Are you a true Christian Believer?

I see it just the opposite, it is my faith which allows me to approach life and see limitless potential in everything.

As for the Bible, I believe it is the inspired word of God. It's not a step-by-step instruction manual and it's not something anyone else should interpret for you. You have to read it and determine for yourself what it says to you. I think different people can read the same passage and arrive at two completely different meanings, and I don't think that means either of them is wrong. I think God allows you to interpret it in the correct manner for you, and as long as you follow your conscience based upon what you believe, then that's what matters to Him.

I do find it amusing though when people try to point out specific things to show that the Bible is unscientifically accurate, as if that's going to invalidate the entire thing to a Christian. You have to take it in the context of the time in which it was written and the people's understandings at that time.

For example, Joshua 10 when the sun and moon stand still. That seems to be one of the most popular occurrences brought up by scientific minds to prove that the Bible is fiction. They suggest this because we all know that the Earth revolves around the Sun, not the other way around, so suggesting God stopped the Sun is clearly a lie.

However, do you think Joshua understood that at the time, no rather clearly he did not. So rather than God saying 'my son, I cannot stop the Sun and Moon for they do not move, in fact the Earth, which is the planet you are standing on... oh and a planet is a round globe in space... actually rotates on it's axis and revolves around the Sun, therefore what I must do is stop the rotation and revolution of the Earth, and I will do that for you now.' This would likely have been followed by Joshua saying 'what's an axis, how can be we be a globe when the world is flat, what's space...' So you see it's much easier to simply allow them to think that the Sun and Moon were stopped. That in no way impunes the Bible, it's simply a matter of thinking who the intended audience was and understanding why at times it may appear to be written more simplistically because of that.

At any rate I could debate this with you all day and your beliefs will have no impact on mine, nor mine on yours. That doesn't mean either of us lack an open mind, merely that we both believe ourselves to be right to the point that our minds won't be changed. There is nothing anyone could ever say that would ever cause me to believe there is no God, that's simply not possible.

If you haven't read it you might like Dante's Inferno. It provides a really interesting suggestion as to how Hell is structured. I found it fascinating. Just a suggestion as you seem interested in religion in general.

 

I suppose it depends on what kind of Christian you are. Bart Ehrman explained that he was a very devoted Christian and being Christian meant that he had to adhere to the truth even if the truth led him away from Christianity, which it eventually did.

What more would one need then?

I don't really bother with such endeavors. If they're miracles then of course they can't be bound by logic. It just becomes a faith vs. no-faith debate. What Dr. Naik discussed was different however. He pointed out some of the detailed rituals of the Bible which are not carried out by Christians.

I agree. Taking it out of its context is what a majority of Christians tend to do. This is another problem that Ehrman addresses when he talks about the prophets: when these people were writing they weren't writing for people thousands of years later, they were writing for their people and for their time. And since I'm on the subject of "their people", I've always wondered why Christians view people like Abraham and Moses as loving father figures when they would most likely would have rejected you. Indeed, genocide and xenophobia are rampant throughout the Bible. Just about every group of people living in the ancient Near East are bad-mouthed, wiped out or both (in the Bible). There was a book that I read (written by a Jewish guy) about four years ago on the history of the Jews. In the book he talks about how the Jews hated the Christians more than they hated the pagans because the Christians were viewed as cultural thieves and perverters of their religion. Even in our own time many Jews are a bit anti-Gentile/anti-intermarriage

The fact that the day was extended for the sole purpose of battling is a miracle in itself. How it's worded is quite irrelevant, especially when coming from the perspective of primitive peoples with no real understanding of the solar system. Still, the author of Proverbs says "For the Lord gives wisdom, and from his mouth come knowledge and understanding". Why couldn't God just make him understand? He can (supposedly) do anything afterall.

You ask me do I think Joshua understood at the time....Quite frankly, I have trouble viewing him as a serious historical figure period. And the miracles I simply don't believe in, no matter which way they're worded. PS: There's a show that my friend and I used to watch on History International called Battles B.C. Joshua's conquests were the subject of one of the episodes and I think they did talk about the absurdity of the sun standing still as well as the immoral and brutal act of slaughtering men, women, and children.

You can change my beliefs if you can provide facts, but you can never change facts with your beliefs. One plus one is two no matter who believes it's not. If you believe in God, that's having faith. If you believe that the Bible is inerrant then you're in denial. I don't go after miracles, I critique the texts. Even if a story is one that I don't believe that doesn't mean it's inconsistent. When I talk about the errancy of the Bible I'm not talking about unscientifically explained miracles, I'm talking about blatant contradictions. For example, Matthew asserts that after Judas realizes what he's done he tries to give the silver back to the priests but they refuse it, so he throws it down and they pick it up and use the money to purchase a field. Judas hangs himself. According to Luke, Judas is the one who uses the money to purchase the field and he dies by not by hanging, but by falling headlong and bursting open.

Human beings are an egocentric bunch. Why do you think we believed that we were at the center of the universe for so long? It's hard for us to consider the possibility of nothingness.

I have read it, and I do have it but I do need to read it again. I like dead religions more. I can dissect them without walking on egg shells.

 

As I previously mentioned, the Bible is not a step-by-step manual. You have to read it and interpret it for yourself. I'm not sure specifically which rituals that you are referencing, but many of the Old Testament rituals were done away with by the New Testament. There are some who believe the entire Old Testament was rendered useless by the New Testament, I don't agree with that, but it's a popular belief that the only important parts of Biblical history occurred after Jesus was born. There are also some people who follow Old Testament customs, my mother is one of those people, she observes all the Old Testament feasts, and things like anointing with oil, rules on clean and unclean foods, etc. Personally I disagree with her, particularly about the food, as that was changed in the New Testament, but ultimately it's not harming her to do it her way so I just leave her be and tell my kids she's incorrect.

My biggest complaint about religion is that so many people practice it so poorly and they set a terrible example. I know a lot of non-religious people, particularly ex Catholics, that state that the reason they turned away from religion was because of the hypocrisy they observed in their fellow Christians. I despise religious hypocrites more than any other type because they screw with people's faith. Ultimately your faith should be sufficient to allow you to see their hypocrisy and still believe, however for some people faith is fragile. I suspect those people who cause another to lose faith will be called upon to pay a high price for that, and that's appropriate. I say suspect because the final determination on Heaven and Hell is left up to God and He will consider all factors and make a decision. So I would never be so presumptuous as to say I know where someone is going. And yes I do believe in the concept of Heaven and Hell obviously, but I don't view it as strictly as most of the Christians I know.

That's pretty much how I approach my faith in general. I do my best to do as I know God would want me to. I help others whenever possible, I always endeavor to be kind and respectful. I don't preach at people unless they specifically ask me my opinion, but if they ask I tell them my honest opinions and encourage them to search for themselves. If you search and don't find God, then it's not time for you to do so. I believe God to be omnipotent, but He gives us a massive amount of free will. Why? I don't have that answer but if it were me, the person who voluntarily turned to me would mean more than the person I forced to do so. I think He allows us to choose, and that shows His love for us, as He could easily force us all to comply but He doesn't.

I also think it possible this isn't His first experience with creating life. I think it entirely possible we could be the 10th or 100th time around for Him. If that's the case then perhaps He's tried it every possible way before and He knows what does and doesn't work. I know there are people who will be appalled at the idea and think I'm suggesting that God approaches humanity with a 'how to build a better mouse trap' type mentality. But honestly, He's God, I doubt we're the first humans he created. I'm not saying I think He creates and exterminates human beings on a whim. But I can see that given sufficient time, and depending upon whether we learned to live together harmoniously or not, we could easily kill off the human race on our own. So just saying I think it's possible He's had experience dealing with human beings and may well have tried the blind obedience route, the complete free will route, a mixture of the two, or who knows what else.

Just because I'm a Christian, that doesn't mean I'm an idiot, or incapable of sufficient research to determine whether or not I believe God exists. I know He exists, I feel His presence, and that's something you just cannot communicate to another person who has never felt Him. I'm sure it's easier to believe and have faith when you've felt His presence, seen it at work in your life, but I think anyone who honestly seeks Him will have those opportunities. Until they do, I can understand how it would be more difficult to have blind faith. That is not to say I have never encountered trials or adverse circumstances in my life, I have many times, yet I never asked 'Why Me God?' because I know that's not my place. My life is His to do with as He pleases, all things serve a purpose and I don't need to know what that is to be able to believe.

For someone who had no intention of discussing religion, I sure have a lot to say... I really need to stay out of this thread. Though I suspect you and I are the only two people reading each other's long posts anyway.

 

You're not willing to drink the poison. OK. We're past that. So far I haven't met any Christian who would so don't feel bad.

Religious doctrine is a bit different from other literature. It's not really meant for everyone to have their own interpretation. If the Bible was meant for everyone to have their own interpretation then it probably would have remained oral and never been codified.

I was talking about the Bitter Water test and the remedy for a house plagued with leprosy.

The majority of your post is faith-based and so responding to it in its entirety would just embroil me into a back and forth faith vs non-faith discussion. As for the portion in bold, I find it interesting because if God had to try more than once with us then that would mean he's not perfect. It kind of reminds me of a book called The Popol Vuh, where the gods create animals first, but seeing that the animals can't worship them they create man. And their first few times they fail. You might enjoy it.

 

I addressed the drinking poison thing several posts back. That's not something God has demanded of me, hence it's not something I've tried. Crazy zealots try all sorts of things to lure people to their beliefs, I'm not crazy.

I disagree on the Bible, as I said I believe each person has to interpret it for themselves. People will take anything they can and bend it to fit their agenda, the Bible certainly isn't exempt from that. So to accept anyone else's interpretation is ridiculous. I listen to my preacher, but if it comes right down to it and I don't agree with something he says, I'm going with my interpretation because in the end I'm the one paying the price if I get it wrong. God warns you to beware of false prophets, if you don't understand what you're reading, how would you know who was false and who was not?

As for God being perfect, and the existence of more than one attempt indicating He's not, I don't see it that way at all. God is perfect, but if he gives human's free will, then they aren't. I can understand that He could create the world as we know it and everything in it and set us loose to do as we please, and we can completely fuck it up. That's not on Him, those were our choices, the only choice He made was to give us the free will to do as we liked. So essentially I think if we totally screw everything up, that's on us, because free will means He doesn't interfere to achieve the outcome He desires.

Essentially I think each person has to establish their unique relationship with God. Do what they feel is right, and then be judged on that when the time comes. God doesn't demand stupid shows of faith, or expect you to take every word of every passage of the Bible as a literal way to live your life. It provides guidance, what you take from that is up to you. I interpret things differently than many people of similar faith, some take a very rigid approach to religion, but I personally don't think that's what God intended. Again, I think it's up to the individual to determine how they intend to worship God, and how they interpret their faith, and that's what I do.

I'll look up the book you mentioned, might be an interesting read.

 

It's not a demand, it's one of the signs. The signs are pretty clear, and unlike some other parts of the Bible I don't think there's much ambiguity. What else could Jesus have meant by drinking poison without dying? What else could he have meant by healing the sick? I'm sure that desperate Christians could concoct all types of theories but it's really quite clear.

So, someone who drinks poison is crazy because they have faith in Jesus? What I dislike about Christians most is not the fact that they believe there's an invisible man in the sky who has us under constant surveillance - what I dislike most is their hypocrisy and charlatanism. They'll ask you to believe in something that they don't even believe in. In the Middle East there are men, women, and children who will die in the name of Allah without a second thought. Although I think the idea of Allah is just as absurd as the idea of Jehova I can at least appreciate their sense of selflessness. Christians always pull out these get-out-of-jail-free cards.

I agree with QualiaSoup: if the Bible supports everyone's point of view then it ends up supporting no point of view. If you ignore what the text says and go off of your own interpretation then you're essentially disagreeing with it or else you wouldn't have to go off of your own interpretations. It's kind of like...if everyone could interpret the American legal system the way they want to. It would be chaos.

Christians do not use the get-out-of-jail free cards exclusively for themselves; they also use them for God. Case in point: the post above. That's why I try not to bad-mouth the Bible. I just use the words of the Bible against the Bible. For example, I'm working an on a Youtube video where I point out the fact that God says that those who listen to him shall live in live in safety and without fear. Then directly after it I've inserted a video where Coptic Christians living in the U.S. are protesting because they want the U.S. to save the Coptic Christians in Egypt who suffer terrorist attacks from Muslims on a regular basis. You'd think that these Christians would be God's first priority, because unlike Christians living in the Western world, Coptic Christians are professing their faith in a world that's very hostile to Christianity - a world where people get massacred while celebrating Christmas. If Jehova does exist he's a liar among other things.

Oh yeah? Then why did he ask Abraham to sacrifice his son?

I enjoyed it. I like to read ancient literature because it's very fascinating to peer into the creative minds of early writers whose ideas weren't so different from our own.

 

This I can agree with. I'm astounded at times when I read something written hundreds of years ago and find it so applicable to modern times. I truly believe some people were ahead of their time, Baltasar Gracian comes to mind for instance.

As for the rest of the post, you and I will simply have to agree to disagree. Regarding Abraham specifically, my point was that God no longer requests you to prove your faith. There were instance in the Bible when He did, and Abraham is one of them. They discussed this in my son's youth group recently, the teacher had said that obviously no one in modern times would have the degree of faith that Abraham showed, and she used as an example asking the children in the class how many of them would agree to do what he did to one of their parents if God asked it of them. All the children save my son immediately answered they wouldn't, my son requested clarification. He asked her if in her scenario he would be certain it was God asking, as Abraham had absolutely no doubt it was a request directly from God. She replied that yes there would be absolutely no doubt that God was making that request... he then answered well if God asked it of me I would do it. She was astounded, as was everyone else. This is an example of what I despise about other so called Christians, they talk faith, sometimes they demand faith from others, but when presented with a solid example of it they are appalled and think there's something wrong with the person who is displaying true faith.

Now before anyone else freaks out, my son would never harm me, and I know that. However I completely approve of his answer. We discussed it when we got home and we are all in accord on this scenario. He was concerned I was going to be upset by this, and I wasn't at all, in fact I completely agreed, as did my daughter. She explained to him that if God requests something, you comply, end of story. Because if you believe in God then you trust that He knows what's best for you. We may not see the reasoning behind the request, but I'm convinced that if we could see the big picture it would make perfect sense.

So as I said, you have no faith that there's a God, I have nothing but faith that there's a God, we just have to agree to disagree at this point as neither of us is going to change our opinions.

 

On many things, it's not a matter of us agreeing to disagree but rather your inability to do as Dr. William Campbell and just say "OK, there are some problems with the Bible that I don't have good answers for". In Proverbs 1:33 God is quoted as saying "But whoever listens to me will live in safety and be at ease, without fear of harm". That is his promise. So, the fact that any Christian can die just as easily as an atheist makes him a liar. Fact. Mark's account of the crucifixion differs greatly from Luke's - fact. Nobody knows the date that Jesus was born - fact. We don't have any original copies of the biblical books, only copies made centuries later. Fact. The list could go on but you're not gaining anything from this exchange and I'm obviously not. I do know that women are naturally more emotional than men are and this is perhaps the reason why everyone who has seriously challenged religious doctrine has been a man. Religion is an emotionally comforting thing and so it's understandable.

Another get-out-of-jail free card. This is not a good enough answer for me or any rational minded person for that matter. God supposedly doesn't request the same level of faith anymore...quite convenient. If he's perfect, then why would he have to even alter the level of faith required? A perfect being would lay down the perfect requirements from the start.

To me, this is the pot calling the kettle black.

Wow. If he said he wanted to drink poison would you approve of that too?

See above posts.

 

Like I said, I think this discussion has gone on beyond any useful point.

You assume a lot that I neither said nor implied in the context of my responses.

I never said the Bible was perfect. I happen to believe that parts were likely removed over the course of time, therefore it is incomplete in it's current state. I also believe that certain translations are a travesty and should be avoided. There may be what appear to be contradictions that people often point out, but I find those typically to be misinterpretations, things taken out of context, or people pointing out only the parts that suit their purpose.

I don't honestly care what Dr. William Campbell says about anything, I talk to God Himself, there is no Higher Authority. People like Campbell get tossed over in the 'whatever, another zealot' group for me. If he doesn't want to believe, fine and dandy, but why go to so much trouble to try to persuade other people not to. Honestly when anyone puts that much effort into proving someone wrong, I find it's usually because they aren't comfortable with their own decision, or don't trust themselves, therefore they try to get as much affirmation as possible to appease themselves.

I understand that atheism is the easier choice, because Christianity if done with commitment is not easy. I personally believe some people embrace atheism because it means there are no rules, no code of conduct to follow, but in their hearts they know there is a God and they're simply trying to hide from Him, which is not possible. By finding more people to hide with them, they feel better, there's safety in numbers you know, and more people to help take the blame. That's merely my opinion and as I said it applies to some not all.

I'm not discussing the drinking poison with you yet again, that's been asked and answered by me. For my thoughts on that, I refer you to my previous posts. My answer for my son would not differ from my answer for myself. I don't know why you are so stuck on this?

I don't do 'get out of jail free cards' for myself or anyone else. I will answer for myself, there is no way to escape that. Just as all the false Christians and charlatans will answer for themselves. If I don't measure up as I should, I'll pay the ultimate price for that. I assure you no one will be getting out of jail for free in the end.

I think if you are certain atheism is the way to go, have at it. I fully support your right to make that choice. But if that is what you truly believe, then like Campbell why do you continue to try to convince everyone else that's the only reasonable option? Let them be happy to follow their beliefs, it in no way affects you.

 

I just felt that you brushed facts aside and to me that implied that you disagree.

If you admit that the Bible was susceptible to so much tampering then how can you know what's accurate and what's not? I don't point out things that appear to be contradictions, they are contradictions.

I think he actually remained a believer after the debate. He didn't say that he didn't believe, he just said "Dr. Naik has brought up some real problems, and there are some of these problems...and I don't deny them. And I don't have good answers for them". He didn't say that he was an atheist, he just admitted that there were irreconcilable discrepancies.

Atheists have never put the same effort into pushing their views as Judeo-Christians have. Never has there been any atheistic program that even remotely approaches the Spanish Inquisition.

Atheism is harder in my opinion. You have nothing to look forward to at the end, only dirt and decomposition. It would be much easier to believe that there's a Heaven waiting for you and you can sin as long as you ask for forgiveness. I don't think it gets much easier than that. Also, atheism for most people is something that I believe they find during their quest for answers, not something that's passed down in a neat little package. People are practically brainwashed into Christianity and it's not hard to go with what you're programmed to do. Breaking away from the program is what's difficult.

I disagree. Our prisons are filled up with Christians. A lot of people will argue that there are more religious people in prison then there are atheists because atheists make up a smaller percentage of the country. And that's true, but what does that tell you about religion? Even a person who follows or pretends to follow this supposedly noble conduct can turn out to be one of the worst human beings. Essentially, your conduct boils down to who you are. I don't believe in God but I've never been in trouble with the law, I don't do drugs, I don't steal, I don't kill people, and I don't have a slew of illegitimate children. I think it's more noble if you do what's right because you feel it's right rather than doing it because it's in some outdated book written thousands of years ago.

I've never really met any atheists who look for people to blame. It's actually the opposite. Most of us believe that human beings should take responsibility for their actions instead of blaming it on the devil and be proud of what they've accomplished instead of giving credit to "God". Christians blame humans a lot, which is fine, but at the same time they contradict themselves. In the video that I'm using one of the Coptic Christians said that the American president should do something to help the Christians in Egypt. Why? He's not the one who promised that they'd all be free from harm. Christians brag about God, but they essentially rely on human assistance like everyone else.

Because it's one of the signs, and an ultimate test of faith. If I were a Christian I wouldn't want people to bring it up either. I've been asking a lot of Christians lately if they've ever read that verse (Most of them haven't) and none of them have said they'd drink poison.

I don't know what else to call it then. Me: Oh yeah? Then why did God ask Abraham to sacrifice his son? You: Regarding Abraham specifically, my point was that God no longer requests you to prove your faith. Where does it say this in the Bible? Where does god say that he no longer requests you to prove your faith?

Very few Christians measure up because we have a democracy, not a theocracy. Most Muslims are not secular Muslims but most Christians are secular Christians. People like Ned Flanders always stick out like a sore thumb. This is because in theocratic nations their government, religion, and culture are basically one in the same. With us, we learn everything separately for the most part.

Campbell didn't try to convince anybody that atheism is the way to go. He was the "true Christian believer" in the video who was bested by Dr. Naik. I don't try to force anything on anybody. I simply state facts. If you disagree with facts then that's denial, not disagreement.

 

Actually, with you running around this thread like you own the place, you're no better than the evangelical Christians wandering around from door to door asking if I've found Jesus (is he missing?).

Facts, you say, based on what? From where? How did you come to know these facts? How did the people you're going to quote come to know these facts? What proof do you have that higher beings don't exist? What proof does anyone have that they do?

The fact of the matter is that faith is a part of the human psyche- a belief cannot be refuted no matter what empirical evidence you claim to have because it is intangible. And getting to the heart of it, atheism is just as much of a religion and faith structure as Christianity because you're just as actively pushing your beliefs and faith in lack of faith as any other religious person in the world.

Why do you feel the need to debate and disprove? Why can't you live your life happily and enjoy your belief system and faith (or lack thereof?). I'm Wiccan and I don't bother Christians with this BS, and I sure as heck don't let the people that come knocking on my door asking me acknowledge Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior engage me in debate. No one ever wins. Live and let live my friend, live and let live. Christians aren't hurting you, and they aren't hurting me, and so if faith is what keeps someone from actively bashing another person's skull in for no reason, then hey- who are we to step in and tell them they're wrong?

 

Well, excuse me for keeping up with my own thread.

Facts based on the words of the Bible itself and then some facts are based on archaeology.

Most of these people have spent a good deal of their lives studying and teaching in their respective fields. http://www.bartdehrman.com/biography.htm

I never said that I have proof that higher beings don't exist. But based on biblical literature, Jehova doesn't exist. This is not to say that people aren't free to still believe that he does.

You obviously haven't been reading the thread.

Who says I'm not?

If no one ever wins then what happened in the Campbell vs Naik debate? Because of its own claims the Bible is rendered null and void. For example, Jesus says that if one truly believes he can go up to a mountain and say "Be taken up and cast into the sea" and it will happen. Simple to disprove. Ask a true Christian believer to do it.

I never said it was hurting me directly but religion in general has been the driving force behind countless persecutions. Some people just like debate, some people don't. If I ask someone questions I'm not doing anything illegal. This is not merely for sport, it's to test myself as well. When I first became an atheist in my pre-teens I couldn't give you detailed reasons as to why, I just felt that something wasn't right about Christianity, or religions in general. But now I feel that I have valid and detailed reasons and I like to test those reasons. So far they've held fast. If you don't like my posts then don't read them.

 

Keep up with your thread all you want- but you started this thread with what seemed to be an intent to harass people who disagreed. I read most of it, and to be honest, a good portion of what you've said I agree with, but I don't see a point in bringing it up. Beliefs are completely private and emotional, and I see no reason to bring them down. Frankly, I have little tolerance for a lot of atheists because they all seem to think they're better than everyone else- like THEY have the key to some super power and they're not going to share it with anyone else because other people can't handle it. I'm not saying that you are acting that way- BUT, you've come super close to crossing into that territory a few times, which bothers me. We've had enough arguments lately.

No one knows what the Bible originally said, and it doesn't really matter so much what it says now. At its essence, it is supposed to be guidelines for living your life as a decent human being. If you take every historical document literally, you're going to have a rough time navigating in the world. For instance, there are laws on the books in NYS from 130+ years ago that say you cannot flirt with a woman on Sunday, and carrying an ice cream in your left pocket is illegal. Maybe at the time those laws were made, they made clear sense to the people, but now, they sound wackadoodle crazy- but they're still there. That's the case with a lot of the Bible, in my opinion, too. You can't really use it to support any argument, nor can you use it disprove an argument- again, my opinion. Which is why I don't engage in these sort of theological debates with people on a regular basis.

Usually, I enjoy your posts, so when you post, I tend to make it a point to read them.

And if you're trying to say that Jehovah was Jesus and Jesus did not exist then you're going to have a hard time proving he did not, considering the lack of historically accurate birth and death records of the time. There's speculation about this Jesus of Gamala person, but no one knows if he was real or not- why? Because there are no records that confirm or deny his presence on this earth. Why debate an issue that has no conclusion whatsoever?

Trust me, you don't have to tell the Witch about persecution- I know all about it. I know what the Catholic Church has done. Most people are aware of it. I just feel like you're not doing anyone any favors with this thread. There are people out there who are not fundamentalist Christians who just appreciate the basics, and the people here fit that category.

Also, there are sites out there where you can debate this left and right with people who really enjoy it. We've had so many arguments and irritation around here lately that I feel like we're just continuing to drive a wedge between each other with this topic.

 

Harass people? Harassing them in my opinion would be flooding them with private messages concerning my views. Everyone is free to overlook this thread if they please.

I feel that there's nothing better to share than knowledge, even if it be unpleasant. Whenever people ask to borrow books from me I always lend them with a smile.

Again, I'm not talking about beliefs here. I'm talking about texts and facts. An example of what I mean is Tim Callahan's critique of Homer's Iliad. He said that Homer speaks of Dorians in Crete, but they didn't penetrate Crete until between 1100 B.C.E. and 1000 B.C.E. So, it's quite clear that Homer wasn't writing at the time of the Trojan War (1200 B.C.E.). Then he goes on to explain that when the same critical techniques are applied to the Bible there's outrage. A biblical example would be this: If the birth of Jesus took place during the reign of Herod how could it have also taken place during the time when Quirinius was governor of Syria, who became governor ten years after Herod was dead? This is the same technique used to point out errors in the Iliad.

A super power like...a perfect, omniscient and omnipotent being?

I find it to be the exact opposite. Atheism is not as exclusive or condemning. I constantly hear about how I'm going to go to Hell if I don't save my soul. You're going to be hard-pressed to find an atheist who tells a Christian what's going to happen to them if they don't become atheists.

Meh. If you say so.

This is a pretty good analogy. But it is my opinion that the Bible was meant to be taken literally for the people living at the time, just as the Iliad was meant to be taken literally by ancient Greeks. We no longer take the Iliad seriously however, and yet many people take the Bible seriously. It's just mythological favoritism in my opinion.

I love theological debate. Erhman is right about the Bible being the most important book in the history of civilization. Even if you're an atheist the book has such a profound influence on your surroundings that it's important for you to learn as much about it as you can through reading and conversation.

Aw. Thanks. I've never seen you on here prior to you posting in my thread.

Whether I believe Jesus existed or not is irrelevant. I was talking about his father - God.

This has clearly veered from the original topic.

I don't try to do favors with my threads.

This is something we can agree on. I should probably just leave.

 

Absolutely not!!

I know it's hard to hear 'tone' when someone is writing, but I'm not at all trying to come across as malicious...it's more a questioning calm, if that makes any sense.

Here's the thing- I didn't really like the way you were talking to Espy, but I understand where you're coming from. My issue was that you sounded a little combative in some of your posts (although I am sure not intentionally), and look, you're too intelligent for that. You obviously know what you're talking about, and my suggesting other sites where that kind of thing is done is because there are lots of people out there who discuss this, but it's not something we commonly do around here. Politics and religion, as my dad always reminded me, are not to be topics of polite conversation if you expect them to remain polite.

Truthfully, you haven't seen me here because I left for awhile because of the fighting on the BBW thread. Things got really ugly there, and dealing with that kind of abuse here when I had enough going on IRL was too much for me. I did come and read some threads from time to time, and since I'm invisible when I'm on, I read some of yours. A few posters here I keep up with.

And in light of the topic- have you read Christopher Hitchen's book God is not great? I think you would enjoy it.

 

[YOUTUBE]e6YawzXNRPw&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]

 

[YOUTUBE]w4JVKqVlAjs[/YOUTUBE]

 

Once again UnChosen, it's awesome!...Thank you for sharing for those of us who appreciate these, it makes my day to start if off here listening...

 

Perhaps that was your interpretation of my tone. Anyway, I don't think I was being combative. I was just making it clear to Espy that I was not going to continue to cross facts with beliefs.

It depends on the self-composure and maturity of the debaters.

It was included in a collection of books that I downloaded but it's not high up on my list yet. I'm going to read all of Bart Ehrman's books and then probably Elaine Pagels books.

 

I'd like to thank him also...for besmirching my thread with these videos.