Do you think the Bible could be the word of G-d? /for atheists & agnostics

[Robert.Evans]

The Adam and Chavvah story - is just that - a story. It is not reality.

I believe I already said that it is ABOVE that we are talking about in HIGHER consciousness - something that obviously goes right over your head. It is reality, just not a reality YOU know.

Though of course you can believe in talking serpents and an evil Chavvah if you wish. Just don't expect the rest of us to believe it and fall under stupid patriarchal religious laws.

Who is the rest of us? Atheist I suppose. Those whose minds are blinded. So you don't understand do we should listen to you should we? Since when has that been a good argument to throw at anyone? And though you then go onto say you have no problem with men, there you go with your "patriachal" name calling again. Anyone would think you didn't know that women killed man, children, raped, and STILL DO. But like, your not bothered about that I suppose, because you're a woman. think about it.

Also, - I have no problem with men, just with ridiculous patriarchal ideas about women, especially in religion.

*

What ridiculous ideas?
I suppose the modern family wrecking baby killing modern day woman, aborting babies, dumping them, taking mens jobs, running prostition rings, killing men, running drugs gangs and getting noticeably more masculine and violent is much better is it? You complain at men of the past and then when you have chance to show how wrong we were, you do the same things.

 

[Robert.Evans]

This is hilarious as YOU have no proof that your God even exists.

You thinking it does, doesn't make it so.

And I might add - why would a God need gender? Is there some sexy Goddess up there he needs male sex parts to have sex with? LOL!

*

Blatant ignorance, and yet you have the audacity to use sacred text you don't understand.
Give me YOUR proof that God does not exist. I'll wait.
For your information, one eyed woman, man does not prove God. God proves God. Simple really. I would have thought even an atheist would have figured that out, or is it not in your favour.

Need a gender? It is the natural way that the divine process developed. What do you think, he was sitting up there on a cloud twiddling his thumbs for millions of years till he finally thought of something to do??? Boy, you atheist take the biscuit of stupidity and then run with it don't you.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Wow! More of your ridiculous patriarchal ideas are coming out with every post now.

*

There's that matriarchal feminist man hating bent again

 

[Robert.Evans]

The Bible is indeed just a collection of edited works by humans, - not God.

As to criticizing other religious texts, - it would be ridiculous for me to start discussing Buddhism in a thread specifically asking if we think the Bible could be the word of God!

*

Why would God have to edit his own text??? This is stupid. Of course man wrote it. So what? It is DIVINELY INSPIRED oh blind one!

 

[Robert.Evans]

And there is no way of knowing what IS or isn't so-called Divine Scripture, except perhaps by reading the material, and contemplating it.

However, just reading the Bible and it's descriptions of the actions of YHVH, - make it very obvious this is not the word of any God.

It is the writings of man, and what man wants the right to do, - steal land, murder people for being different, owning women, raping women, murdering babies and other innocents, slavery, sexual slavery, women murdered or raped for the action of men, etc.

The description of YHVH in the Bible, makes it obvious YHVH is not God. His description is pure evil.

*

....raping fathers by women, women killing men, women's greed, women manipulating situations... you were going to mention them, right, right????

I suppose when the men of a certain tribe killed their enemies so the women were safe was also bad was it, when they kept them safe, provided food for them, children, all bad bad bad

 

[Robert.Evans]

So you just ignore all the evil the Bible says YHVH does, and allows?

It doesn't bother you that the being you call God - kills innocent babies, allows women to be raped and owned, sex slaves, etc. (according to the Bible?)

Pollyannaism at play?

*

This is the God of flesh, more your God than ours. Meantime you ignore all the things that women do bad there and all the good that God did to his own people. It is always about spiritual upheavals - man is a part of that.

 

[Robert.Evans]

King David is supposedly a real person.

According to the Bible YHVH kills his innocent baby, for David's crimes.

And then David the criminal gets promoted, a Bible hero. HUMMMM!

It is patriarchal thinking that kills children and women for the crimes of males.

The Bible is obviously not from any God.

It is the writings of a patriarchal tribe.

*

You are too much of a mysandrist to see the truth I feel.

 

[Shad]

The slavery "could" be something that has control over the mind and not referring to literal slavery outside of literal interpretation by the weak word(mind-thoughts) of how man commonly thinks and assumes.

It didn't as these standards were enacted by law.

Taking fictional events as facts is an enslaved mind itself.

In a way if using indoctrination yes it is. However this has nothing to do with the specific laws about slaves. Read the bible as you are again demonstrating you do not read anything you comment on. I am talking about events such as Exodus or the Conquest which people take as factual history.

If there were "God" and these texts are the word(mind-thoughts) of "God," then it is highly likely that how mankind interprets them would be utterly false, such as literal slavery, literal man and woman, literal husband and wife, literal countries, cities, nations, literal marriage, literal children, etc. Literal interpretations would be considered "the word(mind) of man."

Nope. People are capable of creating fully understandable ideas and communicate these via text. We are doing so now. The bible has this as well with specific rules not some generalized "You can have slaves" Again read the text you are talking about.

 

[Unification]

It didn't as these standards were enacted by law.



In a way if using indoctrination yes it is. However this has nothing to do with the specific laws about slaves. Read the bible as you are again demonstrating you do not read anything you comment on. I am talking about events such as Exodus or the Conquest which people take as factual history.



Nope. People are capable of creating fully understandable ideas and communicate these via text. We are doing so now. The bible has this as well with specific rules not some generalized "You can have slaves" Again read the text you are talking about.

Perhaps you should try to read "the laws" for slaves in a non-literal manner if you're willing. Husbands, wives, male, female, sons, daughters, children, etc. as in not literal. If there is "God," and these texts are of "God," then the common mind of man who interprets everything literally could be wrong.

Slave is a broad term. One can be a servant and slave and bonded to endless things. Things that have mastered and control ones mind.

Husbands can be of the conscious mind.
Wives can be of the subconscious mind.
Marriage can be ionic bonding of male(positive) and female(negative).
Sons can be "thoughts."
Daughters can be "emotions."
Children can be "seeds of knowledge."
Man can be any human.
Woman can be the "mind," the human's helpmate.

For every ionic bonding in the brain/mind on a tiny scale, there are prices(consequences) to be paid.
They can either enslave and bond someone, or they can be set free from the things that enslave.

Even an ionic "bond" of cells in the brain/mind leads to one being a "bond" servant to something.

 

[Ingledsva]

If there is "God," to the mind of "God," King David could be could be an ape or a gorilla and King of the jungle, or another specie and a blood line towards the human being.

Or King David could be the suprasellar cistern of the human brain and not a literal guy or animal.

Or it could simply be, that male/female are not literal guy/girl but positive/negative or conscious/subconscious or thoughts/emotions or knowledge/wisdom.

In the mind of man, it would be taken that a literal innocent baby is killed.

In the mind of "God," it could mean that a "thought," an "emotion," a "desire" was killed in ones mind due to a choice or action.

If there is "God," to the mind of "God," all or many of those tribes could have been various animal species evolving.

Obviously it could mean anything, - however, - that is not what the religion teaches it means.

The world is in chaos because of the teachings of the religions of Abraham.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Blatant ignorance, and yet you have the audacity to use sacred text you don't understand.
Give me YOUR proof that God does not exist. I'll wait.
For your information, one eyed woman, man does not prove God. God proves God. Simple really. I would have thought even an atheist would have figured that out, or is it not in your favour.

Need a gender? It is the natural way that the divine process developed. What do you think, he was sitting up there on a cloud twiddling his thumbs for millions of years till he finally thought of something to do??? Boy, you atheist take the biscuit of stupidity and then run with it don't you.

As usual you attack me - as you have no actual rebuttal to refute what I have said.

Natural way that the divine process developed?? LOL! What did God need a penis for? As I said - sex with a Goddess? or masturbation? What?

*

 

[Robert.Evans]

Obviously it could mean anything, - however, - that is not what the religion teaches it means.

The world is in chaos because of the teachings of the religions of Abraham.

*

The world is not in chaos because of the the Abrahamic faiths. That is your problem with men being in charge. Try thinking of the good you have in the world instead of the bad all the time.

 

[Robert.Evans]

As usual you attack me - as you have no actual rebuttal to refute what I have said.

Natural way that the divine process developed?? LOL! What did God need a penis for? As I said - sex with a Goddess? or masturbation? What?

*

Male and female developed naturally as they represented two sides to the same coin. Procreation is the same for the Divine once it has moved from its original position as it is for us. It is not something to laugh at. It is why you are here. And as per usual, you don't understand nor listen and learn.

 

[Ingledsva]

That is merely a feminist mysandristic bent, whether you wish to admit it to yourself or not. Would you jump up and down if it were written by women I wonder? I doubt it.
It was written by men as men represent the masculine side of the consciousness that we are all apart of, that is why there is male female, hot cold, fat thin, life death etc

Obviously your patriarchal view is getting in the way of your reading -

As I have already stated that the Bible is patriarchal because it was written by a patriarchal Iron Age tribe, and religious works that have Goddesses are written by Matrifocal groups.

NONE of them are written by - or transmitted from - a God.

This is very obvious by what is in the written material.

PS. Your duality ideas - do not make it so.

*

 

[Robert.Evans]

Obviously your patriarchy is getting in the way of your reading -

As I have already stated that the Bible is patriarchal because it was written by a patriarchal Iron Age tribe, and religious works that have Goddesses are written by Matrifocal groups.

NONE of them are written by - or transmitted from - a God.

This is very obvious by what is in the written material.

PS. Your duality ideas - do not make it so.

*

Where is your evidence that they are not divinly inspired? Becasue you are an atheist? Won't do I'm afraid. Need more than that. With that you need HUGE faith to believe blind chance can create a universe. Come on, think for just a minute.

The largest theist groups all come from the same root and all reveal the true side of God, the masculine side. It might bother you, but that is the way it is. God is the father not the mother. I am not saying by that that there are not Goddesses, but that is not what we should be seeking (if you're interested - which you're not)

 

[Ingledsva]

Not THE God. But we are talking, oh ignorant one, of the God of the Flesh. And there is a huge difference between the two

If you keep attacking me rather then rebutting the information - I will turn you in.

Stop calling me names for have a different view then you on a debate site.

Again - there is absolutely no reason for a creator God to have any gender.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Where is your evidence that they are not divinly inspired? Becasue you are an atheist? Won't do I'm afraid. Need more than that. With that you need HUGE faith to believe blind chance can create a universe. Come on, think for just a minute.

The largest theist groups all come from the same root and all reveal the true side of God, the masculine side. It might bother you, but that is the way it is. God is the father not the mother. I am not saying by that that there are not Goddesses, but that is not what we should be seeking (if you're interested - which you're not)

And again - stating that a God has to be a MALE, and the female, - whatever that is, - is associated with evil, - is the same old patriarchy that has been taught for thousands of years.

As stated to you many times, - I am an Agnostic.

It is obvious that the bible is not from God, - or even God inspired, - by all the crap that is within it.

*

 

[Robert.Evans]

If you keep attacking me rather then rebutting the information - I will turn you in.

I don't recall attacking you

Stop calling me names for have a different view then you on a debate site.

I am not calling you names

Again - there is absolutely no reason for a creator God to have any gender.


*

I have already explained to you, if you'd care to listen, that he and she does, that is WHY we are here. It is the two sides to the SAME coin. Why is it that as an atheist you think you know more than me. You are ignorant, and that is not name calling, that is what someone is when they do not understand a certain subject. And you don't understand this one. I am ignorant of some things.
Perhaps you should consider the way you comment, and less of the LOL which always looks offensive. If you don't wish to learn, then why comment? Is that not trolling? But I don't want to get into that. You are entitled to your view, but stop making out you know everything, and that everything men have done is bad.

 

[Robert.Evans]

And again - stating that a God has to be a MALE, and the female, - whatever that is, - is associated with evil, - is the same old patriarchy that has been taught for thousands of years.

what of it? I shouldn't say it because you don't like it? If you listened more carefully you would see that the feminine-principle is not evil. All things that are not the singularity that they come from, MUST , by definition, be flawed.

As stated to you many times, - I am an Agnostic.

Not to me you haven't. And i don't know how you're defining it, but you arue as an atheist. An agnostic is not supposed to know one way or another. That is the short definition. I don't want the long one thanks.

It is obvious that the bible is not from God, - or even God inspired, - by all the crap that is within it.

*

When you speak like that, you attack me. I know that is allowed. I just wanted you to know. It is from God, but theology is not a simplistic read and it is not and never will be understood by non-believers

 

[Ingledsva]

I believe I already said that it is ABOVE that we are talking about in HIGHER consciousness - something that obviously goes right over your head. It is reality, just not a reality YOU know.

Who is the rest of us? Atheist I suppose. Those whose minds are blinded. So you don't understand do we should listen to you should we? Since when has that been a good argument to throw at anyone? And though you then go onto say you have no problem with men, there you go with your "patriachal" name calling again. Anyone would think you didn't know that women killed man, children, raped, and STILL DO. But like, your not bothered about that I suppose, because you're a woman. think about it.

What ridiculous ideas?
I suppose the modern family wrecking baby killing modern day woman, aborting babies, dumping them, taking mens jobs, running prostition rings, killing men, running drugs gangs and getting noticeably more masculine and violent is much better is it? You complain at men of the past and then when you have chance to show how wrong we were, you do the same things.

I suppose the modern family wrecking baby killing modern day woman, aborting babies, dumping them, taking mens jobs, running prostition rings, killing men, running drugs gangs and getting noticeably more masculine and violent is much better is it? You complain at men of the past and then when you have chance to show how wrong we were, you do the same things.

I'm not calling you names dude, - your texts speak for themselves.

You know perfectly well the amounts of women doing most of these things is minuscule against the amounts of men doing them.

Also - we are obviously talking about texts written by very obviously patriarchal Iron age tribes, where women were owned, raped, murdered, often for the crimes of men.

*