Top Ten Reasons why Religion Is Bullshit

I did not say the world (or universe) was created in six or seven days, the Bible claimed that! Studies by scientists, archaelogists, geologist, and other disciplines have dated our Earth to billions of years old! And took about that long to be formed to its present state as well From this, I would dispel the claims made by the bible. However, the Bible's version is more pretty.

Cheers!

Frodo said:

I think we have already pretty much settled the part about your belief status, that you are an atheist for all intents and purposes. So long as you don’t believe there is a Creator God you are an atheist, regardless of whether you believe that the events in the Bible happened or not. Do note that it is a matter of belief here. You said that you cannot fathom them logically. Again I wonder if you know what it means to use the word “logically”. It means it comes from clear reasoning. Why then would it be illogical to state that if God exists then the events in the Bible are logically possible to have happened? BTW, I think I have mentioned it before, the creation took place in 6 days, not 7. You only need to prove or substantiate the claims that you make, giving good reasons for your beliefs. So far you just keep saying the Bible events are stories so you do not believe them. But you have not given any good reasons to say they are mere fiction stories, other than your incredulity.

Click to expand...

Agoraphobic said:

I did not say the world (or universe) was created in six or seven days, the Bible claimed that! Studies by scientists, archaelogists, geologist, and other disciplines have dated our Earth to billions of years old! And took about that long to be formed to its present state as well From this, I would dispel the claims made by the bible. However, the Bible's version is more pretty.

Cheers!

Click to expand...

I was correcting you (again) about the 7 days creation. It was a 6 days creation followed by 1 day of rest. That’s why we have a 7 day week, a specified period of time in which there is no astronomical basis, unlike a year or a month. Scientists made a claim about the age of the earth, you BELIEVE them and therefore you chose to dispel the Bible’s claims, am I right? But did you know how they arrive at that alleged age? And what assumptions were used? And when anomalies like these are found (http://www.armaghplanet.com/blog/the-star-older-than-the-universe.html) what do you make of them? No doubt you would simply shrug it off as a mystery to be set aside for future resolution, but until then you would not question one bit the illogical implications of what they found. Neither would you question the evolutionary assumptions they make. You see, for the atheist evolutionism is dogma, doctrine that cannot be false, because there is simply no other alternative.

Bro, you need to walk in a Museum of Natural Science to see the things put together by scientists. Suggest you go to the Singapore Science Centre. They have a little section showing Earth's early years, from molten rock when the earth was a hotter place, its since cooled down. And that took a far longer time than six days. What more proof do you need? I am unable to articulate all of that in a couple of sentences, you go see for yourself.

Cheers!

Frodo said:

I was correcting you (again) about the 7 days creation. It was a 6 days creation followed by 1 day of rest. That’s why we have a 7 day week, a specified period of time in which there is no astronomical basis, unlike a year or a month. Scientists made a claim about the age of the earth, you BELIEVE them and therefore you chose to dispel the Bible’s claims, am I right? But did you know how they arrive at that alleged age? And what assumptions were used? And when anomalies like these are found (http://www.armaghplanet.com/blog/the-star-older-than-the-universe.html) what do you make of them? No doubt you would simply shrug it off as a mystery to be set aside for future resolution, but until then you would not question one bit the illogical implications of what they found. Neither would you question the evolutionary assumptions they make. You see, for the atheist evolutionism is dogma, doctrine that cannot be false, because there is simply no other alternative.

Click to expand...

Agoraphobic said:

Bro, you need to walk in a Museum of Natural Science to see the things put together by scientists. Suggest you go to the Singapore Science Centre. They have a little section showing Earth's early years, from molten rock when the earth was a hotter place, its since cooled down. And that took a far longer time than six days. What more proof do you need? I am unable to articulate all of that in a couple of sentences, you go see for yourself.

Cheers!

Click to expand...

LOL! You walk down the display panels in the Science Centre about the history of life and simply BELIEVED all that? That’s your proof and evidence that evolution is true? Wow….you are even more gullible than the Christians you accuse of! LOL! Do yourself a favour the next time you walk down the path of displays. Read the texts and circle the words that imply belief, suggest, even magical words can be found! Example of a magic word is "evolve", and "arose" LOL! And don't be taken in that simply throwing in billions and millions of years will do the trick.

Look who's refuting FACTS when they are proven by authorities and people trained and qualified by authorised organizations. So, you'd rather take a page from the Bible, a text that's thousands of years old, written by Scribes and Village Elders, and believe its stories over data and facts compiled by Scientists with state of the art equipment? With respect to people of faith, I have refrained from using this term for such people - now, I suppose I am cornered into using them -stupid, and hare-brained idiots!

Chaeers!

Frodo said:

LOL! You walk down the display panels in the Science Centre about the history of life and simply BELIEVED all that? That’s your proof and evidence that evolution is true? Wow….you are even more gullible than the Christians you accuse of! LOL! Do yourself a favour the next time you walk down the path of displays. Read the texts and circle the words that imply belief, suggest, even magical words can be found! Example of a magic word is "evolve", and "arose" LOL! And don't be taken in that simply throwing in billions and millions of years will do the trick.

Click to expand...

Agoraphobic said:

Look who's refuting FACTS when they are proven by authorities and people trained and qualified by authorised organizations. So, you'd rather take a page from the Bible, a text that's thousands of years old, written by Scribes and Village Elders, and believe its stories over data and facts compiled by Scientists with state of the art equipment? With respect to people of faith, I have refrained from using this term for such people - now, I suppose I am cornered into using them -stupid, and hare-brained idiots!

Chaeers!

Click to expand...

Exactly WHAT have been PROVEN as FACTS, may I ask you? Your faith in scientism is commendable but misplaced, and you have more faith than me! LOL!

I don't mind you calling me idiot or hare-brained. I think you enjoy and relish that rather than really feel cornered to do that. Anyways, being called a fool by an atheist means nothing, compared to an atheist being called a fool by God.

The figures provided by carbon dating (or other measurement) on the ago of rocks, You may call them data, but to me, in this world we live in, at this time, I would accept them as evidence, or proof. Facts, for want of another word. They weren't just merely made-up, fudged numbers. God calling anyone by any name? Must be hearing things, - sounds inside the head, treatment is advised.

Cheers!

Frodo said:

Exactly WHAT have been PROVEN as FACTS, may I ask you? Your faith in scientism is commendable but misplaced, and you have more faith than me! LOL!

I don't mind you calling me idiot or hare-brained. I think you enjoy and relish that rather than really feel cornered to do that. Anyways, being called a fool by an atheist means nothing, compared to an atheist being called a fool by God.

Click to expand...

Agoraphobic said:

The figures provided by carbon dating (or other measurement) on the ago of rocks, You may call them data, but to me, in this world we live in, at this time, I would accept them as evidence, or proof. Facts, for want of another word. They weren't just merely made-up, fudged numbers. God calling anyone by any name? Must be hearing things, - sounds inside the head, treatment is advised.

Cheers!

Click to expand...

Carbon dating on rocks? LOL! You really don't know your stuff, do you? FYI carbon dating is only used on things that were once alive. Are rocks living organisms? But then again as an atheist you have to believe that rocks are living things, at least once. LOL! And yes, God calls the atheist a fool. Read Psalm 14 for reference.

I meant to say, embedded in these rocks, were remains of plants, animals, that have become fossilized. Bro, certain data from evidence collected are all we have, from these, we make the best of what we can, under existing conditions. Of course, you can open the Bible and find all your answers there if you have the faith they are correct. Next time anyone with a hunch or feeling that the Bible is correct, can speak up in court, and use Biblcal quotes as evidence, if the court honours what that person says, I may look that Great Book differently. But for now, as a member of the human species, supportive data from scientific journals and recognised scientists are a more prudent bet for what is correct.

Cheers!

Frodo said:

Carbon dating on rocks? LOL! You really don't know your stuff, do you? FYI carbon dating is only used on things that were once alive. Are rocks living organisms? But then again as an atheist you have to believe that rocks are living things, at least once. LOL! And yes, God calls the atheist a fool. Read Psalm 14 for reference.

Click to expand...

Agoraphobic said:

I meant to say, embedded in these rocks, were remains of plants, animals, that have become fossilized. Bro, certain data from evidence collected are all we have, from these, we make the best of what we can, under existing conditions. Of course, you can open the Bible and find all your answers there if you have the faith they are correct. Next time anyone with a hunch or feeling that the Bible is correct, can speak up in court, and use Biblcal quotes as evidence, if the court honours what that person says, I may look that Great Book differently. But for now, as a member of the human species, supportive data from scientific journals and recognised scientists are a more prudent bet for what is correct.

Cheers!

Click to expand...

Hmm mm....I see that you are retracting your answer, or revising it. I suppose you did some quick check and oops, you realised you got that part wrong. In any case, when they carbon date the stuff found in rocks they detect carbon still there, when it should have long dissipated long after 50,000 years. Yet there they are embedded in rocks that are supposedly millions of years old. What do you make of it? http://www.dinosaurc14ages.com/carbondating.htm

By the way, you should have been confident of the Bible since it got the beginning right from the start. Long before scientists discovered the universe had a beginning the first book of the Bible said "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth...."

Bro, I am not an expert in this field. There is every possibility that I can misunderstand or overlook certain aspects in the topic(s) we discuss. You do bring up very sharp points, and I can tell you are well-versed in the subject of religion, but that isn't good enough to convince me that your book (the Bible) is the ultimate truth. In fact, it has misled society very much and fixated the thinking of those who read it too often. (Brainwashed!)

Firstly, there exist different religions, each with its own story of how life, the universe and the world around began. So which one is the truth? Siding with anyone of them only displays biasness and arrogance (to a certain extent). ALL of them are based on old time superstition. So, the rational thing is to dispel all of them as false, start anew, with new findings, based on evidence collected and observed by ourselves (our species). It is more logical to see the snake as a reptile, a carnivorous vertebrate, oxygen breathing, living organism than some devil created creature with evil tendencies, which the Bible has made it out to be.

Cheers!

Frodo said:

Hmm mm....I see that you are retracting your answer, or revising it. I suppose you did some quick check and oops, you realised you got that part wrong. In any case, when they carbon date the stuff found in rocks they detect carbon still there, when it should have long dissipated long after 50,000 years. Yet there they are embedded in rocks that are supposedly millions of years old. What do you make of it? http://www.dinosaurc14ages.com/carbondating.htm

By the way, you should have been confident of the Bible since it got the beginning right from the start. Long before scientists discovered the universe had a beginning the first book of the Bible said "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth...."

Click to expand...

Agoraphobic said:

Bro, I am not an expert in this field. There is every possibility that I can misunderstand or overlook certain aspects in the topic(s) we discuss. You do bring up very sharp points, and I can tell you are well-versed in the subject of religion, but that isn't good enough to convince me that your book (the Bible) is the ultimate truth. In fact, it has misled society very much and fixated the thinking of those who read it too often. (Brainwashed!)

Firstly, there exist different religions, each with its own story of how life, the universe and the world around began. So which one is the truth? Siding with anyone of them only displays biasness and arrogance (to a certain extent). ALL of them are based on old time superstition. So, the rational thing is to dispel all of them as false, start anew, with new findings, based on evidence collected and observed by ourselves (our species). It is more logical to see the snake as a reptile, a carnivorous vertebrate, oxygen breathing, living organism than some devil created creature with evil tendencies, which the Bible has made it out to be.

Cheers!

Click to expand...

I am not an expert in science too, but I try to read up a fair bit, enough to keep ahead of the atheists! LOL! You said the Bible has misled society very much, in what way? Do not confuse this with people who misinterpreted what the Bible said and twisted it for their own twisted agendas. I don’t see my job as to convince you of the truth of the Bible. If you don’t wish to be convince no amount of evidence would suffice. What I will and can do is to refute your arguments against Christianity, and show you why atheism is false, and that your objections against Christianity rests on poor reasoning and wrong information and lots of misconceptions. I can’t drag you to the river to drink, but I can clear the path for you so that you walk the path if you so choose to do so. Again and again you speak about being rational and logical, but you have yet to explain why logic and reason should even exist in our universe. I have posed this question many times, and you have evaded it just as often.

Christianity has grown and evolved together with humanity, and shaped a lot of our thinking as well. Modern Christianity has shed off a lot of faults and is now trying to keep up with social changes. The one thing that not every Christian sector has kept up with are social changes in modern society -such as self-assisted deaths, abortion, gay marriages. These in themselves do not face full agreement across the entire community in our species as well, so Christian sects represent the different views/opinions of our species as well. But one point to differentiate between the two. One (the Christian) view is that they are immoral and God forbids, the other, is that we, as humans have the right and duty to take care of our own lives, and live the life we choose to live. We determine our own future, and not leave it to something divine to decide. That is the main difference. But the past, Christianity condoned slavery. Believed that non-believers do not have rights, and punished and treated non-believers like animals, (I believed they were called heathens), and Christian societies shattered and dismantled the social fabric of societies of aboriginal and native peoples because they did not know Jesus Christ. The damage done is irrepairable and today, these societies have to carry on under unimaginable circumstances and hardships - thanks to Christianity. The only consolence the people suffering from these (eg; Africa, South America, Australia) have is an apology from the Christian descendants of their violators. Of course we cannot hold modern Christians responsible for what their grandparents have done, but the damage is done; thanks to Christianity.

Cheers!

Frodo said:

I am not an expert in science too, but I try to read up a fair bit, enough to keep ahead of the atheists! LOL! You said the Bible has misled society very much, in what way? Do not confuse this with people who misinterpreted what the Bible said and twisted it for their own twisted agendas. I don’t see my job as to convince you of the truth of the Bible. If you don’t wish to be convince no amount of evidence would suffice. What I will and can do is to refute your arguments against Christianity, and show you why atheism is false, and that your objections against Christianity rests on poor reasoning and wrong information and lots of misconceptions. I can’t drag you to the river to drink, but I can clear the path for you so that you walk the path if you so choose to do so. Again and again you speak about being rational and logical, but you have yet to explain why logic and reason should even exist in our universe. I have posed this question many times, and you have evaded it just as often.

Click to expand...

Agoraphobic said:

Christianity has grown and evolved together with humanity, and shaped a lot of our thinking as well. Modern Christianity has shed off a lot of faults and is now trying to keep up with social changes. The one thing that not every Christian sector has kept up with are social changes in modern society -such as self-assisted deaths, abortion, gay marriages. These in themselves do not face full agreement across the entire community in our species as well, so Christian sects represent the different views/opinions of our species as well. But one point to differentiate between the two. One (the Christian) view is that they are immoral and God forbids, the other, is that we, as humans have the right and duty to take care of our own lives, and live the life we choose to live. We determine our own future, and not leave it to something divine to decide. That is the main difference. But the past, Christianity condoned slavery. Believed that non-believers do not have rights, and punished and treated non-believers like animals, (I believed they were called heathens), and Christian societies shattered and dismantled the social fabric of societies of aboriginal and native peoples because they did not know Jesus Christ. The damage done is irrepairable and today, these societies have to carry on under unimaginable circumstances and hardships - thanks to Christianity. The only consolence the people suffering from these (eg; Africa, South America, Australia) have is an apology from the Christian descendants of their violators. Of course we cannot hold modern Christians responsible for what their grandparents have done, but the damage is done; thanks to Christianity.

Cheers!

Click to expand...

You did not make the proper distinction between what Christianity actually teaches and what Christians have believed or done, which may or may be consistent with what Christianity teaches. But firstly you have to properly establish the former before you can use that to indict the latter. As for keeping up with social changes, not all changes are morally good. Society today is very permissive and accept many things. Who knows it may even be acceptable for one’s wife to sleep with her own son if the liberal sexual floodgates are opened, but does that make it morally right? Yet such questions only further begs the question, who decides what is morally right or wrong? Is there even a moral standard? Or there are no moral standards except what each society deems acceptable? Mind you, being acceptable is not the same as morally right. I believe Christianity is the truth, and Christians have not always lived up to the moral standards God has set for us. That’s our fallen human nature at work. While I note your sarcasm about Christianity, or to be accurate Christians, having done damage throughout history, this only serve to prove the point the Bible makes all along, that we are fallen and sinful. But you would be bigoted if you fail to see the good that Christianity, and Christians, have done.

Bro, do not try to interpret me as you perceive in your mind about "atheists." I respect the Christian religion, its teachings, and intentions, I admire the persona of Jesus Christ, as a model human, and feel that people should emulate (at least) him in the story about him. That he sets a great example. Humans are humans, subject to temptation, greed. Are weak-willed. So many things can go wrong under humans. I just do not believe that things described in the Bible happened as actual events in history.

Cheers!

Frodo said:

You did not make the proper distinction between what Christianity actually teaches and what Christians have believed or done, which may or may be consistent with what Christianity teaches. But firstly you have to properly establish the former before you can use that to indict the latter. As for keeping up with social changes, not all changes are morally good. Society today is very permissive and accept many things. Who knows it may even be acceptable for one’s wife to sleep with her own son if the liberal sexual floodgates are opened, but does that make it morally right? Yet such questions only further begs the question, who decides what is morally right or wrong? Is there even a moral standard? Or there are no moral standards except what each society deems acceptable? Mind you, being acceptable is not the same as morally right. I believe Christianity is the truth, and Christians have not always lived up to the moral standards God has set for us. That’s our fallen human nature at work. While I note your sarcasm about Christianity, or to be accurate Christians, having done damage throughout history, this only serve to prove the point the Bible makes all along, that we are fallen and sinful. But you would be bigoted if you fail to see the good that Christianity, and Christians, have done.

Click to expand...

Agoraphobic said:

Bro, do not try to interpret me as you perceive in your mind about "atheists." I respect the Christian religion, its teachings, and intentions, I admire the persona of Jesus Christ, as a model human, and feel that people should emulate (at least) him in the story about him. That he sets a great example. Humans are humans, subject to temptation, greed. Are weak-willed. So many things can go wrong under humans. I just do not believe that things described in the Bible happened as actual events in history.

Cheers!

Click to expand...

The person of Jesus is rooted in history, yet you would hardly believe what the Bible says about Him. Jesus believed the events in the Old Testament as real history. Would you say He was deceived? Or that He went around deceiving people? Jesus was more than just a model human and a good example. He made claims about Himself, claims that would demand a response from us. A noted Christian apologist said we either have to conclude He was either liar, lunatic, or Lord. BTW, many of the events in the Bible have been corroborated by other historical documents, archaeological findings. The Bible is more reliable than you care to think. Much of your views about the Bible and Christianity are simply wrong and misinformed, as I have shown many times. You should relook your own views again.

I see Jesus as a character, a persona, a model. His story is a great story that everyone should listen. His example, and teachings in his story should be followed, he is the perfect man. Too good to be true. In reality, how many people can live and behave like him? It is just an idealized person.

Cheers!

Frodo said:

The person of Jesus is rooted in history, yet you would hardly believe what the Bible says about Him. Jesus believed the events in the Old Testament as real history. Would you say He was deceived? Or that He went around deceiving people? Jesus was more than just a model human and a good example. He made claims about Himself, claims that would demand a response from us. A noted Christian apologist said we either have to conclude He was either liar, lunatic, or Lord. BTW, many of the events in the Bible have been corroborated by other historical documents, archaeological findings. The Bible is more reliable than you care to think. Much of your views about the Bible and Christianity are simply wrong and misinformed, as I have shown many times. You should relook your own views again.

Click to expand...

Agoraphobic said:

I see Jesus as a character, a persona, a model. His story is a great story that everyone should listen. His example, and teachings in his story should be followed, he is the perfect man. Too good to be true. In reality, how many people can live and behave like him? It is just an idealized person.

Cheers!

Click to expand...

There is no denial that Jesus is a REAL person of history. He is so important and such a focal person that He divides our reckoning of history into BC and AD. But there are people who wishes downplay His significance so now they use BCE or CE. That’s a reflection of how much the world hates God and wants little or nothing to do with Him. Jesus was sinless. So you are right, no one can live like Him. But that’s the good news! Because Jesus lived the perfect life, and was sinless, He qualified to be the pure and perfect Lamb of God who takes away our sin! You know Chinese right? The Chinese character for “righteousness” is comprised of the characters of “lamb” over “me”. See http://walkengeonwater.com/thelamb/

I am not denying that Jesus never lived. Just that the Jesus of Nazareth, the one whom you guys call the King of Kings, was a fictitious character. During that time of history, the people in that part of the world were ruled by the Romans, whom they hated very much, felt oppressed, and they looked forward to a messiah, a person with the ability to take them out of the misery, and that means freed from Roman Rule. Then there must have been a person, a rebel, (probably a few of them) who were leaders who tried. Well, when caught, the Romans, with the assistance of the local sector Jewish leaders were tasked with the job of bringing back justice and restore law and order - to Roman standards - and that mean crucifying the poor dude. From this, the story of Jesus materialised, and after his death, the divine part entered the story, and the prophecy was fulfilled, and you have Jesus Christ, the Messiah, Saviour of the Jews, was hatched. The rest is history. It grew and grew, because the idea of a kind God appealed more than one who wants sacrifices and gifts. One that was forgiving was soft-landing for troubled humans of the times. Jesus was a character more loved than feared, and people preferred this gentle Jesus than the tyrant earthly kings they were more familiar with. Nations grew, led by the image of this Jesus, followed zealously by the masses, growing in strength, to what we have today. Still growing. Because he appeals. People who have nothing in life, look forward with hope to be with their saviour, with joy, and comfort in their dying days. To some, they see a chance in this to exploit the gullibility of those who believe, but to the believers, it doesn't matter, because being with their lord Jesus overcomes any other shortgivings in their lives. This is the legacy of Jesus Christ. For this reason, it does not matter whether Jesus is real or not. It is the hope in him that is greater than whether he existed or not.

Cheers!

Frodo said:

There is no denial that Jesus is a REAL person of history. He is so important and such a focal person that He divides our reckoning of history into BC and AD. But there are people who wishes downplay His significance so now they use BCE or CE. That’s a reflection of how much the world hates God and wants little or nothing to do with Him. Jesus was sinless. So you are right, no one can live like Him. But that’s the good news! Because Jesus lived the perfect life, and was sinless, He qualified to be the pure and perfect Lamb of God who takes away our sin! You know Chinese right? The Chinese character for “righteousness” is comprised of the characters of “lamb” over “me”. See http://walkengeonwater.com/thelamb/

Click to expand...

Agoraphobic said:

I am not denying that Jesus never lived. Just that the Jesus of Nazareth, the one whom you guys call the King of Kings, was a fictitious character. During that time of history, the people in that part of the world were ruled by the Romans, whom they hated very much, felt oppressed, and they looked forward to a messiah, a person with the ability to take them out of the misery, and that means freed from Roman Rule. Then there must have been a person, a rebel, (probably a few of them) who were leaders who tried. Well, when caught, the Romans, with the assistance of the local sector Jewish leaders were tasked with the job of bringing back justice and restore law and order - to Roman standards - and that mean crucifying the poor dude. From this, the story of Jesus materialised, and after his death, the divine part entered the story, and the prophecy was fulfilled, and you have Jesus Christ, the Messiah, Saviour of the Jews, was hatched. The rest is history. It grew and grew, because the idea of a kind God appealed more than one who wants sacrifices and gifts. One that was forgiving was soft-landing for troubled humans of the times. Jesus was a character more loved than feared, and people preferred this gentle Jesus than the tyrant earthly kings they were more familiar with. Nations grew, led by the image of this Jesus, followed zealously by the masses, growing in strength, to what we have today. Still growing. Because he appeals. People who have nothing in life, look forward with hope to be with their saviour, with joy, and comfort in their dying days. To some, they see a chance in this to exploit the gullibility of those who believe, but to the believers, it doesn't matter, because being with their lord Jesus overcomes any other shortgivings in their lives. This is the legacy of Jesus Christ. For this reason, it does not matter whether Jesus is real or not. It is the hope in him that is greater than whether he existed or not.

Cheers!

Click to expand...

You cannot separate the Jesus of history from the so-called Jesus of theology. This is a fake and forced distinction. Jesus never came to free anyone from any political rule, and He never did. It takes more credulity to believe that people would just invent a fictitious character they know to be false and then just go ahead and willingly subject themselves to persecution and cruel executions. For what? A CSB is just that, a CSB. Whatever tall story you have to try to explain Jesus away, it must be supported by facts, not just your insistence that they must be correct because you simply cannot believe the Bible’s account.