If the Nephilim (giant humans) were created because angels procreated with humans and the resulting DNA made them giants, why was Jesus not a giant? Was it because the angels were fallen and the evil in their hearts made giant children? Was not Jesus a man made by Mary and God, creating a child with human and spirit? Why the discrepancy? If he was in fact a real life human, why was Jesus not a giant?
For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth. – Genesis 7:4.
If God initiated the flood because man was wicked, why did he have to kill off all the animals, creatures that did not sin? What did the animals do to deserve this punishment, the extinguishing of their lives? Why God?
Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. – Hebrews 11:1. Does anyone see a problem with this scripture? It basically says that faith is the self-comforting belief without evidence. Why would a god want you to believe in him with no evidence?
Absalom said to Ahithophel, “Give us your advice. What should we do?” Ahithophel answered, “Sleep with your father’s concubines whom he left to take care of the palace. Then all Israel will hear that you have made yourself obnoxious to your father, and the hands of everyone with you will be more resolute.” So they pitched a tent for Absalom on the roof, and he slept with his father’s concubines in the sight of all Israel. Now in those days the advice Ahithophel gave was like that of one who inquires of God. That was how both David and Absalom regarded all of Ahithophel’s advice. – 2 Samuel 16:20-23
So all in all, because David killed Uzziah in order to sleep with Bathsheba, Uzziah’s wife, God cursed David and had David’s son forcibly have sex with his concubines “in the sight of all Israel!” What does this say about Yahweh, the God of Judaism and Christianity?
Why is it wrong when a suicide bomber
Religion loves to deploy magic whenever science deconstructs religion. When science picks religious beliefs apart, religion turns to magical incantations in order to convolve faith and reality. Evolution? God did that. The creation of the universe out of nothing? God did that. Who created God? God is eternal.
How long should we allow such sleight of hand to be the response to such questions? How dare theists use such childish rebuttals as responses to these important questions! What do you think?
Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them. – Romans 1:24-32
The Bible declares that homosexuals deserve death, but there are those who still think that they can be gay and a Christian at the same time. How is it that some people can conflate these two ideologies? How can a person consider themselves Christian in this day and age when the Bible says that homosexuals deserve death for their “sins”?
Excerpt from The True Nature Of Human Nature
As a final nail in the coffin of the creation account, let us examine a definitive hole in the creation mythos on day five. On this day, birds are created, alongside the animals in the seas. On day six, land animals are created. However, again in using the fossil record, we find a glaring hole in this account. Birds are direct descendants of dinosaurs. Fossil evidence establishes that dinosaurs and birds had congruent features such as hollow, pneumatized bones, were nest-builders and had similar digestive behaviors. Archaeopteryx is a classic example of a fossil that fills a missing link gap.
This brings us to our inevitable dilemma. Land animals are clearly created on the sixth day, after birds! This runs in direct opposition to what Paleontology has shown us! We can even ignore the overwhelming evidence for evolution because the bible does not subscribe to this fact. Let us examine the fossil record. Fossils in lower layers died longer ago than specimens found in higher layers. It can be viewed as the earth tree rings. When do you ever find a bird fossil at a portion of the earth’s strata lower than the first land animals? Never! It never happens! Therefore, you can exclude all of the overwhelming evidence that science has culled together, such as similar bodily characteristics, habits, conclusive DNA evidence (it is scientifically proven that a T-Rex and bird are a closer match DNA-wise than an alligator, a reptile) and the fact that feathers developed in the fossil record with dinosaurs and no other such animal. The layers of the stratum show that the land animals came first and that birds came after. There is no way to provide confluence to the text. It is irreconcilable.
For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him. – Leviticus 20:9
The murder of children because of their cursing of parents? How can this behavior be even remotely justifiable? Since when can anything verbal justify the killing of an individual? Who cares if this is listed in the Old Testament. How was this ever moral? Why did God ever allow this type of behavior?
I almost let my son die. If not for my loving wife, I may have let my son die. This is what the “harmless” door knocking Jehovah’s Witnesses can do and truly expect from you. They demand blood.
Excerpt from the book The True Nature Of Human Nature
Preston was going to be born with a rare heart condition known as “Transposition of the Great Arteries,” also known as TGA. Without going into the details, the layman explanation of the condition is that the heart was fine, but the arteries, the plumbing of the heart, was inversely installed. The oxygenated blood that was meant for the body was re-pumped back to the lungs, and the deoxygenated blood destined to be replenished with oxygen in the lungs was redistributed into the body again. In essence, he was going to choke to death almost as soon as he left the safety of the womb. He would die in minutes, hours or days. If there were sufficient mixing in the heart (something that occurs in almost all newborns), he would live a month or two tops. The diagnosis of TGA was a death sentence. A baby born with TGA, if no remedial is done, will die. It is certain death.
Herein lies the issue. The Jehovah’s Witness organization does not allow the use of blood transfusions. They use the bible as evidence that God would not allow such a thing. If a Witness were to proceed with a transfusion, they would be disfellowshipped, the most severe form of excommunication that exists.
Here is the defining moment for me personally. My wife followed her own path to emancipation, and I am happy to say we all met at the same destination of peace. We found the best doctor in the world to do the procedure, Dr. Jan Quaegebeur and the procedure in his hands had a 99% success rate. We discussed with the other doctors that we needed this to be a bloodless surgery, and they agreed to do their best. They gave our son blood expanders and would recycle his blood as required.
However, the day of the surgery came and Dr. Q, as he is called at the hospital came up to us and said that he would do the best to avoid a blood transfusion but that he could not guarantee a bloodless surgery. There is a certain amount of blood required in the blood pump before it can operate and being that Preston was two weeks old, he did not have a lot of blood available. I kept saying out loud “this is supposed to be a bloodless surgery!” but my loving wife intervened and said, “Please do whatever it takes to save our son” and she signed the requisite waivers. I felt relieved that my wife made the tough decision but also ashamed. Did this false religion mean more to me than my son? See chapter 4 for a more in-depth view of this situation under the discussion of “Social Compliance.” I feel that in the end, I would have caved in and accepted the procedure with blood, but I will never truly know. I only know that I have Dr. Q and my loving, intelligent wife to thank for in saving the life of my son. A blood transfusion was, in fact, necessary or the chance for death was certain. I never wanted to broach the subject again, but my wife did and one day said “Are you ok with my decision for a blood transfusion? I pick the life of my son over God”. I agreed with her decision, with the weight of my shame in full view of my facial features. I thanked her for doing what I was not ready to do, save our son.