Lies and Absurdities within the Bible?

[RavEMasteR]

Well, like the title says, this thread is for debating about lies and absurdities within the Bible. In the end, the Bible will forever be upheld as evil/absurd/rubbish, or as truth/good.

To start it off, I'll provide a site as a massive resource against the Bible. Let us begin, shall we?

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/

The above site lists everything out by category, and I mean everything, good or bad.

Note that you can all try to debunk the idea that it's bad by providing a better intepretation of the stuff that's in the site.

Happy intepreting!

[RavEMasteR]

Not seeing the lie, here. It is quite clear in the Bible that nonbelievers are punished in some way...

True, it is stated, but the problem is, the Bible also states contradictory statements. That's the lie there.

I think this is one pivotal flaw in your thinking. You see, I said a human has no right to judge God because the differences between humanity and deity are infinite in scope and basic in nature.

Saddam, Hitler, and Qin were all finite, flawed humans; they were all within human understanding, which means they were within human judgement.

God, you see, is not merely a powerful human, as these historical figures were. God is completely different from a human, and therefore anyone who criticizes/judges God for anything must account for the difference.

My point in the previous post was that everyone must admit that if an entity is superior (or just different) enough from oneself, then one will not always be able to understand the entity's reasoning.

That's only what the Bible says. How sure are you that this God is not part of an alien race who dumped us here to perform unhumane experiments on us? Being an alien means being destructible.

What I mean is that God technically has the right to do whatever He wants to do with humans because he created humans. Hitler is completely different because he was not God; he did not create humans, so he has no right to kill them.

However, God's right to kill people need not be his reason for doing so. If God, in his infinite wisdom, believes it'sl be better if these people die a little sooner than those people, then it is so.

If my country's prime minister, in his greater wisdom than mine, decides to slaughter all the Chinese people in my country because it has to be done to remove the problem of Chinese criminals, then it is so???

What God did was kill the entire group of people, without mercy for those who knew absolutely nothing, or did nothing wrong. Just like drowning children with the flood. The babies knew ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!
Not really.

[Shild]

the Bible also states contradictory statements. That's the lie there

Prove it.

That's only what the Bible says. How sure are you that this God is not part of an alien race who dumped us here to perform unhumane experiments on us? Being an alien means being destructible.

I have seen no reason to disbelieve the Bible, and plenty of reasons to believe it. If you have something specific which indicates that God is an alien from some other planet, by all means post.

If my country's prime minister, in his greater wisdom than mine, decides to slaughter all the Chinese people in my country because it has to be done to remove the problem of Chinese criminals, then it is so???

You prime minister is a human. Your prime minister did not give life to the Chinese, so s/he cannot rightly take it away. Plus, though s/he might be wiser than you, s/he is still rock-dumb compared to God.

What God did was kill the entire group of people, without mercy for those who knew absolutely nothing, or did nothing wrong. Just like drowning children with the flood. The babies knew ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

The babies knew nothing, which is why the flood was actually an act of divine mercy. You see, all humanity was corrupt and evil in that time, accept for Noah. If God had allowed the infants to grow in that environment, they would have been corrupted and gone to Hell. As it is, they were killed before the age of accountability, so they were with God.

[RavEMasteR]

Prove it.

Both you and I know that I don't have to. There are thousands of sites out there that kindly lists out the absurdities and contradictions within the Bible. Like, look at the first page of this thread, and click on the link provided on the first post. If I did list all the contradictions here, Otseng would have a hard time cleaning up the servers.

I have seen no reason to disbelieve the Bible, and plenty of reasons to believe it. If you have something specific which indicates that God is an alien from some other planet, by all means post.

And where does this reason come from? Hypnotic effects? "Feeling God, which BTW, I prefer to call hallucinating?

I don't have any proof that God is an alien, but neither do you that God is what you think he is. In your case, you need proof, but in my case, it's nothing more than an assumption, or an example of another possibility. (Thanks Izzy for teaching how to use this idea of assumption and evidence!)

You prime minister is a human. Your prime minister did not give life to the Chinese, so s/he cannot rightly take it away. Plus, though s/he might be wiser than you, s/he is still rock-dumb compared to God.

That wasn't my point of posting this. I am talking about killing the entire group of people just to root out a few. It's like destroying the entire planet coz' a intergalactic refugee is there (Star Wars, anyone?). Is such massive destruction necessary? No.

The babies knew nothing, which is why the flood was actually an act of divine mercy. You see, all humanity was corrupt and evil in that time, accept for Noah. If God had allowed the infants to grow in that environment, they would have been corrupted and gone to Hell. As it is, they were killed before the age of accountability, so they were with God.

Excuse me, but if one day God comes down to you and says that your son is to become a Satanic monster in the future, you would drown him yourself???

The babies knew nothing of CORRUPTION, that's what I meant. I did not say they won't even know that they're dead. They will still suffer the pain of drowning, and later, die a slow and painful death coz the water fills into their lungs, and is causing their tiny brains to erupt and squash all the nerve cells. You call that mercy?

[Corvus]

The babies knew nothing, which is why the flood was actually an act of divine mercy. You see, all humanity was corrupt and evil in that time, accept for Noah. If God had allowed the infants to grow in that environment, they would have been corrupted and gone to Hell. As it is, they were killed before the age of accountability, so they were with God.

An argument for abortion?

I remember hearing about how a law against suicide had to be passed shortly after Jesus' ascent, because too many people were doing it in a rush to be with him.

[otseng]

Prove it.

Both you and I know that I don't have to. There are thousands of sites out there that kindly lists out the absurdities and contradictions within the Bible. Like, look at the first page of this thread, and click on the link provided on the first post. If I did list all the contradictions here, Otseng would have a hard time cleaning up the servers.

Start creating threads for each absurdity, I don't mind. The only issue would be the time to answer each one fully. Feel free to pick out one every so often and create a new thread on it.

[otseng]

That wasn't my point of posting this. I am talking about killing the entire group of people just to root out a few. It's like destroying the entire planet coz' a intergalactic refugee is there (Star Wars, anyone?). Is such massive destruction necessary? No.

However, there's one aspect you're leaving out. And has been mentioned before, God has absolute right over life. He can destroy mankind at will without being in the wrong. It is his creation, he has absolute right to do with it he wants. It might seem unfair to us, but it's not within our realm to say God is wrong.

Here's an example. Suppose you have on your computer some files you have created. A whole collection of original graphics and mp3 music files that you composed. I see them and say that's a great collection you got. Then you decide to delete them all. I start screaming and say that's a stupid thing to do. But, you as the owner and creator of those files have all rights to do with it whatever you want.

[Corvus]

However, there's one aspect you're leaving out. And has been mentioned before, God has absolute right over life. He can destroy mankind at will without being in the wrong. It is his creation, he has absolute right to do with it he wants. It might seem unfair to us, but it's not within our realm to say God is wrong.

Does a creator have every right to destroy its creation? I'm not sure about that.

It might seem unfair to us, but it's not within our realm to say God is wrong.

But why? This assumes He's infallible, but should we take it as fact just because it's written in scripture?

[Shild]

An argument for abortion?

No, actually. You see, the antediluvian culture was one which would definitely corrupt those born into it beyond the possibility of redemption. The modern culture, though not entirely wholesome, is not completely depraved.

The abominable quality of the antediluvian peoples was apparently due to action by fallen angels (see Genesis 6) who corrupted humanity, not to humanity's built in flaws.

I remember hearing about how a law against suicide had to be passed shortly after Jesus' ascent, because too many people were doing it in a rush to be with him.

This is off-topic, but how "shortly"? Christianity was not popular enough to influence laws until long after Christ's ascension, or so I thought. Can you give me a source?

But that's just my own curiosity. Back to topic.

Does a creator have every right to destroy its creation? I'm not sure about that.

You do not agree with the logic? Pleas elaborate.

But why? This assumes He's infallible...

Actually, this assertion does not assume God is infallible; it assumes God is superior, or at least vastly different. In either case, humans have no ability to accurately judge God.

We would scoff at a barely-verbal toddler who criticizes a president's economic policy (superiority), and at a boat maker who criticizes the construction of an oil rig (vast difference).

The point is that God is outside of human understanding.

[Corvus]

We would scoff at a barely-verbal toddler who criticizes a president's economic policy (superiority), and at a boat maker who criticizes the construction of an oil rig (vast difference).

The point is that God is outside of human understanding.

The problem with this is that it restricts rational questioning of intent and character by giving up and saying, "The ways of God are mysterious and unfathomable", the blind acceptance of which is very troubling.

[Shild]

The problem with this is that it restricts rational questioning of intent and character by giving up

Actually, it does not restrict anything; it points out a restriction which already exists.

As for "blind acceptance," you seem to accept the argument without complaint. The fact that the logic seems like "giving up" does not make it wrong, just difficult to accept.