Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

I - an atheist - am morally better than the Christian God

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
    Sustain the universe, be the advocate for every single human who has trusted in Him for salvation, etc. Caring for children in heaven would be higher priority and I don't know if He personally does that.
    There's no point in even responding to these guys. They aren't genuinely interested in anything any of us have to say about God.


    Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by mossrose View Post
      There's no point in even responding to these guys. They aren't genuinely interested in anything any of us have to say about God.
      I know. It's just in case anyone reading the thread cares to know the answer. They have as much sense about the treasure of Christ and a dog or pig does about pearls or precious treasure. A dog or pig would only care if it were something they could eat or play with. Actually, a dog might understand that Jesus is good better than these fools.
      If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Christianbookworm View Post
        I know. It's just in case anyone reading the thread cares to know the answer. They have as much sense about the treasure of Christ and a dog or pig does about pearls or precious treasure. A dog or pig would only care if it were something they could eat or play with. Actually, a dog might understand that Jesus is good better than these fools.
        Raqa.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
          No. And the verse about the Thief isn't even the main reason for that idea in the first place. It is the parable of Lazarus the beggar.
          You clearly do not understand that I used that verse merely as an exemplar. Once punctuation is inserted at a particular point it affects the meaning of the text in the translation.

          Originally posted by Sparko View Post
          I think you just misunderstood a phrase of speech there. I meant that we are very close to certainty. Of course, we can never be absolutely certain, but we can be very sure of what the originals must have said, based on the variants.
          That is an assumption.

          Originally posted by Sparko View Post
          I noticed you skipped over my question about what are YOUR credentials.
          My credentials are adequate for my purposes.
          "It ain't necessarily so
          The things that you're liable
          To read in the Bible
          It ain't necessarily so
          ."

          Sportin' Life
          Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

          Comment


          • Originally posted by JimL View Post
            Raqa.
            What language! And you ain't a brother in Christ. It would be wrong to call a fellow Christian an apostate as an insult.
            If it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
              I would hardly imagine that the ancient Egyptians had any concept that the ethical behaviours expected within their society were socialist or that various cenobites consider their mode of living to have socialist leanings.
              I don't buy the inherent claim that for us to categorise a thing that the person doing the thing has to categorise it the same way.

              From what you have written you appear to regard these works as reliable source documents for the events they purport to recount.
              I consider them reasonably unreliable. However, they paint a plausible picture of Jesus as a social reformer who is concerned for the poor and social outcasts and who is leading an apparently non-violent movement. This is a largely coherent and plausible depiction of a person, and is familiar to us today in people like Martin Luther King Jr.

              In Josephus' works he depicts a couple of dozen different reform and revolutionary groups with a variety of agendas over this period, so it was clearly an active time. A couple of the groups he mentions were apparently pacifist. In that general context, the gospels' presentation of Jesus as described above seems plausible so I don't see much reason to question the fundamentals of it.

              A young boy growing up in Nazareth would surely have heard of these events and of those who suffered and/or took part in them.
              Sure. It seems possible even that Jesus' father was killed by the Romans in one of the fights/massacres in the area.

              But this doesn't equate to Jesus being violent himself. He could equally have drawn the lesson from this that military resistance against the Romans was doomed to fail. Some of his words in the gospels imply he sees his countrymen on a path toward a serious military uprising against the Romans and he doesn't see it working out well for them. Obviously that's a good candidate for words-put-into-Jesus's-mouth-after-the-fact if any are, but it's also a plausible view for a thoughtful person in Jesus's time to have had.

              Basically, given the gospels paint a plausible general picture of a person leading a movement to help the poor, and given Josephus tells us a huge variety of movements and reformers were thriving at the time, I think we can take the general gospel outlines of Jesus as plausible, and not reject them in favour of assuming without much evidence that Jesus must have been the average of all anti-Roman reformists and revolutionaries we know about from that era.
              "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
              "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
              "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

              Comment


              • Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                There's no point in even responding to these guys. They aren't genuinely interested in anything any of us have to say about God.
                Not quite true. The nonsense people believe, and why they need to believe it, is always of interest. Especially when they attempt to impose these beliefs on the rest of us via legislation and vote for racist 'demigods' in order to do it.
                Last edited by Tassman; 08-21-2020, 12:32 AM.
                “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                  You clearly do not understand that I used that verse merely as an exemplar. Once punctuation is inserted at a particular point it affects the meaning of the text in the translation.

                  That is an assumption.
                  no, that is what Textual Criticism does. - that's it's goal. And the more material there is to work with, the more accurate the results.

                  My credentials are adequate for my purposes.
                  As I thought, You have no more credentials than my "hillbilly degree"

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    no, that is what Textual Criticism does. - that's it's goal. And the more material there is to work with, the more accurate the results.
                    You made an assumption with this remark "I meant that we are very close to certainty. Of course, we can never be absolutely certain, but we can be very sure of what the originals must have said, based on the variants." Without any originals we can never be "absolutely certain".


                    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    As I thought, You have no more credentials than my "hillbilly degree"
                    You are welcome to believe that if it gives you comfort.
                    "It ain't necessarily so
                    The things that you're liable
                    To read in the Bible
                    It ain't necessarily so
                    ."

                    Sportin' Life
                    Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                      You made an assumption with this remark "I meant that we are very close to certainty. Of course, we can never be absolutely certain, but we can be very sure of what the originals must have said, based on the variants." Without any originals we can never be "absolutely certain".
                      That is what biblical scholars say.

                      Source: https://normangeisler.com/a-note-on-the-percent-of-accuracy-of-the-new-testament-text/


                      NT textual authorities Westcott and Hort estimated that only about one-sixtieth rise above “trivialities” and can be called “substantial variations.” In short, the NT is 98.33 percent pure. Second, Greek expert Ezra Abbott said about 19/20 (95 percent) of the readings are “various” rather than “rival” readings, and about 19/20 (95 percent) of the rest make no appreciable difference in the sense of the passage. Thus the text is 99.75 percent accurate. Third, noted NT Greek scholar A. T. Robertson said the real concern is with about a “thousandth part of the entire text.” So, the reconstructed text of the New Testament is 99.9% free from real concern.

                      © Copyright Original Source





                      You are welcome to believe that if it gives you comfort.
                      Gee thanks for your permission.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                        That is what biblical scholars say.
                        That is what two biblical scholars wrote, both of whom are now dead, one for nearly ninety years. Robertson had no knowledge of the discoveries at Qumran and very little for Ras Shamra, those latter texts were discovered barely six years before his death. It should also be noted that both men were on the evangelical wing of Christianity and therefore had a degree of bias.

                        Schaff was an eminent scholar but he too was long dead [1819-1893] before modern archaeology was developed. Recent important archaeological discoveries, with major philological research undertaken from some of those, have all been made since his death.

                        Source: https://normangeisler.com/a-note-on-the-percent-of-accuracy-of-the-new-testament-text/


                        NT textual authorities Westcott and Hort estimated that only about one-sixtieth rise above “trivialities” and can be called “substantial variations.” In short, the NT is 98.33 percent pure. Second, Greek expert Ezra Abbott said about 19/20 (95 percent) of the readings are “various” rather than “rival” readings, and about 19/20 (95 percent) of the rest make no appreciable difference in the sense of the passage. Thus the text is 99.75 percent accurate. Third, noted NT Greek scholar A. T. Robertson said the real concern is with about a “thousandth part of the entire text.” So, the reconstructed text of the New Testament is 99.9% free from real concern.

                        © Copyright Original Source



                        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                        Gee thanks for your permission.
                        You are welcome.
                        "It ain't necessarily so
                        The things that you're liable
                        To read in the Bible
                        It ain't necessarily so
                        ."

                        Sportin' Life
                        Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                          That is what two biblical scholars wrote, both of whom are now dead, one for nearly ninety years. Robertson had no knowledge of the discoveries at Qumran and very little for Ras Shamra, those latter texts were discovered barely six years before his death. It should also be noted that both men were on the evangelical wing of Christianity and therefore had a degree of bias.
                          Qumran has nothing to do with the NT texts. And a scroll of Isaiah found there was also very close to the masoretic text with only a few significant variants, and some modern bibles have even used that scroll to update their translations.

                          I am sorry you don't accept the expert opinion of dead scholars. That must put a real crimp in your studies.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                            Qumran has nothing to do with the NT texts. And a scroll of Isaiah found there was also very close to the masoretic text with only a few significant variants, and some modern bibles have even used that scroll to update their translations.

                            I am sorry you don't accept the expert opinion of dead scholars. That must put a real crimp in your studies.
                            If you had bothered to recall my previous replies to you, you would realise that I have already acknowledged that the copies may indeed not differ widely from the original MSS.

                            The point I am making [and one that seems to have completely by-passed you] is that without those original MSS we can never be absolutely certain if what they contained corresponds exactly in every respect with those much later copies.
                            "It ain't necessarily so
                            The things that you're liable
                            To read in the Bible
                            It ain't necessarily so
                            ."

                            Sportin' Life
                            Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
                              If you had bothered to recall my previous replies to you, you would realise that I have already acknowledged that the copies may indeed not differ widely from the original MSS.

                              The point I am making [and one that seems to have completely by-passed you] is that without those original MSS we can never be absolutely certain if what they contained corresponds exactly in every respect with those much later copies.
                              I said that earlier:

                              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                              I think you just misunderstood a phrase of speech there. I meant that we are very close to certainty. Of course, we can never be absolutely certain, but we can be very sure of what the originals must have said, based on the variants.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                                I said that earlier:

                                Of course, we can never be absolutely certain, but we can be very sure of what the originals must have said, based on the variants.
                                You have contradicted yourself. If "we can never be absolutely certain" we cannot be "very sure of what the originals must have said". You cannot have it both ways.
                                "It ain't necessarily so
                                The things that you're liable
                                To read in the Bible
                                It ain't necessarily so
                                ."

                                Sportin' Life
                                Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                14 responses
                                42 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                129 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                78 responses
                                411 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                303 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X