Jump to content

For Our New Resident Thumper


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Gods Giraffes and Genocide.
You clearly don't get it. We ignore the first part of the bible because Jesus made those laws irrelevant and created new laws. Also, I guess he rewrote history at the same time and made it so those things never happened. But we can still use certain parts to make sure faggots don't marry. Get it?
Link to post
Share on other sites
You clearly don't get it. We ignore the first part of the bible because Jesus made those laws irrelevant and created new laws. Also, I guess he rewrote history at the same time and made it so those things never happened. But we can still use certain parts to make sure faggots don't marry. Get it?
These parts are untrue.1. There is a huge difference between ignoring, and reinforcement. No sin can enter heaven. We must be perfect to enter heaven. Before Jesus, the Jews either HAD to be perfect OR they had to make a yearly sacrifice at the temple. Jesus died and covered all of our past and future sins. The Old Testament is a wonderful example of his grace. It's a constant reminder of all the crap we would have to do if Jesus hadn't died.2. I don't even understand the history part. Maybe you're saying that Christians don't believe in the stories of Jonah or Noah, but I can guarantee that at least two Christians on this board do think those stories happened. BG and I.3. The New Testament is 100% clear that any sex, hetero or homo, outside of a marriage between one man and one woman is wrong, so it's not important that it's also in the Old Testament.
Link to post
Share on other sites
2. I don't even understand the history part. Maybe you're saying that Christians don't believe in the stories of Jonah or Noah, but I can guarantee that at least two Christians on this board do think those stories happened. BG and I.
I was pretending to be a hypothetical Christian for the sake of humor.Also, honestly, how can you believe in Noah's Ark? I mean, I can get the idea of believing that Jesus was God. There's very little suspension of disbelief necessary for that to happen. You just have one localized guy who turned water into wine, was killed, and came back to life. It's breaking the rules that we know, sure, but it's a local break.Noah's story is so nonsensical, would require so many breaking of the rules of physics, biology, Earths science, chemistry, etc all over the world, and would forever alter the human race, the animal kingdom, the makeup of the planet, etc etc.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, honestly, how can you believe in Noah's Ark? I mean, I can get the idea of believing that Jesus was God. There's very little suspension of disbelief necessary for that to happen. You just have one localized guy who turned water into wine, was killed, and came back to life. It's breaking the rules that we know, sure, but it's a local break.Noah's story is so nonsensical, would require so many breaking of the rules of physics, biology, Earths science, chemistry, etc all over the world, and would forever alter the human race, the animal kingdom, the makeup of the planet, etc etc.
My belief in Noah probably isn't what you are assuming. I believe that Noah was a man who actually lived, and that a flood covered his 'world'. That's it. I take all of the various flood 'myths' as greater and greater evidence that Mesopotamia was, in fact, flooded completely at some point. I also don't have to break any rules, because my belief that God is omnipotent and omniscient would mean that I think He can do whatever he wants outside of physics, etc. I don't think it's easier or harder to believe when your starting point is: There is a God, and he's all powerful. You are starting with: laws of physics and biology and Earth science and chemistry and etc can NOT EVER be broken by any 'being' inside or outside of time, regardless of if they were the one that actually 'created' said thing. When you start with that assumption, of course, believing in Noah's ark is stupid.It's really not hard to understand where I'm coming from. I know that many atheists believe that we use an all-powerful God as a scapegoat to explain things away... "God can do whatever he wants! blah blah blah!!" But the reality is... God can do whatever he wants. If he wanted to show Noah his power, by bringing a lot of animals to him miraculously, then that's fine. If he wanted to protect the food-chain during this event, then fine. If Noah (or Moses, who wrote the book Noah is in) didn't think of things like flies or other insects as 'animals' then fine, they may have been protected but unmentioned. I believe in an all-powerful God. If my god wasn't all-powerful, then what good is he?
Link to post
Share on other sites
My belief in Noah probably isn't what you are assuming. I believe that Noah was a man who actually lived, and that a flood covered his 'world'. That's it. I take all of the various flood 'myths' as greater and greater evidence that Mesopotamia was, in fact, flooded completely at some point. I also don't have to break any rules, because my belief that God is omnipotent and omniscient would mean that I think He can do whatever he wants outside of physics, etc. I don't think it's easier or harder to believe when your starting point is: There is a God, and he's all powerful. You are starting with: laws of physics and biology and Earth science and chemistry and etc can NOT EVER be broken by any 'being' inside or outside of time, regardless of if they were the one that actually 'created' said thing. When you start with that assumption, of course, believing in Noah's ark is stupid.It's really not hard to understand where I'm coming from. I know that many atheists believe that we use an all-powerful God as a scapegoat to explain things away... "God can do whatever he wants! blah blah blah!!" But the reality is... God can do whatever he wants. If he wanted to show Noah his power, by bringing a lot of animals to him miraculously, then that's fine. If he wanted to protect the food-chain during this event, then fine. If Noah (or Moses, who wrote the book Noah is in) didn't think of things like flies or other insects as 'animals' then fine, they may have been protected but unmentioned. I believe in an all-powerful God. If my god wasn't all-powerful, then what good is he?
jay_bey_gasface.jpg
Link to post
Share on other sites
My belief in Noah probably isn't what you are assuming. I believe that Noah was a man who actually lived, and that a flood covered his 'world'. That's it.
I don't think that belief lines up with Genesis.13 And God said to Noah, "I have determined to make an end of all flesh; for the earth is filled with violence through them; behold, I will destroy them with the earth."Are you suggesting that God is fibbing here for Noah's benefit?
Link to post
Share on other sites
My belief in Noah probably isn't what you are assuming. I believe that Noah was a man who actually lived, and that a flood covered his 'world'. That's it. I take all of the various flood 'myths' as greater and greater evidence that Mesopotamia was, in fact, flooded completely at some point. I also don't have to break any rules, because my belief that God is omnipotent and omniscient would mean that I think He can do whatever he wants outside of physics, etc. I don't think it's easier or harder to believe when your starting point is: There is a God, and he's all powerful. You are starting with: laws of physics and biology and Earth science and chemistry and etc can NOT EVER be broken by any 'being' inside or outside of time, regardless of if they were the one that actually 'created' said thing. When you start with that assumption, of course, believing in Noah's ark is stupid.It's really not hard to understand where I'm coming from. I know that many atheists believe that we use an all-powerful God as a scapegoat to explain things away... "God can do whatever he wants! blah blah blah!!" But the reality is... God can do whatever he wants. If he wanted to show Noah his power, by bringing a lot of animals to him miraculously, then that's fine. If he wanted to protect the food-chain during this event, then fine. If Noah (or Moses, who wrote the book Noah is in) didn't think of things like flies or other insects as 'animals' then fine, they may have been protected but unmentioned. I believe in an all-powerful God. If my god wasn't all-powerful, then what good is he?
jay_bey_gasface.jpg
shakira.jpg
Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think that belief lines up with Genesis.13 And God said to Noah, "I have determined to make an end of all flesh; for the earth is filled with violence through them; behold, I will destroy them with the earth."Are you suggesting that God is fibbing here for Noah's benefit?
I can't make that assessment without all the information. I wasn't there, so I don't know what Moses meant and I don't know if he even knew. The issue is totally moot in my mind. God could have easily done it if He wanted to, and I'm cool with it either way. In the verse you quoted, it says that God will destroy the earth, but we know that didn't technically happen either. Which means that it can be interpreted in different ways. What I'm saying, is that I don't care which way it's interpreted, it's all just a guess at this point, and doesn't have anything to do with salvation.Also, don't use the KJV. It's not a good translation. NASV please.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't make that assessment without all the information. I wasn't there, so I don't know want Moses meant and I don't know if he even knew. The issue is totally moot in my mind.
Moses' or Noah's scope of knowledge of 'all flesh' or 'the earth' might be in question; God's is not. Moses quoted God. So we're left with, I believe, three possibilities:
  • God knew that he would spare parts of the earth but told Noah something else.
  • The flood covered all the earth.
  • This verse is not historical.

God could have easily done it if He wanted to, and I'm cool with it either way. In the verse you quoted, it says that God will destroy the earth, but we know that didn't technically happen either.
I never took this to mean the planet itself would be destroyed. I'm willing to grant that God would have to use terminology that would make sense to Noah. If you want to argue that God told Noah 'all flesh' meaning 'all flesh that you're aware of', I can see that. It does present certain problems when we try to extend any of God's statements in the bible if they are specially crafted to the perspective of the specific listener.
Also, don't use the KJV. It's not a good translation. NASV please.
Oh for ****'s sake.
13 Then God said to Noah, “The end of all flesh has come before Me; for the earth is filled with violence because of them; and behold, I am about to destroy them with the earth.
13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I never took this to mean the planet itself would be destroyed. I'm willing to grant that God would have to use terminology that would make sense to Noah. If you want to argue that God told Noah 'all flesh' meaning 'all flesh that you're aware of', I can see that. It does present certain problems when we try to extend any of God's statements in the bible if they are specially crafted to the perspective of the specific listener.
Correct. That's all I was saying.
Oh for ****'s sake.
I'm not saying it's wrong, I just personally don't like it, and many words aren't the best choice. NASV is the most correct, AND I can immediately understand it. You are always quoting KJV, and it's annoying, nothing more. I hate trying to translate old English into something I can understand. Also, this comment was not about this verse in particular, it was a general statement directed at you specifically.
Link to post
Share on other sites

As a christian, I find this whole Noah business extremely suspect. If God had a beef with man, then fine, but what beef could he have with the other creatures what inhabited the earth. And why were the fishies and whales and such given a free pass?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was pretending to be a hypothetical Christian for the sake of humor.Also, honestly, how can you believe in Noah's Ark? I mean, I can get the idea of believing that Jesus was God. There's very little suspension of disbelief necessary for that to happen. You just have one localized guy who turned water into wine, was killed, and came back to life. It's breaking the rules that we know, sure, but it's a local break.Noah's story is so nonsensical, would require so many breaking of the rules of physics, biology, Earths science, chemistry, etc all over the world, and would forever alter the human race, the animal kingdom, the makeup of the planet, etc etc.
What's harder?To transform the molecular structure of a liquid with a command, or to engage the physical laws to an extreme measure?The Bible said that before the flood, there was no rain, all things were watered from basically underground streams. If you lived before the flood you would have all the empirical knowledge of science to tell you why the rain was not possible.I guess we Christians are lucky that the people who wrote the Bible were right that there is enough water on the planet to flood the entire earth. That would have been embarrassing if later after we explored the whole world that we found that there wasn't enough water to actually cover the earth.Also lucky when the Bible says that the stars in the heavens are numerically like the sands on all the shores. I mean you can only see about 4,000 stars total with the naked eye. Now we know that there are more than 4,000 stars, by like ten or eleven times!It's like they had insider information or something.
Link to post
Share on other sites
As a christian, I find this whole Noah business extremely suspect. If God had a beef with man, then fine, but what beef could he have with the other creatures what inhabited the earth. And why were the fishies and whales and such given a free pass?
Does the life of a fish have any value outside of it's purpose to feed man and keep the ocean's circle of life running so we can eat sushi?I mean from a evolutionary standpoint and from a creationist standpoint, fish are pretty much only here for us to eat and to slap people with.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Does the life of a fish have any value outside of it's purpose to feed man and keep the ocean's circle of life running so we can eat sushi?I mean from a evolutionary standpoint and from a creationist standpoint, fish are pretty much only here for us to eat and to slap people with.
This is B.S. We also need them to decorate chinese restaurants.
Link to post
Share on other sites
What's harder?To transform the molecular structure of a liquid with a command, or to engage the physical laws to an extreme measure?The Bible said that before the flood, there was no rain, all things were watered from basically underground streams. If you lived before the flood you would have all the empirical knowledge of science to tell you why the rain was not possible.I guess we Christians are lucky that the people who wrote the Bible were right that there is enough water on the planet to flood the entire earth. That would have been embarrassing if later after we explored the whole world that we found that there wasn't enough water to actually cover the earth.Also lucky when the Bible says that the stars in the heavens are numerically like the sands on all the shores. I mean you can only see about 4,000 stars total with the naked eye. Now we know that there are more than 4,000 stars, by like ten or eleven times!It's like they had insider information or something.
You call genocide on the population of the earth by your God , lucky?
Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't understand engaging in discourse with religious people over the legitimacy of their religion. Trying to discuss Christianity like it has any logical basis, other than to be used as a means to control the general populace, is ludicrous. It is the religion that introduced both hell and forgiveness with the same holy book. It's like arguing with a 5 year old about the easter bunny, which, although entertaining, is quite pointless. And I just don't see the entertainment value in arguing with people that have been converted since birth to believe a complete mythology.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I still don't understand engaging in discourse with religious people over the legitimacy of their religion. Trying to discuss Christianity like it has any logical basis, other than to be used as a means to control the general populace, is ludicrous. It is the religion that introduced both hell and forgiveness with the same holy book. It's like arguing with a 5 year old about the easter bunny, which, although entertaining, is quite pointless. And I just don't see the entertainment value in arguing with people that have been converted since birth to believe a complete mythology.
Arguing with atheist is equally annoying.Their constant arrogance and closed minded refusal to recognize that their pet religion of evolution is more faith based than anything remotely scientific causes me to yawn often when I see them post.Plus there is the unintended LOL every time they talk about how they 'knew' there was no God when they were in their early teens and they think this doesn't make them look stupid.But what are we going to do? You guys keep showing up, showing your stupidity, and refusing to start your own section because deep down you have a hole in your soul that drives you to seek out ways to stop the voices in your head by being louder than everyone else.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Arguing with atheist is equally annoying.Their constant arrogance and closed minded refusal to recognize that their pet religion of evolution is more faith based than anything remotely scientific causes me to yawn often when I see them post.Plus there is the unintended LOL every time they talk about how they 'knew' there was no God when they were in their early teens and they think this doesn't make them look stupid.But what are we going to do? You guys keep showing up, showing your stupidity, and refusing to start your own section because deep down you have a hole in your soul that drives you to seek out ways to stop the voices in your head by being louder than everyone else.
You call evolution faith-based and then call ME stupid. And what is your theory that fits the preponderance of evidence in the geological record? Oh wait. I am doing what I just counseled against. I really don't care that you believe in a creator. I don't really care that you believe that the words in a book written in the bronze age was inspired by the creator you believe in. What I do care about is your desire to push the ridiculous beliefs contained within that book on the rest of society, as with gay marriage. What I won't do is argue with you about it like you hold a legitimate position. Because you don't.
Link to post
Share on other sites
You call evolution faith-based and then call ME stupid. And what is your theory that fits the preponderance of evidence in the geological record? Oh wait. I am doing what I just counseled against. I really don't care that you believe in a creator. I don't really care that you believe that the words in a book written in the bronze age was inspired by the creator you believe in. What I do care about is your desire to push the ridiculous beliefs contained within that book on the rest of society, as with gay marriage. What I won't do is argue with you about it like you hold a legitimate position. Because you don't.
You are so filled with hate that you are blinded to your own ridiculous conclusions.But you do reinforce my opinion that people who deny God are really mentally unstable.
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are three things you can guarantee in this section.1. Atheist will arrogantly spout that the Bible and its message is false2. When you respond to them how they talked to you, they will remind you that the Bible says don't do that.3. They will not understand why this is hilarious.Therefore there are two rules I adhere to in this section.1. Don't cast pearls before swine ( fail at this often but what you going to do )2. Return all insults back in an equal fashion, then enjoy the show.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...