ISRAELITE KING OMRI IN ARCHAEOLOGY AND ANCIENT DOCUMENTS

ISRAELITE KING OMRI IN ARCHAEOLOGY AND ANCIENT DOCUMENTS

“Then the people of Israel were split into two factions; half supporting Tibni son of Ginath for king, and the other half supported Omri. But Omri’s followers proved stronger than those of Tibni son of Ginath. So Tibni died and Omri became king. In the thirty-first year of Asa king of Judah, Omri became king of Israel, and he reigned twelve years, six of them in Tirzah. He bought the hill of Samaria from Shemer for two talents of silver and built a city on the hill, calling it Samaria, after Shemer, the name of the former owner of the hill. But Omri did evil in the eyes of the LORD [Yahweh] and sinned more than all those before him. He followed completely the ways of Jeroboam son of Neat, committing the same sin Jeroboam had caused Israel to commit, so that they aroused the anger of the LORD [Yahweh], the God of Israel, by their worthless idols. As for the other events of Omri’s reign, what he did and the things he achieved, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel? Omri rested with his ancestors and was buried in Samaria. and Ahab his son succeeded him”—1 Kings 16:21-26 NIV

Omri reigned from about 886 BCE to 874 BCE, after a coup takeover from the previous king Tibni. After he solidified his power, he bought “the hill of Samaria”, 34 miles north of Jerusalem. He transferred the capital of the northern kingdom there, a location that was easily defended, because it is on a high high hill, rising about 300 feet above the surrounding fertile valleys., which was perhaps his most significant accomplishment. Excavators have unearthed Omri’s royal citadel on the acropolis. Archaeologists have discovered that Omri and his successor, son, Ahab, adorned Samaria with magnificent structures to rival those of Solomon in Jerusalem.

Omri’s palace was surrounded by a 5 foot thick wall enclosing a four-acre area. The wall was constructed of fine ashlar (cut) masonry laid in header-stretcher fashion (alternating narrow-face and wide faced placement of rectangular blocks). On the SW side of the enclosure was a palace constructed around a central courtyard. The preserved portion is 78 feet by 88 feet in size. Outside the royal quarter was a lower city built on the slope of a hill. 

Omri is identified in the Bible as one of Israel’s most evil kings, a terrible spiritual leader, but appears prominently, as someone who is famous, in nonbiblical pagan records. Reflecting the fact that Omri subdued Moab, its king Mesha included Omri’s name in the Mesha stele (circa 846-7 BCE), stating that “Omri had occupied the land of Media (northern Moab), and had dwelt there in his time”.  About five years later, the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III referred to Jehu, a later Israelite king, as the “son of Omri”. Sargon II (circa 721 BCE), in his annals, referred to Israel as “Omri-Land”. Tiglath-Pileser III (circa 732 BCE) spoke in his annals about “the house of Omri”.

All this evidence shows that Omri was a very famous and successful king in a worldly sense, yet the Bible pays him virtually no attention. In sharp contrast, political success, in the eyes of Bible writers, under God’s direction, counted for nothing worthwhile if an individual did not serve the true Almighty God. “Better is one day in your courts than a thousand elsewhere; I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of the wicked” (Psalm 84:10 NIV). 

From this we also learn that the more time that passes, the stronger the case becomes for the authenticity of God’s Word, the Bible, whereas other works need to be corrected and updated, etc. “All people are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field; the grass withers and the flowers fall off, but the word of the Lord endures forever” (1 Peter 1:24,25 NIV).

19 thoughts on “ISRAELITE KING OMRI IN ARCHAEOLOGY AND ANCIENT DOCUMENTS

  1. Unfortunately, God doesn’t exist. This has now been proven. You have not found an error in any of my arguments.

  2. False. You have not found a single error. You won’t even discuss the core steps in the argument. But I will continue to give you opportunities.

    Do you agree that this moral rule is correct?
    “Person X should attempt to prevent any moderate to severe harm H1 to any person Y or group of persons Z, if and only if 1) X certainly or probably knows about the opportunity to help by prevention, 2) X is certainly or probably able to prevent the harm, 3) X will certainly or probably not die in the prevention attempt, 4) X will certainly or probably not be permanently injured in the prevention attempt, 5) X will certainly or probably not suffer greatly in the prevention attempt, 6) allowing H1 is probably or certainly not necessary to preventing greater harm H2, and 7) allowing H1 is probably or certainly not necessary to producing a benefit B which outweighs the harm H1. Any person X has a moral duty to attempt to prevent harm H1 if all seven of these contingencies are satisfied. Persons are moral if they attempt to prevent a moderate to severe harm when all seven relevant specific contingencies are met; otherwise they are immoral.”

    If you think it is incorrect, then tell us why. If you don’t understand it, then ask me questions about it.

    1. “Not everyone has faith” (2 Thessalonians 3:2 NIV). It’s your choice to not have faith, even though “what nay be known about God is plain to them, because God made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature–have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse” (Romans 1:19,20 NIV).

      1. RT: “Not everyone has faith” (2 Thessalonians 3:2 NIV).

        GW: I agree. I am a person without any faith. Faith is a vice and so I try to avoid it.

        RT: It’s your choice to not have faith,…

        GW: Is faith a choice? I’m not sure it is. If you think so, then please prove that speculation. There are other religious people who believe that faith is simply a gift of God and has nothing to do with human choice.

        RT: even though “what nay be known about God is plain to them, because God made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature–have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse” (Romans 1:19,20 NIV).

        GW: This claim is simply false. We now know that God does not exist. The world is probably eternal and has not been created. Even you have said that something cannot come from nothing, and so our universe could not have come from nothing. If God did exist, he would not be always invisible. He would make himself visible in grand universal revelations, which I have described to you many times. People have no excuse to believe in God.

        GW: Today I will present a new argument to you:
        1. If God did exist, then the Holocaust would never have occurred.
        2. But the Holocaust did occur.
        3. Therefore, God does not exist.
        The premises are true, the logic is valid per Modus Tolens, and so the conclusion is true. Find an error, if you can.

        1. No, your premise 1 is false.There is abundant of that Almighty God the Creator does exist (Psalm 19:1-4; Romans 1:19,20; Hebrews 3:4; Revelation 4:8,11).
          Premise 2 is true.
          Premise 3 reaches a wrong conclusion (Psalm 14:1), based on the false premise #1.

          1. RT: No, your premise 1 is false.There is abundant of that Almighty God the Creator does exist (Psalm 19:1-4; Romans 1:19,20; Hebrews 3:4; Revelation 4:8,11).

            GW: No, premise #1 is true. Your objection is irrelevant since the premise is stated as a contingency. That premise says neither that God exists nor that God does not exist. It just says what would be the case in our world, IF God did exist. If God did exist, then the Holocaust would never have occurred. So, you didn’t address the truth or falsity of the premise. You went off on a tangent.

            RT: Premise 2 is true.

            GW: We agree that premise 2 is true.

            RT: Premise 3 reaches a wrong conclusion (Psalm 14:1), based on the false premise #1.

            GW: Wrong. The final step is not a premise; it is the conclusion of the argument. Since both premises 1 and 2 are true, and the logic is valid per Modus Tolens, the conclusion must be true and is true. You have found no error in the argument.

            GW: Do you really believe that God would allow the Holocaust, if he did exist? If you believe this, prove your claim.

          2. Your premise #1, “if God existed, the Holocaust would not have occurred,” is false. “From eternity to eternity, you [Yahweh] are God” (Psalm 90:2). God has always existed. The Holocaust occurred. Why? “This alone I have discovered, God made humankind upright, but they have sought out many evil schemes” (Ecclesiastes 7:29 NET Bible). God has allowed humans to choose either the ‘narrow road leading to life’, or ‘the broad road leading to destruction’ (Matthew 7:13,14 NIV). God strongly advised humans to take the “narrow road’, and warned of the eternal death consequences of taking the ‘broad road’. These choices led to such evils as the Holocaust. Therefore, God is not responsible for humans making the wrong choices.
            Since your premise 1 is false, your conclusion is false.

  3. RT: Your premise #1, “if God existed, the Holocaust would not have occurred,” is false.

    GW: No, it is true. But if you think it is false, then you have a burden of proof — you must demonstrate beyond all reasonable doubt that if God did exist, then he would have allowed, authorized, or caused the Holocaust. I don’t think you can do that, but I surely would like to see you try.

    RT: “From eternity to eternity, you [Yahweh] are God” (Psalm 90:2). God has always existed.

    GW: If God did exist, he would be eternal, but sadly he doesn’t exist. This has been proven to you several times.

    RT: The Holocaust occurred. Why?

    GW: Because the Nazis caused it to occur. Most of the Nazis were Christians and had adopted the antisemitic attitudes in Europe prevalent since Martin Luther who was himself an antisemite. But the Holocaust would not have occurred, if God did exist. He would have prevented it.

    RT: “This alone I have discovered, God made humankind upright, but they have sought out many evil schemes” (Ecclesiastes 7:29 NET Bible).

    GW: That’s half false and half true. First, God does not exist; we now know this. Secondly, some humans have committed some horrible immoral acts. The Nazis did. This is a historical fact. You aren’t a Holocaust denier, are you?

    RT: God has allowed humans to choose either the ‘narrow road leading to life’, or ‘the broad road leading to destruction’ (Matthew 7:13,14 NIV). God strongly advised humans to take the “narrow road’, and warned of the eternal death consequences of taking the ‘broad road’. These choices led to such evils as the Holocaust.

    GW: False. First, God does not exist, and this has been proven. Secondly, if God did exist, he would not allow humans to take a “narrow road” to cause physical harm, e.g. kidnaping, torture, murder, and extermination as the Nazis did. If he allowed this to happen either through the design/creation of human persons or through simply standing aside and doing nothing to prevent or stop it, then he would be at least partly culpable for the acts of wrong doing. His culpability could be described as enabling, facilitating, sponsoring, or conspiring, all of which are immoral. However, we know that if God did exist, he would be perfectly moral. So, the Holocaust is just another piece of evidence which rules out the existence of God. I don’t know why you don’t understand this. It is plain to see. “Know the truth, and the truth shall set you free!” (Attributed to Jesus)

    RT: Therefore, God is not responsible for humans making the wrong choices.

    GW: Of course he isn’t! How could he be? He doesn’t exist! A nonexistent person cannot be responsible for anything. But if there did exist an eternal, all-knowing, and all-powerful person or intelligent agent, then he would be responsible, directly or indirectly, for EVERY EVENT! No event or anticipated event would escape his notice. No event would occur without his cooperation. Just think about it. Such a person or intelligent agent would allow, authorize, or cause EVERY EVENT. If you disagree, then explain and defend your answer.

    RT: Since your premise 1 is false, your conclusion is false.

    GW: You are mistaken. You have not proven that premise #1 is false. Because both premises are true and the logic is valid per Modus Tolens, then the conclusion is true and must necessarily be true. Try again.

    GW: If God did exist, he would not and could not have any morally justified reasons to allow the Holocaust. If you think otherwise, then present some suggestions for those reasons. Maybe you could just ask God to give you some suggestions. Ha. Just kidding. You can’t do that because God does not exist. If you could do it, you would do it because you are so intent on proving you are right and I am wrong.

    1. “God never performed a miracle to convince an atheist, because his ordinary works provide sufficient evidence”—Ariel Roth
      “Every house is built by someone, but God is the builder of everything”—-Hebrews 3:4 NIV

      1. Everything that has a beginning has a cause
      2. The universe had a beginning
      3. The universe’s beginning had a cause

      Two types of causes:
      1. Intelligent (such as the faces on Mount Rushmore)
      2. Non-intelligent, or natural (such as the Grand Canyon)

      Things don’t happen without a cause. To deny the Law of Causality is to deny rationality. For those who deny the Law of Causality, we ask, “What caused you to come to that conclusion?”
      “Now we see how the astronomical evidence leads to a biblical view of the world. The details differ, but the essential elements in the astronomical and biblical accounts of Genesis are the same: the chain of events leading to man commenced suddenly and sharply at a definite moment in time, in a flash of light and energy”—Robert Jastrow
      There is thus overwhelming proof from science supporting God the Creator’s existence.

      The existence of evil does not disprove God’s existence.

      1. RT: “God never performed a miracle to convince an atheist, because his ordinary works provide sufficient evidence”—Ariel Roth

        GW: God does not exist (this has been proven), and there is no good evidence that any other gods exist. For a miracle to occur, a god is required. But if God did exist, he would perform miracles in his regular grand revelations to all persons, as I have previously described to you. This has never happened. Therefore, God does not exist.

        RT: “Every house is built by someone, but God is the builder of everything”—-Hebrews 3:4 NIV

        GW: False. First, God does not exist, and this has been proven. But if God did exist, he would not be the builder of everything because human persons have built some things – houses, commercial buildings, autos, planes, computers, pyramids, etc.

        RT: 1. Everything that has a beginning has a cause
        2. The universe had a beginning
        3. The universe’s beginning had a cause

        GW: This is the infamous Kalam Cosmological Argument for the Existence of God, and it has been refuted many times. We do not know that the universe began to exist, so premise #2 has not been proven. In fact, it is likely that the universe is eternal. I gave you three good reasons for thinking this, and you even agreed with one of them — “Something cannot come from nothing.”

        RT: Two types of causes:
        1. Intelligent (such as the faces on Mount Rushmore)
        2. Non-intelligent, or natural (such as the Grand Canyon)

        GW: We do not know that the universe began to exist, but something important happened to the universe at the Big Bang. There was a great transformation of the universe. Although this event may not have had a cause, I tend to think that it did, as do you. Yes, the cause would have to be intelligent or nonintelligent. There is no good evidence for any intelligent cause prior to the Big Bang, so by default we must assume that the cause of the Big Bang was nonintelligent. I think the cause of the Big Bang was probably due to increasing temperature, pressure, and density of the primordial particle or to the sudden emergence of “dark energy” from this particle.

        RT: Things don’t happen without a cause.

        GW: That is probably true, but we don’t know it for sure.

        RT: To deny the Law of Causality is to deny rationality.

        GW: This is plainly false. Rationality precedes the Law of Causality which is a product of thinking rationally. The Law of Causality resulted after observation, rational inference, and probability thinking.

        RT: For those who deny the Law of Causality, we ask, “What caused you to come to that conclusion?”

        GW: Prior genetics, parental training, environmental conditions, and life experience cause people to either accept or reject the Law of Causality. You and I accept it, i.e. we think it is probably true.

        RT: “Now we see how the astronomical evidence leads to a biblical view of the world. The details differ, but the essential elements in the astronomical and biblical accounts of Genesis are the same: the chain of events leading to man commenced suddenly and sharply at a definite moment in time, in a flash of light and energy”—Robert Jastrow

        GW: I read Jastrow’s famous book decades ago. His view has been superceded. If the biblical view matched the scientific view, the details would not differ, as Jastrow says they do. The Bible says nothing about the Big Bang or evolution. In fact its description contradicts the scientific description of these things. For example, the order of the creation of species in Genesis does not match the order of emergence of species through evolution. Also, there was no flash of light at the Big Bang, as Jastrow claimed. It was an expansion, not an explosion.

        RT: There is thus overwhelming proof from science supporting God the Creator’s existence.

        GW: False. You have presented no proof. In fact you have not even presented any good evidence for this. Furthermore, the existence of God has been disproven by me and several other persons.

        RT: The existence of evil does not disprove God’s existence.

        GW: I don’t use the term “evil” because it is ambiguous and has too much religious baggage. However, the existence of horrible harms, like the Holocaust, does disprove God’s existence. I presented that proof to you and you failed to find any error in it.

        GW: If you believe that if God did exist, then he would allow the Holocaust, then please tell us what God’s morally justified reasons would be for allowing it. You can’t or you won’t. The occurrence of the Holocaust is slam-dunk evidence against the existence of God. God is dead! Actually, the concept of God is dead.

        1. “His people have acted corruptly toward him, this is their defect–they are not his children but a a devious and crooked generation”—Deuteronomy 32:5 CSB
          “God . . . will wipe out every tear from their eyes. Their will be no more death, or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away”—Revelation 21:3,4 NIV
          According to atheism, in one breath atheists claim evil doesn’t exist. “People are just dancing to the music of their DNA”. In the next breath, they are outraged at evils, such as the Holocaust. When someone dies, did God murder him?
          God has provided a way out of the predicament of sin and death through Jesus Christ (Romans 3:25).
          Atheists assert there is no God, and evolution is the reason everything is here. It is interesting that Hitler used the theory of evolution to justify the Holocaust. The murders committed by Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc., were the logical outworking of atheism. Atheistic beliefs were their justification. If there is no God, then anything is permissible. Why not murder to get what you want, if you can get away with it?
          However, the existence of evil actually proves atheism false. There can be no objective standard of good without God. You can’t know what a crooked line is unless you can compare it to a straight line. When atheists complain about evil, they presuppose the existence of God, by stealing a moral standard from him. Atheists think that God has no right to allow people to be killed and mistreated, but at the same time, they assert that people have a “right” to take deliberate action to execute unborn humans via abortion. This is hypocritical. In the end, evil turns out to be a roundabout argument for the existence of God.
          Evil came about through the exercise of free will (which is necessary for love to exist). The freewill choice of Adam put the human condition in a fallen state, which is continually verified and exacerbated by humans own bad choices (Romans 5:12). i. e., Russia’s horrific evils inflicted on Ukraine and millions of innocent people.

          1. RT: “His people have acted corruptly toward him, this is their defect–they are not his children but a a devious and crooked generation”—Deuteronomy 32:5 CSB

            GW: “His people”? If God did exist, he would not play favorites. He would not reward and punish groups, even the Jews. Instead, he would justly reward and punish individuals.

            RT: “God . . . will wipe out every tear from their eyes. Their will be no more death, or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away”—Revelation 21:3,4 NIV

            GW: If God did exist, he would make things right in the present and not defer this to the future. For example, he would prevent the Covid pandemic, the Holocaust, bone cancer in children, and men raping women. He would do this because he would be all-knowing, all-powerful, eternal, and perfectly moral. God would not act against his own nature. You know this.

            RT: According to atheism, in one breath atheists claim evil doesn’t exist.

            GW: Straw man. Atheists make only one claim – “I do not believe that any gods exist.” I don’t use the word “evil” because it is ambiguous and has too much religious baggage. On the other hand, Hitler committed horribly immoral acts, like attempted extermination. If God did exist, he would have prevented the attempted extermination by preventing all the murders of the Jews.

            RT: “People are just dancing to the music of their DNA”.

            GW: Again, atheists make only one claim (see above). Philosophers who support determinism claim that the behavior of persons is completely determined by prior factors including genetics, environment, child rearing experiences, and all learning experiences. Determinism vs. free will is still a live controversial issue and has not been settled. Nobody, including you, can assume that free will is a fact.

            RT: In the next breath, they are outraged at evils, such as the Holocaust.

            GW: For the third time, I will tell you that atheists necessarily make only one claim (see above). Almost all persons now alive, including theists and atheists, are outraged by the horrible harms of the Holocaust. Aren’t you?

            RT: When someone dies, did God murder him?

            GW: Of course not! That is impossible. Why? Because God does not exist. If God did exist, he might kill human persons, but he wouldn’t murder them! Don’t you know the difference between killing and murder? Murder is immoral killing, and God would not murder anyone. I believe that if God did exist, he would either cause all human persons to live forever (not die) or cause them all to have the same duration of life, e.g. 90 years.

            RT: God has provided a way out of the predicament of sin and death through Jesus Christ (Romans 3:25).

            GW: This is complete nonsense and one of the dumbest ideas ever invented. First, God does not exist, and this has been proven. Secondly, if God did exist, he would implement perfect justice, not “a way out of the predicament.” Christians want to cheat and escape accountability and so they invented these foolish ideas of forgiveness, mercy, salvation, and atonement. These are false and irrational ideas.

            RT: Atheists assert there is no God,…

            GW: All atheists assert “I don’t believe that any gods exist.” Only a rather small percentage of atheists, including me, assert “God does not exist.” This has now been proven.

            RT: and evolution is the reason everything is here.

            GW: False. Most atheists assert that evolution, not creationism, is the reason for different species of living organisms. Evolution is not the reason everything is here. The reason everything is here is that the universe is almost certainly eternal.

            RT: It is interesting that Hitler used the theory of evolution to justify the Holocaust.

            GW: I doubt it. Please present your evidence for this.

            RT: The murders committed by Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc., were the logical outworking of atheism. Atheistic beliefs were their justification.

            GW: Nonsense. These men committed murders because they were greedy for power, irrational, and immoral. In fact, Stalin alternately opposed and supported religious groups to further his own ends. Before the Nazi invasion Stalin opposed religious groups, but afterwards he supported them. Anything to promote his own goals.

            RT: If there is no God, then anything is permissible.

            GW: This is a false statement lifted from a novel by Russian author Fyodor Dostoyevsky. Correct Universal Ethics exists on its own and does not depend on the existence of any god. Under CUE, many acts are impermissible, including murder, rape, slavery, and extermination – all acts performed by Nazis in the Holocaust. If God did exist, he would have prevented the Holocaust.

            RT: Why not murder to get what you want, if you can get away with it?

            GW: Because it is irrational and morally wrong! You know this. Over the long run murder undermines the satisfaction of human goals for survival, reproduction, well being, and advancement. However, we should have laws against murder to reduce its frequency. If God did exist, we wouldn’t need laws against it because he would prevent all murders. The occurrence of murder means that God does not exist!

            RT: However, the existence of evil actually proves atheism false.

            GW: Atheism cannot be proven to be false as long as there is one person who asserts “I don’t believe any god exists.” And there are millions.

            RT: There can be no objective standard of good without God.

            GW: Nonsense. Correct Universal Ethics or CUE is that standard. For example, “Any person X should not enslave any person Y” is a CUE rule. Don’t you accept this rule?

            RT: You can’t know what a crooked line is unless you can compare it to a straight line.

            GW: CUE is the metaphorical “straight line” for morality.

            RT: When atheists complain about evil, they presuppose the existence of God, by stealing that God exists by stealing a moral standard from him.

            GW: You are not thinking rationally. We already know that God does not exist and we still have moral standards. You can’t steal from a nonexistent person. Embrace and comply with CUE and you will be fine.

            RT: Atheists think that God has no right to allow people to be killed and mistreated, but at the same time, they assert that people have a “right” to take deliberate action to execute unborn humans via abortion. This is hypocritical.

            GW: Both these claims are false and I will explain why. God does not exist. A nonexistent person has no rights. Only existing persons have rights. But if God did exist, he would prevent murder of one human person by another. Why? Because he would know about it, have the power to prevent it, and be perfectly moral. God would not act against his own nature. The human zygote, embryo, and early fetus are not human persons, and thus they have no rights. Only after the fetus acquires the capacity of consciousness does it become a person and has rights. When this happens, the rights of the pregnant woman may come into conflict with the rights of the fetal person, and there are ethical rules which apply to this situation.

            RT: In the end, evil turns out to be a roundabout argument for the existence of God.

            GW: This is complete nonsense, as I have shown. The existence of horrible harms, like the Holocaust, are incompatible with the existence of God. Why? Because God would prevent them, if he did exist. If you disagree, then you must PROVE that God would have MORALLY JUSTIFIED reasons to allow the horrible harms, such as the Holocaust. You won’t and you can’t do this. Many have tried, all have failed. But if you believe God exists, then just ask him for those reasons and report back to us. You won’t and you can’t do this either. I’m sorry to inform you that your entire religious worldview is irrational.

            RT: Evil came about through the exercise of free will (which is necessary for love to exist).

            GW: There you go again – spewing irrationality. First, we do not know if free will even exists. This is still an undecided issue. Secondly, the story of Adam and Eve is just fiction. Thirdly, you have not given any definition of “evil.” Fourthly, eating an apple (a metaphor for seeking knowledge) would not be a sin, if God did exist. Fifthly, if God did exist, he would not punish Adam and Eve so harshly and would not punish their descendants for their acts, as is purported in Genesis. It would be morally wrong for God to do these things, and instead he would be perfectly moral. And lastly, disobedience or obedience to an authority figure is not necessary for love of the authority figure. For example, you can disobey your own father’s immoral requirements and still love him. Does that apply to you?

            RT: The freewill choice of Adam put the human condition in a fallen state, which is continually verified and exacerbated by humans own bad choices (Romans 5:12). i. e., Russia’s horrific evils inflicted on Ukraine and millions of innocent people.

            GW: I’ve already explained why you are mistaken. You are stuck in ancient times, gullibly believing ancient authors who had less intelligence, rationality, and wisdom than you have today. Cast aside these ancient authors and think for yourself! Think rationally and eventually you will come to the same conclusions as I have.

          2. “In the past God overlooked such ignorance [including atheism], but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead”—Acts 17:30,31 NIV
            Atheism is “ignorance”.
            “Their land is full of idols; they bow down to the work of their hands, to what their fingers have made”—Isaiah 2:8 NIV
            You have your own ideas about what you think God should be like and how he should act. You exalt your ideas above those of the Christian Biblical God. Although you deny it, you idolize your own ideas.
            “Who shapes a god and casts an idol, which can profit nothing? People who do that will be put to shame”—Isaiah 44:10,11 NIV
            Although you haven’t made a literal idol, you idolize your atheistic ideas.
            Repent while you still have the time, and accept God’s truth, and his offer of eternal salvation through Jesus (John 3:16; Acts 3:19,20).

  4. RT: “In the past God overlooked such ignorance [including atheism], but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead”—Acts 17:30,31 NIV

    GW: First, we now know that God does not exist. This has been proven. Secondly, if God did exist he would judge each person individually when they died, not on a general judgement day. He would not delay justified rewards and punishments, but would present them immediately upon death. You don’t have a proper conception of God.

    RT: Atheism is “ignorance”.

    GW: No. Atheism is the position “I don’t believe in any gods.” Theism is ignorance disguised as knowledge.

    RT: “Their land is full of idols; they bow down to the work of their hands, to what their fingers have made”—Isaiah 2:8 NIV

    GW: We atheists don’t bow down to anyone. Nobody is worthy of our worship. But if God did exist, we would bow down to him. He would be worthy of our worship. But sadly, he doesn’t exist; this has been proven.

    RT: You have your own ideas about what you think God should be like and how he should act.

    GW: And you have your own ideas about this. But your ideas are just mistaken. You don’t understand the concept of God.

    RT: You exalt your ideas above those of the Christian Biblical God.

    GW: False. God does not exist, so I cannot exalt my ideas above his. However, I exalt my ideas about God above your ideas about him because yours are mistaken.

    RT” Although you deny it, you idolize your own ideas.

    GW: I don’t idolize my ideas. I just think my ideas about the concept of God are correct and yours are incorrect.

    RT: “Who shapes a god and casts an idol, which can profit nothing? People who do that will be put to shame”—Isaiah 44:10,11 NIV

    GW: This verse doesn’t apply to me since I don’t believe in any gods or shape a god or cast an idol. I do value the truth, however. Nothing wrong with that.

    RT: Although you haven’t made a literal idol, you idolize your atheistic ideas.

    GW: I have the idea that God does not exist, and this idea is true. It has been proven. You have found no errors in the proofs. But I don’t idolize the idea that God doesn’t exist. I would idolize God if he did exist. Who wouldn’t?

    RT: Repent while you still have the time, and accept God’s truth, and his offer of eternal salvation through Jesus (John 3:16; Acts 3:19,20).

    GW: There is no God to whom to repent. This has been proven, whether you like it or not. God possesses no truth since he doesn’t exist. But more importantly, you do not possess the truth about the existence of God. The idea of salvation or atonement through Jesus, the core idea of Christianity, may be the most ridiculous idea ever invented by human beings. If God did exist, he would implement perfect justice, not salvation from justice. You just don’t understand the concept of God.

    1. “Such a person feeds on ashes; a deluded heart misleads him; he cannot save himself, or say, ‘Is not this thing in my right hand a lie?'”—Isaiah 44:20 NIV
      Yes, in itself, atheism is an entirely negative position. However, organized atheism, like your brand of it, is never simply noncommittal in this way. It exalts the liberal ideas of modern western world ideology as being superior to all others, including those of older versions of atheism. You claim the Bible has many falsehoods, including the existence of Almighty God the Creator, and who his Son, Jesus Christ is, by exalting your ideas over the Biblical truths. Yet, neither you, nor anyone else, has ever proven the Bible false in a single thing.
      Furthermore, while it is true that you don’t literally bow down and worship anything knowingly, your “deluded heart misleads” you [new modern atheists], and you are actually unwittingly guilty of the most depraved idolatrous form of worship of all, that is, of sinful mankind itself, via atheistic Humanism.

      1. RT: “Such a person feeds on ashes; a deluded heart misleads him; he cannot save himself, or say, ‘Is not this thing in my right hand a lie?’”—Isaiah 44:20 NIV

        GW: I am not lying. I am merely telling the truth. God does not exist!

        RT: Yes, in itself, atheism is an entirely negative position.

        GW: The atheist position is “I don’t believe in the existence of any gods.” This is a rational position. It is a statement about the subject themselves, not about what exists or not in the world. On the other hand, I go one step further. I claim that God does not exist. This is a statement not about me but about what exists or not in the world. I have many proofs that God does not exist, and nobody, even you, has found an error in any of them.

        RT: However, organized atheism, like your brand of it, is never simply noncommittal in this way.

        GW: The only organized atheism of which I am familiar is the “American Atheists”. You can google this group. They do not take the position I take which is “God does not exist, and this has been proven.” As I said, only a small percentage of atheists take my position. One is James Sterba. Look up his books on Amazon.

        RT: It exalts the liberal ideas of modern western world ideology as being superior to all others, including those of older versions of atheism.

        GW: You are just mistaken about this. You don’t know the field, topic, or history of atheism better than I do. Atheists have a variety of beliefs on metaphysics and ethics. There are even atheists who are pro-life on the abortion issue. There are atheists who believe in an afterlife without any gods. Instead of making your focus on atheism or atheists in general, just focus on my beliefs and knowledge. I challenge you to focus on any of the three arguments against the existence of God which I have presented to you. Stop going off on tangents.

        RT: You claim the Bible has many falsehoods, including the existence of Almighty God the Creator, and who his Son, Jesus Christ is, by exalting your ideas over the Biblical truths.

        GW: I don’t do any “exalting.” I just proclaim the truth. We now know that God does not exist and that Jesus could not be the son of God.

        RT: Yet, neither you, nor anyone else, has ever proven the Bible false in a single thing.

        GW: False again! I pointed out three falsehoods in the Bible earlier today in another post on this website.

        RT: Furthermore, while it is true that you don’t literally bow down and worship anything knowingly,…

        GW: How could anyone UNKNOWINGLY bow down to and worship some being?

        RT: your “deluded heart misleads” you [new modern atheists],…

        GW: My heart pumps blood. It can’t be deluded. I don’t know about your heart.

        RT: and you are actually unwittingly guilty of the most depraved idolatrous form of worship of all, that is, of sinful mankind itself, via atheistic Humanism.

        GW: How could having knowledge be a sin? It couldn’t. I know that God does not exist. But if God did exist, he would reward all the atheists for their positions and punish all the theists for theirs.

        GW: The author/s of the book of Genesis believed that acquiring knowledge was a sin. That’s why he/they claimed that Adam and Eve committed sin by eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. The author/s were flat out wrong. Knowledge is a good thing.

        1. It was not called “the Tree of Knowledge”. Adam and Eve were warned of the deadly consequences of eating from “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:17 NIV). This was a literal tree with literal fruit, neither of which had any intrinsic properties to impart knowledge. This tree represented God’s sovereignty, and his right to set the standards for his creatures.

          1. RT: It was not called “the Tree of Knowledge”. Adam and Eve were warned of the deadly consequences of eating from “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:17 NIV).

            GW: Yes, it was called “the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,” but this was a tree of knowledge. This is a metaphor.

            RT: This was a literal tree with literal fruit, neither of which had any intrinsic properties to impart knowledge.

            GW: You have no good evidence that it was a “literal tree,” that Adam and Eve were real persons, or that the entire story is a report of real events. We may safely assume that it is all fiction. There are no first-person author-identified eye-witness reports, as is also the case with the alleged event of Jesus coming back to life. Almost all your conclusions are unsupported by sound evidence. They are just speculations.

            RT: This tree represented God’s sovereignty, and his right to set the standards for his creatures.

            GW: Your metaphorical interpretation here (a metaphorical tree) contradicts your earlier literal interpretation (a literal tree). You can’t have it both ways. Make up your mind! The fictional God gave a command to the fictional Adam and Eve and then punished them for disobedience of his command. That’s the gist of the fictional story. If God did exist, he would not have given such a stupid command and would not have punished disobedience with disproportionally harsh and transgenerational consequences. Those acts would be immoral, and if God did exist, he would be perfectly moral. You can’t infer God from contradictions.

            GW: Of course, if God did exist he would set standards – Correct Universal Ethics, for ALL PERSONS, including himself. God would not be a hypocrite. Thus, God would abide by the CUE rule on prevention, which I have explained to you before. This is how we know that God would have prevented the Holocaust.

            GW: You still have not specified what you believe God’s morally justified reasons for allowing the Holocaust would be. We are still waiting for that.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com