A Challenge for Christians: Show Us Your Very Best Proof For Jesus (worship, Catholic)

[maat55]

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

The Saul one is only a contradiction if the Amalekite is telling the truth. The Bible is only reporting the guy's claim. And we know that the Amalekites were scumbags.

The problem with this is that god is presumed to be the one reporting this. He should know exactly how Saul died. How would Samuel know the outcome in 1 Samuel 31? "God" should be able to tell which way it happened. I would expect such discrepancies when humans are reporting events.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Originally Posted by pneuma

And why is it that it has to be God that created things the way they are? And God did not leave, he is within all of us. To many it looks like he left us all alone and they do this because they are looking for God " out there somewhere" when they should be looking within.

I have been told my entire life that "God is inside of us all." And that everyone has an innate sense of God. Well that's nonsense. I am nearly 69 years old and I have never met God. He has never once spoken to me. He acts, in fact, exactly like someone who was never there to begin with.

But if God is inside of you, you need to ask Him some hard questions. Like, if he really loves humans so much, why does He do such terrible things to us? The horrors are too many to list, but flesh eating bacteria is as good a place to start as any. If we did these sorts of things to our pets we would be considered monsters, rather then kind and loving masters.



These sorts of things are not consistent with the claim of a loving God. On the other hand, if no such God ever existed to begin with, then the horrible things that occur are consistent with a universe based on random chance. Things that are possible will sometimes occur.

So are we really better off subscribing to prayers and make believe to keep us safe? Or are we better off employing scientific investigation to better understand and control the things that occur. Some people believe that we are better off remaining naive children. Let THEM get their faces eaten off. I personally prefer a more proactive approach that requires scientific study and the steady increase in knowledge. Knowledge one will never find in a religious fundamentalist book of ancient make believe.

[pneuma]

Originally Posted by Tired of the Nonsense

I have been told my entire life that "God is inside of us all." And that everyone has an innate sense of God. Well that's nonsense. I am nearly 69 years old and I have never met God. He has never once spoken to me. He acts, in fact, exactly like someone who was never there to begin with.

Then can you explain why in our earliest writings we find mention of God? If it is not from an innate sense of God where did it come from?

But if God is inside of you, you need to ask Him some hard questions. Like, if he really loves humans so much, why does He do such terrible things to us? The horrors are too many to list, but flesh eating bacteria is as good a place to start as any. If we did these sorts of things to our pets we would be considered monsters, rather then kind and loving masters.



These sorts of things are not consistent with the claim of a loving God. On the other hand, if no such God ever existed to begin with, then the horrible things that occur are consistent with a universe based on random chance. Things that are possible will sometimes occur.

I get it TOTN, and I don't have all the answers to these type of questions.

However if God put laws into place for us to keep for our protection and we break those laws are we not reaping what we sow? Take the law of gravity, if you or I jumped off a 100 foot cliff ( please don't add some type of aid to the senerio) would we not expect to dies for doing so?

Can science explain where the flesh eating bacteria comes from? How do we know it is not some kind of side effect from something man created? Or a man made bacteria man created for war?

So are we really better off subscribing to prayers and make believe to keep us safe? Or are we better off employing scientific investigation to better understand and control the things that occur. Some people believe that we are better off remaining naive children. Let THEM get their faces eaten off. I personally prefer a more proactive approach that requires scientific study and the steady increase in knowledge.

If scientific investigation was only used for the benefit for humankind I would not have any problem with that, however we are all a where that many of these things are made strictly for warfare and sometimes they create a bug by accident that is very deadly to the human race.

Knowledge one will never find in a religious fundamentalist book of ancient make believe.

A book that warns us that there are consequence for breaking the laws is a good book imo.

[thrillobyte]

Originally Posted by Tired of the Nonsense

I have been told my entire life that "God is inside of us all." And that everyone has an innate sense of God. Well that's nonsense. I am nearly 69 years old and I have never met God. He has never once spoken to me. He acts, in fact, exactly like someone who was never there to begin with.

But if God is inside of you, you need to ask Him some hard questions. Like, if he really loves humans so much, why does He do such terrible things to us? The horrors are too many to list, but flesh eating bacteria is as good a place to start as any. If we did these sorts of things to our pets we would be considered monsters, rather then kind and loving masters.



These sorts of things are not consistent with the claim of a loving God. On the other hand, if no such God ever existed to begin with, then the horrible things that occur are consistent with a universe based on random chance. Things that are possible will sometimes occur.

So are we really better off subscribing to prayers and make believe to keep us safe? Or are we better off employing scientific investigation to better understand and control the things that occur. Some people believe that we are better off remaining naive children. Let THEM get their faces eaten off. I personally prefer a more proactive approach that requires scientific study and the steady increase in knowledge. Knowledge one will never find in a religious fundamentalist book of ancient make believe.

And to add insult to injury Christians are always spouting that this God loves us with immeasurable love....so much so in fact that He sent His Son to die so that we could have eternal life. But He appears to have overlooked our needs in this world, like protection from the flesh-eating bacteria in the pic above and endless other disease. Some love!

Originally Posted by pneuma

Can science explain where the flesh eating bacteria comes from? How do we know it is not some kind of side effect from something man created? Or a man made bacteria man created for war?

Ohhh boy! Brush up on your biology, pneuma. Flesh eating bacteria is just streptococcus gone mad. God allowed it to evolve into a killer.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Originally Posted by pneuma

Then can you explain why in our earliest writings we find mention of God? If it is not from an innate sense of God where did it come from?

From early times people believed that the earth was flat and the center of creation, too. That the heavens revolve around us and if you got too close to the edge of the earth you would fall off was common accepted knowledge. They believed this because to the uneducated mind these things seemed obvious. And yet as our level knowledge has grown we have discovered that what seems obvious often actually has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual truth. There was a time when the existence of a supernatural Being seemed to be the only reasonable solution for existence. We can now see scientifically however that everything that occurs does so for entirely natural reasons. The problem of course is that some people prefer to remain ensconced in ancient superstitious ignorance. Those are the people most likely to have their faces eaten off by declaring their reliance on religious faith rather then medical science. One way to look at it, is that this natural selection at work. You do have to feel sorry for the children who die because their parents were ignorant gullible fools however.

Originally Posted by pneuma

I get it TOTN, and I don't have all the answers to these type of questions.

However if God put laws into place for us to keep for our protection and we break those laws are we not reaping what we sow?

If God put laws into place, and God is omnipotent, then how could we possibly break His laws?

Originally Posted by pneuma

Take the law of gravity, if you or I jumped off a 100 foot cliff ( please don't add some type of aid to the senerio) would we not expect to dies for doing so?

There are natural laws in effect, this is true. And these laws CANNOT be broken. Except that of course we in a sense break the law of gravity constantly by flying. We have learned, through the acquisition of knowledge, what is and is not possible. Gravity works as it does because mass attracts mass. For reasons that make sense at the level of quantum mechanics. But gravity is also the weakest of the known forces. We overcome gravity every time we lift something. So, people jump off of high cliffs regularly, and do it for sport using parachutes and ultralight gliders. What this represents is a demonstration of what knowledge, understanding the laws of physics (nature), can accomplish. Remaining in the grip of ancient superstitious ignorance DOES NOT accomplish these sorts of advancements.

Originally Posted by pneuma

Can science explain where the flesh eating bacteria comes from? How do we know it is not some kind of side effect from something man created? Or a man made bacteria man created for war?

Bacteria is the oldest form of true life known. It's billions of years old. Bacteria is in fact responsible for most of the free oxygen in our atmosphere. We couldn't survive without bacteria. And over those billions of years bacteria has evolved and diversified into billions of different strains. You are suggesting that this particular strain of flesh eating bacteria was in fact created by humans. On the one hand that could be a possibility. But on the other hand you just made it up. Billions of strains of bacteria exist naturally and are constantly evolving. Nature works at a slower pace than humans, but nature has a huge head start.

Originally Posted by pneuma

If scientific investigation was only used for the benefit for humankind I would not have any problem with that, however we are all a where that many of these things are made strictly for warfare and sometimes they create a bug by accident that is very deadly to the human race.

Scientific investigation is simply interested in discovering how things work. What humans do with the knowledge is all on humans.

Originally Posted by pneuma

A book that warns us that there are consequence for breaking the laws is a good book imo.

Balance out the fact that the very same book justify's hacking to death helpless women and children and babies with swords, and I would suggest that we need to start all over again with a better book.

[TRANSPONDER]

Originally Posted by pneuma

You still have a wrong understanding of mythos trans. A mystery is a mythos that tell a story. Paul explained the mythos of the resurrection in 1 Co.15. we are raised a spiritual body. Now I am note sure whether my understanding is the same as mystic or not but we are close in that we both see it as a spiritual Resurrection.

I agree that Paul was talking of a spiritual resurrection for Jesus (which is simply the messianic spirit going back to heaven) which is what the disciples taught him, as distinct from the solid body resurrection that would happen at the last days.

However you want to use the term "mythos". If Paul thought it was a real event "Mythos" to me isn't the right term. "Mythos" means to me something that didn't happen but is a metaphor, symbolic story or parable of something considered to be true.

Now if you take the resurrection stories as "Mythos", then we are disagreeing only on the rather speculative claims of spirits and cosmic consciousnesses.

You keep going on what you think God should do and then complaining that God does not live up to your expectations. Now if God is in each of us, which I believe he is, the power to change things is within us and God uses us to make the changes that are required. You probably agree with that leaving out the God aspect. However imo that gives people room to boast they are better then others as they can say look what I did. Again imo that gives people an inflation of themselves so they can look down on others.

My word we are coming down to a very metaphorical god indeed. More the best impulses (why not the worst?) that reasoning humans can come up with. And for me I wouldn't worry too much about the motivation of people doing the good out of a feeling of self worth. It's better for me than peddling religious twaddle because it makes them feel justified.

Again you place your concept of God in the mix, which seems to be an omni God. And that is where a lot of the problems in dealing with these things stem from. The omni's are an invention of man, at least in the common understanding of them.

Again - you can hardly blame me for talking about the god everyone seems to be peddling. If you have a different concept, explain it and we'll discuss that one. Increasingly it seems to be little more that the reason we can reason.

Man is nothing more then an animal, and like any animal will not risk it life for those outside of its own house so to speak. However humans will risk their lives for others, so what is it that separates man from the rest of the animal kingdom?

'So to speak' rather covers up that some animals are a lot more widely social that you would like to admit. Right now I would say that few (if any) have the ability to see outside the Tribe to the to the need for species co -operation, but even with our reasoning and complex society, it's taken us long enough to get there. And I don't see any help from the divisive them -and-us god of either Testament (whether as purported history oir Mythos).

But if you say by 'God' you just mean the best thinking and impulses humans can have, you can use the term. I prefer not to, and I certainly see no reason to see it as some existing entity outside of the human mind.

What do you want him to do?

Carry on not existing and having all the evidence seeming to point that way will do fine. We'll do the rest.

[thrillobyte]

Just for change of pace I went through a list of 60 "guaranteed" prophecies Jesus supposedly fulfilled. I could not believe what I was reading. If these are prophecies, they are fulfilled by Jesus only in the fevered imaginations and wishful thinking of the most ardent Christians. Some of them are so ridiculous it shames me to even bring them up but here are a few:

Of course one of the most infamous is Matthew blatant backfire of having Jesus riding into a Jerusalem on a horse and also a donkey:

"Behold, your King is coming to you;
Lowly and riding on a donkey,
A colt, (a horse) the foal of a donkey."

So I guess this would make Matthew a bit of a horse's @sz, wouldn't it?

Then there is

“When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.” Hosea 11:1.

Anyone can clearly see that the baby child is in fact Israel being called out of Egypt during the Exodus, but that's not good enough to suit Matthew. He wants this prophecy to be about Jesus. So he invents the story of Herod's slaughter of the children so he can have Jesus Mary and Joseph running to Egypt and then calling them back to Israel. Pretty dramatic stuff. The stuff that makes for best-selling novels. The only problem is none of it is true. Luke tells an entirely different tale in the nativity story. Talk about the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. It's shocking to me that gullible Christians fall for this nonsense.

More proof that Jesus the divine son of God never existed.

[Rafius]

300 OT prophecies fulfilled by Jesus the man-god. The problem is that it's the Bible that gives the prophecies and the Bible that says they were fulfilled!

The NT authors knew the OT prophecies for a messiah and wrote the NT in such a way as to make it appear that those prophecies had been fulfilled. Easy!

[thrillobyte]

Originally Posted by Rafius

300 OT prophecies fulfilled by Jesus the man-god. The problem is that it's the Bible that gives the prophecies and the Bible that says they were fulfilled!

The NT authors knew the OT prophecies for a messiah and wrote the NT in such a way as to make it appear that those prophecies had been fulfilled. Easy!

A bit like 10 years from now claiming that prophecies of a boy wizard in Harry Potter and the Half-Pint Prince were fulfilled in the coming of a 5'6" Daniel Radcliffe.

[TRANSPONDER]

Originally Posted by thrillobyte

Just for change of pace I went through a list of 60 "guaranteed" prophecies Jesus supposedly fulfilled. I could not believe what I was reading. If these are prophecies, they are fulfilled by Jesus only in the fevered imaginations and wishful thinking of the most ardent Christians. Some of them are so ridiculous it shames me to even bring them up but here are a few:

Of course one of the most infamous is Matthew blatant backfire of having Jesus riding into a Jerusalem on a horse and also a donkey:

"Behold, your King is coming to you;
Lowly and riding on a donkey,
A colt, (a horse) the foal of a donkey."

So I guess this would make Matthew a bit of a horse's @sz, wouldn't it?

Then there is

“When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.” Hosea 11:1.

Anyone can clearly see that the baby child is in fact Israel being called out of Egypt during the Exodus, but that's not good enough to suit Matthew. He wants this prophecy to be about Jesus. So he invents the story of Herod's slaughter of the children so he can have Jesus Mary and Joseph running to Egypt and then calling them back to Israel. Pretty dramatic stuff. The stuff that makes for best-selling novels. The only problem is none of it is true. Luke tells an entirely different tale in the nativity story. Talk about the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. It's shocking to me that gullible Christians fall for this nonsense.

More proof that Jesus the divine son of God never existed.

Yes. The two donkeys is down to Matthew misreading the OT scripture and not understanding it. It is the same with the "Virgin birth" prophecy. They are all down to Matthew not understanding his Hebrew.

The Egypt prophecy is a particularly interesting one. The OT relevance is to the Exodus of course and to relate it to Jesus being taken to Egypt is a bit of a stretch. But one could say that this may have been a mistake of Matthew's, but the story could still be true.

It takes a comparison of all the parts of the story, compared to Luke's contradictory nativity and the tacit denial of any Nativity by Mark or John. The whole point of the flight to Egypt is just to get Jesus out of Judea and then we get the extremely shoddy plot of a divine summons back "All clear - you can come home now"-ah sorry, his son is on the throne, so you'd better go to Galilee where another Herodian is ruling. The whole story being arranged to get Jesus out of Bethlehem of Judea into Nazareth of Galilee.

Of course excuses can be thought up - There was a huge Jewish presence in Egypt so why wouldn't Joseph go there? Antipas wasn't deposed until after Jesus' time, so he wasn't as 'Bad' as Archelaus. But there was no way to know that at the time of Joseph's supposed return.

The massacre of inocents is excused as being too minor an atrocity for history to notice, but the point is that none of the other gospel writers notice it either - or anything that Matthew says. Matthew also Finds another prophecy about that 'Rachel weeping for her children' which is (and it is rather amusing that an atheist has to point this out) a metaphor relating to the obliteration of the two northern tribes by Assyria.

And the whole thing is contradicted by Luke, anyway.