Things you didn’t know about the Bible

[AlistairCookie]

You are getting desperate now.

Darwinian theory is the epitome of a theory of gaps and bullshit.

What? You mean that development couldn't have happened in evolutionary time? Well, it must have been "punctuated equilibrium". <--- gap bullshit

What? You mean there are a plethora of animal fossils that lack evolutionary ancestors in Precambrian strata? Well, um we worship at the altar of Darwinism, so
we believe it happened anyway, and we're going to call it "science" and teach it to our kids. Idiots.

What? You mean DNA is more complicated than the most complicated software that was ever written? Well, it, um ... it evolved from random mutations... <--- Stupidity

If I’m the one getting desperate, why are you using strawman arguments and logical fallacies to prove your points. For example you are quoting me and and refuting Darwinism though you KNOW I haven’t advocated for it. That’s called dishonesty, though I’m certain you’ll neither own up to it, nor apologize. The only person who’s said I believe in those things is you. I certainly haven’t. I know this might be difficult for you but a good way to find out what I believe is to ask me. Your technique of telling me what I believe has been a massive failure.

I would be happy to engage with you on the stupidity and incredulity of the bible myths - the actual subject of this thread - but please stop using strawman arguments.

Since you brought it up though, sure there are gaps in the evolution argument. As long as we don’t know everything about everything, there are gaps - only an idiot would think differently. The difference - and the inherent reason that it is not the god of the gaps fallacy - is that when scientists find gaps in a theory they don’t fill them in with supernatural explanations. They simply say “Ooooh wow! This is wild - Let’s do more research.”

 

[SportsBookData]

The story called "The Theory of Evolution", like Religion, is a distorted and manipulated one. Your evolution has VERY LITTLE to so with anything you were taught. The gaps in the evolution timeline can be easily explained but this would mean that the brain-washing program called "history" would need to be re-written. Although it won't be long before you know the real truth (#Disclosure), hiding this truth throughout history was highest priority for control purposes.

On the topic of DNA, the term "junk DNA" is also an important part of this brain-washing history program. There is no such thing as "junk DNA". This, you will also learn soon. (#DemandTruth).

 

[Cireboy]

C is for cookie, that's good enough for him

 

[festeringZit]

If I’m the one getting desperate, why are you using strawman arguments and logical fallacies to prove your points. For example you are quoting me and and refuting Darwinism though you KNOW I haven’t advocated for it. That’s called dishonesty, though I’m certain you’ll neither own up to it, nor apologize. The only person who’s said I believe in those things is you. I certainly haven’t. I know this might be difficult for you but a good way to find out what I believe is to ask me. Your technique of telling me what I believe has been a massive failure.

I would be happy to engage with you on the stupidity and incredulity of the bible myths - the actual subject of this thread - but please stop using strawman arguments.

Since you brought it up though, sure there are gaps in the evolution argument. As long as we don’t know everything about everything, there are gaps - only an idiot would think differently. The difference - and the inherent reason that it is not the god of the gaps fallacy - is that when scientists find gaps in a theory they don’t fill them in with supernatural explanations. They simply say “Ooooh wow! This is wild - Let’s do more research.”

If you're not a Darwinist, then I have no problem admitting I was wrong in assuming you were. I apologize. Now, you in turn said you were certain I wouldn't own up
to it, nor apologize - can you see the hypocrisy there?

More later, I'm headed to the gym.

 

[AlistairCookie]

If you're not a Darwinist, then I have no problem admitting I was wrong in assuming you were. I apologize. Now, you in turn said you were certain I wouldn't own up
to it, nor apologize - can you see the hypocrisy there?

More later, I'm headed to the gym.

Yes, I am surprised that you owned up to it. I apologize for assuming that you wouldn’t. I’m going to have a beer.

 

[AlistairCookie]

Everyone knows the "the beloved child’s taleª" from the bible of Noah's Ark, but how many of you have ever thought about the sheer number of people who were tortured to death over those fateful 40 nights?

There are no actual numbers quoted in the bible regarding the population size, but the folks over at Answers in Genesis say that it could have been anywhere between 750 million and four billion. Actually historians put the number far lower in the year 5000 B.C., somewhere between 5 and 20 million inhabitants of this blue and green space rock.

But, let's go with the biblical experts over at AiG, since they are most likely the most reliable source with regards to what was happening on earth seven thousand years ago and put it somewhere in the middle, say one billion people on earth.

The sheer depravity that follows is mind boggling, and the theological gymnastics that the Christians and Muslims will perform to justify such cruelty is shocking. It's already been noted that I sneakily use the internet to learn things and discover facts, and I must admit that I am up to my old tricks again. About 25% of the world's population today is made up of children up to the age of 14, and about 10% are below the age of 5.

We know why God said he decided to end his creation (we won't get into the fact that an omnipotent God would have known this would happen before he created these people, decided to create them anyway and the fact that he had did so caused him great remorse and regret) he said literally everyone except Noah and his family was wicked - he could have snapped his fingers and turned them to salt in an instant as he had done to Lot's wife, but instead chose death by torture.

But was everyone wicked - is that even possible? Can newborns and toddlers be wicked? Should newborns and toddlers be sentenced to death by drowing? I know the correct answer here, but it seems that those who look to the bible as a moral compass do not. The answer to all three questions is absofuckinglutelynot.

Using the estimates from AiG, there were ONE HUNDRED MILLION INFANTS AND TODDLERS who met their fate by struggling to breathe until finally inhaling enough water to fill their lungs and die. Now, we could also use actual historians estimates for the world's population in 5000 B.C and put it at at the low end of 20 million people. Then, the numbers go down a bit. Only 2,000,000 infants and toddlers were tortured to death. I don't know about you, but that shouldn't make anyone feel any better.

And yes, this post is 100% intended to mock your beliefs if you read those facts about the story of the flood and think to yourself, "the drowning of millions of children was righteous." But I guess that's really the difference between me and the the Trickster Yahweh; I would NEVER under ANY circumstances torture five year-old child.

 

[festeringZit]

Everyone knows the "the beloved child’s taleª" from the bible of Noah's Ark, but how many of you have ever thought about the sheer number of people who were tortured to death over those fateful 40 nights?

There are no actual numbers quoted in the bible regarding the population size, but the folks over at Answers in Genesis say that it could have been anywhere between 750 million and four billion. Actually historians put the number far lower in the year 5000 B.C., somewhere between 5 and 20 million inhabitants of this blue and green space rock.

But, let's go with the biblical experts over at AiG, since they are most likely the most reliable source with regards to what was happening on earth seven thousand years ago and put it somewhere in the middle, say one billion people on earth.

The sheer depravity that follows is mind boggling, and the theological gymnastics that the Christians and Muslims will perform to justify such cruelty is shocking. It's already been noted that I sneakily use the internet to learn things and discover facts, and I must admit that I am up to my old tricks again. About 25% of the world's population today is made up of children up to the age of 14, and about 10% are below the age of 5.

We know why God said he decided to end his creation (we won't get into the fact that an omnipotent God would have known this would happen before he created these people, decided to create them anyway and the fact that he had did so caused him great remorse and regret) he said literally everyone except Noah and his family was wicked - he could have snapped his fingers and turned them to salt in an instant as he had done to Lot's wife, but instead chose death by torture.

But was everyone wicked - is that even possible? Can newborns and toddlers be wicked? Should newborns and toddlers be sentenced to death by drowing? I know the correct answer here, but it seems that those who look to the bible as a moral compass do not. The answer to all three questions is absofuckinglutelynot.

Using the estimates from AiG, there were ONE HUNDRED MILLION INFANTS AND TODDLERS who met their fate by struggling to breathe until finally inhaling enough water to fill their lungs and die. Now, we could also use actual historians estimates for the world's population in 5000 B.C and put it at at the low end of 20 million people. Then, the numbers go down a bit. Only 2,000,000 infants and toddlers were tortured to death. I don't know about you, but that shouldn't make anyone feel any better.

And yes, this post is 100% intended to mock your beliefs if you read those facts about the story of the flood and think to yourself, "the drowning of millions of children was righteous." But I guess that's really the difference between me and the the Trickster Yahweh; I would NEVER under ANY circumstances torture five year-old child.

Sigh. Or, you have the narrative wrong.

Not all Christians believe the flood was world-wide. You might want to do some reading on local-flood theory.

Just like, only a minority of Christians believe in young earth.

 

[AlistairCookie]

sigh?

Dude, I don’t need to do flood theory but is funny to me now that you’re saying to me, “duh, of course that story in the Bible isn’t true.” lmao You MUST realize by now that I don’t actually believe these stories, no? The point is millions of people do, and MOST of them have no idea what’s even in the Bible.

But anyway, five years ago the number of Americans who believed the earth was less than 10,000 years old was around 4 in 10, or 128 million people. A Gallup poll put the number at 38% in 2017, so about 123 million people. Yes, technically a minority I guess.

 

[festeringZit]

sigh?

Dude, I don’t need to do flood theory but is funny to me now that you’re saying to me, “duh, of course that story in the Bible isn’t true.” lmao You MUST realize by now that I don’t actually believe these stories, no? The point is millions of people do, and MOST of them have no idea what’s even in the Bible.

But anyway, five years ago the number of Americans who believed the earth was less than 10,000 years old was around 4 in 10, or 128 million people. A Gallup poll put the number at 38% in 2017, so about 123 million people. Yes, technically a minority I guess.

Um, You clearly lack some basic reading comprehension skills. I didn't even come close to saying "Of course that Bible story isn't true." Who cares how many people believe in young earth creationism? If you weren't so ignorant on the issue, you'd know that it's a modern phenomenon, that wasn't the position of the church through history, based on a wrong assumption of the meaning of
the Hebrew word 'yom,' because of it's wide semantic range - and that fact that ancient Hebrew had a miniscule vocabulary.

 

[AlistairCookie]

You’re the one who brought up how many people believed in it, yom

 

[AlistairCookie]

How many of you knew the idea of eternal torment in the pits of a fiery hell did not exist in the old testament, but was brought to everyone's attention by authors (whoever they were) of the new testament. Yes, that idea was introduced by the meek and mild, savior of all mankind, who was all about love and compassion actually spoke more about hell than he did heaven.

C.S. Lewis, noted Christian apologist and apparently more kind and compassionate than Jeshua, said, "There is no doctrine which I would more willingly remove from Christianity than this, if it lay in my power.”

 

[StackinGreen]

You have heard of (valley) Gehenna? Stop spreading misinformation. As if your silly meme above is truly Christian teaching. Or the idea of torture even being meaningful in the way a material based human understands. What's your purpose in the thread? To counteract bad teachings? That might be good. But lying about Jesus Christ is not so good. I wouldnt recommend such things, it will not lead to anything good.

 

[sportsm60]

You have heard of (valley) Gehenna? Stop spreading misinformation. As if your silly meme above is truly Christian teaching. Or the idea of torture even being meaningful in the way a material based human understands. What's your purpose in the thread? To counteract bad teachings? That might be good. But lying about Jesus Christ is not so good. I wouldnt recommend such things, it will not lead to anything good.

It is obvious that Alistair is either a satanist or just some jerk off that thinks he has it all figured out. Maybe both. Nobody living today has it all figured out. We have souls that go somewhere when our bodies die. Alistair probably has no problem with taking the mark of the beast. But thats his problem. I took my mark. It is tattoed on my shoulder. It is a heart, with a cross thru it, wrapped with a ribbon that has faith written in it.

 

[festeringZit]

How many of you knew the idea of eternal torment in the pits of a fiery hell did not exist in the old testament, but was brought to everyone's attention by authors (whoever they were) of the new testament. Yes, that idea was introduced by the meek and mild, savior of all mankind, who was all about love and compassion actually spoke more about hell than he did heaven.

C.S. Lewis, noted Christian apologist and apparently more kind and compassionate than Jeshua, said, "There is no doctrine which I would more willingly remove from Christianity than this, if it lay in my power.”

Every single time you post on this subject, you show how utterly ignorant you are.

There wasn't a word for hell in the language at the time, nor did the concept exist. Jesus used the word Gehenna, which was just a garbage dump outside Jerusalem.
Later authors like Dante and his inferno popularized the concept of hell.

You should stop posting on anything to do with Christianity until you educate yourself, you are making a fool of yourself.

 

[Salsantorre]

It is obvious that Alistair is either a satanist or just some jerk off that thinks he has it all figured out. Maybe both. Nobody living today has it all figured out. We have souls that go somewhere when our bodies die. Alistair probably has no problem with taking the mark of the beast. But thats his problem. I took my mark. It is tattoed on my shoulder. It is a heart, with a cross thru it, wrapped with a ribbon that has faith written in it.

Wow, that is so cool

 

[StevieRay]

Sal has a tattoo of a butt on his butt

 

[Feedthedead]

Anunnaki the missing link.

https://stellarhousepublishing.com/anunnaki/

 

[Salsantorre]

Sal has a tattoo of a butt on his butt

How do you know?

 

[wilbur]

Religion has started almost all wars and is just a money pit for people that think there is a god.
Keep throwing your money away, you will go to heaven!

 

[wilbur]

How do you know?

So, Sal.

Why does Stevie know somuch about your butt?