When discussing with Christians one of the lines that is commonly cited regarding observations about the insanity of the OT god is that "That is the old covenant, The bible god made a new covenant when he sent Jesus. I see several issues when I hear the argument made. Doesn't the new covenant concept mean that Christian bible-based morality is relative? Like in the OT we have the bible god telling people that it is OK to do very bad things, He endorsed and sanctioned slavery, genocide, infanticide, and lots of other wicked stuff in the OT like racism and segregation. but now it is not OK.

What about the divine command theory of morality put forth by Christians which seems to say that "when God orders you to do an immoral thing, it is no longer immoral."? If This is true, then morality based upon that theory would be entirely arbitrary and still relative. Under this theory, the Bible portrays a god that orders the slaughter of babies multiple times, endorses rape, slavery telling of lies, unnecessary murder, unprovoked wars and makes it OK since God ordered it. How is this EVER OK? If you are being told to accept that there are some cases when the slaughter of thousands of innocent babies is OK, then I believe that your view of morality becomes very skewed. How do Christians reconcile this old covenant verse the new covenant argument with verses in the bible like Malachi 3:6

“I am the LORD, I change not. therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.”Malachi 3:6 James 1:17: "Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the[b] Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.[/b]"

what evidence is there for its truthfulness of Malachi 3:6 and James 1:17 when we have the bible God changing his position all over the bible?

Each time the children of Israel went to war against another nation . . . there was a reason for it. Most of you never read deeply, you simply run away with your own bias.

davidylan:

Each time the children of Israel went to war against another nation . . . there was a reason for it. Most of you never read deeply, you simply run away with your own bias.

Like when you want to steal peoples land you say that your god has given the land to you or promised you the land right? that is enough "reason".

toneyb:

Like when you want to steal peoples land you say that your god has given the land to you right? that is enough "reason".

this is pretty stupid and typical of many of you whose starting point on many of these frankly pointless debates is neither facts nor the willingness to understand BUT to continue propagating your own bias.

Did you even bother to read what i posted earlier even though you quoted it? what i said and your response are poles apart. Have you bothered to go back to dig the bible looking for possible reasons why God would suddenly command the jews to destroy the Ammonites for example? Ever bothered to understand why He ordered them to smite the Midianites?

Nah, its just better to continue bleating the same shallow allegations. The least i expect is depth when you debate.

@ toneyb

I have been going through your post and I like most of them, The reason the Old Testement is not highly regarded by many Christians is due to Paul, not Jesus. Paul was a smart man. He knew he could attract many more people to his religion if he cut out all of those bothersome commandments. So he substituted "faith" in its place. The idea caught on, and someone wrote the gospel of John, which no longer required one to keep commandments and give up their possessions to obtain eternal salvation. Instead, all you had to do is "believe" (John 3:16). That is the biggest reason Christianity is the most popular.It is the easiest club to get into when you stop thinking for yourself.

bindex:

@ toneyb

I have been going through your post and I like most of them, The reason the Old Testement is not highly regarded by many Christians is due to Paul, not Jesus. Paul was a smart man. He knew he could attract many more people to his religion if he cut out all of those bothersome commandments. So he substituted "faith" in its place. The idea caught on, and someone wrote the gospel of John, which no longer required one to keep commandments and give up their possessions to obtain eternal salvation. Instead, all you had to do is "believe" (John 3:16). That is the biggest reason Christianity is the most popular.It is the easiest club to get into when you stop thinking for yourself.

another absurd, baseless allegation. Presented WITHOUT facts . . . and without the slightest attempt to read through the bible to find out the truth. If any, Paul was the only one of the apostles who relied heavily on the old testament. Hebrews for example contains tons of old testament analogies.

but of course dont let facts get in the way of your own myopia.

It was Paul who first pointed out the corollary between Christ's death and the Jewish passover instituted in the old testament. It was Paul who talked the serpent in the wilderness being a symbol of Christ's crucifiction. It was Paul who tied the ancient Jewish priesthood and its rites to the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross . . .

Nah . . . you can keep on blabbing your same old discredited talking points.

davidylan:

this is pretty stupid and typical of many of you whose starting point on many of these frankly pointless debates is neither facts nor the willingness to understand BUT to continue propagating your own bias.

Did you even bother to read what i posted earlier even though you quoted it? what i said and your response are poles apart. Have you bothered to go back to dig the bible looking for possible reasons why God would suddenly command the jews to destroy the Ammonites for example? Ever bothered to understand why He ordered them to smite the Midianites?

Nah, its just better to continue bleating the same shallow allegations. The least i expect is depth when you debate.

The ammonites because the killed the Jews, What about the Canaanite, Jebusites etc? what did they do wrong? Did they Jews and their tribal god not just kill them because they wanted to take their land from them?

Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods.  In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully.  If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock.  Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it.  Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God.  That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction.  Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you.  He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors.  "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him."  (Deuteronomy 13:13-19)

toneyb:

The ammonites because the killed the Jews

Decietful hypocrite . . . so you knew that? But of course we shldnt expect you to be honest enough to include that little FACT/piece of detail when you go on your usual "Yahweh is bad" rants.

toneyb:

What about the Canaanite, Jebusites etc? what did they do wrong? Did they Jews and their tribal god not just kill them because they wanted to take their land from them?

Here is just a tidbit of what the canaanites did - Deuteronomy 18: 9 When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, [size=18pt]thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations[/size].
10 There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch.
11 Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.
12 For [size=18pt]all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee.[/size]
13 Thou shalt be perfect with the LORD thy God.
14 For these nations, which thou shalt possess, hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners: but as for thee, the LORD thy God hath not suffered thee so to do.
15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;

Nah . . . facts shldnt stop you reciting your prepared rants.

ferreting through the internet to plagiarize more talking points?

davidylan:

Decietful hypocrite . . . so you knew that? But of course we shldnt expect you to be honest enough to include that little FACT/piece of detail when you go on your usual "Yahweh is bad" rants.

Here is just a tidbit of what the canaanites did - Deuteronomy 18: 9 When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, [size=18pt]thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations[/size].
10 There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch.
11 Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.
12 For [size=18pt]all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee.[/size]
13 Thou shalt be perfect with the LORD thy God.
14 For these nations, which thou shalt possess, hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners: but as for thee, the LORD thy God hath not suffered thee so to do.
15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;

Nah . . . facts shldnt stop you reciting your prepared rants.

So it is right to kill Unbelievers? And you get angry when Moslems Kill people because of their beliefs This even proves that the morality of the bible God kept evolving as the morality of the people evolved. Who gave Yahweh the right to tell his chosen men to kill others because they do things that were abominable unto him? Were those things abominable to the gods the people worship? I thought he loved humanity , Why not preach to the Canaanite and tell them to desist from that which were wrong? Why kill them all including innocent children? . Why did the bible god's morality evolve from Kill others and have nothing to do with them to love them and preach to them? Why are Christians not Killing Unbelievers to day? So the people deserve to die because of their unbelief?

Why did the Bible god's morality, knowledge and behaviour kept Changing as the morality, knowledge and behaviour of his chosen men kept changing? even though he said that he changed not?

toneyb:

So it is right to kill Unbelievers? And you get angry when Moslems Kill people because of their beliefs This even proves that the morality of the bible God kept evolving as the morality of the people evolved. Who gave Yahweh the right to tell his chosen men to kill others because they do things that were abominable unto him? Were those things abominable to the gods the people worship? I thought he loved humanity , Why not preach to the Canaanite and tell them to desist from that which were wrong? Why kill them all including innocent children? . Why did the bible god's morality evolve from Kill others and have nothing to do with them to love them and preach to them? Why are Christians not Killing Unbelievers to day? So the people deserve to die because of their unbelief?

Typical with these fools . . . shift the goalposts as soon as their crass ignorance is exposed. First the problem was that the canaanites were simply innocent people wrongfully dispossessed of their land . . . all of a sudden its now about "why shld you kill unbelievers".

Well simple answer - Before the crucifiction of Christ everyone was under the law of sin and death - the soul that sinneth IT SHALL DIE. Achan was a jew but the day he was caught pilfering from the people of Ai he was instantly put to death. That was the law then, we are not in a position to argue that.

Now we are under the law of grace . . . which is the reason you can still post and go to bed in peace tonite. 4000 yrs ago you probably would have been struck with leprosy right there like Miriam or found the same fate as the sons of Korah.

toneyb:

Why did the Bible god's morality, knowledge and behaviour kept Changing as the morality, knowledge and behaviour of his chosen men kept changing?

Change in terms of what?

davidylan:

Typical with these fools . . . shift the goalposts as soon as their crass ignorance is exposed. First the problem was that the canaanites were simply innocent people wrongfully dispossessed of their land . . . all of a sudden its now about "why shld you kill unbelievers".

Well simple answer - Before the crucifiction of Christ everyone was under the law of sin and death - the soul that sinneth IT SHALL DIE. Achan was a jew but the day he was caught pilfering from the people of Ai he was instantly put to death. That was the law then, we are not in a position to argue that.

When has worshipping other gods become a wrongful thing to do? and you open your dirty mouth and call others fools? What do you expect a very incompetent and tribal deity that can not provide a land for his chosen people that were in the wilderness to do? i will expect him to do the same thing your incompetent god did, ie tell his chosen men to go kill them off because the worship other gods. That is the same thing that Allah did, I wonder why you guys hate him so much. Before the new testament when the jews knew no better their god was all over the place encouraging them to steal, rape, kill, sacrifice virgins, enslave and pillage their neighbours. But when their morality evolved so also did that of their tribal and incompetent deity.  Any soul that refuses to conform or stay in line will die not any soul that sinneth will die.

Now we are under the law of grace . . . which is the reason you can still post and go to bed in peace tonite. 4000 yrs ago you probably would have been struck with leprosy right there like Miriam or found the same fate as the sons of Korah. 

Why did your god change his mind? I though he said that he never changes? Law of grace eh? Law of grace or law of civilization? I can post and go to bed in peace because the descendants of the people that  created the old testament god in their image realized that he was no longer a viable god in a fast changing world. They dumped him and created another new god called jesus. Leprosy eh? There are so many things that cause leprosy, deities Never cause leprosy. and you get angry when people say that you are deluded.

davidylan:

Change in terms of what?

From advocating slavery, rape, murder, human sacrifice, theft to abandoning them, from leading his chosen men in battles to running away completely.

@ toneyb what  more do you expect from a deluded apologist? I believe he did not even bother to read your post at all. Why did his tribal and dangerous god change his ways and laws when the old testament says that the laws were PERFECT?

Psalms 19:7 The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple

Is it because the people that invented him saw that he was a good for nothing deity that they decided to create another deity and leave the incompetent old testament god that promised to protect them so many times but failed? they had to create a new deity that will be universally accepted? The OT doesn't count any more, except for the parts about gay sex being an abomination. adam and eve. And noah. and the ten (or however many) commandments. and any other part they like to pick chose and throw around. their faces turns red when they hear of the "atrocities" attributed to Allah, but they don't even flinch when they hear how god/yahweh slaughtered all the babies in the mostly unprovoked wars and ordered the elimination of entire ethnic groups in joshua including innocent women, children. instead they try to justify it as a good thing. . . . deluded goons. . . . . .

davidylan:

Typical with these fools . . . shift the goalposts as soon as their crass ignorance is exposed. First the problem was that the canaanites were simply innocent people wrongfully dispossessed of their land . . . all of a sudden its now about "why shld you kill unbelievers"

how were the canaanites guilty? what was their offence? worshipping other gods? is it not the same thing you fools accuse allah of doing in the koran? do you fools not call allah a wicked and evil deity for telling his people to kill unbelievers? why are you guys shifting the goal post when it comes to your own god , what is the difference between what your god commanded his chosen men to do and what allah commanded his own chosen men to do? when has worshipping other gods or doing abominable things unto the tribal god of the jews warrant people to be killed and destroyed completely? why are christians not killing unbelievers today? deluded goon. . . . .delusion at its finest

Well simple answer - Before the crucifiction of Christ everyone was under the law of sin and death - the soul that sinneth IT SHALL DIE. Achan was a jew but the day he was caught pilfering from the people of Ai he was instantly put to death. That was the law then, we are not in a position to argue that.

well simply before the jews knew better when they were primitive and savages every body was under their sword.  . . .as toneyb said the soul that rebels must be put to death. disobedient children were to be stoned to death, naughty women were to be stoned to death, people that will not stay in line were all to be put to death. . . when they knew better their god also knew better and changed. . .from his evil ways. . .the bible was written by human beings, so davidylan has no examples of a god giving any moral commands. all he has is  an ancient society deciding what actions are anti-social, and  ancient humans deciding what actions are humane and inhumane, acceptable and unacceptable and ascribing it to their god like every other society that have a god do.

Now we are under the law of grace . . . which is the reason you can still post and go to bed in peace tonite. 4000 yrs ago you probably would have been struck with leprosy right there like Miriam or found the same fate as the sons of Korah.

yahweh causes leprosy eh? tell yahweh that he should pls pls pls send leprosy to me in the next 2 mins just to show you that he is a living god. . .tell yahweh to infect me with leprosy in the next 2 minutes or else. . . .you goons believe that imaginary deities infect people with disease and you get angry like toneyb has said when people call you fools. 4000 years ago your infidel ancestors would have been killed and their lands pillaged if they were living any where close to the ancient jews. . . 4000 years ago your female virgin relatives would have been sacrificed as burnt offering to yahweh the tribal god of the ancient jews. . . .4000 years ago you would have probably been enslaved and live all your miserable life in slavery under the divine injunctions of yahweh if your tribe was living any were close to the jews who were chosen by their god. . .deluded fool. . . . .

@ davidylan its over 10 mins and your yahweh has failed to infect me with leprosy ohhh. . . . .deluded goon. . .you call yourself an "intelligent" scientist but yet you still believe the writings of ancient savages that believed that imaginary deities have the ability to infect people with diseases. . .what a shame. . . .

"I distrust those people who know so well what god wants them to do, because I notice that it always coincides with their own desires."
Susan B. Anthony


"And that what we call god's justice is only man's idea of what he would do if he were god.""
Elbert Hubbard


"The ancient jews created the old testament god in their own image very intolerant, sexist, homophobic and very violent."
Mazaje


"If triangles made a god, they would give him three sides.
Montesquieu


"If horses had gods, they would look like horses."
Xenophanes


"Man rarely (if ever) manages to dream up a god superior to himself. Most gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child."
Robert A Heinlein

David,
The shift in the nature of the biblical God is pretty clear for anyone to see.
But before we get into a series of long and irrelevant posts, do you agree that there was a change? Regardless of whether it was the coming of christ or any other reason, did God change in your opinion?

What did the canaanites do wrong? Did your god reveal himself to them? You say they commited sin,did they know the commandments of yaweh? You cant xpect them to sit back and wait for yaweh to show,they had to worship their own gods and consult their witches,mediums,magician.
Remember,what one man calls a magician,witch or medium is another man's priest or pastor

Tudör:

What did the canaanites do wrong? Did your god reveal himself to them? You say they commited sin,did they know the commandments of yaweh? You cant xpect them to sit back and wait for yaweh to show,they had to worship their own gods and consult their witches,mediums,magician.
Remember,what one man calls a magician,witch or medium is another man's priest or pastor

How will they know the commandments of Yahweh when they like the ancient jews also created their own gods in their own image? I was stunned when davidylan was trying to justify all the slaughter of the gentiles and said that because the worshiped other gods and refused to worship yahweh the tribal and warrior god of the ancient jews they derserved to be killed. He turns a blind eye to his own god and turns to Allah on the Islamic thread who is no different from his own God of the OT.

davidylan:

Each time the children of Israel went to war[b] against another nation . . . there was a reason for it[/b]. Most of you never read deeply, you simply run away with your own bias.

Yes, indeed. Very rarely do people (and deities for that matter) do things just arbitarily. They more often than not have reasons and/or rationalisation. The question is NOT whether they had/have reasons/rationalisation.

the question is whether those reasons are good, justified and founded on rational basis

Under this rubric, what are the good, justified and rational reasons for God performing and ordering some of the most barbaric acts in human history? If it was reasonable and rational for God to perform and order those acts then, is it also reasonable for such acts to be performed today?

davidylan:

another absurd, baseless allegation. Presented WITHOUT facts . . . and without the slightest attempt to read through the bible to find out the truth. If any, Paul was the only one of the apostles who relied heavily on the old testament. Hebrews for example contains tons of old testament analogies.

Lets get some facts striaght here, Pauls letters were written long before any of the gospels, his letters were written about 25 years after the alleged death of Jesus. While Mark the first gospel was written about 35 to 40 based on oral tradition and stories told by christians wo wanted to convert people to their new religion years after the events it narrated. The gospel of John which i alluded to was not written by John the illetrate disciples of Jesus, the gospel of John was the last gospel that was written and it was written about 60-65 years after the events it narrated, the gospel of John was written by a highly educated greek speaking Christian not the illeterate fisherman Aramaic disciple of Jesus.  It was Paul who did away with the Law with tortured arguments about being dead to the Law. The funny thing is that Paul didn't even need to make the silly arguments that he did. The Law was created for Jews and he preached mostly to Gentiles who weren't under the Law to begin with.

but of course dont let facts get in the way of your own myopia.

It was Paul who first pointed out the corollary between Christ's death and the Jewish passover instituted in. the old testament. It was Paul who talked the serpent in the wilderness being a symbol of Christ's crucifiction. It was Paul who tied the ancient Jewish priesthood and its rites to the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross . . .

Paul was preaching to the gentiles when he made that corollary, he wasn't preaching to the Jews was he? After all, he was teaching them a religion based on the God of Israel. Those pesky Hewbrew laws were bound to come up. With a little hand-waving he was able to do away with that concern. he did away with the laws of circumcision that was very important to the Jews, dietary laws and other very important old testament laws. Faith and grace were what he taught instead of works which were taught about by Jesus and also in the OT.

1Co 11:25  In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the[b] new covenant[/b] in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me."

2Co 3:6  who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

2Co 3:14  But their minds were hardened. For to this day, when they read the old covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away.

Jesus never mentioned anything about a "new" covenant.

Nah . . . you can keep on blabbing your same old discredited talking points.

I personally do not like engaging people like you any more, My initial reponse was to Toneyb but your post deserves a response, you have never discredited any of my points.

Just like today men of god today prophesies lies and so it was in those days, I HEAVILY DOUBT IT if it were God telling the isrealites to go and wipe out entire communities, commiting all sorts of crime against humanity, segregation, slavery and all sorts of evil because they were doing abominations in his sights! sabi he's not willing that any should perish abi?
Take achan's story for example how can GOD be happy that an entire lineage is wiped off! was it achan's wife that stole? was it his children? yet God said they should be stoned to death NA BIG LIE no be God. since it wasnt God speaking directly to the isrealites (ofcourse it'll be through human beings i.e prophets) there's high probability human prophesy will be more than God's. There's nothing like OT and NT God never changes
Bible stories are very tough to belief, most of these stories were orally transferred to offsprings and you know how rumuors change. Bible stories are outrageous and too ambigious to believe

rich_john:

Just like today men of god today prophesies lies and so it was in those days, I HEAVILY DOUBT IT if it were God telling the isrealites to go and wipe out entire communities, commiting all sorts of crime against humanity, segregation, slavery and all sorts of evil because they were doing abominations in his sights! sabi he's not willing that any should perish abi?
Take achan's story for example how can GOD be happy that an entire lineage is wiped off! was it achan's wife that stole? was it his children? yet God said they should be stoned to death NA BIG LIE no be God. since it wasnt God speaking directly to the isrealites (ofcourse it'll be through human beings i.e prophets) there's high probability human prophesy will be more than God's. There's nothing like OT and NT God never changes
Bible stories are very tough to belief, most of these stories were orally transferred to offsprings and you know how rumuors change. Bible stories are outrageous and too ambigious to believe

The OT God told the Jews to do all those things according to the bible. I used to be a part of a bible study group back in the days. Usually, after everyone arrives at the scheduled time we would all stand in a circle and hold hands with our heads bowed and our eyes closed so tight then the leader of the bible study group will tell us to open our minds and our hearts to your message through Jesus Christ blah blah blah. Then we' will all sit down, open our bibles and read the next chapter in the bible from where we last left off. We looked and sounded like a bunch of ogre-sized primary school kids taking turns reading a paragraph each. We started from the book of genesis down to the last book. Every body took turns interpreting what the passages meant to them or what they thought it meant. Everybody skipped over the nasty parts of the bible like they were invisible, no one discussed the killings, rape, murder, infanticided, slavery, stoning to death of disobedient children, sexist laws, human scarifice, bashing of babaies against rocks, ripping and opening pregnant women, taking the virgins and what not. We all pretended as it it wasn't there. It was a very lame excercies whenever i remmeber it

@ ToneyB

I think you're holding on to straws. The bible is not one of those books that one can merely read on the surface and expect to understand, and worse yet, pretend to understand. Some of the issues you have raised have to do with the acts of God that are a mystery to those of you who have resisted listening to His voice.

God has ultimate control of the affairs of men. You may not always understand why He does what He does because you have not been taught the rudiments of systematic theology. You're just one lone shooter who believes he is qualified to join the army. You're like a man playing back-yard cricket who gets good at it and feels he deserves to play on the professional cricket team.

Bobbyaf:

@ ToneyB

I think you're holding on to straws. The bible is not one of those books that one can merely read on the surface and expect to understand, and worse yet, pretend to understand.

Pretty much the same reason i chose to go to bed rather than waste time bandying words with a deluded band of militant atheists.

bindex:

Lets get some facts striaght here

Bindex and "facts"? you mean the stuff you read up on wikipedia and other anti-god websites that serve simply to advance your own irrational and atheist logic?

bindex:

Pauls letters were written long before any of the gospels, his letters were written about 25 years after the alleged death of Jesus. While Mark the first gospel was written about 35 to 40 based on oral tradition and stories told by christians wo wanted to convert people to their new religion years after the events it narrated. The gospel of John which i alluded to was not written by John the illetrate disciples of Jesus, the gospel of John was the last gospel that was written and it was written about 60-65 years after the events it narrated, the gospel of John was written by a highly educated greek speaking Christian not the illeterate fisherman Aramaic disciple of Jesus.

Pls produce concrete evidence for this. Its amazing you would make so many claims with NOT A SINGLE LINK TO BACK IT UP.

bindex:

 It was Paul who did away with the Law with tortured arguments about being dead to the Law.

1 John 3 (not written by Paul) talks about sin and the law.

Did you say something about "facts"?

bindex:

The funny thing is that Paul didn't even need to make the silly arguments that he did. The Law was created for Jews and he preached mostly to Gentiles who weren't under the Law to begin with.

They were under the law of sin and death too.

You're mixing two things together in your own shameless ignorance. The Judaic law is NOT the same as the spiritual law of sin and death. Gentiles were not under Judaic laws but were under the universal law of sin and death if not Christ's death would only apply to jews!

Oh say something about "facts" again.

davidylan:

Pretty much the same reason i chose to go to bed rather than waste time bandying words with a deluded band of militant atheists.

Why did your God kept evolving as the morals of his people evolved? Is it not written that his Law were perfect? You still hold unto the primitive belief that imaginary deities cause disease and you call others deluded? Allah is a killer God but not Jehovah of the OT You guys are very confused.

Bindex and "facts"? you mean the stuff you read up on wikipedia and other anti-god websites that serve simply to advance your own irrational and atheist logic?

No, facts that i get from reading the books of leading authorities on the New testament form historians and Christian apologist alike like William lane Craig, Gary Habermas, Barh Erhman, Richard Carrier and a lot of other New Testament Scholars out there(both Christian and non Christian). By the way I noticed that you use wikipedia to show Moslems how the history of the Koran is wrong. Wikipedia is only correct when the hypocrite and
shameless davidylan is using it to debunk islamic assertion else wikipedia is an anti-God site. I noticed that you quickly use wikipedia and never complain that it is an anti-Allah site You are a disgrace.

Pls produce concrete evidence for this. Its amazing you would make so many claims with NOT A SINGLE LINK TO BACK IT UP.

These  are from Christian apologist websites that know the history of the gospels, Jesus died some where around 30 AD, and they all agree that The gospels were written long after his death. Thy also agree that the gospels were written after pauls letters.

Dating Paul's letters:

The Gospels were all written after Paul's letters !

the Crucifixion occured around 30 A.D.

Paul's conversion occured around 32 A.D.

Paul's first meeting with the apostles in Jerusalem occured around 35 A.D. ( Acts 9:26)

Paul's ministry probably began in the 40's A.D.

Paul's letter were probably written in the 50's A.D.

Conclusion: Paul's letter were written in a very short 20 years after Christ's resurrection - within the lifetime of many many many eyewitnesses - favorable and unfavorable ones.

Dating the Gospels: When were they written ?

The standard scholarly dating, even in very liberal circles (i.e., those that reject Christianity) is:

Mark was written around 70 AD
Matthew and Luke were written around 80 AD
John was written around 90 AD

http://www.ichthus.info/CaseForChrist/01/intro.html

http://jesus.christ.org/16/when-was-the-gospel-of-john-written

1 John 3 (not written by Paul) talks about sin and the law.

Did you say something about "facts"?

Did you bother to read my first post? The epistle of 1 John was written long after Paul wrote his letters, It was written by an unknown writer who wrote based on Paul's teachings. You will not agree with that but that remains the fact.

They were under the law of sin and death too.

You're mixing two things together in your own shameless ignorance. The Judaic law is NOT the same as the spiritual law of sin and death. Gentiles were not under Judaic laws but were under the universal law of sin and death if not Christ's death would only apply to jews!

Oh say something about "facts" again.

Who made that declaration about the gentiles being under the. spritual law of sin and death? Paul did, Jesus never said any such thing. Jesus warned his disciples not to preach to the gentiles and said he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. The so called great commission at the end of Mark was later added by a scribe because it does not appear in the earliest manuscript, even the NIV acknowleges that fact in its footnote.

Bobbyaf:

@ ToneyB

I think you're holding on to straws. The bible is not one of those books that one can merely read on the surface and expect to understand, and worse yet, pretend to understand. Some of the issues you have raised have to do with the acts of God that are a mystery to those of you who have resisted listening to His voice.

God has ultimate control of the affairs of men. You may not always understand why He does what He does because you have not been taught the rudiments of systematic theology. You're just one lone shooter who believes he is qualified to join the army. You're like a man playing back-yard cricket who gets good at it and feels he deserves to play on the professional cricket team.

Can you use the rudiments of systemic theology to explain why the Morals and behaviour of The OT God kept Changing despite him saying that he never changes and that his laws are perfect? Mazaje said it best on the other thread God works in mysterious was = I have no idea. You guys use that line to fill up the gaps.

I will only restrict myself to pointing out the blindingly obvious stupidity in much of the baseless anti-God rants. no point having a verbal spar with brainless trolls.

bindex:

Who made that declaration about the gentiles being under the. spritual law of sin and death? Paul did, Jesus never said any such thing. Jesus warned his disciples not to preach to the gentiles and said he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. The so called great commission at the end of Mark was later added by a scribe because it does not appear in the earliest manuscript, even the NIV acknowleges that fact in its footnote.

1. Ez 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

2. John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

3. Mark 16: 15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Was John 3:16 also appended by a scribe? Fools.

davidylan:

I will only restrict myself to pointing out the blindingly obvious stupidity in much of the baseless anti-God rants. no point having a verbal spar with brainless trolls.

1. Ez 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

2. John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

3. Mark 16: 15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preacin line with Pauls teachings toh the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Was John 3:16 also appended by a scribe? Fools.

What is this? . Why do you keep making a fool of your self? was the OT god addressing the gentiles in the book of ezra? .
You should expect the gospel of John which was written about 65 years after the death of Jesus in line with the teachins of Paul to include that part how else will the founders of the new faith attract gentiles in to the faith without including John 3:16 since that was their main aim?
Mark 16: 15 was a later addission, your fellow Christian apologist like William lane Criag and Gary Habermas who know very much about the new testament history, and who are also world authorities on new testament studies all agree that it was a later addission even the writers of the NIV included it in their footnote as a later addision by a scribe because it is not found in the earliest manuscipts of the new testament available. That verse goes against the teachings of Jesus who warned his disciples not to preach to the gentiles but to the Jews alone. I noticed you did not use your favourite KJV, because it is vague