Open bible

>Open bible
>Chapter 1
>A talking snake

People died over this shit

>he doesn't understand metaphors
back to middle school with you

>its a metaphor
>bread becomes jesus in your mouth when you eat it in church

I went from generic protestant to atheist to le deus vult orthodox and now im agnostic.
Christianity keeps driving anyone with a semblance of critical thought away.
You have to be lying to yourself or willingly retarded to be a Christian.
>dude its metaphorical LMAO
no
at best you could just view the Bible as a moderately ok book of ethics but nothing else.

Want to know how I know you're lying, OP?

Haha an epic reference to the old days of Veeky Forums before the normies invaded

>at best you could just view the Bible as a moderately ok book of ethics but nothing else.
>stories that have outlived many many powerful empires, being passed down generation to generation
>at best you could just view the Bible as a moderately ok book of ethic
do you know how stupid this sounds?

spoiler : jesus dies at the end

>dude its old it c-cant be wrong

how many times have we had this thread

You're so fucking wrong

All memes aside, all abrahamic books have exoteric (literal) meaning and esoteric (metaphorical/spiritual) meaning. The exoteric protects the esoteric, and you, my dude, just happen to be too much of a freaking moron to get this.

Go complain about your vain bullshit somewhere else

You're completly missing the point. Not only it is old, but it has passed all the ages until today. Your sorry ass won't be able to say the same as everything you were or did will vanish away in less than a century.

>dude the civilized world rose and prospered based on this code of ethics for 2000 but actually its mediocre at best because I say so

>last 2000 years
ah yes, the enlightenment, the product of biblical thought.

>China
>India
>Arabia
>Not more civilized than Europe

Weird, I recall this thing called the Renaissance where Europeans looked to their pagan/agnostic past and began to prosper

Yes! And you know what they also have? Linguistic and structural meanings! Cultural and hustorical context! Things mostly lost to christians today and their translated bibles. The vast majority seems to have lost the plot, so I don't really think it is intellectually honest to call that guy particularly moronic if almost everyone else is on a similar level in the end.

It literally was you fucking retard. Who do you think funded it? Hint: only the church had spare cash.

That's a metaphor too

>only the church funded the enlightenment.
ok
no bro, the church funded everything.

>Only the Church
>Not the newly urbanized and wealthy patrons descended from survivors of the Black Plague who got paid 10 fold for their goods & services

Right? This is like the third time he's posted this in the past month.

Please don't promote atheism user. It leads to degeneracy ;)

no it isnt

l2 faith

Achktually the talking snake doesn't show up until chapter 3

>blasphemy

either it actually turns into jesus or you're not Christian

Hella f*cking epic brah, you sure showed those dumb Christians hahaha lmao

>Christians divorce at greater rates than atheists
>somehow, THEY'RE the moral ones and the godless are "degenerates"

Christcuks really are filth.

>Those uncivilized Christfags who used to fight man on man over a book
[Bombs women and children for oil and iPods]

It was the new mercantile class that had more money, you dipshit.

I don't get it.

It lost its legs, so was not a snake.

Would you have preferred a talking bird?

>hey look, there is this one animal that has no legs
>hey, i know, lets make a story where it loses its legs

>Ancestral snakes had legs
>Snakes lost them
Hmmmm

Why doesn't the bible explicitly state this

I thought religion was supposed to be accessible

only priests should be allowed to read the bible. just like there's only so many shamans in the village.

2deep4 the normies

People die over a lot of things
Don't see you complaining about the cult of reason in revolutionary France or the league of the militant godless in state atheist Soviet Union.
You probably don't even know about the destruction of the Cossacks.

>[Bombs women and children for oil and iPods]
Isn't that what the US Christian Military Hegemonic Industrial Complex does?

>not being a literalist

Kys

Snakes actually have thousands of tiny tiny legs.

That's how they slither.

RIP protestants

>muh question begging epithet
Do you have a argument that isn't muh feelings?

No it was not, the "Enlightenment" was a mistake and our faith has nothing to do with it.

atheists are skeptical of the existence of God, but they are credulous and gullible when you replace the word ‘God’ with another mysterious thing called ‘Morals.’

Science, is the study of natural reality. Applied science is engineering. There's a clear and distinct difference. Neither of the two provide metaphysical outlooks on life that ultimately all humans intimately search for. Science will tell me HOW I was born, but not WHY I was born for example. What it really boils down to is that almost every person has a dogma of his own that he chooses to share with others or not. Even atheists contrive ethics in the exact same manner as the religious do. While atheists reject the existence of gods and the practice of contemporary mainstream religions, they still have no problems respecting human life, but having rejected religious outlooks, they're forced to search for metaphysical value to life elsewhere. That is why the many different moral systems adopted by atheists are in reality not much different than religions. In fact, Max Stirner, a famous atheist philosopher, saw secular morality as nothing more than a new religion.

Tl;dr if you're atheist and believe in morals you're a hypocrite

In other words you have no evidence of God whatsoever or serious reason to believe fantastic tales from goatherders are true and want to change the subject.

Catholic priests have zero understanding of the bible.

In fact, the printing press was inspired by the thought that the bible in the commoner's hands would be more beneficial than having it chained to papist pulpits in a dead language.

And indeed, today a plow boy does know more about the bible than any catholic "expert".

Yes, there are stories about every single animal and what it used to have.

That's an abomination. Catholic church is full of abominations.

The universe God made suffices as proof of God's existence.

Who said I was religious?
I just hate it when supposed atheist try to virtue signal and use a moral code that rolled over from religion.

Both are spooks
You sure are pious for being a supposed atheist.

Who said I was an atheist? And didn't you just say morals don't exist?

In what way?

Are you religious?
Do you believe in "god(s)"?
Do you believe in "morals"?
Why are you deflecting?

Morals don't exist but you're giving off a hypocritical display.

Tell me what you believe and don't dance around it

Tell me what you believe, no dancing round now with random changing of the subject.

>Tell me what you believe, no dancing round now with random changing of the subject.
So you can't do it and attempt damage control and employ "no u"?
Did I strike a nerve?
Caught you in a lie?

What is the subject of this thread?

Your virtue signalling the supposed wrong of people dying over a belief

All sacred truths such as law, right, morality, religion etc., are nothing other than artificial concepts.

Keep the damage control up
But you're a hypocrite

>any random thing I can think of to avoid discussing snakes with legs

Top kek.

>how dare you call me out on my bullshit
>t-talking snakes
Is it too hard to see that you said "people died over this shit"

I like how you overlook your own post
Why would this be hypocrite?

Your posts are cringeworthy as fuck. Your overapplication of the term "virtue signalling" reminds me of esoteric loons and their usage of the term "quantum".

Please don't use technical terms if you don't know what they mean.

>stop doing thing
>muh artificial concepts and labels
Elaborate

I'm not OP.

Still trying to change the subject I see.

>I'm not Op
>but how dare you call me out on my bullshit
>here's a self pic of me and while I say you're changing the subject
Elaborate how it's a subject change when it's in the OP?

"People die over this"
Do you lack critical thinking skills?

At what exact point have you called anyone out on "bullshit" other than on your own mind?

yeah sure its a metaphor but the retards who are religious are retarded enough to believe

Please don't actually believe this.

>At what exact point have you called anyone out on "bullshit" other than on your own mind?
The part where you say I'm changing the subject on "people died over this" which was nothing more than virtue signalling
If you left that out I wouldn't even be here.

>turns around and is gullible towards other artificial concepts such as law, morals, rights and property
Tu quoque

Who cares, people die anyway. f they wanted to fight about God, what's the deal?

It's not like they were killing Atheists

I'm still not OP and after all your random mudslinging I don't believe for a second that your only issue is whether there has been any historical battle fought over interpretation of Genesis 1.

>Enter thread thinking it's gonna be a religious atheist arguing
>It's extreme atheist vs atheist arguing
lol

?

I'm a Muslim.

>I don't believe for a second that your only issue is whether there has been any historical battle fought over interpretation of Genesis 1.
I don't care about that
Might makes right.

My issue is you're virtue signalling over "people died over this shit"
What makes it wrong if people died over it?
Your artificial concepts?

>muslim arguing with atheist about the bible
lol like you can throw stones

In the same way the Mona Lisa is proof of da Vinci's existence.

Atheist, muslim, devil worshiper, same thing.

When Prophet Jesus (pbuh) you are going to be sorry.

The Mona Lisa on its own would be terrible proof of Da Vinci's existence.

muhammad had convulsions, foamed at the mouth and growled like a camel whenever he had visions.

No other prophet had that
Even his first wife thought it was demonic possession

When you see Jesus on His Great White Throne, know that your next stop is going to be hellfire, with Mohammad.

If you love Mohammad enough to go into a dark lake of fire forever, know too that you will never meet him, as there is no light there, and no communication other than weeping, wailing, gnashing of teeth and, of course, screaming.

It would be excellent evidence of a master painter.

You could then do some research (gasp) and find out who the painter was.

Of course it was demonic possession. Who do you think was whispering into his ear for 20 years, but satan himself?

>Your artificial concepts?

Of course not, a talking snake with legs said it is wrong.

Keeps forgetting "people died over this"
Still waiting for you to tell me why that's wrong

how many books have you read where the metaphors are all intricately explained to be metaphors

>metaphors
>people getting burned over metaphores
I-It doesn't make it any better.

WAHAHA WHY DID PEOPLE 5000 YEARS AGO DID NOT WRITE PRECISE SCIENTIFIC LANGUAGE
>HAHAHA TALKING SNAKE
>HAHAHA MAGIC GUY ON A CLOUD

The bible is not a book, it's a compendium of books, some of which are more historical that others.
>Genesis: Almost entirely Mythological
>Exodus: Almost entirely mythical, but may reflect Canaanite political history
...These other Mosaic books are like laws and shit
>Judges: Mythologized History, accurately reflects what one would expect from a coalescing protoState; hero Tales similar to what one finds in the Iliad
>Kings: The House of David is most likely mythologized, while the house of Omri is far more historical

I just told you, a talking snake with legs told me people dying is wrong. I met it yesterday at the shops.

So in other words the metaphor doesn't hold up.

...

[Merely pretending to be retarded intensifies]

This half hearted refutation via moralization ironically will only work on religious people who subscribe to the notion that people dying is wrong.

It's funny that they blame this on the things which tried to curb the homicidal nature of humans, instead of the atheistic motives of the killing.

Do you think the 30 years war was really about sticking it to a guy who believed something else, or do you think it was the fact that the belief in question resulted in Germany no longer giving the pope indulgence money.

Remember, children, Apes are homicidal by nature. That's the nature, and telling people not to kill when it is optimal is rare.

But that's not the books fault, but dumb readers.

Applies to fundamentalists as much as atheists bashing it...

This is normalcy bias. There's nothing unbelievable about a talking snake with legs. Are you seriously suggesting that inter-dimensional beings don't inhabit the bodies of animals and communicate with humans?

There is nothing believable about any artificial concepts but thanks for outings yourself as a hypocrite.

The talking snake I met yesterday was very real, he was not an artificial concept. Are you saying you don't believe me?

Islam is the truest religion in the world.
It's got the fastest rising graph and has strict rules and regulations.
It's the only religion that packs a punch

>I'm gonna "act like a retarded"
Prove it
While you're at it prove morals, rights and property exists and are not artificial concepts

>Prove it

I just told you that it is true, are you saying you don't believe me? Why don't you believe me?

And you keep contradicting yourself
You already outed yourself here
Prove everything you asserted
Or did I tickle your autism, so you had to resort to shitposting to cover your insecurities?

>Prove everything you asserted

I met a talking snake with legs yesterday at the shops and he gave me my basis for morality, prove me wrong.