Matthew Le God

It is not three choices... atheism, agnosticism or theism. Everyone is either a theist or an atheist. Agnosticism is a sub-set of atheism. If someone believe in invisible pink unicorns and they didn't have evidence, would you think they were idiots?

It is not merely an opinion... it is fact. If Christians have decided in the 21st century not to stone to death disobedient children then that is a rewriting of the 10 commandments from the book at the foundation of the religion.

'So sure'? No, atheism is not the claim there are no gods. It is the rejection of theist claims. That is not the same thing.

Read the post again.

The problem came from you imagining me saying something I didn't. Yes But only because modern Chrisitians are creating their own moral code and ignoring the moral code of god in the Bible. As they are creating their own moral code... they don't need god.

An inept god who knows the future created a universe that ****ed up, so he decided to start again and created a global flood to commit a genocide. Please explain why that summary is wrong?

What is your point? There are horrifically bad ideas in both the old and new testament.

Yes But they are not following the foundation of their religion... because the Bible does endorse those things. So the priest is making up their own moral god which is better than the character of god.

What would someone be if they called someone an idiot for saying something they did not say? Because I did not use the word 'promote'!

I didn't use the word promote, you claim I did... but I didn't. But the heart of the releigion they preech is the Bible... and the Bible endorses genocide, slavery, sexism, homophobia etc. If the priest chooses not to endorse them then good... they are better than the god describe in the Bible... because the character of god in the Bible does endorse those things! At no point did I say in 2020 churches in England endorse those things... those churches have decided to ignore the bad parts in their horrific holy book and are going against the character of god's wishes.

This is hard work! The global flood genocide 100% proves that the character of god in the Bible is not 100% kind and loving towards humans in the story. If he was 100% kind and loving he wouldn't drown the world's population in a flood!

He is making up his own moral code if he doesn't use the one outlined in the Bible. If his god existed... wouldn't god be annoyed the priest is ignoring the moral code in the Bible and creating his own?

Turkish still not grasping that in order to prove someone is not 100% 'X' all you need to do is provide one piece of evidence showing the opposite.

Nonsense, a red herring and completely irrelevant. God is supposed to be 100% kind and love. All it takes is one line in his holy book that is him being evil to show he is not 100% kind and loving in the book. Hitler is not a god who is supposed to be 100% kind and loving so it is a complete red herring to use that as an example.

What is the harm in saying? I'd like to beleive as many true things and as few false things as possible. Evidence is required to do that... or else you live in a delusional fairy tale world of talking snakes, giants, burning bushes and zombies walking the streets of Jerusalem! Christians say God is 100% loving and kind. One line in the book showing he is not kind is all it requires to show he is not 100% loving and kind. I'd say a global flood genocide wiping out the entire human race apart from one family is a lot more than 1% evil.

This is a nonsense argument. Christians say God is 100% loving and kind. One line in the book showing he is not kind is all it requires to show he is not 100% loving and kind. I'd say a global flood genocide wiping out the entire human race apart from one family is a lot more than 1% evil.

The Bible is the foundation for the religion. If the village priest is not saying being disobedient to your parents should result in being stoned to death then that priest is making up their own moral code and not following the text at the core of Christianity.

Raging Bull, egg and Turkish have done that numerous times in this thread. They have an idea what they think I've said and argue against that... even when I haven't said it.

At no point did I say a lot of modern churches say we should have slaves, rape, genocides etc. But the foundation of the religion is the Bible and the Bible has not changed. Modern Christians have decided to ignore their gods horrific commands. So they are making up their own moral code and ignoring their god's wishes.

God fails that commandment. Killing Egyptian first born children is murder. Killing people in a global flood is murder.

1) God created Adam and Eve - he gave them a test that he knew before they took it they word fail 2) He punishes them and all of humankind for failing a test he 100% knew they would fail 3) God has created humankind in such a way that they **** up, it was another failure by god and he punishes us by creating a global flood genocide and murders most of the species 4) God gives things another go post Noah and ****s up again 4) God sends Jesus to be sacrificed, to act as a loophole for a set of rules over his unfair test to Adam & Eve he created because god loves a blood sacrifice and can't just forgive without a blood sacrifice 5) If such a god exists he is inept at being a creator as he knows the future and still creates in a way that ****s up! Explain what is wrong about that summary!?

The Bible is supposed to be the word of God for Christians. It incites rape, genocide, slavery, sexism, homophobia... if modern Christians ignore those bits then they are not following their religion and are creating their own moral system. If their god existed I'd think he'd be ****ed off that they are cherry picking which of his commandments to follow and which to ignore!

At the foundation of the religion is the Bible, when was the Bible edited so those bits were no longer in it? Does your local priest consider the 10 commandments as relevant today as there were thousands of years ago? The punishment for disobeying your parents is to be stoned to death! Does your priest ignore that bit? 18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and [that], when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: 19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; 20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son [is] stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; [he is] a glutton, and a drunkard. 21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear. Your priest has decided to ignore those bits, wouldn't God be a bit ****ed off humans don't follow his rules?

The flood in Waterworld was caused by global warming and melting of Ice Caps, the Noah story is a wrathful genocidal maniac god!

This really is nonsense. The Bible is considered the literal word of god by some Christians and Jews. The Bible clearly states God committed a mass genocide where he created a worldwide flood that killed every human apart from a handful. There is no context where global flood mass genocide can be made acceptable. No spin can be made on the Noah story to show it was a kind and loving act to drown innocent people. I'd love to see you try to spin it! The Bible god could be 99.99% kind and loving, but one 1 act of evil removes any claim of him being kind and loving... and there are alot more than 1. So picking out these instances is entirely justifiable as the point is to highlight he is not kind and loving. He wiped out the global population in one story... how the **** is that something to gloss over as cherry picking!