ShakyJake

In a recent debate with a Christian friend over the Bible, I used the post here under "Bible Fun" to state some examples. Well, he forwarded the message to some other friend and the individual replied back with the below. Unfortuantely, I am horrible at writing cohesive counter arguements, so any help with replying back to this individual is appreciated. Below is the bulk of the message I received:

[ August 05, 2002: Message edited by: ShakyJake ]</p>

Radcliffe Emerson

I hope that you realize that you could be an awesome follower of God. God desires that we be either hot or cold for Him. Why is that? Because there is no riding the fence on the issue of Him. I respect your opposition to a biblical lifestyle, and I apologize for the many times that God's followers in themselves do not reflect the glory God truly wants to show you. However, this does not change the fact that when you and me die, we will face Judgment.

False teaching. The earliest Christians do not mention eternal torment for almost 300 years. Clearly inserted by the formal Church to try to control people.


1) SLAVERY - Slavery in that time was normally entered into voluntarily to pay back debt , show gratitude for things(See Jacob with Rachel and Leah). The writers in that time were explaining principles to be applied to relationships not how to treat those you have in bondage. The bible never teaches that forced bondage is permissible but rather that those who do this are wicked (See the Israelites and Pharoah in Exodus).

For one thing, archaeology shows us now that Egypt did not keep slaves. Israelites living in Egypt were there willingly, and allowed to leave willingly. The Exodus has no historical support, it never happened. And this "assumption" about what the bible says slavery is, is interpreting the words quoted, something one cannot do if it's the inspired word of "god".

2) WOMEN - The Bible does not teach that Woman is less than man.

Yes it does. Leviticus says if a woman is raped and is by herself it's her fault, not the man's.
1 Corinthians orders women to remain silent in church, indicating they are second class and not allowed to participate. The bible definitely puts women below men as 2nd class citizens. Actually the bible treats women as property of men.
3) DISCIPLINE - Maybe us as adults need to be disciplined sometimes for the things we do as well....
Science and medicine knows how that homosexuals and lesbians are born that way, and there increasing amounts of children being born that have neither sex. Yet because of this medical condition that can't be changed, the bible condemns them. Pure bull.
And if we're created in god's image, he either has the same faults as we, or it's not true at all.


4) CIRCUMCISION - This was God's 1st covenant with His people through Abraham.
Abraham never existed. Archaeological findings do not support it. This is myth. Circumcision probably arose the same way beards and hair in the Israelites did, to distinguish them from their neighbors, such as the Egyptians, who shaved all of their hair. Even with that difference however, the Israelites were NOT in bondage in Egypt. Egypt was the most open, accepting civilization in that area during that age.

5) ATHEISTS - There must be some standard. Enough said.
So ridiculous it doesn't warrant a reply.

6) OMNI-BENEVELENT GOD - God is love. However, this type of love is not the "I love you honey" type love we are used to. This love is holy, pure and just. God is holy meaning He is without sin. Therefore he cannot condone sin or those who propagate it on themselves, others, or on God's people. If God did not have the power to oppose sin and evil with a just response, he would have no power to do anything else.
But 'god' created us in his image. He loves us more than anything, deliberately gave us sin, (the OT quotes God as saying "I created evil.")yet he also created angels that are perfect and get to be in his presence all the time? And even at that, one of them rebelled?
And on top of this, God knows what's going to happen before it happens?
Yeah, that makes logical sense.

7) WAR - If someone breaks into my house and tries to kill my family do I have the right to protect them by killing the intruder? Yes I think so. David had to protect his people against those who opposed the Israelites.
David invaded rival kingdoms who were not at war with him and slaughtered them. (By the way, if David existed at all, he was a minor king at best, over a small territory, not a major king).
The bible clearly says there were peaceful people living in regions, and the Israelites went in and slaughtered every man, woman, and child.
Sounds like a truly benevolent god to me.

8) HOW LOVELY? - All results of sin. If people do not recognize how messed up our world is because of our sin, then discussing these issues is pointless....
If Christians can't realize humans make their own sin through greed and selfishness with no external supernatural boogey-man controlling them, yes it is pointless.

9)EVOLUTION - Evolution deceives people and draws them away from God. Plain and simple. Maybe you should study Darwin's life and see what he said before he died. He concluded his research was wrong in the end....By the way it takes more faith to believe in evolution that it does to believe in Christ.
Now this is just plain ridiculous. Science has proven evolution.

10) LYING - This is a misinterpretation of the text. What Paul is saying is that people were teaching that more sin would increase God's grace so we should do it. Wrong...This is a false teaching.....

Yet Paul himself indicates he lies. He says "I am all things to all people". Scholars have thoroughly researched this stuff and it's well known Paul was not above lying. This goes against the very Christ he professes to believe in.

Clutch

Shaky, the correct response is: What orifice did you pull that out of?"

Stick with the quotes and don't let your respondant get away with Orwellian reinterpretations that simply ignore the content of the quotes themselves. For example: The message of Exodus is, Don't Mess with Israel. There is no general anti-slavery message; Moses did not say "Let 'em all go". He said "Let my people go". Moreover, consider This does indeed command the seizing of unwilling slaves. Girls too young to be married, more precisely, for sexual use.

This sort of barefaced labelling of one thing as its opposite characterizes every one of the replies you list, Shaky. Just look at how the commandments to slaughter women and infants, to ritually murder captives, to sexually enslave little girls, are justified as self-defense, on a par with protecting yourself from someone who breaks into your house!

Never mind that the OT explicitly represents the Hebrews as moving into rich lands already settled and farmed, and butchering the inhabitants on the grounds that God gave the land to them, on account of their forefather heard voices telling him to murder his son. This invasion can only be portrayed as self-defense by someone who's not read the bible, or who's prepared to tell any lie to delude himself and others.

I consider some of the other points about Paul and women on the Bible Fun thread, too, which you might find useful. But the general approach to adopt is just to look again at the quotes and point out how these replies uniformly treat them as saying the opposite. Truth is a lie; good is evil; sexual slavery is voluntary; vicious aggression is righteous self-defense. That must be what your respondant means by the "standard" that atheism lacks...

xeren

Darwin DID NOT conclude at the end of his life that his research was wrong. I know the exact quote that this theist misinterpreted from Darwin. If anyone can find it and post it for me i would be very thankful.

I can't find that quote, but here is an excerpt form a biography on him:

Starspun

Wow, what we have here is an A1, first class, xian apologetic. To him, the bible doesn't state 'A', what it actually means is 'B'.

Judgement goes against this:

Think of the term omni-benevolent. Benevolence is a kindly or charitable act. What is charitable or kindly about judging anyone? What is benevolent about damning someone to hell? If God judges us, it is NOT all loving. Therefore, God is not omni benevolent.

Where did he pull this out of? Forget I asked. Work is work...slavery is slavery. Apologetics aside.

Yes, it does teach that women are less than men. Why would god judge a group of people instead of the individual? It is the individual that must answer for his or her sin's. Once again, he is not being truthful with what the bible says.

Once again, it goes back to the benevolence lie. Why punish for sin's when it was God that threw sin out there in the first place? Oh thats right, because of free will.
There is no sin. There are actions we take and those actions have good outcomes or bad outcomes, either one is relative to the individual.

One word: OUCH!

Well, at least he can admit Atheists set the standard. That standard would be reason. Enough said.

Impossible.

Yep, war is hell. Especially with God giving someone the go ahead. Omni-benevolence anyone?

If he can't realize how messed up our world is because of religion, then discussing these issues are pointless....

Whether he wants to believe it or not, evolution is a scientific fact, for fucks sake. Darwin said no such thing. It takes ZERO faith to believe in something that is we can use our senses to verify. Can he do the same with God or a dead guy from almost 2000 years ago? nope.

And he knows Paul's thought's because....???

Tell him that he himself has proven his god to be a lie just by that omnibenevolent remark. Not to mention other fallacies the bible presents as god's truth. Now, ask him to come here and disprove Evolution. I'm sure Sci-girl or another would love to school his ass.

Autonemesis

Even if he did, science is not "revealed" or "handed down" from authority. And even if it was, you still need to get all the generations of scientists that followed Darwin and built on his work, to renounce their life's work as well.

ShakyJake

The Reply!:

Radcliffe Emerson

When archaelogists have dug down to first century Palestine and earlier, and call in other experts to verify they do in fact have the right time period of the layer they're working on, it's extremely hard to contest the facts. Some of these digs have only reached these layers in the last 10 to 20 years, the main reason that Christian archaeologists up through the late 70s dispute the findings. They've dug further and found more, and their findings do not support most biblical accounts.
Some things are supported, but the majority are not.

[ August 05, 2002: Message edited by: Radcliffe Emerson ]</p>

CX

And frankly why should you want to? However, that religious belief is incredibly powerful is not in question. Millions, if not billions of people throughout the history of mankind have been transformed by the power of religious or supernatural belief. What is at issue is the objective reality that underlies said belief. That one's belief in a given proposition has dramatic impact on one's personal life is not proof of the objective truth of that belief. We need look no further than the atrocity committed against the U.S. last 11 September to see that.

Clutch

Shaky, This guy's trying to save face by getting out without admitting that everything he first wrote was factually mistaken or a fallacy or both.

But again he's mistaken. None of the points I listed, at least, makes use of anything outside the bible. (For instance, my point about Exodus even assumes that the Israelites were indeed slaves in Egypt!) It's all about reading what the bible actually says -- your interlocutor is just trying to put a better spin on the demolition of his claims, by portraying it as archaeologists versus the bible. It's not. It's what the bible actually says, versus what this guy wishes it says.