Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

[KittenKoder]

It aint necessarily so wrote:

<quoted text>
Dude. Adam was the first man. The story says that he was made Adam on the sixth day. Although your perfect word of god offers conflicting genealogies, neither lists more than eighty generations from Adam to Jesus, which takes us to about 2000 years ago. The earth and universe are billions of years old. Do the math.
Just kidding, I realize that you did do the math, which is why it's time for a new eternal truth.
Biblical revisionism is an encouraging sign. It's your church's reaction to the accumulating embarrassments it is suffering at the hand of science, which your priests have been fighting to disastrous effect.
The War on Science has been a big loser for your church. It has set itself up as the alternative to science, and now, every scientific advance and achievement is an argument against your mythology.
You are losing that battle badly. Some of your people are recognizing this. Instead of denying the science, some of you have begun experimenting to make the mythology fit it, like you are here.
Your myth definitely depicts a young earth. But now you know how foolish that sounds, and you need to add more time to the myth. How? Just start tampering with it. Redefine terms. Who says Adam was the first man or created on the sixth day? And who knows how long a day is, right?
Unfortunately for your church, you lose either way. Sure, arguing for a young earth makes you look ridiculous. But revisionism concerning well know myths makes you look desperate and dishonest as well. You're waffling for your god, and gods shouldn't do that. The perfect ones need to be eternal and unchanging, not caving to secular science.
It is encouraging seeing your church acknowledge that the old eternal truth is no longer working, and that it's time for a new, revised eternal truth.

To be fair and balanced, I must contest this a bit. Not all christians are creatards, some are actually decent people regarding it as nothing but parable, find out what they think of the book first, then if they actually do follow it as more than parable you have a basis for complaint. Religion is not inherently bad, it is only when the followers of said religion interfere with progress that they choose to become an enemy of humanity.

Allow them to revise their beliefs, ancient religions did that all the time and some even turned out to be decent and even helpful to the progress of humanity. Many of the christians are looking for a revision to their scripture, they just need to choose new prophets to follow. Joseph Smith even tried it, and it worked for a time, but the new prophets of the Mormon church today are bigoted jerks, which negates the revisions until that point.

[Hedonist]

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
To be fair and balanced, I must contest this a bit. Not all christians are creatards, some are actually decent people regarding it as nothing but parable, find out what they think of the book first, then if they actually do follow it as more than parable you have a basis for complaint. Religion is not inherently bad, it is only when the followers of said religion interfere with progress that they choose to become an enemy of humanity.
Allow them to revise their beliefs, ancient religions did that all the time and some even turned out to be decent and even helpful to the progress of humanity. Many of the christians are looking for a revision to their scripture, they just need to choose new prophets to follow. Joseph Smith even tried it, and it worked for a time, but the new prophets of the Mormon church today are bigoted jerks, which negates the revisions until that point.

Those that consider the "Garden" just a "parable" haven't really examined the implications. A fine example of cognitive dissonance.

If it's just a "parable" then there was no original sin and therefore no reason for a blood sacrifice on a cross. Their whole house of cards mythology falls apart.

[KittenKoder]

Hedonist wrote:

<quoted text>
Those that consider the "Garden" just a "parable" haven't really examined the implications. A fine example of cognitive dissonance.
If it's just a "parable" then there was no original sin and therefore no reason for a blood sacrifice on a cross. Their whole house of cards mythology falls apart.

Most would not contest that either. ;) Many are working on creating new doctrine, but with what happened to the Mormons when they did have just decided to consider the bible a collection of Aesop's fables to avoid the persecution of the zealot scum. The zealots have destroyed their own religion from the inside.

[The serpent was right]

Don5163 wrote:

<quoted text>Your reasonig is quite flawed. It is a considered by athiests that it is common sense not to kill someone. The Holy Bible states "Thou Shalt Not Kill." I would say as just one of many examples - that "common sense" and the Holy Bible does related to common sense. Your reasoning is quite flawed. It is a considered by atheists that it is common sense not to kill someone. The Holy Bible states "Thou Shalt Not Kill." I would say as just one of many examples - that "common sense" and the Holy Bible has many parallels. Therefore; the Holy Bible does address “common sense” issues in extensive detail. It’s just common sense. Oh, by the way, read the following: If you really, really, really want to exercise your cognitive ability, please read the following in its entirety and read it well, very well: Common sense is defined by Merriam-Webster as, "sound and prudent judgment based on a simple perception of the situation or facts."[1] Thus, "common sense" (in this view) equates to the knowledge and experience which most people already have, or which the person using the term believes that they do or should have. The Cambridge Dictionary defines it as, "the basic level of practical knowledge and judgment that we all need to help us live in a reasonable and safe way".[2]

Atheists don't say that not killing is common sense.
Don't try to think. It's obvious that you are not up of it.

The thing that is so funny is that I COULD quote some common sense teachings from the Bible, and you failed. Doesn't it suck to know that I know your bible several times better then you?

[The serpent was right]

Don5163 wrote:

<quoted text>Your reasonig is quite flawed. It is a considered by athiests that it is common sense not to kill someone. The Holy Bible states "Thou Shalt Not Kill." I would say as just one of many examples - that "common sense" and the Holy Bible does related to common sense. Your reasoning is quite flawed. It is a considered by atheists that it is common sense not to kill someone. The Holy Bible states "Thou Shalt Not Kill." I would say as just one of many examples - that "common sense" and the Holy Bible has many parallels. Therefore; the Holy Bible does address “common sense” issues in extensive detail. It’s just common sense. Oh, by the way, read the following: If you really, really, really want to exercise your cognitive ability, please read the following in its entirety and read it well, very well: Common sense is defined by Merriam-Webster as, "sound and prudent judgment based on a simple perception of the situation or facts."[1] Thus, "common sense" (in this view) equates to the knowledge and experience which most people already have, or which the person using the term believes that they do or should have. The Cambridge Dictionary defines it as, "the basic level of practical knowledge and judgment that we all need to help us live in a reasonable and safe way".[2]

I did want to ask you....
Is it common sense that a man could live in the digestive tract of a fish for three days and survive?

Is a virgin birth common sense?

Is promising that faith can move a mountain when obviously it can't common sense??

Is demon posession common sense?

Is god making a deal with satan common sense?

Is an all knowing god asking things like "where are you", and "what have you done" and "who told you that you were naked"?

Do any of those things appeal to your common sense?

[Atheism-the evil religion]

NEW wrote:

<quoted text>

PROVE GOD IS REAL!!!!!!!!??

Why!?!?

[Atheism-the evil religion]

Pomona Atheist wrote:

<quoted text>I KNOW 100% for a fact that God does not exist. I have no doubt that I am right that God does not exist.

Stupid Ass Atheist wrote:

<quoted text> Prove that God is REAL! I want proof!.

Apparently Stupid Ass Atheist doesn't believe the Dumbass Atheist.

[KittenKoder]

Atheism-the evil religion wrote:

<quoted text>
Why!?!?

If you do not prove it, then you cannot expect anyone else to accept it.

[Very Cynical Person]

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
If you do not prove it, then you cannot expect anyone else to accept it.

You’re debating with a troll and a psychotic delusional one at that.

[Don5163]

SNAKE BOY wrote:

<quoted text>
Really Bud, you sound like you've had a head injury. I mean, you're so garbled you make George Bush sound eloquent.

I don't know how this happened but in the future it will be corrected.

[Don5163]

The serpent was right wrote:

<quoted text>
I did want to ask you....
Is it common sense that a man could live in the digestive tract of a fish for three days and survive?
Is a virgin birth common sense?
Is promising that faith can move a mountain when obviously it can't common sense??
Is demon posession common sense?
Is god making a deal with satan common sense?
Is an all knowing god asking things like "where are you", and "what have you done" and "who told you that you were naked"?
Do any of those things appeal to your common sense?

Just to answer your question short and simple, did you know that God can do miricles or have you ever heard or read about some of his miricles? You spoke of miriclesj performed by God.

[Just Think]

Atheism-the evil religion wrote:

<quoted text>
Why!?!?

Because you said several pages back that you would. We've all been waiting.

Still waiting.

Prove that god exists...

[KittenKoder]

Atheism-the evil religion wrote:

<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Apparently Stupid Ass Atheist doesn't believe the Dumbass Atheist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

[Khatru]

Atheism-the evil religion wrote:

<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Apparently Stupid Ass Atheist doesn't believe the Dumbass Atheist.

Are you one of those batshit crazy Mormon Christians?

Do you believe that your underwear has magical properties?

[Atlanta Fire]

Atheism-the evil religion wrote:

<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Apparently Stupid Ass Atheist doesn't believe the Dumbass Atheist.

So says the troll.

[EVE]

Don5163 wrote:

<quoted text>I don't know how this happened but in the future it will be corrected.

Uh, OK. Perhaps another brick to the head might help.

[British Expat]

Atheism-the evil religion wrote:

<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Apparently Stupid Ass Atheist doesn't believe the Dumbass Atheist.

Tell us! Are you circumcised? Or just a complete prick?

[NightSerf]

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

A brilliant presentation, logically flawless as far as I can tell.

[Don5163]

EVE wrote:

<quoted text>
Uh, OK. Perhaps another brick to the head might help.

Are you sur it wasn't you and your demonic powers that scrambled the test?

[It aint necessarily so]

Don5163 wrote:

My common sense is based upon the Holy Bible. Yours is not.

I don't consider faith sensible. Basing your life on an error filled and self-contradicting ancient book is not rational.

Don5163 wrote:

That means that if you insist on being right, then we actually have nothing to talk about because I believe in God and you haven't given me any sensible reason not to believ so. What!

I don't expect you to accept any of my answers, I don't expect you to understand them, and I don't expect a cogent rebuttal.

As far as insisting on being right, I insist on being accurate, and as right as I can be. And I insist on evidence before I change my position. Don't you? If not, why not?

But that's probably not what you meant. Do you have a specific example of whatever it is you are complaining about? Also, if you think it was inappropriate, why¡