Atheists can't help but bring religion into everything.
Face it: in the cosmic consciousness soup, humans are on the level of a flatworm. There are "some things" out there more powerful, longer lived, more capable than we can even try to understand.
Right because belief in the Christian God is stupid, but belief in the "cosmic consciousness soup" is totally not batshit crazy, degenerate and retarded new age drivel, brought to you by freemasons and jews.
Funny thing, it sounds like you think your nameless data-free god "thing" is older and bigger ("more powerful, longer lived, more capable") than this pitiful Yahweh character.
Sounds like this doesn't call for data but for a contest of deity. Shall we call fire from heaven via tattooed gematria, or see whose relic smashes whose? I would be happy to serve any god that could lick Yahweh in a fair fight.
Because whenever I test narrative memory and cosmic consciousness I keep bumping into him where no other can fit. I was asked here because I've hung with the real Inanna and Dumuzid long before the First Dynasty and have looked into all the forbidden texts I can find. And the guy that keeps quietly asserting himself keeps calling himself Yahweh (Being).
Wrong. Human nature prohibits us from making a Sinless, Holy, Just God. We are so flawed and stupid. We like to believe works save us. Read Genesis. Read the Bible. What do you know about Christianity??
The "made up" theory works better on millions years, evolution, abiogenesis, than for Christianity.
Say Aunt Sally learns in a dream the recipe for an elixir that preserves her youth. When she wakes up, she scribbles the directions on a scrap of paper, then runs to the kitchen to make up her first glass. In a few days Aunt Sally is transformed into a picture of radiant youth because of her daily dose of “Sally’s Secret Sauce.”
Aunt Sally is so excited she sends detailed, hand-written instructions on how to make the sauce to her three bridge partners (Aunt Sally is still in the technological dark ages—no photocopier or email). They, in turn, make copies for ten of their own friends.
All goes well until one day Aunt Sally’s pet dog eats the original copy of the recipe. In a panic she contacts her three friends who have mysteriously suffered similar mishaps, so the alarm goes out to the others in attempt to recover the original wording.
Sally rounds up all the surviving hand-written copies, twenty-six in all. When she spreads them out on the kitchen table, she immediately notices some differences. Twenty-three of the copies are exactly the same. Of the remaining three, however, one has misspelled words, another has two phrases inverted (“mix then chop” instead of “chop then mix”) and one includes an ingredient none of the others has on its list.
Do you think Aunt Sally can accurately reconstruct her original recipe from this evidence? Of course she can. The misspellings are obvious errors. The single inverted phrase stands out and can easily be repaired. Sally would then strike the extra ingredient reasoning it’s more plausible one person would add an item in error than 25 people would accidentally omit it.
Even if the variations were more numerous or more diverse, the original could still be reconstructed with a high level of confidence if Sally had enough copies.
This, in simplified form, is how scholars do “textual criticism,” an academic method used to test all documents of antiquity, not just religious texts. it’s a careful linguistic process allowing an alert critic to determine the extent of possible corruption of any work.
Wow, bro, only 1 reply to you and you react ultra defensively. Not even 5 comments in! Tell me, are you a coward who runs upon scrutiny of your worldview, or do you have actual defenses for it?
You think you are so right, but I wanna call that into question. Pride is bad.
Let's break this down:
I've read more ORIGINAL bible versions than your two brain cells will ever comprehend.
So you mean you read all the thousands of copies of manuscripts? How you define "original versions" is unclear.
Your lack of human history, belief systems, religions is so dumbfoundedly ignorant it is almost impossible to understand.,
"People made beliefs over time that partially echoed the truth so no faith is legit!!" This is a fallacy.
There are many people defending the Truth that is Christianity. Meanwhile, good luck seeing anyone argue for theose other belief systems!! Scrutiny and logic tends to prune away fake beliefs and leaves true beliefs standing!
For you "history", "world", "god" and belief start with the cheap re-written copy of the Torah c. 300 AD
God is eternal.
Thats what you say, and I believe history and the world started ~6K years ago. Yeah ofc you disagree but feel free to rebut that.
censored by post Roman ruling scholars.
What about the rich man and lazarus? What about "love thy neighbor"? What about Jesus' Kingdom being NOT of this world?? What about the Romans killing the literal Savior?? Given the content in the Bible, The romans musta been stupid morons who left a bunch of stuff to criticise them!! Or, you can admit God inspired people to write the Books of the Bible.
And the Torah is just a re-written censored piece of polytheist beliefs of Judaism c. 700 BC
So you believe it came from polythiesm. But i believe polythiesm came AFTER people knew about the true God. So who is right and why? It makes no sense that people would have a strict trend of reducing number of gods. Humans are rebellious by nature so they would make more gods.
to be a single god monotheistic religion in the worship of YHWH.
If polythiesm was true, there would be conflicts among the "gods".
But you know what: people existed before any of those were invented. Before Moses (copy of a Sumerian story, with name changed) left Egypt (another false story, copied from Sumer).
Did i say otherwise? Nope. Obviously humans existed before books. God created men, then men discovered the ability to write and invented books.
Why do you take a gnostic stance, rather than an agnostic one, on dates of when things were written?
Those people believed in gods (plural), knew languages before Hebrew, were in tribese before a single jew or son of Israel had born, and had a notion of history, cosmology and where we came from.
Yes. Adam and Eve existed before Hebrew and Isreal. None of this proves the Bible wrong.
books older, and less censored than the bibleS (yes, there are hundreds of bible versions, some are so drastically different
Do you know what Textual Criticism is? I will bet you have barely considered HOW we got the Bible and what went into translation. The most accurate one is NASB 1977 and 1995.
If aliens coming to earth in the year 4050 have to translate books promoting u/factdigger 's worldview written in 1995, into THEIR own language, are they out of luck?
they'd blow your mind, if you were intelligent enough to read them).
My rebuttals might make you question your worldview, if you care enough to read them.
Also, I notice you never explained how fallible stupid humans made the Sinless, Perfect God. If God does not exist, we should never be able to conjure attributes higher than ours. We are all there supposedly is, how could we concieve anything higher? All other gods lack Omnipotence, and other religions save by works. Christianity is the only one among the religions that says Faith saves, Faith is a gift from God. Faith is not blind, why would you think it is? It is athiests who believe such.
I have a big ol community full of evidence c/evidencedump.
Atheists can't help but bring religion into everything.
Right because belief in the Christian God is stupid, but belief in the "cosmic consciousness soup" is totally not batshit crazy, degenerate and retarded new age drivel, brought to you by freemasons and jews.
Funny thing, it sounds like you think your nameless data-free god "thing" is older and bigger ("more powerful, longer lived, more capable") than this pitiful Yahweh character.
Sounds like this doesn't call for data but for a contest of deity. Shall we call fire from heaven via tattooed gematria, or see whose relic smashes whose? I would be happy to serve any god that could lick Yahweh in a fair fight.
Because whenever I test narrative memory and cosmic consciousness I keep bumping into him where no other can fit. I was asked here because I've hung with the real Inanna and Dumuzid long before the First Dynasty and have looked into all the forbidden texts I can find. And the guy that keeps quietly asserting himself keeps calling himself Yahweh (Being).
Name the time, place, and referee, and it's on.
u/guywholikesDjtof2024
Oh all right. All right! A man with nine legs.
He ran away.
24-hour rule, I win!
u/guywholikesDjtof2024 has roundly dismembered you. In before you threaten to bite my kneecaps off.
Sure you do. What's the source that reveals the true god?
Invented by who?
Wrong. Human nature prohibits us from making a Sinless, Holy, Just God. We are so flawed and stupid. We like to believe works save us. Read Genesis. Read the Bible. What do you know about Christianity??
The "made up" theory works better on millions years, evolution, abiogenesis, than for Christianity.
Read my first reply before reading this.
part 2
Say Aunt Sally learns in a dream the recipe for an elixir that preserves her youth. When she wakes up, she scribbles the directions on a scrap of paper, then runs to the kitchen to make up her first glass. In a few days Aunt Sally is transformed into a picture of radiant youth because of her daily dose of “Sally’s Secret Sauce.”
Aunt Sally is so excited she sends detailed, hand-written instructions on how to make the sauce to her three bridge partners (Aunt Sally is still in the technological dark ages—no photocopier or email). They, in turn, make copies for ten of their own friends.
All goes well until one day Aunt Sally’s pet dog eats the original copy of the recipe. In a panic she contacts her three friends who have mysteriously suffered similar mishaps, so the alarm goes out to the others in attempt to recover the original wording.
Sally rounds up all the surviving hand-written copies, twenty-six in all. When she spreads them out on the kitchen table, she immediately notices some differences. Twenty-three of the copies are exactly the same. Of the remaining three, however, one has misspelled words, another has two phrases inverted (“mix then chop” instead of “chop then mix”) and one includes an ingredient none of the others has on its list.
Do you think Aunt Sally can accurately reconstruct her original recipe from this evidence? Of course she can. The misspellings are obvious errors. The single inverted phrase stands out and can easily be repaired. Sally would then strike the extra ingredient reasoning it’s more plausible one person would add an item in error than 25 people would accidentally omit it.
Even if the variations were more numerous or more diverse, the original could still be reconstructed with a high level of confidence if Sally had enough copies.
This, in simplified form, is how scholars do “textual criticism,” an academic method used to test all documents of antiquity, not just religious texts. it’s a careful linguistic process allowing an alert critic to determine the extent of possible corruption of any work.
Wow, bro, only 1 reply to you and you react ultra defensively. Not even 5 comments in! Tell me, are you a coward who runs upon scrutiny of your worldview, or do you have actual defenses for it?
You think you are so right, but I wanna call that into question. Pride is bad.
Let's break this down:
So you mean you read all the thousands of copies of manuscripts? How you define "original versions" is unclear.
"People made beliefs over time that partially echoed the truth so no faith is legit!!" This is a fallacy.
There are many people defending the Truth that is Christianity. Meanwhile, good luck seeing anyone argue for theose other belief systems!! Scrutiny and logic tends to prune away fake beliefs and leaves true beliefs standing!
God is eternal.
Thats what you say, and I believe history and the world started ~6K years ago. Yeah ofc you disagree but feel free to rebut that.
What about the rich man and lazarus? What about "love thy neighbor"? What about Jesus' Kingdom being NOT of this world?? What about the Romans killing the literal Savior?? Given the content in the Bible, The romans musta been stupid morons who left a bunch of stuff to criticise them!! Or, you can admit God inspired people to write the Books of the Bible.
So you believe it came from polythiesm. But i believe polythiesm came AFTER people knew about the true God. So who is right and why? It makes no sense that people would have a strict trend of reducing number of gods. Humans are rebellious by nature so they would make more gods.
(/Athiest Argument style/)Give strictly repeatable, observable, testable, science-only, lab grade evidence or youre wrong!!!! (/Athiest Argument style/)
If polythiesm was true, there would be conflicts among the "gods".
Did i say otherwise? Nope. Obviously humans existed before books. God created men, then men discovered the ability to write and invented books.
Why do you take a gnostic stance, rather than an agnostic one, on dates of when things were written?
Yes. Adam and Eve existed before Hebrew and Isreal. None of this proves the Bible wrong.
Do you know what Textual Criticism is? I will bet you have barely considered HOW we got the Bible and what went into translation. The most accurate one is NASB 1977 and 1995.
If aliens coming to earth in the year 4050 have to translate books promoting u/factdigger 's worldview written in 1995, into THEIR own language, are they out of luck?
My rebuttals might make you question your worldview, if you care enough to read them.
Also, I notice you never explained how fallible stupid humans made the Sinless, Perfect God. If God does not exist, we should never be able to conjure attributes higher than ours. We are all there supposedly is, how could we concieve anything higher? All other gods lack Omnipotence, and other religions save by works. Christianity is the only one among the religions that says Faith saves, Faith is a gift from God. Faith is not blind, why would you think it is? It is athiests who believe such.
I have a big ol community full of evidence c/evidencedump.
u/smithw1984 Debunk u/ factdigger 's arguments? Plenty of them are in here.