Oh golly gee! We're finally able to convert the Atheists to the one true religion!

http://www.carm.org/atheism/christianmistakes.htm

It was actually very nice, however I couldn't help but notice it all seemed to be telling the reader that they should have the hidden motive of converting the Atheist (whom they make sound like an alien) to believe that Jesus Christ is (sic) his personal saviour.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

HAHAAAA, bloody christians/theists plan against me.
Let them come and ........ I can plan also

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Beau-Seant! *
(*Avatar imagines a great battle)

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

* I know the original translation

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

, but it has its own meaning

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well yes. I if you believe someones disbelief can doom there eternal soul then you would want them "to see the light and truth" as per saving them. Like seeing someone drowning and throwing a life raft. In hopes of sparing there soul.

In theory most who don't have a belief in any religion wont care if someone believes them and would feel no need to get persons to see it there way. In practice i see plenty of ridicule and effort to dismember the christian belief. I don't speak with condemnation. Much of its just part of it being debate forum. Sometimes takes a hard note though.


I was looking through that site and i found this.

The nerve. I guess they conveniently forgot that the church was a proponent of slaver often enough. They felt it was written somewhere that it was ok. It is true that the bible mentions it sometimes in less then a negative light. Even Jesus parables refereed to servitude of the slavery type.

The church has also believed in bigamy sometimes. As some of the most famous god fearing men had multiple wives if they had one wife. Plus some other text.

Anyways biblical interpretation and the general message of the church is ever evolving like that of society. Except a little slower.

Also I couldn't help but be a little offended at the idea of the non religious only doing whats right because of the law. That without religion you have no real conscience.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Actually, you can prove a negative if the negative's negative has contradictory properties, thus we can be positive the negative is true. Also if the negative not being true necessitates the absence of consequences that are actually present we can prove the negative.
eg. If there is a God there can't be milk in my coffee. There's milk in my coffee so God can't exist.

That whole site is pretty lame actually. You just can't maintain an aura of philosophical competence while you believe in Noah's Ark.

 

nah, i believe in a guy who had built a ship and saved his family and maybe his farm animals (few sheep) from some floods. not more
there are legends about it in different cultures (one american indian myth also)

 

True, that has probably happened dozens of times. I'm talking about the ancestors of all animals all being on one boat, world wide flood etc.

 

that of course lol

have a read
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/planetearth/noahs_ark_010823-1.html

 

i agree with the anti noahs arc people. u know the dove that flew in with the olive branch, where had it been when the entire earth was submerged?
where did all the excess water come from? (dont say the poles, its scientifically impossible) The ice has been freezing in recognizable layers for many thousands of years

 

This is what I hate about christians, they want to push their nonesense on everyone....

We Muslims dont do that, if you want to be athiest, so be it....it is your own free will...

The Noble Quran 109. Al-Kâfirûn ( infidels )

In the Name of Allâh, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.

1. Say "O Al-Kâfirûn (disbelievers in Allâh, in His Oneness, in His Angels, in His Books, in His Messengers, in the Day of Resurrection, and in Al-Qadar, etc.)!

2. "I worship not that which you worship,

3. "Nor will you worship that which I worship.

4. "And I shall not worship that which you are worshipping.

5. "Nor will you worship that which I worship.

6. "To you be your religion, and to me my religion (Islâmic Monotheism)."

http://www.ummah.net/what-is-islam/quran/neindex.htm

 

Well PM, that's good and all, but the nations that are predominantly Muslim do push their religious codes on everyone, including nonbelievers. Not that you differ from Judaism or Chrsitianity in that respect.

 

Spam...

Do you really honestly think any of those nations are truly Islamic?

A more accurate statement is to say that such nations have an Islamic façade to prevent a religious revolution by the citizens, but that they really bend and twist Islamic law to fit their own twisted wills. Sort of like normal dictatorships, except with that added layer of "because God told me I could".

:m:

 

I for one believe Noah's Ark happened just like it says it happened in the Bible. I don't understand exactly all the details; perhaps the "bubble" theory is correct, (that the Earth before the Flood had a layer of water/ice in it's upper atmosphere); perhaps there has been a lot of "microevolution" since Noah's time and he only had to carry, say, thirty different species of land animal. But those are just theories and I freely admit that they may not be true. Nevertheless I believe a literal interpretation of the entire Bible.

I don't push my beliefs on anyone. But I would encourage you to read the Bible and give it a fair chance. Haven't you felt something was missing from your life? My personal relationship with Christ fills me completely.

--Aaron

 

That is not true, Islamic law ( Sharia ) applies ONLY on Muslims.

 

There is no way you can call that microevolution, I'm afraid. Approximately 30 species into hundreds of thousands in a few thousand years? That would be evolution to the max. Real evolution hasn't even proceeded at that astonishing rate.

 

Tell that to the US military females in Saudi.

 

You may be right; it could be a stupid idea, I don't know. But I said land animal, not every species on Earth. I don't think he had to carry fish or insects for instance, and that cuts out a whole lot of species. It also depends on who you ask even roughly how species there are today.

I don't even think discussions like this are scientific. Didn't "Science" used to mean repeatable experiments and testable hypotheses? That's right, I'm not a big fan of so-called "Creation Science." They have some interesting ideas, and some of them could be true, but they're no more science than, yep, I'll go there, evolution.

--Aaron

 

Ok well... If you ignore everything but the mammals and birds, Noah still would have had to collect a good 90,000 animals to put on the ark.

Of course, we have to understand that insects, reptiles etc can't swim, or spend such an amount of time in water, so we should rightfully include them aswell. From the 3000 different species of snake, to the 'god knows' how many different types of spider.

Further to that, we need to understand that many animals have one small problem: They eat other animals. As such, you would need to separate most, if not all, of the animals on the ark. You could not put a lion with a rabbit, or a rhino with a mongoose.

To keep many of these animals separated, you would need solid steel bar cages and some training with how to keep fierce predators in order.

Further to this, Noah would have to travel the entire globe to seek out all the animals. From the Polar Bears of icy regions to the desert lizard of the sahara. A task such as this is an absolute impossibility.

Furthermore, Many animals kill their own kind until they intend to mate. Scorpions are infamous for killing other scorpions around them as they are solitary animals. Again, more space would be required to cater for all this.

Add the food, add the tremendous weight of animal shit, and you've got a serious problem.

The story is ludicrous. The Ziusudra version at least remains within the realm of possibility. A man on a boat, going to market with some animals, when the Euphrates blows its banks. He floats off into the Persian Gulf and so on..

Anyone who considers the Noah story as a factual account of events, needs a good slap back to the world of reality.

 

Further to this, Noah would have to travel the entire globe to seek out all the animals
---------------

You don't think since God told Him to do it, that God could have "summoned" the animals to the ark for him.?
Remember, the bible said Noah and his three sons worked on building this ark according to God's designs for 120 years.

I wouldn't want to be found in the ranks of the scorner.......dismissing the supernatural hand of God as "ludicrous".

I do agree so much as to see how it "looks" that way ........being impossible, but God has a way of doing the impossible.

 

I knew someone was going to come up with this farcical comment, and it's not much of a surprise that it's you. You have this overwhelming habit of just adding anything you want to the biblical texts, which is a mixture of sickening and hysterical. But you're right nonetheless; god turned the lions into vegetarians for the duration of the trip, the polar bears were quite happy without an iceberg to keep them company, and the birds sacrificed their daily meals, knowing that there were only 2 worms left.

Why didn't he just summon them the QE2?

Oh do stop it you depressive little fart.

"In the begining there was nothing and God said 'Let there be light', and there was still nothing but everybody could see it."

"Why do born-again people so often make you wish they'd never been born the first time?"

"Why should I allow that same God to tell me how to raise my kids, who had to drown His own?"

Are we done with the worthless quotes now? Good.

 

TheVisitor is right, I guess you haven't actually read the account you're discrediting. God told Noah to build an ark, and then the animals came to him. Two by two. Quite unnatural behaviour, don't you think? So why couldn't the animals then proceed to more unnatural behaviour such as not eating each other?

Spiders and the like can hitch a ride on a handy floating tree.

Why not dump the waste over the side?

I don't know how it worked, but I do know that "with God all things are possible." Does everything have to be easily explainable to be true?

--Aaron