tribeofjudah's Bible study

[Cappster]

Jesus himself quoted from Scripture: Torah, etc.
Jesus himself spoke of Moses, David, the widow during Elijah's time...Namaan the leper, etc....

Could you believe that the Bible is written by men who were led to reveal such writing by the SPIRIT OF THE LIVING GOD...?

People can believe just about anything whether or not there is evidence to suggest that such things even occurred.
...
And on a side note, it is quite easy to look at the Old Testament and tailor the New Testament to the old making the stories fit (shedding of the lambs blood).

There's plenty of evidence to suggest New Testament events happened. And I totally disagree about tailoring the New to fit the Old. Jesus was a radical departure from what the Jewish people of His time were expecting from a Messiah, which is why the Pharisees tried to trip him up on the law. But He tied His teachings to the Old Testament, showing He understood God's law better than they.

Even if there were evidence that Jesus even existed, it is a mighty tough mountain to climb to prove that he was God in the flesh. Doesn't it seem rather silly that God would send himself to be born a man and then sacrifice himself for himself? Sounds rather sadistic to me as to why an omnipotent being would do such a thing.

Anyway, the story of Jesus is not even original and the Bible is full of fallacies of which do not seem to be "guided" by a being who was able to create the universe.

[Deadskins]

Jesus himself quoted from Scripture: Torah, etc.
Jesus himself spoke of Moses, David, the widow during Elijah's time...Namaan the leper, etc....

Could you believe that the Bible is written by men who were led to reveal such writing by the SPIRIT OF THE LIVING GOD...?

People can believe just about anything whether or not there is evidence to suggest that such things even occurred.
...
And on a side note, it is quite easy to look at the Old Testament and tailor the New Testament to the old making the stories fit (shedding of the lambs blood).

There's plenty of evidence to suggest New Testament events happened. And I totally disagree about tailoring the New to fit the Old. Jesus was a radical departure from what the Jewish people of His time were expecting from a Messiah, which is why the Pharisees tried to trip him up on the law. But He tied His teachings to the Old Testament, showing He understood God's law better than they.

Even if there were evidence that Jesus even existed, it is a mighty tough mountain to climb to prove that he was God in the flesh. Doesn't it seem rather silly that God would send himself to be born a man and then sacrifice himself for himself? Sounds rather sadistic to me as to why an omnipotent being would do such a thing.

Anyway, the story of Jesus is not even original and the Bible is full of fallacies of which do not seem to be "guided" by a being who was able to create the universe.

He was sacrificed for the human race, not for God. Can you name some of these "fallacies," and give your evidence that they are indeed fallacies?

[DarthMonk]

I've always found it interesting that ancient cultures all over the world sacrificed first-born sons (or made another culture do it in service of the new god) and that this is exactly what the Christian God is said to have done with his first (and only) son.

[langleyparkjoe]

Wana know the one thing ALL religions have in common?

Man & Woman

[Cappster]

Jesus himself quoted from Scripture: Torah, etc.
Jesus himself spoke of Moses, David, the widow during Elijah's time...Namaan the leper, etc....

Could you believe that the Bible is written by men who were led to reveal such writing by the SPIRIT OF THE LIVING GOD...?

People can believe just about anything whether or not there is evidence to suggest that such things even occurred.
...
And on a side note, it is quite easy to look at the Old Testament and tailor the New Testament to the old making the stories fit (shedding of the lambs blood).

There's plenty of evidence to suggest New Testament events happened. And I totally disagree about tailoring the New to fit the Old. Jesus was a radical departure from what the Jewish people of His time were expecting from a Messiah, which is why the Pharisees tried to trip him up on the law. But He tied His teachings to the Old Testament, showing He understood God's law better than they.

Even if there were evidence that Jesus even existed, it is a mighty tough mountain to climb to prove that he was God in the flesh. Doesn't it seem rather silly that God would send himself to be born a man and then sacrifice himself for himself? Sounds rather sadistic to me as to why an omnipotent being would do such a thing.

Anyway, the story of Jesus is not even original and the Bible is full of fallacies of which do not seem to be "guided" by a being who was able to create the universe.

He was sacrificed for the human race, not for God. Can you name some of these "fallacies," and give your evidence that they are indeed fallacies?

So, God could have pardoned the human race, his imperfect creation that he messed up while creating, but instead created and sent his only son to sacrifice him so that humans may live? Hmmm, doesn't make much logical sense to me and seems rather sadistic...especially for a being that is supposed to be all powerful. I suppose that will be the first fallacy that I have to offer. Another fallacy is the story of Noah's Ark. It is impossible to find two of every animal (including dinosaurs depending on if you are a 6,000 year old creationists) and fit them on a boat. Evolution is all, but scientific law in that all animals have evolved from a previous species. Yes, like it or not, all humans are primates just like our ancestral cousins, the Chimpanzee. How about the commandment "Thou shalt not kill?" How many people did God slaughter in the Bible? So as I say and not as I do?

Adam and Eve...incest anyone? Did their kids not have sex with each other as well? Not to mention the fact that woman in the Bible are equivalent to the worth of cattle. I could go on with all of the claims the Bible makes that doesn't make sense, but that would be a waste of time. Once you start poking holes in certain parts of the Bible, it opens up the thought process of how much of the Bible should be questioned. I question all of it, because it has all of the traits of being made by man. Pettiness, anger, jealousy, vanity, etc...

[Cappster]

I've always found it interesting that ancient cultures all over the world sacrificed first-born sons (or made another culture do it in service of the new god) and that this is exactly what the Christian God is said to have done with his first (and only) son.

But the Bible is different. People say its the work of God so it must be /sarcasm

[Cappster]

Wana know the one thing ALL religions have in common?

Man & Woman

I know one thing the have in common: They all are man-made works of fiction and prohibit critical thinking.

[Deadskins]

Jesus himself quoted from Scripture: Torah, etc.
Jesus himself spoke of Moses, David, the widow during Elijah's time...Namaan the leper, etc....

Could you believe that the Bible is written by men who were led to reveal such writing by the SPIRIT OF THE LIVING GOD...?

People can believe just about anything whether or not there is evidence to suggest that such things even occurred.
...
And on a side note, it is quite easy to look at the Old Testament and tailor the New Testament to the old making the stories fit (shedding of the lambs blood).

There's plenty of evidence to suggest New Testament events happened. And I totally disagree about tailoring the New to fit the Old. Jesus was a radical departure from what the Jewish people of His time were expecting from a Messiah, which is why the Pharisees tried to trip him up on the law. But He tied His teachings to the Old Testament, showing He understood God's law better than they.

Even if there were evidence that Jesus even existed, it is a mighty tough mountain to climb to prove that he was God in the flesh. Doesn't it seem rather silly that God would send himself to be born a man and then sacrifice himself for himself? Sounds rather sadistic to me as to why an omnipotent being would do such a thing.

Anyway, the story of Jesus is not even original and the Bible is full of fallacies of which do not seem to be "guided" by a being who was able to create the universe.

He was sacrificed for the human race, not for God. Can you name some of these "fallacies," and give your evidence that they are indeed fallacies?

So, God could have pardoned the human race, his imperfect creation that he messed up while creating, but instead created and sent his only son to sacrifice him so that humans may live? Hmmm, doesn't make much logical sense to me and seems rather sadistic...especially for a being that is supposed to be all powerful. I suppose that will be the first fallacy that I have to offer. Another fallacy is the story of Noah's Ark. It is impossible to find two of every animal (including dinosaurs depending on if you are a 6,000 year old creationists) and fit them on a boat. Evolution is all, but scientific law in that all animals have evolved from a previous species. Yes, like it or not, all humans are primates just like our ancestral cousins, the Chimpanzee. How about the commandment "Thou shalt not kill?" How many people did God slaughter in the Bible? So as I say and not as I do?

Adam and Eve...incest anyone? Did their kids not have sex with each other as well? Not to mention the fact that woman in the Bible are equivalent to the worth of cattle. I could go on with all of the claims the Bible makes that doesn't make sense, but that would be a waste of time. Once you start poking holes in certain parts of the Bible, it opens up the thought process of how much of the Bible should be questioned. I question all of it, because it has all of the traits of being made by man. Pettiness, anger, jealousy, vanity, etc...

The only fallacies you've demonstrated there are your own logical fallacies.

[Cappster]

The only fallacies you've demonstrated there are your own logical fallacies.

Mmmmmhmmmm...So the only way to *refute* what I said is to plug your fingers in your ears and say, "Nuh-uh what the Bible says is true, it is true, and it is true!" Got it.

[Deadskins]

The only fallacies you've demonstrated there are your own logical fallacies.

Mmmmmhmmmm...So the only way to *refute* what I said is to plug your fingers in your ears and say, "Nuh-uh what the Bible says is true, it is true, and it is true!" Got it.

Another logical fallacy.

[Cappster]

So tell me where I have a fallacy in what I said instead of claiming that I have fallacies and backing it up with nothing.

[Deadskins]

So tell me where I have a fallacy in what I said instead of claiming that I have fallacies and backing it up with nothing.

OK, though we've been over this many times already.

Your last statement:

Mmmmmhmmmm...So the only way to *refute* what I said is to plug your fingers in your ears and say, "Nuh-uh what the Bible says is true, it is true, and it is true!" Got it.

Is logically false, because I said your previous statements contained logical fallacies, not that "what the Bible says is true."

As to your previous statements:

So, God could have pardoned the human race, his imperfect creation that he messed up while creating, but instead created and sent his only son to sacrifice him so that humans may live? Hmmm, doesn't make much logical sense to me and seems rather sadistic...especially for a being that is supposed to be all powerful. I suppose that will be the first fallacy that I have to offer. Another fallacy is the story of Noah's Ark. It is impossible to find two of every animal (including dinosaurs depending on if you are a 6,000 year old creationists) and fit them on a boat. Evolution is all, but scientific law in that all animals have evolved from a previous species. Yes, like it or not, all humans are primates just like our ancestral cousins, the Chimpanzee. How about the commandment "Thou shalt not kill?" How many people did God slaughter in the Bible? So as I say and not as I do?

Adam and Eve...incest anyone? Did their kids not have sex with each other as well? Not to mention the fact that woman in the Bible are equivalent to the worth of cattle. I could go on with all of the claims the Bible makes that doesn't make sense, but that would be a waste of time. Once you start poking holes in certain parts of the Bible, it opens up the thought process of how much of the Bible should be questioned. I question all of it, because it has all of the traits of being made by man. Pettiness, anger, jealousy, vanity, etc...

Starts off with a whopper about God messing up His creation. You're presuming to understand His plan, what happens to your soul after this life, and projecting your own narrow view of morality upon Him. This logical fallacy comes from your preconceived conclusion that God does not exist, and that your time from birth to death is all that there is of your existence.

Then you go off into ramblings about certain Old Testament stories being fallacies, when most Biblical scholars do not take these stories literally, as they were passed down orally for centuries before ever having been put into print. Jesus often spoke in parables, to convey an idea, where the story was, in fact, made up. That doesn't make the story fallacious.

[DarthMonk]

Does everything have to make sense?

I think that if anything has to make sense, it's God. If God exists, I think God has to be rational. I don't think God can do the "logically impossible." Creation has to make sense. Physicists actually have a working theory that the total energy of the universe is zero thereby paving a rational way for something from nothing.

The question now is can that happen spontaneously or is a "summoner from the void" (my phrase, all rights reserved) required?

I maintain that no one really knows. We make our best "guess" and proceed. I have chosen the agnostic road and continue to search for answers.

For those who have chosen other roads it is one thing to say "I think" and another to say "I know." I do not believe those who say the latter. I call them "intellectually dishonest." I do not call them liars. There's a difference.

In the words of Carl Sagan: "An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that no such God exists. To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed."

An irrational God who can perform pure miracles does not work for me. A God who is rational and can perform what would be a miracle for me but what ultimately makes sense - a God like that I could potentially believe in.

I hear the Christian God is a pretty understanding sort - at least from some people. If I have to accept Jesus as my savior to avoid hell then I'm out of luck for now. Seems like a pretty ridiculous demand.

DarthMonk

[Cappster]

So tell me where I have a fallacy in what I said instead of claiming that I have fallacies and backing it up with nothing.

OK, though we've been over this many times already.

Your last statement:

Mmmmmhmmmm...So the only way to *refute* what I said is to plug your fingers in your ears and say, "Nuh-uh what the Bible says is true, it is true, and it is true!" Got it.

Is logically false, because I said your previous statements contained logical fallacies, not that "what the Bible says is true."

As to your previous statements:

So, God could have pardoned the human race, his imperfect creation that he messed up while creating, but instead created and sent his only son to sacrifice him so that humans may live? Hmmm, doesn't make much logical sense to me and seems rather sadistic...especially for a being that is supposed to be all powerful. I suppose that will be the first fallacy that I have to offer. Another fallacy is the story of Noah's Ark. It is impossible to find two of every animal (including dinosaurs depending on if you are a 6,000 year old creationists) and fit them on a boat. Evolution is all, but scientific law in that all animals have evolved from a previous species. Yes, like it or not, all humans are primates just like our ancestral cousins, the Chimpanzee. How about the commandment "Thou shalt not kill?" How many people did God slaughter in the Bible? So as I say and not as I do?

Adam and Eve...incest anyone? Did their kids not have sex with each other as well? Not to mention the fact that woman in the Bible are equivalent to the worth of cattle. I could go on with all of the claims the Bible makes that doesn't make sense, but that would be a waste of time. Once you start poking holes in certain parts of the Bible, it opens up the thought process of how much of the Bible should be questioned. I question all of it, because it has all of the traits of being made by man. Pettiness, anger, jealousy, vanity, etc...

Starts off with a whopper about God messing up His creation. You're presuming to understand His plan, what happens to your soul after this life, and projecting your own narrow view of morality upon Him. This logical fallacy comes from your preconceived conclusion that God does not exist, and that your time from birth to death is all that there is of your existence.

Then you go off into ramblings about certain Old Testament stories being fallacies, when most Biblical scholars do not take these stories literally, as they were passed down orally for centuries before ever having been put into print. Jesus often spoke in parables, to convey an idea, where the story was, in fact, made up. That doesn't make the story fallacious.

All religions seemingly claim they know God's plan. I am not claiming to know God's plan, if such a deity exists. I am stating I see no evidence for God's existence. I am NOT stating I can conclusively prove that a God does not exist as, but the burden of proof is not on me. The burden of proof is on those who claim that God is real...where is the evidence. Now, the classic response is that "I have a personal relationship with God and that things have happened in my life to prove to me that he is real." I see no correlation between what one perceives to be have happened and what is the actual cause of a perceived miracle or miraculous works of God. Science claims that evolution is real and back it up scientifically and welcomes anyone to come along and disprove their evidence. Religion, on the other hand, claims they know they have the answers, but fail to provide any quantitative evidence to back up their baseless claims.

If God wanted to be so well known and worshiped by us peasants, he could make it a lot easier to do so.

[Deadskins]

If I have to accept Jesus as my savior to avoid hell then I'm out of luck for now. Seems like a pretty ridiculous demand.

I hear this a lot, but that demand is nowhere to be found in the Bible. What the Bible says is the converse; If you accept Jesus as your savior (read following His teachings), then you are guaranteed acceptance into Heaven.

[DarthMonk]

If I have to accept Jesus as my savior to avoid hell then I'm out of luck for now. Seems like a pretty ridiculous demand.

I hear this a lot, but that demand is nowhere to be found in the Bible. What the Bible says, is the converse; If you accept Jesus as your savior (read following His teachings), then you are guaranteed acceptance into Heaven.

That's good to know. I made an if-then statement. I hear the demand a lot.

I know some clever contortionists. This is in the Bible:

MARK 16:15-16 (RSV)

_____________________________________________________________

15
And he said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the
gospel to the whole creation.
16
He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who
does not believe will be condemned."

I'll restate:

If I have to "believe the gospel" to avoid "being condemned" then I'm out of luck for now. Seems like a pretty ridiculous demand.

I've already read a bunch of "in the context of" explanations, etc. I get it. I've heard the gospel many times. It might be true. It might not. There might be other ways to avoid condemnation - according to the Bible. This is one of the reasons it (the Bible) is easily deemed self-contradictory. So many of the seeming contradictions seem straight-forward. So many of the ways out seem to require high-level gymnastic topology which invoke unproven theorems based on unprovable axioms.

DarthMonk

[Deadskins]

If I have to accept Jesus as my savior to avoid hell then I'm out of luck for now. Seems like a pretty ridiculous demand.

I hear this a lot, but that demand is nowhere to be found in the Bible. What the Bible says, is the converse; If you accept Jesus as your savior (read following His teachings), then you are guaranteed acceptance into Heaven.

That's good to know. I made an if-then statement. I hear the demand a lot.

I know some clever contortionists. This is in the Bible:

MARK 16:15-16 (RSV)

_____________________________________________________________

15
And he said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the
gospel to the whole creation.
16
He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who
does not believe will be condemned."

I'll restate:

If I have to "believe the gospel" to avoid "being condemned" then I'm out of luck for now. Seems like a pretty ridiculous demand.

The word Gospel means good news. And from my reading of that passage, Jesus is only stating that a belief in God is required to avoid condemnation.

Here's another passage that might explain it better:
Mark 7:24-30
24 Jesus left that place and went to the vicinity of Tyre. He entered a house and did not want anyone to know it; yet he could not keep his presence secret. 25 In fact, as soon as she heard about him, a woman whose little daughter was possessed by an impure spirit came and fell at his feet. 26 The woman was a Greek, born in Syrian Phoenicia. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter.

27 “First let the children eat all they want,” he told her, “for it is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”

28 “Lord,” she replied, “even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.”

29 Then he told her, “For such a reply, you may go; the demon has left your daughter.”

30 She went home and found her child lying on the bed, and the demon gone.

In this story, the woman is a Gentile, and Jesus tests her by saying that God's love is reserved for His chosen people first. But she replies that God's love is unbounded, and spills over to the entire world. Jesus agrees and tells her that her daughter has been healed because she acknowledged God's love.

[Deadskins]

All religions seemingly claim they know God's plan. I am not claiming to know God's plan, if such a deity exists. I am stating I see no evidence for God's existence. I am NOT stating I can conclusively prove that a God does not exist as, but the burden of proof is not on me. The burden of proof is on those who claim that God is real...where is the evidence. Now, the classic response is that "I have a personal relationship with God and that things have happened in my life to prove to me that he is real." I see no correlation between what one perceives to be have happened and what is the actual cause of a perceived miracle or miraculous works of God. Science claims that evolution is real and back it up scientifically and welcomes anyone to come along and disprove their evidence. Religion, on the other hand, claims they know they have the answers, but fail to provide any quantitative evidence to back up their baseless claims.

If God wanted to be so well known and worshiped by us peasants, he could make it a lot easier to do so.

More logical fallacies.

[Cappster]

I don't see the fallacy in that the burden of proof that God exists lies in those who proclaim that such a deity exists. Especially when it comes to trying to influence the way others live their lives in the name of God. Examples: Gay marriage, not eating pork on Saturday, Manifest Destiny, praying 6 times a day, etc... Religion is losing popularity for a reason and it is, because more and more people are seeing through the fairy tales.

[Cappster]

According to Jesus's book, anyone who is not a Jew is a second class child of God. Haha

[tribeofjudah]

According to Jesus's book, anyone who is not a Jew is a second class child of God. Haha

Wrong: Jesus sees no dividing class, he wants to SAVE ALL people.
Salvation LEVELS the playing field for all...

Jhn 10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, [and] one shepherd.

AND......

2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

AND........

Luk 4:25 But I tell you of a truth, many widows were in Israel in the days of Elias, when the heaven was shut up three years and six months, when great famine was throughout all the land;
Luk 4:26 But unto none of them was Elias sent, save unto Sarepta, [a city] of Sidon, unto a woman [that was] a widow.
Luk 4:27 And many lepers were in Israel in the time of Eliseus the prophet; and none of them was cleansed, saving Naaman the Syrian.

[Deadskins]

There is none so blind as he who will not see.

[langleyparkjoe]

Well... I question all of it just like Cappo but I believe in God.. I mean, it's blind faith but I still have it.

[tribeofjudah]

Well... I question all of it just like Cappo but I believe in God.. I mean, it's blind faith but I still have it.

ahhhh, Yes......grasshoppa

You believe there is wind, though you do not see "wind" ..... yet you see its evidence as the leaves and branches sway about when it passes.

You do not see wind, yet you see its evidence
You cannot see GOD, yet you see HIS evidence

[1niksder]

Well... I question all of it just like Cappo but I believe in God.. I mean, it's blind faith but I still have it.

+1