Does the bible make sense?

At 3/31/2017 12:56:02 AM, Composer wrote:

At 3/30/2017 2:15:52 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/30/2017 3:21:10 AM, Composer wrote:

At 3/16/2017 9:02:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
After creating Adam and Eve. God tells them they can eat from any tree in the garden except one.

Show us where Story book God told this to Eve?

Eve repeated what God said to her when the serpent questioned Eve.

Story book God NEVER said that to Story book Eve!

It was said to Story book Adam alone -

Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may surely eat of every tree of the garden,
Gen 2:17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." (ESV Story book)

No mention of ' not touching! '.

Story book Eve didn't exist until later - Gen. 2:22, Story book

But she answered the serpent proving she was aware of what God said and was taking heed until the serpent talked her out of it.

At 3/31/2017 4:36:11 AM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/30/2017 8:52:52 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/30/2017 6:50:35 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/30/2017 6:02:33 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/30/2017 3:28:18 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/30/2017 2:46:40 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/30/2017 1:34:14 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/30/2017 12:24:14 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/29/2017 8:33:26 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/29/2017 8:27:27 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/29/2017 5:02:04 PM, Perussi wrote:

Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

He didn't have what he wanted, he had two humans who had sinned.

It is only a sin if the two knew what they were doing was wrong. They had no concept of good and evil before they ate the fruit.

God said in short "hey, see this? do not eat it". They understood language and were commandable, god even said to name the animals. They weren't idiots. They could understand the concept of good and bad.

How many animal nanes are found in Bible named by Adam? Adam couldn't even follow a simple order like don't eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The bible isn't going to say what he named them, just that he did. He didn't follow it because he failed to not sin. He just failed. I can create complex formulas and i can still sin.

That is why the Bible doesn't make sense. It does even meet the educational standards of a grade four level. After studying the bible you still cannot name the animals or prove trees possess the knowledge of good and evil or even the ability to offer immortality.

That isn't what the bible teaches, it has a purpose, not to educate modernly though, not sure where this came from.

Did God expect man to remain in the stone or Bronze Age? That is why the bible is less relevant today.

It isn't a fvuking textbook.

That is why the bible is less relevant today.

It isn't less relavent at all, it is unlike any other material today.

It is both irrelevant and unlike other trash.

It is very relavent, all of it, but not the parts you are mentioning.

How can all of it be relevant but not the parts I mentioned? All of it means all of it. Duh!!

Yet God punished Adam and Eve because he believed in the nonsense he created.

If we are assuming this happened then what makes anything nonsence?

That is the belief of 2 billion Christians who believe God believed the nonsense He created. But Adam, Eve and the talking serpent ignored God and lived to tell their story.

No, why is it nonsence?

1. Talking serpents. Total nonsense.

Either metaphor or supernatural being satan, don't forget the bible calls this serpent satan.

God even describes the talking serpent as a snake.

2. Trees with knowledge of good and evil. Total nonsense.

The tree is not sentient.

The fruits contained knowledge of good and evil. God put this knowledge of good and evil in a tree but not in humans. Absolute rubbish.
But plants are sentient.

https://www.psychologytoday.com...

3. Tree of life give immortality to those who eat of it. Total nonsense.

The bible doesn't say this.

Read your scriptures.
Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and live forever.

More to follow.

K, but if the christian god exists it could be litteral or not still. We don't know how eden or heaven holds. But god as defined in the bible could definately cheat nature.

Now God is a cheater too, great!!!

Note God said if they ate the fruit they would die. But they didn't have the concept of death either because they were the first human creation.

God wouldn't say if you eat this you will die if they didn't understand "die".

They were living in the Garden of Eden where no death was possible or had ever occurred. It even had the tree of life to grant immorality. Remember they were the first humans created.

Stop repeating that, that argument has fallen.

Do you deny Adam and Ever were the first humans created? They did it see death for another 900 years after they ate the fruit.

God taught them to speak and just explained the concept of death, simple. It is the only reasonable way they could have been talking to each other and understood death. Again, god wouldn't say a word they wouldn't understand. For example, would you be talking to someone and throw a word in they don't know knowing they don't know it? No.

God talked to Adam and Eve in the same language he used on the talking serpent. That was how confused God was, he could not tell the difference between a serpent and Humans. Why? Because creation was very new to Him too.

I think god as defined in the bible would know a snake from a man. Maybe back then there was a universal language, the language of eden i think is mentioned a bit. And actually satan being a snake is possibly a metephor.

So it is not clear what is literal or fabricated what is real or just metaphors in the bible. It is a collections of stories that need special interpretation to make sense.

Don't forget you are only focusing on where possible contradictions are. Most of it is not like this at all.

These are the obvious contradictions beginning with the first book of Genesis. It continues to get worse.

When all else fails...

It wasn't back then like it is today and god is god and could litterally do anything he felt like doing. And some of it may be metaphorical. Translations.... Metaphors... Who the heck knows? But i can believe either way. From a scientific perspective the bible makes no sence at all.

If from a scientific perspective the bible doesn't make sense and it is filled with metaphorical translations. Then it fails as a book of facts.

It isn't less relavent at all, it is unlike any other material today.

It is both irrelevant and unlike other trash.

It is very relavent, all of it, but not the parts you are mentioning.

How can all of it be relevant but not the parts I mentioned? All of it means all of it. Duh!!

Fine, not every single little bit but there are reasons for those parts.

Don't forget you are only focusing on where possible contradictions are. Most of it is not like this at all.

These are the obvious contradictions beginning with the first book of Genesis. It continues to get worse.

When all else fails...

It wasn't back then like it is today and god is god and could litterally do anything he felt like doing. And some of it may be metaphorical. Translations.... Metaphors... Who the heck knows? But i can believe either way. From a scientific perspective the bible makes no sence at all.

If from a scientific perspective the bible doesn't make sense and it is filled with metaphorical translations. Then it fails as a book of facts.

Science is not logic of philosophy, it is a child of them. Logic trancends science.

At 3/31/2017 5:23:24 AM, Keltron wrote:

At 3/16/2017 9:02:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
After creating Adam and Eve. God tells them they can eat from any tree in the garden except one.

Genesis 2:17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die."

What happens when they disobey God and eat the forbidden fruit?

Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life firever.

They become like him and now he does not want them to live forever.

So what does God do? He punishes Adam and Eve for disobeying him.

Genesis 3: 14 So the Lord God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all livestock and all wild animals. You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.
15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring[a] and hers; he will crush[b] your head, and you will strike his heel."
16 To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."
17 To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, "You must not eat from it," "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow you will eat your foo until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken for dust you are and to dust you will return."

The rest of the bible is about God sending prophets to teach the people what is good and evil and laws they should obey. Why?

Odd that God is asking them to learn the difference between good and evil when he punished Adam and Eve for eating the forbidden fruit because they were desirous of gaining wisdom of good and evil. God was against them learning then in the Garden. Now he sends prophets to teach them and wonders why they are reluctant to learn forgetting he punished them when they wanted to learn.

Genesis 3:6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

Because Adam and Eve gained the knowledge and became like Him, God did not want them to also live forever. So he banished them from the garden and had angels guard the tree of life.

So why did he send his only begotten son Jesus?

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

But it was God who took away the tree of life so they would not live forever. Now he is offering Jesus to restore what he took away from them Ie the tree of life.

God suffers from circular reasoning/logic. The bible only makes sense if you suffer from the same condition.
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

In short, God is trying to restore his creation back to Paradise which he took away from Adam and Eve for disobeying him by desiring what he wanted them to learn anyways.

The Bible makes sense within its contemporary context. The first part of the OT is foundational mythology, the middle part, that is the stuff form the books of Chronicles and Kings is mostly history, but written with a Judaic bias (Judah versus Israel). The entire OT is compiled from the point of view of the Babylonian exile, which was a real, historical event. The Gospels present a mythological account of Jesus which is written around prophetic themes from the OT. The Pauline books present a fairly accurate account of Christianity's move toward metroplitinism. And Revelation is an apocalyptic criticism of the Roman empire.

So how did all these contemporary logical context end up so badly as an illogical apocalyptic destination sustained by the delusional beliefs of Jesus who was crucified for his blasphemous claims? Should it not have stopped at the crucifixions? Instead we see it nurtured as a utopian fantasy in the minds of 2 billion Christians. What contemporary remedy is available to treat their condition?

At 3/31/2017 12:53:34 PM, Perussi wrote:

It isn't less relavent at all, it is unlike any other material today.

It is both irrelevant and unlike other trash.

It is very relavent, all of it, but not the parts you are mentioning.

How can all of it be relevant but not the parts I mentioned? All of it means all of it. Duh!!

Fine, not every single little bit but there are reasons for those parts.

There are very few things the bible can be applied to in practical situations. It cannot teach you math, science, banking, cooking, carpentry, etc, etc. Therefore it is mostly irrelevant.

Don't forget you are only focusing on where possible contradictions are. Most of it is not like this at all.

These are the obvious contradictions beginning with the first book of Genesis. It continues to get worse.

When all else fails...

It wasn't back then like it is today and god is god and could litterally do anything he felt like doing. And some of it may be metaphorical. Translations.... Metaphors... Who the heck knows? But i can believe either way. From a scientific perspective the bible makes no sence at all.

If from a scientific perspective the bible doesn't make sense and it is filled with metaphorical translations. Then it fails as a book of facts.

Science is not logic of philosophy, it is a child of them. Logic trancends science.

How does logic transcend science? We have logical fallacies but you seldom hear of scientific fallacies. Logic is a product of reasoning science is a method of verification and elimination. Science helps us correct logical fallacies, incorrect assumption and wrong conclusions,

At 3/31/2017 2:01:59 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 12:53:34 PM, Perussi wrote:

It isn't less relavent at all, it is unlike any other material today.

It is both irrelevant and unlike other trash.

It is very relavent, all of it, but not the parts you are mentioning.

How can all of it be relevant but not the parts I mentioned? All of it means all of it. Duh!!

Fine, not every single little bit but there are reasons for those parts.

There are very few things the bible can be applied to in practical situations. It cannot teach you math, science, banking, cooking, carpentry, etc, etc. Therefore it is mostly irrelevant.

Dood, personal and social skills more, they are more practical than anything you will ever learn in school. Don't get angry, anger is always bad. Treat others as yourself, that gets you somewhere. That's the tip of the iceburg.

Don't forget you are only focusing on where possible contradictions are. Most of it is not like this at all.

These are the obvious contradictions beginning with the first book of Genesis. It continues to get worse.

When all else fails...

It wasn't back then like it is today and god is god and could litterally do anything he felt like doing. And some of it may be metaphorical. Translations.... Metaphors... Who the heck knows? But i can believe either way. From a scientific perspective the bible makes no sence at all.

If from a scientific perspective the bible doesn't make sense and it is filled with metaphorical translations. Then it fails as a book of facts.

Science is not logic of philosophy, it is a child of them. Logic trancends science.

How does logic transcend science? We have logical fallacies but you seldom hear of scientific fallacies. Logic is a product of reasoning science is a method of verification and elimination. Science helps us correct logical fallacies, incorrect assumption and wrong conclusions,

Science is an idea. Ideas are created from thinking. High profile thinking is called "philosophy" usually. And science has nothing to do with fallacies, it is used to create and manage scientific facts. (or just facts) (not meant to sound mean)

At 3/31/2017 3:08:15 PM, Perussi wrote:

Dood, personal and social skills more, they are more practical than anything you will ever learn in school. Don't get angry, anger is always bad. Treat others as yourself, that gets you somewhere. That's the tip of the iceburg.

It also can't teach you spelling, apparently. Can you please cite the "social skills" and "personal skills" in the bible? It's got a couple of nuggets in there (which aren't specific to Christianity or Judaism, and certainly principles that predate the bible), but it's also got a bunch of xenophobia, misogyny, religious discrimination, divinely justified or commanded wars, and other various uncivilized ideas in it.

At 3/31/2017 3:19:28 PM, Ludofl3x wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:08:15 PM, Perussi wrote:

Dood, personal and social skills more, they are more practical than anything you will ever learn in school. Don't get angry, anger is always bad. Treat others as yourself, that gets you somewhere. That's the tip of the iceburg.

It also can't teach you spelling, apparently. Can you please cite the "social skills" and "personal skills" in the bible? It's got a couple of nuggets in there (which aren't specific to Christianity or Judaism, and certainly principles that predate the bible), but it's also got a bunch of xenophobia,

There was very good reason for this back then. People still conquered other countries. And then there is all the persecution of christianity and judaism.

misogyny,

Throw it wt me.

religious discrimination,

Not even commenting on this one.

divinely justified or commanded wars,

Problem?

and other various uncivilized ideas in it.

Opinions looking back from "modern morals".

At 3/31/2017 3:34:29 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:19:28 PM, Ludofl3x wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:08:15 PM, Perussi wrote:

Dood, personal and social skills more, they are more practical than anything you will ever learn in school. Don't get angry, anger is always bad. Treat others as yourself, that gets you somewhere. That's the tip of the iceburg.

It also can't teach you spelling, apparently. Can you please cite the "social skills" and "personal skills" in the bible? It's got a couple of nuggets in there (which aren't specific to Christianity or Judaism, and certainly principles that predate the bible), but it's also got a bunch of xenophobia,

There was very good reason for this back then. People still conquered other countries. And then there is all the persecution of christianity and judaism.

misogyny,

Throw it wt me.

religious discrimination,

Not even commenting on this one.

divinely justified or commanded wars,

Problem?

and other various uncivilized ideas in it.

Opinions looking back from "modern morals".

I'm not surprised at the lack of answers, but this last bit is strange. Are you saying that morals have changed, independent of the bible (which a lot of people think is the moral guidebook for all eternity)? I think we'd agree on that. If that's the case, why use the bible at all?

At 3/31/2017 3:44:52 PM, Ludofl3x wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:34:29 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:19:28 PM, Ludofl3x wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:08:15 PM, Perussi wrote:

Dood, personal and social skills more, they are more practical than anything you will ever learn in school. Don't get angry, anger is always bad. Treat others as yourself, that gets you somewhere. That's the tip of the iceburg.

It also can't teach you spelling, apparently. Can you please cite the "social skills" and "personal skills" in the bible? It's got a couple of nuggets in there (which aren't specific to Christianity or Judaism, and certainly principles that predate the bible), but it's also got a bunch of xenophobia,

There was very good reason for this back then. People still conquered other countries. And then there is all the persecution of christianity and judaism.

misogyny,

Throw it wt me.

religious discrimination,

Not even commenting on this one.

divinely justified or commanded wars,

Problem?

and other various uncivilized ideas in it.

Opinions looking back from "modern morals".

I'm not surprised at the lack of answers,

Simple assertion simple refutation.

but this last bit is strange. Are you saying that morals have changed, independent of the bible (which a lot of people think is the moral guidebook for all eternity)? I think we'd agree on that. If that's the case, why use the bible at all?

*Ethics, what is considered moral today. And i said modern morals in quotes because there are still christians... lots and lots. I didn't want to triggre myself.

At 3/31/2017 3:56:26 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:44:52 PM, Ludofl3x wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:34:29 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:19:28 PM, Ludofl3x wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:08:15 PM, Perussi wrote:

Dood, personal and social skills more, they are more practical than anything you will ever learn in school. Don't get angry, anger is always bad. Treat others as yourself, that gets you somewhere. That's the tip of the iceburg.

It also can't teach you spelling, apparently. Can you please cite the "social skills" and "personal skills" in the bible? It's got a couple of nuggets in there (which aren't specific to Christianity or Judaism, and certainly principles that predate the bible), but it's also got a bunch of xenophobia,

There was very good reason for this back then. People still conquered other countries. And then there is all the persecution of christianity and judaism.

misogyny,

Throw it wt me.

religious discrimination,

Not even commenting on this one.

divinely justified or commanded wars,

Problem?

and other various uncivilized ideas in it.

Opinions looking back from "modern morals".

I'm not surprised at the lack of answers,

Simple assertion simple refutation.

but this last bit is strange. Are you saying that morals have changed, independent of the bible (which a lot of people think is the moral guidebook for all eternity)? I think we'd agree on that. If that's the case, why use the bible at all?

*Ethics, what is considered moral today. And i said modern morals in quotes because there are still christians... lots and lots. I didn't want to triggre myself.

Maybe we have a language barrier. Pick one of the items I've listed as objectionable in the bible and I'll show you multiple examples FROM the bible of it. I don't understand any of the sentence that starts with *Ethics. Triggre yourself, what do you mean? There are still Christians, what's that implying, that there are Christians who don't have modern morals? Again I think we'd agree there, but there are also a TON of Christians who've subconsciously discarded the bible as their moral compass simply because it does not make sense with modern morals (like they don't drag their rebellious kid to the mayor for his stoning when he talks back). Thank goodness for that, actually.

Please clarify.

At 3/31/2017 1:03:13 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 5:23:24 AM, Keltron wrote:

At 3/16/2017 9:02:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
After creating Adam and Eve. God tells them they can eat from any tree in the garden except one.

Genesis 2:17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die."

What happens when they disobey God and eat the forbidden fruit?

Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life firever.

They become like him and now he does not want them to live forever.

So what does God do? He punishes Adam and Eve for disobeying him.

Genesis 3: 14 So the Lord God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all livestock and all wild animals. You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.
15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring[a] and hers; he will crush[b] your head, and you will strike his heel."
16 To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."
17 To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, "You must not eat from it," "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow you will eat your foo until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken for dust you are and to dust you will return."

The rest of the bible is about God sending prophets to teach the people what is good and evil and laws they should obey. Why?

Odd that God is asking them to learn the difference between good and evil when he punished Adam and Eve for eating the forbidden fruit because they were desirous of gaining wisdom of good and evil. God was against them learning then in the Garden. Now he sends prophets to teach them and wonders why they are reluctant to learn forgetting he punished them when they wanted to learn.

Genesis 3:6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

Because Adam and Eve gained the knowledge and became like Him, God did not want them to also live forever. So he banished them from the garden and had angels guard the tree of life.

So why did he send his only begotten son Jesus?

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

But it was God who took away the tree of life so they would not live forever. Now he is offering Jesus to restore what he took away from them Ie the tree of life.

God suffers from circular reasoning/logic. The bible only makes sense if you suffer from the same condition.
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

In short, God is trying to restore his creation back to Paradise which he took away from Adam and Eve for disobeying him by desiring what he wanted them to learn anyways.

The Bible makes sense within its contemporary context. The first part of the OT is foundational mythology, the middle part, that is the stuff form the books of Chronicles and Kings is mostly history, but written with a Judaic bias (Judah versus Israel). The entire OT is compiled from the point of view of the Babylonian exile, which was a real, historical event. The Gospels present a mythological account of Jesus which is written around prophetic themes from the OT. The Pauline books present a fairly accurate account of Christianity's move toward metroplitinism. And Revelation is an apocalyptic criticism of the Roman empire.

So how did all these contemporary logical context end up so badly as an illogical apocalyptic destination sustained by the delusional beliefs of Jesus who was crucified for his blasphemous claims? Should it not have stopped at the crucifixions? Instead we see it nurtured as a utopian fantasy in the minds of 2 billion Christians. What contemporary remedy is available to treat their condition?

The Bible is just an ancient artifact. It has value because it helps us understand how we got to where we are today. There are some good words of wisdom in the Bible like the Golden Rule, and the nihilism expressed in Ecclesiastes. Other that that it's just an old book. Religion itself is just a gilded anachronism. It's function has been rendered redundant by other institutional control mechanisms, but it still has value for its ability to control and misdirect the peasants.

At 3/31/2017 4:02:31 PM, Ludofl3x wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:56:26 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:44:52 PM, Ludofl3x wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:34:29 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:19:28 PM, Ludofl3x wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:08:15 PM, Perussi wrote:

Dood, personal and social skills more, they are more practical than anything you will ever learn in school. Don't get angry, anger is always bad. Treat others as yourself, that gets you somewhere. That's the tip of the iceburg.

It also can't teach you spelling, apparently. Can you please cite the "social skills" and "personal skills" in the bible? It's got a couple of nuggets in there (which aren't specific to Christianity or Judaism, and certainly principles that predate the bible), but it's also got a bunch of xenophobia,

There was very good reason for this back then. People still conquered other countries. And then there is all the persecution of christianity and judaism.

misogyny,

Throw it wt me.

religious discrimination,

Not even commenting on this one.

divinely justified or commanded wars,

Problem?

and other various uncivilized ideas in it.

Opinions looking back from "modern morals".

I'm not surprised at the lack of answers,

Simple assertion simple refutation.

but this last bit is strange. Are you saying that morals have changed, independent of the bible (which a lot of people think is the moral guidebook for all eternity)? I think we'd agree on that. If that's the case, why use the bible at all?

*Ethics, what is considered moral today. And i said modern morals in quotes because there are still christians... lots and lots. I didn't want to triggre myself.

Maybe we have a language barrier. Pick one of the items I've listed as objectionable in the bible and I'll show you multiple examples FROM the bible of it. I don't understand any of the sentence that starts with *Ethics. Triggre yourself, what do you mean? There are still Christians, what's that implying, that there are Christians who don't have modern morals? Again I think we'd agree there, but there are also a TON of Christians who've subconsciously discarded the bible as their moral compass simply because it does not make sense with modern morals (like they don't drag their rebellious kid to the mayor for his stoning when he talks back). Thank goodness for that, actually.

Please clarify.

I picked them all.

"triggre" means "triggered" which means offended. There is a lot of rediculousness with it so i made it even more rediculous to mock it.

At 3/31/2017 3:08:15 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 2:01:59 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 12:53:34 PM, Perussi wrote:

It isn't less relavent at all, it is unlike any other material today.

It is both irrelevant and unlike other trash.

It is very relavent, all of it, but not the parts you are mentioning.

How can all of it be relevant but not the parts I mentioned? All of it means all of it. Duh!!

Fine, not every single little bit but there are reasons for those parts.

There are very few things the bible can be applied to in practical situations. It cannot teach you math, science, banking, cooking, carpentry, etc, etc. Therefore it is mostly irrelevant.

Dood, personal and social skills more, they are more practical than anything you will ever learn in school. Don't get angry, anger is always bad. Treat others as yourself, that gets you somewhere. That's the tip of the iceburg.

Christians are notoriously backward and antisocial and that is because they are trying to learn social skills from the bible which is full of racism, slavery, misogyny and genocide.

Don't forget you are only focusing on where possible contradictions are. Most of it is not like this at all.

These are the obvious contradictions beginning with the first book of Genesis. It continues to get worse.

When all else fails...

It wasn't back then like it is today and god is god and could litterally do anything he felt like doing. And some of it may be metaphorical. Translations.... Metaphors... Who the heck knows? But i can believe either way. From a scientific perspective the bible makes no sence at all.

If from a scientific perspective the bible doesn't make sense and it is filled with metaphorical translations. Then it fails as a book of facts.

Science is not logic of philosophy, it is a child of them. Logic trancends science.

How does logic transcend science? We have logical fallacies but you seldom hear of scientific fallacies. Logic is a product of reasoning science is a method of verification and elimination. Science helps us correct logical fallacies, incorrect assumption and wrong conclusions,

Science is an idea. Ideas are created from thinking. High profile thinking is called "philosophy" usually. And science has nothing to do with fallacies, it is used to create and manage scientific facts. (or just facts) (not meant to sound mean)

People turn to science for answers . Philosophy is being replaced by science and science is replacing religion. The bibles fails scientific scrutiny.

At 3/31/2017 5:00:52 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:08:15 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 2:01:59 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 12:53:34 PM, Perussi wrote:

It isn't less relavent at all, it is unlike any other material today.

It is both irrelevant and unlike other trash.

It is very relavent, all of it, but not the parts you are mentioning.

How can all of it be relevant but not the parts I mentioned? All of it means all of it. Duh!!

Fine, not every single little bit but there are reasons for those parts.

There are very few things the bible can be applied to in practical situations. It cannot teach you math, science, banking, cooking, carpentry, etc, etc. Therefore it is mostly irrelevant.

Dood, personal and social skills more, they are more practical than anything you will ever learn in school. Don't get angry, anger is always bad. Treat others as yourself, that gets you somewhere. That's the tip of the iceburg.

Christians are notoriously backward and antisocial and that is because they are trying to learn social skills from the bible which is full of racism, slavery, misogyny and genocide.

One of the stupidest things i have ever read and i don't think i have to explain why, you know what you did here and if not you are an idiot. Metal meets metal, insult meets insult. I will win.

Don't forget you are only focusing on where possible contradictions are. Most of it is not like this at all.

These are the obvious contradictions beginning with the first book of Genesis. It continues to get worse.

When all else fails...

It wasn't back then like it is today and god is god and could litterally do anything he felt like doing. And some of it may be metaphorical. Translations.... Metaphors... Who the heck knows? But i can believe either way. From a scientific perspective the bible makes no sence at all.

If from a scientific perspective the bible doesn't make sense and it is filled with metaphorical translations. Then it fails as a book of facts.

Science is not logic of philosophy, it is a child of them. Logic trancends science.

How does logic transcend science? We have logical fallacies but you seldom hear of scientific fallacies. Logic is a product of reasoning science is a method of verification and elimination. Science helps us correct logical fallacies, incorrect assumption and wrong conclusions,

Science is an idea. Ideas are created from thinking. High profile thinking is called "philosophy" usually. And science has nothing to do with fallacies, it is used to create and manage scientific facts. (or just facts) (not meant to sound mean)

People turn to science for answers . Philosophy is being replaced by science and science is replacing religion. The bibles fails scientific scrutiny.

Science has a big name but people don't know that science is only the idea of the scientific method which is a great way to prove facts about what is observable. I'll say it again, SCIENCE IS AN IDEA. If there was a logical contradiction in the science would we throw that out? Yes. There is an example of logic defeating science.

At 3/31/2017 4:18:59 PM, Keltron wrote:

At 3/31/2017 1:03:13 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 5:23:24 AM, Keltron wrote:

At 3/16/2017 9:02:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
After creating Adam and Eve. God tells them they can eat from any tree in the garden except one.

Genesis 2:17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die."

What happens when they disobey God and eat the forbidden fruit?

Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life firever.

They become like him and now he does not want them to live forever.

So what does God do? He punishes Adam and Eve for disobeying him.

Genesis 3: 14 So the Lord God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all livestock and all wild animals. You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.
15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring[a] and hers; he will crush[b] your head, and you will strike his heel."
16 To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."
17 To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, "You must not eat from it," "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow you will eat your foo until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken for dust you are and to dust you will return."

The rest of the bible is about God sending prophets to teach the people what is good and evil and laws they should obey. Why?

Odd that God is asking them to learn the difference between good and evil when he punished Adam and Eve for eating the forbidden fruit because they were desirous of gaining wisdom of good and evil. God was against them learning then in the Garden. Now he sends prophets to teach them and wonders why they are reluctant to learn forgetting he punished them when they wanted to learn.

Genesis 3:6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

Because Adam and Eve gained the knowledge and became like Him, God did not want them to also live forever. So he banished them from the garden and had angels guard the tree of life.

So why did he send his only begotten son Jesus?

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

But it was God who took away the tree of life so they would not live forever. Now he is offering Jesus to restore what he took away from them Ie the tree of life.

God suffers from circular reasoning/logic. The bible only makes sense if you suffer from the same condition.
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

In short, God is trying to restore his creation back to Paradise which he took away from Adam and Eve for disobeying him by desiring what he wanted them to learn anyways.

The Bible makes sense within its contemporary context. The first part of the OT is foundational mythology, the middle part, that is the stuff form the books of Chronicles and Kings is mostly history, but written with a Judaic bias (Judah versus Israel). The entire OT is compiled from the point of view of the Babylonian exile, which was a real, historical event. The Gospels present a mythological account of Jesus which is written around prophetic themes from the OT. The Pauline books present a fairly accurate account of Christianity's move toward metroplitinism. And Revelation is an apocalyptic criticism of the Roman empire.

So how did all these contemporary logical context end up so badly as an illogical apocalyptic destination sustained by the delusional beliefs of Jesus who was crucified for his blasphemous claims? Should it not have stopped at the crucifixions? Instead we see it nurtured as a utopian fantasy in the minds of 2 billion Christians. What contemporary remedy is available to treat their condition?

The Bible is just an ancient artifact. It has value because it helps us understand how we got to where we are today. There are some good words of wisdom in the Bible like the Golden Rule, and the nihilism expressed in Ecclesiastes. Other that that it's just an old book. Religion itself is just a gilded anachronism. It's function has been rendered redundant by other institutional control mechanisms, but it still has value for its ability to control and misdirect the peasants.

Is there any justification to continue the use of the bible when it does not even meet the educational requirements of a fourth grader. In fact many of the stories of sexual immorality, genocide in the bible are damaging to young minds.

At 3/31/2017 5:08:14 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 5:00:52 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:08:15 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 2:01:59 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 12:53:34 PM, Perussi wrote:

It isn't less relavent at all, it is unlike any other material today.

It is both irrelevant and unlike other trash.

It is very relavent, all of it, but not the parts you are mentioning.

How can all of it be relevant but not the parts I mentioned? All of it means all of it. Duh!!

Fine, not every single little bit but there are reasons for those parts.

There are very few things the bible can be applied to in practical situations. It cannot teach you math, science, banking, cooking, carpentry, etc, etc. Therefore it is mostly irrelevant.

Dood, personal and social skills more, they are more practical than anything you will ever learn in school. Don't get angry, anger is always bad. Treat others as yourself, that gets you somewhere. That's the tip of the iceburg.

Christians are notoriously backward and antisocial and that is because they are trying to learn social skills from the bible which is full of racism, slavery, misogyny and genocide.

One of the stupidest things i have ever read and i don't think i have to explain why, you know what you did here and if not you are an idiot. Metal meets metal, insult meets insult. I will win.

Don't forget you are only focusing on where possible contradictions are. Most of it is not like this at all.

These are the obvious contradictions beginning with the first book of Genesis. It continues to get worse.

When all else fails...

It wasn't back then like it is today and god is god and could litterally do anything he felt like doing. And some of it may be metaphorical. Translations.... Metaphors... Who the heck knows? But i can believe either way. From a scientific perspective the bible makes no sence at all.

If from a scientific perspective the bible doesn't make sense and it is filled with metaphorical translations. Then it fails as a book of facts.

Science is not logic of philosophy, it is a child of them. Logic trancends science.

How does logic transcend science? We have logical fallacies but you seldom hear of scientific fallacies. Logic is a product of reasoning science is a method of verification and elimination. Science helps us correct logical fallacies, incorrect assumption and wrong conclusions,

Science is an idea. Ideas are created from thinking. High profile thinking is called "philosophy" usually. And science has nothing to do with fallacies, it is used to create and manage scientific facts. (or just facts) (not meant to sound mean)

People turn to science for answers . Philosophy is being replaced by science and science is replacing religion. The bibles fails scientific scrutiny.

Science has a big name but people don't know that science is only the idea of the scientific method which is a great way to prove facts about what is observable. I'll say it again, SCIENCE IS AN IDEA. If there was a logical contradiction in the science would we throw that out? Yes. There is an example of logic defeating science.

There cannot be a logical contradiction in the sciences because the scientific method prevents such logical errors and is designed to be self correcting.

Scientific method definition: a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

At 3/31/2017 5:17:59 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 5:08:14 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 5:00:52 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:08:15 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 2:01:59 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 12:53:34 PM, Perussi wrote:

It isn't less relavent at all, it is unlike any other material today.

It is both irrelevant and unlike other trash.

It is very relavent, all of it, but not the parts you are mentioning.

How can all of it be relevant but not the parts I mentioned? All of it means all of it. Duh!!

Fine, not every single little bit but there are reasons for those parts.

There are very few things the bible can be applied to in practical situations. It cannot teach you math, science, banking, cooking, carpentry, etc, etc. Therefore it is mostly irrelevant.

Dood, personal and social skills more, they are more practical than anything you will ever learn in school. Don't get angry, anger is always bad. Treat others as yourself, that gets you somewhere. That's the tip of the iceburg.

Christians are notoriously backward and antisocial and that is because they are trying to learn social skills from the bible which is full of racism, slavery, misogyny and genocide.

One of the stupidest things i have ever read and i don't think i have to explain why, you know what you did here and if not you are an idiot. Metal meets metal, insult meets insult. I will win.

Don't forget you are only focusing on where possible contradictions are. Most of it is not like this at all.

These are the obvious contradictions beginning with the first book of Genesis. It continues to get worse.

When all else fails...

It wasn't back then like it is today and god is god and could litterally do anything he felt like doing. And some of it may be metaphorical. Translations.... Metaphors... Who the heck knows? But i can believe either way. From a scientific perspective the bible makes no sence at all.

If from a scientific perspective the bible doesn't make sense and it is filled with metaphorical translations. Then it fails as a book of facts.

Science is not logic of philosophy, it is a child of them. Logic trancends science.

How does logic transcend science? We have logical fallacies but you seldom hear of scientific fallacies. Logic is a product of reasoning science is a method of verification and elimination. Science helps us correct logical fallacies, incorrect assumption and wrong conclusions,

Science is an idea. Ideas are created from thinking. High profile thinking is called "philosophy" usually. And science has nothing to do with fallacies, it is used to create and manage scientific facts. (or just facts) (not meant to sound mean)

People turn to science for answers . Philosophy is being replaced by science and science is replacing religion. The bibles fails scientific scrutiny.

Science has a big name but people don't know that science is only the idea of the scientific method which is a great way to prove facts about what is observable. I'll say it again, SCIENCE IS AN IDEA. If there was a logical contradiction in the science would we throw that out? Yes. There is an example of logic defeating science.

There cannot be a logical contradiction in the sciences because the scientific method prevents such logical errors and is designed to be self correcting.

Scientific method definition: a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

If only that were true, but the evidence says otherwise.

At 3/31/2017 6:35:59 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

At 3/31/2017 5:17:59 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 5:08:14 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 5:00:52 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:08:15 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 2:01:59 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 12:53:34 PM, Perussi wrote:

It isn't less relavent at all, it is unlike any other material today.

It is both irrelevant and unlike other trash.

It is very relavent, all of it, but not the parts you are mentioning.

How can all of it be relevant but not the parts I mentioned? All of it means all of it. Duh!!

Fine, not every single little bit but there are reasons for those parts.

There are very few things the bible can be applied to in practical situations. It cannot teach you math, science, banking, cooking, carpentry, etc, etc. Therefore it is mostly irrelevant.

Dood, personal and social skills more, they are more practical than anything you will ever learn in school. Don't get angry, anger is always bad. Treat others as yourself, that gets you somewhere. That's the tip of the iceburg.

Christians are notoriously backward and antisocial and that is because they are trying to learn social skills from the bible which is full of racism, slavery, misogyny and genocide.

One of the stupidest things i have ever read and i don't think i have to explain why, you know what you did here and if not you are an idiot. Metal meets metal, insult meets insult. I will win.

Don't forget you are only focusing on where possible contradictions are. Most of it is not like this at all.

These are the obvious contradictions beginning with the first book of Genesis. It continues to get worse.

When all else fails...

It wasn't back then like it is today and god is god and could litterally do anything he felt like doing. And some of it may be metaphorical. Translations.... Metaphors... Who the heck knows? But i can believe either way. From a scientific perspective the bible makes no sence at all.

If from a scientific perspective the bible doesn't make sense and it is filled with metaphorical translations. Then it fails as a book of facts.

Science is not logic of philosophy, it is a child of them. Logic trancends science.

How does logic transcend science? We have logical fallacies but you seldom hear of scientific fallacies. Logic is a product of reasoning science is a method of verification and elimination. Science helps us correct logical fallacies, incorrect assumption and wrong conclusions,

Science is an idea. Ideas are created from thinking. High profile thinking is called "philosophy" usually. And science has nothing to do with fallacies, it is used to create and manage scientific facts. (or just facts) (not meant to sound mean)

People turn to science for answers . Philosophy is being replaced by science and science is replacing religion. The bibles fails scientific scrutiny.

Science has a big name but people don't know that science is only the idea of the scientific method which is a great way to prove facts about what is observable. I'll say it again, SCIENCE IS AN IDEA. If there was a logical contradiction in the science would we throw that out? Yes. There is an example of logic defeating science.

There cannot be a logical contradiction in the sciences because the scientific method prevents such logical errors and is designed to be self correcting.

Scientific method definition: a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

If only that were true, but the evidence says otherwise.

The human condition has improved because of science and technology. Medication keeps your suicidal depressions down. The Internet allows you to communicate even though you are partially disabled and confined to your room. But your baptism in 1984 did not change your moral attitude. You continued to divorce and remarry, you abandoned your 3 children, you engaged in sexually perverted sex, you continued your adultery and was even banned by your church. All this occurred after you were baptized and accepted Jehovah. Science has done more for you than your bible. In fact you abused the teachings of the bible.

At 3/30/2017 3:24:21 PM, annanicole wrote:

At 3/29/2017 8:52:26 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

At 3/27/2017 12:45:06 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/27/2017 12:36:01 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

At 3/27/2017 2:09:14 AM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/26/2017 10:46:02 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:

At 3/26/2017 9:28:57 PM, Skeptical1 wrote:

Look what you did with their religion. You used it to justify your 4 divorces,you used it to justify abandoning your 3 children, you got disfellowshipped and shunned when Jehovah's earthly organization found out how depraved you were. You used their religion to attract sexually immoral Filipino women. How much lower can you get?

I have not used scripture or the faith of the JWs to justify any such thing, however I have pointed out that I was divorced for adultery ...

Yeah, your own adultery! You were on the receiving end of the divorce for adultery just as you'll be on the receiving end of the supposed horrors of this imaginary yet-future Armageddon.

I have never denied that, bt it is my past, not my present.

By the way, does your latest little split up (with Imelda) count as another divorce? I guess since you claimed y'all were "married in God's eyes" that you two are now "divorced in God's eyes."

It amounts to a breach of contract, and marriage is a contract.

Imelda contracted to love me and to be mine for life, she then committed what in the circumstances amount to adultery, thus ending our commitment, our contract, in Gd's eyes.

Your problem remains that you are tied to the physical and divorced from teh spiritual, that is why you fail so dismally to understand the concept of God's Kingdom as being a very real Kingdom.

It was exactly that back in the days of Moses through to the days of Samuel, when Israel demanded a human king, and as God pointed out to Samuel, they were not rejecting Samuel as Judge over them, but Jehovah as King over them.

The Israel of God, was the start of the revival of God's Kingship, this time under his son, but since, as foretold, the Apostasy took them over also they too were abandoned until the end of the Gentile Times.

That Israel of God, the only true Israel in Jehovah's eyes, was gathered together, trained by Christ, and eventually became accepted subjects of God's Kingdom under Christ in 1925. leading to the adoption, under holy spirit guidance, of Jehovah's name to mark them out as his people just as the original Israel had been until he forsook them.

By 1914, when the Gentile times were, as Daniel foretold, over, at an end, the training of the remains of those future Kings began in earnest, but as we all know they made many mistakes during their period of training which led to sorting out the "wheat from the chaff", the final sorting taking place in 1925 when some refused to accept Jehovah's guidance n the reformation of the organisation in order to carry out their commission.

There is historical and scriptural precedent for everything I have explained above. I now you do not wish to accept that, but that is your loss and will remain so unless you wake up to scriptural truth and forsake your very human doctrine.

At 3/31/2017 5:23:24 AM, Keltron wrote:

At 3/16/2017 9:02:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
After creating Adam and Eve. God tells them they can eat from any tree in the garden except one.

Genesis 2:17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die."

What happens when they disobey God and eat the forbidden fruit?

Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life firever.

They become like him and now he does not want them to live forever.

So what does God do? He punishes Adam and Eve for disobeying him.

Genesis 3: 14 So the Lord God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, "Cursed are you above all livestock and all wild animals. You will crawl on your belly and you will eat dust all the days of your life.
15 And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring[a] and hers; he will crush[b] your head, and you will strike his heel."
16 To the woman he said, "I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."
17 To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, "You must not eat from it," "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow you will eat your foo until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken for dust you are and to dust you will return."

The rest of the bible is about God sending prophets to teach the people what is good and evil and laws they should obey. Why?

Odd that God is asking them to learn the difference between good and evil when he punished Adam and Eve for eating the forbidden fruit because they were desirous of gaining wisdom of good and evil. God was against them learning then in the Garden. Now he sends prophets to teach them and wonders why they are reluctant to learn forgetting he punished them when they wanted to learn.

Genesis 3:6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

Because Adam and Eve gained the knowledge and became like Him, God did not want them to also live forever. So he banished them from the garden and had angels guard the tree of life.

So why did he send his only begotten son Jesus?

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

But it was God who took away the tree of life so they would not live forever. Now he is offering Jesus to restore what he took away from them Ie the tree of life.

God suffers from circular reasoning/logic. The bible only makes sense if you suffer from the same condition.
Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

In short, God is trying to restore his creation back to Paradise which he took away from Adam and Eve for disobeying him by desiring what he wanted them to learn anyways.

The Bible makes sense within its contemporary context. The first part of the OT is foundational mythology, the middle part, that is the stuff form the books of Chronicles and Kings is mostly history, but written with a Judaic bias (Judah versus Israel). The entire OT is compiled from the point of view of the Babylonian exile, which was a real, historical event. The Gospels present a mythological account of Jesus which is written around prophetic themes from the OT. The Pauline books present a fairly accurate account of Christianity's move toward metroplitinism. And Revelation is an apocalyptic criticism of the Roman empire.

There is nothing mythical in any of the Bible, it is fact, sometimes presented in figurative terms, sometimes not.

Genesis 1 is scientifically proven to be accurate in the few details that it gives us. Details which, scant as they are, mankind has only in relatively recent centuries caught up with but which were revealed to Moses over 3,000 years ago.

Genesis 1 is not only absolute proof of the existence of the creator God, Jehovah, but of the reliability of the Bible since as God's word it can only be true. The difficulty which Satan has presented us with is learning to understand what it is really saying despite his corruption, to a very limited extent, of the Bible and even more so of Language over the last few centuries.

Those who refuse to accept its veracity are simply fooling themselves because truth remains truth whether or not they wish to believe it.

At 3/31/2017 4:36:11 AM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/30/2017 8:52:52 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/30/2017 6:50:35 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/30/2017 6:02:33 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/30/2017 3:28:18 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/30/2017 2:46:40 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/30/2017 1:34:14 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/30/2017 12:24:14 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/29/2017 8:33:26 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/29/2017 8:27:27 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/29/2017 5:02:04 PM, Perussi wrote:

Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving"; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true.

He didn't have what he wanted, he had two humans who had sinned.

It is only a sin if the two knew what they were doing was wrong. They had no concept of good and evil before they ate the fruit.

God said in short "hey, see this? do not eat it". They understood language and were commandable, god even said to name the animals. They weren't idiots. They could understand the concept of good and bad.

How many animal nanes are found in Bible named by Adam? Adam couldn't even follow a simple order like don't eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

The bible isn't going to say what he named them, just that he did. He didn't follow it because he failed to not sin. He just failed. I can create complex formulas and i can still sin.

That is why the Bible doesn't make sense. It does even meet the educational standards of a grade four level. After studying the bible you still cannot name the animals or prove trees possess the knowledge of good and evil or even the ability to offer immortality.

That isn't what the bible teaches, it has a purpose, not to educate modernly though, not sure where this came from.

Did God expect man to remain in the stone or Bronze Age? That is why the bible is less relevant today.

It isn't a fvuking textbook.

That is why the bible is less relevant today.

It isn't less relavent at all, it is unlike any other material today.

It is both irrelevant and unlike other trash.

It is very relavent, all of it, but not the parts you are mentioning.

Yet God punished Adam and Eve because he believed in the nonsense he created.

If we are assuming this happened then what makes anything nonsence?

That is the belief of 2 billion Christians who believe God believed the nonsense He created. But Adam, Eve and the talking serpent ignored God and lived to tell their story.

No, why is it nonsence?

1. Talking serpents. Total nonsense.

Either metaphor or supernatural being satan, don't forget the bible calls this serpent satan.

God even describes the talking serpent as a snake.

2. Trees with knowledge of good and evil. Total nonsense.

The tree is not sentient.

The fruits contained knowledge of good and evil. God put this knowledge of good and evil in a tree but not in humans. Absolute rubbish.
But plants are sentient.

https://www.psychologytoday.com...

3. Tree of life give immortality to those who eat of it. Total nonsense.

The bible doesn't say this.

Read your scriptures.
Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and live forever.

More to follow.

K, but if the christian god exists it could be litteral or not still. We don't know how eden or heaven holds. But god as defined in the bible could definately cheat nature.

Now God is a cheater too, great!!!

Note God said if they ate the fruit they would die. But they didn't have the concept of death either because they were the first human creation.

God wouldn't say if you eat this you will die if they didn't understand "die".

They were living in the Garden of Eden where no death was possible or had ever occurred. It even had the tree of life to grant immorality. Remember they were the first humans created.

Stop repeating that, that argument has fallen.

Do you deny Adam and Ever were the first humans created? They did it see death for another 900 years after they ate the fruit.

God taught them to speak and just explained the concept of death, simple. It is the only reasonable way they could have been talking to each other and understood death. Again, god wouldn't say a word they wouldn't understand. For example, would you be talking to someone and throw a word in they don't know knowing they don't know it? No.

God talked to Adam and Eve in the same language he used on the talking serpent. That was how confused God was, he could not tell the difference between a serpent and Humans. Why? Because creation was very new to Him too.

I think god as defined in the bible would know a snake from a man. Maybe back then there was a universal language, the language of eden i think is mentioned a bit. And actually satan being a snake is possibly a metephor.

So it is not clear what is literal or fabricated what is real or just metaphors in the bible. It is a collections of stories that need special interpretation to make sense.

Don't forget you are only focusing on where possible contradictions are. Most of it is not like this at all.

These are the obvious contradictions beginning with the first book of Genesis. It continues to get worse.

When all else fails...

It wasn't back then like it is today and god is god and could litterally do anything he felt like doing. And some of it may be metaphorical. Translations.... Metaphors... Who the heck knows? But i can believe either way. From a scientific perspective the bible makes no sence at all.

God still can do whatever he chooses to do, but he also chooses to subject himself to the restrictions of morality and justice.

At 3/30/2017 3:12:00 AM, bulproof wrote:

At 3/29/2017 8:50:02 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
No, the Bible has not failed scientific scrutiny, that is another lie that many have fallen for.

The bible is categorically refuted by science.

Only in your imaginary world, in the real world science proves it's accuracy.

At 3/30/2017 3:21:10 AM, Composer wrote:

At 3/16/2017 9:02:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
After creating Adam and Eve. God tells them they can eat from any tree in the garden except one.

Show us where Story book God told this to Eve?

Jehovah didn't, it was Adam's responsibility to teach Eve, and he failed in it, badly.

At 3/30/2017 3:04:37 AM, Composer wrote:

At 3/29/2017 8:50:02 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
No, the Bible has not failed scientific scrutiny, that is another lie that many have fallen for.

Apart from e.g. Prov. 30:25 & 30!

25 The ants are not strong creatures,

But not strong compared to what?

I have yet to see the ant that can lift what a man can, in terms of real weight.

The fact that scientists have to rig the equation by making allowance for body weight, simply proves that they are not being truly accurate.

Yet they prepare their food in the summer.
26 The rock badgers are not mighty creatures,
Yet they make their house in the crags.
27 The locusts have no king,
Yet they all go forward in formation.
28 The gecko lizard clings with its feet,
And it goes into the palace of a king.
29 There are three things that have an impressive stride,
Four that are impressive as they move:
30 The lion, the mightiest among beasts,
Which does not retreat from anyone;

Science has not proven that wrong either, at least in the sense it which it is meant, though it has provided lions with something that they will run away from.

Ever watched how a lion defends its young? Ever seen a lion run from anything when doing so? They simply don't they will protect their young from elephants and anything else.

Typically of all who do not wish to accept the truth you have to change the context in order to prove yourself right.

Sorry it simply proves you to be a moral coward who is not prepared to meet the truth head on.

At 3/31/2017 7:06:13 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

At 3/30/2017 3:21:10 AM, Composer wrote:

At 3/16/2017 9:02:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
After creating Adam and Eve. God tells them they can eat from any tree in the garden except one.

Show us where Story book God told this to Eve?

Jehovah didn't, it was Adam's responsibility to teach Eve, and he failed in it, badly.

Eve knew what God had told Adam about the forbidden fruit.

Eve repeated what God said to her when the serpent questioned Eve.

Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, "You must not eat from any tree in the garden"?"

2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, "You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.""

But she answered the serpent proving she was aware of what God said and was taking heed until the serpent talked her out of it.

At 3/31/2017 7:04:08 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:

At 3/30/2017 3:12:00 AM, bulproof wrote:

At 3/29/2017 8:50:02 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
No, the Bible has not failed scientific scrutiny, that is another lie that many have fallen for.

The bible is categorically refuted by science.

Only in your imaginary world, in the real world science proves it's accuracy.

How can you rely on your knowledge of science when you did not even complete your schooling.

Science disprove Genesis beginning with the first verse.

On the first day the sky and earth were created.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Those were the first two things God created (heaven and earth) But that is wrong because the universe is much older than earth and had to be created before earth was created.

At 3/31/2017 5:17:59 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 5:08:14 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 5:00:52 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:08:15 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 2:01:59 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 12:53:34 PM, Perussi wrote:

It isn't less relavent at all, it is unlike any other material today.

It is both irrelevant and unlike other trash.

It is very relavent, all of it, but not the parts you are mentioning.

How can all of it be relevant but not the parts I mentioned? All of it means all of it. Duh!!

Fine, not every single little bit but there are reasons for those parts.

There are very few things the bible can be applied to in practical situations. It cannot teach you math, science, banking, cooking, carpentry, etc, etc. Therefore it is mostly irrelevant.

Dood, personal and social skills more, they are more practical than anything you will ever learn in school. Don't get angry, anger is always bad. Treat others as yourself, that gets you somewhere. That's the tip of the iceburg.

Christians are notoriously backward and antisocial and that is because they are trying to learn social skills from the bible which is full of racism, slavery, misogyny and genocide.

One of the stupidest things i have ever read and i don't think i have to explain why, you know what you did here and if not you are an idiot. Metal meets metal, insult meets insult. I will win.

Don't forget you are only focusing on where possible contradictions are. Most of it is not like this at all.

These are the obvious contradictions beginning with the first book of Genesis. It continues to get worse.

When all else fails...

It wasn't back then like it is today and god is god and could litterally do anything he felt like doing. And some of it may be metaphorical. Translations.... Metaphors... Who the heck knows? But i can believe either way. From a scientific perspective the bible makes no sence at all.

If from a scientific perspective the bible doesn't make sense and it is filled with metaphorical translations. Then it fails as a book of facts.

Science is not logic of philosophy, it is a child of them. Logic trancends science.

How does logic transcend science? We have logical fallacies but you seldom hear of scientific fallacies. Logic is a product of reasoning science is a method of verification and elimination. Science helps us correct logical fallacies, incorrect assumption and wrong conclusions,

Science is an idea. Ideas are created from thinking. High profile thinking is called "philosophy" usually. And science has nothing to do with fallacies, it is used to create and manage scientific facts. (or just facts) (not meant to sound mean)

People turn to science for answers . Philosophy is being replaced by science and science is replacing religion. The bibles fails scientific scrutiny.

Science has a big name but people don't know that science is only the idea of the scientific method which is a great way to prove facts about what is observable. I'll say it again, SCIENCE IS AN IDEA. If there was a logical contradiction in the science would we throw that out? Yes. There is an example of logic defeating science.

There cannot be a logical contradiction in the sciences because the scientific method prevents such logical errors and is designed to be self correcting.

Scientific method definition: a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

A method, method = idea. Don't get me wrong, science is good stuff, but logic is used in it and was used to create it. Logic is broader.

At 3/31/2017 8:50:26 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 5:17:59 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 5:08:14 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 5:00:52 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 3:08:15 PM, Perussi wrote:

At 3/31/2017 2:01:59 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/31/2017 12:53:34 PM, Perussi wrote:

It isn't less relavent at all, it is unlike any other material today.

It is both irrelevant and unlike other trash.

It is very relavent, all of it, but not the parts you are mentioning.

How can all of it be relevant but not the parts I mentioned? All of it means all of it. Duh!!

Fine, not every single little bit but there are reasons for those parts.

There are very few things the bible can be applied to in practical situations. It cannot teach you math, science, banking, cooking, carpentry, etc, etc. Therefore it is mostly irrelevant.

Dood, personal and social skills more, they are more practical than anything you will ever learn in school. Don't get angry, anger is always bad. Treat others as yourself, that gets you somewhere. That's the tip of the iceburg.

Christians are notoriously backward and antisocial and that is because they are trying to learn social skills from the bible which is full of racism, slavery, misogyny and genocide.

One of the stupidest things i have ever read and i don't think i have to explain why, you know what you did here and if not you are an idiot. Metal meets metal, insult meets insult. I will win.

Don't forget you are only focusing on where possible contradictions are. Most of it is not like this at all.

These are the obvious contradictions beginning with the first book of Genesis. It continues to get worse.

When all else fails...

It wasn't back then like it is today and god is god and could litterally do anything he felt like doing. And some of it may be metaphorical. Translations.... Metaphors... Who the heck knows? But i can believe either way. From a scientific perspective the bible makes no sence at all.

If from a scientific perspective the bible doesn't make sense and it is filled with metaphorical translations. Then it fails as a book of facts.

Science is not logic of philosophy, it is a child of them. Logic trancends science.

How does logic transcend science? We have logical fallacies but you seldom hear of scientific fallacies. Logic is a product of reasoning science is a method of verification and elimination. Science helps us correct logical fallacies, incorrect assumption and wrong conclusions,

Science is an idea. Ideas are created from thinking. High profile thinking is called "philosophy" usually. And science has nothing to do with fallacies, it is used to create and manage scientific facts. (or just facts) (not meant to sound mean)

People turn to science for answers . Philosophy is being replaced by science and science is replacing religion. The bibles fails scientific scrutiny.

Science has a big name but people don't know that science is only the idea of the scientific method which is a great way to prove facts about what is observable. I'll say it again, SCIENCE IS AN IDEA. If there was a logical contradiction in the science would we throw that out? Yes. There is an example of logic defeating science.

There cannot be a logical contradiction in the sciences because the scientific method prevents such logical errors and is designed to be self correcting.

Scientific method definition: a method of procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.

A method, method = idea. Don't get me wrong, science is good stuff, but logic is used in it and was used to create it. Logic is broader.

The scientific method begins with a hypothesis and not logic.

Hypothesis definition: a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation.

At 3/31/2017 12:56:02 AM, Composer wrote:

At 3/30/2017 2:15:52 PM, Harikrish wrote:

At 3/30/2017 3:21:10 AM, Composer wrote:

At 3/16/2017 9:02:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
After creating Adam and Eve. God tells them they can eat from any tree in the garden except one.

Show us where Story book God told this to Eve?

Eve repeated what God said to her when the serpent questioned Eve.

Story book God NEVER said that to Story book Eve!

It was said to Story book Adam alone -

Gen 2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "You may surely eat of every tree of the garden,
Gen 2:17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." (ESV Story book)

No mention of ' not touching! '.

Story book Eve didn't exist until later - Gen. 2:22, Story book

At 3/31/2017 12:25:35 PM, Harikrish wrote:
But she answered the serpent proving she was aware of what God said and was taking heed until the serpent talked her out of it.

The answer she gave to the Serpent was NOT what Story book God had said! (Gen. 2:17) shown above!