If you believe in god, you're an idiot...

[Gukag]

And to answer part of your previous post, I don't dislike religion in itself, but as soon as a religion become a State matter it becomes perverted beyond it's original purpose. This is true whether you're talking about christianity under the Roman empire, Budhism in China, Shintoism in Japan, etc..This is more a matter of power and wealth than religion itself, but for hundreds of years one could not be dissasociated from the other.

[Gukag]

Incidentally, some of the more acidic atheists I have ever met in a political context were Ann Raynd "worshipping" libertarians. The tenets of their philosophy are almost diametrically opposed to what I consider the valuable lessons of Christianity.

[Gukag]

Granted, perhaps your insults were more targetted than I first gave them credit for. There's atheists I have a lot of respect for because they have actual reasoning and knowledge behind their decisions, but that's rare regardless of beliefs frankly. Most people have zero critical thinking skills and blindly accept whatever is popular or common in their area of the world, whether it's atheism or any religion. Basically, you have to go more than skin deep with people's beliefs, and I'd just hope your rage towards atheists is restricted towards the extremely ignorant ones.

[Kassel]

The old Testament doesn't count.
The new Testament doesn't count.

Both written by men for power well after the supposed events had passed.

Why are you atheists only dwelling on Christians and the Christian faith?

Becouse they are the only people currently engaged in on the pro religion side of the debate.

[Gukag]

Originally Posted by Kassel [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Becouse they are the only people currently engaged in on the pro religion side of the debate.

Completely false. You're all limited by your perspectives. Obviously someone living in the US or Western Europe will be way more familiar with christianity than any other religion. If you look at atheists from, say, Turkey, they overwhelmingly bash the crap out of Islam. Atheism in China as spread out in the cultural revolution had almost nothing to do with christianity and focused almost exclusively on buddhism and confucianism. It's not exactly rocket science to figure out why.

[soup]

Originally Posted by Gukag [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Completely false. You're all limited by your perspectives. Obviously someone living in the US or Western Europe will be way more familiar with christianity than any other religion. If you look at atheists from, say, Turkey, they overwhelmingly bash the crap out of Islam. Atheism in China as spread out in the cultural revolution had almost nothing to do with christianity and focused almost exclusively on buddhism and confucianism. It's not exactly rocket science to figure out why.

Uhh, I think you're confused.

He's saying Christianity is the only one represented on the pro-religion side in this thread.

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

Originally Posted by Kassel [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The old Testament doesn't count.
The new Testament doesn't count.

Both written by men for power well after the supposed events had passed.

So we should ignore most every history book or book written about past events unless they are written by someone who was actually there huh? Makes sense to me...NOT!

(You do realize that thousands of History scholars even agree that many of the events in the bible are historically accurate and coincide with accepted historical teachings.)

[soup]

Originally Posted by Boggwin Bramblefoot [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

(You do realize that thousands of History scholars even agree that many of the events in the bible are historically accurate and coincide with accepted historical teachings.)

Care to backup this horribly inaccurate and misleading claim?

[Boggwin Bramblefoot]

Originally Posted by soup [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Care to backup this horribly inaccurate and misleading claim?

Here are some examples:

* Clay Tablet, Ebla. Photo copyrighted.The discovery of the Ebla archive in northern Syria in the 1970s has shown the Biblical writings concerning the Patriarchs to be viable. Documents written on clay tablets from around 2300 B.C. demonstrate that personal and place names in the Patriarchal accounts are genuine. The name “Canaan” was in use in Ebla, a name critics once said was not used at that time and was used incorrectly in the early chapters of the Bible. The word tehom (“the deep”) in Genesis 1:2 was said to be a late word demonstrating the late writing of the creation story. “Tehom” was part of the vocabulary at Ebla, in use some 800 years before Moses. Ancient customs reflected in the stories of the Patriarchs have also been found in clay tablets from Nuzi and Mari.

* The Hittites were once thought to be a Biblical legend, until their capital and records were discovered at Bogazkoy, Turkey.

* Many thought the Biblical references to Solomon's wealth were greatly exaggerated. Recovered records from the past show that wealth in antiquity was concentrated with the king and Solomon's prosperity was entirely feasible.

* It was once claimed there was no Assyrian king named Sargon as recorded in Isaiah 20:1, because this name was not known in any other record. Then, Sargon's palace was discovered in Khorsabad, Iraq. The very event mentioned in Isaiah 20, his capture of Ashdod, was recorded on the palace walls. What is more, fragments of a stela memorializing the victory were found at Ashdod itself.

* Another king who was in doubt was Belshazzar, king of Babylon, named in Daniel 5. The last king of Babylon was Nabonidus according to recorded history. Tablets were found showing that Belshazzar was Nabonidus' son who served as coregent in Babylon. Thus, Belshazzar could offer to make Daniel “third highest ruler in the kingdom” (Dan. 5:16) for reading the handwriting on the wall, the highest available position. Here we see the “eye-witness” nature of the Biblical record, as is so often brought out by the discoveries of archaeology.

[Massive Marc]

Originally Posted by Boggwin Bramblefoot [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Here are some examples:

* Clay Tablet, Ebla. Photo copyrighted.The discovery of the Ebla archive in northern Syria in the 1970s has shown the Biblical writings concerning the Patriarchs to be viable. Documents written on clay tablets from around 2300 B.C. demonstrate that personal and place names in the Patriarchal accounts are genuine. The name “Canaan” was in use in Ebla, a name critics once said was not used at that time and was used incorrectly in the early chapters of the Bible. The word tehom (“the deep”) in Genesis 1:2 was said to be a late word demonstrating the late writing of the creation story. “Tehom” was part of the vocabulary at Ebla, in use some 800 years before Moses. Ancient customs reflected in the stories of the Patriarchs have also been found in clay tablets from Nuzi and Mari.

* The Hittites were once thought to be a Biblical legend, until their capital and records were discovered at Bogazkoy, Turkey.

* Many thought the Biblical references to Solomon's wealth were greatly exaggerated. Recovered records from the past show that wealth in antiquity was concentrated with the king and Solomon's prosperity was entirely feasible.

* It was once claimed there was no Assyrian king named Sargon as recorded in Isaiah 20:1, because this name was not known in any other record. Then, Sargon's palace was discovered in Khorsabad, Iraq. The very event mentioned in Isaiah 20, his capture of Ashdod, was recorded on the palace walls. What is more, fragments of a stela memorializing the victory were found at Ashdod itself.

* Another king who was in doubt was Belshazzar, king of Babylon, named in Daniel 5. The last king of Babylon was Nabonidus according to recorded history. Tablets were found showing that Belshazzar was Nabonidus' son who served as coregent in Babylon. Thus, Belshazzar could offer to make Daniel “third highest ruler in the kingdom” (Dan. 5:16) for reading the handwriting on the wall, the highest available position. Here we see the “eye-witness” nature of the Biblical record, as is so often brought out by the discoveries of archaeology.

Lol@christananswers.com