TO ATHEISTS, TO JEWS, TO MUSLIMS, TO MORMONS, TO WICCANS, TO SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS, TO JWS & CATHOLICS
“You have disregarded the command of God to keep the tradition of men.” – Yeshua/Jesus (rebuking the Pharisees)
Which “command” or “Law” came first in history? The “10” and two highest (and “Golden Rule” which even atheists won’t) dispute, or all the other books; Quran, “Sacred Tradition”, Joseph Smith’s, White’s, the Talmud, and so on? And what word before Genesis to Revelation will you compare that came before? What word survived Noah’s Flood? As for those who say, “The Bible is altered, it’s missing books, and which translation to believe?”: what books can you prove are missing that matter and why would that prevent you from obeying the Law or G.Rule, and how does it prevent you from understanding, “Don’t lie” or “steal” or “murder”? As for “which religion to believe?”: the one that doesn’t contradict the commands and gospel! The one that says not to be bitter, stingy, to help the poor and needy and to even be honest with evil men and to control the thoughts of your heart and not be like a wild animal, but to use reason/logic and to try and be perfect. The religion that acknowledges that you must be born again (receive a perfect spirit of your own that will stay pure and immortal) to become fully immortal one day, and trust Jesus, God’s son in the flesh, suffered the punishment of unimaginable pain and being shunned by God (yet not forever), for the sins of many people and races, for you, if you with sorrow for breaking God’s Law and tormenting his Spirit of mercy and peace by doing so ask for his forgiveness and believe God will then forgive your sins throughout all time and keep his promise to perfect your heart, mind and transform your flesh into what will be immortal and what will never sin again.
For you who in your confusion and false salvation claim salvation is seperate from eternal life and that “salvation is not eternal”, prove to YOURSELF, with careful study, patience and prayer that confusion is true. How is being saved from Hell not the partner of being born again? How if Jesus’ self sacrifice covedered the sins of those born before and after his life on Earth does is not cover FUTURE SINS? Where in Scripture does it teach that after being born again and becoming “a new creature in Christ” that Paul said nothing in Heaven or the earth can overcome, or where in the parable Jesus explained of God the sower of seeds that the seeds which bear good fruit (obedience to God with love for Him) will NOT mature but will rot and be burned up due to man’s free will or due to “Satan”? If the “free will” of man, which God says is “a slave to sin” BEFORE, BEFORE! he is forgiven and Satan can defeat God’s promise to secure for himself eternal children (including his faithful angels), then throw out the Bible, God is a liar, Satan is the winner and “the sting” and “curse” of death is what is truly eternal, inevitable and sure, NOT God’s “eternal life”, Son, any prophets or word, not his salvation or eternal life, not even his forgiveness of sins.
Why would, as Pentecostals teach, eternal life be something you only get after you die? Does man’s “free will” that Pentecostals and Arminians teach trump’s God’s will cease after he dies so that he can no longer command God to send him to Hell? Their teaching is confusion and has no basis in any Scripture, rather it is a lie that contradicts God’s word.
How can you miss the symbolism God used in the literal story where God saves for Himself some humans and angels, like Noah to Paul and so on, like angels Michael and Gabriel and so on, but rejects of HIS own will (not man’s choice with man’s God-limited will) and rejects others, permanently? Where in Scripture does it hint Noah or Michael will one day fall? It doesn’t, because there is no fall in the flesh or by the spirits of the forgiven that will prevent them from full immortality. And there is one more proof in Scripture that makes it clear that salvation is eternal: everyone who know’s the parable of Lazarus and the rich man knows the rich man is eternally in Hell, that a rift impassible prevents him from going to Heaven, even from getting relief for a moment, but who realizes or remembers the rift between Heaven and Hell is impassible on the side of Heaven too? Jesus even said that Abraham could not, or anyone rather give to the rich man that drop of water he wanted. How then can “man’s free will” break God’s promise and send him past the impassible to get eternal death, the “second death”, which is eternal torment and God showing no compassion to your feelings and thoughts forever and refusing to verbally respond to you nor even give you “a sign”?
The complacent will think, “who cares?” and the cultist think, “I’ll understand later” and the arrogant “scholar” deceive himself into thinking he still has some leverage over God. But this message is first for thosd whom God will unblind, not those as with the Pharisees Jesus said that God would keep heart-hardened and blind.
Is it “too good to be true” as a Muslim woman replied? What? Too good to be true that God would forgive some and not others? As opposed to what else? That He would send everything He let be in Hell forever, or the other extreme: every rich one and tyrant to Heaven and everything else?!
Finally, to atheists, what morality (laws) do you obey, and obey perfectly so that you cannot be called a hypocrite and why do you follow those laws? Or, do you just do whatever you feel like if you think you might not suffer for it, and are therefore no better than a “religious hypocrite”?
Judgement Day approaches, death is not far, if you think your life truly precious, then treat it as such.
“Often, a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself, whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy ” Charles Darwin…Life and Letters 1887 – sandra, Liverpool England, More False Witness Bearing by creationists. Another one breaks the 9th commandment. Dear Sandra, I would ask you and other creationists to stop misrepresenting Darwin and other scientists by mining their quotes. This above comes from a letter to Darwin’s friend, Charles Lyell. The next line is: “Now I look at it as morally impossible that investigators of truth, like you (Lyell) and Hooker, can be wholly wrong, and therefore I rest in peace.” Darwin, unlike creationists, was intellectually honest and always presented a problem before offering the solution. Creationists usually cut and paste only the problem and try to sully Darwin and science with it. It’s a murky, ugly, untruthful business is quote mining, but desperate creationists are happy to do it in the name of their myth.
– Duster, Canterbury, Kent, 07/6/2010 20:31
And it’s a myth because Duster, part of the group that killed 150,000,000 people in the past 100 years in the name of “I’m God, there is no God” not including millions of aborted babies, which in China atheists forcefully abort and try to stop from being born by sterilizing women after having just one (wow talk about “extremists” and “fanatics” and “kooks”) — because Duster who cares about Darwin being taken out of context, but not the deeds of Christians, creationists, theists or God, said so. Get saved Duster, before it’s too late for you.
James, London said that atheism was: “The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason what so ever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs.” As a faithful Christian, James, i’m sure you live and fear the 10 Commandments and believe that if you break one, you’re off to hell. Well, you’ve broken the 9th: thou shalt not bear false witness. I would fear if I were you. Your false witness here is against non-belief in your god and all gods, and also against science. Atheists only believe in one less god than you, James, and please show me any astronomer who says “nothing magically exploded for no reason”. And for stuff “rearranged itself for no reason”? Again, false witness: there was a reason: reproduction. You’ve broken the 9th Commandment, James. Really…
– Duster, Canterbury, Kent, 07/6/2010 20:20
Art, Austin, TX, said,: “Please don’t force me to correct you again. We discussed this before, remember? The Earth-Sun system is CLOSED..” The earth is not a closed system: sunlight (with low entropy) shines on it and heat (with higher entropy) radiates off. This flow of energy, and the change in entropy that accompanies it, can and will power local decreases in entropy on earth. Even if entropy did occur, evolution does not violate basic physical laws because evolution says nothing about the origin of life. Evolution occured only after life originated – however that happened, either supernaturally (unlikely) or naturally (most probably). Even major creationist orgganisations like Answers in Genesis says the 2nd law of thermodynaimcs should not be used as an argument against evolution.
– Duster, Canterbury, Kent, 07/6/2010 20:09
And even the former atheist Antony Flew had to admit there was at least a God of some kind after carefully examining DNA, but despite all of Duster’s careful examining, he refuses to see anything but arguments that can be used against creationists, despite none of them proving evolution possible, logical, or creationism illogical. Talk about intellectual dishonest and pathological science. Deeply sinful.
“The atheists lunatic belief system: In the beginning there was NOTHING – and absolutely nothing was happening to absolutely nothing. Then, one random day – absolutely nothing exploded and absolutely nothing became… absolutely EVERYTHING. Then the nothing that became everything (for no reason at all) rearranged itself into self-replicating, intricately complex life forms. ” – Michael, Scotland, 5/6/2010 11:21 Or your version…. One day there was an omnipotent being who decided to create the most enormous universe full of stars and planets… he chose one little one, put some stuff on it and then did nothing but watch as they killed themselves for millenia… so he sent his ‘son’ to die for us. A bunch of (uneducated) guys in huts 2000 years ago wrote a book about it which has spawned countless wars and even though we’ve made huge scientific steps since then, people still believe what’s written in that old book…. that make more sense? As it doesn’t to me!
– Oli, Braintree, Englishland, 07/6/2010 13:43
“Or your version….”
“One day there was an omnipotent being”
Another person (atheist? agnostic?) who doesn’t know Bible basics: it Bible doesn’t say God suddenly one day appeared, nor that the day appeared at the same time as God. Truly stupid. Truly ignorant.
“who decided to create the most enormous universe full of stars and planets…”
You committed logical fallacy “begging the question”: what does enormity and being full of stars and planets (actually mainstream scientists claim that most of the universe is empty. Millions of people have already been told that. it seems to me you’re not very informed as me and don’t keep up with the latest science. Further “the most enormous universe” in comparison to what other universe? The little imaginary one that exploded one in your skull? Did you read some book about parallel universes or dote on mainstream science fictional tales in the few news articles you read about how “there’s a giant gap in the universe, billions of light years of an expanse with nothing there and scientists think it might be the entrance to another universe” and then all the sudden it’s as real as a billions and billions of years old Carl Sagan big bang that you saw exploding?
“he chose one little one,”
Where does the Bible say he chose one place to put life on, when throughout the Bible it talks about angels? You also made a strawman argument: do all Christians say God only made life in one area of the universe? Further, even if it were true, you committed the fallacy of begging the question again: what is your point? You’re point, because you are a morally blind and morally backwards person, is that it’s arrogant to think God would do so, as if you are God of all, or greater than him or his judge to say, “How arrogant of you to choose one place to make life.” Huh? Because? Confused much? And as if you know the future? And read all the atheists here railing against me for pointing out THE NEARLY MILITANT ATHEIST CARL SAGAN’S ABSURD IMPLICATION THAT THE ONLY LIFE THAT EXISTS IS ON EARTH! BUT, “DAMN THEM CHRISTIANS NO MATTER WHAT THEY SAY! GOD MADE ME MAD AND DIDN’T GIVE ME MY WAY! HE LETS BAD THINGS HAPPEN! UH UH UH HE DOESN’T LET ME EXPERIENCE WHATEVER I WANT TO! LIKE BAD THINGS! UH UH UH…” Endless contradictions and arbitrary circular reasoning. When will, it end? When will atheists who protest against Christianity no matter what good they see coming from Christians concede they are wrong about God not existing? Pride comes before a fall.
“put some stuff on it”
Listen to that idiot atheist rant. So you have Carl Sagan, an idol among most atheists, seems to me at least, and many atheists trouncing all over Christians with words like, “There’s just this one pale blue dot we know about, precious life all over, glory and beauty all over, look at all the beautiful billions and BIILLLIOOONS of stars my children! Weeee look at me run through the beautiful evolved grass and the beautiful invisible wind that no one can see rushing through my hair but trust me the wind exists even though you can’t directly see it weeee look at me run! Look how I evolved to be able to out run the monstrous dinosaurs and other humans to survive and because my DNA wanted to replicate! Weeee, oh look at the glorious flowers and beautiful everything you crazy evil wicked sinful theists who causes wars and misery and death everywhere due to YOUR gods YOUR God YOUR beliefs (and says very quickly) NOT MINE! and weeee loooook at meeeeeeeeeeeee… you only have one life to live you twists see how awesome the universe is don’t waste your life!” But, you, an idiot, a typical atheist, coming up with an arbitrary argument in smugness and hate and bitterness, have to say the opposite of what you know to be false, just to, “get the Christian to chase his tail” and out of spite for God. The very same group that faults Christians for being stupid for wasting their precious life by not experiencing the “wonderful and beautiful” universe by not “living life to the fullest” (meaning agreeing with whatever an atheist says is fun and good, not the Christians’ version), just say, “stuff” now, because oh: it’s just a stupid Christian ur talkin’ too. Talk about hypocrites. Conniving, evil, wicked, lying, deceptive, time-wasting, hypocrites. How much more of atheist “bullshit” do theists have to listen to before locking them up for temporary insanity, hopefully temporary. Lock those war-starting atheists away. Yes: you are the ones who start wars: 150 million dead in hundred years thanks to atheist communists. And being that atheists lie so much you can’t even trust that they aren’t just using communism as propaganda to get their way, to, how do you say it, “using religion as a tool to control people.”
“and then did nothing but watch as they killed themselves for millenia…”
Wow, really, did not even read page one of the Bible. Here we go again with atheists coming up with arbitrary arguments, committing the fallacy of “circular reasoning”, another damn God if he does damn God if doesn’t argument. Fault: 1) I thought atheists DON’T want God getting involved in every single little thing they do because, “Look how he’s CONSTANTLY ANGRY AT EVERYONE, KILLING LEFT AND RIGHT AND COMMITTING GENOCIDE”, but now, switcharoo: God “don’t do nothin, he just made stuff and watches without feelin'”. What a provoker.
“so he sent his ‘son’ to die for us.”
But wait: you just said he sat and watched, as if he felt nothin’, but all the sudden he sent his (ONLY, PERFECT, AT-ONE-WITH-HIM) son to DIE (WHAT HAPPENED TO THE ETERNITY COMPRESSED INTO THREE DAYS SUFFERING FOR COUNTLESS SINNERS WITH COUNTLESS SINS!?!? WHAT AN ARROGANT DECEPTIVE TRIVIALIZER! YOU SOUND LIKE SATAN MAN!) for us, to DIE for US, THE ENTIRE PLANET(?), but now all the sudden, according to you, God decides, “I’ll send my son to die for them.” Wow you are no story teller, no Bible-story writer. You can’t tell a story that make sense like God can, or those “primitives living in huts” could/. And what happened to the “caves” myth/cliche?. First humans only lived in caves now they only lived in huts.
And despite God dying for “us” you still hate him, even if he died for over 50 billion people, with countless sins. And really?: you care about “millions” of people (theists) dying let alone one, Mr.: “I See No Communist Atheists Muderin’ No One,” Mr. “I Was Around For the Past 6,500 Years to Be Tormented at All the Millions of Deaths I Saw Just as I Was Around To See Evolution First Happen 12 Billion Years Ago and Before that When I Saw the Big Bang Happen!” — huh? just millions? No: over a billion people have died over thousands of years, and over billions more if we really were around for millions and billions of years. You speak CARE-LESS-LY, without care, without care for the truth, just like all atheists. You’re sloppy-minded, like a drunk person, drunk on your delusions of grandeur, thinking you’re superior to God, as if God was just a cloud floating in the sky even though that doesn’t come anything close to the definition of “God.”
“A bunch of (uneducated) guys in huts 2000 years ago”
Wow I’m reading the words of a major moron: You still haven’t seen these things called “pyramids”? Where u been man? Living in a cave, Mr. Uneducated? You haven’t even seen a National Geographic propaganda movie of any kind, no commercials, no magazine covers of the “primitives” you’re talking about? Speed up your education guy who lives in a house superior to a hut (cuz don’t you know what you live in is a definite sign of your intelligence, uh, no): http://ooparts.tk, http://forbiddenarch.tk. Or, you could just look up “pyramids” in Wikipedia, dominated by your fellow nerdier-and-living-in-a-darker-danker-basement-than-you atheists friends.
wrote a book about it which has spawned countless wars
Why are you so gullible? Why do you keep repeating a myth? Biased much? Ignorant of history much? You can’t even check the atheist controlled Wikipedia? What “countless” wars moron? Count some for us: which wars? Are you going to refer to the CATHOLICS? Are all Catholics “Christian”? Are all Christians Catholic? And listen to what an idiot this person is: he’s said “all wars are bad.” So no war is fought for a just reason? No fight is fought for a good reason? You might as well have said, “all defending is bad,” “all attacking is bad”, and you do both with your words. Yet another example of how illogical anti-Christians are, yet another overgeneralizing, sterotyping, assuming, hypocritical, simplelton.
and even though we’ve made huge scientific steps since then,
Like what idiot? This is another moron who thinks atheists paved the way for scientific advancements and that atheists came up with all the great scientific advancements and that evolutionism was the cherry on top (despite it only being shown as having been useful for COUNTLESS MURDERS: STALIN, HITLER, POL POT, KIM IL JUNG, AMERICAN EUGENICISTS, and other serial killers. See how hypocritical atheist-defenders are? Their accusations apply to them, not the Christians they lump in together with the fakes in their arrogance and carelessness. It’s the atheist Bible that spawns countless fights and deaths and endless strife. The “spawning of evil” comes from those who worship false gods, and multiply them, those who worship themselves and other humans, comic book characters and animals, and out of HATRED for God’s word is evil spawned, from atheists included, not THE BIBLE, you spawn of Satan. “Your father is the devil, and he was a liar and murderer from the beginning.” Satan, the accuser, the hypocrite accuser and judge, who condemns God throughout the day, just like his children do, yet do the very things they accuse the righteous of.
people still believe what’s written in that old book….
Look how stupid this guy is; he’s so dumb he commits one of the most obvious logical fallacies: “Age Fallacy”. “It’s old therefore it must no longer be useful.” Cool so all I have to do is wait for you to turn some “old” age for you to be wrong about whatever you’ve said, all I have to do is say, “Darwin is dead and old and so is evolution babble.” So many contradictions in atheist ranting. Oh and, since “don’t murder” and “don’t lie” is “old” (ancient even), it must not matter if I lie to or murder you, right Mr. “I’m New”? Or is that what you just believe for yourself and fellow Christian-haters? You sure are “new.”
people still believe what’s written in that old book…. that make more sense?
No Mr. New Drama Dots, that doesn’t make sense. You’re grammar is nonsensical, which is typical of an atheist.
As it doesn’t to me!
Not only does that sentence not make sense to me, it doesn’t make sense at all. What an idiot. But this idiot, got 60 votes up, no doubt mainly from atheists. There were sixty votes up for this rant, this stupid, childish, oaf’s rant. If that isn’t an awesome sign of how stupid anti-Christians and atheists are, if that isn’t evidence of proof, then what is? Do they need to be seen punching themselves in the mouth or running into brick walls over and over saying, “I can defeat you!” til they drop dead?
I belive in the planet god Staurnius. He says that all life is of him and within him. Without him there is nothing. He declares his existance through our belief in him, shun science, burn your books of evil and worship at his orbit. His physical manifestation can be seen with a telescope, the planet you call saturn.
– Saturnius Priest, omnipitent, 07/6/2010 13:17
A moron atheist gets ten votes up because he compared the most influential helpful religion and book in the world, tested against 4000 years of time, and lasted, and bested all other books after all that time, is still used as an archeological guide even by atheists, and used for studying ancient languages, to his little rant about about worshiping a planet. And even though they knew that the Bible says not to worship material things, as do true Christians (not talking about “Pentecostal” Arminian idiots), to use reason, to have evidence for what you believe and not to assume and not to lie, they compare it to a priest worshiping a planet and to the “superior” “logical” atheists whose lives are based on science and worship science (so they claim) yet when it’s pointed out that they use emotional ranting in place of science, they ask you, “what u talkin’ bout science for?” Uhhhhh: because you idiots keep including it in your attacks and basing your claims on your so called science? Just like this Saturn rant? “Duh”? Yet you make fun of “retards” and claim Christians and theists are “retards”? BLIND, DUMB, IGNORANT, ARROGANT, HYPOCRITES. No atheists, it’s not the lovers of Christ or the God who created all the planets and matter in the universe that are apart of an obscure and bizarre anti-reasoning cult, that’s you Mainstreamers who believe you saw a big bang billions and billions of Carl Sagan years ago, saw gas turning into planets and stars, saw energy turning into rocks, saw magic soup puddles giving birth to little animals when hit with Dr. Frankenstein’s lightning, saw evolution over billions and billions of years of these little animals turning into laughing, dancing, singing, sexual humans, turning into male and females subduing their environment and choosing to worship an invisible creator, who think you see transitional fossils, a bag full as proof that these things happened, who think you still see stars forming from gas and planets from rocks floating around billions and billions of light years away, who think that moths being born with spots is proof that laughing, dancing, singing, sex-having, exploring, God-worshiping humans, came from little living thingies that you can’t see and can’t even describe, and can’t show to anyone. Talk about believers in the “invisible”. Talk about “deluded”. Talk about “kooks” and “cranks” and “crackpots”. Talk about mere faith and needing faith and talking about faith all the time because of zero evidence for what you believe in. Your cult even is a perfect description of how you think: “Mainstream” as in “Because we’re the authority, majority, most popular and most accepted, we’re the right and good ones!” Wow! What happened to those logical fallacy lists that you hijacked and spread all over the Internet in the name of “no gods no guilt”? You’re similar to the false pastors Jesus described, you jump over the sheep gate rather than come in through the Gate with permission, pretending to be a shepherd, rob the sheep, then jump over the gate like a thief in the night after doing damage. You repeat logical fallacies while committing them, because you could care less about them in the first place, and just want to appear wise without having to do the work to truly be wise. You are blind guides leading the blind trying to lead the sighted as well, but you fall into a pit while trying.
This Saturnian priest is a typical atheist; he doesn’t know what science is. He couldn’t use a spellchecker, but got ten votes up. Or is that his dumb way of saying, “Theists can’t spell”? And what a statement that deserves voting up right? “Theists can’t spell, dey don’t do science, dey not builded no pyramids, no dey builded nuttin, dey uh, um, dey war all dah time so dat why der is none left and why atheists rule da world and why atheists are the most biggerest group in da world and why der is only 4 persent of theists in world now.” Talk about “bigotry”, “hateful” and “war spawning”. And he thinks he’s being scientific by mere mockery. Truly an idiot. It’s typical for atheists to vote up any “old” cliches, any nonsense, as long as it’s directed against theists. Truly stupid. No moron atheists: the idiots are you, because all you do is pretend to be scientific by saying, “Nanny nanny ur not scientific, we’re the scientists.” or good even though you watched without protest, or a little feeble protesting when it came to standing up for your enemies when they were unjustly attacked. You’re no better then the same who watched while the Jews were taken away to be humiliated and brutally murdered under the pretense of being thieves and anti-progress, and no better than those who committed those crimes. No moron atheists, it’s you who “builded” nothing, there are no pyramids standing in your legacy. You are a tiny minority, because you’re bitterly unpleasant, self-destructive, negative (despite that some of you pretend or delude yourself into thinking that atheism is about living life to the fullest and that fullest means, “being morally good while having fun”), hypocrites, plainly not trustworthy, murderous, arrogant, morally shallow, self-centered brutes.
But here’s something that isn’t taken out of context, said by Darwin: he said that evil existed. Now what, is evil? Can the evolution or survival of the fittest god tell us what evil is? Why did Darwin say evil existed if there’s no God whose personality decides what is evil or not? Is evil killing an animal to eat it? Is it killing at all? Is it lying, stealing, murdering, dishonoring your parents, worshiping false gods, blaspheming God, breaking the Sabbath? What is it? Is it animals killing other animals to survive or for fun? Show me the law book of evil, Duster, which one should I obey? Are you God, Duster, to tell me which laws are evil or not? Or is everything just opinions? And there is the ever present problem for atheists: they know there are absolute things which are good and things which are absolutely wrong, but because of their disgust for God, they can’t explain why and leave you with drama dots for their answer, or the truth, “I don’t care.”
“A fool gets no pleasure from understanding anything, but only in airing his opinions.” – from Proverbs of King Solomon
Darrel, an atheist said,
“If someone is insulted by my using a label that attributes two nice adjectives to myself, to bad. Want insulting? See “I am a member of the one true religion.” (“Jehovah’s Witness”, “Church of Christ” etc.)” (source)
Me: “etc” meaning what? What does “etc” include Darrel? Why would someone who believes they have the absolute truth be “ABSOLUTELY insulting” Darrel? So if someone believes they have the truth they should always qualify it with, “But I could be wrong and you could be the one with the absolute truth, oh Darrel the atheist.” What with your double standards and insanity? So if math teachers say, “10 X 100 = 1000” they are insulting for stating it as a fact? Or far more complex equations that are flawless?
And in response to Darrel’s, “Considering most people associate it with eating babies, yes, it’s pretty bad.”
Do you know what a strawman is? Who thinks atheists eats babies? How is that not insulting to say to those who disapprove of atheism or think that they are wicked? And hypocrite, they might as well eat babies: forcing abortions on the Chinese, aborting babies every day (that includes atheist Buddhists) WITHOUT ANESTHETIZING THE BABIES, and brutally murdering them.That’s not including the 500 million killed in the past 110 years by atheist leaders and those that went along with their “progress” and “evolution” or the atheists that supported the DDT ban and who continue to spread myths about DDT and all kinds of other lies that rob people of their health, wealth and life.
And Don the atheist, whom Darrel was replying to, said at the bottom of his blog (pretending that they were how theists would respond to being told that the person they are talking to is an atheist):
# They do not believe in God.
# Outrageous! How can this be! I’ve never met someone who didn’t believe in God before.
Don what Christian (not living in desperate poverty or far from a city who lacks an education) has never met an atheist or been informed that there are many of them? Oh the two-year old ones right unfunny, genius joker? Ever heard of the Internet either? Oh yeah no one ever meets an atheist on the Internet… So I shouldn’t think atheists are very dumb (at times), because? Though up until I read that part this post was unusually insightful for one made by an atheist. I found it by typing in that I thought the term freethinker stupid and insulting to Christians.
It’s thoughtless truth-careless hypocritical answers like yours Darrel, one that over looks the gross immorality of atheists over their blooming in the past 110 years, and which is in our faces every day, that many people consider atheists baby-eaters. You’re worse than that: you cut them up mercilessly and trash them or promote taking advantage of them even after that by trying to use their pieces murdered of them for the benefit of sick people psychos like yourselves, who defend all that evil. You are the ones who deserve to be cut up with anesthesia and trashed in Hell forever. Like it or not Darrel, absolute truth doesn’t agree with your lies, and it isn’t a sin to say that you know and understand God and that he loves you and that God doesn’t approve of “whatever” or only Darrel’s absolute truth, only Darrel’s fundamentalist, only what atheists believe is true. Just because atheists are offended, doesn’t mean the ones who offended should change their behavior beliefs or words, or now is “offense” the standard for truth, what offends atheists? Aren’t you blind and arrogant? Who made you God or our gods? How is it you don’t see design anywhere? Since you don’t see the obvious, it’s obvious you will have trouble seeing your own hypocrisy either.
This post can be reached at http://refuted.tk
In response to the 29-year-old female atheist named Patience, who in front of my friends and neighbors said, “People who talk about religion are brainless”, twice, after asking me, “Do you have an opinion on religion” and “are you a hardcore Christian?” and saying at that time, “There is no God”, “Are you afraid of the Devil?” me saying that I wasn’t, and you making mock-scary sounds as if that is simply what Satan does, or as if that is what evil merely is, as if evil didn’t matter, and, “There is no Devil”, and saying and doing all that, despite me obviously not wanting to volunteer the information about what it was that, I am and do, when you asked.
You may have been drunk when you said and did all this, but if you didn’t have that in your heart, it would not have come out. You said that “people who talk about religion are brainless” and you said it twice.
Why you were wrong to judge people as having no intelligence for that reason:
1) To say a person is brainless, when they have a brain and use it well enough to survive, besides being an insult, makes no sense, and can be said to be a brainless comment itself because of that.
2) Another problem with your statement about people who talk about religion being brainless, are that an endless amount of many atheists can be found talking about religion all the time, even among themselves, mainly to mock those who are religious and to show why religion is destructive or illogical, and so you’re calling them brainless too. You can find them doing this especially in question and answer sites like Yahoo Answers, Answerbag, Fluther, and in atheist-controlled forums, or in the encyclopedia “Wikipedia”, especially in their discussion sections on their subject articles. And though they don’t do it all the time, like you, they make a statement about it now and then, but so then you’re calling yourself brainless just for having talked about it yourself. It’s also brainless comment to simply brush off all theists as absolutely useless like you did when atheists are among the least groups in existence, and not suprisingly then, make some of the fewest helpful contributions in the world. In China, where atheists control the majority of the population (which is hardly all atheist), they are known for copying the technology of other (theist-filled) countries. In other words, they are copiers, not innovators. Though sometimes they make improvements, these improvements are made at a severe cost of quality in life of the masses of people they utilize. For example in China, their low-wage workers are so overworked, they can be seen sleeping at the assembly line of their work places, or sleeping in odd places in odd positions, or falling asleep often on the job, or commiting suicide, or people killing others with them before they commit suicide, or get police officers to kill them. The same happens in Japan, and Japan has been having great trouble with illegal Chinese immigrants.
3) Obviously there are facts on religion, not just opinions: but in keeping with your lack of knowledge on the subject of religion, which isn’t suprising if you think merely to mention it is “brainless”, spoke and acted as if there were no such things as having a factual belief about anything having to do with religion, but that speaks against youself since you claim to know they are all illogical and that God doesn’t exist. You implied this when you asked if I had an opinion, as if all there are concerning knowledge on religion is merely opinions. But obviously you can know facts, like that religions exists, that they have certain names and other characterisists, and their history including history of influence on the world, including atheists.
4) How could you ever correct a person if all religion and belief in God or gods was wrong, if you don’t say why? Simply making an insult or saying they are illogical or wrong doesn’t make you right, and if you believe that, then you believe in magic, or that you are God or don’t understand what truth, evidence or reality is, and are contradicting yourself again, because if you believe that your mere word or feelings make you right, then why would that only apply to you and not theists? Why wouldn’t theists be right by what they say and feel? You’ve placed yourself as God above theists for no logical reason and without even realizing it.
5) It’s also obviously wrong, but not obvious to you unless you’ve been living a very self-centered life and not ignoring the every day common things going on around you, or things you could easily learn on your own.
Here are some quick facts you could easily learn from yourself, by going into any common chain bookstore especially, libraries and so on:
6) The Bible originated science. To save you time, you can find it in the book of Judges, and it’s referred to as Gideon’s test. That’s my term for it at least.
7) Being that the Bible originated science, and that Christianity is the world’s most popular religion, is it any surprise that the first group to commit to this method were Christians, and that the first modern scientists were Christians, and that Jews often win prizes for scientific discoveries? A Jewish woman even had come close to discovering the structure of DNA, but some sexist anglo males stole credit from her and she back a footnote in history till recently, but is still mostly obscure. There’s even a book on her.
8) The first modern biologist was a Calvinist Christian named Antony van Leeuwenhoek.
9) Even Darwin had been raised in a Christian environment, and even after he became a doubter or atheist, he implied, intentionally or not, or because of fear of the alternative, that there was a universal good and evil, as opposed to good and evil being whatever an individual wanted it to be. And of course, if there is a universal law, that implies that someone made this law and has let us know what it is, and intends to enforce it (else the Law is pointless to make known as we would go with our will (as we even do partially now, some much more often than others) rather than what we know to be good).
10) Darwin didn’t come up with the theory of evolution on his own, a prominent though now dead Darwinist evolutionist, Loren Eisely, showed evidence that Darwin had stolen credit from (a scientist who was a creationist, and probably a Christian of some sort then, because he was born in Darwin’s era) named Edward Blyth. The only difference is that Darwin removed God from the equation and added that “simple” things (the microscope that Antony invented was still little used during Darwin’s time and Darwin and others who bought into his theory ASSUMED… they assumed everything was governed by simple laws and that there were no ultra small things or highly complex laws that governed the universe) and so made it a “naturalistic” theeory, and not just naturalistic, but as evolution is plagued with today, the problem of oversimplicity. A example of this oversimplicity plague can be found in comments like ones I’ve heard, such as, “There are bones in museums” in other words “Bones that have been found in the ground are proof we evolved from little animals” and is a statement, like so many others evolutionists make, without any evidence. One museum curator who was used for a comment on a show on mystery big cats in Britain, part of a mystery series of shows, was used to make a comment, and he said that when two such cats become isolated on an island, that that is evolution – THAT IS NOT EVOLUTION, and he literally made that simplistic a claim. Evolution involves animals changing over time by mating with ones who survive their environment and the ones surviving more likely because they had more advantageous traits. AND IRONICALLY, Darwinian Evolutionary Theory teaches that INTELLIGENCE IS A FACTOR THAT HIS THEORY WORKS AGAINST! So when you made the brainless comment, you were contradicting the main alternative theory to creationism, which is that brainless is better! But clearly, you even know that brainless is worse! It’s also nonsensical since every animal nearly, has a brain, or some sort of nerve center, and even those that don’t have an intenal programming or clear design (not just a random jumble that is born out of no where or other random jumbles) that helps it to survive and replicate. Eveyone has programming. I once read a book from evolutionists, that said some what that “DNA” was a “program” or rather “programmed”, something like that. I think I know which book the statement is in and wrote it down somewhere on a note. It’s not a rare comment however as evolutionists often say that such and such has a “design” or that DNA is “programmed”. Even Dawkins speculated that there is a “selfish gene”, in other words a part of DNA that instructs creatures to do self-centered things that are hurtful to others, a thing which commands us to compete to come out above another living thing in other words, and more than is needed (to ensure survival, in the same way that many sperm is produced to ensure the survival of at least one which is what evolutionists claim).
11) D.’s Evolutionary Theory can’t explain the human brain’s massive intelligence, not only that, as I’ve written about: animals and even insects have massive intelligence, so great that the best known modern super computers can hardly imitate the speed and complexity of an insect brain.
12) Not even simple living things are simple, like bacteria. If viruses are alive, they would be simplist living things, but even they, until modern times, are hard to replicate, and only certain one are replicated. I mean scientists are just replicating whatever virus they feel like from scratch. Only recently has a bacterium of some sort been replicated, but whether it is “alive” or not, I don’t know. And imagine how hard it must be to replicate a bacterium froms scratch if it is hard to do so with the most simple virus.
13) No one has ever seen life created randomly, as I said in fact 7, and as you can find out for yourself, it takes millions of dollars to try and make some simple living thing at the molecula level (or trillions if you take into account what it took to get to the level of technology and manpower needed to even be able to try to do so at the molecular level) and when two scientists tried, who are famous for having tried, who supposedly replicated the conditions of Earth at the time when life didn’t exist – when they tried, they failed miserably and without intending to do so, showed that besides extremely specific circumstances being needing to exist for life to be created, showed that “their” method was destructive to life. And it’s already been shown, intentionally and not intentionally, that not only would some extremely specific circumstances be needed for life on Earth to exist in it’s own environment, but that the entire universes laws had to be very specific, and the physical environment outside Earth. For example, as you may have heard, the Sun needs to be a specific distance for life to exist on Earth, if too far away, we would be frozen like many other bodies in space, and if too close, we’d be too hot, and as many bodies are, with molten rock everywhere. No or few scientists expect to find life in the solar system except maybe on Mars or Titan. Though I believe life may have been discovered in secret, the point is, all life needed to be created using some specific way and can only live in the natural world in a specific environment, or else they will die soon or right away.
14) There is no evidence for the Big Bang, only evidence against it. There’s no evidence for abiogenesis (the chance creation of life), only evidence against it, there is no evidence for evolution (molecules having the ability to assemble into men let alone any living thing by chance), only evidence against it, no evidence of “no God”, only evidence against that claim, and no evidence that right and wrong are just rules we invented on our own.
15) The evidence that we were created, is that we can see from observation that it’s not possible to create a living thing except through the natural way we already know of. We can’t do it in any other way, like taking some molecules and sticking them together some how, and adding more and more until without hands we’ve assembled a bacterium or baby from the same parts we know they are made of today. The bacterium that was created a few months ago by the way, was not made from the usual things bacterium are made with. Besides that, even if we did replicate a bacterium from scratch from the usual substances that they are made of, does that show that we know how all the programming in its DNA works, why it was assembled in such a way to begin with? No: we’re copying what we already saw in existence. So, how did this information, within DNA, appear? And even if you didn’t know about DNA, you can ask yourself: How did living things that have certain behaviors common to them all come into existence with these behaviors being BORN WITH THEM? For example, did you notice that ducks defend their eggs or babies, but when the babies become adults, they hardly as much will defend another duck? It’s been shown in many experiments, that animals are born with certain behaviors and language. And language is information.
16) Many atheists deny that spiritual things exist, like God, because, “I can see God or spirits”. But that is very ignorant thinking, because there many things which atheist and evolutionist scientists (and creationist ones) have shown exist using INDIRECT evidence, meaning with evidence we can’t directly sense. And that is something you could figure out even without their help, since we all know then when you hit an object, it keeps moving by some unseen force. Today we call that “kinetic energy”. We can even watch other things being hit by other others things and moving, or watching the wind blow against things, and yet we usually can’t see the wind unless its with some other visible gas or filled with dust. And even the wind is moved by kinetic energy, so when we feel wind occuring, but don’t see it, it’s like indirectly observing with our skin or ears, two invisible things happening at once. Another invisible thing, which is definitely spiritual, are laws, moral and natural ones. No one can see the law of conservation of energy directly or the moral law “Don’t lie”. Both are instructions, just neither can be seen except through material representations like these words or energetically represented with sounds, like if someone spoke these words and told you about such laws. So clearly, invisible things do exist.
17) Another thing that many atheists forget or brush off in pride, is that there are many atheists who decided that God does exist after having seen overwhelming indirect evidence. One famous one who was famous for fighting against theism and theistic religions, was Anthony Flew, but to my disgust, even after he realized he was badly wrong, still could not acknowledge that God himself had feelings, in other words, cared about anything. That’s absurd because obviously if God, who is an all knowing being who created a super complex beautiful and ordered universe, created us to have feelings, then surely he knew of them and has them. If he didn’t know about feelings, or saw it was better to not have them, why would he have made them? And especially why program us to desire revenge on people we FEEL have wronged us? Surely there’s a message behind him programming us to have that reaction when we feel someone has broken a moral law against us, like stealing from us, especially something we worked hard for or needed to survive or to keep strong physical pain away. Further, many former theists become atheists because they perceived that God or some god or gods they were worshiping were cruel, and so after that made the illogical action of deluding themselves into believing they don’t exist. It’s illogical because they abandoned their belief for reasons of injustice, not because of a perceived evidence of non-existence of who they were worshiping (and such an illogical action by masses of atheists is one evidence among many, as I’ve shown, that an atheistic mindset is not superior to belief in a superior spiritual being with superior power of control over others.)
18) Religion basically means “a binding to a way of life in which you follow the lead of someone you believe to have a superior quality or fully superior to yourself or superior in all ways”. More basically, or you could say another definition is, “a binding to a way of life.” Do you live your life a certain way and close your mind to other ways of living? Will you only eat vegetables and not things you see can feel pain? Do you repeat the beliefs of atheists whom you believe are wiser than you? For example, do you repeat that, “there is no God” because you heard that a so called scientist whom you consider to be superior to you in math and physics, said that?
19) Many atheists think that if a person is good at a soft science like math or some hard science like biology or physics, that they must then be qualified as experts in religion. But why? What does the religious-spiritual have to do with the physical, or math? At best you can make some analogies, like that 2+2=4 and so it is also simple that God exists, which ironically as you can see isn’t used as evidence that God doesn’t exist. Some mistakenly think that a physicist would know if God existed or not, because they said that God wasn’t needed and that the Big Bang was sufficient. But atheists forget that they have no evidence for their statement. The non-phsycisist atheists merely believe this because they assume a phsycisist by his ability to do something more complicated that they can’t, which they assume is sufficient to know how the universe came into being, is superior to them in knowing then if God was needed. In other words they assume physics knowledge is sufficient for knowing if God exists AND gives them knowledge in all other fields of knowledge, including other sciences. But all they need to do is give more thought with sufficient time to see that such an assumption is wrong: does being an expert in physics make you an expert in ALL AREAS OF PHYSICS? For example, if someone is scooled in basic physics, learns SOMEe higher physics, like spends three years learning about the Big Bang and Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity, is that going to make them an expert in archaeology or a sub-field of archeology like Biblical archeology? Or will it give them expertise in an even more specific field of B. Archeology like Israeli-Roman archeology or Egytpian or Babylonian archeology? It would only give you knowledge as far as the physics-related things with archeology go. But that even doesn’t ensure that your knowledge in the physics-related part of archeology will ensure that you are, HONEST about it, because as you have been told about theists, especially Christians, bias is a problem, basically, PRIDE and as is lesser thought about with theists but which can be a twisted form of pride, which is the same with atheists, and that is a desire for revenge at those who’ve hurt your pride.
20) Pride: Pride gets in the way of everyone. It affects police officers, judges, physicists, atheists, theists, everyone. Just having the title “police officer” doesn’t make you God, a god, or anything close to perfectly moral. The same with any title or personal name or a sentence for a name, like “I’m a Perfect Person”. Everyone has their judgment affected by pride. So though some think that an atheist physicist, a “scientist” as some would simply call such a person, would be perfectly moral because, “hey, they’re a scientist, and seek the truth”, they are clearly wrong, clear because it’s often observed that scientists do immoral things, including lie, and commit fraud, out of both pride, and, for:
21) money. Some would say that greed or trying to get money using cheating, or lying or as some would simply call it, “fraud” is also a part of the pride problem, because the person who cheats does so because they think they deserve it or should be satisfied with the money, shouldn’t have to feel pain, like hunger or being left with some inferior chair to sit on at home, but should have a more comfortable chair, and so have the natural or moral right to steal to live better.
22) Another problem with atheism is that, as I mentioned in a way earlier, the problem of morality. Just what is wrong or right, both morally and logically, if there is no universal Truth or Enforcer of Truth? In other words, if there is no God? I say in other words, because one of the definitions of God, is “Truth”, at least so Jesus said, and which the entire Bible implies. If there is no Universal Judge, a Judge above all us judges of right from wrong, then right and wrong is whatever anyone wants it to be. But really, nothing would exist if there was no God, no truth, because without truth, there is no “this exists” or “this doesn’t exist”, there’s no instructions, no statements, no information that ist true or false (a disortion of truth). Truths wouldn’t exist and lies wouldn’t exist, because lies depend on the truth to exist and with God, there would be no universal truth, no univeral laws of nature or morality, and no matter or energy, because all matter and energy are information based, they have informational value, and matter and energy in this universe had a beginning, as even atheists who believe in a single Big Bang believe. If morality doesn’t really exist, or is just whatever a person believes it to be for themselves, then rape and child abuse could be good for that person. In fact some evolutionists, as is recorded on AnswersinGenesis.com, believe that rape is apart of the evolutionary process, in other words is an advantage of survival, as if to say, “it’s good for survival”. And is surviving wrong for atheists? If rape is used to perpetuate atheism, is that good or bad? For an atheist they would surely use it to villify any theist who rapes, but would they do so for an atheist, or as often? Clearly not, as atheists are not known for preaching morality, but rather against morality, especially that of the Bible, even the clearly good “ten commandments” so called.
23) Those who believe that there were simply endless Big Bangs in the past and will always occur (because the universe is something like a closed bubble to them and is what they want others to believe), they have no evidence for ones that occured in the past, it is just wishful thinking that matter and energy have always existed and just go through cycles. Some would like to believe in alternate universes or that others exist and are somehow connected to ours in such a way that we can get to them one day, or can be connected. Another problem with an endless universes theory and other universes that can be connected to them, is that if beings like ourselves existed (and they should have if there were infinite universes in the past), then there would be ones (as we can see from our ability to make great technological progression) who could connect other universes, or even if they couldn’t, who would become virtual gods or like God and have the desire to procreate to no end. But where are these gods or God-like being? And if you may say that my question is evidence that there are no gods or God-like being, you’re missing the logic then, because I mean where are these gods or God-like being or both who have their origin from a Big Bang? The God of the Bible says he always existed and that no other Gods and not even gods (lesser beings similar to him) exist, and there is no evidence that he is a liar or used any of the “prophets” who wrote the books or letters of the Bible as people to tell lies for him. Also, the universe should be filled with gods if there were infinite universes in the past. We should be seeing beings struggling for power all the time or beings in harmony helping us or a mix of both. But instead, at best, people see strange beings acting demonic, or angelic-looking beings like Jospeh Smith, the founder of Mormonism allegedly did, that produce corrupt religion like he did, or demonic-acting beings that produce corrupt religion, or demonic beings that produce corrupt actions in general, or some see angelic-like beings that are helpful or just noticed, and others supposedly see aliens, and many of which if true, act corrupt, like taking people against their will. But none of these beings act like gods, that is, limited beings with very great and near perfect or perfect intelligence greater than most humans (like Tesla, Einstein or king Solomon) and the power to defeat the will of any other gods at times, and who special supernatural abilities, like the ability to give someone fetility or make crops grow or grow well, or attack people with lightning or water, and so on. The Bible only once or twice makes demons out to be like gods, and once calls Satan a god, but in context, it’s only figurative speech, since Satan it always teaches, is under God’s will, in other words can only do whatever God decides to allow. There is no evidence of any pagan gods or some pagan God like the God of the Bible.
24) Many atheists and evolutionists claim that science lets us know any truth from false, but that is a false statement since science is not alive as some seem to think it is, and whenever it’s been pointed out that this tool “Science” has come up with mistakes, the people who endorse science like God correctly say, “we’re still learning” or “people make mistakes but science corrects them soon”, so at first they act like it is perfect and self-aware and able to act on its own, but then admit their error and correctly point out that it relies on flawed people to work. But it’s not just a matter of a logical fallacy like that, but the fallacy that science only improves. But there is no evidence that just science in general gets better and that regardless of man’s flaws, that it does. The evidence is this: atheists, when they admit that there are Christian scientists, or theist scientists, will imply that such people hinder science and perpetuate a false science (though once one atheist simply said that Christians were hypocrites, and didn’t deny they get better at science). So that is in example atheists unintentionally give of science not (magically) making a person better, or of scientists not seeking the truth. Opposite, Christians and some other types of theists point out that atheists perpetuate the corrupt or non-science of the Big Bang, Life-from-Chance (abiogenesis) and Darwinian evolution or other types of molecules-to-man evolution theories, and it is evidence that all three of these fields of science or so called sciences, don’t get better but are perpetuated without evidence, but false evidence. I say false evidence not without my own evidence for saying that, but which you can see for yourself in the endless articles from atheist and evolutionist controlled magazines and websites which are always putting up false titles about such those theories as being facts, and not showing any evidence for it, or using false titles, similar to, “Link between bird and dinosaur fossil found” or “Star formation seen in distant galaxy” or some title implying some evidence has been found of “no God needed”. But when you read such articles, you’ll see it actually says, “more research needed till a definite conclusion is needed” or there is simply no evidence matching the title’s claim, like in the case of claims of stars being seen in the process of forming, you’ll never see two photos showing a star coming together from gas and or dust, as atheists and evolutionists claim is how they are made, let alone see a galaxy forming. It’s simply false titles and statements of “evidence” and or “proof”. In a few cases outright lies have been admitted, and these examples are not surprisingly, hidden or rarely mentioned by atheists and evolutionsits.
25) If atheism is the best way of life, how can you explain why it is atheists, not merely “communists” as some atheists claim in the bias – how can you explain why atheists are the most violent group in existence? Isn’t it a strange irony that the people who are the greatest supporters of evolution, which they imply or also call “progress” have killed more people then any group that ever existed and in the shortest amount of time? Catholics for example killed an estimated 50,000,000, incluing oppositional Christians, over 1000 years, but the communist-atheist lead groups of the former Soviet Union, Vietnam, China and Turkey, killed 150,000,000 in 100 years, and in the past 100 years. That’s not including the millions of abortions they endorse for depopulation, saving the dirt we walk on, to punish rapists (which I think is a twisted and evil, arbitrary, fake reason that only helps rapists, because rapists rarely rape to make a baby but as an act of violence and to make the other person submit to them (which many atheists will say when wanting to appear good and moral), and rapists would rather it be killed so they can keep on raping without having to pay for any baby they leave behind, and to prevent “poor babies who will have a bad life” from existing (as if atheists are prophets of the future and that poor are worthless – and if worthless why then don’t the atheist-ruled governments of the world kill all their poor people?), and so that the one who gave birth can live a more fun and happier life (if that’s not an immoral reason what is?).
26) If atheists are so moral as many want all theists to believe, if they are superior in morality, if they don’t need the threat of Hell, why do they risk, murder, of endless amounts of babies, let alone one baby? Just what is their evidence that babies aren’t human and don’t feel pain? Why don’t they even campaign for anesthatizing a baby before killing it? And how can atheist ones they be so cold, as to care more about saving the life of some tiny fish, or some little insect, some tiny fly, one that spreads disease, over a human baby? And who made them God over life, let alone human life, over who should be aborted/murdered or not? Who made them God over life period?
27) Another logic fallcy many atheists spread is that, “Christians are immoral because they need the threat of Hell to be moral”, which is a distotion of what both the Bible and Christians say. It’s also hypocritical:
28) If atheists don’t need the threat of Hell to do right, why do they need the threat of punishment of any kind to do right? Are atheist dominated countries like Russia and it’s former states, or Estonia, Vietnam or China, without laws? Do they simply have requests like, “Please don’t murder” or “Don’t murder” (but if you do we will just ask you not to do it again or let you be open-minded and free to do whatever you want)? Never. And any individuals like that are considered to be psychopaths and or narcissists, to mentally ill, or at least very ignorant and stunted in maturity with a childish mind.
29) Atheists often say that God could not exist because he allows evil, and more knowledgeable atheists say this because they Bible says that God is love, and that a loving person doesn’t allow evil. The problem with that statement is that there is no evidence for it. Even the Bible commands Christians to be loving yet not to interfere in some things and to allow certain evils to happen, including against themselves, and to instead giving a loving response back to whoever commits the evil against them. But is that hateful, to allow yourself to be insulted and to be loving back, or is that “love”? So atheists have it backwards again. It’s also hypocritical because:
30) Many atheists say that God is a “control-freak” who is always angry and treats us like children. But how is allowing us to do what we want, even to the extreme, being a “control-freak”? If a parent allowed their child to go around murdering people, raised them without any morals, would the parent be called a control-freak? Would the parent be spoken of as, “Trying to force their will on others” or as one false evil Christian radio show host says, a “cosmic rapist”? So again, atheist, and those who treat themselves as God, like their will is God, have it backwards and are blind to what is clearly not true. It’s also not true that God simply allows anything to be done, because if that were true, we would all be dead since there are many people, atheist and theist, who at times or all the time, would like to destroy the world in moments of rage. But only do we still exist, but so many, that many atheists and theists claim “too many people” exist on this planet.
31) Where did you learn that Satan is simply someone who makes sounds like a cute monster in a stereotypical children’s book? Does the Bible say that Satan simply made scary sounds to Eve, or that he goes around merely doing that? Did someone tell you that “evil” is merely making scary sounds? It’s no surprise that if that is all you think evil is, that that is why atheists show little concern for truth and true morality, but rather for doing as they feel like, which they falsely claim as morality. Morality, goodness, is not, “Whatever I feel it is”, it’s not whatever the majority of humans say it is, it’s what God says it is, and which is why there is fighting: because some choose to obey God, and some choose not to to the hurt of others, to the hurt of others who won’t stand for immorality that brings harm.
32) Christianity is not simply based on “faith”, a word which atheists also confuse with the phrase “blind faith” as if faith can’t be said without “blind”. I wouldn’t be surprised if some atheist listening to a sermon many years ago, took some pastor’s phrase: “blind faith”, out of context to mean that that is all Christians have and admitted to having. And though some so called Christians do merely go about by faith, the Bible does not teach anyone to merely have faith, but faith with evidence, and I’ve given you plenty irrefutable evidence in this letter, which if you deny, make it evident that you are deluded. If you want to read about more evidence for the Bible being true, and there is an overwhelming amount, go to http://20questions.tk, and scroll down to the section where websites are listed which give various types of evidence for the Bible, or as I pointed out the obvious: go to a bookstore, library or use the Internet to search for truth. You can ask if any person is willing to simply tell you, but it could be looked on as you being lazy and wasting time if nothing his hindering you from doing this, no big hindrance at least, since the information has already been written to save time.
Update: Two days ago, Patience claimed not to be an atheist, and on that day I noticed that when she gets drunk, she says things that are the opposite of when she is not drunk. She claimed to love Jesus completely. I’m not sure what she believes. I think she is very cute though, and I love her.