Why Do You Remain A Christian?

[Antlerman]

But instead, I would like to understand the non-science in the Bible. When God created the light, and it was day and night the first week. How was that possible since our Earth is a sphere and there is night and day all the time somewhere on the planet. Right now, it's dusk here where I live, but I know that somewhere else there it's morning. And furthermore, somewhere right now, in this moment, there is midday and somewhere else there is midnight.

 

Do you have an explanation to this "day/night" thing in Genesis from this perspective? Was the "day/night" concept not at all our planets motion in relationship with the sun, or was God located in a certain timezone when he created the Universe? Is perhaps the Universe created based on Greenwich time?

Oh damn, this is good! Touchy! (Or whatever that word is they say in fencing).

 

I think the reasonable explanation is that the earth was inside of the sun, and for the first seven days it was simply a matter of turning the sun on and off. After the Fall, then he put the fallen earth outside the sun and just left it on all the time, and the science of Genesis no longer applied.

 

Explain the non-science/bad science. Good approach.

[Ouroboros]

Oh damn, this is good! Touchy! (Or whatever that word is they say in fencing).

You haven't heard this one before? Oh... I have asked this question several times, but I can never get any good answer. The only explanation I could except is that "light/day" is metaphorical and not literal. But then, if it is metaphorical, then the whole story is very likely a metaphor too! I just don't know what to do with the Christians...

 

(Btw, I think it's touché. )

 

I think the reasonable explanation is that the earth was inside of the sun, and for the first seven days it was simply a matter of turning the sun on and off. After the Fall, then he put the fallen earth outside the sun and just left it on all the time, and the science of Genesis no longer applied.

Yeah. Something like that would be a good explanation...

 

Explain the non-science/bad science. Good approach.

Thanks. I know I'm probably just wasting time trying to get some useful answers. I'm just a born optimist...

 

And I still want to know why The Stranger can't accept that if the Bible is so scientific, why can't he accept the literal interpretation of this verse:

 

Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

 

Or this verse:

 

1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

 

Or this one:

 

1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

 

What would those verses suggest? The verses do not say that God went down and shaped the animals and kick-started their hearts... No it says that God commanded the sky, land, and sea to produce life. In other words, this is interpreted by those who believe in theistic evolution that these verses explains how God commanded evolution to happen.

 

You have to be a non-literalist to deny the literal interpretation of those verses! So why is everything else in the verses literal, except these? Is it a culture of anti-evolution that drives this anti-literal interpretation of the Bible? I don't get it. Basically, they say that these verses should not be read literal, only because then they would allow evolution to be true (and created by God). And how could they ever believe in a God so powerful that he used evolution to create nature? No, that can't be. God must have created the world the way they think he did, not the way the Bible says literally. They pick and choose what is literal. That's probably the only true fact in all this...

[Antlerman]

(Btw, I think it's touché. )

I like touchy better. It sounds more playful to say as you run your blade through your opponent.

 

I think the reasonable explanation is that the earth was inside of the sun, and for the first seven days it was simply a matter of turning the sun on and off. After the Fall, then he put the fallen earth outside the sun and just left it on all the time, and the science of Genesis no longer applied.

Yeah. Something like that would be a good explanation...

I haven't figured out the moon part yet, other than the earth was inside that as well, and the light of the sun shown straight through the moon so you couldn't see it. This makes sense considering how bright the sun is compared to the moon.

 

Did you know the sun is actually only 30 miles in diameter? (That's another discussion, but hey! I need to present that argument to the Stranger to show how it is no different than what the things he is hearing is! Flat Earth Science. Remind me if I don't present that in here for our rational consideration.

 

Explain the non-science/bad science. Good approach.

Thanks. I know I'm probably just wasting time trying to get some useful answers. I'm just a born optimist...

 

And I still want to know why The Stranger can't accept that if the Bible is so scientific, why can't he accept the literal interpretation of this verse:

 

Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

 

Or this verse:

 

1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

 

Or this one:

 

1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

 

What would those verses suggest? The verses do not say that God went down and shaped the animals and kick-started their hearts... No it says that God commanded the sky, land, and sea to produce life. In other words, this is interpreted by those who believe in theistic evolution that these verses explains how God commanded evolution to happen.

 

You have to be a non-literalist to deny the literal interpretation of those verses! So why is everything else in the verses literal, except these? Is it a culture of anti-evolution that drives this anti-literal interpretation of the Bible? I don't get it. Basically, they say that these verses should not be read literal, only because then they would allow evolution to be true (and created by God). And how could they ever believe in a God so powerful that he used evolution to create nature? No, that can't be. God must have created the world the way they think he did, not the way the Bible says literally. They pick and choose what is literal. That's probably the only true fact in all this...

Very selective indeed.

[Crazy Donna]

*Pseudoscientific, straw-grasping bullshit abbreviated for brevity*

Did you really cut and paste that from another site just for us? Wow. So original. I'm sure we've never heard any of that before. *Facemelting Sarcasm*

 

You grasp at vague interpretations of dead languages to try to imply that your magical book magically knew 'science stuff' before we did. You assume that we will find this so magically convincing that we'll all get down on our knees and start worshipping your imaginary god.

 

You have cherry picked a few verses out of your magical book which you believe indicate that your sick bastard god magically wanted us to know about science. You ignore the plethora of verses that would, by the same token, indicate that your magical book was written my misogynistic, homophobic goat herders who thought nothing of stoning a woman to death if she was raped in a city because she didn't scream loud enough.

So lets look at some of your examples. You say that "the first three verses of Genesis accurately express all known aspects of the creation." So lets examine that statement.

 

From Genesis.

 

"1 First God made heaven & earth 2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. 3 And God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light."

 

So god made heaven and earth. Big deal. But he made it and then later made light happen. How did that happen? Did the sun just magically turn on when he said that, or was it a sun before he said that? Because before god invented light, there would be no light. So there would be no stars (which are suns, which create light).

 

Lets keep looking at Genesis.

 

4 And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. 6 And God said, "Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters." 7 And God made the firmament and separated the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament. And it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day. 9 And God said, "Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear." And it was so."

 

So according to your magical book, our 'firmament' (the sky) is made out of water! WOW! Just wait til I call the Nobel Prize Committee and notify them of this. What do planes fly though? It must be water, right? We could solve the world's drought problems in Africa by putting a bucket on a stick and getting water that way. Wow, you're obviously a scientific genius.

 

And what's that? That was the first day? Lets keep reading.

 

"10 God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good. 11 And God said, "Let the earth put forth vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, upon the earth." And it was so. 12 The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed according to their own kinds, and trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening and there was morning, a third day. 14 And God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth." And it was so. 16 And God made the two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth, 18 to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day."

 

What's that? So god apparently made seas. And then he made plants. PLANTS. Think about that.

 

He made plants BEFORE he made the sun and the moon, dumbarse. So how do those plants photosynthesise without the sun? And where does the LIGHT come from when there isn't a SUN to make it?

 

You really want to tell me that your pathetic book of racist, homophobic misogyny is a scientific text, but you overlook these GLARING PROBLEMS because they don't match your precious worldview. How do you have light without a light source (the sun) or plants without the sun to generate photosynthesis? You're trying to tell me that it's a scientific book, so don't you dare resort to magical 'god made it happen' bullshit. You're cherry picking the odd verse that sounds a little like what might have happened in prehistory, and using that to try to convince us that the bible is an accurate representation of the origins of the earth and the universe. Bullshit. Maybe if you read a few different sites (ones that aren't intent on twisting science to make it fix predetermined ideas, which are laughable) you'd realise that all your points have been debunked many times.

 

Lets keep reading.

 

"20 And God said, "Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the firmament of the heavens." 21 So God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 And God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth." 23 And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day. 24 And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds." And it was so. 25 And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the cattle according to their kinds, and everything that creeps upon the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth." 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. 28 And God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth." "

 

So god magically made the animals, the fish, and birds. Whoop de doo. SO according to this, god made everything six thousand years ago. There should be no change, because you reckon evolution is bunkum. So please explain why bacteria keep evolving into new strains? Why do we have golden staph, science boy?

 

You reckon this is an accurate representation of how the earth and the universe was created? What's your explanation for where the light came from prior to the sun? What's your explanation for how photosynthesis occurred without the sun? And since the bible is the truth and the innerant word of god, why don't Boeing 747 aircraft have oars you can stick out the windows in case the engines fail?

 

Why don't you start thinking about things, rather than cutting and pasting bullshit apologetics and creationist pseudoscience from other people's websites? Or is that too hard for your poor little ignorant mind?

 

And don't insult me with 'god bless'. I wouldn't want a blessing from a god that tells us to stone his disobedient children? Ever been stoned with fist sized rocks? I have. Maybe you should read your bible and find out what's in it before you come here and tell us 'god bless'.

[Ouroboros]

Oh, I just remembered another question I have.

 

This is more about logistics and the time factor.

 

Adam supposedly named all animal species on this planet.

 

If we include all worms, flies, non-mammals, fish, you name it, anything that is at least visible for the normal eye, we end up with some million species.

 

Now, to name all those species would take some time.

 

How long is one million seconds? Let's come back to that later.

 

When was the world created according to Young Earth Creationists? If we would go by Ussher's dates, the world was created Sunday 23 October 4004 BC. Six days later, Adam was created. But since it was holiday the next day, Adam didn't start naming the species until Monday, October 31st.

 

Ussher also estimated the day when the fall happened. He claims it was 10 days after the creation, in other words, it was on Wednesday, November 2nd.

 

So let's go back to how long 1 million seconds are. It's about 11.6 days.

 

Even if Adam named one species each second, there was not enough time to name them all before the fall. Something is wrong here...

 

Or perhaps Adam was a superspeedy guy? How fast would he have been to have named 1 million species between Monday and Wednesday? 3 days, that's about 4 species each second. Oh golly! Mr Speed himself... And to come up with the names in that speed too. Amazing. Maybe he's related to Santa Claus who manages to visit all households in the world in a 24 hour period...

[Ouroboros]

I like touchy better. It sounds more playful to say as you run your blade through your opponent.

Like squishy. Can't fault that.

 

I haven't figured out the moon part yet, other than the earth was inside that as well, and the light of the sun shown straight through the moon so you couldn't see it. This makes sense considering how bright the sun is compared to the moon.

The moon is a strange thing overall. The Bible claims it was giving a light, but it doesn't. It just reflects it. Didn't Moses know that?

 

Did you know the sun is actually only 30 miles in diameter? (That's another discussion, but hey! I need to present that argument to the Stranger to show how it is no different than what the things he is hearing is! Flat Earth Science. Remind me if I don't present that in here for our rational consideration.

No way! How weird. How come? Why would they say that? Perhaps you should start a flat-earth discussion. (And I should start a evidence for evolution thread... unless we have one somewhere already. Do you know?)

[Antlerman]

I haven't figured out the moon part yet, other than the earth was inside that as well, and the light of the sun shown straight through the moon so you couldn't see it. This makes sense considering how bright the sun is compared to the moon.

The moon is a strange thing overall. The Bible claims it was giving a light, but it doesn't. It just reflects it. Didn't Moses know that?

He had to have known. God dictated the words. It must have been a translation problem. But that can't happen because the Bible doesn't make mistakes... wait... ahhhh!!!!

 

head explodes

 

Did you know the sun is actually only 30 miles in diameter? (That's another discussion, but hey! I need to present that argument to the Stranger to show how it is no different than what the things he is hearing is! Flat Earth Science. Remind me if I don't present that in here for our rational consideration.

No way! How weird. How come? Why would they say that? Perhaps you should start a flat-earth discussion. (And I should start a evidence for evolution thread... unless we have one somewhere already. Do you know?)

My great grandfather was part of Utopian society formed in 1901. The Christian Dictator who took over after the founder died was offering 5000 dollars to anyone who could prove the earth was a globe. I have his science that explains what we observe in the natural world, that the earth is a flat disk with a north pole, and surrounded by an ice wall which people mistake as a south pole. It's very scientific, nearly identical to the AiG folks. You'll be amused. I just have to dig it up and post it for us...

 

 

BTW, the answer to how Adam had time to name all the animals in 10 days, while creating actual children, and getting into big trouble eating the wrong fruit and all, is simple. He named them all furry things, slimy things, flying things, etc. The whole process took him about 3 days. His brain wasn't all that developed yet. Sort of dumb, actually.

[Ouroboros]

BTW, the answer to how Adam had time to name all the animals in 10 days, while creating actual children, and getting into big trouble eating the wrong fruit and all, is simple. He named them all furry things, slimy things, flying things, etc. The whole process took him about 3 days. His brain wasn't all that developed yet. Sort of dumb, actually.

Yeah. That's a good answer.

 

Oh, talking about language. This will blow your mind (make it exploded again), unless you already knew about it of course.

 

There are monkeys who have sounds for different threats. This is not learned from us humans, but it's in the wild.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/08/science/08monkey.html

 

They're called Campbell's Monkeys. They have sounds for "threat from sky," and "threat from grass," and such. If I remember right, I heard this was discovered with langur monkeys as well.

[Guest end3]

The moon is a strange thing overall. The Bible claims it was giving a light, but it doesn't. It just reflects it. Didn't Moses know that?

 

Let's not forget Moses' glowing face....one of my revelations from the early days here......later to be acknowledged by science that people DO emit light. I'll be darn. Pehaps the moon does emit light.

 

Epigenetics anyone?

 

You see only what you want to see.....sounds familiar...like I have heard that somewhere.

[Ouroboros]

The moon is a strange thing overall. The Bible claims it was giving a light, but it doesn't. It just reflects it. Didn't Moses know that?

 

Let's not forget Moses' glowing face....one of my revelations from the early days here......later to be acknowledged by science that people DO emit light. I'll be darn. Pehaps the moon does emit light.

Except that the light from the human body is extremely low, not even recognizable by the naked eye. And it requires a certain diet (mainly vegetarian I think it was) to achieve that state.

 

The first time I heard about it was regarding monks. Some claim that monks that spend a lot of time in meditation and strict diet start to glow.

 

The moon could have some elements that glow, but obviously not enough since the moon surface can't be seen with the naked eye when it's in the crescent and new phases.

 

 

Epigenetics anyone?

And?

 

You see only what you want to see.....sounds familiar...like I have heard that somewhere.

[Guest end3]

The moon is a strange thing overall. The Bible claims it was giving a light, but it doesn't. It just reflects it. Didn't Moses know that?

 

Let's not forget Moses' glowing face....one of my revelations from the early days here......later to be acknowledged by science that people DO emit light. I'll be darn. Pehaps the moon does emit light.

Except that the light from the human body is extremely low, not even recognizable by the naked eye. And it requires a certain diet (mainly vegetarian I think it was) to achieve that state.

 

The first time I heard about it was regarding monks. Some claim that monks that spend a lot of time in meditation and strict diet start to glow.

 

The moon could have some elements that glow, but obviously not enough since the moon surface can't be seen with the naked eye when it's in the crescent and new phases.

 

Point is that you and AM are mocking this guy just like you mock most every other Christian that walks in here .....and then in the long run you were wrong....

 

The Bible alludes to things many many years before we have become aware of such...but the ole Christards and their dissonance.

 

 

.....right back at ya.

[Ouroboros]

Point is that you and AM are mocking this guy just like you mock most every other Christian that walks in here

Mock him? He claims the Bible is scientific, and when I ask about something that's in the Bible that is not scientific, then I'm mocking him?

 

.....and then in the long run you were wrong....

Eh. So far, in the long run I've been right.

 

The Bible alludes to things many many years before we have become aware of such...but the ole Christards and their dissonance.

So evidently the Bible is not scientific. Hard to make a claim that it has scientific knowledge before it's time, but it not scientific because it's before it's time. So it's basically, words that are not scientific, that "Christards" (as you call them) re-interpret whatever way they want. (I don't call Christians "Christards" btw, but if you want me to, I will.)

 

So explain the day/night science in the Bible. And explain why "bright forth" doesn't match evolution. Then explain how Adam could name all animals in 3 days. Those are all the Biblical facts. If you claim this is science, then be scientific about it instead of whining like that.

[Crazy Donna]

The moon is a strange thing overall. The Bible claims it was giving a light, but it doesn't. It just reflects it. Didn't Moses know that?

 

Let's not forget Moses' glowing face....one of my revelations from the early days here......later to be acknowledged by science that people DO emit light. I'll be darn. Pehaps the moon does emit light.

Except that the light from the human body is extremely low, not even recognizable by the naked eye. And it requires a certain diet (mainly vegetarian I think it was) to achieve that state.

 

The first time I heard about it was regarding monks. Some claim that monks that spend a lot of time in meditation and strict diet start to glow.

 

The moon could have some elements that glow, but obviously not enough since the moon surface can't be seen with the naked eye when it's in the crescent and new phases.

 

Point is that you and AM are mocking this guy just like you mock most every other Christian that walks in here .....and then in the long run you were wrong....

 

The Bible alludes to things many many years before we have become aware of such...but the ole Christards and their dissonance.

 

 

.....right back at ya.

You know, it'd be really really hard to mock every christian who comes in here if they actually had facts and real evidence, and not hearsay and opinion.

[Guest end3]

Eh. So far, in the long run I've been right.

 

Not about the glowing humans.

 

So evidently the Bible is not scientific. Hard to make a claim that it has scientific knowledge before it's time, but it not scientific because it's before it's time.

I guess you have trouble with the word "alludes"?

[Guest end3]

You know, it'd be really really hard to mock every christian who comes in here if they actually had facts and real evidence, and not hearsay and opinion.

 

Hearsay and opinion.....no, science doesn't have that.

[Ouroboros]

Eh. So far, in the long run I've been right.

 

Not about the glowing humans.

 

So evidently the Bible is not scientific. Hard to make a claim that it has scientific knowledge before it's time, but it not scientific because it's before it's time.

I guess you have trouble with the word "alludes"?

You mean the Bible only talks in metaphors and symbolic language?

 

To allude something means to say something which is veiled and not direct. It's like talking about something without explicitly say what it is.

 

So the Bible alludes to what? To scientific facts? By being imprecise and only suggest those facts?

 

It's just like the Qu'ran. It alludes to scientific facts as well. I remember having a long discussion with a Muslim about that. He was also convinced that the Qu'ran was given by God because of this.

 

Does the Bible perhaps allude to giving a proof for Goldbach's conjecture? God must know it, and why wait until mathematicians figure it out? They would be so happy to have it now.

[Crazy Donna]

You know, it'd be really really hard to mock every christian who comes in here if they actually had facts and real evidence, and not hearsay and opinion.

 

Hearsay and opinion.....no, science doesn't have that.

Quit laughing and provide hard evidence that god exists, you sanctimonious cunt.

[Guest end3]

So the Bible alludes to what? To scientific facts? By being imprecise and only suggest those facts?

Why not?

 

It's just like the Qu'ran. It alludes to scientific facts as well. I remember having a long discussion with a Muslim about that. He was also convinced that the Qu'ran was given by God because of this.

 

And?

[oddbird1963]

You know, it'd be really really hard to mock every christian who comes in here if they actually had facts and real evidence, and not hearsay and opinion.

 

Hearsay and opinion.....no, science doesn't have that.

Quit laughing and provide hard evidence that god exists, you sanctimonious cunt.

 

 

I wonder if end3 can bother to give examples of science and its hearsay and opinion without using his own private special definition of "hearsay" and "opinion."

[Ouroboros]

So the Bible alludes to what? To scientific facts? By being imprecise and only suggest those facts?

Why not?

So the Bible is just a metaphor. I'm okay with that. The Genesis story is not to be taken literally, it's just a cute story. I'm okay with that. So then I guess we can come to an agreement, the story in the Bible doesn't resonate with me, but it does with you, and that's okay. Don't push it down my throat though.

 

It's just like the Qu'ran. It alludes to scientific facts as well. I remember having a long discussion with a Muslim about that. He was also convinced that the Qu'ran was given by God because of this.

 

And?

That means the Qu'ran is given by God, just like the Bible. Does it not?

[Antlerman]

Point is that you and AM are mocking this guy just like you mock most every other Christian that walks in here .....and then in the long run you were wrong....

I'm not mocking him, but I do think that to chide and laugh at certain ideas makes a point. It's not personal. I have people who love me make fun of things I do or imagine, and in the end it's because they love me.

 

And secondly, I don't mock "every other Christian". I will embrace any who shows a heart of their own behind the bluster of all their armor of theologies. Look at you.

 

Thirdly, where have I been wrong so far? I'm more than happy to embrace my errors as it puts me in a better position to grow. Can you refresh my memory on this where "in the long run" I was wrong?

 

The Bible alludes to things many many years before we have become aware of such...but the ole Christards and their dissonance.

 

 

.....right back at ya.

Well, I would be interested to know what you think those are. Certainly, please don't go that silly path of saying it predicated things it couldn't possibly have know if it were for divine revelation in areas of science and medicine. That always turns out to be some reading into it wit a strange and bad hermeneutic things it was not really saying - exactly the same thing that is popular with the modern Muslim apologists in proving the Koran the exact same way - using bad hermeneutic and thin, vague references.

 

If you're talking about certain principles of living as humans that they had right and we are now "coming to understand", well that may be true but in the sense that they were common understandings in a lot of places and our culture in its particular inherent dysfunctions lost sight of and through trial and error our ourselves coming back to. None of that proves that God itself dictated your religion all special and perfect, since things like "love your neighbor as yourself," as profound as that in fact is, predated Christianity, outside Jewish traditions, the entire world over. That we got all messed up, and maybe are relearning this does not mean "miracle" insight on the Christian part.

 

Get over yourself.

 

That's a first big step. Where is that in your scripture? If it were divine, where is that?

[Antlerman]

End, do you think you're doing the right thing defending ignorance, just because they bear the name Christian?

[Guest Valk0010]

Seems stranger, unfortunate for you, for example the Greeks first postulated the idea of atoms, so any thing like the earth hangs, referred to the bible can be easily attribute to say, good observation, not divine will.

[lunaticheathen]

You know, it'd be really really hard to mock every christian who comes in here if they actually had facts and real evidence, and not hearsay and opinion.

 

Hearsay and opinion.....no, science doesn't have that.

Quit laughing and provide hard evidence that god exists, you sanctimonious cunt.

 

Ya know, Donna, sometimes...you're my hero.

 

Also, all of stranger's "my friend"s really rub me the wrong way. And the whole "I've been where you are" thing tends to hack me off. Stranger seems sincere, but I still get the "arrogant, smarmy bastard" vibe from him.

 

And copy/paste from a bible "science" site? Lame.

[Guest end3]

End, do you think you're doing the right thing defending ignorance, just because they bear the name Christian?

 

Who of us are omniscient?