I feel you back your arguments badly. You feel the same about mine.

I prefer articles over movies, so if you send me a movie i put watching that movie on a backlog.

That movie you sent me isn't worth reading. Do you have an article for me to read on the same topic? Movies are meant to play with people emotions. Life isn't simple.

What about abortion and people like Stalin. Hitler was more of the Occult than a christian. Then you have all the pagan religions over the thousands of years. I do admit that christian nations are more efficient at killing than nations from 2000 years ago (technology unfortunately). Are you familiar with the Hindu Caste system in India.

Why do you say abortion isn't murder?

have read every major report since the 1901 Hemp report. That would include what those in the industry call their Bible, The LeDain Royal Commission On Cannabis. Its's findings are also available in the LeDain Royal Commission Report on Psychotropic drugs that is also the benchmark of the drug research industry.

They belie your statement. Get any peer reviewed repot or retract your lie.

You should know by now that I say nothing I cannot back up. You should be so honest.

Regards
DL — Gnostic Christian Bishop

You've never backed up anything you've said ever to any considerable degree.

Regards

I understand that both ancient jews and many other cultures believe in some sort of afterlife, but that doesn't make all those places the same simply because they were located in the same location.
— christian2017
Of course, each culture has its own local myths of death and afterlife. Some, such as Egyptians, originally viewed death as final, except for kings & pharaohs, who were semi-divine, and went to heaven. Other, mostly Eastern, cultures looked to reincarnation as a form of delayed justice; not in hell, but in a new body & life. Unfortunately, due to post-death amnesia, the bad guys won't know why their new life as a rat, or a woman, sucks. So, the punishment is retributive, not rehabilitative.

The Chinese have a long tradition of gory punishments in their version of Hell : Diyu. According to Wiki, the "ten courts of hell" sound like it might have inspired Dante's Inferno. But such formal retribution in the afterlife is usually associated with complex king-led societies with official laws & prescribed punishments. Simpler primitive or egalitarian cultures (e.g. wandering Hebrew tribes) usually didn't imagine any sort of ultimate justice. So death was final --- no hell, no afterlife, no reincarnation, no damnation. :death:

Diyu : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diyu

Hebrew Afterlife : Most Jewish ideas about the afterlife developed in post-biblical times. . . . The Bible itself has very few references to life after death. Sheol, the bowels of the earth, is portrayed as the place of the dead, but in most instances Sheol seems to be more a metaphor for oblivion than an actual place where the dead “live” and retain consciousness.
https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/life-after-death/

Retributive Justice : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retributive_justice — Gnomon

thats fair.

It initially puts a lot of store on the issue of causality vs perceived randomness & spontaneity, as indicated by many findings from Quantum Mechanics.
— christian2017

The author suggests only 3 possibilities:-...
1. A hidden variable/cause
2. True Spontaneity – something happens without a cause
3. True Randomness - different outcomes for no reason – ie. without a cause.
— christian2017

These three are language's - philosophy's - attempt to corral the real, in this case QM, and QM doesn't yet corral. Bell experiments to date rule out #1 - that being what the later tests were testing. #s 2 and 3 are objectionable for "without a cause." The word "cause" itself requiring exhaustive definition before sense can be made of it. In a sense we're on a drunkard's search wrt QM. That leaves us nowhere, but the nowhere is, for now, a fact.

In any case and not just this one, I accept that science and philosophy are connected by "silken ties.., And only by one's going slightly taut... Is of the slightest bondage made aware." (pace, Robert. Frost). But that otherwise are different. Feynman on this, "If you think you understand QM, then you don't."

Your author is trying. That puts him into the category of entertainment - and selling books - but not science or philosophy. — tim wood

I don't know how those quotes got attached to my name. Perhaps you can restate what you were saying unpacked more.

I do agree alot of physics books are more entertainment than accurate information.

Based on what you wrote above as far as what i understand that you wrote, i agree. My initial confusion started with the quotes you posted that were attached to what i said.

The only book i mentioned recently (and i don't know if it was this forum topic) is "A brief history of time" by stephen hawkings. I am very familiar with Newtonian physics.

the grave, the underworld, a cold cavern. It was an egalitarian after-death --- no sense of damnation. — Gnomon

Its a matter of details. Just because two concepts have similiarites doesn't mean they are not significantly different. The afterlife described in the epic of gilgamesh was place of darkness, coldness, (coldness) and misery. eternal suffering is damnation (regardless of how much the intensity of that suffering).

I understand that both ancient jews and many other cultures believe in some sort of afterlife, but that doesn't make all those places the same simply because they were located in the same location.

As to worse things, i find that naturalism and/or atheism leads to a simplistic view on how to treat people so it would benefit my spirits to become naturalist or atheist.
— christian2017

I would not call it simplistic, but agree.

The older atheists did not have my full respect until they began forming atheist churches. Those are more like the old mystery schools and those I approve of as then, atheists are recognizing our tribal natures more and are doing their duty to their children by providing an intelligent tribe for their children instead of just letting them gravitate to some immoral mainstream religion based on fantasy and the supernatural.

ok. I make the best pizza in the world but how would i prove that on an online forum.
— christian2017

That is a subjective call on your part as it is tuned to your taste. All you can prove is your taste says it is the best. You might like a meat lover pizza while many would like those yucky pineapple ones. I like the hot and spicy so would reject your best as not the best. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

That pizza statement was a reply to a statement you made about yourself that you would have no way of proving on an online forum, i assumed we both knew i don't make the world's best pizza. And no it wasn't a lie, because most people would figure out the statement was tall order.

As for the atheist church thing, i've heard of that. Its hard to call naturalists moral, when they approve of abortion. I find most naturalists/atheists to be complacent and apathetic. To be fair modern christian are essentially the same.

Its better to die young then grow up in a very depressing and corrupt culture....
— christian2017

Suicide stats belie this. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Why do you say that? I'm talking about this how it relates to American statistics

Abortion is forgivable but it is murder.
— christian2017

You misuse the language. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Why do you say that? You misuse the langauge. Abortion is murder but is forgivable. Why do you say otherwise?

Alcohol is the only psychotropic drug known to kill brain cells. For that reason, I think it is more moral to use other substances for intoxication. Alcohol also creates more violence than many of the other drugs we have access to. Do unto others. We have all heard the joke of ---- what would you like to see coming at you in a car. A drunk going 120 who thinks he is going 100 or a pot smoker going 80 while thinking he is going 100. If one is going to get hit, one would hope for a pot intoxicated person over a drunk. Pot seems to be the more moral drug. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

alcohol can be consumed in less amounts. Jesus Christ drank alcohol. Great weed is slightly more moral but it does kill brain cells and thats been proven. Weed is hard to measure for intoxication when someone is pulled over after they used it.

We today also oppress our poor by keeping them poor with our taxing systems.

In ancient city states with finite resources, baby sacrifice would have been seen as better than creating starvation for the workers who grew and harvested the food that sustained the tribe, whatever name it held.

To think it was done regularly by custom would have had that tribe eventually dwindle to nothing. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Abortion hasn't brought are numbers to nothing and it similar to child/human sacrifice. Its a matter of amount and spectrum. You should do some research on the ancient Amorites. Have you ever read the book of Isaiah or Jeremiah (to find out more about the ancient Israelites).

I'm not a physicist either. I think the point Holmes was making (this was a couple of years ago for me, btw) could be illustrated by looking at the truth of statements. Relativity requires that we index statements in order to make them truth-apt.

"It's a long time till the next galactic tick."

In the mechanistic perspective, the time between now and the next tick is assumed to be the same throughout the universe. Once we realize that time is relative, we have to identify the frame of reference for the statement. This alters the fundamental nature of things. — frank

The speed something travels at effects its radiation (above -~480 fareheit gives off radiation) and effects a clock telling time. Faster means clock slows down and slower mean clock speeds up.

Just because time is relative and hard to hammer down does not change the fact that the movement of objects has a set order in which they occured. If you jump up and down before i jump up and down we might have trouble deciding the seconds between the two events but i can assure you jumped up and down before me. Time still occurs as the iteration of events but the seconds between events is all that is relative.

It initially puts a lot of store on the issue of causality vs perceived randomness & spontaneity, as indicated by many findings from Quantum Mechanics.

If traditional maths is essentially Determinism, as it produces single inevitable outcomes, (other than when probabilities are deployed), then how should we interpret the multiple outcomes?
The author suggests only 3 possibilities:-
the above is from the OP

Alot of people mistakenly argue for PoMoism because of certain test results from QM. My assumption was that you have watched some (not all) of those trite QM youtube videos that make that connection.

Not what CNN and the BBC are telling us either, I know. — Nobeernolife

:)

My bias is that physics, especially QM, is too often grist used in the nonsense mill - some of it interesting nonsense, but still nonsense! If it's a nonsense game, then let play who will, keeping in mind it's entertainment.

I do not find the book on Amazon - why not? Where/how did you read it?

which category people feel ... if people feel t
— Gary Enfield

Never mind feelings. Can you serve here any tempting morsel of the author's thinking, or evidence that he's not in the entertainment business? Any of its substance?

You/he mentions Bell's theorem. By reference or does he explain it and work it out? If the latter and he did a good job, then you ought to have a decent understanding of it, especially the "loophole free" phrase, its meaning and significance. — tim wood

Finally we agree on something. I find that many QM experts (not all) like to play games with us by saying QM proves post modernism. Perhaps Post modernism is a good doctrine, i don't think you can prove it necessarily with QM (atleast at this point). I find many (not all) interpretations to be essentially cop out explanations that our just though processes that approach the threshold of medieval banality (just magic). Not all QM physicists agree on the whole post modern interpretation. There could be a rational explanation for QM, its just the solution is to complex to the point it will take 200 years for a good model that fits the lab results.

Starting with the God of Abraham all the notions of God are false, so my dear, there is no god who hates people,
— Athena
Again, you show that you have not read the Koran.

there are only people who believe there is a god and that their holy book is the truth, and the other holy books are not true.
— Athena
Those people who believe their holy book is not true do not count as believers any more. Try some logic.

Or people who share the same holy book and disagree with the other person's interpretation of the book. I do not have much patience for this.
— Athena
If you had read the Koran, you would know that it clearly states that it must not be doubted. And any attempt to "interpret" the Koran in a way to turn it into a peaceful, contemplative book would leave very little of it.... if you had read it you would know it is chock-full of hatred and threats of violence against non-believers.

You really might want to do a little reality-check for your PC stereotypes. — Nobeernolife

Thats not what all the Hollywood movies i've seen since the age of 5 said, so you sir are wrong!

That article you posted says that no one is damned in "the epic...". Well no one is damned in the sense that just about all of man (not the Bible but "the epic ...." ) goes to the same place, so no one is damned in that sense. But the place every one goes to as described is very depressing and eternally sad (the bat cave where it is forever cold). That book you posted doesn't do "The epic of gilgamesh" justice. There is a reason Gilgamesh spends most of the story trying to avoid "death". Gilgamesh was "successful", he is the last person who should fear eternal sleep or in other words eternal unconsceeeeenscness.(spelling).

Unfortunately for my Christian faith, they didn't actually confirm the truth of the Bible account . Instead, they merely indicate that the writers of Genesis (circa 1500BC) were familiar with the ancient myths of Mesopotamia (Gilgamesh, circa 2100BC), and perhaps mixed them in with some Canaanite myths. Even the polytheistic poet Homer (Greece, 1200BC) seems to have been influenced by those classic stories of antiquity. So, it's not likely that Genesis was written by Moses, with divine inspiration, as some claim. Perhaps Gilgamesh was inspired by the sun god Shamash.

Regarding descriptions of eternal damnation for sinners, I was not familiar with that aspect. Apparently, those stories about the various fates of the dead, were added later in an appendix. From the except in the link below, it seems that their fates were somehow dependent upon how many sons a man had. Not exactly a biblical doctrine. So, I wouldn't conclude from Gilgamesh that parallel ideas in any way verify the inspiration of the Bible. There are many common themes in the myths of many cultures. We can learn from them, but shouldn't take them literally. :smile: — Gnomon

I read my brother's copy. Basically most of men ended up in a dark cave hanging from the ceiling like bats. The cave is cold. This was the fate most of man ended up in. Eternal suffering fire or no fire. The intensity i'm not sure.

Actually reading the story will reveal this Gilgamesh's main concern through out the whole story. I don't remember this being a later addition to the story and considering this theme is all throughout the story, i don't see how it could be a later addition. As far as who ends up in this eternal damnation, the copy i read said essentially everybody, poor, rich, and essentially everybody. I don't remember anything about how many sons you had. The version i read gave a very long explanation of the source of the stone fragments and explained in detail each section of the story in addition to the story itself.

As far as Genesis being written by Moses, i would agree that if there is no god or god similar (or exactly) to the god of the Bible, yes Moses probably didn't write genesis. If there is no god like or the same as the god from the Bible, then the Moses from history was so loosely based on the Moses from the Bible, we could approach the threshold of almost or essentially saying that "Moses" didn't exist. King Arthur existed but he was nothing like the King Arthur from the novel and his name was significantly different from King Arthur.

As far as the flood story coming from prior myths rather than some "godly" historical record, that option is on the table, but if there is a god, we should be open to that these stories were in there correct versions in a particular holy book. Whether that correct Holy book, is written by the greeks, peruvians, norse, asian indians, chinese, saxons, egyptians, or some other group. All of the previous mentioned groups had stories of titan wars, and vengeful dieties bringing a great flood, and some other common stories.

Wouldn't a meta-reality require a creature to view or percieve a "fake" world?
— christian2017

If it is necessary nothingness, than no. I think absolute time and space is this nothingness

How do you feel about collective conceeeence or collective soul?
— christian2017

Our souls are not substances. Only material things are. So I think you can say we are all one. One piece of nothing, to be more precise. But you are your body. You are not both your soul and your body — Gregory

Is "necessary nothingness" something i can google or is that your own phrase/notion? Can you define "necessary nothingness"?

Time is the iteration of the movement of particles. A clock going 100k mph is going to tell time slower than a clock sitting in my bedroom. Special relativity dictates time does exist but the only standard for time is the iteration of the movement of particles. I'm not going to go into the book "A brief history of time" and vectors right now.

Why do people say spirits and souls aren't substances? I'm not saying they are wrong, but how would they prove that (assuming they exist). When someone (theist or deist) says a soul has no substance, i'm not sure what that means. Some say material is nothing more than some sort of cosmic dance or vibration of spirit or in other words spirit is substance and material is a manifestation of the movement of spirit. I'm sure this could be classified as mumbo jumbo but this whole conversation is wierd.

I don't think something that thinks (you and i) can be said to be nothing. It appears we are both open to the possibility of collective consceeeeence or collective soul.

churches have to spend a certain amount on charity, but after they check that box off they very often, stop right there. Churches very often impede true fiscal conservatism with their political voting record and what they say at the county commissioner meetings.

That was an interesting read that held my attention. However, when I asked my question, I was not thinking of comparing human stories of the gods. My thinking was very simple. I don't think anyone today believes Zeus was a real god. Why should I believe the God of Abraham is a real God? — Athena

Are you saying there is no compassion at your local church? Is the suicide rate really high these days? (yes). Were flying cars possible 20 years ago (9/11)? Do we live in a science fiction movie? (yes)

Are there fiscally conservative solutions that would make the poor relatively happy and also self sufficient (yes). Do people like to label the poor lazy? (yes).

Basically we are more than likely about to come to the end of an era. Is it the end of the world i don't know. If you can't find any beauty in your local church, than no, i have no reason to tell you to believe in the god of the Bible. The modern church sqaunders the tithes and offerings. To give that money to a local crack head would honor Jesus Christ more than what the typical church does with it's money.

We can only make decisions based on the information we have.

esus told the Pharicees they had the wrong concept of who God is. Do you understand what I am getting at. Typed from my phonE
— christian2017

How is such a god who can be known different from Zeus? — Athena

I know of the Iliad and Homer and in fact the writings that were associated with Homer were used as school literature and to some extent used as religious teachings in classical greece. I don't know a tremendous about how Zeus viewed the world. This might be unfair but many associate Zeus with satan. Once again this might be unfair however Pergamos in Revelation is the throne of Satan and a major temple of zeus was in pergamos. However Asclepius was also there. Should the christian associate Asclepius or Zeus with the throne of satan, i don't know (or both). Zeus was also the god of Antiochus the 4th (the proto anti-christ and the antagonist of Maccabees). Antiochus the 4th was the antagonist of the story of Hannakah. I'm not a big jew fan, i believe they have the right to Israel or atleast to a bigger country than they have. I don't believe modern Israel is a safe home for jewish people.

I don't believe Jews are inherently better than non jews.

But back on topic, some say Zeus favored the poor based on stories of him visiting and testing people by morphing into a poor man. Other than what limited knowledge i have of the Iliad and the Odyssey and stories like that, i don't have an in depth knowledge of greek pagan theology. In my opinion a careful study of the old testament will reveal a god who wants to bless the poor through practical and equitable ways. "you shall not show partiality to neither the poor nor the rich". In our modern society the poors problems can be solved through modernizing building codes in light of global factory production of building materials which would enable us to have a fiscally conservative society. I'm not going to expand on that right now.

I do see ancient greek culture as an extension of greek pagan theology but i feel (and i could be wrong) much of the more intense religious aspects of the ancient greek was more entrenched in personal and unnotable gods. Much of greek thought was governed from their desire to be like people like Odysseus and Odysseus was big deal back then and studied quite abit, Odyssesus was what would in modern times called "filled with hubris".

Jesus Christ did say "be as wise as a serpent and as gentle as a dove for he sends us out among wolves", however just as poseidon tremendously punished Odyssesus, God/Jesus Christ has the power to send the unbeliever to suffer forever. I believe in "Once Saved, Always Saved". If the horse has a broken leg, it is taken out behind the barn and shot, and it goes to horse heaven.

Do you have a holy book related to Zeus other than the Iliad or the Odyssey?

There are over 1050 laws or strong suggestions in the new testament and over 613 laws or strong suggestions in the old testament related to who Jesus Christ is. I don't know alot about Zeus, but Jesus Christ is nothing like Mohomad. Mohomad had very strange sexual practices akin to the Roman Papacy.

If Zeus was like the god of the Bible, i have no holy book currently (currently) at my disposal to prove it.

The book of Jeremiah and also Isaiah point to a very intricate god who cared for people who had it bad.

Isaiah chapter 53 and 54 point to god with very unique qualities (KJV).

I feel like everyone on this thread is assuming the world could be necessary. Meta-reality is spiritual and so is not a thing, or even an accident like potentiality. Hegel spoke of quantity coming from quality, but he also took into consideration Zenos paradoxes — Gregory

Wouldn't a meta-reality require a creature to view or percieve a "fake" world? When i say creature you have to remember that we are made up of micro stars called electrons and protons and each electron is astronomicaly far away from each proton. Obviously this is a vast over simplification. How do you feel about collective conceeeence or collective soul?

The picture given for general relativity you commonly see to explain gravity is obviously meant to be an over simplification and most people would agree. That ball going along the grid would also have a grid associated with atleast one other direction and then the ball would also create one or two more grids not shown. Basically to wrap our minds around all these grids in a shape that can be displayed in a 3d engine (like blender) would make it hard to show the concept of general relativity. My point is if that gravity grid commonly shown is essentially reality, then reality is not necessarily relative, but what i see with my eyes and what is going happen next (approximate prediction) are two different things. To say that space/time is curved (common general relativity phrase) is confusing because it doesn't do the theory justice in terms of explaining what general relativity really means. As you can tell, i'm not a physicist.

I think I get the first two, but it's not clear to me that we presently live in an age if relativism. How would you characterize our present conceptual framework? — frank

I don't think relativism as applied to Physics relates to philosophy in a real way. Einstein to put it over simply applied reality to a geometrical shape that we aren't naturally inclined to be comfortable with. It isn't that reality is relative but that what we see with our eyes and the way we experience time is stretched or skewed by a universe that doesn't have a straight forward shape. Special relativity basically dictates that time can't be accurately measured (over vast distances) unless its in my bedroom or your bedroom. Time is not relative but it is just it can't be measured accurately, because it is the iteration of events and not the iteration of the clock. The clock ticks different or and the electrons change speed based on how fast the clock is flying (as a whole) through the universe. Have you read "A brief history of time" by Stephen Hawkings?

As for general relativity, the shape space/time (or reality) is a geometric shape that our minds don't really understand. Its not relative i would say, its just so wierd that our minds do not quickly (quickly) quantify or find intuitive enough to have some idea (some idea) of whats going to happen next. Just because something is hard to predict or judge does not make it relative, it just means it requires tremendous amount of time and scrutiny (and in this modern age, teamwork).

It is a problem only with monotheistic religions, and among those only with those who are concerned about others. Stop generalizing about "religion".
E.g. the Romans had their pantheon, and any captured tribe simply got to add their gods there. Problem solved. — Nobeernolife

Well without writing a 10 page paper with banal people, your concise and correct answer is a wonderful starting point. Intelligent people who deal with dumb people don't like to be pushed around by dumb people atleast to some extent. God is an intelligent person and we and the ancient israelites are dumb. God can only handle us dumb people to some measure before he pulls out the old belt.

Stephen Hawkings said in "A brief history of time" that the notion of turtle on top of infinity turtles isn't completely ridicoulous. I do agree with your OP. Even some (some) naturalists would argue that its a possibility the universe and all its mass completely or to some extent loops continoooosuuusly in all its coming and going. Basically the universe changes internally but not externally. I could have been more articulute in how i said that but i think you get what i'm saying.

For the universe to form out of nothing, it almost makes you think, how would someone absolutely prove without a doubt that something wasn't always there.

Yahweh means "I am" or "I am what i am"

Is he over a long period of time questioning where he himself and his own character traits came from or originated. I would argue this train of thought combined with a lack of entities or other beings would be a source of depression or serious depression.

Basically what i'm getting at the universe might just loop back over and over again. I'm sure there are other viable alternatives.

I find you belligerent and obtuse,
— christian2017

I am a fundamental, yes, but you cannot quote or find anywhere where I am obtuse.

Stop lying you drunken bum. Kidding on that last.

You are just repeating in your last so I will ignore it. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

i'm not going to pull up quote after quote where you pretend to fail to see very short leaps or connections (very simple ones). We'll just have to agree to disagree about which one of us is more obtuse or belligerent.

By some. And then others think you are crazy. And then others think you have terrible sexual immorality.
— christian2017

Only the stupid who do not know a Gnostic Christian and only believe the lies that the inquisitors put out to justify their many murders of my forefathers. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

ok. I make the best pizza in the world but how would i prove that on an online forum.

Lets say hypothetically someone gave you 80, 90 or 99 percent proof or a substantial argument that your philosophy/religion was inferior to theirs, wouldn't that drive you to depression? I would love to have a great reason to embrace atheism or naturalism. I can think of far worse things.
— christian2017

Depression??

Hell no. It would be glorious. One of the greatest joys in life is being corrected. To resist it is to want to remain on the wrong path. Christians do that, en mass, as they put their tribal associations ahead of their moral sense. Gnostic Christians do the opposite, and being that we are perpetual seekers after the best rules and laws to live by, I would even pay money to lose an argument.

As to worse things. Just look at the mainstream religions. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

You say you are very advanced in age? (based on a previous conversation from a while back)

As to worse things, i find that naturalism and/or atheism leads to a simplistic view on how to treat people so it would benefit my spirits to become naturalist or atheist.

Christians tend to have equal or better morals than naturalists.
— christian2017

???

Do naturalists believe that genocide and infanticide are good character traits? I don't think so.

Stop being so stupid drunk. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

The amorites were committing genocide (infanticide) on their own people and they oppressed their poor. The poor in ancient canaan weren't largely concerned about having their lives shortened. Depressed people very often prefer a shortened life over suicide. You talk of hell, why do bad people need to go to hell? The ancient israelites also murdered children. Would you like me to post articles about these two topics?

Why do you say i'm a drunk? Isn't alcohol consumption a spectrum?

Naturalists support abortion. Abortion is forgivable but it is murder. Its better to die young then grow up in a very depressing and corrupt culture....

I go on this site so that i consume less alcohol.
— christian2017

Try pot. It is way healthier and a change of thinking pattern might be handy. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

I have no problem with alcohol except the fact that it has more legal ramifications. Except for measuring intoxication from driving, i don't believe it is less moral.

Christians typically aren't allowed to do evangelizing on sites like this.
— christian2017

Apologetics is not evangelizing. It is explaining the text with arguments and opinions and not just quoting it the way the more stupid believers do. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

I've been accused of evangelizing for very minor things on this site a long while back. Christians are held to higher standards on sites like this. I go on this site so that i drink less alcohol.

Contradictions in the bible I already know by the score and having suffered my apotheosis and gained a Christ consciousness, I can tell you that any modern Christian who, given the nature of Christianity, remains a Christian and does not convert to either Gnostic Christianity or atheism, they will not think like me or Jesus.

Many are called to do so but remain on the wide road to hell instead of joining me in heaven. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

What contradictions are there in the Bible? Can you name one? If i'm bleeped out of existence when i die, there is no hell. Or do you have some great explanation as to how i can experience hell if i am bleeped out of existence?

Listen.... I said he didn't change anything. He didn't change the law of Moses. He simply said that even Moses (or God if you will) preferred no divorce. My assumption was you would make that very small leap in thought.
— christian2017

I Indicated that the Yahweh/Jesus combo wanted a no divorce policy. Not Moses. He did not reply to Jesus in that passage. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

But Jesus never said that divorce wasn't allowed. Once again Jesus didn't abolish the law of Moses. Jesus said he didn't abolish the law of Moses. Would it make you feel more comfortable if I posted 10 different Bible chapters for you to read or do you want to use the world's great Bible reference called google and bing?

I do recognize that the majority are belligerent and obtuse, but I hope not as ill mannered as you think. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

I find you belligerent and obtuse, but so am i and most of the people on this forum. Welcome to an online forum.

I am a Gnostic Christian and we are known as the only good Christians by some because we have open minds. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

By some. And then others think you are crazy. And then others think you have terrible sexual immorality. Public opinion can be hard to quantify (keyword hard) and also public opinion is not in every case a reason to be proud.

Given the lack of decent apologists for Christianity, I can affirm that I doubt that any Christians are reading or living by even the good parts of the bible.

The Catholic Church is even putting priests out there to do apologetics and even they are falling flat on their faces.

This is not surprising as they never had decent moral values to sell and that is why they resorted to murderous inquisitions instead of moral debates. Then as now, Christians are moral cowards.

Trust me on this. I have a long history of being insulted by Christians as they run for the hills. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Christians typically aren't allowed to do evangelizing on sites like this. Other religions are given more space for that sort of thing. I don't take it as an insult that i don't post great apologetics. I go on this site so that i consume less alcohol.

Christians tend to have equal or better morals than naturalists. I understand thats not saying much.

Lets say hypothetically someone gave you 80, 90 or 99 percent proof or a substantial argument that your philosophy/religion was inferior to theirs, wouldn't that drive you to depression? I would love to have a great reason to embrace atheism or naturalism. I can think of far worse things.

If Moses allowed divorce which he did, Jesus Christ was simply saying that the pharisees (and people like that) were taking the issues of the sex and the heart far too lightly. As you well know divorce is not a light issue.
— christian2017

You are adding a lot to scriptures without even quoting the original.

You are deflecting all over the place and want me to read half the bible instead of being honest with the text.

Typical Christian.

Seems like we are done here. — Gnostic Christian Bishop

Adding information in every instance is not always deflecting. The best way to find contradictions in the Bible is to approach it from a simplistic perspective. Are you familiar with Proverbs chapter 1 (KJV) particularly that we should embrace subtlety (spectrum) and try to understand dark sayings.

I can promise you if you try to see Jesus Christ as a simple and direct no nonsense kind of kind guy, not only will you find plenty of modern christians who will think like you but you'll also eventually find contradictions in the Bible.

Jesus Christ said "be as wise as a serpent and as gentle as a dove for he sends us out among wolves"

Proverbs chapter 1 (KJV)