Atheists Need To Read The Bible Before Commenting On It

 An Atheist posted this in a religion forum.

Hear me out. Until I was 20 I was sure there was < Sunkist62 > 2023-01-28 07:47

a being who could see everything I did & who didn't like most of it.He seemed to care about the minutia of my life, like on what day to worship, eat meat, or fish on Fridays.
And yet, he let earthquakes & hurricanes, floods & fire destroy entire communities, ignoring the "saints" among them who followed the assigned rules.

Eventually, I realized that I didn't believe there was such a being. It didn't seem reasonable.
I stand against forcing anyone to pray; in schools, football fields, etc. It's not Constitutional

Perhaps this Atheist should have paid more attention to the Bible. Nowhere does God promise that no harm will come to His People. God promised his protection, but like any good parent, God knows that adversity can build character. God isn't a cosmic Santa Claus. He doesn't guarantee paradise on Earth until the time comes for the end of all things. All things ultimately work towards a good end, and it is for the people of God to understand what that ultimate good is.

Complaining about forced prayer is irrelevant, and doesn't help this person's stance. Prayer is communication with God. Any good parent appreciates communication. Even His Son provided a model for that communication.

My message to Atheists is to pay better attention and learn who God really is. These rants like the one I'm citing only show how ignoarant the average Atheist really is when it comes to the God of the Bible.

'Nuff said.

If you're pro life, you're now a "Religious Extremist"

The recent decision by the United States Supreme Court to make abortion a States' Rights issue has Atheists all over the Internet up in arms. Groups like American Atheists and Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) label anybody who's pro-life a "religious extremist", as if you have to believe in God in order to be pro-life.

Sorry guys, but I was pro-life long before I started going to church or even became a Republican. I became a parent, and as I held my beautiful daughter I realized that I coud never support the killing of an innocent viable human being.

Most atheists are political liberals, and that means most of them do not believe that human life has its own intrinsic value. It's left up to the individual to decide if they're carrying a baby or a fetus. A baby has value. A fetus is worthless to the point of being treated as something less than human. The fetus has simply been dehumanized by the law, treated as a non-person until the baby is given a name. A non-person can't be murdered, and this loophole in the law makes it open season on otherwise viable humans.

In the Atheist world view, God has been eliminated and the human being has become God's replacement, holding power over life and death based on a person's whims.

Destroying the egg of a bald eagle carries the fine of 5000.00 plus jail time:

https://www.dividedstates.com/abortion-eagle%e2%80%99s-egg-vs-human-fetus/

An egg is not an eagle. It has the potential to hatch as an eagle. Yet the egg is assigned more value than a potential live person.

There is something seriously wrong with a society that places less value on a human than on a bird, and labels pro-humans "extremists". 

Posted in a Craigslist forum:

Tax the anti-abortion churches .. < nonukesgal > 2022-05-06 11:21

Why should I have to pay road taxes, property taxes, etc. etc. when churches are not paying their fair share..Subsidizing religion is nothing but welfare for the god fearing!

Does Ms. nonukes understand that road maintenance taxes are collected as part of taxes on gasoline?

This is funny, especially since the person identifiying herself as nonukesgal has boasted in the past about driving an electric car. Perhaps she should consider paying her "fair share" of road taxes before harping on churches.

Churches pay their own utility bills, maintenance fees, and even "police and fire protection fees" in lieu of property taxes.

So what does Ms. nonukes think she's helping to subsidize? Does she understand the tax system at all?

Logic And Reason?

 I've been told that Atheists have "logic and reason" while Christians have "superstition and fear".

Yet, when Believers challenge online Atheists to support their beliefs with logic and reason, the conversation gets dragged down to an insult-fest in which the Atheist hurls obscenities in an attempt to intimidate the Believer.

This is completely unnecessary and accomplishes nothing. If Atheism is considered the "default" position and is so logical, why do Atheists have such trouble arguing LOGICALLY in defense of their beliefs?

And yes, Atheism is a non-religious belief system. Atheists have a tough position to defend. The Atheist not only needs to prove God doesn't exist, the Atheist must demonstrate that God is impossible.

The Believer has a much easier time logically defending the existence of God because the Believer's position is PROVABLE. Despite an Atheist's claims of a lack of evidence for God, there are plenty of people who have seen evidence in a variety of ways. On top of that, lack of "evidence" doesn't mean God doesn't exist. God could choose to remain a mystery.

I personally believe that there is plenty of evidence for God. Besides personal revelation, the fact remains: the universe we live in stands as evidence of God's existence. This claim drives Atheists crazy because there is no way to refute it without proving God is impossible.

Also, there are many scientists and other highly educated people who have become convinced that not only does God exist, but His existence is necessary. In other words, nothing would exist without God.

This presents Believers with a golden opportunity to open a dialogue with the Atheist, as long we behave as the Bible dictates with "gentleness and respect".

   

Extremism Is in The Eye Of The Beholder

An Atheist in a blog posted this:

And despite the cries of our opponents, most atheists really aren't very good at extremism. The religious are very good at extremism.

To the Atheist everything a Christian believes is extreme, and acting on that belief is considered extremism.

Atheist extremism is hardly mentioned, however, because it usually results in the creation of governments like the Soviet Union or the Peoples Republic of China.

If you want to see a good example of Atheist extremism, watch the current wave of ANTIFA riots in major US cities. Atheism is a core belief of Communists as they believe religion is a stumbling block to achieving their idea of Utopia.

So tell me, who is more dangerous: a group of nuns who won't offer to pay for birth control for their employees, or a mob of masked thugs destroying public and private property?

The fact is, Atheism metastaizes into radical movements like Antifa.

Think about it. 

American Atheists Doesn't Care About Loss Of A Paycheck

Once again, American Atheists, a haven for intellectual dishonesty, is spinning another false narrative narrative about religious organizations. Their issue is about small business loans:

http://www.feedspot.com/?dadi=1#feed/fof_fo_1688244__f_4977406/article/6262666582?dd=4311523148070748

The focus and purpose of the AA blog entry is to bash President Trump AND religious organizations.

“Due to the Trump Administration’s unwillingness to provide full disclosure, we have had to work with limited data. Yet the picture is clear: this is an unprecedented giveaway to religious organizations,” said Alison Gill, Vice President of Legal and Policy at American Atheists.

“In two months, the Trump Administration has given churches and religious schools more money than double the CDC’s annual budget of  "6.5 Billion” said Nick Fish, president of American Atheists. “If that doesn’t make it crystal clear what this administration’s priorities are, nothing will.

Here's what American Atheists doesn't bother to recognize: these are SMALL BUSINESS loans. There are specific qualifications for receiving these loans. These religious organizations run schools and day care centers. These places employ PEOPLE, and are thus regulated by the  government where it concerns pay and taxation. When it comes to providing services, they are businesses and run like businesses.

Remember the big issue made of religious organizations being held to the same non-discriminatory  hiring practices concerning the LQBTQ community as secular businesses? If those policies stand, that also means the GOVERNMENT regulates the business side of a religious organization, so they should qualify as a business.

Small businesses are doing whatever they can to survive. Church based businesses to not want to terminate employees. Religious organizations still pay utility bills and are levied police and fire protection "fees". The money for this has been cut off due to COVID 19 lockdowns. These loans are a necessity for EVERY small business that is struggling, including a church day care center or school.

The sad fact is, public schools are closed all over the U.S. and the employees of those public schools still receive a paycheck for effectively doing NOTHING. Hoe many billions is this costing the taxpayers? Far more more than a few SBA loans to private schools.

Unfortunately, American Atheists' attitude is, "if you work for a private school, tough luck Charlie."

'Nuff said. 

Now Let's Tear Down the Jesus Statues!

This may be one of the silliest arguments of all time. The fact that "caucasian" inlcudes a wide group of people is virtually ignored by the average protester. Here's a gem by Shaun King, a spokesman for the Anti White Jesus Movement. I don't know if Mr. King is an atheist, but lots of Atheists are reposting his tweets. In attacking traditional renderings of Jesus:

“They are a form of white supremacy,” King tweeted about the monuments. 
“Always have been,” King tweeted. “In the Bible, when the family of Jesus wanted to hide, and blend in, guess where they went? EGYPT! Not Denmark. Tear them down.”

Uh, sorry Mr. King, but is it possible that Jesus' parents took Him to Eqypt because it was 1000's of miles closer to Palestine? Not to mention that Denmark probably didn't exist as a civilized country? But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of a compelling narrative, right?

Egyptians were not all dark brown. Just look at the renderings of the ancient Egyptian nobles that have been preserved through time.

Folks, we don't know exactly what Jesus looked like, but we do know that not all Middle Easterners are brown. It seems that purpose of the argument is to attack white supremacy, but it's being done by forcing Jesus into another stereotype instead.

If I was to say all Asians look alike I'd be called a racist. Yet it's not racist to make the same claim in trying to describe Jesus' appearance.

So who are the racists here?

Think about it.

The Latest Tomfoolery From FFRF

Here we go again. It's that wonderful group, the Freedom From Religion Foundation, those staunch "defenders" of the Constitution, creating an attack ad against the churches during the COVID 19 pandemic.

https://www.freethoughttoday.com/vol-37-no-04-may-2020/feeling-helpless-or-angry-heres-how-to-fight-back

Blasphemy... an Atheist hobby

The article is as follows:

Feeling helpless or angry? Here’s how to fight back.

Many of you have contacted FFRF, angry and worried that governors or other officials across the country are exempting churches and religious worship from the “safer at home” orders necessary to stop the spread of the coronavirus.

Why only churches? There are more health risks at your local Walmart or CostCo store. 

If you’re stuck at home, perhaps feeling a little helpless, isolated and angry that these churches are risking your life and the lives of your loved ones, we want to help you fight back.

If you're an atheist, you don't attend church. You avoid Christians as much as possible. So how is a church endagering your life?

In response to the overwhelming and heartening volume of requests for advice on how best to hold our elected officials accountable during this turbulent time, FFRF has created a set of resources for your use. FFRF’s website now has a page specifically dedicated to secular activism in the time of coronavirus. You can access it here: ffrf.org/legal/covid-resources.

So now the Atheists have something to do with their time while they sit at home. They can write more angry letters which will accomplish next to nothing, since MOST churches are following the stay at home orders!

FFRF has already sent a letter to every governor explaining why church exemptions are unconstitutional and lethal. We’ve also asked each FFRF member to call and email your own governor. That action alert has basic talking points. We’ve sent other letters of complaint, too. We’ve written op-eds. We will continue to challenge these inappropriate religious exemptions. And we know you want to fight them, too.

Actually, restricting one's right to worship is what is unconstitutional. The main reason organizations like FFRF get away with it is because they can judge shop for judicial activists who are willing to bend the Constitution to suit a liberal world view.

Please continue to report (ffrf.org/legal/report) any state/church violations happening in your community. While the Religious Right continues to exploit this global public health crisis as an opportunity to peddle their beliefs, we in the secular community must use all the resources at our disposal to ensure that reason-based solutions drive our public policy responses and solutions to this pandemic.

Nobody is exploiting anything. Nonetheless, the FFRF is behaving like an atheist Gestapo, reporting anybody that offends their sensitive feelings. No atheists are dying because a handful of people at tiny neighborhood church decided to congregate. Nonetheless, FFRF is giving marching orders to the unhappy few to restrict the freedom of the majority.

Thank you for your activism. We hope you are staying home and staying safe.

While the FFRF members hide at home, I'd like to mention that local churches are actively helping in whatever way they can during the pandemic. Churches are helping the needy get food, delivering medicine, providing home teaching aids and materials, and allowing their facilities to be used as temporary COVID testing centers. I have no knowledge of anybody at FFRF or American Atheists doing the same. In fact it's time, especially now, for atheists to put up or shut up, especially when they go the trouble of accenting their gripe with a demeaning picture of Jesus.

More Silliness From Richard Dawkins

"I am agaianst religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world."

REALLY? Dr. Dawkins, have you never heard of Galileo, Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday, or Georges Lemaitre?

I am a habitual watcher of documentaries, especially those about nature and the Universe. I love learning about my world.

What astonishes me is how a brilliant person like Richard Dawkins can make such incredibly stupid assumptions.

That is what happens when bigotry trumps reason. I pity this poor man.

A Silly Twitter Post From Richard Dawkins

From the Twitter feed of Atheism's leading spokesman, Richard Dawkins:

Richard Dawkins@RichardDawkins·Apr 4

Immune because “I’m covered in the blood of Jesus”

A church is an enclosed space where people right next to each other sing their lungs out into the air. A church is virus heaven: a focal point where people get infected, then go out & infect others

Perhaps the same could be said for Dr. Dawkins' lectures. After all, we're talking about 30 to 50 people OR MORE crammed into an enclosed space, elbow-to-elbow. Should we prohibit all college lecures during the yearly cold and flu season for the sake of public safety?

Nawwww... Dr. Dawkins is too important to let a flu bug interfere with his livelihood.

More Pretzel Logic From Atheists Alliance

From a Post by AA President Bill Flavell (Flavell's comments are italicized): 

I bet every atheist has heard Christians claiming that they used to be an atheist. When I hear that, I always ask them why they were an atheist and invariably discover that they were not really atheists at all—they were lazy Christians. Instead of praying/going to church they preferred drinking/sex/drugs/gambling or other self-indulgent pursuits.

So are we to assume no Christians began life as atheists? Ever? 

Then I ask why they changed their minds and they always give me an emotional reason—they had an experience of some kind and discovered Jesus. What I never hear is “I found the ontological/cosmological/teleological argument…” [or whatever].

The Bible focuses on historical testimony, not teleological arguments. Christian belief is an act of faith. Not every Christian has a Philosophy degree and can quote Thomas Aquinas or Saint Augustine.

Well, in my opinion, if you were an atheist for no logical reason, you were a bad atheist and if you are now a Christian for no logical reason, you are a bad Christian.

So Atheists that grew up in non religious households are now bad atheists? All because they did what their parents did?

If logic takes you to atheism, you will almost certainly remain an atheist because no matter how much your life changes, logic will stubbornly stay the same. The beauty of logic is that it does not depend upon how you happen to feel today.

I guess this poor guy never heard of Anthony Flew? After more than 50 years of study, Mr. Flew, the most outspoken Atheist of his time, was led to a belief in Deism by LOGIC.

The idea that logic always leads you to Atheism is simply a silly assumption that Atheists the world over have coddled themselves with for centuries. If you want to see what logic can do, watch the debates between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox. Dr. Lennox uses logic to tear down every premise by dawkins, and he does it in a calm and collected  manner.

This is the reason Dawkins won't debate any more Theists. They're just too logical.

Village Atheist claims "no morals"

An atheist posted this in a Craigslist forum:

Religion = Autistic delusion < granpa > 2020-02-11 06:35

There is no such thing as moral or immoral behavior (and therefore no such thing as sin). There is only civilized and uncivilized behavior.

Civilized behavior is behavior that respects civilized laws, rules, and expectations. Civilized laws are laws that do not give any one person or any one group of people any special rights above what all others have. The more a society treats everyone as equals the more civilized it is. (Equal rights. Equal protection. Equal pay for equal work. Equal punishment for equal crimes.)

Wrong.  A society's laws are also reflective of its morals. On top of that, "civilized behavior" is purely subjective. For example some cultures believe it's more civilized to eat with forks and spoons vs eating with your hands. Look at the various degress of murder a person can be found guilty of. Those aren't practical applications but moral ones.

 
Religion is how autistic people (strictly speaking hyper-empirical people) see civilization. They see all authority figures as priests.

Nope, I don't see Donald Trump or my local cops as priests. Nice try.

Fascists paradoxically promote violence and war as actions that create positive transformation in society.

So are Liberal Democratic activists also Fascists? Look at how they harrass innocent bystanders all in the name of social change.

It is well known that Fascists occupy the far right of the political spectrum. But, as bizarre as it seems, Fascist bigots see themselves as liberals. They see themselves as innocent victims fighting against an oppressive establishment of pedophile priests that are trying to take away their freedom.

https://forums.craigslist.org/?ID=304176055

This poor guy's post is all over the map. What started as an argument against moral behavior turned into a political rant against conservative Republicans. And none of it makes his point.

Next time, try staying on topic, buddy.

Atheists just refuse to "get it"

Posted in the Craigslist Religion Forum:

Reading the Bible vs Studying the Bible..... < slots-and-guitars > 2020-02-09 11:38

Why aren't people allowed to simply read the Bible like any other book? It seems that is the purpose it was written for.

Who says people aren't allowed to read the Bible as literature? What stops one from doing so?

Well, here are two reasons :
1. Religious leaders want to control people by telling the followers what the Bible "Really" means. They claim to have special "Spiritual Knowledge" and special "Relationship with God (s)".

This guy is descibing a cult. I would never attend a church that doesn't encouarge me to study the Scriptures on my own, as the Bereans did, checking up on the preacher's theology. Only groups like the Jehovah's Witnesses demand that their interpretation is infallible and unquestionable.

2. I you simply read the Bible like any other book, you see that it is full of mythology, superstition, outdated science, fables, legends, lies, poetry, and overall is not well written, informative or entertaining.

This is just the kind of bigoted comment I've come to expect from Village Atheists, and yet they claim to be the open minded ones. Brights don't even read the Bible. They depend on other Atheists on the internet for their understanding of its contents. 

Read the Bible like you would Darwin's Origin of Species, And Bible based religions like Catholicism, Islam, JWs, Judaism would lose all their power and authority.

https://forums.craigslist.org/?ID=304140449

In comparing The Bible to Darwin is this guy suggesting that Origin of the Species is filled with lies, outdated science, and fables? That it's not even well written or informative?

The best advice I can give Village Atheists is to try thinking before they make fools of themselves online.

'Nuff said 

A Crash Course in Jehovah's Witness Atheism

This post on the Atheist Alliance International website claims to teach you how to debate religion in just a 900 word essay.

You can read the article here:

 https://www.atheistalliance.org/thinking-out-loud/debating-believers-a-masterclass-in-under-900-words/

I'll focus on the main points of this "master class" in philosophy:


"After thousands of years, no one has developed a successful argument for the existence of ANY god, despite many smart people trying hard to do so."

This is purely a prejudiced opinion. Billions of religious believers across the planet prove this opinion is dead wrong.


"The second thing to remember is the believer is the one with a belief—you are simply wondering why they have the belief."

WRONG. Since the Atheist cannot prove the non-existence of the supernatural, Atheism is based on the BELIEF that gods don't exist. Hiding behind the "Atheism is the default position" argument doesn't change this. Atheists cannot accept the fact that they live in a faith-based reality.


"The believer has the burden of proof—hold them to it. And avoid saying anything that will transfer the burden to you."

You mean, like telling the Believer he or she is wrong and that gods don't exist? That burden always exists for the Atheist, because Atheism is based on a truth claim. This argument from Atheism is just sophistry.


"Avoiding the burden of proof is not cowardice—it’s efficiency."

Unless its the believer avoiding the burden of proof, which is why Atheists avoid taking on that burden in nearly all their arguments.

Further along, the author wrote this:


"Seeking to agree to disagree

Have none of it. In this type of discussion, one person is right and one is wrong. You will have wasted your time if you don’t pin down who is right and who is wrong. Persevere until it’s blindingly obvious."

In other words, until it's "blindingly obvious" that the Atheist is right. This is not a discussion, this is simply a totalitarian attempt to shove the non-believer's opinions down the Believer's throat and then walk away with some mock victory. The Atheist's premise from the beginning is that the Believer is wrong and there is no proof required from the Atheist to support this.

The Author of the post, Bill Flavell, makes some decent points about arguing, but Tip #8 is kind of funny:


"Learn when not to argue. Some people are so delusional or so lacking in their understanding of logic that a coherent discussion is impossible. When you encounter such people it’s best to find another way to spend your evening—make an excuse and leave."

Mr Flavell's logic hasn't impressed me much so far. His article makes several mistakes that anybody with a basic understanding in Philosophy wouldn't have made.


"It takes calmness, patience, and persistence to knock down believer’s arguments. I think if you use these tips you’ll enjoy your discussions more and you are more likely to find onlookers benefit from them, even if your opponents just retire to religious websites to lick their wounds and see if they can do better next time."

Aye, there's the rub! The real intention is to assume a position of superiority and humiliate an opponent using Mr. Flavell's tips. However, he forgot one very important suggestion:

The Atheist must be sure to limit debates to laymen or new believers. Don't attempt to debate with a pastor, seminary student, or philosophy major. These people are prepared to defend their beliefs in a scholarly fashion, and a poorly equipped Atheist will be the one walking off, licking wounds and sputtering obscenities. The Atheist must pick their fights with only the low hanging fruit.

A great example of this are the debates betweeen John Lennox and Richard Dawkins. Dawkins was clearly in over his head and Lennox proved it.

Flavell made one point I agree with:

"The problem is we have to learn how to reason with religious people and few of us know how to do it." This includes Bill Flavell.

Finally, I'd like to point out that although Bill Flavell states that religious people aren't stupid, his article and the condescension it contains really say the opposite. Perhaps Bill Flavell should better prepare himself for debating before advising others.

'Nuff said.

Debate: W.L. Craig vs. Keith Parsons

An interesting exchange between Dr. William Lane Craig and Atheist Keith Parsons.

Some of Parsons' comebacks are so knuckleheaded you might find yourself "face-palming".

Enjoy!

Atheist Cherry-Picking To The Extreme

Once more, I have for you a classic example of an Atheist putting up straw men arguments on his blog and ignoring the Biblical context of the passages he posts.

In a blog post titled "The Bible: Eat Babies", Stan Morris attempts poorly to convince an ignorant audience that God endorses cannibalism. His diatribe is found here:

http://factbasedinitiative.net/2015/05/17/the-bible-eat-babies/

I don't need to refute each individual point, because every verse he posted was taken out of biblical context. In fact, Mr. Morris didn't bother to inform the reader that the verses he cherry-picked were mostly warnings against the dire circumstances of losing God's protection through disobedience.

If God endorsed the eating of babies, why did He bother to send out prophets to warn His people that their cities would be besieged? The preface to this was their chasing after false idols and thumbing their noses at the God who brought them home from slavery.

Yet, even after all the punishments God's people endured, they were redeemed and set back in their rightful place.

This blog symbolizes the blatant intellectual dishonesty that feeds the Village Atheist's view of religion. Hatred of Christianity trumps an honest discussion of it.

Yet the Atheist calls the Believer "ignorant". Oh, the irony....

Fact-Based Initiative: Oxymoronic Atheism

I find the name Fact Based Initiative amusing for an Atheist's blog, since Atheism isn't based on established fact. But here's the site master giving us his opinions. I'll interject in bold italics as I see fit.

STAN'S TAKE

ATHEISTS AREN’T CLOSE-MINDED. CHRISTIANS, THAT’S YOU.

AUGUST 11, 2015 .

1 COMMENT

Dear Christians,

Let me share with you some perspective on what a closed-mind is.

Close-mindedness is not considering that you might be wrong.

That describes Atheism quite nicely, otherwise all Atheists would call themselves Agnostics. Maybe that's why "godless" is such a popular term. It's an attempt at intellectual honesty.

A closed-mind is a mind that knows someone who is and always has been very intelligent, who says he devoted great time to study a subject, but then rejects his findings and results because they don’t agree with you.

Or, maybe the Atheist fails to provide a convincing argument based on its merit.

I know you’re a believer and I was too. I respect you for having good intentions in your belief. You want to be a good person – so did I! What I didn’t realize until recently, though, is that you can’t be a truly good person by promoting a bigoted, mind-warping, nature denying and instinct condemning religion that is ENTIRELY man-made. It has ZERO influence from an all-knowing creator. Here is how I know:

So believing in and trying to be the good person Jesus wants me to be is impossible? My, how open-minded of Mr. Stan.

The Bible has so many contradictions, in numbers and figures alone, that it, at best, would have only PORTIONS of divine influence in it. Why would an all-knowing, all-powerful god put his wishes in the middle of incorrect information? Especially since there are over 4,000 other man-created religions just like this…

I just love those big numbers. Atheists are always claiming thousands of religions exist. The fact is, nobody really knows how many religions exist. Furthermore, a large number doesn't mean all of them are wrong. Obviously, with the number of people who believe in the supernatural, SOMETHING has propagated that belief outside of simple folklore. 

The Bible is scientifically impossible. Creation did not occur. Genesis didn’t happen. Not a chance. That means there is no sin. That means all the bull about “gay people are sinners” is just that – total BULL. Yet, Christians still eat pork, get tattoos and work on the Sabbath. Hypocritical.

Genesis isn't a scientific account, it's a supernatural one.

Jesus did works on the Sabbath and explained why the New Covenant no longer had a Sabbath requirement. Peter and Paul realized that the laws against the eating of unclean animals was relaxed at the time of Christianity's infancy. And I didn't realize that the laws for Levite Priests and ancient Hebrews applied to all Christians. Is Stan suggesting God should be hypocritical and deny conversion to the faith over some body art?

This is about making the world better. Heaven and hell aren’t real. I can’t tell you an afterlife doesn’t exist but I can tell you the Bible hasn’t been right about a single thing yet.

Historical discoveries disagree with that. The Bible has been a reliable source of information on the ancient world.

An open mind in communication with a closed-mind that reasonably rejects the closed-mind’s ideas may seem to be itself closed off but in reality, we’re like two kids at the fair and you jumped on the first ride you saw, telling me it was the best there. I’m the kid that rode all of the rides and know that the one you’re on isn’t the only one there. Nothing but love.

What a dumb analogy. Trying all 31 flavors of Baskin-Robbins Ice Cream doesn't make you a better person then the guy who decided he prefers Baseball Nut or Cherry Royal. Mr. Stan here is calling the closed mind the one that rejects HIS ideas, while being in denial over the closure of his own mind.

This is a fine example of why I say "Atheists Say The Nuttiest Things."

You can find more of Stan's amusing ramblings here:

http://factbasedinitiative.net/

Church Outreach Programs: Where Are The Atheists?

I was helping out an event my church sponsored this weekend. The church received donations and filled 100 book bags with school supplies. The supplies were for kids in Elementary schools. Anybody who needed one was given a bag. On top of that, there were inflatable joy jumpers, plus free snow cones, nachos, popcorn and bottled water for all.

It was a great event, and parents thanked us again and again because nowadays "free public school" has become an expensive affair for people on lower incomes. It's not like the good old days, when the school provided all needs. All that school funding must to go to more important things like adminstrators' pensions. But I digress.

The one thing missing from this event were the Atheists. Where were they? If they're so compassionate and concerned about people, why don't they ever show up and help out? We wouldn't turn them away. We love everyone in a non-judgmental fashion.

I guess atheists are too busy posting anti-Christian intolerance all over the internet to be bothered with making a difference in the lives of real people.

More's the pity. 'Nuff said.

Careless Pseudo Scholarship Spreads On the Web

A user in a religion forum posted this:

The stpry (sic) of the woman taken in audultery is not < MilitantJain > 2015-07-30 08:27

found in John until the 10th century. Google it.

Have Christians lied throughout history to promote their faith? 

No. We haven't.

I took the opportunity to "google it" as the poster suggested and found the answer on good old WIKIPEDIA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_and_the_woman_taken_in_adultery#Textual_history

The story of the Adultress (known as a pericope) is found in its entirety in the Codex Fuldensis, dated positively to AD 546. That already makes the claim by the poster off by 4 centuries. The Codex Bezae also contains the pericope, and it's dated a bit earlier than Fuldensis.

There are possible references to it in the earliest Greek manuscripts. Also, one of the Greek Church Fathers, Didymus, mentioned the pericope as being found in copies of the Gospel dating to the early 4th Century.

Because of the care taken by copyists and the number of existing manuscripts that still survive, it stands as a testimony that Christians have tried to preserve the Bible and present it as completely as possible.

Atheists need to check their own sources first, and examine them with the same critical eye that they use against believers. It's a fault that few of them seem to be able to overcome.

'Nuff said.

"There Is No Proof".... another Atheist Meme

Village Atheists are famous for saying "There is no proof for the existence of God." They'll even go so far as to say "There is no evidence of the existence of any gods."

Both of these statements are Bare Assertion fallacies which Atheists feel no need to defend because they claim that non-belief is the "default position." The fact is, from a logical standpoint, a lack of evidence doesn't disprove anything.

In the meantime, while believers are honest enough to admit they don't have absolute proof of God's existence beyond their own experience, there is a growing amount of evidence that shows biblical events are also historical. Since the Bible is the Christian's source book of knowledge about the faith, verifying its events lends more credibility about its understanding of God.

This year, a documentary was released, titled "Patterns Of Evidence" The Exodus." The film was 10 years in the making and challenges the 60 year old consensus that archaeology proves the Exodus didn't happen. By looking at the same archaeology, plus newer discoveries, a different conclusion can be reached.

Once again, the claim of "no evidence" isn't always the end-all, and Atheists need to get over the notion that Christians are ignorant and cling onto a groundless faith. The more we discover and learn, the more we can be assured that our faith does have outside support.

'Nuff said.