Atheists..... throwing the baby out with the bath water ?

by snare&racket 403 Replies latest jw friends

snare&racket

Thanks Zid (videos).
Read the bible (for whatever reason you have decided this is the only true god and creator) and you will soon see how disgusting the god of the bible is.
Tec WRONGLY asserts that the tales of slavery and genocide and kidnap and infanticide are the shadowy elements of humankind, but the verses CLEARY identify all these actions as commands and laws from God.
Dont pretend that you have secret knowlege of the scriptures Tec and that you know which ones were men doing evil not in gods name and which ones were from god. Jesus is the same person as the god of the old testament to most belief systems, and if not he is gods son and totally digged all of gods actions in the old testament.
God cant punish people for denying him based on the disgusting behaviour he peformed in his holy book, that doesnt make sense. At every judgment people could say "but look at your biography... you seemed like a disgusting mentalist."
To say "yeah but he also said love thy neighbour" is just dumb.
This argument negates the whole heap of evidence that its a total bullshit story anyway.
Tec do you believe god asked Abraham to kill his son?
Do you believe he killed all people on earth in a global flood?
Do you believe he killed Davids baby due to his adultery?
Do you believe he slaughtered millions of 'pagans' in the OT that had no access to his commandments as there was no bible then?
Do you believe a donkey talked?
Do you believe a man had strength because of the length of his hair, which he lost when his beatch cut it? He also then became the first recorded suicide terrorist?
Do you really believe all this tosh?
Why dont you believe in Mohhamed and his flying horse?
Why dont you believe in Zeus?
Why dont you believe in Ra?
Why dont you worship Horus?
Do you REALLY think you are going to a heaven or paradise? Where did this belief system originate? Does that not concern you?
Do you think you will be one if the first humans in hundreds of thousands of years to not die?
Is it a coincidence that these belief systems make promises about our biggest concerns and fears....health, death, pain, tears, suffering?
ziddina

"that you did not admit that you were wrong when you said that the bible itself claims that it is inerrant and infallable. I asked you to show me the scripture that claims this? You could not do so. ..." tec, page 17, post #7778
Oh, brother...
SERiously?????
I cannot believe that you have the audacity to even MENtion that question - or bring it up again.... The fact that you posed that as a "problem" for me, indicates again [to me] that you actually don't know your bible very well...
Whereas I hated having to study the bible after I figured out that they were starting off by mistaking an erupting volcano for a "manifestation" of their "god" - and even their "god" didn't know what an erupting volcano was!!!
But YOU - you, as a practicing "Christian", should already know all of this sh*t...
Try these two scriptures - and you'll have to find just WHERE they are in the bible; but I know that they're in there....
"All scripture is inspired of God - for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight...."
And....
"Cursed be those who add to the [sacred] scriptures, and cursed be those who take away [from the sacred scriptures]...."
There. Question answered.
If the scriptures WEREN'T "sacred" and "infallible", then there wouldn't be such a "foo-raw" over using ALL of the scriptures to supposedly answer ALL of humanity's questions out of it, and if the scriptures WEREN'T "sacred" and "infallible", then there wouldn't be such a fuss - er, "curse" on humans who dare to add their own little piddly bits to it...
tec

Tec WRONGLY asserts that the tales of slavery and genocide and kidnap and infanticide are the shadowy elements of humankind, but the verses CLEARY identify all these actions as commands and laws from God.
So what? Those verses are not the image of God. Christ is the image of God.
Dont pretend that you have secret knowlege of the scriptures Tec and that you know which ones were men doing evil not in gods name and which ones were from god. Jesus is the same person as the god of the old testament to most belief systems, and if not he is gods son and totally digged all of gods actions in the old testament.
See above. Christ is the image of God. Not the scriptures. Not the OT verses. Christ. I don't have secret knowledge, though, you are correct. There is nothing secret about it. Christ is the image of God and since God does NOT change, then He is as Christ showed him to be. Especially considering that scriptures can be tampered with, misunderstood, mistranslated... lying pen of the scribes handled the law falsely. What do you suppose that means? Woe to you, scribes. What do you suppose that means?
God cant punish people for denying him based on the disgusting behaviour he peformed in his holy book, that doesnt make sense. At every judgment people could say "but look at your biography... you seemed like a disgusting mentalist."
You're talking about punishment, not me. But he can hold people accountable for their own idea that verses in a book represent HIm when HE SAID listen to his Son. And that Son said if you have seen him, then you have seen God.
To say "yeah but he also said love thy neighbour" is just dumb.
To say that something that does not claim to be the truth and image of God IS the truth and image of God... OVER the one who is the truth and image of God - Christ -... well, how smart is that?
This argument negates the whole heap of evidence that its a total bullshit story anyway.
Kind of makes me wondering what you're arguing for.
Tec do you believe god asked Abraham to kill his son?
Not sure. Abraham seems to have believed so; and also the people afterward. But it is a (4?) thousand year old account. I don't know what details might be missing, if any at all.
Do you believe he killed all people on earth in a global flood?
Again, not sure. I think that this account is about a deeper truth told in simplistic terms. But I sure wasn't there, and I don't know what details or changes might have occured to the writing.
Do you believe he killed Davids baby due to his adultery?
No. (doesn't make me right, mind you, but no)
Do you believe he slaughtered millions of 'pagans' in the OT that had no access to his commandments as there was no bible then?
No.
Do you believe a donkey talked?
With words? No.
Do you believe a man had strength because of the length of his hair, which he lost when his beatch cut it? He also then became the first recorded suicide terrorist?
No. Legends grow out of truths... and myths and stories may have some truth to them, without all the details being as described. I do believe there is a Samson, and that he killed a lot of Philistines, and that this story has elements of truth and elements of a grown legend.
Do you really believe all this tosh?
See for yourself.
I believe Christ. I don't look around to fine-tooth-comb everything else. If I see Him, then I can see God.
Why dont you believe in Mohhamed and his flying horse?
I do believe in Mohammad, and I don't know what he might have seen or how he might have interpreted it.
Why dont you believe in Zeus?
a) I have no reason to
b) Christ
Why dont you believe in Ra?
Why dont you worship Horus?
Same as above.
Do you REALLY think you are going to a heaven or paradise? Where did this belief system originate? Does that not concern you?
I do not make those kinds of judgments, even about myself. I just do my best to follow Him. All of my beliefs hinge upon Christ.
Do you think you will be one if the first humans in hundreds of thousands of years to not die?
No.
Is it a coincidence that these belief systems make promises about our biggest concerns and fears....health, death, pain, tears, suffering?
I don't think it is a coincidence. Just probably not for the same reason as you.
Peace,
Tammy
tec

Oh, brother...
Oh sister...
SERiously?????
Sereiously.
I cannot believe that you have the audacity to even MENtion that question - or bring it up again.... The fact that you posed that as a "problem" for me, indicates again [to me] that you actually don't know your bible very well...
Actually, the fact that you believe it shows me that you still listen to them and didn't actually do your own research... at least not without their blinders on. I know that will hit a sore spot with you becuase of Moses and Mount Sinai... but in this case, there is no reason to believe that the bible refers to itself as infallable and inerrant.
Whereas I hated having to study the bible after I figured out that they were starting off by mistaking an erupting volcano for a "manifestation" of their "god" - and even their "god" didn't know what an erupting volcano was!!!
Maybe that's why you didn't look at it without bias?
But YOU - you, as a practicing "Christian", should already know all of this sh*t...
I do. (not all of course... but this part, yes)
Try these two scriptures - and you'll have to find just WHERE they are in the bible; but I know that they're in there....
I know where they are and what they are referring to.
"All scripture is inspired of God - for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight...."
Which begs the question... what is scripture? Was Paul referring to his own letters? Was Paul referring to books in a bible that did not yet exist? How does that make any sense?
Or was he referring to what he considered scripture in his day?
Was he referring to Jeremiah 8:8 which states that the lying pen of the scribes has handled the law falsely?
And....
"Cursed be those who add to the [sacred] scriptures, and cursed be those who take away [from the sacred scriptures]...."
Nice WT trick. Adding in those brackets.
It actually says:
"I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: I anyone adds anythign to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy,God will take away from him hi sshare in the tree of life..."
a) Does it make any sense at all that the writer of revelations was referring to any other book than the book of revelations? There was no bible at the time, so he could not have been referring to the bible.
b) Why in the world would you warn people against something that could not be done in the first place? (adding or taking away from the words)
There. Question answered.
Think about the questions I asked you and you will see that these two verses do not state that the bible is inerrant and infallable. Men state that erroniously, using the same verses you use, or on wishful thinking. But the bible does not make that statement about itself.
If the scriptures WEREN'T "sacred" and "infallible", then there wouldn't be such a "foo-raw" over using ALL of the scriptures to supposedly answer ALL of humanity's questions out of it, and if the scriptures WEREN'T "sacred" and "infallible", then there wouldn't be such a fuss - er, "curse" on humans who dare to add their own little piddly bits to it...
I know, right?
Think of all the arguments that wouldn't have to happen if someone had not made this erronious claim? Someone might actually be able to look at Christ wihtout having to compare him to the rest of the words in a book... and someone might even be able to believe both in God and science.
Go figure.
(what about that e x ample I asked you for, regarding your accusations of me?)
Peace,
Tammy
ziddina

"what about that e x ample I asked you for, regarding your accusations of me..."
WHICH accusations...???
Oh, and about that prior question about the bible claiming that it is infallible....
If I have time - and feel like plowing thru the words of a bunch of ignorant Middle-Eastern males, I might go through the 4 Gospels...
I have a sneaking suspicion that I'll find references in there to the "infallibility" of all Jewish holy writings...
ziddina

Oh, and what part of "All scripture" did you not get...???
What 'ALL' could Paul POSSIBLY be referring to???
poopsiecakes

I love it when Tec gets feisty ::giggle::
tec

WHICH
accusations...???
You brought up the issue that Tec can't admit when she is wrong. So pick an e x ample and share it.
What 'ALL' could Paul POSSIBLY be referring to???

ALL that Paul considered to be scripture. Since the bible was not in play at this time, how could he have been referring to the bible as that scripture?
Luke doesn't even claim his gospel is inspired, but rather an account of his investigations, from the accounts handed down from those who were eyewitnesses to events.
And what about these: (or you might be answering them, and I am rushing you... in which case I apologize)

a) Does it make any sense at all that the writer of revelations was referring to any other book than the book of revelations? There was no bible at the time, so he could not have been referring to the bible.
b) Why in the world would you warn people against something that could not be done in the first place? (adding or taking away from the words)

and
Was Paul referring to his own letters? Was Paul referring to books in a bible that did not yet exist? How does that make any sense?

Or was he referring to what he considered scripture in his day?
Was he referring to Jeremiah 8:8 which states that the lying pen of the scribes has handled the law falsely?
Peace,
Tammy
(funny smilie, Poopsie)
ziddina

On the other hand, Zid is almost always feisty - er, combative...
("feisty" has an original meaning of "flatulent"....)
So I'm not sure that I would want to be around anyone who's being "feisty"...
ziddina

I don't recognize those LOWER quotes in your post #7782 as mine... Upper two, yes; other quotes, no...
If you're going to pull up old posts, kindly have the good sense to do what I am now doing - quote the page # and post # - assuming that these comments were made on the same thread...
If not, then reference the thread title also...

Atheists..... throwing the baby out with the bath water ?

Share this