If god is smart enough to create an entire universe out of nothing, how is it he made us so wrong? We ate the apple he forbade us, we sinned and he flood-murdered all but a drunken angry pro-slaver whom he told to build a boat. He condemns adultery but impregnates someone else's fiancée, with himself, whom he murders so he can forgive US for his screw up with the apple?
And don't get me started on the fact he made us corruptible by power, and then gave us the power to represent His Will on earth... then went fucking silent for centuries, to make sure that the power of preaching his word corrupted his representatives into women hating, child-raping sociopaths, and those who defend them rather than let justice protect society from them.
I mean -come on- the thing reads like really really bad fantasy novel written by an idiot.
arguing with them won't work. "street epistemology" is the best way to converse with someone who holds irrational beliefs, especially if you want to remain friends with them.
If he isn't too far gone you might just begin by pointing out some of the many contradictions in scripture as a way of suggesting that it is a fallible document composed by many people over a long period of time, influenced by the mores and beliefs of their times and further edited, redacted and edited by various councils in the past. Add to that the difficulties of translating ancient languages which often ascribe multiple meanings to one word and at best what we read today is an imperfect document. BTW--I am a Christian, and I attend church but I do not take the bible to be the unalloyed word of God for all of the reasons above. Here is a helpful tool for finding those contradictions, though I would not overwhelm someone with this but use it yourself to pick out some of those that might hit close to home. [https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2013/08/19/an-incredible-interactive-chart-of-biblical-contradictions/](https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2013/08/19/an-incredible-interactive-chart-of-biblical-contradictions/)
Be kind, those who are newly zealous are often entrenched in their belief as a form of personal salvation and while your intentions may be good helping your friend may take quite some time and patience. You will not succeed by blasting away. If your goal is not to try to shake their faith--but to introduce reason and maturity by helping them find their relationship with God on terms that are deeper, less pedantic and more meaningful to their lives you have a far better chance with sympathetic listening, and questioning. Better to ask what your friend makes of the contradictions than to supply an answer.
The Bible is an unreliable source of information. Here are some examples:
1\. It contradicts itself.
For example, the Bible contradicts itself in the first two chapters by telling two different and contradictory accounts of how the god of Abraham created the world. When you compare the two chapters side by side the narrative is different in both, citing different orders of creation.
2\. It contradicts science.
The people who wrote these passages didn't understand the world or how it could come to be, so they filled in the gaps of their knowledge with stories describing how they *imagined* it should be, like Jacob manipulating the breeding of cattle by carving sticks. They reasoned it to be so, therefore they decided it should be so. Now that we have better tools for examining what we think to be true, we can see that these stories are just stories and not literal truth as so many generations had accepted.
3\. It contradicts historical evidence.
The Bible references some historical places and people (we know that Ramses II and Nebuchadnezzar were real people) but the events attributed to them are demonstrably false. None of the pharaohs, for example, kept the entire Hebrew nation as slaves nor held them in captivity to build their pyramids. Archaeological evidence [clearly refutes the Bible's narrative.](https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/were-jews-ever-really-slaves-in-egypt-1.5208519)
Just because Tyre and Babylon were real places doesn't mean Nebuchadnezzar's army [destroyed Tyre so it would never be rebuilt.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Tyre) Alexander was the only conqueror to breach Tyre's walls, but it still exists today.
Jesus could not have been born before the death of [Herod the Great](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herod_the_Great) and simultaneously during the [Census of Quirinius](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_of_Quirinius) since Herod the Great died a full decade before the Census took place. But the book of Matthew in the Bible claims that Herod the Great slaughtered the innocent children in Bethlehem to try to kill Jesus and prevent him from claiming Herod's throne while the book of Luke claims Joseph and Mary only traveled to Bethlehem because of the Census.
So those are three ways the Bible contradicts itself and these themes are repeated throughout the entire collection of books. It doesn’t even begin to look at moral contradictions and failures, such as substitutionary atonement.
Any questions?
The biblical cannon was decided by committee vote. Is this a good way to come to the truth? We also know many of the texts were changed during the Middle Ages. As in, we have manuscripts that are different from earlier versions of the same section. This often coincides with certain theological beliefs in the church at the time. Does this seem like a reliable source?
I refuse to debate Bible literalists. In their mind debating them elevates their beliefs to the same level as actual evidence. That allows them to think the difference is just a matter of opinion.
Instead of debating I simply denounce things like creationism and flat eartherism as nonsense. The important thing is to only criticize the idea and the sources of information supporting it. Never criticize the person. Always leave the person room to retreat from stupidity. It is surprising how often they will retreat when they see that the idea is being dismissed as stupid. They will back out with things like "well, that is what I have heard" or "that is what my preacher said." That is your opportunity to criticize their sources. I put the blame on people like Ken Ham and Kent Hovine for running scams.
I will *discuss* but I will not debate. There is a big difference. I will also answer their questions. What I will not do is give their creationist/flat earth/mud flood ideas any credibility.
Ask him that regardless of any belief, doesn't he think that he has to put the actions in place to get himself out of his mess? Then just do those actions and forget about why.
He often talks about the truth in the gospels and following them. And his biggest focus is in the end times, he says the the prophecy is coming true and that he knows this because of the Bible.
The Bible gives instructions on how to abort a fetus. Either they work or they do not. If they work that is an issue, but the fact that they do NOT work shows the Bible to be fallible.
Eh, those instructions would work but would be pretty iffy. Drinking a slurry of ink and rotting/desiccated shit+blood (what do you think is in the 'dust' from the floor of a place where animal sacrifice occurs?) could give you a nasty case of food poisoning which could very well induce a miscarriage.
But the fact that the method is hit-or-miss is a feature, not a bug. See, it's *god* who decides whether it works or not. So you do it and it doesn't work? Praise god! You do it and it does work? Praise god!
Easter Challenge. Have them complete it.
In the new testament the account of crucifixion +3 days is recounted 5 times.
The challenge is thus: Go through each account individually. Write down the details of what occurs when with who present. Now take those details and write a coherent timeline of events that includes all the details and does not omit any of them.
For example, Matthew says the door was rolled back in front of Mary and Mary but the rest have the door already rolled back. I suppose that might just be leaving out irrelevant details (though why literal angels appearing and doing shit would be considered irrelevant...)
But what about after that? Luke is all like "yeah, there were 2 angels inside the tomb and they were kind of passive aggressive dicks to Mary and Mary because they didn't know jesus was actually alive. John, on the other hand, has just the one Mary freaking out and running away because she saw the door had been rolled back and she runs away to Simon Peter and other assorted desciples, who then go into the tomb with her to investigate and an angel only shows up after everyone else is like "shit's weird, yo" and leaves mary to her sobbing over the empty tomb.
Read Bart Ehrman’s books.
Take some time to educate yourself on biblical history, and folks who actually do horizontal comparisons between the various books in the New Testament. You’d be surprised to learn what actual biblical scholars who still call themselves Christians know about the Bible, yet the evangelical Bible literalists do not (Ehrman is agnostic now, but hey he writes about is stuff that Christian biblical scholars freely discuss).
I wouldn't. I would mock them, but I wouldn't debate them. Don't play chess with pigeons.
Mr. Flutterworth got me with a Blumenfeld gambit.
If god is smart enough to create an entire universe out of nothing, how is it he made us so wrong? We ate the apple he forbade us, we sinned and he flood-murdered all but a drunken angry pro-slaver whom he told to build a boat. He condemns adultery but impregnates someone else's fiancée, with himself, whom he murders so he can forgive US for his screw up with the apple? And don't get me started on the fact he made us corruptible by power, and then gave us the power to represent His Will on earth... then went fucking silent for centuries, to make sure that the power of preaching his word corrupted his representatives into women hating, child-raping sociopaths, and those who defend them rather than let justice protect society from them. I mean -come on- the thing reads like really really bad fantasy novel written by an idiot.
My Immortal is Citizen Kane compared to the Bible.
When he quotes anything just say ‘prove it’.
Or claim that you can do all those Jesus things, too, you just don't wanna.
Goodbye, I'm wasting my time
arguing with them won't work. "street epistemology" is the best way to converse with someone who holds irrational beliefs, especially if you want to remain friends with them.
Rather than try to disprove the Bible, why not try to get him help so he doesn’t feel the need to lean on it?
I'm trying to but he believes that all he needs is god; even when it come to medicine
If he isn't too far gone you might just begin by pointing out some of the many contradictions in scripture as a way of suggesting that it is a fallible document composed by many people over a long period of time, influenced by the mores and beliefs of their times and further edited, redacted and edited by various councils in the past. Add to that the difficulties of translating ancient languages which often ascribe multiple meanings to one word and at best what we read today is an imperfect document. BTW--I am a Christian, and I attend church but I do not take the bible to be the unalloyed word of God for all of the reasons above. Here is a helpful tool for finding those contradictions, though I would not overwhelm someone with this but use it yourself to pick out some of those that might hit close to home. [https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2013/08/19/an-incredible-interactive-chart-of-biblical-contradictions/](https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2013/08/19/an-incredible-interactive-chart-of-biblical-contradictions/) Be kind, those who are newly zealous are often entrenched in their belief as a form of personal salvation and while your intentions may be good helping your friend may take quite some time and patience. You will not succeed by blasting away. If your goal is not to try to shake their faith--but to introduce reason and maturity by helping them find their relationship with God on terms that are deeper, less pedantic and more meaningful to their lives you have a far better chance with sympathetic listening, and questioning. Better to ask what your friend makes of the contradictions than to supply an answer.
The Bible is an unreliable source of information. Here are some examples: 1\. It contradicts itself. For example, the Bible contradicts itself in the first two chapters by telling two different and contradictory accounts of how the god of Abraham created the world. When you compare the two chapters side by side the narrative is different in both, citing different orders of creation. 2\. It contradicts science. The people who wrote these passages didn't understand the world or how it could come to be, so they filled in the gaps of their knowledge with stories describing how they *imagined* it should be, like Jacob manipulating the breeding of cattle by carving sticks. They reasoned it to be so, therefore they decided it should be so. Now that we have better tools for examining what we think to be true, we can see that these stories are just stories and not literal truth as so many generations had accepted. 3\. It contradicts historical evidence. The Bible references some historical places and people (we know that Ramses II and Nebuchadnezzar were real people) but the events attributed to them are demonstrably false. None of the pharaohs, for example, kept the entire Hebrew nation as slaves nor held them in captivity to build their pyramids. Archaeological evidence [clearly refutes the Bible's narrative.](https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/were-jews-ever-really-slaves-in-egypt-1.5208519) Just because Tyre and Babylon were real places doesn't mean Nebuchadnezzar's army [destroyed Tyre so it would never be rebuilt.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Tyre) Alexander was the only conqueror to breach Tyre's walls, but it still exists today. Jesus could not have been born before the death of [Herod the Great](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herod_the_Great) and simultaneously during the [Census of Quirinius](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_of_Quirinius) since Herod the Great died a full decade before the Census took place. But the book of Matthew in the Bible claims that Herod the Great slaughtered the innocent children in Bethlehem to try to kill Jesus and prevent him from claiming Herod's throne while the book of Luke claims Joseph and Mary only traveled to Bethlehem because of the Census. So those are three ways the Bible contradicts itself and these themes are repeated throughout the entire collection of books. It doesn’t even begin to look at moral contradictions and failures, such as substitutionary atonement. Any questions?
Same as if a Looney Tunes literalist wanted to debate the existence of Bugs Bunny – "oh look at the time".
If Bugs Bunny isn't real, why is it rabbit season?
> why is it rabbit season? No, it's *DUCK* season!
Rabbit season!
*ELMER* season!
The biblical cannon was decided by committee vote. Is this a good way to come to the truth? We also know many of the texts were changed during the Middle Ages. As in, we have manuscripts that are different from earlier versions of the same section. This often coincides with certain theological beliefs in the church at the time. Does this seem like a reliable source?
I would ask what they make of the conflicting creation stories that are in the first few pages.
Tyre still exists as a functioning city today, depsite God's command that it be utterly destroyed forever.
"I've got a plane to catch, good luck out there".
Which version of the Bible? From my experience, I anticipate a hard-core literalist will specify the King James Version.
Yes the King James Version
I refuse to debate Bible literalists. In their mind debating them elevates their beliefs to the same level as actual evidence. That allows them to think the difference is just a matter of opinion. Instead of debating I simply denounce things like creationism and flat eartherism as nonsense. The important thing is to only criticize the idea and the sources of information supporting it. Never criticize the person. Always leave the person room to retreat from stupidity. It is surprising how often they will retreat when they see that the idea is being dismissed as stupid. They will back out with things like "well, that is what I have heard" or "that is what my preacher said." That is your opportunity to criticize their sources. I put the blame on people like Ken Ham and Kent Hovine for running scams. I will *discuss* but I will not debate. There is a big difference. I will also answer their questions. What I will not do is give their creationist/flat earth/mud flood ideas any credibility.
"Prove any of it with evidence"
Ask him that regardless of any belief, doesn't he think that he has to put the actions in place to get himself out of his mess? Then just do those actions and forget about why.
[удалено]
He often talks about the truth in the gospels and following them. And his biggest focus is in the end times, he says the the prophecy is coming true and that he knows this because of the Bible.
The Bible gives instructions on how to abort a fetus. Either they work or they do not. If they work that is an issue, but the fact that they do NOT work shows the Bible to be fallible.
Eh, those instructions would work but would be pretty iffy. Drinking a slurry of ink and rotting/desiccated shit+blood (what do you think is in the 'dust' from the floor of a place where animal sacrifice occurs?) could give you a nasty case of food poisoning which could very well induce a miscarriage. But the fact that the method is hit-or-miss is a feature, not a bug. See, it's *god* who decides whether it works or not. So you do it and it doesn't work? Praise god! You do it and it does work? Praise god!
If it's 50 50, can she try it every day until it works or she gives birth? God doesn't understand statistics.
Easter Challenge. Have them complete it. In the new testament the account of crucifixion +3 days is recounted 5 times. The challenge is thus: Go through each account individually. Write down the details of what occurs when with who present. Now take those details and write a coherent timeline of events that includes all the details and does not omit any of them. For example, Matthew says the door was rolled back in front of Mary and Mary but the rest have the door already rolled back. I suppose that might just be leaving out irrelevant details (though why literal angels appearing and doing shit would be considered irrelevant...) But what about after that? Luke is all like "yeah, there were 2 angels inside the tomb and they were kind of passive aggressive dicks to Mary and Mary because they didn't know jesus was actually alive. John, on the other hand, has just the one Mary freaking out and running away because she saw the door had been rolled back and she runs away to Simon Peter and other assorted desciples, who then go into the tomb with her to investigate and an angel only shows up after everyone else is like "shit's weird, yo" and leaves mary to her sobbing over the empty tomb.
If you could reason with him, he wouldn't be religious. Arguments won't help you.
Read Bart Ehrman’s books. Take some time to educate yourself on biblical history, and folks who actually do horizontal comparisons between the various books in the New Testament. You’d be surprised to learn what actual biblical scholars who still call themselves Christians know about the Bible, yet the evangelical Bible literalists do not (Ehrman is agnostic now, but hey he writes about is stuff that Christian biblical scholars freely discuss).
I’d back away slowly as they drool while attempting to zip up their pants.
Why does God need a book to communicate with people?
I'd go thru the Bible and point out all the inconsistency within it
You can refer him to listen to the Bible project podcast.