Disprove The Bible, Not Modern Christianity

[rayskidude]

Jesus, who was supposedly the son of the Christian God spoke of Noah and the flood. The flood, by Biblical chronology, would have occurred around 2300 BCE. There are existing geological features and man-made structures on earth that show no signs of erosion that a flood of that magnitude would have caused (see Barringer crater and Egyptian pyramids). Quite simply, Jesus was only going by what he knew and had no supernatural powers lest he would have known it didn't happen.

 

Jesus - as God the Son who took on human flesh - is not mistaken. And where did you get 2300BCE for the Flood? What I've seen in Biblical chronology puts Abraham's birth around 2150BC, and the Flood around 5000BC. I think your chronology is way way off. And BTW, the pyramids were probably built around 3100BC.

[rayskidude]

 

rayskidude' date='14 October 2009 - 11:34 PM' timestamp='1255577698' post='494526']

Truth (and esp God's truth) cannot be obliterated or defeated. God's word & people have been suppressed, oppressed, persecuted, martyred, etc >> but the Bible and Bible believers are all over this planet.

 

what is 'god's' truth and who are 'god's' people?

 

God's truth re: religion is the Bible; God's people are all those throughout history who have believed in and lived for the God of the Bible.

[bdp]

 

rayskidude' date='14 October 2009 - 11:34 PM' timestamp='1255577698' post='494526']

Truth (and esp God's truth) cannot be obliterated or defeated. God's word & people have been suppressed, oppressed, persecuted, martyred, etc >> but the Bible and Bible believers are all over this planet.

 

what is 'god's' truth and who are 'god's' people?

 

God's truth re: religion is the Bible; God's people are all those throughout history who have believed in and lived for the God of the Bible.

 

...yeah...

[Hungrydingo]

I skipped over most posts save the original in this thread. But what did in the bible for me was the blatant inconsistencies it contains. For example, god is described as omnipotent, he even knows the the number of hairs on your head according to jesus. However there are many instances in the bible where does not appear as omnipotent. Questions I always had and never got answer to were Why did god send angels to scout Sodom and Gemorrah? Wouldn't he already know how many good people worth saving were in the city? Why did god have to ask Abraham to sacrifice Isaac and wait days before stopping him? Wouldn't he already know whether or not Abraham would sacrifice him and thus not need to ask him to do so? Why did god get angry when Adam and Eve ate from the forbidden tree? Shouldn't he have know already they were going to do so? So why bother with Eden at all? Why create a tree just to tell people not to eat from it and then create creatures such as the serpent who are capable of tempting your other creations yet get angry when they cave? That's just skimming the surface for me, most of the bible makes no sense, and when you read the bible it's quite clear god is reacting to what humans do, yet he is omnipotent and should know what's going to happen before it happens but gets angry anyways when things don't happen the way he commands.

[mwc]

I was shooting from the hip on the 35AD date, but I simply meant to say that Truth (and esp God's truth) cannot be obliterated or defeated. God's word & people have been suppressed, oppressed, persecuted, martyred, etc >> but the Bible and Bible believers are all over this planet. You cannot say the same for Marcion or any other heretic. And whether the Bibke or Josephus has the more trusted history & chronology >> I belive the Bible has much better attestation thru manuscript evidence. No contest. Josephus = good, Bible = best.

 

Generally, when a heretic dies, so does his movement die soon afterwards. Thus my question:

 

Where are the Marcionites today?

What a stupid line of reasoning.

 

The Egyptian religion was around for about 5000 years which easily bests Judaism/xianity combined. If this same question were asked while it was around it would seem to be quite clever, as I'm sure you think you're being now, but as we know now the religion is really nowhere to be found. It's pretty much long since dead. So why don't we all wait another two or three thousand years and see if this same question is still as clever as it seems today? I doubt it will be.

 

After Marcion his movement lasted for quite some time. Hundreds of years. How about Joseph Smith and the Mormons? The Muslims? None of these "heretics" can be truly judged until their movements are totally dead. "Jesus" has long been proved a heretic since he only came for the Jews and they truly did reject him and so it is Saul/Paul that remains to be judged and, as I said above, given the time frame of some religions, he may succeed in besting them or he may fall short. We're not in a position to know.

 

Given your argument I would accept the Hula-hoop, the Frisbee, the Bell-bottom pant, the Pet rock, the Windows OS, the i<anything> and all the rest to be the best of the best simply because they were the most popular during a given period relative to their competition. Of course this is nonsense. Xianity falls squarely into this category however. It is, and has been for a very long time, the most popular in its field over the given time frame compared to its competition. Two thousand years ago no one expected this to come onto the scene as it did. And no one knows what might come onto the scene tomorrow and be the dominator in the field in two thousand years from now. I guess we should ask the Egyptians how it feels?

 

As for the rest, the reality of the situation is that in the Acts it is known that what is said is simply not so. It is out of order. It is wrong. The Acts of the Apostles is simply wrong.

 

Whatever else you had to say is beside the point. It makes no difference that people made more copies of the bible and that more scraps have been found in garbage heaps, book bindings and whatnot (basically in the trash). It makes no difference other than it provides copy after copy of Acts to demonstrate that it was wrong. "God" got it wrong when it guided the author of Acts. Oops.

 

This has no bearing on why Titus is "better" than Marcion.

 

Are you sure about that? Is this just based on strictly logical argument? Would it hold up to common sense and normal, everyday experience?

Yep. None of this has any bearing on whether Titus is "better" than Marcion.

 

mwc

[oddbird1963]

 

Jesus - as God the Son who took on human flesh - is not mistaken. And where did you get 2300BCE for the Flood? What I've seen in Biblical chronology puts Abraham's birth around 2150BC, and the Flood around 5000BC. I think your chronology is way way off. And BTW, the pyramids were probably built around 3100BC.

 

 

5000BC for the flood? You mean the world-wide flood for which there is no evidence? Nice.

 

I guess it makes you feel better to merely assert that "Jesus . . . is not mistaken." Here's an assertion, better supported to than you assertion: Your Jesus, like the flood you believe in is a myth. It's sad that you sacrifice your intellectual honesty and integrity to maintain a collection of obvious myths. But, I can't be too harsh about it. I, after all, suffered obliviously under such delusions for years.

[Guest]

 

Jesus - as God the Son who took on human flesh - is not mistaken. And where did you get 2300BCE for the Flood? What I've seen in Biblical chronology puts Abraham's birth around 2150BC, and the Flood around 5000BC. I think your chronology is way way off. And BTW, the pyramids were probably built around 3100BC.

 

Didn't that Bishop Usher guy put the creation of the world on October 14, 4004 B.C.E.? How could the flood have happened before the world was created?

[Neon Genesis]

 

 

Generally, when a heretic dies, so does his movement die soon afterwards. Thus my question:

 

Where are the Marcionites today?

 

 

So, why is Islam still around today? Muhammed is considered a heretic and false prophet by bible-believing Christians, so why are there still Muslims?

[Ouroboros]

And Mormons, Jehova's Witnesses, ...

 

Or Scientology. Hubbard is dead, and yet the church moves on.

[rayskidude]

rayskidude' date='14 October 2009 - 10:46 PM' timestamp='1255578388' post='494529']

Jesus - as God the Son who took on human flesh - is not mistaken. And where did you get 2300BCE for the Flood? What I've seen in Biblical chronology puts Abraham's birth around 2150BC, and the Flood around 5000BC. I think your chronology is way way off. And BTW, the pyramids were probably built around 3100BC.

 

Didn't that Bishop Usher guy put the creation of the world on October 14, 4004 B.C.E.? How could the flood have happened before the world was created?

 

Whoever said that Bishop Ussher was the final authority on Bibliocal chronology? As we study earth history, we are always uncovering greater understandings. SO the latest conservative evangelical data I've seen says about 5000BC for the Flood.

 

And there is ample scientific evidence for catatrophism in geology, which is why many geologists have moved away from a strict uniformitarianism to explain the Earth's topography and geology.

 

I recommend you read The New Creationism, written by Paul Garner, British scientist & researcher. He presents some of the latest data and theories re: science as presented from a Biblical position. I think you'd find it interesting to view the data from another standpoint to what you have seen up until now.

[Neon Genesis]

 

 

Whoever said that Bishop Ussher was the final authority on Bibliocal chronology? As we study earth history, we are always uncovering greater understandings. SO the latest conservative evangelical data I've seen says about 5000BC for the Flood.

 

What data? Counting the number of names in biblical genealogies? Are you serious or just a Poe?

[Guest]

rayskidude' date='14 October 2009 - 10:46 PM' timestamp='1255578388' post='494529']

Jesus - as God the Son who took on human flesh - is not mistaken. And where did you get 2300BCE for the Flood? What I've seen in Biblical chronology puts Abraham's birth around 2150BC, and the Flood around 5000BC. I think your chronology is way way off. And BTW, the pyramids were probably built around 3100BC.

 

Didn't that Bishop Usher guy put the creation of the world on October 14, 4004 B.C.E.? How could the flood have happened before the world was created?

 

Whoever said that Bishop Ussher was the final authority on Bibliocal chronology? As we study earth history, we are always uncovering greater understandings. SO the latest conservative evangelical data I've seen says about 5000BC for the Flood.

 

And there is ample scientific evidence for catatrophism in geology, which is why many geologists have moved away from a strict uniformitarianism to explain the Earth's topography and geology.

 

I recommend you read The New Creationism, written by Paul Garner, British scientist & researcher. He presents some of the latest data and theories re: science as presented from a Biblical position. I think you'd find it interesting to view the data from another standpoint to what you have seen up until now.

[rayskidude]

rayskidude' date='17 October 2009 - 12:41 PM' timestamp='1255797707' post='495323']

Whoever said that Bishop Ussher was the final authority on Bibliocal chronology? As we study earth history, we are always uncovering greater understandings. SO the latest conservative evangelical data I've seen says about 5000BC for the Flood.

 

What data? Counting the number of names in biblical genealogies? Are you serious or just a Poe?

 

Who said I was counting genealogies? I never stated that - and we know that genealogies do not present each & every generation. I believe Bishop Ussher derived his chronology from a strict adherence to genealogies to arrive at 4004 BC for Creation. As you can see, I stated 5000BC for the Flood.

[rayskidude]

The Egyptian religion was around for about 5000 years which easily bests Judaism/xianity combined.

 

Say, where are these ancient Egyptians writings which present a strict chronology that can be thoroughly trusted? Are we confident that we know what was in the original Egyptian writings? Do we know for certain they weren't altered by subsequent generations of Egyptian copyists who wanted to embellish Egyptian tradition?

 

But seriously, I've seen where some scholars now believe the Egyptians were off by several centuries in their time count.

 

After Marcion his movement lasted for quite some time. Hundreds of years. How about Joseph Smith and the Mormons? The Muslims? None of these "heretics" can be truly judged until their movements are totally dead.

 

Wow - hundreds of years - I'm impressed. Mormons & JWs = about 175 years. And Scientology - decades, for goodness sake!!

 

But the Biblical faith with it's strong Messianic theme has been around for more than 5,000 years, with Christianity in the last 2,000 of those years; and perseverance through time and persecution is just one of the data points to consider re: religious veracity. How about the truth of what they actually taught & wrote - prophecies they made which were fulfilled, good works they & their followers engaged in and performed well - to the praise of even their opponents? Willingness to die for their faith rather than recant under threats? (And before you mention the Islamic jihadists - I urge you to study the Islamic doctrines of Taqiyya & Kitman - in which Muhammad himself allowed Muslims to lie when threatened for the faith.)

[Neon Genesis]

How does the length of how long Christianity has lasted prove it's claims are true? And what data are you using to determine the age of the Earth?

[rayskidude]

Questions I always had and never got answer to were Why did god send angels to scout Sodom and Gemorrah? Wouldn't he already know how many good people worth saving were in the city?

 

Where did you ever get the idea that God sent angels to scout S&G to determine how many righteous people were there? God sent His angels to deliver Lot and his family from the just condemnation that was coming to punish their exceeding wickedness.

 

Gen 19:12 Then the men said to Lot, "Have you anyone else here? Sons-in-law, sons, daughters, or anyone you have in the city, bring them out of the place.

Gen 19:13 For we are about to destroy this place, because the outcry against its people has become great before the LORD, and the LORD has sent us to destroy it."

Gen 19:14 So Lot went out and said to his sons-in-law, who were to marry his daughters, "Up! Get out of this place, for the LORD is about to destroy the city." But he seemed to his sons-in-law to be jesting.

Gen 19:15 As morning dawned, the angels urged Lot, saying, "Up! Take your wife and your two daughters who are here, lest you be swept away in the punishment of the city."

Gen 19:16 But he lingered. So the men seized him and his wife and his two daughters by the hand, the LORD being merciful to him, and they brought him out and set him outside the city.

Gen 19:17 And as they brought them out, one said, "Escape for your life. Do not look back or stop anywhere in the valley. Escape to the hills, lest you be swept away."

 

Why did god have to ask Abraham to sacrifice Isaac and wait days before stopping him? Wouldn't he already know whether or not Abraham would sacrifice him and thus not need to ask him to do so?

 

What makes you think God didn't know what Abraham would do? But God was giving Abraham an opportuinity to grow in his faith and God was showing Abraham the great strength of his own faith in God. In this testing, Abraham concluded that God would raise Isaac from the dead - certainly Abraham achieved great faith!!

 

Heb 11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son,

Heb 11:18 of whom it was said, "Through Isaac shall your offspring be named."

Heb 11:19 He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead, from which, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back.

 

Why did god get angry when Adam and Eve ate from the forbidden tree? Shouldn't he have know already they were going to do so? So why bother with Eden at all? Why create a tree just to tell people not to eat from it and then create creatures such as the serpent who are capable of tempting your other creations yet get angry when they cave?

 

Why tell your children to clean their room when you know they won't do it - and you'll just end up giving them some form of punishment?

Because obedience to parents is righteous, disobedience is morally wrong and deserves punishment. We learn these essential things of life through our experience in the process of growth & maturation.

 

Why take our children to the store with us - when we know they'll be tempted to ask/demand many things they see? Or why take them to a neighbor's house to play - when we know they'll want to play with the neighbor kid's toys when that kid already is playing with the toy - and then they're all crying? To teach them playing together, patience, personal ownership, asking permission to use other peoples' stuff, etc. It's called growth, maturing, learning, getting along, etc.

 

Heb 12:3 Consider him who endured from sinners such hostility against himself, so that you may not grow weary or fainthearted.

Heb 12:4 In your struggle against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood.

Heb 12:5 And have you forgotten the exhortation that addresses you as sons? "My son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord, nor be weary when reproved by him.

Heb 12:6 For the Lord disciplines the one he loves, and chastises every son whom he receives."

Heb 12:7 It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons. For what son is there whom his father does not discipline?

Heb 12:8 If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons.

Heb 12:9 Besides this, we have had earthly fathers who disciplined us and we respected them. Shall we not much more be subject to the Father of spirits and live?

Heb 12:10 For they disciplined us for a short time as it seemed best to them, but he disciplines us for our good, that we may share his holiness.

Heb 12:11 For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant, but later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.

 

Heb 5:7 In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence.

Heb 5:8 Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered.

Heb 5:9 And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him,

 

 

That's just skimming the surface for me, most of the bible makes no sense, and when you read the bible it's quite clear god is reacting to what humans do, yet he is omnipotent and should know what's going to happen before it happens but gets angry anyways when things don't happen the way he commands.

 

I conclude that all you ever did was skim the Bible - you're understanding is superficial at best. You never studied and sought out the answers by a diligent reading, study, & meditiation. If it wasn't blatantly obvious from your 'skim' - you assumed there was no answer - and yet you weren't willing to do the hard work of study.

 

And please, God does not 'react' to humans - God sets forth His holy & righteous standards - and He promises forgiveness for repentance & faith. So when people turn from their sin, then God relents of His planned judgment against their sin and He delivers blessing - as He had already promised. The people responded to God's teaching and promises, God fulfilled His word. See the book of Jonah - the humans reacted to God.

[bdp]

...I am so glad I freed my mind of this idiocy...

[mwc]

The Egyptian religion was around for about 5000 years which easily bests Judaism/xianity combined.

 

Say, where are these ancient Egyptians writings which present a strict chronology that can be thoroughly trusted? Are we confident that we know what was in the original Egyptian writings? Do we know for certain they weren't altered by subsequent generations of Egyptian copyists who wanted to embellish Egyptian tradition?

 

But seriously, I've seen where some scholars now believe the Egyptians were off by several centuries in their time count.

Wow. Whole centuries? Over thousands of years? Not bad.

 

Except it would be us looking back on them that would be off. The Egyptians would know exactly when it was.

 

And of course none of this matters since we're not trying to establish an Egyptian chronology other than their religion existed for about 5000 years.

 

Wow - hundreds of years - I'm impressed. Mormons & JWs = about 175 years. And Scientology - decades, for goodness sake!!

 

But the Biblical faith with it's strong Messianic theme has been around for more than 5,000 years, with Christianity in the last 2,000 of those years; and perseverance through time and persecution is just one of the data points to consider re: religious veracity. How about the truth of what they actually taught & wrote - prophecies they made which were fulfilled, good works they & their followers engaged in and performed well - to the praise of even their opponents? Willingness to die for their faith rather than recant under threats? (And before you mention the Islamic jihadists - I urge you to study the Islamic doctrines of Taqiyya & Kitman - in which Muhammad himself allowed Muslims to lie when threatened for the faith.)

Yeah, 5000 years *cough*bullshit*cough*. I know the church fathers bought into that but even the Jews didn't have the idea of the messiah until Babylon so the idea itself goes back to around 500 B.C.E. (not a precise date). If we go with the church fathers everything is a "type of christ," or related to the whole ordeal in some way, from masts on ships to pretty much everyone in the bible they could idolize. There used to be a commercial for Tootsie Rolls that included a little song that included the line "The world looks mighty good to me 'cuz Tootsie Rolls are all I see, Whatever it is I think I see becomes a Tootsie Roll to me." Now, I think the church fathers suffered from this same bit of "Tootsie Roll" delusion and you may have contracted it yourself.

 

As for being a martyr I have no desire to find that praise worthy. It originated in the Jewish culture a century or two BCE and is attested in books like 1/2 Maccabees (I'm too lazy to look right now) among others. That the xian culture also were martyrs is no leap of logic. To try to distance this from Islam is simply to put a smiley face on something you find to be honorable.

 

mwc

[Guest]

 

Say, where are these ancient Egyptians writings which present a strict chronology that can be thoroughly trusted? Are we confident that we know what was in the original Egyptian writings? Do we know for certain they weren't altered by subsequent generations of Egyptian copyists who wanted to embellish Egyptian tradition?

 

 

You do realize that every word of that sentence can and does apply to the xtian bible as well?

 

[NotBlinded]

Why tell your children to clean their room when you know they won't do it - and you'll just end up giving them some form of punishment?

Because obedience to parents is righteous, disobedience is morally wrong and deserves punishment. We learn these essential things of life through our experience in the process of growth & maturation.

You live in some fluffy, fantasy world ray.

 

Yes, the little girl better do what daddy wants her to do because disobedience to her parent is morally wrong and deserves punishment. You do realize that many children are hurt because of this horrible, immoral "commandment" don't you?

 

"Do it or I'll hurt you! We know what's best for you."

 

Morals are subjective and relative and for a damn good reason!

 

It's sick...

[Ouroboros]

It's sick...

That's right.

 

When my children disobey me, it's not about morality, but just about them testing the ground of making their own decisions. Morality is connected to what they do when they disobey. If I tell them to not hurt someone and they still do then the question of morality is relating to them hurting the other person, not them disobeying my commands.

 

If I direct my youngest daughter to pay attention to where she puts her feet--she just tripped again, second time this week, because she doesn't look where she is going--and she disobey this instruction, she's not evil, nor is she immoral, she's just learning to listen to good advice, or she'll just suffer the consequences of making dumb mistakes.

 

Religious morality is so twisted and corrupt, it's no wonder our world is going down the drain, faster by the minute.

[NotBlinded]

When my children disobey me, it's not about morality, but just about them testing the ground of making their own decisions. Morality is connected to what they do when they disobey. If I tell them to not hurt someone and they still do then the question of morality is relating to them hurting the other person, not them disobeying my commands.

 

Religious morality is so twisted and corrupt, it's no wonder our world is going down the drain, faster by the minute.

It is indeed wonderful to know that there are children living with parents like you Hans.

 

Religious morals are more about power and control than they are actual morality. They don't know real morality because their understanding is issued as a command and morals don't work that way. Subservience and duress does not morality make...

[Ouroboros]

It is indeed wonderful to know that there are children living with parents like you Hans.

Thank you.

 

I'm lucky. No one of my kids does drugs. No criminal activity. No gangs affiliation. They live at home (even my 19 yo and 21 yo). They help each other, and care for each other (even though they're loud and very passionate when they discuss). And it came from teaching them responsibility for their own decisions and actions. Not teaching them to obey Master Hans at every moment of life. They have to know how to fly. I can't be there every second and tell them when to flap their wings, they have to do it on their own.

 

Religious morals are more about power and control than they are actual morality. They don't know real morality because their understanding is issued as a command and morals don't work that way. Subservience and duress does not morality make...

Very true.

 

I wonder, I don't think the word "morality" is in the Bible at all. Does anyone know? It only talks about "sin," which I can see is the concept of disobedience to God. Perhaps the religious people keep on mixing up those two concepts? I can see "sin" as the right/wrong relationship with God, while morality is obviously the right/wrong relationship between people.

[mwc]

If I direct my youngest daughter to pay attention to where she puts her feet--she just tripped again, second time this week, because she doesn't look where she is going--and she disobey this instruction, she's not evil, nor is she immoral, she's just learning to listen to good advice, or she'll just suffer the consequences of making dumb mistakes.

I don't know. That sounds pretty evil.

 

mwc

[NotBlinded]

I wonder, I don't think the word "morality" is in the Bible at all. Does anyone know? It only talks about "sin," which I can see is the concept of disobedience to God. Perhaps the religious people keep on mixing up those two concepts? I can see "sin" as the right/wrong relationship with God, while morality is obviously the right/wrong relationship between people.

This is what Blue Bible says:

 

"Sorry! The word moral doesn't occur in the KJV."

 

"Sorry! The word morality doesn't occur in the KJV."

 

 

It just hit me funny with the exclamation and all.

 

They would probably say something like acting bad towards other people is wrong because God's will is that we don't, so to do so is going against the will of God so it's sinful. See? It doesn't matter how the person we wronged against feels, it matters how bad we were in God's eyes. (I really have to stop this, it makes me sick!)