Missing the David saga and the Joshua saga. Joshua saga was like non-stop action so that makes it inherently dope. David saga was like a handbook on how to be a boss. You like a girl but she’s married? Send her husband to war and then throw her in the harrem.
Thread still lacks any type of empirical evidence on god thus it is a failure. No stool sample = no God.
You can’t give empirical evidence for both sides in a forum.
:lol:
that’s because you have no argument. your arguments consist “YO DAWG IM GREAT YOU CANT DEBATE ME YOUR ARGUMENTS SUCK!!!” proving again the inverse correlation between religiosity and intelligence. i don’t bother responding to marvin because his arguments arguments are more copy and paste from various theist websites that try to justify the biblical contradictions: “oh hai, there is no contradiction between luke and matthew’s jesus genealogy cause one of them is for joseph and the other one is for mary… yeah…” :looney::looney::looney::looney::looney: trying to reason with nutjobs too long will cause long term brain damage.
now since you’re kinda slow i’ll explain it to you again. i’m making fun of you for being so gung ho about defending a religion you obviously don’t even believe in. that does not contradict the hundreds of years of religious bloodshed and ignorance in the name of jesus. those happened. that is historical fact.
and how do you think all these communist leaders got so powerful in the first place? by setting themselves up as gods that people could worship. people sang hymns to mao everyday. faith causes people to blindly believe in crap without questioning, which is what leads them to do evil.
the gods they believe in are all different. eastern religions don’t believe in the western concept of a god. read the tao te ching and get back to me.
in other words, a religion founded upon ignorance and stupidity of its believers. kind of like today, where 90% of the christian community has never read the bible. some things never change.
what are you talking about? i wish it was relegated to the dark ages, but religious stupidity persists even today. if it didn’t then atheists wouldn’t be so fucking pissed off. cmon son, go back to trolling about poop, although million does that better than you.
That’s not what it’s about, the thread is about philosophical meat-beating.
Don’t get in the way, there are souls to save from the evils of Religion!
…
… no wait, that doesn’t sound quite right does it.
A guy in my philosophy class asked this question yesterday I think it’d be cool to put it here
“By what laws are we judging the laws to be either Just or Unjust”?
sounds like something a college student would ask 
edit: or maybe HS
Crazy thread but heres why i think these arguments go nowhere.
I think the problem is that in these debates where the Christian is debating the Atheist, almost all the time the Christian who claims to believe in the bible will not presuppose the Bible in debate, but rather adopt the atheist’s presupposition and try and lead it to proof of God. The problem is this jus leads to another question if by the off chance you happen to be succesful. Which God? They should rather presuppose what they claim to believe in and go from there when filtering evidence. This would make debates seem more like Christian vs Atheist, then what Im seeing nowadays.
But yea this thread is cray 
Even if Marvin does copy paste from apologist at least he is using an educated source instead of nutthugging sites made by anti-theist kids such as evilbible.No even needs any help on those "contradictions’. It is dumb to consider those things as contradictions because not only is the literacy history a major conflict with the accusations but it’s just common sense because how can the bible show Jesus to be a full descendant of David if only the lineage of one parent is shown, especially if that one parent is a STEP father. And with the history of the literacy, Luke used Matt a source. So common sense, you got some balls claiming people to be brain damage and doing copy paste jobing. lol
LOL.Nice try trying to save yourself but nah, you’ve proven year after year that you know that Christians have to live honest and straight edged lives but here you go again with Dark age references, your usually and only argument in a religion debate.
You didn’t get the part you responded to? Read the referencing of Stalin again… and think what i meant by that.
You misread my argument, looks like you are losing the ability to stay in relevant understanding to what is being said. I was talking about practices and philosophies, not the concept of god’s identity. Every religion will have a group doing their own way of practice.
You’ve proven to be part of that community.
I’m talking about how your arguments are so straw man that you persistently use the dark ages to support you because you have nothing else to use. I’ve already drawn out how useless the dark ages strat is because it’s annihilated academically. You are the only one who has been showing stupidity in threads like this just look at how many invalid comments you gave, the misunderstanding of religious beliefs and in addition to a number of parts in this post that is so far from the point i gave in my last great post to you.
I could be doing those great threads again but you guys asked for this…I didn’t want to debate, i wanted to see how threads like this would do with out my fullness being involved. Million is a long time fan of my threads… and so are you just like you said before. So like my posts instead of replying to me with a useless post decorated with smileys.
A third reason is because it’s a logical fallacy. If both of these gospels contradicted each other then why were they both canonized? I wish Fishjie would atleast question the logic of what he asserts or reads from those atheist sites because it gets frustrating looking at how bad the common sense of some people.
If the gospels do contradict each then why were they included? Why not just one gospel, then the rest of the new testament being composed of the other books such as the Dialogue of the savior, gospel of the Savior, Gospel of Mary, the acts of peter/john, or Acts of pilot… instead just to avoid the “oh contradictions” remark? Some Atheists think that they are the only ones who have noticed these differences and the church never read the books during the canonization.
er no, not at all.
Atheist "I make no claim, I ask you to prove what you claim"
Deist “I make a claim, you disprove it”
One follows the scientific method, the other is a bullshit artist.
Except in these cases the atheists always seem to be the ones aggressively browbeating everyone around them with their beliefs.
The agonizing irony is how absolutely evangelical and doctrinaire people are about it.
The atheists in this thread are exactly what they claim hate. Nearly every vice and logical failure they apply to religion, they’re practicing themselves.
Ring me when you find atheists picking on women, gays, science, and other critical issues. That’s what religion is currently doing.
Most of us find nothing wrong with personal religion if it helps, or even bhudists, hindus, zoastrians, or the other more tolerant of humanity and science organized religions.
Most atheists just shit over the idiocy of Christianity and Islam and the impact they have on our society, and most problems can be traced to those two religions.
Except… they just can’t shut the fuck up about it (and I know something about not being able to STFU). And need to (in some historical incidents, violently) aggressively force their beliefs on others.
Your reasoning is even more messed up though, you’re saying "We personally hate Christianity and Islam, so we attack it, but… other religions aren’t so bad. That’s personal prejudice, not logic or the scientific method.
Show me how bhuda lovers or hindus cause more violence than jesus fans and muslims, you can’t. So from a strict observation of how those groups act, yeah christians and muslims are the worst of the magical sky god fans.
I don’t agree with any of them, I think they are all wrong. But viewing them all by damage done, Christians and Muslims are horrid.
oh im def gonna read this entire thread when I get home from work in the morning, gotta bounce now 
I can understand people who followed religions in the past but now really?
Most people have a hard time accepting “I don’t know” for an answer so they either choose bull shit and call it God or choose bull shit and call it science.
I’m not even arguing that (it’s pointless). I’m rather arguing that your position has more to do with emotion and prejudice than with logic and science.
[media=youtube]MeSSwKffj9o[/media]
…scratches head So because the moral code of a religion differs from yours and the standards given by the “politically correct” world makes them evil and worthy of your ridicule in your world view? Ummm you mean thats not what you’re also doing? And evil? How da hell does that even make sense? All evil is is the absence of good, not some polar opposite entity to good. How can we have evil (the absence of good) if good isnt even established in your worldview?
Dude I’'m all for debates but when I jus see a bunch of whiny over emotional atheists throwing out supposed statistics about violence out of thin air I cant help but cringe. Jus goin wround insulting and bashin rather than debating. Have a civilized debate sheesh…The immaturity in this thread is just ridiculous