Christians - could you ever be convinced god does not exist? - Page 11

Mickey Brausch · #**101** 08-22-2006, 05:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Most people have to be enticed with bread and circuses, or something they can relate too. That's why I would always doubt the authenticity of a "feel good" religion. If there ain't suffering, it's probably man made.

[/ QUOTE ]The overwhelming majority of "man-made religions" (brackets are meant to signify what else could they be?) have been ANYTHING BUT feel-good, cosy, tolerant, peaceful affairs.

From the beginning, in Man's ritualistic and systematic relationship with the inexplicable, i.e. religion, Man imitated the extreme viciousness and cruelty of the world that Man inhabits. Sacrificing a hundred virgin boys and girls in Tenochtitlan is just one example of the blood orgies we've gone through.

Mickey Brausch

Aztec tzompantli (skull rack)

Lestat · #**102** 08-22-2006, 05:47 PM

Unlike (some people), I won't get too involved with this, because I admit my knowledge of the bible is scarce.

I will say it IS very curious to me if no one has been able to disprove things like geography in the bible, etc. I mean, the bible was written a long time ago, and you would think it should contain something that could easily disproved. Like the stars are pin holes in the sky, etc. Given their limited knowledge back then, the bible should be rife with mis-facts. I admit it's interesting that (other than blatently claimed miracles), there doesn't seem to be too much else wrong. But again, I'm not familiar with it and don't know if this is true or not.

yurk · #**103** 08-22-2006, 05:59 PM

I really think the quest for flaws in the Bible needs to be balanced at best. You never hear anyone questioning the validity of say the Illiad (example the invasion of Troy) or other classical works that we draw historical information out.

madnak · #**104** 08-22-2006, 07:14 PM

What ever happened to those blood orgies, man? I totally looked on Craigslist, but the evil cult scene must be pretty lame lately.

madnak · #**105** 08-22-2006, 07:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I really think the quest for flaws in the Bible needs to be balanced at best. You never hear anyone questioning the validity of say the Illiad (example the invasion of Troy) or other classical works that we draw historical information out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh? I don't know who takes the Iliad literally, and it's frequently criticized. Maybe you just don't hear about it because people can acknowledge the Iliad is flawed, rather than going batso and ranting about how there are no flaws, it's the perfect word of the LORD!

madnak · #**106** 08-22-2006, 07:19 PM

Furthermore, if we're talking about the divine word of God himself, it seems fair to use a higher degree of scrutiny.

kurto · #**107** 08-22-2006, 09:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

At first glance, it seems pretty impression that few (if any?) inaccuracies can be picked out from the bible

[/ QUOTE ]

But many have been alleged in the past and found wrong. The Hittite civilization. Just about everything in Acts. One famous archeologist was so convinced Luke was wrong about most of his historical references he set about proving it. He ended becoming a Christian because of the incredible, detailed accuracy in Acts. Comparing the Bible to Willie Wonka is silly.

[/ QUOTE ]

True. Willie Wonka makes much better literature.

And again... there's quite a bit of literature about the inconsistancies in the Bible and things that have no historical evidence. (And by the way, the discovery of a civilitization that was previous thought not to exist doesn't prove that the other things without evidence are real.) Most scholars can't even agree on what text constitutes the 'first Bible'. There are hundreds of thousands of differences between different translations including different stories, some versions say the complete opposite of other versions, etc.

You fail to address things like the Great Flood... for which there is no evidence of or, even the impossibility of making a boat that could carry 2 of every species...

Or things like the Jewish Exodus from Egypt for which there is no record... even though they were supposedly kept in a state of slavery by people famous for recording everything.

There are several books which discuss the differences of text in the hundreds of different manuscripts. 'Misquoting Jesus' was a recent book on the matter.

txag007 · #**108** 08-22-2006, 10:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Most scholars can't even agree on what text constitutes the 'first Bible'. There are hundreds of thousands of differences between different translations including different stories, some versions say the complete opposite of other versions, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]
Can you give me an example of this? Name one.

Lestat · #**109** 08-22-2006, 10:48 PM

I understand what you're saying Kurto and yes... The overwhelming lack of evidence for these things (all things?), is the main reason I'm an atheist. However...

It's interesting to me that people on here are having an incredidbly hard time finding things that are clearly WRONG in the bible. Not things that lack evidence. Things that are flat out wrong.

I would think that a book written so long ago, without any of the technology we have today, would be teeming with what could be pointed out as blatent factual errors in the year 2006.

While the biblical writers took great liberties in claiming incredulous miracles that common sense would say are impossible, why is it there no other clear slip ups, such as insistance that the earth is flat, or the sun revolves around the earth, or that God put treasure upon the highest mountain (which, at the time they could never think could be proved or disproved)?

Maybe the bible does contain such claims, I don't know. But people here are having one hell of a time finding them. There is a difference stating something for which there is no evidence, and stating something which is cearly factually wrong. I just find it interesting that it's so hard to find the latter from a book written so long ago by men who were eons behind us in technological knowledge.

revots33 · #**110** 08-22-2006, 11:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
While the biblical writers took great liberties in claiming incredulous miracles that common sense would say are impossible, why is it there no other clear slip ups, such as insistance that the earth is flat, or the sun revolves around the earth, or that God put treasure upon the highest mountain (which, at the time they could never think could be proved or disproved)?

[/ QUOTE ]

Is not the assertion that man and all the earth's animals existed 6 days after the big bang, a scientifically provable impossibility? I'd call that a mistake on a par with the earth being flat.

And remember, the church DID think the sun revolved around the earth, in fact they tortured and burned people alive who thought otherwise.