This is an honest inquiry into the mindset of religious people. I won't bother typing a long wall of text for sake of time.

My question to the Christians here: why are you atheistic about every other gods but yours?

Lets have an honest, logical discussion. My schedule will not allow pointless back and forths, so trolls will be duly ignored.

It's simply because there is no other valid historical document that's as detailed as the bible.

Ammishaddai:
It's simply because there is no other valid historical document that's as detailed as the bible.

LMFAO! Really? Did you know there was no census of the type said to be abbout the time of Jesus birth? Did you know that the Israelite kingdoms at the height of their power were not very famous as told by the Bible and could barely dominate neighbouring tribes not to talk of withstanding the might of Egypt or Persia. The Bible is a cultural record not a history book. It gets a lot of details wrong as confirmed by other sources.

LordReed:


LMFAO! Really? Did you know there was no census of the type said to be abbout the time of Jesus birth? Did you know that the Israelite kingdoms at the height of their power were not very famous as told by the Bible and could barely dominate neighbouring tribes not to talk of withstanding the might of Egypt or Persia. The Bible is a cultural record not a history book. It gets a lot of details wrong as confirmed by other sources.

What other sources ? Because as far as I can recall, the bible is a historical document that tells of how God dealt with a particular race of people

Ammishaddai:
What other sources ? Because as far as I can recall, the bible is a historical document that tells of how God dealt with a particular race of people

It is a cultural record, no serious historian looks at the Bible and considers it a proper record of historical facts. The other sources are varied, some from Egypt some from Persia, the more famous ones are the Egyptian Steeles.

LordReed:


It is a cultural record, no serious historian looks at the Bible and considers it a proper record of historical facts. The other sources are varied, some from Egypt some from Persia, the more famous ones are the Egyptian Steeles.

Let me get this straight : are trying to tell me that the bible's account aren't also in the historical narratives we see in history textbooks ?

Ammishaddai:
Let me get this straight : are trying to tell me that the bible's account aren't also in the historical narratives we see in history textbooks ?

No it isn't. Take the census that supposedly happened when Jesus was born, the gospel links the birth of Jesus to the reign of Herod the Great, but the census took place in 6 CE, nine years after Herod's death in 4 BCE. Moreover, such census was limited to Judea and did not affect Galilee, which was governed by the ethnarch Herod Antipas and not directly under Roman control.

There were indeed three censuses of the entire empire during Augustus's reign (28 BC, 8 BC and 14 AD), but none of these censuses happened while Quirinius was the Legate of Syria, no Roman census required people to travel from their own homes to those of distant ancestors and, in any case, an imperial census would not have affected Joseph and Mary, who lived in the Herodian Kingdom of Judea, which was not under direct Roman control back then.

We know all this because the Romans were prolific and meticulous record keepers so there is no way the census was accurately recorded in the Bible.

LordReed:


No it isn't. Take the census that supposedly happened when Jesus was born, the gospel links the birth of Jesus to the reign of Herod the Great, but the census took place in 6 CE, nine years after Herod's death in 4 BCE. Moreover, such census was limited to Judea and did not affect Galilee, which was governed by the ethnarch Herod Antipas and not directly under Roman control.

There were indeed three censuses of the entire empire during Augustus's reign (28 BC, 8 BC and 14 AD), but none of these censuses happened while Quirinius was the Legate of Syria, no Roman census required people to travel from their own homes to those of distant ancestors and, in any case, an imperial census would not have affected Joseph and Mary, who lived in the Herodian Kingdom of Judea, which was not under direct Roman control back then.

We know all this because the Romans were prolific and meticulous record keepers so there is no way the census was accurately recorded in the Bible.

But there was a census , right ?

Ammishaddai:
But there was a census , right ?

Yes there was. Lemme qualify my statement a bit there were censuses but not the way it is described in the Bible nor was it at the time period inferred in the Bible.

LordReed:


It is a cultural record, no serious historian looks at the Bible and considers it a proper record of historical facts. The other sources are varied, some from Egypt some from Persia, the more famous ones are the Egyptian Steeles.

To buttress your point. The New Testament is a Jewish interpretation of ancient Egyptian and Mesopotamian ideas from a Greek perspective.

KnownUnknown:


To buttress your point. The New Testament is a Jewish interpretation of ancient Egyptian and Mesopotamian ideas from a Greek perspective.

Hmmmm, I'll look into that. Sounds interesting.

Ammishaddai:
It's simply because there is no other valid historical document that's as detailed as the bible.

Indeed. Leviticus sacrificing a bullock runs into six chapters. Tell me Ammishaddai, what do you make of 1st chronicles?

Or the fact that the Egyptians didn't record the Hebrews as being in their empire? They were assiduous record keepers and would have noticed thousands of undocumented aliens in their country.

Tamaratonye1:

Indeed. Leviticus sacrificing a bullock runs into six chapters. Tell me Ammishaddai, what do you make of 1st chronicles?

Or the fact that the Egyptians didn't record the Hebrews as being in their empire? They were assiduous record keepers and would have noticed thousands of undocumented aliens in their country.

The Egyptians have lost the bulk of their history when Islam's jihad spread all over the middle east and Africa . Are you aware of this?

Ammishaddai:
The Egyptians have lost the bulk of their history when Islam's jihad spread all over the middle east and Africa . Are you aware of this?

Plus the fact that the Egyptians Never ever record their failures of their pharoahs as a matter of tradition.

Ammishaddai:
The Egyptians have lost the bulk of their history when Islam's jihad spread all over the middle east and Africa . Are you aware of this?

As did older superstitions before them past into past into past... So?

Actually most ancient writings were lost when lunatic mobs of nutty Christians sacked and burned the libraries of antiquity. But then, you probably don't want to hear that.

Here's a book you should read aside from your holy storybook, but then, you probably won't.

Zealous Christians, often supported by authorities, sometimes burnt books as part of a violent spectacle. They burnt books a long with other religious objects, primarily cult statues. In 402, Gaza’s most famous temple, the Marneion, where Zeus Marnas was worshipped, was destroyed along with other temples and burnt to the ground. In the wake of this religious struggle, houses were searched, just like in Antioch, in order to find both cult statues and books:

https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/hand...sAllowed=y

Tamaratonye1:

As did older superstitions before them past into past into past... So?

Actually most ancient writings were lost when lunatic mobs of nutty Christians sacked and burned the libraries of antiquity. But then, you probably don't want to hear that.

Here's a book you should read aside from your holy storybook, but then, you probably won't.


https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/hand...sAllowed=y

Anyone can write rubbish and call it fact . But the truth still remains: the bible is the only historical document out there that's more detailed than all the other religious writings in the world

Ammishaddai:
What other sources ? Because as far as I can recall, the bible is a historical document that tells of how God dealt with a particular race of people

Where is the history of west Africans in the Bible?

Ammishaddai:
Anyone can write rubbish and call it fact.

Pffft... Quelle surprise. Facts don't impress you. Only your holy horseshit.

Sadly for you, it was Christian writers who recorded the events in question. Unlike modern Christians, who at least have a sense of shame about being book-burners and try to blame others. For example, from the 5th century writer Socrates Scholasticus:

Socrates Scholasticus: The Murder of Hypatia (late 4th Cent.)

from Ecclesiastical History,Bk VI: Chap. 15

---

Of Hypatia the Female Philosopher.

THERE was a woman at Alexandria named Hypatia, daughter of the philosopher Theon, who made such attainments in literature and science, as to far surpass all the philosophers of her own time. Having succeeded to the school of Plato and Plotinus, she explained the principles of philosophy to her auditors, many of whom came from a distance to receive her instructions.
On account of the self-possession and ease of manner, which she had acquired in consequence of the cultivation of her mind, she not unfrequently appeared in public in presence of the magistrates. Neither did she feel abashed in coming to an assembly of men. For all men on account of her extraordinary dignity and virtue admired her the more. Yet even she fell a victim to the political jealousy which at that time prevailed. For as she had frequent interviews with Orestes, it was calumniously reported among the Christian populace, that it was she who prevented Orestes from being reconciled to the bishop. Some of them therefore, hurried away by a fierce and bigoted zeal, whose ringleader was a reader named Peter, waylaid her returning home, and dragging her from her carriage, they took her to the church called Caesareum, where they completely stripped her, and then murdered her with tiles. After tearing her body in pieces, they took her mangled limbs to a place called Cinaron, and there burnt them. This affair brought not the least opprobrium, not only upon Cyril, but also upon the whole Alexandrian church. And surely nothing can be farther from the spirit of Christianity than the allowance of massacres, fights, and transactions of that sort. This happened in the month of March during Lent, in the fourth year of Cyril's episcopate, under the tenth consulate of Honorius, and the sixth of Theodosius.

https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/hypatia.asp

At least Socrates has the apparent decency to condemn murder, at least when done by different sects.

Ammishaddai:
But the truth still remains: the bible is the only historical document out there that's more detailed than all the other religious writings in the world

Ah, the screech of goalposts being moved. Wasn't your original claim "It's simply because there is no other valid historical document that's as detailed as the Bible"?

Archaeology (I'm talking REAL archaeolotists, not church sponsored archaeologists) discounts much of the historical claims in the bible. There is zero evidence that Moses existed much less that an exodus happened. Archaeologists discovered that whoever wrote the Moses story got the kings of Edom in the wrong order and not only that, they were not "kings" but military generals.

The story of Joshua and the Walls of Jericho is fiction. Archaeolotists found that the walls of Jericho have several times over the millennium been abandoned during times of drought or migration out of the area, which in turn allowed the walls to crumble from neglect but later rebuilt. One such time was when the Bible claims Joshua was said to have lived. It had long been abandoned during Joshua's time but the priests writing the Joshua story in the 3rd century BC (when the wall had been rebuilt) weren't aware of this historical anachronism.

The Bible is a tribal book and it's god, YHWH, is based on one of the gods in the Canaanite pantheon of gods. This is well known among archaeolotists and Bible scholars. The Canaanites worshiped YHWH in the copper mines of Timna in the southern Levant but migrated north, after which the Hebrews, who moved into the area, slowly adopted YHWH as a mountain and metallurgy god. (He was also a god of wind.) Forging metal out of the ground was considered quite a magical process and gods were invoked as the processor of this amazing metal magic. Gods were solicited in the smelting process over much of the world during the iron and bronze age. YHWH also had a consort wife, Asherah, and many statues of Yahweh and Asherah have been found in ancient known Hebrew worship sites. But Yahweh was most certainly one of the pantheon of Canaanite gods, similar to the Greek gods. And that, my dear, is where your god originated from.

The Bible is no better than the Hindu Red Vedas, or the Quran. It's unsuprising that the only place one finds magical stories of superpowerful gods are in holy books around the world. And today's comic books are not too dissimilar.


Edited for inclusion

Ammishaddai:
It's simply because there is no other valid historical document that's as detailed as the bible.

What's detailed about a white man and a white woman who came from the man's ribs and was deceived by a talking magical snake to eat a magical fruit which got an invisible white guy upset that he had to punish them, only for them to end up giving birth to children who populated the entire earth including blacks, Asians and other races?
Valid history indeed...
The Bible is just a book of stories exaggerated to a certain point. Nothing historical about it, especially the supernatural aspect of it.

Tamaratonye1:

Pffft... Quelle surprise. Facts don't impress you. Only your holy horseshit.

Sadly for you, it was Christian writers who recorded the events in question. Unlike modern Christians, who at least have a sense of shame about being book-burners and try to blame others. For example, from the 5th century writer Socrates Scholasticus:


https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/hypatia.asp

At least Socrates has the apparent decency to condemn murder, at least when done by different sects.


Ah, the screech of goalposts being moved. Wasn't your original claim "It's simply because there is no other valid historical document that's as detailed as the Bible"?

Archaeology (I'm talking REAL archaeolotists, not church sponsored archaeologists) discounts much of the historical claims in the bible. There is zero evidence that Moses existed much less that an exodus happened. Archaeologists discovered that whoever wrote the Moses story got the kings of Edom in the wrong order and not only that, they were not "kings" but military generals.

The story of Joshua and the Walls of Jericho is fiction. Archaeolotists found that the walls of Jericho have several times over the millennium been abandoned during times of drought or migration out of the area, which in turn allowed the walls to crumble from neglect but later rebuilt. One such time was when the Bible claims Joshua was said to have lived. It had long been abandoned during Joshua's time but the priests writing the Joshua story in the 3rd century BC (when the wall had been rebuilt) weren't aware of this historical anachronism.

The Bible is a tribal book and it's god, YHWH, is based on one of the gods in the Canaanite pantheon of gods. This is well known among archaeolotists and Bible scholars. The Canaanites worshiped YHWH in the copper mines of Timna in the southern Levant but migrated north, after which the Hebrews, who moved into the area, slowly adopted YHWH as a mountain and metallurgy god. (He was also a god of wind.) Forging metal out of the ground was considered quite a magical process and gods were invoked as the processor of this amazing metal magic. Gods were solicited in the smelting process over much of the world during the iron and bronze age. YHWH also had a consort wife, Asherah, and many statues of Yahweh and Asherah have been found in ancient known Hebrew worship sites. But Yahweh was most certainly one of the pantheon of Canaanite gods, similar to the Greek gods. And that, my dear, is where your god originated from.

The Bible is no better than the Hindu Red Vedas, or the Quran. It's unsuprising that the only place one finds magical stories of superpowerful gods are in holy books around the world. And today's comic books are not too dissimilar.


Edited for inclusion

This lengthy post is full of preconceived prejudice against the bible. And to me , this doesn't sound like a smart way to vilify Christianity or its doctrinal teachings. In fact, my little nephew could have done a better job than this .

And before you start typing another load of balderdash, you need to understand that the Christian faith was founded on the precepts Jesus Christ , not on the wickedness or inferiority complex of mysoginst men . Please let this sink in. Or better still , read up on Christianity in Europe, especially during the middle ages , and see how even true Christians like Martin Luther (1483-1546)and John Wycliffe (1328-1384)were persecuted because of the corruption that was found in the church through the leadership .

Another thing you fail to understand, is that the bible is not a story book . The events captured within its pages actually happened . From the rise of the Babylonian empire to the Fall of the Romans, every prediction happened ; none ever failed to come to pass. In fact those predictions, are what you unconsciously read in the history books and tag to your baseless argument .

So shall we say you are indirectly stealing from God ?

Ammishaddai:
This lengthy post is full of preconceived prejudice against the bible.

LOL. The posts are full of FACTS, which you are apparently not prepared to deal with. Prove that it was "preconceived" and "prejudice" rather than simply seeing the book for what it is.

Ammishaddai:
And to me , this doesn't sound like a smart way to vilify Christianity or its doctrinal teachings.

Of course not -- because you're losing this argument at every turn. You have presented no empirical, testable evidence for your claims, just the usual unsupported assertions about the value (or lack thereof) of one particular ancient anthology of mythology.

Guess you need to apologize for your apologetics.

Ammishaddai:
In fact, my little nephew could have done a better job than this .

Then you need to retire from the pitch and send in your little nephew to argue with us, since you have tacitly admitted that your nephew is more competent than you in intellectual discourse.

Ammishaddai:
And before you start typing another load of balderdash, you need to understand that the Christian faith was founded on the precepts Jesus Christ , not on the wickedness or inferiority complex of mysoginst men . Please let this sink in.

Let what sink in? Could you perhaps rephrase that in the form of a sentence in English?

Ammishaddai:
Or better still , read up on Christianity in Europe, especially during the middle ages , and see how even true Christians like Martin Luther (1483-1546)and John Wycliffe (1328-1384)were persecuted because of the corruption that was found in the church through the leadership .

Persecution does not equal truth. It happens to a wide spectrum of people, including the hopelessly deluded.

Ammishaddai:
Another thing you fail to understand, is that the bible is not a story book

To me, it has always been a storybook. Your indignant whining won't change that.

Ammishaddai:
The events captured within its pages actually happened . From the rise of the Babylonian empire to the Fall of the Romans, every prediction happened ; none ever failed to come to pass.

Bullshit. Pure fucking deluded mythological crap. There was no historical Adam and Eve, no worldwide flood, and if Jesus was a real person who was executed by the Romans, he's been dead for nearly 2000 years. Don't wait up.

Plus, the role of a prophet was not to tell the future. It appears you didn't take Bible 101. All kinds of prophesies did not come true. Here's a few of them.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_prophecies

This is just easy peezy, lemon squeazy

Ammishaddai:
In fact those predictions, are what you unconsciously read in the history books and tag to your baseless argument .

So shall we say you are indirectly stealing from God ?

No, we shall not say that. You are now on record as bearing false witness against me, and I think that an appropriate fate would be for you to lose your religious faith. By, say, unconsciously committing the Unforgivable Sin whenever you hear John 3:16. Yeah, that should do the trick.

You've addressed NONE of the points made above. Did you come to this thread to preach? Looks like it. We don't need to be preached at. It doesn't work. Especially with me.

You've been using circular reasoning fallacies in every post, so yeah, until you come up with some sort of evidence your god exists you're going to have a very bad experience in this debate

[s]

Tamaratonye1:

LOL. The posts are full of FACTS, which you are apparently not prepared to deal with. Prove that it was "preconceived" and "prejudice" rather than simply seeing the book for what it is.


Of course not -- because you're losing this argument at every turn. You have presented no empirical, testable evidence for your claims, just the usual unsupported assertions about the value (or lack thereof) of one particular ancient anthology of mythology.

Guess you need to apologize for your apologetics.


Then you need to retire from the pitch and send in your little nephew to argue with us, since you have tacitly admitted that your nephew is more competent than you in intellectual discourse.


Let what sink in? Could you perhaps rephrase that in the form of a sentence in English?


Persecution does not equal truth. It happens to a wide spectrum of people, including the hopelessly deluded.


To me, it has always been a storybook. Your indignant whining won't change that.


Bullshit. Pure fucking deluded mythological crap. There was no historical Adam and Eve, no worldwide flood, and if Jesus was a real person who was executed by the Romans, he's been dead for nearly 2000 years. Don't wait up.

Plus, the role of a prophet was not to tell the future. It appears you didn't take Bible 101. All kinds of prophesies did not come true. Here's a few of them.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_prophecies

This is just easy peezy, lemon squeazy


No, we shall not say that. You are now on record as bearing false witness against me, and I think that an appropriate fate would be for you to lose your religious faith. By, say, unconsciously committing the Unforgivable Sin whenever you hear John 3:16. Yeah, that should do the trick.

You've addressed NONE of the points made above. Did you come to this thread to preach? Looks like it. We don't need to be preached at. It doesn't work. Especially with me.

You've been using circular reasoning fallacies in every post, so yeah, until you come up with some sort of evidence your god exists you're going to have a very bad experience in this debate

[/s] More lengthy balderdash. Please read through and digest what I have said because it seems you're on a mission to prove to me you are stupid.

Ammishaddai:
[s][/s] More lengthy balderdash. Please read through and digest what I have said because it seems you're on a mission to prove to me you are stupid.

Anybody with an ounce of objectivity can see who's clearly failing to read through and digest here. Are you upset because of your inability to construct a cogent rejoinder, or are you just another apologist who's out of his depth, tried and found wanting on matters concerning his own faith? I suspect majority here are already wringing piss out of their pants after laughing their ass off silly at your pitiful debating skills.

I keep disproving your assertions with evidence. You, on the other hand, keep crying false without actually presenting, rebuttals to said evidence.

Contrary to your sad little tantrums, my disapproval of your bullshit - and all other such bullshit written by similarly situated Christard assholes - is based on a lifetime of study of history and comparative religion. There is no prejudice. I am not pre-judging. I am judging.

And I judge that anyone who believes such fucking nonsense is not to be taken seriously.

Got it now?

[s]

Tamaratonye1:

Anybody with an ounce of objectivity can see who's clearly failing to read through and digest here. Are you upset because of your inability to construct a cogent rejoinder, or are you just another apologist who's out of his depth, tried and found wanting on matters concerning his own faith? I suspect majority here are already wringing piss out of their pants after laughing their ass off silly at your pitiful debating skills.

I keep disproving your assertions with evidence. You, on the other hand, keep crying false without actually presenting, rebuttals to said evidence.

Contrary to your sad little tantrums, my disapproval of your bullshit - and all other such bullshit written by similarly situated Christard assholes - is based on a lifetime of study of history and comparative religion. There is no prejudice. I am not pre-judging. I am judging.

And I judge that anyone who believes such fucking nonsense is not to be taken seriously.

Got it now?

[/s] I don't know the sort of hallucinogenic substances you've been taking, but I need to clarify you here that we were never arguing. So this assumption that " we were debating "is completely in the ranking of your delusions .

Ammishaddai:
[s][/s] I don't know the sort of hallucinogenic substances you've been taking, but I need to clarify you here that we were never arguing. So this assumption that " we were debating "is completely in the ranking of your delusions .

Ah, DENIAL - one of the prominent symptoms of whoop-ass

Are you truly this afraid to defend your claims? Why being evasive like this, Ammishaddai? Recall that you claimed the Bible is more detailed than any other historical document. When I attacked this claim, you changed position, claiming the Bible is more detailed than other religious texts. Tempted as I am to tag this switch as dishonest, it might have been unintentional on your part, probably because you don't even understand your own claims.

You do realize there's a world of difference between this:

Ammishaddai:
It's simply because there is no other valid historical document that's as detailed as the bible.

and this:

Ammishaddai:
Anyone can write rubbish and call it fact . But the truth still remains: The bible is the only historical document out there that's more detailed than all the other religious writings in the world

Those are two separate claims. Can you please present your evidence for any of them?

I'll be waiting.

[s]

Tamaratonye1:

Ah, DENIAL - one of the prominent symptoms of whoop-ass

Are you truly this afraid to defend your claims? Why being evasive like this, Ammishaddai? Recall that you claimed the Bible is more detailed than any other historical document. When I attacked this claim, you changed position, claiming the Bible is more detailed than other religious texts. Tempted as I am to tag this switch as dishonest, it might have been unintentional on your part, probably because you don't even understand your own claims.

You do realize there's a world of difference between this:



and this:



Those are two separate claims. Can you please present your evidence for any of them?

I'll be waiting.

[/s]You're being more stupid than necessary . When I made mention of the bible being the most detailed historical document, I was referring to in terms of its narrative concerning creation and history of mankind. No other document out there has attempted to do this. And until you can show me one single document that holds such detail as the bible, kindly stay the fvck off my mention

Ammishaddai:
[s][/s]You're being more stupid than necessary . When I made mention of the bible being the most detailed historical document, I was referring to in terms of its narrative concerning creation and history of mankind. No other document out there has attempted to do this. And until you can show me one single document that holds such detail as the bible, kindly stay the fvck off my mention

Just stop. The Bible gets so many details wrong I dunno how you can continue to say that it is a detailed historical document. For instance there is no evidence of the majesty of King Solomon's temple much less his reign. How could the Bible have predicted the rise of Babylon when the very dream you allude to supposedly happened during the Babylonian empire? The dream doesn't even mention any dates so what details does it have? Meanwhile there was supposed to be the god's kingdom immediately after the Roman empire according to you folk so where is this kingdom since the Romans have been gone for more than a thousand years?

There simply are no accurate details apart from names, places and approximate time periods, something any writer of fiction can incorporate into his work. Can you list 5 accurate details that are in the Bible that are established historical facts and I mean details not just names and places.

[s]

LordReed:


Just stop. The Bible gets so many details wrong I dunno how you can continue to say that it is a detailed historical document. For instance there is no evidence of the majesty of King Solomon's temple much less his reign. How could the Bible have predicted the rise of Babylon when the very dream you allude to supposedly happened during the Babylonian empire? The dream doesn't even mention any dates so what details does it have? Meanwhile there was supposed to be the god's kingdom immediately after the Roman empire according to you folk so where is this kingdom since the Romans have been gone for more than a thousand years?

There simply are no accurate details apart from names, places and approximate time periods, something any writer of fiction can incorporate into his work. Can you list 5 accurate details that are in the Bible that are established historical facts and I mean details not just names and places.

[/s] Mr Reed, this post of yours is irrelevant because these events actually happened. Had it been they never occurred, then it would have been clear that the bible lied . But this is not so .

If you would recall , I asked you a question yesterday regarding a certain census that was documented in the bible ,and you attested that it happened . So why are you now asking for dates...or are you now saying that dates and periods actually define the truth of an event ? Please be guided

Ammishaddai:
[s][/s] Mr Reed, this post of yours is irrelevant because if these events actually happened. Had it been they never occurred, then then it would have been clear case that the bible lied . But this is not so .

If you would recall , I asked you a question yesterday regarding a certain census that was documented in the bible ,and you attested that it happened . So why are you now asking for dates...or are you now saying that dates and periods actually define the truth of an event ? Please be guided

What events actually happened? Can you give the so called accurate details from the bible?

You said the bible is detailed yet it fails to be accurate in any detail for that census. There were 3 censuses during Augustus' reign none of which take place at the time recorded for Jesus' birth. So what accuracy are you on about?

I asked you a question, list 5 accurate details the bible gives of historical events, can you or can you not?

Ammishaddai:
[s][/s]You're being more stupid than necessary . When I made mention of the bible being the most detailed historical document, I was referring to in terms of its narrative concerning creation and history of mankind. No other document out there has attempted to do this. And until you can show me one single document that holds such detail as the bible, kindly stay the fvck off my mention

How do you know this? Have you read all existing literature on earth, in all languages, to make this qualification? Or is this what your "men of god" keep telling you? Have you heard of confirmation bias?

Any written work can be detailed. Fiction or nonfiction. The real question: is it accurate? And the answer to that is NO. Absolutely 100% NO

Your so-called "details are mostly all wrong. No real Biblical scholars on the faculty of the mainline or even religious schools takes the Old Testament to be "history". That's been debunked about 75 years ago, at least. References upon request. The BEST Israeli archeologists teach that the Old Testament is not historical. These days, this is Christian Apologetics 101. It appears atheists know far more about the Bible than you ever will.

As far as the New Testament goes, gospels are not "history". They are proclamations of belief. Unless you're a fundy nut case, scholars do not accept they are historical, either.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline...spels.html

In 1952, a team was set in place by the world-famous, preeminent scholar, archaeologist and pioneer discoverer of Holy Land historical sites and documents, Dr. William Foxwell Albright, the professor of Semitic languages at the Johns Hopkins University. Their job was to write criticisms and scholarly work concerning all biblical texts. The team was composed of the most respected biblical scholars in the US and Europe, including Dr. John W. Bailey, Professor Emeritus, New Testament, Berkley Baptist Divinity School, Dr Albert E. Barnett, Professor Candler School of Theology, Emory University, Dr. Walter Russell Bowel, Professor, The Protestant Episcopal Seminary, Virginia, Dr. John Bright, Professor, Union Seminary and many others.

The team of 124 clergymen and scholars came mostly from conservative, mainline universities and churches for the most part, the likes of whom will never be seen again in one place, whose names evoke the utmost and deepest respect, even if one completely disagrees with their religious views. They wrote the huge 13 volume set, now considered a valuable rare book, called "The Interpreters Bible". Today it is usually kept under lock and key in seminaries and libraries. This set includes an introduction to scholarship and looks at every single verse and word in the Bible, discusses their origins and possible meanings from various points of view. It has been updated in the 1990's, but the original scholarship is still the central fundamental summary of knowledge, which summarized scholarship from the Medieval period (1850's -1950's) and is therefore considered to be an interesting historical snapshot. It is also an assurance that these absolutely respected leading intellectuals from the 20th Century scholarship, of whom most were religious, have agreed to have each other's names associated with their own and that they felt comfortable with what each other were saying in an academic setting and commanded world-wide respect as conservative, careful, and sincere, life-long teachers, academics and scholars.

On page 15 of "The Interpreters Bible", Dr. Herbert F. Farmer, Professor of Divinity at Cambridge University wrote about the indispensability of the texts, their importance and how the "truth" of them should be approached, after an exposition of the traditional conservative Christian view of person-hood, sin and the salvific actions of Jesus (aka Yeshua ben Josef), known as "the Christ" in human history.

"The reason has to do with the evidence afforded by the texts themselves, and calls for fuller treatment. Scholarly research into the texts themselves, has convincingly shown that they cannot be accepted in detail as they stand."

There was no Garden of Eden, no flood as described, no Abraham, no Exodus, no Babylonian Exile as described. The Egyptians controlled the entire ancient Near East, including what eventually became Israel. No one would "flee" from one place they controlled to another they controlled and had garrisons of their military. Besides the many historical errors, there's also the problem (for fundy literalists) of the hundreds and hundreds of contradictions.

YOUR BIBLE IS THE WORLD'S LARGEST REPOSITORY OF CONTRADICTIONS, CONFABULATIONS AND LIES

Now, I presume this is the part where you get emotional, strikethrough my post and complain about the length because you're suddenly too lazy to read long proses especially when they're criticizing your religion. The truth stings, I know.

You've got no reply. You've got no answer. You're speechless. Thoroughly gobsmacked. So get it out of your system. After being trounced, outsmarted, and out-gunned, you can let the tears all out.

[s]

Tamaratonye1:

How do you know this? Have you read all existing literature on earth, in all languages, to make this qualification? Or is this what your "men of god" keep telling you? Have you heard of confirmation bias?

Any written work can be detailed. Fiction or nonfiction. The real question: is it accurate? And the answer to that is NO. Absolutely 100% NO

Your so-called "details are mostly all wrong. No real Biblical scholars on the faculty of the mainline or even religious schools takes the Old Testament to be "history". That's been debunked about 75 years ago, at least. References upon request. The BEST Israeli archeologists teach that the Old Testament is not historical. These days, this is Christian Apologetics 101. It appears atheists know far more about the Bible than you ever will.

As far as the New Testament goes, gospels are not "history". They are proclamations of belief. Unless you're a fundy nut case, scholars do not accept they are historical, either.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline...spels.html

In 1952, a team was set in place by the world-famous, preeminent scholar, archaeologist and pioneer discoverer of Holy Land historical sites and documents, Dr. William Foxwell Albright, the professor of Semitic languages at the Johns Hopkins University. Their job was to write criticisms and scholarly work concerning all biblical texts. The team was composed of the most respected biblical scholars in the US and Europe, including Dr. John W. Bailey, Professor Emeritus, New Testament, Berkley Baptist Divinity School, Dr Albert E. Barnett, Professor Candler School of Theology, Emory University, Dr. Walter Russell Bowel, Professor, The Protestant Episcopal Seminary, Virginia, Dr. John Bright, Professor, Union Seminary and many others.

The team of 124 clergymen and scholars came mostly from conservative, mainline universities and churches for the most part, the likes of whom will never be seen again in one place, whose names evoke the utmost and deepest respect, even if one completely disagrees with their religious views. They wrote the huge 13 volume set, now considered a valuable rare book, called "The Interpreters Bible". Today it is usually kept under lock and key in seminaries and libraries. This set includes an introduction to scholarship and looks at every single verse and word in the Bible, discusses their origins and possible meanings from various points of view. It has been updated in the 1990's, but the original scholarship is still the central fundamental summary of knowledge, which summarized scholarship from the Medieval period (1850's -1950's) and is therefore considered to be an interesting historical snapshot. It is also an assurance that these absolutely respected leading intellectuals from the 20th Century scholarship, of whom most were religious, have agreed to have each other's names associated with their own and that they felt comfortable with what each other were saying in an academic setting and commanded world-wide respect as conservative, careful, and sincere, life-long teachers, academics and scholars.

On page 15 of "The Interpreters Bible", Dr. Herbert F. Farmer, Professor of Divinity at Cambridge University wrote about the indispensability of the texts, their importance and how the "truth" of them should be approached, after an exposition of the traditional conservative Christian view of person-hood, sin and the salvific actions of Jesus (aka Yeshua ben Josef), known as "the Christ" in human history.

"The reason has to do with the evidence afforded by the texts themselves, and calls for fuller treatment. Scholarly research into the texts themselves, has convincingly shown that they cannot be accepted in detail as they stand."

There was no Garden of Eden, no flood as described, no Abraham, no Exodus, no Babylonian Exile as described. The Egyptians controlled the entire ancient Near East, including what eventually became Israel. No one would "flee" from one place they controlled to another they controlled and had garrisons of their military. Besides the many historical errors, there's also the problem (for fundy literalists) of the hundreds and hundreds of contradictions.

YOUR BIBLE IS THE WORLD'S LARGEST REPOSITORY OF CONTRADICTIONS, CONFABULATIONS AND LIES

Now, I presume this is the part where you get emotional, strikethrough my post and complain about the length because you're suddenly too lazy to read long proses especially when they're criticizing your religion. The truth stings, I know.

You've got no reply. You've got no answer. You're speechless. Thoroughly gobsmacked. So get it out of your system. After being trounced, outsmarted, and out-gunned, you can let the tears all out.

[/s] If you knew I would strike this lengthy writeup, then why didn't you provided a short summary that has that "document " ?


My good man , I don't have time for lengthy writeups that confirm stupidity . Please provide that document that confirms what you are saying . Or else I'll keep striking each baseless post you make

LordReed:


What events actually happened? Can you give the so called accurate details from the bible?

You said the bible is detailed yet it fails to be accurate in any detail for that census. There were 3 censuses during Augustus' reign none of which take place at the time recorded for Jesus' birth. So what accuracy are you on about?

I asked you a question, list 5 accurate details the bible gives of historical events, can you or can you not?

Mr Reed, let me assume that you've read the story of Daniel the prophet and the revelations given to by the God of Israel . Now tell me , did the Greeks not rule after the Persians ? Please answer with a yes or no. Because I don't have the time to read lengthy arguments that sway from the topic.