Hello, everyone. I was an atheist until at the age of 27 I began to study the Bible in order to debunk it. I learned quickly that the Bible was grossly misrepresented by apostate Christendom's adoption of pagan teachings such as the immortal soul from Socrates, the trinity from Plato, the cross from Constantine, hell from Dante and Milton, Easter from Astarte, Christmas from the winter solstice celebrations, and most recently the Rapture from Darby.
Though I have never and will never be a part of organized religion, my beliefs are not entirely dissimilar to that of The Jehovah's Witnesses, due to the removal of the aforementioned pagan influence. I have studied briefly the history of the major world religions, Buddhism, Christianity, Confucianism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Shintoism and Taoism and have published sacred and non-sacred texts from each of these online: The Dhammapada, Four Noble Truths, Paradise Lost, Divine Comedy, Analects Of Confucius, Bhagavad Gita, Qur'an, Pirqe Aboth, Nihongi, Kojiki, Tao Te Ching and Chuang Tzu.
Having been an atheist most of my life and given that nearly everyone I know is atheist, I think I understand and respect where most of you are coming from. I don't believe in "converting" anyone to anything, but I do think the atheist tends to be mislead when it comes to the Bible. Not that that matters much, except for that I do enjoy, given the opportunity, to correct them in thoughtful and polite discussion and debate.
I hope we can have some interesting conversations.
"But the point I'm making, Heather, is that he's so deliberately ambiguous, that one can't refute anything he says, because when he's finished verbalizing, he hasn't said anything."
I do remember something about, 'confounding the learned', which is of course not the same as, 'having something learned to say'.
1. Crackpot: God is real!
2. Us: Evidence, please?
3. Crackpot: I have no evidence, you dumb ass.
4. Us: Sorry, we don't believe you.
5. Crackpot: (Enraged) THIS SHIT IS GOD! (Storms out or gets kicked out.)
If this is a recuring pattern, should we just generalize, and offer a reponse after (3), 'Please come back after you find some evidence. We will be willing to humor you then!'