Why are some Christians anti Evolution?

[2PhiloVoid]

No, there was a claim of "justice". It could not be substantiated. Many, if not most, Christians have dropped the idea of a punitive hell since it simply contradicts too many other teachings of the Bible.

Well, sure. I get it. If there is no Holy, Eternal, All-knowing and Almighty god whom we can clearly point to and discern from the haze of reality, then we'll have a very difficult time trying to substantiate a biblical notion of justice. Anyone can see that the justice which the biblical god decrees isn't expressed with the same meta-physical concepts that make up more modern notions of justice [which also have nearly none].

So, I agree. To bring it up here in this thread quickly becomes a kind of fool's errand since to even talk about things like punitive punishment for sins, Hades and/or the Lake of Fire requires we do so in terms that no one today typically relates to.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well, sure. I get it. If there is no Holy, Eternal, All-knowing and Almighty god whom we can clearly point to and discern from the haze of reality, then we'll have a very difficult time trying to substantiate a biblical notion of justice. Anyone can see that the justice which the biblical god decrees isn't expressed with the same meta-physical concepts that make up more modern notions of justice [which also have nearly none].

So, I agree. To bring it up here in this thread quickly becomes a kind of fool's errand since to even talk about things like punitive punishment for sins, Hades and/or the Lake of Fire requires we do so in terms that no one today typically relates to.

Now you are just dodging your need to provide support for your beliefs. If anyone is begging the question it is you. I am asking for evidence, you are refusing to provide any.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Sorry, but you were the one that made the claim of "justice" and then contradicted yourself.

Where exactly did I contradict myself?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Where exactly did I contradict myself?

You claimed that God was just and then you supported his not being just .

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Now you are just dodging your need to provide support for your beliefs. If anyone is begging the question it is you. I am asking for evidence, you are refusing to provide any.

Which beliefs do you think I'm dodging a need of support for?

Oh, I see. I think what's going on here is that you don't realize that I'm an Existentialist. I don't dodge because I don't need to. I don't believe in "metaphysics" even if I do think that the fields of epistemology, hermeneutics and axiology are useful, along with the usual sciences.

But if you're wanting evidence for the existence of the biblical God in the face of both an evolved world that sits amidst nations that are scrambling about their daily lives soaked in "modern notions" of justice, then I have no evidence to provide your epistemic inquiry other than that which anyone else (or yourself) already has.

And if the existing evidences for the biblical God don't "do" it for you, why would I waste your and my time getting into hermeneutics so as to clarify any meaning the bible might have since you want evidential substance first? It would be kind of silly for me to try, wouldn't it?

You get it, don't you? 'Doing' Christian theology or Christian ethics is not like 'doing' Geology; this isn't an academic, systematic practice of fitting together hard evidences and diverse facts like a puzzle to arrive at a clear, objective, even comprehensive model of what we feel sure the "thing-in-itself" really is. And this is the case whether we're talking either the book of Genesis OR the book of Revelation... and much of what we often find placed in between in the rest of the Bible.

 

[BNR32FAN]

You claimed that God was just and then you supported his not being just .

Oh ok, so it’s your opinion that I contradicted. I didn’t actually contradict myself I contradicted your assessment of the situation. Yeah that sounds more likely.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Oh ok, so it’s your opinion that I contradicted. I didn’t actually contradict myself I contradicted your assessment of the situation. Yeah that sounds more likely.

No, your failure was explained to you and you had no response. As a result you did contradict yourself.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Which beliefs do you think I'm dodging a need of support for?

Oh, I see. I think what's going on here is that you don't realize that I'm an Existentialist. I don't dodge because I don't need to. I don't believe in "metaphysics" even if I do think that the fields of epistemology, hermeneutics and axiology are useful, along with the usual sciences.

But if you're wanting evidence for the existence of the biblical God in the face of both an evolved world that sits amidst nations that are scrambling about their daily lives soaked in "modern notions" of justice, then I have no evidence to provide your epistemic inquiry other than that which anyone else (or yourself) already has.

And if the existing evidences for the biblical God don't "do" it for you, why would I waste your and my time getting into hermeneutics so as to clarify any meaning the bible might have since you want evidential substance first? It would be kind of silly for me to try, wouldn't it?

You get it, don't you? 'Doing' Christian theology or Christian ethics is not like 'doing' Geology; this isn't an academic, systematic practice of fitting together hard evidences and diverse facts like a puzzle to arrive at a clear, objective, even comprehensive model of what we feel sure the "thing-in-itself" really is. And this is the case whether we're talking either the book of Genesis OR the book of Revelation... and much of what we often find placed in between in the rest of the Bible.

I don't think that you are following the discussion. We are not discussing the evidence for a God since no one has ever supplied any. We were discussing a supposed characteristic of God. A specific version of God was shown to be self contradicting. By the way, that does not refute all versions of God. Just the one being discussed.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, at least I don't have to become a die-hard, card-carrying Communist in order to get you to comment on my lack of credentials. So, all's good!

Ouch!

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I don't think that you are following the discussion. We are not discussing the evidence for a God since no one has ever supplied any. We were discussing a supposed characteristic of God. A specific version of God was shown to be self contradicting. By the way, that does not refute all versions of God. Just the one being discussed.

Right. You were discussing a supposed characteristic of God....one on which I then implied needs additional conditions to even talk about or to understand what is meant when "God's justice" is being referred to.

As for presenting substance, I would if I was allowed to, but I can't since I'm an Annihilationist.

 

[AV1611VET]

Many, if not most, Christians have dropped the idea of a punitive hell since it simply contradicts too many other teachings of the Bible.

So is that good, bad, or otherwise? are you bragging or complaining?

 

[AV1611VET]

No, your failure was explained to you and you had no response. As a result you did contradict yourself.

Romans 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

 

[AV1611VET]

We were discussing a supposed characteristic of God. A specific version of God was shown to be self contradicting. By the way, that does not refute all versions of God. Just the one being discussed.

God metes out three kinds of judgements:

1. justice: getting what you deserve
2. mercy: not getting what you deserve
3. grace: getting what you don't deserve

Do you understand the differences?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Right. You were discussing a supposed characteristic of God....one on which I then implied needs additional conditions to even talk about or to understand what is meant when "God's justice" is being referred to.

As for presenting substance, I would if I was allowed to, but I can't since I'm an Annihilationist.

You can still discuss it. In fact you appear to agree with me. Or at the very least you should.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So is that good, bad, or otherwise? are you bragging or complaining?

That is an improvement. It demonstrates that their morals have matured over the years.

 

[Subduction Zone]

God metes out three kinds of judgements:

1. justice: getting what you deserve
2. mercy: not getting what you deserve
3. grace: getting what you don't deserve

Do you understand the differences?

The problem is that what is being proposed is getting a punishment far worse than one deserves. Therefore it is not just. By the way, this only refutes that specific version of God.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Romans 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

So now God is unjust according to you. By the way, that is Paul's claim, not God's claim. Didn't you know who wrote Romans?

 

[sjastro]

That’s a typical atheist approach to the Bible.

How is this relevant in the context of the mistreatment of women in the Bible?
If it’s meant to being a pejorative statement against atheists or a backhander to a Christian by calling them an atheist then it has backfired as the converse of your statement implies Christians support the mistreatment of women because Deuteronomy 20 makes an explicit case for this.

What is totally incomprehensible is how anyone can think the victim should be executed along with her attacker because the Bible says so.
Do you think modern law should be based on this principle?
Pity the victim, if she doesn’t resist she is executed, if she does there is the possibility she is killed by her attacker for resisting.
What about other aspects of the Bible such as executing individuals who work on the Sabbath (Exodus 35:2) or the ethnic cleansing of Canaanites (Numbers 21:2-3)?
Are the ethics acceptable because they are mentioned in the Bible?

 

[Bradskii]

How does it illustrate God’s power if it isn’t true? What power has been illustrated if it didn’t really happen. The only way it illustrates God’s power is if it actually took place.

If you think that it happened then it's an example of God's power. If you think it didn't then it's an illustration of God's power.

 

[Bradskii]

I never said it was eternal I honestly haven’t come to a conclusion whether it is temporary or eternal.

Maybe you should check your bible. Surely, if it says it's eternal then who are you to challenge the word of God?

Matthew 25:46
And these will go away into eternal punishment.

Matthew 25:41
Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire...'

Jude 1:7
Just as Sodom and Gomorrah... serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.

Revelation 20:10
...and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.