If the Bible was written by God..

Who? Me? NEVER! I question the intelligence of those who buy into those children's fairy tales

 

Do you suppose these hand clapping trees were Palm Trees??

Were the singing mountains the Rocky Mountains??

Perhaps the singing hill was Blue Berry Hill??

 

Faith is very successfully compartmentalized by very intelligent people.
Intelligent people can be and often are very, very wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

What do you hope to accomplish by mocking their beliefs?

 

Keep in mind that many religious people follow their prophet's example of hating most of humanity - such as being perfectly ok with most of humanity burning in a fiery torment just for simply picking the wrong unproven super-hero out of the tens of thousands on offer. They don't love all of humanity like Modern Secular Humanists, do, hence their hatred for most of humanity.

 

LOL "What does God want with a starship?"

 

Doesn't it feel good to get it out? I realize wiping is a pain, but pooping is supposed to feel good. Maybe you should see a doctor or consider changing your diet. I love to poop and all of my friends like pooping. Maybe you just have the wrong attitude about it. Try squatting instead of sitting.

 

Ahh, but the slaves in biblical times would have died if not for the option to become slaves. Goomba hinted earlier a suggestion that capitalism produces similar types of slaves without the de jeuro compulsion, granted, but perhaps not so ethically distinguishable from the biblical slave. This is a point that should be addressed, nevermind the wild goose chase Goomba is leading to get to making that point.

 

There are plently of Jewish/Christian fundamentalists who hold the torah/bible to be the literal word of god, and that each writers was simply an ghost writer, writing down words that god put into their minds.

 

The one good thing about New Atheism is that I'd say it does a good job refuting the doctrine of Biblical literalism which I'd definitely say is obviously false.

Problem is that only about 14% of Christians believe that the Bible is the literal word of God, so most of their arguments don't apply to most Christians.

I also think that New Atheism motivated a lot just by "cultural Marxism" or an "anti-majority" mindset what we see on the progressive side. This is why we see it directed at Christianity much more so than at Islam or other religions - basically since Christianity is part of "the establishment" it's fair game - this is also what I think motivates a lot of the special interest movements such as "LGBT" rights - I think a lot of the more virulent proponents of gay rights were in favor of it more because "Christians dislike it" than anything else.

 

Yep, so don't blame science for what bitter atheists post to the internet. Science knows it is working under a set of assumptions that are only valuable because they provide the framework by which science and technology can demonstrably solve real world problems.

So since it works so well in that regard, it is an irresistable next step to apply that same framework towards the quest to answer the ultimate questions humanity has about its origins. This is not unreasonable, and the aforementioned successes generate confidence that the results may be accurate. But it never escapes the underlying assumption, which can never be proven.

Since so many Christians on this forum are satisfied that the Bible can be rationalized to fit with modern science, and therefore do not deny relevant science, I don't see why the debate goes on. The question of the assumption of objective reality is an absolute impasse.

Atheists are just often too prideful to admit it. They were smart enough to learn and understand the principles they see others struggling with (if humans come from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?). They were moral enough to recognize that gay people aren't hurting anyone so there's nothing wrong with that. And they were courageous enough to stand up to their would-be indoctrinators and defy the faith many of them were probably raised with. So they aren't about to watch that go down the drain because of some ultra subtle assumption underlying all of science that never mattered for anything before. Nevertheless, it is an assumption, and they can't tell you there is no God. But try to understand why they feel the need to. They feel you are being duped and that they have the proof to show you.

 

The bible has gone from God actually sitting down at the typewriter and drinking endless cups of bad instant coffee, to 'inspired' by god. In the same way that a dark and spooky forest might inspire a schlocky YA fantasy fiction 'author' to churn out another teen pleaser.

 

Very nice writing in presenting your perspective on the subject matter. As noted above in red letter, you have pretty well summed up the "logic" which rules their being. That logic being one that is based on 'emotionalism' (feelings)...(they feel)... a logic that seeks to provide a shelter from persecution for being emotional while at the same time being emotionally driven.

 

The Bible is too full of inconsistencies to be taken literally or as Truth.

if the God of the Bible is the true God, he's a pretty pathetic, jealous, angry and spiteful God.

Not a God that I would want to worship.

I

 

Do you know that the different flood stories in different cultures may reflect that a flood is a possible fact to those cultures. The question is why a possible fact is distorted into a myth. It is so because human lack the ability to convey a fact without distorting it into a myth as times go by.
God has to convey a truth through the incapable humans through a story. His job is to conserve the contents in a story form such that they can be conveyed by the incapable humans who can only convey a fact as a story before the invention of effective recording tools such as our papers today.
Info in story forms is more or less like encoded info. You thus need a close relationship with that decoder to see the original contents. Of course, you can remains at the level of the stories, they are accurate enough for your human need. You humans need is to read the salvation message out to save your own arse.

You read the story form as scientific falsehood because you failed to "decode" it correctly with a distance too far away from the author who tried to convey the info.

 

just because there was "a flood", doesn't mean the whole world was covered by water.

its a fairy tale, not meant to be taken literally.

u been duped.

 

So what facts ever happened more than 10000 years are accurately recorded by humans? name one!

Moreover, I didn't remotely say that the flood is global. That's not the topic.

How do you know, out of your faith?

 

i have faith that the flood story, is a silly fairy tail.

im confident in my belief

 

It remains your faith then, not necessarily a fact especially what you can put is an assertion by faith. More realistically, there can be an actual fact but failed to be conveyed by ancient humans but in a myth form. This is natural as ancient humans don't have the ability to convey a fact the other way. Multiple accounts of myths can thus point to a possible fact.

 

the worldwide flood story, is s stupid myth.

get over it

 

These "inconsistencies " are just cherry picked to look that way. Same old tired false arguments.

 

How do you know it was worldwide?

 

Just to clear the decks it was only men who put stylus to papyrus.

 

1) The Bible was never intended to be a scientific textbook. But even science textbooks have notable inaccuracies in them for obvious reasons. I can list some of them if you doubt me.

2) God is perfect. But humans are not and the means humans communicate with each other are not perfect. Thus for obvious reasons even a perfect God can author books that turn out to be imperfect.

 

When people make that assertion to me I ask them what evidence they have to support it. I have yet to have any evidence presented.

 

Claiming a perfect God can author books that turn out to be imperfect is a non sequitur fallacy.