Conversation with An Atheist

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

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

NayborBear

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2020
875
334
63
74
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
And the unanswered question is; how do you know this? Seems you’re connecting this conclusion to Pangaea.
Methinks the lad is referring to a "slice of eternity" prior to this current "slice of eternity" where "Pangea" DID exist!
Far as I can see?
He's still trying to sort the difference/s in these "slices of eternity."
Which is a "perpetually confusing and terminal" problem that has and shall continue to perplex "sciences of empiricism."
1 Timothy 6:20
O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
:My2c: and 5 bucks'll get ya a cup of coffee!
 

CrowCross

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2026
1,386
391
83
Philly
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Interesting. I checked about 5 different commentaries on the verse and 4 out of the 5 agreed that the division was a political/ethnic one and not a physical division of the land. I have always though it was referring to a cataclysmic physical division of the land.
It could have also been speaking about the Tower of Babel dividing of the people.
 

Mancunian

Active Member
Aug 17, 2026
423
144
43
Cheshire
Faith
Atheist
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
The salt from the flood waters...which wasn't as high as oceans of today...would have easily been leached out of the soil by rain water
The ark supposedly came to rest on Mt Ararat? The flood waters covered the highest mountains on earth, I'm assuming though that the flood waters would have been a diluted saltwater... Rain is freshwater and so are underground springs.
A pretty toxic mix for fish, but that's another topic....
The earth would have been in ruins after a global flood.
Noah's family would definitely have been starved to death when back on 'dry land' if any of this was remotely true.
 

NayborBear

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2020
875
334
63
74
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Noah's family would definitely have been starved to death when back on 'dry land' if any of this was remotely true.
That's assuming Noah and family consumed all the food, and all the feed and fodder for the critters, and the critters quit doing that which critters do in preserving their species.
Whilst awaiting for the fields to repopulate.
Look what God did through His Prophet Elijah and that poor woman and her son.
And you are under the premise that this SAME God would NOT take care of not only Noah and families needs as well as the critters?

Under empiricism? It would be easy to draw the same conclusion you have.
And?
:Broadly:
 

Mancunian

Active Member
Aug 17, 2026
423
144
43
Cheshire
Faith
Atheist
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
That's assuming Noah and family consumed all the food, and all the feed and fodder for the critters, and the critters quit doing that which critters do in preserving their species.
Whilst awaiting for the fields to repopulate.
Look what God did through His Prophet Elijah and that poor woman and her son.
And you are under the premise that this SAME God would NOT take care of not only Noah and families needs as well as the critters?

Under empiricism? It would be easy to draw the same conclusion you have.
And?
:Broadly:
Yes we all know what the God who created the universe, our solar system, the laws of physics and mathematics did to the children of bethel too according to the Bible.

Are we accepting that a God that is so powerful and all knowing, sent some bears to maul children because they mocked Elijah?

Are we not taking that literally? Which bits are we taking literally?
 

Mancunian

Active Member
Aug 17, 2026
423
144
43
Cheshire
Faith
Atheist
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
And before you say it Elijah ascended and Elisha was the replacement prophet that was mocked for his baldness.

I wonder why the creator of Saturn Uranus and Jupiter would get involved?
 

Mancunian

Active Member
Aug 17, 2026
423
144
43
Cheshire
Faith
Atheist
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
The main reason that I don't believe in the Christian God is that the gospels don't agree with eachother.
This is the most important part of the holy Bible. This part must be coherent and all of the gospels must agree.
The crucifixion and resurrection of jesus must be the most important event ever witnessed by mankind, the son of God, here to pay for our sins.
Why don't the accounts of Matthew Mark Luke and John match perfectly regardless of the time between the accounts?
If you want to, we can make a separate thread for the contradictory gospels.
 

Mancunian

Active Member
Aug 17, 2026
423
144
43
Cheshire
Faith
Atheist
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
I've read it over and over and over and over.
Matthew Mark Luke and John.
I've read them over and over and over and over.
 

Mancunian

Active Member
Aug 17, 2026
423
144
43
Cheshire
Faith
Atheist
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
That's assuming Noah and family consumed all the food, and all the feed and fodder for the critters, and the critters quit doing that which critters do in preserving their species.
Whilst awaiting for the fields to repopulate.
Look what God did through His Prophet Elijah and that poor woman and her son.
And you are under the premise that this SAME God would NOT take care of not only Noah and families needs as well as the critters?

Under empiricism? It would be easy to draw the same conclusion you have.
And?
:Broadly:
Do you really believe that God eliminated every living thing on this planet apart from Noah, his family and two of every 'Kind'.
I always wonder about marsupials? I wonder about eucalyptus. I wonder about bamboo. I wonder about the giant anteater. I wonder about where Noah got his Emperor penguins from. I wonder where Noah got his poison dart frogs from. Noah doesn't have time on his side. Noah the 800+ year old boat builder doesn't have reality on his side.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: NayborBear

Wrangler

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2021
21,851
9,612
113
57
Shining City on a Hill
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Why don't the accounts of Matthew Mark Luke and John match perfectly regardless of the time between the accounts?
Let’s ask AI:
This is a classic question in biblical scholarship known as the "synoptic problem" (for Matthew, Mark, and Luke) plus the unique material in John. The accounts don't match perfectly for several interconnected reasons that go beyond just the passage of time:

Literary Dependencies and Sources​

Scholars generally agree the three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) share literary relationships. Most commonly accepted is the "Two-Source Theory":
  • Mark was likely written first (c. 65-70 CE)
  • Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source, plus another lost source called "Q" (for Quelle, German for "source")
  • Each also had unique materials (M for Matthew, L for Luke)
John stands separately—written later (c. 90-100 CE) with significantly different structure, chronology, and theological emphasis. It independently records many events absent from the Synoptics.

Different Purposes and Audiences​

Each evangelist wrote for distinct communities with specific theological aims:
GospelPrimary AudienceKey Emphasis
MatthewJewish ChristiansJesus as fulfillment of Hebrew prophecy
MarkRoman/Gentile readersAction-oriented, suffering servant
LukeGentiles/TheophilusUniversal salvation, marginalized groups
JohnHellenistic/developing churchHigh Christology, "I am" statements
These goals shaped how material was selected, arranged, and sometimes modified.

Oral Tradition Variability​

Before written accounts stabilized (c. 30-65 CE), stories circulated orally for decades. Oral cultures naturally produced:
  • Variation in exact wording
  • Different orderings of events
  • Compressed or expanded narratives
  • Regional transmission differences
This explains parallel accounts with slight discrepancies even when describing the same event.

Anachronistic Chronologies​

Notable chronological issues include:
  • Last Supper timing: Synoptics suggest Passover meal; John has Jesus crucified before Passover
  • Temple cleansing: Placed near end in Synoptics; early in John's ministry
  • Resurrection appearances: Different locations, sequences, and witnesses across all four
Modern scholars typically view these as theological framing rather than attempts at modern-style historiography.

Ancient Genre Expectations​

Gospels weren't written as modern biographies or journalistic reports. Ancient biographical conventions allowed:
  • Thematic arrangement over strict chronology
  • Harmonizing traditions for theological coherence
  • Selective inclusion/exclusion based on purpose

Scholarly Consensus​

Most contemporary scholars (across confessional and secular traditions) recognize that:
  1. Perfect historical concordance wasn't the ancient authors' goal
  2. Discrepancies reflect authentic diversity in early Christian communities
  3. Harmonization attempts often create more problems than they solve
  4. Differences can coexist with core historical agreement (Jesus existed, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, disciples believed in resurrection)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mancunian

Mancunian

Active Member
Aug 17, 2026
423
144
43
Cheshire
Faith
Atheist
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Dear dear sir . the words she brings Are the most sensible of all .
That is why i also reminded her , DO NOT debate with any of them .
LET THE SCRIPTURES do the talking . because if one believes NOT the SCRIPTURES
they wont believe me who speaks the truth about JESUS either .
I would like to ask you a question .
Now before i do , no ma tter how you answer i will not be offended my friend .
Its for my own personal reasons i ask it .
But if you had to make a choice and you were asked to make that choice .
And the question was , OF all the peoples you have spoken to on this thread
WHO do you think its perhaps the most extremist of all
WHO would you say that one was . now remember if you say me i promise i will not be offended
or if you say maybe epi , or wrangler or some other .
But in you heart who do you see as the most zealous religoius extremist , IF you had to answer that question .
I think that Marveloustime hasn't got anything constructive to say. If he or she did have anything constructive to say, he or she would use their own words and not rely on posting Facebook ready slogans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wrangler

Mancunian

Active Member
Aug 17, 2026
423
144
43
Cheshire
Faith
Atheist
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Let’s ask AI:
This is a classic question in biblical scholarship known as the "synoptic problem" (for Matthew, Mark, and Luke) plus the unique material in John. The accounts don't match perfectly for several interconnected reasons that go beyond just the passage of time:

Literary Dependencies and Sources​

Scholars generally agree the three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) share literary relationships. Most commonly accepted is the "Two-Source Theory":
  • Mark was likely written first (c. 65-70 CE)
  • Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source, plus another lost source called "Q" (for Quelle, German for "source")
  • Each also had unique materials (M for Matthew, L for Luke)
John stands separately—written later (c. 90-100 CE) with significantly different structure, chronology, and theological emphasis. It independently records many events absent from the Synoptics.

Different Purposes and Audiences​

Each evangelist wrote for distinct communities with specific theological aims:
GospelPrimary AudienceKey Emphasis
MatthewJewish ChristiansJesus as fulfillment of Hebrew prophecy
MarkRoman/Gentile readersAction-oriented, suffering servant
LukeGentiles/TheophilusUniversal salvation, marginalized groups
JohnHellenistic/developing churchHigh Christology, "I am" statements
These goals shaped how material was selected, arranged, and sometimes modified.

Oral Tradition Variability​

Before written accounts stabilized (c. 30-65 CE), stories circulated orally for decades. Oral cultures naturally produced:
  • Variation in exact wording
  • Different orderings of events
  • Compressed or expanded narratives
  • Regional transmission differences
This explains parallel accounts with slight discrepancies even when describing the same event.

Anachronistic Chronologies​

Notable chronological issues include:
  • Last Supper timing: Synoptics suggest Passover meal; John has Jesus crucified before Passover
  • Temple cleansing: Placed near end in Synoptics; early in John's ministry
  • Resurrection appearances: Different locations, sequences, and witnesses across all four
Modern scholars typically view these as theological framing rather than attempts at modern-style historiography.

Ancient Genre Expectations​

Gospels weren't written as modern biographies or journalistic reports. Ancient biographical conventions allowed:
  • Thematic arrangement over strict chronology
  • Harmonizing traditions for theological coherence
  • Selective inclusion/exclusion based on purpose

Scholarly Consensus​

Most contemporary scholars (across confessional and secular traditions) recognize that:
  1. Perfect historical concordance wasn't the ancient authors' goal
  2. Discrepancies reflect authentic diversity in early Christian communities
  3. Harmonization attempts often create more problems than they solve
  4. Differences can coexist with core historical agreement (Jesus existed, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, disciples believed in resurrection)
Remember.
This is the single most important piece of information that mankind needs to know about. Everything rests on this.It's a matter of life and death.

Actually.
It's contradictory. The resurrection of jesus wasn't documented until at least 30 years later... John was nearly a century later.
 

Mancunian

Active Member
Aug 17, 2026
423
144
43
Cheshire
Faith
Atheist
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
The new testament is a sequel, we need to look at the OT as the word of God. The commandments that were handed to Moses (cough cough) are the moral standard.
 

NayborBear

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2020
875
334
63
74
Midwest
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
The new testament is a sequel, we need to look at the OT as the word of God. The commandments that were handed to Moses (cough cough) are the moral standard.
Actually? Ya needs look at the O.T. not only as the Word of God? But also as the Fulfillment of the "LOVING KINDNESS," or more like "ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY" to get things right BETWEEN one, and God!
And THAT? In a nutshell? IS THE GOSPEL TRUTH!
I'll give ya one more item to consider:
If it weren't for Judaism?
There would BE no "Christianity!"
Because THAT would mean that Judaism SUCCEEDED in KEEPING things "on the square" WITH 'Yaw-'Uh-'VAY!
Yet? And one could think that God "stacked the deck" AGAINST Adam, Eve, Enoch, Abraham, and Israel.
But He didn't!
Why do you think God was so grieved He made "man" flesh? And THEN? Give "man" A CHOICE?
Could it be because "man" is so GULLIBLE?
Could it be because "man" so UNDERESTIMATED satans seductive influences(aka beguilings)?

The answer is YES!
But not to fret about this too much there pilgrim, as the Loving Kindness of our creator, which endures forever, has GIVEN yet ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY in yet another "slice of eternity" aka the millennium.
Where/When satan is "taken out of the picture" during that "slice of eternity!"
Only to be "inserted" BACK! During yet ANOTHER "slice of eternity!"
To some? That might cause God to APPEAR as some "mischievous manipulator!"
Wouldn't it?
Yet? He does these things for His GOOD Pleasure!
One could LOOK at it as God just keeping Himself Amused eh?
Because eternity IS a very very VERY long L-O-N-G time!

Here! Give this a read! Provides some insight as to the "Who's Who and the Did What to Mankind?"

The Book of Enoch, by R.H. Charles, [1917], at sacred-texts.com

CHAPTER VI.

1. And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters.
2. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.' 3. And Semjâzâ, who was their leader, said unto them: 'I fear ye will not indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.'
4. And they all answered him and said: 'Let us all swear an oath, and all bind ourselves by mutual imprecations* not to abandon this plan but to do this thing.'
5. Then sware they all together and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it.
6. And they were in all two hundred; who descended ⌈in the days⌉ of Jared on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it.
7. And these are the names of their leaders: Sêmîazâz, their leader, Arâkîba, Râmêêl, Kôkabîêl, Tâmîêl, Râmîêl, Dânêl, Êzêqêêl, Barâqîjâl, Asâêl, Armârôs, Batârêl, Anânêl, Zaqîêl, Samsâpêêl, Satarêl, Tûrêl, Jômjâêl, Sariêl.
8. These are their chiefs of tens.

CHAPTER VII.
1. And all the others together with them took unto themselves wives, and each chose for himself one, and they began to go in unto them and to defile themselves with them, and they taught them charms and enchantments, and the cutting of roots, and made them acquainted with plants.
2. And they became pregnant, and they bare great giants, whose height was three thousand ells:
3. Who consumed all the acquisitions of men. And when men could no longer sustain them,
4. the giants turned against them and devoured mankind.
5. And they began to sin against birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and fish, and to devour one another's flesh, and drink the blood.
6. Then the earth laid accusation against the lawless ones.

CHAPTER VIII.
1. And Azâzêl taught men to make swords, and knives, and shields, and breastplates, and made known to them the metals 〈of the earth〉 and the art of working them, and bracelets, and ornaments, and the use of antimony, and the beautifying of the eyelids, and all kinds of costly stones, and all colouring tinctures.
2. And there arose much godlessness, and they committed fornication, and they were led astray, and became corrupt in all their ways. Semjâzâ taught enchantments, and root-cuttings, Armârôs the resolving of enchantments, Barâqîjâl, (taught) astrology, Kôkabêl the constellations, Ezêqêêl the knowledge of the clouds, 〈Araqiêl the signs of the earth, Shamsiêl the signs of the sun〉, and Sariêl the course of the moon. And as men perished, they cried, and their cry went up to heaven . . .

*Meaning: A spoken curse, an angry or hostile remark directed at someone, or an appeal to a supernatural power to inflict harm.

Note:
This was WELL BEFORE Abraham, Issac, and Jacob. And WELL BEFORE Noah's flood too!