How not to start a conversation with a skeptic...I think

[Mr Greene]

Maybe God is an Arab and didn't care about others? Who's to say

Hmm...if we're made in god's image and god is Arab, why are there more white people around the globe than the rest? He just doesn't know what he wants or how to make up his damn mind.

So that would indicate that Vasco da Gama was acting directly against the will of god when he rounded Africa dropping crosses at every headland...

[Astonished]

Yeah, leave it to an omnipotent, omniscient deity to have his 'word' (allegedly the most important message ever):

Be written decades or longer after the alleged events.

In languages he would know are sure to die, be susceptible to copy error, misinterpretations, human manipulation.  

On little pieced of parchment, that are known to be easily destroyed.

To only a very small group of people in one very small geographical area on the planet, leaving the rest of humanity to 'invent' religions, that this deity would know would displease him.

Such great planning.

And none of this hints at Christianity being just another human 'invented' religion... Nope, not at all.

Actually the Bible was written first in the zodiac which I explained in this post.

http://atheistforums.org/thread-42171-po...pid1234508

---

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: - Romans 1:20

I have always said that the ancient civilizations of the world were monotheists turned polytheists, and that Babylon was the origin of all the worlds mythologies as evidenced from my post from well over a year ago.


As told in the book of Genesis, God promised the woman a seed (this is the prophecy of the virgin birth because "seed" only comes from the man) which we all know to be Jesus Christ, the redeemer.

And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. - Genesis 3:15

In the Book of Revelation Jesus is the Lion of Judah.

And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof. -  Revelation 5:5

So here we have the first and last books of the bible depicting the Virgin and the Lion.

http://www.evidencetoconsider.com/prophe...dle-sphinx
This means that before there was ever a scripture written God symbolized his plan in the zodiac and the ancient peoples knew this, and are without excuse.

Horus can be traced back to the Horites (you see, Egypt didn't originate anything):
http://jandyongenesis.blogspot.com/2011/...ement.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horites

As a side note, what I find Interesting is that the descendant of Esau were described as having red skin.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edom

Does the term "redskin" sound familiar? If we look at the native American symbol for God (The Great Spirit), and the symbol for Horus, they both depict an all seeing eye.



Could these native Americans be the descendants of the red-skinned Edomites formerly known as the Horites?

---

That being said, trying to blame peoples ignorance of the Bible on God is just asinine, especially since the Bible states to "lean not on your own understanding".

---

Or that you are absolutely certain the original text was in fact perfect or different in any significant way. By the way, do you care to back that claim up, Hugs, or are you just going to sit there with your thumb up your ass to hold in yet another empty, baseless assertion? Want to put some green on that proposition? And even if you're right, that means we can infer nothing whatsoever from the bible in its current form and is therefore useless and we should all be deists AT BEST. There's no part of that argument that doesn't make the proponent look foolish.

First of all you made the claim that there are contradictions in the Bible. I clearly asked you to provide evidence of the contradiction (this means to provide the conflicting scriptures). You have yet to do this.

You imply that a loving God flooding the world is contradictory, which shows you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. God is a loving God but he is also a God of Justice. Law requires a penalty, and the penalty for sin is death.

Noah warned of the flood for 120 years, no one believed him...

And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; - 2 Peter 2:5

You've had just as much warning, what's your excuse? If God was to destroy you in the same manner, after all the warning you received (let's not forget, you know the Bible better than theists do) would you consider that an injustice?

And where the fuck was god himself delivering this essential message? If his will is to let crackpots like yourself be his voice, fuck him and the rest of his flock. No loving being leaves something so fucking important so fucking vague, or goes to such an extreme length to exercise justice. That you would even try to justify this makes you a criminal in my eyes.

[Huggy Bear]

And where the fuck was god himself delivering this essential message? If his will is to let crackpots like yourself be his voice, fuck him and the rest of his flock.

Hold up, I thought you knew the bible better than theists, and if that's the case then why don't you know that God DID originally address the people himself and it freaked everyone out so much that they requested that only Moses speak to God, hence why ever since God has only spoke through prophets.

Exodus 20
18 And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking: and when the people saw it, they removed, and stood afar off.
19 And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.

No loving being leaves something so fucking important so fucking vague, or goes to such an extreme length to exercise justice. That you would even try to justify this makes you a criminal in my eyes.

What's vague about:

Acts 2
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Sounds pretty straight forward to me.

As far as the punishment being extreme, you should also know that all scripture must run in continuity, the flood wasn't some random punishment, there was a reason for it.

And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. - 1 John 5:8

First thing you must realize is that the natural types the spiritual.

For example:

When a baby is born first the water breaks, then some bleeding, then the baby's first breath (spirit).

In order to enter the kingdom of God, one must be born into it, which requires a person to be baptized (water) have his sins remitted (through the blood of Jesus Christ) and then he receives the holy spirit (represented by fire, e.g. the fire that fell on the people at Pentecost when the received the holy spirit)

How does the flood factor in?

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. - Revelation 21

The earth must be reborn also. That means is must also be born in the same manner.

The flood was it's baptism, then Jesus spilled his blood in it, cleansing it, then will come the fire.

2 Peter 3
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

Therefore the flood was the first stage in earth's rebirth, but you knew that already.

[Astonished]

And where the fuck was god himself delivering this essential message? If his will is to let crackpots like yourself be his voice, fuck him and the rest of his flock.

Hold up, I thought you knew the bible better than theists, and if that's the case then why don't you know that God DID originally address the people himself and it freaked everyone out so much that they requested that only Moses speak to God, hence why ever since God has only spoke through prophets.

Exodus 20
18 And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking: and when the people saw it, they removed, and stood afar off.
19 And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.

No loving being leaves something so fucking important so fucking vague, or goes to such an extreme length to exercise justice. That you would even try to justify this makes you a criminal in my eyes.

What's vague about:

Acts 2
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Sounds pretty straight forward to me.

As far as the punishment being extreme, you should also know that all scripture must run in continuity, the flood wasn't some random punishment, there was a reason for it.

And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. - 1 John 5:8

First thing you must realize is that the natural types the spiritual.

For example:

When a baby is born first the water breaks, then some bleeding, then the baby's first breath (spirit).

In order to enter the kingdom of God, one must be born into it, which requires a person to be baptized (water) have his sins remitted (through the blood of Jesus Christ) and then he receives the holy spirit (represented by fire, e.g. the fire that fell on the people at Pentecost when the received the holy spirit)

How does the flood factor in?

And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. - Revelation 21

The earth must be reborn also. That means is must also be born in the same manner.

The flood was it's baptism, then Jesus spilled his blood in it, cleansing it, then will come the fire.

2 Peter 3
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

Therefore the flood was the first stage in earth's rebirth, but you knew that already.

You're not getting the underlying problem, pal. Why should anyone take anything in that book seriously, let alone as any form of 'truth'? Your completely unwarranted assertion that it's perfect in any stage of its development is utterly vapid and plainly dishonest. The questionable morals and contradictions in what we have now are more than enough to dismiss the thing as too flawed to be a good indicator of anything significant. If you insist on using it, though, then you have to own up to god's horrific character and uncountable fuck-ups. There is no special permission slip that lets you off the hook for ignoring everything objectionable. You are actually doing nothing but harming your position by falling back on this thing. You really think it's the best approach to use? You'd be better off using the deistic cosmological argument. You're also terribly deluded in thinking that you can interpret these passages in a way that is actually compatible with geological science. For everything you can twist your mind into thinking is potentially correct, anyone else can find something contradictory. You'd be better off doing what Thomas Jefferson did and write your own damn book with your own spin on it. Then people would have to listen to you because you could claim you were a prophet since no one ever needs to prove anything as long as they have religious conviction on their side.