44 Reasons Creationists Are Deceptive

The bible doesn't say that either

Well again the bible never said our species was that old so you haven't established that one or the other can be correct but not both.

 

WTF? You would NOT eliminate the Devil if you had Jesus' alleged super-powers? Perhaps you and I have a different idea of what, shall we call, "compassion and love towards our fellow man" is. As a Modern Secular Humanist I of course would eliminate him, but you are hesitating, and am I sensing that Jesus has failed to create as moral/compassionate of followers as Modern Secular Humanism has? I care about you, but I am wondering what your hesitation is in saying the moral/compassionate thing here.

 

Jesus was a carpenter not an editor.

 

It says ADAM was the first human, and gives the ancestry down to Jesus, and it's about 4000 years or so! So what the hell are you talking about?

 

In the story yes. But ever, no.

Adam's age.

 

Yes, a carpenter, and not the "virgin-birthed son of god." Being a carpenter was tough in those days, so he preferred people to worship him and put him up and feed him, rather than doing the back-breaking work of being a carpenter, so he made up a cute story about giving them life after death, even though the "soul" has never ever been scientifically proven to even exist (so it's just a con, and Jesus was a con-artist.) No different than David Koresh, or Jim Jones, or Bagwan Shree Rajneesh, or Sai Baba, etc., etc.
I say this as a former cult member.

- - - Updated - - -

If it was inspired by the guy who (allegedly) created the whole thing then you'd think they could get it right! Instead, they look like fools.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, he didn't care about his "children" enough to take a mere 15 seconds out of his busy life of carpentry to tell people that the texts got it wrong, that the earth is not 4000 years old. Fifteen seconds. I would if I was in Jesus shoes, how about you? Do you value education?

 

I define barbarians as people so stupid, so barbaric, that they would believe that gays should be killed, that slavery was cool, that women were inferior, that people with a different invisible friend should be slaughtered (Exodus 32:28 ), etc. Yes, clearly, certainly, they were barbarians. People can do better than to get the answers about the universe from barbarians - who didn't even know where the sun went at night.

- - - Updated - - -

So apparently to this "Jesus" fellow, carpentry was a higher priority in life than teaching people the secrets of the universe. A person that stupid is clearly not worthy of worship.

 

Can't refute our arguments logically, huh?

 

Those would be some pretty bad attributes, if true, we can both agree. So can we also agree that if we atheists were so jealous that people said "our name is jealous", that you'd condemn that as well? I would certainly condemn someone like that....how about you? Or is jealousy a virtue in your world?
http://biblehub.com/exodus/34-14.htm

 

I can think of at least 150 reasons but here's 2.

1- For the amount of rain to fall and cover all the earth's land mass within 40 days and 40 nights, it would come down at such a force that it would destroy every living being, be it plant or animal and destroy all structures including Noah's Ark

2- The absence of all trees would kill the oxygen which we need to survive. Think about it, the earth is completely covered in water. By the time the waters receded the trees would have died along with the earth's oxygen supply.

 

Notions of the after life predate Jesus by thousands of years. If it was a con, it wasn't his.

He didn't write the bible people did.

Certain things don't matter when discussing spiritual matters. Jesus wasn't a scientist.

Yes I value education. Believing in God and education aren't contrary.

 

Answers about the universe? Who said there were any answers about the universe in the bible? All it talks about is God, it mentions nothing about the universe. It's not an astronomy book.

Well it was actually conveying a message of peace and love to a war weary world. Seems more important to me than what some distant star is made out of.

 

When the Bible makes claims about the origin of the universe, in an authoritarian manner, then of course it's making scientific claims! If those claims are false, then the magical stories in the Bible have to be viewed as fairy tales (creationism, walking on water, Jesus' magic resurrection/return, etc.) So if the Bible got evolution wrong, and it did, then Christians are not actually going to survive their own deaths like we (I'm a former Christian) were taught.

- - - Updated - - -

You obviously bought your Bible at a rummage sale, second hand, and Genesis was removed from that version (maybe someone needed some toilet paper, I don't know.) I'm sorry for that.

 

You don't seem to understand that genocide of all roughly 20 million humans, and even all billions of innocent animals (except those on one lone boat) is the farthest thing from "peace and love" that has ever existed (Genesis 6-9)!
Hitler slaughtered fewer people/animals than your invisible friend, it can be argued. Really think about that when you go to bed tonight, my friend.

 

Most plant life lives in the ocean. It's called phytoplankton. It produces most oxygen in the world

 

Like apparently the truth, morality, etc.

- - - Updated - - -

You seem to smart to actually believe that the flood narrative in the bible is actually real. I used to be like that, but then the consistency of science won me over, over the inconsistency of the Bible. You deserve intellectual internal consistency in your life.

 

The phytoplankton would now be many miles under the ocean where light and photosynthesis is absent. It would die off quickly.

 

Can we agree that hatred is, for example, not letting, say, moral Buddhists into an exclusive gated community, simply because they think differently than you do? ("Heaven")

 

Look, only two of each type of animal were saved. That would mean that there were plenty of dead carcasses floating around for the benefit of all the meat-eaters. As for the vegetarian varieties there could have been lots of vegetation still floating around. Just imagining the situation, I can come up with all sorts of wild ideas and I am not even close to being Omniscient which would allow me to figure it all out before hand. BTW: your signature line works both ways, and applying it here works also in my favor.

 

Correct, he was not the only con-artist to promise life after death.

 

Obviously the "all-loving, all-powerful" magic "Jesus" doesn't really care about his followers enough to have educated them about this issue (then, or in the last 2000 years), so instead, they kind of look like foolish - going against science and all. Sad, really.

 

The bible never once mentions the universe. Further it makes claims in a metaphorical manner. Do you not understand metaphor or do you really think theists believe women are ribs and men are clay?

It didn't get evolution wrong, it didn't mention it at all. Second saying that metaphorical text is technically incorrect is absurd, it's metaphorical.

No, I've read genesis. It is metaphorical, that is obvious.

 

Nope...the fine arguments in this thread are unrefutable. They are just too good.

But on another note, one thing that I thought was interesting in the last several years is the finding of soft tissue in dinasaur bones...not just one but several. Most all of them actually. And the original scientist who found this discovery......was so good. She knew she was on dangerous ground. She followed certain steps that guaranteed continued funding for her research.

1)She immediately mocked the prospect that "young earthers" would hijack her discovery to flaunt their agenda.
2) She marveled the miracle of soft tissue that after 100 millions years or so...could still rehydrate into pliable blood vessels.
3) She confronted competing research from fearful skeptics who "found" that it certainly was just bacteria mounds with sound research that the tissue was truely dinosaur.
4) she finalized her acquistion of future funding and financial security by researching how tissue could be in such good shape after 100 mil years and "discovered" that the iron in the dinosaur's blood preserved the tissue. She tested this hypothesis by leaving bird entrails in blood for two years compared to water. The blood did better then the water and thus an answer was found as to how soft tissue will last 100 million years.

She can now study ( as long as she stays away from carbon dating or futher study on the entrail in blood thing) to her hearts desire. Good for her.

Personally I look at the above scenerio and I see red flags. But I'm thinking you don't. And really, that is how we differ.

 

Why would I? Jesus didn't and He is my role model.
As for whatever it is you are sensing.... Perhaps your sensors are clogged with secular debris. It is more fun to see you attempting to find out what is the moral/compassionate thing here.

 

Well, you can't prove its a con, and because that is your claim the burden of proof is on you