Religion is "man-made" is like saying universe is

[paarsurrey1]

Revealed-Religion is "man-made" is like saying universe is "man-made", is it so?

Regards

[Willum]

[Replying to post 79 by Erexsaur]

You were born to a father and mother, no?
So yes, man is man-made.

The Bible is man-made.
Beliefs are man-made.

I have read 64.

Here:

One of many ways we know that the Bible is true is that in the first chapter of Genesis, we learned that God promised a man named Abraham that he (Abraham) will be the father of a nation. His grandson Jacob was renamed "Israel." Our knowledge of the land of Israel today is not from the pages of the book that told us of Bugs Bunny. We also learn that God blesses those that bless the Jews. What are you and I doing?

I think this will answer eloquently all myths associated with this belief.
viewtopic.php?t=33368&start=30&lofi=0

Judaism is the product of God's revelation to Moses on Mt. Sinai for the inhabitants of Israel and Christianity is the product of Jesus' death on the cross. Knowledge of both was meant to cover the earth for the promotion of peace. The Judeo-Christian faith thus originated from God. The wayward nature of man is what sparks false application of its vital truth and breeds consequent division.

Moses was simply a paranoid schizophrenic. This explains everything that may have happened in the story succinctly. Certainly more easily and believably than divine intervention.

That and an investigation into popular pagan myths: You will find that the Hebrew 'borrowed,' pagan myths, declared them true and started a 'true religion,' somehow.

Jesus for example is just one of many such icons with similar stories - dionYSUS (DionJesus), or god of Gods.

Jesus is a homophone of Ie Zeus, or hail Zeus.
http://www.hiddenbible.com/jesuszeus/jesuszeus.html

Zeus is just the Latin name of Dios, Dio, Dieux and all other ways Catholics say "God."

I am sure you have questions.

[Kenisaw]

[Replying to post 68 by Kenisaw]

Hello Kenisaw,

However, I think it is important to note something about these dissenters. Their alternative solution is definitely NOT supported by evidence and data. Their solution is definitely not verified and validated. I have no issue with anyone deciding that the evidence doesn't fit the accepted scientific theory, but then they should be able to create a new theory WITH explanatory ability that fully explains the facts and data that they've studied in the first place.

"God did it" doesn't do that.

Read on. I will cover this further down.

But are all willing to accept the validated facts as revealed? Human nature has its bag of tricks.
Why does the Creation/evolution debate, for example, continues to rage instead of having been settled long ago?

Ignorance. Most of the people that I have conversations with simply do not understand how scientific theories work, what the data and evidences are, and often disagree with it simply because their religious book or dogma has a different story that conflicts with the findings of science.

For record keeping's sake, the above is from post 67.

But how may a person exposed to what was revealed that should have settled an issue be described as ignorant? Did you mean willfully ignorant?

In some cases yes it is willfull ignorance. In some cases it is laziness. In some cases it is ignorance in that they don't know anything about it.

The Bible is more than a mere religious book or mere dogma. Can’t we see that around us?

No, what is around us does not show that the Bible is more than a religious book or dogma. If you are suggesting otherwise I suppose you will need to explain why you think so.

Does it conflict with other sciences such as thermodynamics, physics, or electrical theory also?

All over the place.

Aren’t you familiar with the verse in it that protects trade?

And the verses that protect mass slaughter and slavery.

Why are only the things that pertain to the beginning the troubling issues?

Perhaps you may have missed the majority of threads at this website since it began, but it isn't just the beginning of the Bible that makes no sense.

Before the abundance of knowledge of fossils with their estimated ages, was man in the dark about how man began?

Some people had an inkling about it, but they couldn't support a scientific theory about it with data...

Are you talking about operational science or historical science?

There's no such difference.

]Over 50% of scientists in America consider themselves religious and/or believe in a personal god according to polling statistics. Yet most of these people find evolution to be a valid scientific theory. But those are people who have dug into the matter.

I was also taught evolutionary dogma in high school by my science teacher that I trusted and believed it and hoped for the day that I would find a solution to the conflict with Biblical truth that my mother taught me. There’s no solution. As written in scripture, there’s simply too much around us that point to the creation model. It takes compromise for Bible believers to believe evolution. Is the natural mind above the supernatural?

Prove that the supernatural exists first, and then I will answer your question regarding the "natural mind".

As to the rest of your comment, there simply is no evidence for the creation model.

A lot of those who disagree can't even discern between a theory and a scientific theory.

It's ignorance.

Are you saying that everyone that disagrees with evolutionary dogma is unable to discern between kinds of theories? Are you sure?

If you reread my sentence quoted above, you will note that I said "a lot of those". How you got to "everyone" from that I cannot say, but your question is not reflective of my actual statements.

------------------------------

For post 68
I don’t mind your jumping in. What I post for one is open for all. Welcome!

My thanks.

The question you might want to ask yourself, Erex, is why creationist sites need to mislead people like that....

As long as our worldviews (one Bible-based and the other not) oppose, you and I will always see the other side as promoting error that misleads instead of informing. It depends on who do we want our ears to hear. As for us creationists, Jesus warns that leadership of (also informing) others without Him is to scatter abroad (Matthew 12:30). We that believe His word must believe all of it including Genesis.

I noticed you did not comment on the information provided about radiometric dating. If I may assume you cannot counter it, I will move on...

About your statement in post 66, “God did it� doesn’t do.� Who would be around to carry out scientific inquiry if God didn’t do His part in creating us first?

Your statement assumes we need a god being around in order for us to be here and carry out scientific inquiry. There is no evidence that this is the case. I cannot accept that as a valid premise to begin this conversation. Perhaps if you go ahead and present from empirical data that shows that such a being exists, we can then discuss your question afterwords.

Are scientists the only authority by which we must live?

Scientists are even an "authority" in the first place. They don't tell people what to do, and they certainly don't tell them how to think. In fact science encourages others to validate and verify things themselves. I'm not sure I understand why you would think scientists are an "authority"...

Try as we may, we cannot believe away God’s word.

So owning slaves is OK then, despite what the Constitution says? I'm just going by the word of a god here after all...

Pretend you were a builder of high-performance cars that gave me one of the top models for free (Did we pay money for our bodies?). I then decide to forsake knowledge that you had anything to do with the car so that as I enjoy it, someone asks me how I got it. Claiming a belief that scientists say that the car oozed out the side of a volcano, I would say, “‘Kenisaw did it’ doesn’t do!� What would you think?

Can you prove Kenisaw exists? Yes, you can. Then one can least make the argument that Kenisaw did, in fact, design and make that car. So to follow your example to the proper conclusion, all you need to do is provide evidence that shows that your god exists. Let me know when you have something...

Should I in this case pretend that you don’t exist in order to protect automotive craftsmanship? But if I decide to make an about face to respect you and to do things right, I hope you would forsake your desire to whip me up.

I think in this case you should just prove that your god exists, so that you don't have to come up with examples about things this yet-to-be-proven god being did...

Let’s also try this: If I decide to believe all of your and DrNoGod’s claims and forsake my trust in the Biblical creation model, how would that benefit me and the field of science? What wisdom, sense of fulfillment, and what satisfaction would it bring me?

It wouldn't benefit science per se, unless you verified or invalidated some scientific finding, which would help either confirm or refute something and add to the progress of scientific advancement. Regardless of that, it would benefit you immensely. You'd stop wasting your limited life span on meaningless dogma and make better use of your time. You'd think more logically and rationally, which would help you become more efficient and accurate. You might even actually help people by volunteering, instead of doing something like praying which doesn't actually do squat for anyone.

How would it personally help me as I turn against and build up hostility against believers of the creation model to “protect science?� I leave the answers up to you.

Earl

Am I hostile to you? I disagree with you, that doesn't mean I hate you or feel animosity towards you. My engaging you in a discussion is not even to protect science. It's to point out the flaws in the religious arguments so that you can see where the holes in your logic are. It's to make sure that someone that reads things at this website as a guest will see those holes, and be able to understand why science (in my opinion) is superior to religion as an explanation of things.

It doesn't help anyone to build up hostility. I wouldn't recommend that no matter what you think...

[Erexsaur]

[Replying to post 80 by DrNoGods]

Post #1 for you, DrNoGods,

I ask again Is it really important to support the theory of evolution at all cost even at the expense of knowledge of God?

It is not necessary for a modern human (who have only been present on this planet for about 0.007% of its existence) to have witnessed an event to conclude that it occurred. Analysis of evidence left behind is sufficient, and like any crime scene investigation all of the available evidence has to be considered, in context, and analyzed for the most likely conclusions. In the case of evolution, the fossil record and the genetic evidence all support the theory, so until someone comes along with a better description or a falsification, it is the best explanation.

Thanks for saying that all available evidence should be considered. However, are you saying there are times when witnesses aren't necessary? I thought that science demands as much info as possible. Have you considered any possibility of an explanation that existed beforehand that's overlooked? I only know there are too many scientists speaking on the contrary to what you said above.

Perhaps it may be helpful to consider the possibility of a subtle enemy seeking to draw us away from sound knowledge through controversy.

As for the supposed .007% time you said that humans existed on this planet, what should we do with Jesus' statement,

"But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female (Mark 10;6)."

But I don't understand the other two sentences. I know of the biblical "ten commandments" and that they were meant to (presumably) apply for all time for humans so would still be in effect But I don't see how this connects to the protection of trade. Today, trade is a worldwide, massive enterprise with every level of honest participant and thieve one could imagine, and countless laws and activities to protect it. I don't think the ten commandments are policing it in any way!

As for my arbitrary question, "Would you please give what was said in this ancient book that protects trade today?" have you forgotten the scriptures below?

"Just balances, just weights, a just ephah, and a just hin, shall ye have: I am the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt (Leviticus 19; 36)."

And

"A just weight and balance are the LORD'S: all the weights of the bag are his work (Proverbs 16; 11)."

Violations of these scriptures during scientific work would be violations of science. Is this precious ancient wisdom worthy to be discarded as if mythical and obsolete? Please?

I can have hope in many things, such as my own ambitions and future, as well as those of mankind in general, without any trust in a Creation model.

But have you forgotten your ultimate hope beyond these things? Isn't there immaterial meaning above material possessions? What's the meaning of such not only without those you love, but without your ability to love? Where do we find appreciation, respect, and dignity without the Creation model? By what pattern should parents teach their children?

Aren't you familiar with Ecclesiastes? Don't you know of some that had it all plus all the money they wanted and yet ended their lives miserably?

Don't you know your high calling? Please don't forget it! It's there whether you are aware or not.

Creation models (and there have been many ... just have a browse through this list):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_creation_myths

are attempts to explain origins without any bedrock in science or rational thought. They are myths and stories created by different people in different times, usually far enough in the past that science could not be brought to bear on the problem because it had not been developed sufficiently. There was no way to explain the sun, moon and stars, or the cycle of day and night, or earthquakes, lightning, thunder, etc. until science had discovered what these things were and how they worked. So it made sense to assign them to deities or the actions of deities. Now they are no longer mysteries and we don't need to invoke gods as explanations.

Why is it that the explanation of so much around us such as the reality of death, the fact that man and woman marry, that women have pain during childbirth, that thorns, thistles, weeds, etc. are present in harvests, the 7 day work week, (the list is endless) is found in the "mythical" book called Genesis? Please? How then may we call Genesis a myth when it explains the above?

Through science, we have explanations and clarifications of what God already said and did. Please consider the Jewish diet for example that originated with Moses. Today's science reveals it to be the best of diets, thus placing the Jews ahead of us by about 3K years when it comes to diet.

Earl


.

[Erexsaur]

[Replying to post 81 by Willum]

Post #2 for you, Willum

You are correct that I have questions.

You concluded that man is man-made, that the Bible is man-made, and had degraded prominent Bible characters. Although true that we were born of a father and a mother, what man made the first man and woman? There's much wisdom in the Bible that hardly appears as if from the characters in the state as you described them.

Would you please inform me of what significance has your conclusion to you and me? Does it in any way help us toward our destiny? What do you do with the fact that there are people that have made peace with God, realized the promises of the Judeo-Christian faith, and are well satisfied? What is your ultimate hope? Are you ready for your final grade from Mr. Reality when the time comes? I certainly want to make sure I have a decent grade!

More questions: Laws like, "thou shalt not kill, love your neighbor, and honor thy father and mother," are these man-made? If yes, who deserves the credit? Who's getting the royalties for the book that's was always the no. 1 best seller called the Bible? What do you think about children that think they are able to do well with no need for their parents? Although one may find almost anything about God and the Bible on the internet and other places, are you sure you can trust just any of these things?

What honest view do you have of yourself and your destiny? Based on what?


Earl



.

[Erexsaur]

[Replying to post 82 by Kenisaw]

Post #3 for you Kenisaw,

In response to my question, "The Bible is more than a mere religious book or mere dogma. Can't we see that around us?", you said,

No, what is around us does not show that the Bible is more than a religious book or dogma. If you are suggesting otherwise I suppose you will need to explain why you think so.

But what do you do about the testimonies of others including myself that do testify the opposite? Are you saying that commandments that protect you such as "thou shalt not kill" is nothing short of empty dogma? Please?

May I ask why do we die? Why does it take not only work, but hard work for us to make a living? Both of these and many more are explained in the Bible. My question then becomes, do we want to see the Bible for what it really is?

In response to my question, "Does it conflict with other sciences such as thermodynamics, physics, or electrical theory also?" You said,

All over the place.

Where did you get this view?

Aren't you familiar with the verse in it that protects trade?

And the verses that protect mass slaughter and slavery.

As for the Bible verses that protect trade, my answer is in my post to DrNoGods. I find it very hard to see that the much unparalleled wisdom and protective commandments found in the Bible to be authored by a murderer. It's impossible even to hand over a billion dollars to a person telling him it's his only if he accepts it if he refuses to accept it. So has God has much good waiting for you if you accept it even as you presently see Him only as a murderer.

I too read the passages that gave you and many others this bad impression of God. But there's much helpful material to explain these difficult passages. Rejection of knowledge due to misunderstanding is dangerous and potentially deadly!

Why are only the things that pertain to the beginning the troubling issues?

Perhaps you may have missed the majority of threads at this website since it began, but it isn't just the beginning of the Bible that makes no sense.

I have seen what you spoke of in many threads. Incidently, here is what I think is a helpful link:

http://breakpoint.org/2018/02/three-ms- ... t-provide/

Before the abundance of knowledge of fossils with their estimated ages, was man in the dark about how man began?

Some people had an inkling about it, but they couldn't support a scientific theory about it with data...

Is knowledge of fossil data man's ultimate source of knowledge and that all that oppose a certain view are incapable of supporting scientific theory? Is understanding of the theory in question essential for the welfare of man? Are we talking about scientific theory or whether God exists to rule us or not? Please beware of strawmania.

How would it personally help me as I turn against and build up hostility against believers of the creation model to "protect science?" I leave the answers up to you.

Am I hostile to you? I disagree with you, that doesn't mean I hate you or feel animosity towards you. My engaging you in a discussion is not even to protect science. It's to point out the flaws in the religious arguments so that you can see where the holes in your logic are. It's to make sure that someone that reads things at this website as a guest will see those holes, and be able to understand why science (in my opinion) is superior to religion as an explanation of things.

It doesn't help anyone to build up hostility. I wouldn't recommend that no matter what you think...

Thank you. I did not think that you were hostile to me or that you dislike me. Our opposing worldviews are what keep us at odds. I understand that all that I say may not be completely free of flaws, but our views appear foolish to each other as matter appears as anti-matter to anti-matter and vice versa.

As the gospel that Paul shared with the Greeks in Athens appeared as foolishness to them, so does the Biblical gospel (that includes creation truth) appears foolish to individuals until they choose to trust and believe God. The gospel worldview contradicts the secular at every point. Hence the battle. The gospel begins to make sense only after an about-face. The long desired proof then comes only from the Lord Himself.

Earl
.

[Danmark]

But what do you do about the testimonies of others including myself that do testify the opposite? Are you saying that commandments that protect you such as "thou shalt not kill" is nothing short of empty dogma?
....
May I ask why do we die? Why does it take not only work, but hard work for us to make a living? Both of these and many more are explained in the Bible. My question then becomes, do we want to see the Bible for what it really is?

"Testimony" is only valid when it reflects an observation, something that any person in the position of the testifier would be able to observe. You are conflating your opinion with objective observation.

All cultures have developed rules against murder and theft. Anyone who needs a 'god' to tell them not to murder or not to steal is a sociopath. Even social beasts have developed a morality that includes not stealing and not murdering members of their tribe. Society, both animal and human, falls apart when such basic laws that violate our sense of reciprocity, fairness, and empathy are routinely violated.

The reason life takes work is because food does not just fall in our mouths without effort. We die because things, including life forms, simply wear out. NONE of this has any implications for some speculative god. Nothing you have mentioned requires some 'god.' All can be explained by natural phenomena.

[H.sapiens]

[Replying to post 80 by DrNoGods]

Post #1 for you, DrNoGods,

I ask again Is it really important to support the theory of evolution at all cost even at the expense of knowledge of God?

Since there is no evidence of any god, only hand waving and sophistry, the expense of knowledge of god is zero.

It is not necessary for a modern human (who have only been present on this planet for about 0.007% of its existence) to have witnessed an event to conclude that it occurred. Analysis of evidence left behind is sufficient, and like any crime scene investigation all of the available evidence has to be considered, in context, and analyzed for the most likely conclusions. In the case of evolution, the fossil record and the genetic evidence all support the theory, so until someone comes along with a better description or a falsification, it is the best explanation.

Thanks for saying that all available evidence should be considered. However, are you saying there are times when witnesses aren't necessary? I thought that science demands as much info as possible. Have you considered any possibility of an explanation that existed beforehand that's overlooked? I only know there are too many scientists speaking on the contrary to what you said above.

Perhaps it may be helpful to consider the possibility of a subtle enemy seeking to draw us away from sound knowledge through controversy.

As for the supposed .007% time you said that humans existed on this planet, what should we do with Jesus' statement,

"But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female (Mark 10;6)."

You might start with demonstrating that your Jesus existed and then show that he said anything of the sort.

But I don't understand the other two sentences. I know of the biblical "ten commandments" and that they were meant to (presumably) apply for all time for humans so would still be in effect But I don't see how this connects to the protection of trade. Today, trade is a worldwide, massive enterprise with every level of honest participant and thieve one could imagine, and countless laws and activities to protect it. I don't think the ten commandments are policing it in any way!

As for my arbitrary question, "Would you please give what was said in this ancient book that protects trade today?" have you forgotten the scriptures below?

"Just balances, just weights, a just ephah, and a just hin, shall ye have: I am the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt (Leviticus 19; 36)."

That's horsepucky since it is easily demonstrated that the Exodus is a myth.

And

"A just weight and balance are the LORD'S: all the weights of the bag are his work (Proverbs 16; 11)."

Violations of these scriptures during scientific work would be violations of science. Is this precious ancient wisdom worthy to be discarded as if mythical and obsolete? Please?

I can have hope in many things, such as my own ambitions and future, as well as those of mankind in general, without any trust in a Creation model.

But have you forgotten your ultimate hope beyond these things? Isn't there immaterial meaning above material possessions? What's the meaning of such not only without those you love, but without your ability to love? Where do we find appreciation, respect, and dignity without the Creation model? By what pattern should parents teach their children?

Aren't you familiar with Ecclesiastes? Don't you know of some that had it all plus all the money they wanted and yet ended their lives miserably?

Don't you know your high calling? Please don't forget it! It's there whether you are aware or not.

You really must learn about Evolutionary Stable Solutions. When combined with the ToE the answers are clear without Ecclesiastic mumbo-jumbo.

Creation models (and there have been many ... just have a browse through this list):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_creation_myths

are attempts to explain origins without any bedrock in science or rational thought. They are myths and stories created by different people in different times, usually far enough in the past that science could not be brought to bear on the problem because it had not been developed sufficiently. There was no way to explain the sun, moon and stars, or the cycle of day and night, or earthquakes, lightning, thunder, etc. until science had discovered what these things were and how they worked. So it made sense to assign them to deities or the actions of deities. Now they are no longer mysteries and we don't need to invoke gods as explanations.

Why is it that the explanation of so much around us such as the reality of death, the fact that man and woman marry, that women have pain during childbirth, that thorns, thistles, weeds, etc. are present in harvests, the 7 day work week, (the list is endless) is found in the "mythical" book called Genesis? Please? How then may we call Genesis a myth when it explains the above?

You can cherry pick items out of most any work of fiction, especially when you put up the target to cover the holes in the wall that you previously shot.

Through science, we have explanations and clarifications of what God already said and did. Please consider the Jewish diet for example that originated with Moses. Today's science reveals it to be the best of diets, thus placing the Jews ahead of us by about 3K years when it comes to diet.

Earl

Far from the healthiest diet, just poor reporting. Lester L. Grabbe, writing in the Oxford Bible Commentary on Leviticus, says "[a]n explanation now almost universally rejected is that the laws in this section [Leviticus 11–15] have hygiene as their basis. Although some of the laws of ritual purity roughly correspond to modern ideas of physical cleanliness, many of them have little to do with hygiene. For example, there is no evidence that the 'unclean' animals are intrinsically bad to eat or to be avoided in a Mediterranean climate, as is sometimes asserted." - thanks wiki.

[DrNoGods]

[Replying to post 83 by Erexsaur]

I ask again Is it really important to support the theory of evolution at all cost even at the expense of knowledge of God?

There are many god-believing people who are happy to accept the theory of evolution as a correct explanation of how life diversified on this planet over time, but in their view it is simply the mechanism their god of choice chose for the process. For example, Catholics who support "theistic evolution." So it is possible to believe in a god being and evolution simultaneously, but there is no empirical evidence for the existence of the former and a great deal for the latter.

However, are you saying there are times when witnesses aren't necessary?

Most definitely. There are countless examples of this assuming you are referring to human witnesses. To claim otherwise would be equivalent to saying that humans could have no knowledge of anything prior to a few hundred thousand years ago (or a few million depending on the definition of "human"). But that is very clearly not the case. For example, we know with certainty that dinosaurs existed (we have fossils), and that they died out tens of millions of years before any human existed (we can date the fossils).

As for the supposed .007% time you said that humans existed on this planet, what should we do with Jesus' statement,

"But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female (Mark 10;6)."

Take it as part of the biblical creation myth which has been shown to be false. The accepted age of the Earth is approximately 4.6 billion years. The common ancestor that modern humans share with chimpanzees and bonobos is believed to have lived only about 0.01 billion years ago (10 million). The difference between these time frames is 4.59 billion years ... humans appeared a mere instant ago on these time scales. Sexual reproduction, where there is a need for a male and a female, appears to have began around 1 billion years ago ... long before there was anything resembling a human.

Violations of these scriptures during scientific work would be violations of science. Is this precious ancient wisdom worthy to be discarded as if mythical and obsolete? Please?

This is a claim that the scriptures are to be taken as absolute truth, and any scientific efforts that disagree with them or show them to be false are incorrect by definition. That is not how science works. It is not a violation of science to arrive at any result which disagrees with some article of scripture. Science makes observations and measurements of the natural world and attempts to explain them within the framework of established rules, laws, axioms etc. that exist at any given time. There is no connection to any scripture, or any requirement that scripture even be considered.

Where do we find appreciation, respect, and dignity without the Creation model? By what pattern should parents teach their children?

These things are innate in social animals or else they would not have survived. Have you ever seen a flock of sheep, or a herd of cattle, all fighting with each other and killing their young because they don't have access to (for example) the Ten Commandments? Morality does not come from religion.

Why is it that the explanation of so much around us such as the reality of death, the fact that man and woman marry, that women have pain during childbirth, that thorns, thistles, weeds, etc. are present in harvests, the 7 day work week, (the list is endless) is found in the "mythical" book called Genesis? Please? How then may we call Genesis a myth when it explains the above?

None of these things are "explanations" from Genesis. Is the fact that all living things die a prediction? Death is a reality not because the first book of the christian bible discusses it. It is a reality because of the biology of living things of all types. Did the first mammals have pain during childbirth long before Genesis was penned (given the size of the birth canal and the size of the offspring, my guess would be yes)? The fact that Genesis describes a creation event that we know did not happen (in any aspect), a global flood that we know did not happen when and how it is described in that book, a series of plagues upon Egypt that clearly could not have possibly happened, etc. etc. is sufficient evidence to categorize Genesis as a collection of myths and allegory and nothing more.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 85 by Erexsaur]

I find it very hard to see that the much unparalleled wisdom and protective commandments found in the Bible to be authored by a murderer. . . . God has much good waiting for you if you accept it even as you presently see Him only as a murderer.

God is not a murderer; God does not exist; however, the 'god' character of the Old Testament is the most prolific mass murderer of all of literature. He proved that in Act I of that compilation with the flood myth where 99.9999% of humanity was destroyed.

That has NOTHING to do with the fact there is much human wisdom (along with accounts of slavery and other atrocities) found in the OT.

[Monta]

Revealed-Religion is "man-made" is like saying universe is "man-made", is it so?

Regards

It has to be. I've never heard this before but think its brilliant!

They thought of everything else, this must have slipped their mind