Atheist Bible Study 1: Genesis

[Mystic]

Dear MK,

I think you are batshit crazy?  Why the fuck would I want to see anything with YOUR perception?

Yours Truly,

Min

Let it go, Min. It's good what the theists are doing here. The more they reflect on what we say, the more likely they will eventually ditch the faith and become atheists. This is a good thing!!!

Haha, you learning. Good let's all have fun with this! And see where it leads!

[Drich]

bla bla bla ....

tl:dr
You have no clue why anyone is an atheist, ignorant troll.

please snow flake all of you are the same.. you cry out to God and got nothing in return. or did not get what you felt you were entitled to.. it is always some form of that.

What you are is an ignorant presumptuous angry old man, and obviously religion has done nothing for you.

middle aged actually and religion has not done anything for me.. however God has taken care of me from day one to today where i need not even bother to play the lottery anymore. Religion is or should be used only as a tool to get to know God. other wise it becomes a boat anchor keeping God from people.

FIRST, you have to prove there is a god, and that Jesus existed. You can't.

from a court of law perspective i can. as there is more documentation concerning the existence of Jesus Christ than any other historical figure of that area. to doubt the existence of Christ is to doubt the existence of everyone else in that time period. a douche may object and say, those written records are all religious texts... here's the thing anything written about christ that confirms his deity no matter who wrote it is considered a religious text. The whole book of luke was consider to be written by a complete outsider who had no horse in this race, and it is now consider to be one of the 4 gospels. Even though it was not written for religious purposes or to a church or religious group of any kind.
So to say only religious text mention jesus is moving the goal posts as all written text that confirm christ are categorized this way no matter who wrote them. that being the case Christ is the predominate figure literally in this time period and again to cast doubt on Christ is to also cast doubt on everyone else.

But you don't want legal proof you want what is not possible you want to put God under scientific scrutiny. you would ask that of anyone else? would you demand to put the remains of julius caesar under the microscope to prove who he was?

All your pre-canned answers you bought off the shelf at Fundy-land are wrong.
Go away. No one cares about the shit you attempt to write.

The funny thing is if i used pre canned answers then maybe you would have a chance in a debate. you ever wonder why you always have to attack my character or intelligence? I know you know that crap is as intellectually dishonest as one can get, but as of late is your only avenue.. do you want to know why? because i do not use off the shelf answers otherwise you could google your response, and the only think you have left is an ad hoc or ad hom attacks.. which you do not seem to have a problem with.

"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God--"
Ephesians 2:8

Some were not given the "gift" THAT is why they are atheists.

how do you know if you have or have not been given this gift? You clearly do not understand the basics, you have created some hippy fundie version of jesus who biblically does not exist. you cry out to God in petition and wonder why he does not answer your 'prayer'

The gods are all made in the image of men.
That why you have an angry judgmental Jebus.

what a m-fing moron.. You made a version of jesus and was he angry? you made a version of God and did he have emotion? So goes 2000 years of like minded perception. and then the jews before.. Do you want to know why the pharisees and sadducees did not follow Christ as the son of God? because He then like now did not fit the religious mould. He was not what people expected of a deity. they wanted to see pictures of the greek gods embodies in their God... just like you do. you need a satan to be the king of the underworld you need a zuse for a heavenly Father and you need a hippy jesus... You are not alone in these pics as this is how these figures have been depicted for 1000s of years, because when we build a god that is what we want...

I have shown you God and Jesus to be completely opposite of what you think of through the bible. and you still claim we invent god... again how m-fing stupid you are to say something as blind sided as that!!1 Again you are answering stock responses when I do not give you a stock remark. you are so lost you continually return to these broken answers as if they can still mean something. THEY DON'T!

The God of the bible looks nothing like anything in any form of mythos or non christian religion. The deal in Christianity put people in direct contact with God.. again not even in the christian religion! is this possible in all cases as some believe we must have priests and dead saints to intercede for us.. No the Holy Spirit since acts 2 is our only intercession needed! I have shown you over and over Jesus is not the hippy douche you made up! He was strong took no prisoners and harsh with people who stood in his way delivering the truth of God's word!!

You are an angry judgmental person who gets off on playing "superior" Church Lady.

idnat special.. a 1990 SNL reference and you call me old.. what kind of ham fingered crap is this? just more ad hom pie thrown in my direction to see if something will stick.. this is what dummies do when they can't speak topically.. they try and tear down people so the other dummies can feel safe from also being put on the spot and being forced to provide answers they/you can not.

So .... your Jebus is an angry judgmental Church Lady.
(There is NO Christian congregation / group that would approve of your behavior ... not one. Obviously you are a "loner" ... is that why you are so angry ?)

never been to a korean baptist revival i see. you are and have been desperately trying to reel me in by appealing to what you think are the limits of my 'religion.' Again I am not religious moron. I am not bound by the law. My rules are that of Christ Himself To love God with all my being meaning to put God first in everything, and to agape' my neighbor as my self. Agape' is a respect form of love that can be forged over time. like me heating an ingot of iron and beating it over and over into submission once the crude iron casts out the impurities and becomes a master work of steel then the steel will show the love time thought and attention put into it's transformation and reshaping.

This is what is known as the long game, and truth be told you are not really the focus it is everyone else who wants to know but does not want to face the heat or the anvil right away... which is only but one tool I have, as I have had many many discussions with members here that never get heated.
all ne need to is ask a question and follow up respectfully.

[Bucky Ball]

tl:dr
You have no clue why anyone is an atheist, ignorant troll.

please snow flake all of you are the same.. you cry out to God and got nothing in return. or did not get what you felt you were entitled to.. it is always some form of that.

I never cried out to any immaginary sky daddy. I do get that you are so limited that you can only imagine what a 2 year old can think of.

[TwoCultSurvivor]

I work in courts all the time. I cover them for a major metropolitan newspaper.
From a court of law perspective, no, you cannot prove that Jesus existed as a figure in history.

Certainly not "beyond a reasonable doubt," and likely not "by a preponderance of the evidence."

Courts do not allow "hearsay" testimony, and ALL the evidence about Jesus' historical existence is hearsay.
I'm including Tacitus, for whom Jesus was a throwaway line in a comment about a different subject entirely.

I'm including Josephus, whose most famous reference to Jesus is a fraud and whose second-most famous reference is incongruous with the legend we're discussing.

I'm not saying Jesus never existed. I think it's likely he did: but the evidence requires us to accept second, third and fourth hand accounts as reliable.

That can happen in history.

It cannot happen in court. There's more proof that the South American caravan has Middle Eastern lepers headed to the USA than there is that Jesus existed, as far as courts would be concerned.

[Bucky Ball]

It may be that the character invented by the new cult followers were loosely based on one or more of the wandering apocalyptic preachers of the time. 
The story includes some well-known memes of the day, (virgin birth, dying and rising gods), in stories of other gods/messiah figures. 
The most suspicious thing to me, is that the content of the preaching includes the prime concern of the rabbis after the temple destruction, and the diaspora had begun. 
This concern was how were the Jews to live a righteous life, now that the temple was gone, and which of the laws were to still be followed. That was boiled down by the rabbis to the "golden rule" :"love god and love your neighbor as yourself"'. There was no need for this discussion when the temple was still standing. 

As far as evidence goes, it's pretty weak. 
If someone accepts the evidence for Jesus, one also has to accept (if one is not a hypocrite) this evidence --> 

1. Hundreds if not thousands of people were involved in concluding that what they said they saw and concluded was actually true. 
2. The witnesses provided sworn testimony in court, sworn affidavits which we can look at today, and affirmed they were completely utterly convinced that what they were saying was totally completely true. 
3. The witnesses came from all social strata, and every diverse background, including the most highly educated of the day. 
4. These witnesses included judges, magistrates, the governor of the state, and family members of those about whom the assertions were made. 
5. Many involved had much to lose if the assertions were to be found true. The consequences would impact many in very personal ways, if found to be true, thus had no conflict of interest, or reasin to lie. Many could lose beloved spouses and family members and friends about whom they cared a great deal. 
6. The proceedings were thorough, exhaustive investigations. They deliberately gathered evidence. They made every effort to sort out truth from fallacy. They went to every possible length to actually discern the facts. 
7. There are numerous artifacts from the time, and many documents from the proceedings we can review in person today. 
8. These proceedings happened, not 2000 years ago, but a mere few hundred years ago. The literacy rate was far far higher than in ancient Israel. 
9. For claimed events from 2000 years ago, there are no actual original documents of any kind. None at all. Only copies from centuries later. 
10. For the events in question we have sworn documented court testimony, not just word of mouth transmission. 
11. A truck full of documents from the proceedings exist at the University of Virginia Library. You can go see the testimony of the eye-witnesses for yourself, today. 
12. By any measure or method, the quantity and quality of the evidence for the events in question FAR FAR FAR outweigh the quality of the evidence for the events in Jerusalem 2000 years ago. 
13. Anyone who claims they have good evidence to support belief in Jesus, his death, and resurrection, or any miracle thought to have happened today, IF they are in any way a consistent, honest, logical and a reasonably thoughtful person, they MUST also accept :

That of the 250 people accused, 19 women in Salem Massachusetts, including Sarah Goode, and Rebekah Nurse, The Witches of Salem, really were actually witches, and were justly condemned and executed for performing demon magic. 

[TwoCultSurvivor]

I did not realize theists were welcome on this site.

Not that I'm complaining. I just didn't know the ground rules.

Thanks for being here and being willing to "dialogue," if that's the right word for it.

[Minimalist]

They provide entertainment and minimal intellectual stimulation.

[GrandizerII]

Down to Abram
Genesis 11:10-26

Nothing much going on here. Just another genealogy, and with numbers to boot. You can see men are starting to die far younger, but still having impressively long lifespans. This one goes all the way to Abram (later to be renamed Abraham), as a sort of prelude to his stories. This should be fun.

[Drich]

I work in courts all the time. I cover them for a major metropolitan newspaper.
From a court of law perspective, no, you cannot prove that Jesus existed as a figure in history.

Certainly not "beyond a reasonable doubt," and likely not "by a preponderance of the evidence."

Courts do not allow "hearsay" testimony, and ALL the evidence about Jesus' historical existence is hearsay.
I'm including Tacitus, for whom Jesus was a throwaway line in a comment about a different subject entirely.

I'm including Josephus, whose most famous reference to Jesus is a fraud and whose second-most famous reference is incongruous with the legend we're discussing.

I'm not saying Jesus never existed. I think it's likely he did: but the evidence requires us to accept second, third and fourth hand accounts as reliable.

That can happen in history.

It cannot happen in court. There's more proof that the South American caravan has Middle Eastern lepers headed to the USA than there is that Jesus existed, as far as courts would be concerned.

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

I did not say an american court did I? At Christ's trial the court (The only suitable court that could be used to judge him) ordered him executed because they recognised him as the Son of God.. But because they had not power to execute him (the priest took him to the roman authority) Pilate point blanked asked him if he was who the claimed and Jesus said I am but my kingdom is not of this world.. Pilate then responded I can find no fault with this man...

---

I did not realize theists were welcome on this site.

Not that I'm complaining. I just didn't know the ground rules.

Thanks for being here and being willing to "dialogue," if that's the right word for it.

honest question=honest answer.

foolish challenge/gottcha questions= me being put on your ignore list.

[GrandizerII]

And now we get to this guy:



We saw some interesting accounts on Adam, Noah, and some others, but they all seemed rather mythical and distant. With Abraham, things start to feel different. Abraham, compared to the aforementioned figures, is more human and more realistic. In fact, he is the first person in the Bible about whom you could reasonably say has good character development in his accounts (relatively speaking). You get to know a lot more about him than you do about Adam and Noah, and perhaps even feel for him as he experiences all sorts of struggles and joys in life. We also see him in action as he negotiates with people and fights his enemies and pleads for his friends. And there are quite a few moments with him that are arguably pretty powerful, and we will get to them eventually.

So to anyone who's interested, pick up your Bible and let's (section by section) get through the next several chapters in Genesis on Abraham. We can start first with the remaining passage in Genesis 11.