Disprove God

[Checkmate]

I once asked Paul Manata if he believed that one line in Psalms that says atheists can do no good. He said yes.  I see now that I should have asked him about this verse.  I would love to see the looks on the faces of guys like Paul, Jason Gastrich, Jimmy Swaggart, and Peter Poppoff if anyone actually challenged them to drink poison to show that it does them no harm.

I doubt they'd take the challenge. I remember a story of how Billy Graham was once challenged by someone of another religion to a "healing duel". Billy "gracefully" declined, citing that it was not "proper" to test God.

 

In other words Billy KNEW nothing would happen. Just like Benny Hinn will only perform on stage and studiously avoids intensive care wards and morgues.

[dario]

Disproving Jesus is a wonderful starting point, for without him there is no Christianity.  Deuteronomy tells HOW TO IDENTIFY A FALSE PROPHET...

 

Deuteronomy 18

21 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

Mark 16

17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."

 

And that's just one thing, I can show plenty more, but one is all that is needed to declare jesus false.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

 

I'm very familiar with these verses, not because I've read them in the bible a lot, but because they are often quoted in here. Didn't the apostles do the exact things Jesus said they would do in Mark 16? Just because we don't see it happening all of the time doesn't mean it never happened. Acts has plenty of verses telling about how the apostles were doing such things. It happened and Jesus predicted it would happen. So far your "one thing" did not declare Jesus false. I would like you to show me the "plenty more" that you have.

[Eponymic]

I'm very familiar with these verses, not because I've read them in the bible a lot, but because they are often quoted in here.  Didn't the apostles do the exact things Jesus said they would do in Mark 16?  Just because we don't see it happening all of the time doesn't mean it never happened.  Acts has plenty of verses telling about how the apostles were doing such things.  It happened and Jesus predicted it would happen.  So far your "one thing" did not declare Jesus false.  I would like you to show me the "plenty more" that you have.

 

Just like Zeus did all the things he said he did, like turning people into animals & trees.

 

And excuse me little one. I just gave you a good bit of resources. Don't ask for the easy way out man. It don't work that way.

[Eponymic]

Sorry if I'm getting a bit plucky with you Dario,

but I hate it when Christians are given something substantial to deal with. Then they totally ignore it and deal with the easy or emotional arguments.

[crazy-tiger]

An analogy I read once said, " that scenario is about as likely as a tornado whirling through a junkyard and accidentally assembling a fully functional Boeing 747."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ah... the old analogy from Sir Fred Hoyle.

 

The same Fred Hoyle who believed in the Creationists idea of what Abiogenesis is.

 

Maybe you've seen this before, maybe you haven't. Either way, I'm still going to show it to you.

 

 

Yes, the analogy is right in that the Creationists idea "is about as likely as a tornado whirling through a junkyard and accidentally assembling a fully functional Boeing 747." Unfortunately, it bears no resemblence to what Abiogenesis really is...

 

The analogy argues AGAINST the Creationists idea and SUPPORTS Abiogenesis. (which also means it argues against ID... Somehow, I don't think Sir Fred Hoyle realised his mistake)

 

I would like to apologize for any confusion I may have caused when I was talking about evolution and the universe.  I am not educated in either of these areas and so I will no longer argue for them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Believe me, that just gained my respect...

 

ANY Christian, in fact any person, who can admit to the lack of knowledge in a subject AND refrain from arguing about them gains a lot of respect in my eyes.

 

[JeffXL]

 

Thank you for this excellent chart, crazy-tiger! It will be used to instruct the ignorant that I may have to deal with.

 

Where did they come up with that embarrassingly idiotic 747 story?

[dario]

Dario wrote:

I'm very familiar with these verses, not because I've read them in the bible a lot, but because they are often quoted in here. Didn't the apostles do the exact things Jesus said they would do in Mark 16? Just because we don't see it happening all of the time doesn't mean it never happened. Acts has plenty of verses telling about how the apostles were doing such things. It happened and Jesus predicted it would happen.

Excuses, excuses. LOL... And they should be quoted here, so whats your point? What the apostles due is a moot point, Jesus doesn't put a time frame for the great commission, nor is it limited to the apostles. The signs are for ALL believers. No wiggle room.

 

 

 

 

 

My point, is that Jesus predicted it would happen and it did.

 

Deuteronomy 18

21 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

 

I believe that what Jesus predicted, did come true and did take place when the apostles started doing these things. I cannot believe that you are arguing against what is clearly in front of your face. How do we know that there aren't people who have done these exact things? I'm sure you know very well that when Jesus performed a miracle, he wanted it hushed up. Do you think then, that when a person performs a miracle they should broadcast it to the world? Don't give me excuses for why this does not work.

 

 

 

"Sorry if I'm getting a bit plucky with you Dario,

but I hate it when Christians are given something substantial to deal with. Then they totally ignore it and deal with the easy or emotional arguments. " -eponyic-

 

I read most of the verses you gave me that "contradict" each other and found out that most of the verses don't contradict each other, but rather complement each other. I promise you that I will go into further detail tomorrow. I'm going to bed.

[crazy-tiger]

Where did they come up with that embarrassingly idiotic 747 story?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This guy... Sir Fred Hoyle

 

 

He's the one who coined the term "Big Bang" despite being a believer in "steady state"... (the things you learn on the internet)

[Cerise]

And still...no definition of what exactly is meant by the word "God".

 

Once more, there is no point in beginning a debate in which the terms are not laid out. Give me something identifiably "god" and then I can argue on whether or not it is possible/probable for one to exist.

 

Otherwise, we might as well be arguing about whether or not one-horned snarkblacks or jabberwockys exist.

[Mr. Neil]

I believe that what Jesus predicted, did come true and did take place when the apostles started doing these things.  I cannot believe that you are arguing against what is clearly in front of your face.

The verse says that all of these things will accompany those who believe. Plain as day.

 

The question is, why are you limiting this to only the apostles?

 

 

How do we know that there aren't people who have done these exact things?  I'm sure you know very well that when Jesus performed a miracle, he wanted it hushed up.  Do you think then, that when a person performs a miracle they should broadcast it to the world?  Don't give me excuses for why this does not work.

Ironically, you're the one making excuses here. If your original explanation was that the apostles fulfilled the prophecy, then why are you now making excuses for all of the other believers who can allegedly do these things?

 

Better question... Can you do any of these things? Can you drink poison without getting hurt? Can you place your hands on the sick and make them well? If you're a believer, then you should be able to do these things.

 

Or can't you tell us because you have to keep it hushed?

 

 

I read most of the verses you gave me that "contradict" each other and found out that most of the verses don't contradict each other, but rather complement each other.  I promise you that I will go into further detail tomorrow.  I'm going to bed.

They complement each other?

 

Are you Jason Gastrich?

[JeffXL]

This guy... Sir Fred Hoyle

 

Damn! And it sounded like a creationist's ravings! Thanks!

[Asimov]

Damn! And it sounded like a creationist's ravings!  Thanks!

 

He was a Cretinist.

[white_raven23]

"Sorry if I'm getting a bit plucky with you Dario,

but I hate it when Christians are given something substantial to deal with. Then they totally ignore it and deal with the easy or emotional arguments. "  -eponyic-

 

I read most of the verses you gave me that "contradict" each other and found out that most of the verses don't contradict each other, but rather complement each other.  I promise you that I will go into further detail tomorrow.  I'm going to bed.

 

Strange, I don't see any direct verses Eponymic gave you. I do see web sites, and I see book references. To add to the book pile, I submit "Biblical Nonsense" by Jason Long.

 

And if you feel like skipping book references simply because there isn't easy access like the net....then here you go. This book appears in it's entirety on this guy's web page. I guess sharing the message was more important than making money off the book.

 

So here you go.

http://www.biblicalnonsense.com/

[white_raven23]

whoops,

 

I accidentally wrote my post on my roommates account.

[Eponymic]

whoops,

 

I accidentally wrote my post on my roommates account.

 

Here we go, now that I'm on my own account:

 

My point, is that Jesus predicted it would happen and it did. 

 

And my point is that you're using the Bible to defend the Bible. If you were to read even a portion of the the books, essays, treatises, and other documents that prove the Bible is not a historical, factual document in any way, then you would see that using Bible as your reference means squat.

 

If you are going to use the Bible as a factual, historical document, it has to be treated as such. You can't just randomly say 'this is fact and happened, and this is a parable or allegory so it didn't happen.' And if you look at the geographical, sociological, chronological errancies and do some research and also start seeing all the interpolations & plaguirisms the Bible employs, then you'll see its nothing but a large collection of what amounts to fairy tales or mythological tales.

 

 

I believe that what Jesus predicted, did come true and did take place when the apostles started doing these things.  I cannot believe that you are arguing against what is clearly in front of your face.  How do we know that there aren't people who have done these exact things?

 

Because there is no verifiable evidence for it. As state before, you're using a mythological book as your source for facts.

 

  I'm sure you know very well that when Jesus performed a miracle, he wanted it hushed up.  Do you think then, that when a person performs a miracle they should broadcast it to the world?  Don't give me excuses for why this does not work.

 

Show me where in the Bible Jesus says, 'I'm gonna perform this awesome miracle. But you shut the hell up about it! Don't you tell anyone! Because telling people how cool this is will only make them hate us' I don't remember ever saying he wanted to be modest regarding his miracles. Weren't they one of the tools he used to gain followers?

 

I read most of the verses you gave me that "contradict" each other and found out that most of the verses don't contradict each other, but rather complement each other.  I promise you that I will go into further detail tomorrow.  I'm going to bed.

 

Please do, eh.

[Eponymic]

Strange, I don't see any direct verses Eponymic gave you. I do see web sites, and I see book references. To add to the book pile, I submit "Biblical Nonsense" by Jason Long.

 

http://www.biblicalnonsense.com/

 

I believe he was referring to the link I gave him with a list of some biblical contradictions.

[dario]

I looked at the website, www.infidels.com, that you gave me, eponymic and here are a few that I found. There were a lot of verses so I'm not going to list them all.

 

Which first--beasts or man?GEN 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

GEN 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

GEN 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

GEN 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

 

I'm not sure which version of the bible these verses come out of, but the word, AND, that I have in bold, is actually NOW in my bible. This changes the whole meaning of the sentence around, don't you agree?

 

 

Who was at the Empty Tomb? Is it:

MAT 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

MAR 16:1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

 

JOH 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

 

 

Here we have 3 different accounts of who went to the empty tomb. Matthew only has 2 people going to the tomb, Mark has 3, and John has 1. In all 3 accounts, we have Mary Magdalene. Now wouldn't it be more suspicious if all 3 writers had written the same thing, even though they come from different perspectives? The fact is they complement each other rather than contradict. Just because one writer doesn't include all of the people that were at the tomb, doesn't mean they weren't there. For example, when you have 2 pens, you will always have 1 pen. When there is 2, there is always 1. Does that kind of make sense with what I am talking about? If not, I understand, I am not the best writer nor do I give good analogical examples.

 

 

Who is the father of Joseph?MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.

 

To avoid a long story(I can give you one if you wish), Heli is Joseph's father-in-law; Mary's father.

 

 

 

 

 

Whom did they see at the tomb?

MAT 28:2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.

MAT 28:3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:

MAT 28:4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.

MAT 28:5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.

MAR 16:5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.

 

LUK 24:4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:

 

JOH 20:12 And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.

 

 

I give the same reasoning for this one, that I gave to the other one concerning the tomb.

 

 

Here are the few, out of the many, that I tried to answer for you. Remember, which I know you will, these are just my interpretations of why these verses don't contradict each other. They may be right or they may be wrong, but would you admit if they were right?

[Eponymic]

I'm not sure which version of the bible these verses come out of, but the word, AND, that I have in bold, is actually NOW in my bible.  This changes the whole meaning of the sentence around, don't you agree?

 

That's part of the whole point. People will just miscellaneously change words to better fit the meanings to their liking. Yes, it changes the meaning, but shouldn't we be able to get an accurate book that doesn't need to be changed 1,000 times. There isn't any other historical document that has been rewritten, altered & changed like the Bible has.

 

 

Here we have 3 different accounts of who went to the empty tomb.  Matthew only has 2 people going to the tomb, Mark has 3, and John has 1.  In all 3 accounts, we have Mary Magdalene.  Now wouldn't it be more suspicious if all 3 writers had written the same thing, even though they come from different perspectives?  The fact is they complement each other rather than contradict.  Just because one writer doesn't include all of the people that were at the tomb, doesn't mean they weren't there.  For example, when you have 2 pens, you will always have 1 pen.  When there is 2, there is always 1.  Does that kind of make sense with what I am talking about?  If not, I understand, I am not the best writer nor do I give good analogical examples.

 

Granted, this is one of the weaker references on that page, so it could simply be something where the writers didn't account for the other people. But you'd think within the same book, that at least two of the 3 references would match up.

 

Whom did they see at the tomb?

I give the same reasoning for this one, that I gave to the other one concerning the tomb.

 

Dude, it's easy to say, okay, the only significant person was Mary M. in the other story. But it's pretty friggin significant if two angels come before you instead of just one. Kinda hard not to mentioned that other angel.

 

I mean, as an example, if you were writing a historical account about how you had dinner with the President and the Vice-President, would you really just write about the President without mentioning the Vice-President if he had an active part in the story. It's like witnessing two people saving someone's life and only talking about the 1 without even mentioning the other.

 

Here are the few, out of the many, that I tried to answer for you.  Remember, which I know you will, these are just my interpretations of why these verses don't contradict each other.  They may be right or they may be wrong, but would you admit if they were right?

 

Sure, I admit that the whole Father of Joseph thing could be explained away.

Though can you admit that you're making interpretations of what is supposed to be a historical record. I can't name one other historical tome that has anywhere near the errors in it that the Bible has. Can you?

 

And really, how many historical texts are debated over as to their accuracy like this? There are plenty of historical records from around that time that are accepted as being honest & accurate. Sure there are some that have interpolations, but those errancies certainly don't measure to the vast number of historical errors that are found in the Bible.

[Pariah]

Dario, I find that this page on the website than Eponymic linked for you is particularly revealing about the outrageous claims of the Bible. Maybe you could provide a short rebuttal to that page for us?

 

BTW, you still haven't answered (to satisfaction) why you, a believer, can not drink poison, etc. You have also ignored our requests to define what you believe about who God is.

[Eponymic]

Dario, I find that this page on the website than Eponymic linked for you is particularly revealing about the outrageous claims of the Bible. Maybe you could provide a short rebuttal to that page for us?

 

BTW, you still haven't answered (to satisfaction) why you, a believer, can not drink poison, etc. You have also ignored our requests to define what you believe about who God is.

 

I can drink poison.

 

I'm not gonna look too pretty afterwards, but I can drink it.

[Pariah]

I can drink poison.

 

I'm not gonna look too pretty afterwards, but I can drink it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

[Kryten]

Who is the father of Joseph?MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.

 

To avoid a long story(I can give you one if you wish), Heli is Joseph's father-in-law; Mary's father.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What? It says Joseph was the son of Heli-- not son-in-law. You are contorting an obvious error in order to make it fit into your predetermined set of beliefs. If God meant "son-in-law", but accidentally wrote "son", then he sucks at communicating. Are you saying that God sucks? He seems to be less almighty than I remember...

 

Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that God intends to send 90% of all humans ever born to eternal torture because they refused to accept the story of Jesus' resurrection-- which has four different versions, plus ZERO physical, secular, or historical evidence or witnesses??? What about the 500 zombies that roamed Jerusalem after He rose? Why is there NOTHING written about them? Was Jesus illiterate? Couldn't HE write??

This isn't like an auto accident with four different inatentive witnesses-- it's more like four short-story writers each embellishing the story of the previous writer.

The entire basis of your faith is as drifting sand-- shifting when blown by the winds of logic, reason, evidence, and truth.

[white_raven23]

And no to mention....why bother with the lineage of Joseph when MARY supposedly concieved through the spirit!

 

Talk about patriarchal chauvanism.......if anyone's lineage should be listed in this case, it's MARY'S.

 

But it's not. Nevermind her 9 months carrying a kid other people may have felt she deserved a stoning for (unwed whore). Her lineage remains irrelevant.

[Panther]

Dario,

 

Please tell us what brand of christianity that you follow.

 

Also, I believe the burden of proof is on you, not the other way around.

 

We can continue to go this other route....but.......

 

So far, I am seeing so much info. being given to you that you are admittingly not even researching.

Why not even take a peek?

 

You said earlier that nothing would shake your faith.....so my question to you is....

 

Are you more interested in trying to prove the bible god to us?

 

OR

 

Are you more interested in finding out for yourself what the truth is on the matter?

 

I'm not trying to be sarcastic with you in any way at all....but come on, let's be honest here so no one's time is wasted.

 

If you are TRULY seeking knowledge, then you have to open your mind to the possibility that you may be wrong.

Do you think that we were christians for a number of years and someone came along and said "you're being duped" and that we just simply believed them?

 

Of course not!! I can't even count how many hours and days and months that I have spent pouring over material.

 

Knowledge is a process. You can't just debunk a statement or two and think you have proven anything.

 

Like anything worth anything, this takes much time and it does require you to be brutally honest with yourself.

So far, I am feeling like you really don't want us to prove anything to you, you really want to prove something to us.

 

My friend, please think about all I have said.

 

It matters not to me either way if you believe or don't believe.......but do yourself a favor.....

Just take an unbiased look for once.....and go from there.

If you're not willing to at least honestly look at what we present, then why are we bothering?

 

If you could only realize how many christians come here on a consistent basis and try to "save us."

 

Please answer me one more thing.....will you take a look at our testimonies? There is a whole section dedicated to this and you will see first hand the reason why. It is very compelling, interesting and heartfelt.

 

I truly feel as if you will understand us a bit better after that point.

 

This was truly written in all sincerety....

[dario]

I apologize to the people who are waiting for certain responses from me, just understand that I'm getting a lot of information thrown at me. Please be patient in waiting for my responses.

 

I am a man who trusts in God. I trust that what the bible says is fact. I trust that there really was a man named Jesus, both because the bible says so and because other writings have proved it. I believe in what Jesus stood for and the things he commanded us to stand for. The facts way too heavily in favor of Jesus and the things he did, that I can't ignore them or try to explain them away. I have seen many attempts at trying to disprove it, but none stand true with the evidence given.

 

Now because I trust and have faith in God does not mean that I'm going to test him. Does it make sense, that because Jesus said "believers" will be able to drink poison and not be harmed, that I go and drink poison to see if it is true? No, this does not make sense, however, this does not mean that, when forced to drink poison, a christian has not come away from it unharmed. I can find you many stories of christians healing people and christians speaking in tongues.

 

Does this mean I can drink poison without being harmed? I don't want to find out. If I do it just to find out, then probably not, but if for some reason, I am forced to because I'm a christian, then who knows?

 

I need to go now, but the next question that I will try to get to is defining my God.