No bible was used in the making of this video, because it is factually incorrect. If you have to distort something to mock it you don't have a case..I thought atheists liked to boast about their bible knowledge?

Eve was tempted by Satan, not a talking snake. Adam and Eve both sinned when they ate the fruit, but the crime was not eating fruit, it was disobeying God. Their sin brought death into the world.

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:"

Jesus and the Father are not the same person. The Father is not the Son and the Son is not the Father, but they are both God. God is three persons, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Jesus did not impregnate Mary; the Father sent the third person of the Holy Trinity, the Holy Spirit, in this wise:

"And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God."

Jesus did not sacrifice Himself to Himself. Again, the Father and the Son are not the same person. He was an atoning sacrifice for the sins of the world. He bore the punishment (death) for all sins so that through Him, we could be forgiven for our sins and be given eternal life.

"This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins"

A dead body was not required for Gods plan of redemption, to correct the mistakes human beings made. What was required was a man who lived a perfect, sinless life in total obedience to God. Since no human being could fulfill that requirement, God sent His Son in our place.

"Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come

But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!

Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification.

For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ."

People are not sent to hell for doubting the love of God. They are sent to hell for their sins. God offers forgiveness to every single person, and He does not desire that any should perish, but that all will come to repentance. Never the less, because God is Holy and just, He will punish all sin.

People are not saved by taking the sacraments. That is a catholic ritual. We are only saved by faith in Jesus Christ, and that faith alone will justify us before God. We eat bread and drink of the fruit of the vine in remembrance of Him, but that is all.

The Kingdom of Heaven is not in the sky. The Kingdom of Heaven is on Earth, and will be in this Universe. We are not going anywhere. We will experience life as God had originally designed it, here on Earth, before the fall.

The gospel is simple:

We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, and the wages of our sin is death. Because of sin we are spiritually separated from God and headed for His prison called hell. He has set a day to judge the world, and on that day all sin will be punished. However, God doesn't want to send anyone to hell. He created it for the devil and his angels, not human beings. He loves us, which is why God sent His only Son to bear the punishment for our sins, in our place, so we wouldn't have to go to hell. He took all of our sins upon Himself on the cross, and died in our place.

Now, because of Jesus, we can be forgiven and go free. Jesus paid our fine in full. This is the good news, that through Jesus our sins are forgiven, and that He grants us eternal life. Pray to Jesus Christ and ask Him to come into your life as Lord and Savior, and you will be saved.

>> ^lantern53:

I know a lot of Christians and none of them are like the people in this video.
All the Christians I know are pretty nice, decent people, they believe in helping their fellow man, they are empathetic and as normal as anyone else.
Actually, they are better people because they don't go beating their wives, driving drunk, doing drugs, etc. for the most part.
But if you like your bugaboos to be church-going people, so be it.



I know a lot of christians too. Without a doubt most (not all) are nice people. However, their belief in talking snakes, noah, and armageddon and the like is freakish. I don't blame them in the least, as they were indoctrinated into this crazy belief system as children. Not like they had any choice in the matter. It was purely geographic. If they had been born somewhere else, such as afghanistan, they'd likely have been muslim.

Romney was not BORN a mormon, he was born, as all babies, ignorant of everything, even stupidity. He was then raised as a mormon, and had the stupidity injected into his brain on a daily basis.

I don't believe it's not hard for someone to reject their religious background, but fuck... this world HAS to come to a point where we start calling religion out (every religion) on the stupid inane, bullshit it spreads.

If a person wants to believe in a non-specific godly entity which created the universe, that's one thing (although still pretty stupid, since there is zero evidence of that), but it's quite another when you believe in virgin births, and people parting seas in two, and talking snakes, and overlord Xenu, and Joseph Smith's unbelievably pathetic lies, and the word of schizos who think they talk to god and want to kill everyone who doesn't believe in them, etc...

Religion is NOTHING BUT bullshit, deception and complete ignorance. I'm not saying there aren't good people in all religions in the world (well, maybe most religions), but they need to get their heads out of their asses, and leave the fairy tales to children (which to be honest, in this day and age, are probably less likely to believe in something as obviously fake as a talking snake).

@shinyblurry

First you affirm that an atheist is someone who believes there is no god, and now it's about whether the universe was deliberately created? Shifting the goalposts much? Btw, you're wrong, answering yes to that question can mean you are a deist, if you believe the creator has no hand in matters since the moment it designed said universe.

As for gnosticism, you refer to the historical sense of the word (of which I am well aware), right after saying that this is a "philosophical" (i.e. atemporal) question. The historical Gnostics were just "heretical" Christians, a diverging sect much like the Mormons are today, and you'd be hard pressed to find any today, since the "true Christians" thoroughly wiped them out.

Finally, the otherwise sound advice of "don't believe everything you read" is hilariously ironic coming from a conservapedia-quoting, I-believe-in-sky-Daddy-talking-snakes-and-incestuous-origins-of-humankind-cuz-my-Book-says-so Christian.

Speaking of book-quoting, why is it that when you (or any other Christian) quotes the "infallible Word of God" it is "supporting evidence", but when an atheist does it it is "ignorant cherry-picking"?

>> ^hpqp:


I was going to suggest reading Byron's "Cain: A Mystery", which develops the immorality of original sin in a much more sophisticated and poetic fashion, but seeing that you did not even get the point of the nonstampcollector video I linked (if you even watched it), Byron would be way over your head.

You say: "God let them know it was wrong to disobey Him by outlining the consequences if they did."
Have you even read the Bible? God is the one who lies, saying "in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (Gen.2:7); the serpent, OTOH, tells the truth (Gen. 3:4-7, italics mine):
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
7 And the eyes of them both were opened, [...]
It is the lack of knowledge that makes the fabled first humans inferior to (and dependant upon) their father-figure creator. Religion relies on ignorance, obedience and blind faith in authority, i.e. everything that demarcates a dependent infant from an independent adult.



I know I shouldn't feed the troll, but I forgot to add this biblical tidbit to my argument (Gen. 3:22-3, italics mine):

22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.


Not only does everything the serpent says come to pass, it is even validated by God Himself.

Before you go all copy-pasty-preachy on me shiny, remember that we're talking about a fable with a frikkin' talking snake!

If you are insecure about expressing your thoughts on foundational biblical fundamentals, then I will not inquire further.

>> ^r10k:

Let's keep it even more simple. How about we dispense with the typical anti-Christian bait questions and we both get on with our lives? I like that idea a lot more than trying to debate with a confused person.
>> ^honkeytonk73:
Lets keep it simple. A small exercise to help us better understand your stance, and to possibly help you to better understand yours.
-Are you certain that a talking snake lured Eve into eating an apple some 6000 years ago... an apple that somehow started a chain reaction that ultimately led to humanity as it is today?
-Do you truly adhere to the notion that an old man named Noah built an ark, and somehow collected two of every species from all parts of the world, saved them, then somehow returned them to their respective locations to restart their individual species anew... a few thousand years ago?
If you don't adhere to these notions which are quite clearly explained in the Bible, which is touted as the truth and the 'word of god'... then can you be confident that the rest of it is The Truth(tm)?

>> ^r10k:
Hey, don't apologise. I'm sure the anti-religious majority around here love what you're saying, even if they don't understand a word of it.

Let's keep it even more simple. How about we dispense with the typical anti-Christian bait questions and we both get on with our lives? I like that idea a lot more than trying to debate with a confused person.

>> ^honkeytonk73:

Lets keep it simple. A small exercise to help us better understand your stance, and to possibly help you to better understand yours.
-Are you certain that a talking snake lured Eve into eating an apple some 6000 years ago... an apple that somehow started a chain reaction that ultimately led to humanity as it is today?
-Do you truly adhere to the notion that an old man named Noah built an ark, and somehow collected two of every species from all parts of the world, saved them, then somehow returned them to their respective locations to restart their individual species anew... a few thousand years ago?
If you don't adhere to these notions which are quite clearly explained in the Bible, which is touted as the truth and the 'word of god'... then can you be confident that the rest of it is The Truth(tm)?

>> ^r10k:
Hey, don't apologise. I'm sure the anti-religious majority around here love what you're saying, even if they don't understand a word of it.

Lets keep it simple. A small exercise to help us better understand your stance, and to possibly help you to better understand yours.

-Are you certain that a talking snake lured Eve into eating an apple some 6000 years ago... an apple that somehow started a chain reaction that ultimately led to humanity as it is today?

-Do you truly adhere to the notion that an old man named Noah built an ark, and somehow collected two of every species from all parts of the world, saved them, then somehow returned them to their respective locations to restart their individual species anew... a few thousand years ago?

If you don't adhere to these notions which are quite clearly explained in the Bible, which is touted as the truth and the 'word of god'... then can you be confident that the rest of it is The Truth(tm)?



>> ^r10k:

Hey, don't apologise. I'm sure the anti-religious majority around here love what you're saying, even if they don't understand a word of it.

The Earth is actually flat and resting upon pillars. Covered in a blanket of night with pinholes which we know as the stars. The sun is a flaming chariot. The fast moving dots against the blanket are the various gods moving about. We are at the center of existence because we are special... and it all was created in the span of a few days a mere 6000 years ago. At that point humanity spawned from a single male, and a female clone spawned from a rib bone. Soon after the 'lesser' female was tempted by a talking snake into eating an apple she was told not to. Of course then.. shit hits the fan. You listen to God or you get your ass whooped. Now.. don't ask me about how two individuals spawned a whole species... as obviously their offspring would have had to procreate with each other, or with their mother to get the first few generations going in full swing.

Perfectly plausible start to all existence if you ask me... not this fancy schmancy science stuff. Hmph!

From your response you didn't comprehend any of what I wrote. I propose an exercise in logical deduction.

He who thinks he hears voices in his head is schizophrenic and institutionalized.
He who thinks he hears the voice of god/jesus, is considered blessed.

Life is all a matter of perception. Oftentimes the very same event perceived by multiple individuals is entirely different. What is considered mundane to the logic minded, may seem magical to the easily impressed. This is even more profound in ages past when even less was understood about nature.

While a flashlight today is considered commonplace. 300 years ago you would have been accused of witchcraft and burned at the stake for possessing gifts from demons. Alchemy (chemistry) was considered evil magic. Individuals died for practicing it. Modern technology was born from Alchemical research. The technology you now hold so dear and sits in your hands as you read this. Contradicting the church with scientific truth was life threatening. Galileo suffered imprisonment as a result. Even greater numbers died for standing up for their contradictory 'beliefs'.

Many of the truths you even accept now for fact, were once 'heretical' by the very people who first wrote the Bible you hold so dear. Yet have been 'selectively' forgotten due to incontrovertible proof proving their 'bible imbued truths' as being completely false and were based purely on superstitious suppositions rooted in fantasy.

Here is where the logical fallacy lies: By accepting the Bible as the truth, yet only accepting PARTS of said work as truth, and the rest as metaphor and/or ignorable is simply hypocritical. It must be accepted as a whole, or rejected as a whole if your 'faith' in it being the '100%' word of God is required. Partial acceptance is simply a partial commitment and is not complete faith. Total faith in the 'word of God' as written in the Bible means accepting all the hypocrisies, accepting the vengeful/horrific god of the old testament, and believing that killing one's children for not listening to you, and slaughtering non-believers simply because they are non-believers is acceptable.

I ask not this question of you, but you should ask this question of yourself. Do you accept, and fully understand all parts of the bible fully as 100% infallible truth, and can honestly tell yourself that you will follow all teachings, even the ones warranting the stoning of children and non-believers as complete truth as spoken from the 'mouth' (if he has a mouth) of god. Is a talking snake the pure 100% truth. Is the speaking burning bush 100% truth? Did the flood of Noah actually occur absent of any physical evidence (where would all the water 'drain' to anyway may I ask?).

The question isn't mine to answer. The question is for you to answer for yourself.. to either believe 100% in the bible, or live life in a state of partial belief. Partial belief has been tantamount to heretical belief in the eyes of the church for thousands of years (save for more recent, somewhat saner, times).

^Magic is real and a resurrected zombie god from an alternate dimension saved our asses... seems like a perfectly valid concept to me. Now.. the whole talking snake and bush thing was a bit of metaphor to keep the kids entertained. It wasn't talking flora or fauna, but a non-corporeal voice being projected through matter within our dimension via a tiny wormhole. If you create and vibrate a mini inter dimensional wormhole just right, you can produce vibrations and generate vocal resonances within our dimension. Cool stuff if you ask me. But being all powerful, God could have just magically appeared in a human form, but I like his style. The whole dramatic snake and burning bush thing just oozes completely of STYLE. I like it. One cool cat.

There isn't any such thing as "The Scientific Method" maybe that's why people have problems knowing what it is.

Is that the new conservative tactic, to deny the existance of something? Kinda like "nyah nyah, I can't see you, so you can't see me!"

Pope John Paul -- the last catholic pope, in case you don't use the internet for historical truths either -- announced that evolution is not incompatible with religion. I recommend you use the internet to get the details. The announcement was in Oct 24, 1996.

It is a well established truth that most high ranking members of the church take their bibles as metaphorical truths rather than literal ones. It is only zealotry or insanity that drives people to believe that the earth is less than 10k years old, or that we're all descended from two people who ate an apple given to them by a talking snake.

Frankly, I don't care that anyone believes any of that nonsense. What I do care about is that religion, at least in the US, is becoming so dog-eat-dog that people are reliving history : hating other religions, enforcing literal interpretations, and simple closed-minded zealotry.

The theory of evolution is as much a "theory" as the theory of gravity is just a "theory", which is to say, you can test gravity and prove its existance pretty damn well every day. We don't understand a lot of gravity right now, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The theory of evolution is very similar in that respect -- we understand a lot of it, we know it to be a fact, we just don't understand all of it. Science is like that; we are always in pursuit of greater understanding.

Religion is anathema to that.

'God gave us the gift of reason'

Which you can ignore if it relates to talking snakes, evolution and contraception but can freely be applied to sick people.

Someone sent me this email yesterday before I saw this video:

Definition of Christianity: "…the belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree…

Back in the day, and I mean WAY back, people didn't have any newspapers. So a bunch of people got together and decided to write their own newspaper. It was called the "Bible Times." (get it? )

You can use it as a source for sure! The "Bible Times" documented the cold hard facts and never, EVER, was a symbolic piece of literature. Come on! Tree of life? Talking snake? Cold hard facts, cold hard facts...


>> ^gwiz665:
I can't in good conscience vote for this. Every time I see the Bible as a "source" I cringe.
documentaries