Bible Disproved By One Scripture

[ajb]

Sorry but I don't see how not believing in God would benefit me

That is not the question to ask at first.

 

The point is, as Phi says, is for you to re-evaluate the evidence. Thats all. Maybe this will change your mind, maybe not.

Edited July 4, 2016 by ajb

[granpa]

What difference does it make whether God exists or not?

[Moontanman]

What difference does it make whether God exists or not?

 

 

If it could demonstrated that god doesn't exist maybe lots of believers would stop believing. That would stop believers who want to teach religion in our public schools, Maybe stop believers from passing laws that are based on their religion.

 

No more street preachers would be a significant side effect...

Edited July 5, 2016 by Moontanman

[Phi for All]

What difference does it make whether God exists or not?

 

The rational stance is "We don't know". So the importance is on treating evidence skeptically, verifying it or falsifying it before deciding to trust it or not. There's no evidence either way about god(s) existing, so natural explanations are more reasonable than supernatural ones.

 

It's OK to trust science while still honestly saying "We don't know" about the existence of god(s). In the end, it doesn't make a difference whether god(s) exist or not, what matters is not weakening the foundations of your knowledge with Iron Age irrationalities and wishful thinking.

[Delta1212]

Sorry but I don't see how not believing in God would benefit me

I don't know that it would benefit you. What benefits do you derive from believing in God?

 

And I'm not asking that in a rhetorical "there are no benefits" way. I'm genuinely asking what benefits you personally derive from your belief. I know of some potential answers in the abstract, but I'm curious about your individual experience.

[Ultimate Infinity]

First of all hope and strength I am dealt with depression throughout my life and I firmly believe that my belief in God was what did and still helps me pull through and learn things from struggles also my grandpa died recently and if it wasn't for my belief in God and heaven I would be a mess

[Moontanman]

First of all hope and strength I am dealt with depression throughout my life and I firmly believe that my belief in God was what did and still helps me pull through and learn things from struggles also my grandpa died recently and if it wasn't for my belief in God and heaven I would be a mess

 

 

So you take comfort in a delusion? Religion is not just a comfortable delusion. Religion causes calculable harm, up until the beginning of the enlightenment when secular governments gelded religion, from things like the divine right of kings to Jesus saying not to wash your hands religion has done a tremendous amount of harm. You are welcome to your beliefs as long as your beliefs do not require that you convert others or take rights away from people your religion tells you to.

 

Religion has been the reason millions of people were and in some countries still are killed for simply not believing or for believing in a god or gods the people in power do not believe it.

 

I have never seen religion do anything positive that could not be done by non religious humans. In many cases religion asserts that the believers should do harm to others. Keep your religion in your church and stop trying to govern the rest of us by the rules of your religion.

 

Taxation of religious offerings would also be a good idea...

[dimreepr]

"

 

So, you are saying Christ got it wrong.

He said he was here to fulfil the laws, but you say that's impossible.

You seem to be arguing against yourself.

Then they screwed up royally.

The OT tells you that rape and slavery are OK. The NT tells you that the first one was right and that not a jot or a tittle of it will ever change.

 

 

Are you saying Jesus was right?

The OT was a book out of it's time 2000 years ago and this interpretation of that verse is, I think, the reason it's included, in what we call the bible, and has done nothing but muddy the waters and prevent any meaningful insights in the NT from being understood.

[John Cuthber]

 

 

Are you saying Jesus was right?

 

The OT was a book out of it's time 2000 years ago and this interpretation of that verse is, I think, the reason it's included, in what we call the bible, and has done nothing but muddy the waters and prevent any meaningful insights in the NT from being understood.

I'm saying your point of view is inconsistent.

There is no issue of "interpretation" of the bit where Christ says "the old rules are here to stay". That's what he said.

 

Why not throw out both books and start from scratch without the nonsense?

[Phi for All]

The OT was a book out of it's time 2000 years ago and this interpretation of that verse is, I think, the reason it's included, in what we call the bible, and has done nothing but muddy the waters and prevent any meaningful insights in the NT from being understood.

 

I think it was put together purposefully to be muddied waters that only the clergy could help common man see his way through. Constantine and the Council of Nicea weren't stupid, and that was a chance to compromise and become the most powerful religion ever. If any of it had a coherent meaning that people could follow themselves, they wouldn't need the clergy.

[dimreepr]

I'm saying your point of view is inconsistent.

 

 

My POV is both books are out of their time and that they were both trying to teach contentment; however the OT is simply to far out of it's time for anything meaningful to be discerned. I fail to see the inconsistency in any of my posts.

There is no issue of "interpretation" of the bit where Christ says "the old rules are here to stay". That's what he said.

 

 

Come on John we both know that's not what he said and of course it's open to interpretation, given when it was written and the culture and language it was written in.

 

"Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose." - New living translation

 

"In everything, then, do to others as you would have them do to you. For this is the essence of the Law and the prophets." - Mathew 7:12

Why not throw out both books and start from scratch without the nonsense?

 

 

I agree but failing that why not just throw out the OT, that's where the nonsense resides?

 

I think it was put together purposefully to be muddied waters that only the clergy could help common man see his way through. Constantine and the Council of Nicea weren't stupid, and that was a chance to compromise and become the most powerful religion ever. If any of it had a coherent meaning that people could follow themselves, they wouldn't need the clergy.

 

 

When understanding wanes the politicians move in.

Edited July 5, 2016 by dimreepr

[Ultimate Infinity]

Also remember this is God's words which obviously are much more elaborate than any human words in history by an infinite amount so they can probably be interpreted to help every individual sentient person improve in their own way according to their special unique traits

[ajb]

Also remember this is God's words....

Citation please

 

Mortal men claim that the Bible is the word of God, but not all of us take that on face value.

Edited July 5, 2016 by ajb

[dimreepr]

Also remember this is God's words which obviously are much more elaborate than any human words in history by an infinite amount so they can probably be interpreted to help every individual sentient person improve in their own way according to their special unique traits

 

 

In some ways I admire your conviction and hope it brings you peace but you don't need god to be content, you just need to understand how.

[DrP]

It does say in the book that the Christian secret to a happy life is contentment!

 

If it was the word of god then why are there so many mistakes and wrong things?

[John Cuthber]

 

 

My POV is both books are out of their time and that they were both trying to teach contentment; however the OT is simply to far out of it's time for anything meaningful to be discerned. I fail to see the inconsistency in any of my posts.

 

 

Come on John we both know that's not what he said and of course it's open to interpretation, given when it was written and the culture and language it was written in.

 

"Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose." - New living translation

 

"In everything, then, do to others as you would have them do to you. For this is the essence of the Law and the prophets." - Mathew 7:12

 

OK That's the second time you have deliberately not looked at the right line from the Bible.

And once again I wonder why you thik we wouldn't notice.

The one that says (as I put it) "the old rules are here to stay" is this one

"For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

or, if you prefer the older translation "

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

rather than the irrelevant line that you keep insisting on.

 

It's pretty clear that He says the old laws are here to stay forever.

 

Pointing out that some other line says something irrelevant doesn't change that.

 

Also re "do to others as you would have them do to you.".

Well, I can't say Matthew didn't say it.

But he certainly wasn't the first.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule#Antiquity

and it never did tally with rape and slavery as being "good things".

 

The Bible as, as you say,a book of its time.

It's time is past. We should stop paying it any attention.

The only good bit in it is the "do unto others as you would have others do unto you" and it copied that bit from somewhere else without the decency to attribute the quote. So, even when it gets something right, it still manages to do wrong.

Also remember this is God's words which obviously are much more elaborate than any human words in history by an infinite amount so they can probably be interpreted to help every individual sentient person improve in their own way according to their special unique traits

Actually, not only do we know that they are the words of men, but we know which men wrote it, and when and where.

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

 

Did your preacher not tell you that?

You might want to ask why.

[dimreepr]

OK That's the second time you have deliberately not looked at the right line from the Bible.

And once again I wonder why you thik we wouldn't notice.

The one that says (as I put it) "the old rules are here to stay" is this one

"For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

or, if you prefer the older translation "

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

rather than the irrelevant line that you keep insisting on.

 

It's pretty clear that He says the old laws are here to stay forever.

 

Pointing out that some other line says something irrelevant doesn't change that.

 

 

My word I didn't realise he spoke English.

 

The Bible as, as you say,a book of its time.

It's time is past. We should stop paying it any attention.

The only good bit in it is the "do unto others as you would have others do unto you" and it copied that bit from somewhere else without the decency to attribute the quote. So, even when it gets something right, it still manages to do wrong.

 

 

That's rather closed minded, what about turning the other cheek or love thy nieghbour, but so what if it was copied (that's kinda my point)?

 

And again it's the OT that manages to do wrong and confuse.

[John Cuthber]

 

 

My word I didn't realise he spoke English.

 

 

 

That's rather closed minded, what about turning the other cheek or love thy nieghbour, but so what if it was copied (that's kinda my point)?

 

And again it's the OT that manages to do wrong and confuse.

Way to go on missing the point there.

I presume you are hoping nobody noticed.

It's actually an interesting question.

 

It's like trying to assign either truth or falsehood to the statement "Bilbo Baggins said "what have I got in my pocket?"

Obviously, he didn't say anything because he didn't exist.

But if you said that in a pub quiz, you wouldn't get the points.

I accept that I should have said that it is reported that he said that- or it's equivalent- and I did point out earlier that it's a translation.

 

But, as I said, the interesting question is why do you keep ignoring the fact that the relevant part of the scripture

"For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

is quite clear; the laws stay forever.

Re "What about turning the other cheek or love thy nieghbour,"

Good question; what about them?

They are both small aspects of the agreed sensible course (several millennia earlier than Matthew) that you should do unto others...

 

So there's nothing( as far as I can tell) in either testament that really adds to that.

So it's something like 800,000 words longer than it needs to be.

[dimreepr]

It seems we are missing each others point, perhaps if the bible had a title like 'How to be content with your lot' written by John Steinbeck, we'd see eye to eye. Conveying an understanding isn't a simple prospect and aphorisms only hint or steer towards it; try explaining time in less than 800,000 words.

Edited July 5, 2016 by dimreepr

[Ultimate Infinity]

It does say in the book that the Christian secret to a happy life is contentment!

 

If it was the word of god then why are there so many mistakes and wrong things?

What mistakes

[dimreepr]

What mistakes

 

 

The Old Testament.

[Ultimate Infinity]

 

 

The Old Testament.

Geez don't be too specific. ( Note there was a heavy dose of saracasm in that last statement)

[dimreepr]

Geez don't be too specific. ( Note there was a heavy dose of saracasm in that last statement)

 

 

It seems you've missed mine.

[granpa]

How about God created microorganisms on day 4 becoming corrupted into God creating sun moon and stars on day four?

[John Cuthber]

It seems we are missing each others point, perhaps if the bible had a title like 'How to be content with your lot' written by John Steinbeck, we'd see eye to eye. Conveying an understanding isn't a simple prospect and aphorisms only hint or steer towards it; try explaining time in less than 800,000 words.

" try explaining time in less than 800,000 words."

No, I won't- because that would be another irrelevance you have introduced.

" if the bible had a title like 'How to be content with your lot' written by John Steinbeck, we'd see eye to eye. "

If it was then few would have read it and it would never have been used as a "justification" for racism, slaver and so on.

 

"It seems we are missing each others point, "

Well to me you seem to be deliberately missing it.

 

Moontan man said

"I am curious, between murder, rape, genocide, slavery, sex slavery, sex slavery of underage girls, bigotry, pillage, and the portrayal of God as a jealous vindictive monster what do you think there is to learn? "

You said "I'm curious as to the verses in the NT that suggest any of that, care to provide one?"

and I pointed out that the answer is Matthew 5 18

​and your rather silly response was that Matthew 5:17 doesn't say that.

Well so what?

Nobody said it did.

It's about something else.

 

My point is that you can't claim that the NT changes anything- because it quotes Jesus as saying that nothing will ever change.

So it says the OT is still the law- with all the nasty stuff that Moontanman described.