show me some evidence, evidence, and evidence

Originally posted by TacDavey
It's a possibility that they all just left, but that's all it is. A possibility. If you can find some sort of logical reason to think that's what happened...

I don't know, I'm no biblical scholar. I do know, however, that the widely held Christian viewpoint is that the laws were changed from OT to NT.

Destruction sure. But not necessarily evil. Again, that's what I've been talking to Sadako about.

It's as likely a possibility as "they never existed because they're not destroying right now", just saying. I personally don't believe in them, but I'm also hot saying "this specific God exist; that one didn't", despite the fact that some were worshiped as long or longer than the Judeo-Christian god and were believed to be as real.

Despite that passage (reportedly) from Jesus' own lips saying that the laws of the Jews would not be done away with?

So murdering infants and children due to the "sins" of their parents isn't something you'd classify as "evil", but you'd classify those said "sins" of the parents as evil, you're telling me this?

YouTube video

YouTube video

YouTube video

A word on circumcision too....
YouTube video

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
You heard. 🙂

YOU say it happened.
Science disagrees.
Yeah I listed a lot of those lessons just now....

I dont care what you say about destruction.
Earthquake hits Japan: Natural distater: Not Evil.

All powerful sentient being leveling whole cities, indiscriminately killing women, children and any pets: Evil.

You're still dodging the question. Can you give me an evil that I, as a Christian, have to perform or can't you? These are all actions that God performed. Give me one that I MUST perform.

Originally posted by Robtard
It's as likely a possibility as "they never existed because they're not destroying right now", just saying. I personally don't believe in them, but I'm also hot saying "this specific God exist; that one didn't", despite the fact that some were worshiped as long or longer than the Judeo-Christian god and were believed to be as real.

The idea that they never existed is more likely than "they just changed their minds out of the blue." That, coupled with all the other reasons to reject belief in them. I'm not all that educated in all those points, but I know that no one still thinks the Egyptian gods existed. At any rate, it isn't the same with the God of the Bible.

Originally posted by Robtard
Despite that passage (reportedly) from Jesus' own lips saying that the laws of the Jews would not be done away with?

You're really asking the wrong person. I'm not an expert in the Bible, so I rely on those who are. And they tell me that the laws changed from OT to NT. If you think they are wrong, you'll have to take it up with them, not me.

Originally posted by Robtard
So murdering infants and children due to the "sins" of their parents isn't something you'd classify as "evil", but you'd classify those said "sins" of the parents as evil, you're telling me this?

I'd say the punishments for sin was a lot harsher in Biblical times. The problem with using the Bible to claim God is evil is that the very same Bible also claims He is all just. You would have to be claiming He performed evils, while ignoring the fact that He is all just, which is cherry picking.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
I disagree on your closing point.

Science cannot be ignored, and trying to shame everyone into ignoring science here wont help your argument. (I know that it contradicts religion, and its real, so that doesnt suit the Religious side's argument, but since the irony is that any evidence that IS evidence should stand up to scrutiny....) 🙂

(Unlike God, in all likelihood.)

Science is irrelevant. At least all the science that you've been talking about. So is all the religion that you've been talking about. To prove or disprove God, you can't weight the actions done by religious men to the contributions done by science. You can't use the Bible to anything more than a bedtime story if you're out to prove God, same as with our flawed science.

What seems to be hardest to you, is the mix of humanity and religion. You seem to have a rather good eye for human nature, but you don't at all seem to get the nature of religion.

Example: Jews managed for many many years. Jesus came along "No, no, no. You're doing it wrong" and then the Christians came to life to do it wrong as well.

How much of the bad things you say about religions do you get from actual religious texts, in comparison to how much you get from actions by humans? 😉

You're basing most of your conclusions on history and not on religion. You're skipping the faults of humanity and jump straight to blaming religion. It's like wanting to go north, so you decide to shortcut south 😛

I've dodged nothing, Mr.Strawman, sir.

I've shown enough bible quotes that show directly the christian scriptures and examples of evils in it, and examples of how they are applied to destructive ends...you just ignore most of it.

I know it. you may not...but others reading this do and will.

You already admitted you're no Bible scholar...yet you claim to be able to tell us we are wrong for disagreeing about the God hypothesis being true..
And in order to come to the logicless and strange conclusions that you do, in the face of all history and evidence of direct quotes from the bible, you ignore all that makes sense, to suit your original position.. How comes your not in "God hates ****?"
They are a logical conclusion to a devout bunch of followers of god's word in the bible.
(Doesn't make them right though, neccessarily)

If you do not choose to follow all of god's word but just what you deem to be the nice bits you agree with, ignoring all else, including most of the old testament, (IE cherry picking) then there is only so much more to be gained from a conversation where you make statements regarding his supremacy of the universe and goodness, based entirely on your own chosen perception... no matter how much of an apologist you regard yourself as...you dig?

Now... speaking of dodging: Bring us your proof of god, and quit with the strawmannery, please....cause, with respect you've not make a great deal of sense in your other lines of argument.

Peace.

Originally posted by Q'Anilia
Science is irrelevant. At least all the science that you've been talking about. So is all the religion that you've been talking about. To prove or disprove God, you can't weight the actions done by religious men to the contributions done by science. You can't use the Bible to anything more than a bedtime story if you're out to prove God, same as with our flawed science.

What seems to be hardest to you, is the mix of humanity and religion. You seem to have a rather good eye for human nature, but you don't at all seem to get the nature of religion.

Example: Jews managed for many many years. Jesus came along "No, no, no. You're doing it wrong" and then the Christians came to life to do it wrong as well.

How much of the bad things you say about religions do you get from actual religious texts, in comparison to how much you get from actions by humans? 😉

You're basing most of your conclusions on history and not on religion. You're skipping the faults of humanity and jump straight to blaming religion. It's like wanting to go north, so you decide to shortcut south 😛

Science is always relevant.
Stop using your computer if you disagree/hate/disregard science. 🙂
(Lest you be a hypocrite. 😛)
Religion is human perpetuated.
"God doesnt kill people: People with Gods kill people."

Saying that we can't criticise it because man has a other faults, is like saying "Oh dont take the gun out of your child's cot........might as well not bother as there are knives and broken glass in there too..."
No. You remove the gun or bullets from the gun, then you work on the broken glass and knives.

Its disturbing that people would use the gun on the kid (Abraham) or would use the sharp objects in that cot to cut the baby, if it was their unproven belief that god wants them to do it.

I base my conclusions on Religion, Human history, natural history, science, free thinking, rationality, reason and common sense.

Yes. Man is a bastard at times. and one of the biggest faults of humanity is it's invention of the God theory (which would be fine of regarded as just that.. and religion:
Biggest divider of man next to politics.

Also, Tacdavey:

If you want another answer,
"You live as a slave under god....threatened with hell, if your reject the notion."

.....and slavery of human beings is an evil.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Science is always relevant.
Stop using your computer if you disagree/hate/disregard science. 🙂
(Lest you be a hypocrite. 😛)
Religion is human perpetuated.
"God doesnt kill people: People with Gods kill people."

Saying that we can't criticise it because man has a other faults, is like saying "Oh dont take the gun out of your child's cot........might as well not bother as there are knives and broken glass in there too..."
No. You remove the gun or bullets from the gun, then you work on the broken glass and knives.

Its disturbing that people would use the gun on the kid (Abraham) or would use the sharp objects in that cot to cut the baby, if it was their unproven belief that god wants them to do it.

I base my conclusions on Religion, Human history, natural history, science, free thinking, rationality, reason and common sense.

Yes. Man is a bastard at times. and one of the biggest faults of humanity is it's invention of the God theory (which would be fine of regarded as just that.. and religion:
Biggest divider of man next to politics.

1. Science is not always relevant. The sun is warm. I know this by stepping out when it's sunny. I don't need science to tell me it's warm 😛 Science is not always relevant, because there's only so much science can do. We're living at an age where our curiosity expand faster than our science 😉

2. I don't disagree with, hate or disregard science. I've never said, implied or thought that. I love science. I'm not a hypocrite just because I don't believe science at our current stage can prove God, and using a computer to say so. Not in the ways we use technology, at least.

3. You don't know that, though. You don't know that religion is human perpetuated, because you can't prove that it is. It's an assumption you've made, not information you've attained. We can't prove God, but that doesn't conclude that he doesn't exist. Just that we can't prove him.

4. You are very free to critize religion. I've never said that you aren't allowed to do so. What I'm saying is that you're blaming religion for the faults of man. You didn't answer me on if you're basing your prejudice of religion on religious texts, or on actions of humans though 😛 Because the religions that seem to be at focus for you, none of those ask you to war other people. War isn't a solution written in the books. None of the books.

God's words are the books. The books don't ask you to wage war. Therefore, by your own conclusion of logic, because the unproven God doesn't ask them to war, religious war is because of man and not God 🙂

5. You don't seem to have a lot of common sense though, because you've made up your mind without having all the facts. That's not common sense. You are unable to tell where man begins and religion end. You seem rather incompetent at this, because most, if not everything you blame and hate religion for, is not something religions ask of their followers.

Every war made in the name of Christianity or Islam is a sin! The and God says this 😄 The books ask them not to.

6. The "theory of God", the idea, the concept of religion is super 🙂 It's really great. It's not a flawed system. It's just humanitys problem abiding the rules given them that's a problem.

Fair enough on the numbering: 🙂

1) But you didnt know WHY it was warm 'til science proved it.

2) .....but you said its irrelevent. And that implies either lack of understanding of the process, or a lack of respect for the system of theory, peer testing and study of said theory etc IE the scientific process.....analysis.

3) We do. Show me proof of angels doing it, and proof that churchs, mosques and synagogues and all the people who built them, worship in them, preached in them never existed, and I'll believe you.
Whilst your at it, show me Proof that God himself wrote the scriptures/commandments (And I mean proof, not references to man made texts.)

4) Actually they do. Might wanna read them again. And yes, the sin that it infers is another good example of contradiction in the system.

5) Except the facts Ive presented are enough, and I don't make claims I cant back up....thats for the faithful.
(Faith being what you have to have to state a propostion without a shred of proof in the assertion)

6) It is massively flawed and full of contradiction..and the many different ideas about which imperfect system is to be adopted as the supreme 'god' keep causing wars.
Plus you've just argued successfully that such a system doesnt really work anyway....so whats the point of all the fear mongering, superstition, most likely false absolutist claims on science etc?

🙂

1. I'd still know that it was warm when the sun was shining. I'd know it was less warm when it didn't. I'd know it gets a great deal colder when it goes down behind the horizon, and a great deal darker. I'd know the sun produce warmth. I wouldn't know how, but I'd know that it does. I believe even cavemen knew that 😛 My point isn't that science serve no purpose, my point is that no amount of science can prove God. Not right now. Therefore it's irrelevant to keep bringing it up 🙂

2. I said it was irrelevant for the process of proving God. This because it can't contribute. We have no current means of proving God, or we would've. If ever, it's through science we'll prove God, but not right now.

3. God didn't write the scriptures. Man did. The Bible is man-written. I can't speak of the commandments, because I can't remember what the book says happened up that mountain 😛 And just because I can't prove anything, doesn't mean that your assumption is true.

Just because I can't disprove that God isn't human perpetuated, doesn't mean that he is. That's like saying that because you can't disprove God, he's real. So you can't ask me of that and come to a conclusion of non-existant God when I fail to provide 😛 You'd be using the same fallacy that you'd accuse me for.

I'm agnostic though, remember? You're asking me to prove something I can't say happened 😛

4. It doesn't, though. It speaks of individual cases where men are to do acts of violence, under very specific conditions. It does not at any point ask of the people of God to defend his name with blood. It does not anywhere ask you to wage war against another. It asks only things of you personally. Not that you're to act out on the rest of the world. Islam and Christianity both ask of you to turn the other cheek and trust in God to judge.

Albeit you appear confident. So I'll hear you out. Where, in which book, does it say that man should wage war?

5. You made a claim just now, that God doesn't exist. You can't back that up 😛 And for that matter, you have faith in that claim.

6. It's also written by man. Again. Flawed man. It doesn't work, because man doesn't work. Not because it's a bad system.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Also, Tacdavey:

If you want another answer,
"You live as a slave under god....threatened with hell, if your reject the notion."

.....and slavery of human beings is an evil.

Welllllll....that sucks. (the hell fear thing)

I certainly don't believe in the standard fabricated concept of a Christian hell...that's for sure. 🙂

I think a lot of the hell descriptions are metaphoric 🙂

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
I've dodged nothing, Mr.Strawman, sir.

I've shown enough bible quotes that show directly the christian scriptures and examples of evils in it, and examples of how they are applied to destructive ends...you just ignore most of it.

I know it. you may not...but others reading this do and will.

You already admitted you're no Bible scholar...yet you claim to be able to tell us we are wrong for disagreeing about the God hypothesis being true..
And in order to come to the logicless and strange conclusions that you do, in the face of all history and evidence of direct quotes from the bible, you ignore all that makes sense, to suit your original position.. How comes your not in "God hates ****?"
They are a logical conclusion to a devout bunch of followers of god's word in the bible.
(Doesn't make them right though, neccessarily)

If you do not choose to follow all of god's word but just what you deem to be the nice bits you agree with, ignoring all else, including most of the old testament, (IE cherry picking) then there is only so much more to be gained from a conversation where you make statements regarding his supremacy of the universe and goodness, based entirely on your own chosen perception... no matter how much of an apologist you regard yourself as...you dig?

Now... speaking of dodging: Bring us your proof of god, and quit with the strawmannery, please....cause, with respect you've not make a great deal of sense in your other lines of argument.

Peace.

Do you know what a Strawman argument is? Because me accusing you of dodging a question is not an example of one.

I asked for an example of something I must do as a Christian. You brought in "evils" that God performed in the OLD TESTAMENT.

The discussion of whether those were evil or not (which I have responded to by the way) is a completely different discussion. I asked for evidence of evils that Christians TODAY must do. Give me one, or just admit that you can't.

You have blatantly refused to answer this very simple question. I take that as evidence that you don't have an answer.

I have no idea what your were talking about with the cherry picking part. If anyone is cherry picking from the Bible, it's you. You use passages from it to say that God is evil, yet completely ignore the passages from the very same book that say He is all just. THAT is cherry picking.

As for my evidence of God, I gave it. The kalam cosmological argument. We started discussing it a while back and then you just kinda dropped it. My points are still there if you want to go back and look.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Also, Tacdavey:

If you want another answer,
"You live as a slave under god....threatened with hell, if your reject the notion."

.....and slavery of human beings is an evil.

Slavery is bad, yes. But Christianity isn't slavery. No one is forcing you to be a Christian. And hell isn't something God wants, it's something that simply has to be there. He even sent His son to die to keep as many people out of hell as possible.

I don't think it is a flaw of science that we can define things which are outside the reach of it. But because of it being outside of science (and therefore generally our perception) we should not let ourselves be influenced by or believe in any of those things that we can define that way, be it Gods, leprechauns or Spaghetti Monsters.

Originally posted by TacDavey
And hell isn't something God wants, it's something that simply has to be there. He even sent His son to die to keep as many people out of hell as possible.

So then God is not all powerful.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
So then God is not all powerful.

He is. But God is also all just. By His very nature, hell must exist, but that doesn't mean He wants to send people there any more than cops want people to go to jail.

he doesn't want to but HAS to? LOL

Originally posted by 0mega Spawn
he doesn't want to but HAS to? LOL

Yes, by His nature. He is all just, thus, by that definition, He is incapable of doing something unjust. He is all good, and thus is incapable of doing evil.

Originally posted by TacDavey
The idea that they never existed is more likely than "they just changed their minds out of the blue." That, coupled with all the other reasons to reject belief in them. I'm not all that educated in all those points, but I know that no one still thinks the Egyptian gods existed. At any rate, it isn't the same with the God of the Bible.

You're really asking the wrong person. I'm not an expert in the Bible, so I rely on those who are. And they tell me that the laws changed from OT to NT. If you think they are wrong, you'll have to take it up with them, not me.

I'd say the punishments for sin was a lot harsher in Biblical times. The problem with using the Bible to claim God is evil is that the very same Bible also claims He is all just. You would have to be claiming He performed evils, while ignoring the fact that He is all just, which is cherry picking.

So by that rational, if in 3,000 years people no longer believe in the Judeo-Christan god and believe in something else, the Judeo-Christian God will therefore cease to exist and was just make believe all along.

So you don't bother with what's written in the bible, you listen to what others say about it. K. Sadly, this is very common among religious folk.

I didn't say "God is evil", you implied that gods from older and defunct religions were evil and unjust by stating acts they supposedly performed (of which you have yet to show), I showed similar acts with the Judeo-Christian God.

Seems your argument is basically: "these acts are evil, unless it's done by God, then it's not, cos God can't do evil, therefore any act done by God is just, even if said act would be evil if done by someone else or another god."

Originally posted by TacDavey
Yes, by His nature. He is all just, thus, by that definition, He is incapable of doing something unjust. He is all good, and thus is incapable of doing evil.