SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : "I STILL own the ban button, buddy" -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: average joe who wrote (1315)1/3/2013 5:15:50 AM
From: Solon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 2133
 
``I imagine similar things happened to the women of Peor before they were left for the buzzards``

It staggers the imagination and assaults every moral sense. Whether one posts genocide or rape or incest he simply displays a smug arrogance and disconnect--as though these ugly things were moral and acceptable? No regard, no respect, and no compassion, whatsoever.

I posted some of the ugly and disgusting rape scriptures where entire tribes were butchered and the young girls all raped and some of the girls who `tested`for virginity were subsequently kept as concubines to be raped over and over rather than butchered with the rest of their families. His response:

I guess you never been in a war, eh?

Well, I think I know a bit more than that young punk about war and human suffering, eh? And that is why I color it NO.

He is such a MISFIT.

When I posted about Lot raping his daughters on two consecutive nights, he simply said that Lot was innocent. His excuse? He was drunk!
:-(

You want to be an immoral bastard? Just have a drink or two, first...and then blame the victims!! Apparently, it works for our resident asshole!

Yahweh said that Lot was `Just`and ``Righteous`` so his incest is (therefore)--Just and Righteous. This is why FUNDY RELIGIOUS SHIT is so dangerous.
Nothing is out of bounds for mouthy punks like Gregoree.

Has he ever said a word of disapproval or contempt for these heinous acts??



To: average joe who wrote (1315)1/3/2013 5:23:11 AM
From: Solon1 Recommendation  Respond to of 2133
 
This is A LOT to think about. Enough for today...

(I've copied only a portion of the questions)

http://members.aol.com/bbu84/biblicalstupidity/tough.htm#1

Tough Questions for the Christian Church
by James Buckner

note-this page was not written by the author of the CBBB web site. It was found at another site, copied and reprinted, something which the original writer authorizes as long as it is not sold for profit and his name remains attached to it. What makes this page so worthy of being reprinted is the fact that it is clear, thoughtful, thorough-and comes from a former evangelical Christian. This gentleman actually has a page of e-mail discussions with his family members and his pastor regarding his deconversion from Christianity. Very interesting.

Through years of participation in the life and culture of evangelical Christianity, a number of "difficult to understand" issues came to my attention. The approach to these problems endorsed by evangelical Christian leaders is for thoughtful Christians to accept the "difficulties" as inscrutable but nevertheless true, and to endeavor to strengthen one's faith in other areas where "difficulties" are not a hindrance. I acquiesced to this approach while I lived my busy life, until such time as I should be able to search out the solid answers that evangelical theologians had undoubtedly derived from their more thorough and sophisticated study of scripture.

After years of studying the Bible as an individual and in groups, listening to sermons, attending Christian conferences, leading a small group Bible study, reading evangelicalism's best apologists, and even preaching from the pulpit once, I was dismayed to discover that the church cannot answer the tough questions about Christianity. And I was heartbroken when I finally recognized, quite contrary to my own wish, that the cumulative force of the so-called "difficulties" thoroughly and unquestionably discredits Christianity.

Anticipating that many Christians will not accept my conclusion, and that they will urge me to come back to church and continue "searching," because of Jesus's promise that those who search will find, I have listed some questions the church must answer if it hopes to regain my attention.

The questions that follow have been organized loosely into categories to aid in referencing them. Many questions could legitimately be placed in other categories. Their current placement reflects my own judgment of where the weight of the questions carries the most force.

The list is not exhaustive. There are innumerable serious issues with Christianity laid out in the existing body of skeptical literature. The list that follows is a sampling from a variety of sources. Not a few were independently discovered by myself before I learned of the existence of serious skeptical literature, a few are original with myself, and a few actually come from Christian sources.

Some biblical references are given, but all are not. I am assuming that any Christian knowledgeable enough to address these questions intelligently will not have trouble finding the biblical passages at issue. In addition, some questions assume a general familiarity with certain biblical and extra-biblical subjects which are not practical to reference because the relevant knowledge is widely dispersed through a large body of literature; for unreferenced items, a Christian who does not understand the issue probably is not well-read enough to attempt an answer.

Problems with the Integrity of the Bible

Biblical Inconsistencies

1. Why does the evangelical church say there are no contradictions in the Bible when they are plainly there for anyone to see? (These are too numerous even to list a representative sample here. There are many books and monographs on this topic in the skeptical literature.1)

2. Why does the Old Testament teach that there is no hell, while the New Testament teaches that there is? The idea of "progressive revelation" does not explain the conflicts in the biblical texts.

3. Why does most of the Old Testament teach that there is no afterlife (see Ecclesiastes 9:5-6, for example), while later Old Testament writings and the New Testament do?

4. Why does the church say that God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33), when many biblical passages flatly contradict this?2

5. Was God known by the name Yahweh prior to Moses (Exodus 6:3), or was he not (Genesis 4:26, 5:29, 9:24, 22:14, 27:20, 27:27, 28:20-21)?

6. Which "Ten Commandments" are the Ten Commandments - the ones listed at Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5, or the ones listed at Exodus 34? Only the list at Exodus 34 is explicitly called the "Ten Commandments" in the biblical text.

7. Was the Law given by Yahweh perfect (Psalm 19:7), or wasn't it (Hebrews 8:6-8)?

8. Why can't the six accounts of the resurrection be reconciled?3 Paul says that without the resurrection, the Christian faith is in vain (1 Cor 15:14). How could the biblical accounts possibly disagree on such an important narrative?

9. Why were the disciples surprised by Jesus's resurrection after Jesus had told them repeatedly to expect it?4 An angel even reminded the women that Jesus had told them of his impending resurrection (Luke 24:6-7). How is it that the women remembered his words (Luke 24:8), but the disciples didn't (John 20:9, Luke 24:12)? Even Jesus's enemies remembered that he had foretold that he would rise again (Matthew 27:63).

Biblical Ambiguities and Omissions

1. Why is the Bible unclear about how to be saved? Is there anything more important that the Bible could communicate? Why is it ambiguous and contradictory on this subject?

2. Why does Jesus teach salvation by works in the synoptic gospels, but John portrays him teaching salvation by faith?

3. Why does John not teach in his gospel that it is necessary to repent of our sins, since he states that his gospel was written specifically for the purpose of showing people how to be saved (John 20:31)?

4. Why is the nature and practice of the two sacraments - baptism and the Lord's Supper - left ambiguous in the Bible, and a cause of discord among churches?

5. Why is the book of Revelation incomprehensible if it is really "not sealed" (Rev 22:10)? Why are the prophecies in the book of Daniel actually easier to understand, if they are sealed (Daniel 12:9)?

6. Why doesn't the Bible provide unambiguous answers for major divisive doctrines like efficacy of baptism, paedobaptism, mode of adult baptism, soteriology, Christology, trinitarianism, satanology, angelology, nature of the afterlife, eschatology, fundamentals of the faith, the standing of Jewish believers in relation to the Law, the standing of Gentile believers in relation to the Law?

Misinterpretation of Scripture by New Testament Figures

1. Why did the writers of the New Testament feel free to misquote and misinterpret the Old Testament and conflate verses?5

2. Why did the gospel writers use the Septuagint, an inferior translation of the Old Testament?6 Did the Holy Spirit fail to inspire them with the more accurate Hebrew text, the one accepted today?

3. Why did Matthew and Peter take Old Testament passages out of context to make them into prophecies, when they were never indicated to be prophetic by the Old Testament author (Acts 1:20 versus Psalm 69:25, for example)?

4. Why did Mark misreference an Old Testament prophet (Mark 1:2)?7 How can we rely on Mark to explain Old Testament prophecies to us if he is even mistaken about the source?

5. Why does Jude quote the non-canonical Book of Enoch as prophecy (Jude 14-15)? Did the Holy Spirit fail to inspire Jude with the fact that the Book of Enoch would not be accepted into the canon?

6. Why does Matthew quote a non-existent Old Testament prophecy (Matthew 2:23)? Was he using non-canonical writings, too?

7. Why does Matthew attribute a quote about the potter's field to Jeremiah, when Jeremiah has no such passage, and the closest one in the Old Testament is Zechariah (Matt 27:9-10; Zechariah 11:12)?

8. Why doesn't Paul ever quote Jesus from the gospel accounts, or show that he knew anything at all about Jesus's teachings and life as portrayed in the gospels?

9. Why is no single hermeneutic adequate for interpretation of scripture?

Why were the New Testament authors so free and loose in their hermeneutics? How could it be that the meanings of some words and phrases have been lost? How could it be that some cultural references have been lost? How can it be that many books and passages admit of multiple interpretations? Doesn't God want us to understand his Word enough to protect the knowledge of its referents and use unambiguous diction and phraseology?

Failed Biblical Promises

1. Why doesn't prayer work, when the Bible promises that it will (John 14:14, for example)?

2. Why aren't Christians doing greater works than Jesus did, since he himself said they would (John 14:12)? The context is clearly referring to miracles.

Failed Prophecies

1. Why have no prophecies been demonstrated to have been fulfilled? Why are many Old Testament prophecies too vague to be tested? Why are many Old Testament prophecies "yet to be" fulfilled? Why has it been impossible to demonstrate that the Old Testament prophecies were written prior to the events forecasted?

2. Why wasn't Tyre destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar as prophesied by Ezekiel (Ezekiel 26)? When it was destroyed by Alexander the Great, why didn't it remain desolate as prophesied by Ezekiel?8

3. How can it be that Isaiah prophesied a temporary destruction of Tyre, while Ezekiel prophesied a permanent destruction (Ezekiel 26:14,21; 27:36; 28:19 versus Isaiah 23:13-18)?

4. Why wasn't there a 40-year period in Egypt's history when the whole land was devoid of people and animals, as prophesied by Ezekiel (Ezekiel 29:11-12)?

5. Why is so much of New Testament prophecy incomprehensible? Why produce a prophecy at all if it cannot be understood?

Problems with Miracles

1. Why haven't any of the miracles recorded in the Bible been independently confirmed?

2. Why don't verifiable miracles happen today? What better way is there to convince people of the Christian message, and isn't that the commission given to the church by Jesus?

3. Why don't evangelical Christians accept miracle stories recorded in ancient non-biblical works? Isn't it the case that evangelical Christians have decided a priori to accept biblical miracles and reject all others? Aren't the apologists' "objective standards" for accepting or rejecting extra-biblical miracles post hoc?

Origin and Transmission of the Scriptures

1. Why is the authorship of most books of the Bible disputed? Why do many books of the Bible have no statement of authorship? Why are some books in the canon pseudepigraphical (lie about authorship)?

2. Why did the early church not revere the scriptures as Christians do today, so that they added interpolations and made emendations?

3. Why hasn't the Bible been transmitted to us in perfect condition if it is so important and if God had his supernatural hand in it? Why did both Israel and the church add interpolations, emend, and conflate the texts?

The Canon

1. Why is the Mosaic injunction against false prophets ignored in the canon? Deuteronomy 18:20-22 should disqualify Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Jonah, Jesus, and Paul.

2. Why is the canon disputed by the church? Is God content to let uninspired writings falsely be proclaimed as his Word? Furthermore, how do we know the canon is complete?

3. Why has no one been able to describe a consistent objective basis for establishing the canon? Why was the canon established by vote instead of on objective principles? Why was the canon not directly revealed by God?

4. Why is so much of New Testament doctrine revealed through the use of occasional letters instead of in systematic books written, authorized, and canonized specifically to define Christian doctrine? Why didn't God deliver these himself, as he did the Law to Moses? Maybe this explains why the Old Testament Law has more clarity than the New Testament doctrines. Why did God leave the writing of systematic theologies to modern, uninspired writers, who cannot agree with one another?

Biblical Values

1. When Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, why did God lie about what the outcome would be (Genesis 2:17),9 while the serpent told the truth (Genesis 3:5,22)?

2. Why are women treated as chattel and inferior to men throughout the Bible?10

3. Why is the Old Testament and most of the New Testament addressed only to free men, and not to women or slaves? Does God deal only with free males?11

4. Why does the Bible condone slavery?12

5. Why does Yahweh command genocide,13 including the killing of infants? Why does he command that all women who have "known a man" be slaughtered, but the soldiers are to keep the young virgins for their own use (Numbers 31:14-18)? Why does the Bible portray Yahweh as worse than Hitler (Deuteronomy 20:16-17)? Isn't it blasphemous to call the Bible "God's Word," when it libels him so?

6. Why doesn't the Bible condemn polygamy? Is it not really a sin? In fact, the Bible seems to condone polygamy through examples of God blessing polygamists and by its explicit statements regarding David.

7. Why wasn't Lot condemned for giving his daughters to be abused by the men of Sodom (Genesis 19:8)? The Bible actually calls him righteous (2 Peter 2:7)!

8. How can Christians say that the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of religion is based on Judeo-Christian ethics when Deuteronomy 13:6-10 and 17:2-7 flatly contradict this?

9. How can being mauled by a bear possibly be a just punishment for name-calling (2 Kings 2:23-24)? Doesn't this contradict God's own edict of "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth?"

10. Why is faith - believing something for which there is no evidence - a virtue?

11. Why is rational skepticism a vice? If Christianity is true, won't the truth hold up under scrutiny? Shouldn't the church welcome and promote rational skepticism as a way of confirming and spreading the faith when people see that it fails to undermine Christianity? Why isn't skeptical literature studied and refuted in Sunday School classes?

Biblical Guidance

1. Why do Moses, Ezra, Jesus, and Paul all disagree on marriage and divorce? Moses allowed divorce, Jesus disallowed it and also allowed it, Paul allowed it, and Ezra actually commanded it to appease God (Ezra 10). How is an honest Christian supposed to know what to do in this area?

2. Why does the New Testament teach by example that major decisions should be decided by lot (in Acts chapter 1 when Matthias is chosen)?

3. Why doesn't the Bible provide unambiguous guidance for major divisive issues like abortion, divorce, war, church discipline, lending and borrowing money, etc.? Doesn't God want the church to be united? Doesn't God want individual Christians to know how they should live?

Conflicts with Science

1. Why does the Bible teach that the sky is a solid dome of transparent material with water above it?14 (The water poured through the "windows of heaven" to cause Noah's flood, and then presumably poured off the edge of the disk-shaped earth into the abyss.)

2. Why does the Bible teach that goats will have striped offspring if they see stripes when they drink at the watering trough, when this has been discredited by modern genetics?

3. Why does the Bible record scientifically impossible events as factual?

For example, the creation narrative, Noah's deluge, a solid dome over the sky, Earth supported by a foundation. Why has the evangelical church produced "Creation Science" explanations that are complete nonsense? Why is it that none of the more rational reconciliations of science and the Bible survives scrutiny?

4. How can it be that Psalm 16 and Romans 1 teach that the creation is a reliable means of knowing God ("natural theology"), but the scientific study of biological and geological origins contradicts the creation narrative in Genesis? Why does "natural theology" contradict "revealed theology" (the Bible)? Is the creation bearing false witness? Is the Bible bearing false witness?

Absurd Doctrines

1. Where is the justice in punishing us for Adam's sin? The Bible itself says that children will not be punished for the parents' sins (Deuteronomy 24:16). Furthermore, if God really created Adam not knowing either good or evil (Genesis 3:22), how could such a harsh and enduring punishment as death for Adam and all his descendants possibly be just? Our secular courts are more just than God when they show mercy on people who cannot distinguish between right and wrong, such as children and the mentally handicapped. And why isn't this doctrine of original sin found anywhere in the Bible except in Paul's writings?

2. Where is the justice in punishing Jesus for our sins? If our courts of law were to accept the punishment of someone else in the place of the criminal, we would not say that justice has been done, but that injustice has been added to injustice. Would the church have me believe that two wrongs make a right?

3. How can sacrificing Jesus on behalf of the sinner atone for another's sin? This would be like killing my child to reconcile for the misbehavior of my neighbor's child. I have the capacity simply to forgive and forget without demanding compensation for small offenses. Why can't God do this? Does he simply want blood?

4. Why pray? If it changes God's mind then he is not sovereign. If it does not change God's mind then it is superfluous.

5. How can the doctrine of the Trinity possibly be true? Any attempt to make sense of it leads to contradictions. If it is so important, why isn't it clearly taught in the Bible? Why shouldn't an objective student of the doctrine conclude that it was created by the church to hide biblical inconsistencies about the nature of Christ behind a shroud of mystery?

6. Why is God concerned about humans at all? We are less than a speck in the universe. Christianity has the hallmarks of being a religion made by humans for humans.

7. Why have all the rational arguments for the existence of God been successfully refuted? If God exists, is it unreasonable to suppose that there would be at least one irrefutable proof of his existence?

8. Why haven't the existing proofs of God's non-existence been refuted? Surely believers, who have the advantage of an indwelling Holy Spirit with an "infinite mind," cannot be stumped by "finite minds" of unbelievers working within the confining limitations of reason, can they?

9. Why is it that some teachings are conveniently tautological (i.e., circular)? For example, you must pray the will of God in order for prayer to be answered; you must believe the Bible in order to understand the Bible; and the Bible is the Word of God, therefore it is true.

10. How exactly does "loving God and enjoying him forever" give meaning to life? Any satisfying secular activity can give meaning to life. Why does the Christian assume that a metaphysical meaning for life is necessary? Isn't it the Christian who imposes meaninglessness on this present life, declaring that meaning depends for its existence on the life to come? And if Christians did not believe they will live forever, would they continue to love and serve God? Isn't it really eternal life that the Christian loves, and not God? If purpose in this present life is really derived from loving and serving God, then what sense does it make for Christians to make meaning dependent upon a future life?

11. Where is objective, verifiable evidence that a soul or spirit exists and survives the body after death? Why does the Old Testament deny such an idea until the later writings, which show the influence of Greek ideas? The idea of "progressive revelation" does not explain this.

Message 14067624



To: average joe who wrote (1315)1/3/2013 9:13:40 AM
From: Solon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 2133
 
Heartbreaking story. How can anyone pretend that all humans are truly HUMAN. How could those men do this thing? I guess being civilized is not innate or immanent but rather is a quallity that is perhaps more rare than one thinks...

"A human being is a part of the whole, called by us "Universe," a part
limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings
as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his
consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to
our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our
task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of
compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its
beauty.
Nobody is able to achieve this completely, but the striving for such
achievement is in itself a part of the liberation and a foundation for inner
security."

Albert Einstein

``Nobody is able to achìeve this completely`` -- and that unlucky young woman crossed paths with six misfits who were unable to achieve any part of that...