Atheists debates - is it worth it?

[Mitty]

You say you have read the entire bible, but your comprehension is extremely lacking and your distortions are merely an attempt to support your distrust of the bible. Have a great day.

That's only your personal opinion, and doesn't change the fact that biblical morality is obviously just man-made, including the ten commandments, given it didn't apply to Abraham et al and their ancestors. Nor that Jesus didn't claim to be without sin (Mark 10:18), which is why he didn't stone the adulteress when he invited those who weren't hypocrites to test their aim (John 8:7) given that he said that every jot and tittle of OT law still applies till heaven and earth pass when all is fulfilled (Matt 5:17-19) including the commandments to terminate the pregnancies of adulteresses (Lev 20:10 Numbers 5:20-28).

 

[coffee4u]

Wrong. Where does Gen 18 say that it was just an angel, given that Gen 18 clearly says that it was "the LORD" and doesn't say that it was "an angel of the LORD"? Or did you just make that up?

Just imaginative words in a book.
And why would a real god just change it's mind willy nilly anyway?
Which is why biblical morality is obviously just man-made and is subjective and not objective including the ten commandments etc, given that it wasn't morally wrong for Abraham to have a sexual relationship with his sister Sarah and commit adultery with Hagar, or for Abraham to kill his son as a blood sacrifice, or for Cain(an) to kill his brother Abel since the ten commandments etc were just man made and didn't apply to them.

I am always open to genuine seeking questions, but I will not debate atheists. As I said in my first post, I quickly learnt it is a waste of time. And I most certainly will not debate something as precious as scripture with one. I already know all the arguments and digs that I can already see you forming, no thank you.

 

[Mitty]

I am always open to genuine seeking questions, but I will not debate atheists. As I said in my first post, I quickly learnt it is a waste of time. And I most certainly will not debate something as precious as scripture with one. I already know all the arguments and digs that I can already see you forming, no thank you.

That's your choice, and just your personal opinions. But why do you bother to post on this forum instead of just evangelizing to other evangelists?
But either way, it still doesn't change the fact that biblical morality is obviously just man-made, including the ten commandments.

 

[BigV]

My view of an atheist was always a person who did not believe any form of God at all. Christian God or other god's and didn't believe in the spiritual realm either. This is what it used to be but it appears to be wider now, would you say that was correct?

I agree that Atheist is someone who doesn't believe in any Gods. But I've also heard the likes of Ricky Gervais make a point that Christians (or followers of any other religion) disbelieve hundreds of other Gods. And Ricky (an Atheist) just disbelieves in one more God.

Here is Ricky in his own words.

 

[coffee4u]

That's your choice, and just your personal opinions. But why do you bother to post on this forum instead of just evangelizing to other evangelists?
But either way, it still doesn't change the fact that biblical morality is obviously just man-made, including the ten commandments.

It's all about respect. The day you and other atheists on here genuinely learn to respect other peoples beliefs, is the day I will keep answering your questions.

 

[Mitty]

It's all about respect. The day you and other atheists on here genuinely learn to respect other peoples beliefs, is the day I will keep answering your questions.

That's your choice if you don't respect my comments, but doesn't change the fact that biblical morality is obviously just man-made, nor why you can't explain why the ten commandments etc didn't apply to Abraham et al. Nor does it reduce the number of numerous biblical contradictions and inconsistencies and scientific untruths.

And why should I respect any beliefs if there is no real evidence to support them?

 

[BigV]

How many sinners did Jesus punish? I'm guessing about 1.1 million people,

But this is a problem, because the flesh and bones Jesus is not a true representation of God! In the OT Times, he is vengeful and jealous, incarnates himself to show himself as a kind person, who then goes back to his old self after the resurrection?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

It's all about respect. The day you and other atheists on here genuinely learn to respect other peoples beliefs, is the day I will keep answering your questions.

People should be respected, bad beliefs or ideas shouldn't.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Unlike gods, however, there is unequivocal evidence that Covid-19 virus particles exist but not Covid-19 cells as you claim, and are not just imaginative fantasies.

Ok. ok. ok. Thanks for the biology correction---viruses do not have cellular structures---but my intended example stands. I have not seen a Covid-19 virus 'particle' and I haven't even seen a person yet infected with in with my own two eyes. But of course, I'm surmising strongly that these virus particles exist. And why would I do this? Because I have empirical proof? No, not because of that. Same with my religious beliefs. As with many things, we believe in 'truth' do to inferences we're willing to consider and subscribe to, with modifications to our thinking along the way.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

But this is a problem, because the flesh and bones Jesus is not a true representation of God!

What????!! How do you 'know' this?

Not only is this 'anti-christ' speech, it's something I know you can't and haven't validated one way or another.

In the OT Times, he is vengeful and jealous, incarnates himself to show himself as a kind person, who then goes back to his old self after the resurrection?

So, Jesus never got angry nor made any 'threats' to anyone? Really? Do tell!

 

[2PhiloVoid]

That's only your personal opinion, and doesn't change the fact that biblical morality is obviously just man-made, including the ten commandments, given it didn't apply to Abraham et al and their ancestors. Nor that Jesus didn't claim to be without sin (Mark 10:18), which is why he didn't stone the adulteress when he invited those who weren't hypocrites to test their aim (John 8:7) given that he said that every jot and tittle of OT law still applies till heaven and earth pass when all is fulfilled (Matt 5:17-19) including the commandments to terminate the pregnancies of adulteresses (Lev 20:10 Numbers 5:20-28).

How do you know you're interpreting any of this correctly, Mitty? Are you Jewish and an expert in ancient Jewish religious language?

 

[RBPerry]

Actually, I think Pascal is a bit more robust than what people give him credit for and bother to understand about his thinking, mainly because they don't REALLY read his work. No, more typically, they just pick up a little tidbit about his Wager and think they've got him all figured out. Of course, they often do this, too, with many other things in life, like the bible for instance.

You are right my friend. What I was referring to is "What if I'm right and your wrong", but Pascal was much deeper than that.

 

[Mitty]

How do you know you're interpreting any of this correctly, Mitty? Are you Jewish and an expert in ancient Jewish religious language?

What has the Jewish language got to do with Jesus and why he didn't stone the adulteress, and why he didn't claim to be without sin, and didn't claim to be a god?

And where does the bible say that the ten commandments etc applied to Abraham et al, and that it was a sin for Abraham to have a sexual relationship with his sister Sarah and commit adultery with Hagar or to kill his son as a blood sacrifice, or for Cain(an) to kill his brother Abel, or for Lot to sexually assault his daughters?

 

[Mitty]

Ok. ok. ok. Thanks for the biology correction---viruses do not have cellular structures---but my intended example stands. I have not seen a Covid-19 virus 'particle' and I haven't even seen a person yet infected with in with my own two eyes. But of course, I'm surmising strongly that these virus particles exist. And why would I do this? Because I have empirical proof? No, not because of that. Same with my religious beliefs. As with many things, we believe in 'truth' do to inferences we're willing to consider and subscribe to, with modifications to our thinking along the way.

But there are many scientists who have seen the virus particle. But do you know anyone who has ever physically seen a god and physically spoken to one, and who have empirical evidence that gods exist, or are those biblical stories about gods just imaginative fantasies like the story about Smaug and Bilbo?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

But there are many scientists who have seen the virus particle, but do you know anyone who has ever physically seen a god and physically spoken to one, and who have empirical evidence that gods exist, or are those biblical stories just imaginative fantasies like the story about Smaug and Bilbo?

No, I don't personally know of anyone who has had the Lord physically show up and speak to her or him in an empirical way. Of course, if this was happening all of the time, then I'd have to doubt the veracity of the Bible, wouldn't I?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

What has the Jewish language got to do with Jesus and why he didn't stone the adulteress, and why he didn't claim to be without sin, and didn't claim to be a god?

And where does the bible say that the ten commandments etc applied to Abraham et al, and that it was a sin for Abraham to have a sexual relationship with his sister Sarah and commit adultery with Hagar or to kill his son as a blood sacrifice, or for Cain(an) to kill his brother Abel, or for Lot to sexually assault his daughters?

Boy, you're just full of questions, aren't you? Frankly, with that barrage, I can't take you seriously. You're not here to investigate, discuss or even challenge a Christian. You're just here to rattle off your own polemics, and that isn't something I'll put up with.

Moreover, Jewish prophetic language is part and parcel of the bible and isn't something you can just ask, "what does that have to do with it"? By asking this in this kind of shortsighted, rhetorical way, you show that you're outside of the realm of education on this subject matter, so maybe it's time to get better educated.....................Mitty.

 

[Mitty]

Boy, you're just full of questions, aren't you? Frankly, with that barrage, I can't take you seriously. You're not here to investigate, discuss or even challenge a Christian. You're just here to rattle off your own polemics, and that isn't something I'll put up with.

Is that because you can't show us empirical evidence that gods exist and that those biblical stories about talking snakes and talking bushes aren't just imaginative fantasies?

And as a retired scientist questioning was part of my profession and not paying preacher-men selling after-death salvation with money-back guarantees to tell me what to believe so that they can buy private jets and fancy ladies.

Moreover, Jewish prophetic language is part and parcel of the bible and isn't something you can just ask, "what does that have to do with it"? By asking this in this kind of shortsighted, rhetorical way, you show that you're outside of the realm of education on this subject matter, so maybe it's time to get better educated.....................Mitty.

But what on Earth has that got to do with Jesus not claiming to be without sin or to be a god, given that he unsuccessfully appealed for help from his god when he was being executed by the Romans for sedition and claiming to be the Jewish god?

 

[Mitty]

No, I don't personally know of anyone who has had the Lord physically show up and speak to her or him in an empirical way.

In other words those biblical stories about gods and talking snakes and talking bushes have no more credibility than the Dreamtime stories about the Rainbow Serpent.

Of course, if this was happening all of the time, then I'd have to doubt the veracity of the Bible, wouldn't I?

Why would you doubt the veracity of the bible if gods physically showed up all the time? Or do you only believe in fantasies and not empirical evidence?

 

[Mitty]

NA

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Is that because you can't show us empirical evidence that gods exist and that those biblical stories about talking snakes and talking bushes aren't just imaginative fantasies?

Of course I can't show you the kind of empirical evidence you'd like that the God of the Bible exist. You are familiar with the field of epistemology and of biblical epistemology, aren't you? Showing "empirical" evidence, other than the love of Christ, isn't and hasn't been on the Christian menu since the Apostles died off.

And as a retired scientist questioning was part of my profession and not paying preacher-men selling after-death salvation with money-back guarantees to tell me what to believe so that they can buy private jets and fancy ladies.

What kind of scientist were you?

As for your derogatory comments, I can only say that you've obviously confused me for another sort of Christian in another sort of theological framework. Are you only familiar with money-grubbing false teachers who pander and frolic around with women?

But what on Earth has that got to do with Jesus not claiming to be without sin or to be a god,

Again, with this fragment of a statement, you've disqualified yourself from showing that you have any theological qualification. Of course Jesus claimed to be without sin and to be 'from/in/of' God the Father. I don't know what bible you've been reading, but I'm wondering if we're reading the same book, or if it's just that despite your acumen in science, you've failed to take a course on Hermeneutics.

... given that he unsuccessfully appealed for help from his god when he was being executed by the Romans for sedition and claiming to be the Jewish god?

Again, you apparently don't yet "get" the prophetic structure of the bible. If what we have from the New Testament writers about Jesus and His words is anywhere accurate, Jesus knew ahead of time that He was going to go to the cross and die. But of course, you knew this already, right? And you already knew what theological titles like "the Son of Man" means in ancient Jewish prophetic terms, right?