Some people wouldn't buy your "obviously Jesus and God exist(ed)" simply because it's not so obvious. Because what proof is there of God? It's not like we've found his bones.

To Guitar_Addiction:
What accounts? Can you link me to a site that talks about 'em?

Obdurate, i love ya already. Great to have a debater here. Okay, as a religious follower, i will defend thy bible!

The bible has changed over time, no doubt about it, as it was translated. The OT, Old testament, is REAL Jewish history. But, anything before the writing of Abraham may not have happened, and I will explain that in answering to your 2nd question.
The NT was written by the followers of Christ, and take into account that they were written 40+ years later, and each around different times. Mark wrote his 10 years before Matthew, Luke 15 years after Matthew, and John around 90 AD, or 5-10 years after Luke. Each Gospel increased in detail. Now, since we have multiple accounts, I say it's safe to assume that this was not fabricated. Also, the Bible is not biased, wanna know why? Each Gospel [writer] had a different audience, the Jews, gentiles, and Romans. Now, since Christianity extends to all different kinds of religions, it wouldnt have grown as big as it is if it were biased. The gentiles, Jews, and Romans wouldnt have converted if it were biased. Yes, i have read historical accounts, take the crusades, where Christianity was corrupted IMO, where you would have the Muslim POV and a Crusader POV. When comparing my historical documents with the Bible, I cannot pull out any bias in the writing of the Bible.

Logic is Science, what we learned through trial and failure. What's learned becomes logic. We learned that it's "impossible" to part water like that, but with "divine" wind, it could be possible. This is a stuck point, because we has humans can only "Believe" and "have faith." At this time, my mind is blank on the subject... I may come to argue about this at another time .

To answer your second question...
Again, the concept of changing languages and times it were written must be taken into account. If we think about, how likely is it that we spawned from 2 people, Adam and Eve? I personally believe in the theory of evolution. I believed God created space, or the Universe, and it has evolved into what we have today. The reason why? Take into account of the educational capabilities of the people in the past. As a child, the best way to learn was from pictures, songs, and the general word, imagination. The intellect of this time was lower than ours, so to explain things they don't understand, they used stories. As for Revelation, the last book of the Bible and the New Testament, it is highly symbolic because it was written by the Gospel John. John's personal gospel is the most symbolic, it's excluded from the other 3 (I believe they are called Evangelists, or synoptic gospels, or another term I can't remember right now.) John was the only apostle present at the time of Jesus's crucifixion, and since he was the last of the gospels, he wrote it in the most symbolic way. Revelation is the reflection of Judgment Day, a Day we [humans] will never know for certain. Through the use of Science, we may be able to try and predict, but you can't predict divine intervention. So, I say we must take into account of the time it was written, who wrote it, and why it was written. Glad to debate on this further, when the time comes...

1. My God, you write a lot!

2. Couldn't have said it better.

I got carried away again, I vote Obdurate as awesome debater!

Haha, well thanks Joad but I'm really just taking the other side here so we have a debate. I believe in God but I really don't follow much of what I'm "supposed" to. And I think the bible has an overall good message with some flaws (like everything, though I haven't actually read all of the bible... it's on my schedule). Which is why it's difficult thinking up some kind of counter question/argument for this.

I'm also glad when people post more than one word/sentence answers because I want to really like this forum and that brings me closer to it. So far there's only been 2 forums out of a gazillion I've gone to that I miss. Hoping this becomes a third. So get carried away more often. That goes out to everybody else as well.

But anyways.. I don't know if this is really opposing anything you've said but the problem with defending religion is that a lot of it does come down to faith and you can't "win" a debate by saying "well, I believe in..."

Oh, but going back over your post, I noticed you used the word symbolic a lot. So once again, to play devils advocate, how sure can we be about anything if it is largely symbolic? Symbolism/metaphors/whatever are usually left up for interpretation, and even if they seem obvious it may mean something else.

Ultimately though (from what I've seen), is that all the explanations of the Bible/Religion are up to what you believe. Like, you believe that because it has multiple accounts that it's not fabricated, but how do you know for sure? Also, the idea of anything being lost in translation or just changed is a big one that is hard to dismiss (two of you at least have acknowledged this but I don't know to what degree you've considered it). It's a very circular argument, I know, but to be honest I've never aggressively argued against religion before. I've never even aggressively argued for religion either. I tend to stay out of this kinda ****.

I'm a little disappointed with this post.

Disappointed with mine? *wishes there was a crying smiley*
Or yours? *wishes there was a smiley that siad 'no way, that was awesome and meaningful'*

Okay, (in real life, if you ever hear me debate, I always say 'okay' lol) on the subject of symbolism...
Yes, like i said, we will never be completely sure that something as symbolic as Revelation has any relative "truth" at all. As for John's gospel, he had three gospels before him to become his foundation.

Relating to fabrication. Now, the only profession i am sure about (i pay attention in class, it's just I never formally knew the other 3's...) is Matthew's, he was a Jewish tax collector for the Romans, right? Now, we have other Jewish people with different professions. Reason I mention profession is the degree of intelligence. I'm not saying a fisherman was stupid, but high chances they were not as intelligent as someone who worked for the gov. All may have been Jewish, but the Christian teachings, the very same they preach, are directed to all peoples of the world. It can't be biased if their faith restricts it, at least in a sense.

Hmm, for the t-lations, different alphabets = different words, add the factor of time, so many, especially the books that were first written, bits of info could've been exaggerated/lost.

Oh, by the way, Matthew Mark Luke were Synoptic Gospels, so John's an evangelist as well. Had to look it up .

OOO this is getting good.

Oh, I was disappointed with my post. Yours was fine.
And I know what you mean by saying "okay" in debates, it's a good word to get your mind straight before you say something.

Hate to be a broken record here but I'm assuming a big reason for atheism is exactly what you said. Bits of info could've been exaggerated/lost. And there's no way we'll ever know because we can't trace thoughts. And a big part of the nonbelievers philosophy is there's science (I'm really not all pro-science, it leaves nothing to the imagination) that "proves" what has happened and we have Genesis that said some man popped out of the sky (haha) and created the world in.. how many days?

The bible comes off a lot as a fable. Much like Greek/Roman Mythology.
Don't get me wrong, the Bible teaches wonderful things and my god, the beginning of it is the greatest beginning to a story ever told. It's poetic and the world gets created.. as an author myself I know I will never top the bible, haha. But using a buncha stories retold and retold and edited and changed by man over centuries that uses heavy symbolism as a foundation for a major religion? Probably not the greatest idea.

This should probably wrap up soon because it's gonna become very circular (if it hasn't already), unless of course somebody has a huge problem with something here. In that case debate away, but I don't know how much longer I can play as the other side just for the sake of it.
Sometimes people need to be questioned so they fully understand what they believe.

Lol, oh okay, I thought your post was awesome, got me to talk more.

Yea, agree with you on the spawning of atheism, we believe we can prove. I think the main thought in atheism was "We made religion to explain the things that elude all logic and science..." so yeah, agree. I think Genesis, before the times of Abraham, was totally not true (i woulda said bs, but talking like that about the bible is morally wrong...). Yet I am still a firm believer in Christ and God. Oh yeah, as for the amount of days it took for the world and universe to be created, remember that these were stories to help explain things to people who only knew how to talk, walk, eat, and tend sheep (lol). So, if one were to believe this, and I consider anyone who believes Genesis before Abraham is being a fundamentalist, but Roman Catholicism is taught to look at the bible in a historical critical way... i digress, if anyone were to believe this, it's their mind setting and it may not change. I dont think God created the world in "7 days," but i believe that he made the universe and it evolved with "time." Time is merely a man-made measurement of...er... well, how much has passed. There could be no such thing as time if we never took an effort to measure lol...

I digress again... Yes, it wasn't the greatest idea to put symbolism and stories that have been passed through oral tradition, but that's what drew people to it. The need for divine mercy, faith, and something to believe in.

Yes, it has been circular. I think I'm at a standpoint, and if i tried, i'd end up back here again. BTW, last sentence, totally true.

I'm not a complete atheist, but, yeah, I'm not too sure any of it really happened. I think there was a man, called Jesus, who claimed to be the son of God. Therefore, the Romans killed him, as if that would somehow solve all of their problems. Then, some lookalike who said he was Jesus, back from the grave, came onto the scene. As far as Moses parting the sea? I doubt it. I'm going to keep this brief, because I know too little about the subject except what I believe might have happened. As far as Adam and Eve go: One son killed the other. There was one son. The god that told everyone to clothe themselves I'm sure did not encourage inbreeding. Butler out.