A Christian response to atheism

[Big Mac]

This girl is almost as bad as Crazy Christian Girl that I speak with on YIM, just no reasoning with her. "Who are you to judge GoD?!" is exactly what we're getting from this conversation.

[saukhasi]

donkey: if there was a God creator of human beings, He will definitely be able to control human beings enough to provide His message, all the way from being written to being voted to being translated.

Bigmac: I believe i've actually shown you you cannot judge God as I've pointed out misconceptions of yours.

[Big Mac]

You pointed out nothing. The bible is meant by it's authors to be taken literally for the most part. The parts that aren't literal are obviously: Job (which is acknolwedged as a fable to give the moral of having faith in hardships), Song of Solomon (which is a sexual sounding poem), and Tobit (in the Catholic bible). There are a couple of others I may have missed. You have shown me nothing new or interesting, only frustratingly for hte amount of bullshit you make up to defend your buy-bull. The bible teaches slavery(Ephesians 6:5   Colassians 3:22   1 Peter 2:18 ) , sexism (Deuteronomy 22:20,21     Deuteronomy 22:13,14    1 Corinthians 11:13-15   1 Corinthians 14:34), bigotry, homophobia (try denying that one), violence (Elisah sends two she-bears after KIDS for the crime of MAKING FUN ON HIS BALDNESS! II Kings 2:23-24), rape (Deuteronomy 22:23-27   Leviticus 19:20), and God punishes people that didn't elect their leaders such as the Egyptians(Exodus 12:29 Exodus 9:22-25 Exodus 9:11).

Also this is just pushing the limit: Holding the sun still (which is technically hold the earth still which would probably cause bad reactions in the core)  Joshua 10:12-13

Or how about this jewel, God's weakness is apparently iron.....Judges 1:19

That's enough for right now. There is no way to read these out of context, they spell out the actions I have described. Now you can keep going on and on like a broken record (which you are doing) but the Bible was basically meant to be taken literally. Back then people believed this kind of shit happened naturally through God.

[Whitney]

4. Whether or not is is simply a collection is irrelevant - it is faith in God that matters. Even if it were written by one person, we can still find many ways to deny it. Finally, I think it is much better the Bible is written this way so that it grows to a limit - for example, if all the Gospels were written out before Christ was born any one would be able to act out the script. The letters to the churches wouldn't really make sense either. And the Revelations probably won't do OT prophets any good - although there are prophecies (like in Daniel) either way.

The issue of it being a collection is not that it was written by numerous people.    The main issue is that anything talking about Jesus was written well after his death by people who weren't even around to be witnesses.  On top of that there isn't a single contemporary (from the time of Jesus) secular account of Jesus...you'd think that the Son of God would make a rather large impact wherever he went but not a single person of that time thought he was worth mentioning.  At best, writings about Jesus are second hand accounts so there was plenty of time for exaggeration of the events to be included in any of the verbal accounts which were written.

Of course it wouldn't make sense to write them BEFORE Jesus was alive...that wasn't anything near what I was talking about previously.  What doesn't make sense is to wait 50+ years to write anything about him.

Basically, for this and many other reasons, there is absolutely nothing that convinces me that the Bible should be taken on faith as true while rejecting other religious texts.  It it wasn't for the Romans adopting Christianity as an official religion, it could have just as easily been viewed just as we do the Greek gods and Egyptian gods today...a forgotten religion of the past.

[saukhasi]

1. Slavery is something that was already happening. If you were living at that time and age and the Bible didn't have some kind of teachings and consolation about slavery you'd be complaining too.
2. Male and female are to have equal status but different roles - though some may take that as offensive, we must also look at things in historical context.
3. The Bible doesn't teach "homophobia" - it says it is a sin like heterosexual lust (which is emphasized many more times), but it does not teach that we should fear, or hate homosexuals in any way, but rather - love others.
4. if you would read your own biblical quotes carefully God distinguishes adultery from rape. So I don't see how this supports your statement on how rape is taught.
5. For Elisha - unless you can prove that the children (some say youths) did not know what they were doing (bald doen't cut it), there is insufficient evidence to judge whether or not it this preaches violence.
6. I don't get the arguments in the others, but for the iron chariots, when it referred to "they" it was the Israelites and not God.

[donkeyhoty]

if there was a God creator of human beings, He will definitely be able to control human beings enough to provide His message, all the way from being written to being voted to being translated.

So, let me get this straight, God gave you free will, but also controls what you do.

[Whitney]

1. Slavery is something that was already happening. If you were living at that time and age and the Bible didn't have some kind of teachings and consolation about slavery you'd be complaining too.

Yes, it was already happening and it being condoned in the Bible was what many American Southerners used to defend their use of slavery.  The Bible was the perfect time for God to inspire people to speak out against slavery.

2. Male and female are to have equal status but different roles - though some may take that as offensive, we must also look at things in historical context.

Again, perfect time for God to inspire more equality.  I don't find women being told to keep quiet in church to be giving us equal status.  Also, women are treated as commodities in numerous parts of the Bible rather than equals.

3. The Bible doesn't teach "homophobia" - it says it is a sin like heterosexual lust (which is emphasized many more times), but it does not teach that we should fear, or hate homosexuals in any way, but rather - love others.

Leviticus 18:29  For whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the souls that commit them shall be cut off from among their people.

Leviticus 20:13  If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

"their blood shall be upon them" is also used in places in the bible where followers are told how to handle murderers, witches (Lev. 20:27) and adulterers.

These people certainly think homosexuality is a deadly sin and are certainly homophobic because they believe the bible says to be that way:  http://www.godhatesfags.com/

4. if you would read your own biblical quotes carefully God distinguishes adultery from rape. So I don't see how this supports your statement on how rape is taught.

Right, if the woman is in the city and does not cry out loud enough to be heard then it is adultery...if she is heard then it is rape.

It is also okay to rape the women of captive tribes.
http://www.evilbible.com/Rape.htm

5. For Elisha - unless you can prove that the children (some say youths) did not know what they were doing (bald doen't cut it), there is insufficient evidence to judge whether or not it this preaches violence.

Either way....being attacked by a bear is a little over the top for just making fun of some bald guy.  It would be more appropriate to make them go bald or simply make them publicly announce that it is wrong to make fun of people for how they look.

[Big Mac]

1. Slavery is something that was already happening. If you were living at that time and age and the Bible didn't have some kind of teachings and consolation about slavery you'd be complaining too.

So did the Emancipation Proclamation go against the word of God? THe bible states clear rules regarding slavery and willingly condones it to a heavy point. WHy don't you go get some tire chains and try to get a black person you know to be a slave again? Let's see how well that pans out.

2. Male and female are to have equal status but different roles - though some may take that as offensive, we must also look at things in historical context.

So could you explain why Solomon had 1,000 women to basically submit to him? Different indeed, equal indeed not. That goes back to the whole segregation spill in Plessy v. Ferguson. Seperate but Equal is not attainable. Women are not equal in the bible. There are guidelines to how to sell your daughter either in marriage (dowries) and slavery. I'm curious if you are a male or female and what sect you follow.

3. The Bible doesn't teach "homophobia" - it says it is a sin like heterosexual lust (which is emphasized many more times), but it does not teach that we should fear, or hate homosexuals in any way, but rather - love others.

Yeah the whole "Hate the sin, not the sinner" spill doesn't work. The OT clearly spells out why and how to kill Homo's. If that's not homophobic, why don't you tell that to Michael Shepherd's parents and see how well that pans out.

4. if you would read your own biblical quotes carefully God distinguishes adultery from rape. So I don't see how this supports your statement on how rape is taught.

He does to a small extent but this "test" is the equivalent of a Salem Witch trial. What if the rapist gags the woman's mouth? It basically comes down to her word (a woman's word, which is inferior, remember?) to a man's word (who will be sided with if this passage is taking literally). I think it shows a loophole on how to rape a woman if you are crafty enough.

5. For Elisha - unless you can prove that the children (some say youths) did not know what they were doing (bald doen't cut it), there is insufficient evidence to judge whether or not it this preaches violence.

Regardless of their age it says they merely MOCKED him for being BALD. How does this warrant the use of She-Bears to maul and kill them? You are really brain-washed to ignore such a violent passage.

 

6. I don't get the arguments in the others, but for the iron chariots, when it referred to "they" it was the Israelites and not God.

It does refer to Gawd, indirectly. God helped the Israelites out many times by making wasps attack their enemies, teaching Gideon how to use psychological warfare, making the day last longer, and letting the Israelites win a battle as long as Moses arms were up. So what good does iron chariots do against such a formidable ally?

You are perfectly fine with these passages?

I have another question. You think homosexuality is a sin, but do you keep kosher? Do you wear clothes that are of two different fabrics (everyone has worn a polyester/cotton shirt before, don't bullshit this one), been around a woman who gave birth within a week at least? If so then you have broken the rest of God's wonderful laws. And don't try to say Jesus changed them because he specifically says that he did not.

You have yet to convince anyone with these tried and failed methods of witnessing to us.

[saukhasi]

L and Big Mac.

there are tons of other verses that teach respect and love. To single those out is exactly “reading out of context” and therefore that only shows it is very dangerous of read out of context. Same with slavery, sexism, and homosexuality. If those people read the Bible in context they would know that the summation of law is love God and others, and in different situations there are different expressions of that law (which for the Jews, who had exceptional privileges of seeing God’s miracles and manifestations and the exclusive responsibility of  preserving God’s way, was proportionally tough). (Unless you are willing to prove that all expressions of love remain the same in every single circumstance). So I don’t keep kosher. Jesus came to fulfill the law â€" that is because He has died for our sins so we can stand before God’s presence and have no gap between us and other believers â€" which is love that has never been before (after the fall that is). That is why He can save a woman from being stoned, because His completion of the law brings on a new covenant (a different circumstance). Or else that would be one of the most prominent contradiction in the Bible and we would have taken it out years ago. And if those Christians weren’t hypocrites, they’d be out stoning everyone who has sex with someone other than a spouse, checking them out. All this shows is that reading the Bible out of context is extremely dangerous, especially for Christians.

why can't the young women of captive tribes were raped and not treated nicely?

Being attacked by a bear: there is no way to know if the children were really making fun of baldy or disrespecting a prophet (which they would likely understand given the prominence of Elisha and Elijah) with stupid slurs as young people still do today with our lack of vocabulary. That they were mauled by bears would suggest the latter, and not necessarily that God was evil. This isn’t brainwash, it’s thinking of all the possibilities.

[Big Mac]

Wow, saukhasi, you are a shining example of why I left Christianity. This mindless speaking you jabber on about is an attempt to cover your god's ass. The bible is self-serving, it does not preach justice. You fail to convince anyone but the naive into your psychotic cult. Christianity is a cult. A cult will have a charismatic leader who you are not to question and who will shoulder the world's burden in unverifiable acts that no one else mentions historically and is contradicted by history. Do you think Jesus was the only one crucified? No! Thousands of people were to set an example of Rome.The only reason your religion survived is because of Constantine converting to Christianity. Had he not, we would see Christianity in history text books for what it really should be: a passing, faddish cult of our ignorant past.

Yes the bible preaches love, but it pales in comparision to hate it has in it. Not to mention the violence it perpetuates and shows in its passages. Take your head out of your ass and read it word for word without  your religious bias. I'm just going to come out and say it to you. YOU'RE A FUCKING MORON FOR THINKING THESE LAME POSTS WILL CHANGE ANYTHING. Harsh? So is the bible in its stupidity.

[Whitney]

The problem is that those bad verses are just as in context as the verses which seem warm an fuzzy.  You can't say that something is "out of context" just because it doesn't fit well with your idea of what God is like.  What you are doing is picking through the bible for verses which fit into your view of Christianity and using them to figure out ways to reconcil conflicts with the less pleasing parts.

Until you realize that we are smart enough to read a book in context and that we just aren't agreeing with your strange idea of context...then I don't think this conversation will get very far.

[saukhasi]

Your default position is that God is evil – and when being shown that there are other ways to interpret what you take as absolute evidence of God being evil, you still hold on to those beliefs which can now rightfully be called dogmas. You can come up with more contradictions for me to solve, but jumping to conclusions like that is what keeps the discussion from going.

To see what I mean by "in context" is simple = while you point out one incident, or sometimes even one verse or one words in one verse, I take into account other verses which give background information. This isn't to brag, but if you could add verses to support your position that would be really helpful. And I am not making any references to your intelligence. I don't assume things like that.

[Big Mac]

Oiy, you are insulting us. We're not isolating these texts, there are tons of examples and we've picked out a few. It's all in pretty clean-cut references. Slaves, rape, violence, etc. is justified. Why didn't God have them preach peace and love instead of invading Canaan and killing everyone? Makes you wonder, doesn't it? An almighty being couldn't present peace to the world early on? Gee, some almighty being.

Stop with the context argument, no one is buying it and no one should, it's stupid.

[McQ]

Your default position is that God is evil â€" and when being shown that there are other ways to interpret what you take as absolute evidence of God being evil, you still hold on to those beliefs which can now rightfully be called dogmas. You can come up with more contradictions for me to solve, but jumping to conclusions like that is what keeps the discussion from going.

To see what I mean by “in context” is simple = while you point out one incident, or sometimes even one verse or one words in one verse, I take into account other verses which give background information. This isn’t to brag, but if you could add verses to support your position that would be really helpful. And I am not making any references to your intelligence. I don't assume things like that.

Did you not read my earlier post regarding the background of some of us here? Come on, try to show a little better judgement than to think that you are the only one who has ever studied the ENTIRE bible!

Picking out verses to point out contradictions is no more taking the bible out of context than picking out verses that support the position of faith. It's what WE did as christians! I have memorized and studied hundreds of verses for the sole purpose of leading other people to christ. If you are the christian you claim to be, then so have you. In these examples, if you want to say that I'm taking the bible out of context to show the contradiction in Judas' death from two different gospels, then I'd also be taking the bible out of context to use passages to lead someone to christ.

Examples of taking verses out individually for the purpose of supporting the bible and salvation (grab your bible....New American Version to make it easy):


Romans 3:23
Romans 6:23a
Titus 3:5

John 3:16
Romans 5:8
Acts 5:30-31

Acts 3:19
Ephesians 2:8
Romans 10:9

2 Timothy 1:9-10
2 Corinthians 6:2

I took every single verse "out of it's context" to do that. But you would say I did not.

Now, how did Judas die?

Matthew 27: 3-10
Acts 1:16-19

I have taken the ONLY two full accounts of Judas' death that exist in the ENTIRE bible. No missing context here. But they are in contradiction with one another.

So, which is it? Do you understand how we are not taking the bible out of context here, but if anyone is, you are? And I used to, as a christian too.

The only person here who is being disingenuous is you, saukhasi
I'd be happy to go toe to toe with you on bible apologetics any time. The problem is that I was willing to let the real truth show me what was what and you aren't. At least not yet.

[Whitney]

if you could add verses to support your position that would be really helpful.

Is there a formula for this?  Exactly how many verses do we have to present before you'll accept that the less warm and fuzzy parts of the Bible are in context?  If we use your approach apparently we just have to claim your view is out of context without mentioning the verses which show why (you haven't cited a single verse other than what we have mentioned)