Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't read the whole thread but I can easily see how someone can believe in God despite an imperfect world. You just assume that God is not all-benevolent. Humans have existed for millennia with God and Gods that are vindictive, flawed, have weaknesses, and have cruel and immoral tendencies. It's really not that difficult of a concert since we tend to anthropomorphize dieties and so many of these characteristics are familiarly human.

Not the Abrahamic God. There is nothing pagan, human-like (even His anger and His love are not human-like), and familiar about Him. That is why the Abrahamic faiths are markedly different than other religions.

Ummm...he looks just like a human and he is quite human and flawed in the Old Testament. He is absolutely anthropomorphized. Good grief.

No He is not. He is completely different than pagan deities that you are thinking of. Abrahamic God was/is the only god that was/is monotheistic and omnipotent among all other deities of that region or any other region for that matter.

So, you don't understand the word "anthropomorphize" and completely unable to view your religion (your belief in the "Abrahamic God") objectively. Monotheism and omnipotence are irrelevant.

I understand perfectly (without being patronizing like you). But you obviously haven't read or understood the Bible and are basing your judgments on what you heard second hand (from media, neighbors, etc). "Human" attributes that you think of such as God's anger, love, judgment, and punishment in the Old Testament are so not human-like. You would be shocked and transformed if you personally experienced that anger or love. It is NOTHING like human anger or love.

I’ve read the Bible and I have probably had more religious education from a scholarly perspective than you. Stomping your feet and repeating false crap doesn’t make it true. Then again, I’m not sure what I expected from arguing with a religious nut job. Adios.

Gosh, maybe you should realize you chose to come to a religion forum and debate religious people? What were you expecting, people to bow to your values because you’ve “read a lot?” Talk about arrogance.

I don’t know if you have noticed but I am not the only poster here, and not one of my posts have referenced blasphemy.

Not pp, but "I can't discuss/think about that because it's blasphemous" is not a debate. It's a dead end wall of someone refusing to critically thing about things and engage questions.

My apologies. The anonymity makes it difficult to keep track sometimes.

There is at least one poster who repeatedly says that it's blasphemous to essentially "go there" with questions about God's qualities and creations (including evilness/suffering), which you must agree is ridiculous to bring to the table for discussion and debate. Fine for their personal belief - but a pointless dead end on matters of discussion.

I can’t agree. If the poster embraces a religion that includes a rejection of blasphemy, it’s an entirely valid point.

It's a valid point for cementing their belief system. It is not a valid point with regards to debate or discussion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't read the whole thread but I can easily see how someone can believe in God despite an imperfect world. You just assume that God is not all-benevolent. Humans have existed for millennia with God and Gods that are vindictive, flawed, have weaknesses, and have cruel and immoral tendencies. It's really not that difficult of a concert since we tend to anthropomorphize dieties and so many of these characteristics are familiarly human.

Not the Abrahamic God. There is nothing pagan, human-like (even His anger and His love are not human-like), and familiar about Him. That is why the Abrahamic faiths are markedly different than other religions.

Ummm...he looks just like a human and he is quite human and flawed in the Old Testament. He is absolutely anthropomorphized. Good grief.

No He is not. He is completely different than pagan deities that you are thinking of. Abrahamic God was/is the only god that was/is monotheistic and omnipotent among all other deities of that region or any other region for that matter.

So, you don't understand the word "anthropomorphize" and completely unable to view your religion (your belief in the "Abrahamic God") objectively. Monotheism and omnipotence are irrelevant.

I understand perfectly (without being patronizing like you). But you obviously haven't read or understood the Bible and are basing your judgments on what you heard second hand (from media, neighbors, etc). "Human" attributes that you think of such as God's anger, love, judgment, and punishment in the Old Testament are so not human-like. You would be shocked and transformed if you personally experienced that anger or love. It is NOTHING like human anger or love.

I’ve read the Bible and I have probably had more religious education from a scholarly perspective than you. Stomping your feet and repeating false crap doesn’t make it true. Then again, I’m not sure what I expected from arguing with a religious nut job. Adios.

Gosh, maybe you should realize you chose to come to a religion forum and debate religious people? What were you expecting, people to bow to your values because you’ve “read a lot?” Talk about arrogance.

I don’t know if you have noticed but I am not the only poster here, and not one of my posts have referenced blasphemy.

Not pp, but "I can't discuss/think about that because it's blasphemous" is not a debate. It's a dead end wall of someone refusing to critically thing about things and engage questions.

My apologies. The anonymity makes it difficult to keep track sometimes.

There is at least one poster who repeatedly says that it's blasphemous to essentially "go there" with questions about God's qualities and creations (including evilness/suffering), which you must agree is ridiculous to bring to the table for discussion and debate. Fine for their personal belief - but a pointless dead end on matters of discussion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys, "The Bible" does not even agree with itself

GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.

GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

...and that is just part of the way through Genesis.

Your obsession with the Bible is telling. As a "truth and evidence"s seeker you should be content with yourself.

I am content with myself.

Because I read. And I thought. A lot. And it became pretty obvious to me that what I had been told could not possibly be true.

Funny how on one hand I am being told to "read the bible" and then when I come back and show that I have, I am told "Your obsession with the bible is telling".

Is that irony? Or hypocrisy?

Since this is Religion forum you will meet firm resistance. A cursory Google search yields these forums that are more suitable for you:

http://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums

https://atheistforums.org/

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/

Not pp, but Jeff said this forum is for everyone. It's not a "religious forum for religious people." It's a forum to discuss matters related to religion, for everyone.

On above forums you will find like-minded people to "break things down" with and "hash things out". It may be more beneficial and valuable to you.

What value is there in simply engaging with people who only reinforce my beliefs (or lack thereof?). There are beneficial things to be found in everyone delving and leaning in to the different... and perhaps uncomfortable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't read the whole thread but I can easily see how someone can believe in God despite an imperfect world. You just assume that God is not all-benevolent. Humans have existed for millennia with God and Gods that are vindictive, flawed, have weaknesses, and have cruel and immoral tendencies. It's really not that difficult of a concert since we tend to anthropomorphize dieties and so many of these characteristics are familiarly human.

Not the Abrahamic God. There is nothing pagan, human-like (even His anger and His love are not human-like), and familiar about Him. That is why the Abrahamic faiths are markedly different than other religions.

Ummm...he looks just like a human and he is quite human and flawed in the Old Testament. He is absolutely anthropomorphized. Good grief.

No He is not. He is completely different than pagan deities that you are thinking of. Abrahamic God was/is the only god that was/is monotheistic and omnipotent among all other deities of that region or any other region for that matter.

So, you don't understand the word "anthropomorphize" and completely unable to view your religion (your belief in the "Abrahamic God") objectively. Monotheism and omnipotence are irrelevant.

I understand perfectly (without being patronizing like you). But you obviously haven't read or understood the Bible and are basing your judgments on what you heard second hand (from media, neighbors, etc). "Human" attributes that you think of such as God's anger, love, judgment, and punishment in the Old Testament are so not human-like. You would be shocked and transformed if you personally experienced that anger or love. It is NOTHING like human anger or love.

I’ve read the Bible and I have probably had more religious education from a scholarly perspective than you. Stomping your feet and repeating false crap doesn’t make it true. Then again, I’m not sure what I expected from arguing with a religious nut job. Adios.

Gosh, maybe you should realize you chose to come to a religion forum and debate religious people? What were you expecting, people to bow to your values because you’ve “read a lot?” Talk about arrogance.

I don’t know if you have noticed but I am not the only poster here, and not one of my posts have referenced blasphemy.

Not pp, but "I can't discuss/think about that because it's blasphemous" is not a debate. It's a dead end wall of someone refusing to critically thing about things and engage questions.

My apologies. The anonymity makes it difficult to keep track sometimes.

There is at least one poster who repeatedly says that it's blasphemous to essentially "go there" with questions about God's qualities and creations (including evilness/suffering), which you must agree is ridiculous to bring to the table for discussion and debate. Fine for their personal belief - but a pointless dead end on matters of discussion.

I can’t agree. If the poster embraces a religion that includes a rejection of blasphemy, it’s an entirely valid point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't read the whole thread but I can easily see how someone can believe in God despite an imperfect world. You just assume that God is not all-benevolent. Humans have existed for millennia with God and Gods that are vindictive, flawed, have weaknesses, and have cruel and immoral tendencies. It's really not that difficult of a concert since we tend to anthropomorphize dieties and so many of these characteristics are familiarly human.

Not the Abrahamic God. There is nothing pagan, human-like (even His anger and His love are not human-like), and familiar about Him. That is why the Abrahamic faiths are markedly different than other religions.

Ummm...he looks just like a human and he is quite human and flawed in the Old Testament. He is absolutely anthropomorphized. Good grief.

No He is not. He is completely different than pagan deities that you are thinking of. Abrahamic God was/is the only god that was/is monotheistic and omnipotent among all other deities of that region or any other region for that matter.

So, you don't understand the word "anthropomorphize" and completely unable to view your religion (your belief in the "Abrahamic God") objectively. Monotheism and omnipotence are irrelevant.

I understand perfectly (without being patronizing like you). But you obviously haven't read or understood the Bible and are basing your judgments on what you heard second hand (from media, neighbors, etc). "Human" attributes that you think of such as God's anger, love, judgment, and punishment in the Old Testament are so not human-like. You would be shocked and transformed if you personally experienced that anger or love. It is NOTHING like human anger or love.

I’ve read the Bible and I have probably had more religious education from a scholarly perspective than you. Stomping your feet and repeating false crap doesn’t make it true. Then again, I’m not sure what I expected from arguing with a religious nut job. Adios.

Gosh, maybe you should realize you chose to come to a religion forum and debate religious people? What were you expecting, people to bow to your values because you’ve “read a lot?” Talk about arrogance.

I don’t know if you have noticed but I am not the only poster here, and not one of my posts have referenced blasphemy.

Not pp, but "I can't discuss/think about that because it's blasphemous" is not a debate. It's a dead end wall of someone refusing to critically thing about things and engage questions.

My apologies. The anonymity makes it difficult to keep track sometimes.

There is at least one poster who repeatedly says that it's blasphemous to essentially "go there" with questions about God's qualities and creations (including evilness/suffering), which you must agree is ridiculous to bring to the table for discussion and debate. Fine for their personal belief - but a pointless dead end on matters of discussion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys, "The Bible" does not even agree with itself

GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.

GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

...and that is just part of the way through Genesis.

Your obsession with the Bible is telling. As a "truth and evidence"s seeker you should be content with yourself.

I am content with myself.

Because I read. And I thought. A lot. And it became pretty obvious to me that what I had been told could not possibly be true.

Funny how on one hand I am being told to "read the bible" and then when I come back and show that I have, I am told "Your obsession with the bible is telling".

Is that irony? Or hypocrisy?

Since this is Religion forum you will meet firm resistance. A cursory Google search yields these forums that are more suitable for you:

http://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums

https://atheistforums.org/

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/

Not pp, but Jeff said this forum is for everyone. It's not a "religious forum for religious people." It's a forum to discuss matters related to religion, for everyone.

On above forums you will find like-minded people to "break things down" with and "hash things out". It may be more beneficial and valuable to you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't read the whole thread but I can easily see how someone can believe in God despite an imperfect world. You just assume that God is not all-benevolent. Humans have existed for millennia with God and Gods that are vindictive, flawed, have weaknesses, and have cruel and immoral tendencies. It's really not that difficult of a concert since we tend to anthropomorphize dieties and so many of these characteristics are familiarly human.

Not the Abrahamic God. There is nothing pagan, human-like (even His anger and His love are not human-like), and familiar about Him. That is why the Abrahamic faiths are markedly different than other religions.

Ummm...he looks just like a human and he is quite human and flawed in the Old Testament. He is absolutely anthropomorphized. Good grief.

No He is not. He is completely different than pagan deities that you are thinking of. Abrahamic God was/is the only god that was/is monotheistic and omnipotent among all other deities of that region or any other region for that matter.

So, you don't understand the word "anthropomorphize" and completely unable to view your religion (your belief in the "Abrahamic God") objectively. Monotheism and omnipotence are irrelevant.

I understand perfectly (without being patronizing like you). But you obviously haven't read or understood the Bible and are basing your judgments on what you heard second hand (from media, neighbors, etc). "Human" attributes that you think of such as God's anger, love, judgment, and punishment in the Old Testament are so not human-like. You would be shocked and transformed if you personally experienced that anger or love. It is NOTHING like human anger or love.

I’ve read the Bible and I have probably had more religious education from a scholarly perspective than you. Stomping your feet and repeating false crap doesn’t make it true. Then again, I’m not sure what I expected from arguing with a religious nut job. Adios.

Gosh, maybe you should realize you chose to come to a religion forum and debate religious people? What were you expecting, people to bow to your values because you’ve “read a lot?” Talk about arrogance.

I don’t know if you have noticed but I am not the only poster here, and not one of my posts have referenced blasphemy.

Not pp, but "I can't discuss/think about that because it's blasphemous" is not a debate. It's a dead end wall of someone refusing to critically thing about things and engage questions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys, "The Bible" does not even agree with itself

GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.

GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

...and that is just part of the way through Genesis.

Your obsession with the Bible is telling. As a "truth and evidence"s seeker you should be content with yourself.

I am content with myself.

Because I read. And I thought. A lot. And it became pretty obvious to me that what I had been told could not possibly be true.

Funny how on one hand I am being told to "read the bible" and then when I come back and show that I have, I am told "Your obsession with the bible is telling".

Is that irony? Or hypocrisy?

Since this is Religion forum you will meet firm resistance. A cursory Google search yields these forums that are more suitable for you:

http://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums

https://atheistforums.org/

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/

Not pp, but Jeff said this forum is for everyone. It's not a "religious forum for religious people." It's a forum to discuss matters related to religion, for everyone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys, "The Bible" does not even agree with itself

GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.

GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

...and that is just part of the way through Genesis.

Your obsession with the Bible is telling. As a "truth and evidence"s seeker you should be content with yourself.

I am content with myself.

Because I read. And I thought. A lot. And it became pretty obvious to me that what I had been told could not possibly be true.

Funny how on one hand I am being told to "read the bible" and then when I come back and show that I have, I am told "Your obsession with the bible is telling".

Is that irony? Or hypocrisy?

Since this is Religion forum you will meet firm resistance. A cursory Google search yields these forums that are more suitable for you:

http://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums

https://atheistforums.org/

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/

Not pp, but Jeff said this forum is for everyone. It's not a "religious forum for religious people." It's a forum to discuss matters related to religion, for everyone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't read the whole thread but I can easily see how someone can believe in God despite an imperfect world. You just assume that God is not all-benevolent. Humans have existed for millennia with God and Gods that are vindictive, flawed, have weaknesses, and have cruel and immoral tendencies. It's really not that difficult of a concert since we tend to anthropomorphize dieties and so many of these characteristics are familiarly human.

Not the Abrahamic God. There is nothing pagan, human-like (even His anger and His love are not human-like), and familiar about Him. That is why the Abrahamic faiths are markedly different than other religions.

Ummm...he looks just like a human and he is quite human and flawed in the Old Testament. He is absolutely anthropomorphized. Good grief.

No He is not. He is completely different than pagan deities that you are thinking of. Abrahamic God was/is the only god that was/is monotheistic and omnipotent among all other deities of that region or any other region for that matter.

So, you don't understand the word "anthropomorphize" and completely unable to view your religion (your belief in the "Abrahamic God") objectively. Monotheism and omnipotence are irrelevant.

I understand perfectly (without being patronizing like you). But you obviously haven't read or understood the Bible and are basing your judgments on what you heard second hand (from media, neighbors, etc). "Human" attributes that you think of such as God's anger, love, judgment, and punishment in the Old Testament are so not human-like. You would be shocked and transformed if you personally experienced that anger or love. It is NOTHING like human anger or love.

I’ve read the Bible and I have probably had more religious education from a scholarly perspective than you. Stomping your feet and repeating false crap doesn’t make it true. Then again, I’m not sure what I expected from arguing with a religious nut job. Adios.

Gosh, maybe you should realize you chose to come to a religion forum and debate religious people? What were you expecting, people to bow to your values because you’ve “read a lot?” Talk about arrogance.

I don’t know if you have noticed but I am not the only poster here, and not one of my posts have referenced blasphemy.

Not pp, but "I can't discuss/think about that because it's blasphemous" is not a debate. It's a dead end wall of someone refusing to critically thing about things and engage questions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys, "The Bible" does not even agree with itself

GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.

GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

...and that is just part of the way through Genesis.

Your obsession with the Bible is telling. As a "truth and evidence"s seeker you should be content with yourself.

I am content with myself.

Because I read. And I thought. A lot. And it became pretty obvious to me that what I had been told could not possibly be true.

Funny how on one hand I am being told to "read the bible" and then when I come back and show that I have, I am told "Your obsession with the bible is telling".

Is that irony? Or hypocrisy?

Since this is Religion forum you will meet firm resistance. A cursory Google search yields these forums that are more suitable for you:

http://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums

https://atheistforums.org/

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys, "The Bible" does not even agree with itself

GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.

GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

...and that is just part of the way through Genesis.

Your obsession with the Bible is telling. As a "truth and evidence"s seeker you should be content with yourself.

I am content with myself.

Because I read. And I thought. A lot. And it became pretty obvious to me that what I had been told could not possibly be true.

Funny how on one hand I am being told to "read the bible" and then when I come back and show that I have, I am told "Your obsession with the bible is telling".

Is that irony? Or hypocrisy?

Since this is Religion forum you will meet firm resistance. A cursory Google search yields these forums that are more suitable for you:

http://www.atheistrepublic.com/forums

https://atheistforums.org/

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven't read the whole thread but I can easily see how someone can believe in God despite an imperfect world. You just assume that God is not all-benevolent. Humans have existed for millennia with God and Gods that are vindictive, flawed, have weaknesses, and have cruel and immoral tendencies. It's really not that difficult of a concert since we tend to anthropomorphize dieties and so many of these characteristics are familiarly human.

Not the Abrahamic God. There is nothing pagan, human-like (even His anger and His love are not human-like), and familiar about Him. That is why the Abrahamic faiths are markedly different than other religions.

Ummm...he looks just like a human and he is quite human and flawed in the Old Testament. He is absolutely anthropomorphized. Good grief.

No He is not. He is completely different than pagan deities that you are thinking of. Abrahamic God was/is the only god that was/is monotheistic and omnipotent among all other deities of that region or any other region for that matter.

So, you don't understand the word "anthropomorphize" and completely unable to view your religion (your belief in the "Abrahamic God") objectively. Monotheism and omnipotence are irrelevant.

I understand perfectly (without being patronizing like you). But you obviously haven't read or understood the Bible and are basing your judgments on what you heard second hand (from media, neighbors, etc). "Human" attributes that you think of such as God's anger, love, judgment, and punishment in the Old Testament are so not human-like. You would be shocked and transformed if you personally experienced that anger or love. It is NOTHING like human anger or love.

I’ve read the Bible and I have probably had more religious education from a scholarly perspective than you. Stomping your feet and repeating false crap doesn’t make it true. Then again, I’m not sure what I expected from arguing with a religious nut job. Adios.

Gosh, maybe you should realize you chose to come to a religion forum and debate religious people? What were you expecting, people to bow to your values because you’ve “read a lot?” Talk about arrogance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys, "The Bible" does not even agree with itself

GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.

GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

...and that is just part of the way through Genesis.

Your obsession with the Bible is telling. As a "truth and evidence"s seeker you should be content with yourself.

I am content with myself.

Because I read. And I thought. A lot. And it became pretty obvious to me that what I had been told could not possibly be true.

Funny how on one hand I am being told to "read the bible" and then when I come back and show that I have, I am told "Your obsession with the bible is telling".

Is that irony? Or hypocrisy?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys, "The Bible" does not even agree with itself

GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness.
GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day.

GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created.
GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created.

GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created.

GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

...and that is just part of the way through Genesis.

Your obsession with the Bible is telling. As a "truth and evidence"s seeker you should be content with yourself.

I am content with myself.

Because I read. And I thought. A lot. And it became pretty obvious to me that what I had been told could not possibly be true.

Funny how on one hand I am being told to "read the bible" and then when I come back and show that I have, I am told "Your obsession with the bible is telling".

Is that irony? Or hypocrisy?