Your "story" has so many misrepresentations and false assumptions and conclusions that I wouldn't know where to begin in correcting them. You present Christians as having no real or valid evidence for the existence of God, for example. And you present the God that they believe in as being an obviously inconsistent and cruel Being. And you present the evils done in the name of Christianity as being the responsibility of true Christians, or at least as things validly derivable from the Bible. All misrepresentations, at best.
10 comments
Saringuy: "omeone should buy a dictionary and should look the word 'misrepresentation' up."
In case you weren't aware, one can find online dictionaries on the Internet. Here's Merriam-Webster's primary definition of "misrepresentation":
"to give a false or misleading representation of usually with an intent to deceive or be unfair".
I hope that helps.
Douglas, then why did you call it wrong if you knew the meaning?
"You present Christians as having no real or valid evidence for the existence of God, for example."
- The Christian reliance on faith establishes this. If there was evidence of gods, there would be no need for faith. So Douglas, which do you rely on, evidence or faith?
- Even a casual reading of the bible reveals this to be true.
- Attempting to whitewash your religion's history reveals your moral cowardice Douglas.
It seems that the only one trying to misrepresent Christianity is you. Three strikes and you're out Douglas.
'A dog looks up to you. A cat looks down on you. But a pig looks you right in the eye and treats you as an equal. '
-Winston Churchill
...also, prove the existence of your 'God': to our satisfaction.
image
But then, he would've done so way before now - thus rendering the likes of you obsolete - if he did exist; it's not as if he can't do as per Morgan Freeman in the Jim Carrey film "Bruce Almighty". So much for his so-called 'Omnipotence' if he can't .
We Atheists demand to be proved wrong.
But we're always proved right . And you can't prove us wrong. He would appear to us in physical form (and no, not 'Jesus'; he's not allowed) if he did. We demand to be proved wrong.
You fundies 'claim' - without empirical secular peer reviewed evidence - that this 'God' of yours exists ...?!
image
I refer you to the above character from Matt Groening's "Futurama".
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
