My questions

[OnceConvinced]

I have a list of questions here that have been bugging me and would be interested in getting your opinions. I hope this isn't too many. I know there are some that probably require long winded answers so feel free to just say so if you don't want to have to give such big answers and I will accept that. But I need some good explanations for them.

I have added comments in red as to where I am with these questions as of now.

Also I have some issues relating to OT scripture here. I will not accept the argument that because it’s in the OT, it is not relevant to Christians. But I would say that Jesus put a great importance in OT scripture and quoted it all the time. He endorsed the 10 Commandments. There is also much NT stuff that needs OT stuff to get a clear picture of what it is saying, eg. Revelations – Isaiah. But not only that, the OT gives us a clear picture on what God is like. He doesn't change. His values remain the same, he is the same today, yesterday and forever. The OT is pivotal to the Christian faith.

Thanks in advance for your replies.

1) Why did God create us knowing we would sin and then get upset (or heart broken) when we did?

2) Why does God need sacrifices to forgive sin? After all he expects us to forgive unconditionally so why doesn’t he? (Consider this one scrapped. I now concede that god doesn't expect us to forgive unconditionally)

3) Why did God need to sacrifice himself to himself to enable himself to forgive sins? (I can accept here that God may have been trying to make a point about the seriousness of sin - but it just brings me right back to question 1)

4) Why did God order a man to be stoned for the trivial offence of gathering sticks on the Sabbath (Numbers 15:32-36), then thought nothing of breaking the law himself on the Sabbath when he was Jesus on Earth? Did God change his values? I thought God never changed? Doesn't this example make God a hypocrite? (I can go along with the fact that the Pharsees were being overly picky when it came to the "sabbath" law and that their beliefs with regards to the law were maybe incorrect and that Jesus was trying to correct them. But I still find it remarkable that God would demand stoning for such a trivial offence and doesn't seem to worry about it now. To me that is definitely God changing his values)

5) Why wasn’t God able to drive out the men riding chariots of iron in Judges 1:19. I thought God was omnipotent?
(I can accept this may be a translation issue, but many believe it isn't)

6) Why did God command that rapists must marry their victims? Deut. 22:29. Sure, that rule might not apply today, but why the heck would God have demanded that law back then??
(I can agree that maybe in the culture this was accepted, but still can't understand why God wouldn't have found some way to protect the woman from further abuse. God could have put laws in place to condemn people for penalising a rape victim)

7) Why did God think bats were birds? Lev 11:19 (I accept this may be an issue of classification and not a geniune error)

8) What are cockatrices (Isaiah 11:8; 14:29; 59:5; Jeremiah 8:17), and Satyrs (Isaiah 13:21; 34:14)? Possibly a translation issue, but I would be worried about just what the Hebrew words for these were and whether modern translaters are really giving us the correct translations. (i.e how can we be sure that they aren't changing the words to suit modern beliefs and to avoid the fact the bible was talking about mythical creatures.)

9) Why does the bible claim that the heart is the centre of thought when we now know the brain is the centre of thought? Eg Gen 6:5 says “And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” (there are many similar scriptures about thought coming from the heart)

10) Why has there never been a recorded example (even in the bible) of an amputee being healed? Is God not able to heal amputees? (I accept a correction here. There was at least one example in the bible - Jesus healing the soldier's ear and he MAY have healed lame people with missing limbs - but we still never see such a thing today - all though we do hear of ressurrections!)

11) And the typical question - How can a merciful God give infinite punishment for finite crimes? (I’d like an answer from a Christian who believes that hell is eternal suffering.) And please don’t try to evade the question by saying something like “God doesn’t send anyone to hell, people choose to reject God, so send themselves to hell”. This is not a reason to send someone to hell, it’s just a consequence of one’s actions. I could commit a crime knowing that I will most likely go to go to jail for it, but it won’t be ME that finds myself guilty in court, determines the appropriate punishment and locks me up.

12) Picture this. A small infant sitting with Jesus in heaven. Jesus says….(change "sinned to much" to "rejected me" so you don't think I don't understand how Christians are saved)

"Little child, praise God you are here with Me in heaven! There are your mother and your brother burning in hell -- forever. Your mother sinned too much , and your brother left the faith. No, I can never forgive them and release them from their agony."
How is this a picture of a merciful God? He sounds very sick and twisted to me. How could this child possibly live a happy life in heaven knowing what is happening to his family? Perhaps God will wipe the kid’s brain clean so he will never know how evil his God was?

The last two questions: As a christian, I actually rejected the notion of a hell where there is eternal suffering. But I know there are many of you out there who do believe in that type of hell and I would love to see your justifications for those two

Ok, probably way too many tricky questions there, so I'll stop now.

 

[Calminian]

Also I have some issues relating to OT scripture here. I will not accept the argument that because it’s in the OT, it is not relevant to Christians. But I would say that Jesus put a great importance in OT scripture and quoted it all the time. He endorsed the 10 Commandments. There is also much NT stuff that needs OT stuff to get a clear picture of what it is saying, eg. Revelations – Isaiah. But not only that, the OT gives us a clear picture on what God is like. He doesn't change. His values remain the same, he is the same today, yesterday and forever. The OT is pivotal to the Christian faith.

Christians won't disagree with any of this. They shouldn't anyway.

1) Why did God create us knowing we would sin and then get upset when we did?

He values freedom. We do the same. We have children knowing they will suffer and may cause suffering. We could prevent it by not having them. God could have prevented evil and not making us or making robots. But if you have children, this accusation is quite hypocritical. You need to first answer why you yourself chose not to prevent evil and suffering.

2) Why does God need sacrifices to forgive sin? After all he expects us to forgive unconditionally so why doesn’t he?

The premise is false. Where are we commanded to not punish lawbreakers? You need to cite the passages you derived this from.

3) Why did God need to sacrifice himself to himself to enable himself to forgive sins?

God doesn't enable Himself. Another false premise.

4) Why did God order a man to be stoned for the trivial offense of gathering sticks on the Sabbath (Numbers 15:32-36),

Another false premise. Disobedience in a theocratic kingdom is never trivial. He was preparing Israel to bring the message of redemption to the entire world. Many souls depended on it.

then thought nothing of breaking the law himself on the Sabbath when he was Jesus on Earth? Did God change his values? I thought God never changed? Doesn't this example make God a hypocrite?

Please cite the verse you are referring to and on what O.T. grounds you feel Jesus broke the sabbath.

5) Why wasn’t God able to drive out the men riding chariots of iron in Judges 1:19. I thought God was omnipotent?

Another false premise. I'm starting to notice a pattern.

Judg. 1:19 So the LORD was with Judah. And they drove out the mountaineers, but they could not drive out the inhabitants of the lowland, because they had chariots of iron.

The passage nowhere says Yahweh couldn't not drive them out. It says He was with Judah and blessed them with may abilities, but did not enable them enough to drive out the lowlanders. This is actually just a matter of reading the passage.

6) Why did God command that rapists must marry their victims? Deut. 22:29. Sure, that rule might not apply today, but why the heck would God have demanded that law back then??

This is cut and pasted from Tektonics:

Of this, our skeptic finds much that is unfair. But knowing the social context does a world of good.

First, our subject objects that the victim may not want to marry the rapist. In modern times this would be a sensible objection; but for the ancients, this was a highly viable and indeed merciful solution. The victim would no longer regarded as marriageable and would therefore lose means of interdependent support. The rapist is here being required to provide that support. It is quite unlikely in this social context that the victim would refuse this arrangement; indeed, they might well demand such an arrangement. This is not a matter of having the rapist be one's loving partner, or cohort for further sexual relations.

Second, it is asked why the father gets money rather than the victim. This is related to another ancient practice, the dowry. A girl who is married becomes part of a new family, which she goes on to support of her own means, and now relies upon for support; at the same time, her former family loses her support and assistance in daily survival, but gains nothing practical in return - hence the dowry. The effect of the dowry was to make up for that loss of essential support, and in light of the first item above, payment to the father is quite fair, for it is his family that must now continue to support the girl for the rest of her life.

Some may still find the above objectionable; certainly our subject would continue to rail about the unfairness of it all! But this is naught but, as we say, skeptical chauvinism. Our subject has no right to make moral judgments of any kind upon those whose shoes he hasn't the room to fill. (Note as well, as one reader added, that as closely guarded as women were by their families, it may be that the WOMAN here was the initiator, and that the "rape" is not a rape at all; the Hebrew word merely means "lie with" and forced intercourse is only assumed by implication.)

Many biblical objections are due to a lack of understanding of ANE culture.

7) Why did God think bats were birds? Lev 11:19

The category of 'owph includes birds, bats, and certain insects. This is simply an issue of nomenclature. The modern classification system didn't exist back then.

8) What are cockatrices (Isaiah 11:8; 14:29; 59:5; Jeremiah 8:17), and Satyrs (Isaiah 13:21; 34:14)?

Vipers.

Jer. 8:17 “For behold, I will send serpents among you, Vipers which cannot be charmed, And they shall bite you,” says the LORD.

Goats in the Isaiah passage. I suggest getting some modern translations.

9) Why does the bible claim that the heart is the centre of thought when we now know the brain is the centre of thought? Eg Gen 6:5 says “And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” (there are many similar scriptures about thought coming from the heart)

Modern english speaking medical doctors make use of the same idioms. I would guess you do also. This is a silly challenge. It refers to one's emotions.

10) Why has there never been a recorded example (even in the bible) of an amputee being healed? Is God not able to heal amputees?

Miracles have always been rare events in history. Even in O.T. times, they were rare and only select people got to witness them. If miracle occurred as often as you would like, and of every variety you like, they would not have any sign value.

I do think the miracle of the Resurrection, which many were martyred over, is quite a generous sign and more powerful than regrowing a leg.

11) And the typical question - How can a merciful God give infinite punishment for finite crimes?

Time of punishment is not equal to the time of the crime even in our culture. One can spend maybe a few seconds killing someone, but go to jail for life. By your logic this would be unfair. Punishment times are based on the degree of guilt, not amount of time transgressed during the crime.

12) Picture this. A small infant sitting with Jesus in heaven. Jesus says….
"Little child, praise God you are here with Me in heaven! There are your mother and your brother burning in hell -- forever. Your mother sinned too much, and your brother left the faith. No, I can never forgive them and release them from their agony."
How is this a picture of a merciful God? He sounds very sick and twisted to me. How could this child possibly live a happy life in heaven knowing what is happening to his family? Perhaps God will wipe the kid’s brain clean so he will never know how evil his God was?

Another false premise. I hope you don't claim to have once been a christian, because you seem to know very little about our faith. We end up in Hell by refusing the gospel (or God's drawing), not sinning too much. This is basic christianity 101. And it seems not a hard task for the God who created the world, to remove our sorrows in heaven, whether by removing our memories or some other means.

Ok, probably way too many tricky questions there, so I'll stop now.

Er, no, they were actually quite shallow, IMO. There are certainly better objections out there. Whatever book you got these out of, I'd try to get your money back. If you're really interested in becoming a good skeptic I'd look into the writings of Antony Flew. Just some advise.

 

[Adstar]

6) Why did God command that rapists must marry their victims? Deut. 22:29. Sure, that rule might not apply today, but why the heck would God have demanded that law back then??

Lets look at the verses your question relates to in context f the surounding verses.

Deuteronomy 22
23If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;
24Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

The first instance is of an engaged woman having sexual with a man. There is no rape involved in this verse.

25But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die.
26But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:
27For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her.

Here is a case of Rape. It specifically mentions that the man forced her and the man was put to death.

28If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;
29Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

This is not a case of Rape, because no force is mentioned. This is a case of fornication leading to enforced marriage. ( like a shotgun wedding if you like)</SPAN>



All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[OnceConvinced]

Thanks for spending the time to answer some of my quesetion Claminian, it's much appreciated.

He values freedom. We do the same. We have children knowing they will suffer and may cause suffering. We could prevent it by not having them. God could have prevented evil and not making us or making robots. But if you have children, this accusation is quite hypocritical. You need to first answer why you yourself chose not to prevent evil and suffering.

I know I'm in danger of breaking the rules in this forum by debating, but I have to say something here, that premise is faulty and also a strawman. A parent has no choice on what nature their child is born with. So it can't be compared. And no loving parent would want to put their child to death for disobeying them. God on the other hand knits us together in our mother's womb. So he has control over how we turn out when we are born -free will or no free will.

The premise is false. Where are we commanded to not punish lawbreakers? You need to cite the passages you derived this from.

I'm not talking about punishment, just simple forgiveness. It says in the bible we are to forgive no matter what. Bless those that persecute you and all that stuff, turn the other cheek, do not take revenge etc etc. But God does not live by the rules he set.

Please cite the verse you are referring to and on what O.T. grounds you feel Jesus broke the sabbath.

It is a well known thing that Jesus broke the sabbath laws and ordered others to do the same. The pharasees made a big deal over it.

Another false premise. I'm starting to notice a pattern.

This is very frustrating that you make statements like this, but I am not able to debate. I don't believe any of these premises are false. They are only false because you find them offensive.

Judg. 1:19 So the LORD was with Judah. And they drove out the mountaineers, but they could not drive out the inhabitants of the lowland, because they had chariots of iron.

What version are you reading from? That is a very dodgy interpretation. The only version I have ever seen talks of God as being the one that does the driving out.....

"And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out [the inhabitants of] the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron" (this version is from the Blue Letter Bible on the net, as I do not have a bible here at the moment.)

The rapist marrying the victim issue

He he he. I guess having to marry the woman would be the ultimate punishment huh? .... I know that's in bad taste, I'm sorry.

Goats in the Isaiah passage. I suggest getting some modern translations.

I would rather have accurate translations. What makes a modern translation a better translation than an older one? How do we know that with these modern translations the publishers aren't conveniently trying to rewrite things to make it sound more realistic. How do we know the bible isn't being altered slightly to get around these issues? I require a translation that is loyal to the Hebrew texts, which sadly, so far has not been done with any translation of scripture.

9) Why does the bible claim that the heart is the centre of thought when we now know the brain is the centre of thought? Eg Gen 6:5 says &#8220;And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.&#8221; (there are many similar scriptures about thought coming from the heart)

Modern english speaking medical doctors make use of the same idioms. I would guess you do also. This is a silly challenge. It refers to one's emotions.

This is not silly. We adopt a lot of our so-called idioms from scripture and ancient culture. Do you have any real evidence to support that this is metaphorical? Or are you coming up with an explanation that "gets around" an obvious ignorant statement made by the writer of this scripture so that you can continue to believe the bible is infallible?

Miracles have always been rare events in history. Even in O.T. times, they were rare and only select people got to witness them. If miracle occurred as often as you would like, and of every variety you like, they would not have any sign value.

I do think the miracle of the Resurrection, which many were martyred over, is quite a generous sign and more powerful than regrowing a leg.

Being careful to try not to debate here. But I wouldn't expect to hear about regular examples. Just some. As for resurrections, as impressive as they are, it's quite different because an amputation would require the reappearance of something that is no longer there (assuming that the missing limb is no longer available to be reattached). A dead body is still there, so nothing new has to appear. Not only that, but one could argue the body wasn't actually dead in the first place, where is with a limb reappearing cannot be argued against.

Another false premise. I hope you don't claim to have once been a christian, because you seem to know very little about our faith. We end up in Hell by refusing the gospel (or God's drawing), not sinning too much. This is basic christianity 101. And it seems not a hard task for the God who created the world, to remove our sorrows in heaven, whether by removing our memories or some other means.

I agree "sinning too much" is not why you go to hell. That little quote was copied and pasted from another site from someone's sig as it was something that really caught my eye. Perhaps it needs to be changed to "your mother rejected me". Trust me I know a lot about your faith.

Er, no, they were actually quite shallow, IMO. There are certainly better objections out there. Whatever book you got these out of, I'd try to get your money back. If you're really interested in becoming a good skeptic I'd look into the writings of Antony Flew. Just some advise.

Maybe they are shallow to you, but are very important issues to me and a lot of others. Many people have lost their faith over these issues. Maybe you should check out some ex-christian testamonies. And a lot of these topics have warranted huge debates on websites I have visited.

 

[OnceConvinced]

Lets look at the verses your question relates to in context f the surounding verses.

Deuteronomy 22
23If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;
24Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

The first instance is of an engaged woman having sexual with a man. There is no rape involved in this verse.

25But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die.
26But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:
27For he found her in the field, and the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her.

Here is a case of Rape. It specifically mentions that the man forced her and the man was put to death.

28If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;
29Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

This is not a case of Rape, because no force is mentioned. This is a case of fornication leading to enforced marriage. ( like a shotgun wedding if you like)</SPAN>



All Praise The Ancient Of Days

You don't think that the words "Lay hold of her" suggests force?

From v23, I agree, it is not talking about rape. It is talking about an engaged woman in a consensual affair. From v25 it is talking about an engaged woman being raped. From v28 it is talking about a virgin being raped. Also that scripture goes on to mention the fact he "humbled" her, which once again suggests rape.

 

[Lyle]

I'll hit these two...

2) Why does God need sacrifices to forgive sin? After all he expects us to forgive unconditionally so why doesn&#8217;t he?

3) Why did God need to sacrifice himself to himself to enable himself to forgive sins?

2) God is just and in order to be just all sin must be dealt with. it's not about being mean and torture, it's about punishment. if the law were upheld as it should be everyone would be traveling the speed limit.

3) A sacrifice to cover sin forever must be a perfect sacrifice. Since everything born falls under the curse of the law then there is only one perfect sacrifice, Himself. What is more perfect then God? nothing. in order for Him to be just He must be fully just. In order for Him to be forgiviong His justice must be met..
Sins are not brushed away, they are paid for...

 

[OnceConvinced]

3) A sacrifice to cover sin forever must be a perfect sacrifice. Since everything born falls under the curse of the law then there is only one perfect sacrifice, Himself. What is more perfect then God? nothing. in order for Him to be just He must be fully just. In order for Him to be forgiviong His justice must be met..
Sins are not brushed away, they are paid for...

Hi Lyle, thanks for replying.

It still seems like double standards to me. He wants us to forgive regardless, but we have to pay for our forgiveness. But I do appreciate what you're saying.

 

[Calminian]

Thanks for spending the time to answer some of my question Claminian, it's much appreciated.

I have to confess, it actually didn't take much time.

I know I'm in danger of breaking the rules in this forum by debating, but I have to say something here,

Worst comes to worse they'll move the thread.

that premise is faulty and also a strawman. A parent has no choice on what nature their child is born with.

But they can decide whether or not that child is born. Is there any doubt that that child will ever suffer? You can totally prevent it by not having them. Yet you do it anyway and criticize God for doing the same thing. People even have children in extreme poverty and in countries where there is much civil unrest. Yet they criticize God for making them. Who is suffering that man didn't bring into the world?

God on the other hand knits us together in our mother's womb. So he has control over how we turn out when we are born -free will or no free will.

The fact that He knits us together does not mean He controls our decisions. If you believe we have freewill, you just defeated your own argument.

I'm not talking about punishment, just simple forgiveness. It says in the bible we are to forgive no matter what. Bless those that persecute you and all that stuff, turn the other cheek, do not take revenge etc etc. But God does not live by the rules he set.

But you are talking about punishment. You compared it to God's judgement. Are you changing your argument?

It is a well known thing that Jesus broke the sabbath laws and ordered others to do the same. The pharisees made a big deal over it.

Well then it should be easy for you to cite the passage. Otherwise I'll have to conclude you just read this out of some book and didn't check it out. And yes much of Jesus&#8217; ministry was correcting the false understandings of the O.T. by the pharisees. If you&#8217;ll kindly cite the passage I can deal with it in detail. I'm not certain what you are referring to.

This is very frustrating that you make statements like this, but I am not able to debate. I don't believe any of these premises are false. They are only false because you find them offensive.

I don't' find you offensive at all. I just think you are recycling bad arguments which don&#8217;t really take a lot of effort to refute.

What version are you reading from? That is a very dodgy interpretation. The only version I have ever seen talks of God as being the one that does the driving out.....

I was quoting the NKJV, but you can also check the NASB, NIV and NLT. All of them say they (Judah) drove them out, with the exception of the KJV which uses he, but obviously is referring to Judah. Do you actually believe the writer was just mentioning that God was with Judah in passing, but judah was not the one driving out the mountaineers? They just stood by and watch God do it and then watched Him fail to defeat the chariots? The only possible way one could come to this conclusion is plucking the verse out of context, because it was cited in some second rate skeptic book.

Let's be honest here. Were you just reading your bible one day and came across this?

He he he. I guess having to marry the woman would be the ultimate punishment huh?

It's important we are careful not to add our cultural bias to the equation. It may seem terrible, but in those days this was preferred. The man who raped the woman had to take her in and care for her and pay a dowry to her family. If not they would lose out on valuable income that was often much depended on by the girls family. ANE culture was quite a different world.

I would rather have accurate translations. What makes a modern translation a better translation than an older one?

Modern translations often are based on ever improving manuscript evidence and they are also closer to the modern english we speak. Sometimes it's not as much a translation error as language barriers.

How do we know that with these modern translations the publishers aren't conveniently trying to rewrite things to make it sound more realistic. How do we know the bible isn't being altered slightly to get around these issues? I require a translation that is loyal to the Hebrew texts, which sadly, so far has not been done with any translation of scripture.

By studying it. I would suggest looking into the issue. Many skeptics have done so and have come away satisfied the Bible has been preserved. Did you know the entire New Testament can be pieced together just from quotes from the early church fathers? And this N.T. would be virtually identical to what we have today. Are you familiar with the care ancient scribes took in copying the O.T.? Are you familiar with all the checks and balances they incorporated.

Norm Geisler wrote a book called A General Introduction to the Bible. If you really want to tackle the issue, this would be the place to start. For a cursory glance, here&#8217;s a good article. Manuscript Support for the Bible's Reliability

Now a question for you. How do you know all these skeptic books aren&#8217;t trying pull a fast one on you? Look at all the bad arguments that have you using.

This is not silly. We adopt a lot of our so-called idioms from scripture and ancient culture. Do you have any real evidence to support that this is metaphorical? Or are you coming up with an explanation that "gets around" an obvious ignorant statement made by the writer of this scripture so that you can continue to believe the bible is infallible?

This is utterly false. All languages have idioms. Some come from other cultures, some are homegrown. Where did we get the phrase, raining cats and dogs or big cheese? They are developed for various reasons.

And where is your evidence that the Bible writers actually believed that emotions and morality were actually produced from the physical heart? The Hebrews believed men had souls and that morality was a spiritual issue involving the soul. Even today christians don't believe that our physical brains govern our moral decisions. Physiology and material causality cannot explain morality.

Being careful to try not to debate here.

But I wouldn't expect to hear about regular examples. Just some. As for resurrections, as impressive as they are, it's quite different because an amputation would require the reappearance of something that is no longer there (assuming that the missing limb is no longer available to be reattached). A dead body is still there, so nothing new has to appear. Not only that, but one could argue the body wasn't actually dead in the first place, where is with a limb reappearing cannot be argued against.

I'd love to hear your theory on how Jesus faked out the Roman soldiers into believing He was dead, and how He hid all the injuries He must have sustained during the process. Jesus did grow a new ear for Peter. But I guess a new leg is all you&#8217;ll accept. Suit yourself.

Trust me I know a lot about your faith.

But you didn&#8217;t even know how one gets saved.

Maybe they are shallow to you, but are very important issues to me and a lot of others.

If I were a skeptic I&#8217;d search for better arguments. I certainly wouldn't want to stand before God using these.

Many people have lost their faith over these issues.

Over translations of goats???

Maybe you should check out some ex-christian testimonies. And a lot of these topics have warranted huge debates on websites I have visited.

You have testimony of someone losing their faith over bats being called birds?

 

[Rafael]

A parent has no choice on what nature their child is born with. So it can't be compared. And no loving parent would want to put their child to death for disobeying them. God on the other hand knits us together in our mother's womb. So he has control over how we turn out when we are born -free will or no free will.

I'm not talking about punishment, just simple forgiveness. It says in the bible we are to forgive no matter what. Bless those that persecute you and all that stuff, turn the other cheek, do not take revenge etc etc. But God does not live by the rules he set.

Because God knows a child will sin, as He stands outside of the dimension of time and sees begining to end, it does not mean that He forces that child to walk an evil life. The only thing predestined is that no matter what acts the fallen children of mankind take or those of fallen angels - they all will work together for good; to those that love God and are the called, doing according to His purpose and will.
Forgiveness has to be asked for or it does not exist. Love does not exist without a choice, and God risked evil by giving that choice to man. However, God is able to take even those choices for evil and ultimately bring about good. It is man that is disobedient and lets death enter - not God.

It is a well known thing that Jesus broke the sabbath laws and ordered others to do the same. The pharasees made a big deal over it.

The Pharisees added to the law a lot of legalism, ignoring love which is the fulfillment of the law.
In the old testament, God showed mankind the horror of man's fallen condition, Death does not need to be glossed over, but needs to be presented just as it is - the ultimate payment for all sin. Remember too, that all those who die the first death are not gone, but still are within God's reach. Jesus went to the Old Testament people who had died under the law and preached to them, leading captivity captive. Nothing is ever lost to God that He cannot do perfect justice for His creation, yet we are always assuming He will do evil or has done evil with the work of His own hands...?!? Nope, He provided the way out by paying the price for sin and death in the flesh with His own manifestation in the flesh as God in Jesus - identifying Himself completely with man's condition and then providing the way back from the fall.
Any time I read the Old Testament, I see God showing faithfully what happens if not for His grace and tender mercies. Nothing, not one child or animal, is lost to God, and it is only in our own imaginations that God does evil. Like all things, He has created evil, but He does not do evil or force others to do it. The first death is not to be feared like the second death which is the final seperation between God and evil. Even evil and the devil provide a contrast to the light so that it can be better known and revealed in the end.

Ro 8:28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

2Peter 3:9 ¶ The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Eze 18:32 I don&#8217;t want you to die, says the Sovereign LORD. Turn back and live!
Eze 33:11 As surely as I live, says the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of wicked people. I only want them to turn from their wicked ways so they can live. Turn! Turn from your wickedness, O people of Israel! Why should you die?

 

[*~DJ~*]

It still seems like double standards to me. He wants us to forgive regardless, but we have to pay for our forgiveness. But I do appreciate what you're saying.

To be forgiven by God all we have to do is ask. To do this we confess it to Him and ask for HIs forgiveness. He then throws it (our sin) as far as the east is from the west and remembers it no more.

What was meant by our sins are paid for is not US paying for them, but Jesus paid in His own perfect blood for each and every one of our sins. All we have to do to be forgiven is ask.

 

[*~DJ~*]

It is a well known thing that Jesus broke the sabbath laws and ordered others to do the same. The pharasees made a big deal over it.quote]
I believe I know what you are talking about. Here it is:
1 ¶ At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat.
2 But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.
3 But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;
4 How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?
5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?
6 But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.
7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
9 And when he was departed thence, he went into their synagogue:
10 And, behold, there was a man which had his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him.
11 And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out?
12 How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days.
Matthew 12: 1-12

The Jewish Pharisees took the law to extreems. For instance it is commanded not to reap on the Sabbath- this turned into a woman could not look upon her reflection on the Sabbath. She may see a gray hair and be tempted to pluck it out- that would be reaping. It is also commanded not to sow on the Sabbath. It was unlawful to move furniture- even to pull out a chair at the dinner table. The floors were dirt, if you pulled out a chair it would leave a mark that looks like field rows, and that would be sowing.
There are many, many more.

 

[red77]

.

 

[red77]

But you didn’t even know how one gets saved.



If I were a skeptic I’d search for better arguments. I certainly wouldn't want to stand before God using these.



Over translations of goats???



You have testimony of someone losing their faith over bats being called birds?

[/QUOTE]

I think you do Onceconvinced and injustice........I think it was pretty obvious that it wasn't bats being called birds thats caused people to lose faith...........some of those arguments are what you'll find and are emotive issues.........the doctrine of hell can hardly be called a shallow issue no matter how you cut it.............whats more its about the most inconsistent doctrine in churches today, whatever your truth happens to be on the issue you can bet there'll be about 10 differing views...........even just on this forum alone.............

 

[Lyle]

It still seems like double standards to me. He wants us to forgive regardless, but we have to pay for our forgiveness. But I do appreciate what you're saying.

the commandment to forgive is given to Christians

 

[Pure_Joy]

2) Why does God need sacrifices to forgive sin? After all he expects us to forgive unconditionally so why doesn’t he? God is not human, he doesn't need to reason, he is a powerful being he requires respect. Sacrifices show that we respect God, Then he sacrificed hs own to show he loved us back, and to cover all sacrifices so that we no longer need to sacrifice animals.

3) Why did God need to sacrifice himself to himself to enable himself to forgive sins? God required sacrifice for sins from the beginning he is unchanging so why would he change him rules for himself?

4) Why did God order a man to be stoned for the trivial offence of gathering sticks on the Sabbath (Numbers 15:32-36), then thought nothing of breaking the law himself on the Sabbath when he was Jesus on Earth? Did God change his values? I thought God never changed? Doesn't this example make God a hypocrite?God made those rules to punish those who sinned, GOd hates Pride, God hates sin, it makes a point to how Powerful he is.

5) Why wasn’t God able to drive out the men riding chariots of iron in Judges 1:19. I thought God was omnipotent? he chose not to

6) Why did God command that rapists must marry their victims? Deut. 22:29. Sure, that rule might not apply today, but why the heck would God have demanded that law back then??to keep more sin from happening


9) Why does the bible claim that the heart is the centre of thought when we now know the brain is the centre of thought? Eg Gen 6:5 says “And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” (there are many similar scriptures about thought coming from the heart)Well there is your Beating heart, and your soul, the heart of your feelings,

10) Why has there never been a recorded example (even in the bible) of an amputee being healed? Is God not able to heal amputees?survival rates of an amputee were much much less then. Also, he may have but it may not be recorded, also, maybe none went forth in faith

11) And the typical question - How can a merciful God give infinite punishment for finite crimes? (I’d like an answer from a Christian who believes that hell is eternal suffering.) And please don’t try to evade the question by saying something like “God doesn’t send anyone to hell, people choose to reject God, so send themselves to hell”. This is not a reason to send someone to hell, it’s just a consequence of one’s actions. I could commit a crime knowing that I will most likely go to go to jail for it, but it won’t be ME that finds myself guilty in court, determines the appropriate punishment and locks me up.well, basically the devil or Satan chose to seperate himself from God, this created a HELL. because of Adam and eves sin all of humanty were punishedand we all deserve Hell, this is where mercy comes in, (mercy is not getting what you do deserve btw) GOd gave rules, nd laws to be followed if you followed them you were able to be forgiving, then God gave his own son through grace(getting what you don't deserve) to give us a choice to accept his mercy or not.

12) Picture this. A small infant sitting with Jesus in heaven. Jesus says….
"Little child, praise God you are here with Me in heaven! There are your mother and your brother burning in hell -- forever. Your mother sinned too much, and your brother left the faith. No, I can never forgive them and release them from their agony."
How is this a picture of a merciful God? He sounds very sick and twisted to me. How could this child possibly live a happy life in heaven knowing what is happening to his family? Perhaps God will wipe the kid’s brain clean so he will never know how evil his God was? Mercy from god is the fact that the child is in heaven and not in hell, also, once in heaven you have a different mindset, it is your spirit that is in heaven, and you are happy and never worried again.


any of my answers not satisfactoy please pm me anyone, Also, if I messed up something, pm me

 

[Key]

I have a list of questions here that have been bugging me and would be interested in getting your opinions. I hope this isn't too many. I know there are some that probably require long winded answers so feel free to just say so if you don't want to have to give such big answers and I will accept that. But I need some good explanations for them.

Also I have some issues relating to OT scripture here. I will not accept the argument that because it’s in the OT, it is not relevant to Christians. But I would say that Jesus put a great importance in OT scripture and quoted it all the time. He endorsed the 10 Commandments. There is also much NT stuff that needs OT stuff to get a clear picture of what it is saying, eg. Revelations – Isaiah. But not only that, the OT gives us a clear picture on what God is like. He doesn't change. His values remain the same, he is the same today, yesterday and forever. The OT is pivotal to the Christian faith.

Thanks in advance for your replies.

1) Why did God create us knowing we would sin and then get upset when we did?

2) Why does God need sacrifices to forgive sin? After all he expects us to forgive unconditionally so why doesn’t he?

3) Why did God need to sacrifice himself to himself to enable himself to forgive sins?

4) Why did God order a man to be stoned for the trivial offence of gathering sticks on the Sabbath (Numbers 15:32-36), then thought nothing of breaking the law himself on the Sabbath when he was Jesus on Earth? Did God change his values? I thought God never changed? Doesn't this example make God a hypocrite?

5) Why wasn’t God able to drive out the men riding chariots of iron in Judges 1:19. I thought God was omnipotent?

6) Why did God command that rapists must marry their victims? Deut. 22:29. Sure, that rule might not apply today, but why the heck would God have demanded that law back then??

7) Why did God think bats were birds? Lev 11:19

8) What are cockatrices (Isaiah 11:8; 14:29; 59:5; Jeremiah 8:17), and Satyrs (Isaiah 13:21; 34:14)?

9) Why does the bible claim that the heart is the centre of thought when we now know the brain is the centre of thought? Eg Gen 6:5 says “And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” (there are many similar scriptures about thought coming from the heart)

10) Why has there never been a recorded example (even in the bible) of an amputee being healed? Is God not able to heal amputees?

11) And the typical question - How can a merciful God give infinite punishment for finite crimes? (I’d like an answer from a Christian who believes that hell is eternal suffering.) And please don’t try to evade the question by saying something like “God doesn’t send anyone to hell, people choose to reject God, so send themselves to hell”. This is not a reason to send someone to hell, it’s just a consequence of one’s actions. I could commit a crime knowing that I will most likely go to go to jail for it, but it won’t be ME that finds myself guilty in court, determines the appropriate punishment and locks me up.

12) Picture this. A small infant sitting with Jesus in heaven. Jesus says….
"Little child, praise God you are here with Me in heaven! There are your mother and your brother burning in hell -- forever. Your mother sinned too much, and your brother left the faith. No, I can never forgive them and release them from their agony."
How is this a picture of a merciful God? He sounds very sick and twisted to me. How could this child possibly live a happy life in heaven knowing what is happening to his family? Perhaps God will wipe the kid’s brain clean so he will never know how evil his God was?

Ok, probably way too many tricky questions there, so I'll stop now.

Have you looked into CARM.org

And each one of these would have been a fine question in their own right, but they have all be answred before.

If any one of these is of upmost importance to you, ask that single question, and I'll do my best to answer it.

But I am not about to answer "Mechine Gun" questions.

God Bless

Key

 

[OnceConvinced]

But they can decide whether or not that child is born. Is there any doubt that that child will ever suffer? You can totally prevent it by not having them. Yet you do it anyway and criticize God for doing the same thing. People even have children in extreme poverty and in countries where there is much civil unrest. Yet they criticize God for making them. Who is suffering that man didn't bring into the world?

I'm talking about the nature of the child here, not suffering. My point is that God created us with the capacity to sin and then hates it when we do sin. Our child being born a sinner is not our fault.

But you are talking about punishment. You compared it to God's judgement. Are you changing your argument?

No I'm not talking about punishment. I'm talking soley about forgiveness. Unconditional forgiveness.

Well then it should be easy for you to cite the passage. Otherwise I'll have to conclude you just read this out of some book and didn't check it out. And yes much of Jesus&#8217; ministry was correcting the false understandings of the O.T. by the pharisees. If you&#8217;ll kindly cite the passage I can deal with it in detail. I'm not certain what you are referring to.

There are examples in the NT where Jesus healed on the sabbath, which the Pharasees saw as him breaking the sabbath.

John 5:8 tells the story of Jesus telling a man to carry his mat, which the pharasees saw as breaking the sabbath.

I can accept that Jesus was trying to correct the Pharasees, however today, Jews will still claim he was breaking the law and they ought to know their own laws.

I don't' find you offensive at all. I just think you are recycling bad arguments which don&#8217;t really take a lot of effort to refute.

That's fine. I want you to refute them, that's why I am here. So far I have very few convincing arguments from Christians and not all your arguments are particularly convincing.

Let's be honest here. Were you just reading your bible one day and came across this?

It was brought to my attention by others. I'm quite happy to accept that it may be a misinterpretation. But then I do not have faith in any of our modern translations. Too often people have to pick parts out of scripture and go back to the original Hebrew text to get the true meaning. That proves to me that we have dodgy translations.

Now a question for you. How do you know all these skeptic books aren&#8217;t trying pull a fast one on you? Look at all the bad arguments that have you using.

I came to my own conclusions about the translation issues. I got tired of people trying to change the meaning of scripture by going back to the Hebrew text and coming up with a different spin on things. Bible scholars and pastors do it all the time. I have no doubts that the Hebrew and Greek texts we have got our English interpretations from are in order, but what I am concerned about is how they have been incorrectly interpreted into English. The example we discussed above is a classic example of blatant misinterpretation on the part of Translaters.

I'd love to hear your theory on how Jesus faked out the Roman soldiers into believing He was dead, and how He hid all the injuries He must have sustained during the process. Jesus did grow a new ear for Peter. But I guess a new leg is all you&#8217;ll accept. Suit yourself.

What makes you think I don't believe God can resurrect someone? Of course he can. He's God. He could also make limbs appear if he wanted to but he doesn't. (well not any more anyway - forgot about Peter's ear) I agree a resurrection is an amazing thing. We even hear stories about them from over seas.

But you didn&#8217;t even know how one gets saved.

Of course I know how we get saved. I just explained to you that the I just took that little example from somebodie's sig on another site. You are being pedantic. The point in that little example was not "why the family members were sent to hell". The point is "that they were sent to hell and that the child now had to accept they were burning for ever in hell". You are deliberately trying to evade my point.

If I were a skeptic I&#8217;d search for better arguments. I certainly wouldn't want to stand before God using these.

I am not trying to be a skeptic here. I know of many more better arguments, but have ready plenty of debates about them. I chose arguments here that I have not heard good explanations for. (apart from the claims of mistranslations)

Over translations of goats???

You have testimony of someone losing their faith over bats being called birds?

How about the many mistranslations throughout the bible. Actually one mistranslation undermines the entire English bible we have. If there is one error then there are bound to be others. That is the real issue here.

Please don't try to make light of my concerns. I am here to have these concerns allayed. One little wobbly brick and cause and entire building to fall. Just because you have come up with explanations that satisfy you does not mean they will satisfy others.

 

[OnceConvinced]

It is a well known thing that Jesus broke the sabbath laws and ordered others to do the same. The pharasees made a big deal over it.quote]
I believe I know what you are talking about. Here it is:
1 ¶ At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat.
2 But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.
3 But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;
4 How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?
5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?
6 But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.
7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless.
8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.
9 And when he was departed thence, he went into their synagogue:
10 And, behold, there was a man which had his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him.
11 And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out?
12 How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days.
Matthew 12: 1-12

The Jewish Pharisees took the law to extreems. For instance it is commanded not to reap on the Sabbath- this turned into a woman could not look upon her reflection on the Sabbath. She may see a gray hair and be tempted to pluck it out- that would be reaping. It is also commanded not to sow on the Sabbath. It was unlawful to move furniture- even to pull out a chair at the dinner table. The floors were dirt, if you pulled out a chair it would leave a mark that looks like field rows, and that would be sowing.
There are many, many more.

Yeah, another good example there. One of the big problems modern day Jews have with Jesus is that they truly believe Jesus broke the sabbath law.

I agree that the Jews were overly fussy when it came to the Sabbath law. Ridiculously fussy and I don't blame Jesus for getting irritated by it. But then God pretty much endorsed what they believed when he ordered a man stoned just for picking up sticks back in the OT. Who can argue that God didn't go to extremes himself to ensure his law was kept.

 

[Rafael]

Who can argue that God didn't go to extremes himself to ensure his law was kept.

Your nitpicking God (and we all have, at times), but your missing the big picture...
Death is the extreme reality of sin. In the Old Testament, before actually bringing His grace through Jesus, God showed the children of Israel what the realities were, as they could not obey His law even if they wanted to and tried. This realty still exists, but God's wrath is now deferred. All men die, but God provided life before the fall and after the fall - making us twice His when He did not have to. He has the full right to give and take away because He is the Creator. The big picture shows Him as faithful judge to the truth by allowing true love to exist, risking the extremities of evil, knowing that He would have to pay the price, and then loving His creation by sacrificing His own manifestation in the flesh of man as Jesus.
He says many times that He never took or takes pleasure in the death of the wicked. What seems to be the extremity of God comes only as a faithful witness to the truth about the extremity of man's sin and death - which He redeems us from.

 

[OnceConvinced]

5) Why wasn’t God able to drive out the men riding chariots of iron in Judges 1:19. I thought God was omnipotent? he chose not to

But the scripture there says "could not" , not "would not". So I think you may be putting your own spin on it there.

6) Why did God command that rapists must marry their victims? Deut. 22:29. Sure, that rule might not apply today, but why the heck would God have demanded that law back then??to keep more sin from happening

But the rapist could still go out and rape others. And doesn't it mean that woman would have to live with that horror every day? Seems rather cruel.

Calminian had some good points about the culture of the day. But still, I would think that God would have come up with some rules that protected the woman, not left her open to more abuse.

10) Why has there never been a recorded example (even in the bible) of an amputee being healed? Is God not able to heal amputees?survival rates of an amputee were much much less then. Also, he may have but it may not be recorded, also, maybe none went forth in faith

I'm talking more so now. We get examples of miraculous healings (or at least we hear about them). But not amputees limbs miraculously reappearing.

12) Picture this. A small infant sitting with Jesus in heaven. Jesus says….
"Little child, praise God you are here with Me in heaven! There are your mother and your brother burning in hell -- forever. Your mother sinned too much, and your brother left the faith. No, I can never forgive them and release them from their agony."
How is this a picture of a merciful God? He sounds very sick and twisted to me. How could this child possibly live a happy life in heaven knowing what is happening to his family? Perhaps God will wipe the kid’s brain clean so he will never know how evil his God was? Mercy from god is the fact that the child is in heaven and not in hell, also, once in heaven you have a different mindset, it is your spirit that is in heaven, and you are happy and never worried again.[/quote]

I guess this is another issue that has me wondering. God gave us a free will, he didn't want robots. So does that mean in heaven we are going to be robots programmed in a way that removes all hurt and pain? For a child to be able to overcome that you'd think he'd have to be. It still seems pretty warped to me though.

Thanks for replying Pure_joy!