Atheist vs. Theist

Sandycane's picture

Ignorant Xtians!

Every once in a while, I get these stupid emails from a guy who lives near by . I usually delete them.

I'm just curious as to how the experts here would reply to this nonsense...

Here is is:

 

Did You Know?

 

 

God's accuracy may be observed in the hatching of  eggs.

For  example:


-the eggs of the potato bug hatch in 7 days;

-those of the canary in 14 days;

-those of the barnyard hen in 21 days;

-The eggs of ducks and geese hatch in 28 days;

-those  of the mallard in 35 days;

-The eggs of the parrot and the ostrich hatch in 42 days.

(Notice, they are all divisible by seven, the number of days in a week!)


God's wisdom is seen in the making of an elephant... The four legs of this great beast all bend
forward in  the same direction. No other quadruped is so made.  God
planned that this animal would have a huge body, too large to live on two
legs... For this reason He gave it four fulcrums so that it can rise from the
ground easily.


The horse rises from the ground on its two front legs  first. A cow rises from the ground with its two hind  legs first. How wise the Lord is in all His works of creation!

God's wisdom is revealed in His arrangement of sections  and segments, as well as in the number of grains.

Jean Chauvin's picture

Free Will is Fantasy

FREE WILL IS FANTASY

There is no such thing as free will. This is a pagan notion from Greek Philosopher that has crept into the church. Christianity does not consistently believe in Free Will.

Logically speaking, to have free will denotes a negative that you are free FROM a given something or someone. Thus logically this would mean that you are free from God.

Since God is sovereign, this means that He has every control over ALL His creation. To denote that you are free from God would logically mean that God is NOT sovereign.

Many Christians not trained in logic commit this huge error and logical fallacy. Those who hate God on here, do not  hate God via their own free will. They hate God because they were born to hate God.

They are filthy scum that God created as an example of His justice. They will all be destroyed.

Thus Free Will is false via reality of all. To say that you have free will simply is another pathetic attempt at hating God. But in reality, you are simply storing up the wrath of God that is soon to come your way.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

 

 

 

 

Jean Chauvin's picture

God may hate you!

Hello,

Many wimpy Christians today tell people that God loves everybody. God is a flower child and puts tulips in guns. If you don't like God, He sits outside your door like a pussy cat, scrathing your door until you let Him in. Jesus has long hair like Fabio and may be a homosexural in San Francisco.

This is NOT the Biblical Jesus. If Jesus was wanting to come in your door, He'd kick it down.

God does not love everybody. He hated Esau (Romans 9:13). John 3:16 is not about the whole planet world, but only His elect in the world.

So you filthy no good immoral atheists are actually possibly hated by God. You think you hate Him? His hate is a righteous hate. And He will throw you in flames forever. You will be tortured soon enough.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

God Loves Me, but He may Hate You!

 

 

BobSpence's picture

Peanut Gallery for redneF vs. Mr_Metaphysics

I see Mr_M has finally returned.

Mr_M wrote:

Okay.  Give me some other meanings of the term and tell me which methodology denies that if premises of an argument are all true and the form is valid, then the conclusion may be false?

That is fine, but it requires you to know, ie prove, that the "premises of an argument are all true" in the actual world. 

In particular, S5 in Modal Logic assumes that you know that X is 'possibly necessary', which, for such an entity, would require complete knowledge of Reality, including the actual nature of 'God'.

 

redneF's picture

Theists ; Time to grab a clue...

For f**k sakes.

Just "Think about it"

Not just some of it.

All of it...

 

Brian37's picture

Peanut Gallary for rednef v Jean Claud van dippy

I like this quip from Red at the end of the thread,

Quote:
Are you in training for the Olympics in 'Circular Reasoning'?

No Rednef, he is just putting on the opening show of epic fails. His attitude is "fail big or go home".

 

TGBaker's picture

Christian Atheism

Check it out see what you think and critique.

http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=523&C=526

mrOriginal's picture

A QUESTION FOR THEISTS

 I have a question for Theists.

 

You believe that God created you, and everything else. Yet, you cannot prove it, and still decide to believe.

Being such experts on the orgins of life in the Universe answer this.

If you believe in "Creation"

 

Then what created "God"?

 

It is a contradiction to preach Creationism and then keep your "creator" exempt from that belief. 

 

I don't want to hear any of that 'God just IS crap, or there always was GOD", or "because the bible says so"  Give me come concrete God evidence and I will become a believer on the spot. Have God stop by my house, or send me and email or something...or better yet, ask him to respond to this post, when in doubt, go to the source right?

Believing in creation implies that something had to come before something, that came before something, that came before something else..and so on.

So please educate me on the mysteries of the entire Universe without ever getting off our planet.

 

Thanks,

 

Mr. O

butterbattle's picture

Popcorn thread for redneF v. Jean Chauvin

Jean Chauvin wrote:
Hey RedBull, when you get your wings, and you're done crying to mommy, grow some balls and admit that you lost. Otherwise answer my questions.

Jean Chauvin is even ruder than redneF in this debate. Not that surprising, but still interesting to note.

Jean Chauvin wrote:
A Professor in philosophy (Me)

Breaking the 9th commandment for Jesus. Wheee!

Brian37's picture

Peanut Gallery for Rednef v Caposkia one on one thread.

Please do not comment in that thread, post here if you want to comment about their one on one debate.

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/29079

Caposkia wrote:
There is no yes or no answer to that.  The reason is because some of it is understood to be taken literal, and some of it is understood to be taken metaphorically.  unlike the atheistic assumption that we can just pick and choose what to take literal and what not to, there is extensive research that goes into understanding what must be taken literal and not.  Most of what should not be taken literally is pretty obvious.  Beyond literal and metaphorical, there are some parts that are known to be parables and some understood to be historical.  

ultimately the answer depends on what part of the Bible you're talking about.  Don't take it the wrong way, the questionable parts are not pertinent to the belief system of Christianity and are only support for the personality of God and/or a progression in a timelilne.  Some are good life lesson stories... e.g. Job is a book in question as to whether it really happened or not... it can be in question because it is understood to be the oldest story in the Bible.  The likelihood of it being a parable and not historically accurate is better in my mind due to some extra spiritual characters that are not exampled through the rest of the Bible.

Syndicate content