originally posted by: LABTECH767
Atheists and disbeliever's come onto the religious thread's but mostly the christian one's and sit there and make grandiose statement founding in
biased and biggoted opinions that are self serving, then they star one another.
That's a fallacy, most religious threads ARE Christian threads. Disbelievers don't really have much of a chance to go into other religious threads and
discredit them because they are few and far between.
We know you are there, ... and that is from the very being who warned us to call no man a fool.
Yes, that is it. We don't want to believe in god because we are evil at heart and if it were true then we'd go to hell. That's some passive aggressive
condensation you got going on there. I mean it's not like we couldn't POSSIBLY disbelieve because there is no evidence for your mythology, nah we are
all secret believers and just secretly fear the fires of hell (that doesn't exist in the bible).
What kick do the get out of trying to drag people out of there faith, to push them into a bleak world where they will feel no one can help them
not even themselves and are less inclined to help one another.
It's called education, if the truth is dirty and scary does that mean it shouldn't be shared? Or is it ok for everyone to continue to believe in Santa
Clause because it makes everyone feel good? If you view the world without Christianity as what you described, that's on you. It sounds more like YOU
have a fear that you may be wrong more than the disbelievers have a fear of being wrong. I'm an agnostic who feels that Christianity is the furtherest
thing from absolute truth that you could get and don't believe as above.
Maybe you should reanalyze your insecurities, not to mention stop turning your troubles over to some spirit in the sky. Take responsibility for things
and the world stops looking so bleak and terrifying, but doing so would be anti-Christian. It's much easier to sit back and whine that the world is
full of evil and there is nothing that can be done but sit back and wait for the world's judgment, which would be infinitely worse than what we have
on earth here for everyone involved. So why you'd wish for such an event is beyond me.
Where there is an alter there you will find civilization, ... of they who do believe.
So religion is the ONLY purpose of humans that's worth mentioning, even if it is incorrect?
Says the guy whose religion tells him not to judge others and is doing that very thing with this post with some very nasty descriptions (souless
machines with empty heart's and driven by greed, lust, and vindictive hatred of they who do believer). Apparently according to you, the non-religious
stop being social creatures and only care about themselves, which is odd because even science disagrees with you on that statement. Humans don't need
religion to be nice and helpful to one another. It is one of our evolutionary advantages that helped our species survive for so long. Religion came
along later and claimed that territory as its own.
By the way there are two school's of archeaology, ... inscriptionsi in pheonician.
No that is incorrect. As far as above there are real archaeologists and fake ones. The real ones follow the evidence and use it to paint a picture of
how past life on the planet behaved, which may or may not include Christianity being real. The fake ones start with a confirmation bias, Christianity
is real, and then try to find evidence to prove that true. They are fake because that isn't real science. It isn't a different way to approach
archeology. It is just BAD science.
Oh that is right he was a religious guy so his opinion did not count
Um... You do realize that not only do non-Christians shun that lunatic, but Christians as well? Here is a link about Ron Wyatt.
His work was typically rejected by mainstream archaeology and Christians alike, the bulk of his support coming from the more extreme
fringes of evangelical Christianity.
Wyatt's work is best characterized as being highly interpretive and suffering from a deficit of evidence. A schism developed after his death in which
the ownership of his records fell in to dispute. This led to some of his records being difficult to locate.
Answers in Genesis (AIG) provides an appraisal of Wyatt's remarkable good fortune in discovering so many artifacts and sites of the bible:
“”Are the claims true? If they are, such a staggeringly impressive list would mean that Ron Wyatt had been almost as miraculously assisted by God
as the patriarch Moses. If, however, a careful examination of just one or two of these claims reveals them to be false, fanciful or fraudulent, the
‘divine leading’ option evaporates, and it is clear that Christians are being seriously misled.
This may be one of those odd occasions in which AIG is correct, since the alternative is to accept that Wyatt, an amateur archaeologist, did the
archaeological equivalent of developing General Relativity, Gravitational Theory, and after a break for lunch went on to develop the Theory of
Wyatt's work is typically cited by fundamentalists as proof that events in the Bible actually occurred, but even this is only attempted by the
terminally ignorant or stupid. When AIG shies away from something, it's a pretty good indicator that it's broken on through to the other side of
Apparently he's too fringe for even AiG to sign onto his craziness.
You know he is far from alone, ... hypocritical abuse of position.
This is pure nonsense. Science isn't led by belief. It is led by evidence. If the evidence contradicts Christianity or whatever religion of the day,
then so be it. Tough luck for Christianity.
And also remember the like's of herzog have a vested interest in seeing a religon that they find offencive and consider blasphemous disproven
so will even make up or interpret proof with that biased intention.
It's funny you mention this since that describes Christian scientists to a T.
I actually think Wyatt's mount sinai is the real one but have a look at Har Karkoum and remember the tribe's of Israel wandered for decade's as
god toughened them us and made a tainted generation pass away.
Not likely. The odds of millions of people traveling through the desert for 40 years living off of the sparse vegetation, water, and wildlife is so
outstandingly insane that it is hard that people even believe this story is true. Though it doesn't help that there is literally no evidence of this
large migration of people in the geologic and archaeological records so there's that too.
You really have no idea how much proof there really IS for the bible.
Really? Where? Science is showing more and more that the bible is just a collection of embellished stories and that the Abrahamic religions' (that
means not just Christianity) account of spirituality and god are incorrect. Something tells me that your "proof" is all forgeries or some evidence
that is purposely interpreted towards a Christian slant due to confirmation bias.
P.S. I snipped out some text from some of your responses to make mine fit.
edit on 25-8-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)