WHO ELSE WROTE IT?

dear Jb,

come on man! think. try. listen, if not men who else do you think wrote it? angels? think rationaly. even if 'god' inspired it how come there are so many versions? Why are there two different testaments?

Well, let me pull a "messiah" and answer your question with a question: What is your proof that the Bible was NOT inspired by psychic aliens from Alpha Centauri?

Now, do you really think you need to answer that question? How would you provide the proof I requested?

See, first I would need to show that there are intelligent aliens somewhere around Alpha Centauri. Then I'd need to demonstrate that they were visiting us. Of course then I'd need to provide evidence of their psychic abilities, and their interest in influencing our thinking. Making a fantastic claim — psychic aliens, et al. — puts the responsibility for drumming up proof squarely in my lap.

It's like this: if I need to provide proof for how the Bible is NOT inspired by a god, alien, etc., then basically any silly thing people say would be considered true until proven otherwise.

Do you see the error in your logic?

Your question is typical, however. Christians are taught to think this way. "They can't PROVE there is no god, therefore there is a god." "They can't PROVE the Bible isn't true, therefore it IS true."

It's illogical and flawed thinking, but these kinds of things are repeated so often in Christian circles, with everyone nodding their head in agreement, that they SEEM to reflect good clear thinking — at least to other Christians. Everyone else just scratches and shakes their heads.

Again: the Bible is inspired by psychic aliens from another star. What is your PROOF to the contrary?

Now, would you like to rephrase your question?

The Bible teaches that Yahweh is the Supreme Power of the universe and that the operation of his judgment upon non-believing sinners has their destruction as its end.

It is much more plausible to believe that this presentation of God was written my men who behaved in this manner, than it is to believe that it is actually true and is actually the expression of the mind of the Supreme Power in the universe.

Anyway, it doesn't work to ask people to prove a negative: "God did not speak his mind in the Bible." Even if it is true, as I believe, that God didn't write the Bible, it would be impossible to structure any evidence to prove this negative proposition.

try these sites:

http://www.bidstrup.com/bible.htm

or

http://www.geocities.com/b_r_a_d_99/

Would you care to answer your questions in regards to the

....Book of Morman?

....the Koran?

Can you prove that were not written by man, but by God?

Can you prove that they were not inspired by God?

If the God of the past present and future wrote it, in his all-knowingness, why didn't he include some video footage of the resurrection and the parting of the red sea along with some good pictures of Jesus?

Maybe this question is rhetorical.

Check out http://nobull.ws/bible-contradictions.html.

The source of god revealed!!

The source of god is your brain, your brain is communicating with your inner self or itself. Your brain is analyzing the information it sees and hears and what it has seen and been told to be accepted as truth. Language and speech is accepted and learned behavior, no one born in America has to read a book to learn how to speak the English language, it is taught by mimicking and repetition, just like a belief, it is learned behavior by mimicking and repetition, then it is memorized. The information that you receive by your parents, preacher, authority figures, is weighed by your brain as to whether it is valid or not, but since we've all been under constant rule by authority, we are afraid to challenge this information in fear of retribution or punishment or a threat of eternal damnnation.

God is only a concept, taught out of fear and ignorance, as long as humans accept fear and ignorance as legtimate norms, god and religion and urban myths will always be an accepted part and belief of society....so sad for the future of humanity.

The bible is the central point of all christian religion. Our understanding and knowledge of god comes right from that source. Even if you never cracked a bible then the knowledge you have came from someone who got their knowledge from the bible. The bible defines god, his laws, and our history with god.

What if the bible is wrong? If the bible were completely removed from this world and all knowledge that everyone has that they got from that book was also removed then what would we know about god? Pretty much nothing. So the bible is pretty important when it comes to god.

How authentic is the bible then? Is the bible accurate enough to portray god? The bible itself tells us that god wants to talk to us and that god wants us to obey his will. Many would have you believe that the bible is either inspired by god or perhaps actually his personal written word.

But how can this be? If god is omniscient then how can the bible be so flawed? It is riddled with contradiction, inaccurate history, flawed science, plagerism of other religions, indescepancies, misconception, mistranslations, alterations and irrational logic. Any search on any one of those adjectives in relation to the bible on google will bring you a plethora of knowledge on each.

So, if the bible is suspect, doesn't that throw the whole idea of god into question? If any one part of the book of divine instruction can is questionable then how can you trust any other part?

Some christians will accept that the bible should not be taken literally or that some portions of the bible have been discarded in favor of other sections (old testament over new as an example) but the same problems are found in both sections. Who is the authority of picking and choosing what should be believed as literal and what she be believed as simple guidance? The Roman Catholic church created the current layout of the bible years ago when THEY picked and chose what books to keep and which to discard. In actuality the new testament used to be considered frivolous by the RCC. The whole story of "let he without sin cast the first stone" doesnt even appear in the earliest bibles.

The bible is questionable. It is obvious that it was written by primitive men in a time when their understanding of their world was based on mythology and plagerized legends. It condones slavery, murder, rape, incest, torture and killing of innocents, butchering of entire cities, sacrifice, subverting women to a lower class, bigotry, and intollerance.

When you really take a hard look at the bible you will find that the bible is just filled with error. It simply cannot be a matter of picking and choosing what is best. If you are willing to do that then you may as well take the next step and write your own bible using modern knowledge and less primitive flaws.

But that wouldn't be very divine then would it? Neither is the bible.

I think the best way to get the answer for you question is to simply read the bible.....

Once you see all of the contradictions, massacares, genocides etc and all the loving one's neighbour and turning the other cheek etc then you see how it was written by man. If this is in fact the word of god, then he is just like us in the way that he has changed over time, i.e. matured if you will.. therefore not an all loving god! (Don't know if anyone made sense of that???)

“The Bible teaches that Yahweh is the Supreme Power of the universe and that the operation of his judgment upon non-believing sinners has their destruction as its end.”

and

This Supreme Being demands from us to acknowledge it with our measly frail human worship and in turn describes us to the likes of filthy rags. Such a needy insecure being don't you think? I mean, it owns everything so what else does it needs – extra toppings?

I guess the Christians like to be bitch slapped by a book of superstitions and urban legends. I tolerated it for a long time and finally, I just got tried of all the bruises.

>>>I guess the Christians like to be bitch slapped by a book of superstitions<<<<

Sometimes it takes a real hard SLAP, before you say "HEY, Stop hitting me !"

That's when I left. Stop Hitting me ! Stop it! But they won't. They will keep "bitch slapping" you, it's up to YOU to get out of the way...unless you like it that way...."thank you" pastor, can I have another?

Slot machines in Vegas have what is called a "Random Generator" It randomly generates a different combination of numbers or symbols every time you pull the handle, from a finite number of possibilities.

We are the result of the same kind of random selection, with one exception. Once a molecule of life learned to reproduce itself, that single exception came into play.

Every combination of elements that randomly came together after that and could not reproduce itself, vanished forever, and every combination that could, did. Some of those billions and billions of reproducing molecules of life were slightly different from the others, and reproduced better in certain environments, therefore filling every nitch in every environment. There are even worms that live at the bottom of the ocean around volcanic spouts in water that would boil us.

When the big rock hit and killed off the dinosaurs that had been around for 70 million years, wallah! The mighty little mammals had their chance to multiply and conquer the earth. They filled every environment available. They lived in trees because trees were abundant. When trees became less abundant, they came down out of the trees and started walking around. Those that learned to stand up and look around survived and reproduced better than those that didn't, and at the same time they found that by standing that their front legs were free to hold things.

Somewhere about that time, some of those mammals mutated and were born smarter than the others, and early man was on his way.

Well, to make a long story short. We "Homo Sapiens," thinking men, have not been around very long, and it isn't all that certain that we will last much longer, given the nuclear annihilation threat, and the pollution changing the environment threat, and the wars that are raging around the world over whether "My God is better than your God", SO IT MAY JUST BE A TAD TOO EARLY TO SURMISE THAT GOD GIVES A RATS ASS WHAT WE THINK, OR BELIEVE.

Speaking of rats. The next intelligent species to evolve may just evolve from the rodents. They have a lot going for them. They reproduce like crazy. They eat almost anything. They live underground, and would be less susceptible to radiation, and there are already a million varieties of them.
Dan (Rationalist)

What makes you think there is a God of supernatural power?

"What makes you think there is a God of supernatural power?"

I guess I should have started it out by saying: According to the bible, this Supreme Being......blah blah blah.

Dano, I write this comment as a human being with a mind of my own. I am throwing out any religious influence I may have spoken under previously. I have a very difficult time believing that mankind came into existance like how you just said. I do know that scientists everywhere disagree on a lot. If I see incosistancies in the science world, then that is very similar to you seeing inconsistancies in the bible. Which scientists am I supposed to believe- one's that say we came from monkeys or one's that say there is some intelligent designer of the universe? Or for that matter which man is correct- the atheist turned christian, or the christian turned atheist? Also, is global cooling or global warming going on? Who's facts can I really trust whole heartedly? I once heard that it is a billion times more likely for a hurricane to come into a junk yard and put together a perfectly running automobile, than for the world to come into being by way of some big bang. I don't even know how someone can prove a statement like that. (yall might be saying "he doesn't know a lot of anything does he?") The best evidence for a creator, that a person can physically see, is in the beauty and majesty of nature around them. Any so called fact about life and the universe written by any man can be considered skeptic. Yes that includes the Bible. All who visit this site are ponderers of deep subjects. And if we're honest with ourselves we all have a big question mark in our heads that may never be answered.

Yes, I myself tend towards the belief in the God of the Bible. Maybe Jesus was who he claimed to be. Maybe alot of the problems people have with the bible can be easily cleared up or looked at from a view they haven't looked at before.

I disagree with the comments here, every time those comments come across as if to say that the world would be free from its problems (especially wars) if religion were taken out of the picture. That is so bogus. War can be simply about resources. War can be about wanting more territory. War can be about greed. War can be about power. War doesn't need god any more than the ex christian does.

Please try and salvage any thing positive from what I wrote.

Dear JB, we cannot prove that God exists, repeat, we cannot prove that God exists. That doesn't mean he doesn't. OJ was guilty.

dont they say it's a sin to worship other gods, idols of any kind [physical or metaphorical], statues, saints, people, images?

so why then do they worship the cross, jesus [the trinity doctrine was MADE to cover themselves up of course], the STATUE of the ten commandments in front of the courthouse in the south, and most importantly... A BOOK that they swear their life on? A BOOK!!!

you guys are going to hell for worshipping the bible...

Kooky, contrary to popular religious belief, evolution does not deal with origin, and origin does not suggest that all life appeared today in some random collaberation of chaotic elements mixed together. It has been one progressive step after another where conditions exist to encourage or discourage various changes.

One example religion likes to make is a million monkeys pounding on typwriters for a million years still would not randomly type out the entire works of Shakespear. However, if a million monkeys bang on their typwriters and each time one hits the next letter correctly you keep it and continue to the next then the entire works of shakespear will be pounded out in a matter of days.

Religion also likes to bring up disagreements in science and how scientists cannot agree with each other. This is entirely misrepresented. While some do have differing opinions, it is the work of those that seek inaccuracies that strengthens the overall understanding of science. Everytime someone finds something wrong or a better way then everyone benifits - unlike religion which wants everyone to simply base everything on faith. Religion does not want the individual to think.

Taking religion out of this world wont end all its problems, but it will end all problems that religion present. Your argument is like saying "Even If i did throw all the newspapers away in my cluttered home it would still be cluttered". True. But one step at a time, as humanity shrugs off intollerance, myth, and ignorance we will begin to clean our home properly. You have to start somewhere.

"Kooky"...aka the new Ex-Christian "Target boy"; the poster-child for fundamental Christianity; the new and UN-improved prototype for "intelligent" man.

Check this out, Coo Coo. You and your Christian "Anti-knowledge" Death Cult's "hurricane through the junkyard" analogy fails miserably....I repeat---MISERABLY.(and yes, this includes your cute little "Watch falling from the building" analogy, too) The one thing that BOTH of your "analogies" conveniently leave out of the equation is "time".......f%cking SHIT-loads of it. A hurricane can pass through a junkyard in a matter of seconds, you bumbling buffoon. You also forget the "selection" part of it---the part that eliminates what doesn't "progress", and keeps what does.

Secondly, in your internet travels, have you ever seen websites where there are debates going on about the existance of "trees", or "oxygen"? That's not a "no", but a "HELL NO!"...that's because we have OBJECTIVE knowledge that those things exist....do you understand, Einstein? You haven't provided OBJECTIVE evidence for the existance of A-N-Y deity, let alone Biblegod, and/or his bastard side-kick, Buh-jebus.

BTW, your Holy book "proves" the existance of God, the same way my nephew's Ninja Turtle book proves the existance of turtles that whoop asses. ...::Hi-Yaah !::..LMAO!!!!

Hey boomslang. Why are you getting so mad? Kooky is just saying what he thinks. No need to attack him like that. Relax...
Anyway, I used to think the way kooky does and not everything christian scientists say is wrong. Anyway, still what really got me was that scientists were looking for answers and then found an answer after a lot of research. The ID-scientists or creationists had the answer first and then did their research.
It's the same with math. If you know the solution already then it is way easier to figure out how to get to that solution. If there is only the equation without a given answer it is way harder and there will be a lot of people who will have the answer wrong of only half right. Good thing the scientists are working together. So we might find the one and only solution one day. ;)
Hope y'all got my point. It's kinda hard for me since I am not a native english speaker.
Have a good one guys!
Felden

The source of the bibles(lowercase since there are so many different versions) has been traced back to ancient mythologies which preceed the bible's authors by hundreds of years or more. Thousands of biblical scholars have worked on this research, many of them religious and many not, but essentially all of them understand that it has very real human roots. More important, however, is that the history of how the bibles came to be called the word of god is extremely well documented. The declaration that the bible was the word of god was, of course, a political ploy, not a reflection of reality. The church as a political power stood to gain even greater influence and control over the lives of those persons filling the offering plates if the authority they claimed came, not from the writings of mere men, but instead from a divine source or at least a divinely-inspired one, the bible. This scholarly research is accessible on the web via a simple search. Anyone who wants to truly understand this topic has easy access, but most choose not to pursue the truth of the matter.

No, the bible was neither divinely inspired nor was it written by a deity. It was, as factually as gravity, written by self-interested, scared, ignorant, and superstitiuos men.

For Webmaster:


Good! We are already getting right to the point of what I want to talk about. Now, let's see, I am sure that you believe that one must have proof in order to know something is true or that something exists. This is pretty common knowledge, right? If some guy walks up to you and tells you that you are going to die in the next five minutes, you would say "ok....what makes you say that?" (or something to that effect) You would want proof though, wouldn't you? You would want any sources this guy has and you would want to know why he belives you will die soon and what evidence he has to back it up.
Basically, what I'm saying is that you need evidence or proof of some sort before you belive something. That's obvious, anyone would. So...why wouldn't you appply this to beliefs about the origins of the Bible? You said yourself:

"It's like this: if I need to provide proof for how the Bible is NOT inspired by a god, alien, etc., then basically any silly thing people say would be considered true until proven otherwise."

So you're saying that because you cannot prove that the Bible was not inspired by God, therefore we should believe that it isn't? How do you justify that? Furthermore, if I CAN provide proof that the Bible was written by men under the inspiration of God (which I can), then that means we should immediately accept it, right? It has to work both ways:
-If you CAN'T prove it, DON'T believe it.
-If you CAN prove it, believe it.

If this is true, (and tell if I am totally misunderstading your view of truth and beliefs) then I think you should believe that the Bible was inspired by God and it is his infallible means of direct communication with man because I can prove it to you. Now of course, the next post will be "What's your proof?" I would love to give you all my evidence for why I know that the Bible is Gos inspired, and if anyone asks for it I will gladly state in in my next post.

Now as for saying that my thinking is illogical and flawed, how are you defining illogical and flawed (saying "the dictionary" would be a sufficiate answer), granted this would open up a whole knew can of worms, but I'm certainly willing to discuss it. I really would like to know how you are defining your terms though (even though I'm sure I already know the answers you will give me).

That's all for this post but if anyone asks i'll be ready to respond about either of the aforementioned topics.

JB

jb, Can you prove that the Holy Quran is not the inspired word of God?

Allah is the only God, all other Gods are imposters.

I know that the Holy Quran is the inspired word of God, because Mohammad said it is.

Shalom

-If you CAN'T prove it, DON'T believe it.

That's it in a nutshell (pun intended)

Hello JB,

I hope you don't mind if I jump into this discussion. The first thing I'd like to clarify is that the word "proof" is a bit too strong in your statements. You also used the word "evidence" several times, and I think that is far more appropriate. When speaking of empirical facts, one can never attain 100% certainty, so the word "proof", as it is commonly understood, does not apply. Can we agree that what we should demand, before (provisionally) accepting any proposition that is put before us, is that it be supported by credible evidence?

I inserted the word "credible" in that statement because much of what is touted as evidence does not stand up to scrutiny, or is so unreliable as to carry almost no weight. An example of the latter is the existence of people who believe the proposition to be true. While I *do* consider that to be evidence, it is often so weak as to be negligible.

My position regarding the Bible is this. I do not believe that it is the product of a supernatural entity (directly or indirectly), because I have seen no credible evidence for the existence of any such being. On the other hand, and quite independently, I do believe that the Bible is the product of mere humans for a large number of reasons. Some of the credible evidence that I see for this is as follows: 1) The supernatural being that is described in the Bible is nonsensical and contradictory; e.g. touting boundless love, yet condoning and even commanding horrific violence toward innocent humans and even animals. 2) The Bible's history fits the pattern of many other so-called holy books, beginning as oral tradition, eventually codified and redacted by numerous writers, then deemed to be the "word of god." (Frankly, both the Koran and the Book of Mormon have *much* more credible stories in terms of being divinely inspired.) 3) Many of the motifs in the Bible fit those found in much more ancient religions; far more than can be explained by coincidence. For example, the slaughter of innocents is an example of the "dangerous child" motif that dates back to Krishna, and before. 4) Literary analysis of the Bible shows an unmistakable progression of embellishment and harmonization over time. Paul starts off with essentially no knowledge of an Earthly Jesus, yet my the time of John, the story has been filled in and polished. Memories do not improve with age, but legends most certainly do.

Now, you claim to have evidence that the Bible is divinely inspired. I suspect you are going to point to so-called fulfilled prophecies, or maybe even numerical codes hidden in the Bible. In any case, until you produce the evidence, and it withstands critical examination (and I doubt very much that it will, based on hundreds of previous claims that I've checked out), I see no reason to believe the Bible has any more exalted status than any other "holy book" that has been produced from human imaginations.

In response to Jim -
"Now, you claim to have evidence that the Bible is divinely inspired. I suspect you are going to point to so-called fulfilled prophecies, or maybe even numerical codes hidden in the Bible. In any case, until you produce the evidence, and it withstands critical examination (and I doubt very much that it will, based on hundreds of previous claims that I've checked out), I see no reason to believe the Bible has any more exalted status than any other "holy book" that has been produced from human imaginations."

Actually, I have no intent on pointing out prophesy fulfillments or exploring any "secret codes" in the Bible. The main reason being that I have witnessed many Christians using these sorts of examples (which I do believe are awesome evidences of God's work - don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to down-play them at all) and i have always noticed that while these people make good points, I sincerely believe that they are going about it the wrong way.

First, I want to ask you:
Why do you believe what you believe?
There are varying answers I'm sure but that does not matter because, for unbelievers, they will all eventually come to the same conclusion - You believe what you believe based on what you have learned from past experiences, right? You know that bananas exist because you've eaten one before. You know that your livingroom sofa is comfortable because you have sat in it before and it felt comfortable. You know that the cereal is going to pour out of the box tomarrow morning because it always has (provided that it was not empty, of course). You get the gist. The same goes for all of the morals and values you uphold - they are things you have experienced before and you realize the necessity or importance for them to be in your life. You base all of your beliefs on what you have previously experienced too. As many of you have shared on this website, you grew up in churches that you did not like or agree with (for whatever the reason) and have since decided that you dislike or disagree with the Christian religion. Perhaps you don't like Muslims, for example, because maybe you had a bad expeirince with Islam at some point. Whatever it is, whatever the case, as an unbeliever you base EVERYTHING in your life around your experiences.

The Christian, on the other hand, bases their entire life around 1 thing - God's Word. The Bible is the true Christian's source of beliefs and morals. It is the ultimate determining factor of right and wrong, and it is in command of every action that a believer should perform. God has chosen that person to become his child and that person can't help BUT to rely on God's infalable word.

So if nonChristians are basing all their rational on what they have experienced (which could be anything - hundreds of different views, most of them clashing with each other) then how can they POSSIBLY be expected to make correct decisions? Who decided what is officially right or wrong? Nobody. Unbelievers always need proof (or evidence, since I guess I'm not supposed to use "proof"?) before they can accept something as truth. But who came up with that idea? Well, unbelievers made it up. Sure it makes "sense" that you need evidence, but that is just because you have learned to think that way.

The Christian has been called by God and therefore embraces His Word as truth. They don't need the world's evidence to make something true or false; right or wrong. The Believer relies on God and God certianly doesn't need "proof" or "evidence". In fact he created those ideas! He doesn't need them to convince people of anything. When God wants you to believe, then you will. He calls you to him and you cannot resist it. You don't need anything or anyone on this earth to try to tell you if He or His Word exists. You will know for a fact that it does if he ever saves you. This is the simple reason why a nonChritian CAN'T accept any of this stuff about the Bible and Christ - they have never experienced him so how could they possibly understand? They can't!

Now I know this is probably not what you are used to hearing, namely because I am saying that being saved is not something that you do on your own once you have convinced yourself to or once someone else has preached it at you enough times or once you have found enough "evidence". So many times I hear people say: "well if God was real, then he would show himself and I would believe". NO NO NO! Your missing the whole point! God doesn't have to show himself to you and He certainly doesn't need any approval from you to save you! Yes of course this goes COMPLETELY against human nature, which is why it is so hard for anyone to accept. We want to be in control of our own lives and we don't want anything to do with God, so we make up excuses and reasons for things that don't involve God, like evolution. We don't want to admit that there is a higher being in control over us and sustaining us, and that this someone created us, so we say, "well we must have come from somewhere else. Hmmm...I know! Let's go try to find some evidence - that way we won't have to believe in God!".

Sadly enough, many people who are professing Chritians have done the same thing with their beliefs on Salvation (among other things). They don't like the thought of someone being totally in control of their lives (once again, this is the nature of every human) so they decide to make God seem "nicer" and they make Jesus out to be this little old loving man who simply wants to be your friend and they say that if you simply ask him, he'll let you in to the kingdom of heaven and he will bless your life forever. The reality is that God has predestined the salvation of every Chritian from the very beginning and HE chooses US to have eternal life, not the other way around.

Perhaps some of you have heard of the "Lordship Controversy" (this has been made especially popular among Evangelicals). Basically, there are people stating that "Jesus can be your Savior without being your Lord" which is a prime example of what I am saying. They don't want God to seem like this King and Ruler of everything, so they decide that they ant to go and get salvation from him and then live how they please. Just like any other nonbeliever, they are totally missing it because of their sinful instict to resist the authority of God.
I know this message is not popular among most professing "Christians" because it is much more appeasing to dress Jesus up and make him seem like this wonderful guy who is just begging for you to knock on his door. Again, so many people say things like "If God is so loving and merciful and good, then why does He kill people? And why Pearl Harbor? And why 9/11? And why...yada yada yada. Well, fact is, God id loving AND wrathful, merciful AND angry, gracious AND destructive, all at the same time -imagine that! And to us, as mere humans (yes, myself included), yeah, a lot of it doesn't make sense but that's okay. I doesn't have to make sense. We are puny little humans, why does it need to make sense to us? God has much biiger plans in store and we are a teeny, weeny little part of it. And again, where did we come up with this thinking that things "just have to make sense" to us before we will believe them? As humans, we made it up! There is no reason that what we say about something should be better and more sensical than something from an awesome, all-powerful being that's in charge of the entire univerese - let alone your life.

Well i do believe I have gone on enough for now, but I really hope you get what I'm saying. And I am certainly not trying to say that I am perfect and anyone else is stupid for not believing this - I was obviously a nonChristian before too and it has taken me YEARS to accept this stuff and there is a ton of it that I don't understand, somethings that I probably never will - and I'm ok with that. This world has to know everything and be totally smart and be on top of everything, but really what's it all mean in the end? If you understand all of the mysteries of life, how is that going to help you in the end unless you have Jesus Christ as the Lord and savior of your life?
Reality is, (and everyone realizes it of course, no matter how they want to joke about it or whatever) that everyone will die eventually, and there is only one thing that will matter then.
I really don't mean to try to throw some salvation pitch at you but it's just true.

Anyhow, it's late and I'm tired of thinking, let-a-lone writing so I'm going to stop now (no really, I promise) but I hope the comments keepa commin. I'll post again soon.

JB

I am responding to the original posting, of "who else wrote it" If one were one were to realy look back and investigete the origins of the New Testiment, one would discover that Man di in fact write the bible. It was first based on the 1rst Testement, and then elaborated on by Man. The gospells are basically comentary, written years and years after the birth of Christ. Please exuse my spelling, believe it or not, I was an English major at one time! And I would love to be a liguist major, dont have the time! But the New Testament is just a rip off of the Old testament, sort of like an upgraded version, placating to the masses. Whether "God" handed down the ten commandments to Moses is still speculative, but why hasnt he handed down anything else since then?

It was written by men,but worse it
was copied over and over by men.
Each copy added new interperatations and some scribes just added their own stories,this has been proven! Go to Barnes and Nobles and check it out a few books on the making of the bible.

sharonaavigail -
"But the New Testament is just a rip off of the Old testament, sort of like an upgraded version, placating to the masses."

Woah woah woah!
Where in the did you get that from? An "upgraded version" ?
Ok, for one thing, there is major historical context involved here. The Old Testament books were written BEFORE Jesus came (obviously because they are prophesying His birth) and they were mostly written by men of the nation of Israel, all of which were under the inspiration of God. They are about people that were under the old laws of the Israelites, the laws which Jews still follow today.
The New Testament was written after Christ's birth by several men, some of them being eyewitnesses of the events of Jesus' time (including His crucifiction). They were written for people who are no longer under the old laws (that's us) but, because of Christ's death, have been made new and separated from the old laws of sacrifices and such in the Old Testament (which are no longer necessary because Christ was the ultimate and final sacrifice for us so that we don't have to sacrifice animals anymore). It is also written about times in which people can now communicate direcly to God (through Jesus Christ because he is the God-Man and can be a messeger to common people - an important part of the doctrine of the Trinity) and they no longer have to communicate through a priest (as they did in the Old Testament and as Catholics still do). The seperation of old and new is a vital part of Chritianity and that is what seperates it from all other religions (as I haved mentioned, Jewish and Catholic religions, for example). The Testaments represent much more than just time periods and the New Testament is definitely not a revamped version of the Old Testament.
Also, after speculating about God's direct and specific giving of the commandments to Moses (which if you've ever read Exodus it's obvious), you asked:
"why hasnt he handed down anything else since then?"
Hmmm...well let's see - how about the Bible? Although I suppose if you deny the authorship and authority of the Bible, you will never see past the Ten Commandments to realize that there has never been a time when God HASN'T given us commands and blessings.
Also, for the Christian, He has given us the Holy Spirit (esintially a form of God) to lead and guide us in our everyday lives in whatever we do - couldn't ask for much more than that.

JB

Wow! what an overwhelming smell of musty socks and pee!

jb, where did you get such superior understanding and spiritual knowledge?

We've never heard such things as you speak, you must surely be the son of god.

jb, YAWN !!! bwahahahaha LOLOLOL

Holy Bejebus, Please pray for yourself to come out of your physchotic mind cult insanity.

Jesus H. Christ man you reek of jesus mind fog with after burners on. There's no one in their right mind that believes that SHIT.

Deuteronomy Ch 23 vs 2 A bastard child shall not enter the congregation of the Lord, even into his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord.

Joseph and Mary could not have been married, otherwise Mary would not have been a virgin.

If jesus existed, he could have only been a bastard child.

jb, you're finished and all washed up! Take a hike, dude.

The requirement to post on this website is to have an IQ of above 100 or equivalent to a 5th grader. go to www.godsomebodyhelpjbgetafreakinbrain.com

JB,

What you just stated in your last post didn't prove the existence of god and that the bible is factual. It's definetly all a bunch of crap that we've heard time and time again. You just rambled on and you were a total waste of my reading time, I defintely wouldn't have read it if I knew it would be the same old manure. You do realize that most of the people that visit this site are exchristians don't you?? DUH!! I hope that for your sanity that you will get a grip and go back to your original thinking, because thinking on the bible so much as you're doing will send you to the sanitarium.

Ben-
"Joseph and Mary could not have been married, otherwise Mary would not have been a virgin.
If jesus existed, he could have only been a bastard child"

Jesus Christ is God in the form of a man and His conception itself was a miracle. Mary WAS a virgin and Joseph and Mary were not married at the tim of Jesus' birth. That's the awesome thing about it - A man so perfect (a messiah) could only have been concieved by God Himself. So actually, Jesus was not a bastard child.
Also,perhaps you did not notice, but you were quoting an Old Testament verse (Deuteronomy 23:2) which, if you had actually understood (or atleast read) what I just posted earlier, you would have realized that the verse is discussing laws that were broken by Jesus' coming to earth in the first place. But that's beside the point.

BTW, an IQ level of 100 would be equal to a senior in high school not a 5th grader. (I just thought I'd let you know that since your IQ level is sooo high...)

JB

Anony -
"You do realize that most of the people that visit this site are exchristians don't you??"

Well, yeah....that would be why I'm here! I can't think of a better place to shed light the gospel than at a site for "exchritians" (there is really no such thing as an exchristian - your either a chritian now or your never have been. Salvation doesn't work like that, and the fact that you use that term only proves that you have no grasp of what being a Christian is all about - but I won't even get into that). Couldn't ask for a better audience than people who are struggling because of their unfulfilled need for Christ (even though they would never say that they are having a hard time). I'm glad you read that big long post and I was also expecting you not to care. But you did read it - that's why I posted it. Of course I'm not here get positive feedback - I'm here to srengthen my faith and reach ohers while doing it. And I've already achieved both of these in about 24 hrs. - I feel great!

JB

JB said, "I doesn't have to make sense."


You made my point! Exactly!

Thank You JB!

JB: "Unbelievers always need proof ... before they can accept something as truth. But who came up with that idea? Well, unbelievers made it up. Sure it makes "sense" that you need evidence, but that is just because you have learned to think that way."

Oh...My...God!

You are lost.

You will continue to feel great, and your faith will continue to be strengthened, as long as you continue to blindly ignore reason and logic.

Why do you think you have a brain?
To use it!
To judge for yourself between options.
To weigh up factors and "proof's".


If 'chritians' are pre-destined to be saved by god why did Jesus order evangelism?


You say "God id loving AND wrathful, merciful AND angry, gracious AND destructive, all at the same time -imagine that!"

I can imagine that quite easily. Any old human can be that way. You've just shown how human bible-god really is.
I wonder why?
- because he is a reflection of those who invented him?
No, that would make too much sense...


Even if bible-god is real, why should I obey/worship/respect him?

What makes him better than me?

The only reason I can see for giving a rat's arse what he wants out of me is if I thought he had some power to harm me.

He'll send me to Hell?

If someone put a gun in my face and said, "Hand over your wallet!"
I probably would, but it would not make them better than me.
It would not make them right.

What makes bible-god any better than such a person?

What makes him better than Adolph Hitler?

"When God wants you to believe, then you will. He calls you to him and you cannot resist it."

Ah, a fellow Calvinist and Presuppostionalist!

Keep studying man, eventually you'll wake up. Presuppositionalism is by far the best apologetic for keeping Christians in the faith because it simply denies everything that contradicts a Calvinistic worldview. It's perfect — no need for logic, thought, or concentration of any sort.

Be careful. You've surrendered your mind to other men, not to a god.

Dear jb,

As 'evidence' is not something you set any store by compared the the Word of God you declare, I assume your question was purely rhetorical. So, let us know. Are you prepared to search for evidence for the Word of God being true; or do you just believe it?

You say: 'for Webmaster' "Basically, what I'm saying is that you need evidence or proof of some sort before you belive something." (sic)

Yet you also say "The Christian, on the other hand, bases their entire life around 1 thing - God's Word"

So, I think we can safely say that we can go no further with this string. jb - you have to decide whether or not you want to adduce evidence or just rely on the Word of God. If you do want to show evidence, you will have to revisit your ideas of evidence being just a comforting human invention.

If you don't want to rely on evidence, just say so. Acknowledge that what you believe, you believe by faith which is 'The certitude of things unseen' (Heb 11.1) and don't pretend there is any basis for it other than your own experience - an experience which many here simply do not share.

JB,

Whether intentionally or not, you have opened the proverbial can of worms you mentioned.

To begin with, you asked for definitions. Ok, here you go:

Illogical: "lacking in correct logical relation" and "Ignorant or negligent of the rules of logic or correct reasoning; as, an illogical disputant; contrary of the rules of logic or sound reasoning; as, an illogical inference."

Flawed (Flaw): "An imperfection, often concealed, that impairs soundness" and "A defect or shortcoming in something intangible"

How's that? Ok, on we go...

You stated somewhere in your previous posts that it has taken you years to accept some of the things you have. I'm not surprised that you don't want to give it up so easily. However, both of your posts are chocked full of typical (and flawed) Christian logic.

Before getting too deeply into this, I want to address one big error at the beginning of your last post: "Now I know this is probably not what you are used to hearing..."

Actually, most (if not all) of us are quite used to hearing what you've said. We hear it weekly here, when some random Christian comes and posts 'evidence' or 'proof' that their brand of Christianity is true. Furthermore, many of us have heard these same things coming out of our own mouths!

The kind of flawed logic you use is not only common to Christians, it's required in order to support your faith, because without it the faith cannot be sustained.

You may not be comfortable with the idea that someone can leave the faith if they were truly Christians, but it does happen. Even to spirit-filled, bible-believing, born-again, blood-bought Christians can 'fall' from the faith, if that's what you want to call it. Read your epistles again. Paul spends most of his time encouraging the faithful to STAY faithful. Furthermore, according to Christian tradition Satan is a fallen angel, which means he once was exalted. This is not to say we here are the spawn of Satan, but it does illustrate the warm-fuzzy fallacy of Christian logic that asserts "once saved, always saved."

Ok, enough about that and on to other topics.

I think this has been noted already in one or more of the comments already posted, but it bears repeating: those making extraordinary claims bear the burden of proof.

This is difficult for some still in the faith to understand, because to them the existence of God is self-evident. It requires no proof other than the experience of the in-dwelling spirit. However, this is not the way science, archaeology, textual criticism, and other temporal methods of finding truth work.

As the Webmaster points out, if he makes an outlandish or supernatural claim, he bears the burden of proving that what he says is true, or at least give evidence that in some way verifies his claim and can be checked independently. In the same vein, when religious people claim something outlandish or supernatural, the burden of proof is on those people.

Although you've chosen to try and turn this around on us, I'm quite sure you'd adopt this same point of view if your neighbor called you up and claimed that he/she just had a meeting with Jesus, and was given a mission to eradicate all left-handed people, because they are actually demons. As a good citizen, you would probably be calling the authorities!

Now, to the meat of the argument.

You acknowledge in your last post that men wrote the Bible. For now, I'm going to ignore your claim that you have proof (or rather, evidence) that the men who wrote the Bible were inspired by God/used by God to write what they wrote.

So, essentially we agree on the premise that men wrote the Bible to the extent that the present 66 books of the Bible are the result of a couple thousand years of oral and written tradition that was accepted as scripture and passed down through the ages after numerous translations and re-tranlations, having been copied and re-copied thousands of times. All of this involved the hand of man. Can we agree on this?

Ok, assuming we do, I'd like to introduce the concept of Occam's Razor. Usually applied to science, Occam's Razor essentially says that the simplest answer is usually the right one. Another way of putting it would be that one should not make more assumptions than needed. For example, after a rainstorm you find that there is a puddle in your yard. Based on the evidence (rainstorm and puddle), you can safely conclude that the rainstorm caused the puddle, given the strong logical correlation between the two. On the other hand, it would not be reasonable to conclude that Zaphod Beeblebrox, President of the Galaxy, had used your lawn as a urinal, as it requires too many additional assumptions (that Zaphod Beeblebrox exists, that he is President of the galaxy, that the galaxy has a President, that he has means to travel to Earth, etc.).

Applying Occam's Razor to the Bible, we have a similar situation. The Bible is a book. We know man writes books. We know man was involved in writing this particular book, copying it, and translating it. It is reasonable to conclude that man wrote this book. It is not reasonable to conclude that a supernatural agent prompted man to write this book, or told him what to write, because that requires too many additional assumptions (that the supernatural agent exists, that it desires to write, that it has a means of communicating with man, etc.).

In other words, I don't need 'proof' that man wrote the Bible, nor am I required to 'prove' it to anyone else. The available factual evidence (the Bible is a book, man writes books, man was involved in writing this book) allows me to conclude that it was written by man. Additional assumptions cause me to enter the realm of the illogical.

Interestingly, Occam's Razor was devised by a Franciscan Friar (a Christian).

One more thing...

"So if nonChristians are basing all their rational on what they have experienced (which could be anything - hundreds of different views, most of them clashing with each other) then how can they POSSIBLY be expected to make correct decisions? Who decided what is officially right or wrong? Nobody."

Well, I can't speak for everyone here but I don't need a book to tell me what's right or wrong. I was raised a certain way, and my society has certain widely held morals. I don't need to read the Bible to know that I wouldn't like it if someone stole my car, and therefore conclude that it would be just as wrong to steal someone else's. Ergo, stealing is wrong. Hey! Look at that! I didn't even need the 8th Commandment!

Whether these are based on Christianity or not is irrelevant. There is no 'official' right or wrong, so to speak. Some of us face ethical dilemmas every day, and make decisions based on what we believe to be right. Sometimes, we fail miserably. Sometimes, we succeed miraculously.

Christians are no different. In fact, Christians facing the same dilemmas are subject to making the same mistakes we are, because they are human. Whatever your source for morality only informs these decisions, it doesn't make them for you. So, your implication that a Christian is somehow better equipped to deal with the world than a non-Christian is simply wrong.

Incidentally, I'd love to hear what 'evidence' you claim 'proves' the Bible was inspired by God. It'd be great to hear something refreshingly original, but frankly (and with all due respect) I doubt you can deliver.

Looking forward to your reply!

Incidentally, I'm having trouble logging in to my Blogger account, so...

This has been a post by Ubergeek!

"What is your basis for stating that the bible was written by men?"

Because biblegod has exactly the same traits, prejudices, hatreds, jealousies and power trips that men do.

I do believe in a deity, but it sure isn't one who kills people and then says he can't tolerate being in the presence of sin. Biblegod has committed cruelties that I would never dream of doing even if my life depended on it. So either the bible's idea of God is fallible or I'm just a better person than your God.

JB, you show faint glimmers of cogency, but then you invariably slide back into an abyss of murky unsubstantiated assertions, glib answers, and innuendo. I'm not going to bother responding to most of your post; others have already dismantled your "argument" as well as I, so there is no need to repeat it. I will pick a few things to reply to, however.

JB: "...As many of you have shared on this website, you grew up in churches that you did not like or agree with (for whatever the reason) and have since decided that you dislike or disagree with the Christian religion...."

This statement gives you away. It shows that you simply dismiss what we've been saying; it doesn't even enter your consciousness that we have considered the claims of Christianity very deeply. I'd wager that most of us here have thought it through far more thoroughly than you have. So, we did not reject it because we simply "dislike" it or "disagree" with it, but because we have reached the conclusion that is it PURE FICTION. It does not hold up to critical examination. It is an illogical house of cards. It has no substantiated basis. Is any of this sinking in?

JB: "The Christian, on the other hand, bases their entire life around 1 thing - God's Word. ...God has chosen that person to become his child and that person can't help BUT to rely on God's infalable word."

That is patently circular. You are supporting the position of the Christian (i.e. that the god of Abraham exists) by asserting that god exists. That doesn't work. Everything you say is nonsense unless your purported god exists, and you have made not one inch of progress toward showing that he/she/it does exist.

JB: "Unbelievers always need proof (or evidence, since I guess I'm not supposed to use 'proof'?) before they can accept something as truth. But who came up with that idea? Well, unbelievers made it up."

Sorry, but I just can't help but calling this one as I see it. That is simply off the scale of stupidity. But wait...

JB: "...Sure it makes 'sense' that you need evidence, but that is just because you have learned to think that way."

...it just got even stupider. Your argument goes down in flames like this: just try suspending that rule for ten seconds. Let's see what happens if we deem everything true that somehow strikes our fancy (or anybody else's fancy) without any supporting evidence. Well, we now have a pantheon of gods and goddesses; they all exist because somebody said so, and without evidence. We now have the fact that UFOs visit our planet and routinely abduct people. We now have Sasquatch, the Loch Ness Monster, elves, poltergeists, pixies, and people who can bend spoons telepathically. Now, if we re-instate that one simple rule again--if we simply insist on having credible supporting evidence before accepting every claim--we are back to a place where we can begin to sort fact from fantasy. That's where I live. That's where most everybody else here lives. You an join us if you like.

"The Christian has been called by God and therefore embraces His Word as truth. They don't need the world's evidence to make something true or false; right or wrong."

Then there is no way to distinguish what they say from pure fantasy.

"Now I know this is probably not what you are used to hearing,..."

Absolutely wrong. You are a garden-variety Christian. You have said absolutely nothing of substance. Was all that bluster about "evidence" was just for show? Right now I'm kicking myself for wasting my time responding to such sophomoric nonsense.

Ubergeek, that was an excellent reply to JB. I think you are exactly right, and you didn't even resort to the "s" word as I did in my post above. Well done.

JB:
You clearly have Stockholm syndrom. You have been kidnapped and brainwashed by xianity and now you are an addict and believe the propaganda of your captors. My mother and her family tried with me and failed miserably....thank god!!!!ha! ha! ha! I'd rather be addicted to heroin....at least the high would be real.

Anyway, Mary was definitely NOT a virgin. The definition of virgin is merely "maiden" or unwed woman. Surely you've heard of other "virgin births" that were meant tongue in cheek??? It is likely Mary was raped or willingly fornicated and to protect her reputation, **viola!** she was a pregnant virgin! Also if she had not been a virgin, she could not have married so she had to have a miraculous pregnancy to marry Joseph. That is just another falicy of the buybull that MEN wrote to control man-kind's behavior, (especially women-kind).

As previously posted, if for no other reason than the sheer number of times it has been translated, the buybull has no validity. Not to mention that xians can't even agree on a version of it. It was NOT written by god. It was written by men to answer men's philosophical questions for which man was not advanced enough to answer with science. It is no different that Greek and Roman mythology which was created for the same purpose. In fact, a lot of the bible was stolen from mythology or other more ancient religions and almost all religions have some form of "virgin birth".

Newspaper reporters can't accurately report an item mere hours after an event. But you are willing to believe the buybull, specifically the new testament, which was written 200-300 years after the supposed death and resurrection of a man who probably didn't even exist, in a language that no longer exists and has been translated and interpreted innumerable times over the last 1700 years. There is probably not 10% of it that is accurate to the original writing, and the original writing was probably not even 10% accurate to the events. Gullible, gullible, gullible. My dad used to say "There should be a tax for being stupid." I've told him there is....any donation to any religious organization!!!

Heathen Sister, Brilliant simply brilliant, I applaud you, of course, not to over look the other ex-tians that post on this website, you're all brilliant and I thank you all!

Now like you said H-S, Mary could not have been married and been a virgin, so this leaves jesus as a bastard child, also Mary and Joseph had the opportunity to speak up for their child, but chose not to, because Joseph was not the father of jesus, but a child born out of wedlock, Mary knew who the father was, but it was not from any god or angel, she knew that she would be stoned to death the moment that she revealed who the real father was.

It would also be practical to say that all virgin girls even today, should be weary of being inseminated by an Angel of god at any given moment, I mean, if it can happen once before, then god may just send an angel to inseminate a new virgin, why not?

Also the bible could not have been written or inspired by a god, when it took god only 6 days to create the whole universe, yet it has taken this god many thousands of years to write the buybull, it would have been quicker for god to have created another universe, and started all over, this time getting things right, like he/she wanted to, to begin with.

It's all make believe, child/adult pretend. If there really was a god in a church, who would ever want to leave the church? Would'nt we all want to stay there and marvel over this wonderful creator god? But the preacher says you all can go now, he has your money, go and be of good cheer, he and his family is headed to the Steak House....lol

This website is to help people wake up and get real, a few christians eventually get it.

To JB,
Wow you've been taking a beating and you just keep coming back. I just want to put in my two cents. I am not an ex-Christian because I never was a Christian. I have tried so hard to find a god in my life and have always came up empty, and it hasn't been from a lack of trying I guarentee you that. I think I was born with a mind that is very analytical and everytime I have tried to find religion, my inner bullshit detector has gone off loud and clear. I lost one of my best friends to religion. He is now totally brainwashed and will not associate with me the non-believer. I just don't get how people buy into it, but I guess JB is a shining example. My you live your life obeying God's word.

JB: "Sure it makes "sense" that you need evidence, but that is just because you have learned to think that way."

The same "sense" it makes that a Court of Law requires evidence to support allegations and alibis in criminal cases?

Okay, where do I begin?

First of all, i noticed you're playing the "Shift the burndon of proof" game, which is absolutely pointless, as it proves nothing either way.

Secondly have you never heard of Accum's Razor? The simplest explenation is usually the correct one. This would be that the Bible was written by humans.


And what proof do you have that Homer's Odysey was written by humans? Or jurney to the West?


Look here's what happened; some primitive tribes from Ejyptdeveloped a Monotheistic mythology and then traveled east, and then found Hitites on land which they claimed their God gave THEM. So they murdered every man woman, boy and animal. But they kept some of the little girls as sex slaves (In the Bible, they're called "Trial wivves".)

Several of the Jews had written down books of their mythology, which were then compiled by several schollars into one big book.

Then,the Bible was translated by Greek converts to Christianity from hebrew to Greek. then from Greek to Latin. Then from Latin to German. Allot of stuff got edited, changed, mistranslated (sometimes on purpose) entire sections got cut out, and eventually, what you get is a complete mess. A book full off Trial Wives and marrying your brother's widow and slavery and Flat Earth and punishing entire cities for the minor crimes of one person.


Actually, if you think about it, why would an omnipotient being need a bible, or a church? Why not send down angels to act as police? i know, that would interfere with faith or free will or something. But then why do we need inquisitions and jihads and all that brainwashing? And considdering the mess that it's become, why not send down angels to fix the mistakes? Why do we need old men in pointy hats to work through crumbling olp papyrus papers when there's a bloody guy upstairs to who can create an entire universe with a sentence?

I say let the Gods do their oun killing.

@Jim Arvo,

Thank you sir! I agree with you, this topic is screaming to be labeled with the "s" word. Personally, I felt you and some of the other folks had already nailed the coffin shut on this one, but since JB kept hanging on there it seemed like a good idea to spell it out for him.

Happy Friday!

Still having trouble with my account...

Ubergeek

J.B.!not that you will come out of your coma long enough to understand,but most of us were very dedicated fundamentalist christians.Many of us were ordained ministers(me for 20 yrs)!
Your refusal to accept this proves your just another brainwashed cult
member of churchianity.Your"once saved always saved" doctrine is also proof your brain has been hi-jacked by a denominational cult!
Wake Up!!!in jeebus name,.Awake!!
I command thee awake from thy
Coma,NOW!!!!in jeebus name,
amen.

Freddy,

I swear these Christians behave as if they are stuck in a bad marriage and can't get out...The cheaper to keep her mentality, the "what ifs Pascal Wagers," I hate my job, the pay is crappy and it only affords me to eat cat food - BUT, I’m loyal to the end. What confusion.

The 'S' word?
Was that "Sasquatch"?
;)

I can prove (for myself, anyway) that the Bible was written by men.

The fact that it goes a lot easier on men than on women proves that it was not written by women.

The fact that it gives detailed instructions on how to conduct slavery proves that it was not inspired by an essence that is one with everything.

Spacemonk asked "The 'S' word? Was that 'Sasquatch'?"

No, no, no... "Sasquatch" is a 'B' word! Don't make me use the "s" word on you. :-)

Spacemonk says: "The 'S' word?
Was that "Sasquatch"?
;)"

I thought the "s" word was "Spacemonk." ;D


Ubergeek

Oops. I didn't think about context...

Sorry Spacemonk!

Ubergeek

In response to Jim -
"Now, you claim to have evidence that the Bible is divinely inspired. I suspect you are going to point to so-called fulfilled prophecies, or maybe even numerical codes hidden in the Bible. In any case, until you produce the evidence, and it withstands critical examination (and I doubt very much that it will, based on hundreds of previous claims that I've checked out), I see no reason to believe the Bible has any more exalted status than any other "holy book" that has been produced from human imaginations."

Actually, I have no intent on pointing out prophesy fulfillments or exploring any "secret codes" in the Bible. The main reason being that I have witnessed many Christians using these sorts of examples (which I do believe are awesome evidences of God's work - don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to down-play them at all) and i have always noticed that while these people make good points, I sincerely believe that they are going about it the wrong way.


First, I want to ask you:
Why do you believe what you believe?
There are varying answers I'm sure but that does not matter because, for unbelievers, they will all eventually come to the same conclusion - You believe what you believe based on what you have learned from past experiences, right? You know that bananas exist because you've eaten one before. You know that your livingroom sofa is comfortable because you have sat in it before and it felt comfortable. You know that the cereal is going to pour out of the box tomarrow morning because it always has (provided that it was not empty, of course). You get the gist.

[RIGHT…]

The same goes for all of the morals and values you uphold - they are things you have experienced before and you realize the necessity or importance for them to be in your life. You base all of your beliefs on what you have previously experienced too. As many of you have shared on this website, you grew up in churches that you did not like or agree with (for whatever the reason) and have since decided that you dislike or disagree with the Christian religion. Perhaps you don't like Muslims, for example, because maybe you had a bad expeirince with Islam at some point. Whatever it is, whatever the case, as an unbeliever you base EVERYTHING in your life around your experiences.

[Wrong!I spent a long time THINKING about it, and came to the conclusion that science is based on evidence, whereas Christianity is the same as any other myth]



The Christian, on the other hand, bases their entire life around 1 thing - God's Word.

[Isn’t that special?]



The Bible is the true Christian's source of beliefs and morals. It is the ultimate determining factor of right and wrong, and it is in command of every action that a believer should perform. God has chosen that person to become his child and that person can't help BUT to rely on God's infalable word.

[So, you believe that it is right to go to a foreign village, murder every man, woman, boy and animal, and then take a little girl, keep her in your tent, shave her head, strip her, rape her, and then depending on how pleased you were, either keep her as your oun sex slave or leave her to die?]


So if nonChristians are basing all their rational on what they have experienced (which could be anything - hundreds of different views, most of them clashing with each other) then how can they POSSIBLY be expected to make correct decisions? Who decided what is officially right or wrong? Nobody. Unbelievers always need proof (or evidence, since I guess I'm not supposed to use "proof"?) before they can accept something as truth. But who came up with that idea? Well, unbelievers made it up. Sure it makes "sense" that