*Warning: May contain nuts, Christians and/or both

[bilby]

To your side note:

Well sure but if you became a believer of Jesus, it doesn't seem to feel that important a career anymore.

Sounds like a good reason not to become a believer in Jesus.

And a good reason for military commanders to be seriously pissed off if serving soldiers convert. When you join the army, you are expected to obey orders. Even if you decide that you have changed your mind about your chosen career, you can expect to be severely punished for refusing to obey orders.

The assumption that your new beliefs should be respected or even tolerated is incredibly arrogant. Whether or not your religion would go on to become either popular, or respected, (or both) is irrelevant - governments and armies don't make decisions based on knowledge of future events.

 

[Keith&Co.]

- governments and armies don't make decisions based on knowledge of future events.

excellent point. We mostly start any engagement trained, equipped, and tactically oriented to fight the previous engagement.

As to the rest, it always struck me funny that the military looked on atheists as less stalwart than the Christains in the ranks. It was probably from the fact they couldn't separate communism from atheism from the Soviets, at that time. Or, you know, ever.
But the nost fucked up individuals i ever knew underway were the Faithful.
Guys that would not go on the mess decks if a movie was playing because they might see nudity in a popular movie. The guy that would not beat off so his sperm rotted in his balls. The guy who would not eat until everyone on the mess decks said grace.
Dude, you come in 20 minutes after i am served, i am not waiting for you. And if god cannot hear your prayer if someone shouts Hail Satan during it, maybe read the verse about keeping your light under a bucket....

And the guy who said he would have no problem pulling the trigger on a nuke, as long as it was pointed at God's enemies... which he would know as he got daily updates from God thru his Walkman.
Or the christer who was a Klansman....

 

[steve_bank]

It spread and became as abusive and oppressive as Rome proper was. The Vatican was riddled with palace intrigue. Plots, assai nations, poisonings. The idea it was some benevolent movement is not supported by history. The RCC palace intrigue continues minis the violence.

The Sothern Baptist Convention is known for political internal conflict and intrigue.

Islam also spread to a wide area. Christianity is on a par with Islam and reports are Islam is growing, even in USA. What Americans fail to realize is that Islam is not some aberration, it is a well established global culture. Christians are notoriously unable to see beyond their noses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations

Nicaea was not a benevolent meeting of minds. What was agreed was based on geopolitics. The belif in a supernatural Jesus was not universal. Same with a 'holy spirit'.

Get it through your head learner please, Christianity has never been a moral high ground and has never been a tradition of peace. It is as corrupt today as ever. The support of Trump by Christian groups is one of the great modern moral failures in the USA.

Christianity itself has martyred many through history.

 

[Learner]

The way you phrase that, it reads as if xianity exploded almost overnight. In fact, it started small, and stayed small for the first 300 years. By the time Constantine issued the Edict of Milan in 313, proclaiming toleration of xianity, they made up about 10% of the population of the empire. The real growth only started after he started favouring xianity in legal, financial and administrative matters, and by 350, it's estimated that 50% of the empire was xian. Once Theodosius made xianity the state religion - and criminalised polytheism - in the 380s, "it couldn't be stopped". But it took the endorsement and support of Constantine to get it there; without the surge in conversions during his reign, it might never have achieved the success it did.

Well I certainly wouldn't say that (underlined above) as it would also be my opinion as being unlikely. Funny enough, that's what I thought of the way its phrased in the line below - especially if before the "established" church taking place:

My point again, at the time Christians were small. Your mantra is the Romans were out to get us, well they were out to get many groups.

 

[Learner]

Sounds like a good reason not to become a believer in Jesus.

And a good reason for military commanders to be seriously pissed off if serving soldiers convert. When you join the army, you are expected to obey orders. Even if you decide that you have changed your mind about your chosen career, you can expect to be severely punished for refusing to obey orders.

No dispute here, Christians would expect all of the above.

The assumption that your new beliefs should be respected or even tolerated is incredibly arrogant. Whether or not your religion would go on to become either popular, or respected, (or both) is irrelevant - governments and armies don't make decisions based on knowledge of future events.

The contexts you make here was not my argument. (irrelevant in this case)

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

It spread and became as abusive and oppressive as Rome proper was. The Vatican was riddled with palace intrigue. Plots, assai nations, poisonings. The idea it was some benevolent movement is not supported by history. The RCC palace intrigue continues minis the violence.

The Sothern Baptist Convention is known for political internal conflict and intrigue.

Islam also spread to a wide area. Christianity is on a par with Islam and reports are Islam is growing, even in USA. What Americans fail to realize is that Islam is not some aberration, it is a well established global culture. Christians are notoriously unable to see beyond their noses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations

Nicaea was not a benevolent meeting of minds. What was agreed was based on geopolitics. The belif in a supernatural Jesus was not universal. Same with a 'holy spirit'.

Get it through your head learner please, Christianity has never been a moral high ground and has never been a tradition of peace. It is as corrupt today as ever. The support of Trump by Christian groups is one of the great modern moral failures in the USA.

Christianity itself has martyred many through history.

Religious people are not good observers, which is what makes them religious people in the first place. They have opinions and biases like everyone else, believe in ghosts and bigfoot creatures despite zero evidence, go on about life's daily necessities, etc., but when it comes to rational intervention of limbic impulsiveness, fail utterly. Emotions run their lives, it's a faucet they cannot turn off.

 

[1ICrying]

1ICrying, the passage from Psalm 22 was attributed to King David and is a Psalm of despair. What you refer to as 'gobbledygook' is another's poetic genius. Might as well ask why did Led Zeppelin advise "If there's a bustle in your hedgerow don't be alarmed now."

The writers of the gospels would have access to Psalm 22. Clearly if they wanted to use it as fodder for their story all they had to do was include a detail or two that's similar in their story, then quote it. There is absolutely nothing impressive about that here.

But if you're going to appeal to Psalm 22 as proof of prophetic power because it referred to the crucifixion of Jesus 1000 years later you need to address why there were no bulls surrounding Jesus in the crucifixion story (v 12). Why did nobody "gape upon him as a ravening and roaring lion?" Where were the dogs who compassed him? Who is the "darling" Jesus wanted delivered from the power of the dog? Where were the unicorns menacing Jesus? Could it be that this is just poetry? Might it be that the protagonist was someone else?

I'll tell you. Just this morning there was a bustle in my hedgerow. I was alarmed. Turned out that the guy we pay to mow our lawn (who happens to be gay) was out there cleaning some debris that had gotten blown into the shrubbery during a recent storm. Our lawn guy's name is Jeff May. Indeed, it was "Just a spring clean for the May queen."

And that's why I believe in Robert Plant. That dude abides.

Could it just be poetry? Could they be talking about someone else?

No, I don't believe so. This is just one facet of the Bible, along with 100s of other such prophecies, that are all woven together to reveal the proof.

The rest of the proof is right before your and mine's eyes. Our interior thoughts, the complexity of our bodies; interacting with a beautiful/perfect outside world - all working together with the universe in harmony. And you say there is no design, no designer, no God.

It seems a lot more logical to me that this is all put together by a superior super being, rather than just by chance. Miracles and miracles and miracles upon miracles, all come together just by chance. Lucky us. Too bad we're just going to all die and all of this is for naught.

The Bible explains the truth. There is a God. Has been here for all eternity (standing outside of time). And God has son, Jesus...etc etc. . Do I envision a guy with a white beard standing on a cloud? No, I envision something beyond imagination, but still I can see how that Being could have a Son. We on Earth here all have sons and daughters (well, pretty much). So why couldn't or wouldn't the creator of the Universe perhaps enjoy such an experience?

Do you really think that this prophecy of the Bible (and the 100's of others) signify nothing? Is it just a bustle in your hedgerow? Why didn't all that other stuff happen? It can't all be prophecy can it? Yes, those parts were poetic. The Dogs who surrounded him were not real dogs. Look again at what did come to pass. It's fucking undeniable, incredible, nail in your coffin, miraculous.

There's still time to change the road you're on.

Peace

1i

 

[1ICrying]

It spread and became as abusive and oppressive as Rome proper was. The Vatican was riddled with palace intrigue. Plots, assai nations, poisonings. The idea it was some benevolent movement is not supported by history. The RCC palace intrigue continues minis the violence.

The Sothern Baptist Convention is known for political internal conflict and intrigue.

Islam also spread to a wide area. Christianity is on a par with Islam and reports are Islam is growing, even in USA. What Americans fail to realize is that Islam is not some aberration, it is a well established global culture. Christians are notoriously unable to see beyond their noses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations

Nicaea was not a benevolent meeting of minds. What was agreed was based on geopolitics. The belif in a supernatural Jesus was not universal. Same with a 'holy spirit'.

Get it through your head learner please, Christianity has never been a moral high ground and has never been a tradition of peace. It is as corrupt today as ever. The support of Trump by Christian groups is one of the great modern moral failures in the USA.

Christianity itself has martyred many through history.

Religious people are not good observers, which is what makes them religious people in the first place. They have opinions and biases like everyone else, believe in ghosts and bigfoot creatures despite zero evidence, go on about life's daily necessities, etc., but when it comes to rational intervention of limbic impulsiveness, fail utterly. Emotions run their lives, it's a faucet they cannot turn off.

There are a huge amount of people, many of them in the central US states, who claim to follow the Bible and Jesus who in fact have no clue? They are not following the rule of love thy neighbour. But do not let these imbeciles keep you from seeing the truth - that the Bible is in fact true.

Did they tell you not to touch yourself? Or that Halloween was evil. Or no dancing, no drinking, no drugs. No Harry Potter? The Bible doesn't say those things. People distort the Bible in all sorts of ways to either gain money or power. These are not Christians.

 

[Keith&Co.]

It seems a lot more logical to me that this is all put together by a superior super being, rather than just by chance.

You know, argument by incredulity is actually a logical fallacy, so it cannot be more logical.
Just say you like the idea of god and afterlife more betterer, because you're scared of how dark the tunnel gets at the end.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

It seems a lot more logical to me that this is all put together by a superior super being, rather than just by chance.

You know, argument by incredulity is actually a logical fallacy, so it cannot be more logical.
Just say you like the idea of god and afterlife more betterer, because you're scared of how dark the tunnel gets at the end.

And what is the origin of a claimed "superior being" if not chance? The contradiction is so obvious that "Chance" should be the deity's name.

 

[southernhybrid]

You seem like a decent person 1I. I"m sorry that you are so brainwashed by this primitive mythology. Sure, there are some good moral lessons and poetry in the Bible, but it's all just so irrational when you look at the entire story.

I used to feel sorry for my mother because she believed I was going to hell, but then, without giving up her primary beliefs, she realized that people like me aren't going to be tortured for all eternity for the simple inability to believe the bullshit in the Bible. I was happy for her. It must be a burden to have a religion that makes you think that the children that you raised will be punished by your god because they don't believe it's real.

 

[1ICrying]

You seem like a decent person 1I. I"m sorry that you are so brainwashed by this primitive mythology. Sure, there are some good moral lessons and poetry in the Bible, but it's all just so irrational when you look at the entire story.

I used to feel sorry for my mother because she believed I was going to hell, but then, without giving up her primary beliefs, she realized that people like me aren't going to be tortured for all eternity for the simple inability to believe the bullshit in the Bible. I was happy for her. It must be a burden to have a religion that makes you think that the children that you raised will be punished by your god because they don't believe it's real.

Hi SoHy
You seem like a decent person too, brainwashed by modern hogswash. Yes, my religion has been around for awhile. And? I was thinking about that today, how many people around here seem to not believe it based on how old (enduring I might say) of a belief it is. That seems to me about as ridiculous if people refused to believe things that older people said. "Oh, don't listen to Mary....she's 78, what could she know?". "Oh Bill, that might have been true when you were young, but this is the 21st Century." So ya - it happened 2000+ years ago. That's pretty recent when you look at the grand scheme of things.

Yes, it does seem irrational. Doesn't that make you curious as to why 33% of our world population can still believe such nonsense compared to say the 33 people who still believe in Greek Mythology? Many of you compare the 2 beliefs - so why would there be such a disparity here? Could it be you're missing something? Could it be that the irrationality is like the finger pointing at the moon - and you're still looking at the finger?

I believe God will make it crystal clear for all of us exactly what is going on. We will get that updated version of things. "Blessed are those who believe without seeing", Jesus said. So do the rest just get shot off to hell? I don't believe so and I don't believe that's what the Bible is saying. But after the truth is ultimately revealed, people will still have a choice to follow our dear father/God or they will have the choice to continue to say 'fuck you God'.

You Sohy, I am guessing, once it it revealed, unlike some here, will choose to follow the one true God.

Peace

1i

 

[southernhybrid]

Hi 1I. No, I'm not brainwashed, although my parents and church tried to do that to me during my entire childhood. It just didn't work, as it was impossible for me to believe something that didn't make the least bit of sense. So, by the time I was 18, it all left me.

And I do get that mythology is very powerful and that humans, often feel the need to believe in something supernatural. For example, my next door neighbor was also raised a Christian but she thinks Christianity is a hateful religion that often divides people. Unlike me, she does have some beliefs that I would call "woo". She believes that astrology is real, that she has a spiritual connection with wolves, and that, among other thing, burning certain colored candles helps bring peace and love. While I certainly don't share any of those beliefs, I see them as relatively harmless because she's not trying to convince other people that they must believe like she does or they will be punished by some invisible entity that none of us have ever met, other than in our dreams, imagination or in some cases, hallucinations.

My neighbor's very elderly aunt, on the other hand, is a very religious Christian, who believes all the nonsense about people who don't share her beliefs. She also thinks that atheists like me, have special powers given to us by Satan that enable us to influence other people. Too bad I don't have special powers. If I did I could use them to help people live better lives. . But still, how would you feel if you knew that people thought you were being influenced by some evil supernatural entity that gave you special powers? As you can see, people believe all kinds of crazy stuff, but that doesn't mean any of it has any validity.

The reason I claim that I'm not brainwashed or indoctrinated, if you prefer a little nicer word, is because I did my own very long investigation regarding religion without any outside influences, when I was about 19. It took me several years of deep thought, reading many religious books, studying science when I worked on my nursing degree etc. before I lost all of my beliefs in the supernatural. I don't claim to have all the answers, nobody really can. I am just unable to believe in things that are based on mythology, and don't make the least bit of sense to me. Plus, I had never even met another atheist during those years, as the vast majority of atheists were in the closet back in the 70s, so there was nobody to influence my beliefs. My husband, who I met in 1979 was the first atheist I met. We joke about it being god's will that two atheists met in the Bible Belt.

So, while I don't know everything, I certainly don't hold to any beliefs that don't have some evidence to support them, and I'm willing to change my position as new evidence comes along. While it's great to be on an emotional high, or feel good because you've helped someone or accomplished something good, those feelings are just part of being human. What I'm trying to say is that if you're a Christian and your church influences you to help the poor, or do a good deed for a neighbor, etc. that's not evidence of a god. It just means that you have some good people in your church who have influenced each other to do good works.
Plus, there is an emotional reward in doing things for others. Or as I sometimes like to say, "Giving is often much better than getting".

 

[Keith&Co.]

I was thinking about that today, how many people around here seem to not believe it based on how old of a belief it is. That seems to me about as ridiculous if people refused to believe things that older people said.

Um, can you point to someone here who rejects your religious tradition because it is so old?

southernhybrid said 'primitive,' which is different from 'old.'

 

[abaddon]

Could it be that the irrationality is like the finger pointing at the moon - and you're still looking at the finger?

This analogy (borrowed from Zen) doesn't work with God like it does with phenomena. When a finger points at a moon, it points at something in plain sight. One points at the moon instead of saying "the moon exists" because the thought isn't the reality. In other words, what's being pointed at is the wordless experience - in fact, at awareness itself (because one must wonder, if the moon's just a "phenomena" then isn't there something "behind" it. And the answer is: yes, awareness). So the Zen "finger" points at awareness, and away from belief (away from all abstraction).

Nobody can point at God because "God" is just an abstraction. There's nothing but the concept. Christianity points at belief and away from awareness.

... "Blessed are those who believe without seeing", Jesus said...

See. That's very very different from seeing for yourself, and doing it now. You can't make claims and suggest the belief comes first and the confirmation comes later. That's why it isn't convincing.

 

[Rhea]

Yes, my religion has been around for awhile. And? I was thinking about that today, how many people around here seem to not believe it based on how old (enduring I might say) of a belief it is.

You do not understand what people are saying. An enduring belief is not the reason to doubt it. No one here said that.

Instead, and listen carefully so you don’t end up repeating the same flawed response as above, what they say is that a belief that is based on primitive means of observation, testing and measurement, needs to be tested again by more accurate methods to determine if it is still believable. Christianity does not pass that test. So we don’t believe it because the only reason offered to us FOR belief is that it was once experienced 2000 years ago, and never once since.

Now if granny knows something from her childhood, like “Polio is dangerous,” and we still today have ongoing evidence that, “yes, it is,” then it is easy to believe her. If, on the other hand, she says, “mercury is fun to play with and doesn’t harm anyone!” And we know from more modern data that, it does indeed harm people and irreversibly! then we should say, “Granny doesn’t know what she’s talking about, that is outdated information.”

See how it works? The age of the belief is not the test. The veracity of the testing methods are the test.

Yes, it does seem irrational. Doesn't that make you curious as to why 33% of our world population can still believe such nonsense compared to say the 33 people who still believe in Greek Mythology?

People believed in the Greek gods for a long time, 1I. Perhaps as long as Christianity has run.
But there is one major difference that accounts for why Christians hold onto their beliefs longer than the Hellenists did...

I believe God will make it crystal clear for all of us exactly what is going on. We will get that updated version of things. "Blessed are those who believe without seeing", Jesus said.

And it’s this. The absolutely insane statement, Believing without any evidence at all is a Good Thing ^TM
It’s insane, but it is the heart of every con in the world. And we know that cons still work. People still fall for the Nigerian Prince, and the IRS audit and the Microsoft Tech Support call. The hallmark of these scams include the following:

1) you must do something
2) You must do it immediately
3) There are dire consequences if you don’t
4) do not take time to ask for help, research, or think it through. Just believe me and act.​

So Jesus says exactly the same line as the Nigerian Prince with 6 million dollars. I don’t really wonder why 33% of the population falls for this. But the Greek Gods didn’t use this feature. They interacted and went among the people. And when people started comparing notes and realized there wasn’t any actual interaction, it fell apart.

But Christians have a bulwark against that. You’re not supposed to see anything! Ha! You have to just believe.
And yah, many people still fall for that.



I always wonder, if you thought about it, WHY would you have a god that wanted that? What purpose does it serve other than to support a scam? What possible reason could your god have for asking that of you?

Peace

1i

But alas, Christianity does not bring peace. It brings hate, division, accusation, oppression and abuse.

Many Christians are nice despite the teachings of their church. Most of the ways in which they are nice is the moments when they reject the divisive teachings. And so they would still be nice without Christianity.

 

[1ICrying]

You do not understand what people are saying. An enduring belief is not the reason to doubt it. No one here said that.

Instead, and listen carefully so you don’t end up repeating the same flawed response as above, what they say is that a belief that is based on primitive means of observation, testing and measurement, needs to be tested again by more accurate methods to determine if it is still believable. Christianity does not pass that test. So we don’t believe it because the only reason offered to us FOR belief is that it was once experienced 2000 years ago, and never once since.

Now if granny knows something from her childhood, like “Polio is dangerous,” and we still today have ongoing evidence that, “yes, it is,” then it is easy to believe her. If, on the other hand, she says, “mercury is fun to play with and doesn’t harm anyone!” And we know from more modern data that, it does indeed harm people and irreversibly! then we should say, “Granny doesn’t know what she’s talking about, that is outdated information.”

See how it works? The age of the belief is not the test. The veracity of the testing methods are the test.


People believed in the Greek gods for a long time, 1I. Perhaps as long as Christianity has run.
But there is one major difference that accounts for why Christians hold onto their beliefs longer than the Hellenists did...

I believe God will make it crystal clear for all of us exactly what is going on. We will get that updated version of things. "Blessed are those who believe without seeing", Jesus said.

And it’s this. The absolutely insane statement, Believing without any evidence at all is a Good Thing ^TM
It’s insane, but it is the heart of every con in the world. And we know that cons still work. People still fall for the Nigerian Prince, and the IRS audit and the Microsoft Tech Support call. The hallmark of these scams include the following:

1) you must do something
2) You must do it immediately
3) There are dire consequences if you don’t
4) do not take time to ask for help, research, or think it through. Just believe me and act.​

So Jesus says exactly the same line as the Nigerian Prince with 6 million dollars. I don’t really wonder why 33% of the population falls for this. But the Greek Gods didn’t use this feature. They interacted and went among the people. And when people started comparing notes and realized there wasn’t any actual interaction, it fell apart.

But Christians have a bulwark against that. You’re not supposed to see anything! Ha! You have to just believe.
And yah, many people still fall for that.



I always wonder, if you thought about it, WHY would you have a god that wanted that? What purpose does it serve other than to support a scam? What possible reason could your god have for asking that of you?

Peace

1i

But alas, Christianity does not bring peace. It brings hate, division, accusation, oppression and abuse.

Many Christians are nice despite the teachings of their church. Most of the ways in which they are nice is the moments when they reject the divisive teachings. And so they would still be nice without Christianity.

Hey Gang,

You say there is no evidence bu there is plenty of evidence. I was just reading about all sorts of archeological evidence. Here's one about Exodus. Who said that Exodus never happened. In 2018, they found (more) evidence.

10. EVIDENCE FOR THE EXODUS? NEW DISCOVERIES SUPPORT BIBLICAL ACCOUNT

Instead of how Exodus and Joshua describe the Israelites escaping Egypt, crossing the Jordan River, and conquering the land, many contend they were already part of an indigenous population in Canaan.

A recent discovery, however, provides physical evidence to support the biblical account.

Excavations in Khirbet el-Mastarah, an area in the Jordan Valley, have unearthed numerous nomadic or semi-nomadic enclosures and structures dating back to the time of the Exodus, according to an article in Biblical Archaeology Review from Ralph Hawkins and David Ben-Shlomo.

So there's just one slice of evidence, and there is plenty, plenty more. Plenty! : )

In general, I guess the big evidence was that Jesus fulfilled all the prophecies, including conducted PLenty of miracles. We also have in the Bible the parables and wisdom of Jesus. He spoke with authority, and said YES - I am the Messiah! For me and other Christians, we read what Jesus said and we feel that this is authentic. Otherwise Jesus would be just a liar. The things he preached do not add up to him being just a big liar. Yet, not even the Jews who wrote down all those prophecies believe that he is the Messiah, so I guess I can cut you some slack.

Other than that, I was looking back at our thread to find instances of where ya'll seem to think that the Bible story is just to old to be relevant.

Atrib said "I don't believe the Bible because it is a collection of Bronze Age mythology that is unsupported by evidence." Well, I just put one piece of evidence above, so that's untrue. And Sohy, you called it an 'old mythology'. That's as far as I got, but I know there's more. Someone else said that if it were true, God would just send us some updated info, like a DVD. Maybe it's coming.

Does Christianity bring peace. Probably not. Jesus said that it would bring division. But it does say to love your neighbour as yourself is the greatest of commandments, and also to love your enemies. I don't think the flaw is in the religion, but with people who have not grasped this love part.

Is God an evil tyrant? I don't think so. If he does kill some people along the way, perhaps innocent people even, what do you think happened to them on the other side. Maybe they were heavily compensated. Maybe they didn't really experience much pain. We don't know. But to ever state that God is ever in anywaywrong does not make sense. It's like a canvas or a painting telling the painter that he's doing it wrong. We cannot judge God.

Anyhow, I have to go to bed.

Nighty night

1IC

 

[Keith&Co.]

But to ever state that God is ever in anywaywrong does not make sense. It's like a canvas or a painting telling the painter that he's doing it wrong. We cannot judge God.
1IC

No, it's like thinking creatures who have standards of morality that we can use to judge behaviors against.
And i was very, very young when I learned that 'might makes right' was an attitude that the villains used. Moral action is right or it's wrong independent of who takes that action.

Your god is described as a guy who will send she-bears to tare up 42 kids for doing no worse than taunt a bald guy. That's disproportionate, petty, and motherfucking evil, no matter what happened to the kids after the mauling, Heaven-sent or Hell-bent.
I, for one, see no reason to even hesitate to judge such an act merely because the actor is reputed to have created the kids. And the bears. And male-pattern baldness.

 

[Rhea]

You say there is no evidence bu there is plenty of evidence.
[…]
A recent discovery, however, provides physical evidence to support the biblical account.

Excavations in Khirbet el-Mastarah, an area in the Jordan Valley, have unearthed numerous nomadic or semi-nomadic enclosures and structures dating back to the time of the Exodus, according to an article in Biblical Archaeology Review from Ralph Hawkins and David Ben-Shlomo.[/I]

So there's just one slice of evidence, and there is plenty, plenty more. Plenty! : )

That is not how evidence works. That is not evidence of Exodus if there is any other possible explanation for the tents. Especially if there is a more plausible explanation.
You blithely toss out, “there’s your evidence!” as if you have a convincing demonstration that has succeeding in convincing. It’s not and you haven’t.
Trying to evidence something so significant as a mass movement of hundreds of thousands of people is not completed by saying, “we found some structures.”

Is that all it took for you to be convinced? Like Eve, with the apple? Someone said so and you liked what you heard so now it is “truth” to you? You should have higher standards, otherwise you might end up believing in the works of Satan instead of Yahweh.

For me and other Christians, we read what Jesus said and we feel that this is authentic. Otherwise Jesus would be just a liar. The things he preached do not add up to him being just a big liar. Yet, not even the Jews who wrote down all those prophecies believe that he is the Messiah, so I guess I can cut you some slack.

You and other Christians have been told time and again that this false analysis, “either it’s ALL TRUE or he’s a liar, no other scenario is considered!” is one of your major thinking flaws. There are a lot of other possibilities. What’s interesting to me is how we can tell you all these other more valid possibilities, and you come back and repeat just these same two over and over again. It’s so interesting to watch HOW you think. As if the presence of the other, more plausible possibilities are so unsettling that you block them from your mind.

• Christian: Either ALL TRUE or a LIAR!
• Everyone else: Well, it could also be mistakes, it could be embellishments like Paul Bunyan, it could be re-writing later by someone else lying, it could be delusional like Paul or Joseph Smith, it could be entirely fabricated like L.Ron Hubbard, it could be Lore that becomes durable like Santa Claus. All of those are known to happen and are therefore more plausible than it being true.
• Christian: (smiling gleefully like nothing has been said at all,) Either ALL TRUE or a LIAR!

I watch you do that, ignore actual conversations and reality while repeating a simplistic assertion and I don’t have any doubt that your exact mindset is what can produce a false document that a bunch of people fall in love with.

Does Christianity bring peace. Probably not. Jesus said that it would bring division. But it does say to love your neighbour as yourself is the greatest of commandments, and also to love your enemies. I don't think the flaw is in the religion, but with people who have not grasped this love part.

And your religion, your god, is unable to combat human nature. So weird for a guy that you believe created human nature, yah? Being a Christian has absolutely no effect on making you a better person. So what good is it at all?

Is God an evil tyrant? I don't think so. If he does kill some people along the way, perhaps innocent people even, what do you think happened to them on the other side. Maybe they were heavily compensated.

Equally likely, as far as either of us know, what if they are not? What if, as your story goes, they are now punished for eternity!
Now there’s a monster.
1I, do you believe in hell? If there is a hell and your god made it, s/he/it is evil. End of possibilities. Only evil would create hell, or even allow it if s/he/it had any power to stop it.

But to ever state that God is ever in anywaywrong does not make sense. It's like a canvas or a painting telling the painter that he's doing it wrong. We cannot judge God.

Why not? Who told you that you can’t judge actions as good or bad? The story of the being who does the bad actions? That’s mighty convenient, isn’t it?
It absolutely makes sense to see actions and judge them as good or bad. Only a tyrant would oppose being judged by good-hearted people.
Your god is a tyrant?

 

[Keith&Co.]

You and other Christians have been told time and again that this false analysis, “either it’s ALL TRUE or he’s a liar, no other scenario is considered!” is one of your major thinking flaws. There are a lot of other possibilities. What’s interesting to me is how we can tell you all these other more valid possibilities, and you come back and repeat just these same two over and over again.

It's strategic.
If it's all or nothing, then any time they can prove one thing is true, such as Pilate, or that there were Jews in Israel, then it's ALL TRUE. They can dismiss any charge of myth because that NOTHING TRUE denies the obvious recognized archaeological findings.

If they allow it to be seen as a fantastic story told in a historical set.ting, like the Rome miniseries, or 300, or Blackadder, then they have to fight every single miracle and character, like trench warfare, providing evidence for each passage they want others to accept as truth.

Works the same way when they attack science. We say, 'we know W to be true because of evidence X, Y, Z.' They pull Ž out and ask about that. If we cannot answer for Ž, they chortle and discount W, X, Y, Z.

Then they misunderstand the argument and open forum threads saying, 'atheists can't explain Y!'