Slow here at work, so here’s another response to a christian’s nonsense just to keep holding them accountable. I found this one by Connie Cook, who isn’t calling anyone who doesn’t agree with her “fools”, why that would be going against what her jesus says! (yep, another contradiction in their silly set of books) She’s just “agreeing” with her god. As usual, nothing particularly new here. No memes for now.
Here we go:
Every religion/cult claims that those outside of the cult are “fools”, and not one can show that this is the case since not one can show that their claims are true.
no evidence for “fine-tuning” only a baseless assumption that, again, can’t be shown to be true. Theists, including christians, have to explain that if there is fine tuning, why was this god either too stupid, or malicious, to not make the sun give humans and other animals cancer? Why was this god too stupid or malicious when it “designed” the human body to guarantee that thousands of humans choke to death every year?
As is typical, you have no idea what evolutionary theory states, nor how it works. And no, mutation isn’t the only mechanism for change. It’s a shame christians find they must invent strawmen to attack rather than actually learn about what they claim is wrong.
There are things we may never entirely figure out how they happened or work. That still doesn’t mean there is evidence for your imaginary friend or any other theist’s imaginary friend.
Happily, your nonsense about human nature is false, and is a typical tactic for christian to try to scare people into the religion and to keep them there. no one needs your imagniary friend to be good, and since christians cna’t agree on what morals their imagniry friend wants, your morality is no better than anyone else’s is. It’s completely subjective.
You christians have quite a problem too when it comes to morality in that you must insist that your god doesn’t have to follow these supposedly “objective” morals since you have to invent excuses why it is okay for this god to commit genocide, to kill people for the actions of others, etc. This makes your morality subject to who someone is. it also shows your morality is little moreo than might equals right.
“As a matter of interest (maybe you’ll find it interesting), I started praying for Richard Dawkins years ago. I started praying that he would miraculously become a God-seeker. He’s not there yet. But I’m finding it fascinating to watch him change. He’s not quite the antagonistic atheist that he was some years ago, either. Is this a sign that he’s beginning to respond to God seeking him? I sure hope so! I get tired of abstaining, by dint of sheer willpower, from calling some people fools. I’d much rather they just stop being ones at all!”
ROFL. it’s amazing the arrogance of christians when they pretend their prayers do anything. Curious how those prayers never actually do what they have asked, and they have to change their stories. Per the bible, true believers will get any prayer answered, with what was asked for and answered quickly. That you have to claim that oh, well Dawkins is changing a little so my god is real is rather amusing.
Dawkins claim about a christian morality fails since there is no one christian morality. As I noted, you guys can’t agree on what morals your god wants at all. Each of you makes up something different, in effect each making a different god. That Dawkins is more comfortable with what he assumes is “christian morality” simply shows his ignorance, not that he is going to follow any version of your religion anytime soon.
and it’s always great fun to see christians insisting that it’s not *them* calling others fools, only their imaginary friend. That’s called the nuremberg defense, “I’m not responsible, I’m just following orders”.
Club Schadenfreude 
Who does she think she’s convincing with that nonsense?
LikeLike
evidently she thinks she can convince herself about what a fine christian she is.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good points. I no longer identify as a Christian and yes the Bible absolutely has a lot of bull shit in it. It is not a book, it’s just a bunch of separate books by very different authors at very different times. And some of those books have some really good things in them. Some good stories too, non of which I would consider non-fiction but a story can be fiction and still be a good story with meaning. I have recently come to believe in a higher God and a lesser God with the higher God putting the lesser God of creating this universe we live in and this messed up world. In my belief the lesser God chose to make things imperfect in this world. Life forms eat and attack each other, sickness, death. Actually as can be seen in games challenges make things more interesting. I believe in evolution there is strong evidence for it. But that this lesser God got things started and plays some part in things. Not to create a paradise and please everyone but to create interesting stories. If fictional stories and play video games you see they are created with problems. With bad guys. It’s because having challenges and enemies makes a more interesting read and game play through. It can’t really be proven that a God exists and it can’t be disproven ether. Some might argue that is like saying Unicorns can’t be disproven or whether some dinosaurs from prehistoric times still exist because be haven’t searched all the land in the world. However I see a God as something that makes sense and I thing of this God, the lesser God as like an author of a story and us as the characters. But in a way I believe we are all one. These are the conclusions I have come to with deep thinking.
LikeLike
you seem to have pretty much what gnosticism is, a way to say well, my god still exists but there is a “bad” one that I can blame. It’s easy to prove that any god worshiped by humans doesn’t exist. They have attributes and despite thousands of years, no god to be found. It requires making god so vague taht you can’t even know what it is to claim no one can show it doesn’t exist.
LikeLike
Not sure how much you got my point. I was pointing out that bad has a purpose in that it creates a challenge to be overcome and makes things interesting. Do you play a video game and “blame” the game designer for there being a bad guy that you have to fight and defeat. Do you say the game designer is “Bad” because they put enemies in the game that gives you a challenge that you have to overcome to defeat the game. That’s what I’m saying about the creator. You could say it makes the creator “bad” in a way but this bad gives us challenges to overcome. So I’m comparing life with a video game. Yes I wish this world wasn’t so sucky but there is a lot that would not exist without “bad”. They are challenges for us to defeat. Get my point?
LikeLike
If bad has a purpose, why do theists claim that their various good afterlives have no “bad” in them at all?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bad has a purpose and a world with challenges is good. However a perfect paradise would be nice to live in also. They both have there pros and cons. I can’t say one is better then the other. I can understand wanting a vacation from this world with all the challenges and just relaxing in a paradise. These people that are making these claims obviously want to go to a paradise with no bad after they die. Not everyone wants to go to a perfect paradise. Some people think it sounds boring. Put another way I like to lay down and relax sometimes but sometimes I like to work on things and get stuff done. Ideally I would like to spend some time in both types of words. Like this with challenges and some time in the world with no bad. We don’t know what is after death. Not all theists believe the same. I believe after we die we can have more experiences in many different worlds. Some that are paradise and some with struggles to overcome. But again I don’t know where I will go when I die. No one does.
LikeLike
as soon as you claim a “con” then you dont’ have heaven. no evidence of anything going “on” to an afterlife.
LikeLike