The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

god according to the bible would ---never--- use text as a form of communication

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/15/2018 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 996 times Debate No: 110765
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (38)
Votes (0)




god according to the bible would ---not--- use text as a form of communication, the worst possible form of communication to god. - Christians don't understand the character of God" 6:45 or watch the entire thing. - The god that christians believe in is amazingly ---STUPID---!!! - Atheist Experience 21.49 with Tracie Harris and Don Baker. Call starts at approx 47:30. Picks up after a long introduction 54:45 and really gets into it 1:03:30 - 1:11:30. Pay attention everybody to vidie #3 and how YOU as a christian can easily misinterpret YOUR bible which is one of the reasons why YOUR god would --- NEVER --- use text as a form of communication. Don Baker, one of the hosts here in the vidie also briefly mentions it. And he's 100% correct!

For this debate it will be up to you as Con to prove that god according to the bible would use text, namely the bible, as a form of communication. You must also give the "why" this god would choose text as a form of communication. For extra credit, prove that this god would use text as a form of communication above all else.

dsjpk5 will not be allowed to vote in the voting process.


The argument posited by my opponent is that God, as defined and contextualized within the Bible, and only regarding the Bible, would not have used the Bible as his choice of communication. In order to disprove this claim, I must therefor present evidence from the Bible, showing that God "would" use it as "a" form of communication.

I would like to start by citing John 1:1, which states that "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God". The emphasis here, within the very first verse of one of the gospels, is that the Word of God is vitally important to the faith, and to God himself. In fact the two are inseparable. This is to say that it is not the Vision, or the Feeling, that is important, but the Word. John clarifies that God is embodied within the Word, so clearly the Word is how God would have himself be transmitted to the masses.

In 2 Timothy 3:16, the Bible explains that "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,". As the instigator phrases it "according to the bible", all Scripture is breathed out by God. Obviously he "would" use text as a form of communication because he did, as is made clear in the Bible.

In Habakkuk 2:2 the Lord says "write the vision; make it plain on tablets, so he may run who reads it". God himself, in his own words, demands that his word be written down, so that it can be read by people.

Obviously God would use text as a form of communication, according to the Bible, because he demanded that it be so in the Bible. He breathed out all scripture, and demanded, directly, that his word be written on tablets, specifically so that people may read it.
Debate Round No. 1


See? That's why I truly hate beginners like you who truly know nothing and have to improvise and invent excuses in order for their shiny white be-hinds to make a dent in that atmosphere of Io on a cloudy day. Yah didn't pay any attention to the vides did yah sport? Nope. That's painfully obvious. And on and on yah ramble like a steam power locomotive bull hurling towards a matador's big red cape in the dark, thus becoming black.

Now you mention idiot verses from the idiot bible which truly means absolutely nothing. Ziltch. Nada. 0. Zippo. Because what does mean something is the ability to think, reason, rationalize, use common sense and use logic in which case, god, christianity and the bible and obviously you has none. Ready to be pulverized?

Taken from vidie #1 since its such a strain for you to watch it... "If god is all knowing and he knows the future of all events and he wrote a book that can only be interpreted as if it endorses slavery and if its heinous violence against your children against your neighbors" how could a god be that omnipotent and devise a book where we can"t distinguish between the law of Israel and god"s law? I mean their interwoven where we have metaphor and fact and nobody can distinguish the two. We don"t know what we"re supposed to take figuratively. We don"t know what we"re supposed to take literally. Was it actually a tree? I mean come on. How can anyone distinguish this. I mean come on. It doesn"t make any sense. It doesn"t matter how its translated. It doesn"t matter what version. If it was written by an omnipotent being there would be ONE VERSION. And there would be only ONE WAY to interpret it because it would be written well." Aron Ra
"Actually it wouldn"t be written at all. What"s wrong with your god comin" down and talking to people? "Hey you know some of that stuff that"s in the book? I"m here to correct it." Matt Dillahunty

Taken from vidie #2 since obviously you do not have the ability to watch a vidie nor listen to one... "We have to rely on copies of copies of anonymous authors with no originals and the textural testimony to a miracle for example, there"s no amount of reports, anecdotal reports that is sufficient to justify in believing that actually happened as reported. And anything that would qualify as a god would clearly understand this and if it wanted to clearly convey this to people in a way that is believable would not be relying on ---TEXT--- to do so. And this to me is the nail in the coffin for christianity. The god that christians believe in is amazingly ---STUPID---!!! If it actually wants to achieve its goal by spreading its word to humanity by relying on text, by relying on languages that die off, by relying on anecdotal testimony, that"s not a pathway to truth. And anything that would qualify for a god would know this.which shows either god does not exist or doesn"t care enough about the people to understand the nature of evidence to actually present it. Now which of those two possibilities is accurate?" Matt Dillahunty

"If jesus and Muhammad and abraham and moses had never been born, which in any case I tend to dabble, if all their stories were untrue were suddenly found and everyone had to admit it some people I know would show panic. Now what would we do? We"d have no morals suddenly. What could be more nonsensical than that? As the matter of fact the position that we occupy would---be---precisely---the---same as it is now if none of these texts had ever been written, as if none of these lacerations had ever been made. We would still have to reason together about how how to treat one another, about how to build a just city, and about how to have irony and a sense of humor." Christopher Hitchens

All 3 of those quotes are 100% correct no matter which verses you idiotically apply which has 0 implications as god would NEVER use text as a source of communication, toe worst form of communication to god.

NOTHING is established in scripture. That"s because the christian god, if remotely intelligent in which he is clearly not, would never use text as a source of communication, the worst form of communication possible so everybody can get it wrong. There"s translations upon translations upon translations upon translations upon copies upon copies upon copies upon copies upon dead languages upon dead languages with absolutely 0% of a chance to trance it back to the original. So absolutely nobody knows if they are interpreting correctly. And that my friend includes YOU!

So you can continue this charade if you want to. But I think you know better. And while you are at it, you'd also have to prove that YOUR god even exists to be stupid enough to communicate in text form, the worst form of communication possible to a printed god only, as no one, not one person has ---ever--- been able to prove that this god of the bible even exists.


So your first argument (rather, the one you stole from a video instead of thinking of yourself) is that God's word is ambiguous. Whether or not the word of God is ambiguous has no bearing on whether or not he would choose text as a form of communication, on top of speech, which he also used.

The argument you stole from the second video is that the Bible has be re-written many times. Yes, but assuming we live in a world with an omnipotent God, which is an assumption implicit in the topic of this argument, God is fully capable of making sure that the Bible properly reflects his will. Alternatively, if the Bible does not reflect his original Word, it must be his choice that it changes, because he is omnipotent and has power over all things.

Your quote from Christopher Hitchens is not relevant to the discussion, because it does not address what God, according to the Bible, would do.

So you have not demonstrated, in any capacity, that God as he is portrayed in the Bible, would not use text. The Bible shows that he does use text, and specifically requests the use of text. I have demonstrated this in my initial argument.

I would also like to note that I do not appreciate your disrespectful tone. There is no need to insult your opponent.
Debate Round No. 2


Oh please. Grow an ingrown toenail for life. I’ve been using the same argument for about 8 months now. And I’ve run the same argument for probably at least a good 10 times or better and no one, including your genie-us self who loves yodeling grunge country opera has yet to penetrate it. But yeah, just like you who gets into arguments, they come from somewhere. You just do NOT think of them on your wee lil own. After all there’s no such a thing as thinking of nothing. In film as an example, there’s only 7 basic plots and everything is recycled from them. 7. That’s it. And all other plots branch off from those 7 basic plots. So are all the rest, are they plagiarized? Well in music Nirvana, the worst band of all time, they plagiarized at least an obvious 6 times. So you can invent better excuses with your stickum.

So absolutely YOUR god would never use text as a form of communication. Now that’s where the “thinking”, “rationalizing”, “reasoning”, “common sense”, and “logic” receptors set in, in which obviously you, your god, your religion and your bible has none as your god would NEVER use text as a form of communication. This supposed god of yours, in which you cannot even prove exists (which is problem #1 in which you cannot solve in the first place since you think you are so smort - sorry smart) would have foreseen and gained some type, actually ANY TYPE of insight to know that everybody would get it wrong because of copies upon copies upon copies upon copies with translations upon translations upon translations upon translations with dead languanguages upon dead languages with a 0% chance of being able to trace the bible back to the original. Oh yes, he would do something about it considering the absolute fact that the entire bible is centered around his babbling bloated bumbling superior ego complex. So he’d have to properly have to somehow blab that ego somehow so EVERYBODY would somehow get it. Text, not so everybody could not get it today. And even if it could, who is going to interpret it correctly now so that ---everybody--- interprets it correctly from across the globe? Certainly this god of YOURS would have foreseen these fatal miss-steaks you complete more-on. Nah. This nonproved god of weenie tots is not intelligent nor rectangle shaped to fit into any circle enough to figure that one out. Gosh golly gee gosh darned it all neither are you. And you don’t think you should be looked down upon with a disrespectful tone? Oh ab-so-lu-te-ly you do. That’s something you will learn in college when ---especially--- you flat out invent excuses for something in which you clearly know nothing about and yet you try to pretend that you do.

Now onto the first argument. “If god is all knowing and he knows the future of all events...” Well that a gimme that this so called god of meat of YOURS doesn’t. Moving on… “I mean their interwoven where we have metaphor and fact and nobody can distinguish the two.” And that IS a fact. So how can the bible possibly be read? Oh gosh golly and read correctly at that? Nah that never crossed your hourglass with a princess inside mind. Continuing… “We don’t know what we’re supposed to take figuratively. We don’t know what we’re supposed to take literally. Was it actually a tree? I mean come on. How can anyone distinguish this.” Yep see, NOBODY can read the bible figuratively OR literally. I mean HOW can ANYONE do that with no fallback position? YOU can’t that’s for sure. Moving on dildo breath… “It doesn’t make any sense.” Aron Ra is so right. It doesn’t make any sense. And to absolutely pulverize you since you have no brain activity in either hemisphere “It doesn’t matter how its translated. It doesn’t matter what version. If it was written by an omnipotent being there would be ONE VERSION. And there would be only ONE WAY to interpret it because it would be written well." That’s right. Aron Ra IS right. Not your tinsel mind who like him, I do know a lot lot lot more about your claustrophobic ape like god, religion and bible than YOU ---ever--- will, there would be only ONE way to translate YOUR horrific sloppily written bible with its roughly 1,000 contradictions and inconsistencies thus making it truly unreadable, so EVERYBODY could understand this LOVING bible. Its either that OR YOUR god wants to be hated and unloved.
"Actually it wouldn’t be written at all.” Matt is so so so 100% correct because this god of YOURS would ---never--- use text as a form of communication, the worst form of communication possible. Well that’s of course only true if this god of course exists in which case you would have to demonstrate that he does, and that this god is not even remotely intelligent nor edumacated in which case you with a finger twitch up your runny nose worship this thing according to the runs bible is not evidence as this so-called god hates children. Chow time! “What’s wrong with your god comin’ down and talking to people? "Hey you know some of that stuff that’s in the book? I’m here to correct it." Now that’s an example of evidence. Nah but YOUR god relies on something as cowardly and deserting, since he cannot show himself since this god of YOURS who you cannot even prove even exists, is somehow scared of man, what else could it be? As wavering as FAITH, the #1 thing preached in the horrific bible, which is also not evidence, nor is it truth. Faith and truth can be ANYTHING. In this case, believing in an unproved god, since it is not evidence, it qualifies as simpleton air. And with god’s monsterous HUGE overblown superior ego complex, as that is the only thing that reaches across the entire bible about god if you were to have actually have read the damn thing, in which case you clearly haven’t, just as all christians who bluff at calling themselves christians because there’s no real such a thing as following christ, nor is there such a thing as following god, this---god---would---leave---some---type---of---genuine---evidence. Sorry Mr. Whip a Little, the bible is not it.

Really? god used speech? According to what imbecile? You? How Would you know? What grade of alcoholic toys for t*ts milked undies at your average bathroom party for used wrung out pep rally nun’s did you get that one from? Invent better excuses please.

“The argument you stole from the second video is that the Bible has be re-written many times.” Let’s look at that wurd “rewritten” using a thesaurus… edit, rework, redraft, recast, rephrase, reword
Then there’s translated, adapted, rendered,
Then there’s copy with a whole bunch of words such as ditto, counterfeit, forge, imitate, paraphrase, photocopy, plagiarize (oh come on and you REALLY don’t think YOUR special bible DIDN’T knowingly plagiarize?????? How naive are you????), reduplicate, replicate, reproduce, transcribe,
Then there’s revise with a whole bunch of words such as change, compare, develop, launder, perfect, update, upgrade,
Then there’s transcribe with a whole bunch of words such as decipher, duplicate, reproduce, translate
All of those words, every-single-one-of-them, has been picked apart and used to manufacture your bible by malinformed interpreters throughout its inception. There’s a 0% chance that you, the pope, any minister, any pastor, any priest, any rabbi, anybody is reading/ interpreting the bible correctly.

“Yes, but assuming we live in a world with an omnipotent God,...” yadda yadda yadda so according to you it would be up to this god to CHANGE/ UPDATE/ TRANSLATE the bible from a 1.0 to a 1 million .0 or whatever the count may be so that it cannot be screwed up by man so that ALL CAN UNDERSTAND THE DAMN THING. Nah YOUR god cannot figure this thing out which is why unless YOUR god is so blatantly stupid and ignorant would ---never--- use text, the worst form of communication possible which fully backs up argument #1. You only make yourself look like an utter silly pity.

The Christopher Hitchens quote does hold its lock and key. Moses after all as sick and diseased as he was, but with no proof of his existence, only the bible’s mentioning, was a prophet of YOUR god. Stories = text = duh = you = brainless during a nuclear war while you try to get some sleep.

All you have done is point your arrow skywards hoping for the big bang. But all yah got was chuckles the clone. And to further add insult to injury yah didn’t pay any attention to the vidies. Yah only paid attention to some la la bye bye quotes in which sent you to sleep at a rock a die die nursery bondsman nursery rhyme home where grandpa’s and grandma’s still recite famous poetry from The Big Red and Blue Books.

It truly is the typical burping christian’s lot in life to completely and totally ignore actual evidence. Especially when slapped in the face with it.


Are you unable to control yourself, or unwilling? I asked you, very nicely, to not insult your opponent. Telling me to "grow an ingrown toenail for life" is childish, disrespectful, and irrelevant to the discussion. Likewise is your usage of "imbecile", and saying "your God is stupid".

I do not have to sit here and talk to you. If you are unable to engage in this honestly and respectfully, you will soon find that nobody wants to talk to you.

Beyond that, I'm not going to bother reading, or responding to your post if you're unable to express it maturely, and without insult. I'll give you a chance to restate your argument in the next section. If you are still unable to restrain yourself, then you will find that you have lost someone willing to discuss this with you, and that you have gained nothing at all.
Debate Round No. 3


I only read your first two sentences of your RD 3 and then I stopped.
I told you a dimwitted dullard snot meat sow EXACTLY why you deserved to be insulted. Not only that but with your obvious lack of intelligence and an edumacation on something that you obviously know nothing about and yet you pretend that you do, you deserve to be humiliated, degraded and dehumanized.
Since it is obviously and blatantly clear that you did not read a single word that I had to say which presented both insults in which you rightly deserved, as well as rock solid evidence in which your teeny tiny little happy hairy hard off brain cannot refute, I'm not going to bother with what you have to say because not only is there nothing that you can say, but who cares what you have to say? I don't. I don't have the bloated superior ego complex that your unproved god does.
This debate is now over. You had your chance. You blew it. Bye.


Bye. Enjoy having no friends.
Debate Round No. 4
38 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by jtlove 3 years ago
Backwardsedan: The statement "When you say "yes the bible says you can own slaves but" well now you're contradicting yourself because before I was asking if you thought the bible was accurately representing the mind of God, the will of God."

I don't have space here to explain it all, however, you need to closely examine what the Israelites call slavery. What the Hebrews called slavery, is in no shape or form the type of slavery that took place here in America. First, a man volunteer to become a "slave", it was because of debt or financial destitute. He could only be a "slave" for 6 yrs, if he had not worked off all his debt he was to forgiven & set free. However, he could also volunteer to remain a slave/servant at the end of the 6 yrs. A slave had as many or more rights than a freeman. A slave could not be sold, especially to a foreigner.

One should always remember when reading/studying the OT there is what the bible call type and shadows or types & anti-types. This means physical Isreal served as a (type) of what to come in spiritual Isreal (anti-type). Example: Read 1 Pet 3-18-22,

v20-21 Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. There is also an antitype which now saves us, baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

Notice Peter says The Ark was a "type" of the "anti-type" Baptism. Ark physically saved lives, baptism spiritually saves souls.

Slavery in the OT was a man in debt, for 6 yrs max then forgive (Type). Sin is often viewed as a price, In Christ model prayer He asks "And forgive us our debts, As we forgive our debtors." (Mat 6.12) and Jesus says..."Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin." (Jn 8.34) (Anti-type)

slave for debt freed 6yrs vs slave to sin (debt) freed by repent/Christ (it's about forgiveness o
Posted by jtlove 3 years ago
The claim that text is bad communication is a false conclusion and the claim why doesn't God just come and talk is an erroneous baiting statement in an attempt to trip up an individual who is not firmly ground in the scriptures. I notice that every time you post a video of these guys, they have a person on the phone who has little to no knowledge of the Bible or Tanaka. Might be screening the calls, but we'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

Written communication is the only form of communication that has been preserved from antiquity. If written communication is such a terrible form of communication why are laws recorded and published in books? Why does the president sign laws into effect via written/printed communication? Written communication is the same as printed communication. If a text is so bad, why do millennials, prefer to communicate via text verse verbal comm. on their phones?

When the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in 1946/47 and in 1956 most non-believers were excited because here was text or written communication from antiquity and most thought it was going to show a huge disparity from the OT today to back then. In all, scholars have identified the remains of about 825 to 870 separate scrolls. The most complete set of OT books ever found, along with many commentaries.

The Dead Sea Scrolls were most likely written by the Essenes during the period from about 200 B.C. to 68 C.E./A.D. The Essenes are mentioned by Josephus and in a few other sources. The Scrolls have revolutionized textual criticism of the Old Testament. Interestingly, now with manuscripts predating the medieval period, we find these texts in substantial agreement with the Masoretic text as well as widely variant forms.

So instead of showing disparity with the OT, it confirms the accuracy of how well the text has been preserved throughout the millennia. If text is so bad, why is the Libray of Congress full of it?
Posted by judaism 3 years ago
I think I know what's going on here. If you were to step inside any Shul or Church, anywhere in the world, you'd see people smiling and laughing (for the most part). Why is that? What, were Moshe and Jesus really just great guys? Who cares. What we're all really happy about (and especially Christians), is that there's eternal life.

That's the point of their worship. Ours too! Yes, I get it, you should try to be a good person, rebuild the world. . . but there's also life after death? Wow!

You, on the other hand, have it in yourself to believe that you've discovered "truth!" Really? This is a pretty arrogant position to hold. I discovered truth, what, are you Donald Trump already? go join a cult or something, seriously, they'll love you!

Regardless, you're just upset that you "think" - this is the keyword here - you know there's no afterlife, and so you want to implant that sad, terrible news on others.

"It isn't fair, mommy!"


"How come they get to believe in heaven and I don't mommy!"

Grow up.

Your anger disgusts me to the core. If you're so mad about it, do something. What about returning to HaShem?

If not, all I can say is, "Your loss."

P.S., I've answered you enough, I think we are done here.

Oh, and by the way, that was strike three, you're out.

Okay, I'm not a sports guy, but it sounds good in writing.
Posted by judaism 3 years ago
backwardseden, I am sorry for all your losses. People have free will, and we all die someday, so you can't really blame HaShem. This is the natural order. This is the test. Am I scared? Scared of what, of being right?

There is so much proof for HaShem! There is nothing to be scared of!

Did I look at those verses? I studied them! Way before you ever questioned them.

Did you take anything out of context? Yes, you did, why would I say otherwise? You're Torah knowledge is below a Yeshiva boy's. I don't mean to be crude here, but it is.

Does Deuteronomy talk about evil? It depends on you who ask. If you're asking a devout Jew, the answer is no. If you're asking an atheist who hates the G-d of Israel, the answer is yes.

You say there are translation problems? Present them. We take our torah all the way back to the Dead Sea Scrolls. Do not limit the G-d of Israel, He can do as He pleases.

If you knew anything about what being a Jew is, you'd know for sure that all those "You shall be put to death!". . . were metaphorical. I already explained the Talmud's view on this. Disprove the Oral Law, then we'll talk.

I never claimed that the term "homosexual" was in Torah. My hands are in the air - don't look at me!

To comment on other remarks:

As Jews, we don't believe in Jesus. Strike one. As Jews, we believe Moshe was given the Oral Law along with the Written Torah - since they agree with each other, Moshe knew everything the Talmud would later teach - so there you go, the Torah agrees with me. All you have to do is be a good person. Strike two.

Everything you say, like slavery, genocide, rape, is all wrong. Strike three. The genocide portion is a joke, read the Book of Joshua. I've covered this in the past with other atheists. They've never responded.

And it's sad that you have to resort to quoting others. Really, can you not try to be a little original? Strike three. Okay, that one was for laughs. (More to come!)
Posted by backwardseden 3 years ago
"When you start making excuses for atrocities you have removed yourself from ANY valid discussion on morals. When you say "yes the bible says you can own slaves but" well now you"re contradicting yourself because before I was asking if you thought the bible was accurately representing the mind of god, the will of god. You"ve got this conflicted mess of contradictions and you"ve found a way to rationalize them. You"ve gone and looked at them and said "boy that one really sounds bad, BUT that"s what Israel was doing that"s not what god was doing. So let me ask you this" do you believe that there"s an all knowing all powerful fun loving god who has an important message for humanity and he is so completely inept that his best attempts at communicating to people managed to convey the exact opposite message of what you think he meant? Now like are you the one who got it right? And all the people who authored the holy book and got you started that they managed to get it wrong? Is your god such a bumbling buffoon that he cannot state "thou shalt not own somebody as another human being?" or "please don"t rape the people and pillage the villages around you"" and he managed to communicate so poorly that it got written down as "Thou shalt be able to own other people as property and oh by the way go over there and kill everybody kill everything except for the young virgins." Its asinine. You cannot reconcile this." Matt Dillahunty
Posted by backwardseden 3 years ago
"The Torah never says the only way to heaven is to be a Jew" That"s not what I said. I said the only way to heaven is the belief in christ. And it is. And what"s really pathetic is of someone murders 6 five year old girls and then he finds his way to christ, according to the bible, he will make it to heaven. Now if I do not believe in christ and I have done nothing wrong, and that"s obviously the second biggest sin there is, the biggest sin is to go against god, then I will go to hell. Well goodie for me. All the more reason for me to not believe in that s--t god and christ.

"Anyone can go to heaven as long as they led decent lives." Then you show me where that is, in your torah, not talmud.
From the Atheist Experience pay attention to the first call. This is from last week in fact. Its awfully odd that you should bring it up as its impeccable timing. - Atheist Experience 22:11

"So all of your arguments are disproven as nothing but hate, and - dare I say - " Well that"s pretty stupid and shows that you have not read the verses. And if you do not read the verses, don"t even bother me again. K?

"anti-Semitic." Yeah that"s what your god is, and again, you cannot even prove he exists.

Oh and oh yeah. I have genuine friends and loved ones. Do you? Probably not. What do I mean by genuine? Those that will go way way wayyyyyyyyy out of their way to help you out in time of dire need and never ask you a single question. For that I cannot even pity you. But you did it to yourself. And you deserve it. and you will die alone UNLESS YOU CHANGE.

Here's something you also don't get is that your unproved god could have started off with peace, love harmony, kindness, care for each other etc etc etc AND KEPT IT. But nah this sickened god of YOURS believes in hates and evil with his genocides, slavery, hatred of gays, hatred of children, hatred of women, love of raped women, committing abortions, etc etc etc
Posted by backwardseden 3 years ago
And we thus took it to their pastor with them smiling thinking they could prove themselves correct. And you know what happened? Guess. Their pastor said "Well maybe its us that"s wrong." BANG! Immediately i became an atheist. Because if one book is out of chronological order, then the entire text is out of chronological order. Its that simple.
And now with me learning its really simple, no intelligent god would rely on text, the worst form of communication possible. There"s translations upon translations upon copies upon copies with dead languages with absolutely no possible way to trace it back to the original. So absolutely no one is interpreting correctly. NO ONE. And to prove it, why don"t you compare some of the translations of your English torah? Some of them are so far off that they are so unrecognizable that there"s no consensus. Why do you think there"s so much of a differential between temples? The same is true for christianity"s churches? AND to make matters much worse for christianity, why is it that christ is the most fought over figure in history? Its because there"s no consensus.

"The Torah does not hate homasexuals, it hates only the sin." Oh please! Ordering to put to death because they are homosexuals IS PURE HATE AND EVIL.
Leviticus 20:13 " If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Now what part of that don"t you understand? OK do you think that homosexuals should be put to death? Y____? N____ Why?____ Why not?____ Your god orders it so It MUST be true and YOU must follow it. Nah. So don"t you dare tell me I"m taking ANYTHING out of context when it is you that 100% is. And you know what? The word "homosexual" was not even scribed into bible"s until 1946. Talk about REALLY bad misinterpretations. And you should compare translations there. Wow talk about utter lack of consensus. Sheesh.
Posted by backwardseden 3 years ago
Believe me, I most certainly know what death is like. I"ve lost 62 people in my life. 4 to cancer including my mother, 4 to suicide, 4 to murder, 6 to drug and alcohol abuse, 2 were hit by drunk drivers and the rest were natural. Now if you believe in your god, then your god took these people that you loved and this god knowingly did it deliberately and knew that you would suffer and grieve in the process. Is that the mark of a loving god? Are you fricken serious? So don"t you dare in any way state that god is our only salvation ESPECIALLY ESPECIALLY ESPECIALLY when you nor anyone, NOBODY can prove his existence. NO ONE. PERIOD.

Did you look at the verses I posed to you? Of course not. So predictable because you are 100% scared in being proven wrong. But that"s OK. It happens to all of us. I don"t take one god damned thing out of context and I am furious that you mentioned that. And after you mentioning that it is so crystal clear that you have not read, not read in the slightest, your torah. Pe-ri-od. AT ALL. It might be good if you did.

I was born jewish. I had my Bar Mitzvah. My dad had his millionaire friends over who bought me all these nice big gifts. Big deal. But what turned me was I was 14 and I had 2 christian friends and we were comparing my English transcribed torah to their bible and the book of Ruth was out of chronological order. They thought they were so smug and all as nearly 100% of christians naturally do in trying to prove that their religion is correct and ---everybody--- else is wrong no matter what, which is what their god tells them to do, the same with yours Deuteronomy 13: 9-10 and Deuteronomy 17: 2-5 and tells YOU to kill me and EVERYBODY else for believing differently = LOOK IT UP!!!!!!!!! Yeah its 100% pure evil and hate at its finest, so DON"T TALK TO ME ABOUT LOVE OR SALVATION with that crap swilling around my or anyone"s head like a silver noose, K?
Posted by judaism 3 years ago
backwardseden. . . my uncle died Monday morning along with my best friend's grandma the following day, so I don't feel in the mood to argue with an atheist who hates the G-d of Israel, our only salvation.

I used to think you were Jewish. . . but now I'm doubting it, at least spiritually. That's the point, you haven't read the Torah 100% the way through. That's why you hate it, that's why you've taken it out of context. It's why you don't understand it. You're confused.

The Torah does not hate homasexuals, it hates only the sin. The Torah never says the only way to heaven is to be a Jew, in fact, the Talmud says just the exact opposite! Anyone can go to heaven as long as they led decent lives. This is not me speaking, it's the Talmud. Furthermore, if you know anything about halachic law, you'd know that the standard for evidence for stoning someone was so high, that it was hardly ever carried out. In the Talmud, Rabbi Akiva says that once the court put to death one person, and that, he said, was a wicked court. The man in Numbers 15 was stoned out of being a l"shem shamayim.

So all of your arguments are disproven as nothing but hate, and - dare I say - anti-Semitic. Why, you ask? Because the one who hates G-d hates the Jewish nation, since He is our G-d.

If you respond with more hate and misunderstanding, I will not respond. I don't waste me time with those who are unwilling to learn about our rich tradition.

Like I said, I'm not in the mood for more hate. Hopefully, you'll understand, and turn with deep love and affection back to the G-d of Israel. There is nothing good about atheism, the grass isn't greener there, it's black.
Posted by backwardseden 3 years ago
* god commits abortions who knows how many times within several verses in his bible, so that means that christians do not follow their god which is extremely hypocritical and contradictory from his bible HS 13:16 sick and disgusting, 2 KS 8: 9-15 sick and disgusting, 2 HS 15:16 sick and disgusting, HS 9: 11-16, and perhaps the biggest acts of abortions were committed in the great flood according to this so-called god of the bible in the great flood (which never happened btw) so who knows how many pregnant mothers died there in his bible thus proving this god to be nothing but pure evil, hate and thus cannot be involved with love.
* god loves yummy cannibalism in his bible LM 2: 20-22, JM 11: 22-23, LV 26:29, 2 KS 6:28-29, LM 4: 9-11, proving this god to be truly sick and completely whacked out thus is evil, hates,and thus cannot be involved with love..
* Indeed god is far far far worse than Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, Stalin, Hong Xiuquan, all serial killers, all rapists, all tortures, all pedophiles, all sadomasochists etc etc etc combined. After all god knowingly created them which means that he is ultimately responsible for them. Its either that or god is not a god and lets them off the hook with nothing but a tap on the shoulder for their horrific, disgusting, repugnant crimes and simply god---does---not---care. Now here's some examples of god"s sickened, diseased, abominable atrocities for absolutely no reason at all... the great flood according to the bible (which never happened btw) so who knows what the body count was there? 3,000 EX 32:27-28, 14,700 NU 16:49, 24,002 NU 25: 1-11, 12,000 JOS 8: 1-25, 10,000 JG 1:4, 120,000 JG 8:7-10, 42,000 JG 12:3-6, 1,000 JD 15:14-15, 3,000 JD 16:27-30, 25,101 JD 16:27-30, 1 SAM 4 34,002, 1 SAM 6:19 50,070, 2 SAM 8 65,850, 1 KI 20: 28-29 100,000, 1 KI 20: 30 27,000, KI 19 35 -37 185,000, 2 CHR 13 17-18 500,000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, 2 CHR 28:6 120,000, Esther 9:5-18 75,813 etc etc etc Yeah god is really so moral huh? Nope.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.