A list of books in the KJV Bible, read by many for 274 years, were suddenly removed in 1885.

Deuteronomy 4:2 King James Version (KJV)

Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

The collective name assigned to the books that were removed is, “Apocrypha”, meaning: those that were hidden. Generally, the term is applied to writings that were not part of the canon because they are not considered genuine.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 King James Version (KJV)

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Here is the list of what was removed:

1 Esdras (Vulgate 4 Esdras)
Book of Tobit (the Vulgate, and Luther call it “Tobias”)
Book of Judith (“Judeth” in Geneva)
Book of Wisdom
Ecclesiasticus (also known as Sirach)
Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremy (“Jeremiah” in Geneva) (all part of Vulgate Baruch)
Song of the Three Children (Vulgate Daniel 3:24–90)
Story of Susanna (Vulgate Daniel 13)
The Idol Bel and the Dragon (Vulgate Daniel 14)
Prayer of Manasses (Daniel)
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees

Roman Catholic Bibles still currently have these books in the Old Testament. They do not call them Apocrypha. They call them deuterocanonical, which means that they belong to the second canon.

The most popular Bible at the time of Jesus was the Greek Septuagint version – which included the extra books.

Why did this happen?

In 1885 two critics,  Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort had 14 books removed from the Bible. The Catholics ignored Westcott and Hort, but the Protestants and the Anglicans obeyed. Wyh.jpg

This was not the dark ages, they had electricity, automobiles, engines, etc. This was a modern-day removal of 14 books from God’s Word because they felt those books needed to go.

Your KJV Bible was altered by these two men.

Where are we today with the Old Testament?

  • The Orthodox Bible has 51 books
  • The Protestant Bible, (such as the King James), has 39 books
  • The Catholic Bible contains 46 books
  • The Jewish Bible (Tanakh) has 24 books

The KJV Bible speaks of many unknown books:

  • Book of the Covenant – Exodus 24:7
  • Book of the Wars of the Lord – Numbers 21:14
  • Book of Jasher – Joshua 10: 13, 2 Samuel 1:18
  • The Manner of the Kingdom / Book of Statutes – 1 Samuel 10:25
  • Book of Samuel the Seer – 1 Chronicles 29:29 
  • Nathan the Prophet – 1 Chronicles 29:29,  2 Chronicles 9:29
  • Acts of Solomon – 1 Kings 11:41
  • Shemaiah the Prophet – 2 Chronicles 12:15
  • Prophecy of Abijah – 2 Chronicles 9:29
  • Story of Prophet Iddo – 2 Chronicles 13:22 
  • Visions of Iddo the Seer –2 Chronicles 9:29 
  • Iddo Genealogies – 2 Chronicles 12:15
  • Book of Jehu – 2 Chronicles 20:34
  • Sayings of the Seers – 2 Chronicles 33:19
  • Book of Enoch – Jude 1:14
  • Book of Gad the Seer – 1 Chronicles 29:29
  • Epistle to Corinth – 1 Corinthians 5:9 
  • The Annals of King David – 1 Chronicles 27:24

According to biblical scholars, as many as twenty gospels were not included or banned from inclusion. Among these are the gospel of Thomas, Mary Magdalene, Matthias, Perfection, Bartholomew, Nazarenes, and the book of Hebrews.

Some additional books not included in the new testament are The Epistle of Barnabas, Shepherd of Hermas, The Didache, the lost epistle and the third letter to the Corinthians. There are several more.

Did you know this and what does it mean to you?

Join the conversation! 211 Comments

  1. 🙂 It gives me the impression that the priests have intentions of hiding the truth from us.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply
  2. *** Secrets!
    They work best, when no one knows about them.
    sigh ***

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply
  3. The Book of Enoch & The Gospel of Thomas are particularly troublesome for religious leaders.

    Then, there is always translation issues, shifting from one language to another. Many “truths” have been forever lost. Alexandria was a great loss.

    The less we know, the easier we become astray.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply
  4. They removed them because those books contradicted their own personal beliefs. Which is stupid. I don’t understand why they don’t just change their beliefs when it doesn’t line up with Yah/God’s Word.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply
  5. I’ve done lots of research into the books that were removed from the Bible. Here are the articles I’ve written on the subject:
    https://jmshistorycorner.wordpress.com/2018/06/26/the-canon-of-scripture-part-1-the-apocrypha/
    https://jmshistorycorner.wordpress.com/2018/07/12/the-canon-of-scripture-part-2-enoch-and-jubilees/
    https://jmshistorycorner.wordpress.com/2018/07/24/the-canon-of-scripture-part-3-jasher/
    https://jmshistorycorner.wordpress.com/2018/08/14/the-canon-of-scripture-part-4-the-other-books-of-baruch/
    A fifth post (on “The Other Books of Enoch”) will be posted tomorrow. But there’s still plenty to write on the subject. With regards to the apocryphal gospels: the only one I’ve found that appears to be absolutely genuine is the Gospel of the Hebrews (also known as the Gospel of the Ebionites or the Gospel of the Nazarenes). Slight possibility Gospel of Nicodemus (aka Acts of Pilate), but haven’t thoroughly researched that one yet. Here is my list of Biblical books:
    https://www.quora.com/How-many-books-are-in-the-original-Bible/answer/John-Michael-Mustchin?prompt_topic_bio=1
    The removal of the Apocryphal books from the KJV actually started back in the 1600s. Even though James I passed a law prohibiting the removal of Biblical books (good on him! regardless of whatever his other faults were), publishers realised (about the 1630s, I think) that they could sell just as many Bibles (at lower cost and higher profit) by removing the Apocrypha. However, I think that KJV editions with the Apocrypha were fairly mainstream until the 1800s. Either way, it’s pretty bloody dishonest.
    Keep it up!

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  6. As biblical scholarship has progressed in huge leaps since the days of Wescott and Hort, it seems only right that in the pursuit of truth and honesty that all passages which are known interpolation/fraud be removed. And also the fraudulent epistles attributed to the character Paul.

    This would include such passages as the long ending of Mark, the woman taken in adultery and the Johannine comma.

    Fair’s fair, right?

    Ark

    Like

    Reply
    • You stated — “Fair’s fair, right?”

      My response — Not when it comes to books. Books are written by authors to be read. It is not the readers job to remove chapters they don’t like and thus take away from the experience for the next reader.

      If one does not like a book (for any reason) then don’t read it, give it a bad review and warn others to stay away.

      But don’t remove chapters you don’t like and then pass it on. (not fair)

      Like

      Reply
      • Then point I was making was that if those two esteemed gentlemen considered those books should be removed as not being genuine then why stop? Why not remove all fraudulent books?
        Are you perhaps being a little selective here or do you disagree that 6 or 7 ( maybe more?) of the Pauline Epistles are fraudulent?
        Not to mention the other interpolations.

        Like

      • I am simply speaking to motive.

        They felt those particular books had contradictions that could discredit their religion. If followers left the church they would have less control over them, so they had the books removed.

        When someone thinks the Bible is fake they can remove books easily because it really has no value.

        A person of faith doesn’t want to control the Bible, they simply want to see the whole story, so the more books the better. They don’t fear people leaving.

        My second point was to always keep a “Book” intact and let people come to their own conclusions of validity. No body wants a world where people remove chapters from books because they don’t like them. That’s nonsensical. We don’t need any book police.

        Like

      • Fair enough, I understand your point clearer now.
        In this case, I agree. Stick as many books in the bible as possible, including all the ”other” gospels.

        Faith never controlled the bible. The insistence to control the bible was dictated primarily by self-interest, namely from church leaders and politicians, such as Constantine, Theodosius, Luther, Henry V!!! etc.

        Sometimes it is difficult for the individual to come to their own conclusions, especially if they are ignorant of the truth regarding such texts.
        I never realized that Moses, for example, was a fictional character until I was in my forties.
        And it is fair to say the church had – still has -no real interest to genuinely enlighten the faithful.

        Book police no. Educated scholars who are able to show the bible ( and other such texts) as the fraudulent and fictional nonsense it is and one can hope it will eventually be consigned to the bookshelves under Historical Fiction.

        Like

      • YOu stated — “Fair enough, I understand your point clearer now.
        In this case, I agree. Stick as many books in the bible as possible, including all the ”other” gospels.”

        My response — Agreed. Then Theist and Atheist can have a better conversation based on the full content.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Indeed. And are you on board with the fact that we are, dealing with historical fiction?

        Like

      • The only correct conclusion is that we don’t know what we are dealing with. No one has all the answers nor all the facts.

        “Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact.Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.”Marcus Aurelius”

        There will be no claim from me today nor will I accept any conclusion from anyone else. We are all still gathering evidence.

        Like

      • Good ole Marcus

        However, he did not have the benefit of modern day forensics, archaeology, DNA and gene research etc etc.

        Are you saying for examople that evolution is not fact_

        We know Noah and his Ark is fiction.
        We know the Pentateuch is historical fiction including Moses the exodus and the conquest.
        The gospels are anonymous, Matthew, Luke and John having used Mark as a template. In other words, they copied/cribbed from Mark’s text and simply added bits of their own.
        We know the Virgin birth is nonsense, lifted from Isaiah 7:14
        We know there was no total darkness over the earth at the time of the supposed crucifixion.
        We know the census claim is false
        We know 7 epistles are fraudulent, and even the supposed genuine ones are not letters in the true sense but a number of smaller pieces put together to form a larger, single piece.
        Then we have the fraudulent Johannine comma, and the interpolation of the women caught in adultery.
        Thanks to modern biblical studies we now know Acts is useless as an historical document for the travels of ‘Paul”.
        It is estimated that less than 5% of what is claimed to have been spoken by the character Jesus of Nazareth can be directly attributed to him.
        Tell me, how much more evidence would you personally require before you are prepared to acknowledge that the bible is nothing but Historical fiction in its entirety.

        Like

      • You stated — “Are you saying for examople that evolution is not fact_”

        My response — Evolution is a theory not a fact. Evolution is based on scientific data that is a fact but not an absolute certainty. A scientific fact is something confirmed to such a degree that it would be nonsensical to deny it given what we know today. Science is the number one best tool we have for understanding the reality we live in.

        Like

      • As is the Theory of Evolution a fact.
        And I am going to presume you do know what a scientific theory actually is in this case, yes?
        If you are unsure Google is your friend.

        Like

      • You stated — “As is the Theory of Evolution a fact.”

        My response earlier — “Evolution is a theory not a fact. Evolution is based on scientific data that is a fact but not an absolute certainty. A scientific fact is something confirmed to such a degree that it would be nonsensical to deny it given what we know today. Science is the number one best tool we have for understanding the reality we live in.”

        Googles response — A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not “guesses” but reliable accounts of the real world.

        My response – Where do you see me disagreeing with the definition of a scientific theory in my responses to you?

        Like

      • Because you seem highly resistant to accepting evolution as fact – which it is.

        I am actually more than a little surprised that you seem to be disputing this at all.
        Here …. this should help.

        http://www.nas.edu/evolution/TheoryOrFact.html

        Like

      • The article you posted said the same thing I replied to you.

        I think somehow you are missing what I am saying because it is too literal.

        I am going to try and break this down a bit more.

        Evolution is not listed using these words: “The fact of Evolution” it is listed using these words “The Theory of Evolution”. Therefore, I stated the following, “Evolution is a theory not a fact. It’s a classification provided by science like the “Theory of Gravity” we do not have “The Fact of Gravity”. This is not my preference it is the reality of the scientific community on how things are classified.

        When I said, “Evolution is based on scientific data that is a fact but not an absolute certainty.” This is where the science that is used to describe and confirm evolution is a “FACT” or what is known as a “Scientific Fact”. To be clear we cannot deny evolution due to the evidence we have obtained via scientific research, which is why I said in my repeated responses, “A scientific fact is something confirmed to such a degree that it would be nonsensical to deny it given what we know today. Science is the number one best tool we have for understanding the reality we live in.”

        Theories are based on Facts…. Facts can’t be disputed due to direct observation and repeatable, predictable results. Nothing in science is an absolute and that is how scientist want it, it’s simply the most reliable and most probable outcome. Science claims that there are no absolutes.

        If none of that makes sense then I will say it as plain as can be said, evolution is real and proven to be correct. We now even have evolutionary medicine to reduce our susceptibility to disease.

        Like

      • As the article stated Evolution is a theory AND a fact.

        Again, there really is no need to split hairs, although I understand why you might want to, but it does come across as a trifle pedantic.

        The only alternative to evolution is creation.
        Are you holding out for this in some manner?

        Like

      • You stated — “As the article stated Evolution is a theory AND a fact.”

        My response — You are still wrong and stating it is anything other than what the scientific community states that it is has no value.

        We can agree to disagree.

        You stated — “The only alternative to evolution is creation.”

        My response — There are many more theories than just those two. You continue to try an narrow things down to overly simplistic solutions. Example: Simulated reality is in the main stream now.

        Like

      • In context, there is only the scientific perspective or the religious one.

        There is nothing to support the latter.

        Like

      • You stated — “In context, there is only the scientific perspective or the religious one.”

        My response — That’s your opinion but not a fact.

        You are missing one of the largest other options “The Perspective of Philosophy”

        Like

      • Philosophy?
        We are discussing evolution and the veracity of the biblical text.
        So I have to as, surely you jest?

        Liked by 1 person

      • Yes Philosophy. You could say that Buddhism is a religion of Philosophy since they don’t have a deity.

        Philosophy could also easily account for what is commonly believed to be a reality generated by human consciousness.

        It would also cover one of the many worlds interpretation which heavily relies on choice causing alternate realities.

        It would also cover a simulated reality based on advanced human civilization.

        Just because something doesn’t fit within your predefined narrative does not mean it should be dismissed.

        Like

      • I repeat. We are discussing evolution and biblical veracity.

        Like

      • Incorrect, we are discussing truth verses opinion in relation to evolution and the Bible.

        In that type of discussion the floor is open to more than what you care to limit it to.

        This type of discussion has (and I repeat) not been solved by every single human that came before us.

        If the discussion is to frustrating for you then by all means drop out now but don’t complain to me about opinions on truth outside of your beliefs.

        Like

      • Evolution is not opinion.
        Much of claimed Biblical veracity is also not opinion.
        Adam and Eve, Noah, Moses, are all examples of narrative fiction.
        Science has demonstrated that humans did not derive from anyone such as Adam and Eve who did not exist as portrayed in the bible.
        Science has demonstrated that there never was a global flood as depicted in the bible.
        The captivity, exodus and conquest are all part of the Jewish foundation myth.
        And there are numerous other examples that can be cited.
        If you disagree then then , yes, you are entitled to your opinion, but unless you can provide evidence that refutes the scientific evidence then I’m afraid that is all it is – your opinion.

        Like

      • You stated — “Evolution is not opinion.”

        My response — It is to someone who thinks we are in the “simulation theory” version of reality.

        Keep in mind that since you do not have all the answers, every word that comes out of your mouth is an opinion.

        Like

      • Aaah … so now we are moving goalposts again.
        Somewhat like trying to nail down fog.

        I think I will retire and allow you your delusion.

        I really have little time with people who are intent on doing everything but openly lie in their efforts to avoid genuine honesty.

        Like

      • Nope. Just pointing out that you are wrong thinking there are only two opinions.

        The original argument hasn’t gone anywhere.

        If you make a statement and I don’t agree with it then I will respond with why I don’t agree. This doesn’t in anyway finish any past argument or disagreement we have.

        We are still actively in the first 2 arguments.

        Like

      • So let’s back it up a little so I am able to get a grounding on where you are coming from.

        Do you believe that the biblical character, Jesus of Nazareth died on the cross for your/humankind’s sins.
        Yes or no?
        Straightforward simple question.

        Liked by 1 person

      • That seems to be an obvious yes since I am Christian. I wrote an entire 10 part article on my website about being Christian.

        How do you not know that coming into the conversation?

        Do you believe that God exist or do you believe that God does not exist?

        Like

      • Thank for offering a straightforward answer.
        Any other conversation / discussion is inevitably going to be influenced/biased by this indoctrinated belief.

        Do you believe that God exist or do you believe that God does not exist?

        Which god are you referring to?

        Like

      • I’m not referring to any God, I was asking do you think God exist. I’m not sure why you keep avoiding this question.

        In your own words, “A Yes or No answer” seems applicable. A detailed answer would be more informative.

        Like

      • Well, there are thousands if not more, gods, so it seems reasonable to ask which particular god are you referring to?

        Like

      • It seems nonsensical for me to pick Gods one at a time from a list of thousands and then check them off until the entire list is covered.

        Also I’m not sure why I need to help you answer a “straight forward” question.

        I think the problem with Theist and Atheist is the predefined repetitive interactions that don’t lead anywhere. Me and you are simply having a discussion, do you believe God exist?

        Like

      • I am not asking for you to work through all the gods, in a exercise of yes/no, I merely asked which god you were referring to?

        Like

      • I’m not you, so how would i know if you A- Believe in a God and B- Which one it is?

        Like

      • You have attached a capital G, therefore it is perfectly reasonable to ask which god you believe in.

        Like

      • What does cap G have to do with anything?

        Do you believe in god? Does this help you lol.

        Like

      • But , no, I do not believe in gods.

        Like

      • Ahh

        Why do you not believe in any god (God) or Gods (gods) Trying to cover any character case requirements you have.

        Like

      • For the same reason you do not believe in Hanuman, or Thor I expect.

        Like

      • How would why I don’t believe in something be the reason you don’t believe in something?

        Don’t you know why you don’t believe god (Gods) don’t exist? Are you telling me that you don’t know why you don’t believe something?

        Like

      • Of course I know! And as I stated, in all likelihood for similar/the same reasons you do not believe in Quetzalcoatl, Odin or Druantia,

        I am going to presume that you don’t believe in these other gods, am I right?

        Like

      • You could just tell me why you don’t believe in God instead of ignoring my question.

        As for if I believe in other Gods I would say no since I only believe in one God so multiple Gods would seem counterproductive to believing in a single God. I don’t know if past Gods are the same God or not since I don’t know Gods name.

        Maybe people are going through time believing in the same God with different names they assign. Who knows. It’s also possible that other people believing in a single God are all believing in the same god (again I don’t know)

        Let me try this again. Why do you (not me) not believe a god exist?

        Like

      • You have answered your own question.
        I simply go one god further.
        And not to be pedantic, I do not believe in your god probably for the same reason you don’t believe in everyone else’s.

        You do know why you don’t believe in Kichigonai, for example, don’t you?

        Like

      • I don’t even know what Kichigonai is.

        But it’s clear you don’t know why you don’t believe so I guess that’s as good an answer as anything.

        Like

      • Of course I know why I don’t believe.
        For the same reason you do not beleive in Thor, Odin, or Baal.

        Now, based on our mutual understanding of why we don’t believe in these gods, the question now on the table is why do you believe in your god?

        Like

      • I’m going to try your method:

        I believe in God for the same reason other people believe in God. O.o

        Like

      • You mean why Christians believe in your god?
        The indoctrination is beginning to show, Lander.
        It invariably does when believers such as you find themselves confronted with certain, may I say , ugly realities?

        Admitting you are in the same boat as every other god believer demonstrates how you are (all) on a hiding to nothing.

        But of course, the same reason you believe in your god is similar to why a Hindu believes in Brahma. (motivation differs in some respects, of course and I acknowledge this)

        Your hubris – based on social and cultural conditioning – simply eliminates other gods from your outlook to avoid serious cognitive dissonance.

        So, are you honest enough to admit the reason why you believe in you god?

        Like

      • At the moment I’m just answering like you. With no detail or content but without all the dramatic flair.

        LANDER7
        NOVEMBER 13, 2018 AT 6:35 PM
        I’m going to try your method:

        I believe in God for the same reason other people believe in God.

        This is how you like to communicate so no big. We can have vague general understandings of each other.

        No please proceed with the dramatic catching of me in “ugly realities” with “a hiding to nothing” (not sure what that means but it sounds interesting)

        Like

      • It means you are in the same position as every other god believer, each confident in the veracity of their god (s).
        Each confident that the evidence for their god is secure.
        That you feel obliged to believe in your god because you consider you are a sinner is indicative of the power of the cultural indoctrination you suffer from.
        When you recognise and acknowledge this fact you will then realise that every other god believer is in a similar position and why deconverts understand this and in your current position you are unable to.

        Like

      • You seem to have the conversation down to a science. So I will just keep listening to your side of the script.

        You don’t feel a need to provide answers and you seem to like canned responses . Then there is the speech at the end as to why I’m so close minded based on nothing I’ve said since you are speaking for me.

        Bravo we’ve all learned so much about each others position.

        Like

      • It isn’t that ” …have the conversation down to a science.” , but rather my responses are simply the way things are.
        That you now respond in the way you do – and will probably come back with something along the lines of – ”I could say the same about you” – demonstrates perfectly that only apologetic gymnastics will rescue from the hole you have metaphorically dug for yourself.
        But you don’t have to go all defensive and grumpy – it is the same for every god believer.
        It is not that I do not have a need to provide answers, as I have provided answers,
        The problem is, I will not pander to the hubris that in any way suggests your god is better than any other god, or in fact the ”only” god.
        That you are unable to demonstrate this claim and continue with the Theological Two Step, merely shows how effective indoctrination is and how you struggle with the cognitive dissonance.

        However, as you obviously feel you have a strong case go right ahead and plead it …

        Like

      • You haven’t demonstrated anything because you haven’t answered the question:

        And then when I give you the same dull empty answer you come back with two pages of talking points as though I actually said something.

        We aren’t having a conversation you are just giving a speech.

        If you answer the question then we can have a conversation and you could possibly blast me for my actual beliefs or positions rather than boring canned responses.

        Like

      • I answered every question, but you simply do not like the answer as you presuppose your belief by capitalizing your god with a big G, thus elevating it above the gods of other believers and refusing to recognise that your god is simply one among many thousands.
        Please bear in mind my reaction would be similar were I having this conversation with a devout Hindu for example.

        Already , you are getting snippy.

        I said you obviously feel you have a case to plead for your god, so go ahead and plead it.
        How hard could that be? After all you are a devout believer, surely you have evidence that convinced of the veracity of your god?

        Like

      • You stated — “You have attached a capital G, therefore it is perfectly reasonable to ask which god you believe in.”

        I replied — “What does cap G have to do with anything? Do you believe in god? Does this help you lol.”

        And here we are again with a talking point:

        You stated — ‘you presuppose your belief by capitalizing your god with a big G, thus elevating it above the gods of other believers”

        If you don’t want to have a real conversation no big deal but at least break away from your script for a moment.

        If you decide to have a conversation then the question is still on the table.

        Why do you not believe in any god (God) or Gods (gods) Trying to cover any character case requirements you have.

        If the answer is going to be pointed back at me with no details like before then save time and skip it.

        You past answer — “For the same reason you do not believe in Hanuman, or Thor I expect.”

        I don’t want to know what other people or I think I want to know why you don’t.

        Like

      • But I don’t believe for the same reason you do not believe in Thor and any other god – evidence.
        I would thought this point was as plain as the nose on your face?

        Like

      • I am looking for an honest answer as to why you do not believe. It shouldn’t have anything to do with me, you are your own person, surely you know why you don’t believe in something.

        It doesn’t have to wow me but it has to be your answer.

        Like

      • I just answered your question – evidence.
        It is the same answer as to why you do not beleive in Thor.
        The answer is honest. I am an honest man. I do not lie.

        Like

      • So I still have to guess my way through some of this since you are lacking in detail.

        Are you saying you don’t believe in God because you don’t have enough evidence or because religions don’t have enough? Or is it something else.

        Also as a side note I don’t know anything about Thor but I thought he was part human or something.

        Like

      • Try to keep up as this is becoming tiring.
        1: There is no god with a capital G.
        2. There are hundreds if not thousands of gods.
        3. There is no evidence for any of them being anything but man-made inventions.

        As you seem convinced that your god is the ”real deal” then feel free to plead you case with evidence.

        Like

      • A couple of questions first:

        What is the case thing with you and why is it so important?

        Now my answer to what I think you are asking which is why do I believe in God.

        I had an encounter that I couldn’t dismiss so I decided to believe in the creator (changed it since you have an issue with g’s)

        Like

      • I had an encounter that I couldn’t dismiss so I decided to believe in the creator

        Are you aware of the major advancements in neuroscience and its relevance to you belief?

        Liked by 1 person

      • You stated — “Are you aware of the major advancements in neuroscience and its relevance to you belief?”

        My response — Finally something interesting for a real debate! I am aware of several technologies that simulate what people call the “spiritual experience”. I study Quantum Mechanics, Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience but my profession is Computer Engineering. I’m currently working with AI and machine learning as a side hobby.

        I’m very interested in these new fields of technology where people are simulating religious experiences but to be honest I’m more interested in Philosophy since it has the largest impact on our future. Religion is such a small part of our reality that I’m still not sure why it gets so much press.

        Technology is the dominate contributor to our social and economic existence. With the dawn of super AI around the corner we may very well be on the verge of major disruption if we don’t program these new thinking machines correctly. This is where Philosophy will be the key factor.

        To get back on topic, my encounter was outside of those parameters. This is to say I didn’t have a feeling or voice, etc .

        Like

      • So what was this ”encounter” that you felt obliged to confess to being a sinner and believe in a narrative construct, Jesus of Nazareth, as opposed to confessing the same and dedicating your life to Allah or some other deity?

        Liked by 1 person

      • It was simple really. I created a list of questions in private without telling anyone. The questions varied in complexity. I read them out loud in private asking God to answer them out loud so I could verify his existence. I got no response. So that ended that line of thought.

        2 days later I took a day off from work, on late notice, (like that morning). On my way out of my secured condo complex there was a lady walking around inside who didn’t live there. She asked me for some assistance in finding some historic landmark (my place was in one of those old factories).

        I didn’t have anything to do but goof off so I tried to help her, about 30 mins later after an endless sea of chatter about historic this and that she suddenly stops talking and says out loud that God sent her to answer my questions and then proceeds to answer each one I had asked in private 2 days earlier. This took a bit less than an hour. After answering the last question, I suddenly realized where the landmark is but she then stated that she didn’t need to see anything and was just there to answer those questions and she left.

        I can’t shake it. It beats my skepticism. I don’t think it should qualify for anyone else believing since it was a personal experience. I’m not sure how this works but I’m fully convinced it doesn’t have anything to do with religion since my grandmother dragged me to church when I was younger and that didn’t seem to work.

        In short, I created what I believed would be criteria of proof for me and it happened to my satisfaction. I would be a hypocrite to back out now since I set the parameters and they were met.

        Strangely enough I’m now in this weird space where I don’t follow dogma so Christians pretty much get frustrated with me and I believe God exists so Atheist are frustrated with me also.

        Imagine being the minority in every group lol. It’s been an interesting adventure being raked over the coals by predefined bias and belief on both sides. People need to either believe or not believe but based on their own experience and for their own reasons.

        I think I will write an article on it this week to go over the “Then to now” story. Suffice it to say I don’t have any religion answers like which should you pick and all that.

        Like

      • The first question that comes to mind is:
        Why on earth would you create a list of questions to ask a man made deity?
        What was the emotional issue/trauma that prompted such an absurd ”experiment”.

        (And from the way you phrased this paragraph I get the impression you already had a leaning/understanding /bias toward Christianity.

        Again, you use the pronoun so obviously you are appealing to the Judaeo/Christian god.
        Why on earth would you appeal to this particular deity?
        Here is where your honesty will shine through or your argument will come crashing down around your ears.

        Like

      • You asked — “Why on earth would you create a list of questions to ask a man made deity?”

        My response – I wanted to see what would happen. This seems obvious.

        You stated — “And from the way you phrased this paragraph I get the impression you already had a leaning/understanding /bias toward Christianity”

        My response — Everyone on Earth has a bias toward something, so again you are not revealing anything new.

        None of this solves the problem of the encounter so it has no value. Your focus is on religion (I get that) but you are beating a dead horse. I’m not describing a religious event I’m just recalling what happened.

        It’s not designed to convince you of anything, it’s just the only answer to your question of why I believe.

        Now my turn: Do you believe (like the Buddist) that there is more to man than just our physical being regardless of the possibility of a god? I used lower case for you since it seems to be important.

        Like

      • You asked — “Why on earth would you create a list of questions to ask a man made deity?”
        My response – I wanted to see what would happen. This seems obvious.

        You are missing the point. There is always an underlying reason, for asking.
        So what was your underlying reason?
        It has never occurred to me to bother with such nonsense and the idea of writing out a list of questions and vocalizing them to a known man made deity is the height of absurdity.
        I will answer ”My Turn” when you answer fully the reason why you did this.
        Furthermore, I am still waiting for acknowledgement that you have confessed to being a sinner and asked the biblical character, Jesus of Nazareth for forgiveness.

        Like

      • I asked questions to get answers. That one seems self explanatory.

        As for confession of sins this seems obvious since I keep repeating I am a Christian I most have done that a million times by now. I thought you knew something about Christianity? This seems like we are talking about the basics of Christianity lol. Bible Class 101 as it were.

        Still looking for you to stop dodging my question since I have more waiting on that one.

        Like

      • Thanks!
        I think we are slowly but surely getting somewhere.

        I thought you knew something about Christianity?
        I actually know a fair bit about Christianity.
        For the record:
        I would have once regarded myself as a Christian ( but only in the cultural sense, growing up in the UK and not knowing any difference), but I never ever felt any need to ”confess to my sins”! This is still such a ridiculous notion that in truth I struggle to get my head around the idea that anyone would do this.
        If you have been naughty then accept responsibility and deal with it.
        How on earth is the supposed crucifiction of a 2000 year old narrative construct going to absolve you from the responsibility of your shortcomings?

        Or are you perhaps suffering from Death Anxiety, like Francis Collins? His reason for ”confessing”.

        Once I had read the bible and did a little bit of initial study I realised it was all nonsense so the shift from Cultural Christian to Atheist to the Core was inevitable.

        ( and that should answer your question)

        Right, so you were at one stage going through some sort of emotional turmoil – hence, instead of dealing with it in the real world you embarked on the rather sad attempt to reach this man-made deity ( who you must have had some margin of belief in, even at this stage) to come and ”rescue” you.
        So, what was the emotional trauma you were going through that you felt obliged to ask these questions. And if we are being brutally honest, why did you not vocalize these questions to Allah?

        Like

      • Still looking for you to stop dodging my question.

        You are under the perception that you don’t have to answer any questions but still want to be in a discussion.

        Strange.

        Like

      • What are you taking about? I answered it! I am atheist to the core.
        Presuming you understand correctly what an atheist is then my answers covers your question perfectly.

        Like

      • Wow you just keep skipping over my replies to judge my positions. If you don’t want to have a discussion why not just say so.

        I will try again:
        Do you believe (like the Buddist) that there is more to man than just our physical being regardless of the possibility of a god?

        Adding now because you are taking a moment to look at what I am asking:

        Do you think there is definitely no God as a fact?

        Do you think that consciousness can exist outside the body? As in transference to a machine body.

        Why do you have such a low esteem of Philosophy?

        Like

      • I am an atheist, As are you. I just go one god further.
        I am also a humanist.
        Wiki covers it pretty well.
        Secular humanism, or simply humanism, is a philosophy or life stance that embraces human reason, ethics, and philosophical naturalism while specifically rejecting religious dogma, supernaturalism, pseudoscience, and superstition as the basis of morality and decision making

        As you are a Christian you obviously believe contrary to this.
        Feel free to present your evidence to support your belief, especially the reason that was behind the emotional issues that caused you to believe you needed to confess your ”sins” and beg forgiveness from a 2000 year old narrative construct, named Jesus of Nazareth.

        Like

      • So you are still going to dodge my question and the few simple questions I added.

        Why so much fear from just a few questions. You can still be an Atheist and answer a few questions.

        If all you are going to do is preach and judge me then what is the point in having a discussion. You could have just posted you say and then been done with it.

        Get back to me when you find the time in your day to put an answer on my screen to those question I just sent you. This is not hard.

        They weren’t even the tough ones.

        Like

      • You are looking for a discussion on a subject simply because you refuse to accept that me being an atheist and a humanist covers your questions.

        And why did you assume I have a low esteem of philosophy?
        There is no fear on my part, your questions have no real meaning in context of my atheism and humanism.
        The real fear is yours – the inability to admit what you emotional issue was that you felt the need to beg forgiveness for ”sins” from a 2000 year old narrative construct.
        Once you confront this queation and answer it as honestly as you ate able then you will have demonstrated a modicum of integrity.
        So far you have fallen woefully short.
        Perhaps you would like to prove me wrong, Lander?

        Like

      • You stated — ” You are looking for a discussion on a subject simply because you refuse to accept that me being an atheist and a humanist covers your questions.”

        Ok let’s test this theory

        To answer your questions I’m a Christian.

        Here is my wiki info on being christian it should cover everything we are both good now. I have your title and you have mine and we have exchanged canned google definitions.

        A Christian (/ˈkrɪstʃən, -tiən/ (About this sound listen)) is a person who follows or adheres to Christianity, an Abrahamic, monotheistic religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. “Christian” derives from the Koine Greek word Christós (Χριστός), a translation of the Biblical Hebrew term mashiach

        While there are diverse interpretations of Christianity which sometimes conflict, they are united in believing that Jesus has a unique significance. The term “Christian” is also used as an adjective to describe anything associated with Christianity, or in a proverbial sense “all that is noble, and good, and Christ-like.”

        Like

      • Yes … I agree with this. However, unless one is ”born again” then one is generally not considered to be a Proper Christian, or at the very least to adhere to some form of faith statement.

        As you have confessed your ”sins” there was obviously a problematic emotional issue at the root of this confession.
        Drugs, alcohol, and pornography are regularly cited by many born again Christians.
        So what were the issues that caused you to confess and ask for salvation from a 2000 year old narrative construct, Jesus of Nazareth?

        Like

      • Like you, my canned response should cover that, if not then let’s have a discussion. We can start with those questions I asked.

        Unless of course they are still covered in your canned response then we should both still be good.

        Like

      • You stated — “And why did you assume I have a low esteem of philosophy?”

        Because of this interaction. Which makes me think you don’t even know what you are typing.

        I stated earlier — “You are missing one of the largest other options “The Perspective of Philosophy”

        You responded — “Philosophy? We are discussing evolution and the veracity of the biblical text. So I have to as, surely you jest?”

        So I replied — “Why do you have such a low esteem of Philosophy?”

        And her we are with your response — “And why did you assume I have a low esteem of philosophy?”

        LOL really, you can’t see why?

        Like

      • You exhibit all the hallmarks of the indoctrinated Christian who refuses to recognise that their entire worldview is based on lies.
        Oh, you have worked it out by now, and you’ve probably gotten over the initial issues that drove you there, but now you believe you are in deep and have to, simply have to, defend it all costs. Failure to do so will make you look an even bigger fool than when you gave your life to the Lord in the first place.

        The emotional trauma/ insecurities that drove you make a confession is so cliched, so passe that I could almost write the entire thread on my own.

        Ask any deconvert – there are plenty who visit and comment on my blog.
        It is a case of been there done that got the T shirt.
        All without exception consider religion simply abuse.
        Several were preachers or ministers – a couple were heavily involved n missionary work.
        All without exception are relieved to have walked away.
        Many cringe when they read stuff that people such as you write. They consider it shallow in the extreme.

        Philosophy of religion is the theists Great Escape.
        Before long you will be quoting Nietzsche or Aquinas.

        As it happens I rather enjoy listening t Dan Dennett.
        I tend to agree with his statement that maybe Christians simply beleive that they believe.
        When all the evidence is taken into consideration, and if we note the large numbers of young people who are now walking away from Christianity every year this seems to be a spot on observation.

        Like

      • You stated — “Philosophy of religion is the theists Great Escape.
        Before long you will be quoting Nietzsche or Aquinas.”

        My response — Wow you really have a chip on your shoulder when it comes to Philosophy.

        Currently I reading Marcus Aurelius and listening to Sam Harris.

        Well it was fun being judged by an Atheist for a change, it’s about the same as when Christians judge me.

        You talk over me, ignore my questions and act like the simplest questions are to hard to answer.

        I will respond the moment I see answers to those question I asked otherwise you are not taking me seriously.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Do you think there is no God as a fact.
        I am an atheist. Atheists do not believe in gods. My personal lack of belief in gods is based on the evidence ( or lack thereof) so far presented.

        Do you think that consciousness can exist outside the body? As in transference to a machine body.
        I have absolutely no idea.

        Why do you have such a low esteem of philosophy.
        I generally do not bother to even get involved with philosophy, but as I mentioned, I rather enjoy listening to philosopher Dan Dennett.

        What were the emotional/trauma issues that convinced you to think you needed to confess your sins and believe you had to seek salvation in the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth?

        Liked by 1 person

      • You stated – “I am an atheist. Atheists do not believe in gods. My personal lack of belief in gods is based on the evidence ( or lack thereof) so far presented.”
        My response – I think we understand what an Atheist is, I’ve written articles on it. I am curious if you have a “hard” Atheist position, where you believe there is in fact no god rather than lack of proof of one.
        I know this question can be a trap so I will void the option to ask you to prove the claim, I am just curious.

        You stated about mind transference – “I have absolutely no idea.”
        My response – I find this response to be lacking some effort. We have already transferred consciousness to robotic limbs and the body is the next to go.
        I think this is more important than religion and is the next step in the evolution of mankind. I find it silly to discuss God without talking about technology.

        You asked – “What were the emotional/trauma issues that convinced you to think you needed to confess your sins and believe you had to seek salvation in the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth?”

        I choose Christianity as a religion and it requires asking God for forgiveness. For instance, if I get to greedy I then seek forgiveness later in the day. Obviously, I didn’t suffer any trauma from being greedy.
        Forgiveness a position of excepting that one is wrong in their actions. Think of it as anti-narcissism

        Do you believe Elon Musk when he states that we will be connecting human consciousness to the internet within the next year?

        Do you think that human consciousness is more than the body or just a working of the flesh (mind)?

        Like

      • I stated previously I am hard core atheist. This position s based on the quality and or complete lack of evidence so far presented.
        I have answered this question several times already. What other answer are you expecting?

        I care not whether you consoder it lacking in effort. I have never explored the dynamics so I can hardly be expected to have a belief, now can I? Without fully understanding the subject it would be rather silly preferring an opinion.
        And again, it isn’t a topic that currently hold any serious interest for me.

        I choose Christianity as a religion and it requires asking God for forgiveness.
        Why do you believe you need to ask forgiveness from a man-made deity?

        Re: Musk.
        Have no idea. I do not understand the topic enough to offer an opinion.
        Re Human Consciousness.
        Have no idea. I do not have enough knowledge of neuroscience or biology.

        Like

      • So there are two places where we both believe we have answered the question but the other person believes it is not answered. I find this fascinating.

        Yours is: Why do you believe you need to ask forgiveness from a man-made deity?

        Mine is: I am curious if you have a “hard” Atheist position, where you believe there is in fact no god rather than lack of proof of one.

        Since we are both unable to answer these two question I will agree to disagree. It would be like beating a dead horse. If you find a way to re-answer then I will join in and re-answer mine.

        My faith and understanding of God is tied to technology so if you state that this “isn’t a topic that currently hold any serious interest for me.” then we may be at an end point because I am trying to understand why you do not which does interest me.

        Religion is interesting to a degree but at most just seems like a human construct to explain what I believe to be a real god. I think technology combined with philosophy will get mankind more answers.

        This is why I study these topics and why they take up so much space on my website (over 200 articles). Religion has less than 40.

        I predict you are going to be bored since this is going to keep coming up.

        Like

      • I was emphatic that I am an atheist to the core, a position based solely on the quality of evidence so far resented for gods.
        I have also stated several times, as your world view embraces a position contrary to this feel free to plead your case for your god.
        So far yo have declined to do so.
        You come across as being disingenuous once again.
        So rather than trying to be smart why not present the evidence for your god? Maybe you have the evidence to convince me?

        If you insist that your faith is linked to technology, why do you consider your god, the biblical character Yahweh/Jesus of Nazareth is real?

        And once again, why did you feel the need to confess your ”sin” to a character in a ”book?”
        Also, do you believe that a blood sacrifice was crucial to this belief?

        Like

      • Let’s focus on each one of these to get past the road blocks.

        You stated — “feel free to plead your case for your god.”

        My response — What does this refer to? Are you asking me to prove my experience? You are not being clear so it is confusing.

        From my side I’m asking do you A- think there is no such thing as a God being possible ever or B – Simply not convinced but could be convinced if satisfying evidence were produced.

        Let’s see if this works.

        Like

      • No. Not prove your ”experience”.
        Offer the evidence for your god, Yahweh/Jesus of Nazareth.

        My atheism is based on the complete lack of evidence so far produced for gods.

        Like

      • I think you are saying prove God exist. I’m not aware of a way to prove that God exist. This takes us back to the begging of the conversation where we already went over this.

        If you are saying prove that Jesus exists then I don’t know enough about history to do that. Very similar to your knowledge of consciousness and technology.

        If it is outside of this I will need for you to be more detailed in the question.

        Like

      • Your god IS the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth.( You are Trinitarian I presume?)

        How have you determined the character is real?

        Like

      • You stated — “Your god IS the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth.( You are Trinitarian I presume?)”

        My response — The word trinity is not in the Bible.

        As an Atheist you may think life ends when you die but from your perspective would you prefer (if you could) to continue on in some form past death or do you like the idea that things end when you die?

        Like

      • Ah, someone who admits the Trinity is not in the bible.
        Well done, you!
        That makes a very pleasant change.

        Do you agree, then that the Johannine comma is a fraudulent interpolation?
        And am I right in believing that you are not a Trinitarian Christian?
        (As I am sure you are aware,there are several sects of Christianity who do not consider themselves Trinitarian, though they are not regarded as ”proper Christians” by the mainstream.)

        Do you consider the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth to be your god? (Yes or No)

        I quite like the idea of an much extended life.
        You may enjoy the novel Marrow by Robert Reid, which in part explores this very topic.
        Though the near immortality the characters achieve is because of advanced genetic engineering on their own bodies rather than any transfer of so called consciousness.

        Like

      • You stated — “And am I right in believing that you are not a Trinitarian Christian?”

        My response — The word “Trinitarian” isn’t in the Bible.

        The only title I have is “Theist Polymath Philosopher” outside of that I have no direct knowledge of other groups or what they stand for. They don’t seem relevant.

        You stated — “Do you agree, then that the Johannine comma is a fraudulent interpolation?”

        My response — No.
        There are many interpretations but it’s irrelevant since no one has the original manuscripts. The current manuscripts are copies.

        You stated — (As I am sure you are aware, there are several sects of Christianity who do not consider themselves Trinitarian, though they are not regarded as ”proper Christians” by the mainstream.)

        My response — I have no idea how many of anything call themselves “Add Title”. What organizations call themselves or what they believe has no value to me. Also with over 1000 denominations the idea of a “mainstream” is nonsensical.

        You stated — “Do you consider the biblical character Jesus of Nazareth to be your god? (Yes or No)”

        My response — Jesus is as he is described in the Bible. If you ask a question about my belief then the answer is scripture since I didn’t make the Bible. I haven’t formed any personal opinion of someone already defined. This is to say that the Bible defines Jesus not me. I believe the Bible is true so here is your answer.
        John 1:1, 14
        Matthew 3:17
        John 10:30
        Mark 13:32
        Colossians 1:19
        Mark 16:19

        You stated — “Though the near immortality the characters achieve is because of advanced genetic engineering on their own bodies rather than any transfer of so called consciousness.”

        My response — Do you believe that mankind can achieve immortality?

        You stated –“rather than any transfer of so called consciousness.”

        My response — Do you believe in consciousness?

        Do you know what the singularity is?

        Like

      • The only title I have is “Theist Polymath Philosopher”
        Wiki
        Philosophical theism represents belief in a personal God entirely without doctrine.

        And yet you quote passages from the bible.
        Why?

        Once again … more apparent disengenuity.

        My response — Jesus is as he is described in the Bible.

        The biblical character, Jesus of Nazareth is a narrative construct.
        There is no verified evidence for this character.
        Furthermore, his portrayal differs from gospel to gospel – accretion – as each writer embellishes adds or omits to suit (presumably) his – or in the case of the gospel of John – their agenda.
        So, irrespective of the several meanings and interpretations in the bible do you personally consider Jesus to be your god?

        My response — Do you believe in consciousness?

        What do you mean by ”consciousness”?

        Do you know what the singularity is?
        Are you referring to the ”technological singularity”?

        Like

      • You stated — “Philosophical theism represents belief in a personal God entirely without doctrine.”

        My response — Nope that is just your opinion and not a fact.

        You stated — “you quote passages from the bible. Why?”

        My response — This seems obvious since I am a Christian.

        You stated — “The biblical character, Jesus of Nazareth is a narrative construct.”

        My response — This is also just your opinion unless you have proof to back up your claim. I would also add that you knowledge of Biblical history seems weak since his name is not even Jesus in Biblical times.

        You stated — “Furthermore, his portrayal differs from gospel to gospel”

        My response — It depends on which interpretation you are reading and again this is only your opinion. That which is claimed without proof can be dismissed without proof.

        You stated — “What do you mean by ”consciousness”?”

        My response — Let me rephrase. What is part of you is having a conversation with me? And is that part material or immaterial?

        You stated — “Are you referring to the ”technological singularity”?”

        My response — In this case yes but there are possible lesser singularities.

        I’m missing an answer to this question:
        Do you believe that mankind can achieve immortality?

        Like

      • You stated — “Philosophical theism represents belief in a personal God entirely without doctrine.”
        My response — Nope that is just your opinion and not a fact.

        I copied and pasted from Wiki.
        Take it up with them …

        You stated — “Are you referring to the ”technological singularity”?”
        In this case yes

        It is regarded as an hypothesis. At this stage it sounds about right then.

        I’m missing an answer to this question:
        Do you believe that mankind can achieve immortality?

        Sorry, I thought I had answered this previously when I referenced Robert Reed’s novel, Marrow.
        To elaborate, or clarify?
        On the basis of the possibility of engineering super genetics – where the body is almost superhuman ( to use a loose and fast term) where genes will eradicate known disease, prevent the body succumbing to normal injury, is self-repairing, can switch on or off its reproductive systems etc, then from this perspective I don’t see why not.
        In a nutshell then. Yes, I do believe that mankind might very well achieve immortality.
        You really should read the novel It is a brilliant story.

        I’m missing an answer to this question:
        So, irrespective of the several meanings and interpretations in the bible do you personally consider Jesus to be your god?

        Like

      • You stated — “Philosophical theism represents belief in a personal God entirely without doctrine.”, “I copied and pasted from Wiki.
        Take it up with them …”

        My response — “Theology is by believers for believers, so the average logical non-believer (and many average, logical believers for that matter) needs to be prepared to do a lot of head scratching if they want to understand a given theology. Note well, if you are trying to stir the pot, prove “your theology is wrong”, or bring up new points, with the 2000+ years in Christian theology, and the 4000+ years in some other theologies, that’s not too likely.”

        I copied and pasted from RationalWiki.
        Take it up with them …”

        You stated — It is regarded as an hypothesis. At this stage it sounds about right then.

        My response — The singularity is a fact. Do you deny the increase in technological complexity over time and the speed by which it is produced?

        You stated — “You really should read the novel It is a brilliant story.”

        My response — I may take a look but I am still finishing the following books and most are not light reading. I’m reaching a book singularity at the moment.

        Marcus Aurelius Meditations
        Automate the Boring Stuff with Python – Al Sweigart
        World Without Cancer – G. Edward Griffin
        The Book Of Enoch
        Fiction, Intuition, and Creativity – Angela Hague
        The End of Faith – Sam Harris
        Ubik Philip K. Dick

        You stated — “So, irrespective of the several meanings and interpretations in the bible do you personally consider Jesus to be your god?”

        My response — You may not be understanding me on this so let me rephrase. I am a Bible literalist so Jesus is what he states he is in scripture. I can state what I believe he is via what is written.

        Here is an example: I would say Jesus is an advocate with the Father

        1 John 2 My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One.

        Here is another: I would say Jesus is Lord.

        Philippians 2: 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
        If you open a scripture and it says what Jesus is then I would agree and say that is what he is per the Bible. I describe him as the Bible describes him.

        Do you believe that you could obtain power over time that gave you abilities like a god if you were immortal (you stated immortality was possible

        I am also curious if a cap B in Bible also has meaning for you that I may not be aware of?

        Like

      • The singularity is a fact.

        Not yet it isn’t. But it is a prediction.

        I am a Bible literalist so Jesus is what he states he is in scripture. I can state what I believe he is via what is written.

        Are you saying you accept what is written at face value, that you interpret the bible literally?
        i.e.Genesis is fact, the global flood as described is fact, Exodus and conquest as written is fact, the Virgin Birth is fact, etc, etc?

        As the gospel of John is the sole gospel where the central character, Jesus of Nazareth could be said to be claiming he is Yahweh, are you basing your belief that he is your god primarily on this gospel?

        Do you believe that you could obtain power over time that gave you abilities like a god if you were immortal (you stated immortality was possible
        This is an odd question and quite frankly has no reverence to our discussion. There are other points we need to clear first and I do not wish to digress any more than we have already. Maybe later?

        If you feel better to cap the b in bible go for it. I am actually surprised you aren’t using a capital H for him yet. Language, written or otherwise reveals much about the user.

        Like

      • The singularity is a fact.
        Not yet it isn’t. But it is a prediction.

        It was a prediction but as you can see by what Elon Musk has stated we have already activated it. We are moving to the event horizon now.

        You stated — “Are you saying you accept what is written at face value, that you interpret the bible literally?”

        My response — What I am saying is only in relation to you statement, “Is Jesus this or that”. Jesus is only what the Bible states that he is. There is no other reference to pull information from.

        But lander there are millions of books on Jesus: No. These books are based on the Bible and a person’s interpretation of it.

        But lander there are 50 different bibles: No. all Bibles are based on one set of original manuscripts (which no one has) and are too just interpretations of those.

        But lander (add question about Jesus): Answer will be “Bible\Book\Verse”. Because it is the only source of information on Jesus.

        You stated — “i.e.Genesis is fact, the global flood as described is fact, Exodus and conquest as written is fact, the Virgin Birth is fact, etc, etc?”

        My response — There is nothing God can’t do. This is why I say these are weaker arguments. The question isn’t “Can God make a flood that you can’t detect?”, the question is, “Is there a God?”

        If there is no god then there is no need to argue any other point especially scripture and especially one verse at a time. I mean really how much time do you have to argue scripture with all 7 billion humans on this Earth?

        If there is a God then he has no limit in what he can do but you can have a limit in what you will do in his name.

        You stated — “As the gospel of John is the sole gospel where the central character, Jesus of Nazareth could be said to be claiming he is Yahweh, are you basing your belief that he is your god primarily on this gospel?”

        Provide the verse so we can see what you are looking at.

        You stated — “This is an odd question and quite frankly has no reverence to our discussion. There are other points we need to clear first and I do not wish to digress any more than we have already. Maybe later?”

        My response — LOL Imagine being on my side and being asked questions like which God am I referring to because of the caps lock on my pc, which by the way has absolutely no bearing on if there is or isn’t a god. (note: using random upper/lower now).

        I want to know where your belief runs into a challenge. It’s to detached, you seem happy with the status quo. You most likely just live day to day with no thoughts of a higher state of being (like a full cybernetic body) or projection of consciousness, etc. Technology is rapidly moving in a direction that can now even simulate a spiritual experience and you can’t even see the need to accept that change is happening in a way that may bring a final answer to the God question.
        I mean do your thoughts end with the kardashians or is there more?

        Do you use the term “character” repeatedly to prevent from accidentally believing he is real? It’s like the “G” thing for Atheist, right?

        Like

      • Provide the verse so we can see what you are looking at.
        With reference to the I AM phrase, which is generally acknowledge ( by many biblical scholars) to be confirmation he believed he and Yahweh to be the same.

        There is nothing God can’t do
        A faith statement and completely unsubstantiated. As weak and silly an argument as one is likely to hear.
        It does , however, tell me much about the level of indoctrination you have allowed yourself to be subjected to.

        Jesus is only what the Bible states that he is. There is no other reference to pull information from.

        As the bible is nothing more than historical fiction then this makes any such statements simply vacuous.

        Again, I have no inclination to engage in a discussion relating to singularities at this stage.
        I have never thought about the kardashians and in truth, other than the name ‘Kim’ which I have heard bandied about from time to time know nothing about them. I will, however, bow to your apparent expertise in this regard.

        Do you use the term “character” repeatedly to prevent from accidentally believing he is real?
        No accident , I assure you.
        There is absolutely no evidence for the character described in the bible. He is simply a narrative construct.

        Like

      • I asked – “Provide the verse so we can see what you are looking at.”
        You stated — “With reference to the I AM phrase, which is generally acknowledge ( by many biblical scholars) to be confirmation he believed he and Yahweh to be the same.”
        My response – That’s not a verse so we can move on.

        There is nothing God can’t do
        You stated — “A faith statement and completely unsubstantiated. As weak and silly an argument as one is likely to hear.”

        My response — That’s just your opinion not a fact. You keep using a weak argument and I keep responding in a weak way to it. Why not move to a stronger argument (like is God real?)

        Jesus is only what the Bible states that he is. There is no other reference to pull information from.
        You stated — “As the bible is nothing more than historical fiction then this makes any such statements simply vacuous.’

        My response — Again that is your opinion but not a fact.

        You stated — “He is simply a narrative construct.’

        My response — How you are missing this point I have no idea; Harry Potter is a character but no one I talk to wastes the time stating that he is in every sentence. You use it like you are worried about something. Just like that G thing you were talking about.

        It’s like you have a nervous tick or something but in text form. It’s such a waste of typing.

        Like

      • If you are unaware of the ”I Am” sayings and their relevance to the god claim then maybe you need to read John again?

        That’s just your opinion not a fact. You keep using a weak argument and I keep responding in a weak way to it. Why not move to a stronger argument (like is God real?)
        No. The opinion was your statement, which, as I said, is completely unsubstantiated. Furthermore, it presupposes there is a ”God” (sic) and , of course, that god is (the one you genuflect to) yours -the supposed human sacrifice, Yahweh/Jesus of Nazareth.
        Someone could claim exactly the same thing about Allah, or Quetzalcoatl and you would most likely dismiss such a claim out of hand.
        In fact you would have to, otherwise you could not claim to be Christian, now could you?
        I wonder if you are able to see past your hubris and blatant indoctrination yet?

        The bible IS nothing more than Historical Fiction and this is based on the evidence that demonstrates it.
        It seems clear that with each passing comment you reveal just how indoctrinated you truly are.
        What next, a 6000 year old earth and a vegetarian Allosaurus?

        The character Jesus of Nazareth IS nothing but a narrative construct.
        Or call it a myth if you prefer.
        Maybe it is based on some itinerant rabbi who preached in Galilee sometime at the beginning of the first century? Who knows?
        But there is no evidence whatsoever for the Lake Tiberius Pedestrian.
        Probably the most noticeable diference between the characters, Harry Potter and Jesus of Nazareth is that no one that I am aware of has ever been threatened with eternal damnation for not believing in Harry Potter.

        Like

      • My response — You spout opinions, you make claims and it means nothing because you ignore the person you are talking to and why they believe.

        I have reasons for believing God exists and none of those reasons have been addressed from your opinions.

        You ignore my responses and then run to things like, “bible IS nothing more than Historical Fiction” Make a note to self, the Bible was not what made me believe so how is proving anything with it a way to make me not believe? How do you not understand this? Start with “Why” a person believes not what they do afterwards.

        I mean really listen to yourself, I told you why I believe but you just rolled past that to argue this:

        “you need to read John again?”
        “supposed human sacrifice
        “Allah, or Quetzalcoatl”
        “blatant indoctrination yet?”
        “Historical Fiction”
        “6000 year old earth”
        “vegetarian Allosaurus?”
        “character Jesus”
        “itinerant rabbi who preached in Galilee”
        “Lake Tiberius Pedestrian”

        LOL it’s like you’re reading a bad script the Matt threw away one day before going on air.

        You need to have a real conversation at some point about “MY” perspective detached from “YOUR” beliefs of what I should be like as a Christian otherwise what’s the point?

        Notice that I don’t care that you are an Atheist? I want to know where it started not where you are now. I’m curious why you are satisfied with a life devoid of a God experience. You seem happy with the mundane, with daily life. No curious complicated thoughts just, “Bible Bad”. How about telling me what you think life is all about so I can understand something more than these canned responses. Everytime I press you for more I hit a wall of “I don’t know”, how can you not be pondering the harder questions in life. Why don’t you know?

        Like

      • My response — You spout opinions, you make claims and it means nothing because you ignore the person you are talking to and why they believe.

        What an individual believes is irrelevant to what the evidence tells us. And as you do not base your belief on evidence then your beliefs are erroneous.

        For the record, if you don’t fully understand what the word evidence means then look it up.
        Furthermore, you do not exercise, or even seem prepared to exercise, any meaningful degree of scepticism regarding your faith. This in itself already makes everything you write highly questionable.

        I have reasons for believing God exists and none of those reasons have been addressed from your opinions.
        Yes, I am sure you do have reasons, but you have yet to honestly address the emotional issue/s that lay behind your claimed initial inquiry, an inquiry, I might add, which most certainly did not come across as a scientific experiment, but rather a weak plea for help in some area.
        ”Please God, if you are real send me a sign as I am desperate to believe and really need to give up smoking,”
        Up pops the lady … eh voila … God exists! And wow, it just happens to be the god I am familiar with, Jesus of Nazareth. Okay, time I confessed to being a sinner ’cos I really want to go to heaven. Yes, Jesus was a human blood sacrifice and I’m saved!! No more ciggies. Whoopee!”

        So, yes, I understand you were very likely ignorant of the bible – you still are, but either refuse to recognise this or haven’t yet bothered to more fully educate yourself about it.

        So, there are definitely cultural issues in play – which is why the likelihood of your encounter with a Christian rather than a Muslim or Hindu. Imagine if the woman had been a Mormon or a Young Earth Creationist? Ironic that the god would have been the same!
        I admit I am taking a bit of a swing here based on sporadic ventures into your blog that you are English speaking living in what might be considered a Christian based culture.
        But even that should not be definitive regarding your encounter with the woman.
        The point being, you were already fully aware of the Christian God Belief.
        Primed, if you will, and it seems the emotional door was already ajar.
        Aren’t Christians encouraged to be ‘‘broken’’ and ‘‘empty’’, thus allowing themselves to be filled with the Holy Spirit?

        why you are satisfied with a life devoid of a God experience.
        Again, which god, and why would I want/need your god, as opposed to, say, Hanuman, or Shiva, or Allah?

        I am curious why, when you seem on the surface to be a reasonable, intelligent person (like Francis Collins, for example) and yet still feel the dire need to cling to the belief you must be ‘saved’ (from what for, goodness’ sake!), and why a 2000 year old human blood sacrifice is your Get out of Jail Free Card to someplace called Heaven?

        The response, ‘I don’t know’ is one of the most honest answers anyone can give in relation to this discussion.
        Once upon a time the response would have been the same of the question: ”What causes it to rain.”

        That you, and many others, believe you do know, is staggering in its ignorance and the accompanying arrogance makes you little better than a Dickhead like Hovind or Ham.

        You seem happy with the mundane, with daily life. No curious complicated thoughts just, “Bible Bad”.
        Now there’s an assumption without any foundation! Your hubris shining through yet again.
        This discussion is about your god and the reasons why such belief has no evidence-based foundation and why such beliefs are all emotional/cultural in nature.

        I have no great desire at this point in the discussion to venture off on even more tangents.

        You need to have a real conversation at some point about “MY” perspective detached from “YOUR” beliefs of what I should be like as a Christian otherwise what’s the point?
        In actual fact, I highly recommend that you have a conversation with a de-converted Christian, preferably one who was in ministry. One who has trained in apologetics and has argued and refuted every single reason – with evidence – which you are throwing at the wall in a desperate attempt that one make stick.
        There are several such people that come to mind and I can give you links if you are at all interested. Maybe they will even enter into email correspondence if you are truly amenable?
        Let me know and I’ll point you in the right direction.

        Like

      • You stated — “Please God, if you are real send me a sign as I am desperate to believe and really need to give up smoking,”

        My response — Ahh, now I understand what you are saying. You have wasted a lot of time by just not being clear in your responses. You think the questions were designed for something like a change in lifestyle or related to miracles of some type. You make huge assumptions. I designed a series of questions between science, mysticism and faith. I was looking for a set of questions that were specific on several topics to ensure the response could be confirmed and would be outside my current knowledge base.

        The answers received were on target and did exceed what I currently knew at the time and I did engage in further experiments with what I learned and found it to be true. You don’t seem to have any curiosity when it comes to God, I think you only see god as a “water from rock” type of experience. You don’t believe God can answer questions and on top of that you don’t think a question can be something like “How to understand time in relation to consciousness”.

        You need to understand something upfront in this conversation. When an old woman shows up babbling about civil war relics and then suddenly states that God sent her to answer questions you asked in secret it pushes you past your comfort zone a bit. Questions, I may add, that are not for everyday people and range across a spectrum of knowledge. All of this without it being in the conversation I was having with her (a stranger). I would love to know “WHY” you think something like this happened instead of this endless dribble about dogma.

        But to address your crux I feel that I may partially be at fault since you don’t know me and I may be holding back a bit out of curiosity. Long story short. Dad (Atheist and anti-humanist) (Mom – Mystic and engineer) (Grandmother devout Christian) and years of training from each equals me.

        Fast pace — Now add no religion until experiment then bang belief in God. This should bring us to now where I have chosen a religion (Christianity) and I am studying it in detail. Trying to follow it (but only per what I read in the bible not from what is taught in church). Runner ups were Quakers (almost happened) and Buddhist (but after some study I found out they have no Deity). This should cover topics like why I ask for forgiveness (Bible said to). Once you choose a religion it would be nonsensical to not believe it and not follow it within how you understand it. This would be the faith part that you believe is ridiculous (I understand but please stop beating that drum) Links at the end should end our back and forth on this level.
        I now do in depth Bible study and have a 3Dimentional database I keep online. I write articles on what I find in relation to preconceived beliefs in religion (most likely why Christians tend to have a problem with me). I also heavily study Philosophy and consciousness and post on it (why Atheist tend to have a problem with me).

        But as for Atheism and Christianity this may help with where I am in thought:

        https://realitydecoded.blog/2018/07/04/christian-mom-talks-to-athiest-show-so-son-will-talk-to-church-pastor-the-conversation-is-fascinating/

        https://realitydecoded.blog/category/10-things-christian/page/1/

        This may be where you find hard conflicts since “YOU” see it as wasted time but I enjoy studying the Bible and finding truth in it:
        https://realitydecoded.blog/2017/06/26/the-bible-and-interest-debt/

        This one I’m throwing in to lighten your dark mood a bit. You always seem mad and it’s hard to talk to someone who just seems angry all the time.
        https://realitydecoded.blog/2018/01/03/jumping-over-babies-to-remove-sin/

        Like

      • This one I’m throwing in to lighten your dark mood a bit. You always seem mad and it’s hard to talk to someone who just seems angry all the time.

        Amazing how you are so presumptions!
        Angry? With you? *Smile*
        I think religious belief is utterly idiotic.

        That must have taken a fair amount of time to put together.
        Well done.
        Now, are you going to tell me what was the emotional issue that lay behind all of this that prompted you to embark on your little experiment?

        And to demonstrate why I think it is all so much hokum, here is another Christian who had an encounter with Yhwh that convinced him.~See if you are able to spot any similarities?

        https://melwild.wordpress.com/2018/11/16/when-i-heard-gods-voice/

        And I note you don’t seem interested to converse with any de-converted Christians, especially any who have been at the business end of faith and ministry work.
        Afraid to face your demons?

        Like

      • You stated — “And I note you don’t seem interested to converse with any de-converted Christians, especially any who have been at the business end of faith and ministry work.”

        My response — So you don’t read my replies, this is proof of that. Until you acknowledge or read my reply I guess we are stuck here and can’t move forward.

        Like

      • I read your replies and clicked on the links – but didn’t bother with all the videos. Sorry, much as I love Matt D that is a lot of watching.

        You are being very stubborn and seem only prepared to deal with this on your carefully laid out terms.

        My giving up smoking example was not meant to be taken literally, but as I read your reply I realised I was silly using it as you are a literalist in more ways than one.

        As to why it happened to you? I posted a link to Mel Wild’s blog . His current post covers this to a ‘T.’
        However, all this still does not answer the ”why” question, why you flat out refuse to tell me what were the emotional issues that prompted this in the first instance suggests you are hiding something.All you have to do is tell me what it was/they were.
        You already made one confession to your god, how hard can it be to write it out?

        Like

      • I’m talking about the personal Atheist part not the videos. YOu seemed to skip the fact that I already had that. YOu are not reading you are skimming.

        Like

      • Okay, make it simple for me. Highlight it.

        Like

      • For crying out loud. My dad was an Atheist. Trained from day one to discount religion. You somehow jumped over that and gave credit to my grandmother for raising me LOL.

        Like

      • No, I read it three times to make sure I hadn’t missed something. And you were ‘trained” by all three.
        I am surprised you didn’t suffer cognitive dissonance.
        Perhaps granny had more of an influence?

        Like

      • Really? Grandma beats Dad and Mom? Wow.

        What is your damage?

        What happened to you to make you so singularly focused?

        Like

      • It was just a thought. I can direct you to a number of deconverts who’s grandparent s are, even now , exercising a certain amount of influence over their grandchildren.
        Not a happy situation for the parents, as you can imagine

        Like

      • All I can say is bad parents then. My family doesn’t work that way. If you pay your bills you own your thoughts lol.

        Like

      • Sorry. This went whoosh.
        You were the one who mentioned your gran was devout.
        You were the one who mentioned mum is into mysticism, and your old man is an atheist.
        If there was no conflict of interest which side down you fall down on?

        Like

      • This is a time question isn’t it? (and) It’s also a Philosophical question.

        Let’s follow your logic and see where it takes us:

        Start with Time:

        Since I didn’t have a religion or belief in anything for about 30 years I guess you could say Dad one the 3 way perspective of child raising. (That is of course if you had asked the exact same question everyday for those particular 30 or so years.)

        Then there were a number of years that made me question the nature of reality in respect to my understanding of science ( I think we can give Mom that one (upper case) since some of it crossed into some acceptance of mystical beliefs on some level (like coincidence exceeding probability in relation to dreams)

        But if we fast forward to today (about 15 years after almost being killed on an aircraft carrier) then it would seem (Grandma is winning)

        So is it time based or is it some type of strict trauma? What say you? I would argue that this is where Philosophy comes in (upper case)

        Like

      • Is your wife a Christian as well? Just trying to get a bearing.

        Like

      • She was a dedicated church going Christian until she married me. Now she believes in God but doesn’t believe in church.

        Her family (as you can imagine) is not happy with that part. She has spent to much time studying my material.

        To many unanswered questions from all sides.

        Imagine being in a place where you see religion, mysticism, and atheism meet but each side fails to answer all questions. After a few years of gleaming what I have gathered she is now more of a God and science believer.

        This for you from your perspective would be utterly impossible since you are only allowed you piece of the puzzle (which I get by the way).

        I live in a world where this happens and it shouldn’t: https://realitydecoded.blog/2018/11/16/people-are-having-dental-work-done-with-no-anesthesia-using-hypnosis/

        So I am forced to think outside the box of the triangle believes like you create.

        Like

      • She was a dedicated church going Christian until she married me. Now she believes in God but doesn’t believe in church.

        See how cultural influence works!
        You indoctrinated your own wife for goodness sake!

        Re your link:
        So what? I have a friend who know lives in the UK who never had anaesthetic for dental procedures. He simply used to switch off, so he said.
        We once had a talk about whether he would be able to do this for other surgery.

        Mind over matter s nothing new.
        What you beleive is based on delusion and a book of erroneous mythological tales.
        That you simply refuse to acknowledge this but grind on about your god being able to do such things makes you come across as somewhat unhinged.

        Like

      • Your view of me is irrelevant and doesn’t answer to what the truth is.

        You have opinions ( a bit narcissistic) but you lack proof of what you say.

        You avoid tough questions and deflect to statements detached from what was requested.

        Why not get on topic and provide some evidence.

        Like

      • Your view of me is irrelevant and doesn’t answer to what the truth is.

        Truth? I am only really interested in what the evidence tells me.
        Your story has similar patterns /ingredients to hundreds of conversion tales.
        Those who deconvert attest to this fact all the time.
        They even recognise how incredibly obtuse they were and completely unwilling to consider their case was not unique at all.
        Some have even told me that they were advised by other members that such thoughts etc were tests by the Devil.
        I am serious! And what sort of nutter believes in the Devil, right?
        That is a case of mental illness right there.
        Religious Indoctrination is brain washing par excellence, and because religious freedom is praised and respected those who would indoctrinate – as evangelicals for example who are commanded to spread the word as if it is some revolting STD – they are given a tacit blessing to corrupt as many as they are able.
        Just like you have been corrupted in fact..

        Like

      • You stated — “Your story has similar patterns /ingredients to hundreds of conversion tales.”

        My response — So does yours. So nothing new here.

        You stated — “I am serious! And what sort of nutter believes in the Devil, right?”

        My response — You mean devils no devil. The devil is a religious construct, the bible has devils in scripture.

        You stated — “Religious Indoctrination is brain washing par excellence,”

        My response — I would disagree, it’s more like Indoctrination through predictive scripting, very similar to the political process for party Indoctrination and most definitely similar to your initial interactions with me, in that they lack any honest personal content, just canned copy paste responses (on size fits all)

        Indoctrination is usually is simply just lazy repetitive words to an audience that enjoys structure over value.

        Like

      • Of course you would disagree because you have been brainwashed!
        All you do with your responses is try to deflect .
        Muslims must be right … there are over a billion of them.
        Your brand of Christianity is obviously wrong.
        Ask a Catholic.
        Ask a Calvinist.
        You believe the redemptive power of a human blood sacrifice.
        If that isn’t a delusion then I don’t know what is.

        All religions cannot be right – though I’ll wager they all believe they are.
        But they can ALL be wrong.
        Based on the evidence of all the unfulfilled claims of every major religion I’d say you are walking on thin ice.

        In fact you haven’t got a prayer! Correction … look down. There is no ice at all.

        Like

      • That can never empties. I can go back and cut and paste your response over each other and it would almost be an exact match.

        Do you have any personal original voice or idea of your own or is it always just the same words cut and paste?

        Like

      • There is nothing original. The subject has been done to death. It is the same woe-is-me type nonsense with every born again.
        Any deconvert will tell you.

        The character Jesus of Nazareth is a narrative construct.
        There is no evidence of him in the historical record.
        People believe because of cultural and/or emotional reasons.
        children are often indoctrinated from an early age.
        Those who are prepared to face reality and accept the evidence simply walk away.
        Those who stay are much like you.
        Indoctrinated and hypocritical.

        There is nothing that justifies your brand of religion over and above a Muslim, Hindu or Jehovah’s Witness.

        You cannot produce a shred of evidence to demonstrate the veracity of your personal god claims that can in any way elevate it above what someone like Ham and his Young Earth Creationists believe.

        To this end you are not really any better than Calvin who stood by and watched his friend burned alive. Fortunately we don’t allow people like that the time of day anymore.
        Aren’t we the lucky ones!

        Like

      • Ok let’s agree to disagree on this. We are not getting anywhere.

        I will let you get the last word, which I’m sure will be something like what I just read or related to running away or something.

        I will look over your sight (interesting) I’m sure another argument will start there at some point.

        Maybe by then you will be past the talking points.

        Like

      • It inevitably comes down to this … evidence. And evidence is something you simply refuse to deal with, preferring to hitch your wagon to Woo.
        I can just about handle deism – I mean, who knows right?
        But all the” Jesus of Nazareth is my Savior” and had to be executed for my sin.
        Well … that is where any vestige of sanity breaks down and simply becomes a whole heap of moronic bullshit.
        To actively inculcate this into kids and the vulnerable is abuse, plain and simple.

        Enjoy the delusion, but please keep it away from kids.

        There you go … last word!

        Like

      • Last Word plus…

        This is an excellent article by Carrier with all the evidence you could possibly wish for.

        https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/14557

        Maybe after you read it you might blink a few times and really start to think.

        Like

      • I’ll look it over , thanks.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Side Note: Do you know what the orienting reflex is? I ask because your responses seem to follow this method of cognitive response to the options I’m presenting.

        Like

      • I do know. All praise the god Google.

        Like

      • Sorry that should have been now, not know

        Liked by 1 person

      • If you are using Google then narrow it down to “Orienting Decision Making” or it will not make sense to my reference most likely.

        Like

      • I just briefly read the first thing that popped up.
        Are you referring to my ”knee jerk” reaction?
        There is a post up on my blog that I am sure you will relate to. Right up your street in fact.
        Especially if you like music.

        Like

      • You didn’t link it. Is it the one with the guitar?

        Liked by 1 person

      • You are also not understanding my point since you seem to think I have a motive other than what has been stated.

        Like

      • Then perhaps you are not being succinct enough with your replies?
        I get overwhelmed with pseudo religion speak very easily.
        I like it to the point.
        With that on mind:
        Tell me what was the emotional issues/trauma that prompted your search for your god?
        I cannot put it any plainer than that.

        Like

      • I just gave you a great one. Surely that would do it for you.

        Like

      • So because you saw dead and dying bodies you needed to find a god?
        Is this what you are telling me?

        Like

      • YOu stated “What is my trauma”. This seems like a trauma and it happened to me so I’m guessing it counts for you. Or does it have to be more than a plane hitting an aircraft carrier in the middle of the gulf?

        What more is needed than this?

        Like

      • Yes, perhaps it resulted in PTSD.
        Why did you consider Yahweh was the answer to this emotional /trauma issue instead of dealing with it in a rational sense as per you atheist father?

        Like

      • This is good now we are getting somewhere.

        I don’t know. Maybe the event was some type of life changer on a subconscious level.

        What do you think?

        Like

      • I don’t. This isn’t about me.
        As you know the reason for the emotional issue why are you unwilling to re-look at from a perspective of ”Shit Happens”.

        Like

      • It’s obvious sht happens, look at the world. But that’s not an answer to reality it’s just an observation of random probability.

        You need to put forth some effort. What do you think pushed me towards religion as you say. We can’t trust me since you already said I was brainwashed. So what do you think?

        Like

      • What do you think pushed me towards religion as you say

        You would get a far better, and likely more accurate response if you engaged a deconvert.

        In fact it might be worth doing a post for you and see if we can get a better answer than I can provide?

        But I’ll give it a shot, nonetheless.

        1. Raised in an environment where you were exposed to Christianity (instead of any other religion)
        2. An element of understandable confusion as a child/teen.
        3. Joined the Navy (Western Armed Forces are notorious for tacitly encouraging participation in religious services) I have a reader who will attest to the crap he received while in the army.
        Trauma from your experience of the severely injured sailors, limited or no proper counselling ( or maybe you were counselled by the ships’ chaplain?) and this leads to Death Anxiety. It isn’t difficult to join the dots from here …

        Again, I’m winging it. But how am I doing so far?

        Like

      • I think all of these are great and could be reasons for why I choose a religion. This should make me seriously question my Christianity. Along with years of dad doing the same and hours of watching Sam Harris, matt dillahunty, and Tracie Harris

        So, this covers religion and all the posts I made about fallacies in region myself.

        Now to address the remainder. How do we explain the incident with the woman, a third person having knowledge of my complex questions doesn’t seem to tie into what you replied with? It’s the last piece of the puzzle and should be easy for you to clear up. Keep in mind that the questions were spread across several topics.

        Like

      • How do we explain the incident with the woman, a third person having knowledge of my complex questions doesn’t seem to tie into what you replied with?

        Did you read Mel Wild’s latest blog piece?
        If so you should be smart enough to figure out the answer for yourself.

        Want to dialogue with a deconvert yet?

        Like

      • Your’re not listening: I dialogue with deconverts almost daily lol

        I welcome as many as you want me to interact with. I also meet with other religious factions almost daily.

        I just spent two days talking with a witch so I think you’re good.

        This is interesting now that you bring it up this way.

        Let’s test this theory of yours:
        Are you willing to talk to a convert? One who has gone from Atheism to Religion? I have a really good one.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Talk? Dialogue over the internet, sure.

        Like

      • I meet people in person. The witch was in person. Atheist are in person. The Jehovah witnesses again in person. Since you don’t know me you should spend less time judging me.

        I don’t ask you who you interact with because I don’t care. You either know what you are talking about or you don’t. Who you know, your credentials, your job, your IQ, etc are utterly irrelevant to me.

        Side Note: online individuals are equally as important (i don’t want to take away from those interactions)

        Like

      • It is human nature to judge. We do it all the time.
        Even the character Jesus judged the Pharisees and others.
        You obviously influenced your wife to give up Church by the sound of it, and you have been judged by her folks.
        If you have kids I imagine you will bring them up ”in the faith” in some form or another.
        I will judge you for that.

        Like

      • You stated — “You obviously influenced your wife to give up Church by the sound of it, and you have been judged by her folks.”

        My response — Again jumping to conclusions. I told her I would go anytime she wanted. I didn’t even care what religion she was. She took in upon herself to read my content and she came to her own conclusion.

        But sure people judge (no doubt) I must do it to because I’m flawed (I may add that to my prayers)

        My point is that you do it a lot. At least with me. I’m saying because I find it interesting, I don’t think it’s good or bad, I just wonder why you feel your opinions are indemonstrable in respect to being wrong .

        Like

      • I have an idea that I think will work and meets your requirements.

        When I was in the Navy a plane crashed into my ship and almost killed all of us. There was a tense 3 hours of possible dying and people were crying in the hanger bay and preparing for the afterlife. Bodies were being brought in and lined up on the floor and I was there watching it all (including one man who was pouring out blood right in front of me)

        This is a true event and a fact. This should meet your requirements for me.

        Like

      • There is a comment in moderation. Why not turn off the link thing in settings? Makes it easier.

        Like

      • On my side or yours?

        Like

      • Yours. Check settings.

        Like

      • It already has “Allow link notifications from other blogs (pingbacks and trackbacks) on new articles ”

        I will take a look later today to see if I can find what you are talking about.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Sorry, the upper case ‘thing’.
        There are thousands of gods.
        An upper case G suggests the word is a pronoun.
        It isn’t.
        All god-believers consider their deity is The One”
        Name your god, or use a lover case g.
        It can’t be too difficult for you surely?You do know the name of your god, yes?

        Like

      • You stated — “Science has demonstrated that humans did not derive from anyone such as Adam and Eve who did not exist as portrayed in the bible.”

        Almost every man alive can trace his origins to one man who lived about 135,000 years ago, new research suggests. And that ancient man likely shared the planet with the mother of all women.

        The findings, detailed in the journal Science, come from the most complete analysis of the male sex chromosome, or the Y chromosome, to date. The results overturn earlier research, which suggested that men’s most recent common ancestor lived just 50,000 to 60,000 years ago.

        Again you have opinions just like everyone else.

        Like

      • Again, this is a clever side step that simply does acknowledge the fact the tale of Adam and Eve is palpable nonsense.
        And this is why I consider you disingenuous.
        Better you simply nudge Jesus to the fore acknowledge you believe you ar a sinner, require His Saving Grace through his blood sacrifice and be done with it.

        It will avoid you having to continually do the Theological Two step in an attempt to avoid being completely honest.

        Like

      • Again Nope. I was just pointing out another fallacy in your opinions since science is proving you wrong.

        Our original argument is still there.

        I get the feeling that you want me to simply agree with anything you say but that’s not how it works.

        We can argue religion after we finish our argument about God. If you don’t like that then you can stop talking to me anytime you want.

        Like

      • I posted — ““Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.” “Marcus Aurelius”

        You stated — “However, he did not have the benefit of modern day forensics, archaeology, DNA and gene research etc etc.”

        My response — And yet his words still ring true in a world that used forensics to put innocent people in jail, who years later were freed using the same evidence. O.o

        Or the gene research that brought us the safe changes in or food chain made by Monsanto that later became nightmares to farmers and ecology. O.o

        It would seem to me that Marcus Aurelius is surviving the test of time.

        Like

      • They ring true in absence of the data I included.

        And in the context of what we are discussing, science has by and large been vindicated.
        The HGP is a perfect example.

        Like

      • You stated – “science has by and large been vindicated.”

        My response – Science has not been vindicated because it never needs to be. Science is an observation that produces testable theories that allow for reliable predictions. Science does not need vindication since it is always in a state of theoretical stability based on scientific fact. Over time theories can change due to new facts on the same topic, like for example gravity.

        Like

      • Again, you seem to enjoy shifting context for some reason and come across as purposely being somewhat obtuse in this matter.

        If you are going to nail your colours to the bible tales then simply say you accept what is written rather than trying to hedge you bets.
        What I wrote concerning the veracity of the biblical tales is accepted by the consensus of biblical scholars.

        Like

      • You stated — “Again, you seem to enjoy shifting context for some reason and come across as purposely being somewhat obtuse in this matter.”

        My response – I hadn’t realized we were going to start name calling so early. I have no personal comments about you so I will simply acknowledge your frustration with me.

        You stated – “If you are going to nail your colours to the bible tales then simply say you accept what is written rather than trying to hedge you bets.”

        My response – I have no need to state anything other than what I believe. If what I am saying doesn’t fit a mold you need it poured into then that’s not my problem.

        As for hedging bets…. the concept is ridiculous. If you can detect someone hedging bets for God then surely God would also notice. There is no need to do such a thing like hedging bets. Who cares.

        I don’t control God so I don’t think about the outcome of my understanding of him. I’m not sure why it’s so important for me to be all knowing about this topic when no one else on Earth is.

        Like

      • My response – I hadn’t realized we were going to start name calling so early
        How long were you planning to wait before you embarked on some?

        You give the impression that you are afraid to answer straightforward questions?

        I would venture that a call to any Christian deconvert to read your latest round of replies would elicit similar terms
        that I have used.
        including … Hand waving, obfuscation, avoidance, etc.

        I don’t control God

        You have yet to demonstrate there are any gods.

        Like

      • In relation to name calling you stated — “How long were you planning to wait before you embarked on some?

        My response — I have no interest in name calling.

        You stated — “You have yet to demonstrate there are any gods.”

        My response — I haven’t made any claims so why would I need proof?

        Are you claiming that God does not exist?

        Like

      • You said I don’t control God
        That IS a claim.

        Are you claiming that God does not exist?

        Are you referring to Yahweh?

        Like

      • You are incorrect since it was a response to you statement of “hedging bets’.

        Like

      • You commented on several things, “Noah and his Ark”, “Moses and the exodus”, “Virgin birth”, etc being fiction.

        My response — It seems this is the weaker argument. That claims of extraordinary occurrences or events can’t be real.

        To put it another way, if God is real then claims of extraordinary occurrences or events can easily be real.

        The stronger argument would seem to me to be, “Is God Real?”, rather than picking and choosing lesser events based on his level of power or control over reality as we know it at the moment.

        The reality of God has not been proven or disproven by science and no religious leader can make him appear or claim their God is real based on shared evidence outside of individual belief.

        So, arguing this point would seem nonsensical. Knowledge of God is reduced to the individual and any experience they have or do not have with God or without.

        Like

      • I am not arguing for your god but the veracity of the bible.
        So to not address this it comes across as you are hand waving, as we know through archaeological evidence that the Flood did not happen.
        So let’s claify this point first and foremost.
        Do you accept the scientific evidence that refutes the tale of Noah’s ark and the flood?
        It is a simple question so a yes or no answer will suffice. Thanks.

        Like

      • You stated — “Do you accept the scientific evidence that refutes the tale of Noah’s ark and the flood?”

        My response – First there is no scientific evidence that disputes Noah’s ark since science has no opinion of Noah’s ark. There is no evidence of a worldwide flood in science but that does nothing to the argument of God and what he can or cannot do in respect to a global flood.

        You stated – “It is a simple question so a yes or no answer will suffice. Thanks.”

        My response – The discussion you choose to have with me is neither simple nor guided by you for my responses. If you want to discuss a topic that obviously has been argued since the dawn of man from every possible angle and never concluded while at the same time limiting what my responses should contain then the discussion is unnecessary. We can just agree to disagree and both think ourselves to be correct based on better information.

        If the goal is to have a discussion then you can’t have expectations of how I will respond or what my response should contain. You should also be prepared for moments where either of us may have to explain more to be understood more.

        You stated – “I am not arguing for your god but the veracity of the bible.”

        My response – There is no Bible without God. It is the foundation of the entire belief and all of scripture. If God is real then all things within scripture are possible. If he is not then it is all fiction. Any other argument is a weaker argument because it hopes to bypass the first.

        Like

      • My response – First there is no scientific evidence that disputes Noah’s ark since science has no opinion of Noah’s ark. There is no evidence of a worldwide flood in science but that does nothing to the argument of God and what he can or cannot do in respect to a global flood.

        Scientific evidence, including paleontology and geology refutes the biblical claim of a global flood as per the Noachian tale.

        My response – There is no Bible without God.

        The is no bible without the Judaeo/Christian god, Yahweh.
        It is merely a collection of religious texts.

        The gods included within its covers are man made.

        Like

      • You stated — “The gods included within its covers are man made.”

        I see your claim, where is your proof that the God of the Bible is not real?

        Like

      • Proof is usually reserved for mathematics.

        Are you asking for evidence?

        Like

      • I’m asking can you prove what you claimed?

        You stated — “The gods included within its covers are man made.”

        If you can’t provide proof it’s no big deal since no one else can either. I was just wondering if you had more than just an opinion.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Again … proof is generally reserved for mathematics.
        Are you asking for evidence ?

        Like

      • Again — I’m asking can you prove what you claimed?

        Like

      • Proofs are generally reserved for mathematics.
        Are you asking for evidence?

        Like

      • If the goal is to repeat ourselves then rinse and repeat until you provide proof for you claim you are only providing an opinion.

        Like

      • Not proof, evidence.
        Until you acknowledge this then you are simply being disingenuous.
        I am curious, in the absence of you being prepared to answer straightforward questions or provide evidence for any of your claims regarding the primary topics in this discussion, do feel trying to point score strengthens your case in any way whatsoever?

        Like

      • You stated — “do feel trying to point score strengthens your case in any way whatsoever?”

        My response — Since there is only you and me talking I don’t see the purpose in scoring. You don’t honestly believe anyone else want to hear our boring conversation about truth in scripture vs evolution do you?

        LOL

        This is just you and me. As for proof (again) I provided it just like you did. You can google and verify just like you recommended I do.

        It would save time if we didn’t repeat ourselves. Move on in the conversation.

        Like

      • What truth in scripture are you referring to?

        Like

      • Shouldn’t we at least save some of this for a post on the topic or do you want to burn out all the good arguments day one?

        Like

      • We are literally making a book with this may replies. You can’t even read them on a phone anymore. You have to be on a pc to read this now because of the template.

        Like

  7. Reblogged this on A Tale Unfolds and commented:
    I thought some of you might enjoy this.
    The Word of God?
    You decide …

    Like

    Reply
  8. We have two very old family Bibles here, dating from the early 1800s. Methinks I’ll go take a look. Never been much of a bible reader, but this looks intriguing.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply
  9. I think ‘they’ set their sails to catch the wind.

    If so, eventually the Bible will consist of just two covers—but people will still swear by it.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Category

Religion Gone Wild

Tags