• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Prove Your God Without Contradictions

Dans La Lune said:
If Jesus is the OT God then he did command the death of infidels. That was my point. That God became more liberal through Jesus raises a host of problems for the religion.
Click to expand...

I don't know the point you're trying to make, and I've stopped caring.
 
Elvira said:
If a belief is not supported by the Bible, then yes, it is a lie...the trinity is not...
Click to expand...

Yet some Christians on this very forum have pointed out that the trinity is in fact supported by the bible. Go figure.
 
Rising Sun said:
You are free to assume anything you like. No one can change your mind unless you want to do so.

You are desperate to prove that all atheists are the same as the dictionary definition, and as this thread proves, including your own posts, that's not true. There's the book definition and then there's the person's beliefs. From now on, instead of repeating myself, I'll just requote previous posts unless you can leave that bone for another.
Click to expand...

No, I am not trying to prove all atheists are the same, but that the nature of their atheism is the same. All atheists lack belief in gods; otherwise they can't be called atheists. Just as all theists believe in god(s). The rest of the details are irrelevant if they don't specifically relate to the belief or lack thereof in gods.
 
devildavid said:
Those are not thousands of ancient texts, but thousands of copies of the same text. Printing or copying the same text a thousand times is not the equivalent of thousands of texts.
Click to expand...

The claim about the number of texts "There are more than 25,000 partial and complete manuscript copies of the New Testament." almost never has the addendum that the vast majority of the 25,000 are dated after the 8th or 9th centuries. In the first 300 years, there are less than 100 'texts' from the New Testament and many of them are mere fragments.
 
calamity said:
As I understand it, the belief goes something like this.

God is all knowing and all powerful but he lets you do what you want even though it makes him unhappy. God is perfect, but yet 99% of all the creatures he created are now extinct and 100% of all things he brought to life will for sure one day die. God is loving, but suffering is essential, and failure of fealty results in eternity spent being tortured.

You get the picture. So, my challenge to the faithful: resolve these contradictions without introducing more of them.
Click to expand...

What contradictions? A contradiction, by way of example, “The door is open and closed.” “The circle is square.” You highlight anything but an explicit contradiction.

So what is your “challenge”? Is your challenge that a loving God wouldn’t allow such things? Fame philosopher Alvin Plantinga addressed that view in the renown work, “God, Freedom, and Evil.” To quote him, “ God's creation of persons with morally significant free will is something of tremendous value. God could not eliminate much of the evil and suffering in this world without thereby eliminating the greater good of having created persons with free will with whom he could have relationships and who are able to love one another and do good deeds.

Translation, there was no iteration of creation of people with free will that didn’t result in people choosing to do evil and by their actions, experience suffering. So, the moral significance of having people with free will, some of which freely choose to serve him for eternity, required some people freely choosing to do evil.

Now, you may interject that God could have created a people with free will who didn’t do evil. But it is not at all known God could do so. Again, God, being omnipotent, could have foreseen that in every scenario of creating people with free will, they freely chose evil in every one. God could then only do away with evil by abolishing free will and creating programmed robots.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Dans La Lune said:
If Jesus is the OT God then he did command the death of infidels. That was my point. That God became more liberal through Jesus raises a host of problems for the religion.
Click to expand...

Does it? I’ve yet to read a rational argument for this view by anyone with a firm grasp of both Testaments. Give it a shot. I’m intrigued.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
(yawning)
Another broken record rant.
 
Dans La Lune said:
Numbers 31:13–31:18 nkjv - And Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all - Bible Gateway

Exodus 32:28 The Levites did as Moses commanded, and that day about three thousand of the people fell dead.

Joshua 6:21-27 KJV - And they utterly destroyed all that was - Bible Gateway
Click to expand...

How exactly are those verses inconsistent with Jesus in the NT? I can reference similar verses by referencing but doing so doesn’t illuminate how Jesus in the NT isn’t consistent with the Lord God in the OT.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
NotreDame said:
How exactly are those verses inconsistent with Jesus in the NT? I can reference similar verses by referencing but doing so doesn’t illuminate how Jesus in the NT isn’t consistent with the Lord God in the OT.
Click to expand...

If that’s what you’re arguing, that Jesus is a monster equal to the OT God, then my work is done.
 
Dans La Lune said:
If that’s what you’re arguing, that Jesus is a monster equal to the OT God, then my work is done.
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO.

At least you can sleep smugly and self-content now. Kudos!

3m5gw3.jpg
 
NotreDame said:
How exactly are those verses inconsistent with Jesus in the NT? I can reference similar verses by referencing but doing so doesn’t illuminate how Jesus in the NT isn’t consistent with the Lord God in the OT.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Which points out a problem of the Bible, as canonized by those 300 years after the Crucifixion; there is a lot left to interpretation. This help explain why there are up to 2000 denomination of Christianity.

As for the contradictions between the OT and the NT; the main one is that the OT is a wrathful who will order the slaying of thousands while the NT preaches love and peace.
 
Rising Sun said:
As for the contradictions between the OT and the NT; the main one is that the OT is a wrathful who will order the slaying of thousands while the NT preaches love and peace.
Click to expand...

Too generalized to know specifically what you find as inconsistent. Both the OT and NT “preach” love. The OT also preaches peace. What specifically is the substantive inconsistency?

Which points out a problem of the Bible, as canonized by those 300 years after the Crucifixion
Click to expand...

I’m not sure what you mean by “canonized.” Regardless, the historical evidence shows the following. Prior to the Council of Rome and Nicea, the Christian community had reached a consensus of acceptable books, the Gospels, Acts, Ephesians, etcetera, a de facto cannon I suppose, except for the books of Revelation, Hebrew, 2 Peter, James, 2 and 3 John. A few councils later, a bishop compiled a list of NT books, the list being identical to the one previously made for Constantine’s copies of the Bible, the difference being the former was characterized as “canon.” This list recognized Revelation, 2 Peter, James, Hebrews, 2 and 3 John as “canon.” The Council of Rome in 382 adopted the list as “canon.”

So, there is evidence of a “canon” NT in circulation prior to your date “300 years after the Crucifixion,” at least a de facto canon.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Dans La Lune said:
If that’s what you’re arguing, that Jesus is a monster equal to the OT God, then my work is done.
Click to expand...

Is that the best ya got? Oh I hope your kidding. Because resorting to the Strawman argument above is illogical. You aren’t going to rationally support, what I ostensibly call your bluster at the moment, your assertion of inconsistency by way of Strawman reasoning.

You alleged inconsistency. You’ve done a fantastic job of not showing it.

In addition, if you think the God of the OT monster, then by all means demonstrate it.

The Strawman and sarcasm doesn’t demonstrate your claims are accurate.

As I said before, I’ve never read or heard a convincing argument of inconsistency like you’ve alleged here by anyone with a firm grasp of both Testaments. And I’ve encountered many of those arguments given my educational background.

So, when you made the claim of inconsistency, I thought it possible you might have a good argument.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
NotreDame said:
In addition, if you think the God of the OT monster, then by all means demonstrate it.
Click to expand...

I just gave you Bible verses as full proof of God’s monstrousness. Did you even read them? Seems we’re not speaking the same language if you did and walked away with the impression that OT God is a benevolent being.
 
Dans La Lune said:
I just gave you Bible verses as full proof of God’s monstrousness. Did you even read them? Seems we’re not speaking the same language if you did and walked away with the impression that OT God is a benevolent being.
Click to expand...

God did not author the bible. The bible describes the capriciousness of life, trying sometimes to give reason for which there is no human reason. The bible is not proof of god, or god's character.
 
ok ill give it a shot god is nothing and nothing decayed into everything because ther were no rules against it
 
OldFatGuy said:
God did not author the bible. The bible describes the capriciousness of life, trying sometimes to give reason for which there is no human reason. The bible is not proof of god, or god's character.
Click to expand...

Exactly, it's a story book about an almost certainly fictional character. There is just as much evidence that Harry Potter or Santa Claus exist as there is that the god of the bible exists.
 
Dans La Lune said:
I just gave you Bible verses as full proof of God’s monstrousness. Did you even read them? Seems we’re not speaking the same language if you did and walked away with the impression that OT God is a benevolent being.
Click to expand...

Yep, the god of the OT is a horrible being. And Jesus specifically stated in the Sermon on the Mount that all the laws that horrible being created must be followed exactly as laid down. So Jesus is no better than that OT god.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom