Don't dictate beliefs

Don't dictate beliefs

There are 11177 comments on the The Star Press story from Sep 5, 2012, titled Don't dictate beliefs. In it, The Star Press reports that:

No one else can say otherwise? That is basically saying those who do "believe in God" are better? Hardly.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Star Press.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#10432 Jan 6, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>Aplogetics.

Strange how you have no problem believing the Bible when it says that creation took 6 days but you refuse to believe the Bible when it gives a ratio of 3:1 for Pi.

I always said that you guys just make it all up as you go along.

Looks like I'm right.

Now, where are these corrected Bibles that you say exist?
So you could not understand the mathematic explanation? A bit over the old wooden head?
Again You make a fool of yourself.
Nicely done.

What percent of the world population was Noah and his family? Lol

Derek, KJV he can't help himself, once a fool alway the fool.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#10433 Jan 6, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>Your position is that the Bible is not perfect - I'm just adding further evidence to support your viewpoint.
"KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Wishing I would leave?
Why is that? Because I keep debunking your third grade arguments against the Bible?
Go back to your comic books, hear you're almost done with Scooby doobie doo! NN"

Ok so KJV posted the above and you respond with

"Your position is that the Bible is not perfect"

Do you see how stupid you are? OMG

I'm shocked that you get the responses you do from your most ludicrous postings.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#10434 Jan 6, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>No proof of god, your only reason here is to try to convert atheists. You can go back to the discovery institute now, its game over.
Skippy I'm afraid I must agree with KJV new name for you "septic" it truly is more fitting.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#10435 Jan 6, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>Lol

You're desperate
No he's correct. If he ways wrong you would have posted the proof against his statement. Your response is more proof that he is correct. No proof.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#10436 Jan 6, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>No, you didn't write the Bible.

According to you, some people known as "they" write the Bible by correcting it every time a new document is found.
Does this shock you knot head?
How dare the Christians up date the New Testament from older scrolls that are from a time closer to the time that Jesus lived? Well they do and seeing that you think that you're the brightest bulb on the tree you should note that while somethings have been changed the messages of the New Testament has not changed.
In fact very little has changed. Other then the fact that the New Testament does come from the oldest known writings.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#10437 Jan 6, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>Let's hold this thought.

First you openly admit that the Bible is not perfect - I thank you for confirming to us that you don't believe the Bible is perfect....

KJV wrote, "
"When does religion correct itself?... "
All the time!!! Every time older documents are found they make the appropriate changes to the Bible.
"

To which I responded...

Khatru wrote, "
Really? Who are "they"?

Where are the corrections made to the Bible that incorporate the Acts of Paul and Thecla? Just think how you believers can thrill with excitement at the part where Thecla leaps into a moat full of man-eating seals and how Jehovah sends down a thunderbolt to kill all the seals.

Where's the Gospel of Thomas? It was found in 1945 and no insertions, deletions or amendments have been made to the Bible.
What about the Gospel of Peter? That was found in 1886. Where are the changes to the Bible made by these people you refer to as "they"?

You would have thought that they (whoever they may be) would have changed the Bible to accommodate Peter. After all, Peter's gospel provides the only eye-witness account of Jesus emerging from the tomb.

You believers love your eye-witness accounts so why hasn't the Bible been changed?

Peter tells us that Jesus emerged from the tomb with two angels and was followed by a talking cross. Once in the open, Jesus and the angels grew to a height of thousands of feet until their heads were lost in the heavens. According to the account, this was witnessed by a Roman centurion and his soldiers (usually eighty men) and also the Jewish Elders.

Why isn't this in the Bible?

Perhaps it's because your claims of amendments being made every time new documents are found is just another of your many lies.

Why do you lie?

You know it makes the baby Jesus weep."
So you are a theist!

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#10438 Jan 6, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Who is this oooooga boooooogga
Caricature of a snot ball?
Welcome back.

Oooooga Booooogga?

He's a relative newcomer with the same mentality level as Skeptic and Kitten. I'm sure you get my drift.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#10439 Jan 6, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Demonstrate how what I really said was a lie.
You took care of that yourself, as usual.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#10440 Jan 6, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you didn't write the Bible.
According to you, some people known as "they" write the Bible by correcting it every time a new document is found.
What are the “new” documents which you continue failing to identify?

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#10441 Jan 6, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
I lack the intestinal fortitude to read through the Bible in its entirety.
In any event I turn away from your superstition because of what I do know about it, not because of what I do not.
Besides, you don't need to know anything about fairy lore to have a sensible opinion about the existence of fairies.
So you lack intestinal fortitude, and you lack knowledge of the Bible. You admit you don't have the background to speak on it. In other words, you're not a worthy contributor to the forum.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#10442 Jan 6, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
How undignified for you to compare your superstition to Stalin.
This only serves to indicate just how threatened you feel.
You don't think Stalin was a threat to humanity? You admired him, right?

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#10443 Jan 6, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>
Mark Twain - "It ain't the parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it's the parts that I do understand."
How humiliating it must be for atheists to admit in a public forum they are against the Bible they haven't read and know nothing about.

“It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.”- Mark Twain

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#10444 Jan 6, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
So you could not understand the mathematic explanation? A bit over the old wooden head?
Again You make a fool of yourself.
Nicely done.
Actually Longears, the people making fools of themselves are the believers who refuse to believe the Bible when it gives a ratio of 3:1 for Pi
Langoliers wrote:
What percent of the world population was Noah and his family?
To answer that question, I'll have a look at the link you posted:

"Did everybody drown in the flood except Noah and his family? Are all the people of of the world descended from Noah?

No. Everybody did not drown. Hundreds, possibly thousands of Sumerians drowned in the flooded area, but there were many thousands of survivors of Noah's river flood, even in his own city, and especially in distant lands not affected by the flood."

http://www.noahs-ark-flood.com/faq.htm

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#10445 Jan 6, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
No he's correct. If he ways wrong you would have posted the proof against his statement. Your response is more proof that he is correct. No proof.
Other than mathematical proofs, there are no proofs, Longears.

That includes both your invisible sky pixie and your 2000 year old zombie.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#10446 Jan 6, 2013
Darwinian evolutionism and ideology devalues human life.

“Humanism” is the most destructive religion in history.

http://www.christianaction.org.za/firearmnews...

No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#10447 Jan 6, 2013
The included link explains why Mr. Waugh is thankful he's a Christian.

He once said,“... believe me, were it not for my religion, I would scarcely be a human being.”

Without God, mankind is subhuman.

http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth08.html

No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#10448 Jan 6, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Does this shock you knot head?
How dare the Christians up date the New Testament from older scrolls that are from a time closer to the time that Jesus lived? Well they do and seeing that you think that you're the brightest bulb on the tree you should note that while somethings have been changed the messages of the New Testament has not changed.
In fact very little has changed. Other then the fact that the New Testament does come from the oldest known writings.
Show me these updates.

What are the scrolls and what are the corresponding updates?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#10449 Jan 6, 2013
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
What are the “new” documents which you continue failing to identify?
Would you like to repeat that in a more intelligible format?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#10450 Jan 6, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
You know nothing of the sort. An explanation would be a Big Bang.
They fail to teach you the other possibilities or look for other possibilities.
This is simply false. The 'other possibilities' simply didn't have the predictive power of the Big bang scenario, nor did they agree with actual observations. Unless, of course, YOU have a new alternative?
Bad science makes a conclusion then searches for evidences to back up a predetermined ending.
This is true and is exactly the problem with 'creation science'. Standard science *does* look at alternative explanations,*does* consider the evidence, and *does not* simply search for evidence to back up its conclusions.
The problem with the Big Bang coming from a exploding spinning singularity
Whao there! This alone is enough to show you don't know what the Big Bang theory says. If you won't take time to learn what the actual scientific theory says, then why should we listen to your criticisms?
is it would have to break about every law and theory of physics.
Except, of course, it does not.
I'll list a few that the Big Bang breaks, oh ya I'm aware science to get around this major problem with their theory is no laws of the universes existed until after the Big Bang happened by some Ridicules minuet amount of time, but it's just long enough they believe to sneak in the Big Bang. Now here is a few laws that's say the Big Bang never happened.

[QUOTE]Gravity
The Big Bang scenario is founded on the best theory of gravity we have: General Relativity.
First and second laws of thermodynamic.
The essentials of the hot Big Bang theory are based on the laws of thermodynamics as applied to an expanding universe (i.e, as required by general relativity).
Quantum Mechanics
The essentials of nucleosynthesis and any understanding of thew time previous to this are, again, based on quantum mechanics.
String theory
String Theory is, at this time, speculative. But, contrary to your claims, it supports the Big Bang scenario and even goes on to explain how the expansion came about.
The theory of Relativity
Once again, the whole edifice is founded on the theory of relativity (in particular, general relativity).
Law of Conservation of Matter
Actually, the correct conservation law is of mass-energy, because we *know* that the law of conservation of matter (mass) is false (nuclear reactions violate it).

In sum, you know *nothing* about the *actual* Big Bang theory, the science it is based upon, nor the evidence that supports it. ALL of your claims (except for the one about string theory) are proven wrong by even a very basic inspection of any modern book on cosmology. And the claim about string theory is shown wrong by considering any book on that subject.

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#10451 Jan 6, 2013
Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>Lol

The Theory of Evolution is a reality that terrifies you.

Although I doubt it terrifies you as much as your god does.
"Darwin's Theory of Evolution - A Theory In Crisis"

"Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a theory in crisis in light of the tremendous advances we've made in molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics over the past fifty years. We now know that there are in fact tens of thousands of irreducibly complex systems on the cellular level. Specified complexity pervades the microscopic biological world. Molecular biologist Michael Denton wrote, "Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than 10^-12 grams, each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machinery built by man and absolutely without parallel in the non-living world."

And we don't need a microscope to observe irreducible complexity. The eye, the ear and the heart are all examples of irreducible complexity, though they were not recognized as such in Darwin's day. Nevertheless, Darwin confessed, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."

http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 52 min Brian_G 20,204
News Who is an atheist? (May '10) 1 hr Chick240 9,500
News Why Kasich's atheist criticisms seem out of touch 2 hr Reason Personified 29
News Hitchens, Dawkins and Harris are old news - a t... 5 hr ATHEOI 189
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 5 hr ATHEOI 45,414
What is of greater value for humanity: Chrisita... 11 hr Bob of Quantum-Faith 417
Christianity isn't based on... (Feb '10) 12 hr Bob of Quantum-Faith 278
More from around the web