There is no evidence for God, so why do you believe?

[Subduction Zone]

Plain and simple, it’s God’s heavenly government, with God’s son, Jesus, as the King.
Isaiah 9:6,7

Jesus, as a descendant of King David (of whom both Mary & Joseph were descendants), was a rightful heir…certainly the one God chose (Daniel 7:13,14) to fulfill His promise to David that his family line would rule “forever”. — Isaiah 9:7.

In the hands of Jesus, it will be what accomplishes God’s “will” for the Earth. —Matthew 6:9,10… “Thy Kingdom come, Thy Will be done on earth”; Matthew 5:5…”Blessed are the meek, since they will inherit the earth.”


2. How do you think you know whereas other Christians do not know?

At Luke 10:21, Jesus praised his Father (whose name is Yahweh / Jehovah) as the One who either ‘reveals’ His Word, or ‘hides’ it.
And at John 4:23,24, Jesus said “true worshippers will worship the Father “

Most of Christendom worships a trinity, not the Father solely, as He requires at Exodus 20:2-6. And Paul emphasized it further at 1 Corinthians 8:5,6.

I have not found any other religion that worships Jehovah as He requires, and also adheres to Jesus’ statements at John 13:34,35… “love” observed by others, is what identifies his followers… & Matthew 5:44… (self-explanatory). These Scriptures preclude getting involved in any war.

The pursuit of peace, of utmost importance to worshipping God acceptably (2 Corinthians 13:11; Romans 12:18; Matthew 5:9;James 3:17,18) , eludes most every religion in times of conflict. As Peter said, “We must obey God as Ruler rather than men.” (Acts 5:29) And Jesus: “Pay back Caesar’s things to Caesar, but God’s things to God.” — Mark 12:17.
We know what takes precedence.

I say all of this, because obedience to God, is paramount to gaining His blessing & understanding of His Word.







It’s a Kingdom, which destroys other kingdoms. It has military might






“Those kings” are the ones ruling over the earth in these Last Days, the “kings” as represented by the image’s ‘feet and toes, partly of iron and partly of clay.’ This “rock cut out not by hands” struck “the feet” of the image (in Daniel 2:34); this brought the entire structure down.

In vs.38, Daniel said to Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, “you are the head of gold.”

(So we know, from this, that parts of the image in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream represented human governments ruling over large portions of the earth, that also impacted God’s people, which certainly applied to Babylon.)

Then Daniel foretold other kingdoms after Babylon: Medo-Persia , then Greece, then Rome, and finally, the current Anglo-American powers, as representing the feet of the image, made of mixing iron and clay. (I can explain in more detail, if you’re interested.)

In a sense, you’re right. They will be totally different from each other!

The phrase is, “then the end (to telos) will come.”

The end of this System… no more human rulership / government…no more warfare and injustice.
“With that I heard a loud voice from the throne* say: ‘Look! The tent of God is with mankind, and he will reside with them, and they will be his people. And God himself will be with them. And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away.’”

* A throne is what? It’s where a king sits, ruling over his kingdom.

Have a good day.

You are just taking verses out of context. That is the worst way to try to win an argument. Do you want to see one that you won't believe, but is totally true. At least twenty times in the Bible:

"There in no God".

Obviously the Bible tells us that there was no God.

Or I am just abusing it by cherry picking parts of verses. As you did.

 

[joelr]

The more we learn about natural processes, the more it looks like a conscious being's force is at work IMV.

The more we see and understand the universe the more we see things happening through natural laws and forces. The theories that posit th ecreation of the laws of physics also do not involve a conscious being.
If the multi-verse is real than all possibilities can play out, no need for a director. Nature operates all around us, unconscious.
There are no scientists in any field who say the more we learn the more it looks like a conscious being is at work. Forces that are creative and evolve do not need be conscious.
By what method do you demonstrate this to be probable or even a possibility?

The 25,000 people who die every day from starvation doesn't sound like something a creator would make part of a creation. 10,000 are children. Every day. The U.N. has a report on this.

It is definitely amazing as far as what we see along what appears to be an ever-expanding universe. Our push to discover is hardwired in us!

Yes that happened from evolution, natural curiosity. All animals are curious to the degree they can be.

EXB
·God is honored for what he keeps secret [L It is the glory of God to hide a matter/things; Deut. 29:29]. ·Kings are honored for what they can discover [L It is the glory of kings to examine them].

Yeah, Deuteronomy 20 also says,

When you go to war against your enemies ......
10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. 15 This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.

16 However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy[a] them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you. 18 Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God.​

put to the sword all the men in it.
As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies.
do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy[a] them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you.


That is a lot of old folks, pregnant women, babies and children who have to die because the Israelites "might" allow themselves to be taught another religion?
Are they that easily swayed anyways? It's not just "no freedom of religion", it's kill all other religions Yahweh doesn't like. Of course since Yahweh is the only "real" God, he could go to those nations and spread his word and explain he's real and their God is not. But no, just kill the families.
Or is this all just made up by people? Think so.

 

[Brian2]

Life operate by chemistry.

Physical bodies are chemical mediums and operate by chemistry.
That is not saying that chemistry alone is going to produce a living body.

 

[Kenny]

The more we see and understand the universe the more we see things happening through natural laws and forces. The theories that posit th ecreation of the laws of physics also do not involve a conscious being.

There are no scientists in any field who say the more we learn the more it looks like a conscious being is at work. Forces that are creative and evolve do not need be conscious.
By what method do you demonstrate this to be probable or even a possibility?

Actually, many scientists found God after studying their field of expertise. Their conclusion, or method as you mentioned, is that if all we are doing is discovering is a perfect set of natural laws and forces that already exist must be because something created it before those natural laws and forces existed - God.

The 25,000 people who die every day from starvation doesn't sound like something a creator would make part of a creation. 10,000 are children. Every day. The U.N. has a report on this.

Yes.. mankind is mean and loveless. We throw away more food than what we need to feed everyone. That is why we need the God of love.

Yes that happened from evolution, natural curiosity. All animals are curious to the degree they can be.

Hardwired by that God you don't want to see? (in context of my signature - since each person is a free-will spiritual agent and everyone has the right to believe as they want)

Yeah, Deuteronomy 20 also says,

When you go to war against your enemies ......
10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. 15 This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.

16 However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy[a] them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you. 18 Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God.

A sheeple response but why did He do that? I remember that before that He said... Genesis 15:16 But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.

What does "iniquity not yet full" mean? I know that "The Lord is longsuffering, and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression" - What were they doing that required that atomic-bomb like response?

And again God says:

Matthew 5:45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

In my understanding as per my signature: "For God so loved the world..." - not hate the world.

 

[Brian2]

If, and that is a huge "if", your God exists he plays hide and seek like a pro. I never said that there were no gods. There do not appear to be any. No one can seem to find a rational reason to believe in one.

Do not accuse others of "scientism" when you have no ability to reason logically. You are using faith. And now you are falsely claiming that others use it.

I find rational reasons to believe in a God and in particular to believe in the Bible God.
But yes we all use faith in our beliefs. We trust and believe the scientists and their testing and conclusions which they tell us are not proofs.
I trust and believe the Bible God and the authors of the Bible and the stories and prophecies etc they have written and can even see the evidence for the truth of what was written
I trust and believe my own rational conclusions about the origins of this universe and life.

Wow! You got one rigth

And that does not tell us it's origins.

You have nor provided any evidence. You do not even seem to understand the concept. How can I "not like" that which does not exist? Again, please try to think rationally. And you do not seem to understand that the "magic fairies thing" is your argument.

I have provided the evidence of the genetic code and the reasoning that all codes have some form of intelligence behind them and/or in their use.
You seem to think that is not evidence of intelligence.
I suppose you also think that the dance of the worker bees to give direction and distance to a food source is not a code which is stored in the genetic code and is evidence of an intelligence behind it.
I suppose you think that the genetic storage of the information that spiders use to make a web and how to use it is not a result of intelligence.
That's OK, you are entitled to your views, however much they have not been thought through.
And yes maybe it was magic fairies that did it and not God/s but there is evidence for the God view and the Biblical God view specifically.

Oh my. . . . I do believe it is hopeless.

That does not answer the question?

 

[joelr]

No it isn't. There is no need for me to provide evidence to you in order to justify my faith.

LOL, right, no need to debate on a Religious Debate forum. Hint, you already have been trying to make evidence claims, this is a goalpost move nothing more.
If you want your faith to be justified with logic, evidence and a rational methodology then you need evidence. If you want to be just another in the long line of unevidenced beliefs people latch onto then sure, you can do that.

Anyone can have faith. Is it a good path to truth, no.

Well actually I probably have provided evidence but all that was good for is for you to use your faith in your scholars to try to demonstrate that my faith is wrong and my evidence is wrong.

I have no faith in scholars. I have faith in evidence. A scholarly work, called a monograph, contains almost as much footnotes of sources as text.
I just watched a 3 video series from Dr Kipp Davis responding to Carriers possible misuse of Hebrew text and Dr Carriers 3 video and 3 part blog response. Because I want to see what the evidence has to say. Not the scholar, the evidence.

So this apologetic you are telling yourself is not grounded in truth at all. But good you have faith in it.

It is good to have anecdotal evidence from those who are said to be witnesses.

"SAID TO BE WITNESSES? Yeah that would not be helpful. We can go over the decades of scholarship that demonstrate the gospels are made up.

Carrier vs Ehrman: Evidence For Crucifixion

Dr Carrier

24:57 - Competing hypothesis, the information comes from a source or you made it up. There has been a hard-fought battle in Jesus studies to admit and allow that the Gospel authors made a **** ton of stuff up. We have gotten to the point now, and Bart Ehrman would agree, we have gotten everyone to agree , well, not the fundamentalists, but all the mainstream scholars, we have gotten them to agree most of it is made up. So we are completely onboard with most of them making stuff up. We can make a good case for how they made them up and evidence of them making it up and so on. Even the sources might be made up.

Sources are not someone took a story about Elija and re-wrote it about Jesus. Those are literary inspirations for fabrications.

But I do provide something beyond that and all you can say is your faith claim that your scholars are right and the prophecies came after the events they prophesied etc.

There are many many reasons why the Gospels are historical fiction and have nothing to do with what a Rabbi named Joshua said.

But even at that you cannot demonstrate anyone had supernatural ESP. You can demonstrate a folk tale about a demigod equates to a person actually having magic power. Old religions are full of prophecies written after the fact. You haven't demonstrated why this is any different.

I have demonstrated that it looks the same.

Luke was an educated Greek and I imagine that educated Greeks were the ones who wrote down that stories or translated them.
You can't get more obvious if you believe the Bible. And for you with your faith it is obvious that the stories were made up by Greeks.

We cannot know who made up the stories because it doesn't say. When we don't know we say "I don't know". There is nothing in th eBible top believe, they are myths and all of them have older sources. Demonstrated by evidence.

We know the Gospels were probably written by Greeks because that was the language they were written in and were written by highly educated people. The evidence shows Luke is a re-write of Mark and Matthew.
You did not comment on the obvious syncretism. But the
Encyclopaedia Biblica : a critical dictionary of the literary, political, and religious history, the archaeology, geography, and natural history of the Bible did, as well as all scholarship and it's Hellenism, Persian but a Jewish take on it.

Evidence for God is not scientific, but it is rational and logical.

You forgot to explain why it's logical and rational. Even deism isn't, you cannot show why a conscious creator must be the start of reality. For Theism, Yahweh and Jesus are as logical and rational as Zeus and Herecules.

The truth of the Bible it seems cannot be supported with anecdotal evidence it seems.

No truth is supported by anecdotal evidence. But we also have massive archaeological evidence that shows the Bible is not correct. Massive historical evidence, most you are unaware of.

Get rid of the anecdotal evidence by saying it is lies and atheists and skeptics have a field day making up their own Biblical history.

Is maybe what some atheists do, I don't know or care. That isn't a good method to find out truth.

No scholar in critical -historical scholarship makes anything up. Ever. They have to argue with evidence, pass peer-review and continue to have their work picked apart until it is accepted by use of historical methods (comparative, literary, outside sources).
So once you find the need to jump into extreme lies it's an admission you are done. I'm noticing the honesty is fading here, you are just slinging mud, continue to claim evidenced scholarship is "faith" and so on.
Yet if all this were being done to show the error in Mormonism or the Quran I'm confident you would be like "yeah, that's right!"

In fact those religions do the same as you are doing. Jehovas Witness are big on calling scholarship "influenced by satan". But accusing them of making stuff up isn't far behind.

Also "skeptics" who made up their own history? What? Do you even know what a skeptic is? Skeptics are looking for truth by examining everything to find flaws and counter-arguments. You think a skeptic would make up a narrative? He would KNOW IT'S FALSE???? Which defeats the point?
That would not be a skeptic, that would be a hoaxer.

Kind of like the majority of Christian writers. scholarship recognizes as forgeries:

• First Epistle of Peter
• Second Epistle of Peter
• Second Epistle to the Thessalonians
• First Epistle to Timothy
• Second Epistle to Timothy
• Epistle to Titus
• Epistle to the Ephesians
• Epistle to the Colossians
• Epistle of Jude

As well as 36 other gospels, the Marcionite canon (1st), and all extra biblical material. Ascension of Isaiah.....
Matthew which is a re-write of MArk. Luke a re-write of both. Acts which is the most fictive sea narrative ever,....

That sort of opinion history is not a good way to know what really happened.

Right but you just made that up in your mind. Scholarship is based on real facts, literary analysis, letters from Bishops, fragments of Gospels, historians like Josephus, Pliny, Jewish writings, and so on...

You literally don't understand the field which is super sus for all fundamentalists who avoid Ehrman and other historical scholars like the plague. Hmmmm, wonder why. I think you know.
Ehrmans best work for consensus of scholarship is Jesus Interrupted, The Bible Unearthed is the best OT book for a basic understanding.

But with your faith, all you have is that opinion history by your scholars.

Because you have not demonstrated your case (at all) I assume you find calling the use of scholarship and evidence "faith" as a petty attempt to lash out. But it's also become denial.
Please tell me another method besides evidence that can demonstrate what happened in history?
All of your methods are the same used by Islam and all other religions. Same apologetics. You have something else?

I think you do, it's denial, confirmation bias, moving the goalpost and tap dancing around facts, that is your method implied above. Exactly what I said, you bought a story and are defending it with fallacies.

 

[Audie]

LOL, right, no need to debate on a Religious Debate forum. Hint, you already have been trying to make evidence claims, this is a goalpost move nothing more.
If you want your faith to be justified with logic, evidence and a rational methodology then you need evidence. If you want to be just another in the long line of uthenevidenced beliefs people latch onto then sure, you can do that.

Anyone can have faith. Is it a good path to truth, no.





I have no faith in scholars. I have faith in evidence. A scholarly work, called a monograph, contains almost as much footnotes of sources as text.
I just watched a 3 video series from Dr Kipp Davis responding to Carriers possible misuse of Hebrew text and Dr Carriers 3 video and 3 part blog response. Because I want to see what the evidence has to say. Not the scholar, the evidence.

So this apologetic you are telling yourself is not grounded in truth at all. But good you have faith in it.



"SAID TO BE WITNESSES? Yeah that would not be helpful. We can go over the decades of scholarship that demonstrate the gospels are made up.

Carrier vs Ehrman: Evidence For Crucifixion

Dr Carrier

24:57 - Competing hypothesis, the information comes from a source or you made it up. There has been a hard-fought battle in Jesus studies to admit and allow that the Gospel authors made a **** ton of stuff up. We have gotten to the point now, and Bart Ehrman would agree, we have gotten everyone to agree , well, not the fundamentalists, but all the mainstream scholars, we have gotten them to agree most of it is made up. So we are completely onboard with most of them making stuff up. We can make a good case for how they made them up and evidence of them making it up and so on. Even the sources might be made up.

Sources are not someone took a story about Elija and re-wrote it about Jesus. Those are literary inspirations for fabrications.



There are many many reasons why the Gospels are historical fiction and have nothing to do with what a Rabbi named Joshua said.

But even at that you cannot demonstrate anyone had supernatural ESP. You can demonstrate a folk tale about a demigod equates to a person actually having magic power. Old religions are full of prophecies written after the fact. You haven't demonstrated why this is any different.

I have demonstrated that it looks the same.


We cannot know who made up the stories because it doesn't say. When we don't know we say "I don't know". There is nothing in th eBible top believe, they are myths and all of them have older sources. Demonstrated by evidence.

We know the Gospels were probably written by Greeks because that was the language they were written in and were written by highly educated people. The evidence shows Luke is a re-write of Mark and Matthew.
You did not comment on the obvious syncretism. But the
Encyclopaedia Biblica : a critical dictionary of the literary, political, and religious history, the archaeology, geography, and natural history of the Bible did, as well as all scholarship and it's Hellenism, Persian but a Jewish take on it.




You forgot to explain why it's logical and rational. Even deism isn't, you cannot show why a conscious creator must be the start of reality. For Theism, Yahweh and Jesus are as logical and rational as Zeus and Herecules.

No truth is supported by anecdotal evidence. But we also have massive archaeological evidence that shows the Bible is not correct. Massive historical evidence, most you are unaware of.




Is maybe what some atheists do, I don't know or care. That isn't a good method to find out truth.

No scholar in critical -historical scholarship makes anything up. Ever. They have to argue with evidence, pass peer-review and continue to have their work picked apart until it is accepted by use of historical methods (comparative, literary, outside sources).
So once you find the need to jump into extreme lies it's an admission you are done. I'm noticing the honesty is fading here, you are just slinging mud, continue to claim evidenced scholarship is "faith" and so on.
Yet if all this were being done to show the error in Mormonism or the Quran I'm confident you would be like "yeah, that's right!"

In fact those religions do the same as you are doing. Jehovas Witness are big on calling scholarship "influenced by satan". But accusing them of making stuff up isn't far behind.

Also "skeptics" who made up their own history? What? Do you even know what a skeptic is? Skeptics are looking for truth by examining everything to find flaws and counter-arguments. You think a skeptic would make up a narrative? He would KNOW IT'S FALSE???? Which defeats the point?
That would not be a skeptic, that would be a hoaxer.

Kind of like the majority of Christian writers. scholarship recognizes as forgeries:

• First Epistle of Peter
• Second Epistle of Peter
• Second Epistle to the Thessalonians
• First Epistle to Timothy
• Second Epistle to Timothy
• Epistle to Titus
• Epistle to the Ephesians
• Epistle to the Colossians
• Epistle of Jude

As well as 36 other gospels, the Marcionite canon (1st), and all extra biblical material. Ascension of Isaiah.....
Matthew which is a re-write of MArk. Luke a re-write of both. Acts which is the most fictive sea narrative ever,....





Right but you just made that up in your mind. Scholarship is based on real facts, literary analysis, letters from Bishops, fragments of Gospels, historians like Josephus, Pliny, Jewish writings, and so on...

You literally don't understand the field which is super sus for all fundamentalists who avoid Ehrman and other historical scholars like the plague. Hmmmm, wonder why. I think you know.
Ehrmans best work for consensus of scholarship is Jesus Interrupted, The Bible Unearthed is the best OT book for a basic understanding.


Because you have not demonstrated your case (at all) I assume you find calling the use of scholarship and evidence "faith" as a petty attempt to lash out. But it's also become denial.
Please tell me another method besides evidence that can demonstrate what happened in history?
All of your methods are the same used by Islam and all other religions. Same apologetics. You have something else?

I think you do, it's denial, confirmation bias, moving the goalpost and tap dancing around facts, that is your method implied above. Exactly what I said, you bought a story and are defending it with fallacies.

The logic / rational methodology has been as absent as
evidence.

Tossing in a claim ( with no eviddnce) about how (all) atheists just make things up (lie) is obnoxious. Tho
the projection lends a vague tint of humour.

 

[ppp]

Physical bodies are chemical mediums and operate by chemistry.
That is not saying that chemistry alone is going to produce a living body.

Sounds like you are heading towards another argument from ignorance, @Brian2

 

[joelr]

So you use your faith to call anyone who disagrees liars.

No I use evidence to show anyone who disagrees they are probably wrong, based on evidence. It depends on the topic.

But don't your scholars use denial, denial of the Bible and replacing it with their own opinions of what happened.

No. Most of the historians were fundamentalists. I said that. Dr Richard Miller even tells of his difficult transition of having to face facts. He got a theology masters, divinity degree and so on. When he went into critical-history he had to face facts. It's all a mythology.
He tells his difficult story here:

Bible Scholar Dr. Richard C. Miller Leaves Christianity​

Ehrman, Kipp Davis, many others did as well.

They studied the facts honestly, without bias and apologetics and realized it was mostly a lie.

Matthew Ferguson, historian

The evidence for Jesus is not extraordinary, despite apologetic exaggerations to the contrary. Nevertheless, there is a limited degree of evidence for the historical Jesus, and such evidence points towards [an] obscure, itinerant apocalyptic prophet… This figure, of course, was exaggerated and embellished by legendary accounts since not long after the time of his death. Such exaggerations inspired the legendary figure that is now worshiped in modern Christianity today. That Jesus, however, who is prayed to and worshiped in church, has not been proven by historical evidence.

Jesus Interrupted-
"Ehrman begins by addressing the issues with biblical knowledge and how the bible is taught, along with how the bible is properly studied using the historical-critical method. The shocking ignorance about the bible and how it came to be cannot necessarily be put squarely on the shoulders of believers. Ehrman shows how nearly all mainstream divinity schools and seminaries actually teach the origins of the bible with accuracy and using the historical-critical method, but the ministers and theologians coming out of these schools never teach what they learn to their students and/or congregations. Thus, ignorance about the bible in the layperson makes way for unquestioning faith in the bible."


these facts are the opposite of what you claim is happening. ONCE AGAIN, evidence shows what is happening, not speculation.

We know that you say that people who disagree with the opinions of your scholars are liars. (maybe you get that from other skeptics)

No, they are sometimes wrong, it depends. Lies are a specific case. Give me an example, don't generalize please.

But yes, good evidence is not faith, it is evidence. But we aren't talking about the evidence, we are talking about the interpretations of the evidence, the opinions of your scholars,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, which have become your opinions.

Generalization fallacy.
98% of Marks Greek is verbatim in Matthew.
No historian writes about Jesus and when they do it's about the gospels.
Hellenism happens in 300BC. Savior dying/rising demigods who rise in 3 days and get followers into the afterlife did happen in other Greek influenced religions.

Genesis IS dependent on Mesopotamian myth.
Israelite DNA is Canaanite.
The Persians did have a religion that looked more like Christianity than Judaism when they invaded in 600BC.
Greeks did invade in 167 BC and the NT is a Hellenistic document in style and form and theology.
These are facts.
The gospels do start with the Greek for "as told to me by...."

What are you talking about??? If anything is an interpretation it's because of massive evidence. There is NO interpretation where Jesus is any more real than Osirus. The Gospel Jesus anyways. NONE.

 

[joelr]

Simple, it comes from the Old Testament and Jewish practices, not Hellenism.
That it comes from Hellenism is your faith and trust in the opinions of your skeptic/atheist scholars. That is comes from the OT is my faith.
And OK you have all the evidence about the Bible and those who believe it are believing lies and are themselves liars.
So that is out of the way and you don't have to reply to this and say that.
I know I have had enough.
Thanks for the chat.

Wow, that 's denial in the truest sense.
So

Encyclopaedia Biblica - is wrong.

Hellenistic religion | Ancient Greek Gods, Rituals & Beliefs - is wrong and every historian studying the NT and Greek culture, all wrong.
All the OT scholars who know the Greek theology used later in the NT, wrong.
AND, you never studied any of it, you know, because magic, Jesus magic?


Cool.
You don't care about what is actually true. You care more about a story being true than what real life presents. Why not just say that?





"only in Hellenistic times (after c. 330 BCE) did Jews begin to adopt the Greek idea that it would be a place of punishment for misdeeds, and that the righteous would enjoy an afterlife in heaven.[

wLee, Sang Meyng "


Sang Meyng Lee, Born 1963; 2005-2008 Adjunct Professor at San Francisco Theological Seminary, Pasadena; since 2008, Professor of New Testament and Dean of Academic Affairs at Presbyterian Theological Seminary in America, Santa Fe Springs,

Hellenistic religion | Ancient Greek Gods, Rituals & Beliefs | Britannica

Hellenistic religion, any of the various systems of beliefs and practices of eastern Mediterranean peoples from 300 bc to ad 300. The period of Hellenistic influence, when taken as a whole, constitutes one of the most creative periods in the history of religions. It was a time of spiritual

www.britannica.com

Changes that religions began taking from Hellenistic religions (this describes Judaism to Christianity exactly) - how many times is salvation mentioned.


-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


Hellenistic religion - Beliefs, practices, and institutions






The Relationship between Hellenistic Mystery Religions and Early Christianity:


A Case Study using Baptism and Eucharist


Jennifer Uzzell




Early apologists admited similarities and blamed them on Satan.


Even allowing for these caveats, it is clear that substantial ideological and ritual similarities did exist. In fact they were sufficiently obvious to the early Christian apologists that they felt obliged to offer some explanation for them, particularly since, to their embarrassment, it was clear that the Mystery rituals predated their own. The most common explanation, offered by many Christian apologists including Firmicus Maternus, Tertullian and Justin Martyr, was that demons had deliberately prefigured Christian sacraments in order to lead people astray. This explanation has sufficed for Christians over countless centuries, and indeed scholastic bias towards the assumed uniqueness, primacy and superiority of Christianity is one of the major methodological pitfalls encountered by those engaged in the comparative study of Christianity and the Mysteries.


Baptism has been widely compared with initiation into the Mystery cults. In many of the Mysteries purification through ritual bathing was required as a prerequisite for initiation.


Dying/rising demigods


In Pagan Hellenistic and Near Eastern thought, the motif of a “Dying and Rising God” existed for millennia before Christ and there had been stories of divine beings questing into the underworld and returning transformed in some way.


Eucharist.


-Perhaps the clearest point of contact between the Mysteries and Christian Eucharist, and one of which the Church Fathers were painfully conscious, lay in a sacramental meal of bread or cakes and wine mixed with water in which initiates to the cult of Mithras participated.


They seek salvation from the debased material world through a spiritual ascent through the spheres. Mithras was expected to return to earth to lead his followers in a final cataclysmic battle between good and evil.





Richard Carrier | Mystery Cults & Christianity

4:37 Greeks conquer Judea 332 - 110 B.C.Greek idea (Hellenism) flow into Judaism



6:06 Basic Mystery cult, common features:


- Individuals “initiated” into the mysteries, ritually and by teaching sworn secrets about the universe. Something about the cosmos one needed to be saved, secrets. Many secrets are now lost.


- purpose was to gain salvation in the afterlife


- all use baptism and communion(communal meals)


- fictive kinship “brotherhood”


9:00 - Trends in Hellenistic religion


- Petra Pakkanen, Interpreting Early Hellenistic Religion (1996)


- Four big trends in religion in the centuries leading up to Christianity


- Christianity conforms to all four


9:16 Four Trends


- Syncretism: combining a foreign cult deity with Hellenistic elements. Christianity is a Jewish mystery religion.


- Henotheism: transforming / reinterpreting polytheism into monotheism. Judaism introduced monolatric concepts.


- Individualism: agricultural salvation cults retooled as personal salvation cults. Salvation of community changed into personal individual salvation in afterlife. All original agricultural salvation cults were retooled by the time Christianity arose.


- Cosmopolitianism: all races, cultures, classes admitted as equals, with fictive kinship (members are all brothers) you now “join” a religion rather than being born into it





12:34 Savior deities, dying/rising, pre-Christian, Osiris, Adonis, Romulus, Zalmoxis, Inanna (oldest 1700 B.C., female deity resurrected in 3 days)





13:32 Worship of Inanna was continued in Tyre during the origin of Christianity (Tyre is mentioned in Bible). Highly unlikely it’s a coincidence that a Jewish sect decided to build their own version of a dying/rising deity using the Jewish concepts of angels instead of Gods.


15:37 bad scholarship on internet, Horus not a dying/rising God. Mithras is also not. Mithras does undergo a passion, no death.


18:30 All Mystery religions have personal savior deities


- All saviors


- all son/daughter, never the supreme God (including Mithriasm)


- all undergo a passion (struggle) patheon


- all obtain victory over death which they share with followers


- all have stories set on earth


- none actually existed


- Is Jesus the exception and based on a real Jewish teacher or is it all made up?

 

[joelr]

In other words, you just repeat things you like that may bolster up your false ideas but don't know for yourself.

I know what I learn from reading books from PhDs in the field, lectures by the same and from discussions among any fringe theories.
This seminar is a basic overview but agrees with all OT scholars and scholarship on the subject. All of the evidence points to this.

So when you purposely twist basic concepts like "learning", into the above statement you sound like you have no interest in actual discussion of how things are known or anything related to what is true.
Also you are wrong, as is every apologist who makes such ridiculous assumptions. I don't just look for things that back up certain ideas, I look at all scholarship on the subject, or as much as I can.
What's happening is you sound butthurt that the consensus is what is presented above so you take it out on me, calling scholarship "false" and claim I'm just using confirmation bias to support specific ideas.
Actually I'm looking for what is true. These ideas are the consensus of academia looking at historical facts.

Only apologists will try and manipulate this into being a negative.

OK, have a good one. By the way, you have the "rapture" wrong, but people (like you) will say whatever they want, even if it's not true. Have a good one!

The "rapture" is a Persian myth re-tooled in Revelation. There is no doubt in the fields that it started with Persian religion.
Messianic ideas and end of the world, God vs devil and a general resurrection are Persian myths adopted by Jewish thinkers.

If you think I am wrong about something explain it and give sources. OR, just say you don't care about what is actually true, just what you want to be true from an ancient mythology. Then I'll understand. Please don't pretend otherwise, like has been happening in other posts and now seemingly here.



Revelations, from Mary Boyce, scholar in Iranian religions





but Zoroaster taught that the blessed must wait for this culmination till Frashegird and the 'future body' (Pahlavi 'tan i pasen'), when the earth will give up the bones of the dead (Y 30.7). This general resurrection will be followed by the Last Judgment, which will divide all the righteous from the wicked, both those who have lived until that time and those who have been judged already. Then Airyaman, Yazata of friendship and healing, together with Atar, Fire, will melt all the metal in the mountains, and this will flow in a glowing river over the earth. All mankind must pass through this river, and, as it is said in a Pahlavi text, 'for him who is righteous it will seem like warm milk, and for him who is wicked, it will seem as if he is walking in the • flesh through molten metal' (GBd XXXIV. r 8-r 9). In this great apocalyptic vision Zoroaster perhaps fused, unconsciously, tales of volcanic eruptions and streams of burning lava with his own experience of Iranian ordeals by molten metal; and according to his stern original teaching, strict justice will prevail then, as at each individual j udgment on earth by a fiery ordeal. So at this last ordeal of all the wicked will suffer a second death, and will perish off the face of the earth. The Daevas and legions of darkness will already have been annihilated in a last great battle with the Yazatas; and the river of metal will flow down into hell, slaying Angra Mainyu and burning up the last vestige of wickedness in the universe.


Ahura Mazda and the six Amesha Spentas will then solemnize a lt, spiritual yasna, offering up the last sacrifice (after which death wW be no more), and making a preparation of the mystical 'white haoma', which will confer immortality on the resurrected bodies of all the blessed, who will partake of it. Thereafter men will beome like the Immortals themselves, of one thought, word and deed, unaging, free from sickness, without corruption, forever joyful in the kingdom of God upon earth. For it is in this familiar and beloved world, restored to its original perfection, that, according to Zoroaster, eternity will be passed in bliss, and not in a remote insubstantial Paradise. So the time of Separation is a renewal of the time of Creation, except that no return is prophesied to the original uniqueness of living things. Mountain and valley will give place once more to level plain; but whereas in the beginning there was one plant, one animal, one man, the rich variety and number that have since issued from these will remain forever. Similarly the many divinities who were brought into being by Ahura Mazda will continue to have their separate existences. There is no prophecy of their re-absorption into the Godhead. As a Pahlavi text puts it, after Frashegird 'Ohrmaid and the Amahraspands and all Yazads and men will be together. .. ; every place will resemble a garden in spring, in which


there are all kinds of trees and flowers ... and it will be entirely the creation of Ohrrnazd' (Pahl.Riv.Dd. XLVIII, 99, lOO, l07).

 

[joelr]

Each claimant would have to answer that question for himself. I'm not going to blanket the question with prejudice.

How about you blanket the question with some evidence.

 

[joelr]

Hope you get some more information about this. There is no activity in sheol, the grave, or hell. Considering what hell is, in old English dialect there is an expression “helling potatoes." It did NOT mean to roast them, but to place the potatoes in the ground or a cellar. If you want to learn more, look up Jeremiah 7:31 and hopefully you will tell me what you feel about that.

What does old English have to do with anything?

How Hell/Sheol was understood in Judaism is for Hewbrew OT PhDs to explain. Not English translations. I hope you get some more information about this.


The introduction to hell in the OT is explained by Dr John Collins in the Yale Divinity lectures, at 17:30


Old Testament Interpretation


Professor John J. Collins

12:10 a possible inspiration for Ezekiel treatment of dead (valley of bones) was Persian myth


14:20 resurrection of dead in Ezekiel, incidentally resurrection of the dead is also attested in Zoroastrianism, the Persians had it before the Israelites. There was no precent for bodily resurrection in Israel before this time. No tradition of bodies getting up from the grave. The idea of borrowing can be suggested.


In Ezekiel this is metaphorical.


The only book that clearly refers to bodily resurrection is Daniel.





17:30 resurrection of individual and judgment in Daniel, 164 BC. Prior to this the afterlife was Sheol, now heaven/hell is introduced. Persian period. Resurrection and hell existed in the Persian religion.
Resurrection of spirit. Some people are raised up to heaven, some to hell. New to the OT.

 

[joelr]

You are correct.

Unfortunately, mainstream christian thought was hijacked long ago, and corrupted with concepts from Plato and other non-christians.


But it didn’t start out that way...

No it started with Hellenism and Persian myths mixed with Jewish theology. The soul is a Hellenistic idea.

The Resurrection in its Cultural Context [feat. Dr. Bart Ehrman]


5:00 No soul in Judaism. 1st Cor, very misunderstood. Paul is writing to a group of Christians who did not believe in a physical resurrection. A physical resurrection is a Jewish idea (from 2nd Temple Persian myth). In traditional Jewish thinking there isn’t a separation between body and soul. It’s all one thing. They did not have the idea that the soul would be rewarded because the body/soul was the same.


6:25 A Soul is Pagan not Jewish Pauls opponents in Corinth who were Christians were raised in PAGAN circles where there was separation of body and soul and were saying there was no physical resurrection of the body, just a soul. Paul was saying there must be a physical resurrection because Jesus was raised from the dead. So Paul argues there are different types of bodies to resolve this conflict. Paul argues Jesus rose in a spiritual body that looked like a human body but was an immortal body.


Clear proof that a soul living into afterlife IS PAGAN, or Hellenistic.

21:20 People have trouble getting their minds around how scholarship has developed since the Enlightenment that allowed technology to develop. Why didn’t earlier people develop similar advances. It happened when scientists decided not to try to understand everything from a religious philosophical perspective but from an empirical evidence point of reference.


Francis Bacon, Newton…… Historians started developing the same mindset at the same time and also made great leaps.


Someone who thinks Christianity is the exception to the rule is breaking the rule. Even if you are Christian you bracket your faith to study the past.


23:07 Anti Supernatural bias, Ehrman gets accused often of this bias. It is NOT an anti-supernatural bias, it’s how the discipline works. There are millions of historians, many of them are Christian, but when they do history they don’t import their beliefs into it.


You cannot have a resurrection without a miracle and you cannot have a miracle without God intervening. There is no historian who talks about God intervening in history.


27:05 You cannot have a resurrection without a faith commitment

 

[joelr]

This is completely untrue!

Please, it is best to say you don’t know, than to spread lies about what a group teaches.

Because really, it casts aspersions on everything else you say. No one can trust your statements.

Then I'll source my statements.

This comes from an ex JW who has a youtube channel. Lloyd Evans. He has had many ex-JW on his channel as well.

30:20 - a history of building up peoples expectations that armeggedon is just around the corner only to continually fail....

He has presented a number of pamplets describing a paradise where animals and humans co-exist in peace, these are given to members.


In the site
Failed date predictions of Jehovah's Witnesses, they go over many past dates,

Ongoing Date Implications​

Watchtower incorrectly promoted teachings on the following dates that they no longer accept:

539 A.D.
1780
1798
1799
1829
1840
1844
1846
1872
1874
1878
1880
1881
1891
1906
1910
1914
1915
1917
1918
1920
1921
1925
1926
1928
1932
1935
1940s
1951
1975
2000

Despite being known for their failed predictions of Armageddon, Watchtower does not hold back from criticising other religions that do the same.

"RELIGIOUS LEADERS sometimes predict tragic worldwide events to warn mankind and gather followers. Doomsday prophet Harold Camping and his disciples widely advertised that the earth would be destroyed in 2011. Needless to say, the world is still here." Watchtower 2014 May 1 p.3

Watchtower history is based around the doomsday message that the end is about to come. Statements abound such as in the 1930's book The New World;

"The Scriptures give good reason to believe that it shall be shortly before Armageddon breaks."

Toward the end of the twentieth century, the Watchtower Society refrained from issuing specific dates for Armageddon, but still has not stopped implying dates and time frames.

Luke warned about those whose message is that the "due time has approached."

"He said: "Look out that YOU are not misled; for many will come on the basis of my name, saying, 'I am he,' and, 'The due time has approached.' Do not go after them." Luke 21:8

Moses warned against those that make predictions in the name of Jehovah that do not come true.

"And in case you should say in your heart: "How shall we know the word that Jehovah has not spoken?" When the prophet speaks in the name of Jehovah and the word does not occur or come true, that is the word that Jehovah did not speak..." Deuteronomy 18:20-22

The Watchtower says that the standard by which to judge a false messenger is whether their messages "come true."

"Jehovah is the Grand identifier of his true messengers. He identifies them by making the messages he delivers through them come true. Jehovah is also the Great Exposer of false messengers." Watchtower 1997 May 1 p.8

Ironic, considering the Watchtower specifically said the end would come in 1914 and then 1925. This section demonstrated over 20 "messages" promoted by the Watchtower for decades that turned out not to be "true." What does this prove about them as messengers and prophets ?

Footnote​

Watchtower articles sometimes present two different years for the same event. On occassion, this has been because Watchtower originally erroneously included a year "zero" in prophetic calculations and rectified some calculations by extending dates by one year. Another reason is when Watchtower applies October as the start of the year for Biblical prophecy, such that their prophetic fulfilment span two years.




So I expected this was ongoing. I'm sure Lloyd Evans mentions some type of expectation about this event in the future but I don't remember dates.
If your sect differs then great, you don't expect the end of the world. But it seems to be a part of the JW theology in some respect.

 

[joelr]

Actually, many scientists found God after studying their field of expertise.

Who?
I can name many biblical historians who were fundamentalists who left the religion after reviewing the historical evidence.

Their conclusion, or method as you mentioned, is that if all we are doing is discovering is a perfect set of natural laws and forces that already exist must be because something created it before those natural laws and forces existed - God.

Again, who? A general deism doesn't demonstrate anything except a general deism.
No one in physics says the natural laws are "perfect". They are actually a bit of a mess. However for one we have no way to know if they even could be any other way.
We don't know if an infinite multiverse exists and all possible permutations exist.
Physicist Sean Carroll firmly believes in the math of many-worlds where all possible states are realized in different dimensions. Relativistic state.

We see natural laws created at the symmetry breaking at the big bang (possibly), from one unified law. This can easily have happened naturally.
We believe the fundamental forces were not created with the big bang but happened after the big bang, so that doesn't support what you are saying at all.
Nature is completely capable of creating these laws as they are not laws at all. They are just how spacetime manifests in the simplest way. There isn't a "code", it's just energy states, probabilities and how things work because there is no other option. The forces split that way.
It does not require a conscious being.

Yes.. mankind is mean and loveless. We throw away more food than what we need to feed everyone. That is why we need the God of love.

There are laws about used food for health reasons. If God is infinite and has love nothing is stopping him from helping out. It's clearly not a creation but a manifestation of probabilities. Please demonstrate love from God. That is from a late rendition of Yahweh using Greco-Roman philosophy and new age wu.

Hardwired by that God you don't want to see? (in context of my signature - since each person is a free-will spiritual agent and everyone has the right to believe as they want)

God giving freewill is a syncrtetic theology from Persia:

"Freewill, choice
the basic Zoroastrian doctrine of the existence of free-will, and the power of each individual to shape his own destiny through the exercise of choice. "
Mary Boyce

Evolution had no choice, genes that are heritable cannot help but result in evolution. Being curious to a degree is a survival traight. Animals who were not curious were eaten easier. There is no being doing that, it's nature. You are adding something that isn't needed and isn't there in order to justify a pre-held belief. This is a terrible way to know what is true and an excellent way to ensure you will always be fooled by incorrect beliefs.

Good vs evil and freewill

Harsh experience had evidently convinced the prophet that wisdom, justice and goodness were utterly separate by nature from wickedness and cruelty; and in vision he beheld, co-existing with Ahura Mazda, an Adversary, the 'Hostile Spirit', Angra Mainyu, equally uncreated, but ignorant and wholly malign. These two great Beings Zoroaster beheld with prophetic eye at their original, far-off encountering: 'Truly there are two primal Spirits, twins, renowned to be in conflict. In thought and word and act they are two, the good and the bad .... And when these two Spirits first encountered, they created life and not-life, and that at the end the worst existence shall be for the followers of falsehood (drug), but the best dwelling for those who possess righteousness (asha). Of the two Spirits, the one who follows falsehood chose doing the worst things, the Holiest Spirit, who is clad in the hardest stone [i.e. the sky] chose righteousness, and (so shall they all) who will satisfy Ahura Mazda continually '----1\n with just actions' (Y 30.3-5). essential element in this revelation is that the two primal Beings each made a deliberate choice (although each, it seems, according to his own proper nature) between good and evil, an act which prefigures the identical choice which every man must make for himself in this life . The exercise of choice changed the inherent antagonism between the two Spirits into an active one, which expressed itself, at a decision taken by Ahura Mazda, in creation and counter-creation, or, as the prophet put it, in the making of 'life' and 'not-life' (that is, death); for Ahura Mazda knew in his wisdom that if he became Creator and fashioned this world, then the Hostile Spirit would attack it, because it was good, and it would become a battleground for their two forces, and in the end he, God, would win the great struggle there and be able to destroy evil, and so achieve a universe which would be wholly good forever.

A sheeple response but why did He do that? I remember that before that He said... Genesis 15:16 But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.

What does "iniquity not yet full" mean? I know that "The Lord is longsuffering, and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression" - What were they doing that required that atomic-bomb like response?

And again God says:

Matthew 5:45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

In my understanding as per my signature: "For God so loved the world..." - not hate the world.

Please tell me what your newborn baby would have to do, or maybe, children, elderly, pregnant women, what iniquity do you think deserves murder?
Those are 6 cities, with people, lovers, babies, hopes, probabilistically EXACTLY LIKE THE ISRAELITES, but the authors hated them for land reasons or some dispute.

So your claim is God so loved the world he murdered 6 entire cities? Now, he's infinite, so showing up and showing he's actually the only God (he's the only God right?? Or is El still the supreme God here?) so the Amorites can say, "wow, we have it wrong, we now see that Yahweh is an actual real God so we are definitely following him"?

Maybe in his chariot? Or he could wrestle them? Nope. Have his people kill them. Because love. This doesn't seem like love.

 

[joelr]

The logic / rational methodology has been as absent as
evidence.

Tossing in a claim ( with no eviddnce) about how (all) atheists just make things up (lie) is obnoxious. Tho
the projection lends a vague tint of humour.

You are right, it is a bit ironic/funny.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I'd presume so. Intubation doesn't just remove itself, and he said that the doctors had no explanation for what happened.

So you presumed that prayer works because "the doctors had no explanation for what happened" after someone was healed? I guess there were some uneducated doctors involved that didn't know about spontaneous remission?

"Intubation doesn't remove itself" ... No, but it can come loose on its own or someone can remove it.

How does that show that prayer worked though? Could you provide more details?

 

[Kenny]

Who?
I can name many biblical historians who were fundamentalists who left the religion after reviewing the historical evidence.

Yes... it can go both ways and that is why you and I have the discussions. Nothing is new under the sun, just different names in different eras.

There are many. Here's is one of them.

One of the World's Most Powerful Scientists Believes in Miracles

NIH director Francis Collins, winner of the 2020 Templeton Prize, answers questions about God, free will, evil, altruism and his Christian faith in a 2006 interview

blogs.scientificamerican.com

Again, who? A general deism doesn't demonstrate anything except a general deism.
No one in physics says the natural laws are "perfect". They are actually a bit of a mess. However for one we have no way to know if they even could be any other way.
We don't know if an infinite multiverse exists and all possible permutations exist.
Physicist Sean Carroll firmly believes in the math of many-worlds where all possible states are realized in different dimensions. Relativistic state.

We see natural laws created at the symmetry breaking at the big bang (possibly), from one unified law. This can easily have happened naturally.
We believe the fundamental forces were not created with the big bang but happened after the big bang, so that doesn't support what you are saying at all.
Nature is completely capable of creating these laws as they are not laws at all. They are just how spacetime manifests in the simplest way. There isn't a "code", it's just energy states, probabilities and how things work because there is no other option. The forces split that way.
It does not require a conscious being.

A lot of what you are giving such as "a bit of a mess" is more about you looking at it with eyes that don't know everything. An example is the appendix. At one time we thought is was "leftover of evolution" but now we know it has a purpose.

Who made the "one unified law"? Naturally buy whose standard? Man's who still know nothing in comparison to what there is to know? Nature creates? Does that negate the possible existence of God?

No... you have opinions based on your paradigm of beliefs which we all do.

There are laws about used food for health reasons. If God is infinite and has love nothing is stopping him from helping out. It's clearly not a creation but a manifestation of probabilities. Please demonstrate love from God. That is from a late rendition of Yahweh using Greco-Roman philosophy and new age wu.

Who said He isn't helping? This sounds more like a victim mentality where man has no responsibility

 

[SkepticThinker]

Yes and no.
Don't you think the principle of complexity of design needing a designer and the reasonableness of "any codes we have, needed a designer, here is another code, it probably needed a designer", should be established before we move on to where the designer came from IF all that is reasonable.

There is no "principal of complexity of design needing a designer." It's just an assertion, as though complexity is the hallmark of good design when in actuality, simplicity is the hallmark of good design. You're just trying to smuggle in the very thing you need to be demonstrating, without actually demonstrating it. That doesn't fly.

Languages are symbolic codes that human beings use to communicate information with each other. DNA doesn't not encode a language, there is no symbolic meaning of the DNA in our genomes, and it has very little in common with human languages.

So there are two problems here.