Why Should God Appear/exist At All?

[nailit]

I asked this in naomi's 'Atheist Authors' thread, below, in response to khandro's query.
He did what all good religionists do and ignored it, so thought I'd put it out here.
Religionists....WHY does your God exist?

[Zacs-Master]

' the gaping insecurities in your flimsy armour'

Spiteful,derision in my book.

[naomi24]

Not in mine. There are gaping insecurities in Clanad's armour simply because his armour is flimsy. His arguments don't stand serious scrutiny.

[Zacs-Master]

Ah well. Let's see what Clanad thinks.

[naomi24]

Indeed.

[jomifl]

Can we do a critique of Harry Potter next.....at least the original text is probably available.

[naomi24]

ooo .... yes please. I love Harry Potter!

[Zacs-Master]

It would just end in spiteful derision, I'm sure.

[naomi24]

Zacs, that's a fine example of spiteful derision.

[Zacs-Master]

I learnt from the master, Naomi. :-)

[naomi24]

Who's your master, Zacs?

[Zacs-Master]

Oh come now, don't be coy.

[naomi24]

Can't be me. Not my style at all. Come on ... do tell.

[Zacs-Master]

Forgive me my armour is flimsy this morning, I couldn't possibly say.

[naomi24]

Ah, well. Not to worry. Back to the subject then.

[Clanad]

Naomi, you have my sincere apologies… for not recognizing you carry the weight of the world upon you shoulders… Being so supremely intelligent must keep you up at night figuring out how the rest of the world continues to exist.

You have presented an extensive list of 'contradictions' yet have given no source for even one. Yet, you've not, obviously, looked at any responses to the contradictions. Your only response is to deride world renown scholars vis-a-vis "...Like them, you and your ‘scholars’ see what it suits you to see…" thereby deriding an entire class of people (ancient and recent) who have devoted their lives to in-depth study of Scripture. They are just wrong, simply because Naomi says they are… some argument!

Jewish History.org says "...Christianity spread like a wildfire after the downfall of Bar Kochba in about 135 CE. Almost one third of the Roman Empire became Christian in little more than 100 years.
That development evoked a great and bitter response from Rome, which saw it as a subversive religion that bred rebellion and diminished the power and stature of the Caesars. Therefore, the Romans persecuted the Christians without mercy, inventing all sorts of fiendish methods of public execution and torture in order to dissuade conversion to the new faith.
However, the harder the Romans tried to put it down the more popular it became…" There are scads of other such data, but they're all wrong, at least in the World According to Naomi>

Fact is the "Church" had explosive growth in the early years and this fact is easily confirmed.

There fore… your own biases have clouded and understanding of why the question what became of the body becomes paramount. (By the way, there are very few scholars, atheists or Christians, that question the existence of Yeshua; such as here for only one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus ).

At any rate, a sincere exchange of ideas and factual information would be highly desirable, but you're typical response is derisive… even more so when you are required to present actual information in support of your position rather than ad hominem attacks…

I'm more than willing to listen to position supporting arguments… how about it?

Parenthetically, if you'd care to expound on your previously stated position concerning some form of panspermia, I'd be glad to listen… alternately, if you were misunderstood, my apologies…


Lastly, having checked recently, I find my flimsy armor (American spelling) to be just fine… but thanks for your concern!

[naomi24]

Clanad, //You have presented an extensive list of 'contradictions' yet have given no source for even one.//

Source – the bible. Read it.

//Christianity spread like a wildfire after the downfall of Bar Kochba in about 135 CE.//

Thank you. So not a ‘growing religion’ at the time of Christ as you claimed. Now there’s a shift.

//Parenthetically, if you'd care to expound on your previously stated position concerning some form of panspermia,//

You're mistaken. I don’t have a ‘stated position’ on that. It’s a thought, but the jury is still out.

Personally I don’t question the existence of Jesus – but I do question the authenticity of the reputation that has been foisted upon him – and as for ad hominem attacks, look to yourself.

[Clanad]

"Source…the bible, read it"… which you clearly stated you had not done in using some unknown source(s) for your extensive list.

Look… you and I know that a cursory scan of numerous (hundreds, thousands?) of sites answering your list… word for word are available… yet you persist is adhering to your claim that only your list has any validity.

Many of the responses to contradictions are presented by Phd.s but most are clearly researched with the requisite footnotes and referenced sources… whereas (being redundant) yours are not… yet, somehow, it's the scholarly answer list that has no value… once again showing that you alone see yourself as the arbiter of truth.

Naomi's production plan is to channel all responses to direct questions into attacks on a person's character and intelligence and then call it sufficient… The armor that's demonstrably flimsy has a distinct flare at the skirt...

[naomi24]

Clanad, my 'source' used the bible - I know that because I've read the bible. What greater authority would be more acceptable to you?

//Naomi's production plan is to channel all responses to direct questions into attacks on a person's character and intelligence//

Not true at all. My arguments stand on their own merits … but a reminder of your methods below…..

//Being so supremely intelligent must keep you up at night figuring out how the rest of the world continues to exist. //

Additionally, not for the first time during the course of this discussion you appear to have suddenly stopped talking me to in favour of addressing a wider audience … presumably in the hope that someone else will dig you out of this one. If you want to know what the bible says, don't take my word for it or, on this occasion, that of my 'source' – or, indeed, of anyone else. Read it for yourself. It's all there – and there can be no doubt whatsoever that it is contradictory.

[naomi24]

Oops.... *me to* ... 'to me'. Tired.

Night all.

[Clanad]

Last time… you've given no indication that you have read any of the responses to the 'contradictions' listed from cut and pasted sources (yet you insist you've read the Bible and, supposedly, could have found the contradictions yourself… with no proof at all…

I appeal to no wider audience anymore than do you, naomi.

Why not pick a few or at least one of the 'contradictions', defend it and have a discussion on its merits? Seems a reasonable approach to actually getting to the facts of the matter, no?