Your Core Belief(s)!

[Halbhh]

Certainly not.

2K years ago, I might have been a-okay with slavery. 2K years ago, I might have thought being homosexual is bad, as if it was a choice. 2K years ago, I might have been perfectly fine with placing women below men. 2K years ago, I might have thought a true Adam and Eve existed. 2K years ago, I might have asserted there existed an actual flood, aided by Noah. I would have also believed there truly existed an Exodus.

Today, I think none of the things above. Would I have been right then, or am I right now?



I certainly admit I do NOT have all the answers. But please be advised.... Just because I do not know the answer to a question, does not mean I cannot still effectively rule out your assertion.

Case/point:

"5K years ago, the world is flat"
"75 years ago, the world is a perfect sphere"
"25 years ago, the world is more pear-shaped"

50 years from now, we may make a new discovery. Does this mean I must still leave the assumption from '5K years ago' on the table????



Okay?

Ok, so since you agree there is wisdom we didn't already have all of at age 30 or 40, then it follows logically from that the points in the details of part #2 of post #237 above about why what is in the common bible is about the real situation of human life and the divine -- that since we have agency/freedom, and then naturally become independent...then logically all the rest is inevitably how it would be follow -- the human condition. Even just from that, you can start to see that much in the common bible is telling us real things about human life, and what would follow about our situation vis-a-vis God, and therefore the text is not just another version like any other religious competing text. It's the text that has the real stuff.

 

[cvanwey]

Ok, so since you agree there is wisdom we didn't already have all of at age 30 or 40, then it follows logically from that the points in the details of part #2 of post #237 above about why what is in the common bible is about the real situation of human life and the divine -- that since we have agency/freedom all the rest is inevitably how it would be then, and thus the common bible is telling us real things about God, and not just another random version like any other religious competing text.

I'm not sure I follow. I do not want to risk not 'picking up what you are putt'n down'. Can you please re-word a bit?

 

[Halbhh]

I'm not sure I follow. I do not want to risk not 'picking up what you are putt'n down'. Can you please re-word a bit?

That if you accept there is real agency, and we have to become independent, and we can do wrong, and we have to learn -- then one can start to see that the contents of the common bible are very accurate to the real situation of life, the human condition, and it fits perfectly how the relationship vis-a-vis God would most completely unfold. God would be able and willing to help us learn.

 

[cvanwey]

That if you accept there is real agency, and we have to become independent, and we can do wrong, and we have to learn -- then one can start to see that the contents of the common bible are very accurate to the real situation of life, the human condition, and it fits perfectly how the relationship vis-a-vis God would most completely unfold. God would be able and willing to help us learn.

Okay, again, let's just concede that deism is true. You still need to prove theism, let alone Christianity.

I will ask you again, what is written in the Bible, ANY VERSION, which could not have been written without the aid of a divine presence?

Didn't humans already exist long prior to any words being written to paper?

It begs the question I asked prior... What's more likely?

Did God create humans, or, did humans 'create' god?

And before you answer, please remember how many asserted 'god(s)' are in circulation.

 

[Halbhh]

Okay, again, let's just concede that deism is true. You still need to prove theism, let alone Christianity.

To understand why Christianity in particular, instead of just some other version of God's relationship with us, see the full text of every bit of section #2 in post 237, which is about just that. If you read it fully through with all parts and to the end, it ought to be clear why what is in the common bible is not only fits but also is what works fully to help the human condition all the way through in a total way, bringing us back into the perfect accord with the source/fullness of being, in contrast to other competing ideas which are less complete answers to the quandaries of life.

 

[cvanwey]

To understand why Christianity in particular, instead of just some other version of God's relationship with us, see the full text of every bit of section #2 in post 237, which is about just that. If you read it fully through with all parts and to the end, it ought to be clear why what is in the common bible is not only fits but also is what works fully to help the human condition all the way through in a total way, in contrast to other competing ideas which are less complete answers to the quandaries of life.

Okay, repeating what you wrote prior does not make it more profound -- the second time around.

Please list a Verse, in any Version of the Bible you wish, which could not have been written by humans alone, without help from 'the divine'. And then please explain why?

 

[Halbhh]

Okay, repeating what you wrote prior does not make it more profound -- the second time around.

Please list a Verse, in any Version of the Bible you wish, which could not have been written by humans alone, without help from 'the divine'. And then please explain why?

But it does help point to where you'd find my full and direct answer to the key question about why Christianity is the full picture of humans and God and what is best and why.

 

[cvanwey]

@Tree of Life believes in God, for one or more of the 8 ways listed in post #1. Would you be so kind as to demonstrate which of these 8 methods seem to absolutely confirm truth in the Holy Spirit? How do I know this is why you believe? Well, there is a video to prove this statement. Please direct yourself to (13:48 -14:10) minutes of the video, where you affirm this assertion:

Which begs questions, also raised in the OP. Why even be concerned with the topics of apologetics, when none of these arguments neither bring one to, or away, from the belief in God?

 

[cvanwey]

But it does help point to where you'd find my full and direct answer to the key question about why Christianity is the full picture of humans and God and what is best and why.

Show me your best Verse(s), which could not have been written by humans exclusively?

 

[Halbhh]

Show me your best Verse(s), which could not have been written by humans exclusively?

The New Testament (that is, as a whole; but it is a good start to fully read one of the 4 gospels through).

To me, in most of the bible when we find a verse that has more profound significance (which is a lot of verses), that significance and full understanding can be gained only if one reads at least the entire passage it is in, and often it instead requires one read the entire book it is in.

 

[cvanwey]

The New Testament (that is, as a whole; but it is a good start to fully read one of the 4 gospels through).

To me, in most of the bible when we find a verse that has more profound significance (which is a lot of verses), that significance and full understanding can be gained only if one reads at least the entire passage it is in, and often it instead requires one read the entire book it is in.

The NT could not have been written by humans alone, whom later wrote down regurgitated growing legendary stories likely produced from circulating oral tradition?

 

[Halbhh]

The NT could not have been written by humans alone, whom later wrote down regurgitated growing legendary stories likely produced from circulating oral tradition?

You can say that.

I thought that.

But saying it or thinking it doesn't make it true, but leaves it remaining just a speculative viewpoint/hypothesis.

Anyway, I thought that.

But I decided to start doing some things Christ said. I don't mean half way, but in a total full way.

For instance to "forgive from your heart" doesn't mean to just intellectually decide to forgive someone, and decide not to hold something against them.

It means to really let go and become truly unresentful. No longer feeling harmed by their wrong they did to you.

How in the world do you do that? I found ways, and then did that full forgiving. It was a real change that was quite strong, and I felt truly lighter.

Christ said things that are much more radical and amazing though, that go far past only the best ways to live in relation to other people. Things about God, and other deep things. And amazing things too.

With faith, you can test some things you could not test without faith. If you do them.

 

[cvanwey]

You can say that.

I thought that.

But saying it or thinking it doesn't make it true, but leaves it remaining just a speculative viewpoint/hypothesis.

You just presented a definition of "faith" Why instead place my speculation/viewpoint/hypothesis, where I see the evidence <less> lead me? Such as continuing to have 'faith' for the Bible as truth, when, as mentioned prior, I now see so many contradictions/assertions? And even if I saw NO contradictions or conflict, why must I then assume the Bible is from the divine?

And please remember, I was a believer for decades. I'm the exact opposite of you. Maybe MY later gathered wisdom has lead me to the 'correct path', that Jesus is not the answer?.?.?.?

Anyway, I thought that.

But I decided to start doing some things Christ said. I don't mean half way, but in a total full way.

For instance to "forgive from your heart" doesn't mean to just intellectually decide to forgive someone, and decide not to hold something against them.

It means to really let go and become truly unresentful. No longer feeling harmed by their wrong they did to you.

But I do this now, and do not appeal to a God in doing so... So?

How in the world do you do that? I found ways, and then did that full forgiving. It was a real change that was quite strong, and I felt truly lighter.

Not sure how this gets you to discerning that this advice came from the divine. Especially when people do this, all over the world, without appealing to YHWH.

Christ said things that are much more radical and amazing though, that go far past only the best ways to live in relation to other people. Things about God, and other deep things. And amazing things too.

If something seems unique, profound, and/or 'amazing', it must be given from the divine?

With faith, you can test some things you could not test without faith. If you do them.

Faith can be used on virtually anything. Faith can be interchanged with trust and hope. I can have complete faith that my dog will return to me, if he jumps the fence and runs. I can have faith in my car brakes. I can have faith that my deceased great grandfather will contact me again. Faith can be applied to 'correct' things and 'incorrect' things, all-the-same.

Faith is thus, not reliable.

 

[Rachel20]

@Rachel20
I noticed Par5 leaving out key parts of a story he points to and creating a false impression that way:

I see that all the time

 

[Rachel20]

Looks as though what you are saying here, is that you hope He exists

It remains hope until I see him Hebrews 11:1

... we may find this very hard to believe, without quite a bit of rationalization.

Not sure I'm concerned about that

Can you explain your experience of first-hand life outside of this 'known' one?

Your experience is the same as mine. You didn't exist before this life either.

Do your best. I would really like to know How did you discern it was God, verses not God?

Wish I could help, but I have no answer

 

[Par5]

@Rachel20
I noticed Par5 leaving out key parts of a story he points to and creating a false impression that way:

"I keep raising such slaughter recorded in the bible, the slaughter of the Amalekites and the Canaanites, and I make no apology for doing so."

But notice that he left out the most crucial parts.

First, why was such a drastic removal necessary -- Why the Canaanite cities were removed:

29 “When the LORD your God cuts off before you the nations whom you go in to dispossess, and you dispossess them and dwell in their land, 30 take care that you be not ensnared to follow them, after they have been destroyed before you, and that you do not inquire about their gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods?—that I also may do the same.’ 31 You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way, for every abominable thing that the LORD hates they have done for their gods, for they even burn their sons and their daughters in the fire to their gods.
Deuteronomy 12 ESV

They burned little children in fires to their idols. It's about as awful an evil as humans can do, really. It's hard to even imagine anything more horrific in a way. Innocent children burned in fires.

That child murdering culture had to be removed so that no trace of it remained.

But...what about the mixed population that was removed?

All the people that were put to the sword.

Because God exists they are transported (to a new place) for some, and for some others, "asleep" (wording of Christ) and will awaken, because God exists, and He cancels the first death, that of this mortal body.

It's like a Policeman that needs to stop an evil cult with hostages they are actively executing each day.

The careful and wise Policeman gasses the entire complex with knockout gas so that everyone falls asleep, and then transports all the lifeless bodies to the courthouse and jail, where he separates the innocent from the guilty, and then revives everyone to face the Fair and Just and Merciful Judge.

But not without a 2nd chance for at least some it seems! --

18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, 19 in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, 20 because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah..."
1 Peter 3 ESV

We see here that Christ himself went to the spirits in prison to proclaim to them the gospel! They seem to be simply people doing wrong in life and not having heard the gospel, even.

Fair, Just, Merciful.

I suppose what you have just posted is a list of the key parts of the story that you say I missed.
I missed most of what you said because it has nothing to do with the mass slaughter of helpless children and infants.
I know that these people were attacked because your god was not pleased that they worshiped other gods and that they were accused of the abominable practice of child sacrifice. I find it quite ironic that to punish them for the terrible crime of murdering their children your god decided to, well, murder their children.
The rest of your post is just a very sad attempt at using magic to say, " Hey look, everything has worked out fine the good fairy has arrived and waved her magic wand and everyone is as good as new.
As for your policeman analogy and his knockout gas. That is beyond pathetic.
These children had a sword thrust through their tiny bodies in order to murder them. All the fairy dust in the world is not going to help them recover from that.
Fair just and merciful you said.
Ok, if you think such action by your god against these people was that, would you have been capable of helping to carry out such a slaughter if ordered to do so by your god? Could you see yourself going from household to household murdering one child after another?
What do you say?

 

[Par5]

I see that all the time

Care to elaborate on that Rachel?

 

[Halbhh]

I suppose what you have just posted is a list of the key parts of the story that you say I missed.
I missed most of what you said because it has nothing to do with the mass slaughter of helpless children and infants.

Using the assumption that God does not exist by presuming (quite reasonably) that those that have died in the mortal body are dead -- e.g.: "mass slaughter of helpless children and infants." (a form of saying that they are still dead; i.e., that God must not exist) -- leads logically after some reasoning/writing to another form-conclusion that God must not exist, tautologically.

e.g. the tautology (circular reasoning from premise of non existence of God to a conclusion that implies God could not exist): "your god decided to, well, murder their children." etc. In other words, the children there are all dead you assume. That is, you assume that God does not exist. (Since if God exists they are all awakened again after transport.)

But what use is there for you to merely restate your premise, after some writing, in a circular, tautological method? To me, that seems a waste of one's time, and I'd not want to do that, to just reason in circle, restating a premise in various new forms.

If God exists, then none of them are dead.

See? So, you are circling inside a blind alley there, basically. It won't let you find out what is in the next street over.

Regarding "punish" for crimes, it's not quite as simple as you are guessing. As one could learn only by reading fully through all the common bible, God gives those doing violence (all forms, wrongs of all forms) but having never hearing the gospel the opportunity for salvation (!), after their removal from this temporary mortal life -- the "spirits in prison":

18For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit. 19After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits— 20to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built."
1 Peter 3 NIV

The perfect example is all those doing evils in the days when God removed all but Noah and his family. Instead of being dead, they are brought the gospel message, and then we can only guess then what portion of them repented then and were redeemed, but it must have been some, those willing to admit their wrongs and turn in repentance to the one who saves.

 

[Par5]

Using the assumption that God does not exist by presuming (quite reasonably) that those that have died in the mortal body are dead -- e.g.: "mass slaughter of helpless children and infants." (a form of saying that they are still dead; i.e., that God must not exist) -- leads logically after some reasoning/writing to another form-conclusion that God must not exist, tautologically.

e.g. the tautology (circular reasoning from premise of non existence of God to a conclusion that implies God could not exist): "your god decided to, well, murder their children." etc. In other words, the children there are all dead you assume. That is, you assume that God does not exist. (Since if God exists they are all awakened again after transport.)

But what use is there for you to merely restate your premise, after some writing, in a circular, tautological method? To me, that seems a waste of one's time, and I'd not want to do that, to just reason in circle, restating a premise in various new forms.

If God exists, then none of them are dead.

See? So, you are circling inside a blind alley there, basically. It won't let you find out what is in the next street over.

Regarding "punish" for crimes, it's not quite as simple as you are guessing. As one could learn only by reading fully through all the common bible, God gives those doing violence (all forms, wrongs of all forms) but having never hearing the gospel the opportunity for salvation (!), after their removal from this temporary mortal life -- the "spirits in prison":

18For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit. 19After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits— 20to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built."
1 Peter 3 NIV

The perfect example is all those doing evils in the days when God removed all but Noah and his family. Instead of being dead, they are brought the gospel message, and then we can only guess then what portion of them repented then and were redeemed, but it must have been some, those willing to admit their wrongs and turn in repentance to the one who saves.

What???

 

[Halbhh]

What???

If you assume death of this mortal body is the final end of a person, a real and final death, then you are just simply using a form of assuming God does not exist.

If God exists, then the death of this mortal body is only something like "sleep".

e.g. --

49 While Jesus was still speaking, someone came from the house of Jairus, the synagogue leader. “Your daughter is dead,” he said. “Don’t bother the teacher anymore.”

50 Hearing this, Jesus said to Jairus, “Don’t be afraid; just believe, and she will be healed.”

51 When he arrived at the house of Jairus, he did not let anyone go in with him except Peter, John and James, and the child’s father and mother. 52 Meanwhile, all the people were wailing and mourning for her. “Stop wailing,” Jesus said. “She is not dead but asleep.”

53 They laughed at him, knowing that she was dead.
---------
Luke 8 NIV

Of course, she was only "asleep" in an ultimate sense. Death of this mortal body isn't the end of a person, but more like a transition, or a sleep.

Ergo, all those people that died in whatever wars, "slaughter" (your wording above), famine, earthquake, old age, cancer, rocks falling on them, whatever, are all still in existence after their mortal bodies are dust.