101. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #167671 by gr8hands on April 24, 2008 at 8:54 am

Philip1978: quoting the evil from the bible looks fun. Let me try . . .

Exodus 22:18-20

Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.

Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death.

He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed.

102. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #167619 by gr8hands on April 24, 2008 at 8:05 am

Frankus1122 -- you're welcome. (Atheists really give the most genuine compliments, because theists tend to say "praise god!" as if god had anything to do with the achievements of any human.)

103. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #167590 by gr8hands on April 24, 2008 at 7:25 am

Frankus1122 -- congratulations to your student, and to you as well!!

104. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #167281 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 8:13 pm

Why is anyone responding to Remnant?

105. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166916 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 1:40 pm

Star Spangled Eagle -- poop is also a transitional entity. It starts out as food, and ends up as theist dogma.

106. Judge orders La. school district to stop Bible giveaways

Comment #166785 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 12:30 pm

Not only did the Gideons pass out bibles in my 5th grade class, but the teacher spent the remainder of the day reading to us from it, answering our questions, and presenting the gospel.

Now, I loved that teacher, and continue to hold him as one of the best that I ever had -- but this was not his finest day.

This needs to stop.

107. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166747 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 12:07 pm

Remnant -- what about the zombies in Matthew 27?

You still haven't written that YOU agree that "unicorn" is a mistranslation -- the links you provided agree with me. Or do you disagree with the evidence YOU provided?

Your weakness is shameful to your god -- and don't tell me I can't know the mind of your god because you can't either, and you can't know that I haven't been given special information by the holy spirit (if god can make an ass speak, as recorded in scripture, then certainly god can reveal whatever god wants to whomever god wants -- even someone who doesn't believe in god). Unless you're limiting what your god can do.

No, Remnant, you're safe to ignore.

I personally invite you to keep posting. But know that I will also be personally ignoring your posts (unless you admit to being wrong). They just aren't worth reading.

108. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166723 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 11:51 am

Remnant -- what about the zombies in Matthew 27?

You still haven't written that YOU agree that "unicorn" is a mistranslation -- the links you provided agree with me. Or do you disagree with the evidence YOU provided?

109. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166705 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 11:43 am

Remnant -- flagging you as a troll does not "censor" you or kick you out. Get a dictionary and look up the word.

Oh, and what about all the zombies from Matthew 27?

110. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166704 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 11:42 am

Remnant -- what about all the zombies from Matthew 27?

111. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166691 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 11:34 am

Remnant -- what about all the zombies? Don't suggest it isn't something understood only by the holy spirit, that's a terrible cop-out, a lie, and just silly.

You still haven't written that YOU agree that "unicorn" is a mistranslation -- the links you provided agree with me.

112. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166634 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 10:59 am

Matthew 27:52-53

And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,

And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

113. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166618 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 10:46 am

One must first prove that jesus existed at all, and then prove he was crucified, and then prove that he rose from the dead. Of course, the most difficult would be that one would have to prove that god exists, and then that jesus was either god incarnate or the son of god.

That first requirement hasn't been met.

114. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166611 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 10:43 am

Remnant -- Greenleaf's theological works have been debunked for quite some time - except for desperate theists who are afraid of "evidence". You clearly have not read his book (I have, and even assign it as required reading to show errors in logic).

I'm reminded of the comment:

Please tell me which non-Christian historians claim the Resurrection, and if they believe that Jesus rose from the grave, then why are they not Christians themselves?

115. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166553 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 9:52 am

2. Jesus was an actual historical figure. There is a large body of evidence both religious writers and from secular writers that confirm His existence

116. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166536 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 9:39 am

irate_atheist, Remnant did answer the unicorn question -- providing two links which stated that it is a mistranslation.

Of course, he didn't read the links, so he didn't see that it shows the errors in the bible, or else he probably wouldn't have provided them. That, of course, would have been dishonest, lying by omission.

117. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166459 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 8:58 am

Remnant, you clearly didn't read the articles you linked, because they clearly state that "unicorn" is a mistranslation, the word is a different animal.

You were wrong.

The bible translation was wrong.

The bible is not inerrant. Your faith is based on a fraudlent book.

118. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166410 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 8:23 am

Remnant:

Numbers 23:22
Numbers 24:8
Deuteronomy 33:17
Job 39:9
Job 39:10
Psalm 22:21
Psalm 29:6
Psalm 92:10
Isaiah 34:7

These all have the word "unicorn" in them -- and all are a mistranslation.

119. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166406 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 8:16 am

Remnant -- answer the "unicorn" mistranslation question!

120. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166393 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 8:05 am

Remnant -- answer the "unicorn" mistranslation question!

121. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166382 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 7:57 am

Remnant -- answer the "unicorn" mistranslation question!

122. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166376 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 7:51 am

Remnant -- answer the "unicorn" mistranslation question! Feel free to get help from the holy spirit.

123. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166342 by gr8hands on April 23, 2008 at 7:08 am

Quick note: amazing that all the marsupials -- not mentioned in the bible, or known about in that part of the world at that time -- somehow managed to be collected by god and driven to the ark, were saved, and then taken back to exist only in Australia. And without being observed by anyone in between, or leaving any carcasses to be found (except in Australia).

Of course, even two young African Bush Elephants, two young African Forest Elephants, and two young Asian Elephants (all different species) would take up some room.

Then there are around 10,000 bird species (only a couple of which are mentioned in the bible or known of in that area), and all the millions of insect species (none of which are mentioned, most of which were not known of in that area).

Yup, once you start doing the math, using reality, actually thinking about it, you can't help but arrive at the conclusion that it isn't true. Those poor creotards are in such denial. They are a danger to themselves and society.

124. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166140 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 7:44 pm

Good night, atheists (and those theists/agnostics who are civil). It's late for one who has students in early classes -- this time it's software training.

125. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166136 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 7:34 pm

Roland_F -- Remnant sounds like someone who dropped out of one of my beginning theology courses I would subtitle "Everything You Think You Know About The Bible Is Wrong", because it conflicted with the crapola he'd been fed for years by ill-educated fundie preachers. (The purpose of my course was to point out that the students did not even know their own bible very well, and needed to learn how to question what was there. Not surprisingly, most christians have not read the whole bible, and are clueless about what it really says.)

He really should read the front/back of his bible, where they go into the authorship and translation issues with the bible. Even The Living Bible does this.

Of course, his dogma will force him to "la-la-la-la-la!" and scream for you to be saved, praying for the protection of the holy spirit from the onslaught of the evil atheists and their unholy lies! What a joke! In this day and age.

126. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166132 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 7:21 pm

Kardashovel, your example in post 3269 doesn't apply, because Steve Zara would not have argued back then that Newton's laws forbid space travel -- they don't, as you aptly describe, but the people of the time didn't believe the laws forbade travel, only that technology and the other circumstances were the problem. In fact, writers have been describing trips to the moon for some little while, including some mythologies.

You're presuming that "currently understood laws of physics" believed something they didn't believe, and someone as current as Steve Zara would have had no difficulty in rendering it theoretically possible with that understanding of physics.

A more apt analogy might involve General Relativity and time compensation of Global Positioning Satellites -- a concept beyond the laws of physics back then. But I sincerely doubt that you would have been capable of imagining them either back then, for the same reason -- because the concepts/theories didn't exist.

127. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166123 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 7:09 pm

Yes, go to sleep Remnant, and dream of being an important person in heaven, adored by god, basking in god's glory forever! Such sweet dreams. No need to deal with reality. You can even jeer at the evil atheists suffering in hell!

Of course, you'll have to wake up eventually, and it will all just have been a dream.

But . . . you can pretend it was real!

128. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166121 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 7:06 pm

Remnant -- why did you include the quotes you did, and ignore the next few paragraphs which showed the results of experiments without that preliminary experiment involving seeding? Oh, that's right, because it would have shown you to be wrong.

And knowing that, but still quoting only the first part, makes you a liar. You need to beg forgiveness from your imaginary sky friend so that your non-existent "soul" will be cleansed from the sin of lying. And hypocrisy. And arrogance. And pride. And foolish talking.

129. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166100 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 6:34 pm

Remnant -- http://sol.sci.uop.edu/~jfalward/Matthew.htm University of the Pacific

Bart Ehrman in The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings writes:

Beginning in the 18th century, however, scholars have increasingly questioned that traditional view, and today the majority agree Matthew did not write the Gospel which bears his name.

130. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166095 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 6:26 pm

Remnant -- you keep getting just about everything wrong about the bible, you get all your science wrong, and you have poor skills with English.

Why are you bothering to post at this forum dedicated to clear thinking, when you are only making an ass of yourself? You aren't even able to defend your own positions. You don't understand the answers given to your silly questions. And you don't see that you're being a hypocrite by so much of what you write being against the very things you profess to believe.

We're not "censoring" you -- we're laughing at you, and suggesting you run along and play with people your own speed.

131. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166093 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 6:22 pm

Remnant -- please provide the name of a single secular biblical scholar who agrees with your statement. Just one would do.

I take it that you didn't even bother to look at your personal copy of the bible to see if what I said had any merit, did you? That's one of the ways I would define intellectual dishonesty.

You are severely out of touch "with the vast majority of Biblical scholars, both secular and religious" with your absurd claims. I, however, work with them on a daily basis -- at a major theological seminary, as part of worldwide ecumenical organizations, and as part of conferences throughout the globe. You are, bluntly, wrong.

Again, you ignored the previous post where I questioned you about the mistranslation of "unicorn" in the bible. No comment? Or did you do the research and found out that you'd been ignorant of this error?

132. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166079 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 6:03 pm

Remnant wrote:

Yes, tell me about the scientific experiments that have, without intelligence, created life from non- life. There are none, only wild speculations.

133. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166075 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 5:57 pm

And not to put too fine a point on it, all theists who believe in an afterlife/heaven are hypocrites.

The proof?

Have them come into the room where their teenage child (or spouse) lies before them dead. If they rejoice and shout "hallelujah!" for joy because their child is now alive in heaven with jesus, and they'll be joining them in glory in an unspecified amount of time . . . only then would any claim that they really believe in that crap have validity.

If a parent believed that their child had just won the mega-lottery and was taken to an island paradise in wealth and happiness, where the parent would be able to join them at some soon but unspecified future time -- they'd be incredibly happy. Perhaps a bit miffed that they weren't able to say goodbye, but they wouldn't scream in agony, rending their clothes, crying out "Why?! Why?!" to an imaginary god.

You can tell what they really believe by how they react to facing death of loved ones. Joy? Or sorrow?

If you have absolute and utter faith that I will successfully tightrope walk over a canyon, it's just so much bullshit if you're unwilling to hop on my shoulders and let me carry you across.

Faith is proven by your actions and reactions -- and don't confuse desperation when you feel the situation is hopeless with actual faith. (A drowning person will reach for anything, even a sword blade or lit torch. In confusion, even horses will sometimes run into a burning area instead of away from it.)

134. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #166066 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 5:41 pm

Remnant -- I see you're ignoring my questions. But I do have more:

You are aware that "the Gospel According to St. Matthew" was not written by Matthew or anyone living at the time of the supposed jesus?

You are aware that "the Gospel According to St. Mark" was not written by Mark or anyone living at the time of the supposed jesus?

You are aware that "the Gospel According to St. Luke" was not written by Luke or anyone living at the time of the supposed jesus?

You are aware that "the Gospel According to St. John" was not written by John or anyone living at the time of the supposed jesus?

These are historical facts, not matters of faith, and can easily be verified.

You still haven't answered about the mistranslation of "unicorn" appearing 10 times in the bible. (Since there are obvious mistranslations there, existing without notice for hundreds of years, how many other mistakes might there be?)

Do you know the complete lineage of mary the mother of jesus? It's important, because in order to fulfill "prophecy" jesus had to come from the line of David -- yet there is no scripture showing that mary was of the line of david. And since scripture claims no human impregnated her, it appears that the prophecies were not fulfilled -- and those scriptures claiming he was the fulfillment are wrong.

Again, that isn't a matter of faith, but fact. joseph was the line of david, not mary, but he wasn't the biological father of jesus according to scripture. The claims of his being of the line of david, and the claims of her conceiving by the holy spirit are mutually exclusive -- one (or both) have to be wrong, but they both cannot be right!

Face it, your "inerrant" bible is a fraud, and your faith is based on fraud. Your claims that understanding only comes via the holy spirit are as valid as claims of a junkie that the pink elephant is only visible if you take LSD.

135. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165994 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 4:42 pm

Remnant, are you still here?

How about using your poor biblical skills, which include a beginner's grasp of how to use Strong's reference works, and explain how "unicorn" appears so many times in the bible?

They don't exist, are completely mythical, and outside of the King James version, every other translation has a different word.

If the bible is the "inerrant word of god" as you say, which version? Which translation? Are you claiming intimate knowledge of Coptic? Aramaic? Koine Greek?

136. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165822 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 12:25 pm

Steve Zara, if someone carried a pig on a plane, and threw it out the window, Kardashovel would claim that it was "flying" all the way to the ground!

137. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165796 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 10:59 am

Because Kardashovel appears unwilling to read the science references I've given, unlike Steve Zara (I do not always agree with him, but I always respect him), he can safely be ignored whenever he continues spouting his errors.

Part of being intellectually honest, Kardashovel, is accepting the possibility of being wrong, and being willing to investigate that possibility when it is pointed out -- particularly when specific reference works are provided to provide education on the topic.

Refusal to even bother checking out that possibility leads everyone to conclude that you don't have thick skin, but merely a thick skull.

The fact that you do not accept that you are incapable of knowing whether the voice in your head is of divine origin or not (did you think we'd forgotten about that?) casts doubt not only on your sanity, but also on your reasoning capabilities.

I urge you to spend less time posting, and more time reading/evaluating.

138. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165759 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 8:52 am

Actually, there is a wonderful book called: Liars For Jesus: The Religious Right's Alternate Version of American History Vol. 1 by Chris Rodda.

139. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165756 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 8:46 am

irate_atheist, certainly you wouldn't accuse navyjake95 of the sin of bestiality -- clearly in violations of his imaginary friend's command not to defile animals in that way, would you? I mean, he's proven himself to be such a good christian.

Oh, wait. No he hasn't. Perhaps someone should make a call to the ASPCA (or PETA).

I'm comforted only by the fact that his obnoxious personality should be sufficient birth control to prevent him from breeding and passing along such defective genes.

140. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165732 by gr8hands on April 22, 2008 at 7:06 am

Philip1978, don't get in a lather about navyjake95 -- he clearly isn't interested in following the supposed word of his supposed god.

The fact he was in the military means he cut his hair, which clearly violates god's instructions that he not cut his hair. His uniforms were blends of different fabrics, which clearly violates god's instructions that he not do so. He probably has had a cheeseburger or chili mac or some other blending of meat and dairy in clear violation of god's instructions that he not do that.

No, navyjake95 picks and chooses which parts of his imaginary friend's instructions he'll follow -- meaning he thinks he's more important than god and knows better than his god what he should do with his life.

I won't even bother with the possible violation of the "thou shalt not kill" Commandment, nor the "love thy neighbor as thyself" command from jesus (which is hard to do if you're waging war against your neighbor).

What a hypocrite. Typical of a theist.

141. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165594 by gr8hands on April 21, 2008 at 6:41 pm

Note: I have no problem with any of the attributes of John Wayne -- except being a theist -- but I thought a racist person like navyjake95 might not appreciate hearing the truth about his hero.

142. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165592 by gr8hands on April 21, 2008 at 6:37 pm

Hate to disparage John Wayne, but I've worked with several actors who worked with him, report that he had to have his underwear "stuffed" so that there would be a bulge on camera, due to having a small appendage therein. These were supposedly straight men, which made their comments rather strange, but maybe that's how straight guys talk, actors at least. So, poor navyjake95 needs to have a reality check on his "hero".

Oh, and as a Presbyterian, Marion (I hope navyjake95 knows that was his real name) would not have accepted jesus as his personal savior, so by many accounts could not be considered a christian -- certainly not "born again".

And navyjake95 must certainly be aware that John Wayne supported giving away the Panama Canal, along with the other liberals of the time. So much for being "one of the boys."

navyjake95, did you know that John Wayne didn't marry white women? Nope, he had three different wives (the two divorces meaning marriage wasn't particularly sacred to him) and they were all Hispanic. And he had a three year affair with Marlene Dietrich (a German bisexual!).

Yup, some hero.

(Oh, I liked his movies -- especially The Quiet Man, but I have no great respect for the man.)

143. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165426 by gr8hands on April 21, 2008 at 1:11 pm

al-rawandi, we Faggots don't have to stage invasions or do any recruiting, since we have so many people enlisting all on their own!

144. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165402 by gr8hands on April 21, 2008 at 12:48 pm

navyjake95, as a military veteran myself (so you have nothing on me and I can certainly speak my mind), I have to ask what culture you grew up in which doesn't believe in killing innocent babies, euthanizing the worthless or starting wars?

Certainly not the U.S. of A. -- or perhaps you didn't read the part of American History where it started the war with England, or where the South started the war with the North, or the two times we declared war on Iraq, or invaded Grenada, or attacked Korea, or sent troops to Viet Nam, just to name a few.

I guess all those atrocities committed by U.S. soldiers in those various military actions were all committed by atheists, right?

(You are aware that John Wayne never actually served in the U.S. military, right?)

If you know how to use the Internet to do searches, you might want to try and find just one example of where any Nazi used the word "Darwin" in any speech, or the text of any book/pamphlet. I can save you the trouble -- there are zero. So much for that part of your rant.

Of course, if someone was involved with Jihad, they wouldn't be god-hating or atheist, would they? (Unless you don't know what those words mean.)

As I recall the last time I went to a gun show ran by rednecks, there were quite a number of people selling Nazi memorabilia (guns, etc.). I wonder why, if your group is so patriotic?

Looks like I've debunked most of your post. Don't you feel silly?

145. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #165390 by gr8hands on April 21, 2008 at 12:35 pm

Kardashovel will have to do better than try and use wikipedia as a serious scientific reference. I've supplied him with a legitimate science resource to refute his statements, so perhaps he'll read it. Or more likely not.

146. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164830 by gr8hands on April 20, 2008 at 6:20 pm

Kardashovel, read The Physics of Star Trek by Lawrence Maxwell Krauss, and you will be enlightened and educated in why wormholes allowing time travel into the past is pure fiction.

It also debunks, sad to say, some of the other Trek goodies. Great for dramatic plots, but bad on the science aspect.

147. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164463 by gr8hands on April 20, 2008 at 9:40 am

It's almost sad (and unfortunately too typical) that Remnant doesn't understand how to use the Strong's reference works, demonstrating that he's not a linguist, historian or biblical scholar.

I'm reminded of Alexander Pope in An Essay on Criticism, 1709:

A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again.

148. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164212 by gr8hands on April 19, 2008 at 5:55 pm

Remnant, you are confused about what "refute" means. I suggest using a dictionary.

While there, look up "sophistry" and then look in a mirror.

Being that I am a seminary trained biblical scholar (but yet an atheist), I doubt that you are capable of showing any area where I have a misunderstanding. That is arrogant pride on your behalf, and you should repent of that sin. Unless, of course, you're merely a hypocrite.

Since you consider it a waste of time to educate us, you are clearly not a christian or interested in following the commandments of jesus.

We have no use for those who come to quote scriptures they don't understand, condemn science they don't understand, and are rude.

I suggest that you simply leave this forum. I, for one, will simply ignore your posts -- unless you provide evidence that god exists. That I would examine, but nothing else. Without that, you really have nothing of interest to offer.

149. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164195 by gr8hands on April 19, 2008 at 5:26 pm

Remnant -- I've shown just a few (of the many) samples showing the bible is not inerrant. Why cling to that false belief in the face of evidence to the contrary?

150. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #164189 by gr8hands on April 19, 2008 at 5:17 pm

Remnant -- Jonah 3:10

And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished.

Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, which shall not regard silver; and as for gold, they shall not delight in it.

Their bows also shall dash the young men to pieces; and they shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes shall not spare children.