Lol where you get this from?

did you get this from the same guy who made the thread?

What you wrote is just wow.

please don't group me whoever dumb enough to believe what you just typed because they obvious didn't do any serious in dept look in the bible by scholars or even just read the bible with a brain.

This thread was, an interesting diversion for a short period of time. It ran into the following problems:

1, The right to hold a belief or opinion does not mean that all opinions are equivalent. e.g. Flat Earth hypothesis vs astrophysics, one is based on conjecture and the other on evidence.

2. Age matters in the sense that most people mature and grow over time, however not all people do so equally, and they do so asymmetrically.

3. Debating god/religion/etc.. is the largest waste of time known to man. At it's best religion is a personal quest for meaning and purpose in one's life. The problem is that it is a personal philosophical endeavour that is unlikely to translate well into the lives of others. At it's worst it becomes pointless arguments that call on undeserved authority to impose viewpoints on others.

4. Historicity, archaeology, scientific evidence, and other forms of rational inquiry are best left out of it. Any religion that calls on them for support had best recognize that they are unlikely to support many religious positions and generally will undermine those positions.

This is best avoided entirely or embarked upon as a personal matter.

Yes, I'm biased. And so are you. There's no getting away from bias in religious discussions.

What do you mean by the bible being "The actual source". Of course an old book like the bible is fancier than some shady website, but I was assuming that whatever branch of satanism OP follows, they have some kind of holy script or doctrine of their own. All religious texts look the same to me weather they are electronic, written on runes, ten or ten thousand years old, they all seem equally grounded in reality.

@bold. Yea, that was pretty much what I was doing. Because they both seem similar to me, I wanted to point it out to see if i could get an interresting response. Except, I don't like to generalize when it comes to all religious people, so replace "religious" with "deeply religious" or  something along those lines in the bolded sentence.

Not my words, but christians I've talked to.

What part of what I typed was dumb. I summarized what I think most serious historians would say about the bible. But it's been a long time since I studied history so I've might have gotten the details wrong? But you're not gonna argue against the bible being compiled and standardized by people, right?

"The  is that it is a personal philosophical endeavour that is unlikely to translate well into the lives of others. At it's worst it becomes pointless arguments that call on undeserved authority to impose viewpoints on others."

Please tell me how do I when I discuss use justiable authority scholars/historians. Why do people come into this topic pretend to take the intelligent road when in actually if you call them out they pretend to know more when there best research is from wiki. People like this are worst than actual people trying to find out what isn't and is. The most this promotes is pure closed-mindless and ignorance. 

"4. Historicity, archaeology, scientific evidence, and other forms of rational inquiry are best left out of it. Any religion that calls on them for support had best recognize that they are unlikely to support many religious positions and generally will undermine those positions."

Oh we have a scholar here or someone that read books on here I assume. Please quote the books you read on the matter or people know who are in the field of this. Please also if you have a book on it quote something from the page and give page number.

I'm so sure you are so wise on the topic that you could easily give me your resources. Oh and since your sure they will undermine everything Christians or anyone says on important matters atheist bring up please prove me wrong on exist on Jesus existence because atheist on Internet claim he didn't even exist.  

Thank you for the ad-hominen attacks.  Yes I am a scholar, and I teach at a university.  I am a scientist, but have studied history extensively as a diversion in undergraduate studies.  The sources, there are many, but I suspect you are not interested in them.  From a scientific point of view I would suggest "God the Failed Hypothesis" by Victor J. Stenger as a good starting point.

I was presenting opinions on the subject, you can choose to agree or disagree.

I meant emperor Constantine the Great, of course. Man I'm getting tired.

You are wrong and that point has been adressed previously.

"Yes, I'm biased. And so are you"

the difference is you made a judge purely based on personal view which caused you to prejudge a person without even noticing what he was doing. The guy was responding to what he said the bible said spoof course he would use the bible as that is source of the discussion. You basically were calling him a fundismentalist because of him quoting the bible when the discussion was based on what the bible said. So, basically on your bad call you just insulted him for doing what was actually neccassry for the discussion. It's like ifwe were to discuss what Washington say on x issue and when I quote his autobiograhpy you say oh your just like religious person. See how dumb that sounds? Off course he going to quote the bible because that is what argument was about...... What the bible was saying!

"What do you mean by the bible being "The actual source". "

The discussion was on what the bible said what is the best way to find out what it said.... quote the bible the actual source.

"Of course an old book like the bible is fancier than some shady website, but I was assuming that whatever branch of satanism OP follows, they have some kind of holy script or doctrine of their own. "

When did I say the bible was old and therefor has more crediable? If I wanted to discredit satanism I would point that there no historical moment in history to say this could be true or is.  He doesn't even us the history of how satanism is truest even a moment to us how he "controlling" us. How does he know this was there a event to make us believe this. As you have you say they must have some holy script but they do! It's called the the black pope and it was made in 1966.

" http://www.freewebs.com/specialbooks/The%20Satanic%20Bible%20(Underground%20Edition). pdf"

Page 14 

The who created the group he felt like people didn't understand him and that felt all Christians are hypocritical .

the introduction is about how he saw men having lust with women and then seeing how Christianity was false because of this ( them being hypocritical). Then goes into rant about how god and the problem of evil. Oh joy. Then it gets good when the guy basically says I don't like God and feel like satan is really the hero of the story in the bible. But hey guys that just the introduction. Oh and don't forget this quote "In page 12 paragraph 5 where it admits it's not religion and was made really just to anti-deism and he thinks "lol" that this going to be consider a threat to people who are theist. Because it's freaking philosoically made by a guy who was rejected from his society and made a group based on this and the fact that saw some men be hypocritical than go to church. It's a religion and they don't even worship satan but they will defend satan because God is really the bad Guy! :(btw the guy really thinks he is sometype  of ultimate ego manic by the way he prasies himself. There basically a parody of religion by the reading of there bible in that there making fun of Christianity by calling himself a church of satan. It's basically a bad joke by strong-atheist (people who are against religion and go out of there). There you go I just debunked everything you argued for. The making the thread is trolling because that is what cult does every since it's creation.

"seem equally grounded in reality."

It's  not a religion satanism. They don't even believe in satan. But Christianity I would suggest you look up people like William lane Craig or Gary habermas as they very educated men who have gotten degrees and aren't some random guy claim they know the bible that is a Christian.

Double post