The book of Job was one of the first things that began to turn me away from my Christian upbringing. I was troubled by what god did to his most obedient servant. I was told that the terrible things were justified because of Job’s pride. A YouTuber was giving me the same message. This was my answer:

Me: You miss the point about Job. The story clearly shows the caprice of god, who allows the torture of a man who has done only right. God himself tells Satan that Job is righteous. Then he allows Satan to injure Job in ways too horrible to contemplate. Just think how you would feel if (supposing you have children) your entire family were murdered. Do you really think it would be all right, since, after all, god gave you another family? And what about all those lives snuffed out? Had they no value?

You simply cannot spin the book of Job to be anything other than a description of a monster toying with an innocent. In this story the devil is supposed to be the evil one, but, as I have said many times, the god of the bible is revealed by his own "biographers" to be evil enough that a devil is redundant.

YT: Sure God never changes. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Could it be that people in the Old Testament did not really understand what he stands for and hence have the wrong idea of who God is? There are verses in the NT that points to that fact. A typical example is when the teachers of the law wanted to stone a adulterer..

Me: The "people in the Old Testament," as you put it, are some of the "inspired" ones who described god and his actions/orders. Are you saying they were inaccurate? The book is not necessarily true? Its imperfect?

What I have pointed out is that the actions of this god as described by his inspired ones are not only often unloving, but downright vile. The New Testament (1 John 4:8 and 16) says god is love itself, but that is contradicted by many horrors in the Old Testament, and the expected horrors of hell in the New Testament. Your god is a monster.

YT: Yes immortal, however Jesus did strip himself of his immortality:

"The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again.

No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again.

This command I received from my Father."

Me: I bet your English teachers loved you. You still don't understand the meaning of the word "immortal." It means incapable of death. One cannot be both immortal and mortal. All these quotes of the alleged Jesus make no sense in light of the fact that he wrote nothing himself, and was quoted, supposedly exactly, up to 110 years after he was dead. My memory should only be that good.

Oh, and while I'm at it, if Jesus was the son of god, referring to his father in the second person, where do you get monotheism? Two gods plus that spirit thing equals polytheism. Or did you fail math, too?

YT: John 7:53-8:11 in the King James Version: 7:53 And every man went unto his own house. 8:1 Jesus went unto the Mount of Olives. 2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. 3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, 4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. 5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? 6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. 7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. 8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. 9 And they who heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. 10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? 11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.<

Me: Perhaps you are unaware that scholars, among them Bart Ehrman, whose video I will reference for you, say that the above is an interpolation. That means it was added (defined for you, since you seem to have trouble with words like immortal). These verses were not in the earliest manuscripts found for John. The story, if it were true, and demonstrates anything, suggests that Jesus was literate (he wrote on the ground), again urging me to ask why, if he had the most important message for mankind, did he not write it himself?

My answer, of course, is that there was no Yeshua bar Joseph - that he is as mythical as King Arthur or Paul Bunyan.

YT: You have free choice. But that does not mean you can do everything and get away with it. Under democracy we are free too, but again, you cannot do everything as some actions will lead to dire consequences.

Me: Of course I have free choice. I am a good citizen. I do my best to get through life without hurting others, and in fact, helping when I can. You haven't, at least so far, said that one cannot be moral without the bible. But no sane person would choose to go to hell. What I have difficulty with is all the otherwise sane persons who believe there is one.

YT: BTW you cannot commit the sin against the holy spirit if you don't believe in him in the first place. This sin can only be committed by believers.

Me: Oh, but I did believe once. I just came to see that the story was nonsense. So again I deny the so-called holy spirit. It no more exists than the god and the son which, while three entities including the spirit yet claim to be but one. Nonsense, I say.

YT: As I have said, I have time for someone who is prepared to sit and really analyse this topic from an objective perspective. I'll do the same.

Me: I suppose I should be grateful that you would condescend to instruct me. But I've sat through all the sermons I care to long ago. Why you assume that I need your guidance is a mystery, as I am your senior by some 28 years (if your channel bio is still correct).

The following is a playlist of a Stanford Lecture by Bart Ehrman. I hope you will watch it when you have time. Whether you will be edified by doing so remains to be seen.

www.youtube.com/my_playlists?p=08B95E503291F78B