questions Christians can't answer

[Drich]

questions Christians can't answer:

You maybe right, but God or anyone working with God can blast through this list and want more at the end.

1) Who was Cain's wife?

a female descendant from evolved man/man made in the image of God on the sixth day of creation verses cain who's father was created in the garden apart from the 7 day narritive and was given a living soul on day 3

So again the bible describes man being made day 6 and adam being made day 3 Cain was day 3 adam's son and cain's wife was a decendant of day 6 man

2)In the week of creation, how was there an "evening and a morning" for three days when the sun wasn't made until the fourth day?

Two possible sources of light.
One the continence of God is said to radiate light, and or the more likely; the earth is like the other planets of our solar system who's atmosphere's are so dense that sun light could not reach the surface. So when God said let there be light what happened was the atmosphere was settled enough to allow for sun light to illuminate the sky for the first time ever.

Meaning sun moon and stars on day 4 was just the first time they could bee seen planet side. That they where infact hatched/created pre day one when the bible says "in the beginning God created the heavens (sun moon and stars/cosmos) and then the earth. but the earth with without form and empty.

Meaning the genesis text was not written from a heavenly/God perspective but from someone sat on the ground watching things unfold. (like what God did in the book of Revelation)

3) Why is there no evidence for Noah's flood and history continuing uninterrupted around the world at this time?

there is! it is just not what semi intelligent people are taught to look for.
All normal floods happen one of two ways high ground to low ground flooding like a mud slide or wash out.
rivers or oceans intrusion like a tidal wave or levi dam break. There is a third which is what the bible describes. from the ground up where the sediment does not get pushed around..

Know it or not that is what science means when they say there is no evidence for a world wide flood that there is not a world wide layer of silt in the ground.. but if the whole world push water up from the ground at the same time, then the sedimentary layers being examined would look as they do now. because the water is not comming from an outside source and rushing in with debris.

(take a bucket put a hose in the bottom layer in dirt rock clay sand and then organic material. turn on the hose. slowly fill the bucket over 40 days, then let it dry out naturally will the different layers have moved? no. they would only moved is the water was rushing in a given direction like a tsunami but again read the account for the flood. water came from the ground

4)How could people in the bible live 500- 1000 years when lifespans only reached 70 in the 20th century?

two explanations. less mutated BS to kill you/the food supply was exactly what we where evolved to eat/ at it's purest form.
Or they simply did not count years then as we do now.

5)Why were they already speaking and writing Chinese in China and Sanskrit in India long before god "mixed up languages" at the Tower of Babel?

Noah had three sons one son moved north one west the other east. In the beginning of chater 11 verse 2 this whole story is about those who moved east. they came to a spot and build a great city and then set fourth to build the tower..

If you look at the other two brothers people they went out speaking other languages from the start. It was this specific people who God had to seperate by language. (sons of hamm I think)

Why don't all cultures around the world trace their origins to the exact same spot in a Babylonia?

for the same reason we do not always know our individual lineage.

6)Why is there no evidence at all for the presence of millions of Israelite slaves in Egypt and a miraculous "Exodus." Why didn't neighboring empires even notice such a major blow to the area's superpower and loss of its army?

there is and they did. But the evidence is not accepted. for one reason. the people in egypt at this time did not call themselves jews. they are identified as semites and the time line they project is off. Which if you think about it the jews where not known as jew while they where in egypt it was not till amost 100 year later did they fully adopt this name.

here is an hours video on all of the evidence just to prove they found joseph:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-x55kIgheA&t=2097s

also here is an 87 page discussion we had on this subject already:
https://atheistforums.org/thread-40138.html
Rather here is 87 pages of objections I fended off with a simple documentary found in the OP.

7)Why is the Ark of the Covenant missing?

because like in the movie people would worship it rather than God.

How do you know it even existed?

Bible said so.

8) How could Jesus claim descent from the royal line of King David if Joseph was not his biological father?

two ways the other genealogy was through marry and Joseph also being of the same line could indeed legally adopt Christ have have him as his legal descendant. So Christ was legally bound to david and through his mother had the blood of david running through him as well.

9) Why is there not a single contemporary eyewitness to Jesus' ministry outside the bible?

Not true. However like the works of St. Luke any and all outside works were identified as religious works because of the subject matter.

Again remember luke was not a Jew or even religious.. he was sent to document everything he could about Christ and did so for his unaffiliated master. but because of the subject matter his work became apart of a religious text. like wise all other text containing verification of Jesus is either one discredited or two identified as a religious text so it does not count.

10)Why do good people and innocent children suffer terribly while evil rotten people often live long healthy lives?

because 'there are no good or innocent.' those terms are awarded by the wicked to people who do not sin as much as they do.

So why do any of us suffer? To know the cost of redemption. In that how can one have sympathy for a being who still sins or will sin 'suffering' and not have sympathy for the one who never sinned? We suffer to show ourselves how hypocritical and wicked we truly are. (for those willing to see themselves in the light of truth.

11)Why did god himself in the bible commit or order the murder of millions of innocent people - especially children? How can you worship such a genocidal monster?

because death means squat to God.

This life is nothing more than a matrix simulation a bio spiritual simulation of what Real life/ife with God can be. so to slaughter millions in this video game means what?

How many have you killed in your gaming experiences? how many aliens how many terrorists how many cities have yu bombed? did anyone really die?

From God's perspective when you or I die here we are set before him to judge. So where is the crime? the life you live is not yours and when he wants it back you must give it back and again when that happenes really the only thing lost is your fool idea of atonomy. So again where is the crime in that? what is the big deal when a child the wolrd shats on and is starving is called home to be with a loving father?

Where is the crime to call back some atheist a-hole who made his choice will not consider anything elses and only serves as an obstical for potential believers? again the only thing from God's perspective that happens is you can't play pretend you know everything anymore. The real question is why where you given any life at all to begin with?

What else you got is this the best you can do?

[mordant]

Is there a point to that? I can understand people worshiping a God thinking they're doing themselves a favour or trying to do the right thing by others, spreading the word and so on..  But I can't get my head around someone worshipping some unknown something because of the awesomeness of the universe.
Ah well, each to their own I suppose.

Sure, to live my life, with a prevailing sense of gratitude, wonder and amazement, with a sense of something profound deep, and rich about it all.

Now perhaps you might acknowledge this about yourself as well, but assign its to the universe here,  but it’s rather synonymous, where reality of universe is just replaced with a reality of God, as if they are one and the same.

It would be sort of like assigning it all to the singularity.

An "attitude of gratitude" is a bit of a misnomer. Gratitude definitionally has to be directed to some sort of benefactor, even if that benefactor has to be made up.

What we are really after is an appreciation of the positive aspects of our existence, which requires one's awareness to be raised (indeed, given our inherent negative bias -- it has to be cultivated). But it doesn't require a benevolent external actor, simply a recognition of certain events and contextualizing them in a positive way. If it just so happens that some REAL benefactor conveyed that benefit -- a parent, a sibling, a spouse, a child, a dear friend, a random stranger, a doctor, whatever -- then we can of course express gratitude toward that actual, real benefactor.

I think this is an instance where the habitual indiscriminate use of loaded words like "gratitude" drives the discourse a bit off course.

Someone quoted someone on twitter the other day to the effect that his grandfather used to say, in the midst of some pleasant family experience or other, "if this isn't nice, I don't know what is" and this stuck with him throughout his life -- the need to recognize and give voice to positive experiences, otherwise, they tend to pass through us unnoticed, whereas unpleasant experiences are definitely noticed, if not catastrophized.

That's the real issue -- no gods or supernatural impetus required to make it work. Sometimes nice things just happen; sometimes they are instigated or catalyzed by some real actor, sometimes they are at the end of a far vaguer causal chain. The need is for us to even NOTICE these things, not to ascribe magical properties to them.

[brewer]

Christians can answer any questions they want to. 

I just think some of their answers suck.

[Acrobat]

Sure, to live my life, with a prevailing sense of gratitude, wonder and amazement, with a sense of something profound deep, and rich about it all.

Now perhaps you might acknowledge this about yourself as well, but assign its to the universe here,  but it’s rather synonymous, where reality of universe is just replaced with a reality of God, as if they are one and the same.

It would be sort of like assigning it all to the singularity.

An "attitude of gratitude" is a bit of a misnomer. Gratitude definitionally has to be directed to some sort of benefactor, even if that benefactor has to be made up.

What we are really after is an appreciation of the positive aspects of our existence, which requires one's awareness to be raised (indeed, given our inherent negative bias -- it has to be cultivated). But it doesn't require a benevolent external actor, simply a recognition of certain events and contextualizing them in a positive way. If it just so happens that some REAL benefactor conveyed that benefit -- a parent, a sibling, a spouse, a child, a dear friend, a random stranger, a doctor, whatever -- then we can of course express gratitude toward that actual, real benefactor.

I think this is an instance where the habitual indiscriminate use of loaded words like "gratitude" drives the discourse a bit off course.

Someone quoted someone on twitter the other day to the effect that his grandfather used to say, in the midst of some pleasant family experience or other, "if this isn't nice, I don't know what is" and this stuck with him throughout his life -- the need to recognize and give voice to positive experiences, otherwise, they tend to pass through us unnoticed, whereas unpleasant experiences are definitely noticed, if not catastrophized.

That's the real issue -- no gods or supernatural impetus required to make it work. Sometimes nice things just happen; sometimes they are instigated or catalyzed by some real actor, sometimes they are at the end of a far vaguer causal chain. The need is for us to even NOTICE these things, not to ascribe magical properties to them.

Gratitude can be a temporary appreciation, it can also be a state of mind/being. It’s one thing to be grateful in the moment of something being given, but there’s what we can say is to be continually grateful.

If we can imagine a person resentful, bitter, in which this and who they are, is inseparable, that we can imagine what might be the opposite, filled with gratitude.

I look at my mother as such a person, even in suffering and grief or sorrow, she never really caves into resentment and bitterness, but a sort of beautiful resilience, as what I can be best be described as the experience of gratitude, a gratefulness, which is as much a reality for her, as an object in which it’s directed. It’s both a state of being, and the God she loves. It’s nothing magical, or out there, it purely what is.