What Makes a Good Prophecy (and Why Bible Prophecies Aren’t)

What makes a good prophecy?

Most of us are pretty skeptical of bad prophecies and can spot them easily—tabloid predictions by psychics such as Jeane Dixon or Sylvia Browne, for example. Not even many Christians are sucked into the end-of-the-world predictions by such “prophets” as Harold Camping. (There’s a great infographic of Christianity’s many end-of-the-world predictions here, and I write about Harold Camping’s ill-advised venture into prophecy in 2011 here and here.)

And now there’s the (new ’n improved!) prediction by Ronald Weinland that Jesus will return on May 19, 2013.

I’d like to propose some rules for good prophecies against which we can compare the gospel prophecies.

1. The prophecy must be startling, not mundane. “Barack Obama will be re-elected president” isn’t very startling. “Michelle Obama will be elected president” would be startling.

We regularly find big surprises in the news—earthquakes, wars, medical breakthroughs, and so on. These startling events are what make good prophecies.

2. The prophecy must be precise, not vague. “Expect exciting and surprising gold medals for the U.S. Olympic team!” is not precise. “A major earthquake will devastate Port-au-Prince, Haiti on January 12, 2010” is precise.

Nostradamus is another example of “prophecies” that were so vague that they can be imagined to mean lots of things. Similarly, the hundreds of supposed Bible prophecies are simply quote mining. You could also apply the identical process to War and Peace or The Collected Works of Shakespeare to find parallels to the gospel story, but so what?

3. The prophecy must be accurate. We should have high expectations for a divine divinator. Edgar Cayce could perhaps be excused if he was a little imperfect (that he showed no particular gift at all is damning, however), but prophecy from the omniscient Creator should be perfect.

4. The prophecy must predict, not retrodict. The writings of Nostradamus predict the London Great Fire of 1666 and the rise of Napoleon and Hitler … but of course these “predictions” were so unclear in his writings that the connection had to be inferred afterwards. This is also the failing of the Bible Code—the idea that the Hebrew Bible holds hidden acrostics of future events. And maybe it does—but the same logic could find these after-the-fact connections in any large book.

5. The prophecy can’t be self-fulfilling. The prediction that a bank will soon become insolvent may provoke its customers to remove all their money … and make the bank insolvent. The prediction that a store will soon go out of business may drive away customers. The prediction that Harry Potter would kill him drove Voldemort to try to kill the infant Harry first, but in so doing he inadvertently gave Harry some of the abilities that Harry used later to kill Voldemort.

6. The prophecy and the fulfillment must be verifiable. The prophecy and sometimes the fulfillment come from long ago, and we must be confident that they are accurate history.

7. The fulfillment must come after the prophecy. Kind of obvious, right? But some Old Testament prophecies fail on this point.

Isaiah 45:1 names Cyrus the Great of Persia as the anointed one (Messiah) who will end the Babylonian exile (587–538BCE) of the Israelites. That would be pretty impressive if it predicted the events, but this part of Isaiah (Deutero-Isaiah) was probably written during the time of Cyrus.

Or take Daniel. Daniel the man was taken to Babylon during the exile, but Daniel the book was written centuries later in roughly 165BCE. Its “prophecies” before that date are pretty good, but it fails afterwards. There’s even a term for this, vaticinia ex eventu (prophecy after the event).

8. The fulfillment must be honest. The author of the fulfillment can’t simply look in the back of the book, parrot the answers found there, and then declare victory. For example, that Mark records Jesus’s last words as exactly those words from Psalm 22 could be because it really happened that way, or that Jesus was deliberately quoting from the psalm as he died, or (my choice) Mark knew the psalm and put those words into his gospel.

I think that any of us would find this a fairly obvious list of the ways that predictions can fail. We’d spot these errors in a supermarket tabloid or in some other guy’s nutty religion.

But the Jesus prophecies are rejected by this skeptical net as well. Consider Matthew: this gospel says that Jesus was born of a virgin (1:18–25), was born in Bethlehem (2:1), and that he rode humbly on two donkeys (21:1–7). It says that Jesus predicted that he would rise, Jonah-like, after three days (12:40) and that the temple would fall (24:1–2). It says that he was betrayed for 30 pieces of silver (26:15), that men gambling for his clothes (27:35), and it records his last words (27:46).

Are these the records of fulfilled prophecy? Maybe all these claims in Matthew actually did happen, but if so, we have no grounds for saying so. Because they fail these tests (primarily #8), we must reject these claims of fulfilled prophecy. The non-supernatural explanation is far more plausible.

In some circumstances, the refusal to be defeated
is a refusal to be educated
— Margaret Halsey

Photo credit: gnuru

"As for your "religious" experience, to science...Colossians 2:8Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy ..."

Virgin Birth of Jesus: Fact or ..."
"Yes, all man made. Ephesians 4:5 ...One faith...So which denomination were you a part of, ..."

Virgin Birth of Jesus: Fact or ..."
"That fuckwit creationist "physicist" Lambert Dolphin claims a conservative population of 9 billion at the ..."

Dismantling the Noah Story

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Maxximiliann

    Consider, if you will, the historical evidence for the resurrection of Christ:

    Historical fact (1): After being impaled on a stake, Jesus was buried in a tomb by Joseph of Arimathea.

    Historical fact (2): On the third day following his death, Jesus’ tomb was found empty by a group of his female disciples.

    Historical fact (3): Different individuals and groups, on multiple occasions and under various circumstances, personally witnessed the resurrected Christ. This testimony even includes that of enemies and detractors of Christ.

    Historical fact (4): His first disciples beleived Christ had been resurrected from the dead despite having every predisposition to the contrary.

    As I’ve shared before, no naturalistic hypothesis explains these four historical facts better than the obvious: That God did in fact resurrect Christ.

    Prominently, in his book, “Justifying Historical Descriptions”, historian C. B. McCullagh lists six tests which historians use in determining what is the best explanation for given historical facts. The hypothesis “God raised Jesus from the dead” passes all these tests:

    1. It has great explanatory scope: it explains why the tomb was found empty, why the disciples saw post-mortem appearances of Jesus, and why the Christian faith came into being.

    2. It has great explanatory power: it explains why the body of Jesus was gone, why people repeatedly saw Jesus alive despite his earlier public execution, and so forth.

    3. It is plausible: given the historical context of Jesus’ own unparalleled life and claims, the resurrection serves as divine confirmation of those radical claims.

    4. It is not ad hoc or contrived: it requires only one additional hypothesis: that God exists. And even that needn’t be an additional hypothesis if one already believes that God exists.

    5. It is in accord with accepted beliefs. The hypothesis: “God raised Jesus from the dead” doesn’t in any way conflict with the accepted belief that people don’t rise naturally from the dead. The Christian accepts that belief as wholeheartedly as he accepts the hypothesis that God raised Jesus from the dead.

    6. It far outstrips any of its rival hypotheses in meeting conditions (1)-(5). Down through history various alternative explanations of the facts have been offered, for example, the conspiracy hypothesis, the apparent death hypothesis, the hallucination hypothesis, and so forth. Such hypotheses have been almost universally rejected by contemporary scholarship. None of these naturalistic hypotheses succeeds in meeting the conditions as well as the resurrection solution.

    • http://www.atheismandthecity.com/ The Thinker

      Those aren’t historic “facts.” None of them are corroborated in any extrabiblical evidence from the same time as the events were reported. They are at best reported facts, according to the bible, and every one of them is highly contestable.

      You’re only “evidence” for these “facts’ is the bible. It’s totally circular. “The bible proves the bible.” Go figure.

      • Maxximiliann

        Now you’re just playing the buffoon (although …). Argumentum per veneficium fontem. Sorry, try again.

        • http://www.atheismandthecity.com/ The Thinker

          Argumentum assertio. Prove that the points you made are indeed facts.

        • Maxximiliann

          Since when are multiple corroborating eyewitness accounts not facts?

        • http://www.atheismandthecity.com/ The Thinker

          Because eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. And you have to prove first that the gospel writers were eyewitnesses, as this is not an established fact. So that onus is on you too. Have fun providing evidence for that.

          ….I’m getting a revelation…….I predict your response will involve coped and pasted material……maybe I’m a prophet?

        • Maxximiliann

          What about CORROBORATING eyewitness testimony? Is that also wholly unreliable?

          (Sorry for the all caps there but it seems you need a new prescription.)

        • Kevin D. Gibson Jr.

          Are people fallible? Could the corroborating eye witness accounts be fallible? If so, then these aren’t facts. Also why would a all knowing god send his son (savior of man) to a time period where documenting historical facts were flawed and weak. Why would he send his son during a time where the majority of people were uneducated? Why not send his son back during 1700’s, 1800’s, 1900’s? At a better place in time where we at least have cameras, a better, easier way of documenting history?

          You know why, cus that shit most likely didnt happen

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          “If you’d come today you could have reached a whole nation.
          Israel in 4 BC had no mass communication.”

          — Judas in Jesus Christ, Superstar

    • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

      You’re confusing a story with history.

      • Maxximiliann

        Argumentum assertio. “That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.” Prove your claim. Prove that an independently substantiated historical claim by a multiplicity of eyewitnesses is just “a story”, i.e., myth.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          no naturalistic hypothesis explains these four historical facts better than [my supernatural interpretation]

          And I just reduced this argument to ash by noting that it could be a story. Like Merlin. Like Gilgamesh.

          Y’know, it’s weird that you don’t want to take on the burden of proving that God exists. It’s almost like it’s a burden to you.

        • Maxximiliann

          Could be? Could be?! You’ve got to do better than that friend. To prove your mythicism is true you need to prove that Christianity is nothing more than a transgenerational, global conspiracy theory that’s been going on for a little over two thousand years.

          Wait!!

          Wait!!

          Before you get started, lemme go make some popcorn … h eh ehh hehee 😀

        • http://www.atheismandthecity.com/ The Thinker

          To prove your mythicism is true you need to prove that Christianity is nothing more than a transgenerational, global conspiracy theory that’s been going on for a little over two thousand years

          Absurd. All that would be needed to show is that the writers of the gospels and Paul’s writings were not based on an actual person. Once the myth got started, just like in every other religion, like Mormonism and Islam, it is perpetuated by faith.

          The burden of proof is on you to show using extrabiblical evidence that the gospels are true. Here’s a start, what evidence exists that Arimathea existed at all?

        • Maxximiliann

          Why? So you can then say, “New York City is a real city but that doesn’t mean Spider-Man is real”?

          C’mon buddy. Did you honestly think I was gonna walk into that?

          Shock me, say something orphic!

        • http://www.atheismandthecity.com/ The Thinker

          I love the fact that you admit that there is no extrabiblical evidence so cleverly without saying it. Christian apologetics sure is sophisticated.

        • Maxximiliann

          You do know that the Bible is a compilation of 66 works originally transcribed in three languages by 40 amanuensis over the span of some one thousand six hundred years, right?

          You realize, then, why your contumely is so very anserine.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Golly. I have no idea what you say. That must mean … you win!!

        • Maxximiliann

          Where did I lose you? I’d be more than happy to explicate further :)

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Nope. “Could be,” and I win.

          Your claim is so fantastic, so incredible, that you have the burden of proof. I show an alternate explanation (and that the gospels are just stories like a thousand others from history is pretty darn plausible), and I win.

          Did the popcorn make that more palatable?

        • Maxximiliann

          Cancel the parade. You’ve yet to prove your outlandish conspiracy theory.

          And my buttery popcorn does taste great! Thanks for asking :)

  • Jerry

    1. The prophecy must be startling, not mundane
    Subjective… but okay. Temple Destruction (70 AD). – considered a modern marvel at the time thanks to Herod the Great. Check.

    2. The prophecy must be precise, not vague.
    Event will occur at least 70 “weeks” after initial event with an anointed one getting killed beforehand. Check.

    3. The prophecy must be accurate.
    Daniel 9 – Check.

    4. The prophecy must predict, not retrodict.
    Dead Sea Scrolls – CARBON DATING of oldest manuscript of Daniel is 125 BC. Check.

    5. The prophecy can’t be self-fulfilling.
    Temple Destruction is not self-fulfilling. Check.

    6. The prophecy and the fulfillment must be verifiable.
    Temple Destruction is fully viable and historically accurate – Check.

    7. The fulfillment must come after the prophecy.
    Temple Destruction – 70AD – Commemorated by Romans – 82 AD with Arch of Titus – Check.

    8. The fulfillment must be honest.
    Temple Destruction – Check.

    ***** Supporting Links *******:
    1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Temple
    2. http://jesus-messiah.com/prophecy/septuagint.html
    http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/weeks.htm
    4. http://www.harvardhouse.com/Gabriel-to-Daniel_Einstein_Method.htm
    6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arch_of_Titus

    For more prophecies using EXACTLY this criteria, please go here:
    http://www.harvardhouse.com/Gabriel-to-Daniel_1.htm

    Sidenote – Sextus Julius Africanus, a 3rd century scholar not only discusses the 70 Weeks Prophecy, but he also mentions historical references to the earthquake and the darkness seen during Jesus’ death. Africanus quotes Thallus and Phlegon, two independent historians who mention a solar eclipse occurring during the time of Jesus’ death. Africanus states that this is IMPOSSIBLE because the passover meal is based on a lunar cycle and thus the moon would have been diametrically opposite of the sun. Africanus argues through ancient texts that a darkness just like the Bible stated was recorded by a secular historian erroneously as a solar eclipse. He argues this is evidence for the darkness stated in the Bible.

    Sources:

    http://www.neverthirsty.org/pp/historical-secular-quotes-about-jesus/darkness-at-full-moon.html
    http://www.mb-soft.com/believe/txua/africanu.htm

    On the Circumstances Connected with Our Saviour’s Passion and His Life-Giving Resurrection. 1. As to His works severally, and His cures effected upon body and soul, and the mysteries of His doctrine, and the resurrection from the dead, these have been most authoritatively set forth by His disciples and apostles before us. On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun. For the Hebrews celebrate the passover on the 14th day according to the moon, and the passion of our Saviour fails on the day before the passover; but an eclipse of the sun takes place only when the moon comes under the sun. And it cannot happen at any other time but in the interval between the first day of the new moon and the last of the old, that is, at their junction: how then should an eclipse be supposed to happen when the moon is almost diametrically opposite the sun? Let that opinion pass however; let it carry the majority with it; and let this portent of the world be deemed an eclipse of the sun, like others a portent only to the eye. [1103] Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth hour to the ninth–manifestly that one of which we speak. But what has an eclipse in common with an earthquake, the rending rocks, and the resurrection of the dead, and so great a perturbation throughout the universe? Surely no such event as this is recorded for a long period. But it was a darkness induced by God, because the Lord happened then to suffer. And calculation makes out that the period of 70 weeks, as noted in Daniel, is completed at this time.

    (The next three paragraphs are all calculations based on the lunar calendar – you can view them in the link provided.)

    • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

      I appreciate a numbered list to show that you’ve considered all the points. Let’s take a look.

      1. Temple Destruction (70 AD)

      How is this startling? There’d been tension here with outside powers since forever. A prediction that things would get tense enough that the Temple would be destroyed is not startling.

      2. The prophecy must be precise, not vague. Event will occur at least 70 “weeks” after stated event. Check.

      Baby Jesus cries when you misquote the Bible. It doesn’t say “at least 70 weeks.” Go to the corner until you’ve actually read Daniel and can tell us what it really says.

      What does it say that you’ve got to buoy up God’s infallible Word because it’s not really all that infallible?

      3. The prophecy must be accurate. Daniel 9 – Check.

      Daniel was written around 170 BCE, and it’s laughably wrong in its predictions of just the few years in its future. I’ve written several posts about Daniel; take a look.

      4. The prophecy must predict, not retrodict. – Dead Sea Scrolls – CARBON DATING of oldest manuscript of Daniel is 125 BC. Check.

      I don’t know what you’re referring to. Dating Daniel to around 170 BCE explains the facts quite easily.

      7. The fulfillment must come after the prophecy. Temple Destruction – 70AD

      Gospels written after 70. Fail.

      Sextus Julius Africanus, a 3rd century scholar not only discusses the 70 Weeks Prophecy, but he also mentions historical references to the earthquake and the darkness seen during Jesus’ death. Africanus quotes Thallus and Phlegon, two independent historians who mention a solar eclipse occurring during the time of Jesus’ death.

      I have this on my list to study up on, but I haven’t done so yet. If I recall, this is a weak chain of evidence. If there had been these events, we should see records from the contemporary historians, not some dude centuries later.

      • Jerry

        C’mon man. You’ve got to take a serious look. Let me repost the link.
        http://www.harvardhouse.com/Gabriel-to-Daniel_1.htm

        This goes over all of the prophecies that fit your requirements.

        But let me iterate through the points again….

        1. Temple Destruction (70 AD)

        Herod the Great was known for his marvels of architecture. This temple was HUGE and extravagant. I would consider its destruction more remarkable than an earthquake (like you mentioned). That’s like predicting the destruction of an Egyptian pyramid.

        Here’s a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4lTT908uY0

        Here’s a scale model of it: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cd/Second_Temple.jpg/1280px-Second_Temple.jpg

        2. Accuracy

        It’s pretty accurate for the first 490 years, predicting Jesus death…. but it doesn’t mention the timeframe between Jesus death and the Temple destruction.

        The implication of this is that the atonement of iniquity MUST happen before a temple destruction. Now that the temple is destroyed, Israel must rebuild it before this prophecy can be “valid” if you could even justify “weeks” as eras of years. The temple destruction has serious implications for the Jewish Messiah coming. He either already arrived, or, the temple has to be rebuilt in which the Messiah will go through the East gate.

        I’m going on a tangent. I would like to throw in some circumstantial evidence from the Jewish Talmud as well.

        http://www3.telus.net/public/kstam/en/temple/details/evidence.htm

        In the centuries following the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem (70 CE), the Jewish people began writing two versions of Jewish thought, religious history and commentary. One was written in Palestine and became known as the Jerusalem Talmud. The other was written in Babylon and was known as the Babylonian Talmud.

        We read in the Jerusalem Talmud:

        “Forty years before the destruction of the Temple, the western light went out, the crimson thread remained crimson, and the lot for the Lord always came up in the left hand. They would close the gates of the Temple by night and get up in the morning and find them wide open” (Jacob Neusner, The Yerushalmi, p.156-157). [the Temple was destroyed in 70 CE]

        A similar passage in the Babylonian Talmud states:

        “Our rabbis taught: During the last forty years before the destruction of the Temple the lot [‘For the Lord’] did not come up in the right hand; nor did the crimson-colored strap become white; nor did the western most light shine; and the doors of the Hekel [Temple] would open by themselves” (Soncino version, Yoma 39b).

        What are these passages talking about? Since both Talmuds recount the same information, this indicates the knowledge of these events was accepted by the widespread Jewish community.

        This is the same holy book that states Jesus was the bastard son of a Roman soldier. It’s odd to then learn that the Jewish rituals “did not work or return favorable signs” for 40 years prior to the destruction. Hmm… what happened ~40 years earlier?? Oh… Jesus was crucified.

        So… if you want accuracy as far as Jesus is concerned, then yes, you have it, but for the temple destruction, Daniel 9 doesn’t mention when it will occur, only that it will occur after the death of the Messiah

        http://biblehub.com/daniel/9-26.htm (so you can compare verses)

        26 After the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing, and the troops of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its[a] end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed.

        4. Predict, not retrodict

        Prediction is carbon dated to 125BC
        “and the troops of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary”. Roman legions under Titus destroyed Jerusalem and burnt the Temple to the ground. The “wailing wall” is not the temple btw…. it’s one of the supports Herod used to expand the temple. (refer to video)

        7. Gospels written after 70. Fail

        I didn’t mention the Gospels. This is Daniel.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          But let me iterate through the points again….

          Why are they any more compelling the second time around?

          I would consider its destruction more remarkable than an earthquake (like you mentioned).

          I already addressed this. This is not startling. If you saw a “prophecy” of a temple being destroyed in another guy’s religion, you’d find it no more compelling than I do.

          2. It’s pretty accurate for the first 490 years, predicting Jesus death…. but it doesn’t mention the timeframe between Jesus death and the Temple destruction.

          I’ve analyzed Daniel in 3 posts. Check them out. If you’re just going to insist on the fundamentalist reading of Daniel, then I’m not sure we’ll make much progress.

          The implication of this is that the atonement of iniquity MUST happen before a temple destruction.

          Since the temple is destroyed, the atonement must’ve already happened? Is that your point?

          This is the same holy book that states Jesus was the bastard son of a Roman soldier.

          Since that’s wrong, I guess that “holy” book is not much of a reference.

          It’s odd to then learn that the Jewish rituals “did not work or return favorable signs” for 40 years prior to the destruction. Hmm… what happened ~40 years earlier?? Oh… Jesus was crucified.

          Notice how low you’ve stooped. You don’t have “Oh, yeah. Jesus was raised from the dead. Everyone knew about it.” So instead you’re reading ancient books until you find something vaguely supportive. Again, you’d laugh at someone in another religion doing the same thing.

          And again I ask: is this the best God can do? He wants to have a clear prophecy in his holy book, and he can do no better than this?

          Daniel 9 doesn’t mention when it will occur, only that it will occur after the death of the Messiah

          Daniel was written around 170 BCE. It explains things nicely when seen from that standpoint. And it’s all summarized in those posts.

          Prediction is carbon dated to 125BC

          So you’ve got Daniel to 125 BCE. And …?

          7. Gospels written after 70. Fail

          I didn’t mention the Gospels. This is Daniel.

          Daniel is referring to the years immediately after its authorship.

        • Jerry

          Lol… let me give you the dimensions for the temple complex just so you can appreciate this size….

          Archaeological investigation reveals that the outer wall of Herod’s Temple itself was an irregular quadrangle: south wall = 280 m.; west wall = 485 m.; north wall = 315 m.; east wall 460 m. The total circumference of the temenos or sacred precincts, was 1,540 m., and the total area = c. 144,000 sq. m.(M. ben-Dov, In the Shadow of the Temple, 77).

          or… 1,550,003.1 sq. ft.

          White House: 55,000 sq ft.

          http://www.mycrandall.ca/courses/ntintro/jerusaltempl4.htm#T22
          http://www.whitehousehistory.org/history/white-house-facts-trivia/facts-white-house-dimensions.html

          You don’t think that’s impressive?

          I’ve analyzed Daniel for 3 posts

          Were you aware of this?
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_years_%28Jewish_calendar%29

          You can’t use the Jewish interpretation because they’re missing 150 years from their timeline… also their calendar was lunar based. It just makes things… complicated.

          Also, if Daniel was already fulfilled with the Maccabees then why did the Essenes in Qumran and the Jews mentioned in the Talmud still speak of a coming Messiah? The Jews were very much expectant of one during the first century.

          In other words, the Jewish math for the 70 weeks does not work with secular data. It does, however, work when calculated for Jesus.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Yes, the temple was impressive. Not what we’re talking about.

          You can’t use the Jewish interpretation because they’re missing 150 years from their timeline

          I use the Christian dating. But you’d know that since you’ve read my posts on Daniel, right?

          also their calendar was lunar based.

          Sort of. Not relevant. They had a correction to keep it in phase with the solar year.

          Also, if Daniel was already fulfilled with the Maccabees then why did the Essenes in Qumran and the Jews mentioned in the Talmud still speak of a coming Messiah?

          Pesher. They gave themselves license to reinterpret.

          In other words, the Jewish math for the 70 weeks does not work with secular data.

          Respond to the posts on Daniel. I think it was quite thorough. I’m not going to repeat it all here.

        • Jerry

          I was talking about a link in one of your articles. It’s very in-depth and it discusses the Jewish interpretation of Daniel 9.

          I found awesome movie on youtube, though.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CtdGm556gM

        • adam

          And I found this on google, though.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          I don’t see how this responds to the points I was making in my posts. Daniel was written around 165 BCE.

        • Jerry
        • adam

          Just some more unacceptable evidence….

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Is this like a card game where you can get out of a predicament by playing the Sort-of-a-Miracle card? Or perhaps this is just misdirection like in a magic show?

          Stay on topic, please.

        • Greg G.

          The Jews were not one sect. Josephus describes the major ones. IIRC the Hasmodeans were not even accepted by most Jews. They provided a short time of Judean independence but there would be a reason to reject them as the Messiah sect once Rome took over. One can only pretend to be the Messiah while things are looking good.

        • TheNuszAbides

          and/or you have a lot of confidence in your bodyguards/hostages/etc.

        • TheNuszAbides

          “is this the best God can do? He wants to have a clear prophecy in his holy book, ”

          that’s an ill-founded assumption of what He wants, though. if any Message were clear then we wouldn’t have/need any Exceptional Prophetty Types to wax visionary and wow kings and stuff.

      • Jerry

        I would also like to add a direct quote from your article above for point 1.

        We regularly find big surprises in the news—earthquakes, wars, medical breakthroughs, and so on. These startling events are what make good prophecies.

        Titus surrounding Jerusalem with his legions doesn’t fit this description?

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Besieging cities is remarkable? You could respond that it doesn’t happen every day, which is true, but is this the best God can do?

        • Dys

          Also, there’s a serious problem with the timeline if Jerry’s buying into the Daniel 9 prophecy and relating it to the destruction of Herod’s temple…

          “adherents of the classical Christian theory must interpret verses 26 and 27 as references to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. The problem here is that the fall of Jerusalem lies thirty-seven years outside of the seventy-weeks scheme. Since “desolations are decreed,” the Romans under General Titus, “the people of the prince who is to come,” were to “destroy the city and the sanctuary” of Jerusalem in 70 AD, long after the seventieth week is over, to punish the Jews for their murder of their Messiah. This is an awkward and arbitrary leap.”

          But yeah…prophesying that a temple would be demolished, especially after it had already been destroyed once before in an area that was constantly being attacked and conquered by various factions is hardly indicative of magical foresight.

          http://infidels.org/library/modern/chris_sandoval/daniel.html#traditional

        • Jerry

          You can reconcile this with the Talmud. Please view my other post with Bob. For ~40 years before the temple destruction, the Jews noticed strange phenomena in the temple.

          http://www3.telus.net/public/kstam/en/temple/details/evidence.htm

        • Dys

          Resorting to further miracle claims and arguments from incredulity and ignorance, which your offered article does in abundance, doesn’t help your case in the slightest.

        • Jerry

          I’m just using the criterion of embarrassment. The Jews for some reason felt that they had to include a prior 40 year episode for the Temple even though they state Jesus was a bastard child. When you look at the failed rituals, and when you look at the temple veil being torn, the symbolism still points to Jesus as the Messiah.

        • Dys

          the symbolism still points to Jesus as the Messiah.

          I’m impressed that Christians feel perfectly comfortable telling Jews that they’re not interpreting their own books properly. I think it’s fairly obvious (unless one dips into some rather severe semantic vaguery) that Jesus doesn’t match the requirements for the messiah in the OT. Christianity has taken those shortcomings and tried to metaphorize them to make it match, but it’s a cob job at best.

          And the story they invented to get Mary and Joseph into Bethlehem is incredibly obvious.

        • adam

          No, the symbolism does NOT point to Jesus as the Jewish Messiah, that is WHY they dont recognize Jesus as such.

        • Jerry
        • Dys

          I’m constantly amazed at people’s ability to mistakenly accept that correlation is causation.

        • adam

          speaking of which….

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Modern medicine saves a boy’s life.

          And … ?

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Strange phenomena? That pointed the Jews to the truth of the Christian story?

          Then why didn’t they become Christians?

        • Jerry

          Why did they kill them? The Jews obviously didn’t make the connection. On the one hand they say Jesus was a bastard child, on the other hand, they say their rituals for forgiveness come back negative.

        • adam

          The REAL problem is that YOUR Jesus didnt fullfil Jewish prophecy, so ‘christians’ reworked the ‘prophecies’ to fit YOUR Jesus….

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          That was a major source for me. Very thorough.

          My post on Daniel is here.

      • Candy Smith

        3. The prophecy must be accurate.
        Daniel 9 – Check.

        https://carm.org/does-daniel-9-24-27-predict-jesus

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          I’ve responded to Daniel here.

          No more CARM links. I’ve already responded to them.

  • Candy Smith

    Here is the problem with this title:
    What Makes a Good Prophecy (and Why Bible Prophecies Aren’t)

    Whoever this person is that wrote this article is giving their opinion about what they think makes a good prophecy or not. The Bible says in The Old Testement in Isaiah 7:14 that Jesus will be Born of a virgin and then later in The New Testement in Matt. 1:18,25, that happens, so there is no “what makes a good prophecy and the Bible isnt one”, argument. That argument is absurd.

    • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

      “Whoever this person is that wrote this article” is me.

      You haven’t read Isaiah 7. Do so and then tell me what it says. It is no prophecy of the birth of Jesus. I explain why <a href=http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2013/12/virgin-birth-of-jesus-fact-or-fiction/here.

      • Candy Smith

        The Bible says in the Old Testament that Jesus would Be born of a Virgin in Isaiah 7:14, “Therefore the Lord himself will

        give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a
        son, and will call him Immanuel.”

        Then later in the New testament in Matt. 1:18, 25, he is born of a virgin. Isaiah isn’t the prophecy being fulfilled. It’s predicting it. It is fulfilled in Matthew.

        Matt. 1:18, 25″This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary . . . was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit . . . But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.”

      • Candy Smith

        Well, your explanation in the article is wrong. I don’t know exactly what U were thinking when U wrote this article, but just reading it, it is obviously that Isiah Predicts it and Matthew fulfills it.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          I’m not sure I gave the link to my post that summarizes Isaiah 7, but here it is again (below).

          Are you saying that you’ve read that post? If so, you’ll have to clearly explain what you found unconvincing. All you’ve said is that you disagree, which tells me nothing.

          http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2013/12/virgin-birth-of-jesus-fact-or-fiction/

        • Candy Smith

          I said more than just I disagree.

        • Candy Smith

          .k

        • Candy Smith

          Whoever this person is that wrote this article is giving their
          opinion about what they think makes a good prophecy or not. The Bible says in The Old Testement in Isaiah 7:14 that Jesus will be Born of a virgin and then later in The New Testement in Matt. 1:18,25, that happens, so there is no “what makes a good prophecy and the Bible isnt
          one”, argument. That argument is absurd.

          I told U that there isn’t such a thing as “what makes a good prophecy. The Bible obviously predicts the future. I dont know what the problem is.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          As my other post makes clear, Isaiah 7 is talking about something quite different. Its prophecy is fulfilled within a few years. It mentions “Immanuel,” but then Jesus is (obviously) named “Jesus.” And the entire Immanuel bit is just 3 verses–hardly what a prophecy of the savior of the world is due.

          The Bible obviously predicts the future.

          You’ll have to give an example. But given our track record so far, there’s not much likelihood of agreement.

        • Candy Smith

          U really truly don’t know any?

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          I know lots of claims, and I’ve responded to them here (Isaiah 7, Isaiah 53, Psalm 22, and others). Seek and ye shall find.

          As for actual successful prophecies? No, I know of none.

        • Candy Smith

          How hard is it for U to go to a website such as Carm and look at all the Messianic Prophecies Concerning Jesus. One of the links I sent U shows the verses both in the Old and in The New.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          It’s not hard at all. In fact, I’ve looked at CARM and many other sites for this and other topics.

          And then I clearly laid out my issues in a modest-sized blog post. It’s all there, for each claimed prophecy.

          Next step: stop whining, read my conclusions, and then respond as necessary.

        • Candy Smith

          As for actual successful prophecies? No, I know of none.

          So how can U pretend that there aren’t any successful prophecies that U know of, when the evidence is right there in the Bible?

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Uh … because it’s not?

          Don’t give me another CARM link. I’ve already hit the ball over the net–I’ve responded to all their (weak) claims.

          Your turn. You don’t like my response? Then point out the erros.

        • Candy Smith

          track record so far?

          What track record are U reading because it obviously isn’t the Bible?

          https://carm.org/evidence-biblical-inspiration

          About half way down is the list of Messianic Prophecies concerning Jesus Christ.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          yes, and I’ve responded to those. Let’s not go back to square 1. Respond to my posts. If you can’t find them, I can point you to them.

        • Candy Smith

          I have something to show U.

        • Candy Smith
        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          I’ve summarized my entire argument in the other post. If you disagree, you need to make clear your objections.

          http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2013/12/virgin-birth-of-jesus-fact-or-fiction/

        • Candy Smith

          In the NIV version of Isaiah 7:14, the Bible says virgin

          14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you[a] a sign: The
          virgin[b] will conceive
          and give birth to a son, and[c] will call
          him Immanuel.[d]

          So Im not really sure why U said this:

          Does Isaiah even say “virgin”?

          To make things even more difficult for Matthew’s claim, the word “virgin” in Isaiah 7:14 doesn’t really say that.

          If it doesnt say virgin, or doesnt mean it, then what the heck does it mean, because Later in Matthew, Jesus is born a virgin, so i dont know what U think it really means, But Matthew proves u wrong.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Why is Isaiah 7:14 startling? Women are virgins, then they have sex, then they get pregnant, and then they have sons that they can name Immanuel. Nothing supernatural here.

        • Candy Smith

          The reason Isiah doesnt say Jesus is because he hasnt been named Jesus yet.

        • adam

          So it’s obviously NOT a prophecy.

          How idiotic.

        • Candy Smith

          Am. NO! THe Bible says THe lord will be born of a virgin in the old testament and later in the new testament, he is born of a virgin.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          “Candy”: This isn’t hard. Isaiah 7 says nothing about the Lord or Jesus. Read the chapter thoroughly and then come back and tell us what it actually says. You clearly don’t understand it.

        • Candy Smith

          It’s talking about Mary’s unborn child who she later calls Jesus.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Go read Is. 7 completely and thoroughly. Then tell me what it says–the entire chapter.

          It’s talking about Mary’s unborn child who she later calls Jesus.

          I know–it’s crazy, right? Matthew quotes Isaiah 7 where it says “and his name shall be called Immanuel” … and then they name him Jesus! The prophecy fails right there.

          More here:
          http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2013/12/virgin-birth-of-jesus-fact-or-fiction/

        • Greg G.

          The Septuagint says “virgin”. The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Hebrew texts which do not say “virgin”. The authors of the New Testament wrote in Greek and mostly used the Septuagint. Two of the gospel authors, Matthew and Luke, took the Septuagint version of that verse as a prophecy and came up with contradictory accounts to fit it in. It’s not prophecy, it’s made up stories meant to imitate a prophecy.

        • adam

          Nope

          The mistranslation as “virgin” dates back to the Greek version of the Bible known as the Septuagint, which renders the Hebrew alma (“young woman”) there as parthenos
          (“virgin”). It’s not the only place the Septuagint makes this and
          similar mistakes. But because Matthew (1:23) highlights the Greek here,
          this mistranslation is well known.

        • Candy Smith

          Why is it obviously NOT a prophecy. Jesus didn’t have a name. That is why he is called Lord. That is why there is a verse in the New Testament that talks about Mary naming him and that she names him Jesus. The prophecy was that The Lord will be born of a virgin and that is exactly what happened.

          This guy just wants to find something wrong with the Bible and if someone is determined to find something wrong, he will find it. That doesn’t mean it is actually there.

        • Michael Neville

          Jesus didn’t have a name.

          And all this time I thought Jesus’ name was Jesus, which is a cognitive of Joshua, a common 1st Century Jewish name.I

        • Candy Smith

          So does that mean U understand now?

        • Michael Neville

          No, you still haven’t explained why Jesus’s name isn’t Jesus. Do you want to try again, this time with coherency?

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          In your opinion, there is.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          First of all, according to what are any of those things wrong?

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          God has given us freewill. In order to stop people from doing evil things, he would get rid of our freewill. Would U prefer us to be nothing more than a bunch of robots!??

        • Candy Smith

          Everyone is a sinner. God is allowed to take a humans life whenever He chooses to.

        • Pofarmer

          Sinning is an imaginary crime against an imaginary deity. We are not, in any way shape and form, all sinners.

        • Candy Smith

          That is your opinion.

        • Pofarmer

          Yes, yes it is.

        • Candy Smith

          Yes what it?

        • Candy Smith

          Saying there is no such thing as sin doesn’t mean there isn’t any. Besides, if you have you ever lied, or cheated, or stolen, then according to the Bible, you’ve sinned.

        • Pofarmer

          I could honestly give a fuck less what the Bible says about it. Thanks.

        • Candy Smith

          How do you “know” there is no such thing as sin? After all, you’d have to “know” there was no God, too. Are you sure you “know” there is no God…or do you just “believe” there is no God? There is a big difference.

        • Pofarmer

          Well, what I “know” is that no one has yet proved the existence of “God” whatever you mean by it, or generally, can’t even give a coherent explanation of it. So, until someone does that, the concept of “sin” is as meaningless as the concept of “God”.

        • Candy Smith

          Just because we haven’t proved that He exists doesn’t mean he doesn’t. Besides the existence of God cannot be proved or disproved.

        • Pofarmer

          I’m sorry. If God cannot be proven or disproven then there’s no way to tell whether it is real or imaginary. If science can’t tell me anything about God your priests can’t either.

        • Candy Smith

          God cannot be proven through science and he cant be disprove and evolution doesn’t disprove him either.

        • Pofarmer

          Like I said. If God can’t be proven or disproven, move along. It’s no more real than any other imaginary being.

        • Candy Smith

          Like I said. If God can’t be proven or disproven, move along. It’s no more real than any other imaginary being.

          Well thats a stupid claim to make.

          The Bible says that we must accept by faith
          the fact that God exists: “And without faith it is impossible to please
          God, because anyone who comes to Him must believe that He exists and
          that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him” (Hebrews 11:6).
          If God so desired, He could simply appear and prove to the whole world
          that He exists. But if He did that, there would be no need for faith.
          “Then Jesus told him, ‘Because you have seen me, you have believed;
          blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed’” (John 20:29).

        • Pofarmer

          Well thats a stupid claim to make.

          The Bible says that we must accept by faith

          So what? The Bible says all kinds of dumb things. It’s a propaganda document for a specific religion. It makes all kinds of claims that don’t pan out.

        • Candy Smith

          So what? The Bible says all kinds of dumb things.

          In your opinion!!!!

        • Greg G.

          The supernatural is contrived to be undetectable. There are supposed properties of God that can be examined however. You need more excuses for why God doesn’t answer prayer when the prayers are counted and the results are studied.

          If there is an omnipotent and omnibenevolent being, there should be no suffering but there is. A benevolent being would not engage in unnecessary suffering. An omnipotent being can achieve anything suffering can achieve, so all suffering is unnecessary. If suffering exists, either there is no omnipotence or the suffering is gratuitous. Gratuitous suffering means it is sadistic which rules out omnibenevolence.

        • Candy Smith

          A benevolent being would not engage in unnecessary suffering.

          By what standard is there any unnecessary suffering happening now.

          Simply stating that unnecessary suffering occurs does not mean that it is so.

        • Candy Smith

          An omnipotent being can achieve anything suffering can achieve, so all suffering is unnecessary.

          In your opinion all suffering is unnecessary but God who knows everything has reasons for why he allows it. And U in your finite mind are trying to claim that U know everything and that U therefore can’t say u that all suffering is unnecessary and it doesn’t work like that.

        • Michael Neville

          So your omnibenevolent (that’s a big word which means “all good”) god allows suffering because…well, just because. Doesn’t sound like a good guy to me. I don’t claim to know everything but I do know that if someone suffers that’s not a good thing.

          Incidentally, there’s a word in English you might want to inform yourself about. It’s the second person pronoun “you”. Consider using it, you’ll look slightly less ignorant.

        • Candy Smith

          So your omnibenevolent (that’s a big word which means “all good”) god
          allows suffering because…well, just because. Doesn’t sound like a
          good guy to me. I don’t claim to know everything but I do know that if
          someone suffers that’s not a good thing.

          Well first of all, when U gave the reason U didn’t even give a single reason. U are so lazy and so ignorant of the truth that U can only “just because”. Not only is that lame but it’s downright stupid.

          I don’t claim to know everything but I do know that if
          someone suffers that’s not a good thing.

          Also, it’s your opinion that a being that allows suffering isn’t good. God could and does have reasons for why He allows it. U would want to know what those reasons are right, or would U prefer to stick to the stupid claim that he just does it “just because”. Also, U said U aren’t claiming to know everything but saying He allows it “just because” sure does make it sound like U are claiming to know everything because U would have to know everything in order to say that He does it “just because”??

        • Michael Neville

          Why am I bothering to reply to a semi-literate ignoranus who doesn’t even know how to write the word “you”? Put some effort into becoming less ignorant and learn to write real English. You’re not in 6th grade any more so don’t act like it.

        • Candy Smith

          If suffering exists, either there is no omnipotence or the suffering is gratuitous.

          Also your opinion.

        • Michael Neville

          Sure it’s his opinion. You haven’t shown that it’s wrong. Your twaddle about “gawd’s unknowable ways” is your opinion as well, since you have no evidence to show you didn’t just pull it out of thin air.

        • Candy Smith

          An omnipotent being can achieve anything suffering can achieve, so all suffering is unnecessary.

          The Bible gives reasons for why suffering exists. That’s why his opinion is 100% wrong!!

        • Candy Smith

          He hasn’t proven that there is such a thing as unnecessary suffering!!

        • Michael Neville

          You haven’t “proven” that there isn’t unnecessary suffering. Got any evidence there isn’t? I didn’t think so.

        • Candy Smith

          God always has a reason for the suffering that occurs.

        • Michael Neville

          How do you know that a fictitious, imaginary, non-existent critter has anything? You haven’t shown any evidence that your god exists anywhere but your imagination. So do you have any evidence? I didn’t think so.

        • Candy Smith

          First of all, it is still your opinion that he is fictitious.

        • Candy Smith

          Just because I havent given any evidence, that doesnt mean I dont have any.

        • Candy Smith

          There are several reasons for why there is suffering in the world.

          1.) Free will

          God has given us freedom of choice. Having this freedom means that
          we can rebel against God and make choices that are contrary to His
          desires. Since we can say that evil is anything contrary to God’s
          perfect and holy will, then anyone who chooses anything contrary to
          God’s perfection is committing evil. But this is the risk of being able
          to have freedom of choice. Evil and suffering are the result of making
          bad free choices.

          2.) For discipline and instruction

          The Bible tells us that God disciplines those whom He loves (Heb. 12:6)
          and that no true child of God is without discipline and instruction. It
          is obvious that the results of our rebellion against God brings
          suffering and it is also true that we can learn through our suffering
          that such rebellion is bad. We then could glorify God during and after
          our suffering by proclaiming the truth of His word that urges us to
          follow God and His ways.

          3.) It is the result of sin

          Biblically speaking, pain and suffering are the results of sin in
          the world. Adam, who represented all humanity as well as creation,
          rebelled against God and brought suffering into the world (Rom. 5:12).
          Sin is more than simple rebellion and breaking of God’s law. It is
          permeating throughout all of God’s creation bringing imbalance, famine,
          earthquakes, disease, etc. This does not mean that God created evil.
          Instead, it is God who is allowing evil and suffering to continue for
          His divine plan.

          4.) To serve as a warning

          Evil and suffering in the world can serve as a warning against
          breaking God’s law and then people can see the necessity of following
          God’s truth. God’s ways are right and good and following them leads to
          security and safety. The consequences of disobeying God’s word are
          manifested in suffering. Therefore, suffering in the world easily serves
          as a demonstration of the need to follow God’s words thereby
          vindicating what God has said.

          5.) To make a point

          It is possible that God is simply allowing evil and suffering in the
          world to prove that rebellion against Him brings pain and suffering.
          God may be allowing sin to take its natural course in the world so that
          on the day of judgment God can say “Do you see what rebellion against my
          words brings?” This may seem overly simplistic but it may prove to be
          one of the reasons that God allows pain and suffering. After all, did He
          not make us in His image and give us the freedom to choose? And in our
          freedom have we not rebelled? Yes, we have. Should God then make us
          robots or restrict our freedom so much that we have no choices at all?
          Of course not. But since we are limited in our knowledge and have used
          our freedom to rebel, God allows us to have what we desire and in the
          end, our sins will prove that God’s way is the right way.

          6.) To serve as a means to bring the Son

          The death of the Son is the means by which God has redeemed those
          who would receive Jesus. This death cannot occur if Jesus were not a
          man. In order to be a man he had to be born as one. But since Jesus was
          sinless, death has no power over Him. Therefore, in order to die and in
          order to redeem us, His death must be at the hands of evil people. But,
          without sin, suffering, and evil in the world, Jesus could not have
          been sent to the cross. So, it could be said that suffering in the world
          is necessary in order to bring about the cross which in turn
          demonstrates the great and awesome love of God. Jesus said that the
          greatest act of love is to lay one’s life down for another (John 15:13). If God is love (1 John 4:8) and love gives (John 3:16), can it be that God must demonstrate the greatest act of love? If so, it can only be done through suffering in the world.

          7.) We don’t know.

          Biblically speaking, pain and suffering are the results of sin in
          the world. Adam, who represented all humanity as well as creation,
          rebelled against God and brought suffering into the world. This sin is
          more than simple rebellion and breaking of God’s law. It is an offense
          against a holy God. Sin is permeating throughout all of God’s creation
          bringing imbalance, famine, earthquakes, disease, etc. This is not how
          God created things but it is God who is allowing them to continue for
          his divine plan. Ultimately, we can’t know all the reasons why God
          allows suffering, we just know that He does.

        • Candy Smith

          Gratuitous suffering means it is sadistic which rules out omnibenevolence.

          And who are U to decide that that is happening in the Bible. All U can do is give your opinion.

        • Candy Smith

          You need more excuses for why God doesn’t answer prayer when the prayers are counted and the results are studied.

          Please give me more detail please.

        • adam

          “Just because we haven’t proved that He exists doesn’t mean he doesn’t. ”

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3da7f08a3390ef2111a626073dd7132a22b19bc1ce34ac9d4883c5e2d74a0eb8.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          So are U asking for an explanation for God, the Christian God?

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Yeah exactly and U are giving your opinion that there is no such thing as sin,

        • adam

          Sin is a man created literary device

          It is IMAGINARY

        • Candy Smith

          IN YOUR OPINION!!!!

        • Candy Smith

          Sin is doing what is wrong before God, it is breaking his law (1 John 3:4).
          But, to say there is no such thing as sin is to say there is no God.
          But, if there is a God, then it makes sense to say that he is the Law
          giver, the one who reveals what is right and wrong like do not murder,
          do not steal, etc.

        • Candy Smith

          Think about it. Saying there is no such thing as sin doesn’t mean
          there isn’t any. Besides, if you have you ever lied, or cheated, or
          stolen, then according to the Bible, you’ve sinned.

        • Candy Smith

          How do you “know” there is no such thing as sin? After all, you’d have to “know” there was no God, too. Are you sure you “know” there is no God…or do you just “believe” there is no God? There is a big difference.

        • Candy Smith

          Saying there is no such thing as sin doesn’t mean there isn’t any. How do you “know” there is no such thing as sin? After all, you’d have to “know” there was no God, too. Are you sure you “know” there is no God…or do you just “believe” there is no God? There is a big difference.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Allow me to explain the verse about jealousy. It isn’t a sin.

        • Candy Smith

          It is important to understand how the word “jealous” is used. Its use in Exodus 20:5 to describe God is different from how it is used to describe the sin of jealousy (Galatians 5:20).

          When we use the word “jealous,” we use it in the sense of being envious of someone who has something we do not have. A person might be jealous or envious of another person because he or she has a nice car or home (possessions). Or a person might be jealous or envious of another person because of some ability or skill that other person has (such as athletic ability). Another example would be that one person might be
          jealous or envious of another because of his or her beauty.

          In Exodus 20:5, it is not that God is jealous or envious because someone has something He wants or needs. Exodus 20:4-5 says, “You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God…” Notice that God is jealous when someone gives to another something that rightly belongs to Him.

          In these verses, God is speaking of people making idols and bowing down and worshiping those idols instead of giving God the worship that belongs to Him alone. God is possessive of the worship and service that belong to Him. It is a sin (as God points out in this commandment) to worship or serve anything other than God. It is a sin when we desire, or we are envious, or we are jealous of someone because he has something that we do not have. It is a different use of the word “jealous” when
          God says He is jealous. What He is jealous of belongs to Him; worship and service belong to Him alone, and are to be given to Him alone.

          Perhaps a practical example will help us understand the difference. If a husband sees another man flirting with his wife, he is right to be jealous, for only he has the right to flirt with his wife. This type of jealousy is not sinful. Rather, it is entirely appropriate. Being jealous for something that God declares to belong to you is good and appropriate. Jealousy is a sin when it is a desire for something that does not belong to you. Worship, praise, honor, and adoration belong to God alone, for only He is truly worthy of it. Therefore, God is rightly jealous when worship, praise, honor, or adoration is given to idols.

          This is precisely the jealousy the apostle Paul described in Corinthians 11:2, “I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy…”

        • Candy Smith

          God is holy and He cannot sin. The Bible tells us He cannot lie (Hebrews 6:18; Titus 1:2). Also, since God is eternal by nature (Psalm 90:2), He cannot stop being God. He cannot deny Himself (2 Tim. 2:13). God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He tempt anyone with evil (James 1:13).

        • Herald Newman

          Everyone is a sinner. God is allowed to take a humans life whenever He chooses to.

          It absolutely horrifies me every time I hear this kind of nonsense come out of Christians. This is the shit that religions do to people’s brains!

          Edited to add the context, to make sure it’s preserved.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Except its your opinion that He is cruel. It is nothing but your opinion.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith
        • Pofarmer

          Funny you link to CARM. That’s the organization that started me on the track to being an atheist.

          Did you know that his own daughter is now an Atheist too?

        • Candy Smith

          Matt Slick Talks about Beating His Daughter – YouTube
          Video for matt slick daughter atheist▶ 0:16
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9pyCl77PDs
          Jun 13, 2014 – Uploaded by Granny Twine
          Matt Slick Talks about Beating His Daughter. Granny Twine … Matt Slick talking about his daughter Rachel on .

        • Pofarmer

          Wow.

          What an asshole. He’s certainly one I’d listen to.

        • Candy Smith

          Well first of all, it’s your opinion that He is an asshole. Second of all, He is sovereign over all life and He can take life whenever he sees fit.

        • Pofarmer

          Matt Slick is sovereign over all life? Who knew.

        • Candy Smith

          God is sovereign over all life. Sorry that a mistake.

        • Pofarmer

          Sure he is. That’s we he let’s mass murderers and rapists romp around.

        • Candy Smith

          Yeah because they have this thing called freewill.

        • Candy Smith

          If he stepped in and stopped them, then we would have no free-will. We would be nothing more than a bunch of robots.

        • Pofarmer

          Sorry, why does the free will of the rapist override that of the rapee?

        • Candy Smith

          So, if we want God to stop evil and suffering, then He must stop all
          of it. We have no problem with this when it means stopping a
          catastrophe, or a murder, or a rape. But what about when someone thinks of something evil? Evil is destructive whether it is acted out or not.

          Hatred and bigotry in someone’s heart is wrong. If it is wrong, and if
          God is to stop all evil, then He must stop that person from thinking
          his own thoughts. To do that, God must remove his freedom of thought.

          Furthermore, which person on the earth has not thought
          something evil? God would be required, then, to stop all people from
          exercising their free will. This is something God has chosen not to do.
          Therefore, we could say that one of the reasons that God permits evil
          and suffering is because of man’s free will.

        • Pofarmer

          Is there free will in heaven?

        • Pofarmer

          Shane (Christian caller): Well, then, so why [do you say] is God so immoral, first of all? Why is God so immoral?

          Tracie Harris (co-host): I don’t know. Why don’t you ask him? I would love to know why he is so freaking immoral.

          Matt Dillahunty (co-host): I don’t think that God exists. But if we’re
          talking about the God character in the Bible as God is represented…

          T: As he’s written, he’s horrible.

          M:
          You know, it’s a pretty horrible, jealous, angry being that advocates
          slavery. I don’t know why he’s that way. Maybe he’s just a dick.

          T:
          I was telling someone earlier today that you either have a God who
          sends child rapists to rape children, or you have a God who simply
          watches it and says, ‘When you’re done, I’m going to punish you.’

          S: Does a child rapist make you mad, Matt? I mean, do you hear about that and get angry? Yes or no?

          M: What?

          T: ‘Do you get angry when you hear about child rapists?’

          M: Yes.

          S: Well, so why shouldn’t God get mad when he hears about evil in this world? You tell me that.

          M: If there was a God and he heard about evil in this world, I think he should get mad. What the hell does that have to do with anything?

          T:
          But here’s the thing, though. If I were in a situation where I could
          stop a child rapist, I would. That’s the difference between me and your
          God.

          M: Yeah.

          S: But, sorry, say that again?

          T: If
          I could stop a person from raping a child, I would. That’s the
          difference between me and your God. He watches and says, ‘I’m shutting
          the door and you go ahead and rape that child and, when you’re done, I’m
          gonna punish you.’ If I did that, people would think I was a freaking
          monster.

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6hI2hp_lP8&feature=youtu.be&t=55m37s

        • Candy Smith

          Tracie Harris (co-host): I don’t know. Why don’t you ask him? I would love to know why he is so

          freaking immoral.

          Well He is immoral in your opinion!!!

        • Candy Smith

          I could stop a person from raping a child, I would. That’s the
          difference between me and your God. He watches and says, ‘I’m shutting
          the door and you go ahead and rape that child and, when you’re done, I’m
          gonna punish you.’ If I did that, people would think I was a freaking
          monster.

          Why would stopping a child from being raped be wrong?? Who said that it’s wrong??

        • Candy Smith

          You know, it’s a pretty horrible, jealous, angry being that advocates
          slavery. I don’t know why he’s that way. Maybe he’s just a dick.

          Still your opinion!!

        • Candy Smith

          T: As he’s written, he’s horrible.

          Opinion as well!!!

        • Candy Smith

          And also why is anything that those two people that U listed, why is any of what they do wrong. According to what standard is it wrong?

        • Pofarmer

          According to standards of Human society.

        • Candy Smith

          So what? That’s society’s opinion. What about those that disagree?

        • Pofarmer

          Thats why we have the legal system.

        • Candy Smith

          Yeah and where the heck did this legal system come from? Who decided what was right and what was wrong??

        • Pofarmer

          Human societies.

        • Candy Smith

          Which is based on their opinions.

        • Pofarmer

          Yep. Shared social values.

        • Candy Smith

          And that is still opinions!!

        • Pofarmer

          Sure it is. That’s why laws and values differ from society to society and place to place. In some places it’s perfectly fine to whip someone nearly to death for sticking a piece of Gum on a lamp post. In some places it’s perfectly fine to set a woman on fire for going out without a male relative, etc, etc, ad nauseum.

        • Greg G.

          Exactly! We don’t even need God’s opinion to figure it out.

        • Candy Smith

          What does that mean? Shared values? It is still opinions!!!

        • Candy Smith

          Haven’t societies been wrong before? Think of Nazi Germany or America in the 1800’s regarding slavery.

        • Pofarmer

          Well, sure. I mean “Manifest Destiny” was the idea that we were ordained by God to take over the rest of our continent, no matter what that did to the indigenous peoples. At one time it was considered O.K. to burn people to death who disagreed with your religion(protestants did it too) etc, etc.

        • Greg G.

          Yes, societies have been wrong before. The societies that produced the Old Testament were wrong on cutting hair, eating shellfish, owning slaves, beating slaves, burying poop.

        • Candy Smith

          Oh so he is an asshole??

          Let’s think about that comment and see i it actually makes any sense.

          U have a child who is grown. I am also relating this to my family and my brother, BTW. Your adult child goes away to his final year of college in Wales and having grown up in a Christian house. Went to YouthGroup and Awana and Sparkies since he was very little, but when he goes away to Wales, for 9 months. 4 months before he comes back he sends an email saying he no longer believes in God. Now apparently I would be an asshole to force my grown child to continue believing in God when he clearly doesnt!?? That actually makes sense to you!?? Are U kidding me?

          No it doesnt. Matt didnt do anything wrong and U can say whatever nonsense U want about him but it proves nothing. To force your child to continue in something that they no longer believe would make U an asshole.

        • Pofarmer

          Talking about him saying he beat his daughter.

        • Candy Smith

          I meant to say like in talking about atheism and what she now believes!! I dont mean literally beats her.

        • Pofarmer

          Went to YouthGroup and Awana and Sparkies since he was very little,

          Yeah, what you need to understand, is that with that much indoctrination, there are all kinds of claims and promises made that aren’t going to hold up under closer inspection. There would also be emotional and mental fatigue set in after a while. Sometimes people just try to hard. Faith won’t hold up to reason. I could have probably maintained my faith forever if my wife hadn’t turned into a Fundie. Fundies are no fun to live with. Speaking of which………………..

        • Candy Smith

          It wasnt an emotional response. I was simply telling U why U calling him an asshole is stupid. It makes no sense!!

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Thats a choice she made. What does that have to do with anything?

        • Pofarmer

          The great apologist Matt Slick couldn’t keep his own daughter in the fold? Just think it’s interesting.

        • Candy Smith

          Matt Slick doesn’t need to force his daughter to be a Christian. Once she becomes an adult,she has thing called being independent and she can make choices on her own. She decided to become an atheist, don’t blame Matt.

        • Greg G.

          1 Timothy was forged in Paul’s name, not that it matters as far as anything about the god thingie..

        • Candy Smith
        • Greg G.

          Why do apologists have to equivocate slaves and indentured servants? From the linked page:

          In Exodus 21:2 a slave was required to be set free after six years of service.

          That is about indentured servitude, not slaves bought with money. Indentured servants were Hebrews. Read the next couple of verses after Leviticus 25:44. It says that you shouldn’t treat your fellow Israelites harshly but slaves are excluded from that and they may be treated like slaves.

          Apologists are not honest about slavery in the Bible.

        • Candy Smith

          Well the slavery in the Bible is different than the slavery that we experienced 50 years or longer.

        • Greg G.

          Actually, when slavery was started in the colonies, it was based on biblical law. Apparently, it didn’t work so well so adjustments were made.

        • Candy Smith

          Slavery happened because of sin.

        • Greg G.

          According to Christians, everything bad happened because of sin. Murder is because of sin. Murder is disallowed by the Ten Commandments. But slavery is sanctioned by the Bible.

        • Candy Smith

          While the Bible as a whole recognizes the reality of slavery, it never promotes the practice of slavery. In fact, it was the application of biblical principles that ultimately led to the overthrow of slavery, both in ancient Israel and in the United States of America. Israel’s liberation from slavery in Egypt became the model for the liberation of slaves in general. In America, many are beginning to wake up to the liberating biblical truth that all people are created by God with innate equality (Genesis 1:27; Acts 17:26–28; Galatians 3:28).

        • Greg G.

          The Bible gives explicit instructions in two places on how to turn an indentured servant into a permanent slave using family values. The master lets him marry a female slave, when his servitude expires, he must choose to leave his wife and children or to become a permanent slave. That’s is a pretty good promotion of slavery.

        • Greg G.

          While the Bible as a whole recognizes the reality of slavery, it never promotes the practice of slavery.

          The Bible recognizes the reality of murder but forbids it. It also recognizes the reality that people covet their neighbor’s ass and forbids that, too.

        • Candy Smith

          OK and?

        • Greg G.

          If the Bible can forbid eating shellfish, it could forbid owning other people. Regulating slavery is condoning it.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          What U need to do is go onto a Christian website and ask about these verses? The websites will explain them.

        • Greg G.

          What U need to do is go onto a Christian website and ask about these verses? The websites will explain them.

          No, they won’t. That is horrible advice. Apologists can’t tell the difference between a slave and an indentured servant. They will tell you that restrictions for indentured servants applied to the slave bought with money. They make stuff up.

          You should not accept what an apologist says.

        • Candy Smith

          Types of Slaves

          The Old Testament recognized different types of slaves depending on
          their circumstances. None of them correspond to modern chattel slaves.

          Foreigners

          The Old Testament Law gave the procedure for taking foreigners (Deuteronomy 20:10-11).
          When making war against a city, Israel was to first extend an offer of
          peace, in which the city’s inhabitants could voluntarily bind themselves
          over as slaves to Israel. This was more like serfdom than slavery.
          Foreign women and children could be taken in war, but the women could
          also be taken as wives (Deuteronomy 21:10-13; Rahab—Matthew 1:5).

          Debtors

          A poor man could sell himself to a richer man if there was famine and
          the poor man had no way to provide for himself. Or a debtor could sell
          himself to the one he owed money to. If the debtor owed money to several
          people, he could sell himself to a rich man who agreed to pay off the
          debts. Similarly, the head of a household could sell a family member in
          exchange for any of the above. Other arrangements were possible; Jacob
          sold himself to Laban for fourteen years to pay the bridal prices of
          Leah and Rachel. Some debt slaves were foreigners and lived under
          slightly different regulations if they were not proselytes (converted
          Jews).

          Girls

          When a girl was sold into slavery, it was usually to marry into the
          family when she came of age. A father might sell a daughter to benefit
          the family or to improve the girl’s prospects—usually, the girl married
          into a higher socioeconomic class. Although abuses undoubtedly occurred,
          the intent was to improve the girl’s future. Every girl in that culture
          faced an arranged marriage; if she was sold, she moved into her
          husband’s house earlier than usual and was provided for long before her
          wedding.

        • Candy Smith

          Actually they can and you may be talking about certain websites but you cannot make the claim for all of them.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          What about those of us who don’t need to have a Christian presupposition supported and are OK following the facts? Can we just read the Bible and let it speak for itself?

        • Candy Smith

          U are following the facts?? What facts would that be?

        • Candy Smith

          First of all, dont EVER call me a liar. It’s smarter to say I am mistaken.

        • Greg G.

          You are mistaken.

        • Candy Smith

          I wasn’t talking to you.

        • Pofarmer

          Well, yes, that’s why the Catholic Church held women in slavery up until the NINTEEN FUCKING 90’S. Get a grip Candy.

        • Candy Smith

          Why are U bringing Catholic into this? Catholic and Christianity believe in the same major things like the Resurrection but they also believe in a bunch of there nonsense that Christian don’t believe in.

        • Pofarmer

          Lol. Catholics kind of consider themselves the originals.

        • Candy Smith

          Yeah except they believe in a bunch of nonsense.

        • Pofarmer

          That’s not an exclusive trait.

        • Candy Smith

          What’s not an exclusive trait??

        • Pofarmer

          Believing a bunch of nonsense.

        • Candy Smith

          Well then that’s your opinion.

        • Candy Smith

          The Bible does not specifically condemn the practice of slavery. It gives instructions on how slaves should be treated (Deuteronomy 15:12-15; Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 4:1), but does not outlaw slavery altogether. Many see this as the Bible condoning all forms of slavery. What many fail to understand is that slavery in biblical times was very different from the slavery that was practiced in the past few centuries in many parts of the world. The slavery in the Bible was not based exclusively on race. People were not enslaved because of their nationality or the color of their skin. In Bible times, slavery was based more on economics; it was a matter of social status. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their families. In New Testament times, sometimes doctors, lawyers, and even politicians were slaves of someone else. Some people actually chose to be slaves so as to have all their needs provided for by their masters.

          The slavery of the past few centuries was often based exclusively on skin color. In the United States, many black people were considered slaves because of their nationality; many slave owners truly believed black people to be inferior human beings. The Bible condemns race-based slavery in that it teaches that all men are created by God and made in His image (Genesis 1:27). At the same time, the Old Testament did allow for economic-based slavery and regulated it. The key issue is that the slavery the Bible allowed for in no way resembled the racial slavery that plagued our world in the past few centuries.

          In addition, both the Old and New Testaments condemn the practice of “man-stealing,” which is what happened in Africa in the 19th century. Africans were rounded up by slave-hunters, who sold them to slave-traders, who brought them to the New World to work on plantations and farms. This practice is abhorrent to God. In fact, the penalty for such a crime in the Mosaic Law was death: “Anyone who kidnaps another and either sells him or still has him when he is caught must be put to death” (Exodus 21:16). Similarly, in the New Testament, slave-traders are listed among those who are “ungodly and sinful” and are in the same category as those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers, adulterers and perverts, and liars and perjurers (1 Timothy 1:8–10).

          Another crucial point is that the purpose of the Bible is to point the way to salvation, not to reform society. The Bible often approaches issues from the inside out. If a person experiences the love, mercy, and grace of God by receiving His salvation, God will reform his soul, changing the way he thinks and acts. A person who has experienced God’s gift of salvation and freedom from the slavery of sin, as God reforms his soul, will realize that enslaving another human being is wrong. He will see, with Paul, that a slave can be “a brother in the Lord” (Philemon 1:16). A person who has truly experienced God’s grace will in turn be gracious towards others. That would be the Bible’s prescription for ending slavery.

        • adam

          “The Bible does not specifically condemn the practice of slavery. ”

          Of course not it CONDONES slavery

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/fc08e92607fbb10ca5d9fec66168d9bf582a2748fa716fdb4283c37e046c25e1.jpg

          “What many fail to understand is that slavery in biblical times was very
          different from the slavery that was practiced in the past few centuries
          in many parts of the world.”

          No, it was the same and justified by using the bible as proof.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/86effa5e2bc761ae95f687bf44f1632c13ebd40a54b07502d779f242a887cc3e.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          The slavery in the Bible WAS NOT the same as what we see happen in movies (that are based on true stories).

          The Old Testament recognized different types of slaves depending on
          their circumstances. None of them correspond to modern chattel slaves.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Wrong again. The two kinds of biblical slavery map quite nicely on American slavery. You should read your Bible more.

          More here:
          http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2014/08/yes-biblical-slavery-was-the-same-as-american-slavery/

        • Candy Smith

          Please provide the verses rather than this absurd website. I have seen this website before.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Read the article. I wrote it. The relevant verses are given.

        • Michael Neville

          You can lie to yourself but don’t lie to us.

          You may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. Lev 25:44-46 (NIV)

          This says specifically that foreign slaves are property which can be bought, sold and inherited just like any other property. That’s is exactly what chattel slavery is all about.

          When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. Ex 21:20-21 (NIV)

          A book that says beating a slave to death is acceptable (as long as the slave takes a couple of days to die) because the slave is property is supporting chattel slavery.

        • Candy Smith

          I can offer an explanation that will explain these exact verses. I am not lying. If U want to hear it, please let me know. And dont say you know what it’s going to say. Just listen to what I have to say because believe it or not, there is a chance that U are wrong!!

        • Michael Neville

          When are you going to learn that U is not a word in the English language. The second person pronoun, both singular and plural, is YOU. Learn this simple fact and use it, you ignorant, stupid excuse for a human being.

          As for your excuses of plain language instructions on slavery that come straight out of your “holy” book, sure, I’ll read your bullshit. But recognize that I do know already that you’re going to try to bullshit me, aka LIE, about what your Bible says.

        • Candy Smith

          Ok I’ll work on that. I know it isn’t a word.

        • Candy Smith

          No i am not going to lie. Instead of telling me what I am going to do, how about you just listen to what I have to say because regardless of what you think, there are still explanations for the two verses in Leviticus and Exodus. You can spend a bunch of time telling me there isn’t or that they are inaccurate or you can just listen.

        • Candy Smith

          It isn’t reinterpret. There are verses that can be confusing. They need explanations. I am not changing the words. Yeah they are plain words but I’m going to explain them.

        • Candy Smith

          You’re going to pretend that the indentured servitude that Hebrews could
          enter was the same thing as the chattel slavery that “foreigners” would
          undergo. All you Christian apologists use that LIE to try to
          reinterpret the plain words of Leviticus and Exodus.

          Well you do not know if I am going to say that or not. U are assuming I will.

        • Candy Smith

          So using the U instead of you makes me an ignorant stupid excuse for a human being??

          Well that’s stupid. And it’s also your opinion.

        • Michael Neville

          Yes, using incorrect English, especially misusing a simple word that you learned when you were a small child, means that you are an ignorant, stupid excuse for a human being. Sorry if reality bites you in the ass.

        • Candy Smith

          Well no it isn’t reality. It’s your opinion. It’s a habit and quite honestly you are the first person to say anything. So if it really was reality, more people should say something. But they haven’t. Therefore, it’s your opinion.

        • Michael Neville

          It’s not only my opinion, it’s the opinion of English teachers. But if your opinion is that you don’t care if you’re an ignorant, stupid person then continue to use bad English. It’s not my fault that you’re an ignorant, stupid person.

        • Candy Smith

          It’s not my fault that you’re an ignorant, stupid person.

          that is also your opinion. One word that I use incorrectly doesn’t make me any of those things. No English teacher would agree with you on that.

        • Candy Smith

          Exodus 21:20-21″And if a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his
          hand, he shall be punished. 21If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.”

          God permitted slavery to exist in both Old and New Testament times. But this does not mean that slavery was a God-ordained system. Slavery was an invention of fallen man–not of God. Nevertheless, God allowed it to exist the way He allows other things to exist that He does not
          approve of: murder, lying, rape, theft, etc.

        • Greg G.

          Exodus 21:20-21 says that a master can beat a slave to death without punishment as long as the slave suffers for a day or two before dying. But “a day or two” is pretty vague and since the next day begins at sundown, the slave only has to show signs of life until the sun sets.

        • Candy Smith

          God also works within the system of fallen man and makes allowances for the freedom and failures of mankind within that system. We see this, for example, in Jesus saying that God allowed divorce because of the hardness of peoples’ hearts (Matt. 19:8). The fact is, people are sinners and do things contrary to the will of God. But, even though people have murdered, lied, raped, and stolen, God has still used people who’ve committed these sins to accomplish His divine will. Moses murdered an Egyptian but was used by God to deliver Israel. David committed adultery but was promised to have the Messiah descend from his seed. This is proof that though God desires that people not do much of what they do, He permits them their freedom yet uses the system and the people according to His divine will.

        • Greg G.

          If God is keen on forbidding coveting your neighbor’s slave (Exodus 20:17), he could just forbid slavery just as easily. This “works within the system of fallen man” is silly.

        • Candy Smith

          Now of course you can continue to tell me that God is evil and blah blah blah but reality is,is that is nothing more than your opinion. So sorry but your complaints mean nothing.

        • Michael Neville

          Your defense of your monster of a god is nothing more than the indoctrination you’ve received from others. You’ve obviously spent no more time thinking about how your god behaves than you have spent learning to use proper English. So your defense means nothing.

        • Candy Smith

          My defense of my monster of a god??

          Well first of all, it’ still your opinion.

          You’ve obviously spent no more time thinking about how your god behaves

          There is nothing to discuss about his behavior. He is subjected to the rules that humans have. He doesn’t have to listen to them. He isn’t like us. Humans for example can be jealous of certain things and want them. God however, doesn’t do this. The reason is because He owns everything so he cant be jealous or want anything.

        • Greg G.

          If God is omnipotent, then suffering is unnecessary. Unnecessary suffering exists gratuitously. Allowing unnecessary suffering gratuitously is sadistic. A sadistic being is not benevolent. Therefore we know that there is no being that is both omnipotent and benevolent.

        • Candy Smith

          I am not sure why you are repeating yourself.
          NOT all suffering is unnecessary. In fact, to say that any suffering is unnecessary is nothing but ones opinion.

        • Candy Smith

          Unnecessary suffering exists gratuitously. Allowing unnecessary suffering gratuitously is sadistic.

          Please prove to me that any of that is true? Because all you have done so far is given your opinion. Prove that unnecessary suffering exists and that it exists gratuitously and also prove that the existence of suffering automatically means God doesn’t exist. You are acting as if God has no reasons for allowing suffering but how can you possibly know this?

        • Candy Smith

          God is sovereign over all of life and can take it whenever He sees fit. God and God alone can give life, and God alone has the right to take it whenever He so chooses. While it is wrong for us to take a life, except in instances of capital punishment, war, and self-defense, this does not mean that it is wrong for God to do so. God is under no obligation to extend anyone’s life for even another day.

        • Candy Smith

          The Old Testament records God killing multitudes of people, and some people want to believe this makes Him a murderer. The misconception that “killing” and “murder” are synonymous is partially based on the King James mistranslation of the sixth commandment, which reads, “Thou shalt not kill” (Exodus 20:13). However, the word kill is a translation of the Hebrew word ratsach, which nearly always refers to intentional killing without cause. The correct rendering of this word is “murder,” and all modern translations render the command as “You shall not murder.” The Bible in Basic English best conveys its meaning: “Do not put anyone to death without cause.”
          As already stated, to kill and to murder are different things. Murder is “the premeditated, unlawful taking of a life,” whereas killing is, more generally, “the taking of a life.” The same Law that forbids murder permits killing in self-defense (Exodus 22:2).

        • Candy Smith

          In order for God to commit murder, He would have to act “unlawfully.” We must recognize that God is God. “His works are perfect, and all His ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is He” (Deuteronomy 32:4; see also Psalm 11:7; 90:9). He created man and expects obedience (Exodus 20:4-6; Exodus 23:21; 2 John 1:6). When man takes it upon himself to disobey God, he faces God’s wrath (Exodus 19:5; Exodus 23:21-22; Leviticus 26:14-18). Furthermore, “God is a just judge, and God is angry with the wicked every day. If [man] does not turn back, He will sharpen His sword; He bends His bow and makes it ready” (Psalm 7:11-12).

        • Candy Smith

          The flood was just because mankind was evil. “The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time” (Genesis 6:5). We cannot fully imagine the extent of the wickedness of that day. We have never seen the like. The evil was “great,” and every thought of everyone’s heart was only evil continually. There was no goodness in the world; every person was wholly corrupted. There was nothing within them that was not evil. The people of Noah’s day were not dabblers in sin; they had taken the plunge, and everything they did was an abomination.

          The text provides some clues as to the extent of the evil before the flood. One problem was the rampant violence: “The earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence” (Genesis 6:11). The descendants of Cain, the first murderer, were abounding in bloodshed. Another evil among the antediluvians was occult sexuality. Genesis 6:1–4 mentions the Nephilim, “heroes of old, men of renown” who were the products of a union between fallen angels and human woman. The demons who participated in this sin are currently in “chains of darkness . . . reserved for judgment” (2 Peter 2:4). The people who participated—and the Nephilim themselves—were destroyed in the flood. The biblical description of pre-flood humanity is that they had become totally hardened and beyond repentance. Things were so bad that “the Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled” (Genesis 6:6).

        • Candy Smith

          The flood was just because God commanded it (and God is just). “The LORD is upright . . . and there is no wickedness in him” (Psalm 92:15). “Righteousness and justice are the foundation of [God’s] throne” (Psalm 89:14). God always does what is right. His decrees and judgments are always just. If He decreed that the whole world be flooded, then He was just in doing so, no matter what human skeptics say. It is not surprising that we tend to define justice in a way that will benefit ourselves.

        • Candy Smith

          My defense is the fact that the only thing that you can offer when you call God’s name’s in your opinion. All U can say is “In my opinion, I think He is immoral. ” But you CANNOT say He is immoral as a fact. You have nothing other than your opinion to offer.

        • Candy Smith

          I have looked at the way He has behaves and the simple fact is that He is sovereign over ALL life and He take it whenever He sees fit. While it is wrong for us to take a life,
          except in instances of capital punishment, war, and self-defense, this
          does not mean that it is wrong for God to do so.

          In order for God to commit murder, He would have to act “unlawfully.” We
          must recognize that God is God. “His works are perfect, and all His
          ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is He”
          (Deuteronomy 32:4; see also Psalm 11:7; 90:9). He created man and expects obedience (Exodus 20:4-6; Exodus 23:21; 2 John 1:6). When man takes it upon himself to disobey God, he faces God’s wrath (Exodus 19:5; Exodus 23:21-22; Leviticus 26:14-18).
          Furthermore, “God is a just judge, and God is angry with the wicked
          every day. If [man] does not turn back, He will sharpen His sword; He
          bends His bow and makes it ready” (Psalm 7:11-12).

        • Michael Neville

          the simple fact is that He is sovereign over ALL life and He take it whenever He sees fit.

          Got any evidence to support this bullshit? The Bible isn’t evidence for anything so you’re going to have to think really hard about why your monster of a god can kill just because he can. Might makes right is not a excuse for anything.

        • Candy Smith

          You reject the Bible but there is no reason to. The Bible tells us why there is suffering in the world. Of course you reject it, so tell me, what is the reason for the suffering that exists. The Bible also tells us why God does what he does and it gives the reasons for why He does it.

        • Candy Smith

          First of all, please tell me why murder is wrong in the first place??? Second of all, it isn’t just because He can. The Bible is clear that when it comes to sin, no one is innocent. All have sinned and fall short of God’s glory (Romans 3:23).
          Without His grace, no one would live. God’s judgment upon some reveals
          His holiness and is used to instruct others to live in fear of Him. In order for God to commit murder, He would have to act “unlawfully.” We
          must recognize that God is God. “His works are perfect, and all His
          ways are just. A faithful God who does no wrong, upright and just is He”
          (Deuteronomy 32:4; see also Psalm 11:7; 90:9). He created man and expects obedience (Exodus 20:4-6; Exodus 23:21; 2 John 1:6). When man takes it upon himself to disobey God, he faces God’s wrath (Exodus 19:5; Exodus 23:21-22; Leviticus 26:14-18).
          Furthermore, “God is a just judge, and God is angry with the wicked
          every day. If [man] does not turn back, He will sharpen His sword; He
          bends His bow and makes it ready” (Psalm 7:11-12).

        • Candy Smith

          God certainly has the ability to enforce the rules he reveals to us, but
          what is morally right with God is due to his character–not his power.
          The reason it is wrong to lie is that God cannot lie (Titus 1:2). Therefore, right and wrong are not determined by God’s ability to be
          stronger than anyone else. Right and wrong are determined by God
          revealing his own immutable, holy essence.

        • Candy Smith

          Why not?? Why isnt the Bible evidence for anything?? Do you have a better explanation for why there is death and suffering?? You obviously must because the Bible explains everything about why God does what He do.

        • Candy Smith

          There is absolutely nothing that happens in the universe that is
          outside of God’s influence and authority. As King of kings and Lord of
          lords, God has no limitations. Consider just a few of the claims the
          Bible makes about God:

          God is above all things and before all things. He is the alpha and
          the omega, the beginning and the end. He is immortal, and He is present
          everywhere so that everyone can know Him (Revelation 21:6).

          God created all things and holds all things together, both in heaven and on earth, both visible and invisible (Colossians 1:16).

          God knows all things past, present, and future. There is no
          limit to His knowledge, for God knows everything completely before it
          even happens (Romans 11:33).

          God can do all things and accomplish all things. Nothing is too
          difficult for Him, and He orchestrates and determines everything that
          is going to happen in your life, in my life, in America, and throughout
          the world. Whatever He wants to do in the universe, He does, for nothing
          is impossible with Him (Jeremiah 32:17).

          God is in control of all things and rules over all things. He
          has power and authority over nature, earthly kings, history, angels, and
          demons. Even Satan himself has to ask God’s permission before he can
          act (Psalm 103:19).

          That’s what being sovereign means. It means being the ultimate
          source of all power, authority, and everything that exists. Only God can
          make those claims; therefore, it’s God’s sovereignty that makes Him
          superior to all other gods and makes Him, and Him alone, worthy of
          worship.

        • Michael Neville

          You keep forgetting that I don’t accept the Bible as an authority. So you can stop quoting its lies at me, I don’t buy that silly nonsense.

        • Candy Smith

          Then what is your authority? What do you use to decide whats right and wrong? I can turn to the Ten Commandments. What do you have that’s like this?

        • Greg G.

          Which Ten Commandments? One set said “Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother’s milk.” That means No cheeseburgers. Eating swine flesh is an abomination so a bacon cheeseburger is an abomination that breaks one of the three Ten Commandments.

        • BlackMamba44

          What do you use to decide whats right and wrong?

          Empathy.

        • Candy Smith

          Empathy? Interesting? Let me ask you this: do you believe in evolution?

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          But there is no feeling sorry for others in evolution. Evolution has something to do with survival of the fittest, right?

        • adam

          “But there is no feeling sorry for others in evolution. ”

          Even animals feel sorry.

          “Evolution has something to do with survival of the fittest, right?”

          So does empathy.
          Do you know what empathy is?

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c3d7dd2c03fcc948ba5d1ff877e546205f0bf464af9229e15212fe9f571e7a53.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Lions dont feel sorry when they kill other animals to eat, right?

        • Candy Smith

          The reason Atheists know right and wrong, is because God has written it in our hearts.

        • adam
        • adam

          the heart doesnt have a memory.

          This is all just part of your mythology, and you are too ignorant to understand that.

        • Candy Smith

          That isnt what it means.

        • Candy Smith

          Yes, atheist can know right from wrong because the Bible says so.

          Romans 1:14-15, “For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them.”

          The Bible tells us that everyone has the law written on their heart. The law is those do’s and don’ts of moral behavior. Consider the 10 Commandments in Exodus 20:1-17 which tells us such things as do not lie, steal, or commit adultery. Though not all unbelievers acknowledge all of the moral truths in those commandments, they sufficiently recognize moral truths and show they are written on their own hearts.

        • Greg G.

          The Bible authors didn’t understand what the brain did. They thought thinking was done in the heart and kidneys.

        • Candy Smith

          Empathy? Really? Interesting?

          Let me ask you this? Do you believe in evolution?

        • BlackMamba44

          I don’t “believe” in evolution. I go with the consensus of the scientists.

          Yes, empathy. Why is that interesting? I wouldn’t want to be harmed so I’m going to do my best not to harm. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6e9866cf0f4d275b6ff17cc050f761253d049e70a63de1e59fb6ba80b791b1f0.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Yes, empathy. Why is that interesting? I wouldn’t want to be harmed so I’m going to do my best not to harm.

          Why dont you want to be harmed?? If you are just going to cease to exist when you die and eventually no one will remember you. And you are not held accountable to anyone, why not just walk into someones house and start stealing there stuff??

        • BlackMamba44

          Holy shit, you’re a moron. I can’t argue with stupid.

          I do steal all I want. And that amount is zero.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/65523ff16e64a74da7dfba58a67ff5da760cd0d7b673dd7160a80b3e9ebbe708.jpg

        • adam
        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Yeah because marriage was designed for a man and a woman, not the same sex. These are God’s rules.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          That is a law in the old testament. Is it also in the New as well?!?

        • adam
        • epeeist

          I can turn to the Ten Commandments.

          So where in the ten commandments does it say that child rape is wrong? Where in the ten commandments does it say that stem cell therapy is wrong?

        • Candy Smith

          First of all, I do not know why those commandments are not in there. Okay, but let me ask you this. Who are you to decide that any of those are wrong and should be a ten commandment??

        • adam

          “There is absolutely nothing that happens in the universe that is outside of God’s influence and authority.”

          THAT’s the problem.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/13282502375d3da24cf6b663f813609c25b2ff6c1bdd9b750a6d095cf6c73c07.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          You are talking about the one about clothing and don’t wear a certain type of clothing, right?

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Never mind about that question.

        • Candy Smith

          (Numbers 31:17-18)–“Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately. 18But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves.”

          The Midianites were descended from Abraham and Keturah (Gen. 25:1). They inhabited the land of Moab and were apparently involved in seducing Israel into going after false gods. Because the Israelites fell into idolatry this way, God told Moses to order the deaths of all who had bowed to the false gods in that land.

          “While Israel remained at Shittim, the people began to play the harlot with the daughters of Moab. 2For they invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate and bowed down to their gods. 3So Israel joined themselves to Baal of Peor, and the Lord was angry against Israel. 4And the Lord said to Moses, “Take all the leaders of the people and execute them in broad daylight before the Lord, so that the fierce anger of the Lord may turn away from Israel.” 5So Moses said to the judges of Israel, “Each of you slay his men who have joined themselves to Baal of Peor.” (Num. 25:1-5).

          God later instructs the Israelites to deal harshly with the Midianites: “Be hostile to the Midianites and strike them; 18for they have been hostile to you with their tricks, with which they have deceived you in the affair of Peor, and in the affair of Cozbi, the daughter of the leader of Midian, their sister who was slain on the day of the plague because of Peor.” (Num. 25:17-18). Later, when Moses meets the returning Israeli army he was angry because he saw the Medianite survivors. “The Midianite women, he said, should have died because they were directly culpable in Israel’s sin at Baal of Peor. All the women except the virgins were then sentenced to death along with all the boys. This insured the extermination of the Midianites and thus prevented them from ever again seducing Israel to sin . . . The virgins were spared because they obviously had had no role in the Baal of Peor incident nor could they by themselves perpetuate the Midianite peoples.”

          Some may object that the Israelites then married the virgins, the daughters of those whom they had killed; and that this would be a horrible thing for the virgins. Perhaps it was a horrible thing for them. But, their lives were spared. Also, in that culture at that time, warfare and plunder was a necessary evil. The reality of taking women as wives was unfortunate but true.

          Why was God so harsh with those in idolatry?
          We must understand that God dealt very harshly because it was through the people of Israel that the Messiah would later come. Satan, in his perpetual effort to oppose God, sought to have the people of God fall into false worship and through intermarriage with other people to destroy the messianic line and make not only the promises of God null and void but also destroy means by which the Messiah could be born. If this could be accomplished, then none would have any hope of deliverance from sin. Therefore, we see in the Old Testament God being very harsh and strict according to the Law.

        • adam

          And this is the very best that a ‘God’ can do?
          .
          Then why call it a God?

        • Candy Smith

          If he didnt do anythinmg then hye would be like a judge that didnt punished someone that was convicted of murderer. He would be even more unjust.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          “He would be even more unjust.”

          Oh really??? According to what???????????? According to what He would be more unjust?? Your opinion?? Because that’s about all You can offer.

        • adam

          Sorry, you are not very bright

          Definition of unjust

          1 : characterized by injustice : unfair

          Definition of injustice
          1 : absence of justice : violation of right or of the rights of another : unfairness

          2 : an unjust act : wrong

          It is sadder that cruelty is model you judge love by.

        • Candy Smith

          You are giving your own definition of just. What about the biblical definition?

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          It isnt biblical.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          I am pretty sure I have already explained that verse.

          Anyways, regardless, I have already said many times, God has the right to do as He sees fit with His creation. Since we are all sinners, including them, that means we deserve death. You think this is wrong??

          Let me ask you this:

          Could you believe in a God who would become a human, suffer at the hands of humans, and be killed by them, all so that His death could be the payment for their sins? That is extremely loving. God is saving people who deserve to go to hell – and we all deserve that. Remember that the same God that sends people to Hell also died for them. If they reject what God has provided, then what is God left to do? He would have to judge them.

          Are you implying that it is unjust for God to send people to hell? If
          so, then you accuse God of injustice. Sin is wrong and it must be
          punished. What would you have God do to those who oppose Him and do evil? Do you want Him to ignore that which is wrong? Do you want Him to turn His head and not be holy and righteous?

          And like Im sure I have said before as well, you have nothing to offer, other than your opinion. U have no objective standard for anything. U need to prove to me that any of those things are actually wrong in the first place. Why was He wrong for doing that?

          What gives God the right to have total control of the universe?

          You may ask???

          The real question (NEEDS TO BE) is, why wouldn’t an omniscient, omnipotent, morally perfect God have theright to do as he sees fit?

        • adam

          “God has the right to do as He sees fit with His creation.”

          So you support abortion then, right?
          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/51d896ac1e97dd8dc947aa106dced45602107c45658b9b232c2ac6daf3b5d340.jpg
          Parents have the right to do as they see fit with their creation.

          “Could you believe in a God ”

          Not until it is demonstrated that such a God is anything but IMAGINARY. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/fe4f85db4759e41e6b97a929743f5278be0c5c5b4ac46c7d4849a954219e949c.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          I do not support abortion how about you??? Do you support it?

        • adam

          How can you not?

          Dont people have a right to do with their creation what they want?

          Like you claim.

        • Candy Smith

          No they dont!! I never said people have the right to do what they want!?? I said God has the right!?? If people take lives, they cant give them back but God can. And just because He can, that doeasnt mean He should.

          I dont support abortion. I dont think its okay. I dont know why you think I do!!???

        • adam

          “God has the right to do as He sees fit with His creation.”

          Dont people have a right to do with their creation what they want?

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7123c548a1342e2d1779d51809c0ce85d82e0551dcde5fa0f6496d68284963dd.jpg

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Sorry, you are not very bright

          That is your opinion. You are the one giving your own definition of evil and unjust. They are not the Biblical definition. We need to look at both of them.

        • adam

          ” They are not the Biblical definition.”

          The bible definition of who created evil is God

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fef3e09d4fced201880c6048e47897bc3461d04f1c5de54936408c4560c105b.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          The bible definition of who created evil is God

          No that is not what the Biblical definition is.

          This is the biblical defintion of evil.

          Evil is what is morally wrong,
          sinful, or wicked. Evil is the result of bad actions stemming from a bad
          character. Biblically, evil is anything that contradicts the holy
          nature of God (see Psalm 51:4). Evil behavior
          can be thought of as falling into two categories: evil committed
          against other people (murder, theft, adultery) and evil committed
          against God (unbelief, idolatry, blasphemy). From the disobedience in
          the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:9) to the wickedness of Babylon the Great (Revelation 18:2), the Bible speaks of the existence of evil.

          I have already said that Evil is not a thing that can be created. Do you not remember me saying that?

        • adam

          ” Evil is the result of bad actions stemming from a bad
          character. Biblically, evil is anything that contradicts the holy
          nature of God (see Psalm 51:4). Evil behavior
          can be thought of as falling into two categories: evil committed
          against other people (murder, theft, adultery) and evil committed
          against God (unbelief, idolatry, blasphemy). From the disobedience in
          the
          Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:9) to the wickedness of Babylon the Great
          (Revelation 18:2), the Bible speaks of the existence of evil.”

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fef3e09d4fced201880c6048e47897bc3461d04f1c5de54936408c4560c105b.jpg

          “I have already said that Evil is not a thing that can be created. Do you not remember me saying that?”

          Yes, I remember you lying about that.

        • Candy Smith

          Yeah is isnt a lie. U just dismissed it because you refuse to face

          reality.

          However, evil is not a “thing” like a rock or electricity.
          You cannot have a jar of evil. Evil has no existence of its own; it is really the absence of good. For example, holes are real but they only exist in something else. We call the absence of dirt a hole, but it cannot be separated from the dirt. So when God created, it is true that all He created was good. One of the good things God made was creatures who had the freedom to choose
          good. In order to have a real choice, God had to allow there to be something besides good to choose. So, God allowed these free angels and humans to choose good or reject good (evil). When a bad relationship exists between two good things we call that evil, but it does not become a “thing” that required God to create it.

          Evil is the absence of good, or better, evil is the absence of God. God did not have to create evil, but rather only allow for the absence of good.

          God did not create evil, but He does allow evil. If God had
          not allowed for the possibility of evil, both mankind and angels would be serving God out of obligation, not choice. He did not want “robots” that simply did what He wanted them to do because of their “programming.” God allowed for the possibility of evil so that we could genuinely have a free will and choose whether or not we wanted to serve Him.

          So sorry but no I did not lie. Also you need to prove that evil actually exists in the world. That is impossible with Atheism. In Atheism, there is no evil, there is no good, right, wrong.

          And disagree with me if you want but i would think that you wouldnt want to disagree with the amazing Richard Dawkins right? Who by the way, contradicts himself!!

          The photo isnt posting. I’ll instead post the link to it.

          So He makes a complaint about God. In fact, I pretty sure this is the opening to his book “The God Delusion”, which BTW, a bunch of these names are incorrect. But not only that but at some point he makes a comment about morality and says that there is no such thing as evil, and no good.

          Also, He is giving nothing but his opinion. Without an Objective Basis for Morality, the most He can do is give his opinion.

        • adam

          I have already given the definition of evil.

          You commit the same evil, by pretending that calamity is love.

        • adam
        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          God did not create evil

          Wrong. Someone needs to read his Bible more thoroughly.

        • Candy Smith

          Im sure you are talking about the verse in Isaiah right?

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Not just Isaiah:

          I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, Jehovah, do all these things (Isaiah 45:7).
          Is it not from the mouth of El Elyon that both calamities and good things come? (Lamentations 3:38)
          When disaster comes to a city, has not Jehovah caused it? (Amos 3:6)

          I’ve written more here:
          http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2014/08/god-creates-evil-unfalsifiable/

        • Candy Smith

          Isaiah 45:7
          in the King James Version reads, “I form the light, and create
          darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these
          things.” How does Isaiah 45:7 agree with the view that
          God did not create evil?
          There are two key facts that need to be considered. (1) The word
          translated “evil” is from a Hebrew word that means “adversity,
          affliction, calamity, distress, misery.” Notice how the other major
          English Bible translations render the word: “disaster” (NIV, HCSB),
          “calamity” (NKJV, NAS, ESV), and “woe” (NRSV). The Hebrew word can refer
          to moral evil, and often does have this meaning in the Hebrew
          Scriptures. However, due to the diversity of possible definitions, it is
          unwise to assume that “I create evil” in Isaiah 45:7 refers to God bringing moral evil into existence.

          (2) The context of Isaiah 45:7 makes it clear that something other than “bringing moral evil into existence” is in mind. The context of Isaiah 45:7
          is God rewarding Israel for obedience and punishing Israel for
          disobedience. God pours out salvation and blessings on those whom He
          favors. God brings judgment on those who continue to rebel against Him.
          “Woe to him who quarrels with his Master” (Isaiah 45:9). That is the person to whom God brings “evil” and “disaster.” So, rather than saying that God created “moral evil,” Isaiah 45:7
          is presenting a common theme of Scripture – that God brings disaster on
          those who continue in hard-hearted rebellion against Him.

          So if you are going to continue to ignore that explanation and continue to pretend that God created evil, please go right ahead but you are still wrong!!

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          You would appear brighter if you’d figure out a way to identify quoted material that you’re responding to.

        • Candy Smith

          i made a mistake. sorry. i am human.

        • Candy Smith

          I am correcting my last comment.

        • adam

          Then correct it.

        • Candy Smith

          You are right. He would be unjust so therefore when He punishes us, He isn’t wrong.

        • Greg G.

          But your vision of God is like a judge who let’s off people of one race of people no matter what crimes they have committed and condemns all other races to eternal torture no matter how trivial the offense.

        • Candy Smith

          People are condemned to Hell because they have sinned against an infinite God and that crime deserves that kind of punishment. Whether you like that or not, that really doesn’t matter because God is still the one is charge.

        • eric

          So, God told the Israelites to take the Midianite girl children as wives in order to foil Satan’s plot to get the Israelites to
          intermarry with foreigners?
          Makes sense.

        • Candy Smith

          Why did the Israelites kill the people of Gilead?
          “And the congregation sent 12,000 of the valiant warriors there, and commanded them, saying, ‘Go and strike the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead with the edge of the sword, with the women and the little ones,'” (Judges 21:10).

          As with so many difficult issues concerning the word of God, context is hugely important. In Judges 19:22-30, the wicked men of Gibeah (a city in Israel of the tribe of Benjamin, 1 Sam 13:15) demanded sexual relations with the Levites who were staying at a house in that city. The owner of the house, to his utter shame, offered his virgin daughter and the Levite’s concubine. Both the man and the Levite should have defended the women even to their deaths, but they both failed miserably in their moral duty. Nevertheless, the men of the city took the concubine, sexually abused her all night, and then released her. She died at the door of the house in which the Levite rested.

          In the morning when the Levite discovered his concubine’s body, he put her on his donkey, went home, took a knife, cut her into 12 pieces, and sent the body parts throughout all of Israel. “While this is difficult for modern readers to understand (as well as for the Levite’s contemporaries; Judges 19:30; cf. Hosea 9:9), he meant to arouse the nation to action by calling for a national judicial hearing. Perhaps he was charging them with the responsibility of removing the bloodguiltiness that rested on the entire nation for his concubine’s death.”1 The response of Israel to this incredibly horrible act was to gather at Mizpah “as one man.”

          The Levite explained the circumstances of his concubine’s death and asked the people of Israel what to do. They then decided to go against Gibeah in retribution.

          The people of Israel asked those of Gibeah to deliver into their hands those who had performed this wickedness so that they might remove the evil from the land of Israel. Gibeah, which was of the tribe of Benjamin, refused (Judges 20:13). Civil war ensued and Benjamin was defeated. Then, “in researching their secondary problem (cf. v20:5), the Israelites discovered that no one from the town of Jabesh Gilead (located about nine miles southeast of Beth Shan and two miles east of the Jordan River) had responded to the call to Mizpah.”2 Therefore, Israel wiped out the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead, all of them except for 400 virgins and 600 men — so that their name might not be utterly destroyed. Like it or not, that was the battle and the reality of war in ancient Israel.

        • adam

          And this is the very best that a ‘God’ can do?

          Then why call it a God?

        • Candy Smith

          Sovereignty in relation to God means that God has the absolute right to do with His creation as He desires. Some verses that support this are as follows: Psalm 115:3, “But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases.” Isaiah 46:10, “Declaring
          the end from the beginning and from ancient times things which have not
          been done, saying, My purpose will be established, and I will
          accomplish all My good pleasure;” Dan.4:35, “And
          all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, but He does
          according to His will in the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of
          earth; and no one can ward off His hand Or say to Him, What hast Thou
          done?”

        • Candy Smith

          In the context of Christianity, sovereignty means that God has the right to exercise supreme and final authority over all things. This is so because God is all knowing, all powerful, and all present. There is nothing that is outside of God’s knowledge, ability, and presence. Of course, God cannot sin or stop being God since that would violate His own nature. But, God can do all things that He desires to do. This means that He always does what is right. It also means that He is sovereign over you and over me. The problem is not comprehending that He is supremely in control. The problem is how we work that out in our lives and the lives of others when we are faced with great difficulties.

        • Michael Neville

          Who gave your god any rights? I didn’t vote for him nor do I recognize that a fictitious, make-believe, non-existent figment of your imagination has any more rights than you do. There’s the further point that “might makes right” is not moral so that shoots down your pretense that your bully of a god is moral.

          You and your fellow Christians are suffering under a handicap. There’s zip point shit evidence that your god is nothing more than a boogeyman invented by Middle Eastern priests to give them control over other people. That’s what religion is all about, power over others. The priests, ministers, pastors, and other assorted godbotherers tell their followers, that’s stupid, ignorant people like you, that “God is all-powerful and gave us authority to tell you what to do.” You may believe their bullshit, I don’t.

        • Candy Smith

          No one gave my God any rights. He is the creator of everything. When U have children u have authority over them, right?

        • Greg G.

          When U have children u have authority over them, right?

          Not when they are adults.

        • Candy Smith

          Yeah but i am specifically talking about when they are kids.

          God is in charge whether we are adults or not.

        • Michael Neville

          Why does your asshole of a god have any authority? Don’t give me that “he created you” bullshit because it doesn’t fly. I have no authority over my adult daughter and your god doesn’t have any authority over me just because YOU (notice I know how to properly spell an common English word) say he does.

          So how about some evidence that your god has any kind of authority over a sentient, moral adult? Or is that just your opinion?

        • Candy Smith

          So what that you don’t have any authority over her. This isnt the same thing.

        • adam

          “God is in charge whether we are adults or not.”

          Must be why things are SO FUCKED UP.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e71894366d405a2560c124d806904b75ddf8371641ab58bc4449b6c60b966fb8.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          That isn’t Gids fault. You need to be blaming humanity, not God.

        • adam

          “You need to be blaming humanity, not God. ”

          Then you lied about your “God” being in charge.

          ” There is nothing that is outside of God’s knowledge, ability, and presence. ” says Candy

        • Candy Smith

          what are you talking about?

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          So God let someone else do something, so that means He isnt in charge?

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          If I give you a bunch of choices (pretending im in charge of you) but I let you make the choices. You are in charge but you only have a certain amount of what U are in charge of.

        • Candy Smith

          First of all, children are NOT innocent. Second of all, Pharoah didnt listen, He told him to release the people and He didnt. Obviously He didnt want to kill him. Pharoah should have listened. He choose not to and suffered because of it.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          God hardened Pharaoh’s heart. Is that right?

          Basically, God has the right to do with His creation as He wills. We see from the Word that God is in control, “For truly in this city there were gathered together against Thy holy servant Jesus, whom Thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, 28 to do whatever Thy hand and Thy purpose predestined to occur,” (Acts 4:27-28). In other words, God is in control. God can also move peoples’ hearts (Prov. 21:1) and directs history to where He wants it to go.

        • Greg G.

          Basically, God has the right to do with His creation as He wills.

          If God wills to swap who gets saved, you are OK with that? Maybe he will decide he likes skeptics better than gullible people.

        • Candy Smith

          Why would He do that?

          It is yoiur opinion that He may like skeptics better than gullible people. And BTW, we are not gullible people. The evidence for God is obvious. You just don’t see it because you see evidence for evolution but the evidence for God is obvious.

        • Greg G.

          Why would He do that?

          Why wouldn’t he? I copy & pasted you saying “Basically, God has the right to do with His creation as He wills.” The Bible says God flooded the world, then regretted it. If God can change his mind…

        • adam
        • adam
        • adam

          You lying

        • Candy Smith

          I’m lying about?? What exactly?? i asked what you are talking about? Normal people just answer.

        • adam

          So your ‘God’ didnt create humanity?

        • Candy Smith

          You need to be blaming humanity because Humans have used their free-will to sin and do horrible things.

        • adam

          “God is in charge whether we are adults or not.”

          Then it is RESPONSIBLE for how fucked up things are.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/576b5354eb99d2993f45ae1c298d7ea1beb6be63a081a92e69a99632f9b856b3.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Then it is RESPONSIBLE for how fucked up things are.

          No He isnt. People are sinners. Things are the way they are because of sin.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          It wasn’t the voice of God. She’s crazy. He wouldn’t do that!!

        • adam

          “It wasn’t the voice of God. ”

          Prove it

          “She’s crazy. He wouldn’t do that!!”

          And yet he did to Abraham.

          Dont you know anything about your God from the bible.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/04fc47eedecc709bf1da625b69df07f923b2d25cf43fec8328d14cbfa11ed82b.jpg

        • epeeist

          When U have children u have authority over them, right?

          Authority to kill them if they refuse to clean their room you mean.

        • adam

          ” He is the creator of everything. ”

          He IS the creator of EVIL

          So why worship him?

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/514852465fa2b5b17de6a24be66112db1943cad898d3bf7a9e625c3e59706697.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          No He is NOT the Creator of evil. That is 100% wrong.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Once again, free-will and Jesus.

          That picture is very cute except it leaves out God’s other attributes. And you also are forgetting that for Jesus to be put on the cross, there has to be evil men. Without evil men, that would never have happened. That is just one reason why God allows evil to exist.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Adam and Eve had free-will. To say that we have no free-will would mean that we are robots. 1.) Robots with no free will are not tempted, they can only respond according to their programming. 2.) If we don’t have free-will then why are murderers put in jail if they didnt have a choice?

        • Greg G.

          Adam and Eve had free will to do what? They didn’t have knowledge of Good and Evil before they ate the fruit. If they did have the knowledge, it would have been no big deal if they ate from it.

          2.) Murderers are put in jail because the threat of jail inhibits certain actions.

        • Candy Smith

          Did Adam and Eve know they were doing wrong when they ate the fruit?

          Given what we find in Scripture we can see that Adam and Eve had been made aware that they were not to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil…

          “The LORD God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17 but from the tree if the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die,” (Genesis 2:16-17).

          We see later that Eve repeated the command to the serpent. However, it’s worth noting that she added three words, “or touch it.” Most probably since God gave the instruction to Adam, Adam then gave it to Eve. Eve then repeated it to the evil one.

          “The woman said to the serpent, “From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; 3 but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die,'” (Genesis 3:2-3).

          So when they chose to eat the fruit, we must conclude that they knew they were doing wrong.

        • Greg G.

          Given what we find in Scripture we can see that Adam and Eve had been made aware that they were not to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil…

          Why does your brain stop working every time you are fed a tired, old apologetic? If A & E had no knowledge of good and evil, then they had no knowledge that obeying was good and disobeying was evil. Knowing that they were told to not eat the fruit is not the same as knowing that eating the fruit was somehow wrong without the knowledge the fruit would give them.

        • Candy Smith

          Adam and Eve had free will to do what? They didn’t have knowledge of Good and Evil before they ate the fruit. If they did have the knowledge, it would have been no big deal if they ate from it.

          Yeah it would have been a big deal because God instructed them not.

        • Greg G.

          How did they know that not following instructions was evil?

        • Candy Smith

          Adam and Eve had free will to do what?

          To choose to listen to God or choose to disobey Him. The answer to this is pretty simple and it is explained in the Bible.

        • Greg G.

          The would have to have knowledge of good and evil to understand the concepts of “obey” and “disobey”. If God withheld that ability from them, he had no justification to blame them.

          If God doesn’t require a reasonable justification to condemn humans, then he could change his mind on the whole crucifixion. Jesus and Paul thought the coming of the Lord would happen during their generation. Somebody ust have changed his mind. Or it’s just an old myth. One or the other.

        • Candy Smith

          Murderers are put in jail because the threat of jail inhibits certain actions.

          Why is what they did wrong?? My point is if we have no free will and are just robots, why are we being held accountable for our actions!??

        • Dys

          If we have no free will, it still makes sense to lock up murders, because doing so will stop them from murdering others. In that case, it’s not about accountability, but prevention.

        • Candy Smith

          If we have no free will, it still makes sense to lock up murders,
          because doing so will stop them from murdering others. In that case, it’s not about accountability, but prevention.

          That makes no sense. What are we trying to prevent? Robots. They first of all didnt do anything wrong because God doesbt exist and if HE doesnt exist, no one can sayy that murder is wrong.

        • Dys

          That makes no sense. What are we trying to prevent? Robots.

          No, we’re trying to prevent more murders, obviously. Regardless of whether they’re ultimately accountable, locking up murderers prevents further murders and safeguards society.

          They first of all didnt do anything wrong because God doesbt exist and if HE doesnt exist, no one can sayy that murder is wrong

          Of course people can say that murder is wrong if god doesn’t exist. Where did you get the idea they couldn’t? Besides, if the only reason you can say that murder is wrong is because “god said so”, you don’t have morality anyway. You just have mindless obedience.

        • Candy Smith

          Why? They havent done anything wrong!! Are we not just a bunch of animals!??

        • Candy Smith

          So killing is just what animals do, right?!

        • Candy Smith

          Of course people can say that murder is wrong if god doesn’t exist.
          Where did you get the idea they couldn’t? Besides, if the only reason
          you can say that murder is wrong is because “god said so”, you don’t
          have morality anyway. You just have mindless obedience.

          No they cant. Think about it. If there is no God, then Morality is subjective!!

        • Candy Smith

          IF God exists then he is in charge of us and it isn’t just because he says its wrong. Its one of his rules and we are held responsible for our actions.

        • Candy Smith

          Besides, if the only reason you can say that murder is wrong is because
          “god said so”, you don’t have morality anyway. You just have mindless
          obedience.

          How do you know that that is the only reason? What if there is another reason?

        • Greg G.

          Whether we have an illusion of free will or no free will, our survival instincts will force us to eliminate dangers and threats.

          Does your religion shackle your mind so that these ideas cannot be processed?

        • adam

          “Adam and Eve had free-will.”

          Adam and Eve were so innocent and ignorant that they didnt even know they were naked.

          It would be as if you were to take a loaded gun into a preschool and place it on the table in front of a bunch of toddlers and tell then ‘Don’t Touch’.
          And when one of the toddlers picks it up and kills another toddler, you blame the toddlers instead of the person placing the loaded gun.

          “1.) Robots with no free will are not tempted, they can only respond according to their programming. ”

          So this is what Heaven is like?

          “2.) If we don’t have free-will then why are murderers put in jail if they didnt have a choice?”

          Law

          You really are extremely stupid arent you?

        • Candy Smith

          At first it might seem that if God created all things, then evil must have been created by God. However, evil is not a “thing” like a rock or electricity. You cannot have a jar of evil. Evil has no existence of its own; it is really the absence of good. For example, holes are real but they only exist in something else. We call the absence of dirt a hole, but it cannot be separated from the dirt. So when God created, it is true that all He created was good. One of the good things God made was creatures who had the freedom to choose good. In order to have a real choice, God had to allow there to be something besides good to choose. So, God allowed these free angels and humans to choose good or reject good (evil). When a bad relationship exists between two good things we call that evil, but it does not become a “thing” that required God to create it.

        • Greg G.

          Isaiah 45:7 (KJV)
          I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

        • Candy Smith

          Ok i get shown this verse often. I will explain it.

        • Candy Smith

          “Why does Isaiah 45:7 say that God created evil?”

          Isaiah 45:7
          in the King James Version reads, “I form the light, and create
          darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these
          things.” How does Isaiah 45:7 agree with the view that
          God did not create evil?
          There are two key facts that need to be considered. (1) The word
          translated “evil” is from a Hebrew word that means “adversity,
          affliction, calamity, distress, misery.” Notice how the other major
          English Bible translations render the word: “disaster” (NIV, HCSB),
          “calamity” (NKJV, NAS, ESV), and “woe” (NRSV). The Hebrew word can refer
          to moral evil, and often does have this meaning in the Hebrew
          Scriptures. However, due to the diversity of possible definitions, it is
          unwise to assume that “I create evil” in Isaiah 45:7 refers to God bringing moral evil into existence.

          (2) The context of Isaiah 45:7 makes it clear that something other than “bringing moral evil into existence” is in mind. The context of Isaiah 45:7
          is God rewarding Israel for obedience and punishing Israel for
          disobedience. God pours out salvation and blessings on those whom He
          favors. God brings judgment on those who continue to rebel against Him.
          “Woe to him who quarrels with his Master” (Isaiah 45:9). That is the person to whom God brings “evil” and “disaster.” So, rather than saying that God created “moral evil,” Isaiah 45:7
          is presenting a common theme of Scripture – that God brings disaster on
          those who continue in hard-hearted rebellion against Him.

        • Greg G.

          That is another lame apologetic that should be retired.

          No matter how it is translated, “adversity, affliction, calamity, distress, misery,” “disaster,” and “woe” all cause unnecessary suffering, which is an evil thing an omnipotent being could do without.

          Doesn’t your church have a bright 12 year-old to point out how silly your apologetics are?

        • adam

          “At first it might seem that if God created all things, then evil must have been created by God”

          No, it comes from the claim BY the character “God” in the story

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fef3e09d4fced201880c6048e47897bc3461d04f1c5de54936408c4560c105b.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Here is the rest of what I said that you choose to leave out.

          However, evil is not a “thing” like a rock or electricity. You cannot have a jar of evil. Evil has no existence of its own; it is really the absence of good. For example, holes are real but they only exist in something else. We call the absence of dirt a hole, but it cannot be separated from the dirt. So when God created, it is true that all He created was good. One of the good things God made was creatures who had the freedom to choose good. In order to have a real choice, God had to allow there to be something besides good to choose. So, God allowed these free angels and humans to choose good or reject good (evil). When a bad relationship exists between two good things we call that evil, but it does not become a “thing” that required God to create it.

        • Candy Smith

          Perhaps a further illustration will help. If a person is asked, “Does cold exist?” the answer would likely be “yes.” However, this is incorrect. Cold does not exist. Cold is the absence of heat. Similarly, darkness does not exist; it is the absence of light. Evil is the absence of good, or better, evil is the absence of God. God did not have to create evil, but rather only allow for the absence of good.

        • Greg G.

          If God is good and God is omnipresent, how can there be a lack of good anywhere?

          But there is no such thing as Evil. Some things we like and we call them “good”. Some things we do not like so we call them “bad”. Some things we really detest and we describe those as “evil”. We can have things we call “good” and things we call “evil” at the same time.

          Christians should retire that sermon about evil being the lack of good. It has been worn out for a long, long time and it is wrong.

        • Candy Smith

          Really? There is no such thing as evil!!

        • Greg G.

          There is no such thing as Evil, with a capital E. That’s a religious invention.

        • Candy Smith

          If God is good and God is omnipresent, how can there be a lack of good anywhere?

          He can’t. For you to claim that He is, is your opinion.

        • Greg G.

          Your reply doesn’t parse well. It seems to be an answer to a completely different question. Or did your cognitive dissonance kick in because you do not have an answer

        • adam

          ” Evil is the absence of good, or better, evil is the absence of God.”

          Evil is the creation of your God

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fef3e09d4fced201880c6048e47897bc3461d04f1c5de54936408c4560c105b.jpg

        • adam

          Definition of cold

          1a : having or being a temperature that is uncomfortably low for humans it is cold outside today a cold drafty atticb : having a relatively low temperature or one lower than normal or expected the bath water has gotten coldc : not heated: such as (1) of food : served without heating especially after initial cooking or processing cold cereal cold roast beef (2) : served chilled or with ice a cold drink (3) : involving processing without the use of heat cold working of steel

        • Candy Smith

          So no matter what i say you always find a way to try and prove me wrong. That’s just stupid.

        • adam

          “So no matter what i say you always find a way to try and prove me wrong.”

          Because you ARE wrong.

          “That’s just stupid.”

          That would be you, again.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ec831d9facb36edd9b3ffe2e278ad5365e6a7e6a8e7c7ef5a0c29f4a0708f64b.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Not really. I explained to you that evil is not a thing that is created. What do u think about that??

        • adam

          I think you are not very bright, unfortunately, you keep demonstrating that.

          Definition of evil

          3a : causing harm : pernicious the evil institution of slavery
          b : marked by misfortune : unlucky

          Bible God BRAGS about creating evil

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fef3e09d4fced201880c6048e47897bc3461d04f1c5de54936408c4560c105b.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          I have already explained why it says that and why it doesnt mean that He created evil. Did you see what I posted or not??

          Also, you are giving your own definition of evil. What about the biblical definition?

        • adam

          “Also, you are giving your own definition of evil.”

          Nope, not my own

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7123c548a1342e2d1779d51809c0ce85d82e0551dcde5fa0f6496d68284963dd.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Evil is what is morally wrong,
          sinful, or wicked. Evil is the result of bad actions stemming from a bad
          character. Biblically, evil is anything that contradicts the holy
          nature of God (see Psalm 51:4). Evil behavior
          can be thought of as falling into two categories: evil committed
          against other people (murder, theft, adultery) and evil committed
          against God (unbelief, idolatry, blasphemy). From the disobedience in
          the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:9) to the wickedness of Babylon the Great (Revelation 18:2), the Bible speaks of the existence of evil.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Question: “Why does Isaiah 45:7 say that God created evil?”

          Answer:
          Isaiah 45:7
          in the King James Version reads, “I form the light, and create
          darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these
          things.” How does Isaiah 45:7 agree with the view that
          God did not create evil?
          There are two key facts that need to be considered. (1) The word
          translated “evil” is from a Hebrew word that means “adversity,
          affliction, calamity, distress, misery.” Notice how the other major
          English Bible translations render the word: “disaster” (NIV, HCSB),
          “calamity” (NKJV, NAS, ESV), and “woe” (NRSV). The Hebrew word can refer
          to moral evil, and often does have this meaning in the Hebrew
          Scriptures. However, due to the diversity of possible definitions, it is
          unwise to assume that “I create evil” in Isaiah 45:7 refers to God bringing moral evil into existence.

          (2) The context of Isaiah 45:7 makes it clear that something other than “bringing moral evil into existence” is in mind. The context of Isaiah 45:7
          is God rewarding Israel for obedience and punishing Israel for
          disobedience. God pours out salvation and blessings on those whom He
          favors. God brings judgment on those who continue to rebel against Him.
          “Woe to him who quarrels with his Master” (Isaiah 45:9). That is the person to whom God brings “evil” and “disaster.” So, rather than saying that God created “moral evil,” Isaiah 45:7
          is presenting a common theme of Scripture – that God brings disaster on
          those who continue in hard-hearted rebellion against Him.

        • adam

          “However, due to the diversity of possible definitions, it is
          unwise to assume that “I create evil” in Isaiah 45:7 refers to God bringing moral evil into existence.”

          Just YOUR opinion

          Stick with facts

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fef3e09d4fced201880c6048e47897bc3461d04f1c5de54936408c4560c105b.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          The verse from Isaiah 45:7
          has been misunderstood by many people, primarily because of a poor
          translation in the King James Bible (and ASV). Parts of the book of
          Isaiah are of the poetry genre, and there is a literary technique used
          at times in Hebrew poetry called antithetical parallelism which sets two
          thoughts in complete contrast to one another, which is exactly what is
          happening in Isaiah 45:7. For example, if you were asked what the opposition of “light” is, you would likely respond “darkness,” which is what Isaiah 45:7
          says. But if you were asked what the opposite of “peace” is, would you
          respond “evil”? No, you likely wouldn’t. This is why nearly all other
          translations of this verse (including the New King James Version)
          translate the word “calamity” or something similar, as that is what the
          antithetical structure of the verse mandates. God does not bring moral
          evil upon anyone, but He does bring about calamity and disaster upon
          those who oppose Him, but such a thing does not make Him evil; it makes
          Him a just and righteous God.

        • adam

          “translate the word “calamity” or something similar, as that is what the
          antithetical structure of the verse mandates.”

          Ah, good

          Definition of calamity for Students – Merriam Webster

          1 : great distress or misfortune … he felt oppressed by the vague sense of impending calamity. — Jack London, The Call of the Wild

          2 : an event that causes great harm and suffering : disaster

          EVIL

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fef3e09d4fced201880c6048e47897bc3461d04f1c5de54936408c4560c105b.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          God did not create evil, but He does allow it.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Still ignoring me?? Look at a different version!!! That is the KJV!! It is a mistranslation.

          But the New American Standard Bible gives the sense of Isaiah 45:6-7
          more clearly: “There is no one besides Me. I am the Lord, and there is
          no other, the One forming light and creating darkness, causing
          well-being and creating calamity; I am the Lord who does all
          these.” In other words, God devises calamity as a judgment for the
          wicked. But in no sense is He the author of evil.

        • adam

          “creating calamity;”
          Definition of calamity for Students

          1 : great distress or misfortune … he felt oppressed by the vague sense of impending calamity. — Jack London, The Call of the Wild

          2 : an event that causes great harm and suffering : disaster

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fef3e09d4fced201880c6048e47897bc3461d04f1c5de54936408c4560c105b.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/86effa5e2bc761ae95f687bf44f1632c13ebd40a54b07502d779f242a887cc3e.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          I have given you an explanation for Leviticus?? Have I not??

        • adam

          You gave your opinion.

        • Candy Smith

          You may buy saves?

          Leviticus 25:44

          (Leviticus 25:44)–“As
          for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you.”

          In the fallen world that mankind had created, slavery was a reality. God permitted its existence and worked within its system. Slaves were more domestic servants than oppressed field workers. Slaves could be the captives of war (Num. 31:25-47), subjects of debt to be worked off (2 Kings 4:1), born into slavery (Gen. 17:12-13), or entered into voluntarily (Exodus 21:5-6). In the Ancient Near East, some slaves were able to own other slaves and even conduct business. In Exodus 21:2
          a slave was required to be set free after six years of service. Though slavery carries a very negative connotation here in America, it was not nearly as bad as it was here in the first 100 years of our nation’s existence.

          As I said above, God works within the fallen system to bring about His will. Slavery was permitted by God, and rules of treatment of slaves were given so they would not be mistreated.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          It’s tragic what religion does to someone like you. God regulates slavery, and here you are (not him, but you) apologizing for him. Explaining away his moral failings. Why not let him do that himself?

          Ask yourself why support for slavery would outrage you if in any other religious book, but in the Bible, it’s A-OK with you.

        • Candy Smith

          And according to what basis is slavery wrong??

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          My evolution-given inate morality.

          How about you? You’re saying that you would have no clue that slavery is a moral problem without God telling you so?

        • Candy Smith

          My evolution-given innate morality.

          Which is subjective!!!

          I never said I thought it was wrong unless I knew what the Bible says. I asked you WHY IT IS WRONG IN THE FIRST PLACE. According to what and what standard do you use to say that Standard is wrong. The only thing you can say is In my opinion I think slavery is wrong. In my opinion, I think what Hitler did was wrong. But you cannot say anything else.

          My standard is the Bible which is Objective because God’s nature is reflected by the Laws given. I’ll explain this.

          God created us, so He has the right to hold us to His moral standard.

          From its first verse, the Bible asserts, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1). Because God created us and made us in His image, we belong to Him and are obligated to live according to His standard or face His judgment.

          If a fellow human were to arbitrarily decide what morality involves and impose his standard on us, we could say his morality is subjective, according to his personal preferences and beliefs. But because God created us, He has authority over us and has the right to hold us to His standard. We inherently know this ultimate standard of right and wrong because God has written His law on our hearts (Romans 2:15).

          God’s moral standard flows from His unchanging nature, so His standard is absolute.

          God is just and does judge sin. We all deserve to die for sin, including the Canaanites wiped out by Israel, who, according to Genesis 15:13–16, were given roughly 400 years to repent of their wickedness but did not (Ecclesiastes 12:14; Romans 6:23; Hebrews 9:27). God has always perfectly balanced His justice and mercy—reserving His wrath for unrepentant, unbelieving sinners, and showing mercy to sinners who turn to Him in faith (Romans 4).

          God Himself testified, “For I am the Lord, I do not change” (Malachi 3:6). He didn’t ever think up a moral standard to decide right from wrong. Rather, His moral standard flows from His perfectly pure and holy nature. Since His nature is unchanging, His standard is absolute.

          God cannot sin, so His standard is objective.

          Remember that God’s moral standard flows from His unchanging nature. Because God’s nature is perfect and holy, He cannot sin, so His standard is objective. It is impossible for God to contradict Himself or act inconsistently with His own nature (2 Timothy 2:13).

        • Candy Smith

          God regulates slavery, and here you are (not him, but you) apologizing for him.

          because he doesnt have to do anything. He doesn’t have to bow down and apologize to finite humans. That would be absurd. There is no reason for this and I am still not apologizing for him, so qquit saying I am. Thats just stupid. He is infinite, all-powerful, and you are not. He is in charge and you are not. U have NOTHING TO OFFER BUT YOUR OPINION.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Put “quotes” or «something» /else/ ‘around’ the other person’s text so your stuff is less confusing.

          He doesn’t have to bow down and apologize to finite humans. That would be absurd.

          What if he’s make believe? Then he would be just a made-up Bronze Age god that people have turned into an enormous religion, just like lots of other gods.

          For your claim to make sense, you’d need to show that your imaginary god is actually real. Go.

          There is no reason for this and I am still not apologizing for him, so qquit saying I am.

          The point is: it’s you, not him. You’re doing his work for him. Is he too busy watching TV? Have him get off the couch and go all Job on my ass. You keep assuming that he exists, ignoring the fact that his existence is the whole point of this conversation. Show me.

          U have NOTHING TO OFFER BUT YOUR OPINION.

          There’s a lot of that going around.

        • Candy Smith

          There is no reason for this and I am still not apologizing for him, so qquit saying I am.

          The
          point is: it’s you, not him. You’re doing his work for him. Is he too
          busy watching TV? Have him get off the couch and go all Job on my ass. You keep assuming that he exists, ignoring the fact that his existence is the whole point of this conversation. Show me.

          God commands us to talk to otherwise. He doesnt have to show himself. He isnt going to show himself to those that are full of pride and you are full of pride.

        • adam

          Can you own slaves AS PROPERTY

          Can you BEAT SLAVES as long as they dont die within a couple of days..

          God says yes, you say yes.

          You are cruel because you worship a cruel god.

        • Candy Smith

          Can you BEAT SLAVES as long as they dont die within a couple of days..

          God says yes, you say yes.

          You are cruel because you worship a cruel god.

          And why is this cruel?? According to what is any of that cruel?? The most you can offer is your opinion but that’s it.

        • adam

          “And why is this cruel?? According to what is any of that cruel?? ”

          Definition of cruel

          1 : disposed to inflict pain or suffering : devoid of humane feelings a cruel tyrant has a cruel heart

          2a : causing or conducive to injury, grief, or pain

          ” The most you can offer is your opinion but that’s it.”

          Nope, not my opinion

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7123c548a1342e2d1779d51809c0ce85d82e0551dcde5fa0f6496d68284963dd.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          So God allows suffering, that makes Him cruel?? Okay but here’s the problem!! What if He has perfectly good reasons to allow it? How do you know He doesn’t?? You can say He doesn’t just because you feel like it but that doesn’t make you right. I suggest that it is possible that God has reasons for allowing pain and suffering.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          ” The most you can offer is your opinion but that’s it.”

          Nope, not my opinion

          That is a definition of cruel that you found off of the internet!! That doesn’t make God cruel.

        • adam

          “That is a definition of cruel that you found off of the internet!! ”

          You mean Merriam Webster dictionary….

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7123c548a1342e2d1779d51809c0ce85d82e0551dcde5fa0f6496d68284963dd.jpg

        • adam

          You may own slaves as property?

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/86effa5e2bc761ae95f687bf44f1632c13ebd40a54b07502d779f242a887cc3e.jpg

          You may BEAT them as property as long as they dont die within a couple of days:

          When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that
          the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the
          slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the
          slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/60865103a336b5d68f96eb3254e706491af8f8a5dbd80dafef9edf2beab0319d.jpg

          When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at
          the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who
          bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not
          allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the
          contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to
          marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must
          treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes
          another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep
          with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may
          leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

        • BlackMamba44

          Don’t like what the bible says? Just pick a different bible.

          KJ21 I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I, the Lord, do all these things.

          ASV I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I am Jehovah, that doeth all these things.

          BRG I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things

          CEV I create light and darkness, happiness and sorrow. I, the Lord, do all of this.

          DARBY forming the light and creating darkness, making peace and creating evil: I, Jehovah, do all these things.

          DRA I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord that do all these things.

          GNV I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

          JUB I form the light and create darkness; I make peace and create evil: I am the LORD that does all this.

          KJV I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

          AKJV I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

          LEB I form light and I create darkness; I make peace and I create evil; I am Yahweh; I do all these things.

          TLB I form the light and make the dark. I send good times and bad. I, Jehovah, am he who does these things.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b6d9a1f48da757d61eba5cf61ef3120e4f1038689cdb0e0beb281f6e0e505a0a.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          This is a common misconception. Some people think that the Bible was written in one language, translated to another language, then translated into yet another and so on until it was finally translated into the English. The complaint is that since it was rewritten so many times in different languages throughout history, it must have become corrupted . The “telephone” analogy is often used as an illustration. It goes like this. One person tells another person a sentence who then tells another person, who tells yet another, and so on and so on until the last person hears a sentence that has little or nothing to do with
          the original one. The only problem with this analogy is that it doesn’t fit the Bible at all.

          The fact is that the Bible has not been rewritten. Take the New Testament, for example. The disciples of Jesus
          wrote the New Testament in Greek; and though we do not have the original documents, we do have around 6,000 copies of the Greek manuscripts that were made very close to the time of the originals. These various manuscripts, or copies, agree with each other to almost 100 percent accuracy. Statistically, the New Testament is 99.5% textually pure. That means that there is only 1/2 of 1% of of all the copies that do not agree with each other perfectly. But, if you take that 1/2 of 1% and examine it, you find that the majority of the “problems” are nothing more than spelling errors and very minor word alterations. For example, instead of saying Jesus, a variation might be “Jesus Christ.” So the actual amount of textual variation of any concern is extremely low. Therefore, we can say that we have a
          remarkably accurate compilation of the original documents.

          So when we translate the Bible, we do not translate from a
          translation of a translation of a translation. We translate from the
          original language into our language. It is a one-step process and not a series of steps that can lead to corruption. It is one translation step from the original to the English or to whatever language in which a person needs to read. So we translate into Spanish from the same Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. Likewise we translate into the German from those same Greek and Hebrew manuscripts as well. This is how it is done for each and every language into which we translate the Bible. We do not translate from the original languages to the English, to the
          Spanish, and then to the German. It is from the original languages to the English or into the Spanish or into the German. Therefore, the translations are very accurate and trustworthy regarding what the Bible originally said.

        • BlackMamba44
        • Candy Smith

          No it isn’t. Like I said it is a common misconception that Atheists have. I am NOT GIVING MY OPINION!! The Bible hasnt been rewritten and rewritten. There is no proof of it being translated from say Greek to English to Spanish and so on. That just isnt true.

        • BlackMamba44

          Your opinion.

        • Candy Smith

          No it isn’t!!

        • Candy Smith

          Definition of evil

          3a : causing harm : pernicious the evil institution of slavery
          b : marked by misfortune : unlucky

          See exactly like I said that is your definition of evil. Why aren’t the people that burned their children and offered them as sacrifice evil? Why is God evil for getting rid of evil people which He has the right to do, but why only Him??

        • adam

          ” Why aren’t the people that burned their children and offered them as sacrifice evil? ”

          They are evil.

          Why would think they were not?

          “Why is God evil for getting rid of evil ”

          He is evil for CREATING EVIL.

          You know for killing everyone for Adam’s innocence and ignorance

          For torturing for eternity

          And of course:

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/398eee168a95a1c3714d1513e1274d5c0eb7136e6f5206bb94180f68ef55410d.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Why is God evil for getting rid of evil ”

          He is evil for CREATING EVIL.

          Except He didnt. If he did than yes he would be but he didnt.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Yet, he brags about it.

          NO HE DOESNT!! For like 5th time, that is a mistranslation. How long do U plan on ignoring that comment??

        • adam

          ” that is a mistranslation.”

          Nope,

          And I already demonstrated that ‘calamity’ is the same evil.

          how long are you going to ignore your own stupidity.

        • Candy Smith

          ” that is a mistranslation.”

          Nope,

          And I already demonstrated that ‘calamity’ is the same evil.

          Calamity is the same as evil.

          Well im sorry but that is your opinion . In your opinion it is. Just saying they are the same doesn’t mean they are.

          Calamity-an event causing great and often sudden damage or distress; a disaster.

          Evil is what is morally wrong, sinful, or wicked.

          Yeah I can tell that they are the same thing.

          (Isaiah 45:7, KJV) – “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.”

          Is God really the one who created evil? To answer the question we must first look at how the word for evil, rah, is used in the Bible, examine the context of the Isaiah 45:7 passage, and look at other passages on the same subject.

          First of all, the Hebrew word for evil, rah, is used in many
          different ways in the Bible. In the KJV Bible it occurs 663 times. 431 times it is translated as evil. The other 232 times it is translated as wicked, bad, hurt, harm, ill, sorrow, mischief, displeased, adversity, affliction, trouble, calamity, grievous, misery, and trouble. So we can see that the word does not require that it be translated as evil. This is why different Bibles translate this verse differently. It is translated as calamity by the NASB and NKJV; disaster by the NIV; and woe by the RSV.

          Second, the context of the verse is speaking of natural phenomena.

          “I am the Lord, and there is no other; Besides Me there is no God. I will gird you, though you have not known Me; 6That men may know from the rising to the setting of the sun That there is no one besides Me. I am the Lord, and there is no other, 7The One forming light and creating darkness, Causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the Lord who does all these,” (Isaiah 45:5-7).

          Notice that the context of the verse is dealing with who God is, that itis God who speaks of natural phenomena (sun, light, dark), and it is God who is able to cause “well-being” as well as “calamity.” Contextually, this verse is dealing with natural disasters and human comfort issues. It is not speaking of moral evil; rather, it is dealing with calamity, distress, etc. This is consistent with other scriptures.

          Also, you have to prove that evil actually exists before you can call God evil. What do you mean by evil? By what standard do you use to call something evil? Within your belief system, that is atheism, there is no such thing as evil. There is nothing evil in an atheism belief system.

          Since you pretty much think that we are nothing more than a bunch of animals, why is it wrong to kill people. It’s just survival of the fittiest. There is no “I see the starving child, and i feel bad for it, so I’ll give it some food.” Instead theres only “Thats tough for you”.

          there is no empathy within the evolutionary belief system. Of course Atheists will claim there is but thats just because they added it but it isn’t consistent withing their belief system.

          You disagree!?? Oh well!!

        • adam

          “Well im sorry but that is your opinion .”

          Merriam Websters.
          Nope, simple definitions of the words.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7123c548a1342e2d1779d51809c0ce85d82e0551dcde5fa0f6496d68284963dd.jpg

          You are the only one here spouting uninformed OPINIONS.

        • Candy Smith

          The definition of Calamity and the definition of evil ARE NOT THE SAME!!!

          The verse from Isaiah 45:7 has been misunderstood by many people, primarily because of a poor translation in the King James Bible (and ASV). The context of Isaiah 45:7 makes it clear that something other than “bringing moral evil into existence” is in mind. The context of Isaiah 45:7
          is God rewarding Israel for obedience and punishing Israel for
          disobedience. God pours out salvation and blessings on those whom He
          favors. God brings judgment on those who continue to rebel against Him.
          “Woe to him who quarrels with his Master” (Isaiah 45:9). That is the person to whom God brings “evil” and “disaster.” So, rather than saying that God created “moral evil,” Isaiah 45:7
          is presenting a common theme of Scripture – that God brings disaster on
          those who continue in hard-hearted rebellion against Him.

          You need to stop coming to the assumption that you know what the verse is talking about because you dont!! You need to start interpreting the verses correctly and you are NOT interpreting this verse correctly!!

        • adam
        • adam

          “He is evil for CREATING EVIL.”

          Then we agree, and you worship EVIL

          Here is God bragging about creating evil from the bible:

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fef3e09d4fced201880c6048e47897bc3461d04f1c5de54936408c4560c105b.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Isaiah 45:7
          in the King James Version reads, “I form the light, and create
          darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these
          things.” How does Isaiah 45:7 agree with the view that
          God did not create evil?
          There are two key facts that need to be considered. (1) The word
          translated “evil” is from a Hebrew word that means “adversity,
          affliction, calamity, distress, misery.” Notice how the other major
          English Bible translations render the word: “disaster” (NIV, HCSB),
          “calamity” (NKJV, NAS, ESV), and “woe” (NRSV). The Hebrew word can refer
          to moral evil, and often does have this meaning in the Hebrew
          Scriptures. However, due to the diversity of possible definitions, it is
          unwise to assume that “I create evil” in Isaiah 45:7 refers to God bringing moral evil into existence.

          (2) The context of Isaiah 45:7 makes it clear that something other than “bringing moral evil into existence” is in mind. The context of Isaiah 45:7
          is God rewarding Israel for obedience and punishing Israel for
          disobedience. God pours out salvation and blessings on those whom He
          favors. God brings judgment on those who continue to rebel against Him.
          “Woe to him who quarrels with his Master” (Isaiah 45:9). That is the person to whom God brings “evil” and “disaster.” So, rather than saying that God created “moral evil,” Isaiah 45:7
          is presenting a common theme of Scripture – that God brings disaster on
          those who continue in hard-hearted rebellion against Him.

        • Candy Smith

          I am posting this more than once because apparently you cant read it the first time I said it.

          Isaiah 45:7
          in the King James Version reads, “I form the light, and create
          darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these
          things.” How does Isaiah 45:7 agree with the view that
          God did not create evil?There are two key facts that need to be considered. (1) The word translated “evil” is from a Hebrew word that means “adversity, affliction, calamity, distress, misery.” Notice how the other major English Bible translations render the word: “disaster” (NIV, HCSB), “calamity” (NKJV, NAS, ESV), and “woe” (NRSV). The Hebrew word can refer to moral evil, and often does have this meaning in the Hebrew Scriptures. However, due to the diversity of possible definitions, it is unwise to assume that “I create evil” in Isaiah 45:7 refers to God bringing moral evil into existence.

          (2) The context of Isaiah 45:7 makes it clear that something other than “bringing moral evil into existence” is in mind. The context of Isaiah 45:7 is God rewarding Israel for obedience and punishing Israel for disobedience. God pours out salvation and blessings on those whom He favors. God brings judgment on those who continue to rebel against Him. “Woe to him who quarrels with his Master” (Isaiah 45:9). That is the person to whom God brings “evil” and “disaster.” So, rather than saying that God created “moral evil,” Isaiah 45:7 is presenting a common theme of Scripture – that God brings disaster on
          those who continue in hard-hearted rebellion against Him.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          KJV says evil
          You say calamity, which is the same.

          In your opinion they are the same. Simply claiming they are doesn’t actually mean they are!

        • adam

          “In your opinion they are the same. ”

          Nope Merriam Webster Dictionary

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7123c548a1342e2d1779d51809c0ce85d82e0551dcde5fa0f6496d68284963dd.jpg

        • Michael Neville

          You don’t even know your own Bible. Read Isaiah 45:7.

          EDIT: I see Adam got there first.

        • Candy Smith

          I do know what it says and I’ll explain that to you. U obviously haven’t read any other versions other than KJV. Maybe you should try reading a different version.

          Isaiah 45:7bin the King James Version reads, “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.” How does Isaiah 45:7 agree with the view that God did not create evil?

          There are two key facts that need to be considered. (1) The word
          translated “evil” is from a Hebrew word that means “adversity,
          affliction, calamity, distress, misery.” Notice how the other major
          English Bible translations render the word: “disaster” (NIV, HCSB), “calamity” (NKJV, NAS, ESV), and “woe” (NRSV). The Hebrew word can refer to moral evil, and often does have this meaning in the Hebrew Scriptures. However, due to the diversity of possible definitions, it is unwise to assume that “I create evil” in Isaiah 45:7 refers to God bringing moral evil into existence.

          (2) The context of Isaiah 45:7 makes it clear that something other than “bringing moral evil into existence” is in mind. The context of Isaiah 45:7 is God rewarding Israel for obedience and punishing Israel for disobedience. God pours out salvation and blessings on those whom He favors. God brings judgment on those who continue to rebel against Him. “Woe to him who quarrels with his Master” (Isaiah 45:9). That is the person to whom God brings “evil” and “disaster.” So, rather than saying that God created “moral evil,” Isaiah 45:7 is presenting a common theme of Scripture – that God brings disaster on
          those who continue in hard-hearted rebellion against Him.

        • Michael Neville

          The Hebrew word can refer to moral evil, and often does have this meaning in the Hebrew Scriptures. However, due to the diversity of possible definitions, it is unwise to assume that “I create evil” in Isaiah 45:7 refers to God bringing moral evil into existence.

          No, your tap-dancing, hand-waving and “looka that” bullshit doesn’t change the FACT that according to your own propaganda your thuggish bully of a god brags that he’s evil. Your god kills people just because he can. That, you stupid, ignorant person, is evil.

          And don’t bring out that bullshit about “he created you so he can kill you.” I created my daughter, if I kill her then I’m liable for criminal charges. If I kill my pet cat just for grins and giggles I’m also liable for criminal charges. When humanity has decided a cat is more valuable than your god thinks sentient, intelligent humans are then your god is evil.

          I’m not “rebelling” against your asshole of a god. I’m saying he doesn’t exist. If you want me to believe your sadistic bully exists then you have to provide evidence of his existence. So far you’re completely lacking in doing so.

        • Greg G.

          If tap-dancing and hand-waving aren’t evidence for God, I don’t know what is.

        • Candy Smith

          You know for killing everyone for Adam’s innocence and ignorance

          For torturing for eternity

          Could you believe in a God who would become a human, suffer at the hands of humans, and be killed by them, all so that His death could be the payment for their sins? That is extremely loving. God is saving people who deserve to go to hell – and we all deserve that. Remember that the same God that sends people to Hell also died for them. If they reject what God has provided, then what is God left to do? He would have to judge them.

          Are you implying that it is unjust for God to send people to hell? If so, then you accuse God of injustice. Sin is wrong and it must be punished. What would you have God do to those who oppose Him and do evil? Do you want Him to ignore that which is wrong? Do you want Him to turn His head and not be holy and righteous?

        • adam

          “Could you believe in a God who would become a human, suffer at the hands of humans, and be , killed by them, all so that His death could be the payment for their sins?”

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/878b8e07d2b942087c85ac234890ad18b3e8f811594bc275918c5d05cbe88467.jpg

          Why would a God have to have payment for something it created in the first place?

          Why is YOUR God so cruel that he just can’t forgive?

          “Are you implying that it is unjust for God to send people to hell?”

          Torturing someone for an ETERNITY for what they did in a VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY,
          VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY,
          VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY,
          VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY,
          VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY,
          VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY,
          VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY,
          VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY,
          VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY,
          VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY,
          VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY,
          VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY,
          VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY,
          VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY,
          VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY, VERY temporal act is MONSTEROUSLY CRUEL

          ” What would you have God do to those who oppose Him and do evil?”

          Well for a loving God, he would teach.
          But that is not what kind of God you worship is it?

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9bfb7cbb09a39ae8911c3879d7def113ab5277eb302961e16b02b2a649a0e7d6.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          First of all, God did not create sin. He gave Adam and Eve free will and they MADE A CHOICE to rebel. They brought it into the world. Of course u can ask why He did this, but your question is no different than with children. We know that when we have children, that they will behave badly, right? Yet we still choose to have them, right?? So just because we know they will behave badly, that doesnt mean we shouldnt have children.

        • adam

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9bfb7cbb09a39ae8911c3879d7def113ab5277eb302961e16b02b2a649a0e7d6.jpg ” He gave Adam and Eve free will and they MADE A CHOICE to rebel. ”

          Adam and Eve were like toddlers, not knowing even that they were naked, just as the character god made them in the bible.

          So that it COULD torture people for ETERNITY

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          How could they be guilty of a moral error? They didn’t know morality since they hadn’t eaten the magic fruit yet

        • Candy Smith

          God made people to have a relationship with them. He wanted them TO HAVE A CHOICE, AND NOT FORCE THEM. He DID NOT CREATE SIN, so quit saying He did. He gave them a choice and they made a choice to listen to Satan, a complete stranger rather than listen to God, who they know very well.

          Sin is breaking God’s Law and has to be punished. If a judge didnt punish a convicted victim, he would be unjust. Similar, if God didnt punish those that CHOOSE to disobey Him. He would be Unjust.

        • adam
        • adam

          “God made people to have a relationship with them”

          Exactly my point:

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9bfb7cbb09a39ae8911c3879d7def113ab5277eb302961e16b02b2a649a0e7d6.jpg

          You just believe torture is love….

        • adam

          ” He gave them a choice and they made a choice to listen to Satan”

          Satan?

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/05cafdf4e54d70a9410dfd45f846304eb9891592e53b7561d59d1be03b899362.jpg

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          They didn’t listen to Satan, they listened to a serpent (read your Bible), and the serpent was right! God was the liar this time.

        • Candy Smith

          The serpent was right?? Right about what???

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          God said that they would die. The serpent said they wouldn’t … and he was right.

          Read your Bible a little more closely next time.

        • Candy Smith

          No God was not the liar. That is absurd. God is the one that cannot lie, so claiming otherwise is false.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          how do we know that God can’t lie? Maybe that source is biased.

          Anyway, the Bible makes clear that God does lie. More here:
          http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2014/08/george-washington-couldnt-tell-a-lie-but-god-can/

        • Candy Smith

          you

          Torturing someone for an ETERNITY for what they did in a VERY, VERY, temporal act is MONSTEROUSLY CRUEL

          Well that was an overreaction since the first time you used it was nothing more than your opinion. So, I am going to limit to one time since using it 50 times still makes it your opinion. Using the word more than a normal amount of time doesn’t make your opinion into a fact.

          Are you implying that it is unjust for God to send people to hell? If
          so, then you accuse God of injustice. Sin is wrong and it must be
          punished. What would you have God do to those who oppose Him and do evil? Do you want Him to ignore that which is wrong? Do you want Him to turn His head and not be holy and righteous?

          Instead of coming to the conclusion that your opinion makes you right and God is cruel, the smart thing to do would be to research this and try to understand the reason for this. This would make more sense because the only other thing u can do is waste time calling him names, which you cant prove as a fact.

          Why would God punish someone for eternity for temporary sins?

          The reason God would punish someone for eternity for temporal sins committed on earth is based on who the sin is against, not on the size of the sins. Let me illustrate. If I were to walk up to you and slap you, you might get angry or even take a swing at me. We’re done (hopefully). If I were to walk up to the President of the United States and slap him, I would be arrested and probably spend years in jail. Why would the exact same “small” offense get such a different result? It is because of who it is against. Likewise, when we move up the chain of command to the infinite God of the universe, it isn’t difficult to see that the consequences are amplified infinitely as well. Therefore, eternal punishment in hell fits the crime – it is against.

          Like it or not, when we sin, we sin against God. He is holy and he is righteous and anything that we do that is contrary to his will –
          breaking the Law of God (1 John 3:4) – properly deserves a punishment. Since our offense is against an infinitely holy God, the consequence is likewise infinite and that is why eternal hell exists.

        • adam
        • adam

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e936d3b9451f720cc31cb395e29d663e0b002544c7104ca964476499270530f4.jpg “Well that was an overreaction”

          NOpe,

          If EVERY byte from every singe computer ever made, every byte from every movie and audio, every text and every picture ever sent was that “VERY”

          ALL of those wouldnt be a single molecule in all the universe as far as time goes.

          All demonstrating how PETTY both YOU and your imaginary God are.

          “Like it or not, when we sin,”

          It’s MYTHOLOGY, sin is IMAGINARY.

          “breaking the Law of God (1 John 3:4) – properly deserves a punishment.
          Since our offense is against an infinitely holy God, the consequence is
          likewise infinite and that is why eternal hell exists.”

          An such is the source of your CRUELTY

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a18a3237d360e002dbdd901e4a3f5688a3463b7d939dbc595090ceadb5ae4faa.png

        • adam

          ” I would be arrested and probably spend years in jail. ”

          Most likely not.

          but that is no comparison.

          Let’s say you slapped Drumpf,
          NOW, if Drumpf sentenced you to death, all your children to death, all their children and their childrens children to death, but instead had the power to keep all your progeny alive so that it could torture them mercilessly for ETERNITY, then you have an analogy.

          Then it demonstrates how UTTERLY CRUEL you and your “God” really is.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c4e3bbea2d1e4d81dbd3798980be2ee8b39f893fee5d1d2b81b76b5e7ba184e1.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Then it demonstrates how UTTERLY CRUEL you and your “God” really is.

          In your opinion He is cruel.

        • adam

          “In your opinion He is cruel.”

          Nope

          Not my opinion, FACT.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7123c548a1342e2d1779d51809c0ce85d82e0551dcde5fa0f6496d68284963dd.jpg
          Definition of cruel

          1 : disposed to inflict pain or suffering : devoid of humane feelings a cruel tyrant has a cruel heart
          2a : causing or conducive to injury, grief, or pain

        • Candy Smith

          Okay and that doesnt make God cruel!! Just because He does something that you dislike that doesnt make him cruel!?? You can say He is cruel, but like I have said before, it is your opinion that He is cruel, it isnt a fact!!

          U the atheist or agnostics who claim that God is cruel have a large burden of proof. You not merely claiming to know about
          the actions of God; you are also claiming to sufficiently know the
          circumstances in which He performed those actions, as well as His
          motivations.

          Additionally, you are claiming to know the very mind of
          God, ascribing to Him the attitudes of indifference and/or sadistic
          pleasure necessary to define Him as cruel. Quite frankly, this is beyond the you (skeptic’s) ability to demonstrate—you cannot possibly know the mind of God.

          There is no doubt that God both allows and,
          at times, causes pain and suffering, but God’s goodness cannot be
          impugned because He commits an act that appears cruel to us.

          While we can’t claim to know His reasoning
          in every circumstance, we do know several reasons for actions that can
          appear to us to be cruel, especially if we don’t know—or don’t bother to
          find out—the circumstances:

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          ” What would you have God do to those who oppose Him and do evil?”

          Well for a loving God, he would teach.
          But that is not what kind of God you worship is it?

          Who the heck says He hasnt taught?? Are U kidding me?? Jesus taught his disciples all kinds of things.

          Also, you are not God, so quit pretending to be. I know I asked that question, but its your opinion.

        • adam

          “Who the heck says He hasnt taught??”

          The bible

          People havent come together in his name.

          Instead Abrahamic worshiper – Jews, Christians and Muslims STILL can’t agree on who Magical Sky Daddy loves most and who will ‘inherit’ it’s kingdom.

          So just what “in your mind” justifies eternal torture?

          God is IMAGINARY.

          so YOU quit PRETENDING

        • Candy Smith

          People havent come together in his name.

          And you know this how???

        • Greg G.

          People havent come together in his name.

          And you know this how???

          Because of the biggest prayer failure of all time. Jesus prayed that believers would agree as one so that the world would be impressed enough to know that Jesus came from God. Instead, the world see 45,000 different denominations with some denominations killing each other and that the believers were not in agreement even in Paul’s times, as we see in 2 Corinthians. The most Christians can say is that they agree enough to be identified as Christians but that makes their disagreements all the more stark.

          John 17:20-23 (NRSV)20 “I ask not only on behalf of these, but also on behalf of those who will believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 The glory that you have given me I have given them, so that they may be one, as we are one, 23 I in them and you in me, that they may become completely one, so that the world may know that you have sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

        • Michael Neville

          There’s the further point that some Christians don’t consider other Christians to be Christians. Candy has already shown that she doesn’t consider Catholics, the largest Christian denomination, to be Christians.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          So just what “in your mind” justifies eternal torture?

          Am, how about the fact that nothing you say can claim that its wrong or immoral. The only thing you can offer is your opinion. Now what Justifies, IOW, what makes it right….

          Because God is infinite, when we sin, we are offending an infinite
          God. This is incredibly significant. The reason sin is so bad is not
          so much because of the one committing the sin, but because of the One who is offended. In other words, sin is so incredibly bad because it takes on a horrible quality by the very fact of who it is against; an infinitely pure, holy, and righteous God.

        • Greg G.

          You are saying that a righteous God has a judgement with binary values. That’s infantile, not infinite.

        • adam

          “when we sin”

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6dcc69951467cdee1110228ac54595c79373de4c5b7cb128997a085f34d18054.jpg

          ” In other words, sin is so incredibly bad because it takes on a
          horrible quality by the very fact of who it is against; an infinitely
          pure, holy, and righteous God.”

          So why is such a ‘being’ so overly sensitive and petty?

          Surely there is no infinitely pureness in such pettiness.

          Petty God means petty follower as well.
          Why are you so petty?

        • Candy Smith

          So why is such a ‘being’ so overly sensitive and petty?

          Who says He is petty?? That is nothing more than your opinion!!!

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          God is IMAGINARY.

          It is your opinion that He imaginary. I’m not really sure if you think this claim is something more than your opinion but if you think it is, then you would be wrong.

        • Greg G.

          It is your opinion that He imaginary. I’m not really sure if you think this claim is something more than your opinion but if you think it is, then you would be wrong.

          When you miss someone, do you ever imagine that the person is with you? But when the person is with you, it is completely different than when you imagine the person is with you. But there is no distinction between God being with you and imagining God being with you.

        • Michael Neville

          Don’t you have any other argument than “that’s your opinion”? You need to show, as in give evidence, that the opinion is wrong. Just calling something an opinion and then making an unevidenced assertion that it’s wrong is not a rebuttal.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          He also needs to show that his position is not an opinion.

        • adam

          then demonstrate that your God is anything but IMAGINARY.

          If you could you would.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e8d06962d4285a26a26dd0f6b5ce20ea4207eef26617bb6f4c0cb3e5f25e3394.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Oh maybe I just havent yet!! Ever give that a thought. I havent said it yet. That doesnt mean I cant!

        • adam
        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          I dont do genocidal rampages

          Of course you dont because you know there will consequences. There are no consequences for God because unlike us humans, He has no rules to follow. He created us for crying out loud. He can do what He wants with his Creation and no one can claim otherwise other than giving their opinion.

        • adam

          ” He created us for crying out loud. He can do what He wants with his
          Creation and no one can claim otherwise other than giving their
          opinion.”

          Just your opinion, and a VERY CRUEL one at that.

          Demonstrate that your God is anything but IMAGINARY, before you start talking about its ability to create.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7123c548a1342e2d1779d51809c0ce85d82e0551dcde5fa0f6496d68284963dd.jpg

          ” He created us for crying out loud. He can do what He wants with his Creation”

          Dena created Margaret
          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/576b5354eb99d2993f45ae1c298d7ea1beb6be63a081a92e69a99632f9b856b3.jpg

          She can do what she wants with her creation.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a18a3237d360e002dbdd901e4a3f5688a3463b7d939dbc595090ceadb5ae4faa.png

        • Candy Smith

          I have already explained that there is a difference between God and the parent. There is a big difference!!!

        • adam
        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Luke 12:47-48,
          “And that slave who knew his master’s will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes, 48 but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of a flogging, will receive but few. From everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more.

          We must understand that as there are differences in the degrees of sin, there are also differences in the degrees of the effects of sin and the punishments that will come to those who are not redeemed (Luke 12:47-48). As Christians, the severity of our sin can have different effects on us, and even though we are forgiven the effects of our sin in this world are readily known.”

          That verse is simply a punishment for sin.

        • adam

          “We must understand that as there are differences in the degrees of sin, ”

          No we mustnt

          Sin is an IMAGINARY disease invented to sell you an IMAGINARY cure.

        • Candy Smith

          Sin is an IMAGINARY disease invented to sell you an IMAGINARY cure.

          That is still your opinion. How many more times do I have to repeat myself!?? Saying there is no such thing as sin doesn’t mean there isn’t any.
          Besides, if you have you ever lied, or cheated, or stolen, then
          according to the Bible, you’ve sinned.

          I will keep saying this as long as you continue saying the same thing over and over.

        • adam
        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Jesus’s death as payment for sins? That’s your theology. It makes no sense to the rest of us, so don’t trot it out as some great sacrifice.

        • Candy Smith

          Of course it doesnt make sense, because you for 1.) have no faith whatsoever in God. 2.) You dont trust Him. 3.) You are in love with your sin. 4.) You come to the conclusion that the Bible is false from the getto so whenever someone like myself tries to talk to you about it, it doesnt mean anything.

          The sacrifice makes ABSOLUTE SENSE. In fact its one of the greatest events in History. It is amazing. But because you refuse to change your ways, you will NEVER see things from a different way. So please, if you are willing to change your way of thinking, please let me know???

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          I follow the evidence. I have no idea what you do.

          The sacrifice of Jesus is just part of the story. Change the story, and such a sacrifice isn’t needed. Sin (god(s) becoming offended) is a religious thing. Remove the supernatural, and the sin vanishes.

        • Candy Smith

          Change the story?? Why?? Why do we have to change the story?? God has a plan for us!! He wants things to go a certain way. You can give an alternative opinion, but it wouldnt be what God’s plan is, so then that makes you wrong??

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          You’re a waste of time, bro. I don’t know if you enjoy yanking everyone’s chain or if you’re just stupid.

          We don’t simply assume God’s existence like you do. If you make a statement that assumes God, it will sound like bullshit to the atheists here. You’ve ignored the rather important first step, showing that your god exists.

          Of course, I know why you skip that first step–it’s because you have zero evidence.

        • Candy Smith

          We don’t simply assume God’s existence like you do. If you make a
          statement that assumes God, it will sound like bullshit to the atheists here. You’ve ignored the rather important first step, showing that your god exists.

          Of course it sounds like nonsense because you arent looking for God. You are not honestly looking for him. If you were, you would have found him, this is exactly what the Bible says. I’ll even show you the verse.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          So you’re going to prove something to me by showing it to me in your holy book? You do realize that it’s not my holy book, right? Why would that convince me?

          Are you a Poe? Your arguments sound too earnest and stupid for a legitimate Christian.

        • Michael Neville

          Why should we look for gods (remember there’s more gods than the immoral bully you worship)? We don’t have god-shaped holes in our psyches crying out to be filled. You need to give us reasons to look for some gods. “He’ll punish you forever if you don’t believe in him” is a threat, not a reason.

        • Candy Smith

          You’ve ignored the rather important first step, showing that your god exists.

          Of course, I know why you skip that first step–it’s because you have zero evidence.

          Just because I haven’t shown you evidence, that doesn’t mean there is isn’t any because it is illogical to claim that there is no evidence. Only someone that knows everything can make that claim and we obviously dont so claiming there is no evidence doesn’t work.

          And even if I did give you evidence, you probably wouldnt agree but whether you agree with it or not doesnt make it false.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Just because I haven’t shown you evidence, that doesn’t mean there is isn’t

          Hmm. I think: you’re a Poe.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          I have already explained these to you. U would rather continue giving your opinion about what you think about God rather than learn the truth and understand what I have already explained. Obviously you dont want to know the truth and you obviously dont care that you are being unreasonable. Your complaints against God are nothing more than opinions. As an atheist, the only thing you can offer is your opinion. You cannot offer an objective standard for morality. As an atheist, you cannot claim that Hitler was morally wrong for what he did and you cannot claim that God was wrong for ANYTHING He did. All you can do is whine and make complaints but your complaints mean nothing!!

        • adam

          “U would rather continue giving your opinion about what you think about
          God rather than learn the truth and understand what I have already
          explained.”

          You are just giving your opinion.

          And based on your cruelty and ignorance, your opinion has no merit.

          “You cannot offer an objective standard for morality. ”

          And neither can you.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/98265d38f8c9a73888180e83402d04fd1421c4b8f148d83327738ec63e349f62.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          “You cannot offer an objective standard for morality. ”

          And neither can you.

          Yeah I actually can!! When I say its wrong to murder, I dont rely on my opinions. I turn to the Bible. God forbids it and this doesn’t mean He cant do this. Plus,” to kill and to murder are different things. Murder is “the premeditated, unlawful taking of a life,” whereas killing is, more generally, “the taking of a life.”

          God’s moral standard flows from His unchanging nature, so His standard is absolute. God is just and does judge sin. We all deserve to die for sin, including the Canaanites wiped out by Israel, who, according to Genesis 15:13–16, were given roughly 400 years to repent of their wickedness but did not (Ecclesiastes 12:14; Romans 6:23; Hebrews 9:27). God has always perfectly balanced His justice and mercy—reserving His wrath for unrepentant, unbelieving sinners, and showing mercy to sinners who turn to Him in faith (Romans 4).

          God Himself testified, “For I am the Lord, I do not change” (Malachi 3:6). He didn’t ever think up a moral standard to decide right from wrong. Rather, His moral standard flows from His perfectly pure and holy nature. Since His nature is unchanging, His standard is absolute.

          God cannot sin, so His standard is objective.

          Here’s an example of an objective moral: God’s moral standard prohibits lying, a standard flowing from His nature that cannot lie (Hebrews 6:18).

          If a fellow human were to arbitrarily decide what morality involves and impose his standard on us, we could say his morality is subjective, according to his personal preferences and beliefs. But because God created us, He has authority over us and has the right to hold us to His standard. We inherently know this ultimate standard of right and wrong because God has written His law on our hearts (Romans 2:15).

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          U follow the evidence??

          What evidence?? That the Universe came from nothing?? Where is the evidence of nothing creating everything?? What about us? Where did we come from? Pond Scum?? And that makes sense?? Really?

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          You need to get your science from scientists. Science has no consensus view for where the universe came from.

          Where is the evidence of nothing creating everything??

          I dunno. Should I have some?

          What about us? Where did we come from? Pond Scum?? And that makes sense?? Really?

          Yeah, God making man from dirt makes so much more sense. And there’s evidence to back it up, too!

        • Candy Smith

          Yeah, God making man from dirt makes so much more sense. And there’s evidence to back it up, too!

          What part of that doesnt make sense? Since God can do anything, it isnt nonsense!!!

        • adam
        • adam

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3d75f40886a30963d29f96e7ac5c05cad2aeb7bf5d71b350bbea60643eeff355.jpg

          “1.) have no faith whatsoever in God.”

          Of course not, it is an IMAGINARY character in a collection of stories.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b4daa8eb8f6cdde7dc6cef1fd33a8d0acc554ea42510fdbeea6ee4c3b3b5a9c2.jpg

          “2.) You dont trust Him.”

          Of course not, it is an IMAGINARY character in a collection of stories.

          ” 3.) You are in love with your sin. ”

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e936d3b9451f720cc31cb395e29d663e0b002544c7104ca964476499270530f4.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Saying there is no such thing as sin doesn’t mean there isn’t any.
          Besides, if you have you ever lied, or cheated, or stolen, then
          according to the Bible, you’ve sinned.

          Saying there is no such thing as sin doesn’t mean there isn’t any.
          Besides, if you have you ever lied, or cheated, or stolen, then
          according to the Bible, you’ve sinned.

          Saying there is no such thing as sin doesn’t mean there isn’t any.
          Besides, if you have you ever lied, or cheated, or stolen, then
          according to the Bible, you’ve sinned.

        • adam
        • Michael Neville

          You know Jesus didn’t die. He spent a miserable afternoon hanging around the cross and then, day and a half later, he’s all better. That’s not dying. Death includes staying dead, so Jesus fails in the dying category.

          You still haven’t explained why your sadistic, immoral thug of a god has any right to judge anyone. I know you say he’s “all mighty” but might makes right is not a solid basis for morality. It’s the basis for bullying. I don’t like bullies and so I have no respect for the make-believe, fictitious, imaginary god you’re trying (and failing miserably) to sell to us.

        • Candy Smith

          You know Jesus didn’t die.

          I dont know that and neither do you. He was stabbed in his side and water poured out of him like blood. He was dead. He said It is ffinished” He died. Dont play dumb with me. U cant pretend that he didnt ever die. That makes no sense. U are assuming He didn’t because U want to reject the Resurrection.

          He spent a miserable afternoon hanging around the cross and then, day
          and a half later, he’s all better. That’s not dying. Death includes
          staying dead, so Jesus fails in the dying category.

          Apparently you haven’t read what the Bible says because U skipped pass a WHOLE BUNCH of stuff. So how about U try reading what the Bible actually says and not your shortcut non-true version of what U want it to say.

          Death includes
          staying dead, so Jesus fails in the dying category.

          Actually, he fails your version of a dying category not what the Bible says. The Bible shows us that He died. It would be stupid to say that he didn’t.

          Not if God who is all-powerful can bring Him back?? Is this the first time in the Bible that someone has died and been brought back??>

        • Candy Smith

          I know you say he’s “all mighty” but might makes right is not a solid basis for morality.

          According to WHAT????

          This is not the Christian position. God
          certainly has the ability to enforce the rules he reveals to us, but
          what is morally right with God is due to his character–not his power.
          The reason it is wrong to lie is that God cannot lie (Titus 1:2).
          Therefore, right and wrong are not determined by God’s ability to be
          stronger than anyone else. Right and wrong are determined by God
          revealing his own immutable, holy essence.

        • Candy Smith

          I know you say he’s “all mighty” but might makes right is not a solid basis for morality. It’s the basis for bullying.

          In your opinion!!!!!!!

        • Michael Neville

          Damn straight it’s my opinion. But just announcing that something is my opinion doesn’t show that the opinion is wrong. You’re not too good at this debate thing, which isn’t surprising since you’re an ignorant, stupid excuse for a human being.

        • Greg G.

          For many of us, your opinion used to be our opinion. We rejected it because we finally figured out that the opinion was wrong and it would be stupid to maintain. You should get a more enlightened opinion like we did.

        • Candy Smith

          For many of us, your opinion used to be our opinion. We rejected it
          because we finally figured out that the opinion was wrong and it would be stupid to maintain. You should get a more enlightened opinion like we did.

          My opinion is wrong?? According to what is it wrong?? Why is wrong?? Based off of what? Is it based off of your opinion. So it is your opinion that my opinion is wrong!!?? Yeah that makes a lot of sense.

          My opinion isn’t wrong because you say it is.

        • Candy Smith

          I don’t like bullies and so I have no respect for the make-believe,
          fictitious, imaginary god you’re trying (and failing miserably) to sell
          to us.

          Of course it is you opinion that he is a bully. It isn’t a proven fact.

        • Michael Neville

          You really need to get a different argument than “that’s your opinion.” Sure it’s my opinion but, unlike you, I give reasons why I have those opinions.

        • Candy Smith

          You still haven’t explained why your sadistic, immoral thug of a

          god has any right to judge anyone

          Well since He created us. He has the right to do with us, what he wants. And He also knows more than us. He knows everything and we dont.

          What gives God the right to have total control of the universe?

          The real question is, why wouldn’t an omniscient, omnipotent, morally perfect God have the right to do as he sees fit?

          What makes it right for God to take human life, when he forbids us to do so?

          Humans can take life, but we can’t bring the dead back to life, nor can we control what happens to someone after they die. A human’s killing another human is a destructive and irresponsible act, for once we kill someone, we can’t undo it or control the harm that results.

          God, however, has greater abilities and knowledge than we do, including control over life and death. If God kills someone, he is able to bring them back to life or to place them in any sort of afterlife he chooses.

        • Michael Neville

          Well since He created us. He has the right to do with us, what he wants. And He also knows more than us. He knows everything and we dont.

          You’re still pushing the “might makes right” idea. That is how bullies operate. So you’re admitting your god is a bully. I don’t like bullies so I don’t like the god you’re trying to sell.

        • Candy Smith

          You still haven’t explained why your sadistic, immoral thug of a god has
          any right to judge anyone. I know you say he’s “all mighty” but might
          makes right is not a solid basis for morality.

          According to what might
          makes right is not a solid basis for morality?? And you are assuming that that is the way Christianity works. Well it isn’t.

        • Michael Neville

          I’ve been a Christian. I’ve examined Christianity. Unlike you I’ve got a mind and can use it. I know how Christianity works. It starts with a god who loves us and will send everyone to hell who doesn’t kiss his ass. You brag how your god not only can kill people just because he’s pissed off at them but has the absolute right to do so. You are the best advertisement for what a hateful, fear-inducing religion Christianity is.

          By the way, “u r rong” is not an argument. If you want to disagree with me then you need to give reasons why you disagree. Why don’t you do that?

        • BlackMamba44
        • BlackMamba44
        • epeeist
        • BlackMamba44

          Haha!! That gave me a giggle.

        • Greg G.

          Try saying something that is not wrong.

        • Candy Smith

          Of course its your opinion that Im wrong!!

        • Greg G.

          See, you said something that was not wrong. You should try to do that more consistently.

        • Candy Smith

          I would like to point out something. 2 quotes that Richard Dawkins has made. They are pretty much a contradiction. I will show you.

        • Greg G.

          Great! Has anyone ever claimed that Dawkins was omniscient or infallible?

        • Candy Smith

          What are you asking? I just said I want to point something out that I think is incorrect?!!! No one has done that but Atheists love him so much, they are oblivious to how weak his arguments are, especially his book The God Delusion. I haven’t read it but I have read books where the author will talk about it and they mention having read it.

        • Greg G.

          Atheism has no hierarchy, if that’s what you think. Atheists are a bunch of individuals. Dawkins is just another atheist. He is also a human. Maybe he changed his mind about something.

          If you got this from creationists, you should read the contexts of the quotes. Creationists have a long history of taking a sentence out of context if it sounds bad that way. It’s called “quotemining”. For example, the Bible has 17 verses that have been translated to say, “there is no god”. Of course, the verses say things like, “there is no god besides me”. Creationists thrive on that stuff.

        • Candy Smith

          Atheists do it too.

          For example, the Bible has 17 verses that have been translated to say,
          “there is no god”. Of course, the verses say things like, “there is no
          god besides me”. Creationists thrive on that stuff.

          What is this verse supposed to mean? Are you talking about the verses in Psalms??

          Psalm 14:1-(ESV)-The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds; there is none who does good.

          Psalm 53:1-The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, doing abominable iniquity; there is none who does good.

          Are these 2 of the verses that you are talking about?

        • Greg G.

          Those and 15 more. Plus another seven or eight in the Apocrypha in the Catholic bible. Some of those have “there is no god” in many translations, but some are in particular translations. None of the verses are trying to make that point in context but they do contain the phrase.

        • Candy Smith

          Well dont talk about the catholic bible. It isnt the same thing. only speak of the Bible from Christianity!! Please.

        • Greg G.

          I should have read this one first. You don’t care about credibility at all. Catholicism is Christianity. The Catholic bible has some books that are alluded to in the New Testament.

          Your religion is badly midinforming you just as the Catholic Church misinformed it’s members.

        • Michael Neville

          Candy Smith isn’t trying for credibility, she’s trying to sell something she knows we’re not interested in buying.

        • BlackMamba44
        • BlackMamba44

          Catholicism has been around a whole lot longer than your variation of Christian. You’re a heretic to them.

        • Candy Smith

          Why Catholicism has a lot of the main same things as Christianity does, it unfortunately believes in a lot of nonsense. It is a false version of Christianity. Same as Roman Catholicism.

        • Pofarmer

          I’m, Just. Words fail me.

        • Candy Smith

          What?

        • BlackMamba44

          Hahahahahah!

          Oh, the irony. My mother is Catholic and was raised Roman Catholic so you can fuck right off.

        • Candy Smith

          Why the heck are you saying that?

        • BlackMamba44

          Go look through your comments and you can answer this question yourself.

        • adam

          You believe in MAGIC, which is the biggest nonsense.

        • Candy Smith

          You believe in MAGIC, which is the biggest nonsense.

          Christianity isn’t magic. The things that happen in Christianity and what we believe isn’t magic. Being all-powerful isn’t magical. There is a difference between the word magic and omnipotent. Maybe you should learn the difference.

        • adam

          Definition of magic

          1a : the use of means (such as charms or spells) believed to have supernatural power over natural forces
          b : magic rites or incantations

          2a : an extraordinary power or influence seemingly from a supernatural source

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7123c548a1342e2d1779d51809c0ce85d82e0551dcde5fa0f6496d68284963dd.jpg

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Yes, it does believe a lot of nonsense. But that’s the pot calling the kettle black. Think about an outsider seeing your nonsense vs. Catholic nonsense. Why would they side with you?

        • epeeist

          Why Catholicism has a lot of the main same things as Christianity does,

          Nope, Catholicism was here first, therefore anything your particular sect and Catholicism jointly agree on will almost certainly stem from Catholicism.

          Not only that of course, Catholicism is much larger than every other Christian denomination.

        • Candy Smith

          Who cares that they were here first? That doesnt make them right.

        • Candy Smith

          Catholics believe in things that Christians DO NOT BELIEVE in.

        • Pofarmer

          Teh ignorance is appalling.

        • BlackMamba44

          It really is. And it’s all the same shit. They’ve got nothing original.

          Patheos opened my eyes to the amount of religious stupid out there.

        • Pofarmer

          Unending.

        • adam

          What?

          and ignore the founder of YOUR christianity, who founded it on HATE?

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/78d2605305eadcda78155977377e79721c970efc02c864dedd893cd1d7e34a5d.jpg

          Luther and Protestantism.

        • Candy Smith

          He founded it on hate?? He rejected Catholicism because He realized that what they were teaching was false and when he tried to warn them, they kicked him out. The only hate I see is the Catholics kicking him out because they actually pray to The Virgin Mary when she has been dead for a long time.

        • adam
        • BlackMamba44
        • Candy Smith

          That isnt true!!!

        • Michael Neville

          Your bigotry is showing.

        • Two Americas

          Hilarious. If you are going to toss Catholicism, then I guess we will have to toss everything before 1500 and declare Luther to be God.

        • adam
        • Two Americas

          Luther. Your point? I was not praising the man.

        • adam

          Luther, deserves tossing as well.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Said the dude from the Johnny-come-lately flavor of Christianity.

          I appreciate that you think your version is right, but there are 45,000 versions. Does the biblical ambiguity that allows this Babel of Christian sects not tell you anything about whether this book was divinely inspired?

        • Candy Smith

          None of the verses are trying to make that point in context but they do contain the phrase.

          And what would the point be with the two verses??

        • Greg G.

          And what would the point be with the two verses??

          QUOTEMINING! I’m just trying to show you that taking a sentence or a phrase from its context can make it appear that the author is saying the opposite of what he/she is actually saying.

          You couldn’t figure out what my point was because you forgot the context of this conversation. If you scroll up, you can read the comments leading up to the present.

          You said you were going to present a couple of contradictory Dawkins quotes for some reason. You should check to see if one or both are quotemines,. You wouldn’t want to lose credibility, would you?

        • BlackMamba44

          It’s interesting that you chose those quotes.

          Here’s one for you, straight from Jesus:
          Matthew 5:22 (NIV)
          22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister[a][b] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’[c] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

          “Raca” is an Aramaic term of contempt

        • epeeist

          No one has done that but Atheists love him so much, they are oblivious to how weak his arguments are, especially his book The God Delusion.

          So which of his arguments are weak and why?

        • Candy Smith

          I said them. I guess it wasnt here.

        • Candy Smith

          ill get back to you later.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Why?

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Yeah that’s not true.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Yeah that picture doesn’t prove anything. That’s just a picture you found somewhere It doesn’t prove anything. Science and the Bible actually agree, aside from the absurdity of evolution, that is.

        • adam
        • BlackMamba44
        • adam
        • Pofarmer

          When you’re wrong, and simply repeating pulpit glurge, you’re wrong.

        • BlackMamba44

          Heat does not exist. Heat is the absence of cold.

          Light does not exist. Light is the absence of darkness.

          Good is the absence of evil. God did not have to create good, but rather only allow for the absence of evil.

          That your god chose to allow the absence of good, rather than the absence of evil makes your god a sadistic ass.

        • Candy Smith

          That your god chose to allow the absence of good, rather than the absence of evil makes your god a sadistic ass.

          That is still an opinion. God made evil possible but man made it actual so blame humans, not God!!

        • BlackMamba44

          oh godammit, would you shut up with the “your opinion” crap? Of course it is, just like everything that you spout. Sheesh.

        • adam

          ” God did not have to create evil,”

          Of course not, he created it because it IS EVIL.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/31c0369f60b3e2062c18efaffc8b2dc0e965d1137c84726d22e9f0c641423fb5.jpg

          “but rather only allow for the absence of good.”

          Evil

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fef3e09d4fced201880c6048e47897bc3461d04f1c5de54936408c4560c105b.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Of course not, he created it because it IS EVIL.

          In your opinion. Again you have nothing other than your opinion to make that claim.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Continue ignoring the truth?!!! That’s fine with me!!!

        • adam

          “Continue ignoring the truth?!!! That’s fine with me!!!”

          Yes, we all see how you are fine ignoring the truth.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b38d78216587ea69d76f912e99d939a19aabe42cd534acfce829f95cef6dc00d.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Well nothing but the definition of evil……???

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          because of original sin man will go to Hell

          That isn’t true all. That shows you DO NOT know what the Bible says.

          Men will go to Hell because of their own sin. We are sinners by choice.

          Romans 1:18-23. Please read that!!!

          Everyone knows God. They just choose to suppress the truth.So ALL men will be WITHOUT EXCUSE!!!!

        • Candy Smith

          Im pretty sure I have already explained this but if not I will explain it again.

          Isaiah 45:7
          in the King James Version reads, “I form the light, and create
          darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these
          things.” How does Isaiah 45:7 agree with the view that
          God did not create evil?
          There are two key facts that need to be considered. (1) The word
          translated “evil” is from a Hebrew word that means “adversity,
          affliction, calamity, distress, misery.” Notice how the other major
          English Bible translations render the word: “disaster” (NIV, HCSB),
          “calamity” (NKJV, NAS, ESV), and “woe” (NRSV). The Hebrew word can refer
          to moral evil, and often does have this meaning in the Hebrew
          Scriptures. However, due to the diversity of possible definitions, it is
          unwise to assume that “I create evil” in Isaiah 45:7 refers to God bringing moral evil into existence.

          (2) The context of Isaiah 45:7 makes it clear that something other than “bringing moral evil into existence” is in mind. The context of Isaiah 45:7
          is God rewarding Israel for obedience and punishing Israel for
          disobedience. God pours out salvation and blessings on those whom He
          favors. God brings judgment on those who continue to rebel against Him.
          “Woe to him who quarrels with his Master” (Isaiah 45:9). That is the person to whom God brings “evil” and “disaster.” So, rather than saying that God created “moral evil,” Isaiah 45:7
          is presenting a common theme of Scripture – that God brings disaster on
          those who continue in hard-hearted rebellion against Him.

        • adam

          We’ve covered this.

          Evil is evil, I gave you the dictionary definition.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fef3e09d4fced201880c6048e47897bc3461d04f1c5de54936408c4560c105b.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Evil is evil, I gave you the dictionary definition.

          Yeah and like I said you have to actually understand what it is saying. Rather than assuming it actually means He created evil, if you put in a little bit more effort, you would understand that this isn’t true!! But instead you just want to keep claiming whatever you feel like saying and it isn’t the truth.

          The context of Isaiah 45:7 makes it clear that something other than “bringing moral evil into existence” is in mind. The context of Isaiah 45:7 is God rewarding Israel for obedience and punishing Israel for disobedience. God pours out salvation and blessings on those whom He favors. God brings judgment on those who continue to rebel against Him. “Woe to him who quarrels with his Master” (Isaiah 45:9). That is the person to whom God brings “evil” and “disaster.” So, rather than saying that God created “moral evil,” Isaiah 45:7 is presenting a common theme of Scripture – that God brings disaster onthose who continue in hard-hearted rebellion against Him.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Evil is evil, I gave you the dictionary definition.

          You still have proved that evil actually exists in the world!!! Simply giving a definition of evil doesn’t prove that it exists. So please prove to me that there is such a thing as evil. I’ll give you a hint, in atheism, there is no such thing as evil, right, wrong, or good. They dont exist!!!

        • adam
        • epeeist

          I’ll give you a hint, in atheism, there is no such thing as evil, right, wrong, or good.

          So we should see ravening hoards of atheists stealing, raping and murdering because they don’t acknowledge right and wrong.

          http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/719/509/0ad.png

        • Candy Smith

          No!! That isnt so!!

          Yes, atheist can know right from wrong because the Bible says so.

          Romans 1:14-15,
          “For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the
          Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them.”

          The Bible tells us that everyone has the law written on their heart. The law is those do’s and don’ts of moral behavior. Consider the 10 Commandments in Exodus 20:1-17 which tells us such things as do not lie, steal, or commit adultery. Though not all unbelievers acknowledge all of the moral truths in those commandments, they sufficiently recognize moral truths and show they are written on their own hearts.

        • epeeist

          The Bible tells us that everyone has the law written on their heart.

          But why should I accept the bible as anything more than the mythos of a particular Middle Eastern tribe?

          Consider the 10 Commandments in Exodus 20:1-17 which tells us such things as do not lie, steal, or commit adultery.

          So where in those commandments does it tell me that I shouldn’t rape children, or enslave people?

          Though not all unbelievers acknowledge all of the moral truths in those commandments

          Quite frankly the so called “ten commandments” are a feeble attempt at producing a moral code. From roughly the same era we have the code of Hammurabi, the Confucian Analects, the Nichomachean ethics all of which are vastly superior to anything in the bible.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Why is that evil?? Simply showing me pictures of something that you think is evil doesn’t mean it is!! Prove to me that that is actually evil??

        • adam

          “Why is that evil??”

          by definition, we’ve covered this numerous times, you appear too stupid to comprehend. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3d75f40886a30963d29f96e7ac5c05cad2aeb7bf5d71b350bbea60643eeff355.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          By definition!! So what??? The definition for evil doesn’t make rape wrong!?? Why is it wrong?? Saying Rape is evil because of what the definition says doesn’t work!!

          I am not to stupid!! You are just being difficult!!

        • adam

          Definition of evil
          3a : causing harm : pernicious the evil institution of slavery

          b : marked by misfortune : unluck

          “I am not to stupid!! ”

          Apparently too stupid to understand a dictionary.

        • Candy Smith

          No I am not too stupid to understand a dictionary. Simply saying giving a definition for evil doesn’t prove that rape is evil?? Why is rape evil?? Tell me specifically why it is evil??

        • adam

          “Simply saying giving a definition for evil doesn’t prove that rape is evil??”

          Of course not, it is the harm that makes it evil.

          AGAIN, demonstrating you are too stupid to understand the dictionary.

        • Candy Smith

          So what, if a person is harm?? Why is harming someone evil??

        • Greg G.

          Most of us have a sense of fairness and we do not want to be harmed. It is unfair to harm others. You don’t need a god to tell you this, do you? The Golden Rule was said by philosophers in other cultures before it was attributed to Jesus. Rabbi Hillel, a first century BC Pharisee, was challenged to recite the Torah while standing on one foot when he was in a hurry. He said, “Don’t do what your neighbor hates, all the rest is commentary.” Paul said essentially the same thing in Galatians 5:14, but James 2:8-10 refutes it by saying it’s a good start but breaking one bit of the law, breaks the whole law. If it was objective, the Bible should at least pick a side.

          The sense of fairness is common in social animals. Even monkeys and dogs have it.

        • Candy Smith

          I know how to use a dictionary.

        • Michael Neville

          So you think a starving child isn’t evil. You certainly do need religion to tell you right from wrong because obviously you don’t have a clue about it. The name for people like you is “sociopath”.

        • Candy Smith

          I am asking you to tell me why the heck it is evil. I never said it wasnt wrong I can claim that its wrong, and it isnt my opinion. You on the other hand cant offer anything but your opinion!!

        • Michael Neville

          Because, you callous, indifferent sociopath, I give a damn about people. And all you offer for what is moral or immoral is your opinion. You pretend it isn’t but it really is. Can you show that murder is immoral? Of course you can’t, you defend your murderous thug of a god when he kills people so you have your opinion that murder is moral. Your sadistic god condones slavery and orders rape and genocide so you’re good with those too. At least my opinions about what is and isn’t moral are healthier than your sociopathic tendencies.

        • Candy Smith

          You certainly do need religion to tell you right from wrong because obviously you don’t have a clue
          about it.

          I actually agree with that.

          Yes, atheist can know right from wrong because the Bible says so.

          Romans 1:14-15,

          “For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things
          of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in
          that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them.” The Bible tells us that everyone has the law written on their heart.

          So you know whats right and wrong but you have no standard for it. You have no basis that you can say, for why “rape is wrong” other than your opinion!!!

        • Michael Neville

          No, I don’t know right from wrong because that collection of myths, fables and lies called the Bible says I do. I know right from wrong because I’m a sentient human who gives a damn about other people. My morality is based on empathy and the golden rule (which is in the Analects of Confucius and the Sermons of Buddha, both of which predate Jesus by about 500 years). My morality is not based on what some self-appointed spokesperson for an imaginary critter says that critter likes or dislikes.

          All morality is opinion since there is no objective morality, let alone an absolute morality. You may think that rape is wrong but what is rape? Some of your fellow Christians don’t think marital rape is rape so even you godsoaked moralists have different opinions on morality.

        • Candy Smith

          All morality is opinion since there is no objective morality, let
          alone an absolute morality.

          You dont know that there is no ojective morality. You just are assuming that there isnt!!

        • Michael Neville

          Neither you nor any other Christian apologist have ever shown any examples of objective morality which stands up to rebuttal. Your imaginary god is the source of imaginary morality so that’s not objective. Your uninformed opinions on morality are on a kindergarten level along with the rest of your thinking. Even PhD philosophers like William Lane Craig have been unable to show that any morality is objective.

          So until one of you show how morality can be objective then it’s a reasonable assumption that it isn’t.

        • Candy Smith

          I do have an example of an objective morality.

        • Candy Smith

          Even PhD philosophers like William Lane Craig have been unable to show that any morality is objective.

          Oh really?? Are you sure??

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Very helpful. Thanks for that in-depth analysis with lots of evidence. Your position is much clearer now.

        • Candy Smith

          If there is no objective morality, as you believe then you are wasting times with all your complaints about what the Bible says, because ultimately, it is nothing more than your opinions.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          And you just assume that there is.

          Since you started it (and since you’re making the bold claim that objective morality exists), show us that it does.

        • Candy Smith

          Moral outrage simply does not make sense in an evolutionary universe. Without the biblical God and literal Genesis, right and wrong become personal preferences such that “murder is wrong” is equivalent to “blue is my favorite color.” Both are personal opinions and provide no basis for arguing with someone who has a different opinion.

          In an evolutionary worldview or belief system or way you view the world, (whatever you want to call it), why is it wrong to lie—particularly if it benefits our survival value?

        • adam

          “Moral outrage simply does not make sense in an evolutionary universe.”

          It absolutely does. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7123c548a1342e2d1779d51809c0ce85d82e0551dcde5fa0f6496d68284963dd.jpg

          But it does not make any sense from a biblical universe.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3d75f40886a30963d29f96e7ac5c05cad2aeb7bf5d71b350bbea60643eeff355.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          “Moral outrage simply does not make sense in an evolutionary universe.

          “It absolutely does.

          Not if we are nothing more than animals as evolutionists believe!?? What kind of idea of morality is logically consistent with atheism, the idea of a universe in which we’re just highly-evolved pond goo?

        • adam

          ” What kind of idea of morality is logically consistent with atheism,”

          The best kind.

          Empathy

          You know the opposite of following just to follow

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/96f7282d507681a8f2d9b1e0df55dadf5d1ee80173cca0745ada61eda096d945.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/701ad31004c57acab5bab2092d271b38e35efb5a87d32ff6631714eef0cfc9e4.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Yeah that’s cute?? Empathy?

          If morality is based on empathy then doesn’t that mean that one’s subjective experience is the basis for ethical behavior?

        • adam

          “If morality is based on empathy then doesn’t that mean that one’s subjective experience is the basis for ethical behavior?”

          Of course.
          that and SOCIETIE’s ‘experience.

          Like you demonstrating that you see nothing wrong with OWNING other PEOPLE AS PROPERTY, to beat within an inch of their life or more as long as they dont die withing a couple of days.
          But society keeping you from doing so,because this society recognizes the EVIL of slavery.

        • Candy Smith

          And Morality being subjective doesnt work.

        • Greg G.

          When people get their subjective morality from empathy and reason, they tend to agree. Religion does that on the major issues but take credit that doesn’t belong to it. Religion also come up with killing people for picking up sticks one day of the week.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Morality is objective? Show us or stop making the claim.

        • Candy Smith

          The slavery verses have explanations and if you look up an explanation about the verse about the beating, you will realize, that the people got beat were not nice people.

        • eric

          “Thou shalt not enslave’ wouldn’t have needed explanations, and it would have been a lot more clearer to a lot more people.

          And laws that let you beat on ‘not nice people’ is still not consistent with an all-loving or merciful God.

        • Candy Smith

          Yeah it does!! That exact word has an explanation. Dont assume like you know everything because you dont!

        • Candy Smith
        • Dys

          That article is the epitome of moral bankruptcy. It makes one thing perfectly clear – as long as you vilify the people you’re enslaving, slavery is justifiable. It also engages in your dreaded subjective morality in order to justify slavery in the past.

          The author is making excuses for owning another person as property. It’s sad and pathetic.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          It’s amazing what a religion will push an otherwise sane and moral adult to accept.

        • Greg G.

          Jesus says a slave who makes a mistake when he knew what to do should be beaten severely while a slave who makes the mistake because he wasn’t aware of what to do deserves to be beaten but less severely, and Jesus didn’t mention anything about how nice the slaves were.

          Luke 12:47-48 (NRSV)47 That slave who knew what his master wanted, but did not prepare himself or do what was wanted, will receive a severe beating. 48 But the one who did not know and did what deserved a beating will receive a light beating. From everyone to whom much has been given, much will be required; and from the one to whom much has been entrusted, even more will be demanded.

          Jesus thought is was absurd to even consider thanking a slave:

          7 “Who among you would say to your slave who has just come in from plowing or tending sheep in the field, ‘Come here at once and take your place at the table’? 8 Would you not rather say to him, ‘Prepare supper for me, put on your apron and serve me while I eat and drink; later you may eat and drink’? 9 Do you thank the slave for doing what was commanded? 10 So you also, when you have done all that you were ordered to do, say, ‘We are worthless slaves; we have done only what we ought to have done!’” –Jesus, Luke 17:7-10

        • Dys

          So if someone decides you’re not a nice person, they’d be perfectly justified in enslaving you. Sounds like a completely deplorable and arbitrary system.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Those damn slaves got what they deserved! Because they weren’t nice!

        • Rudy R

          If I deemed you to be not a nice person, would it be moral for me to enslave and beat you?

        • Candy Smith

          Well first of all, it is more than just not being a nice person. There is more to the story than that!!

        • Greg G.

          So what? You are trying to tell us that slavery isn’t all that bad. Step up and prove it by selling yourself into slavery.

        • Candy Smith

          The slavery that we have experienced in the past few centuries is bad. The Slavery in the Bible is nothing like that. Upon closer investigation, you can see that this is true.

        • Greg G.

          It was closer inspection that made me realize that slavery in this part of the world was based on biblical slavery. It evolved over the centuries. What parts of later slavery are forbidden in the Bible?

        • Dys

          There is more to the story than that!!

          No, there really isn’t.

          The bible is written from the perspective of the people taking slaves. So of course the people they enslaved had it coming – they wrote the story that way.

        • Candy Smith

          Yeah there really is. You just are way to stubborn to see it.

        • Dys

          Not at all. If you want to justify enslaving someone, you need to vilify them first. That’s exactly what the bible does.

        • Candy Smith

          Let me ask you this?? How much effort have you put into trying to understand the verses that are about slavery?? Have you gone to ANY Christian Websites that explain it??

        • Dys

          Have you gone to ANY Christian Websites that explain it??

          Yes. And I find their excuses lame. The ones that don’t try to ignorantly dismiss all of biblical slavery as nothing more than indentured servitude do the same things you’ve been trying – insisting it wasn’t that bad, they deserved it, etc. Admitting that the bible condones immoral behaviour is the rational conclusion, but it goes against Christian dogma to admit it, and so excuses must be made.

          You seem to be under the impression that all someone needs to do is go to a Christian website read the excuses, and suddenly their minds will be changed to the “correct” understanding. But you don’t know that your preferred websites are correct – they just match up with what you want to believe.

          Try thinking for yourself.

        • Candy Smith

          God is certainly not arbitrary in His moral actions, nor is
          God subject to some external standard of morality that governs His decisions.

        • Dys

          So God can’t decide what is or is not moral? Then what determines it? If morality is just part of God’s nature, then why is God’s nature one way and not another?

        • Candy Smith

          I have a couple of points to make.

          1.) God created us. He has the right to hold us to His standards.

        • Dys

          Disagree – it does not follow that the act of creating a living, thinking being grants the creator the ability to dictate absolute standards of behavior or thinking. That’s the “might makes right” system of morality.

        • Candy Smith

          That’s the “might makes right” system of morality

          I told you why this doesnt work.

          God certainly has the ability to enforce the rules he reveals to us, but
          what is morally right with God is due to his character–not his power.
          The reason it is wrong to lie is that God cannot lie (Titus 1:2).
          Therefore, right and wrong are not determined by God’s ability to be
          stronger than anyone else. Right and wrong are determined by God
          revealing his own immutable, holy essence.

        • Candy Smith

          It does not follow that the act of creating a living, thinking being
          grants the creator the ability to dictate absolute standards of behavior
          or thinking.

          Except God created everything. Also, if there is a God, then would it not make sense to say that He is the Law giver, the one who reveals what is right and wrong like do not murder, do not steal, etc.

        • Dys

          Except God created everything. Also, if there is a God, then would it not make sense to say that He is the Law giver, the one who reveals what is right and wrong like do not murder, do not steal, etc.

          What doesn’t make any sense is for a creator to make imperfect thinking beings, and then complain when they inevitably think for themselves and come to conclusions other than what the creator preferred. It’d be like complaining that a chair doesn’t meet my standard that it should fly.

          the one who reveals what is right and wrong like do not murder, do not steal, etc

          No god is needed to figure out that things that disrupt society are detrimental to social animals.

        • Candy Smith

          However, the Bible states that God should be obeyed because he’s perfectly just and righteous:

          Your statutes are wonderful; therefore I obey them…The statutes you have laid down are righteous; they are fully trustworthy…Your promises have been thoroughly tested, and your servant loves them. (Ps 119:129, 138, 140)

          It also states that some actions wouldn’t be right even if performed by God:

          “Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it? Far be it from you to do such a thing – to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?” (Gen 18:23-25)

        • Candy Smith

          2.) God’s nature doesnt change. It may seem like it does but it doesn’t.

        • Dys

          Why is God’s nature the way it is? What determined it? Why isn’t it some other way? How do you know God’s nature is actually a good source of morality?

        • Candy Smith

          How do you know God’s nature is actually a good source of morality?

          Well what can you possibly offer that would make it not be?? God created us. He is Sovereign over all life. Do U know what that means??

        • Candy Smith

          I will lists my points and then we can go over each of them. Is that okay with you??

        • Dys

          Sure. I’m hitting them as we go.

        • Candy Smith

          I have an SBAC Test tomorrow so I have to get ready for school now.

        • Candy Smith

          So God can’t decide what is or is not moral?

          No He can!! Absolutely!!

        • Candy Smith

          I asked for specifics.

        • Dys

          Yes, you did. And yet I don’t care. Stop pretending you’re a teacher or any type of authority here – you’re not.

          Do you honestly think no one here has read Christian apologetics before?

        • Candy Smith

          I wanted specifics for the websites. Yes I think people have but I can guarantee, I cant prove but I cant guarantee that almost everyone here is so in love with their sin, that they reject what it says. Most people here are not open to the truth. They would rather suppress the truth and try to make sense of atheism. I cant really tell whether you are sincere or not but I am leaning toward not, but that is just my opinion but based on your attitude this makes the most sense.

        • Candy Smith

          Admitting that the bible condones immoral behaviour is the rational
          conclusion, but it goes against Christian dogma to admit it, and so
          excuses must be made.

          No it isn’t the rational conclusion. IT IS NOTHING MORE THAN YOUR OPINION!!! You have NOTHING other than your opinion that you can offer. All U can offer as a non-believer is YOUR OPINION. Opinions DO NOT make FACTS.!!

        • Dys

          All U can offer as a non-believer is YOUR OPINION. Opinions DO NOT make FACTS.!!

          And there’s the bias. Non-believers are just as capable of interpreting the bible as believers. What you don’t like is that they don’t reach the same conclusions as you do.

          Opinions DO NOT make FACTS

          You say this, but you don’t think it applies to you.

          Those Christian websites you love so much? They’re offering opinions. Opinions on why slavery wasn’t all that bad. Opinions on why it was ok for some people to get enslaved. And guess what? None of those opinions are facts.

          What you’re doing is pretending you have facts, when all you’re offering are opinions.

        • Candy Smith

          Non-believers are just as capable of interpreting the bible as
          believers. What you don’t like is that they don’t reach the same

          Unbelievers start with the attitude of thinking that the Bible is wrong. They start with having no faith in God and dont trust Him with anything. This makes it impossible to look at the Bible correctly.

        • Candy Smith

          Opinions DO NOT make FACTS

          You say this, but you don’t think it applies to you.

          Well that is because I am not giving am opinion.

        • Dys

          Well that is because I am not giving am opinion.

          Yes, you are. But that’s your arrogance.

        • Candy Smith

          No it isnt! I am saying this based off of what the Bible says. Based off of Gods Word.

        • Dys

          No it isnt! I am saying this based off of what the Bible says. Based off of Gods Word.

          It’s your opinion that the bible is God’s word. It’s your opinion that the bible is correct. Those are not facts, they are opinions.

        • Candy Smith

          If the Bible isnt Gods Word, then please explain to me how all of the fulfilled prophecies were fulfilled??

        • Dys

          If the Bible isnt Gods Word, then please explain to me how all of the fulfilled prophecies were fulfilled??

          You understand that the authors of the New Testament had access to the Old Testament, right? And you understand that it’s possible to write a story that matches up with a prediction, regardless of whether the story is true or not, right?

          We’ve already gone over the problem with thinking that Isaiah 7:14-16 refers to Jesus – it clearly doesn’t, in context. But the author of Matthew took one line out of context, and wrote his virgin birth narrative. But just to check…you know that just because someone wrote a story that a virgin gave birth, doesn’t mean it actually happened, right?

          And that’s not taking into account all the incredibly non-specific generic prophecies.

        • Candy Smith

          Opinions on why it was ok for some people to get enslaved.

          See you still have your mind set on the way that slavery is in the Bible. You think of it like the slavery from a few centuries ago. The slavery from a few centuries ago is different from what is in the Bible. The slaves in the Bible had rights and were able to go free after a certain amount of time. That doesnt happen in the slavery that we have seen in the last few centuries. The masters get punished for hurting their slaves or killing them. That doesnt happen in the slavery from a few centuries ago.

          The websites are not giving their opinions. How can you say they have??? You havent looked at them?? You are making an assumption and you havent looked at the website(s) that I am talking about.

        • Dys

          The websites are not giving their opinions. How can you say they have??? You havent looked at them??

          I’m thinking you don’t know what the word “opinion” actually means.

        • Candy Smith

          I know what opinion is. Its like subjective in a way??? Yes or No??

        • Dys

          I know what opinion is. Its like subjective in a way??? Yes or No??

          Yep. Do you also understand that interpretations and viewpoints are subjective?

        • Candy Smith

          Yeah I do but there is a correct way!!

        • Dys

          Yeah I do but there is a correct way!!

          And you’ve decided, based on your subjective opinion, that the correct way is one that preserves the assumptions about the bible that you’ve made.

          You’ve also decided, based on your subjective opinion, that non-believers can’t have valid interpretations because they don’t think the bible is the word of god.

          Still all your opinion, still not facts.

        • Candy Smith

          Right?!?

        • Candy Smith

          Read the excuses.

          That is your opinion.

        • Dys

          I have lots of opinions. So do you. Yet I don’t feel the need to point out every time you offer one. Probably because doing that is incredibly idiotic and a waste of time.

        • Candy Smith

          Maybe if you tried, it would happen. U have no way of knowing that it wouldnt happen yet you insist on pretending to know what the outcome will be. You do not know what will happen if you read what I have to say.

        • Candy Smith

          I know they are correct because they explain it correctly and it makes sense. You cannot say otherwise until you read it. Until you read, all you have are assumptions!!

        • Dys

          I know they are correct because they explain it correctly and it makes sense.

          Ah…so because it makes sense to you, that means it has to be right. No incredibly biased subjectivity there at all!

          You cannot say otherwise until you read it.

          Sure I can. I just did.

          Until you read, all you have are assumptions!!

          What do you think your religion is based on? It’s all about assumptions. For instance, you’re assuming that the bible is inerrant, that it contains the word of god, and that it accurately describes things. All of those are assumptions. And not well substantiated ones at that.

        • Candy Smith

          My point is is that since it makes sense to me, an 18 year old, maybe it will make sense to you, however old you maybe.

        • Dys

          My point is is that since it makes sense to me, an 18 year old, maybe it will make sense to you, however old you maybe.

          No, that’s not what you said. What you basically said was “makes sense to me, so it must be right”. Which is an admission that you aren’t even entertaining the possibility that you could be wrong.

        • Candy Smith

          I can be wrong but there is so much proof in Christianity that it makes it very unlikely that it’s wrong.

        • Dys

          I can be wrong but there is so much proof in Christianity that it makes it very unlikely that it’s wrong.

          There is no proof. There might be evidence, but it’s not particularly compelling.

        • Candy Smith

          Yes there is.

        • Candy Smith

          I listed a bunch of them. Archeology, Science, History, the fulfilled prophecies.

        • Candy Smith

          There is no proof. There might be evidence, but it’s not particularly compelling.

          Its not compelling. It isnt interesting to you?? So what?? That doesnt make it wrong.

        • Dys

          Its not compelling. It isnt interesting to you?? So what?? That doesnt make it wrong

          Would you do me a favor? Stop saying “that’s just your opinion” and “that doesn’t make it wrong”. They’re stupid responses that accomplish nothing except demonstrating you have no comprehension that they apply to you as well.

          Those “proofs” you find so convincing? They don’t make Christianity right.

        • Candy Smith

          What do you think your religion is based on? It’s all about assumptions.

          No it isnt!!! There is a lot more than that!!

        • Candy Smith

          For instance, you’re assuming that the bible is inerrant, that it
          contains the word of god, and that it accurately describes things. All
          of those are assumptions. And not well substantiated ones at that.

          The Bible hasnt been proven to be wrong. It has been proven through history, science, and archeology. All of the fulfilled prophecies could not have happened without God and it doesnt make sense to say that it happened by chance.

        • Candy Smith

          The bible is written from the perspective of the people taking
          slaves. So of course the people they enslaved had it coming – they wrote
          the story that way.

          That is 100% wrong.

        • Dys

          Candy, you don’t know what you’re talking about. They were justifying enslaving people. So they did what every civilization has done to justify enslaving or warring against another nation – they vilified and dehumanized them.

          And if someone wanted to do the same to you, they could write down what a rotten person you are to justify enslaving you, regardless of whether it’s right or not.

        • Candy Smith

          I do know what I am talking about. I have read Christian Websites that explain it, and I have read more than one. They all explain it and all you have to do is read them. If you would read it and change your way of thinking just for the time that it takes to read them, you might see it differently.

          Would U like to be wrong about what the Bible says???

        • Dys

          No, you don’t. What you’ve read is other websites making excuses for enslaving people because they’re stuck in the exact same boat you are. That’s why you’re regurgitating their lame, pathetic excuses for defending slavery. And it all boils down to the same thing – “they had it coming”. But if the shoe were on the other foot, and it was someone enslaving Christians because “they had it coming” according to their religion, I imagine you and your Christian website would be singing a completely different tune.

          Would U like to be wrong about what the Bible says???

          How do you know your interpretation is right? The fact of the matter is that you don’t have any way of verifying that your opinion of what the bible says is accurate.

        • Candy Smith

          Have you read them?? Have you all the other websites that talk about this???

        • Dys

          Have you read them?? Have you all the other websites that talk about this???

          Yep. I even read the one you linked a few days ago. I was not impressed.

        • Candy Smith

          The link to ApologeticsPress you mean??? Are you kidding me??

        • Dys

          Whatever slavery apologetics you posted, yes. It was awful.

        • Candy Smith

          No it wasnt. that makes no sense and that shows me you didnt actually read it. That also shows me that you are not sincere and you do not want to be wrong. When I say that, I mean, like, for example, if someone in your family was put into court tbecause he murdered someone, you would want that your family member to be inncoent, right?? In the same way, do you want to be wrong about your claims about what you think it says. that is what I am asking.

        • Dys

          Please stop projecting. It’s incredibly obvious. I did read your article, actually. And I really didn’t think much of it. I tend to not have positive opinions on pieces making excuses for owning people as property. My morality is better than that.

          In the same way, do you want to be wrong about your claims about what you think it says. that is what I am asking.

          It’s your opinion that I’m wrong. You haven’t demonstrated that my opinion is actually wrong. All you’ve actually done is point to other opinion pieces that you agree with, and pretending they’re facts.

        • Candy Smith

          My morality is better than that.

          Really?? What’s better? And why is whatever you claim to be better right??

        • Dys

          Really?? What’s better? And why is whatever you claim to be better right??

          Just to be clear, you’re on the pro-slavery side of this argument, and you’re questioning my morality?

        • Candy Smith

          I am pro based off of what the Bible has to say about slabery. There is nothing wrong with the Bible kind of slavery. What is wrong is owning someone treating some badly and not being punished for it. If someone is treated badly as a slave, they are punishd. Also, not having freedom isnt right either. The slaves were able to go free. There is a BIG DIFFERENCE between the Bible slavery and the slavery we have seen within the last few centuries.

        • Dys

          There is nothing wrong with the Bible kind of slavery.

          As long as you just pretend it’s indentured servitude. Are you also in favor of daughters being sold off to be sex slaves or wives without their consent?

          What is wrong is owning someone treating some badly and not being punished for it.

          According to the bible, you could beat someone as much as you liked, and as long as they were up and moving after a couple of days, there was no punishment.

          Also, not having freedom isnt right either. The slaves were able to go free.

          This was only true for Israelite slaves. And daughters of Israelites that were sold into slavery didn’t get to go free either.

        • Candy Smith

          Some of is and the one with the daughter and sex have explanations as well!!!

        • Candy Smith

          That verse the beating one has an explanation has well. Any verse you mention will HAVE an explanation.

        • Dys

          Yes, it will have an opinion to excuse it. And you’ll pretend that the explanation is the absolute truth and can’t be questioned.

        • Candy Smith

          Didnt get to to free. once they were married, they are no longer slaves. they are part of the family,

        • Dys

          once they were married, they are no longer slaves. they are part of the family,

          Replace “once” with “if”, and you’re correct. Marriage wasn’t inevitable for female slaves.

        • Candy Smith

          Also, not having freedom isnt right either. The slaves were able to go free.

          Yeah except that is what happens in the Bible from awhile ago not according to the bible!!

          Goodnight!

        • Dys

          Yeah except that is what happens in the Bible from awhile ago not according to the bible!!

          Except for all the places where it says slaves could get handed down and weren’t set free.

        • Candy Smith

          Except for all the places where it says slaves could get handed down and weren’t set free.

          Why are you so insistent on Bible Websites and their opinions?? Yes that is what it is but at the same time, it has to be consistent with what the Bible says, and the Bible is a confusing book but, its important for me to say that The Bible wasn’t made as a complicated book. We are sinners. In our fallen state, it makes it confusing. Another important thing to consider is that the Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew and it was translated into English, so sometimes the words that the writers wrote down might not be what the original word (Hebrew word) actually means. This is why it is critical to look at what the Hebrew word means.

        • Dys

          Why are you so insistent on Bible Websites and their opinions??

          Because you keep pretending your preferred websites are stating facts, and they’re not.

          its important for me to say that The Bible wasn’t made as a complicated book.

          How did you determine that?

          We are sinners. In our fallen state, it makes it confusing.

          We’re not in a fallen state, so that has no effect on one’s ability to read and interpret the text. That’s just a convenient excuse to dismiss interpretations religious people don’t like. It’s like so many of the self-serving defense phrases in the bible that exist to make the believers feel special while dismissing valid criticism out of hand.

          This is why it is critical to look at what the Hebrew word means.

          True, but it doesn’t help your overall point in the slightest.

        • Candy Smith

          Well if the Hebrew word means something else, then would that not matter??

        • Dys

          Well if the Hebrew word means something else, then would that not matter??

          Sure, but that doesn’t help your slavery argument.

          It does throw a wrench in the works for your interpretation of Isaiah 7:14 though, since the primary meaning of “almah” is “young woman”, not “virgin”.

        • Candy Smith

          This person was to conceive and bear a child as a virgin, so the prediction could not be fulfilled in someone who conceived in a natural way.

        • Dys

          There’s no real evidence that the prophecy was ever fulfilled in any way. All you actually have is a story in a book.

        • Candy Smith

          There’s no real evidence that the prophecy was ever fulfilled in any way. All you actually have is a story in a book.

          Are you kidding me?? What would it take for you to believe the prophecies. They said Jesus would be born in Bethelem, and it happened. That is a phrophecy being fulfilled!!!

        • Dys

          Are you kidding me??

          Nope. I told you the truth. You have a story in a book. That doesn’t demonstrate that a prophecy was fulfilled at all. If you want to keep pretending the bible is a history textbook, you’re going to have problems.

          They said Jesus would be born in Bethelem, and it happened.

          Did it? How do you know that? As a matter of fact, I know why they placed the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem – it’s yet another OT prophecy that doesn’t actually match up with Jesus at all, but the gospel authors (mostly whoever wrote Matthew) wanted to make as many connections to the OT prophecies as possible.

          Micah 5:2 talks about a ruler from Bethlehem, but the rest of the chapter makes it clear the prophecy was about a military leader.

          And in order to get Jesus born in Bethlehem, the authors of the gospels constructed a birth narrative about a Roman census that didn’t occur with rules that make no sense (and the Romans didn’t use). Roman censuses didn’t make people return to their ancestral homelands. Here’s a decent explanation of the problem: https://history.stackexchange.com/a/23980 Note: it does make one mistake, saying that Herod the Great died in 4 CE instead of 4 BCE, but that just makes the problem worse, because there was no census taken until 6 CE.

          You seem to be unable to grasp a very simple truth – just because something is written in a book, doesn’t mean it’s true. Even if that book is the bible.

        • Candy Smith

          I never said the Bible was a history book. It is accurate when compared with history.

        • Dys

          It is accurate when compared with history.

          Some of it is, and some of it isn’t.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          People walking on water???

          Jesus walked on water and then He made one of his Disciples walk on water???

          Food falling from the sky?? This isnt Cloudy with the chance of meatballs?? Where did yo get that from?

        • adam
        • Greg G.

          Luke used Josephus as a source so it is particularly accurate where Luke and Acts agrees with Josephus, if Josephus is accurate.

        • Candy Smith

          Luke used Josephus as a source so it is particularly accurate where Luke and Acts agrees with Josephus, if Josephus is accurate.

          What?

        • Greg G.

          Read it louder if you can’t hear yourself.

        • Candy Smith

          And in order to get Jesus born in Bethlehem, the authors of the gospels constructed a birth narrative about a Roman census that didn’t occur with rules that make no sense (and the Romans didn’t use). Roman censuses didn’t make people return to their ancestral homelands. Here’s a decent explanation of the problem: https://history.stackexchan… Note: it does make one mistake, saying that Herod the Great died in 4 CE instead of 4 BCE, but that just makes the problem worse, because there was no census taken until 6 CE.

          Wheres the evidence for that??

        • Dys

          Wheres the evidence for that??

          Wait…you’re asking for evidence? When your default response is to just accept whatever the Bible says as the undeniable truth, despite not having any evidence for large portions of it?

          Where’s your evidence for the virgin birth? You don’t have any.

          But in any case, here’s an article that helps detail the problems with the biblical accounts:

          https://infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/quirinius.html
          The author has a BA in history, and MA in ancient history, and a PhD in ancient history.

          The most common attempt by Christians to get around the problem is to invent a census that they have no evidence for.

        • Candy Smith

          No I am asking where is the evidence for what you claimed. You are saying something that is different from the Bible. The way you explain is different from how we explain it, so i am asking where you get your evidence for your explanation!!

        • Dys

          And I’m pointing out that you have no evidence, but have no problem demanding it from others. I gave you an article to look over that explains quite a bit of where the evidence comes from. You just have to make it past the first sentence of a comment sometimes.

          The Bible is not the evidence – it is the claim.

        • Candy Smith

          They said Jesus would be born in Bethelem, and it happened.
          Did it? How do you know that? As a matter of fact, I know why they placed the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem – it’s yet another OT prophecy that doesn’t actually match up with Jesus at all, but the gospel authors (mostly whoever wrote Matthew) wanted to make as many connections to the OT prophecies as possible.

          Read what the Bible says.

        • Dys

          Read what the Bible says

          Understand that just because the Bible says something, doesn’t make it true. The Bible is not a history book.

          The gospel authors had a motivation to place Jesus’s birth in Bethlehem, regardless of whether it was true or not.

        • adam
        • BlackMamba44

          No, they didn’t say Jesus would be born, because Jesus didn’t have a name yet. Remember when you said that?

        • Greg G.

          There things taken as prophecy that they interpreted that the Messiah would come from Bethlehem but that does not mean that everyone born in Bethlehem would be the Messiah. I think Matthew and Luke struggled to explain the conundrum in John:

          John 7:40-43 (NRSV)40 When they heard these words, some in the crowd said, “This is really the prophet.” 41 Others said, “This is the Messiah.” But some asked, “Surely the Messiah does not come from Galilee, does he? 42 Has not the scripture said that the Messiah is descended from David and comes from Bethlehem, the village where David lived?” 43 So there was a division in the crowd because of him.

          Matthew and Luke came up with different explanations. Luke seems to have rejected all the baby killing in Matthew’s version. Matthew seems to have been inspired by Josephus’ account of Moses’ birth narrative rather than the Bible version.

        • Candy Smith

          Everyone born in Bethelam??

        • Greg G.

          Everyone born in Bethelam??

          What are you trying to say?

        • Candy Smith

          I do not know what you are saying??

        • Candy Smith

          It says the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem, and He was?? So what is there to figure out??

        • Candy Smith

          Matthew and Luke came up with different explanations. Luke seems to have rejected all the baby killing in Matthew’s version. Matthew seems to have been inspired by Josephus’ account of Moses’ birth narrative rather than the Bible version.

          Actually they just say it differently. A difference is not a contradiction. If you see a dog and a lady walking and you say to your friend I saw a dog and a lady walking, but then your friend only sees the lady and not the dog, that isnt a contradiction, it is just a difference.

          Also, lets see what the definition of a contradiction is.

          A contradiction occurs when two (or more) different statements on a topic cannot both be true at the same time and in the same sense. For instance, let’s look at the statements “I am walking my dog,” and “I am not walking my dog.” Both statements cannot both be true at the same time and in the same way. They are mutually exclusive. However, the following is not a contradiction: “Bob saw two people get out of the 1967 black Camaro,” and “Frank saw three people get out of the 1967 black Camaro.” These statements are not mutually exclusive because both statements can be true at the same time. Bob may have been at an angle where he was only able to see two people, where Frank could have been at a different angle where he was able to see three people. Both statements can be true at the same time and in the same sense without excluding the other.

          So just because Matthew and Luke explained something differently, that doesnt mean that there is a contradiction!!

        • Greg G.

          Matthew says Joseph and Mary were from Bethlehem and went to Egypt because of a dream, returned when Herod was dead, but went to Galilee because of another dream. Luke has Joseph and Mary living in Galilee but going to Bethlehem on tax business when she was none months pregnant, and they tried to rent a room instead of going to their home where they lived in Matthew.

          That what a contradiction is.

          Matthew has them running away to Egypt. Luke has them going to the temple in Jerusalem about a week after birth.

          Matthew has wise men from the east following a star in the east and has them ending up in the west.

          Herod died in 4 BC. The census was after Herod’s son was removed ten years after his father had died.

          It is not like a one reports a woman and a dog while the other only reports a woman. Besides what is mentioned in the Gospel of John as a conundrum, there are no common elements in the story.

          Joseph is never mentioned in Mark and Jesus’ mother is never mentioned by name in John.

        • Candy Smith

          There are explanations for all of that!!

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Except Jesus is a Historic Figure. We have a dates by him. A.D, B.C

        • adam
        • Greg G.

          We also have days of the week named for Norse and Roman gods. We have months of the year named for more Romans gods. The calendar is based on mythology.

        • Michael Neville
        • Greg G.

          God hates evil. There is still evil.

          Thor hates Frost Giants…

        • Michael Neville

          You’re right, I haven’t seen a single frost giant like for forever.

        • Michael Neville

          What’s the evidence for the historicity of Jesus? I personally accept that in the first part of the 1st Century CE a revivalist preacher named Yeshua ben Yosef was wandering around Palestine. I do not believe that the miracle-working Jesus described in the Bible existed. There’s no evidence for this Jesus other than the Bible which was (a) written decades after Jesus’ supposed death and (2) is a collection of myths, fables and lies thus useless as evidence.

          Please don’t throw Josephus at me. The Testamonium Flavium was almost certainly a 4th Century forgery by a Christian apologist named Eusebius. A considerable number of Christian writers – Justin and Theophilus in the 2nd Century, Minucius Felix, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Julius Africanus, Tertullian, Hippolytus and Orgen in the 3rd Century, and Methodius and Eustathius in the early 4th Century – who knew Joesphus and quoted from his works do not refer to this passage, though one would imagine that it would be the first passage that a Christian apologist would cite.

          Nowadays the years are divided into CE (Common Era) and BCE (Before Common Era). There’s enough non-Christians around to have made that change pretty universal.

        • Candy Smith

          There’s no evidence for this Jesus other than the Bible which was (a)
          written decades after Jesus’ supposed death and (2) is a collection of
          myths, fables and lies thus useless as evidence.

          That isnt true.

        • Michael Neville

          That’s your opinion. I need facts and logic to accept the historicity of Jesus, not your say-so.

          Since you’ve already exposed yourself as a creationist then I really
          don’t think you have anything to add to a serious discussion about your
          god. Both of the Genesis creation stories (read and compare the first
          two chapters of Genesis, you’ll see they don’t agree) were originally
          Babylonian myths that some Hebrew priests stole and edited to support
          one god rather than a pantheon. I cannot accept as reality some 2500
          year old myths written by people who didn’t know where the Sun went at
          night. And I can’t accept as reasonable somebody who rejects reality in
          favor of mythology.

        • Candy Smith

          If I suggest a couple of books that I think are important, would U be willing to take a look at them??

        • Michael Neville

          If you can give me reasons to look at those books, i.e. summarize their arguments and show why those arguments aren’t just the same old Christian apologetics that I’ve read for years (I’m 69, I’ve been an atheist since I was about your age, and I’ve read a lot of Christian apologetics), then I’ll consider it.

          I strongly suspect that you’d never heard of Josephus and the Testamonium Flavium until I mentioned them a few hours ago. Besides Josephus I could also have mentioned why Pliny the Younger, Suetonius and Tactitus don’t provide evidence for the historicity of Jesus. I’m quite familiar with the main arguments Christians give to “prove” their god exists. If you know of some new and improved arguments for the historicity of Jesus then I’ll look at it. If they’re the same discredited, unsound arguments I’ve known about for years then don’t bother.

        • Candy Smith

          In support of this, the greek translation of the hebrew Old testament (LLX) which predates the time of Christ, translated the hebrew word “almah” which by the unambiguous Greek word “parthenos”, which always refers to a virgin.

        • Dys

          which by the unambiguous Greek word “parthenos”, which always refers to a virgin.

          That’s not actually true…Genesis 34 refers to Dinah as a “parthenos” even after she was raped.

          The septuagint contains translation errors – the mistranslation of “almah” to “parthenos” is one of them. If the Hebrew bible really meant to label the woman in question as a virgin, “betulah” would have left no room for doubt. But they didn’t use it.

          And the rest of the verse makes it abundantly clear that the passage doesn’t refer to Jesus, as the issue Isaiah was discussing had already concluded well before Jesus was ever born.

        • Candy Smith

          God says that he will be giving a sign to Ahaz. In order for the
          prophecy to make sense, the woman in question must already be pregnant
          at the time the prophecy was given. By the time Jesus came around, Ahaz
          had long since passed away.

          The “sign” in Isaiah 7:14 is offered to the King to assure him that God will deliver Judah from their coalition of enemies. The sign of a messiah being born long after King Ahaz was dead would not
          seem to accomplish the goal.You are saying, therefore, that Isaiah 7:14
          could only be talking about something that happened shortly after
          Isaiah spoke those words and could not have anything to do with the
          Messiah.

          The problem with this argument is that it assumes that Isaiah 7 was written in a vacuum. It assumes that the story was written with no connection to the rest of
          the book of Isaiah and for absolutely no purpose other than to dryly
          record an event. The Book of Isaiah, however, is not a memoir or a work of history. There
          is very little narrative in Isaiah at all. When it does tell a story,
          it is utilizing that story to make a larger point. When the New Testament author cited Isaiah 7:14
          in reference to Jesus, it was not merely ripping the verse out and
          slapping it on the page. It was making a larger case that Jesus was the
          fulfillment of a series of prophecies about a promised Messianic Son in
          Isaiah 7-12.

        • Dys

          So the best you’re able to do is mindlessly regurgitate CARM nonsense. The prophecy is clear – the child it is talking about is meant as a sign to resolve the crisis Isaiah 7 is describing. That crisis was resolved well before Jesus was ever born. Assyria conquered the two kingdoms.

          It’s not a messianic prophecy. – instead what you have is wishful thinkers trying to extrapolate what they want to be true from a story that doesn’t warrant it.

          Your article (and you) completely tosses the context of Isaiah 7 out the window so you can imagine it’s really talking about Jesus. The war between Judah and the coalition of Aram and Israel is hand waved away.

          Isaiah 7 is fairly straightforward – Israel and Aram are warring against Jerusalem. Ahaz is told that HE will be given a sign. And that sign will be a child, and that before the child knows right from wrong, the two kingdoms attacking Judah will be destroyed. It then immediately talks about an Assyrian invasion (which happened around 740 BCE), where Israel and Aram are conquered by Assyria.

          The timeline is clear – it all happened before Jesus was ever born. But you’re insisting that none of the context matters, and that it’s really about Jesus, despite all the problems with that conclusion. Your article doesn’t actually deal with this at all.

        • adam
        • epeeist

          Wait, Isiah 7:14 prophesies a young woman will have a child. How can you not be converted after that? I mean, whoever heard of such a thing.

        • Dys

          It’s unheard of, I tell ya!

        • adam

          “Why are you so insistent on Bible Websites and their opinions??”

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7123c548a1342e2d1779d51809c0ce85d82e0551dcde5fa0f6496d68284963dd.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          There are two types of slavery in the Bible. One is for debt. And one is for those that cant avoid to pay to care for their family, so sometimes they would send their children in to work for the food or etc.

        • Dys

          No, you’re wrong. The bible describes two types of slavery, but the ones you gave above are both for Israelites. You’ve omitted completely foreign slaves – the ones bought or captured from other nations.

        • Candy Smith

          I described two types of slaveries.

        • Candy Smith

          yes you are right. ok.

        • Candy Smith

          Israelites vs. Foreigners

          Leviticus 25:39-46
          explains some of the differences between an Israelite slave and a
          foreign slave. An Israelite slave was to be treated as a cross between
          family and a hired man, not as a chattel slave. But Israel also had
          foreigners who had been taken in battle or who, like the Gibeonites, had
          chosen to become Israel’s servants (Joshua 9). These slaves could be held permanently—could be,
          but it wasn’t required. An Israelite who had to sell himself was to be
          treated respectfully and redeemed as quickly as possible (Leviticus 25:47-55).

        • Candy Smith

          Foreigners

          The Old Testament Law gave the procedure for taking foreigners (Deuteronomy 20:10-11).
          When making war against a city, Israel was to first extend an offer of
          peace, in which the city’s inhabitants could voluntarily bind themselves
          over as slaves to Israel. This was more like serfdom than slavery.
          Foreign women and children could be taken in war, but the women could
          also be taken as wives (Deuteronomy 21:10-13; Rahab—Matthew 1:5).

        • Candy Smith

          Debtors

          A poor man could sell himself to a richer man if there was famine and
          the poor man had no way to provide for himself. Or a debtor could sell
          himself to the one he owed money to. If the debtor owed money to several
          people, he could sell himself to a rich man who agreed to pay off the
          debts. Similarly, the head of a household could sell a family member in
          exchange for any of the above. Other arrangements were possible; Jacob
          sold himself to Laban for fourteen years to pay the bridal prices of
          Leah and Rachel. Some debt slaves were foreigners and lived under
          slightly different regulations if they were not proselytes (converted
          Jews).

        • Candy Smith

          – Any foreign slave who escaped to Israel was to be sheltered and not returned to slavery (Deuteronomy 23:15-16).

          – Foreign slaves were not automatically released after six years;
          foreigners were not allowed to own land in Israel, and it would have
          been next to impossible for them to earn a living on their own; to
          release such slaves against their will may have been cruel.

        • Dys

          So, instead of allowing foreigners to own land and earn a living, God decided they should just stay enslaved.

          Are you starting to understand why this explanation doesn’t work very well when God is supposed to be all-powerful and benevolent? It makes much more sense as an excuse when you leave God out of it.

        • Candy Smith

          Slavery in the Bible is a difficult topic to broach because our paradigm
          is both horrific and largely unrelated to slavery in the Bible. Slaves
          in our time and in recent centuries are “chattel” slaves. They were
          tricked into or forced to work. They received no pay and had no right to
          refuse to work. Their humanity was owned by another person.

        • MR

          Slaves in our time and in recent centuries

          And for millennia before. Don’t kid yourself.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1448a3b509be0eb2d08a113f8cb9c663f8d0a91aa79b5b72cf91c0e0c1167672.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          And for millennia before. Don’t kid yourself.

          What?

        • MR

          Don’t worry, if you’re not smart enough to figure it out on your own, it’s not worth pursuing. Good luck on your SBAC.

        • Candy Smith

          Good luck on your SBAC.

          Thanks!

        • adam

          “Slavery in the Bible is a difficult topic to broach because our paradigm is both horrific and largely unrelated to slavery in the Bible. ”

          Slavery in America DEPENDED on the bible for the justification to OWN PEOPLE AS PROPERTY

          http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_slav4.htm

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/86effa5e2bc761ae95f687bf44f1632c13ebd40a54b07502d779f242a887cc3e.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Slavery in the Old Testament was very different and involved a variety
          of methods, situations, and restrictions. But the Old Testament is clear
          about capturing people and selling them as chattel: kidnapping was a
          crime punishable by death (Exodus 21:16).

        • Dys

          That law only pertained to kidnapping fellow Israelites. See the matching verse Deuteronomy 24:7

        • Candy Smith

          whats pertained?

        • Dys

          It only applied to kidnapping Israelites.

        • Candy Smith

          God sees them as victims of a crime.
          Slavery is illegal in every country of the world, although some
          countries enforce the law more than others. In many cases, trafficking
          involves some kind of kidnapping, which was punishable by death in the
          Old Testament (Deuteronomy 24:7) and identified as lawless, rebellious, and ungodly in the New Testament (1 Timothy 1:9–10).
          Slavery was allowed and supported by the civil authorities in the time
          of the New Testament, and Paul did encourage slaves to submit to their
          masters and the system (Ephesians 6:5–8; Colossians 3:22–24),
          knowing that, if they didn’t, they faced branding or execution. But
          since slave owners no longer have the legal right to own slaves, these
          exhortations become largely moot.

        • Candy Smith

          I have to go to bed really soon.

        • Candy Smith

          The Purpose of Slavery

          In an ideal world, slavery would neither be an option nor a necessity.
          Because of the socioeconomic situation of Old Testament Israel, God did
          allow slavery, but He allowed it for a simple purpose: to help the poor
          survive. A person could sell himself into slavery (akin to indentured
          servitude) in order to pay off debt or provide a basic subsistence. God
          did not intend for Israel to have poverty (Deuteronomy 15:4), but sin made it inevitable (Deuteronomy 15:5), and God allowed slavery to deal with that reality.

        • Dys

          For such an all-powerful God, he really did have some serious limitations. The best he could do was allow slavery?

        • Candy Smith

          He gave reasons why. Plus part of the reason it happens is because of sin.

        • Candy Smith

          Goodnight!!!

        • Dys

          Later

        • Candy Smith

          I dont know what projecting is???

        • Dys

          Clearly.

        • Candy Smith

          Can you tell me so I avoid doing it like you asked me to??

        • Dys

          Psychological projection is when someone accuses another of something they themselves are guilty of. For example, a rude person might accuse someone else of being rude.

          In this instance, I was referring to this line: “That also shows me that you are not sincere and you do not want to be wrong.”

          And I’m claiming that based on the fact that you’ve insisted I can’t have a valid interpretation of the bible as a non-believer and your constant attempts to treat your opinions as facts.

          So, I don’t think you’re being sincere, since you’re not actually here for a discussion. I think you’re here primarily to try and dictate what you think the truth is, and are casually dismissing criticism with nonsense like “that’s just your opinion” and “saying that doesn’t make it right”.

          And nobody wants to be wrong, but in this case, you’re asserting that I’m wrong, and pointing to opinion pieces that you agree with, as if that somehow makes my opinion wrong. It doesn’t. But you’re acting as if your opinions on your religion, the bible, and websites that agree with you are facts, and they are not. On repeated occasions now, you’ve made it clear that you believe your opinions are facts. Which tells me you’ve made your mind up, regardless of anything I’ll say or issues I point out.

        • Candy Smith

          And I’m claiming that based on the fact that you’ve insisted I can’t
          have a valid interpretation of the bible as a non-believer and your
          constant attempts to treat your opinions as facts.

          Well you could see thing in a different way if you would look at things from a different position or a different way??

        • Dys

          Well you could see thing in a different way if you would look at things from a different position or a different way??

          Sure. And so could you. Yet you don’t. For instance, if you drop the unsupported assumption that Bible is inerrant, it starts making more sense. Go one step further and leave out that it’s the word of an infinitely good and all-powerful being, and it makes A LOT more sense. You don’t have to come up with fanciful explanations for all the obvious shortcomings.

          But that has nothing to do with the issue of you treating your opinions as facts.

        • Candy Smith

          Well what would be a better explanation for why there is evil and suffering in this world???

        • Dys

          Because there’s not an all-powerful and loving God watching over it. The problem of evil doesn’t exist in atheistic worldviews, because it’s not difficult to explain why evil and suffering exist.

        • Candy Smith

          Because I have and I have a brain that tells me that they are not excuses. You instead asking to see what the links are instantly come to the conclusion that they are excuses. And that is completely unreasonable.

        • Dys

          You instead asking to see what the links are instantly come to the conclusion that they are excuses.

          Except that’s not what I’ve done at all. I read the site, and rejected their reasoning. That’s not unreasonable in the slightest.

        • Candy Smith

          Which sites?? Which websites??

        • Dys

          I’m sorry I haven’t kept a detailed list of my browsing history for your perusal. It must be because I don’t think you’re entitled to it. Silly me.

          I don’t know why you keep wasting time asking for it. I don’t feel the need to go relook up every Christian site I’ve visited just to give you a list.

        • Candy Smith

          If you remember where you have gone, I would like to know the name. That is all I have asked.

        • Candy Smith

          Can U try not to use such big complicated words like “regurgitating”, please??

        • Rudy R

          I’m just repeating your words. What’s more to the story?

        • Candy Smith

          Society can give their opinion about slavery but that is all they can do.

        • Greg G.

          OK, you can be my slave according to what it says in the Bible. We will see what your opinion is after the first couple of years.

          I need my house painted. Be careful with the drips. That calls for a beating.

        • Michael Neville

          Remember, don’t beat your slave hard enough that they die within a day. Make sure they last at least a couple of days, three is optimal, before they die.

        • Greg G.

          The new day starts at sundown, so if the slave lasts that long, the rule is satisfied. Bible idolators count a day and a half as three days and three nights.

        • BlackMamba44

          And remamber: If she accidentally knocks over the paint can, only a few blows.

        • Greg G.

          Of course. But that is just for the first time.

        • Candy Smith

          That isnt what the first means. This verse is pointed out alot and atheists refuse to understand what it actually means.

        • Candy Smith

          “And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart,” (Gen. 6:6, NASB).

          The above verse is not a problem for Classical Christian Theism, nor
          is it a proof text for Open Theism. The verse simply tells us that the
          Lord was grieved and had sorrow in His heart for making man. Why? Because mankind had fallen into great sin, and this grieved the Lord. Does it mean that God didn’t know mankind would fall and become sinful? Of course not. Cannot God know that they would become sinners and also be grieved when it happens? Of course.

          Here is the link:

          https://carm.org/genesis-66-and-lord-was-sorry-he-hadmade-man-earth

        • Rudy R

          It’s not always wrong to lie. If you were hiding a Jewish family in your home during WWII Germany, and Nazis asked if you were hiding Jews in your home, wouldn’t you lie?

        • MR

          Or if your wife asked you if those jeans made her look fat?

        • Greg G.

          Being too honest is not the best policy. “Absolutely not, Honey, It is not the jeans.”

        • Candy Smith

          Evil is evil, I gave you the dictionary definition.

          That proves nothing!!

        • Greg G.

          Lamentations 3:37-38 (NRSV)37 Who can command and have it done,    if the Lord has not ordained it?38 Is it not from the mouth of the Most High    that good and bad come?

          Is verse 38 not about Isaiah 45:7 or is it from something else? It is saying that bad comes from the Lord. Be honest with yourself and admit that the Bible says God is the source of bad.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          So why worship him?

          1.) You need to prove that evil actually exists. 2.) It is your opinion that He created evil, not a fact. The Bible says otherwise.

        • adam

          ” It is your opinion that He created evil, not a fact. The Bible says otherwise.”

          The bible quote God bragging about creating evil.

          You worship EVIL.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fef3e09d4fced201880c6048e47897bc3461d04f1c5de54936408c4560c105b.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          First, we need to understand that without God, we would have no concept of right and wrong. Don’t believe it? To one telling a lie is OK. To another beating one’s spouse is OK. And in some cultures, it is socially acceptable to bury alive children born out of wedlock.

        • Michael Neville

          First, we need to understand that without God, we would have no concept of right and wrong.

          Just because you say so doesn’t mean it’s true.

          According to your own propaganda your god is a thoroughly immoral critter. You even admit he kills people just because he wants to (and no, ignorant twit, he can’t do that because he “created” us, which he didn’t). He approves of rape, condones slavery and orders genocide. That is immoral under any circumstances. So it doesn’t make sense for you to claim your god is the source of morality.

          Try again, this time using some thought in your justification of your opinion.

        • Candy Smith

          Just because you say so doesn’t mean it’s true.

          The person who does not believe that God exists has only one choice when
          it comes to explaining morality—man must have thought it up by himself.

        • Michael Neville

          Yes, that’s right. Morality comes from humans, not from a figment of some Hebrew priests’ imaginations.

        • Candy Smith

          According to your own propaganda

          No it isnt my propaganda, it is your opinion.

          Hold on there is a difference between kill and murder. Murder is “the premeditated, unlawful taking of a life,” whereas killing
          is, more generally, “the taking of a life.” The same Law that forbids
          murder permits killing in self-defense (Exodus 22:2).

        • Michael Neville

          Your god murders people because he can and you think this is a great thing. That certainly doesn’t say much about your morality.

        • epeeist

          The same Law that forbids murder permits killing in self-defense (Exodus 22:2).

          So does drowning the world count as murder or self-defence?

        • Candy Smith

          Well first of all, God doesn’t have to obey any of those laws. Second, He has the right to do what He sees fit with his creation.

        • Candy Smith

          He gave everyone more than enough time to repent and change. The ark door was open. People could have gone in there. All they had to do was repent and change their sinful manner, but they choose not to.

          The flood was just because the Creator has the right to do as He pleases with His creation.
          As the potter can do whatever he wants with the clay on his wheel, so
          God has the right to do as He pleases with the work of His own hands.
          “The LORD does whatever pleases him, in the heavens and on the earth, in
          the seas and all their depths” (Psalm 135:6).

          The global flood of Noah’s day was a just punishment of sin. Those who
          say the flood was unjust probably don’t like the idea of judgment to
          begin with. The story of Noah is a vivid reminder that, like it or not,
          there is another judgment coming: “As it was in the days of Noah, so it
          will be at the coming of the Son of Man” (Matthew 24:37). Are you ready, or will you be swept away?

        • Candy Smith

          He approves of rape, condones slavery and orders genocide.

          No he does no approve of rape this is a misunderstranding.

          He orders genocide? So what??

        • Candy Smith

          According to your own propaganda your god is a thorough
          immoral critter. You even admit he kills people just because he wants to (and no, ignorant twit, he can’t do that because he “created” us, which he didn’t). He approves of rape, condones slavery and orders genocide. That is immoral under any circumstances. So it doesn’t make sense for you to claim your god is the source of morality.

          And it doesnt make any sense to claim that He is immoral. First of all,your complaint are nothing but opinions. Please tell me why any of those things are wrong??

        • Candy Smith

          You even admit he kills people just because he wants to (and no, ignorant
          twit, he can’t do that because he “created” us, which he didn’t).

          In your opinion He didnt. Okay if God does not exist, then the things that you dislike didnt happen. If He does exist, then you have to face Him on the Day of Judgement.

        • Michael Neville

          You can stop making threats. You love your bully of a god since he will “punish” all the people who don’t agree with your narrow interpretation of Christianity but normal people don’t get their jollies by threatening other people.

        • Candy Smith

          He approves of rape, condones slavery and orders genocide. That is immoral under any circumstances

          According to what??? Your opinion?? Are you for real?? This comment is absurd in the highest degrees. You are an atheist. There is no right and wrong in Atheism. In the way you live you’re life as an atheist, there can be no universal moral
          absolutes that transcend time and culture. For an atheist to say that something “is” wrong, is to appeal to universal moral absolute.

          But how do you justify such a thing in and atheistic way of thinking where there are no transcendent beings?

        • Michael Neville

          No, there are no moral absolutes. If you pretend there are then give an example and explain how whatever your pull out of your ass is a moral absolute. And remember, your immoral thug of a god is not the source for anything because fictitious, imaginary critters don’t produce anything. The same challenge applies to transcendent beings. Give me an example and prove that they aren’t just figments of your imagination.

        • adam

          “First, we need to understand that without God, we would have no concept of right and wrong.”

          With God, you have concept of right and wrong

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/831e274b356c03b8778b1d9672b8ab244560e2fda7a4cd57b0436d5bda02694f.jpg

        • BlackMamba44
        • Candy Smith

          of course u would say this is wrong, right?

          Despite what many people believe there exists a universal moral law, and God created it. Moral Laws require a Moral Lawgiver.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          It doesnt matter whether you voted for him or not. That’s irrevalent. You can give you’re opinion and say whatever you want to say, but it’s NOTHING more than your opinion.

        • Michael Neville

          You’re a broken record. No matter what anyone says to you, your response is either “my god is a badass who can kill you just because he feels like it” or “you’re going to hell just because you don’t kiss my god’s ass” or “that’s your opinion.” Can’t you come up with anything original?

        • BlackMamba44

          She’s starting to sound like Wisdom Speaks.

        • Greg G.

          An opinion based on facts, thoughts, and reason is better than an opinion based on a 2500 year old con job.

        • Candy Smith

          An opinion based on facts, thoughts, and reason is better than an opinion based on a 2500 year old con job.

          It isnt based on facts. Not everyone agrees with you and it does not matter how old it is or He is. You need an objective standard. Otherwise your complaints mean nothing.

        • adam

          ” Of course, God cannot sin or stop being God since that would violate His own nature. ”

          but God does sin, according to your bible:

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/98265d38f8c9a73888180e83402d04fd1421c4b8f148d83327738ec63e349f62.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Hold on! That kind of jeolosy isnt a sin. Let me explain, please.

        • BlackMamba44

          Definition of jealous:

          feeling or showing envy of someone or their achievements and advantages.
          “he grew jealous of her success”
          synonyms:envious, covetous, desirous; More
          antonyms:proud, admiring

          feeling or showing suspicion of someone’s unfaithfulness in a relationship.
          “a jealous boyfriend”
          synonyms:suspicious, distrustful, mistrustful, doubting, insecure, anxious; More
          antonyms:trusting

          fiercely protective or vigilant of one’s rights or possessions.
          “Howard is still a little jealous of his authority”

          synonyms:protective, vigilant, watchful, heedful, mindful, careful, solicitous
          “they are very jealous of their rights”
          antonyms:careless

          (of God) demanding faithfulness and exclusive worship.

        • adam

          Go ahead and lie about it.

        • Candy Smith

          It is important to understand how the word “jealous” is used. Its use in Exodus 20:5 to describe God is different from how it is used to describe the sin of jealousy (Galatians 5:20).

        • adam

          Nope, you are lying AGAIN.

        • Candy Smith

          Think about this for a minute. Being Jealous means what?? That You want something??

          When we use the word “jealous,” we use it in the sense of being envious of someone who has something we do not have.

          A person might be jealous or envious of another person because he or she has a nice car or home (possessions).

          How could this possibly apply to God?? Everything is His. He can’t want anything. So, therefore, the kind of jealousy mentioned in Exodus 20:5 is different than what is being said in (Galatians 5:20).

        • Candy Smith

          So really no matter what you say, no matter what you call him, in the end, you are still giving your opinion.

        • Michael Neville

          And your point is what? You and I are both giving our opinions. The difference is that I have some evidence to support my opinion while you’re relying on a thousand year old collection of myths, fables and lies to support your opinion. Plus your hatred of people who don’t share your belief in a sadistic, narcissistic, Iron Age tribal god.

        • Candy Smith

          Your defense of your monster of a god is nothing more than the indoctrination you’ve received from others

          Not is isn’t. It hasn’t to do with the act that you somehow think you have the right to judge an infinite all-powerful, all-knowing God, who knows everything and we humans are finite. We do not know everything. So you are judging and infinite God and you only know a small percentage of things and He KNOWS everything. So you may think He should do things a certain way, but thats your opinion. You have no right to judge Him.

          Not only that but you have nothing offer to prove anything you say. The best thing you can offer is your opinion. You need to give me an Objective Standard for why ANY of the things God did was wrong, and YOU CANNOT DO THIS!!

          He is a monster. Why?? The people with the Canaanites. Did you know that they were burning their children and offering them as sacrifices to false gods. So would u have preferred for God to not step in and just let them keep killing children. Please just answer this.

          You’ve obviously spent no more time thinking about how your god behaves than you have spent learning to use proper English.

          I do not need to spend anytime looking at how He behaves because how He behaves doesn’t matter. He isn’t like humans. When we kill someone there are consequences. He doesnt get punished. He is sovereign over all life, so there is nothing you can say that will make you right.

        • Michael Neville

          Sure I have the right to judge anyone and anything including your non-existent, imaginary god. I’m an intelligent person with a well developed sense of right and wrong. Human morality is based on “mores”, the concept that societies decide the morality of actions. Non-existent, imaginary critters have nothing to do with mores or morality.

          According to your propaganda your non-existent, imaginary god is a sadistic, narcissistic bully with the emotional maturity of a spoiled six-year-old. He kills people just because he can. He condones slavery and rape and orders genocide. Might makes right is not a basis for morality. Because of my sense of right and wrong I know that your god is immoral.

          If you want me to change my opinion about your non-existent, imaginary, immoral god then you first have to show that your god exists. You haven’t even tried to do that. Instead you threaten me with hell, make unevidenced claims about how great your non-existent, imaginary god is, and whine about my opinions.

        • Aram Nurala

          The good news for you is the Canaanite story is utter fiction. More likely, as recent archaeology shows, the Israelites were in fact a breakaway sect of the Canaanites, eschewing pork and thinking themselves better than their former compatriots. As such, the fiction of being slaves in Egypt was invented, there being not even one hieroglyphic mentioning such a thing, nor any trace of millions of people wandering Sinai for forty years. In conclusion, every time you slam the Canaanites as evil you’re also slamming your ‘chosen people’ the Israelites, being as they’re one and the same. Something to think about, assuming you care about facts at all.

        • Candy Smith

          The Bible does not forbid slavery, nor does it demand that every slave
          owner who wants to please God must immediately emancipate his slaves.
          Instead, the Bible at every turn calls for a treatment of slaves that
          would have been more humane than any found in the culture at large. The
          very idea that a master could be punished in any way for killing a slave
          would have been scandalous at the time Moses gave the Law. The culture
          at large made no attempt to grant slaves any rights. Slaves in Egypt or
          Moab, for example, were afforded no such protection.

        • Greg G.

          MN predicted you would lie about slavery. Leviticus 25:44-46 says to not treat fellow Israelis harshly but the foreign slaves could be treated like slaves. Even Jesus didn’t have a problem with beating slaves.

          Hammurabi Law: Three Classes, circa 19th century BC, appear to be better than the OT. Hittite Law had an aversion to the death penalty that favored slavery instead, circa 15th century BC, which would be better than the OT. Code of the Nesilim, circa 16th century BC, doesn’t seem so bad for slaves.

          Christians are not honest about Old Testament slavery.

        • Candy Smith

          Exodus 21:20–21
          is certainly troubling to people with modern sensitivities. Modern
          people in the free world have come to view autonomous personal freedom
          as the highest form of good and anything that curtails personal freedom
          as the ultimate evil. People may be tempted to read a passage like Exodus 21:20–21
          and charge God with moral evil. Such charges need to be challenged, for
          slavery is not the only area where modern sensitivities and biblical
          guidelines clash—abortion and homosexuality are two other flashpoints.
          The danger on this issue is that most Christians would agree that
          slavery is morally reprehensible.

        • Greg G.

          The danger on this issue is that most Christians would agree that slavery is morally reprehensible.

          Which shows that there is no objective morality.

        • Michael Neville

          If you’re going to cut and paste something you should cut and paste more than just the introduction. You should also give the source or a link to where you’re getting your cut and paste from. Plagiarism is a form of stealing.

          gotquestions.org gives a very half-assed answer to the question about the Bible allowing a slave owner to kill his slaves. So what if other cultures were more lenient to slave owners? Stealing $100 is a lesser injury to someone than stealing $1000 from them but it’s still stealing.

        • Candy Smith

          gotquestions.org gives a very half-assed answer to the question about the Bible allowing a slave owner to kill his slaves.

          that is your opinion.

        • Greg G.

          that is your opinion.

          Yes, of course, it is his opinion. Is that supposed to be an argument or are you admitting his opinion is correct?

        • Candy Smith

          Wait who’s opinion?

        • Candy Smith

          Plagiarism is a form of stealing.

          So is that going to be your excuse when you face God on the Day of Judgement?? Are U planning on saying to God “Oh I had discussions with Christians but when they offered an argument about God and etc, and when I realized they had plagiarized something so I told them that it was form of stealing. ”

          What do you think God is going to say??

          Worrying about whether I am plagiarizing or not does not matter. What matters is that you accept Christ as your Savior and ask for your sins or you will wish you listened to me. Seriously if you dont have a change of heart, the last thing you will be worrying about is whether a plagiarized something or not. That isn’t going to matter in Hell.

          Also, this isn’t school. I am not going to get expelled.

          Regarding Exodus 21:20–21,
          consider that many of those who sold themselves into servitude were
          those who had lost everything, indicating that they were often times the
          “lazy” ones. In order to get them up to par on a working level, they
          may require discipline. And the Bible does say to give discipline—even
          fathers were to give their children “the rod;” to withhold it is
          considered unloving (Proverbs 13:24, 23:13).
          So beating with a rod (or more appropriately “a branch”) is not harsh,
          but required for discipline. Even the Apostle Paul reveals he was beaten
          with a rod three times (2 Corinthians 11:25),
          and he didn’t die from it. In fact, the equivalent in today’s culture
          (spanking) was commonplace in public schools until just a few years ago.
          Only recently has this been deemed “inappropriate.”

          According to verses 20–21, if an owner severely beat his servant, and
          the servant died, then he would be punished—that was the law. However,
          if the servant survived for a couple of days, it is probable that the
          master was punishing him and not intending to kill him, or that he may
          have died from another cause. In this case there is no penalty other
          than that the owner loses the servant who is his temporary property—he
          suffers the loss.

          Regarding this verse, there seems to be some debate as to the proper translation of verse 21.
          Several versions (NIV, HCSB, NLT) translate it as “. . . if the servant
          recovers after a day or two,” rather than “remains alive a day or two.”
          If this is the proper translation, it obviously makes this a moot point.

        • Michael Neville

          If your sadistic monster of a god exists and I’m before him then he’s going to have to justify himself to me. I’ve lived a pretty blameless life and he’s committed genocide, condones rape and slavery, and kills people just because he can. No, I’m not afraid of your asshole of a god. Besides, what’s he going to do to me? Send me to Hell? You’re convinced that’ll happen. In fact you’re creaming in your jeans over the thought of the billions of people your thug of a god will punish for eternity.

          I also don’t understand how I’m accountable for your plagiarism. I guess that’s one of the mysteries of Christianity.

        • Candy Smith

          He does not have to do anything. Like I’ve days before”it’s you’re opinion that He is a sadistic monster. You are choosing to ignore that statement. Fine go ahead and ignore but it still doesn’t change the fact rhat you are giving your opinion.

          When you see Him on the day of judgement, be prepared for Him to say that you hang given your opinion.

        • Michael Neville

          As I said, if he exists (and that’s a huge IF which you’ve done nothing to provide evidence for) then he’s going to have to justify himself to me. You might just roll over and play puppydog to this asshole but I don’t play those games. I am prepared to justify my life because overall I’ve done as best as I could. So he better have some good excuses for his crimes and immorality. I don’t like bullies and I’ll stand up to them every chance I get.

          Also your threats are getting pretty tiresome.

          http://limpingintotruth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Gervais-hell-santa.png

        • Candy Smith

          I am prepared to justify my life because overall I’ve done as best as I could.

          You will have no excuse when you face him.

          That picture is stupid. One is a fantasy and one is your destiny of where you will spend eternity!!

        • Candy Smith

          So he better have some good excuses for his crimes and immorality.

          First of all, who the heck do you think you are?? Do you actually think that you have the right to judge God this way and say that he better have some good excuses?? I mean that is what you say to a person, a human being. Last time I checked, God wasn’t human.

          So before you continue pretending to be right, how about you educate yourself on who you are dealing with!!????

        • Candy Smith

          So he better have some good excuses for his crimes and immorality.

          And as I have said like at least five times already, it is STILL your opinion that what He has done is immoral.

        • Candy Smith

          I’ve lived a pretty blameless life and he’s committed genocide, condones rape and slavery, and kills people just because he can.

          Just because he can? Really? Is that the best answer that you can give. It’s more than that.

        • Candy Smith

          I’ve lived a pretty blameless life and he’s committed genocide, condones rape and slavery, and kills people just because he can.

          So what? Who cares? 1.) Everyone is a sinner. 2.) He is sovereign over ALL life.

        • Candy Smith

          I never blamed you for plagiarism???

        • Michael Neville

          You are obviously too stupid to even understand what you wrote. You said:

          Are U planning on saying to God “Oh I had discussions with Christians but when they offered an argument about God and etc, and when I realized they had plagiarized something so I told them that it was form of stealing. “

          That tells me you expect me to have to justify to your asshole god why I caught your plagiarism. Perhaps you didn’t mean that but that’s what you wrote. And again, it’s not my fault you can’t write English very well.

        • Candy Smith

          What matters more to you?? Avoiding Hell for eternity or worrying about whether or not someone plagiarizes??

        • Candy Smith

          Yeah im not talking about u. I am asking if that is what u plan on saying to God??

        • Pofarmer

          I don’t plan on saying anything, because my consciousness will no longer exist, just like yours.

        • Candy Smith

          I don’t plan on saying anything, because my consciousness will no longer exist, just like yours.

          But you don’t know that for sure??!?? U just hope that that is the truth.

        • Pofarmer

          To quote Mark Twain “I was dead for billion of years, and was not the slightest but inconvenienced by it. “

        • Greg G.

          But you don’t know that for sure??!?? U just hope that that is the truth.

          But what if there is a god who remains hidden and prefers that people who don’t believe in hidden gods. That god would damn all of those who believe in gods. He would rather spend eternity with rational skeptics than gullible people.

        • Pofarmer
        • Greg G.

          I remember watching that video long ago. Pat really lays it out.

        • Candy Smith

          First of all the Bible says that God will reveal himself to those who faithfully seek him.

        • Greg G.

          All religious texts say stuff like that. God doesn’t reveal himself, people fool themselves.

        • Candy Smith

          So you’re a muslim??

        • Greg G.

          No, he doesn’t expect 72 virgins, either.

        • Candy Smith

          Let me ask you this? Why is murder wrong?

        • Susan

          Why is murder wrong?

          Because we see it as a dreadful thing to be on the wrong side of.

          Now, I will ask you the same question.

          Why is murder wrong?

        • Candy Smith

          lets deal with your answer first!!

          We see it as a dreadful thing?? So what?? That doesn’t make it wrong?? Hitler certainty didnt think of it as a dreadful thing, right?

        • Susan

          lets deal with your answer first

          Sure.

          We see it as a dreadful thing? So what?

          I said we see it as a dreadful thing to be on the wrong side of. Give me a position on morality that isn’t connected to that.

          That doesn’t make it wrong.

          It does. That’s what we appeal to when we call “murder” wrong. That no one wants to be murdered or for someone they love to be murdered. That would include Hitler

          Most of us don’t want to see a stranger murdered.

          Nor kittens tortured.

          Some of us don’t eat meat because it’s a horrible choice to make when you have other choices.

          Now that we’ve dealt with my answer, how about you provide one we can deal with?

          Why is “murder” wrong?

        • Candy Smith

          Why is rape and slavery wrong? By what standard do you use to decide that any of those things are wrong??!??

        • Pofarmer

          Mine. Under Sharia, for instance, rape and slavery is apparently perfectly ok in many instances.

        • Candy Smith

          I dont know what that is, but okay??

        • Candy Smith

          So it isnt wrong?? And what the heck is Sharia??

        • Candy Smith

          You’ve lived a blameless life? Oh really? I find that hard to believe!??!

          Have you ever lied? Have you ever stolen? Have you ever lusted? Have you disobeyed your parents?

          Those are all sins. U are not blameless!!

        • BlackMamba44

          Lusting after someone is just thinking that someone is hot/sexy. How is thinking “I wanna tap that” a sin?

          You actually agree with eternal punishment in hell for thinking something?

          Religion really does poison the mind.

        • Candy Smith

          Why are you debating what He says is a sin. That would be like arguing with your mom or me arguing with my mom about a rule.

        • BlackMamba44

          Where am I debating? I asked you a couple of questions and made a comment.

          My mom wasn’t going to torture me for eternity for breaking a rule. Will yours? Also, I actually have evidence of my mom’s existence. Not so much for your Yahweh.

          Why do you keep replying numerous times to a single comment? (You remind me of another wacko Christian – Wisdom Speaks).

        • Candy Smith

          Of course she isnt but there is a difference between a parent and God.

          Yes, God must punish those who break His law because it is the right thing to do. Just as a parent should punish a child for doing something wrong (intentionally), so God must punish those who do wrong. You see, if God did not punish the person who does wrong, then He would be unjust and unrighteous. He would be breaking His own law — which He cannot do. But, someone might say that the punishment of a parent on a child is temporary whereas God’s punishment is eternal. Why the
          difference? The answer is two-fold. First, God is infinite and a
          parent is not. Second, God is the standard of all righteousness and the parent is not.

          Because God is infinite, when we sin, we are offending an infinite
          God. This is incredibly significant. The reason sin is so bad is not
          so much because of the one committing the sin, but because of the One who is offended. In other words, sin is so incredibly bad because it takes on a horrible quality by the very fact of who it is against; an infinitely pure, holy, and righteous God.

          A parent is not the standard of righteousness. God is. A parent is
          (or should be) using the righteous standard of God in raising children. Therefore, though a parent’s punishment is temporary because it is instruction and correction, the punishment of God is eternal because our sin is against an eternal God. There is a big difference.

        • BlackMamba44

          Blah, blah, blah

        • Candy Smith

          You actually agree with eternal punishment in hell for thinking something?

          Do U really think someone is going to go to Hell for breaking one commandment?? No, that is not going to happen. Everyone has lied. God cannot be with sinners. God is perfect and we are not. When Adam and Eve sinned, they were no longer perfect. Jesus died on the cross for our sins so that we can live with God forever. God is saving people that deserved to be punished. Jesus could do this because He really is the one and only innocent person. If you do not ask for forgiveness, you will not be let into Heaven and there is nothing Unjust about that since you are receiving a gift that you do not deserve in the fist place

        • BlackMamba44

          Thanks for not answering the questions.

          Wow. So if I follow every commandment except “thou shalt not murder”, I can murder someone and Yahweh’s okay with that? It’s only one commandment.

          I don’t care what YahwehJesus did. I didn’t ask from him to do that. Hell, I wasn’t even born yet.

          A gift? You mean like the gift of eternal torture if I don’t ask for forgiveness for not being perfect? For being human? Fuck him.
          No one deserves eternal torture for a finite crime. Your god is an asshole and I would not want to spend eternity with the likes of him and his minions (i.e. you).

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/37ff8d565e37f90f1692534abc7bde4f84ad626409dbae57a062be3d469bfcbb.jpg
          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9ee4ef4d383cdcaaf67955f6b3355755b1a64455013f2a176ebf9b78030aead4.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          I don’t care what Yahweh Jesus did. I didn’t ask from him to do that. Hell, I wasn’t even born yet.

          You didnt ask Him to do that. So you would rather go to Hell, then??

        • Candy Smith

          God made Hell for Satan, but those that reject Him will go there because they have rejected Jesus.

        • epeeist

          A street corner seems to be missing it’s hell fire preacher.

        • BlackMamba44

          Yet Satan walks the earth and Yahweh throws most of humanity into hell. Hmmm….

          Yahweh can provide me with some evidence first then I’ll decide to accept or reject. I can’t reject a lack of belief.

        • Candy Smith

          Your god is an asshole and I would not want to spend eternity with the likes of him and his minions (i.e. you).

          An how cute?? you gave another opinion. You called God a name but its your opinion. You are going to reject God because of what Hell is when He has provided a way for you (for us all) to not end up in Hell and because of you cant get over the need for punishment in this world full of sinners, you are going to go to Hell instead?? Are you kidding me?

          U dont want to spend eternity with Him?? So you must be okay with Hell then?? Right?? Because that’s the only other option!!? You need to think about what you are saying!!

        • BlackMamba44

          And all you have given is opinions. Nothing but opinions.

          You can’t reject something that you lack belief in.

          No evidence for Hell
          No evidence for Yahweh

          Yawn. You’re boring.

        • Candy Smith

          No evidence for Hell
          No evidence for Yahweh

          And all you have given is opinions. Nothing but opinions.

          No not really!! I have an objective standard. I am not relying on opinions and feelings unlike you. When I say murder is wrong, I turn to the Bible and say this is so because God forbids it. Same thing with lying. God cannot lie, so lying is wrong because God cannot lie. Also, since God cannot sin, His standard is objective. I will explain more of this later.

          Well first of all, it is your opinion that there is no evidence for God. U cannot claim that there is no evidence for God. Only someone that knows everything can make that claim. A more logical claim would be to say “I have not seen convincing proofs for His existence.”

        • BlackMamba44

          Still your opinion.

        • Candy Smith

          Can I have another chance, please??!? With talking with me, I mean??

        • BlackMamba44

          You are completely relying on your opinions and your precious fee-fees. You need a book and an imaginary sky daddy to tell you not to murder. That’s just scary and sick.

          And sure I can claim no evidence for Yahweh (there are thousands of gods). Because there isn’t. If there is, I’m sure you can provide it, right? Not your opinion; not your emotions; not your feelings. And NOT THE BIBLE. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4968ad52df45daef06f957a96f666ba8860cb6c14a25043547852f25dc81cc34.png
          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e8f98e8d39b9ca190fff4dc92744a588d8a2cc9fc3488c144cec511bfbdc7ecc.gif

        • Candy Smith

          There is a kind of circular reasoning that is a bit more broader.

        • Candy Smith

          You cannot say there is no evidence for God. You dont know everything so that statement isnt logical. The most logical statement you can make is that you havent seen convincing evidence!! That’s more logical!!

        • MR

          What evidence convinced you?

        • Candy Smith

          Well lets think about this!? If there is no God and there is o Hell, then in the end, I lose nothing, because we will simply cease to exit, but if I am right and you are wrong and God and Hell do exist, then you will be the one to suffer, not me!!

        • BlackMamba44
        • Candy Smith

          why would he reward agonstic skeptics?

        • Candy Smith

          There is no evidence for this!!

        • BlackMamba44
        • Candy Smith

          You’ve never done anything?? Really? Are you perfect because that’s what God wants?

        • BlackMamba44

          GO AWAY!!! I have no more interest in your bullshit. Do I have to block you?

        • Candy Smith

          in just asked for another chance. All you have to say is no. Geez.

        • epeeist

          It’s a well known fact that only non-theists go to heaven so it rather looks as though you are destined elsewhere.

        • Candy Smith

          It isn’t a known fact. It’s your opinion. The Bible doesnt say this at all.

        • epeeist

          It isn’t a known fact. It’s your opinion.

          No it isn’t (notice the apostrophe that shows where I have run two words together) an opinion, it’s a well formed argument that shows the stupidity of Pascal’s wager.

          The Bible doesnt say this at all.

          We’ve been through this before. Why should I take anything in the bible to be anything more than the mythos of an obscure Middle Eastern tribe?

        • Candy Smith

          I’m not a non-theist. How am I destined somewhere else?

        • epeeist

          I’m not a non-theist. How am I destined somewhere else?

          You didn’t read the article did you? (Or did you attempt it and find that you couldn’t understand it).

        • epeeist

          When I say murder is wrong, I turn to the Bible and say this is so because God forbids it.

          The bible? One fucking long screed of contrary opinions.

        • MR

          Who needs the bible to figure that stuff out? Phht.

        • adam

          “When I say murder is wrong, I turn to the Bible and say this is so because God forbids it.”

          1) Capital Punishment Crimes:

          Kill People Who Don’t Listen to Priests

          Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

          Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God

          Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving
          you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens
          astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you
          must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove
          that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that
          town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the
          livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the
          street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt
          offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it
          may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart
          for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be
          merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great
          nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. “The LORD your God
          will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am
          giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him.” (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

        • Greg G.

          So, according to Deuteronomy 13:13-19, we can start by eliminating any city with more than one religion and more than one denomination of any religion. Then we would need to determine which of the remaining have the correct religion and the correct denomination.

          I grew up in a town with less than a thousand people and we had a Baptist Church, a Methodist church, the Church of Christ, a Presbyterian Church, and a small Catholic Church, all within a half mile of each other. Basically, the Bible wants us to kill everyone who lives in anything but a small hamlet, and most of them, too.

          Maybe if God would have been more explicit and gave us reliable evidence, we wouldn’t be in this mess.

        • adam

          bible God can never seem to get enough killin…..

        • Candy Smith

          Capital Punishment Crimes:

          Kill People Who Don’t Listen to Priests

          And why would that be wrong? You may certainty not like it. Yo may certainty not agree with it but all you can do is disagree, you cant actually say that what He did was wrong!!

        • adam

          “And why would that be wrong?”

          It would be evil,
          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7123c548a1342e2d1779d51809c0ce85d82e0551dcde5fa0f6496d68284963dd.jpg https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3d75f40886a30963d29f96e7ac5c05cad2aeb7bf5d71b350bbea60643eeff355.jpg
          God doesnt forbid murder, he commands it, so AGAIN, YET AGAIN and AGAIN you LIE.

          Why else be dishonest, other than your God is ?

        • Candy Smith

          And why would that be wrong?”It would be evil,

          That doesnt prove anything!! That is an opinion!!You are saying its evil because I say its evil. That’s doesn’t prove anything

          God doesnt forbid murder, he commands it, so AGAIN, YET AGAIN and AGAIN you LIE.

          First of all, yes, He does forbid it. Read the ten commandments. Second of all, most people would say that this is a contraction. God says not to kill and then kills.

          In Exodus 20:13 it says, “Thou shalt not kill,” yet God kills people in floods,
          famines, and has Israel go and kill entire people groups. Why the
          contradiction?

          First of all, there is no contradiction. “Thou shalt not kill” is from the old King James Bible. Modern translations (ESV, NASB, NCV, NIV, NKJV, NLT, NRSV) have it as “You shall not murder.” The word in the Hebrew for “kill” here in Exodus 20:13 is תִּרְצָח(ratsach). It is translated into the English many different ways, depending on the context: “slayer 16, murderer 14, kill 5, murder 3, slain 3, manslayer 2, killing 1, slayer + 310 1, slayeth 1, death 1.”

          Murder is the unlawful taking of life. Killing is the lawful taking of life. God has said, “You shall not murder,” not “You shall not kill.” After all, God says killing in self defense is justifiable. Exodus 22:2, “If the thief is caught while breaking in, and is struck so that he dies, there will be no blood guiltiness on his account.” If mere killing of any kind was the issue, then why would God saying killing in self defense is permissible? He wouldn’t. This is another reason that modern translations say, “You shall not murder.”

          Also, consider that the New Testament quotes Exodus 20:13 in Rom. 13:9 as “You shall not murder.” The word in Greek for murder here is φονεύω, (phoneuo). Matt. 10:28 says, ““And do not fear those who kill the body, but are unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” The word of kill here is apoktinumi. Let’s compare.

          Rom. 13:9, “murder” is φονεύω (phoneuō), commit murder, kill (Mt 5:21; 19:18; 23:31, 35; Mk 10:19; Lk 18:20; Ro 13:9; Jas 2:11; 4:2; 5:6)
          Matt. 10:28, “kill” is ἀποκτίννυμι (apoktinumi), to kill, slay

          As you can see, different words are used for “murder” and “kill.” The Greek is more specific, and since the Greek New Testament quotes the Hebrew Old Testament we can see that Exodus 20:13 is best translated as “You shall not murder.”

          One final comment: since all people have sinned against God (Rom. 3:23) all people are under the judgment of God. The wages of sin is death (Rom. 6:23),so when God executes someone it is not murder, it is killing because it is a lawful taking of life. Remember, all people have sinned. Sin is the breaking of God’s law. Therefore, God’s execution is lawful.

          Im not sure how you think that saying its wrong because I say so means anything. You are giving your opinion when you say that something is wrong, it isnt a fact!!

        • Greg G.

          When I say murder is wrong, I turn to the Bible and say this is so because God forbids it. Same thing with lying. God cannot lie, so lying is wrong because God cannot lie. Also, since God cannot sin, His standard is objective.

          The Bible also says eating swine flesh is an abomination but later it says it is OK to eat it. Obviously, the Bible is not objective.

          I don’t need to turn to the Bible to know that murder, lying, and stealing are wrong. Neither do most people in Asia, India, Africa, or anywhere else. You don’t need it either. I think slavery is wrong but the Bible says it’s OK as long as you don’t beat the indentured servants as harshly as you beat the slaves bought with money from foreigners.

        • Candy Smith

          The Bible also says eating swine flesh is an abomination but later it
          says it is OK to eat it. Obviously, the Bible is not objective.

          Please provide these Bible Verses!!

        • Greg G.

          Please provide these Bible Verses!!

          It’s hard to believe you didn’t know this.

          Leviticus 11:7-8 (NRSV)7 The pig, for even though it has divided hoofs and is cleft-footed, it does not chew the cud; it is unclean for you. 8 Of their flesh you shall not eat, and their carcasses you shall not touch; they are unclean for you.

          Deuteronomy 14:8 (NRSV)8 And the pig, because it divides the hoof but does not chew the cud, is unclean for you. You shall not eat their meat, and you shall not touch their carcasses.

          Isaiah 65:4 (NRSV)4 who sit inside tombs,    and spend the night in secret places;who eat swine’s flesh,    with broth of abominable things in their vessels;

          Isaiah 66:17 (NRSV)17 Those who sanctify and purify themselves to go into the gardens, following the one in the center, eating the flesh of pigs, vermin, and rodents, shall come to an end together, says the Lord.

          Many translations use “abominations” and “disgusting things” instead of “vermin”.

          Romans 14:14 (NRSV)14 I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean.

          Acts 10:9-16 (NRSV)9 About noon the next day, as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat; and while it was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw the heaven opened and something like a large sheet coming down, being lowered to the ground by its four corners. 12 In it were all kinds of four-footed creatures and reptiles and birds of the air. 13 Then he heard a voice saying, “Get up, Peter; kill and eat.” 14 But Peter said, “By no means, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is profane or unclean.” 15 The voice said to him again, a second time, “What God has made clean, you must not call profane.” 16 This happened three times, and the thing was suddenly taken up to heaven.

        • Candy Smith

          Of course you dont that’s because God has made you aware of right and wrong. You just cant account for it. You can know it’s right or wrong but you cannot logically say that Murder is wrong.

        • BlackMamba44

          No. The serpent in the garden made us aware of right and wrong, by telling Adam and Eve to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (i.e. right and wrong). Before Adam and Eve ate from the tree they didn’t know right and wrong.

          So the bible IS the only thing keeping you from murdering other people. Scary

        • Candy Smith

          So the bible IS the only thing keeping you from murdering other people. Scary

          I NEVER SAID that!! DO NOT PUT WORDS INTO MY MOUTH THAT I DONT SAY!!

        • BlackMamba44

          You don’t say anything. You copy and paste. You’re not able to form your own thoughts. You can thank your religion for that.

        • Candy Smith

          I can form my own thoughts. Saying that means nothing.

        • Candy Smith

          Me copying and pasting things isnt thanks to religion. It’s me making a deliberate choice to do that.

        • BlackMamba44

          Reading comprehension. Learn it.

        • BlackMamba44

          Without providing the source of your copypasta.

          You’ve been told this is plagarizing. That is stealing.

        • MR

          Then that’s deliberate deceit and makes you no better than the serpent in the story.

        • BlackMamba44

          You don’t have to say it. The evidence is in your comments.

        • Greg G.

          Do you need the Bible to tell you that murdering other people is wrong? I don’t.

          Do you need the Bible to tell you that stealing is wrong? I don’t.

          Do you need the Bible to tell you that slavery is wrong? I don’t and it’s a good thing because the Bible doesn’t say that.

        • Candy Smith

          I never said I needed the Bible to know that those things are wrong. We all already know that it is wrong, because like Romans 1:14-15, says-
          “For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things
          of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in
          that they show the work of the
          Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their
          thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them.”

        • MR

          Candy,

          Please continue your conversation with Greg here, but I just want to point out something.

          What you did when you quoted the Bible here is correct. You let it be known that this was from Romans and you put the part you quoted in quotes (“”). This lets us know that what you are saying are someone else’s words, not your own. You should do this any and every time that you quote either the Bible, another person, or another website.

          To not do so is to imply that they are your own words, and this is deceitful. Just like the serpent was in the story about Adam and Eve. What do you think is the fate of deceitful people? Maybe you are not doing it intentionally, but every time you do so, you are losing credibility. If you were to do this at school or in a job, it could get you kicked out or fired. That is how serious plagiarism can be.

          Any time you copy something from a website, you should always make that known. For example:

          The GotQuestions website says, “Why did God curse the serpent when He knew that it was actually Satan who had led Adam and Eve into sin? The fate of the serpent is an illustration. The curse of the serpent will one day be the fate of Satan himself .”

          A great non-answer, but at least you’re showing where you got it from.

          I think this will save you a lot of grief. This is a standard practice that you would do well to follow. It is an honest and decent practice, don’t you think?

        • BlackMamba44

          She doesn’t care. She’ll just ask her god for forgiveness and all will be fine.

        • MR

          Unbelievable.

        • Candy Smith

          I do not see that as a question that comes up on GotQuestions. I took the question and posted it on Google and hit enter. If it was a question, it would of come up with an option to go to GQ!

        • MR

          You’re not the sharpest cheddar on the cracker, are you, Candy? I used that as an example of what you should do. (For the record, that is from GotQuestions.) Anyway, I can see your problem is greater than I originally thought. If you’re a PoE, so be it, if you’re a young ‘un, well, at least your engaging with people who don’t hold your beliefs. Hopefully maturity will be kinder to you.

        • Candy Smith

          So if I put quotes around what I am saying when I copy and paste what someone else has said then I’m okay??

        • MR

          And say who it is from.

          Also, it’s very confusing when you just copy and paste what Greg says without identifying that he said it, because it look like you said it. Some of us use the “blockquote” feature, but at the least you should do something like this to make it clear that you are quoting Greg or another poster:

          —-
          >>”Adam and Eve is a story”

          I don’t think it’s a story.
          —-

          It would save a lot of confusion.

        • Candy Smith

          Alright Ill do that.

        • Greg G.
        • MR

          I considered pointing her to that, but I thought baby steps were more appropriate.

        • adam
        • Greg G.

          I never said I needed the Bible to know that those things are wrong. We all already know that it is wrong,

          You said, “You can know it’s right or wrong but you cannot logically say that Murder is wrong.

          I can present a logical case that we should not murder.

          Can you present a logical case in favor of:

          Leviticus 19:19 New International Version
          “‘Keep my decrees. “‘Do not mate different kinds of animals. “‘Do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. “‘Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.

          Deuteronomy 22:9 New International Version
          Do not plant two kinds of seed in your vineyard; if you do, not only the crops you plant but also the fruit of the vineyard will be defiled.

          Many kinds of crops have been developed and enhanced by cross-breeding them. Even farm animals have been enhanced by cross-breeding.

          Grapevines are often grafted onto the roots of a grape that is adapted to the climate.

          because like Romans 1:14-15, says-
          “For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things

          Huh? That’s not what those verses say.

          Romans 1:14-15 (NRSV)14 I am a debtor both to Greeks and to barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish 15 —hence my eagerness to proclaim the gospel to you also who are in Rome.

          EDIT: Disqus snafu caused this not to post. The Back button reloaded the page and most of the post was there when I hit Reply but I didn’t notice that a small part had not been saved so I added approximately the same words.

        • Candy Smith

          You have no standard by which you can use to say that Murder is wrong, Objectivity Wrong!!

        • Greg G.

          I don’t need to say murder is objectively wrong. I just need a general principle of fairness (which seems to be innate in many social animals, including humans) and an understanding of that people want to thrive and not die.

        • Candy Smith

          I don’t need to say murder is objectively wrong.

          Really?? You don’t??? So then what Hitler did wasn’t wrong then, right?? It was objectively wrong?? Most people even atheists would say that it was! I’m kind of surprised that you dont hate it as much as other atheists do!!

        • epeeist

          So then what Hitler did wasn’t wrong then, right??

          You do realise that Hitler was a Christian don’t you? For example:

          My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Saviour as a fighter.

          and

          Even today I am not ashamed to say that, overpowered by stormy enthusiasm, I fell down on my knees and thanked Heaven from an overflowing heart for granting me the good fortune of being permitted to live at this time.

          One has to ask whether you know what it means for something to be “objectively wrong”. Let us ask, is murder wrong because your god says so, or does your god says so because it is wrong?

        • Greg G.

          If the Jews who were killed in the Holocaust worked on the sabbath, then it was not objectively wrong to kill them, it was mandatory, according to the Bible.

          I think it was wrong that the Holocaust happened but I don’t have to pretend that is objective fact nor that the Bible is a source to prove objective morality.

        • Candy Smith

          I don’t need to say murder is objectively wrong

          And also, the reason you dont need to say that it is objectively wrong is because you can’t!! So even if you wanted to, you wouldn’t be able to!!

        • Greg G.

          And also, the reason you dont need to say that it is objectively wrong is because you can’t!! So even if you wanted to, you wouldn’t be able to!!

          I can’t because it isn’t and I am honest.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Agreed. Neither do you.

        • Candy Smith

          Yeah I actually do. I turn to the Bible and I say God forbids murder and since He made us, He has the right to hold us to His Standard. My standard for morality is objective, since I am not basing it off of my opinions.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          So my opinion would be objective if I based it off the guy sitting in the subway talking to himself?

          I don’t think you understand what “objective morality” means. If you ever do, you can tell us why it exists. I’ve never seen any good evidence that it does.

        • Greg G.

          Bob says murder is wrong so I’m not basing it on my opinion.

          You are using a book that says killing innocent animals is the proper way to deal with sins committed, and priests and their families live off those animals. Then the book says killing a godman is even better.

          You would have to be deranged to use such a source for objective morality. Since it is a book of false stories, it is even crazier to hold it in any high regard.

        • james

          apologists have no problem with baby slaying and ripping out fetuses from pregnant women as long as god is doing fire work display and moving around.

          i quote :

          “Moses was acting according to the will of the living and visible god, who made himself known with his presence, name, and word, to the israelites. They saw the presence of god, were guided through the wilderness by him, saw his glory reflected in moses’ face, witnessed his miracles.”

          because you have more biblical knowledge than me, my question is if it is known that joshua, saul and dave received the same amount of miracles before they went out baby burning and slaying

          if any other religious text has any killings, christian apologists say that other religious text don’t display a bigger fire work display like their god did.

        • Greg G.

          Off the top of my head, Joshua was a cohort of Moses so his career pretty much began with the baby killing of the first Passover.

          David was usually punished by God by other people dying.

        • adam

          ” I turn to the Bible and I say God forbids murder”

          And yet God commands it in the Bible

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3d75f40886a30963d29f96e7ac5c05cad2aeb7bf5d71b350bbea60643eeff355.jpg

          “My standard for morality is objective, since I am not basing it off of my opinions.”

          Of course you are, because you ignore everywhere in thebible where the character God commands murder.

          Kill People Who Don’t Listen to Priests

          Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

          A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)

        • Candy Smith

          Yeah and there is NO RULE THAT SAYS GOD CAN’T DO THAT!! Unlike us, he has authority over ALL OF US. He created us. He can do as He pleases.

        • Greg G.

          It means that it is a lie to say that God is good.

        • Candy Smith

          No. It doesn’t!! it is your opinion that He isnt good. You have no other to offer other than you opinion to make that claim.

        • Greg G.

          You said, “He can do as He pleases.” If it pleases God to do bad things, it is a lie to call him good.

          The Bible says God does bad things.

          Isaiah 45:7 (NRSV)7 I form light and create darkness,    I make weal and create woe;    I the Lord do all these things.

          “Woe” is also translated as disaster, bad times, calamity, and evil, the latter two being the most common.

          Job 2:10 (NRSV)10 But he said to her, “You speak as any foolish woman would speak. Shall we receive the good at the hand of God, and not receive the bad?” In all this Job did not sin with his lips.

          Jeremiah 32:42 (NRSV)42 For thus says the Lord: Just as I have brought all this great disaster upon this people, so I will bring upon them all the good fortune that I now promise them.

          Lamentations 3:37-38 (NRSV)37 Who can command and have it done,    if the Lord has not ordained it?38 Is it not from the mouth of the Most High    that good and bad come?

        • Candy Smith

          The Bible says God does bad things.

          No it doesn’t. Thats you interpenetrating it wrong as usual.

        • Greg G.

          Now you are lying because you have been shown verses that say exactly that and you tried to justify it.

        • Candy Smith

          They say exactly that??

          No they dont!! You havent given a defintion for bad. furthermore, how do you know tnhat your defintion is the right one. Also, the oinly thing that you can use to Judge God by is based off of your opinions, and obviosuly opinions dont make facts.

          Where is your Obejctive standard?? IOW, where is your unchanging standard for which you use to judge God?? Oh wait thats right you dont have one. yyou only have opinions.

        • MR

          We can use your standard for God. Do you believe God is just?

        • Greg G.

          The verses literally say that God does bad things. Read them with your eyes open and your brain turned on. Take your fingers out of your ears and stop saying “lalalalala”.

        • Candy Smith

          No it doesnt. When you read it, you instantly assume that that is actually what it means. First of all, you need to look at what the Original Bible said, which is written in Hebrew and Greek. Also you need to look up explanations that will explain that. You can tell me that the explanations are lame, except how would you know that. You’ve obviously never look at them yourself.

        • MR

          Do you believe God is just?

          This is now the third time I am asking this question. You have skipped it twice. I’m trying to understand your position, so please answer the question.

        • Candy Smith

          I havent seen it. I apologize

        • MR

          This is now the fourth time I’ve asked:

          Do you believe God is just?

        • Candy Smith

          Yeah I do!!

        • Candy Smith

          What about Mercy? Justice is an important attribute of God. To not punish those that choose to disobey Him would be Unjust?? Yes or No? I am talking about punishing by itself, I don’t mean any instances.

        • MR

          You’re the one who wanted to take it one step at a time. Define what you think it means to be just.

        • Candy Smith

          Try lookign up an explanation for those verses. Maybe you will be surprised at the answer. Of course you will never know if you dont attempt to do that. So I would suggest rather than wasting your time blaming God for verses that is out iof His Bible, mayvbe you need to look up explanations.

        • Greg G.

          Surprised? No. Amused.

        • Candy Smith

          Furthermore, whats bad!?? Where is this idea of good and bad without God!???

        • Greg G.

          Good is what allows us to thrive and be happy. Bad is what harms us. It has nothing to do with imaginary beings.

        • Candy Smith

          He is imaginary in your opinion.

        • Greg G.

          He is imaginary in your opinion, too, because you know you need faith and you have nothing else.

        • Candy Smith

          We are to have faith but that doesnt mean that there isnt evidence. Creation is evidence. It is scientifically impossible for nature to make itself. To say that it did, is to say that
          it was pre-existent to be able to make itself, before it made itself, which is ludicrous.

        • Candy Smith
        • Greg G.

          So you are throwing up random apologetics? That doesn’t address anything.

        • Candy Smith

          I said it wasnt random. I said it actually addresses the verse you mentioned

        • Greg G.

          You responded like a scatterbrain. I read it and responded. It didn’t appear to me that it addressed my point. Then I saw your second post where you apologized and said it was a mistake. Your third post contradicted the second post.

        • Candy Smith

          if you go to it, you will see what I mean.

        • Greg G.

          Another scatterbrain post.

          I went to it when I read the first post. I do not see what you mean.

        • Candy Smith

          The link that says Jonah?? Is that what you are talking about??

        • Candy Smith

          Wait ignore that link that was a mistake.

        • Greg G.

          Too late, I already replied. You should have used the Edit feature to mark the error and correct it.

        • Candy Smith

          wait im sorry dont ignore it. It addresses one of the verses that you mentioned.

        • Candy Smith

          “Woe” is also translated as disaster, bad times, calamity, and evil, the latter two being the most common.

          That is also your opinion!! Woe means great sorrow or distress which is NOT what evil and calamity are. How can you pretend that they are the same. They have completely different definitions.

        • Greg G.

          No, it’s objective fact that other versions translate it as I reported it. See biblehub.com You are talking out of the other end of your alimentary canal.

        • Candy Smith

          The other verses say calamity.

          Also, lets pretend that calamity and evil are the same thing and that God really did create evil, despite what my explanation has said. What’s your point??

        • Greg G.

          Some of the translations say calamity. Other translations use the words I listed. That is a fact.

          Are you under the impression that calamity is a good thing?

          The point is clearly that saying God doesn’t do bad things is a lie. That means that God is not all good, according to the Bible.

          Read up the thread as a reminder if you can’t follow the conversation.

        • Candy Smith

          Some of the translations say calamity. Other translations use the words I listed. That is a fact.

          True.

        • Candy Smith

          The point is clearly that saying God doesn’t do bad things is a lie.
          That means that God is not all good, according to the Bible.

          But that is an opinion.

        • Candy Smith

          You dislike what He does in the Bible. That doesnt mean that he is bad.

        • Candy Smith

          God allows Calamity. That is what it means. It doesnt mean He created it. Lets take this step by step. I am saying that it means He allows it. The next thing we should discuss is why He allows it.

        • Candy Smith

          10 But he said to her, “You speak as any foolish woman would speak. Shall we receive the good at the hand of God, and not receive the bad?” In all this Job did not sin with his lips.

          So what?? So what that He didn’t sin. You seem to have missed point of the story. i would think you don’t actually care because you would prefer to continue giving your opinion about what you CAN’T PROVE. Or maybe you could try to understand what the point of the story is and I mean the actual point, that you would find off of a christian site, not an atheist site which is dedicated to being a negative nancy and can only give their opinion.

        • Greg G.

          The original story makes God look bad enough. The bet with Satan seems to have been added to the beginning and the end, but it makes God really look like the bad guy. It’s a horrible story no matter what point it makes.

        • Dys

          He created us. He can do as He pleases.

          Might makes right is a shitty standard for morality. And that’s exactly what you just described.

        • Candy Smith

          It isnt might makes right. Thats what it may seem like but will you let me explain, please?

        • Dys

          You keep saying it’s not “might makes right”, and then keep perfectly describing “might makes right”

        • Candy Smith

          I am asking you if I can explain it. I want to know if you are willing to listen to what I have to say or not??

        • Dys

          I don’t know if you can explain it or not. If it’s just a copy/paste from an apologetics site, don’t bother. I’ve read them before, and all they wind up doing is resorting to divine command theory, which is the definition of “might makes right”.

        • Candy Smith

          I will send you the link, once we discuss what I have to say, I will provide the link.

        • Candy Smith

          You have read them before?? Please be more specific. What websites have you gone on?? And also, just because you disagree with what the websites says, that doesn’t it wrong. You disagree based off of our opinion.

        • Dys

          You have read them before?? Please be more specific. What websites have you gone on??

          I don’t remember them all, and it doesn’t matter anyway.

          And also, just because you disagree with what the websites says, that doesn’t it wrong.

          Nor does it mean the website is correct.

          You disagree based off of our opinion.

          And you agree with them based on your own.

          Are you going to stop pretending you’re just giving your own opinion someday, or are you going to keep whining “that’s just your opinion” forever?

        • Candy Smith

          The Christian position is NOT based off might makes right.

        • Candy Smith

          Do U think of God as just another person or do you think of Him as an Infinite Being who is all-powerful, all-knowing?? What do you think of Him as???

        • Dys

          Do U think of God as just another person

          I think of him as a fictional character in a book, portrayed in various conflicting ways, which is to be expected from a book with multiple authors.

          an Infinite Being who is all-powerful, all-knowing??

          Those are claims made by his fan club, yes. Of course, there are issues with them when it comes to the biblical narrative.

        • Candy Smith

          His Fan Club?? Really?? Please avoid the immature comments. No one I have talked to has ever said that.

        • Candy Smith

          And what is wrong with the Bible having multiple authors?? It isn’t just book. You do realize that right??

        • Dys

          It isn’t just book. You do realize that right??

          It’s multiple books bundled together. Yes, it’s a religious text. You do realize that just because the bible says something doesn’t mean it’s true, right?

        • Candy Smith

          You do realize that just because the bible says something doesn’t mean it’s true, right?

          Yeah and what about when History and Archeology agree with it?? What about when the prophecies that were predicted in the Old Testament are fulfilled in the New??? Does that not mean something to you?? Does it mean anything!?? This is important so please be sure to think carefully before you respond. I would advise that you do.

        • Dys

          What about when the prophecies that were predicted in the Old Testament are fulfilled in the New???

          The people that wrote the New Testament were VERY familiar with the scriptures in the Old. It doesn’t take much effort to write a story that appears to meet a prophecy.

          This is important so please be sure to think carefully before you respond. I would advise that you do.

          I’d advise you to not just mindlessly accept that everything the bible says happened the way it says or happened at all.

        • Candy Smith

          I think of him as a fictional character in a book, portrayed in various conflicting ways,

          Conflicting ways?? In what ways would that be??

        • Dys

          God in the OT is clearly a tribal god for just the Hebrew people, is portrayed as walking in Eden, can’t get the Israelites to overpower an army that has iron chariots, etc.

        • Candy Smith

          Walking in Eden!??! AM, OK!! There is an explanation for that. There is an explanation for both of those. Are you interested or not??

        • Dys

          You don’t get it. I know there are explanations. What you don’t seem to grasp is that those explanations are not in the bible. They are not scripture. They are opinions.

          Christian apologists do this all the time. They think that as long as they can come up with some way to resolve a contradiction in the bible, that somehow magically makes the contradiction disappear and makes their explanation true. It does neither.

        • Candy Smith

          God cares about everyone!!!

        • Dys

          God cares about everyone!!!

          Then you haven’t read the OT very thoroughly. There’s a lot of people God didn’t care much about. So much so that he told the Israelites to war against them for their land.

          And then there was the non-existent flood he sent to wipe people out.

        • Candy Smith

          And then there was the non-existent flood he sent to wipe people out.

          First of all, if you read what the Bible says about why He did what he did, it makes total sense and is completely just but rather investigating it, you instead claim that He doesnt care.

        • Candy Smith

          Also it is non-existant in your opinion.

        • MR

          Fiction

        • Candy Smith

          That is your opinion that He is fiction or that the Bible is fiction.

        • MR

          That’s what you just asked me for, you idiot, my opinion. You asked what I thought of him as. That is what I think. Get a clue and quick knee-jerking.

        • adam
        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          I have explained that verse at least 15 times.

        • adam
        • adam

          “I am asking you if I can explain it. ”

          Obviously you can’t or you would have.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7123c548a1342e2d1779d51809c0ce85d82e0551dcde5fa0f6496d68284963dd.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Obviously you can’t or you would have.

          Yeah ah, huh. I am asking you because I am not going to waste my time if you arent interested. If you are not sincere, I will not bother. All you have to do is answer me. Instead you are playing games with me.

        • adam

          You’ve done nothing but waste time, when you could have been demonstrated that your God is anything but IMAGINARY>

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          You havent proven that He is Cruel. You have only given your opinion.

        • Michael Neville

          You admit that your capricious god can kill people just because he feels like it. Killing people for grins and giggles is wrong and you have no problem with that. Not only is your god evil, you’re evil as well because you approve of your god’s evil.

        • Candy Smith

          You admit that your capricious god can kill people just because he feels
          like it. Killing people for grins and giggles is wrong and you have no
          problem with that.

          First of all, I never said that He does it just because He feels like it. I never said that. second of all, you havent proven that killing is wrong. Simply saying its wrong doesnt mean it is.

        • Michael Neville

          First of all I don’t “prove” anything. I makes statements and support them. I don’t try to prove that I’m right and I’m willing to listen to arguments against what I say as long as reasons are given for me being wrong. You keep saying that I’m wrong but you never give any reasons why you think I’m wrong. “THAT’S YOUR OPINION!!1!” is not a reason

          Second, you said: “He can do as He pleases.” That is saying that he can kill people just because he feels like it. Considering your propaganda shows that he does kill on a whim (Lot’s wife looked in the wrong direction and zappo! she’s a pillar of salt) then it’s reasonable for me to say your god kills just because he can.

          This is the only life we have (I don’t think “you’ll get pie in the sky when you die”). So to deprive someone of life, especially just because the murderer feels like killing, is wrong. To get back to an earlier argument of mine, killing someone for grins and giggles is treating them as things, which I believe in wrong.

          Once again I make the further argument that Might Makes Right is not a basis for morality. It’s the justification bullies use for their bullying. So I’m left with the conclusion that your god is a murderous, immoral bully. That you worship this thug of a god does not say good things about you.

        • Candy Smith

          “My standard for morality is objective, since I am not basing it off of my opinions.”

          Of course you are, because you ignore everywhere in the bible where the character God commands murder.

          I’m not ignoring. I just choose to look at it properly. The way to look at is as simple as God created us, He has the right to tell us what is right and what is wrong. When we choose to disobey, He has the right to punish us. Everyone is a sinner and sin demands death. Everyone that God got rid of was a sinner, including the children, However, we will have to have a separate discussion about the children and infants, but everyone else was a sinner.

          Furthermore, we can go through each instance and we can read that God gave them and opportunity to repent, an opportunity to be able to get on the boat and he gave them MORE THAN ENOUGH TIME. 400 YEARS is more than enough time.

        • adam
        • Michael Neville

          Your god has no rights over other sentient beings. You pretend he has rights because you think he created us. I created my daughter but that gives me no rights over her. It certainly doesn’t mean I can kill her but you pretend that your god can kill anyone he wants. Might makes right is not a basis for morality, which means your sadistic, narcissistic bully of a god is immoral. You condemn your god with your own words.

          BTW, where do you get “400 YEARS” from, besides your rosy red rectum?

        • BlackMamba44

          In her last comment on this subject she said “120 years”. I corrected her on that because in the bible “120 years” was about the mortal human lifespan, not how long God let humans sin before drowning them.

          Now it’s “400 years”.

        • Michael Neville

          So I was right, 400 years is a number she guessed at.

        • BlackMamba44

          Yep. Straight out of her rosy red rectum. :)

        • Candy Smith

          Actually I do.

        • Candy Smith

          I can present a logical case that we should not murder.

          Which will be based on what?? Something Objective?? No!! It will be Subjective!!!

        • Greg G.

          Yes, it will be subjective. If you use the Bible and the god thingie to try to make your subjective feelings out to be objective, you have to make some of the arbitrary commandments in the Bible to be objective, including the ones that you no longer follow.

          Paul’s theology is based on the 613 laws of the Old Testament being impossible to follow. The meat restrictions are arbitrary, for example, the OT says no pork but beef is OK while the Hindus say eating beef is bad, all for superstitious religious reasons for both cases.

          The OT says killing people is wrong except when it says you have a reason to kill them, like if the person picks up sticks on the wrong day of the week (Numbers 15:32-36) or if a rape victim doesn’t scream loudly enough (Deuteronomy 22:23-24).

          Your argument for objective morality would make those things objectively moral, too.

          Why do you capitalize “Subjective” and “Objective”?

        • Candy Smith

          Paul’s theology is based on the 613 laws of the Old Testament being
          impossible to follow. The meat restrictions are arbitrary, for example,
          the OT says no pork but beef is OK while the Hindus say eating beef is
          bad, all for superstitious religious reasons for both cases.

          How are they arbitrary?? There are a bunch of different kinds of laws in the Bible. Some of the laws are mentioned in both the New and Old. Some aren’t. The ones that are are of much more importance.

        • Greg G.

          How are they arbitrary??

          I just cited a few the arbitrary commandments. Read the paragraph you quoted from.

          The ones that are are of much more importance.

          That’s not what it says in the New Testament.

          James 2:10
          For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it.

        • Candy Smith

          Why do you capitalize “Subjective” and “Objective”?

          What do you mean by capitalize??

        • Greg G.

          Capital letters = ABCDEF…
          Small letters = abcdef…
          UPPERCASE
          lowercase
          Capitalized
          not capitalized

          italics

        • Michael Neville

          More and more I’m seeing 12 going on 7.

        • BlackMamba44

          I learned capitalization in 1st grade. I was 5. That question floored me.

        • MR

          Homeschooler?

        • epeeist

          In a home with a one book library.

        • Greg G.

          Maybe two books, the Bible and the doorstop.

        • epeeist

          I think I am coming to the conclusion that one of the reasons that people like Candy Smith (or her parents at least) avoid the knowledge that humans have built over the last few hundred years is fear. Fear that it will undermine the certainties that they find in their “holy book”.

        • Pofarmer

          Fear of Hell, Fear of Death, Fear of change. Take yer pick.

        • Greg G.

          Certainty is more important than truth.

        • epeeist

          Certainty is more important than truth.

          One of the oft repeated canards against so-called “New Atheists” is that of “scientism”.

          What this means is that the theists are unable to comprehend the idea of being accepting of the lack of certainty and the fact that our knowledge (as I keep saying) both tentative and provisional.

        • MR

          Argument of the -isms. It shoves science into a scary sounding pigeon hole. Meanwhile, science is just a more disciplined way of observing and making determinations about the world–just like we all do every day, except more disciplined. It’s sad that they feel the need to demonize it. It’s also very telling.

        • Greg G.

          She said she had to get up for school the next day so I’m thinking “not”.

        • Candy Smith
        • adam

          “Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them.””

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c862151f2f5bdf2af3910632858abe4bc4896f4a6d1d906e92b6825e8d451539.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          Did Adam and Eve know they were doing wrong when they ate the fruit?

          Given what we find in Scripture we can see that Adam and Eve had been made aware that they were not to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil…

          “The LORD God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that
          you eat from it you will surely die,” (Genesis 2:16-17).

          We see later that Eve repeated the command to the serpent. However, it’s worth noting that she added three words, “or touch it.” Most probably since God gave the instruction to Adam, Adam then gave it to Eve. Eve then repeated it to the evil one.

          “The woman said to the serpent, “From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; 3 but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die,'” (Genesis 3:2-3).

          So when they chose to eat the fruit, we must conclude that they knew they were doing wrong.

          But some might say that Eve was deceived and that she did not intend to do wrong, so she may not have known she was doing wrong by eating the fruit. This might be the case, but we know that she quoted God’s prohibition against eating the fruit to the serpent. Therefore, she knew
          what God had said, and she went against it, deceived or not. Being deceived about eating the fruit does not automatically mean she was guiltless.

          Adam, on the other hand, apparently made a willful choice to rebel against God because there was no apparent deception on his part. Eve gave him the fruit, and he willingly partook. So, Adam, without a doubt, knew he was rebelling against God and was doing wrong.

        • BlackMamba44

          Plagarusm

        • Michael Neville

          I can say that causing someone else to suffer is wrong and I don’t need your sadist of a god to say that.

          You have to show how and why your god is the source of morality. Just saying so doesn’t mean anything, that’s just YOUR OPINION!

        • Candy Smith

          God has the right to judge humans, including by killing them, because He is
          the Creator. He is
          perfectly righteous, so He has the perfect standard from which to judge. He is
          all-knowing, so He has all the relevant information to judge every individual
          person. And He is all-powerful, meaning that He is able to perfectly bring
          judgment to bear.

        • Michael Neville

          God has the right to judge humans, including by killing them, because He is the Creator.

          That is not a reason to kill anybody. You’re admitting that your god is a sadistic, murderous bully who kills people just because he can. It doesn’t surprise me that you have sociopathic tendencies since you worship a sociopathic god.

        • Candy Smith

          I think slavery is wrong but the Bible says it’s OK as long as you don’t
          beat the indentured servants as harshly as you beat the slaves bought
          with money from foreigners.

          Please provide that verse as well!!

        • BlackMamba44

          How about a verse straight from Jesus about how to treat slaves? I’ll provide it again.

          Luke 12:47-48 (NIV)

          47 “The servant who knows the master’s will and does not get ready or does not do what the master wants will be beaten with many blows. 48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.

          This doesn’t even have anything to do with foreigners. If the slave did wrong and knows he/she did he/she is beaten with many blows. But, if the slave did wrong and didn’t know he/she did wrong then he/she just gets a few blows.

          You are unhinged. And it’s showing more and more in this comment section.

        • Candy Smith

          This doesn’t even have anything to do with foreigners. If the slave
          did wrong and knows he/she did he/she is beaten with many blows. But, if
          the slave did wrong and didn’t know he/she did wrong then he/she just
          gets a few blows.

          That is simply how things were back then!! That’s how the punishments happened!! Unlike todays or within the past few centuries kind of slavery, the slavery of the Bible WAS NOT based on SKIN COLOR AND RACISM!! It was different!!

          There are different levels or degrees of sin!!

          Yes, there are different degrees of sin. Jesus said in John 19:11, “You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above; for this reason he who delivered Me to you has the greater sin.” The context is that Judas had betrayed Jesus, and so our Lord was
          before Pilate who said that he had the authority to crucify Jesus. Jesus said that the one who had delivered him into Pilate’s hands had the greater sin.

          There are other verses that imply different degrees of sin. Please consider the following:

          Luke 7:41-43,
          “A moneylender had two debtors: one owed five hundred denarii,
          and the other fifty. 42 When they were unable to repay, he
          graciously forgave them both. So which of them will love him more?”
          43 Simon answered and said, “I suppose the one whom he forgave
          more.” And He said to him, “You have judged correctly.”

          Luke 10:11-13,

          ‘Even the dust of your city which clings to our feet we wipe off in protest against you; yet be sure of this, that the kingdom of God has come near.’ 12 “I say to you, it will be more tolerable
          in that day for Sodom than for that city. 13 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the miracles had been performed in Tyre and Sidon which occurred in you, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes.”

          Luke 12:47-48,

          “And that slave who knew his master’s will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, will receive many lashes, 48 but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of a flogging, will receive but few. From everyone who has been given much, much will be
          required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more.

          As you can see, Jesus taught that there are degrees of sin. But all sin separates us from God (Isaiah 59:2), and the wages of sin is death (Genesis 2:17; Romans 6:23). Christians should want to turn from sin and follow the Lord Jesus Christ.

          We must understand that as there are differences in the degrees of sin, there are also differences in the degrees of the effects of sin and the punishments that will come to those who are not redeemed (Luke 12:47-48).

        • BlackMamba44

          Yes, I know. I don’t care if the slave is foreign or not. Your precious book condones the beating of other humans. So much for the loving Jesus.

        • Candy Smith

          You dont understand what it is saying.

        • BlackMamba44

          What is there to understand? According to your precious book, it’s ok to beat slaves.

          Stop apologizing for that horrible book and OWN IT.

        • Candy Smith

          You should care if its foreign or indentured because there’s nothing wrong with the indentured, like the instance with Rachael and Jacob.

        • BlackMamba44

          Reading comprehension. Learn it.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Biblical slavery is pretty much identical to American slavery (indentured servitude + slavery for life).

          You really ought to read your Bible more thoroughly.

        • Candy Smith

          The Bible is NOT BASED ON RACE!!!!

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Search in the Bible for every tribal or cultural affiliation–Samaritan, Edomite, Moabite, and so on. The Bible wallows in race.

          Ever heard the term “chosen people”? That means that the other tribes weren’t.

          Sucks to be them, I guess.

        • Candy Smith
        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Which doesn’t address the question.

          The hard truth is that the Bible is a book that simply reflects the ideas of the people of that time. Ask yourself why the Bible doesn’t have anything that would be crazy for a person of that time and place to write. For example–suppose the Bible demanded vegetarianism. Or free love. Or women’s rights. Or rejected slavery.

          Those ideas, in turn, are from our culture. A holy book written today might have those instead.

        • Michael Neville

          Like the Flying Spaghetti Monster’s eight “I’d Really Rather You Didn’ts”. I think No. 1 is appropriate for this discussion:

          I’d Really Rather You Didn’t Act Like a Sanctimonious Holier-Than-Thou Ass When Describing My Noodly Goodness. If Some People Don’t Believe In Me, That’s Okay. Really, I’m Not That Vain. Besides, This Isn’t About Them So Don’t Change The Subject or do but make it good.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          God’s vanity (or humans protecting God’s vanity) is hard to comprehend. The Flying Spaghetti Monster gets it, and he’s made of frikkin’ spaghetti. What’s Yahweh’s problem?

        • Candy Smith
        • Michael Neville

          Your god may not lie but he sure likes killing people. He does it a whole lot and solely because he can. I’d rather deal with a liar than a wholesale killer.

        • Candy Smith

          It isn’t because He can!! You are just assuming that that is the reason but it isn’t!!

        • Candy Smith

          He doesn’t like Killing people but sin needs to be punished!!

        • Michael Neville

          So your god doesn’t do mercy. Your god is a sadistic, narcissistic bully who likes to punish people. It doesn’t say much about you that you worship that asshole.

        • Candy Smith

          So your god doesn’t do mercy. Your god is a sadistic, narcissistic
          So your god doesn’t do mercy. Your god is a sadistic, narcissistic bully who likes to punish people. It doesn’t say much about you that you worship that asshole.

          My God doesn’t do mercy!?? Are you kidding me?? How blind are you? Honestly!?? What the heck would you call Jesus dying on the cross??? He died and payed the price that WE ALL DESERVE!!! And you are asking about his mercy?? Wow!!

          Your god is a sadistic, narcissistic bully who likes to punish people.

          That is STILL your opinion. You can spend as long as you want calling Him as many different names as you feel like calling Him but at the end of the day, you are STILL giving your opinion.

          Further, according to the Bible, God has demonstrated great patience, love, and sacrifice on behalf of humanity (Romans 5:8). The core concept of the gospel is that God was willing to become a human being, suffer and struggle, then be killed by His own creations. All of this, in order to provide the means to allow mankind to live forever with Him. That’s hardly selfish, arrogant, or egotistic.

          It doesn’t say much about you that you worship that asshole.

          Well you are still giving your opinion when you call God that name so that name cant apply to me since you are only giving an opinion.

        • Michael Neville

          Your god kills people for no reason other than he feels like it. If that’s mercy then you don’t have a fucking clue about what mercy is. But I’ve already established that you’re a sociopath just like your sadistic, murderous bully of a god.

        • Candy Smith

          Your god kills people for no reason other than he feels like it.

          That isnt true. You somehow have forgotten to read what the Bible says. The people were evil. They were sacrificing their children to false gods. You are 100% wrong to claim that He did it just because and for no other reason then just because He felt like it.

        • epeeist

          The people were evil.

          All of them? The Chinese (not mentioned in the bible), the Inuit (not mentioned in the bible), the Australian aborigines (not mentioned in the bible).

          Your god drowned all of these, some 99.99996% of the world’s population. This would have included a substantial number of infants and children, were they evil as well? On top of that the rest of the biosphere, animals and plants were drowned purely as collateral damage, were they evil as well?

          Let’s not forget either that the simulation of drowning is classed as torture, think of what the real thing is like especially for those like babies and infants who wouldn’t know what was happening.

          Michael Neville is correct, your god is a narcissistic, sadistic, murderous bully.

        • Candy Smith

          Michael Neville is correct, your god is a narcissistic, sadistic, murderous bully.

          He gave an opinion. It isnt a fact. Its his opinion.

        • Greg G.

          epeeist pointed out a Bible story that supports MN’s opinion. MN’s opinion is informed by the Old Testament.

        • adam

          ” It isnt a fact. ”

          It is fact

          Definition of narcissism Merriam Webster
          1 : egoism, egocentrism

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5291b83724220b1943ca1f0652b802df3089b2cc3c5eb2055e585e33d1b9843b.jpg
          Definition of sadism Merriam Webster

          b : excessive cruelty

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9bfb7cbb09a39ae8911c3879d7def113ab5277eb302961e16b02b2a649a0e7d6.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          No it isn’t!! You are still giving your opinion!! I can give a definition of evil and then say some 5 year old is evil?? Why?? Because I say so!!?? That is EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE DOING!!!

          Giving a definition of Cruelty and then saying it matches God doesn’t mean it does. It is your opinion that it does.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Regarding the children there are several things to consider and think about.

          1.)Without the protection of their parents, the infants and small children would have starved to death

        • adam

          “1.)Without the protection of their parents, the infants and small children would have starved to death”

          Of course not with NO GOD to protect them…

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/38a372d179f379b51cdb5f1c227e4a5bd6dd543347d09566c2aedd943b72e754.jpg

        • Greg G.

          1.)Without the protection of their parents, the infants and small children would have starved to death

          So you’re telling us that the best an omnipotent, omniscient being could come up with is to drown them?

        • Candy Smith

          So you’re telling us that the best an omnipotent, omniscient being could come up with is to drown them?

          No there is more than just that!! Also, consider the age of accountability. We get to that more later.

        • Greg G.

          In Genesis 6:6, God regrets making mankind. Shouldn’t he have just regretted putting the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil on the one planet in the universe where it could cause problems?

        • Candy Smith

          I explained what this meant?? Did I not?? Yes or no???

        • Greg G.

          I explained what this meant?? Did I not?? Yes or no???

          I have no idea whether you explained this. I haven’t read all your posts in this forum and I have never heard or seen you explain anything anywhere but this forum. Saying you already explained it does not answer my question.

        • Candy Smith

          Shouldn’t he have just regretted putting the Tree of Knowledge of Good
          and Evil on the one planet in the universe where it could cause
          problems?

          Obviously The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil served a purpose!!

        • Greg G.

          Obviously The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil served a purpose!!

          It serves the purpose of a MacGuffin in a fictional story. Within the context of the story, the purpose is not so obvious.

        • epeeist

          1.)Without the protection of their parents, the infants and small children would have starved to death

          So your omnipotent and omni-benevolent god drowned the babes and infants in order to stop them starving. It seems your god is moronic in addition to being a narcissistic, sadistic, murderous bully. It never occurred to the imbecile that all it needed to do was click its metaphorical fingers and invoke a miracle in order to save them.

          But no, your god delights in suffering, of others that is. All you need to do is consult, say, 1 Chronicles 21, Deuteronomy 3, Joshua 6 or Judges 21 for example.

        • Candy Smith

          So your omnipotent and omni-benevolent god drowned the babes and infants in order to stop them starving. It seems your god is moronic in addition to being a narcissistic, sadistic, murderous bully. It never occurred to the imbecile that all it needed to do was click its metaphorical fingers and invoke a miracle in order to save them.

          I haven’t finished. That isn’t the only reason. Remember this thing called freewill. I also said the children would have likely grown up being evil like their parents.

          All of your names are STILL nothing more than opinions.

        • Meepestos

          “I also said the children would have likely grown up being evil like their parents”. Which we all know is BS nowadays and even back then.

        • Candy Smith

          Really?? We dont see children killing other children today?? What about children going into schools and shooting other children?? Are you kidding me?? Regardless of what you think, Children are NOT INNOCENT!! They make decisions and choose to do evil thing.

        • Meepestos

          There are many examples of children raised by “evil” parents that grow up not “evil”. It seems the authors of the god character ignored this or didn’t take this into consideration.

          Though many adults that are abusive were abused as children, doesn’t meant that all children that were abused end up as adults that abuse, as statistics show that most children that were abused do not grow up to be abusive.

        • Candy Smith

          Where would that be??

        • Meepestos

          All around the world. You should get out and meet them.

        • Candy Smith

          There is no such thing as an innocent person. No one doesnt sin!! There is no person who is sinless except for Jesus. He was truly sinless. Other than Jesus, EVERYONE else is a sinner!!

        • Meepestos

          i can only sin in the eyes of those that believe in the concept of sin, as they are the ones that believe in the “immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law.” hence one that lacks the belief in a god or disbelieves in a god is not a sinner, in his or her own eyes or those that don’t believe in the concept of sin.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Tell me about it! “Innocent” 3 year olds?? They should all be frying in hell right now. They deserve no better.

          You’ll pull the switch to send them there, wouldn’t you?

        • Candy Smith

          Who said any 3 year old is going to go to Hell?? There is no verse in the Bible that specifically says that children will burn in Hell!!

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          Uh, you’re the one who said, “Children are NOT INNOCENT!!”

        • Michael Neville

          Children are innocent unless they’re not, depending on which argument is being made. It’s quantum™ like photons going through both slits.

        • Greg G.

          The Bible says people will be sent to hell with no age restrictions given so it does say that babies will burn in hell.

          Churches made up the part about children not being sent to hell because people would quit going if they were telling mothers who lost a child that their kid was in hell.

          If God is not going to spare angels who sin, why would he spare a fetus?

        • epeeist

          also said the children would have likely grown up being evil like their parents.

          Ah, so your god was drowning them in order to stop them becoming evil in the future. So, either you god knew they were going to become evil, in which case the claim to free will is a nonsense given that their actions are fully foreseen. Alternatively, if they had free will then your god was denying it by drowning them.

          All of your names are STILL nothing more than opinions.

          No, they are reasoned arguments based upon the content of your “holy book” and what it reveals of the attributes of your god.

        • Candy Smith

          Ah, so your god was drowning them in order to stop them becoming evil in the future. So, either you god knew they were going to become evil, in which case the claim to free will is a nonsense given that their actions are fully foreseen. Alternatively, if they had free will then your god was denying it by drowning them.

          https://carm.org/questions/about-doctrine/if-god-all-knowing-and-he-knows-our-future-then-how-free-will

          https://carm.org/if-god-knows-our-free-will-choices-do-we-still-have-free-will

        • epeeist

          https://carm.org/questions/

          https://carm.org/if-god-kno

          Sorry, but if you want a dispassionate discussion of the problem of free will then theologians are not the people to go to, they have an agenda to push. You might find this article to be a reasonable summary.

          As it is the game is given away in this quotation from one of your links:

          But, the questions is why does he know? Does he know because he is a good guesser, or because he can see the future, or is it because he ordains all things after the counsel of his will (Eph. 1:11)? It is the latter.

          If “he ordains all things”, or even if it is merely because “he can see the future” then this means our actions are determined, hence we do not have free will.

        • BlackMamba44

          Ask the rape victim about free will.

          God has a plan for us all. He doesn’t tell us that plan, though. Then he gives us the ability to make our own decision. So, if we use that free will to make a decision he doesnt like or it goes against that plan, he sends us to hell.

          Your god is an ass.

        • Michael Neville

          Ask the rape victim about free will.

          That’s the problem with the free will argument. It concentrates on the free will of the perpetrator to commit transgressions. It completely ignores the free will of the victim not to be victimized.

        • Candy Smith

          But no, your god delights in suffering, of others that is. All you
          need to do is consult, say, 1 Chronicles 21, Deuteronomy 3, Joshua 6 or Judges 21 for example.

          Saying God delights in causing suffering is nothing but your opinion. All of those verses have explanations and saying that it is evil is nothing more than your opinion!!

        • epeeist

          All of those verses have explanations and saying that it is evil is nothing more than your opinion!!

          But the bible is the word of your god, why should it need “explanations”?

          Take the first of the references I made, 1 Chronicles 21, in that it plainly says:

          14 So the Lord sent a plague on Israel, and seventy thousand men of Israel fell dead.

          Are you saying that this didn’t happen, in which case the bible is plainly false or did it happen, in which case your god kills seventy thousand people because of the supposed transgression of one man?

        • Michael Neville

          Might makes right is a basis for evil. Killing people just because he feels like it makes your god evil. I realize that you will disregard this quote but it says what sin is:

          And sin, young man, is when you treat people like things. Including yourself. That’s what sin is. –Terry Pratchett Carpe Jugulum

          According to your Bible your god treats people as things. That tells me that your god commits sins, which makes him evil. And yes, that’s an opinion. Show that this opinion is wrong.

        • Michael Neville

          Everyone was evil? What a ridiculous, bigoted thing to say. Give some evidence that they were evil and remember, the collection of myths, fables and lies called the Bible isn’t evidence.

        • Candy Smith

          Ok well I am pointed out what the Bible says and your negative incorrect attitude isnt going to make this conversation easy. I highly suggest changing your attitude so we can have an easier conversation.

        • adam

          “Ok well I am pointed out what the Bible says ”

          Nope, JUST your opinion.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8638fdedfe8fad3b245ca0981085794967c878d6bfba020d03d8b426a1c98936.jpg

        • Michael Neville

          You keep forgetting that I don’t think the Bible is anything more than a collection of myths, fables and lies with nothing important to say on any subject. So you need to come up with some other evidence that your god isn’t a murderous, sadistic asshole who, according to your own propaganda, kills people just for grins and giggles.

        • Candy Smith

          So you need to come up with some other evidence that your god isn’t a
          murderous, sadistic asshole who, according to your own propaganda, kills
          people just for grins and giggles.

          Well first of all, you keep saying that God kills people just because He can or just because He enjoys it. Well that is wrong. 100% wrong!!

        • Candy Smith

          With nothing important to say on any subject.

          That is false!!

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          “The people were evil”
          Nope, the God is EVIL

          Are you kidding me?? You keep telling yourself that the people were not evil. Meanwhile the Bible verses that say the exact opposite still exist in the Bible. Im not sure what you think you can accomplish by choosing to ignore them and continue to reference this Bible that I have explained like AT LEAST 15 TIMES, BUT YOU dont like what I say or you are choosing to ignore it, just like you choose to ignore all the VERSES THAT PROVE THAT THE PEOPLE WERE NOT INNOCENT!!

        • Meepestos

          Bible verses merely reflect the attitudes of the authors of the verses and the locales they speculated about. The god character in the bible demonstrates the same traits and characteristics of those that created it. It is like they were looking in the mirror when they created the concept of it, which is understandable when one looks at the locale and times of these folks – a time of population movements that led to violent changes that elicits behaviors that we obviously see in your/their God.

        • adam

          “You keep telling yourself that the people were not evil.”

          The God who created evil is THE EVIL

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fef3e09d4fced201880c6048e47897bc3461d04f1c5de54936408c4560c105b.jpg

          “Meanwhile the Bible verses that say the exact opposite still exist in the Bible.”

          But God itself claims to create EVIL, IN THE BIBLE.

          ” BUT YOU dont like what I say or you are choosing to ignore it, ”

          Yes, you claim it means ‘calamity’ which I demonstrated means the same thing.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7123c548a1342e2d1779d51809c0ce85d82e0551dcde5fa0f6496d68284963dd.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          The God who created evil is THE EVIL

          IN YOUR OPINION!!! IN YOUR OPINION!!! IN YOUR OPINION!!! IN YOUR OPINION!!! IN YOUR OPINION!!! IN YOUR OPINION!!! IN YOUR OPINION!!! IN YOUR OPINION!!! IN YOUR OPINION!!! IN YOUR OPINION!!! IN YOUR OPINION!!! IN YOUR OPINION!!!

          “Meanwhile the Bible verses that say the exact opposite still exist in the Bible.”

          But God itself claims to create EVIL, IN THE BIBLE.

          i have EXPLAINED TO YOU THAT THAT ISNT WHAT IT MEANS. That is the KJV!!! THE KJV isnt one you should use. THis isnt the first verse that has something that atheists have a problem with. So maybe, YOU SHOULD LOOK AT A DIFFERENT VERSION OTHER THAN KING JAMES!!

        • Greg G.

          It is the opinion of Isaiah the prophet.and the author of Lamentations, too.

          Your explanation just substitutes disaster and calamity, which are also evil things.

        • Dys

          Chanting “in your opinion” doesn’t accomplish anything, especially since you’re just giving your own opinion.

        • epeeist

          An incident that I have revealed before might bear repeating.

          I once challenged a group of what I think were Plymouth Brethren about evolution and the age of the earth. Eventually I got talking to one particular woman, as I listed the pieces of evidence for an old earth she started repeating to herself “I believe in Jesus Christ”, over and over again and ceased to engage with me completely.

        • Michael Neville

          Knock off the “IN YOUR OPINION” bullshit. Explain why the opinion is wrong. You need to bring your argumentation up to fourth grade level. Right now you’re in kindergarten.

          i have EXPLAINED TO YOU THAT THAT ISNT WHAT IT MEANS.

          That’s your opinion. You don’t like the KJV because it shows your sadistic, bullying god to be evil. And don’t yell at us, asshole!

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined Bob Seidensticker

          That’s cute. You say, “IN YOUR OPINION!!!” as if you have something else.

        • BlackMamba44

          Don’t like what it says? Just look at a different version.
          So much for the word of God.

          Edit: typo

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Nope, not my opinion.

          Yeah it is your opinion actually, because while that is what the Bible says, I have told you that the KJV is the right one to use, and you have said that calamity and evil are the same yet there is no proof for this. Calamity is causing damage. Evil is basically what Hitler is. And there is NO COMPARISON BETWEEN what Hitler did and what God did. Hitler killed innocent people who didnt deserve it. God killed people who were wicked. . Leviticus 18:2–30 points out the horrendous crimes that were going on in the land of Canaan. They were having sex with their mothers, sisters, and so on. Men were having sex with other men. They were giving their children to be sacrificed to Molech (vs. 21). They were having sex with animals (vs. 23). So it is impossible to make the claim that those tribes were innocent and undeserving of punishment.

          But one can’t neglect that children sin, too. As previously pointed out, today there are kids killing kids, kids thieving, kids raping, and so on. So the innocence of children is a farce. In fact, if they were sacrificing their children, then how many children were alive when Joshua entered the Promised Land anyway?

          Furthermore, they had more than enough time to escape the flood, get out of the city and live. They simply choose not to because they wanted to keep sinning. The people of the Canaanites were given 400 years and no I did not pull that out of my anus. I think, I may be mistaken that you blamed me for doing that once before. There is a Verse in the Bible that actually says 400 years.

          As for the Children, there is no reason to blame God, He provided the way out, the children’s parents are the ones that didnt let them go. If they were going to continue to sin, or if they didnt believe the warnings, then they should have given their children up. The only person you can blame are the parents. God provided a way out, the parents choose to ignore it.

        • adam

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d0d0298251c444a7ed04da50dce984d9062e4ab3cd35d48cb69c11eabfe078e2.jpg “Yeah it is your opinion actually, because while that is what the Bible
          says, I have told you that the KJV is the right one to use, ”

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fef3e09d4fced201880c6048e47897bc3461d04f1c5de54936408c4560c105b.jpg

          It is from the KJV

        • epeeist

          the VERSES THAT PROVE THAT THE PEOPLE WERE NOT INNOCENT!!

          Nope, the bible is the claim, not the evidence.

        • Candy Smith

          Nope, the bible is the claim, not the evidence.

          Ok and??

        • Dys

          Just because the bible says something, doesn’t mean it’s true.

        • epeeist

          Ok and??

          To be true something must correspond to the facts, to take a subject that I picked you up on in another post, the bible claims there was a global flood. This simply does not correspond to the facts. In other words, what the bible claims is not true.

          There are numerous other “holy books” in the world, for example the Quran and the Vedas. Muslims and Hindus would claim their “holy books” are true and yours false. Can you show that their claims are false and yours true?

        • Candy Smith

          Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. (Genesis 6:5)

          What a strong statement! Every intention and thought was evil all the time. Imagine the murders, rapes, thefts, child sacrifices,
          cannibalism, and so on. This was happening continually. Yet this was about 120 years (maximum) before the Flood (Genesis 6:3). So God was still patient, allowing time for repentance and change (1 Peter 3:20). God even called Noah to be a preacher of righteousness (2 Peter 2:5), yet people still refused to listen and continued in their evil ways.

          You missed this verse. How about reading it!???

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Why is drowning children?? You haven’t proven that that is wrong??? Let me ask you this: Do you believe in evolution??

        • Greg G.

          Nobody claims that evolution is not red in tooth and claw. You claim that God is not evil and you are trying to say drowning children is not evil.

        • Michael Neville

          Do you believe in evolution?

          I don’t believe in evolution just like I don’t believe in dentistry or astronomy. Evolution is the best explanation we presently have for how various lifeforms are or were the way they are or were. Your question is a complete red herring.

          If you want to know what a red herring is, google is your friend.

        • adam

          “Why is drowning children?? ”

          Obviously because God likes to torture.

          ” Let me ask you this: Do you believe in evolution??”

          Covered this already.
          If you cant keep up, take notes.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ba6ff62b4fa3a9d09e8e938168bca0a7c17e25df5c4ca0e31fb227ca52d5abef.jpg

        • epeeist

          Yet this was about 120 years (maximum) before the Flood (Genesis 6:3).

          You do realise that “the Flood” never took place…

        • Candy Smith

          You do realise that “the Flood” never took place…

          In your opinion it didnt!!

        • Dys

          And according to basic geology it didn’t either. Just saying “that’s your opinion” doesn’t change the fact that there was never a global flood.

        • epeeist

          In your opinion it didnt!!

          Nothing to do with “opinion”. As Dys notes, basic geology shows it didn’t. On top of that, basic archaeology, palaeontology, biology and history also show it didn’t happen.

          And in other news, the earth is 4.5 billion years old, the universe is 13.7 billion years old and the biosphere can be accounted for by common descent with modification (AKA evolution).

          None of this is “opinion”, all of it is based on solid evidence.

        • Michael Neville

          Got any evidence that this flood happened? I mean real evidence, not a myth that some Hebrew priests stole from the Babylonians 2500 years ago.

        • Greg G.

          In all opinions which take evidence seriously, the Flood never took place.

        • adam

          “In your opinion it didnt!!”

          And you believing a story book that it did.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8638fdedfe8fad3b245ca0981085794967c878d6bfba020d03d8b426a1c98936.jpg

        • BlackMamba44

          120 years before the flood was God being patient?

          God was talking about the lifespan of mortal humans.

          6 When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. 3 Then the Lord said, “My Spirit will not contend with[a] humans forever, for they are mortal[b]; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.”

        • BlackMamba44

          a. Genesis 6:3 Or My spirit will not remain in
          b. Genesis 6:3 Or corrupt

          These are other translations.

        • adam

          ” Every intention and thought was evil all the time. Imagine the murders, rapes, thefts, child sacrifices, cannibalism, and so on. This was happening continually. ”

          Then why would YOUR “God” create such a thing?

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9fef3e09d4fced201880c6048e47897bc3461d04f1c5de54936408c4560c105b.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          HE DIDN’T!!! I have to ask you this: Are you stupid????

        • Candy Smith

          We have to start by determining what is meant by “evil.”

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          How do you justify that definition as being the right one?

        • Greg G.

          Every intention and thought was evil all the time. Imagine the murders, rapes, thefts, child sacrifices,
          cannibalism, and so on. This was happening continually.

          How could that have happened if the Lord had not ordained it?

          But that’s just my opinion. Oh, wait! it’s the Bible’s opinion, too.

          Lamentations 3:37-38 (NRSV)37 Who can command and have it done,    if the Lord has not ordained it?38 Is it not from the mouth of the Most High    that good and bad come?

        • Candy Smith

          Why dont you try looking up and explanation for that verse??? There are places that will explain it!!

        • Greg G.

          It is referring to the Isaiah 45:7.

        • Candy Smith

          That wasnt what I meant.

        • Greg G.

          Why don’t you try for quality posts instead of quantity so you can write what you mean?

        • Candy Smith

          God has given man freewill. Freewill means you make a choice. Obviously being able to make a choice means one can do what is wrong. If God did not allow anyone to make a choice, then they would be no more than robots, FORCED TO LOVE HIM. God does not want beings WHO ARE FORCED TO LOVE HIM. He wants beings who make the free choice to love them.

        • Greg G.

          If God is condemning people to eternal torture, he is forcing people to love him. It is the ultimate force. That is not a free choice. Why could there be free will without negative consequences? Isn’t that what heaven is supposed to be?

        • Candy Smith

          When a parent punishes a child for disobeying, did they force that child to disobey?

        • Greg G.

          When a parent punishes a child for disobeying, did they force that child to disobey?

          If the parents made it impossible to obey every command, then the parents would have absolutely forced the child to disobey.

          Romans 3:23 (NRSV)23 since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God;

        • Candy Smith

          If the parents made it impossible to obey every command, then the parents would have absolutely forced the child to disobey.

          What??

        • Greg G.

          It’s a setup. It’s a no-win situation. There are so many rules that it is impossible to not do something against the rules, that it is inevitable that something would draw punishment.

          When was the last time you went a week without doing something considered to be some sin or another?

        • Candy Smith

          I have a game that I play that is completely inappropriate. I make a choice to play it. I can choose not. But I dont.

        • Greg G.

          Is anybody harmed by your game? Are you harmed? Does it prevent you from doing good? If not, so what?

          Do your imaginary friends get mad? So what?

        • Candy Smith

          Why could there be free will without negative consequences?

          How about we define free-will. Not everyone agrees on what free-will is. Remember, it needs to be a biblical definition.

        • Greg G.

          Then define free will in such a way that there must be negative consequences.

          When I was a kid, sometimes my parents would get a box of fancy chocolates. Some of them were really good and some I didn’t like at all but I had free will to choose and some choices had the negative consequence of flavors I didn’t like, but none of the choices were deadly poisons. With experience, I got to know my favorites. Later in life, I discovered that the shapes and swirls on the top of the candies identified which was which. Then I had informed free choice and could avoid the bad choices.

          But we don’t get informed free choices in life. We can choose what is likely to be a good choice, but there are arbitrary bad things out there. We can drive someone to the doctor but there is always a chance of being severely injured or killed in a crash.

          The Bible says those bad things wouldn’t happen unless God ordained them. So the bad things that happen when we make what should be a good choice is just the bad God messing with you. Even the bad consequences of bad choices are the same, as they would only happen because God ordained them.

          The good God idea is refuted by everyday events and by the Bible.

          It makes more sense that we live in an indifferent universe where unexpected things happen sometimes but we can lower the risks by making better choices.

        • Candy Smith

          The good God idea is refuted by everyday events and by the Bible.

          It is refuted by man giving their opinions. Genesis explains why the world is like this. Gee what a concept. Genesis explains why there is evil and suffering and natural disasters. Revalation tells us how God will make a new world will none of those things and more will exist. Except that wont apply to U, because you are so busy being full of pride, that it is impossible for you to see any of that.

        • Greg G.

          The Garden of Eden story is poor fiction. Expecting people with no knowledge of good or evil to understand that it was wrong to disobey, then punishing all humans because of it is a crazy story. Why are you so gullible?

        • Candy Smith

          It is fiction in your opinion!!

        • Candy Smith

          How do you know that that didnt know good and evil?? There is a difference between knowing good and evil and experiencing it. Also, whether they knew good and evil, doesnt matter. What matters is whether they knew it was wrong?? They knew it was wrong. Someone who doesnt know that what they did was wrong would not repeat the instructions back to someone (adding words), but still she obviously knew it was wrong??

        • Greg G.

          How do you know that that didnt know good and evil??

          Have you ever read the story for comprehension? If they had never eaten from it, they wouldn’t have the knowledge. If they had the knowledge, then it wouldn’t do anything to them. They didn’t even know they were naked until they ate from it.

          Have you never tried to think? Are you afraid to try it?

        • Candy Smith

          Have you ever read the story for comprehension? If they had never
          eaten from it, they wouldn’t have the knowledge. If they had the
          knowledge, then it wouldn’t do anything to them. They didn’t even know
          they were naked until they ate from it.

          No that isnt true. No No. The Fruit didnt give them any knowledge. You are not understanding it correctly.

        • Candy Smith

          I am thinking. You are assuming that eating from the tree means they now know right and wrong. After they ate from it, they had experienced good and evil, right?? is that not what the text says. The text doesnt say they now knew good and evil.

        • Candy Smith

          Why I am so guillible?? Well first of all, because the way you explain it is wrong?? When one explains it the right way which you didnt do, either way im not guillible it makes more sense!!?? Furthermore, there are a bunch of questions that exist out there that will explain the Adam and Eve story.

        • Candy Smith

          Expecting people with no knowledge of good or evil to understand that it was wrong to disobey,

          A 2 year old disobeys and doesn’t listen. What you are saying is that the parent should not punish the 2 year old because he doesn’t know whats evil and whats good and that it was wrong to disobey??

        • Greg G.

          You have to teach a child to obey? Have you ever seen spoiled brats who do not obey? You must teach them that it is right to obey and wrong to disobey. Adam and Eve had no clue about right and wrong or good and evil. Read the story and think.

        • Candy Smith

          Adam and Eve were NOT kids. They were grown.

        • Candy Smith

          You need to read the story and think. Eve repeated the instructions back. Why would see repeat it back if she didnt know that it was wrong. Adam told her to not eat from the Tree. When Satan came along questiioning Gods Word, He said Did God really say this. What was Her response?? Was it “Ah I dont know because I am a child and I dont know anything?” No it was “We are not to eat from the tree or touch it.

          Adam on the other hand knew it was wrong. God had told Him not to. There is NOTHING that you can say to prove that they didnt know right and wrong. God made them in Him image. He made them as rational beings, programmed with language.

        • Candy Smith

          How do you know that they didnt know good and evil??

        • Greg G.

          I have read the story for comprehension. You should try it.

        • Michael Neville

          So I’m accountable for the actions of two people who died thousands of years ago, people who I had no influence over? That’s either silly or so grotesque as to be unbelievable. Your favorite god is a real asshole if he thinks everyone should be punished because of what two people did a long time ago.

        • Candy Smith

          So I’m accountable for the actions of two people who died thousands of
          years ago, people who I had no influence over? That’s either silly or
          so grotesque as to be unbelievable.

          Hold on now. You asked a question. Let me answer it. Otherwise dont bother asking. We are sinners by nature as well as by choice. Like I said before, there are verses that explain the Garden of Eden. There are questions such as: Why do I face the consequences of Adam’s sin when I did not eat the fruit? What is the sin nature?,

        • Candy Smith

          The Bible says those bad things wouldn’t happen unless God ordained
          them. So the bad things that happen when we make what should be a good
          choice is just the bad God messing with you. Even the bad consequences
          of bad choices are the same, as they would only happen because God
          ordained them.

          God ordained them??? God allows people to suffer for their choices. In the Bible, people make wrong choices, they suffer. Sometimes, God brings out an event and allows it to happen to punish those who disobey him.

        • Greg G.

          You can’t trust Old Testament God to only ordain bad to bad people. Sometimes he does it for a bet. Remember Job?

        • Candy Smith

          Remember Job?? Yeah what about him??

        • Greg G.

          His wife, kids, servants, livestock were killed but not for anything they did, but because God decided to make a bet over what Job would do if they were all taken from him.

        • Candy Smith

          A bet??

        • Greg G.

          Do you not know what the word means or do you not recognize a bet when you see one?

        • Candy Smith

          What is the point of God allowing Satan to cause problems for Satan??? Do you actually know??

        • Greg G.

          This is not Twitter. Why not put your thoughts into one post?

          The story says that Satan could not cause problems for Job without God’s OK. Apparently Satan is following God’s wishes.

        • Candy Smith

          The story says that Satan could not cause problems for Job without God’s OK. Apparently Satan is Following God’s wishes.

          God allowed Satan to do what He did. He let it happen.

        • Candy Smith

          But we don’t get informed free choices in life. We can choose what is
          likely to be a good choice, but there are arbitrary bad things out
          there. We can drive someone to the doctor but there is always a chance
          of being severely injured or killed in a crash.

          We dont get to make free-will chocies?? Well first of all, free-will is limited by what we can do. By our nature. Second of all, we do make choices. You want a coke or do you want a dr. pepper. you choose the coke. Could you have chosen the dr pepper?? Yes. Thats a choice. You choose to murder someone, you choose to not murder someone. Thats a choice.

          God on the other hand CREATED EVERYTHING. He is sovereign over all life. Furthermore, there is no such thing as an innocent person. People use the word innocent but thats because they have rejected the Bible. Sin is what brought suffering and evil into this world and no God did not create. He didnt create evil either. He allows it.

        • Greg G.

          The decisions I make are never intended to hurt anyone. Are there moral issues with choosing Corn Flakes or Cheerios?

          Sovereign rules no longer makevsense. It wss just the fiction of the day.

        • Candy Smith

          Sovereign rules no longer makevsense. It wss just the fiction of the day.

          Oh ok but God doesnt stop being control. They made sense then and they make sense now because he is still in charge. He hasn’t stopped being in charged.

        • Greg G.

          (My phone battery was dying and the screen dimmed so I couldn’t check my typos.)

          You played the “faith” card. That shows that you have nothing but uninformed guesswork and you know it.

        • Candy Smith

          I was making an example of a choice that people make that dont cause harm. We can discuss those that do cause harm but they are obviously a choice as well.

        • Greg G.

          Read up on brain studies on choice. It’s not like what they want you to believe in church.

        • epeeist

          Remember, it needs to be a biblical definition.

          Why? As I have said before and you have ignored, the question of free will isn’t a theological issue it is a philosophical one.

        • Candy Smith

          I havent ignored it. First of all I never saw it and second of all, i dont know what that means and when the heck did I say theological issue.

        • epeeist

          First of all I never saw it

          Fine, I’ll repost it again then.

          i dont know what that means

          Free will is a subject considered dispassionately by philosophers rather than those with an agenda to protect. The literature is large, but this is a reasonable introduction.

          when the heck did I say theological issue.

          You said you wanted a biblical definition, but since free will isn’t mentioned in the bible I generalised it to theology.

        • Candy Smith

          I asked for a defintion.

        • epeeist

          I asked for a defintion (sic)

          If you had read the article I linked to you would have seen that there are a number of positions on what constitutes free will. Asking for a definition is therefore singularly foolish.

        • Greg G.

          Remember, it needs to be a biblical definition.

          Remember, free will is never mentioned in the Bible. Good luck with a biblical definition.

        • Candy Smith

          Free will isnt but it is pretty obvious that we have a choice.

        • Greg G.

          Scientists have shown that decisions can be predicted quite accurately about 20 seconds before the person thinks he made the decision by EEC and computers. That indicates that decisions are made subconsciously and free will may be an illusion.

        • Candy Smith

          Science have given their opinions. You have choose to believe what Science has experimented.

          You are making a choice to make these comments. You have made a choice to be an atheist. The evidence for Gods existence is there for all to see. His existence cannot be proven or disproven. IT MUST be excepted by faith.

        • Greg G.

          That is untrue. I was a Christian and my choice was to remain a Christian but it became obvious that it was a charade. I could no longer believe no matter how much I wanted to do it.

        • Candy Smith

          You made a choice to stop being a Christian.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          If God is condemning people to eternal torture, he is forcing people to love him.

          No He isnt. He has offered a way to avoid Hell. We all deserve it. We are ALL sinners. He is gracious enough to not send us to Hell. he would be COMPLETELY JUST IN DOING SO!!

        • Greg G.

          No He isnt. He has offered a way to avoid Hell. We all deserve it. We are ALL sinners. He is gracious enough to not send us to Hell. he would be COMPLETELY JUST IN DOING SO!!

          Exactly! That is force. A judge can threaten to throw you into jail to force you to give up some information, for example. If a person uses threats to force another person to have sex, that is rape. If a person uses the threat of force to take things, that is robbery. If a person uses the threat of releasing information of something you would rather not have as common knowledge, that is blackmail.

          Those are examples of force.

        • Candy Smith

          If he was forcing us to worship him with the threat of Hell, then 99-100% of the worlds population would be Christian. Clearly, that isnt the case, so it obviously isnt a threat.

        • Greg G.

          If it was real, then it might be that high. But it is absurd fiction so even most people who believe it don’t take it seriously enough to read the Bible.

        • Candy Smith

          First of all, you do not know for a fact that there is no afterlife. You believe that there isn’t.

        • Greg G.

          There is no reason to think there is an afterlife but many reasons to think there are not. We can imagine many things. Gods and afterlife are contrived to be impossible to distinguish from imaginary concepts.

        • Candy Smith

          You can list a 1000 reasons for all I care. That doesnt prove that there is no Afterlife. Think about it, if you are wrong, I lose nothing and you don’t lose anything either, because we become worm food. However, If I am right, I still dont lose and you lose everything.

        • Candy Smith

          Gods and afterlife are contrived to be impossible to distinguish from imaginary concepts.

          God is not impossible. Is it completely reasonable to believe in God. Without God we cannot make sense of anything. Do you really think that with how beautiful the universe is and all the beautiful places that there are, that that all came about by chance or does it make more sense to think that an intelligient being is behind it. What about our bodies?? Our bodies are way too complex to have evolved. We know so much more than we did know about Cells back when Darwin was alive. I would think that if He was alive today, and He saw what we knew, He would question His own claims.

        • Candy Smith

          Those that end up in Hell will have made a choice. They wanted a life without God. That is what God gave them. Anyone that ends up in Hell will realize that they deserve it.

        • Greg G.

          But it is an uninformed forced choice.

        • Candy Smith

          No it isn’t. Parents do not force their children to disobey. They make a choice. We as sinners make a choice to disobey. We suffer the consequence. Furthermore, the evidence for God has been there since the beginning. Read what Romans 1:18- 18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.

          Romans 1: 21-23- 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

          Romans 32- Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

        • Greg G.

          Parents do not force their children to disobey.

          It was a hypothetical analogy but I knew someone whose aunt and uncle took her in when her mother died and they were like that toward her, but not her cousin.

          If parents make up rules that are contradictory or physically impossible to follow, they will find a way to punish the child.

          The New Testament adds thought crimes to the mix of “sins”.

        • Candy Smith

          The New Testament adds thought crimes to the mix of “sins”.

          Where is this??

        • Candy Smith

          Uniformed??? Definition- not having or showing awareness or understanding of the facts.

        • Greg G.

          “Uniformed” means “wearing a uniform”. I used the word “uninformed”. Your last post insisted that faith is necessary. Faith means uninformed.

        • Candy Smith

          Faith means uninformed.

          According to what?

        • Candy Smith

          Those are examples of force.

          And that doesnt apply with God.

        • Greg G.

          God, if it existed, would be forcing others.

        • Candy Smith

          That is an opinion, still!! Like I said if he was forcing people, 99-100% world would be Christians. Obviously this isn’t the case.

        • Michael Neville

          According to you, that’s YOU Candy Smith, if we don’t kiss your god’s ass then we get tortured forever. If that isn’t force then you don’t know what the word means.

        • Candy Smith

          Well first of all, we are supppsed to worship God because He deserves it. Second of all, he wants to have a relationship with us. Having a relationship needs to require a choice. He doesnt just want us to be robots.

          But suppose that one believes God exists and will throw those who don’t worship him into hell. When the scenario is depicted
          as a choice between flattering a despot or torture, it seems that one is unethically forced into worship.
          In reality, the choice is between choosing to do good by loving God and following him, or choosing to reject God and do evil.
          One is rewarded for doing good and punished for doing evil, but this is not necessarily coercion. In society, people are punished with fines or incarceration for doing wrong, yet no one would say that we’re forced to obey the law; in fact, many choose to commit crimes, even when there is a great chance they’ll be caught. In many other situations, people choose to receive immediate gratification despite knowing there will be negative consequences later. People get drunk, knowing they’ll have a hangover the next day; students have fun during the weekend instead of doing homework, knowing they’ll get bad grades on Monday; people conscious of their weight indulge in foods that are delicious but also fattening. In each case, there is a clear choice: self-gratification now and unhappiness later, or self-discipline now and reward later.

          Coercion is more than the existence of a negative consequence: it is a threat or an irresistible force that causes a person to do something they would not have done otherwise. If someone becomes a Christian because they come to know Christ and want to follow him, they aren’t being forced into that choice; they may not have even thought about hell. On the other hand, if someone becomes a Christian because they’re afraid of going to hell, their position is similar to that of a child who doesn’t do wrong because he’s afraid of being caught and punished by his parents.
          Is the child being coerced? Technically, he’s making a choice he
          wouldn’t otherwise make because of fear. Ideally, he would do the right thing because he wanted to; but if the only way to motivate him to do the right thing is by threatening punishment, better that than his doing the wrong thing. Similarly, worshiping God is the right thing to do, and is in our best interests, and God would rather we come to him out of love instead of fear. If nothing else will get us to do the right thing, fear is a last-resort motivator. However, as there are people who freely choose not to worship God, and others who choose to worship out of a genuine desire to do so, it’s clear that God is not forcing us to worship him.

        • Candy Smith

          God, if it existed, would be forcing others.

          Well first of all, you havent know can you prove that He doesnt exist. So dont use the word “if”like I have already proven that God doesnt exist, because it isnt possible period. Nor is it possible to prove that He does exists. He MUST be excepted by faith.

        • Greg G.

          No ghosts, bigfoots, or gods have any evidence. It takes evidence to distinguish imaginary things from real things. Faith in place of evidence is gullibility.

        • Candy Smith

          Do you know everything?? Do you know everything that there is to know and you have stopped learning??

        • Candy Smith

          I would think not but based off of your claim that there is no evidence for God, you are claiming otherwise.

        • MR

          What is your definition of the word just?

        • Dys

          Sorry Candy, that’s just your opinion. You haven’t proven that any of it is true.

        • adam

          “God has given man freewill.”

          It is obviously not free, when it costs your life.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8f82147c8efa48709931146100a7df8d385664f36cdcdc777d2f5005d4938345.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          People make a choice to disobey the laws now and they are punished for it. People make a choice to MURDER SOMEONE, humans, JUST HUMANS, and they are sometimes put to death.

        • Michael Neville

          But you give your god a free pass when he murders someone. So you’re saying your god is justified in killing people just because he can. You approve of your murderous, immoral god.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Look at the other verses that surround this verse. Why is He saying this?

        • adam

          So that his followers will kill the old and young, girls and women and little children.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5f0ce47a0b8497b025b2a4cdb7fd4798551813adf11a0738022e31dadfdbb766.jpg

        • Candy Smith

          That verse doesnt mean that. Explanations that exist, that you refuse to look at, explain what it actually means.

        • MR

          That’s just your opinion. People can make up shit to explain anything.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Yeah and maybe you should look up an explanation. The explanations explain why He did that. Ill give you a hint. The people were wicked.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Read the explanation!!! It really isnt difficult!!

        • Candy Smith

          You are so full of pride that it is impossible for you to see the truth.

        • Michael Neville

          I suppose you claim “the truth” is whatever nonsense you believe at any particular time.

        • Candy Smith

          Whatever Nonsense?? What part is nonsense??

        • Michael Neville

          Nonsense like your approval of your sadistic, murderous bully of a god being justified in killing people just because he feels it. As I’ve said many times, might makes right is immoral, so your pretense your god is moral is nonsense.

        • Candy Smith

          You must be stupid?? I have said over and over that He doesnt do it because He feels like it and you have continued to ignore me. Maybe its time for me to start ignoring you, so you’ll know what it feels like.

        • Michael Neville

          You just say that your sadistic, murderous god doesn’t kill because he feels like it. You haven’t shown the slightest bit of evidence to suggest otherwise. “He created us” does not give him the right or justification to kill people.

        • Candy Smith

          your pretense your god is moral is nonsense.

          What gives you the right to say that He is immoral??

        • Michael Neville

          My sense of right and wrong gives me that right. Your god kills people just because he can. He condones slavery and orders rape and genocide. I think those things are evil and immoral. Sure it’s my opinion and you may think senseless killing, slavery, rape and genocide are the greatest things since sliced bread but that’s just your opinion.

        • Candy Smith

          Is punishing someone when they disobey nonsense??

          Are the governments evil when they demand the death penalty??

        • Michael Neville

          Since your sadistic bully of a god doesn’t give just punishments your first question is moot. Hell is infinite punishment for finite sins. That isn’t just and should be considered nonsense.

          There are large numbers of people who do think that governments who carry out the death penalty are evil. The US is one of the very few first or second world countries where the death penalty is still commonly used.

        • Candy Smith

          Hell is infinite punishment for finite sins. That isn’t just and should be considered nonsense.

          It is nonsense in your opinion. Of course there are explanations that exist that are completely reasonable.

        • Michael Neville

          So you’re good with your sadistic god punishing people for forever. You’re a sadist yourself.

        • Candy Smith

          Since your sadistic bully of a god doesn’t give just punishments your first question is moot.

          Thats an opinion!!?? According to what doesnt He give just punishments??

        • MR

          That’s just your opinion. You’ve read so many lies that it’s impossible for you to see the truth.

        • adam
        • Candy Smith

          Not doing what He wants. Have you not read the Bible?? Because your words show me that you havent. They were given a long time more than enough time to change. The ark was ope. They could have gone in at anytime. All they had to do was repent and change their way, and they choose not to.

        • MR

          Have you not read the Bible?? Because your words show me that you havent.

          You are the one who admitted to not reading the Bible.

        • Candy Smith

          Yeah I haven’t read it. But you are making a claim that isn’t consistent with what the Bible says, and you have supposedly read it. I have read the verses that explain why He does what He does??? Did you miss it or did you simply choose to ignore it?? Which one?? It must be one or the other!!

        • MR

          Where did I make a claim? Pay attention!

        • Candy Smith

          You said God kills people just because He feels like it.

        • MR

          I did not. Pay attention.

        • Candy Smith

          i must be getting you confused with someone else. I apologize.

        • MR

          Thank you.

        • Michael Neville

          According to your Bible your god killed people just because he felt like it. Elisha was wandering through the woods and some boys mocked his baldness. So Elisha, who was a real whiner, says: “Lord, these kids are being snotty to me, time for some smiting. Amen.” Then your god whistles up two bears who maul 42 children. None of that mamby-pamby “boys, you should be nice to old men” lecturing like normal, reasonable people would do. Instead your asshole of a god gets 42 children killed just because he felt like it. That’s 2 Kings 2:23-24 if you want to read the story in your Bible.

        • Candy Smith

          According to your Bible your god killed people just because he felt like it

          Not accoridng to what the Bible says. Also DO NOT EVER CALL HIM NAMES. Calling HIm names is about as stupid as ypu can get.,

          Furthermore when you investigate the verse about the children, you learn that they were not really children, they were more like young adults. Maybe before automatically disproving this claim, I think the wise thing to do would be to investigate this first.

        • Candy Smith

          According to your Bible your god killed people just because he felt like it

          Again that is you opinion. It is really getting annoying for to continue to ignorantly say Because he felt like it. That is complete nonsense. I would highly suggest that you stop using those words because it isnt the smart way to word it.

        • Michael Neville

          I’ve given example after example of your god killing people just because he felt like it. The first born of Egypt were killed for no reason other than your god felt like killing a bunch of kids. The Hebrews had to mark their houses so your god didn’t kill the wrong kids in his murder frenzy.

          Just because you don’t want to face facts is no reason for me to stop rubbing your nose in your sadistic, murderous, bullying god’s immoral behavior.

        • Candy Smith

          I’ve given example after example of your god killing people just because he felt like it.

          No what you actually did was put out a verse where he killed someone but you did not point out an example of where he did just because he felt like it.

        • Candy Smith

          First of all, I have to make one incredibly important point before we dive into this verse deeper.

          God did not break his own moral law. The Bible says do not murder.
          Murder is the unlawful taking of life. But, all people have sinned
          against God and are worthy of death (Rom. 3:23; 6:23). So, God had them killed according to the Law.