Atheists, convince me.

I was raised a christian but I’m open to factual evidence on why we exist, maybe God and evolution coincide.

 

Okay so here's probably the best solution coming from an AP Human Geopgraphy and AP World History "expert" (im only in highschool but i study a lot on it lmfao)

Back in the times of "B.C" and early "A.D" Those in power wanted to stay in power and keep those lower than them well, lower than them. So in order to do this, as well as keep peace, and protect the state from being overthrown they had to make them selves worthy,and many of them did this by claiming god gave them that power, and they are chosen by the god to be ruler and most righteous man (mind you the idea of a god or god's came in by the early man when it was learned that they buried their dead with roses and belongings and cave paintings were stories of "heaven" and such). These leaders had books written claiming these very things and that anyone who went against them would be punished, not only by law but after death by the gods themselves.

So here's my argument, if you read the bible (i haven't read all of it but enough ig) there are many things that do exactly what a person in power would want. Things such as only a god can punish and judge his people, things that keep us, as religious people in our place, to keep us in order and follow. In the story about Adam and Eve. The devil comes to Eve as a serpent and poisons her mind by basically saying to her "if god can have all this knowledge, then why can't you?" and that's exactly the mind set some many people have as well, and to keep people from thinking the same, they go on to say that when Adam and Eve (Adam being convinced by Eve)ate the apple, god punished them or.. us the generations to come, for their knowledge. Now, 2 things come out of this. 1. Superior knowledge is reserved only for god. 2. It was the woman's fault for this and puts the blame on Eve. This puts us into our times of patriarchy and mysogyny.

Now, coming from a christian I do believe in god and that his word is spoken in the bible, but I feel that it has been manipulated and changed over the thousands of years the bibles been a thing. Anyone have a counter argument?

 

Can either of you demonstrate that Jesus's new covenant negated the old law? It seems their is biblical proof supporting the argument that Jesus affirmed the old law.
I'll leave these quotes here:
“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” — Matthew 5:18-19

“It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.” (Luke 16:17)

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.” (Matthew 5:17)

“Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law” (John7:19)

From these quotes I conclude that Jesus endorsed the old Jewish laws, including the stoning of gays, blasphemers, the subjugation of women, and the oppression of gays.

--- Double Post Merged, May 10, 2018, Original Post Date: May 10, 2018 ---

My counter argument is that this is all circumstantial evidence.

 

Technically this is true, but only the very small fundamentalist groups believe in such things, definitely not all religious people.

The Old Testament is part of the Bible? Also, most Jewish people do not live by those things

 

Spectrum of jews:

Secular - Most jewish kids I’ve met are secular. Especially you live in american or western european diaspora. You mostly just do stuff for tradition as opposed to any beleif.

Reformed - These are like jewish protestants. Ive never actually met any seriously releigous reformed jews however most still attend a synagogue. They do allow women to fully participate in all activities.

Conservative-These are like jewish roman catholics. Some of these people are religious and many make an attempt to follow the more important laws of the torah (Old Testament) with some edits for modern lifestyles although most observe the sabbath. Most have unequal rights for women, especially in regards to congregational voting however still more rights than the next few i will list

Orthox-Similar to conservative however more religious and a bit old in some regards, men and women are seperated in synagogues and more of an attempt is made to follow all laws of the Torah. This is the national religion of Israel. Most (men) wear kippot in public and keep kosher.

Modern Orthodox-Somewhere between Orthodox and Conservative, just religious enough to wear a kippah in public and keep kosher.

Ultra Orthodox-Very religious, anyone Ultra orthodox+ certainly beleives in the Old Testament and attempts to follow all of its laws as closely as possible. Within Israel, these tend to be the poor and have large families.

Ultra Ultra Orthodox-These are the people who were protesting the use of cellphones with unrestricted internet access because they can be used to access “unkosher” websites. Not rly sure how else to describe them.

Side note:
I fall between secular and conservative

 

I agree that most Christian's don't follow thier holy book.

 

Meaning old testaments rules?

(ill get to quotes where Jesus abolishes food rules later today, when I have more time)

 

Not all of it blindly, they don't

 

You have yet to respond to my substantive argument.

 

I'm not trying to argue with that xD I was just pointing out that while the Bible may carry such teachings, they aren't necessarily followed

 

I agree. Most Christians are furiously inconsistent with their own moral teachings.

 

nah that's those damn jews they got it all wrong

:thinking:

although I guess every religion says the others "got it all wrong" huh?

 

Such as?

Are you referring to old testament rules?
The ten commandments?
Something else?

 

This is getting annoying. You people seem unable to actual respond to my argument but are completely willing to respond to one off posts and responses.


The new testament in no way negates the old Jewish laws, if any of you bother to read back a page I give a wealth of concrete evidence to support this. Christians who are being consistent with their holy book ought to follow the old Jewish law (with the exception of a few specific laws that Jesus explicitly negated).
You are all repeatedly ignoring my actual substantive arguments, nhdead didn't respond to my point about purple hats, and you Christians haven't responded to the quotes I provided to show the validity of the old testament at all.

 

The thing about that is like was pointed out above in someone post is that some of the old testament laws (those which were created for a purpose or symbol or sign or whatever it might be) were not transferred into new testament. A couple examples of why it might have been disregarded is One: health - back in the day they didn't have refrigeration or very good measures of taking care of food like that, pork is one of the biggest products that cary viruses if not kept in the right temps or if spoiled, therefore God was protecting them. Second: the old testament dealt with a lot of separation and rules for certain reasons that would cause me to right an essay on if i tried explaining xD but it was to separate them from the rest of the *world* long story short - kind of like Israel being separate from the world and then through Jesus's work anyone could be a part of God's children meaning those rules or limitations were as u could say excluded.

--- Double Post Merged, May 11, 2018, Original Post Date: May 11, 2018 ---

So loving your neighbour is doing whats right for them or supporting whats right for them. <-- if you agree with this statement than i shall proceed with why the Bible does not contradict itself in the certain themes you put forward. Slavery was a cultural thing the Bible does not Support it it merely acknowledges the cultural ways back then in fact it would be looked down upon by God, so just because it was done and thereby recorded does not validate the actual action taken place. Yes, Abraham and many others had slaves in the Old Testament and we believe they are saved, does that make it right? It was the Culture back then and no man is free from sin thats what makes Christ's gracious sacrifice so important because every man sins and through Him by believing we can be saved from it. Because it was done does not validate it, it was merely recorded.

Trans/homosexual ... yikes touchy topic sorry to all i offend honestly just coming from the Bible's perspective here. Here we go, So loving your neighbour is doing whats right for them. If the Bible supported this perspective, Trans/homosexual it would actually be contradicting itself through agreeing with it. So many ways you can address this but here is a few Bible's perspective's : #1 Verses on marriage is between man and a woman, if the bible agreed with homosexuality it would be contradicting those verses #2 Verses condemning such values - not the experiencing of those desires but acting in them. This would be contradicting those verses as well #3 Supporting such values and encouraging them is actually numbing there conscience as God is clearly against it and will punish those who act in it. Loving your neighbour = doing whats right - whats right according to the Bible is encouraging those to follow God and thereby they will receive salvation (a good thing) so ur showing love. Many other things i could argue from but as you have probably started falling asleep i should probably stop xD Hope this cleared a few things up or gave something to think about love the conversation its good to just argue a topic every once in awhile to see where you stand or even discover where you stand

 

I want you to move past the pork bit as I understand the new testament might explicitly negate that. I also want you to read my post a few pages back where I adress the "old testament" argument.

 

There's a story that I think would show Jesus doesn't support stoning. It's not about gays, but a women who committed adultery

" “Teacher,” they said to Jesus, “this woman was caught in the act of adultery. The law of Moses says to stone her. What do you say?”

They were trying to trap him into saying something they could use against him, but Jesus stooped down and wrote in the dust with his finger. They kept demanding an answer, so he stood up again and said, “All right, but let the one who has never sinned throw the first stone!” Then he stooped down again and wrote in the dust."

(John 8:6-8)



Jesus was a supporter of women's rights. While I don't have a quote specifically stating anything, there were multiple times Jesus spoke to women in public, a thing not accepted at the time.

Then here's some more:
"He said to them: "You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with or visit a Gentile. But God has shown me that I should not call anyone impure or unclean." (Acts 10:28)

"For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth." (Romans 10:4)

Sorry if this doesn't make sense in some way, feel free to quote it again
edit: grammar

 

This doesn't show he negated the old law, it shows he explitily negated some parts of the old law. Every part not explicitly negated by Jesus should still be religious law for christians.

 

You said subjugation of women, stoning of gays, blasphemers, and others.

Are there others you are concerned about?

 

Matthew 5:18-19 Emphasis on *until all is accomplished* the old testament is a like a sign pointing not specifically to the new testament but rather the great sacrifice and the fulfillment of the law. Ok so cool law is still in effect right? not in the way your talking about, reason for my emphasis on *until all is accomplished* is that once the law is accomplished we won't be held accountable to its standards anymore or rather we have been cleared or completed the law through the sacrifice of Christ not we but Christ we can't do to sin but through Christ (as Christ said, that nothing shall pass the law because He knew only He could - which is why He came - because of His love for His people. So therefore He is saying, when He says *until all is accomplished* He is saying when he accomplishes the law.

Matthew 5:17 Now we have confirmation that He will accomplish/ fulfill the law. He didn't come to abolish he came to fulfill it and thereby impute that fulfillment on His chosen. Therefore we no longer have to fulfill it, and as can be seen through all of history and the old testament we can never fulfill it due to our sin. We however don't discard the law but rather pursue to live according to it out of thankfulness for what Christ has done, as He said "if you love Me you will obey my commandments" we don't do it to try and be saved but rather out of thankfulness for what Christ has done of which we could never do.

John 7:19 This verse gives the validity of the statement that man cannot fulfill the law, therefore the need for Christ is there, of which Jesus points out saying after this verse "Why do you seek to kill Me?" The very one who came to save us from our sin and are disability to accomplish the law is being threatened. In this verse He demonstrates that the very law they strived to accomplish they had not to that day one of them fulfilled it at all. They could not no matter how hard they tried completely fulfill it.

Ps. I noticed you used verses that all exist in only the gospels (that which was before Christ fulfilled the law) therefore the law was still in effect, however as noticed in each verse Christ continually points in some way to the fact that it would be fulfilled and man could not do it, thereby revealing the pure gospel - John 3:16 That God sent His only begotten son that whosoever believed would not perish but have eternal life. The law is not eliminated it is merely fulfilled and in demonstration of that thankfulness we commit to living according to the law with the knowledge that we can not fulfill it but Christ has and therefore worship Him.

This is all the Bible's perspective on this, i have spent some time stuying religions, Christianity being the #1 on that list