Lee Priest on European immigrants

[nextgen]

you cant give your own definition and then disprove it by your other definition.

Being atheist doesnt mean you dont care about life. Im atheist and all human life is important in my eyes. Religion offers another "tribe" to follow... another US vs Them opportunity.

Thank you for your response. I am simply breaking the belief down to its most base element, to mirror the implied argument presented against God (He cannot exist because people suffer)

Yes religion is an aid in the creation of an already inherent Us vs Them mentality, I am in agreement with you, although we must remember people have this mentality regardless of religion, race/gender/class etc

[nextgen]

Spoken like a true terrorist

Thankfully as you are quite aware, that is not a viewpoint that I hold 

[The Wizard]

Thankfully as you are quite aware, that is not a viewpoint that I hold 

Indeed but take care in quoting as such as that is obviously the view of the latest deluded terrorists

Enjoy your weekend

[WannaBePro]

and that's where you're wrong.. try doing some actual research instead of getting your theology from social media

there is an overwhelming amount of archaeological evidence to support the faiths, Christianity in particular.. alongside mutliple non-christian respected historical accounts from that time period

And how would you know where my knowledge of theology comes from?
I lived in Israel and had to study the Torah in school. I read the King James bible when I was 17. I began reading the Book of Mormon when I was 18, but never actually finished. I still have yet to read the Quran. In grades 1 and 2 we learned Greek mythology, which I got very interested in and kept reading into my early teen years.

There is little historical/archaeological evidence to show that Jesus, and Moses for that matter, existed. They are most likely a compilation of different mythical prophets portrayed as one person in one of many mythological writings.
You would think that if Moses traveled with the Jews from Egypt for 40 years they would have left SOME evidence for that. We can dig up dinosaurs but can't find a shred of evidence of a major migration movement. Plus, the area they traveled shouldn't have taken 40 years. Unless Moses was really bad with directions (from God, presumably) and orientation and took everyone in circles for 40 years.
Jesus was known to walk on water and heal the blind. There was a story of a man around that same time period (I can't for the life of me remember what they called him, I'll edit this post if it comes to me) who matched up Jesus' miracles almost word for word. Meaning it was probably a compilation of stories from different places in that region.

I, personally, realized that religion was mythology when I was in kindergarten and a classmate told me about the talking serpent and the forbidden fruit from the tree of knowledge. As soon as I heard talking snake I immediately thought "fairy tales." Once I got older and actually read the damn books, it solidified my stance on the whole thing being a mythology. Don't get me wrong, the stories are quite interesting, not as interesting as Greek myths, but still have a few life lessons to teach. So, as a book of literature, I have nothing against it. However, as a book of faith, well... it takes a lot of faith to believe some of the stories.

[nextgen]

Indeed but take care in quoting as such as that is obviously the view of the latest deluded terrorists

Enjoy your weekend

Thank you, likewise

[youandme]

Lee Priest is spot on.

[nextgen]

And how would you know where my knowledge of theology comes from?
I lived in Israel and had to study the Torah in school. I read the King James bible when I was 17. I began reading the Book of Mormon when I was 18, but never actually finished. I still have yet to read the Quran. In grades 1 and 2 we learned Greek mythology, which I got very interested in and kept reading into my early teen years.

There is little historical/archaeological evidence to show that Jesus, and Moses for that matter, existed. They are most likely a compilation of different mythical prophets portrayed as one person in one of many mythological writings.
You would think that if Moses traveled with the Jews from Egypt for 40 years they would have left SOME evidence for that. We can dig up dinosaurs but can't find a shred of evidence of a major migration movement. Plus, the area they traveled shouldn't have taken 40 years. Unless Moses was really bad with directions (from God, presumably) and orientation and took everyone in circles for 40 years.
Jesus was known to walk on water and heal the blind. There was a story of a man around that same time period (I can't for the life of me remember what they called him, I'll edit this post if it comes to me) who matched up Jesus' miracles almost word for word. Meaning it was probably a compilation of stories from different places in that region.

I, personally, realized that religion was mythology when I was in kindergarten and a classmate told me about the talking serpent and the forbidden fruit from the tree of knowledge. As soon as I heard talking snake I immediately thought "fairy tales." Once I got older and actually read the damn books, it solidified my stance on the whole thing being a mythology. Don't get me wrong, the stories are quite interesting, not as interesting as Greek myths, but still have a few life lessons to teach. So, as a book of literature, I have nothing against it. However, as a book of faith, well... it takes a lot of faith to believe some of the stories.

I am glad to hear you are reasonably well read on the topic, the fault, as you know, is that you are intentionally interpreting figurative stories literally, you mention the talking snake and so on, you are aware we must have discernment in our interpretation, it seems you read into this literally.

As we know, Jesus himself was a real man, confirmed not only by the eyewitness accounts of the New Testament, but also by non-biblical historians as well as archaeological finds. Which leaves the conclusion, Jesus was either a magician, a maniac or the messiah, and that is your free will to decide.

It does take a lot of faith yes, but that doesn't make it untrue. It also takes a lot of faith to believe much of mainstream science which endeavours to deny God.

[Option D]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/10/europe/amputee-soldier-muslim-facebook-donald-trump/

[Yamcha]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/10/europe/amputee-soldier-muslim-facebook-donald-trump/

[WannaBePro]

I am glad to hear you are reasonably well read on the topic, the fault, as you know, is that you are intentionally interpreting figurative stories literally, you mention the talking snake and so on, you are aware we must have discernment in our interpretation, it seems you read into this literally.

As we know, Jesus himself was a real man, confirmed not only by the eyewitness accounts of the New Testament, but also by non-biblical historians as well as archaeological finds. Which leaves the conclusion, Jesus was either a magician, a maniac or the messiah, and that is your free will to decide.

It does take a lot of faith yes, but that doesn't make it untrue. It also takes a lot of faith to believe much of mainstream science which endeavours to deny God.

Science doesn't "deny god."
Science explains natural phenomenon which can be reproduced over and over.
Every time religion has tried to explain natural phenomenon, they'd say "God did it." While science says "we don't know why this happens. Lets find out and see if our theories are reproducible over and over in the real world."

I'll give you an example. When I was a kid, my grandma told me of her grandmother who said that if you leave milk out it will spoil because the devil will spit in it, but if its hidden in the fridge, the devil will not get to it. Clearly, we know that milk spoils because of bacteria, and not because Satan spit into it.

The biggest debate right now in science vs religion is where did the universe come from? Religion's answer is, of course, God made it. Science hypothesizes the big bang, but this is only the dominant theory, there are other more fringe theories which have not stood up to the evidence we've gathered thus far. But in the end, scientists will say "we don't know all the details yet, but one day, we will get there and will be able to explain the big bang and put all the pieces together. And if the pieces do not come together, then we toss that theory and try to come up with a new one to explain everything." This requires critical thinking, something religion lacks.

[nextgen]

Science doesn't "deny god."
Science explains natural phenomenon which can be reproduced over and over.
Every time religion has tried to explain natural phenomenon, they'd say "God did it." While science says "we don't know why this happens. Lets find out and see if our theories are reproducible over and over in the real world."

I'll give you an example. When I was a kid, my grandma told me of her grandmother who said that if you leave milk out it will spoil because the devil will spit in it, but if its hidden in the fridge, the devil will not get to it. Clearly, we know that milk spoils because of bacteria, and not because Satan spit into it.

The biggest debate right now in science vs religion is where did the universe come from? Religion's answer is, of course, God made it. Science hypothesizes the big bang, but this is only the dominant theory, there are other more fringe theories which have not stood up to the evidence we've gathered thus far. But in the end, scientists will say "we don't know all the details yet, but one day, we will get there and will be able to explain the big bang and put all the pieces together. And if the pieces do not come together, then we toss that theory and try to come up with a new one to explain everything." This requires critical thinking, something religion lacks.

Thank you for your input, I'm quite aware of what science is and don't require your thoughtful explanation. As you know I didn't say science denies God, I said it endeavours to. Although much of modern science simply proves His existence and there are plenty of scientific experts that could explain this in much greater detail than I

Your example is rather pointless, as no religion answers the question of why milk spoils

[YngiweRhoads]

Thank you for your input, I'm quite aware of what science is and don't require your thoughtful explanation. As you know I didn't say science denies God, I said it endeavours to. Although much of modern science simply proves His existence and there are plenty of scientific experts that could explain this in much greater detail than I

Your example is rather pointless, as no religion answers the question of why milk spoils

How about a single example?

Just one.

You must know something the rest of the world doesn't. Please enlighten us.

[nextgen]

How about a single example?

Just one.

You must know something the rest of the world doesn't. Please enlighten us.

[YngiweRhoads]

Show the peer reviewed example where the overwhelming consensus among scientists is that there is indeed evidence God exists instead of someone's opinion.

[nextgen]

Show the peer reviewed example where the overwhelming consensus among scientists is that there is indeed evidence God exists instead of someone's opinion.

aw, you could have at least watched the video you asked for  

[robcguns]

That was actually pretty good. Does anyone know if Sharia law allows a man to take a dump on a woman's chest?

hahahaha