• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

God's love and the destruction of Sodom? How is this reconciled?

Erebus

Well-Known Member
thank you for keeping it short. I still believe that God's omnipotence is restricted once the rules for creation are set. Once he set the rules for nature in his creation he cannot do no matter what.

This is at least my view of the so-called omnipotence (to put it bluntly: I personally don't believe in any of the omnis, it's doctrine to me. I know that many Christians hold that at least one or two of the omnis are true, though)

A non-lethal option would be to lose territory every single time a town wants to commit mass rape. That's too high a price, I think.
God did not create an earth just to have his timetable for further creation set by rapists, I guess.

Fair enough! Removing omnipotence and omniscience from the equation also removes a lot of the issues surrounding defending God's actions. If he's neither omniscient nor omnipotent then it's conceivable that his only options were to either ignore Sodom or destroy it.

I personally feel that the prevention of harm argument you gave is more compelling than the defending his territory argument if we're judging the morality of Sodom's destruction. However, this is also the point where morality becomes heavily subjective.

Interesting discussion! Cheers :)
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Roman historian Pliny claimed African warriors rode giant scorpions. He claimed Hannibal rode elephants over the
Alps and invaded Rome itself. And Hannibal's nemesis, Scipio Africanus, was born to the gods. See the problem?

Most atheists don't believe in Moses, but believe in Hannibal. Employing the same techniques of critical analysis we
should presume that Hannibal, if he existed, was nothing more than a local warlord or escaped slave who gathered a
band of men to himself. His story was crafted as a precautionary tale for the Romans, similar to what the bible is
claimed to have done with its figures such as King David.

So why don't we teach this? Why do we believe Hannibal, Cleopatra, Aristotle and Plato to be historic figures? Why
the double standard in our "critical analysis" of things.

Why do we believe in Julius Caesar? We have two books by him that are historically accurate. We have writings by other writers that attest to him. We have coins with his face on them. We have busts/reliefs of him.

Why do we believe in Jesus Christ? We have NO writings from him. We have NO writings from other writers attesting to him outside the New Testament which itself is just a testament of the nonsensical believing without seeing ideology. We have NO coins with his face. We have NO busts/ reliefs of him. We have No artifacts that can be attached to him. We have zero, zilch proving he was anything more than a mythological character possibly modeled after some anonymous figure in Palestine.

Yet Christians are bold enough to say there's more proof for Jesus than there is for Julius Caesar. Where they get the audacity to make such an assertion--with a straight face yet, I cannot begin to fathom.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Oh, but it did old mate.

In a remote part of Russia, on June 30, 1908, there occurred a terrific air blast, now widely known as the Tunguska event. This event is believed to have been caused by an incoming asteroid (or comet), which never actually struck Earth but instead exploded in the atmosphere, causing what is known as an air burst, three to six miles (5–10 kilometers) above Earth’s surface.

That explosion released enough energy to kill reindeer and flatten trees for many kilometers around the blast site. But no crater was ever found.

An article from Carl Sagan’s book ‘COSMOS.’ “A comet is made mostly of ice-water (H2O) ice, with a little methane (CH4) ice, and some ammonia (NH3) ice. Striking the Earth's atmosphere, a modest cometary fragment would produce a great radiant fireball and a mighty blast wave, which would burn trees, level forests and be heard around the world. But it might not make much of a crater in the ground. The ices would all be melted during entry. There would be few recognizable pieces of the comet left perhaps only a smattering of small grains from the non-icy parts of the cometary nucleus. Recently, the Soviet scientist E. Sobotovich has identified a large number of tiny diamonds strewn over the Tunguska site. Such diamonds are already known to exist in meteorites that have survived impact, and that may originate ultimately from comets.

It is recorded in the Christian scriptures that Jesus was nailed to the cross at 9AM, and three hours later at the stroke of mid-day, 12 PM, Darkness covered the city for three hours. This was not a normal eclipse of the sun, the longest of which lasts for only about 7 minutes.

This had to be an incoming heavenly object, which remained between the sun and Jerusalem, blanketing the city in darkness for three hours. Then at 3 PM, immediately before the sun appeared once more, there was a terrific blast that rocked the mountains and the temple in Jerusalem, which was built by Herod the Great, breaking the lintel from which hung the great Curtain that was torn from top to bottom, behind which curtain was the innermost sanctuary of the temple, ‘The Holy of Holies,’ where, in the temple built by Solomon, the two Greater golden cherubs, beneath whose outstretched wings the covenant box with the two lesser cherubs on its lid once stood, before that temple was sacked and burned in 587/586 B.C.E. by Nebuchadnezzar’s troops.

This was not an earth quake as most Christians are asked to believe, but an air blast, high above Jerusalem over the desert country on the eastern side of the Jordan, which was consistent with the Tunguska-like fireball over Russia, but unlike Siberia, that desert country did not have any forests, and like the air blast over Russia, did not create any crater as evidence of that event.

Apparently, air blasts such as those which occurred over Russia, on June 30, 1908, and over Jerusalem in the early part of the first century C.E., are not that uncommon throughout history, as Archaeologists have come up with a theory that in a region just north of the Dead Sea, the towns and population in that area, may have been obliterated by a Tunguska style airburst, some 3,700 years ago.

The theory is, that some 3,700 years ago, a meteor or comet exploded over the Middle East, annihilating all human life across a wide area of land north of the Dead Sea. Archaeologists who have found evidence of the cosmic airburst, say that this event was the cause of the destruction of Sodom and its surrounding cities, leaving the land unfit to be reoccupied for 500-600 years.

Tall el Hammam, is believed by archaeologists who have recently worked on that site to be the ancient City of the biblical Sodom, excavation of that site makes this absolutely clear that it was completely destroyed by a singular event. The archaeologist Steven Collins, in his book; “Discovering the city of Sodom” claims that Tall el-Hammam is the site of the ancient city of Sodom, whose destruction is part of an important Biblical episode related to the life of patriarch Abraham.

Was the story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah a miraculous event, or an historical event that the three men who appeared to Abraham, knew was going to happen at that point in time? Is the miracle in that story to be found in the visitation of those men?
Sorryn no one has found. Sodom. They have only found possible sites. That is all.

And the darkness at the crucifixion was not noticed anywhere else in the world. There would have been secular records of it. Nor is there any evidence that ties an earthquake to the event.

You are only grasping at straws and making ad hoc explanations. You have no evidence.

You posted quite a lot of nonsense. Do you want to go over it one point at a time?
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Yes, but that's not quite enough, for the entire destruction of a city and all inhabitants, both the guilty, and the babes....

So, without the "rest of the story" as in post #24 above, atheists can plausibly invent entirely new interpretations (with plenty of hidden assumptions of course), and sell those interpretations/falsehoods, as a plausible way to read what little they know about the story.

For instance, to assume and/or imply that most of the people weren't really doing much wrong, and were merely just like modern Americans....

So, to rightly point out this one major evil -- that's just not enough. (and in scripture God chose to tell us more)

But we need to figure out how to write the basics listed in post #24 the best way: brief but full. If you have any help for me on that, it would be very much appreciated! :)
You had a very good post on 24. I didn't have anything additionally to add other than a few personal thoughts

I think the biggest problem is that we concentrate only on the temporal and not on the eternal. As you noted, Jesus did preach to the dead so people's earthly life, though shortened, doesn't translate into a forever situation.

When I was reading I noted, "Matthew 11:23 And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You will be brought down to Hades. For if the mighty works done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.

This is interesting to me... the hearts of the Sodomites apparently were better than those in Capernaum since the Sodomites would have changed had they seen the miracles that were done in Capernaum.

That is why I leave the eternal judging to God.
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Oh, but it did old mate.

In a remote part of Russia, on June 30, 1908, there occurred a terrific air blast, now widely known as the Tunguska event. This event is believed to have been caused by an incoming asteroid (or comet), which never actually struck Earth but instead exploded in the atmosphere, causing what is known as an air burst, three to six miles (5–10 kilometers) above Earth’s surface.

That explosion released enough energy to kill reindeer and flatten trees for many kilometers around the blast site. But no crater was ever found.

An article from Carl Sagan’s book ‘COSMOS.’ “A comet is made mostly of ice-water (H2O) ice, with a little methane (CH4) ice, and some ammonia (NH3) ice. Striking the Earth's atmosphere, a modest cometary fragment would produce a great radiant fireball and a mighty blast wave, which would burn trees, level forests and be heard around the world. But it might not make much of a crater in the ground. The ices would all be melted during entry. There would be few recognizable pieces of the comet left perhaps only a smattering of small grains from the non-icy parts of the cometary nucleus. Recently, the Soviet scientist E. Sobotovich has identified a large number of tiny diamonds strewn over the Tunguska site. Such diamonds are already known to exist in meteorites that have survived impact, and that may originate ultimately from comets.

It is recorded in the Christian scriptures that Jesus was nailed to the cross at 9AM, and three hours later at the stroke of mid-day, 12 PM, Darkness covered the city for three hours. This was not a normal eclipse of the sun, the longest of which lasts for only about 7 minutes.

This had to be an incoming heavenly object, which remained between the sun and Jerusalem, blanketing the city in darkness for three hours. Then at 3 PM, immediately before the sun appeared once more, there was a terrific blast that rocked the mountains and the temple in Jerusalem, which was built by Herod the Great, breaking the lintel from which hung the great Curtain that was torn from top to bottom, behind which curtain was the innermost sanctuary of the temple, ‘The Holy of Holies,’ where, in the temple built by Solomon, the two Greater golden cherubs, beneath whose outstretched wings the covenant box with the two lesser cherubs on its lid once stood, before that temple was sacked and burned in 587/586 B.C.E. by Nebuchadnezzar’s troops.

This was not an earth quake as most Christians are asked to believe, but an air blast, high above Jerusalem over the desert country on the eastern side of the Jordan, which was consistent with the Tunguska-like fireball over Russia, but unlike Siberia, that desert country did not have any forests, and like the air blast over Russia, did not create any crater as evidence of that event.

Apparently, air blasts such as those which occurred over Russia, on June 30, 1908, and over Jerusalem in the early part of the first century C.E., are not that uncommon throughout history, as Archaeologists have come up with a theory that in a region just north of the Dead Sea, the towns and population in that area, may have been obliterated by a Tunguska style airburst, some 3,700 years ago.

The theory is, that some 3,700 years ago, a meteor or comet exploded over the Middle East, annihilating all human life across a wide area of land north of the Dead Sea. Archaeologists who have found evidence of the cosmic airburst, say that this event was the cause of the destruction of Sodom and its surrounding cities, leaving the land unfit to be reoccupied for 500-600 years.

Tall el Hammam, is believed by archaeologists who have recently worked on that site to be the ancient City of the biblical Sodom, excavation of that site makes this absolutely clear that it was completely destroyed by a singular event. The archaeologist Steven Collins, in his book; “Discovering the city of Sodom” claims that Tall el-Hammam is the site of the ancient city of Sodom, whose destruction is part of an important Biblical episode related to the life of patriarch Abraham.

Was the story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah a miraculous event, or an historical event that the three men who appeared to Abraham, knew was going to happen at that point in time? Is the miracle in that story to be found in the visitation of those men?

An explosion that powerful would have taken out everyone, including Abraham and his brood. But of course Yahweh miraculously protected them, right?
ox.png
 

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
Sorryn no one has found. Sodom. They have only found possible sites. That is all.

And the darkness at the crucifixion was not noticed anywhere else in the world. There would have been secular records of it. Nor is there any evidence that ties an earthquake to the event.

You are only grasping at straws and making ad hoc explanations. You have no evidence.

You posted quite a lot of nonsense. Do you want to go over it one point at a time?

No nonsense there old mate. If you believe the Holy scripture, you must accept that Jerusalem was shrouded in darkness for three hours, and the light of the sun reappeared at the same time that the mountains shook and the lintel holding the curtain that hung before the Holy of Holies broke causing the curtain to tear from top to bottom.

If you don't believe the scriptures, then it is a waste of time for any Christian to bother talking with you, and as far as the scientific archeologists, who have discovered evidence of ruins that they identify as the ancient sites of Sodom and Gomorrah, they too would only waste their time trying to convince one who is obviously terrified by the thought of scientific evidence proving to the world that the scriptures are correct.

An extract from the following link_____ Dr Steven Collins, a professor of Biblical studies and apologetics at Trinity Southwest University, says that the "monstrous" Tall el-Hammam site in the southern Jordan Valley, which lies eight miles northeast of the Dead Sea, matches the descriptions of the Bronze Age city-state.

He told Popular Archaeology that it meets "every criterion" of Sodom - which, according to the Old Testament, was destroyed by fire and brimstone along with its neighbour, Gomorrah.

Biblical city of Sodom 'found in Jordan' | The Independent | The Independent

Anyway old mate, you enjoy the rest of your day.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
No nonsense there old mate. If you believe the Holy scripture, you must accept that Jerusalem was shrouded in darkness for three hours, and the light of the sun reappeared at the same time that the mountains shook and the lintel holding the curtain that hung before the Holy of Holies broke causing the curtain to tear from top to bottom.

If you don't believe the scriptures, then it is a waste of time for any Christian to bother talking with you, and as far as the scientific archeologists, who have discovered evidence of ruins that they identify as the ancient sites of Sodom and Gomorrah, they too would only waste their time trying to convince one who is obviously terrified by the thought of scientific evidence proving to the world that the scriptures are correct.

An extract from the following link_____ Dr Steven Collins, a professor of Biblical studies and apologetics at Trinity Southwest University, says that the "monstrous" Tall el-Hammam site in the southern Jordan Valley, which lies eight miles northeast of the Dead Sea, matches the descriptions of the Bronze Age city-state.

He told Popular Archaeology that it meets "every criterion" of Sodom - which, according to the Old Testament, was destroyed by fire and brimstone along with its neighbour, Gomorrah.

Biblical city of Sodom 'found in Jordan' | The Independent | The Independent

Anyway old mate, you enjoy the rest of your day.
It was all nonsense. And you need to learn how to vet your sources. Nothing can be found of "Popular Archaeology" magazine except for self promotion. That is always a bad sign. If it was a reliable source there would be other sources that affirmed this.

Once again, without spewing nonsense would you like to support your claims one at a time?

By the way, in case you did not know apologists tend to be just Liars For Jesus. See if you can find some real peer reviewed work that supports your beliefs.
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
Why do we believe in Julius Caesar? We have two books by him that are historically accurate. We have writings by other writers that attest to him. We have coins with his face on them. We have busts/reliefs of him.

Why do we believe in Jesus Christ? We have NO writings from him. We have NO writings from other writers attesting to him outside the New Testament which itself is just a testament of the nonsensical believing without seeing ideology. We have NO coins with his face. We have NO busts/ reliefs of him. We have No artifacts that can be attached to him. We have zero, zilch proving he was anything more than a mythological character possibly modeled after some anonymous figure in Palestine.

Yet Christians are bold enough to say there's more proof for Jesus than there is for Julius Caesar. Where they get the audacity to make such an assertion--with a straight face yet, I cannot begin to fathom.

Sure, but did Caesar have SEVEN writers attest to his deeds?
Is there 1500 years of writings about the coming Caesar as there was for the Jewish Messiah?
Yes, Caesar is credited with the Julian Calendar, but did the year 1 begin with him?

Saying 'there's nothing outside of the New Testament' is interesting - there was no New Testament
when Matthew, Peter, Luke, John, James, Paul and others wrote of Jesus. These writings were
eventually bundled into the NT.

The writings that fascinate me the most are those written BEFORE Jesus came. One of my
favorites was Jacob in Egypt, Bronze Age, speaking of a future Hebrew nation that would end with
the coming Messiah - and the Gentiles would believe on him.
Just this year, just now, for the first time, Christians are a minority in America. We are living off the
smell of an empty vase. I wonder long term what this will mean. Certainly pushing Christianity out
of European affairs after 1900 did not do that continent well.
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Sure, but did Caesar have SEVEN writers attest to his deeds?
Is there 1500 years of writings about the coming Caesar as there was for the Jewish Messiah?
Yes, Caesar is credited with the Julian Calendar, but did the year 1 begin with him?

Saying 'there's nothing outside of the New Testament' is interesting - there was no New Testament
when Matthew, Peter, Luke, John, James, Paul and others wrote of Jesus. These writings were
eventually bundled into the NT.

Matthew never wrote about Jesus.

Peter never wrote about Jesus.

John never wrote about Jesus.

Colossians, generally accepted by scholars today as a fake
, opens with "Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother..."

1 Timothy, generally accepted by scholars today as a fake
, opens with "Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the command of God our Savior and of Christ Jesus our hope...".

With so many fakes claimed to be written by Paul why should I believe James was really written by James??? Doesn't make any sense.

75% of the New Testament is not written by the people purported to have written it. And you want me to believe the New Testament is a reliable historical source?????
1j2kh57pkm9sl.png
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
Matthew never wrote about Jesus.

Peter never wrote about Jesus.

John never wrote about Jesus.

Colossians, generally accepted by scholars today as a fake
, opens with "Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother..."

1 Timothy, generally accepted by scholars today as a fake
, opens with "Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the command of God our Savior and of Christ Jesus our hope...".

With so many fakes claimed to be written by Paul why should I believe James was really written by James??? Doesn't make any sense.

75% of the New Testament is not written by the people purported to have written it. And you want me to believe the New Testament is a reliable historical source?????
1j2kh57pkm9sl.png
Why do you state as fact what is obviously hotly debated?
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Why do you state as fact what is obviously hotly debated?


There's no debate about this among the majority of Biblical scholars, with the sole exception of the fundamentalists ones who have a dog in the legitimately of the New Testament race.
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
There's no debate about this among the majority of Biblical scholars, with the sole exception of the fundamentalists ones who have a dog in the legitimately of the New Testament race.
I have to disagree because I think those who wish to discredit the Bible can be just as dogmatic and they do have a dog in the race.
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
I have to disagree because I think those who wish to discredit the Bible can be just as dogmatic and they do have a dog in the race.

Anything is possible, I suppose. But the fact still remains that the majority of Biblical scholars have concluded the New Testament is 75% fake. Even the Jesus Seminar composed of Christians concluded that 80% of the stuff attributed to Jesus in the gospels Jesus never said.
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
Matthew never wrote about Jesus.

Peter never wrote about Jesus.

John never wrote about Jesus.

Colossians, generally accepted by scholars today as a fake
, opens with "Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother..."

1 Timothy, generally accepted by scholars today as a fake
, opens with "Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the command of God our Savior and of Christ Jesus our hope...".

With so many fakes claimed to be written by Paul why should I believe James was really written by James??? Doesn't make any sense.

75% of the New Testament is not written by the people purported to have written it. And you want me to believe the New Testament is a reliable historical source?????
1j2kh57pkm9sl.png

Do you have any evidence for this, or are you repeating 'scholarship' ?
'Scholars' begin with an assumption about the bible, "It can't be true, so what is the best
explanation" ?

The author of Luke (whoever he is, doesn't' matter) wrote Luke's Gospel and then The Acts.
He was with Paul on that last journey to Rome - his nautical account is quite famous for its
detail and insight into Roman technology. And he quote Matthew and Mark.
Mark was written by Peter's companion or secretary.
John wrote his epistle towards the end of his long life.
That is history.

I love how Zachariah put it in his 9th and 12th - the Jews, waiting for their Messiah as King,
would see him come in glory to reign over the nations, but they will mourn when they realize
this is the same lowly man who rode upon the donkey, the one they pierced. That's future
history.


Hannibal wrote no book, nor is there any coin or statue of him. Why do you believe in
Hannibal?
 

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
It was all nonsense. And you need to learn how to vet your sources. Nothing can be found of "Popular Archaeology" magazine except for self promotion. That is always a bad sign. If it was a reliable source there would be other sources that affirmed this.

Once again, without spewing nonsense would you like to support your claims one at a time?

By the way, in case you did not know apologists tend to be just Liars For Jesus. See if you can find some real peer reviewed work that supports your beliefs.

Perhaps you might like to read the following link _______ The Discovery of the Sin Cities of Sodom & Gomorrah - Associates for Biblical Research (biblearchaeology.org) ________ Not that you would ever believe anything that proves the Scriptures to be correct. Atheists tend to be liars, in their feeble attempts to discredit the Holy Scriptures.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I have to disagree because I think those who wish to discredit the Bible can be just as dogmatic and they do have a dog in the race.
It is pretty much only fringe believers that insist that the Gospels were written by the names on them. The date that they were written refute the claims that they were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John alone.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Perhaps you might like to read the following link _______ The Discovery of the Sin Cities of Sodom & Gomorrah - Associates for Biblical Research (biblearchaeology.org) ________ Not that you would ever believe anything that proves the Scriptures to be correct. Atheists tend to be liars, in their feeble attempts to discredit the Holy Scriptures.
Find a valid source. Apologists are almost never reliable. In fact your source refutes itself by trying to claim that the mythological Flood story happened. Why do you listen to people that call your God a liar?
 

SeekingAllTruth

Well-Known Member
Do you have any evidence for this, or are you repeating 'scholarship' ?
'Scholars' begin with an assumption about the bible, "It can't be true, so what is the best
explanation" ?

The author of Luke (whoever he is, doesn't' matter) wrote Luke's Gospel and then The Acts.
He was with Paul on that last journey to Rome - his nautical account is quite famous for its
detail and insight into Roman technology. And he quote Matthew and Mark.
Mark was written by Peter's companion or secretary.
John wrote his epistle towards the end of his long life.
That is history.

I love how Zachariah put it in his 9th and 12th - the Jews, waiting for their Messiah as King,
would see him come in glory to reign over the nations, but they will mourn when they realize
this is the same lowly man who rode upon the donkey, the one they pierced. That's future
history.


Hannibal wrote no book, nor is there any coin or statue of him. Why do you believe in
Hannibal?


Just for the record, I don't believe in Hannibal. I certainly don't believe he led an army of elephants across the Alps. Did you ever hear anything more ridiculous in your life?

If you can find ANYTHING in the secular historical record that supports John writing the epistles--or anything that mentions John, period I will change my mind. Otherwise it's just tradition with no evidential foundation.

Even in the Matthew gospel the writer(s) botch the donkey verse. He has Jesus riding into Jerusalem on a horse AND a donkey. How on earth did a man inspired by the Holy Spirit to write the gospel manage to pull a boner like that??????

"This took place to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet:

5 “Say to Daughter Zion,
‘See, your king comes to you,
gentle and riding on a donkey,
and on a colt
, the foal of a donkey.’”
Matthew 21:4-5
Jesus-on-a-Donkey-on-a-Colt-300x282.jpg
 

joelr

Well-Known Member
A lot is at stake here.

God basically instructed the erasure (removal) of cities in Canaan, and that can seem really unfair to modern Americans having little to no context of what is happening there.

Many (atheists) have tried to fill in the blank and paint it that God destroyed an entire cities because of a few bad people, for instance -- which would seem to make 'god' then profoundly unfair/evil, in human eyes.

For those lacking the full picture of the entire stories.

For instance, the destruction in Canaan seems wrong unless one knows about the profound evil of burning children in fires as sacrificed to idols that was the main Canaanite culture. (Deuteronomy 12:31)

And that God revives all the dead back into life. And brings the gospel to those that never had a chance to hear it.

Without that full picture, it won't make sense to people as fitting a just and loving God.

God cares enough about us to remove great evils, also to stop the tendency of evil to spread to other peoples/areas over time.

But people won't understand this very well without the extra information I tried to put in post #24.

It's the 'rest of the story'.


Once again, there is no evidence of child sacrifice among the Canaanite culture. There is child sacrifice when killing 70,000 in a plague or telling Israelites to kill entire populations. That amounts to many children being killed. But all the evidence points to Yahweh being a myth so plague ever happened.

Here is Dr. Brendon Benz, Associate Professor of History at William Jewell College explaining what we actually know about the Canaanite culture. No child sacrifice.
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
Even the Jesus Seminar composed of Christians concluded that 80% of the stuff attributed to Jesus in the gospels Jesus never said.
Oh yeah the guys who voted on the sayings of Jesus with colored beads. I'm sorry but the truth isn't up for vote.

They make up what they claim Jesus was and then they say anything that disagrees with their version of Jesus is fake. It's called re-writing history and wishful thinking. It's no more valid than Thomas Jefferson's miracle free new Testament. Actually less valid ...
 
Top