1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. We are holding our 2022 Angel Ministry Drive now. Please consider signing up, or if you have any questions about being an Angel, use our staff application form. The world needs more prayer now, and it is a great way to help other members of the forums. :) To Apply...click here

Who's spreading falsehoods?

Discussion in 'Creation & Evolution' started by Aron-Ra, Feb 25, 2007.

  1. AV1611VET

    AV1611VET SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE Supporter

    +42,786
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    If God embedded age into the world, and gave you an acceptable form of proof, would that render your conclusion false?
     
  2. AV1611VET

    AV1611VET SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE Supporter

    +42,786
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    I guess you can't reason a person out of a position they did not reason themselves into, can you?
     
  3. RealityCheck

    RealityCheck Senior Veteran

    +441
    Atheist
    Married

    Yes. Now, do you have such an acceptable form of proof?
     
  4. RealityCheck

    RealityCheck Senior Veteran

    +441
    Atheist
    Married

    No, and that's the reason no one can reason with you - you have taken a position without reason.
     
  5. tocis

    tocis Warrior of Thor

    +110
    Other Religion
    Married
    *sees that the usual suspects have dropped in to make their standard oft-debunked claims*

    *drops out of thread - it's no longer worth the effort*
     
  6. Nathan Poe

    Nathan Poe Well-Known Member

    +1,589
    Agnostic
    US-Democrat
    Perhaps, but if God "embedded" age into the world, what acceptable proof would He be able to provide? By showing himself to be a deceiver, His credibility is more or less shot.
     
  7. Aron-Ra

    Aron-Ra Senior Veteran

    +356
    Atheist
    Single
    Then I encourage you to read a post I wrote to this forum on Ernst Haeckel & Embryology. After that, perhaps you could answer my challenge to you in the OP?
     
  8. LittleNipper

    LittleNipper Contributor

    +166
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Republican
    The Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic Bible. All others are translations. The King James is the best English translation of the Old Testament. The NIV is considered the best for the New Testament.
     
  9. RealityCheck

    RealityCheck Senior Veteran

    +441
    Atheist
    Married
    Except that the Bible does not actually exist in the original Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic. The source texts for the Bible are in these languages - but the first actual Bibles were Latin translations of these languages.
     
  10. thaumaturgy

    thaumaturgy Well-Known Member

    +858
    Atheist
    Married
    That is a really interesting question! No joke!

    If God embedded age in the earth, in other words if God made the earth to LOOK like it was older than it actually is, the only proof he could provide would be absolute proof of his own existence (and then he'd have to make an embedded age-containing object for me).

    At this point I'd say "Aha! A trickster god! This is not a god who should be worshipped because he is inherently a liar. I will not worship this god as he is deceitful."

    If you do worship this trickster god after knowing full-well that he is a trickster, then how do you differentiate yourself from a satanist?

    You have collapsed all the paradox of god, the euthyphro dilemma is solved immediately (whatever god does is good, so tomorrow he could decree mass murder "good" and you would have no choice but to do it). The Ontological argument would be rendered pointless (for instance, now I could conceive of a being who apart from being than which none greater can be conceived, one which values TRUTH, and that would make the trickster god either null and void --thus eliminating the proof you just got-- or would render the Ontological Argument invalid since the god of the OA is nothing like this god.

    Interesting where that would lead....
     
  11. RealityCheck

    RealityCheck Senior Veteran

    +441
    Atheist
    Married

    Interestingly, many religions and mythologies from around the world include the concept of a trickster God, and frequently, it is the trickster god that sparks the act of creation. Creation is usually portrayed as disorderly and chaotic, and in this chaos law is imposed by other beings (sometimes an enemy of the trickster, a partner, or sometimes even the trickster himself).

    But few of these religions actually worship the trickster god or pay this god tribute - they don't feel they need to for two reasons - first, the trickster often plays his jokes on humans, who resent the tricks (Coyote, for example, from Native American myths) because they are anywhere from very annoying to very deadly; and second, the trickster frequently is the ally of humans against other supernatural beings (Prometheus in Greek mythology). The gods that humans do pay honor and tribute to are those they are trying to appease so that the gods don't smite them - but these gods are not loved for this trait. Rather, humans see these gods as powerful but petty tyrants prone to acting on capricious whim - and the best way to keep them from directing those whims at them is to bribe them and pay them off.
     
  12. Nathan Poe

    Nathan Poe Well-Known Member

    +1,589
    Agnostic
    US-Democrat
    Considered by whom?
     
  13. ReverendDG

    ReverendDG Defeater of Dad and AV1611VET

    +116
    Pantheist
    US-Others
    No way is the KJV this best translation of the bible, its a horrible limited translation of a limited group of texts, the only reason i find people like the KJV is because it perpetulates beliefs that are later found to be false from better texts, but they want to believe those beliefs dispite them being wrong in later tranlations

    The NIV is better but the translaters bowed to pressure from pro-lifers and corrupted the text they translated

    there is no bible, its a collection of many texts written over a long course of time, only people who want to believe its one text when its obvious its not, believe this.
     
  14. RealityCheck

    RealityCheck Senior Veteran

    +441
    Atheist
    Married


    I'm partial to the older RSV, which doesn't seem to be much in favor any more.
     
  15. Schroeder

    Schroeder Veteran

    +66
    Anabaptist
    Married
    US-Constitution
    this from one who abveiously knows nothing of scripture. We who you say speak of science or the theory as such are ridiculd but for some reason you all seem to KNOW everything and understand it all just fine. We who are not evolutionst dont understand it and are ignorant liers YET YET those who are not christians DO KNOW all thee is about the bible and what it states. TYPICAL bla bla bla.
     
  16. thaumaturgy

    thaumaturgy Well-Known Member

    +858
    Atheist
    Married
    When I sat down to read the bible I specifically chose the NRSV so that I could actually understand the language. I wanted to get the meaning rather than try to constantly remember the grammatical roles of thee and thy and direct and indirect objects.

    THAT the Bible has "preferred" translations and there are fierce defenders of one over another is a great indication that no real value can come from trying to understand God via the Bible or any holy book.

    If God had a single thing to do with such a book, I should think this, the most important book of all time in all creation would be:

    1. Better written
    2. Make some sort of consistent theological sense (hello, Marcion).
    3. NOT be at the whims of human translation to the point that no one really knows what is the "right" translation. Just a bunch of people "favoring" one over another. And condemning others to damnation for not favoring their favorite translation.

    Religion is something that CANNOT be learned ab initio. It has to be taught because it is nothing but interpretations of vaguely worded texts of unknown and unknowable origin.
     
  17. vossler

    vossler Senior Veteran

    +156
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Constitution
    Quite an interesting discussion.
    and then two Christians responded with:
    Why is it difficult to believe that God did something He said?

    According to His Word He created everything ex nilo, out of nothing. I can understand why non-Christians wouldn't be open to believing that, but for Christians to not even entertain the idea is quite fascinating.

    If God were to create something from nothing, like Adam for example, it would be complete when it was made. Adam wasn't a baby that was born but a fully grown man and therefore would appear to be older than he was. The same would hold true for everything else.

    Why, as a Christian, do you believe that God could ever deceive us? Are you saying that His Word is wrong and that He was purposely deceiving us to believe He created everything in six days? What would be the purpose in that?

    According to your beliefs then He decieved us so that we could find out the truth for ourselves, that everything on this planet, including the rocks, dirt, etc, was formed through some evolutionary process?
     
  18. thaumaturgy

    thaumaturgy Well-Known Member

    +858
    Atheist
    Married
    Interesting complaint. You are bordering on almost completely wrong about me. I've obsessed over religion for now about 35 years. I decoverted to atheism at about age 40, so I spent a lot of time learning the faith. I've read the bible straight through (sans apocrypha) as well as countless other books on christianity and biblical historiography and archaeology. So, apart from getting a ThD I don't know what else I could have done to get more acquainted with what the Bible says. I obsessed on religion at an almost "Martin Luther Scrupulosity" level.

    But then I started to look at it critically.

    I know I'm not 100% accurate. I just yearn for some brilliant defensor fides to step up to the plate on this board to soundly correct my statements. If I've said something in error, convince me. Don't whine that the evil atheist says harsh things about our holy book. That moves the faith forward not an inch.

    The more I read and learn and the more I post some of that stuff here and the less I see of defense of the faith the more I am convinced that it can't be defended!

    If the best people can do is blubber about how arrogant the "evolutionists" are and how the scientists simply won't take YOUR word for the fact that some given random bible quote says something of intrinsic value and is inerrant in all ways, then I have to think that Celsus was right when he proclaimed:

    "the following are the rules laid down by them [the Christians]. Let no one come to us who has been instructed, or who is wise or prudent (for such qualifications are deemed evil by us); but if there be any ignorant, or unintelligent, or uninstructed, or foolish persons, let them come with confidence. "

    And you know...when I was a believer I never would have sat still for being told that was the nature of my faith. I think that's why I obsessed over it so much and worried that I needed to learn more. Not less.
     
  19. FishFace

    FishFace Senior Veteran

    +165
    Atheist
    If the world has embedded age and God exists, why are we to believe anything at all? Could God not be deceiving us about anything? You've already rejected the normal empirical assumptions that underly all sorts of things - you no longer think that evidence points to what it appears to point to. In the same way as God can embed age, God could quite easily be making us see the world as it isn't. God could have planted the Bible with the intent of making everyone wrong.
    Once you start rejecting principles like this, you're left with an unworkable mess of doubt.
     
  20. MrGoodBytes

    MrGoodBytes Seeker for life, probably

    +271
    Seeker
    Single
    Yes. Now for the proof part, if you don't mind.
     
Loading...