Yawp! Both of my hobbies! And if you like debating with people who don't know anything, what are you doing on the SecWeb? Shouldn't you be at Apologetics.org?

Michael

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Detached9:
What is the most expedient way to discredit the Bible?
My favorites are all the contradictions on whether someone has seen God or not and lived. Those ones are my favs.

-Derek


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Metacrock: My hobbies are collecting silver age comics and arguing with people who dont' know anything.

Based on what I have seen of your commentary, you have chosen the appropriate people to "argue" with. The only problem for you, Metacrock, is the fact that not one of your SecWeb opponents fit your criterion. That puts you at a distinct disadvantage.

Metacrock: Why don't you try reading it to find out what its about? Why not try reading some actual theology so you will know what all the fuss is about?

The ability to read is all one needs to see what is written in the JC Bible. Theology is needed only by those desperate to prove the impossibly absurd isn't impossibly absurd.

rodahi

How about:

"Revelations - John's brain on drugs"

Lance

Kosh: Remember where John said he was "in the spirit"?

How about 180 proof?

My favorite simple one is this. Both Mohammed and John Smith claimed to set down a bible inspired directly by God. How does one decide those claims are false, but the Gospels are true? And why don't those reasons persuade Moslems and Mormons?

And my favourite simple one is this:
WITH YOUR BRAIN.
It's there for a reason you know.

Hmm... I must have walked into Atheistic Proganda: Revising History 101 by mistake.

Is there any reason I cannot equally accuse atheists of brainwashing of children?

Any reason I can't say the same thing about atheism?

It wasn't? What about people who when they say "free-thinking" actually mean "atheistic only thinking"?

Could people please STOP CONFUSING "FUNDAMENTALISTS" AND "CHRISTIANS".
They are not one and the same thing. I am a Christian but not a fundamentalist. Most Christians I have seen posting here are not fundamentalists. If you don't like the doctrine of inerrancy then don't believe it! I don't like it and I don't believe it, but yet I am still a Christian.
Only a fundamentalist need harmonise the details of the ressurection accounts or reconcile the geneologies of Jesus. Disproving inerrancy only affects fundamentalists, who are, all said an done a minority of Christians.

Lance

Tercel: Read some history dude. Who ran the crusades, inquisitions, witch burnings and the like? Sure as hell wasn't the skeptics.

Or better yet, read about how Christianity took over the Roman empire...and its actions shortly afterword. We always here about the "Christians and Lions", but the pagans got far worse after Christians were in charge.

The proof is in the actions.

As to children, your children are your business. My children sure as hell are NOT. The problem with Christians of the do-gooder mentality is they want to get to MY children to make MY religious decisions for me.

And religious education, of whatever flavor, skeptical included, is indeed a form of brainwashing. You do it to your kids, I'll take care of mine...thank you very much.

My point was very simply that just because 10 gadzillion people believe you can't fly, that the earth is flat, or in a earth centric solar system doesn't make it a FACT.

Free-thinking simply means evaluating by available evidence. Most of us haven't found enough evidence that's worth a thing. And how many Christian fathers, how many scriptures, and so on are there stating that is simply better to have "faith" than to attempt to reason?

I agree with you on the fundies. Total idiots all.

But that puts you even in a worse position. The resurrection of Christ is the core doctrine of Christian faith. Very simply, the tall tales told in the bible do not add up, even at the gross detail level. If you want to paraphrase apolgetics boy Lee Strobel, the evidence if this was used would be tossed right out of court!

Imagine...you're in a criminal court case for captial murder as a life does indeed hang in the balance here (if you believe the cult's view). You have 5 witnesses. They can not agree on time, numbers of people, and what exactly happened at the scene. In some cases, you have major problems with location. So...if you are on this jury, or better yet the judge, would you try this case? Or have a hope of conviction for capital murder if you're the prosecutor?

If you're talking about the bible, it's a bronze age comic, from back when they were just The Fantastic Three.



The only thing I know is that this



is about as likely a second coming.

Those profound works of literature doesn't have an author who claimed that he/she are writing the words of god.
BTW isn't it a bit strange that the "word of god" can become a book. If god wanted it to be a book, god would of course call it "book of god" in the first place, right ?