Talk:EvilBible.com

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Icon bible.svg

This Bible related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Steelbrain.png

I found this website which allegedly "debunks" the site[edit]

http://debunkedevil.blogspot.co.uk/

Thoughts? 2.124.172.198 (talk) 20:20, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

The Sentence: "First of all, the Bible is absolutely reliable as a historical document." Had me LOL. The most reliable Source that site cites is this.
While nice that it isn't completely off the Rocker, it does question Evolution without outright denying it. "This is an interesting one for sure. I agree that micro-evolution is as close to a fact as you can get with our limited knowledge." " The theory of evolution by natural selection is at this point in time filled with far too many holes to be assumed to be a scientific fact". Because the Bible is such a reliable Source it msut be truer than that Theory full of holes amirite?/s
Also nice how the Crusades are justified: "The only wars backed by God were against societies taking part in extreme immorality (demon worship, human sacrifice, sodomy, etc)."
Once again, Charlotte using a statistic to prove her point and does not give a source for it." Holy Shit! Well looks like my Irony Meter broke just now. 7 long paragraphs, a lot of claims without proof or Source. 4 Sources in her Paragraph... Well anyway it is quite lacking as a rebuttal. — Unsigned, by: Benaresh / talk / contribs
Good post! Reverend Black Percy (talk) 22:59, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Chris is a "religious nut" when it comes to politics[edit]

Not sure if this considered off-topic but here we go: Chris "Baba" Thiefe routinely banned from the site anyone who disagreed with him politically. Swiftly and without style. From reading his posts, especially his replies to conservative-leaning posts, one can see that he is every bit as much of a zealot as those he decries. For example, his take on the 2nd Amendment is riddled with factual errors and twisted logic, including a glaring lack of understanding of how the U.S. court system works. Whenever a user is banned from the site, that person's posts get deleted, so that only Chris' replies will show. Basically, he is just as irrational as those he loves to bash (and perhaps we all are...?) Just wanted to put that out there.