Whoops... there it is.

@lednabwm whoops, no it isn’t. Those aren’t the words of Christ but the words of Paul, written 30 years after Christ’s death. That quote has been changed to read “me” instead of “Christ”.

I’m no fan of right-wing Christianity (or, in fact, ANY Christianity) but presenting false evidence gives the fascists a nice easy straw man to hang their argument on.

@choobs @lednabwm
Except that the Christians themselves say that the Bible is the Word of God even if there non-existent god did not write any of it.

@the5thColumnist @choobs

Well, by his reasoning, christ isn't responsible for anything because the eye-witnesses are all of questionable character. Not to mention, the folks back then were not that bright.

@lednabwm @the5thColumnist <shrug > I spent the first 15 years of my life in a cult and several decades after that trying to deprogramme so I have a better than average understanding of how Christians work. You do you - all I was trying to do is point out that you’ll never be able to score points against them by using misquoted scriptures because I guarantee they know them better than you do.

@choobs @lednabwm
I would bet the average atheist knows the bible better than the average christian, but since there is no book of Christ, none of the Bible was written by him, why do they always refer to it as the word of god, if it isn't.

@the5thColumnist @choobs @lednabwm An article of Christian faith is that divinely inspired writing - by a selected few first and second hand witnesses (and not for example the apocrypha writers) - is the literal word of God. Different sects choose different books. It's a lexical infallibility claim. Since it's an article of faith, it's not something that the faithful are willing to discard or doubt.

@opalmirror @choobs @lednabwm
and by the very same logic of faith I can decide to believe all of that is bunk

@the5thColumnist @opalmirror @choobs

It is all bunk.... most of us already know it. Sometimes, though, some here feel it's their duty to apologize for those who don't, as well as their pet faith.

@lednabwm To play the Devil's advocate, how do you know it's bunk? Religionists can't prove the existence of their gods, but neither can atheists prove their nonexistence.

@riggbeck @lednabwm Atheists can't prove a non-existence because you can't prove a negative. They'd have to search every corner of the known and unknown universe and a god might be hiding behind them the entire time. It would be far easier to prove any god exists.