Jump to content


Senior Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About SkepticOfBible

  • Rank
  • Birthday 07/09/1981

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location
    New Zealand

Previous Fields

  • Still have any Gods? If so, who or what?

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yup, I am one of them. You can find my testimony here Welcome to the forum
  2. Welcome to the forum Love can make you do crazy things. I hope we can provide you with a good support system. I believe you have come to the right place. All I can say man, it's time to move on and not dwell on the past. We may not escape it, but we can certainly make our future better. As I have learned in life, sometimes if you don't get what you desire, then maybe it's for the best. You can only fight to the best of your abilities. Doing more would only harm you Keep it strong there buddy. You'll get through this phase of life. Cya Skeptic
  3. To me they looked like standard atheistic questions, which can be answered with standard apologetics. I will be suprised if it shakes people's faith up. But i suppose there are always exceptions
  4. Well it was more like conversion for me, since I never was a religious person in the first place, although I am fascinated by Anthropology
  5. Thanks You are aware in the case of fundies, it is mostly because of fear, that they won't deconvert. As for the rest, I guess if religion is not causing too much problem in their lifes, then they don't see the need to Information is only a tool at the end of the day. It can't deconvert you anymore than a chisel can make you into a scuplture I found this article to be quite helpful in understanding as why christians won't deconvert, and I don't disagree much http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ano...stminister.html There is another one on exchristian.net, which talks about a similar thing, but I don't have the link for now.
  6. I been around on as this one forum for quite some time, but I never told others to who I was. I finally managed to write my testimony I guess the best place to start, would be to tell as to how I got into the theology debate. Before I came to the place where I am working now, I was a happy go lucky person, who was a borderline hindu, but believed "all path lead to one place" - God, ie all religion are the same. Science to me was complimentary to God. Everybody knows from right to wrong. After all it's common sense. But then I came over in this wonderful part of New Zealand, I meet a bunch of people called the Fundamentalist evangelical christians. I work for the biggest evangelist(which I found out after I came here) of the country, and my office is right in the middle of Bible school/Camp. My work environment is quite secularised, although we tend to work on christian content quite a lot, and some of the guys discuss christianity quite loudly(young earth creationism), but in general they refrain from evangelising to me. However other christians outside my office told me that I am going to hell because I don't believe in Jesus and that I am nothing without the belief of their God. Evolution is actually evilution and the earth was created in 6 literal day. Pretty much I am a "sick" person, whose only cure is Jesus and "Tolerance is a Myth" (Greg Koukl). Their arguements for Christianity sounded convincing, but at the back of my mind I knew something was wrong. I would have converted to christianity, if I had not got access to Internet. The internet showed me a lot of their claims didn't have much substance in them, thanks to Skeptical sites and Jewish Counter Missionary websites. So pretty much I can say "Internet Saved me". It certainly was a life changing experiance for me, because Christians do ask real good question about life,God, morality. the afterlife. However what I discovered is that their answers aren't quite fantastic, some of them depressing. This experiance certainly made me requestion my current belief and in fact did converted me to Skeptism. Ironically, I used to hate the word skeptics, which I mistakenly took for cynics. It is now I realise that everybody is a skeptic. At times the bible really depressed/disgusted me, specially when I read about the killings of the babies in the Old Testament. Somehow I must reconcile my sense of decency with the worship of this kind of God. The sexual laws in the Old testaments, pretty much killed people for having sex or just losing virginity in case of accident. To me all of this made sense from a man writing the word of God from a barbaric sense, but I couldn't comprehend as to why would the creator of the universe would bother about the activities about a particular tribe and why would an all-loving god choose one person over another. So much for the verse which says "God doesn't have favourites". I guess that's one of the reason why Christians told me to read the NT, since it contains more fluffier teachings(not to mention a complete revisionist take on the Old Testament). One of the biggest lies that Protestant put forward is that "we all believe in the same, yet differ". However as soon as look at differences amongst the various sects, they are as diverse as the culture between two countries. Right now I am a agnostic on the borderline deist/panentheist, with following answer to some of the question I had answer to others and to myself. Do I think there is god or not - I don't know, but I am not gonna blindly believe anything Do I know there is a afterlife - I don't know, but I guess life is journey which I have to find out. Nobody else knows either, since nobody has come back from the dead Do I know everything - No and never will, because knowledge is infinite Do I believe in the god of the bible(hebrew/christian) - No, and never will. So is my opinion. Do I still believe all religion are true and lead to one path- Not anymore for first and Don't know for the second Do I still believe all religion are valid - Yes they are, and everybody has the right to their belief. Just be careful what you choose, because some of the beliefs are harmful Coming from a highly multi-religious country, I understand the basic needs that religion fulfill. Most religionist just want to get on with their life, with simple answers. I don't bother them, so far as they don't bother me. It's been 2 years now, since I got into the theological debate. I must have spent hours on this topic. More than I should have. I really want to take a break, but everyday I just seem to learn more and more, which pretty much increases my thirst for knowledge. In the past 2 years, I have learnt more about the various biblical theology and the history of the christianity, then someone who has been a fundamentalist christian for a lifetime. One thing I am proud off, is that I managed to convince one of my collegues to not to convert to christianity. He was a freethinker like me, but was extremely attracted to christianity. However after a few talks with them, with what I knew at that time, he quickly changed his mind. Here were some of the websites that were a great influence on this Journey Agnostic Review of Christianity(80% of my arguements come from here, and the best counter apolgetic site on the website) No Religion Losing My Religion Paul Toubin Skeptical Review of Christianity Messianic Verses in the Tanach(Short and Excellent Rebuttals) Messiah Truth(Comprehensive Jewish Counter Missionary Website) Thanks for reading guys Skeptic
  7. Not According to you bible. Read matthew 25:31-46 and the Book of James
  8. I am still waiting for Historical evidence described in the Gospel of Mark, where there was big earthquake and zombies walked out of the caves? You would bet if something on that scaled happened, some Pagan/Jewish historians would have written about it, even if they wrote from their point of view eg "Demons arose to fight our Gods" Kat, with regards to the miracles being accepted by Jews. I would like to point out to (Deut 13;18) Deuteronomy 13:1 The entire word that I command you, that shall you observe to do; you shall not add to it and you shall not subtract from it. [2] If there should stand up in your midst a prophet or a dreamer of a dream, and he will produce to you a sign or a wonder, [3] and the sign or the wonder comes about, of which he spoke to you, saying "Let us follow gods of others that you did not know and we shall worship them!7quot; [4] do not hearken to the words of that prophet or to that dreamer of a dream, for HASHEM, your G-d, is testing you to know whether you love HASHEM, your G-d with all your heart and with all your soul. [5] HASHEM, your G-d, shall you follow and Him shall you fear; His commandments shall you observe and to His voice shall you hearken; Him shall you serve and to Him shall you cleave. [6] And that prophet and that dreamer of a dream shall be put to death, for he had spoken perversion against HASHEM, your G-d Who takes you out of the land of Egypt, and Who redeems you from the house of slavery to make you stray from the path on which HASHEM, you G-d, has commanded you to go; and you shall destroy the evil from your midst Deuteronomy 18:15 A prophet from your midst, from your brethren, like me, shall HASHEM, your G-d, establish for you to him shall you hearken. [16] According to all that you asked of HASHEM, your G-d, in Horeb on the day of the congregation, saying, "I can no longer hear the voice of HASHEM, my G-d, and this great fire I can no longer see, so that I shall not die." [17] Then HASHEM said to me: They have done well in what they have said. [18] I will establish a prophet for them from among their brethren, like you, and I will place My words in his mouth; He shall speak to them everything that I will command him. [19] And it shall be that the man who will not hearken to My words that he shall speak in My name, I will exact from him, [20] But the prophet who willfully shall speak a word in My name, that which I have not commanded him to speak, or who shall speak in the name of the gods of others that prophet shall die. [21] When you say in your heart, "How can we know the word that HASHEM has not spoken?" [22] If the prophet will speak in the Name of HASHEM and that thing will not occur and not come about that is the word that HASHEM has not spoken; with willfulness has the prophet spoken it, you should not fear him. From a Jewish point of view(especially the 3rd centuary), it wasn't a impossibility that non-jews could produce signs or do miracles. It was what the prophet had said that the jews were supposed to take into account. ie 1)If the prophet did not teach according to the Torah (which Jesus and Paul did) 2)If the prophet taught them to worship a God other than their forefathers knew(Singular God who does not take a form of a man). 3)If the prophet gave a false prophecy(which again Jesus and Paul did) Therefore according to Deaut 13;18, Jesus was declared a false prophet by the scripture. Remember even Moses could not explain the miracles done by Pharoah's Magicians, so according to Jewish theologians, they were equating Jesus to these sort of mysteries.
  9. Which five?I didn't see any names? I recommend you read the following articles http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/apostles.html#tradition I know you are trying hard, but I am still waiting
  10. Obviously you ignored my post. Alexander the Great and Jesus is no comparision. And it is bogus that he did have contempories Once again here you go, incase you forgot to read http://www.livius.org/aj-al/alexander/alexander_z1b.html All these authors lived more than three centuries after the events they described, but they used older, nearly contemporary sources, that are now lost Please see the website for the contemporary of Alexander. If you are claiming that the Gospels are historically accurate, then please tell provide me with historical and even biblical evidence for the following stupendous event which surpasses even Jesus's own resurrection Matt 27:50-53 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. i await your answer, and I am still waiting for the following claim you made Kindly point us to historical or biblical evidence that all the apostles died for their beliefs and name one non-christian documentation that says the disciples were martyred.
  11. Alexader the Great is a bad example There is a lot of contemporaneous writing about him, by friend and foe alike.. His history was a lot more then oral tradition. Of those recorded, few are in contradiction. More information can be gleaned here http://www.livius.org/aj-al/alexander/alexander_z1b.html All these authors lived more than three centuries after the events they described, but they used older, nearly contemporary sources, that are now lost Alexander, left a wake of destroyed and created cities behind. We have buildings, libraries and cities, such as Alexandria, left in his name. We have treaties, and even a letter from Alexander to the people of Chios, engraved in stone, dated at 332 B.C.E. In a British Museum, there is a marble inscription dating from 333 BC which mentions Alexander's dedication of a Temple to Athena. It would be hard to deny that their was a Greek conqueror in the 4th century BC that suddenly disseminated Hellenic culture from Egypt to the Indus, and left behind numerous cities named "Alexandria" Yet no Historian out there says that the extraordinary events surrounding his life are true. He is remembered and revered even in modern military academys as being the most 'succesful' strategist and general in history. These claims are verifiable; not only the people but the situations. It requires no leap of faith to accept the probability that he existed We can only establish some historicity to Alexander because we have evidence that occurred during their life times. Yet even with these evidences, historians have become wary of after-the-fact stories of many of these historians. So does the evidence of Jesus matches up to Alexander? What crock? http://www.theskepticalreview.com/JFTBobbyEtTu.html Turkel apparently thinks that he can appeal to "oral cultural" as a catch-all explanation of any identifiable problem in the Bible, but he cannot explain how his skipped-generation theory could be explained by an "oral culture" that needed genealogies to be abbreviated when some genealogical sections of the Bible ran on and on and on and on and.... Here is just one chapter of genealogical data that extended through eight more chapters. 1 Chronicles 1:1 Adam, Seth, Enosh; 2 Kenan, Mahalalel, Jared; 3 Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech; 4 Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. 5 The descendants of Japheth: Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. 6 The descendants of Gomer: Ashkenaz, Diphath, and Togarmah. 7 The descendants of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Rodanim. 8 The descendants of Ham: Cush, Egypt, Put, and Canaan. 9 The descendants of Cush: Seba, Havilah, Sabta, Raama, and Sabteca. The descendants of Raamah: Sheba and Dedan. 10 Cush became the father of Nimrod; he was the first to be a mighty one on the earth. 11 Egypt became the father of Ludim, Anamim, Lehabim, Naphtuhim, 12 Pathrusim, Casluhim, and Caphtorim, from whom the Philistines come. 13 Canaan became the father of Sidon his firstborn, and Heth, 14 and the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgashites, 15 the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites, 16 the Arvadites, the Zemarites, and the Hamathites. 17 The descendants of Shem: Elam, Asshur, Arpachshad, Lud, Aram, Uz, Hul, Gether, and Meshech. 18 Arpachshad became the father of Shelah; and Shelah became the father of Eber. 19 To Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg (for in his days the earth was divided), and the name of his brother Joktan. 20 Joktan became the father of Almodad, Sheleph, Hazarmaveth, Jerah, 21 Hadoram, Uzal, Diklah, 22 Ebal, Abimael, Sheba, 23 Ophir, Havilah, and Jobab; all these were the descendants of Joktan. 24 Shem, Arpachshad, Shelah; 25 Eber, Peleg, Reu; 26 Serug, Nahor, Terah; 27 Abram, that is, Abraham. 28 The sons of Abraham: Isaac and Ishmael. 29 These are their genealogies: the firstborn of Ishmael, Nebaioth; and Kedar, Adbeel, Mibsam, 30 Mishma, Dumah, Massa, Hadad, Tema, 31 Jetur, Naphish, and Kedemah. These are the sons of Ishmael. 32 The sons of Keturah, Abraham's concubine: she bore Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, and Shuah. The sons of Jokshan: Sheba and Dedan. 33 The sons of Midian: Ephah, Epher, Hanoch, Abida, and Eldaah. All these were the descendants of Keturah. 34 Abraham became the father of Isaac. The sons of Isaac: Esau and Israel. 35 The sons of Esau: Eliphaz, Reuel, Jeush, Jalam, and Korah. 36 The sons of Eliphaz: Teman, Omar, Zephi, Gatam, Kenaz, Timna, and Amalek. 37 The sons of Reuel: Nahath, Zerah, Shammah, and Mizzah. 38 The sons of Seir: Lotan, Shobal, Zibeon, Anah, Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan. 39 The sons of Lotan: Hori and Homam; and Lotan's sister was Timna. 40 The sons of Shobal: Alian, Manahath, Ebal, Shephi, and Onam. The sons of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah. 41 The sons of Anah: Dishon. The sons of Dishon: Hamran, Eshban, Ithran, and Cheran. 42 The sons of Ezer: Bilhan, Zaavan, and Jaakan. The sons of Dishan: Uz and Aran. 43 These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the Israelites: Bela son of Beor, whose city was called Dinhabah. 44 When Bela died, Jobab son of Zerah of Bozrah succeeded him. 45 When Jobab died, Husham of the land of the Temanites succeeded him. 46 When Husham died, Hadad son of Bedad, who defeated Midian in the country of Moab, succeeded him; and the name of his city was Avith. 47 When Hadad died, Samlah of Masrekah succeeded him. 48 When Samlah died, Shaul of Rehoboth on the Euphrates succeeded him. 49 When Shaul died, Baal-hanan son of Achbor succeeded him. 50 When Baal-hanan died, Hadad succeeded him; the name of his city was Pai, and his wife's name Mehetabel daughter of Matred, daughter of Me-zahab. 51 And Hadad died. The clans of Edom were: clans Timna, Aliah, Jetheth, 52 Oholibamah, Elah, Pinon, 53 Kenaz, Teman, Mibzar, 54 Magdiel, and Iram; these are the clans of Edom. This genealogical information went on for eight more chapters, so I would be interested to see Turkel explain how the arrangement of all this genealogical data, which merely parroted some of the same information reported in Genesis and Exodus, aided memorization in the "oral culture" that Turkel used as an explanation for why some writers skipped generations. Furthermore, he needs to explain how his "oral-cultural" explanation is compatible with the chronicler's claim that he had "reckoned all Israel by genealogies" (1 Chron. 9:1) and that those genealogies had been previously "written in the book of the kings of Israel." That doesn't sound as if the chronicler had at all intended to aim his genealogical information at an oral culture but at one that kept written records that could be consulted. ..... I just showed that the chronicler, whose genealogies were among the most extensive and detailed in the Bible, clearly indicated that he was addressing his genealogical data to a literate culture, which could read the information both in his book and a previously written one called "the book of the kings of Israel." Furthermore, I showed here and here that biblical societies were far more literate than Turkel would have his readers believe. Turkel had obviously overstated the need for oral transmission of data and had no doubt done so because he was--and still is--desperately trying to find a way to "explain" discrepancies in the Bible. .... I assume everyone noticed that Turkel did nothing more here than make an unsupported assertion. I have shown above that all of Turkel's talk about memory aids in "oral cultures" is inapplicable to written works, because they were obviously directed to those who were literate. Furthermore, I showed above that the chronicler's genealogies were long and tedious and that he had appealed to "the book of the kings of Israel" (9:1) as the source of his information. Such an appeal certainly suggests that the chronicler was directing his genealogical information to those who could read. Kindly point us to historical or biblical evidence that all the apostles died for their beliefs name one non-christian documentation that says the disciples were martyred.
  12. Or like the evidence suggest, the Gospels were a outcome of the Oral Tradition from the early church, which is why they contradict each other. Ever played chinese whispers. That's exactly what had happened to the jesus story. http://www.scripturecatholic.com/oral_tradition.html But then from your point of view, these authors were not writing their own opinion were they?They were writing under the guidance of the HS. So why do 2 HS filled person contradict each other?
  13. Unless off course if you make a promise to Yahweh to sacrifice the first living thing you see, and if it happens to be human, then you must. Judges 11:30-39 30 And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD : "If you give the Ammonites into my hands, 31 whatever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in triumph from the Ammonites will be the LORD's, and I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering." 32 Then Jephthah went over to fight the Ammonites, and the LORD gave them into his hands. 33 He devastated twenty towns from Aroer to the vicinity of Minnith, as far as Abel Keramim. Thus Israel subdued Ammon. 34 When Jephthah returned to his home in Mizpah, who should come out to meet him but his daughter, dancing to the sound of tambourines! She was an only child. Except for her he had neither son nor daughter. 35 When he saw her, he tore his clothes and cried, "Oh! My daughter! You have made me miserable and wretched, because I have made a vow to the LORD that I cannot break." 36 "My father," she replied, "you have given your word to the LORD. Do to me just as you promised, now that the LORD has avenged you of your enemies, the Ammonites. 37 But grant me this one request," she said. "Give me two months to roam the hills and weep with my friends, because I will never marry." 38 "You may go," he said. And he let her go for two months. She and the girls went into the hills and wept because she would never marry. 39 After the two months, she returned to her father and he did to her as he had vowed. And she was a virgin. That was interesting wasn't it? so God's absolute moral about not sacrificing humans take a back seat if you have to fulfill a promise to God.( Deut 12:31, 2 Kings 16:3;Ex 34:15, Lev 20:2, Deut 18:12, Jer 7:31 Lev 21:11) So you are saying your God is not into Human Sacrifices and now you are saying Jesus, the man was a valid sacrfice? So now is Jesus a animal? Please tell me how how did Jesus fulfill the Lev 4 as requirement of valid sin sacrifice Designing A Human Sacrifice Called "Jesus" Another problem found with Christian claims concerning the sacrifice of Jesus involves the nature of a sin sacrifice. There are different sin atonement rituals for various types of sin and Jesus fulfills none of them. Did the sacrifice of Jesus comply with God's holy law regarding a sin sacrifice where an animal is killed? Jesus stated that he came to fulfill, or make full the law of God(Matt 5:17-20). If this is true, then the sacrifice of Jesus must conform with the law of God, which he was living under as a Jew. According to the law of God(Lev 4), a valid sin sacrifice contains the following elements. * The animal must be a designated animal type, approved of for sacrifice by Yahweh. * The animal must be physically unblemished. * The sacrifice must be ritualized by a Levitical priest. * The sacrifice is to die of blood loss. * The sacrifice occurs at the officially designated place, the Tent of Meeting/Temple. * The blood is poured out/sprinkled on the altar. The human sacrifice of Jesus did not comply with any of these regulations and Jesus scores a perfect 0 out of 6 concerning these listed requirements. Particularly noteworthy is that Jesus was allegedly scourged and beaten(Matt 27:26-30). Being physically injured is reason alone for disqualification as a sacrifice in the sin atonement ritual. Lev 22:20,24 But whatsoever hath a blemish, that shall ye not offer: for it shall not be acceptable for you. Ye shall not offer unto the LORD that which is bruised, or crushed, or broken, or cut; neither shall ye make any offering thereof in your land. No Levitical priest would have considered Jesus a valid sacrifice after he had be scourged and beaten.
  14. Hey kuro, How about posting this in the a christian and a atheist forum A great topic indeed Skeptic
  15. Hey Tropical Check out the following article http://exchristian.net/exchristian/2005/11...n-christian.php This is written for christians who are struggling in their faith. I found the advice quite frank and very down to earth Check it out Skeptic
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.