• 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.

bhsmte

Newbie
Apr 26, 2013
52,761
11,792
✟254,941.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others

Citing scripture to non-believers, is the equivalent of a muslin citing their holy book to you, to try and convince you of something.
 
Upvote 0

Paul of Eugene OR

Finally Old Enough
Site Supporter
May 3, 2014
6,373
1,858
✟278,532.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married

Atheist claim #1 could be perfectly true and and religion still be valid.

Claim #2 is simply false. However, religion playing such a prominent role in our lives, religious words will accompany our wars, conflicts and suffering, and so one can see how that notion might arise.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 6, 2014
38
0
108
http://www.edmundclowney.com
✟168.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Aw, that is thoughtful. I used to enjoy reading certain passages.

You see my post in your obsession thread?


yes, I saw! It got me interested in this thread but I probably shouldn't have barged in. My apologies everyone! You all share extremely interesting perspectives. And thanks very much, Deidre!
 
Upvote 0

Aldebaran

NCC-1701-A
Christian Forums Staff
Purple Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2009
43,072
13,632
Wisconsin, United States of America
✟879,918.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Citing scripture to non-believers, is the equivalent of a muslin citing their holy book to you, to try and convince you of something.

So you have no interest in scripture, or what it is meant for?
 
Upvote 0

digitalgoth

Junior Member
Jun 4, 2014
258
47
✟25,320.00
Faith
Other Religion
So you have no interest in scripture, or what it is meant for?

An atheist might say, "What's the point of one poorly written and overly boring book? Why not an Encyclopedia?"

In other words, to an atheist, the Bible is what they see it as, a translated book of sermons, codified and bound together to create a standard dogmatic expression of a group of people's beliefs. Many of them consider it poorly translated and having a variety of conflicts, from basic story telling to the exact nature of God.
 
Upvote 0

Aldebaran

NCC-1701-A
Christian Forums Staff
Purple Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2009
43,072
13,632
Wisconsin, United States of America
✟879,918.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single

So why do these atheists come to a Christian website where the basis of belief and values in on a book that you consider "poorly translated and having a variety of conflicts, from basic story telling to the exact nature of God."?

I would think your presence here to be illogical.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 6, 2014
38
0
108
http://www.edmundclowney.com
✟168.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
An atheist might say, "What's the point of one poorly written and overly boring book? Why not an Encyclopedia?"

Yes, well why not an encyclopedia? Isn't it quite obscure to say the bible is poorly written? Whatever it is, the Bible is certainly not poorly written.
 
Upvote 0
Jul 6, 2014
38
0
108
http://www.edmundclowney.com
✟168.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
An atheist might say, "What's the point of one poorly written and overly boring book? Why not an Encyclopedia?"

Yes, well why not an encyclopedia? Isn't it quite obscure to say the bible is poorly written? Whatever it is, the Bible is certainly not poorly written.
 
Upvote 0

Paul of Eugene OR

Finally Old Enough
Site Supporter
May 3, 2014
6,373
1,858
✟278,532.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Yes, well why not an encyclopedia? Isn't it quite obscure to say the bible is poorly written? Whatever it is, the Bible is certainly not poorly written.

parts of it are excellently written. Some of it seems a bit more obscure than it needed to be, among them the visions of Ezekiel.
 
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,522
2,609
✟102,963.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Yes, well why not an encyclopedia? Isn't it quite obscure to say the bible is poorly written? Whatever it is, the Bible is certainly not poorly written.

Seriously? The Old Testament has writing errors and construction problems similar to that of a third grader's first draft.
 
Upvote 0

Aldebaran

NCC-1701-A
Christian Forums Staff
Purple Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2009
43,072
13,632
Wisconsin, United States of America
✟879,918.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Seriously? The Old Testament has writing errors and construction problems similar to that of a third grader's first draft.

You have to remember that it was translated from Hebrew. The sentence structure they used is different than what we have in English today. Even early 20th century English is different from what we have today. A difference in the way people spoke thousands of years ago shouldn't be too much of a surprise.
 
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,522
2,609
✟102,963.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship

The errors I speak of involve characters without intro or real endings shoved in (example, judges right after the story of Ehud the Left Handed introduces another person in basically 2 sentences who is just put in there. It doesn't further the story any, and honestly sounds like that person would be really interesting if actual details were added). Contradictions about numbers, such as time frames, etc, which show a lack of editing and are likely the result of multiple authors who didn't collaborate together.
 
Upvote 0

Paul of Eugene OR

Finally Old Enough
Site Supporter
May 3, 2014
6,373
1,858
✟278,532.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married

That's not the situation with the stylistic shortfalls uncovered. Consider the first chapters of Genesis, with the narrative explaining creation twice, and the order of the creation differs from the one time to the other. This is not possible to explain under the hypothesis of a single author of Genesis, but is explainable as coming from two sources (probably oral traditions) that were pasted together by an editor who ignored the discrepancies.

Discrepancies that include, for example, whether Adam was created before or after the other animals.

Gen 1:25-26 God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good. Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
NASU

versus

Gen 2:18-19 Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him." Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name.
NASU

Two traditions, separately transmitted until combined by the editor who put Genesis in its final form.
 
Upvote 0

keith99

sola dosis facit venenum
Jan 16, 2008
23,111
6,802
72
✟380,961.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single

I agree.

But relative to #1 a lot depends on what the atheist (or honest Christian) is addressing. Some less honest people of faith argue that simply because religion is widespread it must be true. That there are alternative reasons it might become widespread is a valid counter to that argument.
 
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,522
2,609
✟102,963.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship

I would say religion tends to be more an excuse to justify wars than the actual cause most of the time. I'd say competing for limited resources is the primary source of war.
 
Upvote 0

Aldebaran

NCC-1701-A
Christian Forums Staff
Purple Team - Moderator
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2009
43,072
13,632
Wisconsin, United States of America
✟879,918.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single

I just took a look in my bible to get the context of these 2 areas. All of chapter 1 is basically an overall summary of God creating the earth and everything on it, including man. What you see in Chapter 2 is when the focus shifts to the creation of man. I think the emphasis in chapter 2 is when the animals were brought to the man to see what he would call them. It doesn't necessarily mean that the second sentence you quote starting with "Out of the ground...." was something that occurred after God said that it wasn't good for man to be alone, but is rather looking back at the fact that God had created the animals. That part of it wasn't the focus of what was being told in that part of the narrative.
 
Upvote 0

Deidre32

Follow Thy Heart
Mar 23, 2014
3,926
2,438
Somewhere else...
✟82,366.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
yes, I saw! It got me interested in this thread but I probably shouldn't have barged in. My apologies everyone! You all share extremely interesting perspectives. And thanks very much, Deidre!

you're welcome. and you're not 'barging' in. lol

at the end of the day, maybe we're more alike than different.
 
Upvote 0