Apologetics budding superstar Sheldon Agonson, has taken my statements and converted to mainstream apologetics. I am not angry with his twisting and lying and misplacing my words to analyze them out of context. I am sorry for his soul, as he, like so many before him have proven that lying and twisting is the only convincing argument for Jesus. An update was added to Websterss in line 2. I know, I was warned to stay away, and you were all correct in your advisories. But I’m happy to have another brother in hell to look over to Lazarus and Abraham, across that gulf of misery and lament eternity with me. Hell is for the heathen, but the servants in hell will be the liars. The only reason he would lie the way he has, is he knows there is no hell, and his need for dominating validation has trumped his senses. He continues to play from apologetics 101, and baiting accusations to attract endless replies to pad the stats bar for his two readers. This is either intentional, his reading comprehension is elementary, or English is his second language. I’m willing to give a pass if needed. Sheldon, in one post you have done what most apologist do in three. You have tagged atheism in your post, gleefully stating you were happy to have someone argumentative to call you out on your babbling accusations about atheist laziness to argue with you. Cherry picked points and ignored convincing arguments on morality. Sheldon, you keep saying you want an answer. The answers were given in the first paragraph. You may not like my writing style, but the answer you seek was given plainly. And lastly, you keep directing the comments to your site. Control is key for apologists. Editing and keeping control of the argument on your turf isn’t smart. It’s weak. You know damn well your comments would get eaten alive by our readers, and you hid in the confines of control. Hope you’re better than that with your family, but alas… that is the Christian male working in you. Once again, humanist morality outshines the god of the Bible and his followers. You have repeatedly accused me of attacking the church. Fact checking and quoting scripture is damning to the church on its own merits. I don’t need to attack. A careful reading of scripture shows your roots. And your bias can only be confirmed when you agree with its morality.
Born into a certain lair, depending on to who from where, was raised into a strict belief, that if well followed would cause relief. A way of life so grand it’s said, to have raised up living from the dead, and if believed with all my heart, life would light the often dark.
Applied my self into the way, paid my tithes and learned to pray, read the book and proved all things, and stayed high in religions rings, then somehow many years had past, and things weren’t adding up so fast.
Some doubts were hushed and hard to say, was I the lone who felt this way? When I would list but a concern, read more scripture you will learn, apply your faith and don’t surrender, hope is where the life will render.
And so It was, I began again.
Doubling down I did my best, and to the lord I took a test, to verify most carefully, his book of words and then I’d see, but by and by the search from me, had eyes that crossed with dotted tees, and woeful were the histories. I read and pondered every verse, the lord it seemed he was a curse, to opened eyes on every verse, things are not what they seemed.
And so I prayed
In earnest gave I the lord my plea, invested years in him you see, certain that a faithful soul, could hear his word if truth be told. Wanting to believe the words, that marked the pages so absurd, to say I needed little reason, but just one would do.
Retiring to a quiet thicket, the lords voice came by sound of crickets.
It all unraveled very fast, not a thing or two would come to pass, as soon as opened eyes could see, deceived by friends and trusted creeds, that one who thought as smart as me, could fall into a trap so deep, set by ones who cared for me. If only just one part was right, I could continue in the fight, but no god hears the words you say, but alas its hope that traps with faith.
It was pointed out to me that our interpretation of scripture is uneducated and misguided. I made a comment,”his interpretation sounds like all he’s doing is rationalizing for god”. The answer:
“Absolutely not. It would be called rightly interpreting the Bible, Jim. Ignoring the cultural context, genre, analogical language, or explanatory scope would be superficially treating the text, thus, reading it wrongly.” More rationalizing, or no?
I need an excuse for this “scripture” please. Or is it the interpretation of the original I’m struggling with?
“Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him. And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, and said unto them, Nay, my brethren, nay, I pray you, do not so wickedly; seeing that this man is come into mine house, do not this folly. Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing. But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go. Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man’s house where her lord was, till it was light. And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and, behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down at the door of the house, and her hands were upon the threshold. And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her up upon an ass, and the man rose up, and gat him unto his place. And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel.”
Judges 19:22-29 KJV
Correct interpretation? It is only a religious zealot that would not defend his daughters life to his own death.
The typical bible has an average of 1,189 chapters. These are made up of 31,173 verses and using a rough word count, this amounts to 807,370 words, although the King James Authorized Bible has 780,137 words. Using a standard font, the average bible has around 1200 pages depending on the version. I scoured the Bible for other facts to no avail. And studies outside the Bible regarding evidence is nearly non existent. However, the evidence that it claims itself to be true apparently is good enough.
You want to see this absolutely brilliant crop dusting of the Christian argument for morality see this post and read the comments. They spent the next several hours trying to address only selected verbiage and imho without question lost, and resorted to cherry picking points with Branyanistic name calling and Mel moving the topic goal posts. It was masterful ! Here’s the first comment-
“I’ve always found the morality argument for a god to be the absolute weakest for the simple reason that we have hard evidence that this thing we call “morality,” which is really nothing but a formative sense of good (positive) and bad (negative) behaviour, is a product of neurological processing power. The more neurons, the more accute an organisms understanding of it. Countless studies, across numerous species, prove this beyond any rational doubt. It is not a human phenomena, and its anything but complicated- John Zande
Some excellent points from Ark in yesterdays post, and some unanswered questions from Mel, who is not taking a fundamental approach to believing the Bible, such as the Adam and Eve story or Noah’s ark, but we are to believe in the virgin birth and the resurrection. Other than some place names in the Bible that we know exist, how can we determine which is fact and which is fable?