You said:
talitha said:
So why don't Christians have an illuminated brain as their symbol instead of a torture device?
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Silly me. I keep forgetting that my posts are invisible in EC.
talitha said:I assume the atheist icon is a dark brain because those who do not accept Christ are darkened in their understanding. They do not have the light of God within them, giving them His wisdom.
If the originals don't exist, then how can you know what they say as a whole? But more than that, who decided what stayed and what went? It all goes back to interpretation.
No, the word I'm looking for is interpreted. Whoever wrote the books of the Bible may have embellished certain ideas and changed them from what they originally were creating their interpretation of the events.
How can you be sure that that didn't happen with the books of the Bible?
I don't know how to make this question clearer. I was asking if the Bible accurately depicts the events that it claims to. My point was that if it had, they could then be verified by an external source. I'm aware that it hasn't changed in 2000 years.
I'm not saying you said it, but the fact that some Christians (on this board nonetheless) believe it is proof of the inconsistencies in the interpretations of the book itself.
Not to say that you don't sincerely believe this, but this is an explanation according to you whereas others may have (and do have) completely different opinions on this topic.
So why couldn't he just "override" the devil and make the world a great place and have humans living in peace and prosperity?
It seems very narcissistic and sadistic to create a race of people, create a supreme evil being, and then smite the people for all of eternity because they ate from the tree of knowledge after being convinced by a serpent, who was the devil and now the only way to be forgiven for doing something you had no hand in is to submit to the supreme being that put all of this into motion in the first place.
That is exactly why I am opposed to religion. It teaches people that humans are by nature bad and sinful, being "corrupt" and having "broken souls". I think humans as a whole are ok and it's not fair to hold them to standards that force them to be something they are not.
Can you point to any other records written in the same time period, of the events you are questioning? Please list your references that catalogs time, people or events that contradict or even run a parallel course to the events you are questioning.You've proven my point. What I was getting at was that the Bible does not in any way relate to real world events, yet Christians base their entire set of beliefs on this book. Had these events actually occurred, there would be some kind of record in the real world.
Anything dealing with God, morality or biblical figures does indeed originate with the bible. So what does that leave from your OP? your bonus question?The Bible is not in any way a record of history. And not all the questions were derived from the Bible.
Which I have pointed out without the bible/God their is no standard of good. What is left is a selective interpretation of the word. For instance Oscar Scheindler was a "good" Nazi that saved a few hundred people from Hitler's death camps. In the End, He still was a Nazi/War profiteer that contributed to Germany's war effort in WWII. By all our current standards he was not a "good" man.A lot of them are just common sense questions, like about Abraham, good things happening to bad people, etc.
Even Here in our society "good" is equally subjective. What is "good" now, was not "good 50 years ago. So logically speaking without a true standard their can not be "good" people. Just people who can be deemed better than others. So again without the standards the bible offers your question is invalid. If you insist on using the standard of "good" provided by the bible, then you must accept Christ's teaching on "good people." In that there are no "good people." Only God is Good.
So to ask why does God let bad things happen to "good" people? the answer being there are no good people. If you discard God the Son's definition of "Good people" the you can not ask why God allows Bad things to happen to them. Because God the Son says: "There is no one who is good no not one. Only God is Good." If you wish to discard the bible completely then know you question becomes invalid because you have discarded your acknowledgment of God.
Quoting the Bible doesn't answer anything. I could write a book about space aliens attacking France and claim it to be true and that it happened hundreds of years ago.Here is where your faith/logic takes a nose dive and apparently you either can not ,or will not see the fatal flaw in your thought process. Meaning your "logic' is not "logic" at all, but a fool's faith in what you want to believe to be true.(As demonstrated by the last paragraph)
It's ironic to see those who would strive to reticule one for having faith, be subject to the same faith they ignorantly protest in others.
Another example:
If you write the book you are speaking about, and I ask questions derived from an understanding that I have from your book. then in order for my questions to be valid I must accept the answer you give sighting your book. Because in the realm in which I ask these questions I have accepted everything to be true up to the point the question is asked. In the case of Abraham and God's command to kill his son. you have to accept everything up to the point where God gives the command and Abraham decides to carry it out. Otherwise your question is based in a misleading or deductive fallacy. thereby rendering your efforts moot. Which means it is not logic you offer, but blind faith in what you believe is right.
Again, This is not about God yet. this is about your failings in the logic you pretend to serve. I am simply trying to hold you accountable to what you claim to be doing here. If you are the bringer of logic then should your efforts not reflect this very logic?So go ahead and quote the Bible, it won't make a difference.
Or are you here for another reason?
You said:
So why don't Christians have an illuminated brain as their symbol instead of a torture device?
Do we have the originals of Romeo and Juliet? No; they are lost. We have no clue whether the play you read or watch is the exact same as it was when it wrote it.
However, we do have manuscripts, and what you see and read today is based on that. And on the whole, the play, as experts will probably tell you, is essentially the same.
Again, translation isn't the same always as interpretation.
When we have so many excerpts and texts from the time and when they all say practically the same thing in each and every one, we know what you fear isn't to worry about.
How? Because we have ancient texts and have compared them.
If you mean whether the Bible is factual history? Not always, particularly when it comes to the Torah, although the information on the Kingdoms of Israel and Judea (and when they were United as one under Saul, David, and Solomon) is extremely reliable. Other parts are hit and miss.
Furthermore, part of the very nature of truth is that truth is eternal and absolute. There is never a time when truth is anything but truth, so that makes sense. When we interpret the Bible and say "the Holy Spirit has guided me to this interpretation," we must be careful, for billions of people have read it. Most of the time, we arrive to the same conclusion. Sometimes, we arrive to a different one, although as I said above, different doesn't mean contradictory. We need to go way back to the original interpreters, and thankfully, we have their writings. So long as there is no contradiction, we're fine. If there is, then we go back to the drawing board. Not entirely unlike science in a way.
The other part is, we really don't know. How do you fathom of the mind of the infinite with a finite mind of your own. It just doesn't work (and this is only logical).
Except it wasn't for all time. And the devil originally was not evil and evil is not supreme. In Christianity, we have no concept of dualism. The physical is not lesser than the spiritual, nor is it an illusion or evil. The physical is good (again, see Genesis 1). Evil is the lack of good, not a essence of its own; chaos is the lack of law and order. Consider light; darkness isn't anti-light, but the absence of it. Christians have this theology about good and evil.
No. Christianity, as I said, teaches that creation is inherently GOOD. Substance is GOOD. Humanity is inherently GOOD, even though it is broken. God wishes to save which is good; if we were truly evil, then we wouldn't even exist. Christianity absolutely opposes the idea that humanity is somehow inherently evil.
We have a broken soul; that means that we cannot save ourselves. That doesn't mean that the soul is completely destroyed. We are still capable of doing things that are meaningful, beneficial, and, yes, good. Feeding the hungry, doing kind favors without desire for reward; we are indeed capable because the soul is broken, not annihilated. However, these are not enough to save us; we are incapable of saving ourselves because we are broken and corrupt.
drich0150 said:Can you point to any other records written in the same time period, of the events you are questioning? Please list your references that catalogs time, people or events that contradict or even run a parallel course to the events you are questioning.
drich0150 said:Even Here in our society "good" is equally subjective. What is "good" now, was not "good 50 years ago. So logically speaking without a true standard their can not be "good" people. Just people who can be deemed better than others. So again without the standards the bible offers your question is invalid. If you insist on using the standard of "good" provided by the bible, then you must accept Christ's teaching on "good people." In that there are no "good people." Only God is Good.
drich0150 said:Again, This is not about God yet. this is about your failings in the logic you pretend to serve. I am simply trying to hold you accountable to what you claim to be doing here. If you are the bringer of logic then should your efforts not reflect this very logic?
drich0150 said:Why do you not address my answer to your bonus question? Or do you need more time to "think" out a proper response?
drich0150 said:Actually it only shows half a brain... I bet you wish you thought about that a little more before posting a 1/2 cocked thought.. oh but wait your efforts are consistent with "our" assessment of your "faith."
So it is your testimony that the dinosaurs left a historical record for us during the time of Abraham? Or are you simply pointing to one possible interpretation of a fossil record? Either you do not understand the question i asked or.. your best answer falls far short.Dinosaurs.
I did not say you could not label a person good. Oscar Scheindler was labeled a good man. I am simply pointing out that "good" with out a standard to compare it to is a subjective term. Even the wicked can deem one of their own "good." This does not mean that they truly are.I can't accept that there are no good people, whether it be by the Bible's standards or otherwise.
How many time do I need to say it? then your questions are not valid.How many more times do I need to say it? The Bible is NOT a record of history. If god is out there, prove it in a way that doesn't quote Bible verses. There must be physical proof somewhere.
First, it's a two dimensional picture.
Second, it also only shows half a head, so does that mean atheists have half a head too?
So why don't Christians have an illuminated brain as their symbol instead of a torture device?
A play, regardless of how high you hold it is still a play and is regarded as entertainment more than anything else. This is a system of belief we are talking about here. People live their lives according to the words on those pages. There's a big difference.
The four gospels tell the story of Jesus' life in different ways.
If two people can take a "truth" such as the teachings of the Bible and arrive at different conclusions, then it's not the eternal and absolute truth you speak of.
Throughout the Bible god is unleashing his wrath on humble believers
I'd say satan is in league with god if god can't destroy him.
Original sin declares humanity as inherently bad. The only way to cleanse the evil is to accept Jesus as your lord and savior, so no I would say it teaches the opposite.
I can't accept that there are no good people, whether it be by the Bible's standards or otherwise.
If god is out there, prove it in a way that doesn't quote Bible verses. There must be physical proof somewhere.
A play, regardless of how high you hold it is still a play and is regarded as entertainment more than anything else. This is a system of belief we are talking about here. People live their lives according to the words on those pages. There's a big difference.
But they don't. The four gospels tell the story of Jesus' life in different ways.
But all of the ancient texts in their entirety are not available.
So it's inconsistent.
If two people can take a "truth" such as the teachings of the Bible and arrive at different conclusions, then it's not the eternal and absolute truth you speak of.
Giving up and saying god did it is not a satisfying answer.
Throughout the Bible god is unleashing his wrath on humble believers for giving in to satan, meanwhile satan pretty much does whatever he wants and god allows it. I'd say satan is in league with god if god can't destroy him.
Original sin declares humanity as inherently bad. The only way to cleanse the evil is to accept Jesus as your lord and savior, so no I would say it teaches the opposite. Christianity's views on homosexuality and sexuality in general are anti-human.
Why is our soul broken? And what exactly does that mean? There are many atheists and people of other faiths that are happy and live productive lives, doesn't seem like their souls are broken.
And if this is the case now, imagine what happened when the Bible was first drafted, after all, people wrote it.
So there's one known mistranslation. How many other do you think are in there and is that something you should base your beliefs on? You're personifying animals by saying there's an animal for every negative human trait. According to what?
So you're saying that god designed the devil to tempt humanity so they can ask god for forgiveness for giving in to desires that he created in the first place?
So they saved one family out of a whole city. What a hero! They mercilessly slaughter every living thing in that city because god chose favorites and that's acceptable?
We know your icon can be seen as representing a brain (and mind) that has gone dark, but surely you can still recognize an example, illustrating a point? This one is pretty direct.
Exactly! Same life. Seen from different perspectives, and expressed by different people.
This does not follow. The Author is infinite. How could you possibly think any passage has merely one meaning?
Nope. Not once. What could ever possess you to think such a thing, let alone take the time to write it out?
Big little word there, "if." Lots of assumption going on, and you're advertising it by voicing conclusions based on nothing else?
This was written in response to " Christianity absolutely opposes the idea that humanity is somehow inherently evil." Please change your avatar to a guy sticking his fingers in his ears and screaming lalala, I can't hear you.
All that means is you have yet to fathom the Bible's standard on this subject.
Smartest thing I've seen you say yetYup, every atom is proof. Now all you need to do is work on your definition of G-d
I guess you never read the book of Job or heard of the Great leviathans or Behemoths that roamed the lands... (And were described in detail in the bible)I was referring to their absence in the Bible. I think some giant lizards would deserve some kind of mention.
Then why hold God to your subjective standards of good? Or better yet why demand that we account God's actions to your unspecified standard of good?God's standard of good is not one I would hold myself to. He was a ruthless ogre in the old testament. Even applied to god's standards, good Christians suffer all the time.
I have pointed to a standard. Whether you agree with it or not is irrelevant to this part of the conversation. I have established that God does indeed adhere to a standard, where as you do not. In absents of this standard I point out that your judgment is subject your peers and what they deem acceptable.
Apparently you simply can not fathom the fatal fallacy in your "logic." If you wish to discuss this further I ask that you address the points i have made line by line as I have taken the time to address yours.Requesting proof is invalid?
Because a cross section of the human Head is represented in that picture. Half a head/Half of a brain.So how do you know that it's half a brain then?
It was a rhetorical question. An example to highlight the udder idiocy of your statementIt was a rhetorical question. An example to highlight the udder idiocy of your statement
The Bible was written largely by people who knew Jesus personally. The disciples had Him as a teacher, James was Jesus half-brother (Jesus didn't have Joseph's genes), and Paul saw a vision of Jesus on the road. The disciples, including Paul, also performed miracles, which were signs from God that they had authority to speak His words.
The Bible is God's word expressed through the pen of a man.
Just because it takes a little effort to understand what it's saying doesn't mean we should throw the book out the window.
I have a few reasons for saying that there are animals for every negative human trait. First is from the Bible, the second is from my understanding of the world.
In the Bible, the snake/serpent tempted Adam and Eve. Even today, we compare people to a snakes if we consider them lairs. We, of course, understand this snake to be Satan, who's also described as a lion, Lord of Flies (Beelzebub), and a dragon (which is technically not a real animal). There are also many animals that were considered unclean, such as pigs.
On the flipside, we also have some animals which symbolize positive traits, such as the dove or eagle.
As for my experiences, I have seen animals display traits that are considered evil when seen in people. For example, there's one breed of snake that I learned about on Animal Planet of which males have the ability to give off a feminine scent, confusing the other males and resulting in utter confusion. Basically, they're lying to the other males, hoping to have an advantage in finding the real females. But because they'll all doing it, it's not really any help to them.
I know where you're going with this, but your objection is just another opportunity for me to prove my position as Biblically accurate. Paul had addressed it himself in Romans.
Romans 9:15-21 - For he says to Moses,
I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.
It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on Gods mercy. For Scripture says to Pharaoh: I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth. Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
One of you will say to me: Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will? But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, Why did you make me like this? Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?
God creates each person with a purpose. Even Satan was created for a purpose, but because God is just, He cannot allow evil to go unpunished. And yes, I know that they were designed to do evil, but the fact remains that they are still evil. What a man does for evil, God plans for good. God Himself is not evil.
One thing you either don't understand or refuse to ackowledge is that none of us deserve God. We all deserve God's wrath, and if God were a god of justice alone, that would be what we would all receive. But God chose to have mercy on some of us, such as the woman's family in Jericho.
Besides that, what you're missing is the context of their situation. They lived in a very different time period, nothing like the one we live in. Each nation was spreading its city walls, and they enjoyed attacking and conquering other nations to expand their influence. Many times, Israel had been enslaved to their surrounding nations. And in fact, they had just escaped from their enslavement to the Egyptians. The city of Jericho was a major threat to the Israelites.
Except it wasn't written while he was alive but about 60 years after he died.
I was referring to their absence in the Bible. I think some giant lizards would deserve some kind of mention.
I guess you never read the book of Job or heard of the Great leviathans or Behemoths that roamed the lands... (And were described in detail in the bible)
Then why hold God to your subjective standards of good? Or better yet why demand that we account God's actions to your unspecified standard of good?
I have pointed to a standard. Whether you agree with it or not is irrelevant to this part of the conversation. I have established that God does indeed adhere to a standard, where as you do not. In absents of this standard I point out that your judgment is subject your peers and what they deem acceptable.
Apparently you simply can not fathom the fatal fallacy in your "logic." If you wish to discuss this further I ask that you address the points i have made line by line as I have taken the time to address yours.
Because a cross section of the human Head is represented in that picture. Half a head/Half of a brain.
It was a rhetorical question. An example to highlight the udder idiocy of your statement
The quick and dirty version is that the crucifix is the symbol of Christianity because it symbolized the suffering Jesus went through, while nailed to the cross, to save us from our sins. Am I right?
Because it "takes a little effort to understand" means it could be open to interpretation, therefore not something I would base my life on, especially if I wasn't the one translating/interpreting it.
This doesn't make snakes evil. If they continue to do it, it must be helping them somehow otherwise over time, they would lose that ability.
He can't allow evil to go unpunished, but he created it in the first place?
Come on now, have a little more confidence in humanity than that! Our destiny is totally what we make it, god or not. It's time to get off your knees and do something.
And god picked a favorite and told them to destroy families of people. I find it interesting that everyone always thinks they're god's favorite, it never occurs to them that they could be the Canaanites.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?