Bacteriologist:

Religious platitudes aka preaching. Thanks I'm not interested. Save it for the sheeple in their slaughterhouse called the church.

This nonsense alone makes you undeserving of a concrete reply from me. Ever. So don't bother to quote me again. Because you will be ignored.

Never mind Sir! I'm not here to preach to you in any way so you interest is meaningless. But if your heart is troubled due to the power of intellect of a so called religionist, know today that you've been arguing with NONE CHRISTIANS all these while. So your intellect may not feel any challenge, as they're the same as you are (deluded in your thoughts)

I'm one of the TRUE Christians, so my comments will surely throw you and all the professors in your faculty off balance!

You asked questions regarding HELL and i gave you an irrefutable and logical response to prove to you that TRUE FAITH has what it takes to make you tremble in silence!

So it's not what the credulous and misinformed churchgoers around you have told you now, it's GOD'S WORD that's powerful enough to shut your hopeless mouth up! Isaiah 54:17

Bacteriologist:


Ook...So a god creates EVERYTHING in the whole universe including evil

But God did not create evil, which in this sense is rebellion against Himself. That's absurd to even think of. He couldn't have created rebellion against Himself.

and then creates human beings (and some angels) with the ability to commit evil.

The more correct word to use is "freedom to rebel against Him, should they choose to", instead of "ability". Meanwhile, not some angels, but all the angels. They had freedom to make choices regarding obedience to God, but they were not free from the just consequences of those choices they willingly made.

Then turns around to blame humans and the angels for the same mess he created in the first place.

which mess anyway? Giving man freewill? The only other option would have been to make robots which cannot freely choose to do what they want.

Your god, if he exists at all, is a moral thug.

According to which standard of morality?

Do not preach or quote the Bible at me. I'm not interested in discussing a book that was used to justify the enslavement of my ancestors.

You purported to show the absurdity of an idea in the Bible, and I quoted a passage addressing that same idea in the Bible so as to set it straight, and you're cancelling it? Sort yourself out man. Meanwhile, that those who engaged in slave trade quoted the Bible to support it does not mean that the Bible supports it, just like a person committing murder and quoting the Nigerian constitution as justification for the murder he committed does not mean that the Nigerian constitution supports murder.

If you want to talk about the Bible maybe let's bring out the parts where owning other people as property(slavery) is justified, homosexuals can be killed and women cannot teach in churches because they're women. Or where people picking up sticks or herding their cattle on the Sabbath can be put to death.

You would have to show by what universal moral standard these things are bad.

What a loving god we have here... right.

Quite a loving God, who was willing to give everything, including His only begotten Son, to save man from the damnation which man rightly deserved. Such love!

A god that says: "oh love me and obey me or else you will burn in the fire I prepared for my enemy Satan(whom I created anyway)"

Do you have any idea that there is anything called the moral law (whose principles are expressed in the 10 Commandments) by which God governs the universe? Anyone who will suffer damnation will have been shown to have transgressed that law.

Like who the **** creates his own enemy?

There you have the answer. God didn't create His own enemy. However, He created beings with freedom to choose to become His enemies. The only other option would be to create robots which could never disobey Him, because they're just that: robots.

And how are most of you Christians comfortable with this kind of love? And have the guts to call it unconditional?

How much more unconditional can that Love get which is willing to suffer what is justly yours, that you may enjoy what justly belongs to it?

"Love me or Burn in hell."

By the time they're being destroyed, even those about to be destroyed would acknowledge the Justice of God's judgment.

Isn't unconditional love. Unconditional love makes no demands. It loves WITHOUT CONDITIONS.

There is no incompatibility between God's inexplicable love and the existence of a moral which can never be set aside, and by which God rules Creation, and which stipulates penalties for its offenders. For there to be no law is for there to be anarchy.

A god that punishes people forever for finite crimes, is again, a masochistic, moral thug.

Sinners cannot live forever, though it be in another portion of God's creation. Living forever is the exclusive reward of the righteous. Sinners will simply be put out of existence by means of a fire that will not be quenched to it has completed its work.

NO..in the sense that you choose to interpret it.

So are you the one to say which is the correct interpretation?

Some parts of the Bible even says a particular part of the body will burn for certain thousand of years.

is this not the case with most skeptics trying to discredit the Bible? They hardly even know what they're trying to discredit. Please the Bible does not say this anywhere.

But yeah...anything to defend god..

We don't defend God. Instead, God defends us. He's our Defender. But we answer purported attempts at discrediting the Bible.

Jesus Christ!! How are a lot of you not disgusted by the concept of an eternal fire created by a so-called loving god?

Except that nobody will burn forever. The sinners would simply be returned to the state in which they were before they were created: the state of non-existence.

. (Edit: it has been brought to my notice that there are no biblical references that states that the body burns for a certain number of years.)

Next time, make sure you know very well what you want to criticize, and save yourself the blushing.

DoctorAlien:


We don't defend God. Instead, God defends us. He's our Defender. But we answer purported attempts at discrediting the Bible.

The book discredits itself. Imagine it says the god stood by as the stone tablets it wrote with its own hand were destroyed. Who doesn't recognise a "the dog ate my homework" excuse when you see it?

A bunch of iron age fairytales with no real support is as discredited as it can get.

LordReed:


The book discredits itself. Imagine it says the god stood by as the stone tablets it wrote with its own hand were destroyed. Who doesn't recognise a "the dog ate my homework" excuse when you see it?

A bunch of iron age fairytales with no real support is as discredited as it can get.

The one giving us rules on how to manage power, should first exhibit a measure of restraint to lead by example! Psalms 78:41

His thought is far too high than our thought,{Isaiah 55:9-10} otherwise no intelligent creature made in his image could stand to say "there is no God" Psalms 10:4

LordReed:


The book discredits itself.

No it doesn't. The Bible is a beauty of 66 books in the most sublime of harmonious relationships.

Imagine it says the god stood by as the stone tablets it wrote with its own hand were destroyed.

I suppose you're talking about the moment Moses threw down the tablets of stone in his hand containing the 10 Commandments, which God wrote with His own finger. Well, yes Moses did throw them down in anger at the fact that the Israelites were already committing idolatry just days after hearing the 10 Commandments spoken by God with His own voice. And yes, the tablets did break. But have you not read the part where God instructed Moses to hew out the exact same type of stone tablets, and to come up into the mountain again, and that He would rewrite the exact same 10 Commandments on the new tablets of stones? And Moses sure did, and God wrote on the new set of stone tablets the exact same things on the first tablets which Moses broke.

Maybe there's lesson there. God is willing to pardon us when we do wrong, just as He pardoned Moses for breaking the tablets.

Who doesn't recognise a "the dog ate my homework" excuse when you see it?

which excuse please? Point it out.

A bunch of iron age fairytales with no real support is as discredited as it can get.

This description fits things like big bang theory, evolutionism, etc.

DoctorAlien:
No it doesn't. The Bible is a beauty of 66 books in the most sublime of harmonious relationships.

What a joke. It's so harmonious you discard the first part to embrace the second only to go back to the first to pick and choose. Harmonious my little toe toenail.

I suppose you're talking about the moment Moses threw down the tablets of stone in his hand containing the 10 Commandments, which God wrote with His own finger. Well, yes Moses did throw them down in anger at the fact that the Israelites were already committing idolatry just days after hearing the 10 Commandments spoken by God with His own voice. And yes, the tablets did break. But have you not read the part where God instructed Moses to hew out the exact same type of stone tablets, and to come up into the mountain again, and that He would rewrite the exact same 10 Commandments on the new tablets of stones? And Moses sure did, and God wrote on the new set of stone tablets the exact same things on the first tablets which Moses broke.

Maybe there's lesson there. God is willing to pardon us when we do wrong, just as He pardoned Moses for breaking the tablets.

which excuse please? Point it out.

The same story you are trying hard to justify. That is a poor excuse for why we have no evidence for the existence of what this god supposedly wrote by himself. If a child gave you such an excuse you'd be cross.

This description fits things like big bang theory, evolutionism, etc.

This is just antiscience bullshit. Produce evidence for your god or your fairytales, don't deflect.

Maximus69:


The one giving us rules on how to manage power, should first exhibit a measure of restraint to lead by example! Psalms 78:41

His thought is far too high than our thought,{Isaiah 55:9-10} otherwise no intelligent creature made in his image could stand to say "there is no God" Psalms 10:4

Quoting a bunch of fairytales to support the fairytale, how classic.

LordReed:


What a joke. It's so harmonious you discard the first part to embrace the second only to go back to the first to pick and choose. Harmonious my little toe toenail.

Please what are you talking about? And how do I do such a thing?

The same story you are trying hard to justify. That is a poor excuse for why we have no evidence for the existence of what this god supposedly wrote by himself. If a child gave you such an excuse you'd be cross.

I didn't set out to tell you what happened to the tablets of stones which God wrote with His own fingers. Neither did I claim to have knowledge of what happened to the stone tablets. I instead corrected the erroneous idea underlying your initial question, that the breaking of the tablets were an excuse for anything.

We may not know where the stones are today but we know exactly what they contained. As for the stones themselves, they were hid in the ark of the covenant. Humans weren't allowed to open it and look into it. But God first spoke the contents of the stone to the hearing of all Israel. After that, He wrote what He spoke on the tablets of stones with His own finger. Moses recorded God speaking the contents of the table, and the things He said in Exodus 20:1-17. Later, in Deut. 5, Moses recounted the things which God spoke, and confirmed that the same things were written on the tablets of stones. They would have been quickly memorized by the Israelites, and passed down over generations. Scribes copied them over and over again as they reproduced the Torah. So we know the contents of the tablets of stone.

This is just antiscience bullshit. Produce evidence for your god or your fairytales, don't deflect.

I believe I haven't deflected. Otherwise, point out how I've deflected.

And oh, I am not anti-science. However, I'm anti-naturalism.

DoctorAlien:

Please what are you talking about? And how do I do such a thing?

You can pretend you don't understand that's your cup of tea.

I didn't set out to tell you what happened to the tablets of stones which God wrote with His own fingers. Neither did I claim to have knowledge of what happened to the stone tablets. I instead corrected the erroneous idea underlying your initial question, that the breaking of the tablets were an excuse for anything.

We may not know where the stones are today but we know exactly what they contained. As for the stones themselves, they were hid in the ark of the covenant. Humans weren't allowed to open it and look into it. But God first spoke the contents of the stone to the hearing of all Israel. After that, He wrote what He spoke on the tablets of stones with His own finger. Moses recorded God speaking the contents of the table, and the things He said in Exodus 20:1-17. Later, in Deut. 5, Moses recounted the things which God spoke, and confirmed that the same things were written on the tablets of stones. They would have been quickly memorized by the Israelites, and passed down over generations. Scribes copied them over and over again as they reproduced the Torah. So we know the contents of the tablets of stone.

Yeah, a god that can make a universe that endures for a eons cannot prevent 2 stone tables from breaking. Those are freaking fairytales if you still can't get the hint.

I believe I haven't deflected. Otherwise, point out how I've deflected.

And oh, I am not anti-science. However, I'm anti-naturalism.

You are attempting to call into question scientific theories that have nothing to do with the subject matter. BBT has got nothing to do with proving the Bible is credible.

LordReed:


Quoting a bunch of fairytales to support the fairytale, how classic.

Bunch of fairytales to support the fairytale!

The book say the Supreme Being is considerate, so with all his mightiness he won't just behave irrationally like power drunk humans! Surely humans like you and i will never tolerate such, but how will his admonition make any sense if he is not tolerant?

The book says his thought is higher than our thought, and it's obvious from your quote pointing to his action as senseless, but to someone having deeper reasoning, the SENSE of this so called Supreme Being is UNCOMMON!

From the way you're reasoning, it's obvious that you'll deal ruthlessly with anyone who doubt your existence or competence. But according to his book, he won't do behave like you.

I think that's why he deserved the honour to be revered as GOD!

Meanwhile all your suggestions about how to solve the problem we are having on this planet coincides with his plan, the only difference is the EXTERMINATION of stubborn ones who will not allow his plans to work. And if we're to deduce from the way you reason, i think he is far too tolerant and more permissible than you Sir!

Maximus69:


Bunch of fairytales to support the fairytale!

The book say the Supreme Being is considerate, so with all his mightiness he won't just behave irrationally like power drunk humans! Surely humans like you and i will never tolerate such, but how will his admonition make any sense if he is not tolerant?

The book says his thought is higher than our thought, and it's obvious from your quote pointing to his action as senseless, but to someone having deeper reasoning, the SENSE of this so called Supreme Being is UNCOMMON!

From the way you're reasoning, it's obvious that you'll deal ruthlessly with anyone who doubt your existence or competence. But according to his book, he won't do behave like you.

I think that's why he deserved the honour to be revered as GOD!

Meanwhile all your suggestions about how to solve the problem we are having on this planet coincides with his plan, the only difference is the EXTERMINATION of stubborn ones who will not allow his plans to work. And if we're to deduce from the way you reason, i think he is far too tolerant and more permissible than you Sir!

Batman says killing is wrong so he doesn't kill therefore Batman is real. This is the nature of your argument, that because the story logic can work in some ways and because it is analogous to real life therefore it is real and credible. Do you also believe that the tortoise bald head is because it hid hot food under a cap on its head or do you apply a more critical analysis to figure out that that is a fairytale. If you cannot critically examine the Bible stories the same way you examine tortoise and hare stories then you have no leg to stand on.

LordReed:


You can pretend you don't understand that's your cup of tea.



Yeah, a god that can make a universe that endures for a eons cannot prevent 2 stone tables from breaking. Those are freaking fairytales if you still can't get the hint.




You are attempting to call into question scientific theories that have nothing to do with the subject matter. BBT has got nothing to do with proving the Bible is credible.

You mentioned fairytales, and I listed examples of things that can be classified as fairytales. That is in no way deflecting.

There is nothing about BBT more scientific than creationism. BBT is not scientific because scientists talk about it; scientists talk about creationism too. BBT is not scientific because it is naturalistic. Science is not naturalism.

So, you have no point.

DoctorAlien:


You mentioned fairytales, and I listed examples of things that can be classified as fairytales. That is in no way deflecting.

There is nothing about BBT more scientific than creationism. BBT is not scientific because scientists talk about it; scientists talk about creationism too. BBT is not scientific because it is naturalistic. Science is not naturalism.

So, you have no point.

The pretense is strong with this one.

LordReed:


Batman says killing is wrong so he doesn't kill therefore Batman is real. This is the nature of your argument, that because the story logic can work in some ways and because it is analogous to real life therefore it is real and credible. Do you also believe that the tortoise bald head is because it hid hot food under a cap on its head or do you apply a more critical analysis to figure out that that is a fairytale. If you cannot critically examine the Bible stories the same way you examine tortoise and hare stories then you have no leg to stand on.

Reality is what works Sir NOT just a logical story!

You and i believed (trusted) the concept that two plus two is four, NOT just because we were taught in school but BECAUSE IT'S WORKING!

The Spiderman or Batman may sound logical to anyone but can you tell me the group that's doing anything worthwhile from what they learned from them?

The tortoise is just an animal like the story of a talking snake in a garden of Eden (Bible), so it all sounds just like myths and fairytales for sure.

But can you point to any group doing anything profitable with the story of the tortoise?

Well, during a time when the earth is divided due to Racism and Politics, when hostility is the order of the day in our society.

A religious group went throughout the earth and picked people from all the nations they stepped their foot to ORGANIZE over 8,500,000 people and turned them to one big happy family of peace loving worshippers, guess what? all these people VOWED heartily never to make, buy, sell or take up arms for any reason whatsoever again!
They are all having one line of thought and volunteered themselves to keep visiting people in their neighbourhood to increase the number of the happy and peace loving global family!

All these WORKED OUT due to what they found in that book BIBLE!

That's a miracle far greater than all the miracles ever recorded in that book! Isaiah 2:1-4

Please you can't compared that to the myth of either Superman, Spiderman, Batman or any other comic man that's NOT WORKING OUT anything profitable either here or there Sir!

Maximus69:


Reality is what works Sir NOT just a logical story!

You and i believed (trusted) the concept that two plus two is four, NOT just because we were taught in school but BECAUSE IT'S WORKING!

The Spiderman or Batman may sound logical to anyone but can you tell me the group that's doing anything worthwhile from what they learned from them?

The tortoise is just an animal like the story of a talking snake in a garden of Eden (Bible), so it all sounds just like myths and fairytales for sure.

But can you point to any group doing anything profitable with the story of the tortoise?

Well, during a time when the earth is divided due to Racism and Politics, when hostility is the order of the day in our society.

A religious group went throughout the earth and picked people from all the nations they stepped their foot to ORGANIZE over 8,500,000 people and turned them to one big happy family of peace loving worshippers, guess what? all these people VOWED heartily never to make, buy, sell or take up arms for any reason whatsoever again!
They are all having one line of thought and volunteered themselves to keep visiting people in their neighbourhood to increase the number of the happy and peace loving global family!

All these WORKED OUT due to what they found in that book BIBLE!

That's a miracle far greater than all the miracles ever recorded in that book! Isaiah 2:1-4

Please you can't compared that to the myth of either Superman, Spiderman, Batman or any other comic man that's NOT WORKING OUT anything profitable either here or there Sir!

Again this is a terrible argument. That your fairytale helps you achieve something in this life is still not evidence it is true. Cinderella is a fairytale that a lot of people can relate with, coming up from grass to grace is a dream a whole lot of people have and guess what some of them do achieve that dream. Megan Markle a commoner became royalty by marriage, just like Cinderella, that doesn't mean Cinderella is a true story.