God would not have allowed them to do so.

Oh really????

What happened to free will?

They would have in a sense been physically able to. But God would have put a stop to it in a sense of telling people of the fallacy of this lieing about God.

Just like god wouldn't let priests molest and rape children. Oh.. wait..

no that is what is called false prophets, which God warned us of ahead of time.

It's not helping your case when the guy appointed as "God's rep on earth" has (and continues) to shelter the offenders from the justice the deserve.

God in no way "shelters" any offenders. But it's God's job to punish them and he will, it is not our place to do so. It's a chain of command type of thing.

What about all the other books that were written about God, like the Torah and Quran? Why would God have allowed those lies to have been written?

Aren't you being a little biased about YOUR CHOICE of books?

What about the religious books and teachings of the Eastern Mystics, and Wicca, etc. Why would God have allowed those lies to have been written.

What you're suggesting here simply makes no sense. It would require that a person FIRST choose the Bible, and THEN take that stance concerning just that one book. I'm sure the Muslims take the same stance with their Quran. That's a feeble and meaningless stance for any religion to take.

for a couple reasons....... the false prophets again and free will. The other books are just false prophets and allows them. But would not allow lies to be said about him in anyway, cause then that would make him a liar. The holy bible isn't just a book, it is the word of God. So thus HAS to be 100% correct and without flaw.

Doesn't anyone ever consider the possiblity that these people are actually mentally sick?

What kind of a Father would punish people for being sick? More importantly, what kind of a God would allow people to become sick in the first place?

Blame it all on Satan. Satan, the helpless fallen angel who has no power of his own always takes the blame for God's failings.

That get's old real quick.

This crap of a God who punishes everyone for every little thing is just a very over-simplistic and quite sick ideology to begin with.

Maybe if the priests weren't required to become celibate in the first place, they wouldn't have grown to become such perverts. The whole obscession this religion has with making sex out to be so filthy is disgusting in its own right.

Nope I don't believe the Hebrew authors. I think all this sick perverted stuff came from them to begin with, not from any God.

Well, in that case, it's a book that claims that this Fatherly God instructed people to stone unruly children to death.

Therefore I reject it, because no genuinely supreme being could possibly be that ignorant and stupid, IMHO.

So this just proves to me that this book cannot be the word of any divine being. It certainly can't be from my creator, because that would mean that I'm the moral and intellectual superior to my very own creator which makes no sense.

So it's a done deal. The Bible cannot possibly be the word of my creator. It's impossible.

first of all i don't know where you're getin this celibate stuff. Does not say anywhere in the bible about being abstinent from sex in anyway. Only thing it says along those lines is it is to be with one partner, a married partner at that.

With speaking of priests, i assume you're referring to Catholics....... Catholics have their own "holy" books outside of the bible they claim to be just as holy and they follow them as such.

And it does not make sex out to be so filthy or disgusting, it is a great thing done with two married people.

Unless you think i'm mistaken about the holy bible not saying anything about a priest being abstinent, and if so then please reference me some verses that mention as such. I hate it, but just as any other human i am wrong/mistaken from time to time. Can't know EVERYTHING, so please enlighten us.

God is more then a father, he is a creator. And the wage of sin is death. God warned them of such, so if one knew that they would die if they sin........ why would they?

Even same today, the wage of sin is death *lake of fire* so why would anyone go around sinning?

According to you I go around sinning all the time. I reject the Bible as the Word of God. I reject the notion that Jesus was the son of Yahweh.

According to you, that's even an unforgivable sin, that I yet have time to be forgiven for.

In short, the Biblical religion makes no sense at all, and is in grave contradiction with it's own proclamations.

I see no reason at all to believe that such an absurd fairytale could possibly have anything to do with even a wise man, much less a wise God.

well that's your right, your free will. But not one person has ever gave me an example of contradiction as of yet. Alot of atheist mention these contradictions but not one can be mentioned........ i wonder why. Also with a mentioning of a contradiction both contradicting verses have to be from either the new or old testament, not one from old and one from new. Cause some things are different from the two.

Msharmony, I myself don't have a solid opinion on this issue, but many of the "miracles" attributed to Christ are recorded by Paul-who never MET Yeshua-he simply had "visions" of Yeshua. I'm not saying you're "wrong", but that you need to gather better evidence to make your case.

Because you refuse to acknowledge them. It's that simple.

It's easy to just deny things. Lots of people are in great denial, this seems to be a very prominent human trait.

In the end, it doesn't matter. You believe that you will be "saved" from your rebellious character. I believe that I do not have a rebellious character. Two different means which lead to the same result. So it's machs nix.

As a "personal religion" I really couldn't care less what any individual believes. It's the extreme bigotry, ignorance, and arrogance that the Abrhamic religions instill in the masses on a large scale that concerns me. I'm more concerned with the negative affects these religions have on humanity as a whole. If an individual person believes that they've been "saved" from their own evilness, I have no problem with that. In fact, in some cases that may actually be a good thing. On a personal note I'm thankful that I'm not an evil person in the first place and therefore never had any need to worry about such things. Perhaps this is what allows me to see through these ancient mythologies so clearly.

Some historians believe that the OT (especially Deuteronomy) were altered in a post hoc manner. What thinks you of that?

http://www.thedevineevidence.com/prophecy_jesus.html


The Messianic prophecies were written over the span of a millennium by several Old Testament prophets.They spoke of a Messiah who would one day come to earth and walk among mankind. These prophecies mentioned specific names, locations, and even the timing surrounding His appearance. The known date of completion for the
Old Testament writings is 430 B.C., so these prophecies were in circulation at least 430 years before the time of
Christ.

Skeptic Interjection: Is it possible these prophecies were written after the life Jesus?

Answer: There is simply too much evidence showing the Old Testament writings to be in circulation for this to be
possible. One example is the Septuagint which predates the Masoretic texts by more than 1,000 years. The Dead
Sea Scrolls are another example, with many scrolls dating back to 250 BC. Other (less reliable) sources include
the Talmud and various authors which record the knowledge of certain messianic prophecies around the time of
Christ. Even if you reject the Old Testament date of completion as 430 B.C. there is enough evidence to show a
time gap of at least 250 years between the last messianic prophecy and the time of Jesus. If we accept the
Mosaic authorship of the Torah in approximately 1400 B.C., some messianic prophecies were written up to 1,400
years before the life of Jesus.

Skeptic Interjection: I've read in some skeptic literature that the translation of the Septuagint didn't begin
until 250 B.C. and was finally completed in 50 B.C.

Answer: Even if this is true, this still allows for a 50 year gap before the life of Christ. Regardless, the fact of the
matter is the Scriptures were in existence prior to 250 B.C. for the translators to begin their mission.

Skeptic Interjection: Is it possible the Christians interpolated the Messianic prophecies into the Hebrew Bible?

Answer: The odds of this occurring are practically impossible. The Jews were well acquainted with their
Scriptures. If Christians tried to alter the texts, the Jews would have immediately pointed this out. If someone
today altered the Christian Bible, the Declaration of Independence, or any other well known literary work, they
would immediately be discredited once confronted with the original documents. There are simply too many extant
manuscripts preceding Christianity that show the Messianic prophecies were well known and in circulation.

The Jews of antiquity were very familiar with the Messianic prophecies, though there was some confusion at the
seemingly conflicting prophecies: one interpretation told of a suffering servant while another told of a triumphant
and glorious king. Today we know the Bible speaks of two separate appearances. We know His first appearance
was one of peace, sacrifice, and humility whereas His second coming in the end times will be one of glory,
judgment, and reconciliation. The prophecies and fulfillments we will be discussing in this article are those that
were completed in the life of Jesus Christ.

The prophecies referring to the Messianic lineage are very exciting once we see their historical importance. For
centuries the ancient Jews kept meticulous records of their genealogies. These records existed even during times
of foreign captivity and immense persecution. The records were finally destroyed during the Roman invasion and
destruction of the Jewish temple in 70 A.D. This is important for two reasons:

1.)The records had to be in existence when the Messiah came in order to prove His lineage. Both Luke and
Matthew were able to give a detailed lineage of Jesus to show He was a descendant of the required
ancestors. Matthew lists the lineage of Joseph while Luke lists the lineage of Mary.

2.)Because the temple and the records were destroyed in 70 A.D., the Messiah must have been born before
this time. We know from historical records Jesus lived in first century A.D. This happened at the perfect
time- right before these records were destroyed, making it impossible to verify the claims of any other
Messiah claimant.


Skeptic Interjection: Doesn't the Bible warn its readers against the use of "endless genealogies" in proving
Jesus to be the Messiah?

Answer: These two references are I Timothy 1:3-4 and Titus 3:9. However, this is where critics can get caught
in their own skepticism. Though Christian scholars have dated Matthew and Luke to have been written before
Timothy and Titus, many critics allege the two Gospels were written after Paul's epistles. This begs the question
how Paul would be refuting texts that did not yet exist! It is generally believed that Paul was combating heresies
surfacing within Gnostic, apocryphal, and pseudographical texts- not the canonical Gospels.

Thomas: have you read "The Conspiracy Of Zion"? The evidence in that book seems to contradict what you are saying, and it may be of interest to you.