Why Didn't God Leave Huge Quantities of Secular Evidence For Jesus?

[Subduction Zone]

People say that God didn't show himself to them. The creation reveals God's creation all around us. We don''t see God but we see his creation. His Eternal Power and Godhead

You have to quit repeating nonsense that you cannot support.

 

[Isolde Schulz]

That is precisely the sense of human entitlement which lands us in the current predicament. Maybe Apophis 2029 will end the misery?

 

[joelr]

I believe that the existence of cavemen is exaggerated.There is nothing in the context of Bible verses that hints at the existence of primitive people. God created human beings. The Common Propaganda Regarding "Cave Men"

Because OT scripture was written by Bronze age people who knew no science and could only make up silly regional gods and prescribe laws to follow.
The fossil line of hominids is well established from hominids who walked a small amount up to modern humans.
You should at least consider looking at how much evidence we have for the evolution of hominids


Hominidae - Wikipedia

 

[joelr]

Using figures of speech doesn't mean that the Bible is a collection of stories. You have to look at the context of the verse to know if it's a parable or real and when you read the Bible over and over you notice things that you did't notice before. I believe that people who say that the Bible is stories that teach a lesson are trying to interpret the Bible from the belief of there not being a God, which is absurd when you look at the creation around you and how it has design and purpose. Can/should we interpret the Bible literally? | GotQuestions.org

Some type of deism or reality being created by some thinking agent still has nothing to do with ancient stories. Even if it were true, Greek Gods are not real, the Hindu religion isn't automatically true and neither are biblical narratives.
When they created Yahweh he wasn't even the God of everything he was only God of Israel and there was a council of divine beings.
Later this was changed. But it's all fiction.

 

[Skywalker]

Do you think repeating a fallacy I already debunked makes it more true the 2nd time?
It also supports the idea that the Israelites took a myth and re-worked it so they too would have a flood story. Since there has never been evidence of the supernatural this is almost 100% likely to be the case.

Is the Matrix a real story because it used several older stories?





So you haven't ever been taught how stars are formed? Every religion claims their God is real because morals. They are all wrong. So the odds that you are as well is very likely.
Also we don't get morals from the Bible. Besides that biblical law is exactly the same as the laws from other nations of the period (Dr Josh speaks on this often) we don't follow those morals. We pick and choose. If the Bible was a strict moral standard then it would be immoral for women to speak in church. Graven images would be immoral yet religious freedom is a big modern moral.
"Good" is an abstract quality that we put on events and things. So is "evil". Personifications of them are one reason why ancient people created fictional Gods. The Biblical characters are another example.

Feel free to put forth some evidence anytime? You are just preaching beliefs.






That is the English translation. After the fact when people already accepted Persian myths as part of the religion.

"The difference might not be obvious but it is vital. The English version means that even though God put eternity in people's hearts, they cannot understand it. The Amharic version says that God has put eternity in the hearts of men so that they cannot understand it. This means that people cannot understand the work of God by their minds, but only by their hearts. The Amharic version seems like the right one to me, but I do not know the original languages"

Why do you think Hebrew high priests rejected the concepts because the Torah said nothing about these concepts.
These religious thinkers never knew about concepts you said everyone should know. SO that isn't true. You "know it" after your culture adds new myths to a religion. Then you pretend like everyone always knew.






In Jewish cosmology there were 7 heavens. God and the stars lived there. Heaven as a destination for all followers and their souls came after the Persian/Greek invasion.
The Hebrew religious leaders were influenced by them. Already a known fact.





Already did this one. It's not a reference to a soul going to heaven. This was like just a week ago we covered this?



Except the evidence shows Israel emerged around 1200B.C. and their myths and stories emerged then as well.
Prior to that Israel was the Canaanite culture and they had different myths. They brought Ashera over for a while as a consort to Yahweh before they became monotheistic.

Again you are just stating beliefs without evidence. We know what you believe. But there isn't proof. And it's very unlikely that the magic folktales of one culture are actually real. These stories are no different than Egyptian or Mesopotamian myths.

Similar details show that the flood event actually happened and the Bible and Sumerian mythology both record the same event, even though Sumerian theology is not biblical and doesn't have a concept of a holy, just, and loving God. The Flood of Noah and the Flood of Gilgamesh

A popular theory, proposed by liberal "scholars," said that the Hebrews "borrowed" from the Babylonians, but no conclusive proof has ever been offered.22 The differences, including religious, ethical, and sheer quantity of details, make it unlikely that the Biblical account was dependent on any extant source from the Sumerian traditions. This still does not stop these liberal and secular scholars from advocating such a theory. The most accepted theory among evangelicals is that both have one common source, predating all the Sumerian forms.23 The divine inspiration of the Bible would demand that the Genesis account is the correct version. Indeed the Hebrews were known for handing down their records and tradition.24 The Book of Genesis is viewed for the most part as an historical work, even by many liberal scholars, while the Epic of Gilgamesh is viewed as mythological. The One-source Theory must, therefore, lead back to the historical event of the Flood and Noah's Ark.25 To those who believe in the inspiration and infallibility of the Bible, it should not be a surprise that God would preserve the true account of the Flood in the traditions of His people. The Genesis account was kept pure and accurate throughout the centuries by the providence of God until it was finally compiled, edited, and written down by Moses.26 The Epic of Gilgamesh, then, contains the corrupted account as preserved and embellished by peoples who did not follow the God of the Hebrews.

Comparing the Bible to the Matrix is not a comparable analogy because there's a lot of evidence that Zoroastrianism copied the Bible.

Ability doesn't determine role. Women are not incapable of being pastors over men, they are forbidden because of the sin of people. Do women have to remain silent in church? | GotQuestions.org

First Corinthians 11, 1 Corinthians 14, and 1 Timothy 2 all teach male spiritual leadership in the home and church as a universal principle. Pastors and elders are men, and women come under that authority with the rest of the church. Women should be careful to maintain the order God has designed for the church and show her submission to authority in culturally appropriate ways (in Corinth, a head covering). There are many roles a woman can fill in the church, and Scripture does not forbid her from singing or praying or otherwise participating in the service. But bringing the Word of God to the entire congregation is not one of her roles. That task is reserved for men.

Religious freedom is consistent with graven images being immoral because it's not the government's role to manage people's relationship with God. Jesus and Paul never tore down pagan altars. They gave the people a simple message and it was up to them if they wanted to accept it or reject it.

The Old Testament didn't mention Satan as clearly as the New Testament because until after the Persian invasion, the Israelites walked away from God and into idolatry, and God didn't want another being that they would be tempted to worship.

Psalm 23:6 is heaven being mentioned in the Old Testament. People don't believe Psalm 23:6 refers to heaven because they have their own interpretations of the Bible. "Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever."

 

[Isolde Schulz]

Because OT scripture was written by Bronze age people who knew no science and could only make up silly regional gods and prescribe laws to follow.
The fossil line of hominids is well established from hominids who walked a small amount up to modern humans.
You should at least consider looking at how much evidence we have for the evolution of hominids


Hominidae - Wikipedia

If one forgets the Neanderthals, one is a Cromagnon.

 

[joelr]

There is no way that nature could just exist, when there are so many variables in nature where life wouldn't exist without those variables there. Without the trees we couldn't survive, and vice versa. This shows that there is a personal God. Basis of Belief

Not true at all. From the big bang and onwards the laws of physics accounts for all of the design. There could be endless other universes where the laws were different and there is no life.

Even if there is some creator it has nothing to do with ancient stories about people getting messages from their local God and then copying old myths. Your religion is no different than Hinduism or Islam. They are made up myths designed to teach lessons and laws to ancient people.

 

[Isolde Schulz]

Not true at all. From the big bang and onwards the laws of physics accounts for all of the design. There could be endless other universes where the laws were different and there is no life.

Even if there is some creator it has nothing to do with ancient stories about people getting messages from their local God and then copying old myths. Your religion is no different than Hinduism or Islam. They are made up myths designed to teach lessons and laws to ancient people.

And to make them servile and compliant. Myths however serve a more sinister purpose which materialises more so in the current era. In graphic arts alone, the semiotic shift has put previous decades to shame while elevating the halcyonic. Sinister simply means "left" impulse.

 

[joelr]

Similar details show that the flood event actually happened and the Bible and Sumerian mythology both record the same event, even though Sumerian theology is not biblical and doesn't have a concept of a holy, just, and loving God. The Flood of Noah and the Flood of Gilgamesh

First science has 100% ruled out a world flood. So it's definitely a myth.


"Modern geology, its sub-disciplines and other scientific disciplines utilize the scientific method to analyze the geology of the earth. The key tenets of flood geology are refuted by scientific analysis and do not have any standing in the scientific community.[5][6][7][8][9] Modern geology relies on a number of established principles, one of the most important of which is Charles Lyell's principle of uniformitarianism. In relation to geological forces it states that the shaping of the Earth has occurred by means of mostly slow-acting forces that can be seen in operation today. By applying these principles, geologists have determined that the Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old. They study the lithosphere of the Earth to gain information on the history of the planet. Geologists divide Earth's history into eons, eras, periods, epochs, and faunal stages characterized by well-defined breaks in the fossil record (see Geologic time scale).[110][111] In general, there is a lack of any evidence for any of the above effects proposed by flood geologists and their claims of fossil layering are not taken seriously by scientists.[112]
Flood geology - Wikipedia



Putting the word "holy" before a God doesn't mean anything. It's a ridiculous word. All gods cultures make up are just and loving to some degree.
Yahweh is a terrible God who kills entire nations including children and instructs that entire cities be wiped out.
Luckily it's just a fictional story.

Greek myths had a flood as well.
"In Plato's Timaeus, written c. 360 BC, Timaeus describes a flood myth similar to the earlier versions. In it, the Bronze race of humans angers the high god Zeus with their constant warring. Zeus decides to punish humanity with a flood. The Titan Prometheus, who had created humans from clay, tells the secret plan to Deucalion, advising him to build an ark in order to be saved. After nine nights and days, the water starts receding and the ark lands on a mountain.[24]"

Comparing the Bible to the Matrix is not a comparable analogy because there's a lot of evidence that Zoroastrianism copied the Bible.

All of the evidence put forth here was clear that the Persian myths pre-date the biblical versions. Scholarship is well aware of this. So your denial is just denial.
We covered the works of Mary Boyce and all the exact details from the Persian religion, you had no way to account for that except denial. Now you claim there is "evidence"? Yet you had no evidence when we were discussing this?
Now you are just playing games and being intentionally dishonest. Going into preaching mode was the beginning of the end.

So it looks like comparing the Bible to the Matrix is very much factual. Both take fictional stories and re-work them to create a savior God narrative who has come to save humanity, dies and is resurrected into his full power form. Then the savior flies off into space.

Ability doesn't determine role. Women are not incapable of being pastors over men, they are forbidden because of the sin of people. Do women have to remain silent in church? | GotQuestions.org

If we followed biblical morals women would not speak in church. It would be immoral. As would religious freedom.

Religious freedom is consistent with graven images being immoral because it's not the government's role to manage people's relationship with God. Jesus and Paul never tore down pagan altars. They gave the people a simple message and it was up to them if they wanted to accept it or reject it.

But graven images are not considered immoral. Nor is working on Sunday. Or following other Gods. So we do not take morals from the bible.

The Old Testament didn't mention Satan as clearly as the New Testament because until after the Persian invasion, the Israelites walked away from God and into idolatry, and God didn't want another being that they would be tempted to worship.

Blah blah, for this ridiculous idea you don't even have an apologetics article?
The OT does mention Satan very clearly. He works with Yahweh. Yahweh sends him to do dirty work.
Then in the NT he's the big enemy of God. Hmmm, just like the Persian myth? Wow, what a coincidence!

Psalm 23:6 is heaven being mentioned in the Old Testament. People don't believe Psalm 23:6 refers to heaven because they have their own interpretations of the Bible. "Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever."

Already done this. It isn't a reference to a soul going to heaven. The Jewish religion didn't believe that was a thing.
They took the myths from the Persians and Greeks later.

 

[We Never Know]

Using figures of speech doesn't mean that the Bible is a collection of stories. You have to look at the context of the verse to know if it's a parable or real and when you read the Bible over and over you notice things that you did't notice before. I believe that people who say that the Bible is stories that teach a lesson are trying to interpret the Bible from the belief of there not being a God, which is absurd when you look at the creation around you and how it has design and purpose. Can/should we interpret the Bible literally? | GotQuestions.org

Every story in the bible has hidden messages. If you don't see them, then you may not understand the bible.

 

[We Never Know]

The creation declares the glory of God. Psalms 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.

Incredible human hand - creation.com



When you look at design like this, don't you wonder who made everything?

What is the purpose of a tick? A mosquito? Strokes? Cancer? Shall I go on?

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

It's not important how old the earth is. It doesn't have anything to do with having a relationship with God.

Well, you don't need Jesus to have a relationship with God. Skip the man from Galilee who never really existed anyway and pray directly to God.

 

[Isolde Schulz]

This is what Total hyper-Calvinism says, that God, being the Supreme ruler of the universe, can pick and choose who He wants to save and who He wants to send to hell. Doesn't matter that the not-chosen were never given the Holy Spirit to believe, it was purely God's prerogative to not choose them. Paul said this in Romans 9:20:

"But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' "

Seems like a pretty rotten thing for God to do to people that He claims to love, but then hyper-Calvinism says that God can love people even as He predestines them for eternal suffering in hell. Funny way to show love, if you ask me.

It could be that the treasured "love" is sadomasochistic in nature. Not all things from space are benevolent.

 

[SeekingAllTruth]

The evidence for God is look around you-the creation reveals that there is a Creator. We don't see God but we see his creation all around us. The creation declares the glory of God, like Psalms 19:1 says.

God had no problem appearing to Moses and Noah so why is he so shy today?

 

[We Never Know]

No, that is not evidence for God. We can explain what we see when one looks around without invoking magic.

Just because we can offer an explanation for something doesn't mean its right. And on the other hand it also doesn't mean god did it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Just because we can offer an explanation for something doesn't mean its right. And on the other hand it also doesn't mean god did it.

Missing the point as usual. There was a claim of evidence. None was presented.

 

[We Never Know]

All jokes and religion aside. We look at the people 2000+ years ago as basically idiots that didn't know much compared to today. Sadly 2000 years from now that's exactly how they will look at us in our time. Let that sink in.

 

[Isolde Schulz]

God had no problem appearing to Moses and Noah so why is he so shy today?

I tend to believe he's waiting for a climax of sorts. Aren't we there yet?

 

[Subduction Zone]

God had no problem appearing to Moses and Noah so why is he so shy today?

You know how as you get older certain body parts do not work as well as when you were younger? Imagine yourself in the dating scene. It appears that some of God's parts do not work as well when he was younger and as a result he is more than a bit shy.

Until someone comes up with a better explanation I am going with that one. Hmmm, what sort of chemical would work as Viagra for God?

 

[Subduction Zone]

All jokes and religion aside. We look at the people 2000+ years ago as basically idiots that didn't know much compared to today. Sadly 2000 years from now that's exactly how they will look at us in our time. Let that sink in.

No, not idiots. It took a couple of thousand years to acquire the scientific knowledge that exists now that is readily available to anyone. Back then they did not have that advantage. They did the best that they could.