier you are, the more you demonstrate that atheism is not just a prejudice, but that many of its adherents are utterly incapable of defending it.

      • Joe P.

        This is getting ridiculous… Most of your posts boil down to an infantile kernel of either “nuh uh I don’t believe you” or “i know you are but what am I” and yet you attempt to hold them up as shining examples of reason over us irrational atheists…

        Newsflash: An opinion that differs from yours isn’t the same as a “lie” nor is a negative opinion expressed about you “slander”.

        I guess though for you up really is down and black is the same as white…

        Sometimes I don’t know why we even bother.

      • WilmRoget

        Your false characterization only demonstrates that you cannot address any of the many points I have presented.

        “Sometimes I don’t know why we even bother.”

        Because you are trying to feed your ego. But because it is not working, you are getting upset, and your ego demands even more, and you try another insult and slur, and it does not work, so you ego demands more.

        Essentially, you are starving yourself of the very affirmation and ego-reward you seek – all because you try to steal it by harming others. The more you try to steal your self worth by harming others, the worse you end up and the greater the need to steal becomes.

        You’ve trapped yourself, as so many have. Fred Phelps lived most of his miserable, hate filled life in that trap.

      • Joe P.

        What ‘homophobic’ argument is that exactly? The one where homophobia and racism come directly or indirectly from interaction with the outgroup (with absolutely no moral endorsement made nor implied of either belief?) I once again assert that your reading comprehension sucks.

        If these prejuduces don’t arise from our interactions with other groups where do they come from? Does satan put them in our minds?

      • WilmRoget

        “What ‘homophobic’ argument is that exactly?”

        Since I pointed it out the first time, in detail, your pretense now is dishonest.

        You attempted to blame homophobia on the actions of homosexuals – a ‘blame the victim’ approach, and that is classic homophobia.

      • Joe P.

        However I never actually blamed the victim. You assumed that. I merely said the prejudices arise through the experience of interactions with the other group. I never put any moral judgment into this or assigned ‘blame’ here (though you clearly did.)

        You’ve spent many posts since then repeating how “homophobic” it was without really backing it up. I’ve made many posts since then too but pointing out how it’s NOT homophobic (while for those posts you simply called me a liar.)

        Let me break it down for you: The fact that you’ve heard vaguely similar elements in an argument from a homophobe DOES NOT make me a homophobe. I am not a homophobe. I do not fear gay people. I do not hate gay people. I do not blame gay people for being gay. I do however recognize that they are on one side of the social interactions by which other groups build their opinions and prejudices of them. This is simply a fact. I don’t know how much clearer I can get.

        You’ve once again proven that it’s not possible to argue with someone who doesn’t even listen.

      • WilmRoget

        “However I never actually blamed the victim. ”

        And yet, you really did. Oh, you tried to be clever about it, but, yeah, you did.

        ‘You’ve spent many posts since then repeating how “homophobic” it was without really backing it up.’

        False, I did explain and back it up. You avoided the subject, issued false accusations, employed racist talking points, and now deny the intrinsic meaning of your own argument.

        ‘Let me break it down for you: The fact that you’ve heard vaguely similar elements in an argument from a homophobe DOES NOT make me a homophobe.”

        Let me break it down for you. Vague is not relevant, you used explicitly homophobic arguments, and when it quacks like a duck and waddles like a duck and has duck DNA,

        odds are

        its a duck.

        ‘You’ve once again proven that it’s not possible to argue with someone who doesn’t even listen.”

        With every insult, you demonstrate that atheism is a prejudice.

      • Joe P.

        Of course I’m prejudiced against irrationality. Everyone should be.

        I also see you’re back to the “nuh uh” argument, going in circles.

        I’ll await your witty retort to my other post on the decades of research showing how the religious are less intelligent than atheists.

      • WilmRoget

        “Of course I’m prejudiced against irrationality. Everyone should be.”

        It is interesting how you’ve presented that. We were talking about homosexuality and homophobia, so without any reference from you, it appears that you are characterizing homosexuality as ‘irrationality’. We are discussing your articulated homophobia, after all.

        Yet, it is slightly possible that you are only responding to the very last phrase in my post – a lazy approach, but possible. In which case, your degrading and dehumanizing characterization of religion as ‘irrationality’ is worse than your homophobia – for with your homophobia, you only hate about 10% of humanity, but with your atheism, you hate at least 90%.

        ‘I’ll await your witty retort to my other post on the decades of research showing how the religious are less intelligent than atheists.’

        You mean the empty summary with no supporting documentation? I understand, you believe that you are intrinsically smarter than:

        Nicholas Copernicus, Sir Francis Bacon, Johannes
        Kepler, Galileo Galilei, Rene Descartes, Blaise Pascal, Isaac Newton, Robert Boyle, Michael Faraday, Gregor Mendel, William Thomson Kelvin, Max Planck, Albert Einstein to name just a few

        and yet, not smart enough, apparently, to
        realize that your claim immediately required a comparison to those, and other individuals, a comparison you don’t win.

      • Joe P.

        “Empty summary with no supporting documentation”? Did you miss the “full text” links to the right, or even the references to how to find it actually published in a library?

        I never said I was smarter than *every* religious person, and that you would try to put such words in my mouth lays bare either your disingenuousness or dismal understanding of averages, both of which seriously undermine your credibility.

      • WilmRoget

        “I never said I was smarter than *every* religious person, and that you would try to put such words in my mouth ”

        Nor did I try. I just pointed out that your assertion provoked comparison to people of faith, and provided examples, all of whom clearly demonstrated superior intelligence, during their life, compared to what your posts display.

        You provided a dubious summary about a dubious study. Just admit it.

      • WilmRoget

        By the way, the way your framed your remark “the religious are less intelligent than atheists”, expresses the idea that atheists, all of them, since there is no qualifier there, are more intelligent the religious, all of them, since there is no qualifier there.

        And admit it, had you written something accurate, like ‘some atheists are smarter than some people of faith’ – what is there to puff your ego up about in that?

        So – were you smart enough to see that accuracy would not help you, but not smart enough to see that the generalization you provide invited a comparison you personally were bound to fail?

      • Joe P.

        Now you’re getting absurd. The way I wrote that sentence was just as accurate as saying that “africans have darker skin than europeans” and “midgets are shorter than giants”. Yes, there are exceptions to both rules, but when talking about groups of people unless stated otherwise it’s implied that you’re talking about characteristics of the group not about individual member outliers.

        I didn’t say “some atheists are smarter than some people of faith” because statistically that’s no better than saying nothing at all. Nor did I say ALL atheists are smarter than ALL people of faith which appears to be the way that you (inaccurately) interpreted it.

        Since you have trouble understanding statements that are really quite obvious to everyone else let me rephrase: Most atheists are smarter than most people of faith, which is just another way of saying that atheists are on average smarter than people of faith are on average.

      • WilmRoget

        “Now you’re getting absurd. ”

        No. Your dismissal is a poor way to get out of your sloppy writing patterns.

        “The way I wrote that sentence was just as accurate as saying that “africans have darker skin than europeans””

        Well, the problem is that such a statement is only accurate if only decides that the European colonists and their descendants living in Africa do not count as Africans – which then makes your statement all-inclusive, which means that you were indeed saying that all atheists are smarter than all people of faith.

        Your posts just don’t support your claim of superior intellect.

        “it’s implied”

        In other words, your words don’t actually mean what they say, there are all kinds of hidden, subjective implied meanings that you can fabricate on the spot to get yourself out of a jam.

        ‘Since you have trouble understanding statements that are really quite obvious to everyone else”

        Your insults only show that your intellect is not up to the task of explaining, or defending, your position is a civil, logical and reasoned manner, you have to rely on the kind of behavior that even the least intelligent, or the very youngest, are capable of.

        “Most atheists are smarter than most people of faith,”

        And again, there is no concrete evidence to support your claim. Further, since there are around 9 times as many people of faith – using the most generous projection of the number of atheists, and given that all kinds of other facts could skew any results when there is such a huge disparity in size of data pools, your claim has no value.

        For example, in a culture that prizes intelligence, there is a potential for more intelligent people to become more egotistical, more self-centered, more arrogant, than they would otherwise. Atheism, as a prejudice, rewards and nurtures those antisocial traits, while religions, most of which teach some degree of humility, would lack appeal for that minority of ‘highly intelligent people’ who are also egotistical, self-centered and arrogant. So those highly intelligent people who are egotistical, self-centered and arrogant, would be drawn to atheism, perhaps more than egotistical, self-centered and arrogant of average intelligence.

        Of course, a superior intellect would have recognized that without having to be told. A genuinely superior intellect would recognize that any attempt to proclaim himself or herself superior, would reflect poorly and make a bad impression on others.

        “Most atheists are smarter than most people of faith, which is just another way of saying that atheists are on average smarter than people of faith are on average.”

        And a really intelligent person would recognize that the two statements are not equivalent, since comparing averages for two groups of such extreme difference is size, is neither accurate, or credible.

      • Joe P.

        No I said exactly what I meant, and you’re getting even more absurd. Africans ARE in-fact darker in complexion than Europeans. If you’re going to call this statement false, based on the exceptions, then you’re getting even more absurd. That you could read something into it that wasn’t there is more about you and your presuppositions than my writing being sloppy, especially since ALL linguistic communication includes implicit and connotative information that’s “out of band” and gives our words and sentences richness and meaning. This out of band information is drawn from shared experience with the world. Now if you’re going to intentionally misread things there’s nothing I can do about that.

      • WilmRoget

        “Africans ARE in-fact darker in complexion than Europeans.”

        Not those descended from European colonists.

        ‘No I said exactly what I meant, and you’re getting even more absurd.”

        Your derogatory dismissals don’t make you seem more intelligent.

        Your protestations don’t accomplish anything. As you presented it, your example contradicts the excuse you tried to make with it.

        This is the problem with claiming to be of above average intelligence – you have to live up to it, and you are not.

      • Joe P.

        Wow, your intentional obtuseness is getting kinda ridiculous. Next you’re gonna argue that humans don’t have two legs? Come on man…

        But if you wanna get nit-picky then one would expect that with the increased sun exposure from being closer to the equator even a colonist population which is genetically identical to their European progenitors would be darker in complexion in Africa due to tanning effects.

        I think deep down you know that your criticism is absurd. You’re really looking more and more like a smarter than average troll with way too much time on his hands.

      • WilmRoget

        “Wow, your intentional obtuseness is getting kinda ridiculous”

        Interesting. I have repeatedly informed you that your use of insults works against you, every time, that it makes you look incapable of a reasoned argument, and unwilling or incapable of civility,

        yet you continue to engage in that very self-destructive behavior. That certainly makes your accusation of obtuse ironic.

        “But if you wanna get nit-picky then one would expect that with the increased sun exposure from being closer to the equator even a colonist population which is genetically identical to their European progenitors would be darker in complexion in Africa due to tanning effects.”

        Still making excuses for your false assertions and carelessness. That is really not a good way to show that you are of above average intellect.

        “I think deep down you know that your criticism is absurd. You’re really looking more and more like a smarter than average troll with way too much time on his hands.”

        And yet you are the one relying on insults, assertions you cannot, and at least once had no intention of backing up with evidence, run off on diversions and red herrings and distractions.

      • cimmo

        So good things = goddidit.
        Bad things = satandidit.

        Who made Satan?

      • WilmRoget

        So none of that is honestly derivable from my post.

        Are you always this dishonest?

      • Joe P.

        Just google “Intelligence Correlates with Disbelief in God across 137 Nations”… The higher a nation’s IQ the less likely its people are to believe in a magical sky fairy. The same thing is found in more than 80% of the studies that look at this idea (way beyond the range of statistical error.)

        I’m sure though that you’ll dismiss this, or any other scientific evidence you don’t like, as irrelevant, when the truth is exactly the opposite.

      • WilmRoget

        Just admit you have no credible source. If I google ‘the earth is hollow’ it returns 65,100,000 results.
        ” a magical sky fairy.”

        Ironically, you think you are more intelligent that people of faith, and yet, cannot see that your use of the term ‘ a magical sky fairy’ parallels homophobes’ use of ‘gay lifestyle’ demonstrating malice and contempt on your part.

        You have no evidence.

      • Joe P.

        Okay, how about Google “religiosity and intelligence” and go through the first 10, 100, or 1000 results, all of which point to an overwhelming majority of studies that find the exact same correlation.

        I absolutely do not deny that those terms demonstrate contempt for your beliefs (and they deserve every bit of that contempt.)

        I am more intelligent than most people, especially most religious people. This is just a statistical fact.

        That other people, who in the case of irrational homophobia hold unjustifiable beliefs, also use harsh words doesn’t prove a thing other than people can be harsh (which is no surprise to anyone who knows a thing about humanity.)

      • WilmRoget

        So you want me to do the work necessary to substantiate your claim. Fine. Wire me $500 and I’ll get right on it.

        ‘I absolutely do not deny that those terms demonstrate contempt for your beliefs (and they deserve every bit of that contempt.)”

        Thus, you are operating on the same dehumanizing, antisocial, self-centered level as homophobes and racists, you know it and admit, and all of your complaining has been dishonest and fraudulent.

        ‘I am more intelligent than most people, especially most religious people. This is just a statistical fact.’

        There is no evidence in your posts to substantiate that claim. You write an an 11th grade level, which would make you rather average in the U.S.

        “That other people, who in the case of irrational homophobia hold unjustifiable beliefs, also use harsh words doesn’t prove a thing other than people can be harsh (which is no surprise to anyone who knows a thing about humanity.)”

        Oh, a truly intelligent person would know otherwise. A truly intelligent person would recognize that your use of abusive language indicates the same emotional state, and the same psycho-social purpose that motivates the hate speech of racists and homophobes, etc.

      • Joe P.

        Attacking irrational harmful beliefs is in no way “on the same level” as attacking people for being and living the way they were born. The fact that you equate the two speaks volumes of your lack of true character.

        Coddling toward people’s irrational, immature, arbitrary, divisive, and harmful belief systems is a huge part of why the world is so messed up today. As they say: Passive acceptance of evil by the many can be worse than the few who actively perpetrate it.

        Despite your baseless assertions otherwise I would never advocate violence toward those simply for holding irrational beliefs, but I sure as heck will speak out against those irrational beliefs and deservedly ridicule those who hold them.

      • WilmRoget

        “Attacking irrational harmful beliefs”

        Characterizing the experiences and lives of most of humanity in that way is absolutely on the same level, if not worse.

        ‘The fact that you equate the two speaks volumes of your lack of true character.”

        If you find fault with honesty, integrity and civility, that is not my fault, but yours.

        “Coddling toward people’s irrational, immature, arbitrary, divisive, and harmful belief systems is a huge part of why the world is so messed up today.”

        Your vicious characterization of most of humanity’s lives in that way, is a symptom of the real reason the world is so messed up.

        ‘ As they say: Passive acceptance of evil by the many can be worse than the few who actively perpetrate it.”

        Which is why I make the effort to rebuke atheism, and homophobia, and racism and sexism and other evils.

        ‘Despite your baseless assertions”

        I made none.

        “otherwise I would never advocate violence toward those simply for holding irrational beliefs’

        Your characterization of our lives and experiences is such vicious and derogatory is entirely about advocating (indirectly at the moment) violence. That is the purpose of all hate speech.

      • cimmo

        I don’t hate you.
        But I am starting to feel sorry for you.

        How long have you been on this thread? Since it started, seven days ago? And how many posts? 300+?

        Wow, mate you need a life.

      • WilmRoget

        More insults – why is it that bad behavior is consistently the predominant way people express and defend atheism?

        As for your critique – just about every homophobe I’ve ever debated has resorted to some variation of that, when they have utterly failed to substantiate their claims or even be civil. Like so many of your peers here, you’ve simply demonstrated one of the many parallels between atheism and homophobia.

        Bear in mind, I have no expectation of convincing you, or anyone, at the start. But I have been ‘in the trenches’ on the online debate about homosexuality, refuting homophobia, and I know that while it takes awhile for people to recognize a prejudice for what it is, in time, with patience, people do get it.

        When I first began rebuking homophobia, I got the same responses from homophobes that you and your peers have unleashed – now in the U.S., the majority supports same-sex marriage and anti-gay beliefs are perceived, by the overwhelming majority, as a prejudice.

        On atheism, I need merely be patient and accurate, people will figure it out and understand that atheism is a prejudice, eventually.

      • Joe P.

        Then by your own logic you’re indirectly promoting violence against atheists. Hypocritical as usual (par for the course for the vast majority of the self-avowedly religious.)

        As far as your “most of humanity” argument… If all your friends decided to jump off a bridge does that make it a smart idea? Of course not.

        You are in the minority and if your “feel good” / all-positive take on religion is the “right” one then the vast majority of your religious brethren are “doing it wrong” and for that reason alone the dogma should be scrapped as vague, contradictory, and unhelpful in the real world. Your uncritical acceptance of the whole shebang as somehow the “sacred” “word of god” lays the groundwork for the nut-jobs and fundamentalists who blow up buildings full of innocent people.

        I’ve said nothing of your “lives and experiences”. The problem most of us atheists have with deism is the irrational beliefs typically invoked by certain linguistic and social “experiences” inflicted mostly on the very young and which bear all the hallmarks of brainwashing.

        If you refrained from this brainwashing until after the targets have reached the age of reason I’d have much less of a problem with it (because it would never take root to the extent that it does now in otherwise reasonable people) but you DO brainwash your kids and in so doing fundamentally hold humanity back from our full potential as rational beings.

      • WilmRoget

        “Then by your own logic you’re indirectly promoting violence against atheists. ”

        No. There’s been no hate speech on my part. If the nuance is too difficult for you to recognize, that is not my fault.

        “You are in the minority”

        Even if your assertion were true, so?

        ‘Your uncritical acceptance of the whole shebang’

        Your derogatory fantasies only reflect your character.

      • WilmRoget

        “Attacking irrational harmful beliefs is in no way “on the same level” as attacking people for being and living the way they were born. ”

        The very characterization of religion as ‘irrational, harmful beliefs’ is hate speech, the moral equivalent of homophobia.

        “Despite your baseless assertions”

        I have no baseless assertions. The fact is that hate speech has a specific purpose – to lead to, invoke, encourage and incite violence. People who engage in hate speech are winding themselves, and their peers, up to engage in physical violence.

      • Paul Julian Gould

        You guys do know you’re the last ones in the room, don’t you? Just poked my head in to make sure the coffee pot wasn’t still on… turn out the lights when you leave, yeah?

        /*chuckle*/

      • cimmo

        I know I’m trolling a troll.
        But he seems to take it so seriously?

      • WilmRoget

        Nice attempt to feel superior to others there.

      • Paul Julian Gould

        Hypersensitive much there, bub?

        I’ve not commented directly to you at all in this… that there may be a few things on which we just might agree, I’ve not wanted to wade into this mess, save for a comment to someone else.

        I use RSS feeds for those blogs that interest me, and I subscribe to those entries I’d like to see without having to dive back into the browser. The past 2 days, there have been perhaps 4 commenters, yourself and a couple of others… my mailbox has had to be emptied every couple of hours. There are some commenters that occasionally dip in, and it is for their comments I’m still subscribed.

        And the back-and-forth repetition between you and the couple of others is solving nothing, you’re all saying the same damned thing over and over.

        That you think I’m acting superior by this says volumes more about your insecurities than my behavior, buddy. A look in the mirror is de reguer for anyone who is at all self-aware. Are You?

      • WilmRoget

        “Hypersensitive much there, bub?”

        By starting with an attempt to put me down, you demonstrates that yes, your prior post was entirely about feeding your ego.

        ‘I’ve not wanted to wade into this mess,’

        Yet you did wade into to mock those participating. I get it, you realized that you could not contribute, felt left out, and decided that you could make yourself feel better by mocking everyone else.

        “That you think I’m acting superior by this says volumes more about your insecurities than my behavior, buddy. A look in the mirror is de reguer for anyone who is at all self-aware. Are You?”

        And again, your attempt to insult me only shows a desperate need to feel superior. Your apparent desire to control who contributes, to use mockery to shut down a conversation you won’t or cannot participate in, is an act of ego-aggrandizing domination.

      • Paul Julian Gould

        Woof…

        1110 comments on this thread, and now a pedantic ass presumes that he knows me.

        Good night, Gracie… it’s been one and do have a happy.

      • WilmRoget

        Your abusive reply only affirms what I presented before.

        Let’s see if you can live up to your dramatic exit.

      • Paul Julian Gould

        And it says more than anyone really needs to know that somehow my comment was all about you…

        This one is, as you chose to address me directly.

        That you took an innocent comment made in humor, generally directed as some sort of slap at you…

        Well, if everyone and everything makes you feel inferior, Occam’s Razor applies.

      • WilmRoget

        “And it says more than anyone really needs to know that somehow my comment was all about you…”

        Since nothing in my post communicates that – that somehow of your speaks about you.

        Further, your insults only have the effect of demonstrating that you are trying very hard to make yourself feel superior by putting other people down.

      • Joe P.

        If you’re unwilling to spend a few minutes going through a single page with less than a dozen google results in order to gain some perspective I’m sure as heck not going to pay you to screw your head on straight.

      • WilmRoget

        You are unwilling to spend the couple of seconds necessary to post a link, but spend the time to wiggle out of it by typing up a feeble ad hominem, and you are not willing to pay me for the work you expect me to do for you –

        yet you have the audacity to complain and try to insult me.

        You are making it very clear that there is no credible evidence to support your claim.

      • Joe P.

        Not at all but comment boards very often filter/block/delay messages that link as spam. Hence my extraordinarily easy instruction on how to find a small sample of the relevant source material.

        Anyhow, here you go (a meta-analysis of 63 different studies done over the course of decades… If you want to try to attack the methodology of each one you’ll need to refer to the source studies referenced at the end):

        httpCOLON//psrDOTsagepubDOTcom/content/17/4/325
        (Just replace the “COLON” with an actual colon and the “DOT”s with actual dots.)

        You might notice that this by itself (which was included in the links I told you how to access) is evidence that I’m more intelligent than average. Though it’s weak evidence it IS evidence and it’s the best you’re gonna get while staying on-topic since I’m certainly not going to send you copies of my degrees or standardized test results.

        From the fact that you spent more time replying to me than would be needed to do the search I expect that you either A) don’t really want to know or B) already did the Google search, looked at the first few linked pages, and have nothing to say in response.

      • WilmRoget

        “You might notice that this by itself (which was included in the links I told you how to access) is evidence that I’m more intelligent than average. Though it’s weak evidence it IS evidence”

        Actually, your claim is subjective and self-serving, and as such, contradicts itself, for a truly intelligent person, one more intelligent than average, would recognize that flaw, and that the argument itself is rather, well, common or average, and find a stronger set of evidence to use.

        However, a person of above average intelligence would also realize that trying to proclaim himself as smarter than most people, is arrogant, a demonstration of egotism – and since egotism is at the root of all prejudices, such a declaration would only strengthen my argument that atheism is a prejudice, a means though which people tell themselves they are superior, feed their ego, by denigrating and dehumanizing others.

      • Joe P.

        Most people have an average IQ of 90. In all frankness that is pretty unintelligent. My intelligence has infact been tested, at various times in my life, and always over the 98% percentile, so the fact that I’m more intelligent than average is just that, a fact.

        I can tell simply from your ability to write that you too are smarter than the majority of humans on the face of the earth. Just because you choose not to say it doesn’t make it any less true nor does it make you “better” for not having acknowledged it.

        Now for the “stronger evidence” of my own individual intelligence being higher than average: I’m not going to give you my personal information and test results in a public forum. That’s just nonsense.

      • WilmRoget

        “My intelligence has infact been tested, at various times in my life, and always over the 98% percentile, so the fact that I’m more intelligent than average is just that, a fact.”

        See, a really intelligent person would recognize that your personally testimony is not fact at all.

        “Now for the “stronger evidence” of my own individual intelligence being higher than average: I’m not going to give you my personal information and test results in a public forum. That’s just nonsense.”

        So, you cannot/will not back up your claim, to protect your anonymity, but don’t seem to realize that your claim, without any external evidence, is merely self-serving hearsay.

        And that is not very smart.

        Now, if you were not one of those people who just dismiss the testimony of most of humanity, I would take your word for it – but because you are, you are going to need to meet the standard of evidence that atheists demand regarding religion, for your claim about your IQ, and well, pretty much everything else. I might let you slide on things like “I hate broccoli” or “I can’t stand Coldplay”, but anything else – you need concrete evidence.

      • Joe P.

        I’m not really terribly concerned with the fact that you don’t believe me. I’ve provided more than ample evidence that I’m more intelligent than the average human being (the mere fact that I’m on a computer typing this and not an illiterate hand to mouth farmer in the Sudan is already starting to skew the odds upward that this is true, as is the fact that I’m an atheist.) While this isn’t absolute proof and you can take that at what it’s worth, it’s a truth that’s at least in principal provable (whether or not I’m willing to post my personal information online to actually do so.) Your god on the other hand is, in principal, unfalsifiable, so even without looking at any evidence my “truth” is overwhelmingly more credible than yours.

      • WilmRoget

        ” I’ve provided more than ample evidence that I’m more intelligent than the average human being ”

        Nope. You have a provided an unsubstantiated, and entirely self-serving assertion, and yet do seem to realize how this not help you, and that failure, indicates at best an average, or less than average, intelligence.

        “the mere fact that I’m on a computer typing this”

        Actually that very statement proves the opposite, for since Windows, programmers have worked to make computer use easier and easier, they have essentially dumbed it down.

        “not an illiterate hand to mouth farmer in the Sudan is already starting to skew the odds upward that this is true,”

        Ah, but lack of access to education, and being from Africa, having dark skin, does not equate to being unintelligent. It is likely that, deprived of the technological (and other) advantages you have, you probably would not survive the Sudan for very long without a tremendous and unusual amount of assistance from others. And a truly intelligent person would get that without having to be told.

        “as is the fact that I’m an atheist.”

        Which actually does not correlate with intelligence, but is does correlate with egotism and arrogance.

        “it’s a truth that’s at least in principal provable (whether or not I’m willing to post my personal information online to actually do so.)”

        Actually, it is not. First off, establishing that any data you could present here has not been altered, is not possible within the parameters of this discussion. Because the data would be digitized, no matter what it was, it could be forged or altered. A truly superior intellect would get that with out having to be told.

        Second, you could not, within the parameters of this discussion, prove that any data, even if accurate, were actually your data. In other words, you could post a set of IQ scores, but you could not prove that they were yours.

        Third, you could not prove here that the tests were accurately given, or accurately interpreted. And then there is the issue of the credibility of such tests – since actual researchers in the field study and research a variety of kinds of intelligence. You might, theoretically, have a superior spatial intelligence, for example, and an inferior analytical intelligence.

      • Joe P.

        So basically anything I could post isn’t evidence because it could be forged. So why should not every post you’ve made be ignored because it could be total B.S.?

        Now back to your points about the intelligence of illiterate farmers: There is ample evidence that living a life being provided with an education and an intellectually stimulating environment has a significant positive impact on the intelligence level that’s achieved as an adult (around 50% actually) so those very advantages you’ve provided are in-fact adding to and reinforcing the statistical evidence that I’m more likely to have higher intelligence than that dirt poor subsistence farmer.

        I never said that the Sudanese subsistence farmer *couldn’t have been* as intelligent, had his mother had adequate nutrition and prenatal care, and he received a quality education, and had he grown up in a complex and intellectually stimulating environment, but he didn’t. That he has some knowledge and skills I do not have, given the vastly different environment he finds himself in, is to be expected, but it does not mean the average intelligence level is equivalent.

        The presupposition that all humans are gifted with identical faculties for thought is yet another article of faith, much like your god, but that does not make it true either.

      • WilmRoget

        “So basically anything I could post isn’t evidence because it could be forged.”

        And that is why is was not smart of you to make claims you cannot substantiate. A superior intellect would have realized that without having to be taught.

        “There is ample evidence”

        Again, you have none.

        ‘I never said that the Sudanese subsistence farmer *couldn’t have been* as intelligent,”

        Your attempt to nitpick away your own sloppy writing doesn’t change anything. Again, someone with an above average intellect would be more careful in the first place. But racism got the better of you, didn’t it?

        ‘The presupposition that all humans are gifted with identical faculties’

        Once again, your diversionary tactic, introducing a principle no one is using, does not substantiate your claim to having an above average intellect. In fact, it is a tragically common, average tactic used across the internet.

      • Joe P.

        Evidence: Look at all of the sources at the bottom of enDOTwikipediaDOTorg/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ (the consensus being that about half is genetic and half is environmental… If you’re going to want more “evidence” that IQ isn’t intelligence see the references at the bottom of enDOTwikipediaDOTorg/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics) )

        The fact that you seem to have very little common knowledge, and demand endless piles of evidence for facts that are well established in the academic community, reflects very poorly on you, even more than my own recognition of my intelligence (which, while I recognize can cause animosity, especially with those less intelligent, or those who think humility equates to superiority, I don’t really care, because you already dislike me because I think you’re delusional.)

      • WilmRoget

        Your attempt to circumvent moderation here reflects poorly on you.

        “The fact that you seem to have very little common knowledge, ”

        Once again, you rely on insults instead of logic, reason, or civility. Your reference, by the way, does not support your primary contention, and, you are still ignoring the fact that the idea of IQ is a highly limited and deeply challenged premise.

        “demand endless piles of evidence for facts that are well established in the academic community”

        So, according to you, the scientific principle reflects poorly on those who use it. I see.

      • Joe P.

        The fact that IQ is deeply challenged (largely by those whose motivation appears to be that they don’t seem like and/or are disturbed the results) is why I included the second link, which has references that go further into the correlation between IQ and the ‘g’ general intelligence factor. The general intelligence factor ‘g’ is NOT challenged in any meaningful way, correlates well with underlying neurobiology, and is by far the best all around definition of “intelligence”.

      • WilmRoget

        “The fact that IQ is deeply challenged (largely by those whose motivation appears to be that they don’t seem like and/or are disturbed the results)”

        Again you rely on ad hominem, disparaging the character of people who assert something you don’t like.

        “The general intelligence factor ‘g’ is NOT challenged in any meaningful way, correlates well with underlying neurobiology, and is by far the best all around definition of “intelligence”.”

        Your unsubstantiated assertion has no value, it is simply the opinion of someone who is attempting to feed his ego at the expense of others, who has made claims he admits he has no intention of substantiating even if he could.

        None of that behavior indicates an ‘above average intelligence’, and that fact that you did not think of that in the first place, lends credibility to the possibility that you have at best, an average intelligence, which you desperately need to believe is superior.

      • Joe P.

        Seriously you’re gonna ask me for evidence and links, and then criticize me for providing it?

        IQ is somewhat limited, politicized, and all that, but “deeply challenged” is vastly overstating it. IQ correlates well with conscientiousness, educational achievement, income, lack of criminality, and even parenting ability, and with the general intelligence factor. Of course IQ is not perfect (it’s exceedingly difficult to eradicate all traces of environmental bias from any aptitude test) but it does correlate well with the (presumptively underlying truth of the) general intelligence factor which is nowhere close to being “deeply challenged” (although given the current racial disparities in IQ and ‘g’ many would like to pretend it doesn’t exist.)

      • WilmRoget

        “Seriously you’re gonna ask me for evidence and links, and then criticize me for providing it?”

        Since I did no such thing . . . you know, the frequency with which you misreport on the written word makes me wonder – are you just being perpetually dishonest, or are you genuinely confused about what you read?

      • cimmo

        Joe P:
        “Evidence: Look at all of the sources at the bottom of enDOTwikipediaDOTorg/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ….”

        WilmTheLiar:
        “Your attempt to circumvent moderation here reflects poorly on you.”

        Joe P:
        “Seriously you’re gonna ask me for evidence and links, and then criticize me for providing it?”

        WilmTheLiar:
        “Since I did no such thing . . . you know, the frequency with which you
        misreport on the written word makes me wonder – are you just being
        perpetually dishonest, or are you genuinely confused about what you
        read?”

        Your god is watching this.
        What Would Jesus Do?

      • WilmRoget

        Your name-calling, while certainly consistent with your professing enjoyment of mocking and abusing others, only reflects poorly on you. It only accentuates how you have nothing to actually complain about.

        God is watching you too, and you are bound by the standard of judgement you impose on me, not only bound for God’s judgement, but that of anyone else who chooses to judge you.

        By the way, attempting to post a link in such a way as to avoid having it checked out by the moderators, is indeed an attempt to circumvent moderation here.

      • cimmo

        “reflects poorly on you” = criticism.

        crit·i·cism:
        the act of EXPRESSING DISAPPROVAL and of noting the problems or faults of a person or thing

        “Since I did no such thing . . . ”

        YES.
        You did.
        You are a liar.
        You deliberately misconstrue and antagonize.
        You are a seriously flawed individual.
        You need help.

      • WilmRoget

        The nastier you are, the worse you look.

        Your false accusation only indicates that you reject society’s moral system.

      • WilmRoget

        There is a difference, by the way, between criticizing what someone presents, and criticizing them for presenting something.

        But you don’t care about that, do you? As long as you have some excuse to misbehave in public.

      • cimmo

        Oh, so now you DO recognize that you DID criticise Joe P?

        The semantic trickery does NOT abrogate the fact that you lied when you said:

        “Since I did no such thing…”
        Lies.

        I still find your behaviour fascinating and also not just a little bit frightening. I just cannot get my head around the fact that someone like you exists and has absolutely no sense of shame or embarrassment. You must have seen the comments in this thread between us heathens discussing how we perceive your perplexing behaviour and what we make of it – and basically how we really cannot fathom what is going on in your head? But I guess this just magnifies that persecution delusion you got.

        Seriously, I’ve said this before and you’ve just ignored it, but unless you are here just to take the piss, for the sake of anyone close to you, you really should get some help before you physically hurt someone.

      • WilmRoget

        “The semantic trickery ”

        The semantic trickery is entirely yours, along with the verbal abuse.

        “Lies.”

        Nope. The lies are yours.

        With every insult and slur, you demonstrate not only sadism and malice on your part, you demonstrate that atheism is indeed a prejudice, an excuse for sadistically denigrating other people to exalt yourself.

      • cimmo

        I’m sure you’re aware of it by now, but this troll has been on this thread for over a week deliberately lying and antagonising people just like he did there.

        I genuinely think he has a psychiatric disorder – your thoughts?

        My comment to him about this obvious troll:

        ****

        Joe P:
        “Evidence: Look at all of the sources at the bottom of enDOTwikipediaDOTorg/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ….”

        WilmTheLiar:
        “Your attempt to circumvent moderation here reflects poorly on you.”

        Joe P:
        “Seriously you’re gonna ask me for evidence and links, and then criticize me for providing it?”

        WilmTheLiar:
        “Since I did no such thing . . . you know, the frequency with which you
        misreport on the written word makes me wonder – are you just being
        perpetually dishonest, or are you genuinely confused about what you
        read?”

        Your god is watching this.
        What Would Jesus Do?

      • Joe P.

        Troll in practice yeah. I honestly think he’s probably a very bright guy who was fundamentally damaged by an irrational belief system which was forced upon his defenseless mind when he was young. Now he desperately wants to make his world and the concensus of other minds match with what he can’t help but believe. Unfortunately this fatally undermines his faculties to pick up and pull on threads of information that threaten to unravel this knot of beliefs. While it kinda makes him a jerk I still feel bad for the guy.

        Since I’m sure no evidence has even a chance of making a dent on him, and we’ve been going back and fourth so long that almost nobody else will even read through it, I think I’m pretty much done with him. We can focus our efforts on the next generation to keep them from getting this messed up.

      • Joe P.

        I’ve already told you, multiple times, that I’m not giving you my personal information as would be required for evidence that pertains to my intelligence personally, and as you’ve already said, you wouldn’t believe it anyway because it could be forged, so the best you’re gonna get is statistical evidence that supports the inference that I’m more likely to be smarter than the average human being. It’s been more than proven to anyone with open eyes that neither of us are likely to be below average on the human intelligence scale. You’ve already basically admitted my above average intelligence yourself when you told me I wrote at an 11th grade level (which, although you said makes me “pretty average”, and although I don’t agree with it, would still put my writing above average in the global pool of humanity, since most humans aren’t that educated.) If you want evidence that language ability has correlation with intelligence use a search engine (since it’s another one of those “common knowledge” things you cry out “no evidence” for when I mention.)

      • WilmRoget

        “I’ve already told you, multiple times,”

        I recall only one such post. But no matter. The point is that you made a claim that you had no intention of ever backing up with corroborating evidence, even if you could.

        So it was most likely a lie from the very beginning.

        ‘so the best you’re gonna get is statistical evidence’

        Actually, the best is the direct evidence of your posts, and they do not substantiate your claim. Essentially, your posts demonstrate an average level of intelligence, a lack of forethought and analysis, and a tendency to go for the cheap, the tawdry, the degrading, rather than the substantive, the reasoned.

        ‘ You’ve already basically admitted my above average intelligence yourself when you told me I wrote at an 11th grade level”

        In the U.S., the average person over the age of 18 has at least an 11th grade level education. Further, it is possible that your results have been skewed upward through the use of spell check and grammar check. You could have only a 5th grade level education and intelligence, and Microsoft could be making your posts look better than you initially wrote them.

      • Joe P.

        Or I could have a team of super-intelligent monkeys working together to type posts (and you’re not arguing with a human being at all…) Engage in pointless speculation much?

      • WilmRoget

        Your reply does not substantiate your claim of ‘above average intelligence’. It wasn’t even witty or clever.

        One of the things that scientists who study intelligence look for is the ability to project forward – “if I do x, what will happen”. Thinking ahead, in other words, the ability chess players use to test, before making a move, the various ways that move might be countered by their opponent.

        There is very little of that kind of thinking ahead in your posts. There is no evidence of you saying to yourself ‘hmm, if I raise this point, what will the other guy reply, could it be used to undermine my position’.

        But crows and their relatives, and some parrots and aquatic mammals, do demonstrate this ability. Why is it found in their repertoire of behavior, but not in your posts?

      • Joe P.

        Like I said before. You already said I write at (at least, since you have every reason to minimize your estimate) an 11th grade level. That alone would put me more more likely than not to be more intelligent than the average human, as would the fact I’m an atheist (both of which are pretty well established.) Anyhow, if you look at the context my statement about my own personal intelligence was more of a comment in passing coupled with a put-down (on you delusional and as a whole sub-par in intelligence religious folks) than a part of any argument, and based on the amount of time you’ve spent on it really seems to have gotten to you.

      • WilmRoget

        “That alone would put me more more likely than not to be more intelligent than the average human”

        No. As I said before, computer software and spell check could be inflating your score considerably.

        ‘as would the fact I’m an atheist (both of which are pretty well established.)’

        Wrong again, in fact, your use of this highly disputed claim does not indicate an above average intellect, but a below average one.

        Additionally, your repeated use of insults does not substantiate your claim to above average intelligence, that is, after all, a rather average and ordinary technique, often used by people who lack the skill to formulate a more reasoned and civil reply.

      • Joe P.

        I consider the question of atheistic tendencies with regarding to higher average intelligence asked and answered. I’m not going to keep answering it over and over again, nor am I going to repeat the research and conclusions of hundreds of independent researchers (I could be lying about that too though right?) That one point alone, and the fact that I’m an atheist, supports my assertion about my likely intelligence level. Now YOUR “evidence” of my supposed lack of intelligence, the impression you claim to get from my posts, is far more subjective (not to mention wrong) than the starting point for my own assertion.

      • WilmRoget

        “I consider the question of atheistic tendencies with regarding to higher average intelligence asked and answered”

        You made a claim with no substantiating evidence.

        ‘That one point alone, and the fact that I’m an atheist, supports my assertion about my likely intelligence level.”

        The fact that you made a number of unsubstantiated claims, and used a meta study of dubious values, whose own authors admitted was highly limited, indicates that you want to be perceived as more intelligent that you actually are.

      • Joe P.

        I gave you that study because it includes a reference to all 63 of the source studies for their meta-analysis. The fact that you just read the summary page isn’t my problem.

      • WilmRoget

        Again your rely on claims about things you cannot know and cannot back up.

      • cimmo

        “You have no evidence.”

        That never stopped you from posting over and over and over, bleating about us horrible heathens wanting to kill and slander you.

      • WilmRoget

        Your false characterizations are not helping you.

        Really, you’ve made your word worthless, by failing to keep your promise to be silent and your dramatic exit, for that?

        At least try to make such faithlessness count for something.

      • cimmo

        “by failing to keep your promise to be silent”
        I NEVER did that.
        Quote me, bitch.

        Do you agree with the doctrine of universalism?

      • WilmRoget

        “I NEVER did that.”

        And yet you did. Your use of sexist, misogynistic obscenity only reveals yet another prejudice on your part, and affirms that you simply cannot be civil, even when your rudeness is being used against you.

      • phantomreader42

        Wilm, you are lying again. You have never once in your entire life “rebuked” a homophobe or a racist. You only exist to slander atheists.

      • WilmRoget

        ” You have never once in your entire life “rebuked” a homophobe or a racist.”

        Your false accusation only proves how easily you lie about people. I have tens of thousands of posts over the last 2 decades, on websites across the internet, from Beliefnet to newspapers to facebook and beyond, refuting anti-gay theology, homophobia, racism, sexism and anti-semitism.

      • Ave Satana

        Who the heck cares. You all need to get over yourself and get out of the house. Arguing about something as useless and utterly mind numbing as religion is pointless and there are many other things you can do with your time than face palming every minute and bicker about this imaginary being this or that. real or not it really doesnt matter. Hell- doesnt matter you won’t have brain receptors even if it is….heaven also doesn’t matter for the same reason as hell…..now stop wasting your time

      • Ave Satana

        Pain* i meant to say pain receptors but no matter I don’t have time to stay on here

      • Paul Julian Gould

        And that’s really rather the point in a nutshell, isn’t it?

        This has become an unbelievably long thread, and here I am making it longer, but here goes:

        If I’ve been able to transcend my own selfish desires at least as well as I’ve tried, if I’ve somehow made a positive difference in someone else’s life, if I’ve really tried to treat others to the best of my ability, and, speaking only for myself, loved the Supreme Absolute as I can best understand such, above all else, and make the effort to honor those tenets common to all faiths, philosophies and ethics — If I’ve done these to the best of my ability, I’d hope I’ll be able to give good account of myself in the afterlife, if such exists. If it doesn’t, at least my last thoughts won’t be of regret, and I’ll know nothing further, and it won’t matter.

        If one lives one’s life based in a collection of rules attributed to some book, and gives lip-service to those rules, and making such strenuous effort to make others abide by them, then one’s time and life have been wasted. It’s not the commandments, but the living of life that matters, and that to the best of one’s ability and challenges.

      • WilmRoget

        “Who the heck cares. You all need to get over yourself and get out of the house. ”

        So why did you bother to post? Why should any of us, who do care about this issue, care about what you wrote?

        I’ve heard the same trivializing, dismissive, egotistical and arrogant tirade you provided from homophobes for years. It simply tells me that you need attention, but cannot participate in any meaningful way and know you cannot.

      • Ave Satana

        Oh please try to act like you know this satanist and everything about me. judge me oh christian like you judge everyone in this comment section already. I bothered to post because the comments on here are completely not worth bickering about; its a website what are you going to accomplish here other than stroke your ego. If you have evidence a god exist then show it to scientist and get a medal if not get over it and do like most of the christians I know and keep your beliefs where they belong In your own home. I surely hope your not the type to try to drag religion into politics schools and other places where they surely don’t belong.

        “I’ve heard the same trivializing, dismissive, egotistical and arrogant tirade you provided from homophobes for years. It simply tells me that you need attention, but cannot participate in any meaningful way and know you cannot.”

        I care less about attention as that is obviously something you are trying to get coming to a page that is mainly for atheist. Homophobes ha the three major religions are the truely homophobic religion and your judging us…do you even know what your doctrine says ehh?

      • Ave Satana

        You’re also not participating in any meaningful way you’re always relying on personal attack and you bring no evidence to support your claims and just cry about atheist are this and that; other than a play on words during this conversation you’re completely being too cynical for any intellectual debate. I’ve read all the comments down to a little over a day ago and they are rather annoying. You call atheist names and judge, but judge not less you be judged as I and anyone on here probably is judging your overwhelming arrogance by now. Please carry on however I might like watching this play out until i get bored and go back to writing my college evaluations.

      • WilmRoget

        Your tirade does not help you.

        “keep your beliefs where they belong In your own home.”

        Yet by posting, you don’t live up to your own demand of us.

        “I care less about attention”

        Nonsense. That is precisely what you are after.

      • cimmo

        You can do better that that.
        You’re getting stale.

      • WilmRoget

        You promise to leave, making grand dramatic exits, and then you don’t follow through.

        It is as if even you know that your word has no meaning.

      • cimmo

        Nope, never did such a thing.
        You cannot read properly.

      • WilmRoget

        Your denials about your own words don’t help you.

        I knew you were just playing the dramatic exit game in hope of having the last word and getting a cheap insult in.

        I want you to know that by doing so, you destroyed your credibility, entirely, all but irrevocably.

      • cimmo

        Your denial about your own words describing your history of pedophilia don’t help you.

        See, I can make up bullshit too.

        I want you to know that by misquoting me again, you will have destroyed your credibility, entirely, and irrevocably.

      • WilmRoget

        “See, I can make up bullshit too.”

        You really established your ability to do so at the very begining. But your dishonesty does not indicate anything about me. In fact, your use of dishonesty to try to smear me, only cripples the credibility of your accusation.

        After all, you admittedly falsely accused me of one thing – so it stands to reason that every single accusation you’ve thrown at me is also, in your own words “made up bullshit”.

        “I want you to know that by misquoting me again,”

        Since I have not, and since you have already proven that you make false accusations, it is only your credibility that is damaged.

      • WilmRoget

        The big mistake you are making, well, one of the big mistakes you are making, is that you are trying to be clever, to score points with your ego and your peers, to bully

        rather than trying to be accurate.

        Which ought to make you wonder – why isn’t accuracy a better tool for defending atheism? What is it about atheism that it is most consistently defended through insults and ego games like trying to be clever, rather than through accurate and careful analysis?

      • Ave Satana

        Plz prove your assertions since you somehow know me and what i consider worth my attention. the only thing i see is someone who has trouble bringing anything to the table and is backing into the corner slowly while turning to personal attack over and over like he knows everyone while still not able to bring any evidence for their claims making this entire discussion moot. You lost any respect I had to any of your post when you started saying atheist are homophobes. Call me a homophobe and you will be asking for a lot more than you can handle because i believe you are the only homophobe on this page

      • WilmRoget

        “the only thing i see is someone who has trouble bringing anything to the table”

        Then put down the mirror.

        ‘Call me a homophobe and you will be asking for a lot more than you can handle because i believe you are the only homophobe on this page”

        Ah, a threat, and a lie about me that shows that you haven’t paid attention to anything here.

      • Hail Satan

        That wasn’t a threat that was the simple truth. You’re calling nonbelievers homophobes is the same as calling me a homophobe and if you even call people that are bi homophobes then you would be the homophobe would you not. Which do you have a persecution complex or a superiority one you clearly are switching between the two

      • WilmRoget

        “That wasn’t a threat that was the simple truth. ”

        No, it was a threat.

        ” You’re calling nonbelievers homophobes”

        First, I am not calling non-believers ‘homophobes’, although several specific individuals are also homophobes. I am saying that homophobia and atheism are both prejudices. Second, in that sentence ‘you are’ or ‘you’re’ is wrong.

        “and if you even call people that are bi homophobes then you would be the homophobe would you not.”

        Your sentence is not rational.

        “Which do you have a persecution complex or a superiority one you clearly are switching between the two”

        Your insult, and the all but illiterate way you wrote it, only reflects poorly on you.

      • cimmo

        Scroll down about a dozen pages (I have no idea how it ended up down there) and have a look at his recent responses to a question I asked him regarding certain bible verses that speak about homosexuality.

        He has an interesting take on the issue.

      • daleblah

        When there were enough of them, the christians torched every temple of every other religion in the roman empire, crucified and killed their priests and followers who wouldn’t convert, and spread their religion thru forceful conversion (under threat/punishment of torture and death) for the next 1.500 years.
        Today its the most widespread religion.
        So you keep your high ground,as did all the other pacifists as they burned on the stake of the inquisition.

      • Artor

        If Gawd can win any fight against any opposition, then why is it receding so fast in the face of science? Why are preachers screaming about Gawd being pushed out of schools? YHVH talks big, but from the available evidence, he’s weaker than a creampuff. One might even say non-existent.

      • Joe P.

        We’d still have a moral obligation to try.

      • daleblah

        But if this being is omnipotent, can it create a rock that it itself, can not lift?

      • Roger Stetson

        Sounds like the satanic metal fantasy fiction of 17 year old. Or Heavy Metal magazine comic serial.

      • Mike Dunchok

        lol But the God with the worst and most horrible hell is the Christian God…

      • Joe P.

        Which is absolutely the *worst possible* advice if the ‘god’ is conjured into existance by or feeds on our belief, because by worshipping it we’re making it real.

      • Joe P.

        And if none of those gods exist, which is the simplest (and hence most likely, all else being equal) answer, then by worshiping this monster of a god you’ve just condemned mankind to suffering for the only time and in the only realm in which we will ever exist.

        If there is no god, and our life is all we get, then 76 years out of 76 years is unity, same as eternity out of eternity, so in either case it’s the whole shebang, and we should treat it as such since it matters just as much.

      • Matt Begley

        If the Christian god actually existed and I was able to get close enough, I would rip off his head and fuck the wound.

      • Joe P.

        Crude and undiplomatic wording to say the least, but as far as the sentiment goes I can’t blame you one bit…

        I’m sure plenty more ‘christians’ whose ‘personal god’ is nothing like the one described in the primary text will lash out in defense since the god they know is nothing like this, but these people aren’t christian at all if their god isn’t the one in the book (but they’ll never admit this.)

      • Doninc La Rosa

        YOU PEOPLE TALK A LOT OF IGNORANT RUBBISH . . NONE OF YOUS EVEN KNOW WHAT CHRISTIANS TEACH

      • Paul Julian Gould

        Wrong… some of us do, and of those of us who do, at least some of us can type a coherent sentence and not yell at everyone in ALL CAPS, so there’s that.

      • MaineGeezer

        Seems as though a lot of alleged Christians don’t know, either.

      • trolleyfan

        Actually, most tests show the average atheist knows the Bible *better* than the average Christian.

        Throw in the fact that a large percentage started out *as* Christians and, well, it’s not looking like we’re the ignorant one here…

        BTW, the cap lock turns *off* as well as on…”the more you know!”

      • WilmRoget

        Nice lies there. But one poll, which made no effort to establish ‘average’ of anything, showed that some atheists had a broader knowledge of religious trivia across a variety of faiths than some Christians.

        But atheists, whose belief system does not condemn deceit, lie about that poll.

      • trolleyfan

        It’s one poll more than you’ve got.

        And, yeah, our “belief” system *does* condemn lies and deceit, just like almost every other culture’s, because – and I know this is tricky for theists to understand – lies and deceit hurt *people,* not gods, and we’re people. Thus, it’s in our own self interest to, well, condemn lies and deceit, same as every other culture does…except apparently Christians, who have been told this repeatedly for decades, but still lie about it…

      • WilmRoget

        “It’s one poll more than you’ve got.”

        Nope. A number of studies have shown that people of faith are mentally and emotionally happier and better able to cope with stress and loss, than people who reject religion. So you have a fraud you lied about.

        “And, yeah, our “belief” system *does* condemn lies and deceit”

        Nice lie, but atheism contains no condemnation of any wrongdoing whatsoever. And in your posts, you live down to that astonishing lack of morality.

      • cimmo

        “but atheism contains no condemnation of any wrongdoing whatsoever.”
        Wrong.
        I live in a society with mutually agreed upon laws. If you or I go against society’s wishes we will be penalized for it – while we are alive, not after.

        In my world, I would expect a child rapist to be put away for a long time, so he cannot do such a mutually agreed upon bad thing to anyone else.

        In your world what happens? Nothing until death of the rapist then God judges and sends him to hell. Together with me, whose only ‘sin’ is unbelief?

        Is that correct? If so, you have a very interesting idea of what justice is.

      • WilmRoget

        “I live in a society with mutually agreed upon laws. If you or I go against society’s wishes we will be penalized for it – while we are alive, not after.”

        None of which arise out of atheism, and none of which are tenets or laws articulated by atheism. I’m not wrong.

        ‘In your world what happens? Nothing until death of the rapist then God judges and sends him to hell. Together with me, whose only ‘sin’ is unbelief?’

        Your claim is false. Now, either it is a deliberate lie, which would mean that you are not particularly moral, or you are ignorant about ‘my world’, but still presented your conjecture as fact, which is still wrong. So, either way, you failed to demonstrate that atheism condemns wrongdoing, and failed to demonstrate that you understand what is right behavior and what is wrong behavior.

        Frankly, you were simply trying to be insulting and degrading, and that is wrong behavior, and since you are doing so in defense of atheism, the net result is that your behavior strengthens the claim I made.

      • cimmo

        “Your claim is false.”
        Did I make a claim or ask a question (or two)?
        Did you notice the question marks at the end of those sentences you quoted?

        So, is my question incorrect? If so, then you tell me where I went wrong.

        So how about actually addressing the exact substance of my comment? In a world where only god does the judging, what happens to child rapists?

      • WilmRoget

        Your incompetence is duly noted. The phrase “Nothing until death of the rapist then God judges and sends him to hell. ” is a claim.

        “So how about actually addressing the exact substance of my comment?”

        I did.

        “In a world where only god does the judging, what happens to child rapists?”

        Since the practical reality is that no such world exists, your question is a pathetic diversionary tactic. It comes across as a nasty game, rather than a sincere question. It comes across as a desperate and amoral attempt to avoid the fact that atheism has no moral code, no condemnation of child rape, or rape of any kind.

        Atheism has no condemnation of rape. None. Atheism, however, does condemn and dismiss the many bodies of knowledge and experience that do condemn rape, like Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Sufism, etc. So you embrace a belief system that has no condemnation of any wrong, including child rape, but reject those that do.

        What do you think that communicates about you?

      • cimmo

        “So you embrace a belief system that has no condemnation of any wrong, including child rape, but reject those that do.”

        Absolutely false. Again you lie to make a point.
        I told you I accept society’s standards of right and wrong. Subjective morals derived from evolutionary processes and refined by culture.

        In the real world, that is how we as a community get along. But the biggest difference between a reasoned secular societies view of right and wrong and a theocratic view of absolute right and wrong is not with the crimes that cause harm, but the so-called crimes that are merely a behavioural difference. If no harm to anyone is actually done, then what is the problem?

        Which is exactly the opposite view that most religions, especially yours, have about many human behaviours. Even when no one gets hurt, you still declare it morally wrong, and lobby to make it a secular crime as well – because of your assertion that the victimless behaviour is a “sin” – this I definitely DO reject.

        Just to make a point – according to the ‘rules’ you live by and want us all to follow, what differences are there between the punishments given to child rapists and mere unbelievers? Rhetorical question, I’ll answer it for you:
        As far as I can see, it is a one size fits all punishment system – hell (the definition of which varies depending on the flavour of bullshit you eat).

        Hell for everything: murder, raping, unbelief, even working on a Sunday.
        Nope. That’s wacked – just like every single bit of the dogma – except the ‘good bits’.

        Yes, it is possible to obtain sustenance by picking out sweetcorn from a turd, just the same as you can pick good bits out of your religious dogma.

        But neither is necessary and I’d rather not.

        I’m glad I live in one of the most secular countries on the planet and in THE most secular time in human history – so far. This is an unambigious trend around the world that scares you shitless.

        Anyway, enjoy your hubris while it lasts.

      • Paul Julian Gould

        Assume for the sake of discussion I’m describing the worldview of a theist of some sort. It says much about the way one truly thinks about and treats one’s fellow creatures by whether one views Deity as a punitive parent, or a rehabilitative friend. The basis for Evangelical Protestant Christianity and its variants as practiced in the US is punitive – that all are worthy of being punished in an eternal screaming hell but for another being punished in our place… the rest stems out from there, of course, but the rockbottom basis is that very thing.

        Extrapolate from that as you will…

      • cimmo

        Yes, isn’t it standard xtian doctrine, perhaps a universal part, that due to original sin and the fall that everyone is born a ‘sinner’ and intrinsically broken – worthless without “salvation”.

        And people readily infect their children with this self-hating torment?

        Child abuse – that’s what that is.

      • Paul Julian Gould

        Indeed… and it also shows how the doctrines of Calvinism have such a lock on the thinking of the right in the US, even those who’d eschew such a comparison. Total depravity? Please… and that’s only one point in 5, none of which should be subscribed to by anyone.

        I’ve said elsewhere that the main difference between an atheist of good heart and myself is precisely one deity, nothing else. That we share the points of it being really a good thing to treat others as we wish to be treated, that we believe in behaving decently towards ourselves and others, and that some things are generally either bad form or just really not what a decent human should do don’t require a deity, nor do they negate the same.

        But some folks insist on a huge list of things that supposedly matter; others, like myself, find a very short list more manageable, and really don’t insist on the importance of the ultimately irrelevant.

      • Man of my own mind

        Hey cimmo I think you forget before atheist came to the scene and started taking positions of power it was Religion that the laws of man were based on and were a lot more stern towards criminals and though I am no priest my bible makes no mention of hell just a black abyss when I think abyss I think of emptiness and nothingness so that is were religion and uninformed atheist are wrong and god doesn’t preach hatred that is man on several occasions the bible makes reference to people like the good Samaritan read that story so you can have at least a little knowledge of religion

      • cimmo

        “before atheist came to the scene and started taking positions of power it was Religion that the laws of man were based on and were a lot more stern towards criminals”

        I think you’ll find that more humane approach to the treatment of wrongdoing IS due to secular/humanist belief. Which is basically what you’ve said.

        “my bible makes no mention of hell”
        Perhaps you need to read it again – without a spin doctor ‘interpreting’ it for you:

        Hell is conscious torment:
        Matthew 13:50 “furnace of fire…weeping and gnashing of teeth”

        Mark 9:48 “where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched”

        Revelation 14:10 “he will be tormented with fire and brimstone”

        Hell is eternal and irreversible:
        Revelation 14:11 “the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever and they have no rest day and night”

        Revelation 20:14 “This is the second death, the lake of fire”

        Revelation 20:15 “If anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire”

        *****
        “so you can have at least a little knowledge of religion”
        Right back at you, sunshine.

        And try using a punctuation mark or two, please.

      • Joe P.

        You seem to be looking for, within someone’s lack of belief in a diety, the same set of bundled dogma and morality that you get with your prepackaged belief system, but it’s not there (nor is there any reason why it should be…)

        Human morality comes from human biology and the ways we’ve evolved to function in groups, pre-dates all those religeons you mentioned, is independent of those theistic belief systems, and while you may choose not to rape your neighbor because that moral directive came bundled in you #4 christianity value meal which threatens eternal torture if you do wrong, us atheists don’t rape our neighbors because we’ve recognized on our own that doing so is inherently wrong… I know who I think is more virtuous.

      • cimmo

        Did you mean to address this to me or the zealot?

        BTW, I concur – especially with your second paragraph.

      • Joe P.

        Yeah sorry it was meant for ‘WilmRoget’ the guy spouting dogma as evidence.

      • cimmo

        This was the entirety of that paragraph I posted that you quote mined to attempt to prove your point:
        In your world what happens? Nothing until death of the rapist then God judges and sends him to hell. Together with me, whose only ‘sin’ is unbelief?

        The middle bit you cherrypicked was all part of the same questioning. How can the sentence: “Together with me, whose only ‘sin’ is unbelief?” make any sense as a stand alone question?

        Yep, again you prove that you are only interested in scoring fictitious points and refuse to address the substance.

        Again you state without any substance this lie:
        “Atheism has no condemnation of rape.”
        Which is bullshit and basically irrelevant. Atheism is just a lack of belief in a deity, that’s all. But you have to be mendacious and claim it to be more than that, don’t you.

        It is society that condemns and if that society is made exclusively of atheists (and some almost are), then it would still condemn and punish those who went against the communities wishes.

        And once again you avoid the question:
        “In a world where only god does the judging, what happens to child rapists?”

        Mate, you are so wrong about everything – fractally wrong it seems.

        Anyway, I think I’ve addressed all your gishgallop posts so, enjoy being the odd one out amongst all the unbelievers.

        It will really boost your persecution complex and enhance your narcissism no end.

      • kilvehk

        excuse me i have to interject. most atheists are as such because logic dictates they must be, thusly it can be said that that which is logical is the driving force of an atheists moral code. to use the example previously laid out a child rapist through logic is amoral for a few reasons, #1. causing harm to others is illogical because of potential repercussions from others in a group/society. #2. children are biologically incapable of propagation thus sex with a child is pointless. #3. having forceable sex with a child is detrimental to the child’s well being thus it is illogical to participate in such an act.

        i could say more but i believe i have made my point if i have not please feel free to ask for further clarification.

        also on a side note i must apologize for the malicious
        attitude of others on here. i assure you most atheists do not behave as such as it is once again illogical. yes religion has done and continues to do massive amounts of harm both to individuals and society as a whole however if we are to make any headway convincing others to embrace logic and reason attitudes like those displayed here must not be tolerated on behalf of all reasonable and logical people i denounce the attitudes of cimmo and those like him.

      • WilmRoget

        ” most atheists are as such because logic dictates they must be, ”

        No in all regards. Logic does not dictate that anyone must be an atheist, in fact, logic would indicate that since the majority of humanity experiences the Divine, those who do not are accurate, or justified in their rejection of the Divine.

        “thusly it can be said that that which is logical is the driving force of an atheists moral code.”

        Well, all kinds of false things can be said. But there is no evidence that logic is the driving force of an atheist moral code.

        ” assure you most atheists do not behave as such as it is once again illogical.”

        Your attempt to deceive me is not going to work. Not only have all of your peers behaved badly, your own assumptions are not much better.

        “yes religion has done and continues to do massive amounts of harm both to individuals and society as a whole”

        Wrong. So you see, you are not any better than your peers.

        “we are to make any headway convincing others to embrace logic and reason”

        Your fundamental assumption – that people of faith have not embraced logic and reason is as abusive as anything else your peers have presented.

      • Man of my own mind

        Hey wilm you can’t convince or change ignorance but I applaud your effort probably a bunch of depressed teenagers that hate the world because they are strange and awkward not one argument I have read made by any of the haters has any merit or makes any sense fools left to there follies that’s how satan works convinces them there right and absolute with no belief except what science tells them

      • cimmo

        Oh the irony of you declaring us unbelievers as ignorant.

        You don’t even know your own bible when it comes to your faith’s doctrine of hell.

      • kilvehk

        “No in all regards. Logic does not dictate that anyone must be an atheist, in fact, logic would indicate that since the majority of humanity experiences the Divine, those who do not are accurate, or justified in their rejection of the Divine.”

        i wholeheartedly disagree good sir. in fact what you have presented here is a logical fallacy which is known as appeal to popularity. just because an opinion is popular does not make it true, and yes religion is an opinion because personal experience and a book does not constitute evidence of anything.

        “Well, all kinds of false things can be said. But there is no evidence that logic is the driving force of an atheist moral code.”

        i present myself as evidence that logic can be the driving force behind an acceptable moral code. admittedly you have only my word to go on but that is the catch 22 isn’t it i can not prove with physical evidence that which is purely a state of mind. i know of many atheists who think the same but once again that is just my word and their word.

        “Your attempt to deceive me is not going to work. Not only have all of your peers behaved badly, your own assumptions are not much better.”

        i was not making any attempt to deceive you and im not sure why you would assume that i was. also let me point out that these are not my peers they are just people who happen to share one of my views. what assumptions have i made exactly btw?

        “Wrong. So you see, you are not any better than your peers.”

        anti abortion laws oppression of science brainwashing children anti gay laws just to name a few way religion is detrimental.

        “Your fundamental assumption – that people of faith have not embraced logic and reason is as abusive as anything else your peers have presented.”

        it is not an assumption. it is a simple logical generalized conclusion. the bible and other religious works in most cases by their very nature in this day and age with all our knowledge denies and rejects logic and reason. for example evolution has happened is happening and will continue to happen. that is a fact. (btw before you say evolution is just a theory let me say gravity is also a theory you would be wise to not argue that one go look up the definition of theory and understand that a theory is a system that binds together a collection of facts. evolution is a fact, how it happens is the system that binds the facts of evolution together and is the only part of the theory that could be challenged. divine genetic manipulation for example is a perfectly valid theistic proposition on an alternate means of how evolution could have happened the problem is you can not prove divine genetic manipulation) anyways back to my point the very core of the christian faith is dependent on the non existence of evolution. genesis is very clear in how all things can into existence and it was not evolution if you throw out genesis because it is clearly incorrect then eve would not have existed if eve did not exist then original sin does not exist if original sin does not exist then jesus would not have died on the cross to allow others to be absolved of it if jesus did not get nailed to the cross then wtf is the point of worshiping jesus if there is no point in worshiping jesus then why even have the religion in the fist place?

      • WilmRoget

        “i wholeheartedly disagree good sir.”

        So? You don’t even bother to employ basic capitalization that is taught to elementary school children in the 1st grade, if not earlier in preschool.

        ” in fact what you have presented here is a logical fallacy which is known as appeal to popularity.”

        No, it is not.

        “just because an opinion is popular does not make it true”

        The issue is not popularity. Are you being dishonest, or are you genuinely confused? The issue preponderance of evidence. The preponderance of evidence – the bulk of it – lies on the side of ‘the Divine exists’.

        ” just because an opinion is popular does not make it true,”

        So remember, no matter how many atheists are posting here and how much you pat each other on the back, or how many books Mr. “a little pedophilia is ok” Dawkins sells, atheism remains a derogatory opinion based on lack of evidence, and its popularity does not make it true.

        “i present myself as evidence that logic can be the driving force behind an acceptable moral code.”

        Then essentially you’ve refuted your own claim. Your word is not credible, you’ve made multiple false assertions. And frankly, your posts show that you either do not know, or ignore codes of behavior. You see, the code of right behavior for writing in English has rules regarding capitalization, and you either don’t know them, or you ignore them. Logically, it stands to reason that you do the same with moral codes as well, and the dishonesty in your posts, the false claims, affirms that premise.

        “it is a simple logical generalized conclusion. the bible and other religious works in most cases by their very nature in this day and age with all our knowledge denies and rejects logic and reason.”

        It is a false assertion based on careless and sloppy, dishonest and disreputable scholarship. It is simply a vicious attempt to feed your ego by reviling millions of people, and that shows that you personally disprove your premise regarding morality and logic.

        ‘anyways back to my point the very core of the christian faith is dependent on the non existence of evolution.”

        Your point is false and ignorant. You are equating Christianity with creationism. The reality is that creationism, and the literalistic approach to the Genesis account, is a relatively new (about 200 years) minority view of the text. You either do not know the material, or you are being deliberately deceitful – and again, that makes you a poor example of morality.

        Your run on sentences don’t help you. Poor writing skills create the impression of a poor thinking skills, and your last paragraph demonstrates a real lack of logic and reason.

      • cimmo

        What exactly have I said that you would like to ‘denounce’?

      • cimmo

        BTW, did you notice how well your olive branch of reason went down with the zealot?

        And you think any criticism I may have made of him and his posts is really unfounded?

        Why show any tolerance at all to one so bigotted in the extreme against atheism?

      • kilvehk

        have you heard the expression “be the bigger man”? that is the point here. whether or not he deserves respect/ tolerance is not the issue we as atheists should set an example and be the best humans we can be thusly taking the ammo out of their gun. your criticisms are not unfounded and in my eyes actually needed it is the way you approach it that i have a problem with and it is that which i denounce.

      • cimmo

        Maybe the way this forum lays out the chonological order of posts is confusing, but I do think my initial few comments and replies were entirely above board.

        But I only give someone the benefit of the doubt a few times and once it becomes clear that they are basically an a-hole, then I feel I am no longer obligated to show respect.

      • kilvehk

        if they were then i was not referring to those posts as i did not see them :P this for lack of a better word “forum” definitely needs some work lol. i do understand where you are coming from but it still falls to us to represent atheism in the positive manner it intrinsically should be if the person will not listen and you can not stay calm walk away or ignore the person

      • Joe P.

        Terminally ill children who are lied to and told that they’re getting better have less stress and feel better than those that know the truth. Well cared for uneducated slaves were fairly happy people too…

        Sometimes reality is stressful, and the reality and responsibility of free will are a weight that any moral person must choose to shoulder no matter the cost, otherwise we’re less people and more cattle. Unfortunately the world for future generations is that much worse off for our comfy lies we tell ourselves…

        Maybe if the majority of humanity didn’t leave us to shoulder the burden of reality on our own us atheists wouldn’t be so stressed out and unhappy.

      • kilvehk

        perhaps its just me but i am not unhappy at all nor do i get stressed very often. i am perfectly content to accept that there is no life after death and for that matter death might not even be death as we think of it because we can not know that our perception of reality is even close to correct. for all we know we could be a brain in a vat being fed images and stimuli or just part of a computer program or countless other possibilities.

      • Joe P.

        That’s good. I think I’m probably a bit happier too, but I’m also a lot smarter than the average person, so I’m not gonna call the pollsters liars since I know for a fact I’d be much happier and less stressed about the world if more people believed as we do. For the time being I must treat the reality my senses reveal as true. I am not ready to throw up my hands and go along for the ride just yet, I want to leave the world better for my kid not worse (knowing I can’t get off the hook by sufficiently brain-washing him to ‘accept jesus’ so he can enjoy eternal happiness no matter how much we mess up his world.)

      • kilvehk

        indubitably to make the claim that the pollers are liars or wrong without seeing the data and methodology would be a serious flaw in reasoning. i agree it would be nice if this was not even an issue but alas this is the world we live in and we must do all we can to bring about that dream. to do otherwise is to resign yourself to the whim of religion, to do nothing is just as bad as religion itself.

      • cimmo

        I have no problem with the finality of life. Nor have I ever found myself in a moral dilemma. And I have never needed to make up an answer for those big things in life that are not actually known. If we don’t know, then that is the answer.

        Maybe it was just how I was brought up? By parents/family and in a community of mostly unbelievers. This process instilled me with totally reasonable subjective moral values that fit in to societies expectations as a whole.

        Personally I think a lot of the more screwed up in society are those in the middle of the faith dilemma.
        They have been indoctrinated to believe something that as adults they intrinsically know is not right. Cognitive dissonance?

      • kilvehk

        i think that is partially the case. the other part of the equation in my eyes is the fear of death religion essentially puts a cushion between the person and death by promising they will continue on and thus death should not be feared. i had to go though this when after 2 months of discussion my friend began to lose his faith and realize the points i made were flawless and that his faith must therefore be wrong. he went through a very rough patch where he just gave up on life because “there was no point” and it took me another month to show him that it was not pointless and that death is nothing to be afraid of. he is now a perfectly content atheist.

        from that experience it is my belief that most of the populace is incapable of accepting atheism simply due to lower cognitive function. i say this only because my friend was lucky enough to be hyper intelligent and thus better able to process the validity of the points i made even though he was an adamant christian little by little he had no choice but to accept certain points which as time went on piled up until he found he could no longer believe in god. this shows that indoctrination is not a reason for the refusal to accept atheism and thus there must be something else holding ppl back and the only thing i can think of is the inability to process the data necessary to accept atheism as the only logical option.

      • WilmRoget

        Since you provided no evidence to support your claims, you excuse making really has no value. And since the eventual point of your excuses is just another attempt to proclaim how wonderful and superior you are, the net effect is that your post is fraud.

      • phantomreader42

        Wilm, isn’t that imaginary god of yours supposed to have some sort of problem with bearing false witness? It sure hasn’t stopped you from lying through your rotting teeth .

      • WilmRoget

        Since I have no ‘imaginary god’ but have experienced the very real Absolute, your false accusations are both ironic, and abusive.

        It is amazing how consistently atheism must be expressed with verbal abuse and hate speech.

      • phantomreader42

        Your hallucinations are not reality, Wilm. And your whining about “hate speech” only makes it obvious you’re a delusional asshole, since it’s YOUR cult that keeps proposing legislation to make anyone you don’t like second-class citizens.

      • WilmRoget

        The nastier you are, the more you prove that atheism is a vicious and despicable prejudice.

        With every insult, every lie, you mirror the behavior of homophobes, and prove that you are operating on their level, or worse.

      • rawhunger .

        You sound like Pee-Wee Herman…

        “I know you are but what am I?! I know you are but what am I?!!

      • WilmRoget

        Funny, nothing I’ve written comes even close, but you and your peers rely entirely in childish insults more appropriate for an elementary school playground.

      • trolleyfan

        Anyone see a reason I should continue to talk with someone who – having zero knowledge of me – declares me to be an immoral liar. Anyone?

        (cricket chirps)

        Sorry dude, discussion over.

      • WilmRoget

        Nope, not over. And since I made no such statement, your false assertion has the effect of actually being a confession.

      • cimmo

        ” whose belief system does not condemn deceit,”
        Wrong.
        You can be good without God.
        I am, and I dare you to prove otherwise.

      • WilmRoget

        I dare you to prove that you are good.

        Further, you cannot prove your assertion “You can be good without God.”, particularly not here. So you present as fact a statement that is at best subjective conjecture – that is deceit.

        Deceit is not good. You engaged in deceit, deliberately, so you are not good.

        Further, your entire premise has no bearing on the factual assertion: atheism does not condemn deceit. By going off on an unfalsifiable tangent, only that demonstrates egotism, you again showed that, at least when posting here on this subject, you are not good.

        The idea that “you can be good with God” or that morality can arise without religion, cannot be tested. So any time anyone makes that claim as a statement of fact, they are being dishonest, and thus immoral and not good.

      • cimmo

        The idea that morality can arise ONLY from religion – and ONLY from YOUR religion, cannot be tested.

        So any time anyone makes that claim as a statement of fact, they are being dishonest, and thus immoral and not good.

        Further, you cannot prove your assertion “Since the existence of God is reality, and not superstitious or irrational,..” So you present as fact a statement that is at
        best subjective conjecture – that is deceit.

        Deceit is not good. You engaged in deceit, deliberately, so you are not good.

      • WilmRoget

        “The idea that morality can arise ONLY from religion – and ONLY from YOUR religion, cannot be tested.

        So any time anyone makes that claim as a statement of fact, they are being dishonest, and thus immoral and not good.”

        So? I have not made that claim. So you are already being immoral, dishonest.

        “The idea that morality can arise ONLY from religion – and ONLY from YOUR religion, cannot be tested.

        So any time anyone makes that claim as a statement of fact, they are being dishonest, and thus immoral and not good.”

        No. I cannot prove to you. There is a difference. Other people find the evidence I present sufficient proof. And again, your egotism and self-centered worldview is amoral at best.

        “Deceit is not good. You engaged in deceit, deliberately, so you are not good.”

        And yet, I did not. So your false accusation only shows that you not only not good, but incapable of recognizing ‘good’ when you see it.

        Further, your entire line of reasoning, which completely avoids the utter fraud and immorality in your post, is itself immoral.

        The more you use insults and dehumanizing behavior, the more you use lies and false accusations, the more you avoid the intrinsic frauds in atheism, you more you show that atheism is a prejudice, and as such, intrinsically immoral.

        And cimmo, you were to prove that you were good, and instead, you proved the opposite. You cannot even attempt what you demand of others, and that is not good.

        And none of it, none of your attempted diversion, provides proof that atheism, which has only one tenet, condemns any wrongdoing.

        Atheism has no condemnation of any wrong of any kind. Further, the position of so many atheists, that they create their morality as needed, is the process that has been used by villains of every kind throughout human history to justify evil of every kind.

      • cimmo

        Considering how full of hubris you are, I am surprised you did not notice that I used your own words and phrases (with subtle variations) against you.

        So those same paragraphs that you use to support YOUR position are righteous and blessed, but when I use the same words to support my position then that is bad and immoral?

        Yeah, you really are special.

      • phantomreader42

        I dare you to prove that you’re not a serial killer who rapes farm animals, Wilm. :P

      • WilmRoget

        With every slander, you only reveal your character and affirm that atheism is a vicious prejudice.

      • phantomreader42

        With every slander, you only reveal your character and affirm that christianity is a vicious prejudice.

      • WilmRoget

        Since I have not slandered you, your plagiarism is not only not clever, and not effective, it again points out your flaws, not mine.

        And reusing my own words like that also shows that you are not much of a free-thinker.

      • Joe P.

        You slandered him as a slanderer and equated his lack of sharing your warped worldview as equivalent to homophobia…

      • WilmRoget

        Not at all. But your assertion “your warped worldview ” is slander.

        Ironic.

      • cimmo

        For the record, only five posts above this one, you said this to phantomreader42:

        “With every slander, you only reveal your character and affirm that atheism is a vicious prejudice.”

        Two posts later you lie and state this:
        “Since I have not slandered you,..”

        Joe P called you out and you double down and accuse him of slander.

        Seems like this slander thing is a one way street?

        OK, since you’re going to accuse me of it anyway, here is some real slander to chew on:

        Mate, you are a dickhead.
        Go see a psychiatrist and get some treatment, because you are genuinely disturbed.

      • WilmRoget

        Let’s see – you accuse me of slander, without a shred of evidence, that you call me obscenities and attack my mental health.

        You are really really trying to create an irony black hole, aren’t you?

      • cimmo

        Since you have clearly demonstrated that you perceive every single comment an unbeliever says is either a lie, hate speech, slander or just wrong, I thought I’d throw you a bone so that for once your assertion of slander and hate speech against you would actually be true.

        No need to thank me.

        Yes indeed, I have slandered and abused you.
        I’ll do it again – you are an mendacious arsehole.
        And yes, I genuinely do think your mental health is in question.

        But somehow you seem to get off on being David surrounded by us unbelieving Goliaths. You went specifically looking to have this argument and I just wonder what the motivation is?

        I do this for sh!ts and giggles, and as I live in one of the most secular countries on the planet, I cannot experience this degree of batsh!t crazy first hand.

        Talking with you is like talking to an alien species.

        But I think this is a far more personal endeavour for you. You seem to have made it a mission to stamp out unbelief?

      • WilmRoget

        “Since you have clearly demonstrated that you perceive every single comment an unbeliever says is either a lie, hate speech, slander or just wrong, ”

        No, just the ones that actually are. Your derogatory characterization is not helping you.

        “Yes indeed, I have slandered and abused you.I’ll do it again – you are an mendacious arsehole.
        And yes, I genuinely do think your mental health is in question.”

        And the nastier you are, the more you look like the very thing you call me.

        “I do this for sh!ts and giggles,”

        So, sadism basically.

        So as I’ve argued from the start, atheism is a vicious, sadistic prejudice, an excuse people like you give yourself to abuse and vilify other people for your own amusement.

      • cimmo

        Well done, you didn’t disappoint. I genuinely LOLed.

        Yep, I guess according to your viewpoint I am a sadist taking pleasure at seeing a xtian squirm and weasel around trying to defend his belief in fairy tales. Although you’re more on the offense, attacking unbelief – why? Got no defense?

        Yep, you are fun – but getting a bit predictable – are you really just a one trick pony with all the ‘slander, hatred and persecution you claim to be getting?
        Try something different for my amusement?

        But here’s the thing why I consider you an alien species – to you, all this is absolute reality, isn’t it? Even this ‘debate’ is seemingly a very personal thing for you – correct?

        Now I just cannot get my head around that concept.
        Aliens in human form!

        Wow.

      • WilmRoget

        “Well done, you didn’t disappoint. I genuinely LOLed.’

        In other words, you cannot honestly address, much less refute, what I presented.

        ” I guess according to your viewpoint I am a sadist”

        By your own admission, you are.

        The nastier you are, the more you demonstrate that atheism is a prejudice.

      • cimmo

        You and I know that nothing I say matters any more.
        Nothing you say matters much anymore either – it is the same bullshit over and over.
        You’ve got your schtick and you’re going to stick to it.

        I could even state right now that I’ve had a personal revelation and accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Saviour (did I capitalize all the magic words correctly?) and you’d still want to have an argument about how much your feelings are being hurt by all the persecution.

        Diddums.

      • WilmRoget

        Your derogatory assumptions only reflect your character.

        Now, did you manage to live up to this dramatic exit, or did you fail as you did the last time. Guess I’ll have to get caught up on the posts here to see.

        Oh, no, you did not. You couldn’t even hold out for ten minutes.

      • cimmo

        Pathetic, really.
        Can’t understand the meaning of a little word like “IT”.

        Do you agree with the doctrine of universalism?

      • WilmRoget

        With every insult, you reveal your character.

        Since the ‘doctrine of universalism’ is not relevant, and because you choose to be abusive, you don’t get an answer. When you learn to be polite, I will reward that good behavior with the answer.

        But I don’t reward bad behavior.

      • Joe P.

        Buy a dictionary genius and look up the word slander.

      • WilmRoget

        Let me guess, you are in a race with cimmo to see who can cause an irony black hole first.

      • Joe P.

        Judaism doesn’t condem deceit against ‘goyim’ cattle, so are you also saying jews aren’t to be trusted? Good luck with that line of reasoning.

      • WilmRoget

        Your false assertion only reflects poorly on you. The command ‘do not bear false witness’ has no caveats.

        But hey, you’ve made so many blatantly false assertions as it is – what is one more? Just another sad attempt to divert attention from the prior falsehoods.

      • Paul Julian Gould

        Sorry, I’d have to call that particular concept out as false and borders on bigotry.

        What you claim as “Judaism” is a legal opinion of a medieval rabbi. The Talmud is not the Torah. The Talmud is a court transcript, if you will, of more than a millennium of rabbinical disputation and opinion on all parts of the Torah. “