- This topic is empty.
- Posts
David,
Quote
++”Suppose there was no U.N. back then, and the government itself along with everyone, is wicked, vile, and sacrifice their firstborn to idol gods.Stu:Are you asking me whether I would act on the voices in my head that were saying “smite all the males…”?
++”Are you suggesting you would “forgive” them? Or “help them fix their criminal ways”? “I'm sorry future child sacrifice. I have forgiven your dad and I have put him on a rehabilitation program.”
I think we’re getting a bit carried away here. We are talking about pagan sacrifice amongst a middle eastern tribe. What principles should apply to how this issue was dealt with by god? Or, is the biblical reference really, as I asserted, a political justification for one tribe invading another by making the enemy seem sub-human, and that actually little in the way of sacrifice was really happening amongst the Canaanites – reading Leviticus does give you this impression – were they sinfully wearing more than one fibre? (No I am not condoning even a few child murders done in the name of non-existent sky fairies). In other words, what was the unusual and particular extent of the problem in the case of the Canaanites that did not apply to other pagan tribes of the time?
++”… I'm asking what should have been done, what any loving just, fair, forgiving person, such as yourself would have done, if you had the power? Yet, you refuse to answer it, because that means you're letting the child sacrifice to continue. And saying that would be politically incorrect, not to mention extraordinary unloving, unjust, unfair, etc.
OK, so you are not asking what I think god should have done.
And by the way, I stand by my answer to that question.
***
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? (Epicurus)
***What would I have done? I certainly would have ignored the Incompetent’s murderous rallying cries.
I would have leapt several buildings in a single bound, removed the firstborn children from all parents while they were re-educated not to believe in the power of things that don't exist. Maybe I could have brainwashed them all into not killing, then changed all their genomes to remove the “god genes”. Does this demonstrate the ridiculousness of the question? What superhero powers would you have given yourself in order to stop sacrifices? What would you have done?Another aside: do you think those who sacrificed their firstborn got enjoyment from it, or do you think they were absolutely terrified by the prospect, and were bullied into it by priests?
++”Why is it that I often feel you are worming your way out of questions, by saying they don't apply and asking a replacement question?
I don’t know why you feel that way. Does this answer your question adequately?
On the question of hypocritical parents, in case you still can’t read my first reply to you asking, the answer is YES – such parents are hypocritical. Parents who smoke and drink in front of their children then tell them not to are hypocritical. Parents who say don't run out onto the crossing, then do so are as well. Parents who say “hold my hand, we need to cross safely together”, or “I am allowed to drive the car but you are not yet because young people have brains that are not quite ready to make driving decisions” are not.
Please re-state any other questions for which my answers were not satisfactory to you.
Stuart
Quote
Can you tell me the Theory of Divine Creation? t8 and David don't seem to want to share this detailed explanation with me.David:
++”The “God created everything out of nothing (or energy) theory” is very similar to the statement: “Nothing created everything out of nothing somehow” belief. Neither are very detailed. God didn't tell me how he transformed his vast amounts of energy into matter.
Well, now at least you are making a testable hypothesis – that matter did start off as energy. Of course, your “Theory” needs a supernatural being even more complex than the act of creation, whereas mine doesn’t.
++”I wouldn't understand the math anyway. Nor would most scientists.
How do you know this?? If you haven’t been “told” the maths, how do you judge it incomprehensible?
++”And similarly, scientists have extremely little to say on “why” there is everything when there could simply still be nothing.
Are you a deist, like t8? Anyway I do appreciate your courtesy in at least having a go at the answer!
How about the creation of life and speciation?Stuart
Quote Warning! The Old Testament verses quoted below describe the mass murder of children and may not be suitable for those of a nervous disposition. Lev. 20:9 For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.
Deu. 20:13 And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword:
20:14 But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.So saith the loving and forgiving deity.
Looking at the account in Deut 20,
My point, when this began, was that you are apparently saying God should have been more “loving” and “forgiving” in this case, and apparently that means not showing love to those whom these people affect and influence (including the children whom they were murdering).My point, again, is that you accuse God of not being forgiving in this instance, but this implies that you want him to simply forgive these ones and let them live, and apparently, let their children be sacrificed to some idol god.
What “love” does that show to the innocent parties?
Quote OK, I see it in the sense that it is not hypocrisy, but in that sense I don’t think it is a valid argument, either, because… OK, so we can agree that it isn't hypocritical when someone with authority tells someone else not to do something that they themselves can do.
Quote Do you vote? If so, you are the government; they represent your views. Is this not a cop-out? If not, I should ask you whether you believe in human rights (apropos my support of governments that oppose child brutality on my behalf). So back to the original question: do you support the death penalty? It's not a “cop out” because “no” I don't vote for human governments. I don't take sides or get involved in human wars or politics. I try to remain as Jesus early disciples, “no part of the world.” My vote is for God's kingdom. (Dan 2:44)
Quote Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. This is of course not the only answer.
If a child is taken to the hospital to get a needle, he may not like the needle and may not understand it (his puny brain and all), but the parent knows it is for the child's long lasting wellfare. And the parent isn't malevolent.
Today, too, often, we only see the pain and like the child don't understand why. Looking into the Bible might help.
God's sovereignty, his right to rule was challenged. Can man do better on his own? We are finding out. And it's not a pleasant experience. But this will not last forever. These human kingdoms will be done away with when this has been fully proven. (dan 2:44)REVELATION 11:18
“But the nations became wrathful, and your own wrath came, and the appointed time . . . . to bring to ruin those ruining the earth.””It's only now, in the last century, that we faced this possibility. God will not allow his earth to be ruined.
Quote What would I have done? I certainly would have ignored the Incompetent’s murderous rallying cries.
I would have leapt several buildings in a single bound, removed the firstborn children from all parents while they were re-educated not to believe in the power of things that don't exist. Maybe I could have brainwashed them all into not killing, then changed all their genomes to remove the “god genes”. Does this demonstrate the ridiculousness of the question? What superhero powers would you have given yourself in order to stop sacrifices? What would you have done?You can't have it both ways. You argue that it was wrong for God to do that.
And you argue that the very notion of God is silly.“if there is a God” was it wrong for him to step in and put an end to those lives, thus showing justice and love to the innocent ones? Maybe that is a better question for you to be asking.
It's you that started this line of reasoning. Yet you jump to this being ridiculous when it suits you.
Quote Another aside: do you think those who sacrificed their firstborn got enjoyment from it, or do you think they were absolutely terrified by the prospect, and were bullied into it by priests?
Most were probably following their man made religious traditions (which Jesus spoke against).“Parents who say . . . “I am allowed to drive the car but you are not yet because young people have brains that are not quite ready to make driving decisions” are not [hypocrites].” –Stu
THANKYOU.
So sometimes, when someone with greater knowledge, authority etc (as in the example of a Creator) has the ability to tell someone not to do something and yet he can do it himself WITHOUT it being hypoctrical.
SO YOU FINALLY AGREE TO THAT?
Thankyou.
You may now stop calling God hypocritical. It's quite silly for you to do that since you don't believe in him anyway.
What you should start doing is saying “if there is such a God wouldn't he be hypoctricial.”….
That way, you can't jump back and say: “this is silly, God doesn't exist.” and evade your own weaknesses in reasoning.
david
Quote Quote
Can you tell me the Theory of Divine Creation? t8 and David don't seem to want to share this detailed explanation with me.David:
++”The “God created everything out of nothing (or energy) theory” is very similar to the statement: “Nothing created everything out of nothing somehow” belief. Neither are very detailed. God didn't tell me how he transformed his vast amounts of energy into matter.
Well, now at least you are making a testable hypothesis – that matter did start off as energy. Of course, your “Theory” needs a supernatural being even more complex than the act of creation, whereas mine doesn’t.
You have all the scientific information I do. We know what happened. We don't know why.
My answer is God.
Your answer is…..Something [or someone] outside of the universe, before the universe, started it all.
I call this God.
You call it….Quote your “Theory” needs a supernatural being even more complex than the act of creation
And your theory needs…..answers.David,
++”Looking at the account in Deut 20, My point, when this began, was that you are apparently saying God should have been more “loving” and “forgiving” in this case, and apparently that means not showing love to those whom these people affect and influence (including the children whom they were murdering). My point, again, is that you accuse God of not being forgiving in this instance, but this implies that you want him to simply forgive these ones and let them live, and apparently, let their children be sacrificed to some idol god. What “love” does that show to the innocent parties?
Is god unwilling to achieve the goal of stopping sacrifice without killing people? Is he incapable? Lets’ pretend he is omnipotent, then he has the power to alter the behaviour of people without having to kill them. Why does he choose smiting frequently in the OT? Has he made some kind of rule to himself that “free will” will not be violated by other meddling, even if it means having to break his own commandment? It might be helpful for people to know that, don’t you think?
++”OK, so we can agree that it isn't hypocritical when someone with authority tells someone else not to do something that they themselves can do… “Parents who say . . . “I am allowed to drive the car but you are not yet because young people have brains that are not quite ready to make driving decisions” are not [hypocrites].” –Stu THANKYOU. So sometimes, when someone with greater knowledge, authority etc (as in the example of a Creator) has the ability to tell someone not to do something and yet he can do it himself WITHOUT it being hypoctrical. SO YOU FINALLY AGREE TO THAT?
No. The appeal to authority is a bastion for the scoundrel. An important difference is evidence. There is evidence that smoking is harmful, and it would be hypocritical of a parent to do it whilst telling children not to. There is evidence that driving or independently crossing the road requires a certain level of brain maturity, and (presuming no changes in the law) the parent was not allowed to drive at that age either. Linking the analogy back to the summary execution of Uzzah, god did not explain that although he commands his children not to kill, this was necessary because there is evidence that by Uzzah dying the greater good of all people will be served, or even anything like that. (Even those grounds would be unprincipled in my view, but perhaps not in yours). There is no evidence that killing will improve the situation, and no Canaanite of Israeli should have been convinced by a mere command with such spurious grounds as listed in Leviticus. The question returns to what principles governed the apparently arbitrary order to “cleanse” the tribe of the Canaanites? We are taking an authority’s word for it that killing these people will achieve a moral outcome superior to the status quo
Stuart
David,
++”If a child is taken to the hospital to get a needle, he may not like the needle and may not understand it (his puny brain and all), but the parent knows it is for the child's long lasting wellfare. And the parent isn't malevolent.
And the parent isn’t hypocritical, if she too has her shots kept up-to-date, say. I think this analogy fails to explain the hypocrisy of killing while commanding against it.
++”Today, too, often, we only see the pain and like the child don't understand why. Looking into the Bible might help. God's sovereignty, his right to rule was challenged. Can man do better on his own?
We are finding out. And it's not a pleasant experience.I’m sorry if you are not enjoying life as you would like. I am, on the whole.
Christianity has dominated western Europe for 2000 years. For many people that paradigm resulted in suffering under brutal regimes and early deaths. Now that secular societies dominate the west, there is less oppression (except in the most religiouse countries, or those with a fundamental ideology) and people are living longer, healthier lives, in less pain than ever before.Stuart
David,
Stu:…” What superhero powers would you have given yourself in order to stop sacrifices? What would you have done?
++”You can't have it both ways. You argue that it was wrong for God to do that. And you argue that the very notion of God is silly. ””if there is a God” was it wrong for him to step in and put an end to those lives, thus showing justice and love to the innocent ones? Maybe that is a better question for you to be asking. It's you that started this line of reasoning. Yet you jump to this being ridiculous when it suits you. You may now stop calling God hypocritical. It's quite silly for you to do that since you don't believe in him anyway. What you should start doing is saying “if there is such a God wouldn't he be hypoctricial.”….
I concede your point here absolutely. I started this thread intending to assume the existence of god in order to discuss his OT brutality, and I find myself lapsing back into my true beliefs every now and then. I will try to be more disciplined and keep up the pretence! It is difficult for someone used to real, scientific evidence to accept the claim that scripture is equivalent to such evidence, when it plainly isn’t. I have to say that I am grateful that your scripture posting is more focussed and “relevant” than the liberal splashings of irrelevant quotations in which some here indulge.
Stuart
David,
On origins theories, we need to be quite precise about what we are trying to explain. We have had a go a the origins of matter; the explanation of well over 90% of the world’s physicists is the one I follow too. This may seem like an appeal to authority here but I do stop short of claiming things which are supported by evidence that I have not seen for myself, or read about from eye-witness and peer-reviewed accounts. There is no need for it but you can insert a god – you then have even more explaining to do. (While about half of all Americans reject evolution, about 4% of scientists do not support the conventional big-bang / abiogenesis / evolution model – I defy anyone to name more than a handful of them who are not fundamentalist believers).
On abiogenesis I have freely admited already that the chemistry is open to great speculation. There are very detailed hypotheses for how this might have occurred but none is conclusive. This is to be expected, given the nature of the event(s) under investigation. Is there a section of the Theory of Divine Creation that deals with how god actually carried out the synthesis of the first replicating molecule? The mechanisms, akin to the details of the speculations by scientists, would be of great interest.
The fact of evolution explained by the Theory of Natural Selection is state-of-the-art knowledge about how speciation occurred You can argue about the fine details of chronology or the relative importance or the different means by which it happened, but there is are no scientific grounds to doubt that it happened. I have never read an alternative, falsifiable theory that is a better explanation for the evidence, unless you have such a Theory of Divine Creation of Life?
Stuart
Hi Stu:
Quote ++”Also, know because of my personal experience that you are making a mistake when you say that there is not creator. I read the Psalm that t8 posted in which God states that “the fool has said, there is no God”, but as I have already mentioned, I was an agnostic at one time myself, and all of us who are born-again Christians were in unbelief at one time also, and so I can say that all of us were also foolish at one time in our unbelief. ++”Also, know because of my personal experience that you are making a mistake when you say that there is not creator. I read the Psalm that t8 posted in which God states that “the fool has said, there is no God”, but as I have already mentioned, I was an agnostic at one time myself, and all of us who are born-again Christians were in unbelief at one time also, and so I can say that all of us were also foolish at one time in our unbelief.
So you don not believe me when I say that through my personal experience I am almost certain that there is no god of any kind? Do you think it would be instructive if I posted my own testimony? I'd have to start an atheist testimony thread to do it. Do you discount the possiblility that, through some feat of illusion by someone, you have been immunised against critical thinking about your belief? That is what the “fool” insult is all about. Immunisation. Do you think it would be instructive if I posted my own testimony? I'd have to start an atheist testimony thread to do it. Do you discount the possiblility that, through some feat of illusion by someone, you have been immunised against critical thinking about your belief? That is what the “fool” insult is all about. Immunisation.
You say:
Quote So you don not believe me when I say that through my personal experience I am almost certain that there is no god of any kind? While you say “I am almost certain that there is no god”, I can tell you that I am certain that there is a God.
Relative to the Psalm that states that the “fool hath said there is no God”, the statement is made because of the following:
Quote Romans 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; F6 for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so F7 that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, You ask:
Quote Are you going to tell me the Theory of Divine Creation? t8 seems very coy on the issue. I know the Word of God to be the truth and not a theory, and so what I know of Divine Creation is found in Genesis Chapters 1 & 2. God does not tell us in a whole lot of detail how he created the heavens and the earth. Only that he did. He does tell us of the origin of life. Can you do this through science?
God Bless
Hi 942767
++”While you say “I am almost certain that there is no god”, I can tell you that I am certain that there is a God.
Objectively you must claim this as an opinion. It is not a fact. There is at least reasonable doubt about it. You are certainly within your rights to claim what you believe to be true, but the honest person confronts the fact that he could be in error, just as I concede there could be such a thing as a god of your description, highly unlikely though I think it is.
Did you choose not to answer my question about whether you believe my “testament” that there is no god?
++”Relative to the Psalm that states that the “fool hath said there is no God”, the statement is made because of the following:
Romans 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; F6 for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so F7 that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,…
This is just the insult of the Psalm justified by the argument from design. The insult is still an insult and the argument from design was disposed of a century and a half ago. There is more evidence for claiming the writer of the Psalm and the writer of this passage in Romans to be fools.
The bible is so charming, don’t you think, and so cleverly written to appeal to non-believers?!++”I know the Word of God to be the truth and not a theory, and so what I know of Divine Creation is found in Genesis Chapters 1 & 2.
Well you are right that the “word of god” (the bible, presumably) is not a theory, and it is so wrong so often on points of biology and geology that you could hardly call it reliable, notwithstanding your absolute dedication to its inerrancy.
++”God does not tell us in a whole lot of detail how he created the heavens and the earth. Only that he did. He does tell us of the origin of life. Can you do this through science?
Yes, with astonishing detail, and an estimate of how likely it is to be right.
Stuart
i WAS at the royal tyrell museum of palaeontology in Alberta a week or so ago. I've been there a few times. It's the only dinasour museum in canada and it's a fascinating place to visit.
Stu, where are you from?
Quote (david @ Sep. 30 2007,20:09) i WAS at the royal tyrell museum of palaeontology in Alberta a week or so ago. I've been there a few times. It's the only dinasour museum in canada and it's a fascinating place to visit. Stu, where are you from?
Hi DavidI'm a Commonwealth cousin in NZ and a bit envious of your access to Drumheller, a place I didn't make it to on my one trip through Alberta about 10 years ago. What can you see of the Burgess Shale at the museum? You're only a few hundred kms from North Dakota and the complete geologic column that we have discussed before, too.
Not much in the way of dinosaurs in NZ, but some are still alive (Tuatara) and we have lots of birds that used to be…
Stuart
Hi Stu:
Relative to the following:
Quote ++”While you say “I am almost certain that there is no god”, I can tell you that I am certain that there is a God. Objectively you must claim this as an opinion. It is not a fact. There is at least reasonable doubt about it. You are certainly within your rights to claim what you believe to be true, but the honest person confronts the fact that he could be in error, just as I concede there could be such a thing as a god of your description, highly unlikely though I think it is.
Did you choose not to answer my question about whether you believe my “testament” that there is no god?
I know that God is a reality and that the testimony regarding His Son and His Christ is true because God's Spirit witnesses with my spirit to this reality. It is not an opinion but a fact to me. I have a personal relationship with God through His Son and His Christ, and I have the happiness that can only come through a right relationship with God, and I walk in liberty knowing that all of my sins have been forgiven and that if I make a mistake I am not condemned and so, no I am not open to the possibility that there is no God.
And relative to the following:
Quote ++”Relative to the Psalm that states that the “fool hath said there is no God”, the statement is made because of the following: Romans 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; F6 for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so F7 that they are without excuse: 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,…
This is just the insult of the Psalm justified by the argument from design. The insult is still an insult and the argument from design was disposed of a century and a half ago. There is more evidence for claiming the writer of the Psalm and the writer of this passage in Romans to be fools.
The bible is so charming, don’t you think, and so cleverly written to appeal to non-believers?!As I have said all of us who are born again believers were foolish walking in unbelief at one time. It is good that you are searching for the truth, but I believe that it is a foolish thing for you to critisize God because you may not understand his actions.
But I know Him to be a God of mercy. Do the following scriptures insult you?
Quote John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. F9 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God Quote Romans 5:6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time F16 Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. 8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. Quote John 15:12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. 13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Relative to the following:
Quote ++”I know the Word of God to be the truth and not a theory, and so what I know of Divine Creation is found in Genesis Chapters 1 & 2. Well you are right that the “word of god” (the bible, presumably) is not a theory, and it is so wrong so often on points of biology and geology that you could hardly call it reliable, notwithstanding your absolute dedication to its inerrancy.
++”God does not tell us in a whole lot of detail how he created the heavens and the earth. Only that he did. He does tell us of the origin of life. Can you do this through science?
Yes, with astonishing detail, and an estimate of how likely it is to be right.
I did not say that the bible was innerant. There are many man made errors in transcribing it. I said that it is the Word of God. The concept is the same from Genesis to Revelation.
God is the source of all life, and I don't believe that you can explain this away through science. You may speak of evolution. Something evolving from something, but as to the origin of life, you can try to explain it through science, but I do not believe that you can.
God Bless
Hi 942767
++”… I am not open to the possibility that there is no God.
So you are happy that there is such a possibility, but are not open to admitting it? Or are you saying that there is no possibility that there is no god? To say the latter you would have to know at least absolutely everything about brain biochemistry and psychology to exclude some even remote possibility that your brain has been deceived. Do you know everything about those fields of science?
++”But I know Him to be a God of mercy. Do the following scriptures insult you?
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.No, I do not believe any of this to be true, so it is not particularly insulting.
++”19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. F9 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God
Accusations that are without specific charges, without evidence and without merit. Hardly just, don’t you think? Our secular western societies have more transparent and fairer systems of justice than the celestial dictator uses.
++”Romans 5:6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time F16 Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. 8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
Yes, this is not only insulting but patronising. I do not wish to be included amongst those who have been “saved” by the application of judicial execution to anyone. I am ungodly for many reasons, one of them being that I don’t believe that killing improves anyone’s situation. The 2,000,000+ killings in the OT did not prevent the need for a “saviour”, did they? God has an unfortunate management style, to put it mildly.
++”John 15:12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. 13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
This is biblical spin doctoring. Jesus was supposedly despatched by use of the death penalty, he did not go willingly. (“Why hast thou forsaken me?”)
++”I did not say that the bible was innerant. There are many man made errors in transcribing it. I said that it is the Word of God. The concept is the same from Genesis to Revelation.
So how do you decide which bits were transcribed correctly? With enough errors, the whole thing could be no better than historical fiction. How many people do you think wrote the Torah?
++”God is the source of all life, and I don't believe that you can explain this away through science. You may speak of evolution. Something evolving from something, but as to the origin of life, you can try to explain it through science, but I do not believe that you can.
Science is not about “explaining things away”, it is about making models that give the most powerful and usefully predictive explanations, which is what it does in the case of origins. I’m not sure you know what you believe on origins of life. I hope you will have the honesty to know the theory of evolution well enough not to misrepresent it to others.
Stuart
Regarding non-believers, this is the word of the Loving One, preached by the gentle Lamb of God:
Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.
—Psalms 2:8-9
Now consider this, ye that forget God, lest I tear you in pieces, and there be none to deliver.
—Psalms 50:22
Break their teeth, O God, in their mouth… let them be as cut in pieces. As a snail which melteth, let every one of them pass away: like the untimely birth of a woman, that they may not see the sun…. The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance: he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked.
—Psalms 58:6-10He shall judge among the heathen, he shall fill the places with the dead bodies; he shall wound the heads over many countries.
—Psalms 110:6
O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.
—Psalms 137:8-9Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Oct. 01 2007,19:34) Hi 942767 ++”… I am not open to the possibility that there is no God.
So you are happy that there is such a possibility, but are not open to admitting it? Or are you saying that there is no possibility that there is no god? To say the latter you would have to know at least absolutely everything about brain biochemistry and psychology to exclude some even remote possibility that your brain has been deceived. Do you know everything about those fields of science?
++”But I know Him to be a God of mercy. Do the following scriptures insult you?
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.No, I do not believe any of this to be true, so it is not particularly insulting.
++”19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. F9 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God
Accusations that are without specific charges, without evidence and without merit. Hardly just, don’t you think? Our secular western societies have more transparent and fairer systems of justice than the celestial dictator uses.
++”Romans 5:6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time F16 Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. 8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
Yes, this is not only insulting but patronising. I do not wish to be included amongst those who have been “saved” by the application of judicial execution to anyone. I am ungodly for many reasons, one of them being that I don’t believe that killing improves anyone’s situation. The 2,000,000+ killings in the OT did not prevent the need for a “saviour”, did they? God has an unfortunate management style, to put it mildly.
++”John 15:12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. 13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
This is biblical spin doctoring. Jesus was supposedly despatched by use of the death penalty, he did not go willingly. (“Why hast thou forsaken me?”)
++”I did not say that the bible was innerant. There are many man made errors in transcribing it. I said that it is the Word of God. The concept is the same from Genesis to Revelation.
So how do you decide which bits were transcribed correctly? With enough errors, the whole thing could be no better than historical fiction. How many people do you think wrote the Torah?
++”God is the source of all life, and I don't believe that you can explain this away through science. You may speak of evolution. Something evolving from something, but as to the origin of life, you can try to explain it through science, but I do not believe that you can.
Science is not about “explaining things away”, it is about making models that give the most powerful and usefully predictive explanations, which is what it does in the case of origins. I’m not sure you know what you believe on origins of life. I hope you will have the honesty to know the theory of evolution well enough not to misrepresent it to others.
Stuart
Hi Stu:This is the last response I will make to your posts. We will be going round and round covering the same thing only maybe stated a little differently.
I know what I believe and why I believe what I do, and no, my personal relationship with God leave no room to speculate that He is not a reality.
Some day whether near or far you also will know this reality.
It has been nice talking to you.
God Bless
Hi 942767
I hope you don't find it insulting that I suggest you might have some ideas to get straight in your own mind before you are in a position to be useful to a non-believer who is curious about what your church might have to offer.
Good luck.
Stuart
2 Kings 2:23 And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
2:24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
It’s bad enough that god sets men to kill men. Here the psychopathic deity uses animals to kill children.
Stuart
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
