Do Fabulous Bible Stories Prove Errancy?

[JoeMama]

Do stories like the one in Numbers, about a donkey scolding his master, show that the Bible cannot be believed in its entirety?

Here is the donkey story:

Numbers 22:21-30

21 Balaam was riding on his donkey…23 When the donkey…turned off the road into a field Balaam beat it to get it back on the road. 25 When the donkey…pressed close to the wall, crushing Balaam’s foot against it…he beat the donkey again. When the donkey lay down under Balaam, he was angry and beat it with his staff. 28 Then the Lord opened the donkey’s mouth, and it said to Balaam,

“What have I done to you to make you beat me these three times?” 29 Balaam answered the donkey, “You have made a fool of me! If only I had a sword in my hand, I would kill you right now.” 30 The donkey said to Balaam, “Am I not your own donkey, which you have always ridden, to this day? Have I been in the habit of doing this to you?”

[TRANSPONDER]

Of course I will have issues with that. However life started,it has evolved and the evidence shows the development of co -operative behaviour in animals, family groups,packs and tribes. This is the instinctive basis of reciprocity and empathy and human reasoning builds on this. Morality is a universal debate in all cultures and no one society, religion Holy Book has exclusive dibs on it, nor is it reasonable to go to any one religion as the arbiter of how to live, rather it is religion that should be compared to human moral codes.

In that respect slavery is considered unacceptable, but in the Bible, it is acceptable, and from what you say it is acceptable in the reprehensible form of Southern slavery. Humanity is not inherently evil, but driven by instinct, good or bad, but tempered by reason.

That is really all I have to say about your perfectly appalling views expressed in your post.

Firstly where did life start ? what is the source of creation ? And why are we created ? Secondly if morals is instinctive then they would be no need to teach people how to be good people , they would be no need for parents to teach their children to be well-mannered and relational to other individuals . The development of co-operative behaviour does not mean that the behaviour is good . There is a island called North Sentinel in which the Sentinelese are extremely hostile to outsiders and have killed many outsiders that have come peacefully immediately when you make contact with them they attack with arrows . Their co-operative behaviour is that outsiders should be killed whether armed or unarmed does that make such a behaviour right ??? Morality is not a universal debate there has always been a moral standard if you look at all the religions there are shared themes in each one Belief in a higher power , Moral and ethical principles ,Rituals and worship , Sacred texts and teachings , Life after death and spiritual realms , Community and fellowship and Seek for meaning and purpose . There is nothing appalling about my post it just a lack of comprehension if humans were inherently good there would be no need to debate morality because humans would automatically behave virtuously . Instinct if you are unaware is called the id in psychology which is evil because the id according to Freud represents the primitive and instinctual part of the mind that operates on the pleasure principle, seeking immediate gratification and disregarding societal norms or moral considerations. Give the scriptural reference and context that slavery is considered acceptable . Slavery in America , Africa , Australia was justified through social Darwinism . Social Darwinism applied the 'survival of the fittest' to human 'races' and said that 'might makes right'. Not only was survival of the fittest seen as something natural, but it was also morally correct. It was therefore natural, normal, and proper for the strong to thrive at the expense of the weak. There are many journal articles that you can look up that prove this . The evolutionist that you believe in was the same one that inspired the racial hierarchy and ensured the oppression of minorities for centuries . There are many churches that have people from many races , pastors , ministers , priests etc . So don't try sidestep the actual facts of slavery from social Darwinism and it being used as an economic benefit to whites to fit your narrative of what the bible is

Wrong - all the way. Aside we are drifting off the topic (which usually happens so that's ok) you are cheating by changing the subject by putting questions you think atheists can't answer, putting stock apologetics (not to say smears) and arguments based on poor information at best. But I'll deal with all your points - all of them.

Firstly where did life start ? what is the source of creation ? And why are we created ? Nobody knows for sure, but we can be sure it was not as described in Genesis. The evidence is that the universe evolved though natural forces and accretion of matter. Not a god, and naturally, not through intent. There was no plan, no objective and no reason, and it is actually better for us if there isn't some celestial brute running our lives for us.

Secondly if morals is instinctive then they would be no need to teach people how to be good people , they would be no need for parents to teach their children to be well-mannered and relational to other individuals . Aside that you seem to know this is false, the familial and tribal instinct and species co -operation seen in all social animals is the basis of ethics, not a fully evolved package. Human ethics and morals had to evolve along with increasingly complex society. It is rather the idea that God hath written morals on our hearts that fails because, if that were so, we wouldn't need to be taught, would we? One of the first lessons I remember as a kid is the revelation of the 'other shoes' "How would you like it if that was done to you?" Evolution puts the self as the first thing, philosophical ethics is through reason and is a human thing. If it was a god -thing, we'd know it without teaching

The development of co-operative behaviour does not mean that the behaviour is good . That's how it is with an evolved instinct - it is the self -first, the family next and the tribe third (and faith is needed so the individual becomes willing to die for the tribe). The Religious view seems to be that God's morals are all good (they are not, not by a long way) and human morals have to be good, too. You put out a standard your religion signally fails to meet (and has to be blamed on wickedness or the Fall or Satan) while atheists accept it isn't a perfect system or maybe not even workable.We just have to do our best and not make self -serving excuses.

There is a island called North Sentinel in which the Sentinelese are extremely hostile to outsiders and have killed many outsiders that have come peacefully immediately when you make contact with them they attack with arrows . Their co-operative behaviour is that outsiders should be killed whether armed or unarmed does that make such a behaviour right ???

The Sentinalese - if you really knew their history - were as friendly as any in the past, even though early visitors treated them as good Christians usually did - captured and enslaved them. But it is (there is evidence) probably disease hitting after outsiders arrive that turned them hostile. This is what evolution has given us,good an bad. God - given morality doesn't explain hostile behaviour of uncontacted people as God's morals seems to imply.

So how do you explain it? Why are uncontacted people with the uncorrupted God's Morals written on their hearts,hostile? Cue the excuses.

Morality is not a universal debate there has always been a moral standard if you look at all the religions there are shared themes in each one Belief in a higher power , Moral and ethical principles ,Rituals and worship , Sacred texts and teachings , Life after death and spiritual realms , Community and fellowship and Seek for meaning and purpose .

But all that is better explained by evolution than a god doing it. The basics are better explained as a survival mechanism like animals have than a philosophy written on our hearts. It has to be worked out as society develops and we struggle to cope - religion has to find an excuse that it doesn't work as it should, so how do you explain that God's morality doesn't work. I know (we all do) but you explain why it doesn't work.

There is nothing appalling about my post it just a lack of comprehension if humans were inherently good there would be no need to debate morality because humans would automatically behave virtuously . Instinct if you are unaware is called the id in psychology which is evil because the id according to Freud represents the primitive and instinctual part of the mind that operates on the pleasure principle, seeking immediate gratification and disregarding societal norms or moral considerations. Give the scriptural reference and context that slavery is considered acceptable . Slavery in America , Africa , Australia was justified through social Darwinism . Social Darwinism applied the 'survival of the fittest' to human 'races' and said that 'might makes right'. Not only was survival of the fittest seen as something natural, but it was also morally correct. It was therefore natural, normal, and proper for the strong to thrive at the expense of the weak. There are many journal articles that you can look up that prove this . The evolutionist that you believe in was the same one that inspired the racial hierarchy and ensured the oppression of minorities for centuries . There are many churches that have people from many races , pastors , ministers , priests etc . So don't try sidestep the actual facts of slavery from social Darwinism and it being used as an economic benefit to whites to fit your narrative of what the bible is.

Appalling. Disgusting and dishonest at the last. If humans were made by God and given God's morals they should be good. That they aren't requires excuses. What's yours? Human evil (where did that come from?) The Fall? (who allowed that to happen?) Satan? Who allowed him to interfere? An evolutionary theory means that survival (as you seem to realise) is something that has to enable survival, not guarantee ethics and morals. You are confused because you try to apply religious ideas or perfect good to a process that is functional, not ethical. You have to come up with excuses as to why we have evil, not just in humans but in the Bible.
That is the slavery problem. Humans enslave Others, it is an instinct of 'we are better than them'. It is something we got from Reason, in the age of reason. We didn't get it from the Bible, which condones slavery. But like all this moral failure in religion it has to be blamed on something else.

The miserable excuse that after a civil war and a battle about racial equality still going on, churches now have all kinds flavors is the disgusting propaganda that the equalities that the religions fought against and are still fighting fight now (ethnic and gender rights) you are trying to credit to religion.

Trying to blame the worst evils on atheistic darwinism is an easy target, but it is rather Dogma (like religion) and perverted science (like aryanism) that led to these excesses, and where do you think historical anti semitism came from? The gospels. Absolutely. Nowhere else.

Now, you explain why Christianity is not to blame for anti - semitism, how God's morals are to be excused for not being perfect (evolution has an explanation) and why the Sentinalese are hostile in a Christian context. I've answered your questions, you should now answer mine.

[TRANSPONDER]

I will step back from the stony thing I said about your former post

" Slavery in the South and all over the world was justified through social Darwinism and economic benefits . The church does need to update to modern times because modern times are immoral . Many of the teachings in the bible are beneficial to society today because the problems still are the same . Human nature has not evolved , we are still inherently evil that will never change ."

I find the doctrine of being inherently evil a sad,nihilistic and futile one. Rather i see humans as a critter that has animals instincts for the individual, family and tribe. I can guess that you get over the inherent evils ...No, you tell me; I asked above: if we are inherently evil, who made us like that? Cue the Free Will argument. Well if that was God'sdecision, it's his responsibility for what he decided to do, isn't it?

Again, evolution does what it does for survival, which I guess you were getting at - slavery is perhaps an evolved instinct. But with the rise of humanism thinking further than 'Bible says slavery is ok' led to emancipation; the Bible didn't.

So I backtrack - you weren't justifying slavery (or I hope not) but suggesting that it is a result of evolution. Yes, to reiterate,evolution is not nice, but it is true. Society (social evolution) raised problems that didn't appear when there was only a family group and rival tribes weren't a problem. The insular social problems had to be addressed in law codes (and the Bible hi -jacked those and tried to take the credit) and political and humanitarian ethics.

Bottom line, evolutionary morality accepts it isn't perfect but works to improve. Religious ethics despairs and exhorts us to throw ourselves into magical myth that somehow sidelines the problem. No. Thanks.

[TRANSPONDER]

sorry, duplicate posts happen. But I see there are 14 guests looking in. You are very much welcome and I hope you may have something to post, and if the Bible apologists get their heads slapped, be assured,it is nothing Personal

[Adonai Yahweh]

Wrong - all the way. Aside we are drifting off the topic (which usually happens so that's ok) you are cheating by changing the subject by putting questions you think atheists can't answer, putting stock apologetics (not to say smears) and arguments based on poor information at best. But I'll deal with all your points - all of them.

The subject is not being changed because if you are arguing against my points then it means you have evidence that proves what you belief in is the truth . And that you know for certain the your evidence is the truth . Atheists cant answer many questions all they do is argue and argue and even the evidence you bring such as science can easily be debunked because there are limitations to science . And one of the main problems with atheism is you consider your mind ultimately worthy to consider what is good and bad yet and that issue with that is what makes your morality right ? What makes you accountable for your morality ? Evolution states that we descended from apes so since we descended from apes it means we have a highly developed apes brain .... and that is basically what you have put your trust ?? If morality is determined by what a person thinks is right then its not reliable .... it means anyone can decided that even horrific behaviors can be justifiable because they think its right . Such thinking is appalling because it inspires narcissism

Firstly where did life start ? what is the source of creation ? And why are we created [/i]? Nobody knows for sure, but we can be sure it was not as described in Genesis. The evidence is that the universe evolved though natural forces and accretion of matter. Not a god, and naturally, not through intent. There was no plan, no objective and no reason, and it is actually better for us if there isn't some celestial brute running our lives for us.

Again the Big Bang Theory has limitations . What caused the matter come together ? All matter has physical and chemical properties .... a collection of matter came together create a explosion . The principle of causality states there is a cause and effect . What caused the matter to come together to create the explosion ? Thats bullocks everything on this earth has a purpose from living to non-living organisms . The idea that apes just sprung up on this earth and evolved humans without a purpose is illogical . In science proves there is a purpose for many things . How do you know for certain that it is not Genesis have you even read the book of Genesis to begin with ?

The development of co-operative behaviour does not mean that the behaviour is good .[/i] That's how it is with an evolved instinct - it is the self -first, the family next and the tribe third (and faith is needed so the individual becomes willing to die for the tribe). The Religious view seems to be that God's morals are all good (they are not, not by a long way) and human morals have to be good, too. You put out a standard your religion signally fails to meet (and has to be blamed on wickedness or the Fall or Satan) while atheists accept it isn't a perfect system or maybe not even workable.We just have to do our best and not make self -serving excuses.

Your logic is failing . Evolution itself does not prove morals and ethics and co-operative behaviour is not the sole basis of ethics . Many moral problems back then are still relevant today such as conflict and violence whether it be global , national or tribal , poverty and inequality , discrimination etc . Which demonstrates that morals and ethics have not evolved . Christianity is about improving yourself morally so that you can relate virtuously to family and the community which is beneficial to society that is done by the belief of Jesus Christ and by applying his teachings and principles . Give scriptural references and context that shows that Gods morals are not good . Christians don't make self-serving excuses ... they acknowledge that evil things are influenced by an immoral environment and also that humans are inherently evil because if we remove morality , we are just left with our id ... which is self serving and pleasure seeking ... which is evil because it allows for narcissist and sociopath behaviour . Atheists are allowing for subjective morality ... where anyone can choose to what is good and bad . Which is inconsistent because what we are seeing in todays time is people glorifying behaviour that is wrong ... such as cheating , lying , being manipulative to get what they want .

The Sentinalese - if you really knew their history - were as friendly as any in the past, even though early visitors treated them as good Christians usually did - captured and enslaved them. But it is (there is evidence) probably disease hitting after outsiders arrive that turned them hostile. This is what evolution has given us,good an bad. God - given morality doesn't explain hostile behaviour of uncontacted people as God's morals seems to imply.

A fallacy . Again colonialism was justified through social Darwinism .. Christianity was already practiced in Africa specifically in northern Africa the oldest Christian church is in Ethiopia . As usual with Western people they continue to destroy the nations rich with culture and milk them dry of their resources to benefit their own nations . Christianity was from African people as well as the start of civilisation was from Africa . Whitewashing history is the common theme that Western society excels at . The Sentinalese people have always been hostile and there is one account of anthropologist named T.N Pandit who spent 24 years attempting to make peaceful contact was met with hostility from the Sentinalese people , in those 24 years he constantly sent them gifts until some of them became friendly . Your historiccal knowledge is lacking as well as your biblical knowledge . The God given morality does explain hostile behaviour of uncontacted people . Uncontacted people are hostile because they dont want change their culture by inviting foreign people they kill outsiders or capture and enslave them , this shown throughout the bible with the Jews starting from the Old testament . The Old testament speaks about the hostility that Jewsish people experienced from the Egyptians , Babylonians , Persians , Assyrians many of them were slaves ... the story of Joseph , the story of Daniel , the story of Esther . Many of them were taken from captured and enslaved from their homeland . And in the new testament the Jews also experienced hostility and enslavement from the Roman empire as well as the Greeks . All of these nations that were extremely hostile to the Jews to the point that they enslaved them and captured them .

So how do you explain it? Why are uncontacted people with the uncorrupted God's Morals written on their hearts,hostile? Cue the excuses.

Again lack of biblical knowledge . The Sentinalese people do not have Gods Morals written in their hearts ... if that was the case then they would be no need of the bible . How Christians get to know Gods morals and nature is through reading the bible . The Sentinalese dont understand English , dont accept outsiders even those who make peaceful contact . Their hostility stems from history that they had with outsiders dating back in 18th century and probably even before that , they have passed down to their knowledge to their children and later generations . And their hostility is also to illustrate they are unwilling to change their society for outsiders

Morality is not a universal debate there has always been a moral standard if you look at all the religions there are shared themes in each one Belief in a higher power , Moral and ethical principles ,Rituals and worship , Sacred texts and teachings , Life after death and spiritual realms , Community and fellowship and Seek for meaning and purpose .

But all that is better explained by evolution than a god doing it. The basics are better explained as a survival mechanism like animals have than a philosophy written on our hearts. It has to be worked out as society develops and we struggle to cope - religion has to find an excuse that it doesn't work as it should, so how do you explain that God's morality doesn't work. I know (we all do) but you explain why it doesn't work.

Again using evolution to explain morality is a fallacy . Religion as been the forefront of society , there has been so many historical figures who were Christians that applied their faith that has helped so changed society . Example of this was Martin Luther King Jr a Christian minister who's theological beliefs were rooted in the teachings of Jesus Christ and the principles of nonviolence and social justice found in the Bible. He drew inspiration from the teachings of Jesus, particularly the commandments to love one's neighbor, seek justice, and pursue equality. His famous "I Have a Dream" speech delivered during the 1963 March on Washington, King drew upon biblical imagery, quoting from the book of Isaiah and referring to the promises of freedom and justice found in the Bible. His leadership and his advocacy for civil rights were instrumental in raising awareness, mobilizing people, and pushing for legislative change that lead for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 being passed ... a stepping stone for black americans .

Appalling. Disgusting and dishonest at the last. If humans were made by God and given God's morals they should be good. That they aren't requires excuses. What's yours? Human evil (where did that come from?) The Fall? (who allowed that to happen?) Satan? Who allowed him to interfere? An evolutionary theory means that survival (as you seem to realise) is something that has to enable survival, not guarantee ethics and morals. You are confused because you try to apply religious ideas or perfect good to a process that is functional, not ethical. You have to come up with excuses as to why we have evil, not just in humans but in the Bible.
That is the slavery problem. Humans enslave Others, it is an instinct of 'we are better than them'. It is something we got from Reason, in the age of reason. We didn't get it from the Bible, which condones slavery. But like all this moral failure in religion it has to be blamed on something else.

The miserable excuse that after a civil war and a battle about racial equality still going on, churches now have all kinds flavors is the disgusting propaganda that the equalities that the religions fought against and are still fighting fight now (ethnic and gender rights) you are trying to credit to religion.

Trying to blame the worst evils on atheistic darwinism is an easy target, but it is rather Dogma (like religion) and perverted science (like aryanism) that led to these excesses, and where do you think historical anti semitism came from? The gospels. Absolutely. Nowhere else.

Now, you explain why Christianity is not to blame for anti - semitism, how God's morals are to be excused for not being perfect (evolution has an explanation) and why the Sentinalese are hostile in a Christian context. I've answered your questions, you should now answer mine.

Whats appalling is your intellectual dishonesty ... twisting facts to fit you supposed narrative . God is a God of choice we isn't going to force anyone to following him willing unless it you exercise your free will to do so . That is why he gave Adam and Eve the choice to follow him by allowing the tree of knowledge of good and evil to be in the garden of Eden . Both were created in the Gods image and likeness but sinned and through sinning allowed Satan to have dominion over this earth . Sin was inherited through Adam and Eve and has been passed down from generations to generations . That is why they say you inherit the sins of your forefathers . Like you said some traits are inherited but those are not the sole basis of morality ethics . Thats why I say humans are inherently evil because we have all come from sin , all people from have committed sin even our forefathers have committed sin ...there isnt a single human civilization that doesn't have blood on their hands . The fall was a choice made by Adam and Eve and they knew that it would lead to consequences because God told them it would lead to death ..but they still chose it anyways . In this world there is good and evil . In Christianity good is God and evil is Satan and then there is you in the middle . In psychology this is the id , ego and superego . In your thinking it is your bad thoughts , your good thoughts and then your mind . People are evil because they are influenced by their evil thoughts ( Satan ) and then they act it out .

Funny in the previous post you said the Bible supported slavery in the South now you are saying the bible condones slavery ... you're making inconsistent statements . The age of reason which allowed for slavery due to "instincts " destroyed countless of lives ... and we are still seeing the effects of slavery in Black Americans , Africans and other minority groups . And the Africans nations are still controlled today by the West through Neo-colonialism but where are their reparations ??? Yes go and look up some of the historical events especially the ones in America where influenced by religion . And yes the worst evils in this world has been caused by atheistic Darwinism . Because the bible is clear that all humans beings are created equally and that we ought to love thy neighbour whereas Darwinisms stated that those who are not white have the brains of monkeys and look like monkeys and are incapable and undeserving in being in power . It was through Darwinism that Hitler and the Nazi regime used to justify their racist and eugenicist beliefs ... 6 million jews died because of a genocidal campaign to exterminate the Jewish population in Europe. Also forced sterilization programs were implemented based on the Darwinism notion of improving the gene pool or preventing the reproduction of individuals deemed undesirable or "unfit." These programs targeted marginalized groups, such as people with disabilities, indigenous populations, and ethnic minorities. Darwinism " the ideology of we are better than them " even transcended race and went as far as affecting people from certain socioeconomic status and gender . I'll name a few the Tuskegee Syphillis study where they used Black american men as test subjects . The Guatemala Syphilis Experiment , The Willowbrook State School Experiments , Radiation Experiments . Even going back to race where are the reparations for the native americans and the aboriginals . What about the war that USA and UK instigated under the notion that Iraq had weapons of mass destructions when there were no weapons of mass destruction . The idealogy that " we are better than them " is the reason why countries like the USA , UK and the rest of Europe think its ok to destabilize countries . So dont try and play a social justices warrior when so many atrocities in past and even in mordern times have been the effect of social darwinism because of the " we are better than them " .

Really Christians are the sole cause of antisemitism ??? Dont make me laugh ... Antisemitism has been there throughout history even before Chrisitanity , the Egyptians , Babylonians , Assyrian Kingdom etc all brutally killed Jewish people and enslaved them . Christianity stems from Judaism . The old testament is the is the Tanakh , the books of Moses is the Torah .. the first christians were Jews , all 12 disciples are Jews ... Jesus Christ who is God the man that we follow is Jew and even have the name Christian comes from the word Christ . The religious war between Christians and Jews had causalities on both sides and these stemmed even during the biblical days , there were many Christians that were killed at the hand of the Jewish leaders . After crucifixion of Jesus the Romans took over Jerusalem and had controlled many parts of Israel.. after some time the Roman abandoned their mythology and adopted the christian faith hence why the name the Roman Catholic Church . A lot of the religious tension stemmed from the fact Jesus and his disciples were crucified and killed violently ... all for what ? Just because a Jesus said that he is God and just because the disciples were preaching and opening churches about Jesus and his teachings and principles . These disciples were skinned alive , beheaded , crucificed , beaten to death , stoned , speared and killed by arrows . The issue was the Roman refused to also accept responsibility for the deaths Jesus and his disciples and the many christians they killed and shifted to the blame to the Jews . Both the Jews and Romans were responsible for the deaths . Pontius Pilate issued the order of crucifcation and The Jewish religious authorities, specifically the chief priests, elders, and some members of the Sanhedrin (a Jewish council), played a role in Jesus' arrest and subsequent trial as well as Judas Iscariot . There's no modern day christian that agrees with the Jewish deaths during the Roman takeover of the church and retaliation is not the answer it goes against the bible . Because there was no reasoning for the Romans leaders ( who at that time stilled believed in the roman mythology ) to brutally kill Jewish Christians and Roman Christians as well as the Jewish leaders to brutally kill the Christians and Jewish Christians and severely discriminated against Hellenistic Jews

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to Adonai Yahweh in post #54]

That's a long old post I'll try to get back to you tomorrow. I'll just make one point about the Sentinelaese. Everyone supposedly has God's morals written on their hearts. Paul makes it clear that Abraham was righteous even before the law, let alone before the Bible. You may reject Paul, but then what price the Bible at all?

[brunumb]

Again the Big Bang Theory has limitations . What caused the matter come together ? All matter has physical and chemical properties .... a collection of matter came together create a explosion . The principle of causality states there is a cause and effect . What caused the matter to come together to create the explosion ?

Have you actually studied anything about the Big Bang? While there may be some unresolved issues, what you have described isn't remotely close to what is alleged to have occurred. It can be easy to dismiss scientific explanations when one's understanding is so limited.

[TRANSPONDER]

Post by Adonai Yahweh » Wed Jun 14, 2023 7:24 pm

Wrong - all the way. Aside we are drifting off the topic (which usually happens so that's ok) you are cheating by changing the subject by putting questions you think atheists can't answer, putting stock apologetics (not to say smears) and arguments based on poor information at best. But I'll deal with all your points - all of them.
The subject is not being changed because if you are arguing against my points then it means you have evidence that proves what you belief in is the truth . And that you know for certain the your evidence is the truth . Atheists cant answer many questions all they do is argue and argue and even the evidence you bring such as science can easily be debunked because there are limitations to science . And one of the main problems with atheism is you consider your mind ultimately worthy to consider what is good and bad yet and that issue with that is what makes your morality right ? What makes you accountable for your morality ? Evolution states that we descended from apes so since we descended from apes it means we have a highly developed apes brain .... and that is basically what you have put your trust ?? If morality is determined by what a person thinks is right then its not reliable .... it means anyone can decided that even horrific behaviors can be justifiable because they think its right . Such thinking is appalling because it inspires narcissism

Yes, I think the evidence supported the atheist case better than the theist one. But you are arguing morality. The point you make about the problems with good and bad is the evidence of an evolved brain and instinctive morality. It is not perfect and it is not easy to get right.If it was God -given even with a Bible to back it up, it would be easy. It isn't. Slavery it has to be said is a case in point .For hundreds of years it was fine. Only with the 18th and enlightenment did emancipation even become a thing. Problems aside, the Bible is not a worthwhile guide to morality.

Firstly where did life start ? what is the source of creation ? And why are we created [/i]? Nobody knows for sure, but we can be sure it was not as described in Genesis. The evidence is that the universe evolved though natural forces and accretion of matter. Not a god, and naturally, not through intent. There was no plan, no objective and no reason, and it is actually better for us if there isn't some celestial brute running our lives for us.

Adonai Yahweh
Again the Big Bang Theory has limitations . What caused the matter come together ? All matter has physical and chemical properties .... a collection of matter came together create a explosion . The principle of causality states there is a cause and effect . What caused the matter to come together to create the explosion ? Thats bullocks everything on this earth has a purpose from living to non-living organisms . The idea that apes just sprung up on this earth and evolved humans without a purpose is illogical . In science proves there is a purpose for many things . How do you know for certain that it is not Genesis have you even read the book of Genesis to begin with ?

The only purpose in any and all of it is survival. What works, survives; what doesn't goes extinct. From chemical through biological to social evolution, what works, survives. It is not more meaningful, logical or moral than that. It may not be nice, but it is (on evidence) true. All that humans can do is try for a system of ethics, which may not be perfect, but is better than the blood -spilling of the OT or the impractical gloopiness of the New. Do you give all your money to the poor?I doubt it.If someone tries to steal you phone, do you give him your car keys as well? No. Nobody really follows the Bible.They follow more practical human ethics. We all do, even the ones who want to give Christianity the credit.

The following posts about morality and Sentinelalese just makes the point - morality as it is makes sense as something humans are trying to do with survival instincts, not a god - given morality.That it doesn't work well shows it is man -made. You are making the case yourself. The Bible is not the answer as that is morally questionable, too.

The Sentinelalese were as friendly as usual until they turned hostile. We don't know why, but they likely associated disease with outsiders - rightly. There is a film of contact with Indians sharing coconuts with Sentinelase. They could be friendly enough. They then went hostile again, killing and buying a gift animal in sight of the visitors. Suggests they again associated outsiders with disease. And evolutionary result, not moral.

[TRANSPONDER]

I am reluctant to revisit your excuses for the Bible regarding slavery. At least you are against Slavery, but are trying to make out that it's not the Bible but secularism that supports slavery

"Funny in the previous post you said the Bible supported slavery in the South now you are saying the bible condones slavery ... you're making inconsistent statements . The age of reason which allowed for slavery due to "instincts " destroyed countless of lives ... and we are still seeing the effects of slavery in Black Americans , Africans and other minority groups ."

Your poor arguments are shown here in trying to pretend that "Bible supported slavery in the South" and "the bible condones slavery" are somehow contradictory. One clearly follows from the other. The Bible clearly condones lifetime, chattel slavery, as property, of foreigners. The NT is also complicit, by omission. It makes definite statements about divorce, prostitution (though not very helpful) and sabbath worship (though totally ignored by Christianity), but not a word about slavery being wrong. If it had been in the Commandments or even the sermons,'You shall not own another person as property', Christianity would have been a beacon of emancipation in a world where slavery was the norm. That those who opposed it in the 18th c and later were Christians is not surprising; almost everyone was (1). But the arguments and movement against slavery was not supported by the Bible (though they tried to make it look like it by talking about souls) but on ideas of human equality, which are based on logic and reason, and indeed evolution,of a species, a society and of human moral codes. The South had no problem in referring to the Bible to support slavery, and still does not.

(1) the same failed apologetic 'The great scientists were God -believers".or similar. They were,as everyone was at the time, but their work nevertheless undermined the claims of the Bible. Just as ideas of human equality enabled emancipation from the 18th c,Darwin allowed deism to be replaced by atheism.

[TRANSPONDER]

So we have drifted from absurd and unbelievable stories in both Ot and New (the shekel eating fish) to the morality argument for a god. The morality argument died with DNA and the mechanism for instinct. No God necessary. The argument from human imperfection (used above and by a couple of JWs at my door the other day (1) fails because human and social imperfection shows it is humanity, not a god (name your own) doing things, for good and bad. And I am thankful that I don't have to keep trying to excuse a god and blame stuff that God does or fails to do on man. The fact is that, imperfections, tragedies and failures known and admitted, it is much better in terms of life, health and living style than a hundred years ago even. In the days when everyone prayed to God for health, people died young. Now the rate is far better, not because people believe in God more but the medicine is better. This is a fact, no matter how much the Religious try to discredit medicine, or give Jesus the credit for it. That the Bible claims to know what causes illness and claims to be able to cure it is one of the more fantastical and demonstrably false claims that utterly discredits it, all the way though.

(1) the usual pig in a poke promise. 'Things are bad,aren't they?' then promises about a perfect world.

[Adonai Yahweh]

Have you actually studied anything about the Big Bang? While there may be some unresolved issues, what you have described isn't remotely close to what is alleged to have occurred. It can be easy to dismiss scientific explanations when one's understanding is so limited.

Yes I have read a few of literature and watched videos about it and it has limitations . The science can explain what happen at the moment and after the big bang , also account its called a theory meaning that it is not absolute . Scientific principles are based on the principle of causality, as they seek to establish causal relationships between variables and phenomena in order to explain and predict natural phenomena. If you are unaware , the word explosion has 3 definitions according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary , the 2nd definition is large scale , rapid or spectacular expansion . I'll use more technical and concise wording for your understanding . The theory states that universe was in extremely hot and dense state , where all matter , space and energy concentrated in a singularity that then expanded etc . The limitation is that they cant explain what caused the universe to be in extremely hot state and the matter , energy and space to be concentrated in singularity . And it is consistent in the sense that the literature can change with the more evidence they discover . Meaning that what you believe in now could be false in future .