Legitimate reasons not to believe in God

[samtonga43]

And you are an expert at attempting to make the Bible say anything you want to believe.

Optimistic, Tb? Good for you. keep learning!

 

[Subduction Zone]

Optimistic, Tb? Good for you. keep learning!

Why did you quote yourself and act as if you were responding to @Trailblazer ?

 

[rational experiences]

I'm human you're human.

Science by human data says origin two first bio parents today are only skeletal bone dusts.

No man is God.

Bible testimonial for points to argue a legal case was by conscious wisdom. The teacher. Was on a shut book. Sworn oath to uphold lifes truth.

No human was allowed to reference it.

You do today ignoring the truth men chose to reinvest in technology and nuclear.

About 1000 years ago Muslim scientists owner of land of pyramids wanted to reimplemet old technology.

Jesus advice was re accessed to use as an argument in legal human rights only.

Ignored truth. Bible is evil only.

Life ours is with and in nature.

Lush earth garden.
Ice stable mass reborn each year to restabilise seasons on earth. The Inheritor in gods heavens is season.

Son of God sea...son four holy + cross.

Man's cross of God made sun mass cross. Burnt bared naked gods earth garden mass...floods droughts cancers.

Bio life holy blood cell bones removed. Heaven supported iron core heart only not nuclear transmitters. Science doesn't use iron core holy heart teachings. Life's blood cell kept red celled holy. In heavens mass.

Theme from dusts a man of science builds a machine.
Theme from dusts a man of science reacts dusts virtually blows up mass removes machines history.
Human parents life is now dusts.

Three terms dust.

Honour the holy human baby life....all of us we have and own presence gift of human life by human sex.

Versus any human egotist theist who voices God theories lying.

To deist says a human a God is to honour all mutual highest presence. Greatest any body of one its owned type change none of it.

To theme God is a power is a lie...theist false god.

 

[samtonga43]

This is the last question you get to ask without answering some of their own.

'Their'? To whom are you referring?

The only examples that I can site are those that try to defend the faith on internet forums.

And this is your evidence that the majority of Christians think that cherry picking and quote mining the Bible is OK to support their beliefs? Really?

The average Christian is probably woefully ignorant about the poor arguments that are used to defend their beliefs.

Unfortunately for you, SZ, 'probably' has nothing to do with evidence.
Do some research in the area of epistemology. But get some sleep first!

 

[samtonga43]

Why did you quote yourself and act as if you were responding to @Trailblazer ?

Tb will understand.

 

[Trailblazer]

It appears to you that the majority of Christians think that cherry picking and quote mining the Bible is OK to support their beliefs?

Any evidence?

During Jesus' 1,000 year reign over Earth ' enemy death ' will be No more on Earth.
- 1 Corinthians 15:24-26; Isaiah 25:8

#4 URAVIP2ME, 58 minutes ago

 

[Subduction Zone]

'Their'? To whom are you referring?

Sorry, brainfart, your own. Seriously you could not get that from context? That is not a good sign.

And this is your evidence that the majority of Christians think that cherry picking and quote mining the Bible is OK to support their beliefs? Really?

Unfortunately for you, SZ, 'probably' has nothing to do with evidence.
Do some research in the area of epistemology. But get some sleep first!

Oh look, he is going o run away again.

 

[Trailblazer]

Why did you quote yourself and act as if you were responding to @Trailblazer ?

Because I gave her post an Optimistic rating since she is optimistic if she thinks I do what she said I do below.

samtonga43 said: ↑
And you are an expert at attempting to make the Bible say anything you want to believe.

 

[joelr]

I was replying to your saying that I believe Christianity and Judaism were made-up.
i.e. why I don't think they were

You haven't given any reasons. Saying "because another myths says so" is no different than a Christian saying that religion is the only truth "because it says so".
I'm interested in a discussion not proclaiming personal beliefs without evidence.

I
Your opinion, but it is ~1500 years old and not of unknown author. Furthermore it is claimed to be a direct revelation, as you know.

Is that supposed to be a point? We also know the author of Paul? Paul also had revelations. So did the Bahai prophet in 1800s? He also wrote them down. So what? That isn't evidence?

I
Appeal to human authority ... versus the Qur'an.

No appeal to scholarship and probability. Supernatural claims need proper evidence. It's why you DO NOT accept the newer religion with revelations, Bahai.
The Quran doesn't have any authority. No more than the Bahai revelations or Mormon revelations from Joe Smith. Both are much more recent.
Claims. Unsupported claims.

You continue, over and over to use supernatural claims as evidence while thinking it's any better than all the other claims? It isn't. What you personally believe doesn't change that?
Even worse, we went through all the apologetics in a thread some time ago. EVERY claim was a fraud. All the science was known by ancient Greeks. The prophecies were as vague as any other religion. No actual predictions of real science and it's just a blend of Biblical and Arab mysticism.

I
I think you refer to 'dajal' or 'the beast' 666.

Are Shaitan and Dajjal the same in Islam? - Quora

https://www.quora.com/Are-Shaitan-and-Dajjal-the-same-in-Islam


No, not at all. The Revelation story is Persian. Their devil was at war with their God and humanity.

During the Second Temple Period, when Jews were living in the Achaemenid Empire, Judaism was heavily influenced by Zoroastrianism, the religion of the Achaemenids.[26][8][27] Jewish conceptions of Satan were impacted by Angra Mainyu,[8][28] the Zoroastrian god of evil, darkness, and ignorance.

Hell
The concept of hell, a place of torment presided over by Angra Mainyu, seems to be Zoroaster's own, shaped by his deep sense of the need for justice. • Those few souls 'whose false (things) and what are just balance' (Y 33. I) go to the 'Place of the Mixed Ones', Misvan Gatu, where, as in . the old underworld kingdom of the dead, they lead a grey existence, lacking both joy and sorrow.

I
Scholarship?
I do not give a hoot about your scholars, and neither do you give a hoot about what the Qur'an teaches.

Scholars are the people who learn all of the information about a text, culture, language, where it came from and more to a level others will never even come close to.
They can demonstrate things using evidence. If you don't care about historical information then you don't care. But you have no idea what is going on and you don't care about what is actually true.
The Quran is not demonstrated to be a historical work. Its a religious mythology. I don't take history from that or any myth. If you want to live in a bubble just like other religions do when they refuse to listen to anything outside what their church and book tells them, have a party. I am interested in what is true.

The OT is comprised of ancient texts that are unreliable.
Nevertheless, it is more about interpretation than outright "wrong". it is not impossible to understand that G-d created satan, and that he tests mankind. The assumption that satan is an angel who "works for G-d" is however, misbelief.

It is what the original scripture says. So you are wrong. It may be a story but that is the story. The Quran went and made up a different history, it's not a historical work. It's fiction. J Witnesses claim scholars are influenced by Satan. You are being misled in a similar way.
If the Quran makes a claim than back it up with historical knowledge. If you cannot you don't have an argument and are just waving a myth around as if it's true.
If you want to prove Samuel and Chronicles are wrong then show the reason, show the proof. This would also mean the Torah is wrong and the history on that is pretty solid.

G-d allows His created beings to engage in evil, as He wills.

In the NT Satan seems to be able to fool God.

I
If you take that stance, then why assume angels are capable of sin?
..or is it only particular angels?
It doesn't really matter one way or the other, because G-d is aware of all things.

God is a fiction from religious books. Inana, El, Yahweh, Brahman, Vishnu, not real.

I
What about covid?
Did G-d "send satan" with that too?

You seem confused. Let me repeat, -
"In 2 Samuel 24, Yahweh sends the "Angel of Yahweh" to inflict a plague against Israel for three days, killing 70,000 people as punishment for David having taken a census without his approval.[16] 1 Chronicles 21:1 repeats this story,[16] but replaces the "Angel of Yahweh" with an entity referred to as "a satan".[16]"

I don't see anything about Covid, so no, that didn't happen in the story.
Is it really easier to write a "-" than an "o"?

I
Interpretation is all. Exact mechanisms of origin and transmission are debatable.

Uh, nope. The Torah is well known by experts. If you call anything into question as if it's "not the correct intended narrative" then you need proof. Not another religion making stuff up 12 centuries later.

I
Yes, it's in the Qur'an.

Then unless the topic is Islamic mythology or specific text in the Quran I don't care.

I
No, but I believe in the "last testament" .. the Qur'an.

Yup and thousands believe the Bahai revelations are the latest testament. Millions believe the Mormon revelations are the last testament, millions of other people believe the J Witnesses have the last testament. And none of you have a shred of proof. This is how cults and religious groups get people. They will believe anything if you sell it correctly.

I
I do not believe in "historical scholarship", in as much that one can know with certainty the origin of myth.

Which is the most disingenuous thing ever because you have not read even one historical work on OT mythology and then decided their methods were bad or vague. You have no idea what information they use, what cuniform tablets or text is used, how many sources of verification are used, what historical methods are employed and what do they reveal. You know nothing. You just decided it cannot be true because it would conflict with another myth you believe in.
Congratulations you are keeping the age old process of misinformation and planned obsolescence going.
You are saying nothing here except that you prefer to remain uneducated in the matter.

 

[joelr]

Rubbish !
Muslims don't worship angels or "images of gods".

According to biographies of Muhammad, while on retreat in a mountain cave near Mecca (the cave of Hira), where Mohammad used to go and ponder upon the evil deeds of his community. Gabriel appears before him and commands him to "Read!". He responded, "But I cannot read!". Then the angel Gabriel embraced him tightly and then revealed to him the first lines of chapter 96 of the Qur'an, "Read: In the name of Allah Who created, (1) Created man from a clot. (2) Read: And Allah is the Most Generous, (3) Who taught by the pen, (4) Taught man that which he knew not.(5)" (Bukhari 4953).

QUOTE="muhammad_isa, post: 7953679, member: 34763"]
..all very interesting, but not representative of Divine guidance due to its age and mix of tradition/polytheism.[/QUOTE]

All other divinities in Hinduism are part of Brahman. Just like angels in Islam. Your religion has angels and Satan. Other divinities or supernatural beings.
Either Islam is also polytheism or Hinduism is also monotheism.

Do you ever get tired of being wrong?


QUOTE="muhammad_isa, post: 7953679, member: 34763"]
I know it's a claim .. but not all claims are equal .. FSM bla bla.[/QUOTE]

Maybe not all claims are equal. Joe Smith, Bahai and Muhammad getting revelations are EXACTLY equal. Just because you believe one of them you constantly want special pleading for it. So typical. So misled?


QUOTE="muhammad_isa, post: 7953679, member: 34763"]
I wonder why so many people don't agree with you?
We must all be daft, I suppose. [/QUOTE]

super easy to answer.
1/3 of all religious believers are Christian. Hinduism is another 1/3. Neither believe in the Quran. So 2/3 of all religious believers are wrong according to you. 66.6%. So the idea that a LOT of people can believe incorrect information is proven right there. By your beliefs.

That answers that, why so many don't agree with rational, critical, Socratic methodic ways of thinking. Not sure why, but it's clearly true. Obviously people like to believe supernatural stories about getting to live forever. But is it true? Exactly zero evidence supports it. Like the other 2/3, you are very likely also believing something that is not real.

QUOTE="muhammad_isa, post: 7953679, member: 34763"]
No need to be sorry. You are entitled to your opinion, but the scholars you follow do not impress me. They cannot make me an atheist with their academic disclosures and conclusions about ancient history.[/QUOTE]

You think I cannot see right through this? You haven't debated yet. It's all claims and bluster. You cannot be "not impressed" with scholarship you NEVER READ OR STUDIED in any capacity. It's pure denial. You don't know the methods, how rigorus and definitive the studies are or are not. What the evidence actually is? Because you don't care. You decided a myth is true and put your head in the sand. The end. You are free to engage in self delusion all your life. But you cannot form even a basic debate.
This is literally no different and equally as unimpressive as a Jehovah's Witnesses trying to debate and saying "your scholars are all wrong because Satan has influenced them".
This mentality is what religions and cults count on to keep them alive.



QUOTE="muhammad_isa, post: 7953679, member: 34763"]
That is what you perceive.
I believe that sincerity is the most important thing, and not denomination.
What about a "sincere Hindu" you might ask?
Many Hindus are in fact atheists, so the answer is not straightforward.
Can atheists "go to heaven"?
Anybody might be successful. G-d knows who is sincere and who is not, and has something to hide.[/QUOTE]

Heaven is a myth added to Christianity after the Greek occupation. The Quran bought into some of the theology of the Bible. Still not real.

During the period of the Second Temple (c. 515 BC – 70 AD), the Hebrew people lived under the rule of first the Persian Achaemenid Empire, then the Greek kingdoms of the Diadochi, and finally the Roman Empire.[47] Their culture was profoundly influenced by those of the peoples who ruled them.[47] Consequently, their views on existence after death were profoundly shaped by the ideas of the Persians, Greeks, and Romans.[48][49] The idea of the immortality of the soul is derived from Greek philosophy[49] and the idea of the resurrection of the dead is thought to be derived from Persian cosmology,[49] although the later claim has been recently questioned.[50] By the early first century AD, these two seemingly incompatible ideas were often conflated by Hebrew thinkers.[49] The Hebrews also inherited from the Persians, Greeks, and Romans the idea that the human soul originates in the divine realm and seeks to return there.[47] The idea that a human soul belongs in Heaven and that Earth is merely a temporary abode in which the soul is tested to prove its worthiness became increasingly popular during the Hellenistic period (323 – 31 BC).[40] Gradually, some Hebrews began to adopt the idea of Heaven as the eternal home of the righteous dead.[40]

 

[joelr]

Not really .. it is not a science book, although it might refer to planets orbiting, for example.

Which it took from Greek science.

No it doesn't .. it's subjective..

..and G-d guides whomsoever He wills.

You literally have no debate, you just say random statements about your beliefs.

God is fiction and guides no one except in peoples mind. Prove a God exists.

urse, an atheist cannot believe that G-d will guide them.

They prefer to think that the universe does not have an author .. that it has no cosmic significance.

Atheists don't know where the universe came from. God doesn't guide anyone. Athiests, all different religious people, everyone lives similar lives. Athiest children, religious children, Hindu, Christian, Islam, all equally sometimes face illness or loss of parents. Horrible things. Even abuse. It's terrible. However there is no evidence some are "guided". So Gods guidance looks suspiciously like random life? Wow, imagine that?


How about the 200 or more children who would have survived cancer but the religious parents decided to use prayer to cure the cancer and they all died.

A report from the American Cancer society details this.

According to the American Cancer Society:


... available scientific evidence does not support claims that faith healing can actually cure physical ailments... One review published in 1998 looked at 172 cases of deaths among children treated by faith healing instead of conventional methods. These researchers estimated that if conventional treatment had been given, the survival rate for most of these children would have been more than 90 percent, with the remainder of the children also having a good chance of survival. A more recent study found that more than 200 children had died of treatable illnesses in the United States over the past thirty years because their parents relied on spiritual healing rather than conventional medical treatment.



Guidance?

I don't see how you can know that.

How can you tell if God intervenes or not?

..just because He does not seem to give us what we would like in this life?

It shows in mortality rates of disease. The thing people pray for the most. If an illness has a 70% mortality rate and a person survives they may consider it a miricle.

But actually out of every 100 people 30 should survive.

Illnesses that kill 70% of victims, if you look at annual rates, are always close to what is predicted. So no outside force is changing outcomes. Otherwise the statistics would be all over the place. Everything plays out exactly as statistics, probabilities predict.

Even the number of Democrats vs republicans meets what is predicted. Individuals feel they have freewill and so on. There is no outside assistance. Also prayer studies double blind studies, demonstrated prayer did not help outcomes with disease.

A believer believes that this life is as "a blink of an eye" compared to the life hereafter.

..but it certainly is not easy to keep one's faith in times of hardship .. that is for sure!

Than a believer wastes the little time they have thinking this is only a "blink" while this is it.

You might be right .. maybe your beliefs were not sound or coherent .. I don't know.

..but totally turning away from God is not beneficial, from what I can see.

In Islamic culture is you lose family it probably isn't. That doesn't make it true. Mormons also shun family and they have a hard time leaving. These issues have nothing to do with the theology being true.

I'm sure the Inana worship religion bonded people and gave meaning to the followers life.

Scientific observations have led to the conclusion that these are established fact.

Oh, now you like science. Historical and archaeological information has shown that the Biblical theology is all from older cultures.

The existence of God cannot be observed in the same manner, but that does not mean that God does not exist.

One would conclude that, if they have decided that the Bible and Qur'an contain deluded or fraudulent text.

Doesn't mean he does exist. Also you do not know that God cannot be detected? Muhammad supposedly detected an angel. Moses detected God many times. Miracles are an interaction with the physical world. I bet there are many instances in the Quran of God interacting with the world. Yet believers are always like

"God cannot be detected by science"??? Yet the scripturte clearly says God can interact. Therefore he should not only interact and tell everyone but be studied in a lab setting.

In truth since God is absent and fiction excuses have to be made.



The Bible and Quran DO have fraud text. They think supernatural things are all over. Devils, sea monsters, giants, Jinns, angels. Those are not real. Show me evidence of an angel. Call forth an angel.

1. First of all, we cannot be sure that the author of a text has not put their own "spin" on it .. ie. it is third hand quoting..

Same with the Quran. So much special pleading. No photocopy in 7th century. Claims do not mean it hasn't gone through scribes spin?

2. son of God is used in the OT in a figurative sense, and does not mean anybody is God

3. Jesus was addressing a Jewish audience, and it would actually mean that none of them could achieve success and piety if they refused him as Messiah.

Oh now you want to do historicity study of the text. OMG????????? You dismiss actual PhD scholars but then want to turn around and interpret the ENGLISH version (not even the original Greek) and think your layman interpretation means anything? Wow. What a joke?

You are not correct but I refuse to entertain you in history. You have made your bed with history and you are ignorant of it by design. This is hilarious.

Muslims do not refuse Jesus as Messiah. Nor do they refuse John the Baptist, Moses ...

Don't care. It's all a myth.

 

[joelr]

Brahman may share similarities to God but is not the same. Brahman has, for example, traits such as the insistence that Brahman is consciousness. I don't use the term 'Yahweh' as the entity it referred to in Canaanite times ceased to be what the letters were used for. The original usage was even forgotten. Many centuries later came the concept of God which was not this either. Therefore I think the etymology of 'Yahweh' is tangent to the subject at most.
All testable ideas may be proven or disproven. God's existence is not one of them. Perhaps Brahman's is or 'Yahwehs'. Santa Clause definitely can be proven or disproved because he has traits that allow for it, such as the ability to deliver toys all over the world one night per year.

No, you forgot apologetics. Santa Clause apologetics can say parents deliver toys but Santa is still real and divine. He cannot be disproven. I can claim a demon in my closet. When you look at him he dissapears. You cannot disprove it.
In scripture God interacts and should be detectable.
Prayer has been tested and showed no results so that aspect isn't real.
Theism means direct interaction with people. You can show no outside forces are changing probabilities, especially with illness in the population.

Borrowing imagery from Greece doesn't make it the same thing. I am speaking briefly, but I appreciate what you're saying. You're thinking that all of this is the origin of God though, and it isn't. Paul could be gone and Jesus, too. These would not affect the existence of God.

God is as fictional as Jesus. The OT reflected a warrior deity of the day. The things said about him were no different than thousands of years before.
Then the theologians added Greek theology. Nothing there is real. It's fiction.

This lecture covers the Platonic concepts used

He ends with, "people didn't realize it but the Christian God is mainly Grecko Roman philosophy/theology. How is that "real"???
Plato and Christianity


36:46 Tertullian (who hated Plato) borrowed the idea of hypostases (used by Philo previously) to explain the relationship between the trinity. All are of the same substance.


38:30 Origen a Neo-Platonist uses Plato’s One. A perfect unity, indivisible, incorporeal, transcending all things material. The Logos (Christ) is the creative principle that permeates the created universe


41:10

Agustine 354-430 AD taught scripture should be interpreted symbolically instead of literally after Plotinus explained Christianity was just Platonic ideas.


Thought scripture was silly if taken literally.


45:55 the ability to read Greek/Platonic ideas was lost for most Western scholars during Middle Ages. Boethius was going to translate all of Plato and Aristotle into Latin which would have altered Western history.



Theologians all based on Plato - Jesus, Agustine, Boethius Anslem, Aquinas

59:30

In some sense Christianity is taking Greco-Roman moral philosophy and theology and delivering it to the masses, even though they are unaware

Sounds like that Greek salvation isn't repentance but about extending the life of a person. That is why stories about Jesus are not mere copies. Borrowing the imagery is not the same as copying the story. What we have in the NT are stories as much a departure from those as the story of Noah is from Gilgamesh. Jesus dies and is resurrected in the stories, yet the authors of every gospel make him Israel. It is true children think of Jesus as a man, but he is plainly Israel. Every time a gospel says Jesus fulfills something it is telling us this: the hope of Israel will revive, Israel has not been destroyed for nothing. Any scholar who cannot see this is not to be trusted.

Says you? What is your PhD in? Jesus rising again is a copy of savior deities popular in those times. All scholars understand this. Do you read the original Greek and Hebrew?
The Hellenistic salvation is LITERALLY what the NT used.
But let's clear this up because now you are really reaching here.

Hellenistic religion


This shows all the Christian concepts come from Hellenism, a trend sweeping through all religions from 300 BC - 100Ad. This is why the "mystery religions" also had dying/rising sons/daughters of their one true God. Like Judaism they started out using Mesopotamian myths and then adopted Greek and Persian myths as well.



-the seasonal drama was homologized to a soteriology (salvation concept) concerning the destiny, fortune, and salvation of the individual after death.


-his led to a change from concern for a religion of national prosperity to one for individual salvation, from focus on a particular ethnic group to concern for every human. The prophet or saviour replaced the priest and king as the chief religious figure.


-his process was carried further through the identification of the experiences of the soul that was to be saved with the vicissitudes of a divine but fallen soul, which had to be redeemed by cultic activity and divine intervention. This view is illustrated in the concept of the paradoxical figure of the saved saviour, salvator salvandus.


-Other deities, who had previously been associated with national destiny (e.g., Zeus, Yahweh, and Isis), were raised to the status of transcendent, supreme



-The temples and cult institutions of the various Hellenistic religions were repositories of the knowledge and techniques necessary for salvation and were the agents of the public worship of a particular deity. In addition, they served an important sociological role. In the new, cosmopolitan ideology that followed Alexander’s conquests, the old nationalistic and ethnic boundaries had broken down and the problem of religious and social identity had become acute.


-Most of these groups had regular meetings for a communal meal that served the dual role of sacramental participation (referring to the use of material elements believed to convey spiritual benefits among the members and with their deity)


-Hellenistic philosophy (Stoicism, Cynicism, Neo-Aristotelianism, Neo-Pythagoreanism, and Neoplatonism) provided key formulations for Jewish, Christian, and Muslim philosophy, theology, and mysticism through the 18th century


- The basic forms of worship of both the Jewish and Christian communities were heavily influenced in their formative period by Hellenistic practices, and this remains fundamentally unchanged to the present time. Finally, the central religious literature of both traditions—the Jewish Talmud (an authoritative compendium of law, lore, and interpretation), the New Testament, and the later patristic literature of the early Church Fathers—are characteristic Hellenistic documents both in form and content.


-Other traditions even more radically reinterpreted the ancient figures. The cosmic or seasonal drama was interiorized to refer to the divine soul within man that must be liberated.


-Each persisted in its native land with little perceptible change save for its becoming linked to nationalistic or messianic movements (centring on a deliverer figure)


-and apocalyptic traditions (referring to a belief in the dramatic intervention of a god in human and natural events)


- Particularly noticeable was the success of a variety of prophets, magicians, and healers—e.g., John the Baptist, Jesus, Simon Magus, Apollonius of Tyana, Alexander the Paphlagonian, and the cult of the healer Asclepius—whose preaching corresponded to the activities of various Greek and Roman philosophic missionaries

 

[joelr]

'Salvation' in Jewish writing is not about saving the lives of individuals from eventual death. The individuals always die. Abraham dies old and full of years, for example; but he's saved from being a monster, saved from the ways that he has put behind him.

Yes neither is it in Hellenism, the thing the NT copies. It's about saving a fallen soul to get into heaven.


"

-his process was carried further through the identification of the experiences of the soul that was to be saved with the vicissitudes of a divine but fallen soul, which had to be redeemed by cultic activity and divine intervention. This view is illustrated in the concept of the paradoxical figure of the saved saviour, salvator salvandus.

"

By the way the fallen soul that needs redemption is known to have been adopted from the Greeks. Sanders writes about this. So does Wright. It's all mythology.


During the period of the Second Temple (c. 515 BC – 70 AD), the Hebrew people lived under the rule of first the Persian Achaemenid Empire, then the Greek kingdoms of the Diadochi, and finally the Roman Empire.[47] Their culture was profoundly influenced by those of the peoples who ruled them.[47] Consequently, their views on existence after death were profoundly shaped by the ideas of the Persians, Greeks, and Romans.[48][49] The idea of the immortality of the soul is derived from Greek philosophy[49] and the idea of the resurrection of the dead is thought to be derived from Persian cosmology,[49] although the later claim has been recently questioned.[50] By the early first century AD, these two seemingly incompatible ideas were often conflated by Hebrew thinkers.[49] The Hebrews also inherited from the Persians, Greeks, and Romans the idea that the human soul originates in the divine realm and seeks to return there.[47] The idea that a human soul belongs in Heaven and that Earth is merely a temporary abode in which the soul is tested to prove its worthiness became increasingly popular during the Hellenistic period (323 – 31 BC).[40] Gradually, some Hebrews began to adopt the idea of Heaven as the eternal home of the righteous dead.[40]

Hence not the same, though it is irrelevant or tangent to our topic about God. Jesus and Paul both teach denial of the self and dissolution into Christ. James points out: "The flower falls, and its beauty is destroyed."

It's exactly the same. And the dying rising savior deities are also the same. Is this denial? You are ignoring what I posted?


"

• They guarantee the individual a good place in the afterlife (a concern not present in most prior forms of religion)."

This is sounding even more like Christianity, isn’t it? Odd that. Just mix in the culturally distinct features of Judaism that it was syncretized with, such as messianism, apocalypticism, scripturalism, and the particularly Jewish ideas about resurrection—as well as Jewish soteriology, cosmology, and rituals, and other things peculiar to Judaism, such as an abhorrence of sexuality and an obsession with blood atonement and substitutionary sacrifice—and you literally have Christianity fully spelled out. Before it even existed.



Again, The Hebrews also inherited from the Persians, Greeks, and Romans the idea that the human soul originates in the divine realm and seeks to return there.[47] The idea that a human soul belongs in Heaven and that Earth is merely a temporary abode in which the soul is tested to prove its worthiness became increasingly popular during the Hellenistic period (323 – 31 BC).[40] Gradually, some Hebrews began to adopt the idea of Heaven as the eternal home of the righteous dead.[40]

'God' is not a concept available in ancient Mesopotamia. The most similar thing would be the Early Etruscan formless gods, but these also can be proved or disproved. To begin with they have a number, are not omnipresent. They are, however, invisible and intangible. They take form, but they can change form. God does not take form. They also have personalities.

Yeah, that's wrong. Gods like Yahweh have existed since Sumerians. The first literal known author is Enheduanna writing praise to Inana. A Sumerian woman. Inana was the creator of love, hate, male, female, creator of the universe and so on.
She is humanities first known author and you don't know her AND that Yahweh type Gods existed since Sumer? Man the church has really warped history in the general knowledge department?

The exaltation of Inana (Inana B): translation

1-12Lady of all the divine powers, resplendent light, righteous woman clothed in radiance, beloved of An and Urac! Mistress of heaven, with the great pectoral jewels, who loves the good headdress befitting the office of en priestess, who has seized all seven of its divine powers! My lady, you are the guardian of the great divine powers! You have taken up the divine powers, you have hung the divine powers from your hand. You have gathered up the divine powers, you have clasped the divine powers to your breast. Like a dragon you have deposited venom on the foreign lands. When like Ickur you roar at the earth, no vegetation can stand up to you. As a flood descending upon (?) those foreign lands, powerful one of heaven and earth, you are their Inana.


13-19Raining blazing fire down upon the Land, endowed with divine powers by An, lady who rides upon a beast, whose words are spoken at the holy command of An! The great rites are yours: who can fathom them? Destroyer of the foreign lands, you confer strength on the storm. Beloved of Enlil, you have made awesome terror weigh upon the Land. You stand at the service of An's commands.


20-33At your battle-cry, my lady, the foreign lands bow low. When humanity comes before you in awed silence at the terrifying radiance and tempest, you grasp the most terrible of all the divine powers. Because of you, the threshold of tears is opened, and people walk along the path of the house of great lamentations. In the van of battle, all is struck down before you. With your strength, my lady, teeth can crush flint. You charge forward like a charging storm. You roar with the roaring storm, you continually thunder with Ickur. You spread exhaustion with the stormwinds, while your own feet remain tireless. With the lamenting balaj drum a lament is struck up.


34-41My lady, the great Anuna gods fly from you to the ruin mounds like scudding bats. They dare not stand before your terrible gaze. They dare not confront your terrible countenance. Who can cool your raging heart? Your malevolent anger is too great to cool. Lady, can your mood be soothed? Lady, can your heart be gladdened? Eldest daughter of Suen, your rage cannot be cooled!


Also a war deity, much like Yahweh:


Exodus 15:3:


Yahweh is a man of war;


Yahweh is his name.


Isaiah 42:13:


Yahweh goes forth like a mighty man;


like a man of war(s) he stirs up his fury.


Zephaniah 3:17: Yahweh, your God, is in your midst,


a warrior who gives victory.


Psalm 24:8:


Who is the King of Glory?


Yahweh, strong and mighty;


Yahweh, mighty in battle.


In these passages Yahweh is explicitly called a warrior or directly compared to a warrior. If one


moves out from simple designations to actual functioning, the metaphor or image is even more


extensively present. Yahweh is the subject of many verbs that belong to the sphere of warfare

Sure, but it doesn't change God. Christians can become pagan without realizing it, but that doesn't make God provable or not. Defending Christianity is not my job, and I'm simply talking about the OP. God is not like gods, and part of it is that God cannot be proved or disproved.

There is no God? The concept changed exactly with the times. Aquinas, Agustine, Origen and so on just dug into Platonism. In the end it's all a story based on nothing but fiction.

 

[joelr]

I've no interest in entrapping you into any religion or belief. If you feel like you have found a freedom that you have needed, then I want to help you not get in your way. The same has been done for me by others, and I can do no less. This information about Christianity, though, does not tag 'God'. God does not owe anything to Christianity, does not depend upon it, is not supported by it. God is either discovered or invented, but you cannot say which it is. It is separate from all of these things about Judahite kings and so on.

Without a specific religion you just have a vague unproven concept that doesn't make sense. All the cosmological arguments are answered by secular scholars like Sean Carroll, physicist. The soul is the most outdated concept ever and that leaves just us.

It has a long and complex history, but I know bits that you don't and you know bits I don't.

Well go ahead and mention something I'm not aware of please?

That's all fascinating but not related to whether God can be proved or disproved. You have cited gods and things that are similar to God but not the same as. The very philosophical derivation of God makes it difficult or impossible to prove or disprove.

The demon in my closet who goes away when strangers try to see him is also hard to disprove.



God is a fiction created by people. At least a theistic deity. Prayer has been studied and failed. Illness rates follow probabilities very strictly. No outside help.


It doesn't matter what supernatural thing you invoke and claim it's not unproveable? Supernatural beings require evidence. There is none for God.


All cosmological arguments have been answered to a reasonable measure by philosophers. A conscious being as the first thing in all reality is nonsense. We only know consciousness as a complex phenomenon.


For a complex thing to exist first in reality sounds like a fictive concept. Evidence would be needed.

 

[muhammad_isa]

It's why you DO NOT accept the newer religion with revelations, Bahai.
The Quran doesn't have any authority. No more than the Bahai revelations or Mormon revelations from Joe Smith. Both are much more recent.
Claims. Unsupported claims.

That is your perception..

..it's just a blend of Biblical and Arab mysticism.

..your opinion .. not the opinion of billions of Muslims.

..If you don't care about historical information then you don't care..

I do care .. but reach a different conclusion to "your scholars", because I don't think it is possible to make definitive conclusions about the existence of God from study of ancient history.

It is what the original scripture says..

Original? How do you know it is "original" ?
It is "ancient", and likely revised many times over.

You know nothing. You just decided it cannot be true because it would conflict with another myth you believe in..

That's not true .. I interpret earlier scriptures in light of the Qur'an. The Qur'an is a major revelation .. Christianity and Islam are the world's most populous beliefs.

 

[samtonga43]

Because I gave her post an Optimistic rating since she is optimistic if she thinks I do what she said I do below.

I've seen you doing it, Tb. Over and over again.

So yes, I am optimistic that I am not deluding myself.

 

[muhammad_isa]

All other divinities in Hinduism are part of Brahman. Just like angels in Islam..

Angels aren't part of G-d, they are created beings.
Muslims do not worship angels or satan etc.

Maybe not all claims are equal. Joe Smith, Bahai and Muhammad getting revelations are EXACTLY equal..

..for you, yes. That is because you have decided that they are all equally untrue.
Every claim is different, and needs to be investigated on its own merit.
If you wish to talk about the claim of 'John Doe' or anybody else, why don't you start a thread about it?

Just because you believe one of them you constantly want special pleading for it..

False. I treat all claims as potential truth until I have reason to believe otherwise.

super easy to answer.
1/3 of all religious believers are Christian. Hinduism is another 1/3. Neither believe in the Quran. So 2/3 of all religious believers are wrong according to you. 66.6%. So the idea that a LOT of people can believe incorrect information is proven right there. By your beliefs..

You have already made this false analogy previously.
I do not see Christians as "wrong" .. they believe in G-d as I do.
The "details" differ .. that is about being human.

Obviously people like to believe supernatural stories about getting to live forever. .

It is understandable that people would want to live forever in "a paradise", but not all denominations teach that a believer will automatically go to paradise.
In fact, it would be much easier to believe that everything finishes at death, as one would no longer need to concern themselves .. and could terminate their lives if they suffer continually.

You cannot be "not impressed" with scholarship you NEVER READ OR STUDIED in any capacity. It's pure denial. You don't know the methods, how rigorus and definitive the studies are or are not. What the evidence actually is? Because you don't care..

I do care. I am fully aware of "scholars of ancient history" who say that there is no evidence to support early monotheistic belief or that Moses actually existed, or Noah's flood is impossible, and that YHWH was just one of many gods da da..
I just happen to think that ancient historians cannot prove it, and don't happen to think they are right.
..and even if I spent hours and hours dredging through their claims, it wouldn't change a thing .. you would still say that it is all false myth.

You decided a myth is true and put your head in the sand..

So you say .. anybody that believes in God has been fooled, according to you.
You can't remove faith from Muslims with a few so-called "facts" about ancient history .. maybe "the evidence" is incomplete, and more than likely is.

Heaven is a myth added to Christianity after the Greek occupation. The Quran bought into some of the theology of the Bible. Still not real..

Orthodox Jews also believe in a life hereafter .. check it out, if you don't believe me.

The idea that a human soul belongs in Heaven and that Earth is merely a temporary abode in which the soul is tested to prove its worthiness became increasingly popular during the Hellenistic period (323 – 31 BC).[40] Gradually, some Hebrews began to adopt the idea of Heaven as the eternal home of the righteous dead.[40]

Your argument is no different than the one about vitamin D.
Scientists have noticed that high vitamin D levels are associated with better health.
Some scientists assume that supplementing with vitamin D is always a good thing, whilst others conclude that it might not be a "causal relationship", and might not always be a case of "more is better". It could just be that a person has a healthy lifestyle ..gets out more etc.

The same with your conclusions about Hebrews "beginning to adopt" as opposed to being taught by "sons of God" .. which you deny exist, along with God.
It is based on assumption, and conclusions will differ depending on "who" you ask. It depends on more than "historical scholarship".

 

[muhammad_isa]

Which it took from Greek science..

That is your belief.

You literally have no debate, you just say random statements about your beliefs..

It is not a random statement.
If somebody decides that God exists [nevermind why, for a moment], then it is reasonable to assume that God is able to guide them towards truth, if that is what they sincerely want.

God is fiction and guides no one except in peoples mind. Prove a God exists.

Why would you ask somebody to prove it?
You either believe the scriptures, or you don't.
God knows best [ I believe in God ], why one person believes and another doesn't.
Of course, you assume that all claims about God are false, and that all believers are being fooled.
I most certainly feel fooled .. but not by my religion or God.

Atheists don't know where the universe came from..

Nobody knows for sure .. all we have is imaginative idea, and belief in God [or not]

..there is no evidence some are "guided"..

I know .. you can't see it can you.
It's amazing what positive thinking can do, rather than "it's all a load of twaddle"

A more recent study found that more than 200 children had died of treatable illnesses in the United States over the past thirty years because their parents relied on spiritual healing rather than conventional medical treatment..

Muslims are taught to "tie the camel", which means that we trust Allah to help, but not deny scientific consensus .. without good reason, that is.

..prayer studies double blind studies, demonstrated prayer did not help outcomes with disease..

..testing God?
eg. I will only believe if you prove it to me

..rather silly really..

Than a believer wastes the little time they have thinking this is only a "blink" while this is it.

Waste? What are you on about?
There are millions of believers who are suffering severely .. whether it be because of war, famine, flood etc.
If we were all dead, and knew nothing about it, there is nothing to "waste" .. one would only consider it a "waste" if they were having a good time etc.
Millions of people do not have the opportunity to enjoy life .. they have a miserable existence.
..and it can be demonstrated that those people, despite their predicament, are more likely to be believers.
..but that is another topic, and complex in nature.

Oh, now you like science...

Most educated Muslims do .. I have already mentioned that Muslim doctors make up a large percentage of Medical Doctors in UK .. and many of them worship 5 times a day.

..you do not know that God cannot be detected?

Well, perhaps you can tell me of someone you know who has "seen God"..

Muhammad supposedly detected an angel. Moses detected God many times. Miracles are an interaction with the physical world..

Yes "interactions" or manifestations that "the chosen messengers" experience.
It is difficult to prove that God is behind an unexplained event. Skeptics will assume that there is a "rational" explanation for practically anything.

..he should not only interact and tell everyone but be studied in a lab setting..

Ridiculous .. crack everybody's heads open and look for God in our neurons???

Devils, sea monsters, giants, Jinns, angels. Those are not real. Show me evidence of an angel. Call forth an angel..

Belief in God is a spiritual thing.
Skeptics and people who make jokes about religion cannot believe. It is the way we are wired. God is closer to us than our jugular vein, yet denial brings spiritual blindness.

Same with the Quran.

No, it isn't .. the NT is not claimed to be a direct revelation from God. It is claimed to be chosen texts by an ecumenical council, of anonymous authors, who are believed to be "inspired by God", but not prophets.

Claims do not mean it hasn't gone through scribes spin?

You tell me what has been changed by scribes and why.
..and how did they manage to do that without being detected, as it has been memorised in its entirety from very early on.

Oh now you want to do historicity study of the text. OMG????????? You dismiss actual PhD scholars but then want to turn around and interpret the ENGLISH version (not even the original Greek) and think your layman interpretation means anything? Wow. What a joke?

You are mistaken. Ask Jewish scholars what "son of God" means, and you will see. The idea of "son of God" translating into one of three of a trinity is not a Jewish idea.

..and yes .. Jesus was addressing a Jewish audience .. the conversion of gentiles came later.

Don't care.

I know you don't.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Without a specific religion you just have a vague unproven concept that doesn't make sense.

Let me start here. God is something people believe in without proof. Nevertheless people believe in God. It is optional for you to believe it or not, but proof is not the reason to believe in God. It would be prize winning to come up with something, but in the end such a proof would not be proving God but some other thing.

Says you? What is your PhD in? Jesus rising again is a copy of savior deities popular in those times.

I do respect PhD's, however this doesn't require a PhD. Jesus is Israel in a story about a man who dies but is resurrected for his sinless life. This story is written in a time where it has a poignant message of courage for the Jews who have been overrun and destroyed by Rome.

No PhD is necessary. Each gospel mentions fulfillment and how Jesus fulfills a prophecy about Israel. This happens more than twenty times, and each time it is a prophecy about Israel that Jesus fulfills. There is no need for a complex theory or extensive data collection or genius. Anyone can check this by finding in software the word 'fulfil' in the gospels and then checking to see what the fulfilled prophecies were about. It takes twenty minutes to a couple of hours.

Says you? What is your PhD in? Jesus rising again is a copy of savior deities popular in those times. All scholars understand this. Do you read the original Greek and Hebrew?
The Hellenistic salvation is LITERALLY what the NT used.
But let's clear this up because now you are really reaching here.

I respect PhD's and think they are important, and their research matters.

Yes neither is it in Hellenism, the thing the NT copies. It's about saving a fallen soul to get into heaven.

That is a sentence equating opposites. Immortality is not the goal of Jesus and his disciples. They borrow the Greek story format but repurpose it.

 

[samtonga43]

During Jesus' 1,000 year reign over Earth ' enemy death ' will be No more on Earth.
- 1 Corinthians 15:24-26; Isaiah 25:8
#4 URAVIP2ME, 58 minutes ago

URAVIP2ME is 'the majority of Christians'? Don't be silly!!