The denial here is beyond belief.

People who refuse to worship God don't turn around and sacrifice their children to a make-pretend God. If they did that, they wouldn't be refusing to obey the first God, they would simply not believe in it. And non-believe is not even close to refusal to obey.

You guys might not have the ability to comprehend these things, but a supposedly all-wise creator would easily comprehend these things!

And this is why the Bible cannot have been the thoughts and comments of any all-wise Creator. An all-wise Creator wouldn't be that stupid. Thus the Bible can only be the false accusations of mortal men made against other mortal men.

There's no other explanation possible.

Now you are really showing your inability to comprehend things.

No, I don't believe that it's God's will that anyone sacrifice babies,

Once again, you're just demonstrating your inability to comprehend the problem.

I never said that they refused to worship God; I corrected your moronic statement that the Canaanites were trying to worship God by sacrificing babies. It's clearly you who has the comprehension problem. Anyone with half a brain who has read your exegesis knows that.

Really? So now YOU know God's will? You grilled Cowboy on how he knows God's will, but you yourself claim to know it. I am so glad work called and I had to fix some stuff tonight, thanks for the laughs.

You twist my words in an attempt to make it appear that I'm saying things that I'm not saying.

I never claimed to know God's will.

You accused me of thinking that it's God's will that people sacrifice babies.

I simply rejected your false claim about what I said. I replied that I do not believe that it's God will that anyone sacrifice any babies.

You better go off to work because you're not making any sense here, and you're just purposefully twisting my words around to try to confuse the issue. Probably because deep down inside you recognize that I'm right and so you need to create a diversion.

I replied that I do not believe that it's God will that anyone sacrifice any babies.

There you go again stating that God's will is. You are a blatant hypocrite.

I'll try to put it in Cowboy's Parent/child analogies since that seems to work for you people best.

You're the parent.

You tell your child that you are the only parent and that the child must love, obey and worship you, and that there is no other parent to worship.

If your child now goes off and starts worshiping a box as their parent what must you conclude from that?

There can only be one possible conclusion. The child didn't understand what you had said.

So we end up with two possible scenarios:

1. The child isn't intelligent enough to understand what you are saying.

Or

2. You simply failed to communicate your message properly.

You continually display your own inability to comprehend a simple concept.

I said, I do not believe that it is God's will that anyone sacrifice babies.

To not believe something is not a statement of knowing something.

So you're obviously have much difficulty comprehending these very simple ideas.

~~~~

Forget about "god's will" or anything like. All of that is just a distraction from the point I'm making anyway. It doesn't matter what God's will might be that's totally irrelevant to the point I'm making.

I'll try to put it in Cowboy's Parent/child analogies since that seems to work for you people best.

You're the parent.

You tell your child that you are the only parent and that the child must love, obey and worship you, and that there is no other parent to worship.

If your child now goes off and starts worshiping a box as their parent what must you conclude from that?

There can only be one possible conclusion. The child didn't understand what you had said.

So we end up with two possible scenarios:

1. The child isn't intelligent enough to understand what you are saying.

Or

2. You simply failed to communicate your message properly.

If you, as the parent, are also the all-powerful God who created the child, then if the child isn't intelligent enough to comprehend what you are saying that's your failure and inability to create a child who can comprehend your thoughts.

On the other hand, if there's a failure of communication then once again only you could be responsible for that, because obviously the child is totally unaware that they had misunderstood you.

The only way that the child could show that he or she truly understood you was to either agree to love, worship and obey your, or simply refuse to do that an go off and not worship anything as their parent.

In other words, it's the mere fact that the child is worshiping something as as their parent that proves that they could not have comprehended the original message.

So the proof is in the pudding. Both the Canaanites and Egyptians were trying to worship and/or appease Gods. Therefore they could not have understood that they had made a free will choice to reject the ONLY God that truly exists.

It's as simple as that. Going off on tangents talking about what "God's true will" might be is totally irrelevant to any of this.

Before "God's true will" can be important it needs to be communicated to the objects of his creation without any misunderstanding or failure in communication. And that's the root of the problem here. The Hebrews imply that God is a horrible communicator and can't even comprehend when communication has failed. This is why their fables are necessarily false.

You continually display your own inability to comprehend a simple concept.

I said, I do not believe that it is God's will that anyone sacrifice babies.

To not believe something is not a statement of knowing something. whoa

So you're obviously have much difficulty comprehending these very simple ideas.

That's a limited scenario, a "false dilema" if you will...

You forgot there are still other options.

3. The child doesn't like the rules imposed by the parent so he/she worships the box to gain some "magikal" powers, immortality or money.

4. The child doesn't care about the rules and would rather do what he/she wanted until he/she dies and then will cry like a baby when faced with the consequences of their actions.

5. The child hopes that he/she will be forgiven when all is said and done, so he/she pretends to be ignorant of the situation.


Why is it so hard for some people to fully grasp all aspects of a situation? Limited intelligence???

That's a limited scenario, a "false dilema" if you will...

You forgot there are still other options.

3. The child doesn't like the rules imposed by the parent so he/she worships the box to gain some "magikal" powers, immortality or money.

4. The child doesn't care about the rules and would rather do what he/she wanted until he/she dies and then will cry like a baby when faced with the consequences of their actions.

5. The child hopes that he/she will be forgiven when all is said and done, so he/she pretends to be ignorant of the situation.


Why is it so hard for some people to fully grasp all aspects of a situation? Limited intelligence???

The fact that the biblical scriptures were written from man's perspective rather than from the perspective of a God is also crystal clear right in the ten commandments. In the ten commands God supposedly says that he is a jealous God and that we shall place no other Gods before him.

Only mortal men would have stated it that way.

A genuine all-wise creator of the universe would have stated it quite differently like so:

"I am the only God, there are no other Gods to worship."

The mere fact that it was stated as God being a "jealous" God who does not want us to worship other Gods shows that this was just the writings of men who were trying to create a single God who would be above the gods of all other man-made religions.

So right off the bat in the Ten Commandments we see what would constitute a truly inept communication to begin with.

If God meant to communicate "I am the only God and there are no other Gods to worship" but instead he said, "I am a jealous God and thou shalt not place another Gods before me". Then God would be an extremely poor communicator. Because in the second sentence he's implying that other Gods actually exist and that he is "jealous" of them, and he even also appears to be implying that they actually DO EXIST by suggesting that we should not place them before him.

So there you go.

The Ten Commandments themselves are written from the mindset of mortal men who are trying to create a religion to trump all other religions. These words clearly do reflect what a genuinely all-wise creator would say if he were indeed the only God that genuinely exists.

There would be no need for him to be "jealous" of other Gods, nor would it be possible to place any other Gods before him since they don't even exist.

The bible is just riddled with examples that clearly show it's just a man-made religion, and not the word of any genuinely all-wise God.

There's no good reason for anyone to believe that these writings came from any all-wise God. Therefore to reject them as being nothing more than the fables of men cannot possibly be seen as a blatant refusal to obey "God". Disbelief that fables are the word of a god does not constitute a refusal to obey a god, it's simply a refusal to believe the hearsay fables of other men! And that cannot be taken as a willful and knowing free will choice to refuse God.

So the accusations of the Hebrews and Christians toward those who do not believe in their religious folklore are bogus accusations.

The mere fact that it was stated as God being a "jealous" God who does not want us to worship other Gods shows that this was just the writings of men who were trying to create a single God who would be above the gods of all other man-made religions.

Cowboy wrote:

Sure it does. Jealousy is merely an emotion and we are created in the image of God, so as such God would feel same emotions we do such as jealousy. And the following verse will show evidence of what he was saying. We are all God's, so it's not that there are no other God's. Just our father in heaven is above all and tells us not to put anyone else above him. That is all he's saying, he is priority, he is the authority, he is in command.

John 10:34
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

I'm personally not impressed with your explanation.

Especially considering that we've been to that verse before when I pointed out that Jesus was actually supporting a pantheistic view of reality. You totally rejected that notion and vehemently argued that the term "gods" in this context actually referred to human judges and didn't mean "Gods" at all.

So now you're turning this back around to allow it to mean that we are full-fledged "Gods" now. You have no consistency in your excuses, you'll clearly grab at straws and twist anything into the whatever appears to work at the moment.

So I don't buy your argument above in the slightest. Besides the Canaanites weren't worshiping other humans anyway so your idea here wouldn't be applicable to this situation anyway.

My point is quite simple. Whenever we read the Bible we should always asks the question' "Does this sounds like something an all-wise supremely intelligent and perfect God would say, or does it sound like something mortal men would say?

When we ask that question in this case the answer should be obvious.

If there are no "false gods" then it would be pointless for the real God to suggest that he would be jealous of them, or to even suggest that they could be worshiped. Why even bring that concept up at all?

Just communicate the facts: "I am the only God, there are no other Gods".

But that's not what we read in these fables, what we actually read is, "I am a jealous God, thou shalt have no other Gods before me!"

That would be imperfect and totally ambiguous communication that suggests that other Gods actually exist and that God is jealous of them.

So is this something that an all-wise all-intelligent perfect God would say?

I think not. If there are no other Gods then it's a very misleading statement, therefore it cannot of come from an all-wise all-intelligent perfect source. It's far too flawed to have come from such a source.

Is this something that mortal men who are attempting to create a religion to trump all other man-made religions.

I think so. This is precisely the kind of thing I would expect mortal men to write.

Therefore we come to the REAL QUESTION: "Is it reasonable to reject these fables as nothing more than the writings of feeble mortal men?

The answer is yes, it's very reasonable to reject these fables as not being the word of any all-wise all-intelligent all-perfect God. They simply don't exhibit those qualities.

I'm personally not impressed with your explanation.

Especially considering that we've been to that verse before when I pointed out that Jesus was actually supporting a pantheistic view of reality. You totally rejected that notion and vehemently argued that the term "gods" in this context actually referred to human judges and didn't mean "Gods" at all.

So now you're turning this back around to allow it to mean that we are full-fledged "Gods" now. You have no consistency in your excuses, you'll clearly grab at straws and twist anything into the whatever appears to work at the moment.

So I don't buy your argument above in the slightest. Besides the Canaanites weren't worshiping other humans anyway so your idea here wouldn't be applicable to this situation anyway.

My point is quite simple. Whenever we read the Bible we should always asks the question' "Does this sounds like something an all-wise supremely intelligent and perfect God would say, or does it sound like something mortal men would say?

When we ask that question in this case the answer should be obvious.

If there are no "false gods" then it would be pointless for the real God to suggest that he would be jealous of them, or to even suggest that they could be worshiped. Why even bring that concept up at all?

Just communicate the facts: "I am the only God, there are no other Gods".

But that's not what we read in these fables, what we actually read is, "I am a jealous God, thou shalt have no other Gods before me!"

That would be imperfect and totally ambiguous communication that suggests that other Gods actually exist and that God is jealous of them.

So is this something that an all-wise all-intelligent perfect God would say?

I think not. If there are no other Gods then it's a very misleading statement, therefore it cannot of come from an all-wise all-intelligent perfect source. It's far too flawed to have come from such a source.

Is this something that mortal men who are attempting to create a religion to trump all other man-made religions.

I think so. This is precisely the kind of thing I would expect mortal men to write.

Therefore we come to the REAL QUESTION: "Is it reasonable to reject these fables as nothing more than the writings of feeble mortal men?

The answer is yes, it's very reasonable to reject these fables as not being the word of any all-wise all-intelligent all-perfect God. They simply don't exhibit those qualities.

If there are no "false gods" then it would be pointless for the real God to suggest that he would be jealous of them, or to even suggest that they could be worshiped. Why even bring that concept up at all?

Peter Pan wrote:

I'm personally not impressed with your explanation.

Cowboy wrote:

You don't understand what our father would be jealous of. God is the highest authority and wishes to be treated as such, eg., not having any other god's before him. Not treating your neighbor with more respect and love then you do our father. That is what he ment

Exodus 20:3
3Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

He wasn't speaking of other god's such as Zeus or anything like that. It's kind of hard to be jealous of something that doesn't exist.

Yes, you absolutely will need to twist things to the extreme to continue your delusions. No question about that.

Again, the Canaanites weren't worshiping other humans so your excuse doesn't fit the scenario anyway.

The bottom line is that these fables clearly contain ambiguous and often absurd statements that would make no sense coming from a supposedly all-wise and all-intelligent God.

Moreover it's far more reasonable to believe that mere mortal men who were trying to create a religion to trump all other religions would make these kinds of states.

So that's all the proof that's required. All that needs to be shown is that it's reasonable to conclude that these fables are nothing more than that ramblings of empty accusations of mortal men.

At that point it would be totally unreasonable for a supposedly righteous God to condemn people for simply not believing in these myths. Yet these fables claim that God would pass such a judgment on non-believers.

So there you have it. In order to believe that the Bible is the "Word of God" we must believe that God is unreasonable.

But that flies in the face of what an all-wise, all-intelligent, perfect and righteous God would be.

Thus the Bible is necessarily false. It can't be true.

Moroever, these is a continuous theme all throughout the Bible. The bible contains countless examples of supposed divine behavior which is unreasonable. Not the least of which would be the creation of a plan to have his only begotten son nailed to a pole as the only way for people to gain salvation.

IMHO, that's the single most outrageous and totally unreasonable behavior to expect from a supposedly all-wise, all-powerful and all-intelligent God. I see nothing wise, powerful, or intelligent about such an act. On the contrary, such an act could only be an act of pure desperation by an entity that had no other choices available to him.

So once again, there's truly no good reason to believe that any of this came from any supposedly all-wise, all-powerful God.

Yet, again, this religion claims that to not believe in these fables is sufficient for God to condemn a person.

It's clearly a false dogma created by men. There can be no question about it. On the contrary, as far as I can see, it's totally unreasonable to even consider that it could have come from any all-wise God.

So it's an unreasonable religion all the way through.

The bottom line is that these fables clearly contain ambiguous and often absurd statements that would make no sense coming from a supposedly all-wise and all-intelligent God.

Yes, you absolutely will need to twist things to the extreme to continue your delusions. No question about that.

Again, the Canaanites weren't worshiping other humans so your excuse doesn't fit the scenario anyway.

The bottom line is that these fables clearly contain ambiguous and often absurd statements that would make no sense coming from a supposedly all-wise and all-intelligent God.

Moreover it's far more reasonable to believe that mere mortal men who were trying to create a religion to trump all other religions would make these kinds of states.

So that's all the proof that's required. All that needs to be shown is that it's reasonable to conclude that these fables are nothing more than that ramblings of empty accusations of mortal men.

At that point it would be totally unreasonable for a supposedly righteous God to condemn people for simply not believing in these myths. Yet these fables claim that God would pass such a judgment on non-believers.

So there you have it. In order to believe that the Bible is the "Word of God" we must believe that God is unreasonable.

But that flies in the face of what an all-wise, all-intelligent, perfect and righteous God would be.

Thus the Bible is necessarily false. It can't be true.

Moroever, these is a continuous theme all throughout the Bible. The bible contains countless examples of supposed divine behavior which is unreasonable. Not the least of which would be the creation of a plan to have his only begotten son nailed to a pole as the only way for people to gain salvation.

IMHO, that's the single most outrageous and totally unreasonable behavior to expect from a supposedly all-wise, all-powerful and all-intelligent God. I see nothing wise, powerful, or intelligent about such an act. On the contrary, such an act could only be an act of pure desperation by an entity that had no other choices available to him.

So once again, there's truly no good reason to believe that any of this came from any supposedly all-wise, all-powerful God.

Yet, again, this religion claims that to not believe in these fables is sufficient for God to condemn a person.

It's clearly a false dogma created by men. There can be no question about it. On the contrary, as far as I can see, it's totally unreasonable to even consider that it could have come from any all-wise God.

So it's an unreasonable religion all the way through.

At that point it would be totally unreasonable for a supposedly righteous God to condemn people for simply not believing in these myths. Yet these fables claim that God would pass such a judgment on non-believers.

So there you have it. In order to believe that the Bible is the "Word of God" we must believe that God is unreasonable.