[W:1396] Questions that atheists are afraid to answer

[Mircea]

There's plenty of websites that can help you understand that. When you do you'll see there are no contradictions, except how you are phrasing things.

The Gospels and epistles clearly show Jesus is the Son of God. And did you know ancient rabbis understood and taught that the Messiah would be God?

nonsense

Nonsense is right.

I'm phrasing things exactly as Matthew and Luke stated.

This is what Matthew said:

Matthew 1:6 and Jesse the father of David the king. David was the father of Solomon...

This is what Luke said:

Luke 3:31 ...the son of Nathan, the son of David.

Joseph is either descended of Nathan, or Solomon, but not both.

But none of that matters because Matthew and Luke lied.

The Hebrews refused to accept Jesus, so the gospel writers, especially Matthew and Luke, lied to convince the Hebrews.

The so-called prophecies said that The Messiah ---as opposed to the 1,000s of other messiahs that existed in Hebrew history --- would be descended of David, thus Matthew and Luke lied and made up phony genealogies in a failed attempt to prove to the Hebrews that Jesus was descended from the House of David.

 

[Logicman]

Nonsense is right.

I'm phrasing things exactly as Matthew and Luke stated.

This is what Matthew said:

Matthew 1:6 and Jesse the father of David the king. David was the father of Solomon...

This is what Luke said:

Luke 3:31 ...the son of Nathan, the son of David.

Joseph is either descended of Nathan, or Solomon, but not both.

But none of that matters because Matthew and Luke lied.

The Hebrews refused to accept Jesus, so the gospel writers, especially Matthew and Luke, lied to convince the Hebrews.

The so-called prophecies said that The Messiah ---as opposed to the 1,000s of other messiahs that existed in Hebrew history --- would be descended of David, thus Matthew and Luke lied and made up phony genealogies in a failed attempt to prove to the Hebrews that Jesus was descended from the House of David.

You need to dig deeper. Jesus was born of God to a virgin. That's Matthew. Therefore, Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus, but the Legal father of Jesus whom he evidently adopted. Luke has the genealogy of Mary's paternal line.

One other thing: The Messiah could not be a biological descendant of Solomon because Solomon was disqualified.

 

[it's just me]

I find it really odd that some people seem to find atheism so frightening.
They find any display of atheism a threat to religion which considering the sheer imbalance between the number of churches and the almost total lack of anything for atheists makes any threat seem meaningless.

Not "frightening" as much as "annoying". There is an old joke that goes "How do you know if there is an atheist in the room?

A. They'll tell you.

 

[devildavid]

Not "frightening" as much as "annoying". There is an old joke that goes "How do you know if there is an atheist in the room?

A. They'll tell you.

I have never had that happen to me. How often do you find people declaring their atheism vs. references to god?

 

[Peter]

Not "frightening" as much as "annoying". There is an old joke that goes "How do you know if there is an atheist in the room?

A. They'll tell you.

Maybe it's that we British are more reserved but I don't think I've told anyone about my atheism that didn't actually have something specific to do with the conversation at hand. I certainly wouldn't just blurt it out as I'd seem like a crazy person.

Religion isn't a massive topic of conversation here.

 

[Logician Man]

Maybe it's that we British are more reserved but I don't think I've told anyone about my atheism that didn't actually have something specific to do with the conversation at hand. I certainly wouldn't just blurt it out as I'd seem like a crazy person.

Religion isn't a massive topic of conversation here.

Nah, Peter. It's not just the British. Like David said above, Never in my life have I ever heard any non-religious individual just blurt out their skepticism for no specific reason. And that old joke he claims to have heard. Never heard any other person of faith share such a joke. Must be a 'behind the scenes' thing for certain misguided clergy types.

 

[devildavid]

Maybe it's that we British are more reserved but I don't think I've told anyone about my atheism that didn't actually have something specific to do with the conversation at hand. I certainly wouldn't just blurt it out as I'd seem like a crazy person.

Religion isn't a massive topic of conversation here.

He is full of it. It is not common in the US for someone to declare their atheism in everyday conversation for no apparent reason.

 

[Mircea]

You need to dig deeper. Jesus was born of God to a virgin.

That's a Red Herring.

The issue is that the genealogies of Joseph conflict and you're afraid to admit it or address it.

 

[Logicman]

That's a Red Herring.

The issue is that the genealogies of Joseph conflict and you're afraid to admit it or address it.

They don't conflict. There's tons of websites that go into that subject in more depth too. Knock your lights out.

By the way, GOD is the Father of Jesus. Don't miss the forest for the trees.

In addition, even ancient Jews understood the Messiah would be God. Focus on what's important rather than growing an ulcer over genealogies that have a thousand rabbit trails.

 

[it's just me]

He is full of it. It is not common in the US for someone to declare their atheism in everyday conversation for no apparent reason.

No, that's why you have to stick your nose into every religious discussion here. We can always count on you.

Wherever three or four Christians are gathered, there will also be an atheist.

 

[gboisjo]

No, that's why you have to stick your nose into every religious discussion here. We can always count on you.

Wherever three or four Christians are gathered, there will also be an atheist.

That's because people like you don't run the show anymore, its 2021 not 1721 ..Atheism is a growing phenomena all over the world with the exception of the Middle East.

 

[it's just me]

That's because people like you don't run the show anymore, its 2021 not 1721 ..Atheism is a growing phenomena all over the world with the exception of the Middle East.

Couldn't resist sticking your nose in, could you?

It's not me and it never has been me "running the show" and yes, I am aware of the cancer known as atheism, basically a religion with "me, me, me" in charge.

 

[it's just me]

Nah, Peter. It's not just the British. Like David said above, Never in my life have I ever heard any non-religious individual just blurt out their skepticism for no specific reason. And that old joke he claims to have heard. Never heard any other person of faith share such a joke. Must be a 'behind the scenes' thing for certain misguided clergy types.

Thanks for proving my point, you never disappoint.

 

[Mircea]

They don't conflict.

They do conflict. Joseph's father is either Heli or Jacob, but it cannot be both and his distant ancestor can either be David's son Solomon or David's son Nathan, but not both.

 

[bomberfox]

Nonsense is right.

I'm phrasing things exactly as Matthew and Luke stated.

This is what Matthew said:

Matthew 1:6 and Jesse the father of David the king. David was the father of Solomon...

This is what Luke said:

Luke 3:31 ...the son of Nathan, the son of David.

Joseph is either descended of Nathan, or Solomon, but not both.

But none of that matters because Matthew and Luke lied.

The Hebrews refused to accept Jesus, so the gospel writers, especially Matthew and Luke, lied to convince the Hebrews.

The so-called prophecies said that The Messiah ---as opposed to the 1,000s of other messiahs that existed in Hebrew history --- would be descended of David, thus Matthew and Luke lied and made up phony genealogies in a failed attempt to prove to the Hebrews that Jesus was descended from the House of David.

Its hilarious to watch someone only familiar with christian theology try to pretend to tell jewish people what their messiah is. This is spot on.

 

[bomberfox]

They don't conflict. There's tons of websites that go into that subject in more depth too. Knock your lights out.

By the way, GOD is the Father of Jesus. Don't miss the forest for the trees.

In addition, even ancient Jews understood the Messiah would be God. Focus on what's important rather than growing an ulcer over genealogies that have a thousand rabbit trails.

Rabbinical websites? You do know why Jewish people are not christians right?

 

[bomberfox]

If you repeatedly attack truth and honesty and logic and history then you're very likely to end up getting attacked yourself, stop whining, are you a man or a mouse.

You always whine about ad-hominem, always keen to mention that rule being violated but you never extend that concern to honesty, you expect no ad-hominem when you debate and I expect no dishonesty, if someone is prepared as you are, to be dishonest then don't be surprised if opponents feel inclined to attack your character for doing so.

Ad hominem is a fallacy which completely ruins your argument. Thats the difference between ad hominem and name calling. Jeebus **** fundies gonna ****tardery.

 

[NWO_Spook]

Questions taken from tecoyah's's post:

1. What is your process for evaluating evidence for God?

I assess the quality of the textual or anecdotal evidence (for that is all we truly have) upon the claims and then check for alternative explanations or possibilities based upon probability/plausibility (extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence). One must rule out all rational explanations before one makes a leap of logic, for almost invariably, what some consider to be 'evidence' requires special pleading or an assumption in order to be linked to the notion of gods.

2. Do you even have a process for evaluating such evidence?

Of course.

3. Are you willing to tell me, to describe this process?

The usual methodology behind textual criticism. One assesses the texts based upon the use of language, authorship, motivations, expectations, probability and plausibility and if the source is primary or secondary. Then apply that to studies of the society that produced the author, such as customs, belief systems, history etc. This is in no way an exhaustive listing of my methodology, but it should suffice for the purposes of the question. As for the anecdotal evidence such as 'God talks to me' or 'I had an experience I cannot explain but for God', well that can be dismissed owing to the poor quality of such claims.

4. If not why? why are you unwilling to describe a process yet eager for me to describe my evidence?.

Not applicable. However, I will add that if one makes a claim, one must produce supporting evidence for said claim. One must then expect such evidence to be critiqued and all claims and premises to be assessed based upon such critiques. This is where the theist often fails and they tend to take it personally.

5. How can you claim you've never seen evidence for God when you do not have any way to evaluate evidence for God?

Not applicable.

6 . Can you reassure me that you don't intend to reject anything and everything that I might show to you as evidence?

I would reject evidence owing to a lack of merit ~ that is all. It seems that 'evidence' for the existence of gods can be whatever one wants it to be, and it should be noted that any idiot can state that something is 'evidence' for something else without providing a sound hypothesis to link this supposed evidence to the claim, and as we see here on this very sub forum, many do exactly that. Some have stated that the universe itself is evidence for God without demonstrating why it is to be regarded so with any degree of competence, for invariably such a claim relies on the fallacious 'First Cause/Kalam/Prime Mover' form of argument. Others claim that God is love, or thought or even indifferent, but none have produced credible evidence for such beliefs and the fact of the matter is, none of them actually know if their claims are true.

 

[Logicman]

Rabbinical websites? You do know why Jewish people are not christians right?

I don't know anything of the kind. There's numerous Christian Jews. Many of them are known as Messianic Jews and have their own Messianic Synagogues. So please update your incorrect data on that.

 

[bomberfox]

I don't know anything of the kind. There's numerous Christian Jews. Many of them are known as Messianic Jews and have their own Messianic Synagogues. So please update your incorrect data on that.

Lol..... my point is there is a reason judaism and christianity are not one in the same. Christian jews or jews for jesus are different from most other jews that reject Jesus as the messiah.

 

[Logicman]

Its hilarious to watch someone only familiar with christian theology try to pretend to tell jewish people what their messiah is. This is spot on.

It's hilarious to claim knowledgeable Christians aren't familiar with Old Testament Judaism. If you were up-to-date on OT Judaism and Christianity you would know why Israel missed it's Messiah. I'll help you out with it anyway.

Why Israel Missed its Messiah

By Pete Righter Two thousand years ago, Jesus Christ appeared on the world scene in Israel. Individual Gospel / New Testament authors record him healing the sick, raising the dead, ushering in a ‘N…

righterreport.com

 

[bomberfox]

It's hilarious to claim knowledgeable Christians aren't familiar with Old Testament Judaism. If you were up-to-date on OT Judaism and Christianity you would know why Israel missed it's Messiah. I'll help you out with it anyway.

Why Israel Missed its Messiah

By Pete Righter Two thousand years ago, Jesus Christ appeared on the world scene in Israel. Individual Gospel / New Testament authors record him healing the sick, raising the dead, ushering in a ‘N…

righterreport.com

Israelis disagree and it is incredibly crass to tell the originators of the religion they missed their messiah based on a break away religion. The biblical apocalypse is anti-semitic. Please read from a rabbinical source. Psst judaism does not include hell, one advantage it has over christianity as well as not having a oh woe is the guy that died for a curse that we were born with. Early christianity was insanely antisemitic too because they blamed jews for the death of Jesus “christ killers”https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.myjewishlearning.com/article/what-do-jews-believe-about-jesus/amp/
Quoting jews for jesus as if they speak for all jews is ignorant.

 

[devildavid]

No, that's why you have to stick your nose into every religious discussion here. We can always count on you.

Wherever three or four Christians are gathered, there will also be an atheist.

And this surprises you to to find this in a beliefs and skepticism forum? Do you know what skepticism means?

Also, this is not a room with people talking in person. Do you understand the difference bteween anonymous forum chats and in person conversation?

Why do you expect atheists not to contribute here?

 

[devildavid]

Thanks for proving my point, you never disappoint.

That you think your point was proven is hilarious.

 

[Logicman]

Israelis disagree and it is incredibly crass to tell the originators of the religion they missed their messiah based on a break away religion. The biblical apocalypse is anti-semitic. Please read from a rabbinical source. Psst judaism does not include hell, one advantage it has over christianity as well as not having a oh woe is the guy that died for a curse that we were born with. Early christianity was insanely antisemitic too because they blamed jews for the death of Jesus “christ killers”https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.myjewishlearning.com/article/what-do-jews-believe-about-jesus/amp/
Quoting jews for jesus as if they speak for all jews is ignorant.

Claiming the New Testament is antisemitic is a poor argument. First from the Old Testament:

"Isaiah Chapter 1 likens the Israelites to “Sodomites” and a “brood of evildoers,” whose “hands are full of blood.” Jeremiah Chapter 2 refers to them as “a wild donkey in heat.” Other prophets call them “adulteresses” and liken their behavior to prostitutes. So vivid were the descriptions of the abominations of the Israelites that the Bible records God himself bringing judgment upon judgment upon them, so that even their children were dashed against the rocks. But do you ever hear of anyone calling the Old Testament authors “anti-Semitic”? Never."

"The New Testament should be viewed in the same light. Jesus was a Jew. His disciples were all Jews, and the majority of the New Testament authors were also Jewish. Did they really hate their own race of people, or can it reasonably be said that, like the Old Testament, the tensions in the New Testament are just simply more of the same intra-Jewish rivalries like we saw before? I think the evidence is clearly with the latter. Many cite the Gospel of John specifically as being anti-Semitic. Yet when the term “Jews” is used in a pejorative sense in John’s Gospel it is never directed toward the general populace, but towards the corrupt scribes, God-blasphemers, and ungodly Pharisees instead. In fact, contrary to being anti-Semitic, The Gospel of John presents the Israelites in a very positive light. From John Chapter 1 we read: “When Jesus saw Nathanael approaching, he said of him, ‘Here is a true Israelite, in whom there is nothing false.’”

Is the New Testament Anti-Semitic?

First, from the Old Testament: In the most sacred work of Judaism, the Torah, we find numerous pronunciations by God and Moses referring to the Israelites as being “stiff-necked” and &#…

righterreport.com