Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Part 2)

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Cool, finally I get someone with a decent argument. Nice to meet you Terrlock. You might want to edit your post, you quoted something I said there twice.

Thank you for pointing that out, unfortunately I don't get too much time to spend on boards with work and family commitments so I won't be able to reply as fast as people seem to do on this thread. However I will reply.

RikuoAmero wrote: »

This is how we recognize things and assign labels to them. Besides, look at the implications of what you're saying there. The bible says it is correct. Therefore, logically speaking, it should speak accurately about the world we know about, the reality we experience. Since it doesn't (e.g. no evidence at all for the Exodus story), then why should anyone still say "This book is infallible/inspired by God"? If you're willing to call a book that has these many errors infallible...

There is evidence for a lot of the biblical teachings, however a lot of evidence is suppressed and not brought out into the open. A lot of the countries where evidence would be found are now predominately Muslim countries which would go out of there way to discount exodus as it would give the Jews a legitimate claim that Israel was indeed land given to them by God.

RikuoAmero wrote: »

As I've said to other people, simply stating If...then statements does not demonstrate the existence of a god. You have to demonstrate that the If part of your statement is actually true. Also, how does this excuse the fact that the bible speaks about our reality and gets things plainly wrong? It speaks about a census taken just before Jesus's birth - we know from historical research that that didn't happen. It speaks about the Hebrews as a race living in Egypt and then wandering the desert for 40 years. This didn't happen, again thanks to research.
It'd be one thing if the bible only ever spoke about some mystical higher plane of reality that we can't see, but it doesn't. It also talks about OUR reality, the world we live in. Should we say that the Harry Potter books are telling the truth about the world, that there really is a school in Scotland for wizards and witchs, and say, when we can't find such a school, that the books are talking about a higher reality?

You will have to forgive me for the If...then statements I think it's my logical thinking inner programmer mind that likes to use them.

Maybe I should base my reply in the C programming language.

When I think about it, it's quite hard to get away from if statements....Even your own statements have if statements, however lets get to that piece of scripture in 2 Thessalonians and your very valid question if the Bible is the inerrant word of God why then does it get reality plainly wrong or how can I trust God if the bible shows that he is a liar. I have so much to talk about on the subject that I probably won't get to cover Thessalonians in this post. However i will cover it in a subsequent one.

First of all let me talk a little about the bible itself.


The bible is an integrated message system, that not only contains some historical events, it has the audacity to detail future events that have yet to occur. It is encrypted by the Holy Spirit and only if you have the Holy Spirit can you decipher it. It has features of the text that are only possible if written out side of our space time domain. (Sounds like science fiction, however it is what a full study into the bible shows)

It is not meant to be taken as an Historical book, or detail how everything works in the universe. It does contain Historical events and details, however a proper full study into the bible does show it is accurate, in fact it shows that it's uncannily accurate.

Also You can't just take one snippet of scripture and come to a conclusion that the bible contains false teachings or base doctrine off of snippets of the text, like so many cults do.


You have to take the bible as a whole and study all the books. A lot of the information in one book may not make sense unless you have read the previous books. This works Just as much the other way around. A lot of the items in the early books do not make sense until you read books written hundreds of years later. Actually this is evidence that the bible must have been inspired by the Holy Spirit as it contains scriptures that only make sense when scriptures written hundreds of years later are studied. It shows consistency that could not happen unless there was one over all author.

For man alone to come up with that level of consistency is impossible. For hundreds of years man would say that the Bible has changed a lot over time and can't be relied upon.(So called Chinese whispers) However the discovery of the dead sea scrolls destroyed that argument when it was found that the ancient texts written before the time of Christ, were still accurate with today's scripture and also proved that that the prophets foretold the coming of Christ before he was born.

The prophets foretold the fall of Israel in 70AD, they also foretold that the nation will be brought back to Israel, no where in history was there another nation completely wiped out and then restored almost 2 thousand years later. We do know 100% that this happened as it occurred in 1948. It states that no other nation in the history of the world will be wiped out of existence and come back into existence.


Escatological studies into the bible shows that it predicted the exact years of these events. That is impossible for man to do that.


There are both basic cryptography and advance cryptography techniques used throughout the bible, proving it could not be just written by simple uneducated men. There are hidden messages and codes through out the text.



There are a lot of people in the world who say there is no evidence of God, then there are a lot of people in the world you Claim there is plenty of evidence of God. Then there is scripture that says the whole of creation testifies to God.

I can almost see people rolling there eyes when the hear that statement.

However it's not up to me to defend God. God is perfectly capable of doing that himself.

In fact the very practice of trying to come up with evidence to prove his existence with people who deny he exists is actually anti biblical.

Convenient excuse you say - Well this is my reasoning for it.

1. It's akin to putting God on Trial and making you the Judge.



2. You will never know God if you are looking for God or people to justify himself/God to your own personal preconceptions and standards

In fact this is something I think many non believers will hold to...if (sorry another if statement) God really does exists why then doesn't he show himself to us. Why doesn't he provide me with sufficient evidence. Even if he does exist he is an evil God to allow so many bad things to happen in the world and I wouldn't want to follow any God like that even if he is true.

This is an ignorant view of people who just haven't done their homework. It's an easy quick fix solution to come too, however it is not the truth.


What will happen when your body dies is that your spirit will see the truth and actually when you confront God with these questions, you will then and only then realize that actually the truth was knowable all along and you were blind to it. Unfortunately if you wait until you die to encounter God, it will be too late.


God works on a 1 on 1 basis. To know God you need to invite him in, you need to genuinely want to know him and the truth. However before God will accept your invitation you need to realize the condition you are in and come to him on his terms not your own.


Learning who God is, is a supernatural event that occurs when someone receives the Holy Spirit for the first time.

After that occurs it's not about believing in a God or even about faith....it's about knowing 100% that god is real and is then a huge part of your life.


Do you know that most people in Ireland think they have been brought up a Christian. I find it funny, when I tell people I'm a christian and then they ask me are you catholic or protestant?.....then they get confused when I say no, I'm a Christian. then they ask, what's that? Actually I hate to define terms with man made names to fit people into a certain box. Most people who claim to be christian are not christian.


If you have been brought up a catholic, odds are you are not a christian and never have been. I'm sure there are some Christians in the Catholic church, however that would make you a bad catholic. How many Catholics do you know who haven't even read the bible, they don't know scripture. When you asked them hard questions like your question about exodus and Thessalonians they can't give a good answer. Most people want to just live an easy life and are happy not knowing. They don't really want to know. they are happy to rely on some fella on a pulpit telling them how to live their lives.

You should never Judge God by man made institutions that were put in place by greedy power hungry men to simply control people and to further their own gains.


A lot of religious people will tell you, that you must believe by faith in God....you don't need evidence.... Let me be clear I'm not saying that. Actually that kinda talk is pure nonsense and again shows a lack of understanding of scripture and of God and simply people not doing their homework.

There is a huge difference between believing and knowing.


Faith comes after you know God, not before.


Let me go back to scripture for a little bit before I clarify what I'm saying above. I have purposely put an apparent contradiction in what I said, to demonstrate a point. I hope you can see the contradiction. If I was to stop here with this post and not explain myself further then it would be a contradiction.

However this is true with reading the bible. People see contradictions in the text because they are not studying it in the way it is meant to be studied.


I will let you in on a secret. It is purposely designed to have apparent contradictions. I will attempt to explain why along with showing you my evidence for that.

Along with backing up the statements I have made in the above.


Firstly though it is bugging me that know one has answered your question on Exodus.

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Take a look back through the last few pages on this thread. I pointed out in Exodus where God says to Moses that he'll dictate a second set of tablets, and that this second set would have the same commandments as the first. Except that didn't happen.
There are only a few possibilities here
1) Mistranslation or scribal error or details got muddied up due to the Chinese Whispers effect back when history was passed around orally. This doesn't explain why God apparently doesn't fix these errors
2) That in this higher reality you speak of, what we understand of language and promises is completely different. Perhaps in this higher reality, saying you'll do something actually means you'll do something else instead. If so, then we have no way of confirming or denying anything that is handed down from that reality. They're just not speaking our language, so to speak.
3) It's made up, whether knowingly or unknowingly.

Point 1 . Mistranslated - Mistranlations are the bain of my life. When I say the bible is errant I mean it is errant in the Original languages it is written in. There are ministrations and lost contexts in many English bibles. And you also miss a huge amount of the intended meaning of scripture if you don't study it in the original language.

One of the mis - translations that bugged me for a very long time, was when I read in the bible that if a man rapes a woman then the should get married.

That just isn't right....I mean come on....really....if a man rapes a woman.....they then have to marry....how is that fair to the woman?

When I researched it do you know what I found out....the original text actually says, if a man and a woman have consensual sex....not rape then they should be married.


Also if you read Genesis you see the word waters....God Separated the waters.....right? The word waters there can actually be better translated as plasma.

If you were to create a galaxy or universe do you know how you would do it? Combine Zero point energy with plasma. Anyways I'm going off on a tangent.


See the problem I have I have so much information, if you give me a tid bit at all, I can give so much on the subject.

Anyways your question in exodus is not down to one of those mistranlations.

Chinese whispers - I'm afraid to tell you, that unfortunately, even though the Chinese did have a very advanced ancient culture, they had nothing to do with writing the bible. Also the dead sea scrolls have verified that the bible has been largely unchanged for thousands of years. (I'm still talking about the original languages it was written in)


Point 2) You make a great point here, so good in fact I'm going to write another post up in reply. It's not really relevant to the passage you refer to in exodus, however it's a very relevant question that needs a proper explanation.


OK, finally - exodus 34 - I'm reading through chapter 34 and I'm wondering am I reading a different bible then you are?


Here is 34 1 "And the Lord said unto Moses, Hew thee two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which thou brakest."

Then in 34, 28: And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

So how are they not the same ten commandments as the first? Ok you have the covenant, but you still have the ten commandments.

What is the inconsistency you are seeing there? Maybe I have mis understood your question.

Okay I'm going to submit this reply for now and post up my reply as soon as i can on 2 Thessalonians. Then I will come back to some of the points I raised here, but expand on my reasoning behind them.

RikuoAmero wrote: »

For <snip> sake...I'm tired of this. Fine. I'll say it. This is the straw that breaks my back. I'm done with this thread. I've been here quite a few months, demanding evidence, logic, data or reasoning from believers and not once has it been given to me. All I've seen are attempts to shift the burden of proof, insults, mental gymnastics and worse.

If you ever looked at Steve Shives on YouTube, he does a great breakdown of christian apologetics and how they don't work. Its worth a look just to realise that they really don't have anything new to present. I am in the same boat as you in regard to realising that theists in general commit similar fallacies and runarounds.
Also if you ever read Robert Ingersoll, a 19th Century orator, you will find that many of the arguments used today are very similar then too, and just as bad. He is an excellent writer and you can also find free audiobooks on his writings on LibriVox. Most enjoyable.

katydid wrote: »

No, I have no problem with your practice. I think it's good. I just think it's abused. I have been to funerals where there would have been more meaning in reading a shopping list.

I get the idea of the rosary, even if it's not my thing. But it has become an empty ritual in many cases.

I will chime in and say I'd agree with you there. My father passed recently and while he was in the throes of death priests were jumping in all over the place to say the rosary whenever they could. I actually got quite angry at one stage and told one of them off, my brother had to calm me down.

I'm just ashamed at the stupidity of the human race. We have nobody to answer for that but ourselves. He had no interest in the bible but nobody ever asked us that question.

I will add, as funerals go.. it was quite beautiful, we were lucky to have priests that were known to us as friends of the family who were also more open about their beliefs. There was singing, clapping and laughter.. and in a time of deep despair, isn't that what we all need?

having said that, if you believed in something else, how else could you bury a loved one in this country without being condemned?

tommy2bad wrote: »

Well a lot of your problem is expecting proof ofrreasons that you will accept. If given my reasons and explained why I believe in a god, if also explained why I think the Christian God is as good a description as we have. You don't accept that, fine. It's not my job to persuade you. I don't even want to. Neither is it your job to persuade me I'm wrong, we can argue about why and why not, this that and the other but in the end unless we both accept that our points of view are valid we won't get anywhere.
As if said before be life in God is as much aspirational as inspirational.
The thread is about evidence for the existance of god and one thing we do agree on is the lack of empirical evidence. For Christians this is not a problem, for you it's a major problem. Impass!

I doubt if evidence for the existence of God can be found in one's lifetime - it would surely negate the wonder of faith.
For believers, God is found in his creation - in our lives it cannot be any other way.
And this creation must surely be, at least, a partial reflection of God himself.
Unless you inhabit some idyllic Shangri-La this reflection has to include negative as well as positive perceptions of existence.

tommy2bad wrote: »

And the Christian tradition holds that the negative comes from the fall rather than being an aspect of god.

but Yahweh was evil by today's standards , he killed and tortured any number of innocent people as documented in the OT.

Cen taurus wrote: »

This is a twist of scripture if ever there was one.

The penalty, wages and consequences for man's freely chosen sin against God and their fellow man is death, physical and worse spiritual, it always has been, and always will be, from the fall to the last judgement, man repeats this mistake over and over, and yet the free gift of God, and remedy to our own choices, is still given to us, eternal life in Christ Jesus.

"For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." - Romans 6:23

this is nonsense any god that would turn his creation into a torture chamber because of an alleged mistake by a fictional Eve (sins of the parents much!) is a psychopath.
Anyone posting on this site is infinitely less evil than the "god" setting the test.

tommy2bad wrote: »

And the Christian tradition holds that the negative comes from the fall rather than being an aspect of god.

So a proportion of all existence only exists because of this fall?

Cen taurus wrote: »

Mankind is responsible for the fall and the corruption of the world, not God.
You only have to look around you to know that.
God saves.

this makes no sense. Man didnt make most of the planet uninhabitable or difficult to live due to poor climate. Man didnt create bacteria, viruses or parasites that kill millions every year. And "god" hates humanity so much that at no point did "he" explain the basics of healthcare or hygene to anyone.
The god you believe in stitched up an "Eve" and turned the planet into a torture chamber for his amusement I imagine, the christian god is evil.

silverharp wrote: »

this makes no sense. Man didnt make most of the planet uninhabitable or difficult to live due to poor climate. Man didnt create bacteria, viruses or parasites that kill millions every year. And "god" hates humanity so much that at no point did "he" explain the basics of healthcare or hygene to anyone.
The god you believe in stitched up an "Eve" and turned the planet into a torture chamber for his amusement I imagine, the christian god is evil.

Actually the world was a perfect place before man chose to introduce and contaminate it with evil. Scripture is quite clear about this. And it is also clear it will be again after the final judegement and the new heavens and earth are reinstated.

indioblack wrote: »

Who were the others - and why were they permitted to act in this way?

Satan for one - because he had the same free will as man has been given, to do good or harm, and takes great pleasure from encouraging the downfall of others to his level, just like some people do today.

Cen taurus wrote: »

Satan for one - because he had the same free will as man has been given, to do good or harm, and took great pleasure from encouraging the downfall of others, just like some people do today.

Why was he permitted to act in this way?
If he was going to do harm then free will is no excuse.
And if an agency existed that could prevent this harm is there not a responsibility upon this agency to act?

Cen taurus wrote: »

In a free country, we have free will and are free to choose right or wrong, and pay the consequences of those choices.

Are you saying we are not responsible for our own choices, actions and their conseqences ?

Indeed we are - and so would God be.

wrote:

Originally Posted by Cen taurus
In a free country, we have free will and are free to choose right or wrong, and pay the consequences of those choices.

Are you saying we are not responsible for our own choices, actions and their conseqences ?

indioblack
Indeed we are - and so would God be.

The responsibility for our choices, actions and their consequesnces lie with us alone ... we cannot blame the state or God for giving us freedom.