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

[Robert.Evans]

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.

*

Haha, that is funny; then you call me "dude". Don't please. I think it is disrespectful.
Nowhere in that quote of mine did I say you were that or did that. As you say, my text speek for themselves

And then you say that just because women don't do as many things wrong (though they seem to be making up for it nowadays) that that makes it okay. Boy that is funny.

Rape was a crime, as it is now. Women rape now, as two did to their own father. Men were also murdered and also died in battle trying to protect their women. Presumably you can see that can't you?
And what is this 'often for the crimes of men'?

Men have the power then as mostly now, as they are the stronger gender. If it changes, or equalises, it will be becasue men allow it.

And as the bible is already some thousand pages long, would you like it to be another thousand just to show all the bad things that women did then?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

we are obviously talking about texts written by very obviously patriarchal Iron age tribes
*

Yep, basically a bunch of sexist homophobes.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Yep, basically a bunch of sexist homophobes.

Having a job or role is bad now is it?

 

[Ingledsva]

I don't recall attacking you.

I am not calling you names

Then you need to reread your posts.

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.

How many times do I have to say it? NOT AN ATHEIST!!!!!

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.

BULL! Challanging YOU on a debate site does not make me - IGNORANT, - OH BLIND ONE - BLATANT IGNORANCE - THE AUDACITY TO USE SACRED TEXTS YOU DON"T UNDERSTAND - ONE EYED WOMAN, - ETC.

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?

That is ridiculous and you know it. Let me get this straight? I rebut ALL of your replies to me - but because they have a different opinion - on this DEBATE site - I must be a troll? LOL!

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.

Dude, you are doing that. You are going into mysticism - duality - invisible Gods that cannot be proven, - and yet according to YOU, - we are ignorant to present reasons straight from your Bible which prove it can't be from any God - unless that God is a murdering skitzo.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

...

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.

You have a very strange idea of Agnosticism. Somehow YOUR idea of a God is the ONLY one, - thus those of us whom point out the flaws in the Bible must be Atheists???

For Agnostics - there may be, - or not be, - a God/dess. However, if there is, - there is absolutely no reason to believe the skitzo, murderer of the innocent, patriarchal one of the Bible - is that GOD.

Not believing YHVH of the Bible is God, - does not make Agnostics into Atheists!

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

BULL! My debating the validity of the Bible does not in any way attack you!

The idea that the Bible is from God - is YOUR belief - not proven fact.

Again - as I've said before many times, - I was raised Christian. I've read the Bible many times. I also took Comparative Religions, and a special course from the Catholic Church. I always look up the text in the original languages before I debate with people over their meanings.

SO! - Stop calling me ignorant - just because I am on the other side of the debate, - and you don't like what I say.


*

 

[Ingledsva]

Having a job or role is bad now is it?

When people are tortured and murdered for not staying within a roll that made women owned, sold, raped, objects, - ABSOLUTELY!

I might add - the Bible says all other people can be slaves owned FOREVER, and bred like black people in our past.

You like this idea of you being a slave?

*

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The Bible is a collection of Books, this is not some monolithic cultural and religious adherence, to these Scriptures. Aren't there other religious texts to criticize?

Is this thread about those other texts?

 

[Desert Snake]

Is this thread about those other texts?

Is any thread about those texts?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

WHO VOTED "YES/I'M AN ATHEIST" IN THIS POLL? What?

 

[Unification]

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.

*

Agreed, when the negative teachings result in potential action and action, and strip away someone's freedom.

 

[Ingledsva]

Haha, that is funny; then you call me "dude". Don't please. I think it is disrespectful.

Dude has NEVER been used to show disrespect.

Nowhere in that quote of mine did I say you were that or did that. As you say, my text speek for themselves

And where did that come from??? I never mentioned myself in this context!

And then you say that just because women don't do as many things wrong (though they seem to be making up for it nowadays) that that makes it okay. Boy that is funny.

You are attempting to twist the conversation from the awful crap of the Bible, to your misconceived ideas about women today.

Rape was a crime, as it is now. Women rape now, as two did to their own father. Men were also murdered and also died in battle trying to protect their women. Presumably you can see that can't you?

Really? Three year olds were sold by their fathers to pedophile men. According to JEWISH sites which I have quoted here - men in war - including the Priests - could RAPE the enemy women. Women were owned and passed from one male to another (no choice)= rape. Men held concubines which are SEX SLAVES=RAPE. Men could hold slaves forever and breed them like animals = RAPE. I could go on and on.

Women rape now, as two did to their own father.

I'll assume you are referring to the Bull "S" story of Lot and his daughters? The one where supposedly after being told by an angel of God that the city they were in would be spared, somehow decided all people were dead so they could procreate with their father? And that father that was so intoxicated - he couldn't recognize his own daughters - twice - yet somehow got it up to complete the act???? LOL! NOT!

And what is this 'often for the crimes of men'?

We have repeated examples in the Bible of ancient patriarchal ideas of KILL the women and children of a male to get back at the male. King David's BABY is killed because King David did wrong. The women of the harem dragged into the street to be raped - because the owner-MALE did wrong, etc.

Men have the power then as mostly now, as they are the stronger gender. If it changes, or equalises, it will be becasue men allow it.

And as the bible is already some thousand pages long, would you like it to be another thousand just to show all the bad things that women did then?

And baby apes are stronger then men. How strong an individual is, - is the stupidest reason for anyone to rule nations.

*

 

[McBell]

Do you think that the Bible, *could be the word of G-d? Or divine? This question is for atheists and agnostics, but specification is needed for what type of agnosticism or atheism you are claiming.

*Or some, /any parts of the Bible

It is possible I suppose.
However, I sincerely hope it is not.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Is any thread about those texts?

Yes.

... but if you think there aren't enough, you're welcome to start some new ones.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Then you need to reread your posts.

You need to be less sensitive and see how you come across to others.

How many times do I have to say it? NOT AN ATHEIST!!!!!

That post was written before your comment of being an atheist. Either way, your comments are atheistic, that is obvious.

BULL! Challanging YOU on a debate site does not make me - IGNORANT, - OH BLIND ONE - BLATANT IGNORANCE - THE AUDACITY TO USE SACRED TEXTS YOU DON"T UNDERSTAND - ONE EYED WOMAN, - ETC.

You are ignorant of this subject as we are all ignorant of something. This subject is "spiritually discerned", which you seem to have forgotten. It is a common mistake amongst atheist, and it seems agnostics who state atheists claims.
Your picture is of a one eyed woman. You are spiritually blind, that is fact. You should not be using sacred text, that is fact. But, in this free world we live in, you are entitled to use it. i am just speaking to you from a higher level, a level you obviously don't like.

That is ridiculous and you know it. Let me get this straight? I rebut ALL of your replies to me - but because they have a different opinion - on this DEBATE site - I must be a troll? LOL!

"rebut"? Presumably you don't understand what that means. You have given an OPINION that is FALSE. That is all. And considering you are not considering you are wrong in a book that says it requires SPIRITUAL DISCERNMENT perhaps you are a troll.

Dude,

There's that "dude" again.

you are doing that. You are going into mysticism - duality - invisible Gods that cannot be proven,

So what? God proves not man. That is simple. Just try and listen for a change and accept the argument instead of sticking with your own warped version of it whic suits your atheistic comments.

- and yet according to YOU, - we

Suddenly it has turned into the royal "we" has it.

are ignorant to present reasons straight from your Bible which prove it can't be from any God - unless that God is a murdering skitzo.

*

Your last words are baseless and from someone woefully inadequate in this subject. Ignorance is bliss they say.
As an agnostic, depending on your defintion, you are not supposed to know one way or another if God can be proved or not. You are going out of your way to show you are an atheist yet claim to be agnostic. If you were truly agnostic, you would listen more and talk less. I think you should reconsider your title. It sounds like a cop out to me.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

This subject is "spiritually discerned", which you seem to have forgotten.

That is a meaningless claim, particularly because you have consistently refused to describe your personal experience of God.

 

[Robert.Evans]

You have a very strange idea of Agnosticism. Somehow YOUR idea of a God is the ONLY one, - thus those of us whom point out the flaws in the Bible must be Atheists???

What flaws? You don't like some of things that went on thousands of years ago so you think there is no God? Where does it say that God cannot do bad things? The OT tells you plainly, which I am sure you are aware of, that he does everything, good and evil. Even the initial evil came from a garden He planted. (that is not a literal garden) Please present your flaws. One at a time if you want them answering so you can then ignore them

For Agnostics - there may be, - or not be, - a God/dess. However, if there is, - there is absolutely no reason to believe the skitzo, murderer of the innocent, patriarchal one of the Bible - is that GOD.

There is more reason to believe the one of the bible than any other as the first three faiths are all Abrihamic faiths - so your words are vain. You have a problem with that God of the flesh perhaps. You said yourself that: "However, if there is".... so why then immediately contradict what you said by saying it isn't one, the reason for which appears to be, YOU don't like him.

Not believing YHVH of the Bible is God, - does not make Agnostics into Atheists!

Correct. but your comments do. You are not speaking as an agnostic, but as an atheist.

BULL! My debating the validity of the Bible does not in any way attack you!

It does, though I don't think for one minute that you would understand it. Try having someone attack one of your family and see if you can ignore it without any reaction at all.

The idea that the Bible is from God - is YOUR belief - not proven fact.

God proves not man. How many times to I have to say that. It is proved and logical, but minds closed off will not understand it. You might not like that answer, but that is the answer.

Again - as I've said before many times, - I was raised Christian. I've read the Bible many times. I also took Comparative Religions, and a special course from the Catholic Church. I always look up the text in the original languages before I debate with people over their meanings.

I was figuring you must be a post Christian. You are now outside and this is therapy. You are pushed out and don't like it so wish to attack that very God that has abandonded you. Otherwise, why would you debate it? Why spend so much time and effort speaking about something you have no interest in?

SO! - Stop calling me ignorant - just because I am on the other side of the debate, - and you don't like what I say.


*

But you are ignorant. I don't mind you having an opinion, but you are agressive in what you say, hence "BULL" and yet you have no evidence to show that Intelligence is not involved in creation and that luck and blind chance are a better answer; nor do I think you will spend long ignoring that very comment.
You seem to have forgotten what you are left with. A with most atheist,/agnostics/agnostics with atheist comments, you are now left with blind chance and luck to create everything. Can't you see how stupid that is? Do you really hate God that much that you are prepared to accept such a lame answer as luck?

 

[Robert.Evans]

When people are tortured and murdered for not staying within a roll that made women owned, sold, raped, objects, - ABSOLUTELY!

I agree. Where does it say that is allowed in the OT? Though for the life of me, I do not know why I have to keep defending Jewish scriptures. I suppose that is where the juicy ones are; is that it?

I might add - the Bible says all other people can be slaves owned FOREVER, and bred like black people in our past.

You like this idea of you being a slave?

*

Slavery was not meant as we think of it now. And, for your information, whites have been slaves to blacks and asians as well. Lets keep this debate balanced.
There idea of slavery was to help your brother who had nothing. Yes it was abused. but that is mankind isn't it. There was nothing wrong with the law, just the implimating of it. We are no different now. The OT, that grouge about so much, is happening NOW. Consider that for a moment. Not only our men doing the same things, but women are becoming more masculanized and as bad as the men. Why not complain about the countries that exist now? What is better now than then? It all has come from God, though not as you understand him.

 

[Robert.Evans]

..

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Do you really hate God that much that you are prepared to accept such a lame answer as luck?

Are you really so attached to your belief in God that you are prepared to accept such a lame answer as "God did it"? We have no idea how or why our universe came into being, so you are clutching at metaphysical straws.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Dude has NEVER
been used to show disrespect.

That depends on how the person take it. ALWAYS.

And where did that come from??? I never mentioned myself in this context!

No idea what you mean there

You are attempting to twist the conversation from the awful crap of the
Bible, to your misconceived ideas about women today.

The one twisting there is you. I was answering your comments where you
said women did not do as much wrong and therefore it appeared that it
didn't matter.

Really?

Really! You were not supposed to hurt, kill etc anyone. That was the law.
Love your neighbour. All you are pointing out is that men and woman
are not perfect and would not always keep the law. There is no difference
nowadays. That is why we have laws, police and prisions, for men and
women. Secondary laws would come in as they always do to make it
more usuable in a realistic way. Just like controlling a mob is not like
controlling one man or woman. Laws have to evolve because man will
not keep the royal law.

Three year olds were sold by their fathers to pedophile men. According
to JEWISH sites which I have quoted here - men in war - including the
Priests - could RAPE the enemy women. Women were owned and passed
from one male to another (no choice)= rape. Men held concubines which
are SEX SLAVES=RAPE. Men could hold slaves forever and breed them
like animals = RAPE. I could go on and on.

You could go on and on couldn't you. I noticed that. I think you will find
that there are still pedophiles now, men and women. Seems women are
coming down to our level. But they were not supposed to commit
adultery, nor adulterate anything. One man to one woman, was what
they should have followed. But mankind goes after many schemes. You
should not think that concubines are necessarily raped. They might have
been they might not have been. Times were different then. In times of
war, there were laws on how you could treat a woman if all their men
were dead. That was not rape. but it was certainly better than leaving
there to starve to death. What would you have done?
All you are showing is that mankind does things wrong and does not
keep the law. God is not the problem. The God of flesh that man raised
up is, as we are.
You must also remember that times were different then. We cannot judge
now with what we now have with what they had then. There has to be
practicality about decisions. People will not follow the law, so the law
evolved to counteract the actions of people. But I will repeat, you only
focus on the bad that is within the bible and the bad that men do. You
never consider that they provide for their women and keep them safe.
Just because the Israelites did not write down every good, nice and
boring act that every took place does not mean it did not happen. What
would modern day life look like if we just looked at all the bad now?
Wars, rape, theft, fraud, poor still existing, the list goes on.

I'll assume you are referring to the Bull "S" story of Lot and his
daughters? The one where supposedly after being told by an angel of God
that the city they were in would be spared, somehow decided all people
were dead so they could procreate with their father? And that father that
was so intoxicated - he couldn't recognize his own daughters - twice - yet
somehow got it up to complete the act???? LOL! NOT!

There's that LOL again.
That is what it says. You say you use the bible to refute me (even though
you don't) and then you flat ignore what it says. Now that is rich!

We have repeated examples in the Bible of ancient patriarchal ideas of
KILL the women and children of a male to get back at the male. King
David's BABY is killed because King David did wrong. The women of
the harem dragged into the street to be raped - because the owner-MALE
did wrong, etc.

okay

And baby apes are stronger then men. How strong an individual is, - is
the stupidest reason for anyone to rule nations.


*

Stupid or not, that is the way it was then and still is now. The difference is, the strength can lie in wisdom and not physical strength. Do you not know of gangs in certain areas? How are they ruling that area, through intellect or power and strength?