And my point is that you cannot judge the nature of god by how YOU feel. Some parents don't care.

Cop-out.

And because you have children means nothing. I have children, as well, and I would NEVER submit them to the things that Yahweh submitted "his" children.

Not only that, the comparison of human parenting to godly parenting is not an apt comparison: many parents abuse their children, let them go hungry, desert them, and even kill them.

Or maybe it is an apt comparison--that is what Yahweh has done to his children.

Not only that, but the myth of the flood started in Egypt when Ra decided to punish humans for being rude and disrespectful.

It continued (or ran concurrent)in Sumeria when Enlil decided to wipe out humans with a flood because humans were evil and disrespectful. However, Enki tells Utnapishtim to build an ark (sound familiar) and put animals on board (sound even more familiar?).

The Jews probably took their version of the myth from the Babylonians when they were captive there.

In addition, there are TWO versions of the flood in Genesis, as there are two versions of creation; in both places, the two versions contradict each other.

Go figure

I have read the Bible cover to cover. I have taught the Bible in Sunday School. I have studied the Bible both as a Christian and a nonbeliever. I know what Christians believe, and I know that different Christians believe different things. I know the Bible as well as you do.

I have shaken the hands of many, many Christians; I have consorted with many Christians.

You can tell the other person that he/she doesn't know the Bible, but it doesn't apply to me.

One reason why I left the Christian faith is because I could no longer swallow the many contradictions, hypocrisies, and outright fabrications within the Bible. I could not take its anti-feminine stance.

I asked you to interpret the passage. Telling me to interpret the chapter is what kids do when challenged.

1. Jews wrote the Hebrew Scriptures, not Christians. It is THEIR book. You have overlaid an interpretation of the flood that has nothing to do with it! Jesus was not a factor. In addition, your argument/explanation is not logical. Noah existed, eh? Along with his sons and their wives, so why was the world irredeemably evil? Of course, Noah's sons were NOT clean: they later saw their father naked (some say that means they sodomized him), and were cursed for it.

In addition, if freewill were REALLY a tenet of the Christian faith, wiping out babies before they reached the age of reason negated their freewill! Also, wiping out EVERY person except for the family of Noah negated the freewill of generations to come.

And not only that, the myth of Noah is based on earlier myths! The Jews stole it from other religions.

2. Wait a minute! You are comparing two unlike scenarios! I have NEVER offered one of my children, or the children of anyone else, to a crowd. Don't drag MY actions into this! Lot offered his daughters to a crowd and was subsequently BLESSED by god in that he was allowed to leave the city. His wife, on the other hand, who did NOT offer her daughters, was turned into a pillar of salt (snort) for looking back.

So, taking a peek back to see what was happening is WORSE than letting your daughters be raped or even killed? Oh, boy! That's a gentlemanly god!

3. Your explanation of Mary doesn't even address what I said. God says not to have sex with your neighbor's wife: in part this is to make sure she isn't impregnated with another man's child whom you will have to raise. women were STONED for having the child of men other than those of their husbands.

Yet god impregnates Mary. I don't care how he did it: he got another male's wife pregnant! Why not choose a woman who had no betrothed?

4. Let us examine the verse: (Exo 4:21 NIV) The LORD said to Moses, "When you return to Egypt, see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders I have given you the power to do. But I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go."

Did you read that? God says that "I" will harden his heart. Not that pharaoh would change his mind, but that GOD would harden his heart.

Other verses support this:

(Exo 10:1 NIV) Then the LORD said to Moses, "Go to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart and the hearts of his officials so that I may perform these miraculous signs of mine among them

(Exo 11:10 NIV) Moses and Aaron performed all these wonders before Pharaoh, but the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart, and he would not let the Israelites go out of his country.

(Exo 14:4 NIV) And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and he will pursue them. But I will gain glory for myself through Pharaoh and all his army, and the Egyptians will know that I am the LORD." So the Israelites did this.

Exo 14:8 The LORD hardened the heart of Pharaoh king of Egypt, so that he pursued the Israelites, who were marching out boldly.

(Exo 14:17-18 NIV) I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians so that they will go in after them. And I will gain glory through Pharaoh and all his army, through his chariots and his horsemen. {18} The Egyptians will know that I am the LORD when I gain glory through Pharaoh, his chariots and his horsemen."

Sorry, dude, your explanation doesn't stand up.

5. Abraham despaired when he thought he was going to kill Isaac. IF god were omniscient, he didn't have to test Abraham so cruelly to know how he would react.

You said that god knew that Joseph would be a good stepfather (though I have never read this in the Christian scriptures, can you point out a chapter and verse?), god knew that Mary would willing bear his child, yet god didn't know that Abraham would sacrifice his child?

Nope, doesn't add up.

You can "believe" all you would like, but that is all you have: beliefs. You have no facts, you have no statistics. My beliefs are just as valid as yours.

First, WHERE did I say that people born with handicaps or health problems are lesser humans? Don't put words in my mouth or read out of context. You are at a lack of words or explanation, so you twist what I say.

You live in a dream world. While being born with a deformity doesn't make a person less than human, only an idiot would shrug off such issues as being mere "differences." These problems are not the difference between red hair and black hair, but differences that make people suffer.

And those people suffer much more than you or I suffer. The problems that I have had to overcome in life can't even begin to compare with someone who has a physical or mental handicap. They were not born like me; however, I am beginning to see that you were either born with the inability to understand what I am saying or you wallow in your faith so much that you refuse to understand what I am saying.

I am not talking in parables, ya know.



Of course, god is a "gentleman." You keep anthropomorphizing your god while "he" is supposed to be sexless, a spirit, eh?

But as for the gentlemanly aspects of your god:

1. He wiped out babies in a flood.

2. He said nothing when Lot offered his daughters to the crowd in Sodom.

3. He impregnated another man's wife.

4. After Pharaoh let the Hebrews go, god hardened the pharaoh's heart so that he sent his soldiers after the Hebrews.

5. He mentally tortured Abraham by telling him to sacrifice his son then said, "Oh, I was kidding!"

A real gentleman, that one.

Oh, and as for giving humans the "right" to choose, I have two alternatives: believe in Jesus or go to hell. Well, I "choose" not to believe in a mythic character and I "choose" not to go to hell.

That's that.

You did exactly what I said Christians do: instead of answering my questions head-on, you side stepped.

Do you mean "Mary" instead of "Marry"?

You either didn't understand my question or you chose not to address it. I didn't ASK if Mary were acquiescent to giving birth to the "son" of god, but about DNA.

Why did god even need a human vessel? Why not deliver his only "begotten" son fully grown on earth? Why let Jesus know he was the "son" of god?

I could have a lot more respect for a son of god who didn't know his destiny! Jesus had a bad weekend for the "sins" of humans, when went to heaven. Hey, I could do that!

I also would step up to the plate for having a child by god! Of course she didn't reject the idea.

IF Jesus existed, a much more reasonable scenario was that Mary was impregnated by a man other than Joseph, her betrothed; since this was an offense that called for stoning, she claimed she was impregnated by god.

I can't blame her.

I suggest that you go back and read the passage that I quoted and interpret it for me.

What a cop-out! Every time a Christian can't explain something he/she doesn't understand in the Bible, that person resorts to "I don't know but god has a reason."

Biblical passages are interpreted differently because each denomination will interpret them to fit what the denomination wants to believe--note that I said "wants" to believe. In other cases, Biblical passages are contradictory because someone was a lousy editor.

When the disciples asked Jesus why he spoke in parables, he answered, Matthew 13: 11

He spoke in parables because HE DID NOT WANT EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND. Those who were not the chosen couldn't understand what he said.

A loving god would have made sure EVERYONE understood his words.





Poppycock. The "deep" things in the Bible are merely those garbled aspects that not understandable.






Not only that, but god plagiarized that story from the Sumerians and Babylonians. He is not even original.

Go figure.

CowboyGH wrote:


I see, so god didn't make two faced babies, conjoined twins, babies born with spina bifida, Down Syndrome, Sickle Cell anemia, intersexed (aka hermaphrodites), and a plethora of other defects or syndromes?

He made those people just like he made you and me, eh?

Then why am I intelligent, female, not conjoined with a twin, have one face, all my appendages, and do not have SC anemia or spind bifida?

Why are you not as smart or as good-looking as I am?





Our father has told everyone. Some don't listen, some ignore, some just flat out lie and say he didn't say as such. I'm nothing special.


Your father didn't tell me anything. I have heard homophobic humans rave about gays, but god didn't say a word. In fact, Jesus loved one of his male disciples "the best." Kinda makes me wonder if Jesus wasn't gay.

Of course Christianity is male dominated. Look around: the Catholic Church won't allow female priests. Many protestant denominations also will not allow women positions of power. The further back in history one goes, the more prevalent the male dominance, but it is still male dominated.

How can use god the "father" and accuse me of secular thinking? If Christians used a nongender specific pronoun to refer to deity, then perhaps I could agree with you: let's call god "it." It is god the "father" because Christianity is male dominated! Even Judaism as the aspect of Elohim who is plural and feminine.

Was Mary artificially inseminated? Jesus had a corporeal existence: did he have ONLY Mary's DNA? If so, he would have been a clone and would have been female.

Of course, I know you will explain it away by saying the humans don't understand and that the whole kebosh was a miracle, but if I buy into that, then I have to buy into Danae being impregnated by a shower of gold.

It sounds as if you are confusing debating with arguing. In true debates, the parties remain civil and must back up their claims.

In arguments, people just argue, and it is usually based on opinion, not empirical evidence or even logic.

I looked for "Stone-edge" and couldn't find anything about it that related to Druids.

Now, if you mean "Stonehenge," it is NOT a Druidic edifice and was build long before the Celts came to the British Isles.

As for the Aztecs, they sacrificed people every day in order to keep the universe from imploding or ceasing to exist.

Again, if people buy into this stuff, they should start sacrificing humans. I have a few suggestions on who should be the first ones to go.

The gullibility of humans continues to amaze me: they will partially buy into myths, but only the parts that suit them.

Who cares?

Hey, dude, I am old, but I'll marry you so that you can get your P.R. easily.

Um, you ARE rich, right?

Methinks you think it scares women. Just because women back off from you doesn't mean that they are scared: it just means they don't want anything to do with you, and that is based on a variety of reasons.

I know many confident men--including my boyfriend--and their confidence would never be taken as aggression. I have the feeling you come across too strongly in trying to prove that you have confidence.

Its like wearing make-up: if you notice a woman is wearing it, its too much. If your confidence is scaring women away, then it is bluster, bravado, and braggadocio.

Excuse me, but what a load of crappacious rationalizing.

You sound as if women do NO chores or do not work at jobs outside the home. Let me inform you, child-bearing responsibilities are still largely remain the province of women (and before you men who share those responsibilities jump me, I said "largely"). Hire a babysitter and see how much you would be paying someone to do what she does.

If you are so busy putting an engine in your wife's car and breaking down how much that would cost and/or doing the plumbing, the wife would be doing the rest of the work--you make it sound as if the jobs that are traditionally male oriented are more important than traditional female roles.

If she is cooking, cleaning, doing the laundry, mowing the lawn, then she is inputting as much "unpaid" labor as you are. I did ALL of those things in my marriage and sewed not only most of my clothes, but my ex's work shirts.

So it comes down to rent time and HE can't come up with his half because he has been working on the car and SHE can't come up with her half because she has been doing everything else. Looks like they will be out in the street, eh?

By the way, I have never had a husband or boyfriend replace the engine in my car, but I have paid for repairs done on my car.

Perhaps you don't know it, but a marriage or live-in relationship should be a partnership. If you are keeping tabs on how much YOU do and how much you save, then you are making it into a competition.



Huzzah! My sentiments, as well.

You might very well be "yourself," but from reading your posts, you don't like yourself much. If you don't like yourself, why should anyone else like you?

It is easy to say "be yourself," but it doesn't always apply in circumstances such as attracting a partner. A boorish idiot can be himself--or herself--but that doesn't mean that other people will like him/her.

Perhaps your problem isn't that you can't meet anybody, but that you can't meet a woman who embodies what you like and/or want in someone whom you date or even with whom you live.

To create confidence, first, forget about attracting women and concentrate on yourself. Meditate, learn a new skill or find a new hobby. Stop dwelling on why you can't meet a woman and make yourself into a better, more interesting man. Develop a sense of humor. Do something that you have never done before, something totally out of character for yourself--within legal limits, of course.

Once you start on a regimen to becoming a new and improved "you," then start talking to total strangers, men and women. Make small talk. Smile at everyone.

It worked for me.

I don't know what you mean by the word "discus." Please clarify.