POLL: What is the World's Most Evil Religion?

No response was ever given by axeman to GA's reply.



Quote from axeman:

"YOU have NOT demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt as to persuade me to believe in the notion that the Bible is ridiculous... "



Yeah right....isn't obvious? Lets see here...

1) Magic dude created the whole universe and all of us, but nothing had to create HIM

You clearly do not understand the doctrine of divinity.


2) Water turning to blood

Once we have demonstrated that the Bible is divine rather than human in origin it is not unreasonable to conceive of God's intervention and complete control of nature.


3) God sends wild animals sent to kill infants, but THOU SHALT NOT KILL!!



axeman
Elite Member

Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1771


12-02-03 06:50 PM


Now run off and go convert the brightest minds in medicine
who hold evolution as the center of all modern biological
theory and convert them to creationists.

In case you haven't noticed, the modern body of
scientific knowledge is directly against you.
Creationism isnt even taken seriously by the scientific community.

Darwinian Evolution? It is because of the above statement
that atheist kill millions of innocent unborn children everyday in the U.S.A

Did you not say this?

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25092&perpage=6&pagenumber=20

"Babies are innocent by any reasonable definition.
I reject any silly story which says you are BORN a sinner/guilty."

"Slaughtering infants would be considered evil by any rational
modern human being."

Then WHY do atheist partake in partial birth abortion?
Why did they lobby Capital Hill to make it leagal?

3) God sends wild animals sent to kill infants, but THOU SHALT NOT KILL!!

What makes God's judgement less righteous then sinful mortal men? God's law is vastly more merciful and infinite than yours or mine. If you can not explain the universe how can you understand the mind of God?

4) Hippie dude coming back to life after proclaiming to die for OUR sins.

The proof of the resurrection is a proven historical fact. You simply have not done your homework on the subject of Biblical history.


5) Exodus 20:15 "Thou shalt not steal."


Versus: Luke 19:29-34 "[Jesus] sent two of his disciples, Saying, Go ye into the village . . . ye shall find a colt tied, whereon yet never man sat: loose him, and bring him hither. And if any man ask you, Why do ye loose him? thus shall ye say unto him, Because the Lord hath need of him. . . . And as they were loosing the colt, the owners thereof said unto them, W
hy loose ye the colt? And they said, The Lord hath need of him."

You have obviously missed the point here. It can be logically determined that the owner of the colt was ready to contribute to the work of God and seeing that once confronted with the fact that "the Lord had need of it" they were willing and ready to give.

Nice try.




6) Throw in some slavery:
Leviticus 25:45-46 "Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, . . . and they shall be your possession . . . they shall be your bondmen forever."

How many times do I have to explain to you that in the O.T. Isreal was under theocratic rule. Isreal was to conquer the land of Canaan and were given specific instructions.

Joel 3:8 "And I will sell your sons and your daughters into the hand of the children of Judah, and they shall sell them to the Sabeans, to a people far off: for the Lord hath spoken it."

You really don't get it do you. Isreal was punished because of their sin and disobedience and therefore were taken into captivity.


Again your lack of ancient times and customs is staggering.
If ancient Greece slavery was likened to "Employer/Employee" relationships. Slaves had rights. Slaves were to be paid decent wages. If one was in debt then they would have to work off the debt and once completed were released from service. Some slaves stayed on with their "masters" after being released because they were treated so fairly and paid very well.
No different than today's nanny or butler or personal assistant.






7) Oooops...god changes his mind after saying he never changes.
I guess he must be bipolar.

Malachi 3:6 "For I am the Lord; I change not."

Genesis 6:6,7 "And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth . . . And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth . . . for it repenteth me that I have made him.

Again your lack of understanding and Biblical interpretation is laughable. The Hebrew word given here to express "repenteth" expresses sadness for the failure of man to obey God when given the choice and opportunity to do so.






8) Is god confused here? Truly bipolar

Exodus 20:5 "For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation." (Repeated in Deuteronomy 5:9)

Ezekiel 18:20 "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father."


Yes God is jealous over his creation. "Thou shall not worship other god's."


9) Gee....wish he would make up his sick mind :d

Psalm 145:9 "The Lord is good to all."

Isaiah 45:7 "I make peace and create evil. I the Lord do all these things."

Again the judgement of God is perfect were as man can not judge righteously because he is imperfect.

The Hebrew word given here is a direct reference to good and evil in a sense the evil is a direct consequence for disobeying God law.



10) Wow!!! What a setup. God is worse than the mob!


James 1:13 "Let no man say . . . I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man."

Genesis 22:1 "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham."

This is getting rather boring. Do your homework before making stupid comments about things you have not taken the time to understand.

God did not "tempt" Abraham with evil but rather he "tested" Abraham to see if he would obey God. The Hebrew word used here is also used in other places throughout the Old Testament.





11) Hmmmm your supposed to believe in this fairy tale, but no
one has even ever seen him?

Wow. what a lame argument. And from someone of such intellectual prowess.

I've never been to China but that does not prove that China does not exist. C'mon dude.

John 1:18 "No man hath seen God at any time."
Exodus 33:20 "Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live."

Oh wait a second!!!

Genesis 32:30 "For I have seen God face to face."
Exodus 33:11 "And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend."

Gee... what a liar!!!



O.K. another apparent contradiction right? NOT.

NO man has seen God face to face in all his fullness.
It would take to long to walk you through the Greek lexicon on this one. Once again nice try.


Shall I go on???

Oh wait.... I don't know a damn thing about the christian bible.

EXACTLY! You don't.

I've had tougher arguments debating the Hamitic Hypothesis.
You are truly wasting my time here with this nonsense.
You have dodged the real issue which is about origins.
I have given you a rational explanation but you have only name called.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You clearly do not understand ancient history, laws or customs. you continue to impose your modern day beliefs into the text.

Go back and study the art and science of Biblical interpretation then we can talk.
 
Quote from axeman:

"atheistic worldviews are as prone to the same problems if not more so"

How so? Atheism doesn't state anything.
Atheism is simply the LACK of theistic beliefs.

atheism is stating something- "I don't know" and/or am not convinced.


Atheism is therefore not capable of compelling an atheist
to do anything immoral, because it says NOTHING
of the atheists morality. Atheists have all kinds of moral systems.

However, biblical followers have historically read things
in their holy books which explicitly state to KILL infidels,
stone them to death, and burn the witches.
It also tells them to CONVERT people.

and websites like christianburner.com are doing what?
PROMOTING THIER ATHEISM! and/or making a declaritive statement that theism is false and/or ridiculous?

To deny the validity of the bible because you don't understand it or agree with its rational is a mistake.

So they run off in crusades trying to convert everyone,

Not all theist do this.

and if you refuse, your an infidel,

Not all theist agree with this statement either.

so they KILL you.
How many people did you kill before you converted to atheism?

These versions of THEISM and what they state DIRECTLY
correlate to the actions of the people doing the killing.

How do you know this to be true? You are simply making assumptions without proof. How many atheist abortionist are there as opposed to theist abortionist?


They are simply following their BOOKS. Its very clear.
Actually those that hold to Old Testament rituals and theocratic customs are in error and don't understand the historical text as you have proven that you don't either.


"if christianity and islam are downstream branches of theism, then communism, fascism, utilitarianism et. al are downstream branches of atheism."

False analogy. Atheism is not required for communism, Fascism, etc.
Theism *IS* required for christianity and islam.
Bad correlation.

and evolution and a lack of theism is attributed to abortion of the innocent!

I might as well claim that Nazism is a downstream branch
of catholicism because Hitler was a catholic.
But we know this is a BAD correlation because although
he was a catholic, it was not his SPECIFIC CATHOLIC
beliefs which caused him to kill jews.



"the point is that you can't point a finger at theistic belief systems without recognizing that atheistic belief systems have an equal if not superior claim to the murder and mayhem title... "


Nonsense. Again, how can something which is simply the
LACK of belief in a diety compel anyone to murder? It cant.
Your analogy is totally flawed.

likewise how can you assume that to be a theist is to practice ancient rituals and theocratic rule (especial to kill in the name of God)?

You are simply setting up and strawman and knocking it down.

stick to the real argument.

"In the begining God created the heavens and the earth."
Genesis 1:1

GA asked you to come with a real argument or alternative to the above declarative statement. If you can't do that then just admit it and move on with the debate instead of going around in circles.

p.s. Just because you disagree with the above passage of Scripture does not validate the theist argument. This I agree however if you can't come up with a logical alternative to the contrary evidence then perhaps it's time to move on in this discussion.

just my opinion.
 
Rogue, you are the one who is practicing sophistry. Trying to support your argument that suspension of disbelief is impossible by changing the meaning of the word "atheist". To me, atheism always means the same thing. A lack of belief.
 
Quote from Bolts:

Rogue, you are the one who is practicing sophistry. Trying to support your argument that suspension of disbelief is impossible by changing the meaning of the word "atheist". To me, atheism always means the same thing. A lack of belief.
More...

You are entitled to your belief, and your own definition.


Would the KKK be able to define themselves as non racist?

Sure they would, but would anyone believe them?

Show me where is accepted among scholars and philosophers that a plant practices atheism.

Show me any textbook of biology that defines a plant as an atheist, or as having the properties of an atheist.
 
Good gravy,
Don't these religious nuts ever get the point?
The original point is a plant is an atheist.
And you are trying to make a logical discussion out of this?
You are getting high on your own gas man!
Quoting the bible is really boring.

I WANT to change the SUBJECT?

You are the one bringing it around to a windy diatribe on christianity.
Boring.
Why don't you get off your "sin of pride" horse.
And go haunt Yahoo.
Sheeh.
 
Quote from bobcathy1:

Good gravy,
Don't these religious nuts ever get the point?

Don't these atheist nuts ever get the point?

Apparently NOT.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25092&perpage=6&pagenumber=72

The original point that Guardian Angel made was- "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." (Gen 1:1)
And that the Bible is divine rather than human in origin.


Can the atheist perspective come up with something more reasonable or logical?


Quoting the bible is really boring.

Is that because you don't understand it?


I WANT to change the SUBJECT?

What would you like to discuss?
More...
 
OK, my bad.

This discussion TURNED into one on is a plant an atheist.
The original part was "what is the world's most evil religion".

Personally I think all religion is evil.
None of it seems to teach love
Or tolerance of others.

My 2 cents.
:(
 
Already been explained about 10 times that atheism isn't something you "practice". Hey, this is fun though. Why change the subject? :p
 
Quote from bobcathy1:


Personally I think all religion is evil.
None of it seems to teach love
Or tolerance of others.

My 2 cents.
:(
More...


Check out Buddhism. I am not an expert, but from what little I know, it may defy your statement.

Peace,
:)RS
 
Quote from ARogueTrader:



You are entitled to your belief, and your own definition.


Would the KKK be able to define themselves as non racist?

Sure they would, but would anyone believe them?

Show me where is accepted among scholars and philosophers that a plant practices atheism.

Show me any textbook of biology that defines a plant as an atheist, or as having the properties of an atheist.
More...

What a ridiculous comparison. The KKK's principles are inherently racist. If they claimed to change their principles, then perhaps the principles they then claim would not by definition be racist, but in either case it would have nothing to do with creating a stupid f*$king definition. What is it that is so hard for you to understand? What is your major malfunction? You have made a big argument over a semantic that is not even central to the real argument. If you simply accept the definition axeman provides, since it is not important and simply means that axeman's argument is made using that definition, and you simply then go on from there (not that you were winning your argument over the definition anyhow).......and thanks a lot for helping me to allow you to annoy me to the point that I couldn't ignore your ridiculous arguments over semantics without saying something, but that is a mistake I won't make again. :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top