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]

Let's say you're right. Let's say that God accepts Abraham for what he is, an incetrous bastard. What about Abraham screwing Hagai? Sarai was barren, and he gladly agreed when Sarai asked him to screw Hagai to get a child.

I can list a long set of absurdities that Abraham commited, and yet he is accepted.

Post is incomplete. It's time for class now. Back in a while.

[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.

What if it isn't an either/or situation? What if we suppose that the beginning of creation could only be expressed in terms the transcriber could understand? Would it still make the information rubbish?

Suspend for one moment, if you will, your skepticism. There is an all-powerful, all-knowing God who is creating new life on a new planet. This God knows what He's doing, and so here we are. But the problem is to dictate to Moses (who wrote the first 5 books of the Bible) what He did in terms that Moses can understand. Moses has no concept of biology, geology, botany, astronomy that compares to what we know nowadays.
So God does the best He can to teach Moses what He did, and He does manage to teach Moses the important things--that is, that He (God) made everything and that mankind is a special creation of God, and that God wants mankind to worship Him exclusively, not His creation.

That's my take on it. I don't personally think that the Bible was intended to be a science book, but that the principles contained in it are to be our guidelines for leading a virtuous life.

I never said God doesn't exist. I believe He does, but He's a mass murderer, and a liar. I'm not a skeptic about God's existence, I'm a critic of His actions. 8)

Secondly, if you think the Bible is not something we should take as a science book, suit yourself. The goal of this debate is to if the Bible lies. The Bible has been taken by many to be the word of God, and is the law in their lives. I'm here to criticize such fanatics.

Okay, here's the thing. If God's love accepts everyone as they are, then why do we have people burning in Hell? If sin is excusable in Abraham's case, I don't see how a fair God can actually consider Abraham to be His favourite. Abraham should've been sent to Hell, along with all the other sinners like Him.

God's love recognizes human beings as His children; He does not accept their behavior. He is always willing to forgive, but it is incumbent upon the person being sorry and asking for forgiveness. The role of established religion is to educate the people about God's love and how He provides salvation for us through His Son Jesus Christ. That includes acknowledgement of the need to be saved from our selfish human nature.

If we refuse God's offer of salvation, we are turning our backs on Him, not vice versa. There's a Bible verse that says, Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. (It's in one of the New Testament books, perhaps Hebrews--I don't have a concordance handy at the moment). Hell is eternal separation from God, whether it's a place of outer darkness, or fire. He doesn't "send" people to hell. They choose not to be with Him, and that makes hell their destination.

Yes, but the incestrous Abraham was His favourite, which means God approves of everything that Abraham had done, save for a few other moments, like not circumsizing his son.

I don't really give a damn about established religion. I've been to a church, and all I got was anger and more anger.

Also, I already said God sends people to hell. There are people who wish to be with Him but yet are non-Christians. How do you explain them? They're all going to Hell too, along with me, and all the atheists/freethinkers/muslims/buddhists/basically every other person on this planet apart from Christians. And, that means, if we all die today, 4 billion people are going to Hell.

I'd say that's another form of mass murder. Hell, even Armageddon, or the return of Jesus, is based on killing off every single human being on earth, although the Bible does not say specifically that we will die.

If you sin, you die. That's what happens in the Bible. If you don't believe, you die too.

Everything in the Bible's OT is based on death and destruction. That doesn't sound like an all-loving God to me.

[otseng]

I don't really give a damn about established religion. I've been to a church, and all I got was anger and more anger.

I don't care too much about established (Christian) religion either. However, one thing I'd like to add is that you'll need to separate people from Christ. Christians don't follow a pastor, or a preacher, or some televangelist. Christians follow the Jesus of the Bible, pure and simple. Unfortunately, people in churches do paint a bad picture of God. And many times people in churches are terrible role models.

Also, I already said God sends people to hell. There are people who wish to be with Him but yet are non-Christians. How do you explain them? They're all going to Hell too, along with me, and all the atheists/freethinkers/muslims/buddhists/basically every other person on this planet apart from Christians. And, that means, if we all die today, 4 billion people are going to Hell.

And let me put it this way, we all deserve to go to hell. So, basically we all be in the same boat short of the grace of God. I can't say who and who will not go to hell, I'll let God take care of that. I have my own guesses, but even the mostly outwardly polished person who appears religious could end up in hell.

Everything in the Bible's OT is based on death and destruction. That doesn't sound like an all-loving God to me.

Everything? I've read the Bible cover to cover many times and I certainly don't get that impression.

[RavEMasteR]

The people in church are not really following Christ. They may claim to be doing so, but who are they really following? The man draped in the damned purple robe! That is why churches today have so many different views of what is supposed to be what. If they had only followed one man, how could they end up like this?

We all deserve to go to Hell. No doubt. But why is it that in some parts of the Bible, it was mentioned that we are either fated to end up in Hell or Heaven? We have no actual say in the matter. We're all actually selected already by God to go to Hell/Heaven.

I believe I mentioned OT, which stands for Old Testement. Everything revolves around people dying..., save for a few parts that comments on the glory of God and stuff.

[bry]

We all deserve to go to Hell. No doubt. But why is it that in some parts of the Bible, it was mentioned that we are either fated to end up in Hell or Heaven? We have no actual say in the matter. We're all actually selected already by God to go to Hell/Heaven.

that may be true depending on your whole stance on preselection/predestination. is "fate" an appropriate enough term to depict how the element of time factors into our lives? i think that deserves its own topic.

speaking of which, you really should stop starting debates by posting a link to that site and pretending that you are the one who's doing the debating. you've done that on every forum i've seen you on. here's why it's not a good idea, from a debating standpoint:

1) the scope is too big/general/vague. especially when the website itself doesn't really posit any questions itself. it's like if i plopped a telephone book in front of you and asked, "EXPLAIN THIS NOW." how do you even answer a question like that? where would you even start? and even if you did manage to start from somewhere, how can you be expected to "answer" it in a satisfactory and humanly possible way?

2) when you start your arguments by first citing sources that didn't even come from you, then you're not really the one doing the debating. it shows other people one of two things: a) that you don't really have any thoughts or questions of your own, or b) you're not sure enough in your beliefs and arguments that you let someone else start the argument for you.

3) this makes you look even less suited for debate if you keep relying on the same tactic. whether or not it's true, it indicates to others that you wouldn't make a very flexible, dynamic, or articulate person to debate with. that's never fun.

debates here can be constructive and educational for everyone if there's an element of focus and precision. why not use your ability to start new topics, and bring up more specific issues? lumping everything into one topic is just too much for the brain to keep track of.

I believe I mentioned OT, which stands for Old Testement. Everything revolves around people dying..., save for a few parts that comments on the glory of God and stuff.

one thing i hope we can all agree on is that death is a part of life. it's inescapable. even if you or i achieve immortality somehow, chances are there will be some point down the line where we have to say, "okay, enough is enough, let's see what this death thing is like."

you're right; the bible does deal a lot with the reality of death. there are many instances where people die. that's because death and life are perfectly relevant to the purpose of the bible and the power of God. it's so that we get a glimpse into the purpose and usefulness of life/death, as well as its consequences.

[House Wren]

Also, I already said God sends people to hell. There are people who wish to be with Him but yet are non-Christians. How do you explain them? They're all going to Hell too, along with me, and all the atheists/freethinkers/muslims/buddhists/basically every other person on this planet apart from Christians. And, that means, if we all die today, 4 billion people are going to Hell.

It's not for me to say that all of these people are headed for hell, especially anyone who wishes to be with Him. It seems to me that there will be a way if someone desires to know God. We do not know all of His ways. And there are people I know who don't go around saying they are saved but whose lives show an intimate relationship with a higher, loving Being. It is not my business to determine who is headed for hell and who isn't.

It seems the best way to improve the world we live in is to make sure we are in a close relationship with our Creator and treat our fellow human beings with as much love and respect as we would want to be treated.

When the subject of the greatest commandments was brought up to Jesus, he said we were to love the Lord God with all of our hearts, minds, and strength; and to love our neighbors as ourselves. On these two commandments, he said, rested all the laws and the prophets.

I'm sorry if you did not find what you were looking for in church. But I sincerely believe that if you really want to know God, He will provide a way for you.

[RavEMasteR]

I'm sorry if you did not find what you were looking for in church. But I sincerely believe that if you really want to know God, He will provide a way for you.

Yeah, He did. A way to hate him even more as I read the Bible more.

As for the words of Jesus you mentioned, there are two intepretations that I know of. One is the one that you mentioned, where Jesus came to put an end to all those pathetic laws.

The other, is that based on those commandments, all laws are created, because of the word, "rested".

And, if we use the second intepretation, we'd all end up in..., a point where God is still a murderer and a sadist.

That's just the problem with the Bible. If only the authors had put more thought into their incoherent words, then we will be able to lead our lives peacefully without these debates.

[Shild]

God is still a murderer and a sadist.

Your description of God seems to be anthropomorphic, in that you are assuming it is wrong for God to kill a person, as it is wrong for a person to kill a person.

This thinking is faulty, however. Remember that God is not a human, and that every human owes everything, including life, to God. God is the creator of all life, so He has every right to take it away whenever He decides it should be taken.

God is no more a murderer for killing people than I am for deleting letters while I type this post.

Furthermore, remember that all death comes from God, so if God killing people was murder, then God would have to make people immortal to be a "good" God, and if that were the case, then no one would ever get to Heaven.

But why is it that in some parts of the Bible, it was mentioned that we are either fated to end up in Hell or Heaven? We have no actual say in the matter.

Could you give book, chapter, and verse for that? I don't remember the Bible saying this from any of my readings...

I'm not a skeptic about God's existence, I'm a critic of His actions.

Here's one little logical problem. If you admit God's existence, it follows that God is a lot smarter than you are now or could possibly ever be. It also follows that God has more information than you do now in your judgement.

Suppose a toddler criticizes the President about foreign policy. Now multiply that difference by about infinity, and that's you or me criticizing God.

I understand God's decisions must often seem wrong to you, but as a human, you can only know the most infinitesimal fraction of what God knows, and understand even less of what you know. God has not such human limitations.

You must admit that one big emphasis point of the Bible is faith. When God does something a human doesn't like or understand, the easy way out for the human is to say, "God is just bad."

True faith, however, means recognition of one's own faults and shortcomings. Being faithful is hard, especially if it entails sincerely admitting that God knows best, that he's not just evil.

[RavEMasteR]

I never did claim that I am smarter than God. Nor do I claim to have a perfect understanding of His actions. Imperfection is what makes us human. If I had perfect understanding, I'll be divine, wouldn't I?

However, if we judge things by YOUR standards, God will be a liar. He gave us FREEWILL, we have the choice to do whatever we want, including screwing the world many times over. The problem is, by your standards, we have no say in what we want, we just go to Hell coz' He's God, and He has the right to send us to rot in Hell.

By your standards, we'll all be accepting that Saddam is the ruler of Iraq, and we have no say in whether he should be taken down or not. By your standards, Hitler should remain in power, because he is the Fuhrer after all. By your standards, Qin Shihuang should've stayed in power and continue to slaughter people, coz' he's emperor. We owe Saddam the knowledge that there are people as psychotic as him. We owe Hitler for the growth in German economy while the other countries fell. We owe Qin Shihuang a uniform set of measurements, and for unifying China. We owe all those psychos above something, as we owe God.

Do you see what I mean? Just because He's God who created us, doesn't mean he's free to wreck havoc on us, nor is He free to send us to rot in Hell as Hitler would send the Jews to gas chambers. Here, we have a similarity; people rotting in hell = unbelievers and Jews = coz' they are Jews. Both groups are being sent to suffer for being who they are. Is this all really justified, coz' He's GOD?

[Shild]

However, if we judge things by YOUR standards, God will be a liar.

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

By your standards, we'll all be accepting that Saddam is the ruler of Iraq, and we have no say in whether he should be taken down or not. By your standards, Hitler should remain in power, because he is the Fuhrer after all. By your standards, Qin Shihuang should've stayed in power and continue to slaughter people, coz' he's emperor. We owe Saddam the knowledge that there are people as psychotic as him. We owe Hitler for the growth in German economy while the other countries fell. We owe Qin Shihuang a uniform set of measurements, and for unifying China. We owe all those psychos above something, as we owe God.

Not really.

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.

Just because He's God who created us, doesn't mean he's free to wreck havoc on us, nor is He free to send us to rot in Hell as Hitler would send the Jews to gas chambers. Here, we have a similarity; people rotting in hell = unbelievers and Jews = coz' they are Jews. Both groups are being sent to suffer for being who they are. Is this all really justified, coz' He's GOD?

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.