-->
@eash
The old testament, Hebrew propaganda, was written during the Babylonian captivity.
Why Didn't God Write the Bible?
Posts
Total:
110
-->
@PGA2.0
Infanticide and genocide are hallmarks of your god's morality according to your god
-->
@PGA2.0
So, God chose to reveal Himself to humanity via human beings who were inspired by His Spirit to write what He wanted us to hear.
How do you know God revealed himself to humans? How do we know those humans weren't making it up themselves?
-->
@PGA2.0
The Bible throughout claims
Claims obligate the claimant to a burden of proof (At least in a rational debate) is there any evidence beyond anecdotal to support the claims of the bible?
-->
@disgusted
God, as God, has the RIGHT to punish evil. That is JUSTICE. If God ever takes an innocent human life (i.e., the unborn or a little child), He will restore that life to a better place - His presence.Infanticide and genocide are hallmarks of your god's morality according to your god
-->
@PGA2.0
This is a claim. Can you meet the burden of proof for this claim or shall we dismiss it?If God ever takes an innocent human life (i.e., the unborn or a little child), He will restore that life to a better place - His presence.
-->
@Goldtop
So, God chose to reveal Himself to humanity via human beings who were inspired by His Spirit to write what He wanted us to hear.How do you know God revealed himself to humans? How do we know those humans weren't making it up themselves?
For one thing, He is a necessary Being, and since He is necessary He has provided many infallible proofs both in His written revelation (the Bible) and through what He has created (the universe). From His word (the biblical revelation).we see God predicting the future before it happens. If it reasonable to believe these writings were BEFORE the events they predict in history? I believe that any reasonable and logical person would agree they are. Is it reasonable to believe Jesus Christ was a historical Person? I believe it is reasonable and logical to believe He is. Is it reasonable and logical to believe He rose from the dead? I believe it is reasonable and logical to believe it is so. Is it reasonable to believe the biblical texts are a unity in their teachings? I believe it is most reasonable. Is it reasonable to believe that there is a picture/shadow/type of Jesus on almost every page of the OT? I believe most reasonable, and I can document all these things. Is it reasonable and logical to believe other religious views contradict the biblical revelation and do not supply the level of proof the Bible does? I believe it is most reasonable and logical to believe.
You are not a necessary being. Since that is the truth why SHOULD I believe what you have to say? Why is what you say true?
As limited human beings, we can only appeal to our highest authority. The question is who you take that authority to be? The Bible makes the claim that its authority is an almighty, all-knowing, benevolent Being, thus objective in nature (knowing all things and discerning/revealing all that is good).
You do not make that claim (I hope), thus your views are relative, subject to change. Truth does not change. It is always true or else it would not be the truth.
I can also see God's revelation in what He has made. To think that the universe and the diversity therein is a product of blind, indifferent, unintelligent chance is lunacy. For one thing, how does chance sustain anything? How does it make nature uniform, so that we can make predictions? Chance has no intentionality. There is no purpose to it. There is no meaning to it. Why do we continue to find meaning and purpose in such a universe? Why do we discover mathematical formulas that describe the way things work? Everything should be random chaotic from something without mind, without purpose, without meaning. But it is not. It is more reasonable to believe in God than to believe in a meaningless universe because we are reasonable beings, we are conscious beings. How does consciousness come from something devoid of it? You just SUPPOSE it can, without a shred of evidence.
How do you come up with right and wrong without God? It just becomes your opinion versus my opinion. What makes that right or good? Nothing.
-->
@PGA2.0
He is a necessary Being
What is a necessary being exactly? What makes any god(s) necessary?
How do you come up with right and wrong without God? It just becomes your opinion versus my opinion. What makes that right or good? Nothing.
Assuming any god(s) exist what makes some god(s) notion of right and wrong more than just some god(s) opinion? Isn't that just the argument that might makes right? What if the hypothetical god(s) in question specifically endorse behavior that you find morally reprehensible (slavery for example)? If your god(s) endorse slavery does that make slavery morally correct?
-->
@secularmerlin
The Bible throughout claimsClaims obligate the claimant to a burden of proof (At least in a rational debate) is there any evidence beyond anecdotal to support the claims of the bible?
One burden of proof is prophecy. It provides reasonable and logical evidence via history that its claims/predictions were written before the fact/event. If you care to debate this claim, go to my thread on prophecy (I only have one to date). I have stated many historical facts on that thread. The internal evidence (the Bible itself) supports the external evidence (history).
If God ever takes an innocent human life (i.e., the unborn or a little child), He will restore that life to a better place - His presence.This is a claim. Can you meet the burden of proof for this claim or shall we dismiss it?
But Jesus said, “Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”
Mark 10:13-14 (NASB)
Jesus Blesses Little Children13 And they were bringing children to Him so that He might touch
them; but the disciples rebuked them. 14 But when Jesus saw this, He was indignant and said to them, “Permit the children to come to Me; do not hinder them; for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.
Jesus said the kingdom belonged to such as these, i.e., little children.
Matthew 18:3-6 (NASB)
3 and said, “Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me;6 but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.
-->
@PGA2.0
One burden of proof is prophecy
A prophecy must be specific and confined to a narrow time frame in order to be impressive otherwise it is no different than a conman giving a psychic performance (otherwise known as a cold reading) the bible gives very vague prophecy with open ended time frames and some of the prophecies are predicted and fulfilled in the bible which means that both the prophecy and the fulfilment are merely claims and again require a burden of proof.
As for your "proof" that your god(s) takes unborn babies to a better place they are just the claims included in the bible. The claims are not the proof. Can you demonstrate the veracity of these passages? Do you have any evidence beyond anecdotal?
-->
@secularmerlin
He is a necessary BeingWhat is a necessary being exactly? What makes any god(s) necessary?
A being that is self-existent. He does not depend on another being or anything else for His existence. Gods are human designed. God is not.
How do you come up with right and wrong without God? It just becomes your opinion versus my opinion. What makes that right or good? Nothing.Assuming any god(s) exist what makes some god(s) notion of right and wrong more than just some god(s) opinion? Isn't that just the argument that might makes right? What if the hypothetical god(s) in question specifically endorse behavior that you find morally reprehensible (slavery for example)? If your god(s) endorse slavery does that make slavery morally correct?
What is necessary for right and wrong to be known for certain? Does your opinion make it so? Is it my opinion that makes something right? Does my action to kill another human being make it right? If there is no objective, ultimate, "best" measure, then why is your measure any better than mine. As soon as you start to speak of "better" you imply a best to measure better against. If there is no best, no ultimate measure/fixed standard, then no opinion is any better than any other opinion. How would you, a limited, subjective, relative human being come up with best? Do you just call what you LIKE best? Look at human history. Standards shift depending on whom is in power.
Now if there is an ultimate all-knowing being that has revealed Himself to us, then good can be known with certainty, objectivity can be known because every view, and the right view is within His purview.
You never answered my question. How do you come up with right and wrong without God?
-->
@PGA2.0
A being that is self-existent. He does not depend on another being or anything else for His existence. Gods are human designed. God is not.
Even if Yahweh does actually exist that still leaves thousands of god concepts that are merely the invention of humans. How have you determined that this one god among all gods is the creator of man rather than the creation of man? Do you have any objective proof that the universe did not come into being on its own? Or always existed? Or was created by a flying spaghetti monster on a bender? Because I have no reason to accept your claims until you demonstrate them.
You never answered my question. How do you come up with right and wrong without God?
How do you come up with right and wrong with some god(s)? It still comes down to a subjective opinion it just become some god(s) subjective opinion. On what standard is you god(s) basing moral judgements? This becomes especially problematic if the hypothetical being in question cannot be demonstrated to be existent. Again what do you do if your god(s) endorse slavery or genocide or infanticide or execution for seemingly minor infractions? Do these things then become moral?
Just so we are clear morality is entirely subjective and humans generally accept moral codes that promote human wellbeing and societal good and it's not hard to see why since such codes tend to benefit humans. Of course once we agree on a subjective standard we can make objective statements about morality based on that standard.
My preferred subjective standard is what promotes human wellbeing followed by wellbeing in general. Since the bible makes a number of seemingly arbitrary judgements that conflict with human wellbeing I do not consider it a good moral guide.
-->
@PGA2.0
Necessary for what? Billions of people are getting along just fine without God.For one thing, He is a necessary Being
The rest of your post only talks about what you believe, it doesn't answer my question on how you know the Bible was inspired by God. You keep saying about how it's logical and reasonable to believe things like rising from the dead, which is utterly absurd and not even remotely logical or reasonable.
You don't have to believe anything I say, you're supposed to have a brain in your head to think. But since you believe it's logical and reasonable for people to rise from the dead, then you clearly aren't using your brain to think.
The Bible may make the claim it's an authority, but it was written by men who are not any kind of authorities.
All of your questions are from ignorance and incredulity. If you took the time learn something, you would understand a great deal more and not have to resort to magic to rule your worldview.
-->
@PGA2.0
A being that is self-existent. He does not depend on another being or anything else for His existence.
There you go again, saying things that you believe but can't answer with any kind of logic or reason. How do you know any of that?
-->
@secularmerlin
One burden of proof is prophecyA prophecy must be specific and confined to a narrow time frame in order to be impressive otherwise it is no different than a conman giving a psychic performance (otherwise known as a cold reading) the bible gives very vague prophecy with open ended time frames and some of the prophecies are predicted and fulfilled in the bible which means that both the prophecy and the fulfilment are merely claims and again require a burden of proof.
No, the Bible gives specific prophecy. Take Daniel 9:24-27. That is very specific. Only 490 years after the decree to rebuild Jerusalem is given for Daniel's people. God will judge them for their transgression and sin and bring in everlasting righteousness within that time frame. That happened. History shows that after the Babylonian exile and after the destruction of the city and temple by King Nebuchadnezzar. God told Daniel that He had given Daniel's people 490 years for the six conditions of Daniel 9:24 to be met. The end of the Mosaic Covenant would come with the once again destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. We know this happened in AD 70. History backs up the prophecy.
Take Isaiah 2. That is very specific.
Take Zechariah 12:10. This is a specific prophecy.
As for your "proof" that your god(s) takes unborn babies to a better place they are just the claims included in the bible. The claims are not the proof. Can you demonstrate the veracity of these passages? Do you have any evidence beyond anecdotal?
As opposed to your claims that excludes the Bible. Your claims are not the proof. I have historical writings that date back, in one case to around AD 125. These writings have evidence that is most reasonable to believe. If such a being as Jesus lived, and from both secular and biblical writings we have reasonable evidence that He did, and if He rose from the dead as the writings claim and there is reasonable evidence to believe this, then His words are also reasonable to believe. So I can provide evidence that supports my claims that is most reasonable to believe. Can you do the same for your COUNTER-CLAIMS? When you make a counter-claim then you too have a burden of proof.
Again, the burden of proof becomes impossible for me to establish because by your authority you will never accept what I have to say or what the Bible says.
Hebrews 11:6 (NASB)6 And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him.
How would you ever believe what God says if you do not believe He exists?
-->
@PGA2.0
How would you ever believe what God says if you do not believe He exists.
That is the entire point of the thread, GOD NEVER SAID ANYTHING! If he did, the Bible would have been written by God. It wasn't.
-->
@PGA2.0
No, the Bible gives specific prophecy. Take Daniel 9:24-27. That is very specific. Only 490 years after the decree to rebuild Jerusalem is given for Daniel's people. God will judge them for their transgression and sin and bring in everlasting righteousness within that time frame. That happened. History shows that after the Babylonian exile and after the destruction of the city and temple by King Nebuchadnezzar. God told Daniel that He had given Daniel's people 490 years for the six conditions of Daniel 9:24 to be met. The end of the Mosaic Covenant would come with the once again destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. We know this happened in AD 70. History backs up the prophecy.
So the bible both claims to have predicted somethimgband to have fulfilled it. Congratulations now you have a burden of proof for both the prophecy and the fulfilment of the prophecy.
As opposed to your claims
I have not made any claims we are still discussing your claims.
Again, the burden of proof becomes impossible for me to establish because by your authority you will never accept what I have to say or what the Bible says.
The bible is the claim not the evidence. I'm sorry if this is an inconvenience for you but in a rational debate the burden of proof is on the claimant not the one rejecting the claim.
How would you ever believe what God says if you do not believe He exists.
Why would I ever believe something exists that cannot be demonstrated to exist? If you can demonstrate Yahweh then I will have no choice but to accept that Yahweh exists. I am simply unable to maintain a belief in the absence of evidence.
-->
@PGA2.0
Again, the burden of proof becomes impossible for me to establish because by your authority you will never accept what I have to say or what the Bible says.
Completely wrong, you can't establish any proof because you have absolutely NO proof whatsoever. That has nothing to do with us and everything to do with you.
-->
@eash
Again and hopefully for the last time (though I can remind you again if you forget) the bible is the claim not the evidence. You must demonstrate that the bible is a good authority on reality before I am able to accept it as a good authority on reality. Also I have not made any claims, I just do not accept your claims.
-->
@PGA2.0
. Take Daniel 9:24-27. That is very specific. Only 490 years
Those are weeks, not years, hence the prophecy is false.
-->
@Goldtop
A being that is self-existent. He does not depend on another being or anything else for His existence.There you go again, saying things that you believe but can't answer with any kind of logic or reason. How do you know any of that?
By the impossibility of the contrary.
You nor I am the being that every other being originates from. If there is no necessary being then life originated from something non-living, something without consciousness. Show me how that is possible. Show me it is reasonable to believe.
If there is no necessary being then the universe originate by chance. How is that REASONABLE or possible? Show me it is. Show me how something without intention, without purpose, causes things that have both. Show me how something that is none reasoning, illogical, amoral can cause any of these three qualities. Why would you expect to find reason, logic, meaning in a meaningless universe? THERE IS NO REASON.
What is chance? It is nothing but a mathematical possibility. It has NO ABILITY to do anything. Intentional beings have abilities to do things.
Some things can be thought of in theory, yet they are not possible to demonstrate in practice. For instance, roll a six on a dice repeatedly, without fixing it in any way one million times in a row. Theoretically, you can claim it possible but to demonstrate it would take forever.
How can you know certainty without a necessary all-knowing being?
What is the truth? Do you have it in regards to origins?
Some things can be thought of in theory, yet they are not possible to demonstrate in practice. For instance, roll a six on a dice repeatedly, without fixing it in any way one million times in a row. Theoretically, you can claim it possible but to demonstrate it would take forever.
How can you know certainty without a necessary all-knowing being?
What is the truth? Do you have it in regards to origins?
-->
@Goldtop
Take Daniel 9:24-27. That is very specific. Only 490 yearsThose are weeks, not years, hence the prophecy is false.
They are heptads, which are weeks of years. 70 X 7 = 490. The six conditions are also met and can be demonstrated as met by AD 70. I detailed this in a post on my prophecy thread. No one challenged it. Go over there are challenge it if you wish.
-->
@PGA2.0
By the impossibility of the contrary.
That makes no sense at all.
Show me how that is possible. Show me it is reasonable to believe
That's the answer scientists are working on, it's called abiogenesis. You need to understand it before you can believe it. But then, there's no reason to believe it if you understand it.
THERE IS NO REASON.
There doesn't have to be reason for the universe to exist. it just exists as do we. This is simple to understand. Is there a reason for mosquitoes? Why then do they exist? Answer, they just do exist.
. It has NO ABILITY to do anything. Intentional beings have abilities to do things.
But, the laws of nature can do things, as we can see in nature itself. Tell me what the reason was for the tsunami that killed over a quarter million people? Was there a reason or did it just happen because of the laws of nature?
For instance, roll a six on a dice repeatedly, without fixing it in any way one million times in a row. Theoretically, you can claim it possible but to demonstrate it would take forever.
That's a meaningless strawman, it says nothing about our discussion. Irrelevant.
How can you know certainty without a necessary all-knowing being?
Easy, we use our brains to think, something it appears you aren't doing.
-->
@PGA2.0
If there is no necessary being then life originated from something non-living, something without consciousness. Show me how that is possible.
I don't know how or why life originated but that doesn't mean we accept an unproven and unprovable proposition. That would be an argument from ignorance, that is saying I can't think of another explanation therefore this is true. If the answer is I don't know then you don't have the answer you don't get to just make one up.
Why would you expect to find reason, logic, meaning in a meaningless universe?
Can you demonstrate that the universe has any meaning besides that which we assign to it? As for logic and reason these are just methods of thought which have been shown to have results and only because the universe tends to behave in an observably predictable way. That does not necessitate a guiding force. Gravity would still pull mass towards mass whether it is directed by a conciousness or if it is just an emergent quality of mass. That gravity exists therefore does not demonstrate a concious guiding force. This is true of existence of the universe in general. The universe does exist but that in and of itself is not evidence that ideas created rather than simply existing.
Some things can be thought of in theory, yet they are not possible to demonstrate in practice.
I agree with This one hundred percent. Some things are impossible to demonstrate. In such cases it is beyond our epistemological limits to say with certainty that they are true or false.
without fixing it in any way one million times in a row.
The chances of rolling six one million times in a row is astronomical but really so are the chances of rolling any specific combination of numbers. Regardless of what numbers come up on your dice the chances of that specific combination are still six million to one against and yet if you roll a dice six million times you will get a specific combination of numbers.
How can you know certainty without a necessary all-knowing being?
Complete certainty about anything would seem to be beyond humans. Our experience is just too limited and subjective.
What is the truth? Do you have it in regards to origins?
Nope and niether do you, or at least you seem unable to demonstrate this truth.
-->
@PGA2.0
There's nothing to challenge. Prophecies are baloney, they talk about things that happen all the time; wars, earthquakes, etc. Also, most claimed prophecies were written after the events happened, not before. You've been fooled.Go over there are challenge it if you wish
-->
@secularmerlin
have you read the 1611 preface to the bible?
strange reading indeed. those translators call a male Divine. did you know a male can be called Divine by the translators. i can only give proof of the text being re written to make the manuscripts. for in the manuscripts we find the word pharaoh 22 times. yet Aaron who i think wrote a lot of genesis and exodus. so why would good guys erase the king of egypts name and use a greek word meaning for a family line of kings?
then there is the problem with the word mountain. i think in the ot mountain is used over 250 times and 225 times it says there are mountains in the land of israel. when looking down on the land for isreal. Moses seen the hill country from a mount east of the jodran river.
once anyone starts putting the correct words back into the text. it proves men were deceiving people that read their editings. and i can point to many words not being used correctly by being a detective. read my topic i posted on how to remove text from the bible.
here is great one that floor trinitarians. i can throw out all book in the nt written by paul/saul. for timothy 1:13 paul says he was a blasphemer. and Jesus Says in matt 12:31 never will a blasphemer go the HEAVEN.
if they are asked is paul right about him talking to Jesus would make Jesus a liar. and all words by Jesus can be called into questioning. if Jesus is not a liar and most will agree. then all writting from paul cant be trusted and must be thrown out. it seems you can't trust those guys at the Nicaea summit.
-->
@eash
This does not change the fundamental problem with your arguments, which is that the bible (whether the original text has been altered or not) is a claim not proof of any claim.
-->
@secularmerlin
it is proof of my claim by reasoning within the text itself. you most likely read there are 10 CMMANDMENTS. yet exo 20:1-17 says there are 12. and there are 3 verses using the words, ten commandments. didnt anyone break them down and count them like i did? all the colleges in the usa and nobody has yet to find the things i am pointing out. all of them with their degrees are idiots following idiots.
each word time each verse i point out these decieving words. keep adding up by reasoning there is deceicing going on. each book thrown out gets us back to the books that i can use to prove by using the correct words there 'is the words that can be trusted'.
what i find funny is people opening a secular dictionary to define words in the bible. for the text in the bible defines the meaning of the words and how to use them.
-->
@eash
There are actually 613 commandments in the old testament. In fact the ten commandments that are most popularly quoted are the commandments spoken by Moses. The commandments on the stone tablets Moses brought down later from mount Sinai are different (one is not to seethe a kid in it's mothers milk) and yet the ones most often shown in modern sculpture depicting said tablets are the spoken commands.
None of that matters however since even if the original texts unchanged and perfectly translated were available to us they would still only constitute a claim (or rather a series of claims) not proof of any claim.
-->
@PGA2.0
Infanticide cannot be construed by a rational, logical being as punishing evil. You claim to be such a being but your beliefs put the lie to that. Why should I believe a word you say, you are neither rational nor logical nor honest?