A Bit Of A Hiatus But Finally Done It

[nailit]

A bit of a hiatus (lockdown, work, personal things etc) but finally read the Bible all the way through, again!
How on earth can anybody read this mess and believe its the word of (any) God is beyond me.
Read about a 3rd of it and left of for a bit. (TBH the unrelenting slaughter was getting to me a bit) Picked up again and read whole books at a time. The contradictions alone had me questioning, never mind the bloodshed etc (That was before I got to the new Testament).
Then the New Testament accounts doent agree with each other.
I tried.
The bible is a crock.
Different books, Different authors, different theologies.

Modern church...
We'll try to reconcile them all and call it the bible...
Good luck with that one.

[Theland]

APG - Do you not find it curious, how most of the atheists rely solely on their own opinions as an authoritative source for their assertions?

[AuntPollyGrey]

I find it curious that people base their beliefs on non evidence based scriptures written by humans hundreds of years ago. Each to their own

[Theland]

Is that simply your opinion, or something else besides?

[Mozz71]

//I wouldnt let my kids read it. Would you?//

Absolutely, if he wanted to. Everyone deserves to decide for themselves whether to follow a religion. I wouldn't dream on imposing my own beliefs onto him.

[Neveracrossword]

Theland, many atheists don't make the 'assertions' you attribute to them - we know we don't know how the world began. Only people who make unfounded claims about God or cite 'evidence' that they can't/won't provide are asked to back up their assertions.
PS We keep telling you - 'atheists' aren't a group, society, organisation.

[Theland]

Never - No need to keep telling me.
I get it.
You all accept naturalism where the answer to the question is in the question.
Yes I get it.

[Neveracrossword]

Theland, there is obviously a need to keep telling you certain things, the things you've singularly failed to grasp. I know it's easier for you to be dismissive with your comments - 'you all accept ...' - they usually follow posts when your evidence claims have (once again) been called into question.

[jennyjoan]

if you read it the first time why did you put yourself through such misery again.

[Mozz71]

JJ, I think it's a case of "know thy enemy".

[Neveracrossword]

Sorry, Nailit - Theland's assertions distracted me. I'm glad you got through your self-appointed task - at least you'll never feed the need to do it again.

[naomi24]

Theland, //most of the atheists rely solely on their own opinions as an authoritative source for their assertions? //

It's called independent thought.

[Theland]

Never - You really don't need to repeat yourself.
You dont know and don't care.
Yes I really get it.

[Theland]

Nailit @ 19:12 - You mention morals.
Do you care to expand on that?
Where do you suppose we should anchor our moral code?
Dawkins does not believe in good or evil, saying the universe is totally amoral and deterministic.
I recognise evil, as I'm sure most people do, and we can all cite horrible examples of heinous crimes to illustrate it.
But if you disagree with Dawkins, and believe in good and evil, then are your standards purely subjective and based on your feelings?

[naomi24]

Theland, //Dawkins does not believe in good or evil//

You’ve been listening to too many wonky YouTube videos because that’s misrepresentative. Dawkins is as aware as anyone else that some do good things and others do bad things but like most rational people he doesn’t believe that those acts are influenced or governed in any way by the so-called supernatural. You don’t appear to have read much of his work.

Your God’s moral code left much to be desired. In fact it was appalling. Leaving out the slaughter of millions of men, women and children, just a few more examples of his version of morality. He deliberately caused great mental anguish to Abraham; he encouraged Satan to torment Job in the most unthinkable ways, utterly mercilessly - each of those instances directly due to God’s insatiable desire for adoration and obedience - almost as if he needed to prove himself to himself ….. and he caused a baby to die a lingering death in order to punish the father. All of that can only emanate from a sick mind, a cruel mind. If that's the moral code that you aspire to and that guides you I feel very sorry for you. It’s certainly not for me.

[beso]

There is nothing objective about the so called morality of the Bible.

It is nothing more sophisticated than the prejudices of the arrogant, ignorant misogynists who wrote it.

[Theland]

I won't respond to you Naomi.

[Theland]

Beso, is that on your own authority?

[naomi24]

Theland, but you did.

[nailit]

//if you read it the first time why did you put yourself through such misery again//
The first time that I read it cover to cover I was an evangelical christian (albeit one whose faith was wavering from what I had already read)
This time around I wanted to refresh my memory and did it from a more objective stance.

//Nailit @ 19:12 - You mention morals.
Do you care to expand on that?
Where do you suppose we should anchor our moral code?//
Where do YOU anchor YOUR moral code?
Is it innate or do you get it from the bible?
Answer this and we can take it from there (so we both know where we are coming from)...

[Theland]

Hi Nailit. Thank you for your response.
I hope we can continue without recourse to calling each other mentally I'll etc :-)

Morals - Yes like most people I got my moral code as part of my education from parents, school, community, friends etc, and knowing right from wrong, like most people, came perfectly naturally to me.

The problem arises when, like a lot, if not most, people, I ask, ''Why? Why should I do this and not that? Where is the authority for it?''

I hope I have explained myself comprehensively.
The answer I get to the question, is an objective moral code, that supersedes any man made code.
That objective moral code, or law, comes from the Ultimate Lawgiver, that is God.