Questions about Christianity

postmortemjoe · Aug 27, 2011

GrayAngel said:
Uh, no. It is true that people can misinterpret the Bible, but those of us with any real understanding of it will realize when it's taken out of context or twisted to mean something it doesn't. Satan knows the Bible too, and he quoted scripture to Jesus, but Jesus was wise enough to see through Satan's disception and countered with more scripture.

The problem is not that the Bible is too difficult, but that people are too lazy to read it themselves.

"Those of us with any real understanding"? I'd wager that anyone who believes in their heart Christianity is true will consider themself to have a "real understanding" of what the scriptures teach and hold their mistranslation up above all others, kind of like what you're doing.

GrayAngel said:
How would they lose it? The problem with evolution is that it only works if what's beneficial to one is beneficial for the whole. If one male snake was born without that ability, he would be at a disadvantage. But that doesn't mean their species as a whole wouldn't benefit if they didn't have to lie to each other.

They would lose it over time because it's not necessary for the species to continue to thrive. If the ability is causing such a problem, then the entire species would die off until one acquired a new mutation or figured out a new way of doing things that would help the species to progress.

Snakes don't "lie to each other". What are you talking about?

GrayAngel said:
That is correct. He created evil beings, He uses them, and then he disposes of them. For God to let Satan enter Heaven would be like if I hung a piece of used toilet paper on the wall next to my family photo.

You're missing my point. Why create an evil being? To use them to do what? The only thing they're capable of is evil. So isn't god just doing evil through a proxy?

GrayAngel said:
Confidence in humanity? If you think people are essentially good, you're either in denial or you need to get out more. All societies are corrupt because all people are corrupt.

This coming from a Christian...All people are not corrupt. I don't know where you're getting that from. Stop watching Fox and MSNBC.

GrayAngel said:
Even infants, who are considered innocent by humanist thinkers, are natural sinners. You don't have to teach them to lie, or to hit each other when they're mad. I have never seen a parent sit down with their child and say, "Son, I'm going to teach you about something called lieing. Here's how you do it..." But anything good you want them to learn, you have to hammer into their heads over and over until they finally get it.

Children learn from others. They learn to lie from others just like they learn that lying is bad from others so your point is invalid.

GrayAngel said:
God didn't release the Canaanites from the Egyptians by striking them with plagues until they finally agreed to let them go. God didn't destroy a city wall after the Canaanites circled the city walls of Jericho with instruments so that they could enter. God didn't stop the sun from moving so the Canaanites could finish their battle before their enemies could escape in the darkness.

You totally overshot that question. The Israelites were the ones that attacked under Joshua at the wall of Jericho. Either way, the point I was getting at was that everyone thinks god is working in their favor, it never occurs to them that he may be working against them as he did many times in the Bible.

In Joshua 6, God orders the destruction of the Canaanites, the Jebusites, and other peoples by the Israelites.

GrayAngel said:
Other nations claimed to be God's favorite, but their gods never did anything for them except accept sacrifices and say, "We may bless you, or we may curse you depending on our mood. All a matter of chance, really."

I'm pretty sure other nations would say the same about your god. I'm not referring to other nations or other gods, I'm referring to the Christian nation and the Christian god.

drich0150 · Aug 27, 2011

postmortemjoe said:
Dinosaurs and humans didn't coexist.

Also where did I or scripture say that they did? you ask "why doesn't the bible mention dinosaurs?" I pointed out two places that it did.

You pretty much said that people we'd consider good aren't, but a medieval homophobic tyrant is. Again, those standards go completely against human nature.

I agree God does indeed go against human nature.

You didn't address the second part considering god's standards why do good Christians suffer, are they not considered good by god?

I did infact address the second part. In that no one is Good. This means Christians too..
"There are none that are righteous, no not one."

I thought I was doing a pretty good job of addressing your arguments. I'm sorry if I can't get to every single word, but you're not the only one debating me in this thread.

Your's is not the only thread i am discussing either. Yet somehow i do find the time to address each legitimate point you have brought to the discussion. i realize not everyone can or wants to go line by line that is why i said if you Wish to discuss this topic further that you will have to go line by line.

Right, so until you can come up with a way to depict a totally three-dimensional brain in a tiny icon like that, you're argument is an argument of semantics.

If by semantics you mean the definition of "cross section" means to Bi-sect or to show half of something... Then Yes I identified the picture as showing a Half or a cross section of a brain. which I then used to interpret that "Atheists" are depicted (by the usage of a cross section) to only have 1/2 of a brain. to refute the Idea that simply because that no part of a brain is depicted in the Christian icon, "Christians do not think." In truth if you take a brain and cut it in half, it is not able to "think" either. So then one must conclude that either party can not think, or that the icons have little to nothing to do with one's ability to "think."

I have simply taken the imagery you choose to use to make a false assessment of Christianity, to point you in the direction of it's logical end. It appears you were so busy "thinking" of a come back, that you were not able to make this journey with out my help.

which ironically points out again your brain icon has little merit in identifying one's mental capacity.

So one more time. If you do not want to be dragged out and beaten with your own insults then please keep them to yourself. the people answering your questions (for the most part) are indeed trying to help you by answering these questions. The least you could do is try and not lash out at all who do so.

GrayAngel · Aug 27, 2011

postmortemjoe said:
"Those of us with any real understanding"? I'd wager that anyone who believes in their heart Christianity is true will consider themself to have a "real understanding" of what the scriptures teach and hold their mistranslation up above all others, kind of like what you're doing.

So? People lie to themselves all the time. Do you know what makes a good driver? Do you know bad drivers who call themselves good drivers? If so, does that mean no one can know who qualifies as being a good driver?

Your argument doesn't work in any other situation, yet when it comes to the Bible you expect me to believe that because there are people who misinterpret it to their heart's content, that that means it's impossible to know what it's actually saying. It's not true. Understanding of the Bible comes from reading it without personal bias, without taking it out of context, and putting some real effort into learning from it.

postmortemjoe said:
Snakes don't "lie to each other". What are you talking about?

Their males are disguising themselves as females to deceive the other males.

Another example that comes to mind is a particular type of bird whose egg looks exactly the same as another. This bird would find a nest of that other species, push the eggs out of the nest, and then lay its own egg there. The owners of the nest have no idea that the egg isn't their own. After the egg hatches, the chick will grow much bigger than its adopted parents, always demanding food and never leaving the nest (until, I assume, it's ready to lay eggs).

You have to admit, some of the methods used by these animals, however instinctual, seem pretty evil, especially the snakehead.

postmortemjoe said:
You're missing my point. Why create an evil being? To use them to do what? The only thing they're capable of is evil. So isn't god just doing evil through a proxy?

God's use for them is to have them play certain roles in His plan. Each individual has a different purpose. For the pharaoh, God used him to bring Israel into captivity, so that He could raise up Moses to demand their release. God knew pharaoh would say no (in fact, God hardened his heart so that he would say no), and God responded by showing His power by the ten plagues, each of which proved God's dominion over the things the Egyptian gods were supposed to have power over.

God is not doing evil through a proxy. God intention is for good, even though the intentions of the doer are evil. An analogy I've used a few times goes like this:

When you find gold fresh from a mine, it has impurities in it. The only way to remove those impurities is to melt the gold down, putting it in the fire. The fire has no intention of purifying the gold: it just burns and tries to destroy whatever is put in its path. The intention of the one who puts the gold in the fire is not to destroy the gold, but to purify it.

postmortemjoe said:
This coming from a Christian...All people are not corrupt. I don't know where you're getting that from. Stop watching Fox and MSNBC.

I don't watch any of those channels very often, and what's wrong with MSNBC? I've heard people accuse the "evil Fox network" of being biased, but this is the first time I've seen someone lump MSNBC together with it.

Believe it or not, the fallen state of man is a Biblical concept. If any Christian tells you different, he doesn't believe in the Bible.

postmortemjoe said:
Children learn from others. They learn to lie from others just like they learn that lying is bad from others so your point is invalid.

Children are not taught how to lie. As I've already said, that comes naturally to them. But the good things you want them to learn are difficult to teach. Kids don't hit each other because they see their father hit their mother (in most cases), but because its a natural reaction for them. But if you tell them not to hit each other because it is wrong, they'll have a great amount of difficulty in holding themselves back. Even then, they're likely to act differently when you're not around than when you're there to correct them.

postmortemjoe said:
You totally overshot that question. The Israelites were the ones that attacked under Joshua at the wall of Jericho. Either way, the point I was getting at was that everyone thinks god is working in their favor, it never occurs to them that he may be working against them as he did many times in the Bible.

In Joshua 6, God orders the destruction of the Canaanites, the Jebusites, and other peoples by the Israelites.

You sure you've got the right chapter? I'm looking right at it, but I don't see any mention of Canaanites or Jebusites.

When God is working against you, it's usually fairly obvious to see. Heck, it doesn't take much for people under God's protection to whine and complain that He's abandoned them, so when He is actually working against someone, they'll know it.

When you see a huge nation of former slaves marching around, destroying nations with ease, and if that nation of slaves starts targeting your city, that's a pretty good sign you're on the wrong side. This is what Rahab saw, and she made the wise decision of jumping ships.

postmortemjoe said:
I'm pretty sure other nations would say the same about your god. I'm not referring to other nations or other gods, I'm referring to the Christian nation and the Christian god.

I've read about other gods, and the one religion with the most merit is the Greek religion, which says that their gods bless and curse without reason. So essentially, a man's life is up to chance.

With Christianity, however, life is not up to chance. God actually cares and provides for His people. When God hears our prayers, unlike Zeus, He doesn't look for a way to screw us with our requests. And you can't tell me this is all in my head either, because I've experienced this myself on multiple occasions, and I know it is true.

On the other hand, there are times where people enter situations assuming that God is on their side when He isn't. Football is one of those silly examples, where both sides ask for God's favor and for Him to give them victory. I don't think it matters much to God which side wins.

We may also go into situations where we step out of God's boundaries, assuming it's God's will for us to do something when we're really making a mistake. In that case, God will most likely let us face the consequences of that decision, but that doesn't mean He's no longer protecting us.

drich0150 · Aug 28, 2011

postmortemjoe said:
Psalm 74:12-14: "But you, O God, are my king from of old; You bring salvation upon the earth. It was You who split open the sea by your power; You broke the heads of the monster in the waters. You broke the heads of Leviathan in pieces and gave him as food to the people inhabiting the wilderness."

Job 41:1"Canst thou draw out leviathan with an hook? or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down?"

Psalm 104:26"There go the ships: there is that leviathan, whom thou hast made to play therein."

Isaiah 27:1In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.[/B]

Job 40:15"Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox."

You present no evidence but vague references to verses.

These are all of the verses I could find mentioning leviathan or behemoth. None of them sound like they could be referencing dinosaurs. The word leviathan is exclusively used to refer to a creature that resides mainly in water. While some dinosaurs did reside mainly in water, not all did and there are no instances of leviathan referring to a land dwelling creature. Leviathan probably refers to a whale or some other large animal in the ocean.

I could only find one instance of the word behemoth and while it could be describing a dinosaur that's a herbivore, like the Ankylosaurus, it could also be referring to anything else that is big and eats grass. There's as much evidence that it's referring to a dinosaur as there is for it referring to bigfoot.

All of the above verses mention leviathans and behemoths in the presence of humans. And after all, a human would have to be present to record seeing such things.

Click to expand...

the problem when limiting your exposure to the bible to key word searches is that unless you make the efforts to read past the key word or phrase, you often times miss what it is you are looking for. I suggest that maybe you take another look at the book of Job. now keep in mind the writings in job will not read like a paleontologists text book but their is sufficient evidence to suggest a very large creature with massive legs and a tree trunk like tail.

Also none of these verses confirm or deny man cohabitation with these beings.

You'd think we'd be in perfect harmony with god seeing as he created us.

Click to expand...

As you are about to point out we did at one time.

Or is it because Adam and Eve were convinced by a snake that god put in the garden of Eden to eat fruit from a tree that they shouldn't eat the fruit of. How do you reconcile that?

Click to expand...

The serpent was allowed to bring in a will or dynamic outside of god's will. Before then Adam and Eve only knew God's will. Without another option besides God's will their could not be true choice.

Furthermore, why does the tree of knowledge grow fruit that no one can eat?

Click to expand...

First off it is the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil. Here are some thoughts about this that were shared with someone else who had this question:
The tree represents True Choice. If anything and everything they did in the garden was indeed in the expressed will of God then Adam and eve had no real choice of their own because everything they did was in God will or in God's expressed Choosing for them.

The tree was the one area of the garden that represented a deed or action not in the expressed will of God. This is true Choice because we are now able to do or choose something that all mighty God does not want us to do.

The Choice the tree offers is "free will."

Here are the actual biblically based definitions of the following words:

Sin, is anything not in the expressed will of God.

Evil, is a malicious intent to be out side of the Expressed will of God.

Not all sin is Evil, but all evil is sin.

Free Will is the ability to be in a will not expressed or approved by God.

In other words "Free will" is the ability to Sin.

So why did God put the tree in the Garden? So that we would have the opportunity for Free Will.

Why do we need free will? To choose whether or not we want to spend an eternity with God.

Which again goes back to my first question, why is it god's plan to do evil to humanity by creating Satan and things like a human nature that doesn't appeal to his vision of humanity? That sounds awfully counterintuitive.

Click to expand...

Not unless you have the proper perspective.

That sounds kind of spiteful and petty for a supreme being, does it not?

Click to expand...

No. God set a "standard of Good.' He knew no one could meet this standard so He made atonement for our failings to meet this standard, and offered it to all who would accept his sacrifice, so they may still obtain righteousness (the right to be with God in Heaven.) How is that petty? Especially given the price that had to be paid.

Someone can dedicate their lives to Christ and live the life of a near perfect (no one's perfect, but that's why there's confession)

Click to expand...

Why does "confession" work?

Christian and god will still look at them as not good, even though they've done everything they possibly could to be good and accepted by god.

Click to expand...

That is the point of Christianity. To communicate that "Heaven' is not something "earned" by our actions, but it is a gift to all who accept it whether they are "worthy" in deed or not.

List the points and I will address them.

Click to expand...

We discussed them once already. If you wish to discuss them again then go back and cut and paste in your next response. I am not doing any more leg work here for you. If you do not cut and paste something to discuss i will consider the matter closed.

If it's supposed to depict half a brain then it would also be depicting half a head. Half a brain can't think, and a person with half a head couldn't live. I don't know any atheists with half a head, and if I did it certainly wouldn't be a large enough amount to to make it representative of atheists as a whole.

Click to expand...

Do you think you live now? we are told the wage of sin is death. Do those on death row live? Yes they are alive but to they live? You are alive (for a while at least, like the death row inmate) but you will never live if you continue to seek a "thinkers" life. why? because how much thought can really be done with 1/2 a brain or 1/2 a head anyway? What life you have is but a vapor here one second and gone the next. this "life" is not living. we were designed with eternity in mind. This mortal coil is not living. It is barely life given what awaits.

Lash out? At who?

Click to expand...

Who was your bonus question directed to?

drich0150 · Aug 28, 2011

postmortemjoe said:
Did you read the verses?

Where there's ships, there's people, and apparently a leviathan.

Besides that, you didn't offer any explanation or verses to support your claims.

Click to expand...

What claims did i make? You ask why didn't the bible mention dinosaurs? One the term was not coined till recently. So the actual term "Thunder lizard" or any variation their of will not be found literally translated in a text that is several thousand years old.. So the next best thing is to look for a physical description. Here are two that do not match anything currently living, or have known to have lived in the time frame "science/historeans" has allowed for these events to have taken place.

You said:

Click to expand...

"Do not look to read the bible like a paleontologists text book."

I looked up all of the verses that had those words in them specifically because that was what you gave as evidence. I find nothing that I would consider "describing them in detail" as you put it.

Click to expand...

Then re read Job 40. their is detail listed their. Whether you can compare this detail to a modern resource or not, is not the issue. i simply said their was greater detail that what your findings orginally presented.

I believe the verses you're referring to are Job 40:15-24. The only problem is that in those verses god is describing a creature to Job that is living. So if it was supposed to be a dinosaur, it's historically inaccurate.

Click to expand...

OK what dinosaur like/size creature that was alive 3500 to 4500 years ago that is not alive now?

You want to get on my about not responding to you line by line, so what about carnivorous dinosaurs? They didn't all eat grass.

Click to expand...

Out side of a lion or a leopard the bible does not make a great listing of any carnivores. Does that mean they do not exist?

So according to what you're saying, god created Adam and Eve and everything was great.

Click to expand...

So far so good.

Then, he decided to create an evil serpent to test the faith of Adam and Eve and at the same time, according to what you said, god created free will because now there was a choice between god's will and the not god's will. So why did he feel the need to create free will when everyone was totally happy with the way things already were?

Click to expand...

"The serpent" was the form Lucifer decided to take when he approached Eve. Lucifer on his own was malcontent with the station God gave Him in life. He wanted more. This apparently is a side effect of all sentient beings eventually. So rather than let Adam and Eve develop a discontent in which their was no return (as with Satan and the fallen) He allowed Satan to introduce a controlled choice, in their lives. One that He could work with and eventually atone for.

It's still counterintuitive.

Click to expand...

again only if you can not fathom the plan of salvation.

If he created man who was already 100% under god's will then he created free will only to deceive man by allowing Satan in serpent form to convince Adam and Eve to defy god.

Click to expand...

How is this a deception?

If you father tells you when you were a child not to play in the street, but allows you the freedom to be outside. does it mean He deceives you when you are talked into playing in the street by someone else outside? doesn't your Father know that there could potentially be those who would try and talk you into playing on the street with them? Does it mean He fail you or deceived you because YOU decided to go against His word?

No, this is not a deception. This is merely a consequence of having the freedom of being outside. You were given this freedom by your father much like Adam and eve were given this freedom. Both were given conditions of this freedom. If you like Adam decide to go against the conditions of your freedom then the sin here is not with the father in either case.

Why didn't he just give them free will and then ask if they wanted to follow the will of god or do otherwise?

Click to expand...

Have you ever eaten Thak-to-gee, Moo-my-langie or Sak-jang-bo-kum? It's not expensive. The ingredients can be bought/found in any major city. so why haven't you tried these things? Could it be because you did not know to try them? If you have only ever been exposed to western or the westernized versions of food then grubs, bugs and semi rotted vegetables are not generally considered food.

the same is true here. If all Adam and Eve knew was God will, then they would never have known anything outside of God's will.
Take the tree for instance. They were told not to eat from it. and did not for an undisclosed amount of time.. Till one day they were told how not to be satisfied with what God gave them. They had no desire to eat from that tree till they were awaken to the idea of discontent.

That's a lot more believable than a talking snake telling people to eat fruit that will curse them forever.

Click to expand...

to who you and say maybe the last 300 years of "civilized man?" What of all of those who became before this doubting generation? Is God not to consider them and what constitutes structure for them? Are you suggesting that hundreds of generations/billions of people should be lost to time so that you and other's like you in this generation can find it easier to scrutinize what you want to believe or disbelieve anyway?

Also, do you honestly believe that snakes could talk and that the story of Adam and Eve actually happened the way it is depicted in the Bible?

Click to expand...

Yes. I believe that a serpent(Which may or may not be what we know to be a literal snake.) tempted Eve. I approach the bible with the knowledge that I do not Know anything about it other than what is written. I can not speak in an absolute when the bible does not. however i can when it does. In this case my translation refers to satan's incarnation as a serpent. The word can mean snake but in the Hebrew it can also mean one who is twisted or it can describe a motion. When things are sometimes unclear, I do not lock my faith around a passage that can be interpreted several ways. In this case my faith does not hing on Satan being a snake in the garden. At the same time if somehow i found out that he was, my faith will still not be moved.

I know he was there and what he did. That is what i take from this story. Not the shape he took. Because truthfully what does it matter what he looked like?

But without free choice we would have by default been good people and would have chose to spend an eternity with god.

Click to expand...

What of those who did not want to be there? Satan was not given this option and yet took it anyway, simple because He wanted what God did not want for him to have. Because he took this path, he is beyond anytype of salvation.

By giving free choice to people he's practically condemning some people to hell, everyone is not going to choose to be Christian. This could be for a multitude of reasons such as they were born in a region of the world where Christianity wasn't popular and as such, they subscribe to a different religion, say Islam. Now if this Muslim person lives a moral life and is kind and helpful to others he is still going to burn in hell just because god made him be born in a region where there wasn't a heavy Christian influence. That's not too fair.

Click to expand...

Hebrews 4:
12 For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. 13 Nothing in all creation is hidden from Gods sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account.

We know "The Word" in verse 12 refers to Christ as in "The Word" mentioned by John 1:1.

So The Word/Christ Will divide us from our soul and spirit/Intent and intention. Our joints and Marrow/our actions and our core deeds against the attitudes of the Heart. These things all sound closely related, because they are. What the verse is saying is that Christ will slice the sum total of our lives all of our thought actions intentions feelings and prejudices, lay them out like paper thin deli slices and weigh all that we were exposed to, did do, did not do and give us the most complete and fair trial anyone will ever get.
All of this to answer two primary questions. What did you do with your exposure to Christ/the gospel, and do you love God with all of your being?

Christ said "I am the way truth and the life, no one gets to the Father, but by me." He did not say this specific brand of religion/Christianity is the way truth and the life...

Why would he set a standard that no one could meet?

Click to expand...

It is the nature of "free will." If you are in "God's expressed will" all of the time then your will is not free. If you have a will of your own then you are no longer in God's expressed will. Only those who are in the Expressed will of God are worthy to enter Heaven. Because no one is other than God then that means by allowing us the choice to decide for ourselves to be in Heaven with God for an eternity, disqualifies us from being their.

That sounds sadistic. It's even more sadistic that he sacrificed his only son (which was also him) to prove to himself that humanity was worth saving,

Click to expand...

He didn't have to prove anything to himself. The wages of Sin is death. Blood was needed to absolve the sin debt. Their was only one who could do this for all of man kind. This attonement gave us the Righteousness we need to be worth to be with God. So now we have the ablity to choose our eternal fate on your own, and the righteousness to allow our choice to be full filled.

and yet, Catholics are still required to go to confession and Christians are told to ask for forgiveness. Redundant.

Click to expand...

Who requires this? If you keep studying you will find or start to see the rule of "religion" or religious practice taught alongside biblical commands.

Bible verses aside, I see no reason why humans should, by default be considered sinners or why it is more important to god that we believe he exists then that we do our best to be good people.

Click to expand...

Probably because you do not acknowledge the standards of what "good" is that was originally established by God. Your idea of "good" is based on what our society deems as "Bad."
This is fine and dandy if you do not mine regulating your morals to peer pressure. But, Look at what peer pressure did to 1930's and 40's Germany. Their were many who lived their who considered themselves to be "Good" by the standards in which their society allowed. Does this make them "good" even by the peer presure you are under?

It is only when we yield to God's standard do we know or have an unchanging definition of "Good.'

That is full of opinion and metaphorical conjecture. I will continue to live pursuing a "thinkers life", as you put it. It isn't until I die (according to your belief system) that I will suffer. I'd actually bet that atheists live more than religious people based on the simple fact that atheists aren't constrained to obeying a bunch of anti-human rules that go against their very nature. Instead, I am free to do as I see fit without feeling guilty about it. "Those who seek to live without dying, die without living."

Click to expand...

If by metaphorical conjecture you mean the Bible then I guess I will have to concede your point.

"Those who die in this life without knowing God, remain dead no matter how well their peers judged their comrade's life spent."
-drich0150

This doesn't say that I don't have a moral code, I do, but I definitely don't derive it from the Bible.

Click to expand...

What is the point of morality if it is not based on what God has given us? That is like saying their is honor amongst thieves.. Even if you are well liked by your peers you are still a thief. If you are a thief how is it that you are indeed "good?"

Anyone. I would hardly call that "lashing out" as I didn't insult anyone personally, I just made a casual observation which you've confirmed by saying I'm trying to live a "thinker's life".

Click to expand...

"Thinker" is the moniker that you all have given yourselves. Since I am not here to insult I did not see a need to make a needlessly derogatory remark. I simply allowed you a courtesy that was taken from us by your bonus question, and again by your last comment.

Perhaps a little more thought would have seen you to this fact on your own...

bling · Aug 29, 2011

postmortemjoe said:
If you're asking me if god is doing the best job that could be done, I'm going to have to look at all the killing, raping, corruption, etc that's going on and I'm gonna say no.

Is it not great news that this is not our home?

It is truly unfortunate the I need these opportunities to show, experience, see, recieve, give and grow Godly type Love in this life.

drich0150 · Aug 29, 2011

postmortemjoe said:
The above debates I had with drich0150 and GrayAngel demonstrate exactly why I didn't want the Bible listed as a reference, simply because everyone has their own interpretation of it and it literally can mean anything to anyone. If the Bible is in fact the truth, then there would most definitely be hard evidence of god's intelligent design in the world around us.

Then why ask Questions about the content of the bible if you intend to refuse answers found in it?

It is like you asking questions about Long John silver but at the same time eliminating treasure Island as a credible source material to answer those questions.

"Logically" in your minds eye, how is it possible to answer the questions you pose?
Or is that the point? You ask baited questions, eliminate any credible source material, and when we can not answer the question set with in your parameters you dismiss all that you set out to dismiss.

As a "thinker" how is this considered opened minded? How is this even considered independent thought? If infact you refuse to look at any evidence that you will not abide by?

drich0150 · Aug 29, 2011

postmortemjoe said:
It's debatable whether the Bible is a credible source. As I said before, where is the real world, tangible proof outside of the Bible that proves without a reasonable doubt that Christianity, or any religion is the one true religion? What verifies the Bible's authenticity? What if you're wrong?

If the bible is not a valid source then why ask questions about the nature of the God, His law, and morality described in those pages?

If infact you consider the bible an invalid source of information, that would be like the earth facing the impact of a deadly comet, and the whole of our nations leaders comb though tons of research looking for answers. And then someone went to a back issue of Superman comics for the solution to this problem.

If you were one of those world leaders, To this individual would you ask questions to the methods superman used to stop the comet? Would you ask in-depth questions concerning Superman's past, His up bringing, his works upto the point he stopped the comet? would you ask questions to the nature of superman's followers? Would you then deny the usage of the superman comic as a credible reference material to answer questions based on a character held with in the pages of that comic?

Why waist your time and the time of the comic reader asking questions that can only be answered through the comic if the comic is not a credible source of material?

Just answer this, can you see the problem i am having with you line of thought? Or do you think that if you just ignore this massive flaw in your reasoning ability it will go away?
Why won't you address this uneducated approach you have taken with your reasoning?

You have been shown a system of categorical failures in your chain/circle of logic repeatedly. Understand this has absolutely Nothing to do with God, Faith or the Bible. Your failures are indeed your own. Your method of "logic" and reasoning "undesirable" information is fundamentally flawed at it's core. you have closed you mind to anything that does not share the same the same bigoted sentiment you came here with.. My heart breaks for you and the pride you harbor against God. Know that unless we can come to an understanding about the universal fundamentals of logic you claim to worship, there is little or nothing more i can hope to share with you about religion/God. If this is the case, then It is at this point I must shake the dust from my feet and move on.

GrayAngel · Aug 30, 2011

postmortemjoe said:
It doesn't need to work in any other situation, religion is a unique situation. It's the only thing in the world that you take to be true on faith and live your life accordingly. And people do interpret the Bible different ways. Do you believe it is the literal word of god or do you believe that it is metaphors?

Yes.

Some of it is literal, some of it is metaphorical. Sometimes the distinction is obvious, sometimes it's not. But it's not up to us to decide which is which. Regardless of whether or not a story is a literal event, it's still has the same value.

If Adam wasn't a real man, I know that mankind has a sin nature. If the universe wasn't created in six days, He still created it all on His own, without any help.

postmortemjoe said:
Numbers 15:32-36 tells the story of the Israelites walking through the woods and they come upon a man gathering wood. They arrest the man for working on the Sabbath. When they asked god what to do, he told them to kill the man. That's not out of context at all, you can look it up yourself. Have you ever worked on Sunday? Do you believe it is punishable by death?

1. You make the assumption that this law still applies to Christians. Under the New Covenant, many Old Testament traditions were done away with, such as circumcision, abstinence from pigs and certain animals, etc. After Jesus died for our sins, these things were no longer necessary, and were removed partly for the sake of the Gentiles who didn't follow those traditions, but mostly because we were meant to slaves for Christ, not to the law.

2. Any sin is punishable by death. It's not about the act itself that matters so much as the state of one's heart. Immediately before the verses you selected, there's a distinction made between those who sin unintentionally, and those who blatantly ignore God's laws. The Jews were well aware of God's ten commandments, so if this man was found working on the Sabbath, it's because he decided to ignore God's commandment.

And if you think the New Testament God wouldn't do the same thing, read Acts 5 of Ananias and Sapphira. God struck them dead because of their dishonesty.

postmortemjoe said:
Leviticus 25:44-46 states that Israelites can own slaves as long is the slaves are not of Israeli descent, this includes children too. Again, not out of context.

Also not taking the Bible out of context, it is the book of the jews, they are god's chosen people according to the Bible. Christianity was an afterthought.

First of all, slavery was not the same then as it was in recent American and British history. Slaves were not chosen for their race or treated like cattle. There were rules about how one was to treat their slaves. They were treated as part of the household. Abraham circumcised his slaves, along with his sons, which may not be something you'd think they'd want, but it shows that he cared for his slaves.

In Jesus' days, a large portion of the population was of slaves, but they chose that life for themselves, most likely because of a debt they had to pay. Service was not for a lifetime, but they had to be released, according to Jewish custom, after a certain amount of time.

postmortemjoe said:
I didn't know that's what you were referring to by lie. I guess that could be considered a lie, I just see it as a deceptive practice. Lie indicates uttering a falsehood. Either way, yes, they do "lie", but I wouldn't say it's evil. Evil is a matter of perception as nothing in nature can be good or evil in the absolute sense. It may seem evil to the victim of the crime, in this case the male snakes in your first example, or the adoptive bird parents in the second. However, to the snakes or the baby bird they are doing what needs to be done to ensure the continuation of their species and in their eyes, it is not an evil act. But after all, god chose this as their means of survival, so isn't that him allowing evil to happen?

I've explained previously that God created evil with a purpose, but I'm not sure if animals could be considered sinful in the same since as a human is sinful. The way I take their behavior is as another sign that our world is broken as a result of sin. When Adam sinned, the whole Earth was corrupted, not just mankind.

postmortemjoe said:
I felt the need to quote this separately to simply stress the point that that is 100% your opinion. I know many people that find snakes cute and adorable as most people find cats and dogs. There is absolutely nothing "evil" about a snake's head despite what television and pop culture may have lead you to believe.

Not a snake's head, a snakehead. I'm talking about the needlessly cruel, air-breathing fish I spoke of earlier.

postmortemjoe said:
Listen to what you're saying. God's overall plan was to bring the Israelites into captivity, so he could have Moses rescue them. Already this seems extremely counterintuitive. Then, god knew the pharaoh would not let them go (he actually went out of his way to make sure he wouldn't let them go), so he unleashed not one, but ten plagues on the people of Egypt to show his dominance. Now doesn't that sound like one heck of a process just to show how awesome you are to people that you created in the first place?

You're analogy with gold is incorrect. Yes, it is melted down to remove impurities. What's incorrect is that the gold doesn't suffer one bit. How many people died in the ten plagues?

True, the gold does not have nerve endings. The illustration is that evil/fire is used to purify the gold/people. The way the Bible puts is it is this: "we also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope" (Romans 5:3-4). But I'm speaking in a more broad sense. Everything works together for the good of those who love God, including the evil things of the world.

postmortemjoe said:
God's intentions may be for good, but his acts imply otherwise. By creating an entity for the sole purpose of doing evil deeds with the intention of a good outcome (a means to an end) god is committing evil acts through a proxy because everything he creates is under his authority, and he's allowing it to do evil things to people. If you pay someone to kill someone you know, you go to jail for conspiracy. Same thing here.

Couldn't god feasibly, under the same logic, create a good being to assist in achieving a good end? Why did he have to harden the pharaoh's heart? That seems like overkill.

A human being cannot hire a hit man to kill someone for good intentions. God, however, is infinitely smarter, and He knows the future. Not only that, but He's the only one with the right to create good and evil as He pleases, because we are all His creation.

If you can't understand it, fine. You don't have to. Children are not expected to obey their parents because they understand their rules or commands. They're expected to obey because their parents are above them and they do know best. And when the child is unable to understand, as they often are, they trust that their parents are looking out for the their well-being.

postmortemjoe said:

Some may and some may not, I wouldn't say it makes them natural sinners. I'm sure their intentions aren't evil. They're kids and they're exploring the world around them. The question you need to be asking is "is lying always a bad thing?" If your significant other were to give you a present for Christmas or your birthday that you weren't particularly fond of, what would you say to them? Would you tell them that you don't like it or would you say that it was great and you love it?

There are no absolutes in nature.

Click to expand...

This is kind of a gray area. Some say we shouldn't ever lie under any circumstances. The Bible doesn't seem to take a firm stance on this. Personally, I think there are good times to lie, but there's a difference between a good lie, and a bad lie. Good lies are for another's benefit, and bad lies are for the purpose of deceiving, cause harm, or avoid consequences. When children lie, they never lie to save someone else from trouble (they're pretty quick to point fingers), but if they break something, they'll likely blame the dog, even if they know you were standing there and watched them do it.

Even if you take TV into account, children do not learn their bad behaviors from their surroundings. TV was not always around, so who taught children of the 1800's how to bite?

postmortemjoe said:

I apologize, I quoted the wrong chapter and verse, for some reason I was thinking of the battle at the wall of Jericho. The verse and chapter I was referring to was Deuteronomy 20:16. Either way the point still stands that everyone always thinks that they are on god's good side, when the Bible has proven that this isn't always the case.

Are you suggesting the people with torches and pitchforks are doing god's work?

Click to expand...

I'm not entirely sure where you're trying to go with this. There is only one god. Naturally, anyone worshiping one of the many fakes is going to be disappointed where their god doesn't come through for them.

postmortemjoe said:

Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Judaism would beg to differ on that.

Click to expand...

Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all had the same origin as worshipers of the Jewish God. But after Christ came, the Jews failed to recognize their own God standing in from of them, and they rejected Him as a result.

As far as I'm aware, the Buddhists don't worship gods, and I have no idea what Hindus believe.

I can tell just by looking at their many countries that the Muslims are not being blessed by their version of God. Their countries are some of the most barren places filled with internally oppressed people. Even the "mansion" that Osama bin Laden lived in looked cheap to me. And we're all still waiting for Allah for spill the blood of us infidels.

postmortemjoe said:

If god wanted to directly contact people, you would think he would contact non-believers first.

Click to expand...

Sometimes He does, as with the case of Saul, who became Paul. He still does in the modern world, but not in the way you'd think.

postmortemjoe said:

It's too bad the rest of humanity wasn't more godlike...

But seriously though, he may not care about something as trivial as a football game, but he definitely does have an opinion when it comes to war. The example I cited from Joshua 6 is a good example of this. Every living thing in the city is to be destroyed, man, woman, child, and beast. Actually, let me correct that, every man was to be destroyed, women, children, animals, and everything else was to be split up among god's soldiers as a sort of payment. That is terrifying, especially when you never really know what side your on.

Click to expand...

Whether everyone was killed or some spared and integrated into their society as slaves was dependent on their location from Israel. Those close by where to be completely destroyed, because God didn't want any of the survivors to influence the Israelites with worship of false deities.

When the survivors were taken in, while they weren't given equal authority, they were regarded as citizens of Israel.

The Israelites knew from experience which side they were on, as did the surrounding nations, who feared their god because of what He did.

postmortemjoe said:

Please elaborate.

Click to expand...

Some Christians think they know God better than they actually do. So instead of asking for answers, they'll go with their gut. When the Israelites would turn away from Him in favor of other gods, God would send enemies their way to subdue them, in order to bring the Israelites back into dependence on Him. But other times, God doesn't have to bring trouble our way. Sometimes the consequences of our own mistakes are enough. But in every circumstance, God's purpose is for the growth and preservation of His people.

Emmy · Aug 30, 2011

Dear postmortemjoe. I still believe that the origin of Satan is unknown, God has Not created Satan. God is Love and how can Love create Evil?? As for thinking Satan and Jupiter are the same, that would make God fallible, and it is a FACT there is Nothing GREATER THAN GOD, and God is also Omniscient, God knows the Past as well as the Future. It does make sense, though, " where there is No Light or Love, Darkness and Evil will flourish." I say this with love. Greetings from Emmy, sister in Christ.

drich0150 · Aug 30, 2011

I see you have openly chosen to ignore all that you can not address. I also see that you are pretending that all of the fatal flaws in your logic can be side lined by this series of non sequiturs..

postmortemjoe said:
I compromised with you on this point and I even quoted several verses from the Bible to support my own arguments and to discuss yours. I then asked the question, multiple times, what in the real world can validate the Bible as being true? It was brushed off.

If you want to talk about ignored or brushed off topics lets go back to the first time i identified the fatal flaws in your line of thought. I pointed out from the beginning that you have sustained your "beliefs" on little more than faith. If we are going back and readdressing brush offs lets go all the way back and start from the beginning.

How is a Muslim raised in a primarily Islamic country in the Islamic faith supposed to discover that Christianity is the one true religion?

When did i say this? Where does the bible say this?

Why do "god's standards" include killing people who work on Sunday and owning slaves?

The answer to Non sequitur number 3:Because He does not subscribe to popular culture to define His morals, as you do. Speaking of which, Why does popular culture deem it a moral act to murder unborn babies?
How can you over look the justification of infanticide in order to persecute system of belief that has not practiced what you have highlighted in over two thousand years? Pull the baby murdering plank out of your own eye before you proceed with this hypocritical line of questioning.. Seriously how many people do you think were killed for working on Saturdays? 1000 total? Didn't this country alone kill that man babies last month?

How do you reconcile the discrepancy between science and Christianity in dating how old the earth is?

No:4,
The bible does not tell us how old the earth is. So what discrepancy are you speaking?
(Again I point to the difference between faith and religion)

Use all the Bible verses you want, it's not going to make a difference.

See this is why I allowed you to sucker me in last time. your points are not a matter of biblical discrepancy. They are all spawned from an elementary/Sunday school understanding of what You believe to be Christianity. Here in lies the issue. Once I have deconstructed your take of christianity on a subject. i try and biblically reconstruct what i have taken down, so you have an accurate understanding of what you are misrepersenting... But. Because you want to/NEED to hold on to your dark age version of christianity you throw out the bible and discount all that i have said in the name of what God has written, sighting the tired line about how nothing the bible says matters because it is not true. Which again in of itself, (bible and theology aside) is a failure in your logical thought processes and not a true issue with what the bible says.

Allow me to simplify: You come at me with you busted understanding of God, and when i try and correct this same understanding of God, you tell me God does not exsist... If He doesn't then why did you come to me with your broken understanding of Him in the first place?

What I see, is that you see, where the conversation is going.. Often times to a place where your indoctrinated understanding of God will not provide an easy answer. so you decide to slam on the brakes, discredit the bible and then ask a series of off topic questions in hopes you can start another argument and forget the one you just lost. (Kinda like you did in your last post to me.)

If not, then why do not openly address the fatal flaws in your logic that i have pointed out 7 or 8 times now? They do not even have anything to do with the bible. why do you (when cornered) begin a series non sequiturs? Do you think no one reading this thread has noticed?

Hakan101 · Aug 31, 2011

Let me try to explain this better. Muslims believe in Allah as their god and Mohammed as their "Jesus". The verse you quoted states that "the word of god judges thoughts and attitudes of the heart", yet Muslims worship a different god which contradicts the first commandment "thou shalt have no other gods before me". And if you're going to say that they're one in the same, I need proof (in the Bible).

Non-sequitur 5: If, as you pointed out in Hebrews 4, god judges everyone by their innermost thoughts and attitudes, what's the point of religion and faith? By those standards, an atheist could get into heaven as long as they're a good person.

God judges the heart, he judges according to one's deeds, he judges those who condemn Jesus. There are many verses that speak of God's judgement. God judged Abraham as righteous because of his faith, if we are saved by faith and not by works then it follows that God also judges us by our faith. And if our faith is in a dead god, and not the Almighty God, then our faith is dead.

Wow, I was somewhat taken aback by this answer. First, I want to reiterate that I do not subscribe to popular culture as my moral compass. I choose to determine for myself what I deem good and bad.

This is not a question of "pop culture" but of human decency. Personally, I feel that if you harm an innocent person in any way, that is bad, and I'm sure most people would agree with me there. All this man was doing was collecting wood. Maybe he needed it to start a fire to keep his family warm, I don't know, but the punishment does not fit the crime and I refuse to follow a religion that defies its own golden rule.

Next, the man was killed for working on Sunday, not Saturday, but that's not important.

What's important is the fact that you are for the killing of a living, productive member of society and against the killing of an unborn organism. Now, I haven't ever said I supported abortion (which was mighty presumptuous on your part) but lucky for you, I do.

The "baby murdering plank" I apparently have in my "eye" is based on this, a women is entitled to do whatever she wants with her body. It's as simple as that. You are as entitled to tell her that she can't abort her unborn fetus (because it's not a baby until it's born) as she is to tell you not to indoctrinate your children with Christianity. Cases can be made for both sides, supported by facts, experts can be called in. At the end of the day, you can teach your kids whatever you want, potentially crippling their minds and giving them poisonous ideas that they will then pass on to their children and so on, and she gets flack for aborting a fetus which has no ties to the outside world and, at this point, is not a person. Abortion is an unfortunate thing, but it doesn't give you the right to tell other people what they can do with their bodies, regardless of what your book may say.

If you're all about the sanctity of life, how can you support the murder of "1000" people and then get all in a tizzy when an unborn fetus is aborted? That's a hypocritical line of reasoning if I ever heard one.

Sounds like your morality is based on pop culture. For a very long time abortion was considered a heinous crime. It was against the Hippocratic Oath. That was pop culture back then, murdering the unborn was considered wrong. It was the woman and the doctor's duty to preserve the child's life. Society changes. God's word does not.

I'm assuming you mean the difference between religion and the Bible. Faith can be used to apply to either, or something completely different ("I have faith in my teacher") and shouldn't be the basis for an entire system of belief.

The religion is based on faith (or the Bible, however you want to refer to it). By removing religion, you are taking interpretation of the Bible into your own hands. Seeing as you consider your self a non-denominational Christian, I'm guessing you've already witnessed the many ways the book can be interpreted and didn't agree with any of them. However, by interpreting it yourself, you will come up with your own interpretation which (most likely) will vary when compared to others individual interpretations, this brings me to my next non-sequitur:

Non-sequitur 6: Who's to say what interpretation is correct?

The issue here is trivial at best. The differences in interpretation that I have seen are irrelevant to our salvation. Christ's message still stands whether the Earth is 6,000 years old or 4.5 billion years old. Let the theologians examine those interpretations. What matters is when non-believers twist the Scripture as a message of evil. Those are the interpretations that everyone must put to the test.

Hakan101 · Aug 31, 2011

postmortemjoe said:
Exactly, so the muslim I described would be sent to hell because he condemns Jesus like you condemn Mohammed only because of the culture into which he was born.

Why are you a non-believer? Was it only because of the culture you were born?

I don't believe in slavery, I believe women should be able to vote, and I don't believe any race should be held higher than another. Call it pop culture if you want, but to me that sounds like an evolution of ideas for the better of society as a whole, abortion rights included. If god doesn't want to get on board with that and wants everyone to live by archaic anti-human rules, I have no use for him.

It is good then that God does not want everyone to live by anti-human rules. But the question is whether or not God has a use for you, not if you can use God.

How can that be if there's so many different sects of Christianity? That is an obvious sign that the Bible can be taken different ways to mean different things.

The differences in sects of Christianity are not solely due to the Bible. They're due to tradition, culture, and reformation. Again, the parts that I have seen interpreted differently are trivial. We do not need to know how old the Earth is to receive salvation, nor do we need to understand just what was the Leviathan. Christ's message is understood by all Christians.

Who's twisting scriptures? Every scripture that I've discussed, I've quoted in the thread.

I am sorry, I did not mean that you have twisted Scripture, I only stated that non-believers often do this. When this happens we need to evaluate those messages not only to reveal them as false, but so that we may also gain our own understanding of such passages. There are many parts of the Scripture I would never have known if I had not seen them challenged by non-believers.

drich0150 · Aug 31, 2011

postmortemjoe said:
The non sequiturs are further questions I have about your line of reasoning. They may not be directly related, but they do relate to the bigger picture.

Click to expand...

then why is this bigger picture assembled only at your discretion? why is it when in our discussions you are verbally cornered within the confines of your "logic" it is only then that this bigger picture get painted with a series on non sequiturs? Why is it you can stay on topic when you believe to have the cat by the tail?

So you call me out for brushing off a question, and then brush off my question?

Click to expand...

We are painting a bigger picture are we not? you are here exploring Christianity right? If this is the case then it is to My "bigger Picture" we must first paint.
This Picture must first be defined by the universal usage of logic.

Not to mention I had to intentionally leave some arguments incomplete as to have legitimate grounds for my accusations.
Once could be contributed as a heat of the moment thing. But when faced with two and three examples of consistent negative behavior proves without doubt the nature of your efforts.

Hook, line and sinker my boy!

I don't know what else you want me to say. I conceded to this point when I allowed the use of the Bible the first time.

Click to expand...

And yet you attack and try to dismiss it when you do not have anything to say against it.

What I find funny, is that you call my arguments invalid and say you want to "shake the dust off your boots" and yet, you keep coming back.

Click to expand...

Perhaps you mis understood the shaking the dust from my feet expression. This symbolizes the end of my exploration of christianity with you in this thread. What is left (and what i am taking great joy in) is the systematic deconstruction of the faith you have labeled logic. Exposing all of the hypocrisy and closed minded thinking you are projecting on to us. Because in the end, and unless you will admit to us and yourself what you are doing. any attempt to have a scripturally based conversation with you will ultimately end in a new series of non sequiturs, or a whole host of other logical fallacies As per your last 6 pages of work.

drich0150 · Aug 31, 2011

postmortemjoe said:
Because I'm the one exploring Christianity here. If you say something and I have further questions I'm going to ask them. That's kind of the way this works.

So you agree it is my "big picture" that you seek?

Why is it when you're backed into a corner the only thing you can seem to do is call me out for something I've admitted to two or three times already?

As I have already pointed out. your actions do not reflect your admission. My efforts are to help your words match your actions.

Yeah except for the part where you didn't paint a bigger picture of Christianity and again called me out...again...

Because the picture being painted was repeatedly disrupted with the actions I was calling you out on.

Yes, "shaking the dust from your feet" (Matthew 10:14) means that you walk away from anyone who won't listen to you...so again, why are you still here?

again by shaking the dust from my feet, I openly admitted that i left the ministry, or the biblically backed aspect of my work here and decided to help you focus on the logical fallacies that are preventing you in intelligently discussing what you claim to be exploring.

This is another pattern you exhibit. In that you scan for key words or phrases, lock onto these words and ignore the context in which it was written. It appears you believe you know my arguments better than I. By your difficulty here with me, it would "seem" that you are wrong. May I suggest reading what it is I have to say. rather than trying to get the gist of my message and start writing.

So the only thing you've done is try to point out how I'm ignoring your points and bringing up something else.

This would be an example of a straw man fallacy. In that it is an argument that one constructs that doesn't represent the position of his opponent. Straw men are constructed either out of a desire to defeat one's opponent with out addressing his points, or one does not comprehend what is being discussed.

I'd like to point out that you didn't respond to any point I put forth in my last post, on topic or off.

Once again because i have shaken the dust from my feet on the biblical aspect of my efforts here so that we may lay a logical foundation in order that we may responsibly proceed. after all if you are not faithful to your system of belief in logic, then how can I possibly expect that you become responsible with mine? right now if you wish to proceed we must learn basic accountability. this accountability will include consistency in your word and thought on the most basic level. once you show yourself to be a good steward with your professed belief in "logic" we can move on to God, and the bible..

And again, what validates the Bible? You've done nothing but avoid this question from the start.

I have answer this question very directly at least 6 times. If you weren't so busy skimming my post for things you could dissect, maybe you would have seen it one of the time I went over this. If you want to know then go back and reread what has already been written.(Non sequitur no.8 I guess you missed one.)

Hakan101 · Aug 31, 2011

Why are you a Christian and not a Muslim or Hindu?

You're comparing Christianity and atheism as though they are both religions. They are not. The meaning of the word a-theist means, roughly, without theism or religious belief. People lose religious belief all together, but very rarely do you hear someone converting from Islam to Christianity or vice versa and why would they? They each believe that their book is the word of god and disregard all other religions.

You didn't answer my question. Are you an Atheist because of the culture you were born in?

According to the Bible, god approves of slavery, war, the denial of basic human urges, and the killing of people who work on the Sabbath, that sounds very anti-human to me.

God is anti-human? Think about that for a second. Have you really given that idea the examination it deserves?

Have you heard of the Apocrypha? Presbyterians, Baptists, and Methodists don't recognize it as a sacred text, but Catholics, Anglicans, and Lutherans do.

Also, Catholics, Lutherans, Anglicans, Baptists and Methodists see the Bible as the totally inerrant word of god while Presbyterians believe that it may be true but that there also may be errors due to interpretation and mistranslations throughout the years.

So that may not be the sole reason for their differences, but that's enough inconsistency for me to seriously question the validity of their statements.

And yet they all firmly believe Christ is the only one who saves us. Despite the issues each denomination has with translation/interpretation they still believe this. That should say something about what they cherish most.

LOCO · Aug 31, 2011

postmortemjoe said:
Again, you make vague references but don't actually quote anything that can be used as evidence to support your claims.

According to the Bible,

Hello Postmortemjoe,

The Bible does not condone, support or say anything. You cannot put it in the witness stand and ask it what it meant. It is an inanimate object. Humans who interpret the Bible may err in their translation.

The Bible contains poetry, prophecies, true stories, allegory and parables. Some of which are to be taken literally, some figuratively but always in context. It should be interpreted whilst considering social, political and religious norms of the day.

Filtering and differentiating between all of the above is where the chaos occurs with all the flavours of Christianity today.

Whose interpretation do you trust when all Christians claim to be 'inspired by the Holy Spirit' when translating Sacred Scripture.

If you are genuinely interested in Christianity, do some research.

1. Read Church history. Read the Early Church Fathers, Polycarp, Tertullian, Athanasius, Clement, Ignatius, Augustine, Aquinas etc.

2. Ask a Pastor, Priest, Bishop.

3. Visit some churches, visit a monastery, attend a retreat, attend Bible studies or RCIA. These are all non obligatory.

As you can see many of us here have no or very little clue on how to convince you. Only you can decide how much or how little evidence will satisfy you.

We can tell you personal testimonies but unless your heart is open, it will have little effect.

Even then, you will not get all the answers you want. I can already see that from this thread and well meaning responders may be muddying the waters even more for you.

Most atheists usually convert at a time of personal need anyway e.g. near death experience, inexplicable event where they encountered Gods saving grace with them or a loved one.

Faith continues to be a mystery and for me as a Christian I am content to say 'I don't know all the answers, God remains a mystery to me and that is alright with me'. For others, that is not okay they want an answer immediately and are not comfortable with 'maybe's or 'I don't know'. We live in an instant gratification society.

For me the Christian God answers the why' for our existence.

Science provides some answers and interesting theories as to the 'how' but it can never provide an answer as to the 'why'. The 'why' is what religion and philosophy ponders.

The Bible is not a scientific textbook, contrary to some modern schools of thought.

Religion and science like faith and reason are not mutually exclusive. I think that is a red herring, perpetuated by some religious and scientists for reasons known only to themselves.

"Faith is to believe what you do not see; the reward of this faith is to see what you believe." St Augustine

Blessings in your journey

drich0150 · Sep 1, 2011

postmortemjoe said:
The non sequiturs are further questions I have about your line of reasoning. They may not be directly related, but they do relate to the bigger picture.

Click to expand...

Actually this is not true, for the topic in which we speak has absolutely nothing to do with the bible, It has to do with your failed attempt at reasoning and basic comprehension skills. Example: you asked a basic question relating to how the God of the bible is presented. I goto the bible to answer the question you pose, your response is not to ask another question but to make the statement that the bible is "An invalid point of reference."

So in turn we have to further explore this break down in your basic reasoning, and your response is to invalidate my observations with multiple accusation, and unrelated questions. For example look at the rest of your last post. You took the time to write one paragraph on topic then you go off in a completely new direction in hopes of trying to subvert the topic being discussed.

If you wish to have a biblically based conversation first we must identify this failure in your reasoning ability, and then you must yield to the rules of basic logic and reasoning if we are to proceed.

LOCO · Sep 2, 2011

postmortemjoe said:
This is what I'm not understanding. You can tell me that the Bible doesn't actually say anything or condone anything, yet another Christian will tell me a totally different story based on their interpretation. There seems to be no consistency other than belief in Jesus, god, etc, but as far as the Bible goes it is very open to individual interpretation as to what god actually wants from humanity. If this is the case, as has been proven many times in this thread, how can we be sure what the Bible is actually saying?

I also don't understand this. If god is omnipotent and all-knowing, why would he go along with the status quo of the day? Wouldn't he try and enlighten people by abolishing slavery and things like that instead of encouraging it?

For me it has nothing to do with instant gratification more than it does with an understanding of how the world around us works. I can't be satisfied with religion's answer of "I don't know, it's god's will".

Now I know what you're thinking, "what about science they don't know everything", the difference is that science is perpetually working to uncover the darkness that is our lack of understanding based on empirical study and evidence. That is why it is ok (and some scientists actually take joy in admitting it) to be agnostic about certain things until evidence is discovered to prove one way or the other.

Religion takes the position that it's beyond humans to comprehend some things and that's just the way it is, as you stated. To me, this is a very unsatisfying understanding of the world.

I'm not holding the Bible to the same standards as a scientific textbook. I'm viewing it as the supposed word of god, which, you'd think, would explain the who, what, when, where, why, and how, but it doesn't.

Once you understand the how, according to science, the why becomes rather unimportant. If science were to explain how we got here through evolution, the question of why doesn't even come into play. Why must there be a purpose to us being here when there is no evidence to support that line of reasoning?

Oh, but they are. As I pointed out earlier, to believe in evolution, one cannot believe in Genesis.

Faith has no place in a logical discussion.

Thank you for your kind words.

Well, the Bible was never designed for individual intepretation. If you read Church history you will discover that the first Rabbi was Jesus, he taught the Apostles orally, he never wrote anything down. Then the Apostles decided doctrine and taught doctrine orally too. It wasn't until later on when they realised Jesus was not returning in their lifetime that they started compiling their eyewitness reports/letters etc. The Catholic Church then decided which books would be included in the Bible and compiled the first one. But the CC has always determined doctrine and then taught the masses. Individual interpretation of Sacred Scripture is a modern phenomena.

As for slavery, if you look at history through the lens of today it is easy to see where humanity went wrong. That is the benefit of hindsight. Now we know that 'slavery' is bad yet it still exists in parts of Africa/Middle East and Asia. In biblical times it was normal to own slaves, just as it used to be normal and legal to own slaves once upon a time in the U.S. This is no longer the case in the U.S. I hope.

God gave us 'free will' because he loved his creation and he wanted us to love him back freely of our own choosing. This 'free will' is sometimes used to wreak havoc as in Lucifers/Hitlers case or do good.

Of course it is beyond human understanding to know everything. Nobody knows the 'meaning of life'. To hold on to the viewpoint that because there is no scientific evidence of God or Faith then it automatically follows that he/it doesn't exist is an impoverished view of the world. This is similar to the once universally and scientifically held viewpoint that the world is flat and lets just leave it that. Science also does not provide ALL the answers and it can NEVER answer the WHY of our existence.

It is okay to say 'I don't know' all the mysteries of the universe. Scientists say that all the time, it is an integral part of their profession to inquire into the HOW. Religion and philosophy inquire into the WHY. Both should never stop searching for answers.

The majority of Christians i.e. 1billion+ Catholics believe that evolution is the process used by God to create Adam/Eve. For us it does not determine whether we go to heaven/hell. The Genesis story throughout history has never been interpreted literally, what is a day to God. Again, the 'literal interpretation' is a new introduction.

St. Thomas Aquinas used logic to demonstrate the existence of God. Read up on the 'five ways' of St Thomas.

Logic, reason and faith co-exist and are not contradictory in their pure form. By that I mean that the principles themselves are not contradictory. Faith can be supported by logic and reason; nor does faith dismiss logic and/or reason.

People however do enjoy arguing that they are mutually exclusive; especially those people who do not have faith and wish to point score for their own set of beliefs.

"Faith" is not purely the realm of religious people. Many have faith in their senses alone - iow all that exists can be detected by our senses. This is the underlying premise for most existential atheists.

The intellectually honest person who rejects religion is actually agnostic - admitting that some things may exist that can't be known.

If there was solid evidence/proof that God does not exist, then I would say that an atheist was not using faith in their beliefs. There isn't, so they do. Since a negative can't be proved, both those who believe in a god and those who don't are basing their premise of existence/non-existence on faith.

Logic is absolutely neutral to such concerns. It is after all, a method or a process.

One can derive consequences for belief or disbelief in deity/deities but it will be dependent upon what types of premises the person accepts in the first place.

Blessings

GrayAngel · Sep 3, 2011

postmortemjoe said:
The fact that there are and have been so many different religions on the face of this planet (many before the current day ones) suggest that there is no one, universal being looking over all of humanity, and if there was, why is he being so mysterious? Why doesn't he just publicly address the entire planet announcing his presence?

No. The fact that there are so many religions is proof of just the opposite. It proves that all around the world, even in the most ancient of tribes, people are looking for God. The search can lead us many directions, which is why there is such a vast variety of religion. But only one of them is true.

God doesn't want to prove that He exists. For one, He doesn't have to. We all know that He exists, it's just that some of us choose to ignore our gut. I find it curious that atheists feel such hatred toward God. If they think we're crazy for believing in a figment of our imagination, how much more crazy are the people who despise the same God they don't even believe exists?

Also, as the Bible says, the very universe we live in is proof enough that God is real. Why is it we hold such an appreciation for natural beauty? You'll never see a dog sit down and adore a sunset, but a person who can't enjoy it has something mentally wrong with them. We appreciate nature because it is a work of art, designed with purpose.

Questions about Christianity

Active Member

Regular Member

Senior Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Senior Member

Senior Veteran

Regular Member

Here I Am

Here I Am

Regular Member

Regular Member

Here I Am

Church Militant

Regular Member

Church Militant

Senior Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency