Then maybe you should repeat first grade! How do you know you are conscious? So far your answer boils down to 'I have value because I say I have value.' I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and promote that to a third grade argument right beside Spiderman is better than Hulk and Oh yeah? Yeah!

In a godless creation you have no more value than an insect. You breathe, you eat, defecate, you reproduce, you die. You are a random occurrence. Nothing more....and yet you keep insisting that you have value. And that you have values.

Perhaps you should be asking yourself why you need to ask someone else about what you feel or believe.

Because it's the law and imputed to them as citizens, it doesn't require belief, just obedience. It's not their personal beliefs that is the problem that I'm addressing, rather the anarchial principle and unconstitutional presupposition of the life and world view of anthropological theism. We can make room for this on an individual level, but not when it attacks the foundations of social order to overthrow it.

"Thou Shalt Not Steal" for example is a negative commandment that also embodies a positive duty flowing through the two great positive commandments (e.g., Love God and your neighbor as yourself) - private property is presupposed; so I have an obligation to protect my own estate and the estate of my neighbor. Thou Shalt Not Kill is the same thing, I have a responsibility to protect my own life and the life of my neighbor from being taken unjustly, hence having the effective means to enforce the law is a requirement - the police power flows from the individual and we appoint a portion, without surrender, to the State for justice purposes but that doesn't absolve us of our responsibilities to one another living in community.

John Browning clearly did not design both the 1911 and High-power…one is 45acp and the other 9mm.

Whichever sight those came from is a horrible source for information and I would highly recommend a better source for Bible bashing.
It smacks of amateurism on a level I almost think is embarrassing.
“How could an angel appear to Joseph and Mary… which was it…one or the other…clearly the Bible is a lie!”……oh me…I blame public education and The X-box.
The answer to most of them is clear simply from reading the questions...... but I do still hope M4 reads all those texts

If I make the statement to a friend.
‘I asked Ms Malkin to go to dinner. We drove to Chik-fil-A got out of the car went inside and ordered food.”
Now if asked for further details about the event I might say ‘I asked her out, I drove her Infinity with the V6, and I also noted that the driver side door is sticking. I had the chicken sandwich and a tea which were both fantastic….She looked pretty.
If the same friend asked her about the afternoon the details might sound very different. ‘He just asked via text which was tacky, He drove my car because his was full of trash and on empty, I had to open my own passenger side door. Who takes a date out for fast food I only had a fries and he dressed like a slob in the process?
The details don’t conflict… simply give the friend a more complete picture of the facts.

The Bible is not a Dick and Jane reader. While a single story can be understood by a child that story can also consume countless hours of study and exposition by many wise men or women.

You see where this is going. The Bible is comprised of 66 books by an estimated 33 authors. They all may have a few individual details of events different but they all still have the same message.
The angel appeared to both Joseph and Mary.
Jesus was tempted during and after the 40 days of fasting.
Jesus is Emmanuel.
John and Jesus would naturally be expected to see the reviled Spirit descend…because they were both there.
The heavenly voice addressed Jesus who was with a gathering.
Peter preached to Jews and Gentiles at different times.
On and on it could go…simply by looking at the listed text it is clear that the supposed contradictions are not conflicting Truths simply differing details about true events from different writers.

Now there are some difficult passages in the Bible that have been contested by the Church for a long time…but ironically most don’t even make that list.
At the end of the day The Bible unanimously tells the story of sin and redemption. Judgment and Grace, Justice and Mercy.
A Triune God who redeems rebellious sinners with his own blood.
The whole of the Bible points to Jesus….that is The question you have to answer.
What will I do with this man Jesus?

Welcome to the dark side. We have better sex than Christians.

I suggest a few books to help (they did with me). I could sit here and type up a dissertation to help convince you (or others), but the best thing you could do is read.

The Bible - Yes, reading it critically will turn you into an atheist. It's full of contradictions and ridiculous claims.
Breaking the Spell - Daniel Dennet. Very easy read. Recommended for "don't hurt me."
Sam Harris - Letter to a Christian Nation. Very short and excellent read. Can be finished in a matter of hours. Very provocative
God is Not Great - By the late, great Christopher Hitchens. This is the big one. Heavy read, extremely thought provoking, and very critical of religion. It takes several readings.

I also suggest looking up "Christopher Hitchens" on YouTube. Particularly the two part series "Christianity is immoral."

See you on the other side.

Sure. But being a cafeteria Christian (or Muslim) is not looked upon too highly in the prophetic texts. You can believe whatever you want, most Christians do- they pick and choose what is convenient or what fits what they want their personal god to like, then follow that path.

Same way with so-called Islamic fundamentalists. As Sam Harris once said, the problem with Islamic fundamentals is the fundamental problems of Islam. Read the Koran and underline the violent texts. Then tell me it's a religion of peace. Jainism is a religion of peace. So is Buddhism. The more fundamental a Jain gets, the LESS violent they get.

There are only a handful of stories of people twisting Buddhism into nationalism (WW2 Japan), but for the most part, you can cherry-pick Buddhism all you want. The only problematic part of Buddhism is understanding some of it- not trying to interpret "Should I really kill my neighbor for working on the Sabbath?" Or "Should we kill our daughter because she refuses to conform to our ways (just happened in GB).

So you can pick and choose and call yourself whatever you want- but when you identify as Christian you have to stand behind the Bible and everything it says ; just the same as a Muslim must stand behind every sura in the Koran. If you intend to cherry-pick (which again is okay) and take bits and pieces from each religion, then call yourself "spiritual" and say you still believe in a higher power- that's fine too. Just don't group yourself in with the fundamentalists (read: literal followers of the faith).

I do miss Mr. Hitchions with his razor wit and always found him brilliant and thought provoking.
I highly recommend the following YouTube of a sharp Wesleyan and Atheist going back and forth.
Both far more educated and intelligent than I am.... yet I still disagree with both on various levels.
I do not believe God is threatened by those who genuinely seek Truth….but the Bible does warn those who only seek to reject Truth.
If you dont have 2+ hours skip to 1:20

I find it interesting that my favorite Atheist spent his last days reading ‘The Everlasting Man’ a book written by my favorite Catholic.
I have to wonder what would cause a dying man who spent his life believing in no eternal hope…to spend his last efforts seeking to understand a refute a man who spent his life speaking of eternal and everlasting hope.

There are so many competing religions that you can accuse the theists of the same.

I think you are missing the point. The things that Christians argue over are NOT the existence of God or his nature. And NOT about the overwhelming majority of moral thought in Scripture. Have you seriously seen (here or elsewhere) two proclaimed Christians arguing over the validity of the Ten Commandments? The 'Golden Rule'? Hint: the answer is NO.

On the other hand, the point I have been pressing is that these things (Commandments, etc.) represent moral absolutes. The anti-Theist denies God, and thereby negates the absolute.

There were moral people and just laws long before the Jews or Christians came along. I don't need to be told (and especially threatened) to make me a good human. I try my best to treat people the way I would want to be treated.

I understand your point. To the Christian, 'pragmatic' (in its philosophical definition, or at least one of its definitions) action does not exist, because to the pragmatist, no ultimate moral test really exists.

Semantics, I know. But it certainly illustrates the difference in worldview.