Shadow Archon wrote:
What makes you think that it was?
The fact that God didn’t personally write it and send the book down, and apparently “talked” to other people to get it to write it for him, and the multiple revisions as well, at least throws doubt into the idea of God having wrote it.
umm... have you read it? its actually accounts of other peoples lives. and the only part that god “talked” people into writing was the ten commandments.
I’m addressing the idea that God wrote the bible, though.
crys14 wrote:
umm... it wasnt written by only one person...
My correction, then, but general point is still there.
God didn’t write the bible tho. People wrote accounts of their lives and for us to know how we should live and what could happen during God’s anger or during god’s happiness. It was also written as a code we should follow and what is right or wrong. the new testament are recordings of Jesus’s life and what he did for God and for us. How we should be greatful because he died in the cross for our sins so we wouldnt all end up in hell. And anyways... have you guys thought of something? suppose you guys are right and God doesnt exist... we have nothing to lose. But turn it around if God does exist then where will you guys end up?
It is a sad choice to do something only because of what might happen to you.
we dont just do it because of what MIGHT happen to us... we do it because we believe in God and because we trust him fully. and we have faith in him. it would be stupid to do something just because your scared at what MIGHT happen. i’m just saying though, where would you guys end up? i dont worship God just because i’m scared of him i do it because i believe in him.
We would end up in hell. Where would you end up if one of the 6 billion or so other religions are correct and yours is wrong? What makes you so sure you are right? And thats just the active religions there have been many more.
i mean it towards the atheist who dont believe in God or anything like that...
I know..like me. What I said still stands. Are you christian?
yup... but i honestly was looking forward to a debate since i havent really been in one for about a month... thats why i came on
Oh ok well I was just saying that both of us could be wrong we have the exact same chances.
But if your looking for a debate the religion forum is the place to go cause no one agrees on anything haha.
haha true... and either way no matter how much proof one side gives to the other it still goes on and on without end. and honestly the thought has crossed my mind a few times
__________________
“Sometimes i feel like a butterfly trapped inside a cocoon
wishing i could spread my wings and fly away”
Haylias wrote:
The Bible doesn’t get my vote for various reasons.
1. Riddled with contradictions
2. Scientific innacuracies
3. Morals I don’t agree with (sometimes)
4. Sounds like a fairy tale book.
1. what contradictions?
2. science may be the answer to a lot of things but not to everything has to be explained by science
3. like what morals? (just curious)
4. there are a lot of deaths and things dont always end happily ever after... how the hell is that a fairy tale? the main character dies (Jesus) and there is a lot of death and sometimes torture
4. “1 a: a story (as for children) involving fantastic forces and beings” - Mirriam Webster
heh nope your wrong... fairy tales are stuff that has happy endings and the bible isnt all happy endings... and wow i never noticed that the bible had stuff like mythical creatures (sarcasm) thats a fairy tale
But wild beasts of the desert will lie there
And their houses will be full of owls
Ostriches will dwell there,
And wild goats will caper there
and to the unicorns... ever heard of a figure of speech? (sarcasm again)
and for the cockatrices... Isaiah 11:8
The nursing child shall play by the cobra’s hole,
And the weaned child shall put his hand in the viper’s den.
sheesh i swear that website doesnt have the real verses its rephrasing them.
Well wait, it depends on the version. You realize that they are all translated from dead languages and scribes had to translate all that letter by letter by hand...Yeah there could be A LOT of differences.
yup but he’s saying that the bible is just a fairy tale cuz it has unicorns and cockatrices in them... i have two and it doesnt mention them... if it was meant literatly then it would still mention it
Eh, could be. Either way, this is not even the best argument against the bible at all. Rather it’s infallibility.
eh true i guess your right... but why would anyone in their right minds call the bible a fairy tale? its just stupid honestly
__________________
“Sometimes i feel like a butterfly trapped inside a cocoon
wishing i could spread my wings and fly away”
Haylias wrote:
The Bible doesn’t get my vote for various reasons.
1. Riddled with contradictions
2. Scientific innacuracies
3. Morals I don’t agree with (sometimes)
4. Sounds like a fairy tale book.
1. what contradictions?
2. science may be the answer to a lot of things but not to everything has to be explained by science
3. like what morals? (just curious)
4. there are a lot of deaths and things dont always end happily ever after... how the hell is that a fairy tale? the main character dies (Jesus) and there is a lot of death and sometimes torture
4. “1 a: a story (as for children) involving fantastic forces and beings” - Mirriam Webster
heh nope your wrong... fairy tales are stuff that has happy endings and the bible isnt all happy endings... and wow i never noticed that the bible had stuff like mythical creatures (sarcasm) thats a fairy tale
But wild beasts of the desert will lie there
And their houses will be full of owls
Ostriches will dwell there,
And wild goats will caper there
and to the unicorns... ever heard of a figure of speech? (sarcasm again)
and for the cockatrices... Isaiah 11:8
The nursing child shall play by the cobra’s hole,
And the weaned child shall put his hand in the viper’s den.
sheesh i swear that website doesnt have the real verses its rephrasing them.
Well wait, it depends on the version. You realize that they are all translated from dead languages and scribes had to translate all that letter by letter by hand...Yeah there could be A LOT of differences.
yup but he’s saying that the bible is just a fairy tale cuz it has unicorns and cockatrices in them... i have two and it doesnt mention them... if it was meant literatly then it would still mention it
Eh, could be. Either way, this is not even the best argument against the bible at all. Rather it’s infallibility.
eh true i guess your right... but why would anyone in their right minds call the bible a fairy tale? its just stupid honestly
Its not a fairy tail but I think he means or at least I think that if you read it and didnt know what its purpose was you would think its a story for children cause of the mythical creatures and talking animals and people living for a long long time...
Haylias wrote:
The Bible doesn’t get my vote for various reasons.
1. Riddled with contradictions
2. Scientific innacuracies
3. Morals I don’t agree with (sometimes)
4. Sounds like a fairy tale book.
1. what contradictions?
2. science may be the answer to a lot of things but not to everything has to be explained by science
3. like what morals? (just curious)
4. there are a lot of deaths and things dont always end happily ever after... how the hell is that a fairy tale? the main character dies (Jesus) and there is a lot of death and sometimes torture
4. “1 a: a story (as for children) involving fantastic forces and beings” - Mirriam Webster
heh nope your wrong... fairy tales are stuff that has happy endings and the bible isnt all happy endings... and wow i never noticed that the bible had stuff like mythical creatures (sarcasm) thats a fairy tale
But wild beasts of the desert will lie there
And their houses will be full of owls
Ostriches will dwell there,
And wild goats will caper there
and to the unicorns... ever heard of a figure of speech? (sarcasm again)
and for the cockatrices... Isaiah 11:8
The nursing child shall play by the cobra’s hole,
And the weaned child shall put his hand in the viper’s den.
sheesh i swear that website doesnt have the real verses its rephrasing them.
Well wait, it depends on the version. You realize that they are all translated from dead languages and scribes had to translate all that letter by letter by hand...Yeah there could be A LOT of differences.
yup but he’s saying that the bible is just a fairy tale cuz it has unicorns and cockatrices in them... i have two and it doesnt mention them... if it was meant literatly then it would still mention it
Eh, could be. Either way, this is not even the best argument against the bible at all. Rather it’s infallibility.
eh true i guess your right... but why would anyone in their right minds call the bible a fairy tale? its just stupid honestly
Well because it has fairy tale esque stories in it. Such as walking on water, raising the dead,etc. By the way, the Dead Sea Scrolls I believe mention a few Gods. It’s a jewish texts, but judiasm was the roots of Christianity. Basically, Yahweh is actually under a deity, and he was charged with making the earth. Which can explain to us a few things.
1. Why he needed to rest
2. Why the Bible only explains earth’s creation in detail
3.Why he would get jealous of other gods.
Now, Elohim, the God who is above Yahweh is mentioned in Genesis 1. HOWEVER, it IS translated as God. Remember this verse? “We shall make man in our image."? That is I am pretty sure also some evidence of why it is connected to the Dead Sea scrolls, which it is. Since the Jewish Torah is the OT.
Haylias wrote:
The Bible doesn’t get my vote for various reasons.
1. Riddled with contradictions
2. Scientific innacuracies
3. Morals I don’t agree with (sometimes)
4. Sounds like a fairy tale book.
1. what contradictions?
2. science may be the answer to a lot of things but not to everything has to be explained by science
3. like what morals? (just curious)
4. there are a lot of deaths and things dont always end happily ever after... how the hell is that a fairy tale? the main character dies (Jesus) and there is a lot of death and sometimes torture
4. “1 a: a story (as for children) involving fantastic forces and beings” - Mirriam Webster
heh nope your wrong... fairy tales are stuff that has happy endings and the bible isnt all happy endings... and wow i never noticed that the bible had stuff like mythical creatures (sarcasm) thats a fairy tale
But wild beasts of the desert will lie there
And their houses will be full of owls
Ostriches will dwell there,
And wild goats will caper there
and to the unicorns... ever heard of a figure of speech? (sarcasm again)
and for the cockatrices... Isaiah 11:8
The nursing child shall play by the cobra’s hole,
And the weaned child shall put his hand in the viper’s den.
sheesh i swear that website doesnt have the real verses its rephrasing them.
Well wait, it depends on the version. You realize that they are all translated from dead languages and scribes had to translate all that letter by letter by hand...Yeah there could be A LOT of differences.
yup but he’s saying that the bible is just a fairy tale cuz it has unicorns and cockatrices in them... i have two and it doesnt mention them... if it was meant literatly then it would still mention it
Eh, could be. Either way, this is not even the best argument against the bible at all. Rather it’s infallibility.
eh true i guess your right... but why would anyone in their right minds call the bible a fairy tale? its just stupid honestly
Well because it has fairy tale esque stories in it. Such as walking on water, raising the dead,etc. By the way, the Dead Sea Scrolls I believe mention a few Gods. It’s a jewish texts, but judiasm was the roots of Christianity. Basically, Yahweh is actually under a deity, and he was charged with making the earth. Which can explain to us a few things.
1. Why he needed to rest
2. Why the Bible only explains earth’s creation in detail
3.Why he would get jealous of other gods.
Now, Elohim, the God who is above Yahweh is mentioned in Genesis 1. HOWEVER, it IS translated as God. Remember this verse? “We shall make man in our image."? That is I am pretty sure also some evidence of why it is connected to the Dead Sea scrolls, which it is. Since the Jewish Torah is the OT.
omfg! i hadnt noticed that! i just read it and its true.... i’ll find out about it
__________________
“Sometimes i feel like a butterfly trapped inside a cocoon
wishing i could spread my wings and fly away”
Haylias wrote:
The Bible doesn’t get my vote for various reasons.
1. Riddled with contradictions
2. Scientific innacuracies
3. Morals I don’t agree with (sometimes)
4. Sounds like a fairy tale book.
1. what contradictions?
2. science may be the answer to a lot of things but not to everything has to be explained by science
3. like what morals? (just curious)
4. there are a lot of deaths and things dont always end happily ever after... how the hell is that a fairy tale? the main character dies (Jesus) and there is a lot of death and sometimes torture
4. “1 a: a story (as for children) involving fantastic forces and beings” - Mirriam Webster
heh nope your wrong... fairy tales are stuff that has happy endings and the bible isnt all happy endings... and wow i never noticed that the bible had stuff like mythical creatures (sarcasm) thats a fairy tale
But wild beasts of the desert will lie there
And their houses will be full of owls
Ostriches will dwell there,
And wild goats will caper there
and to the unicorns... ever heard of a figure of speech? (sarcasm again)
and for the cockatrices... Isaiah 11:8
The nursing child shall play by the cobra’s hole,
And the weaned child shall put his hand in the viper’s den.
sheesh i swear that website doesnt have the real verses its rephrasing them.
Well wait, it depends on the version. You realize that they are all translated from dead languages and scribes had to translate all that letter by letter by hand...Yeah there could be A LOT of differences.
yup but he’s saying that the bible is just a fairy tale cuz it has unicorns and cockatrices in them... i have two and it doesnt mention them... if it was meant literatly then it would still mention it
Eh, could be. Either way, this is not even the best argument against the bible at all. Rather it’s infallibility.
eh true i guess your right... but why would anyone in their right minds call the bible a fairy tale? its just stupid honestly
Well because it has fairy tale esque stories in it. Such as walking on water, raising the dead,etc. By the way, the Dead Sea Scrolls I believe mention a few Gods. It’s a jewish texts, but judiasm was the roots of Christianity. Basically, Yahweh is actually under a deity, and he was charged with making the earth. Which can explain to us a few things.
1. Why he needed to rest
2. Why the Bible only explains earth’s creation in detail
3.Why he would get jealous of other gods.
Now, Elohim, the God who is above Yahweh is mentioned in Genesis 1. HOWEVER, it IS translated as God. Remember this verse? “We shall make man in our image."? That is I am pretty sure also some evidence of why it is connected to the Dead Sea scrolls, which it is. Since the Jewish Torah is the OT.
omfg! i hadnt noticed that! i just read it and its true.... i’ll find out about it
Well it’s a Jewish thing, but it’s the roots of your religion, so yeah, you should check it out.
Saosin wrote:
Oh ok well I was just saying that both of us could be wrong we have the exact same chances.
But if your looking for a debate the religion forum is the place to go cause no one agrees on anything haha.
Ah, no, chances of god existing is not 50, 50. It is far less then my little card trick...
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
Saosin wrote:
Oh ok well I was just saying that both of us could be wrong we have the exact same chances.
But if your looking for a debate the religion forum is the place to go cause no one agrees on anything haha.
Ah, no, chances of god existing is not 50, 50. It is far less then my little card trick...
Gplex,
Would you allow me to talk with you. I’m not going to disrespect you or anything like that. I’d just like to, in a friendly way, discuss your last sentence. Please
Saosin wrote:
Oh ok well I was just saying that both of us could be wrong we have the exact same chances.
But if your looking for a debate the religion forum is the place to go cause no one agrees on anything haha.
Ah, no, chances of god existing is not 50, 50. It is far less then my little card trick...
thats not what I said.
That is exactly what you said.
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
Saosin wrote:
Oh ok well I was just saying that both of us could be wrong we have the exact same chances.
But if your looking for a debate the religion forum is the place to go cause no one agrees on anything haha.
Ah, no, chances of god existing is not 50, 50. It is far less then my little card trick...
thats not what I said.
That is exactly what you said.
where did I say it was 50/50? I said we have the exact same chance. Just like people believing in allah or zeus have the exact same chance. It would be 50/50 if it was just those 2 choices but its not theres thousands of choices and religions to choose from. But going on evidence ya I think I would have a better chance if thats what you mean.
Saosin wrote:
where did I say it was 50/50? I said we have the exact same chance. Just like people believing in allah or zeus have the exact same chance. It would be 50/50 if it was just those 2 choices but its not theres thousands of choices and religions to choose from. But going on evidence ya I think I would have a better chance if thats what you mean.
Alright 50, 50 was a bad analogy, you are right on that. What I’m saying the only thing supported by all the evidence is that none of these religions are true. Couple with the fact that all of them can not be right, the chances are not equal.
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
Saosin wrote:
where did I say it was 50/50? I said we have the exact same chance. Just like people believing in allah or zeus have the exact same chance. It would be 50/50 if it was just those 2 choices but its not theres thousands of choices and religions to choose from. But going on evidence ya I think I would have a better chance if thats what you mean.
Alright 50, 50 was a bad analogy, you are right on that. What I’m saying the only thing supported by all the evidence is that none of these religions are true. Couple with the fact that all of them can not be right, the chances are not equal.
Oh definitely yeah based on evidence no religions are supported at least not by good credited evidence just guess work and speculation.
crys14 wrote:
haha true... and either way no matter how much proof one side gives to the other it still goes on and on without end. and honestly the thought has crossed my mind a few times
The other side isnt giving any proof. Thats the problem, they think no evidence, is the greatest ammount of evidence.
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
Shadow Archon wrote:
What makes you think that it was?
The fact that God didn’t personally write it and send the book down, and apparently “talked” to other people to get it to write it for him, and the multiple revisions as well, at least throws doubt into the idea of God having wrote it.
It depends what version of the Bible were talking about first.
Some people go in and write the Bible on how they see fit.
The King James Version is the one I use.
I have to tell ya...all versions of the bible that are in print including kjv have been heavily modified by the scribes over the centuries...The earliest text that we have in the greek language is very different than what people read today...translations cause differences because some words simply cannot be translated without losing meaning. as early as 100 years after jesus’s death there were multiple versions of mark circulating. also when scribes copied the bible they added in new verses, used the margins as verses, and made grammatical errors...Pastor melissa scott is very good at pointing out differences based on language and professor bart ernham is an authority on early christianity
__________________
“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." Stephen F. Roberts
Shadow Archon wrote:
What makes you think that it was?
The fact that God didn’t personally write it and send the book down, and apparently “talked” to other people to get it to write it for him, and the multiple revisions as well, at least throws doubt into the idea of God having wrote it.
It depends what version of the Bible were talking about first.
Some people go in and write the Bible on how they see fit.
The King James Version is the one I use.
I have to tell ya...all versions of the bible that are in print including kjv have been heavily modified by the scribes over the centuries...The earliest text that we have in the greek language is very different than what people read today...translations cause differences because some words simply cannot be translated without losing meaning. as early as 100 years after jesus’s death there were multiple versions of mark circulating. also when scribes copied the bible they added in new verses, used the margins as verses, and made grammatical errors...Pastor melissa scott is very good at pointing out differences based on language and professor bart ernham is an authority on early christianity
Actually the differences in the translations of the canon gospels (message wise) is not as drastic as the skeptics make them out to be. Thats the whole reason why they were chosen. The message was consistent and they were older. Now the “lost books” that got a lot of attention semi-recently with the Da vinci code and everything were the gnostic gospels. The gnostic gospels, written sometime after the first century, were with a message that even changed the message of the OT. From what I read they were a lot like the apocrypha in the aspect that they were designed to make up an explaination or go into more depth. Here we get stories like Judas being chosen by Jesus to betray him or Jesus' hijinks as a child.
Later on we see obscure ideas of Jesus often kissing Mary Magdaline on the ________ and Jesus not actually dying on the cross (a theory which would later lead to islam). These were the books that were weeded out and for good reason IMO.
son 5000 wrote:
Actually the differences in the translations of the canon gospels (message wise) is not as drastic as the skeptics make them out to be. Thats the whole reason why they were chosen. The message was consistent and they were older. Now the “lost books” that got a lot of attention semi-recently with the Da vinci code and everything were the gnostic gospels. The gnostic gospels, written sometime after the first century, were with a message that even changed the message of the OT. From what I read they were a lot like the apocrypha in the aspect that they were designed to make up an explaination or go into more depth. Here we get stories like Judas being chosen by Jesus to betray him or Jesus' hijinks as a child.
Later on we see obscure ideas of Jesus often kissing Mary Magdaline on the ________ and Jesus not actually dying on the cross (a theory which would later lead to islam). These were the books that were weeded out and for good reason IMO.
Jesus spent 6 hours on the cross, before he was taken down, if the story is true, it is unlikely that he died in only 6 hours.
__________________
Cid wrote:
You flame religions and its followers without even considering their side of the story. You’re not much different from Hitler with his extermination of the jews
son 5000 wrote:
Actually the differences in the translations of the canon gospels (message wise) is not as drastic as the skeptics make them out to be. Thats the whole reason why they were chosen. The message was consistent and they were older. Now the “lost books” that got a lot of attention semi-recently with the Da vinci code and everything were the gnostic gospels. The gnostic gospels, written sometime after the first century, were with a message that even changed the message of the OT. From what I read they were a lot like the apocrypha in the aspect that they were designed to make up an explaination or go into more depth. Here we get stories like Judas being chosen by Jesus to betray him or Jesus' hijinks as a child.
Later on we see obscure ideas of Jesus often kissing Mary Magdaline on the ________ and Jesus not actually dying on the cross (a theory which would later lead to islam). These were the books that were weeded out and for good reason IMO.
Jesus spent 6 hours on the cross, before he was taken down, if the story is true, it is unlikely that he died in only 6 hours.
When I said Jesus not dying on the cross I mean he was never crucified. Some one took his place/his spirit left his body before. Thats a gnostic idea that would later be incoperated into islam.
