My apologizes, but still, my interest with the Bible is not a religious kind, so most of the Bible interpretations I've read have been from secular scholars i.e. post Tubingen School.
But what about your own? Or do you just read what others have to say about it and take it at face value? I just want to know, not trying to start a heated argument.
Going back to the "3 John's", I have this, the writing style of the Gospel, the three letters and the book of Revelations is the same. In the Gospel he writes;"This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down"(referring to himself).
In John I he starts off with;"That which was from the beginning which we have heard, which we have seen with our own eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched-this we proclaim concerning the word of life". Then he goes on some more in I John 1:2-4.
In II John he writes to one of the Churches. III John is to an elder of a Church.
In Revelation he writes 1:2-"who testifies to everything he saw-that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus."
I'm still not seeing it as written by three separate people by any means.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Recruiting for East Realm Also recruiting for Sc2 on both EU and NA servers
Thats why nobody should ever formulate an opinion based off of one book. We all need to have a well rounded opinion influenced by others but not solely reflective of one view.
Hey hey hey, I have read other books too. And the authors of those books even stated that they believe Dawkins isn't always right, and that he's a little too ferocious at times. But Dawkins just explains things so well.
I believe you two are too focused on the Bible. I really want people to look at the cores of the religion, not if the Bible is completely fact or not. (Edit: Maybe just focus less on if the Bible contradicts itself)
Here is one great example which should prove that evolution exists which would completely disagree with the Bible in a whole.
The DNA of a gorilla is only different by one (Yes singular) nucleotide. This is such an incredibly small difference. Why else would the DNA of two similar animals be nearly the exact same other than the fact of evolution.
And if one can agree that evolution does in fact exist then you are also forced to believe that "God" did not create man, and that nature did.
Therefore, one can infer that the Bible does in fact contain at least some in-factual information. To come back to your guys' debate.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dream as if you'll live forever, and live as if you'll die today. "James Dean"
Debate guys. This is way too funny. Couldn't watch it to the end though because it also happens to be...hmm....oh well whatever.
[spoil][/spoil]
At least Hell is gonna have some sexy women. Good to know. Won't be too lonely.
Edit- Screw the vid. It's way too ridiculous anyway.
I have a question- does the bible mention anything about homosexuality?
I just watched a bbc documentary...about how homosexuality was inborn rather than a choice...something I always suspected all along.
Well what about it? Does the bible mention anything on the subject or any religion for that matter?
Of course I've formed my own opinion, too. However, I just don't speak Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic, the languages in which the Old and New Testaments are originally written in, so I have to read up on people who do.
I've approached it the way I do with any subject, I read up on it and read a number of different, opposing views, both secular heretics and religious scholars. And if necessary, correct my own opinion if I'm convinced that I'm wrong.
It's good to know I'm discussing this with someone who has come to their own conclusion and not just taken everything they read about something and keep it as their own beliefs. To me, it's a sign of not being able to think for one self.
I view multiple books or even commentaries on a subject to be one person's opinion, and there are a lot of opinions on the same subjects.
However, the hypothesis I myself find plausible is that they aren't all written by the same John, but are based on John's own texts that have not survived to this date. It just adds more credibility to the texts if they're written by the same John.
However, this is just down to how one sees it all. If Bible is not to be questioned, then you are indeed correct with your view, and I can't argue against it. It just boils down to whether you see Bible as a book, or a message from God. God makes no errors, men do.
I agree that men make mistakes. Be it in translation or other. And I cannot argue that you have come to your own conclusions and I mine and we both feel differently about it being the same/different writers. But, the credibility must be there in some way if all four have been canonized. Correct? So, would that then make the ones who canonized it wrong or right?
I'd like to present these three questions, which were the original ones that I asked myself at the age of fifteen, and because I couldn't find a plausible answer to any of them, I started to consider non-religious views and other religions. If anyone has some well thought answers, I'd love to hear them. I'm not asking these to change anyone's view, I merely wish to know how one can answer them.
1) If God created the universe, who created God?
An answer I hear the most is that God just has always been, without a beginning. But why the universe couldn't just be, without a beginning? Big Bang is not necessarily a beginning, we simply can't observe anything that was before it. I simply do not find the alternative that God just has always been any more plausible than the alternative that the universe has always just been.
2) If God existed, which God exists?
There is a large number of different religions, having read most of their Holy scriptures, I simply can not say which is more credible than another. Most of the time it just depends on one's upbringing. There's a significant statistical correlation that makes children adopt their parent's religious views. This just makes me ask the question: "if God existed, wouldn't the religion that is true get the most converts?"
3) If Jesus was the son of God, why did He not teach us to wash our hands?
If humanity washed their hands, they would live longer and healthier lives. Truly that would've been the biggest miracle of them all, to tell about germs earlier than any man could've thought of them. That kind of certain anachronism would have without a doubt proven that God is, and resulted in believers to live longer, healthier lives. Now all the Bible tells to us, is information humanity possessed before its writing.
For example "The Golden Rule" is a philosophy that can credibly be traced back into ancient India, China and Judea, long before the famed rule was given. Even the widely known "Hammurabi's law" is an alternative way of saying the Golden Rule. And Hammurabi died around 1750 BCE.
I'll try and answer these the best that I can in order.
1) No one created God. When Moses asked "who should I say has sent me?", God's response was "I am who I am." Exodus 3:13-15. "I am" is self existence. No beginning, no end. For anyone to use this phrase is to say that they weren't created by anything or anyone and they will never die. Numbers have no beginning or end. Same as God has neither. Which leads me to the next question.....
2) I refer to Deuteronomy 32:39-Here God states that there is no other God. Yes the Bible talks about Baal worship and Ashira poles to one god or another. But they were man made. A god carved out of stone or wood is man made. There are formed into an image in which man sees them as being. I refer to Exodus 20:3-4. This was in the Ten Commandments. Not to do make images of gods out of anything. Because then they would be worshiping the creation rather than the creator. If this is true about the Christian God, that He is just man made, where are the figures or statues of Him? Why has no one ever made any? Ever?
3) Kind of silly in a way. Jewish tradition was to wash your feet before you ate a meal. They walked around in sandles all day, it was dusty and in the summer it was hot. So their feet were dirty. Also, the sanitary conditions at the time, no big concern. We are more germaphobic now than they were when I was a kid. We kill off more helpful bacteria than we know and we wonder why people are getting sicker. That is were I stand on that.
Quote from "Nekrodrac" »
I have a question- does the bible mention anything about homosexuality?
I just watched a bbc documentary...about how homosexuality was inborn rather than a choice...something I always suspected all along.
Well what about it? Does the bible mention anything on the subject or any religion for that matter?
Google Romans 1:21-32.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Recruiting for East Realm Also recruiting for Sc2 on both EU and NA servers
"Likewise also the men, leaving the natural function of the woman, burned in their lust toward one another, men doing what is inappropriate with men, and receiving in themselves the due penalty of their error."
"who, knowing the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but also approve of those who practice them."
I wonder what chunk of the bible this was written in...
I am not going to read this thread. It will make me angry and ruin my evening. I will, however, leave you with these passing tidbits:
Incest is a sin. Says so in Leviticus. Many many times. Adam and Eve were the first two humans..right? Their kids had kids. Then those kids had kids. So on and so forth. Everyone you've ever slept with is somehow related to you. According to the Bible we're all going to hell for incest.
Most religious folk I know (not all, mind you) believe in creation and spurn evolution. Back to Adam and Eve - if they were really the first humans that would mean they were Neanderthals, and coexisted with the dinosaurs - unless you're going to tell me fossils were planted by Satan to trick us into sin like my friends mother tells me? "Dinosaurs didn't exist," she says. "Their 'bones' were planted here to lead you from the path by Satan!" What are the chances of two people, tossed out of the Garden of Eden into the wilderness with no food and no clothes, surviving? What hunting skills did God implant into Adam's mind? Did God teach Eve to cook over a fire (which probably hadn't been discovered yet?) Also, they did speak with God, right? What language? The Bible was written in Hebrew first, right? So they spoke a language that hadn't been invented (for lack of a better word) for hundreds (thousands?) of years, then promptly forgot it when leaving the Garden.
Don't get me started on that dude who lived in the fish for three days. And the talking mule.
Googled and read something about people deserving to die and stuff...
Man, the guy who wrote it at the time must have been really furious.
Is it possible that he really wanted to get it on with a woman...who happened to be a lesbian?
He was so angry that he wrote his feelings in the bible.
The only sensible explanation I can find.
So is Christianity a religion only for heterosexuals or at least anybody pretending to be a heterosexual?
Oh am a heterosexual too(just to avoid confusion.lol) but supposing science is able to prove sexual orientation is genetically determined, how would people explain that part of the bible?
God created 'defective' creatures and punish them afterward? Makes no sense.
Of course this point relies on the assumption that a link is found between genes and sexual preference.
Let's assume that there is no such link. According to the bible gay people must be an abomination of some sort- which is to say the least pretty much pathetic.
I think it's time the bible is rewritten. I doubt it will change anything though. Most religions have become antiquated and beyond saving.
Punishment of humans by the creator, in my opinion, goes against common sense anyway. The creator is fully responsible for anything his creations do. A creator who doesn't understand that and punishes his own creations is malignant and sadistic. I hope that's really not the kind of creator we're dealing with but it's possible. It's surely not anyone worth worshiping.
The way I see it, the creator was met and interpreted by different people of the world in various ways, and they wrote what he said with their own bias, possibly in an attempt to manipulate/control the population, for better or for worse. Look, for instance, at the gender bias in the book, it's historical more than anything. This nullifies the Bible (or any other scripture) as a source of anything absolute. The Bible is not god. It's, after all, just a book. Perhaps written with the help of something greater than humans but it didn't take.
I believe in creation but... not of just two people. Lol.
Googled and read something about people deserving to die and stuff...
In order to get the full context of Romans, you should read the whole thing. It was a letter to Roman Christians that Paul wrote.
Man, the guy who wrote it at the time must have been really furious.
He had every right to be. They were adding in temple prostitution along with the worship. It was pretty common. He was also upset at the Jewish religious leaders who were telling Gentiles(non-Jews) that they needed to be circumcised first in accordance with Jewish Law to be Christians.
Is it possible that he really wanted to get it on with a woman...who happened to be a lesbian?
He was so angry that he wrote his feelings in the bible.
The only sensible explanation I can find.
Actually, Paul chose a life of celibacy. He explains that in a letter he wrote to a different Church.
So is Christianity a religion only for heterosexuals or at least anybody pretending to be a heterosexual?
How can a person claim to be redeemed of sin if they are still living a life of sexual immorality, which the Bible calls sin?
Oh am a heterosexual too(just to avoid confusion.lol) but supposing science is able to prove sexual orientation is genetically determined, how would people explain that part of the bible?
God created 'defective' creatures and punish them afterward? Makes no sense.
Of course this point relies on the assumption that a link is found between genes and sexual preference.
Let's assume that there is no such link. According to the bible gay people must be an abomination of some sort- which is to say the least pretty much pathetic.
This falls under free will. Not a will that was created in us. I'll get into that a bit down below.
I think it's time the bible is rewritten. I doubt it will change anything though. Most religions have become antiquated and beyond saving.
But if it is rewritten, would it then cease to be the Word of God? Yes.
Quote from "Equinox" »
Punishment of humans by the creator, in my opinion, goes against common sense anyway. The creator is fully responsible for anything his creations do. A creator who doesn't understand that and punishes his own creations is malignant and sadistic. I hope that's really not the kind of creator we're dealing with but it's possible. It's surely not anyone worth worshiping.
The creator is not responsible for the creation. I'll say it again, free will. We have the free will to choose to do whatever it is that we wish. Would some of it go against the will of a creator? Absolutely. So, a person who thumbs his/her nose at a creator because it is their choice, doesn't deserve some sort of punishment from that creator? I'm very deserving of a punishment for some of the things I've done in my life. You cannot force a person to love you. God as a creator cannot and will not force anyone, nor stop them, from doing what they really want to do. Free will.
The way I see it, the creator was met and interpreted by different people of the world in various ways, and they wrote what he said with their own bias, possibly in an attempt to manipulate/control the population, for better or for worse. Look, for instance, at the gender bias in the book, it's historical more than anything. This nullifies the Bible (or any other scripture) as a source of anything absolute.
If you look at the time when it was written, to write about women was rare, if at all because that was they way it was. There are quite a few women written about, even a few books named after women, and there are a few women who had key roles in the New Testament. If they didn't they wouldn't have been mentioned and that would add to disprove the Bible as the Word of God.
The Bible is not god. It's, after all, just a book. Perhaps written with the help of something greater than humans but it didn't take.
I agree that the Bible is not God. And as far as it not taking, then why are there over25,000 original ancient New Testament manuscripts archived with at least 5,600 of which are copies and fragments in the original Greek? And there is only 40-60 years between the original autographs to the earliest existing fragment. Julius Caesar's Gallic Wars, there are only 10 original manuscripts and the earliest one is dated 1,000 years after the autograph. Yet Christianity flourishes and the Bible is translated into more languages than most other books. So much for it not taking.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Recruiting for East Realm Also recruiting for Sc2 on both EU and NA servers
I think my biggest problem I have when trying to form a belief is that, there is not enough evidence that one god is more right than another god. I can't find anything that says I should be swayed to be a Christian over say, a Buddhist.The only thing that sticks out in my mind is how well preserved the bible and it's beliefs are all through history and how many of the events in the bible can be described as historically accurate or at least having some real historic accountability.
A big example of the dilemma I have can be summed up into the flood legends. As many others I find it absolutely amazing how many cultures have this idea of the great flood. So, just looking at the flood stories alone what would lead me to believe the tale of Noah over the Sumerian tale which is in fact older, or even the tale of Gilgamesh. Either way, there is no question in my mind that there was indeed a flood, but why should I believe one over another?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
One or the other what? Religion? Or flood story that is even in the Koran which was written about 1,000 years after Jesus? There is even a flood account by the Babylonians, the Assyrians and a few other cultures, not just Jewish or Christian.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Recruiting for East Realm Also recruiting for Sc2 on both EU and NA servers
Exactly. So if I approach the matter of the accuracy of the stories rather than entire books and beliefs, what is there to tell me one story is fact and the others are false or manipulated? Basically I'm using the deluge tales to ask what makes one religion more correct than another? Or why I should believe one over the other.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
In order to get the full context of Romans, you should read the whole thing. It was a letter to Roman Christians that Paul wrote.
I got that someone was really mad and wrote some really nasty stuff about homosexuals and that this argument is being consistently used by Christians against homosexuals if you bother to look it up. That's all I need to know.
Quote from "Nektu" »
The creator is not responsible for the creation.
Assuming the creator is not a total dumbass, he'd be able to accurately predict what his creations would do and those probabilities. If very simple human psychologists can do it, the creator certainly can. Thus, he knows what will happen, and the only way it could possible happen is if he created us.
If you program a robot with artificial intelligence and it goes on a rampage it's all your fault. Not the robot's fault. THAT is preposterous.
Quote from "Nektu" »
I'll say it again, free will. We have the free will to choose to do whatever it is that we wish.
I do not believe in free will. This is a discussion for another time, but you really need to realize that not everyone agrees with your perception of reality.
Quote from "Nektu" »
Would some of it go against the will of a creator? Absolutely. So, a person who thumbs his/her nose at a creator because it is their choice, doesn't deserve some sort of punishment from that creator?
I don't know, should the program be punished if the programmer has gotten a bug somewhere? Should the robot be tortured because he ended up killing people because when you programmed the given robot you put in a trigger that's likely to lead to the killing of people?
Quote from "Nektu" »
I'm very deserving of a punishment for some of the things I've done in my life.
And how did you come to that conclusion?
Quote from "Nektu" »
You cannot force a person to love you.
You don't have to, it's called unconditional love.
Quote from "Nektu" »
God as a creator cannot and will not force anyone, nor stop them, from doing what they really want to do. Free will.
I don't know what god can or cannot do. I do not know the extent of his power. I will not ask him to punish himself for what we do. I'll merely ask him not to punish us for something he is the cause of.
Quote from "Nektu" »
If you look at the time when it was written, to write about women was rare, if at all because that was they way it was.
Which to the all knowing creator should be rather irrelevant. In fact, the bible, if it was really written by the creator to any decent degree, would be extremely different from anything humans have in their heads, because it would be written with all the knowledge humans lack to make proper analysis.
And I'm not talking about specific names. I'm takling about the constant "men, men, men". Men do this, men do that, and when women are mentioned it's usually something about how they're dirty during their periods or talk to snakes whatever.
Quote from "Nektu" »
And as far as it not taking, then why are there over25,000 original ancient New Testament manuscripts archived with at least 5,600 of which are copies and fragments in the original Greek? And there is only 40-60 years between the original autographs to the earliest existing fragment. Julius Caesar's Gallic Wars, there are only 10 original manuscripts and the earliest one is dated 1,000 years after the autograph.
This has nothing to do with what I said and I am not sure what you're trying to say.
Quote from "Nektu" »
Yet Christianity flourishes and the Bible is translated into more languages than most other books. So much for it not taking.
Christianity has nothing to do with god. It did not take.
Yes, you heard me.
There is so much missing from the Sumerian flood story, before the flood and after it. You don't know if he had anyone with him or not. So how was he to repopulate the Earth? There were animals, and he gave sacrifices and was granted eternal life. Rain for 7 days and nights doesn't seem like enough to cover the whole Earth. Multiple gods wanting to destroy the Earth because it is "lost". If it was so lost why have someone repopulate the Earth?
Noah had his family, and after the waters receded, lived for sometime. It rained for 40 days and nights. A bit more believable in my opinion. God saw the wickedness in man and the unrepentiveness. Not that it was a lost cause. How many chances did they get before it was flooded? Since Adam and Eve I would suppose.
Babylonian, the main person was seeking out immortality. Strange way to have it granted and why are no others getting it?
Muslim, the only difference is that Noah's son and his wife don't go into the Ark.
Basically, the main theme of there being a flood, even from China's "account", had to have happened if so many wrote about it. I believe the Jewish account, because God went to Noah, it wasn't Noah going to God. Noah wasn't granted anything special for doing this, except to just live. And the most amazing thing that makes it more believable, Noah was a drunk! Why would God use a drunk? Kind of humbling don't you think?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Recruiting for East Realm Also recruiting for Sc2 on both EU and NA servers
Why do you say Noah was a drunk? The only thing that I can remember from the bible about that is the fact that his daughters had to get him plastered before sleeping with him since there was nobody else to reproduce with for the purpose of re-population.
Equinox, about the whole creator and creation side, a point in your favor is that according to the bible man was created in the image of God. Therefore, there would be no reason to not be able to predict the actions of the human. Not to mention that he is Omnipotent. Does that not make God accountable?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
I got that someone was really mad and wrote some really nasty stuff about homosexuals and that this argument is being consistently used by Christians against homosexuals if you bother to look it up. That's all I need to know.
Yeah, he was pretty upset, but not just at the homosexual thing. That is why I said read the whole thing. I've read what Christians have to say about homosexuality. And that type of judgmental stance, instead of "love your neighbor as yourself" gives Christians a bad name.
Assuming the creator is not a total dumbass, he'd be able to accurately predict what his creations would do and those probabilities. If very simple human psychologists can do it, the creator certainly can. Thus, he knows what will happen, and the only way it could possible happen is if he created us.
If you program a robot with artificial intelligence and it goes on a rampage it's all your fault. Not the robot's fault. THAT is preposterous.
Yes. I believe God can predict and has predicted everything before hand. If I created a robot and it did that it would be my fault. But you are comparing the fallible; created, with the infallible; creator. So of course the fallible wouldn't be perfect in "creating" something.
I do not believe in free will. This is a discussion for another time, but you really need to realize that not everyone agrees with your perception of reality.
Free will and reality are two completely different things.
I don't know, should the program be punished if the programmer has gotten a bug somewhere? Should the robot be tortured because he ended up killing people because when you programmed the given robot you put in a trigger that's likely to lead to the killing of people?
Again, comparing the fallible with the infallible.
And how did you come to that conclusion?
How is this any of your business?
You don't have to, it's called unconditional love.
God has unconditional love for His creation, but does His creation have unconditional love for Him? Are we forced to, or can we chose to?
I don't know what god can or cannot do. I do not know the extent of his power. I will not ask him to punish himself for what we do. I'll merely ask him not to punish us for something he is the cause of.
So, if we push ourselves away from God, is he the cause of that? Or was that our choice to distance ourselves from Him? If we are asked to live a certain way by God and do not, wouldn't that be our fault and in turn we would be the cause of that?
Which to the all knowing creator should be rather irrelevant. In fact, the bible, if it was really written by the creator to any decent degree, would be extremely different from anything humans have in their heads, because it would be written with all the knowledge humans lack to make proper analysis.
So you don't think that God could hand down what He wanted passed along and oversee it being written down?
And I'm not talking about specific names. I'm takling about the constant "men, men, men". Men do this, men do that, and when women are mentioned it's usually something about how they're dirty during their periods or talk to snakes whatever.
And the woman who hid the Jewish spies, the ones that are mentioned in the lineage of Jesus, the whore who wept on Jesus' feet and washed them with her hair and whom Jesus said that her sins were forgiven, and the ones that first saw the empty tomb.
This has nothing to do with what I said and I am not sure what you're trying to say.
I was making a point of the validity of the Bible.
Christianity has nothing to do with god. It did not take.
Yes, you heard me.
the whole of Christianity is centered on God and His Son Jesus. So it has everything to do with God. And if it didn't take why has it been around for so long? Why are there so many different denominations of Christianity. Why is it one of the largest faiths, along with Muslim. If it didn't take, why do people feel the need to discuss it and try to disprove it yet they will not and do not with any other faith? Ever?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Recruiting for East Realm Also recruiting for Sc2 on both EU and NA servers
So, if we push ourselves away from God, is he the cause of that? Or was that our choice to distance ourselves from Him? If we are asked to live a certain way by God and do not, wouldn't that be our fault and in turn we would be the cause of that?
To be fair to everyone, how can someone push themselves away from somebody they don't believe in? It's not like God is satisfying our senses. Maybe we have a 6th sense that tells us god is real, that could be why so many believe. However it is clear that some are not in touch with such a sense if it exists.
Now if I just confused you, I'll elaborate on my ideas: During my philosophy courses through the past few years every time we talk about the philosophy of the physical world and how we perceive things it leads me to a thought about some theological stuff. What if we had a sense or senses pertaining to the non physical world. It doesn't seem far fetched after reading all that stuff from Locke and Descarte but I don't have the time to explain all that lol so I'll hope you understand. We take for granted how mysterious it is that we are able to perceive the physical world if you take science out of the equation that explains it. I mean, our ears pick up on these bizarre things called radio waves that are invisible. The same way our eyes read these light waves, this completely intangible thing to what we know naturally. What I mean by that is, without science, if you told someone they are not seeing a desk or a tree but rather the light reflecting off of it in the form of these things called light waves you would call them crazy. Now what if we had another sense that we have not been able to study with science? What if that sense was something that, like the other senses perceived something we are completely unable to see. What if that sense was why we have so many religions? Theres a reason I thought of this. I can't tell you how many times people have quoted Einstein from when he said that the idea of a god or gods was a natural psychological occurrence to try to explain life. Honestly I just feel this is a cop out so I pondered upon a better idea.
(that whole thing was just to make sure you kept on track with my thought process, hopefully it worked)
So, that idea in the forefront, I present to you my next thought. The only way God should not be held accountable for our actions would be if we all naturally had such a sense of his existence.
(Both scenarios under the idea that a god exists) Scenario 1, with the sense I described: If we had that sense, then nobody would have an excuse to believe that their actions were not going to reap divine and eternal consequences. The lack of belief could be given to being mislead by Lucifer. Scenario 2, without the sense: Now there are only 5 senses. We use these to discover and identify the world and everything else around us. Some people read holy texts and choose to believe in god. Those people are saved. Other people choose to follow what their senses give them. Senses only lead to one conclusion: the absence of God. Those people are sent to an eternal grave ( I don't believe in a burning Hell, it says right in the bible that once we die we are conscious of nothing).
Of course there is the case that some will try to make that God is all around us and we can see it through examining the bible and then seeing the events of the world unfold and the wondrous works from his holiness. Well, obviously some people don't see it that way and are referring to primary evidence that appeals to the senses directly. If this is the case, an Omnipotent God would know our logical thought process and know we could come to such conclusions. Who is responsible in that situation? The human?
Lets say somebody presents the argument in retort to that saying "Well, Satan deceived those people and that is why it's not the fault of God, after all, this whole bout between God and Satan is to see who Satan can turn against God." Well, if Satan deceived us with his ancient and super natural understanding of the universe how can we be held accountable with merely our physical understanding? Why would it be the fault of the human for not perceiving God because he was deceived by an infinitely smarter being? Unless of course there is a sixth sense. That is the only reasoning I can come up with as to why God would not be accountable.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I want to say something but I'll keep it to myself I guess and leave this useless post behind to make you aware that there WAS something... "
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Yes. I believe God can predict and has predicted everything before hand. If I created a robot and it did that it would be my fault. But you are comparing the fallible; created, with the infallible; creator. So of course the fallible wouldn't be perfect in "creating" something.
I do not believe in the whole "fallible/infallible" thing because I believe everyone and everything is fallible and the word infallible exists to describe something we cannot achieve... but, if I were to take your stance:
- assume god is infallible. Well, I have way too many issues with this. For one, man was created in his image, apparently. Man is very fallible. So that means god is also. Secondly, if god is infallible, why was he unable to create a perfect human being? Why do humans have all this baggage? Why do humans feel anger and hate and lust, things that have been labeled as bad by Christians?
If god is infallible, than humans are exactly as he intended them to be. Being his creations, they'd also be infallible. They'd be perfect the way they are, in all their good, in all their evil, because an infallible creator can create precisely what he wants, and an infallible creator will have absolute understanding of what he has done, of what humans do, why they do it, etc.
Quote from "Nektu" »
Free will and reality are two completely different things.
Free will is a part of reality. Just as everything else.
Quote from "Nektu" »
Again, comparing the fallible with the infallible.
No, comparing a creator to a creator. It's the only comparison I can possibly make. I can't compare the infallible to something else because that's illogical. If I can't compare it, I can't discuss it, and neither can you.
Quote from "Nektu" »
How is this any of your business?
If you bring something in a discussion, it will be scrutinized and clarification may be requested. If you do not wish to clarify what you've said, do not bring it into the discussion.
Quote from "Nektu" »
God has unconditional love for His creation, but does His creation have unconditional love for Him? Are we forced to, or can we chose to?
I don't know what you were talking about but I was talking about god's attitude towards people.
Quote from "Nektu" »
So, if we push ourselves away from God, is he the cause of that? Or was that our choice to distance ourselves from Him? If we are asked to live a certain way by God and do not, wouldn't that be our fault and in turn we would be the cause of that?
God is the cause of humans. Thus, everything a human ever does has been caused by god. God should have predicted, as all other things, that human nature would turn away from him in certain forums. So basically god decided that "x amount of humans will turn away from me and I'll punish those". Makes no sense. No, it's not our fault. Our ability to turn from the creator is something he put into us, somehow. It's called wanting freedom.
Quote from "Nektu" »
So you don't think that God could hand down what He wanted passed along and oversee it being written down?
I don't think we know what god wanted passed along or written down.
Quote from "Nektu" »
And the woman who hid the Jewish spies, the ones that are mentioned in the lineage of Jesus, the whore who wept on Jesus' feet and washed them with her hair and whom Jesus said that her sins were forgiven, and the ones that first saw the empty tomb.
As I've stated in that quote I was not talking about specific women. I was talking about how the words used had a patriarchal hint about them.
Quote from "Nektu" »
The whole of Christianity is centered on God and His Son Jesus. So it has everything to do with God.
God said love and understanding. Christianity said hate and judgement. All I see from religious people is how they judge everyone, think everyone should be punished, everyone deserves this, deserves that, gays should die, etc. The amount of Christians that are TRUE Christians, the ones that love their fellow human, is so low that it's not even significant. I say yet again: it didn't take!
Quote from "Nektu" »
And if it didn't take why has it been around for so long?
Because...
"A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider to be God-fearing and pious." - Aristotle
"Religion is the opium of the masses." - Karl Marx
Quote from "Nektu" »
If it didn't take, why do people feel the need to discuss it and try to disprove it yet they will not and do not with any other faith? Ever?
I disproved all sorts of faiths don't generalize please. If I lived in the Middle East I'd never shut up about Islam. There's a lot more Christians here so that's what I oppose.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Recruiting for East Realm
Also recruiting for Sc2 on both EU and NA servers
Bod home Page
But what about your own? Or do you just read what others have to say about it and take it at face value? I just want to know, not trying to start a heated argument.
Going back to the "3 John's", I have this, the writing style of the Gospel, the three letters and the book of Revelations is the same. In the Gospel he writes;"This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down"(referring to himself).
In John I he starts off with;"That which was from the beginning which we have heard, which we have seen with our own eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched-this we proclaim concerning the word of life". Then he goes on some more in I John 1:2-4.
In II John he writes to one of the Churches. III John is to an elder of a Church.
In Revelation he writes 1:2-"who testifies to everything he saw-that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus."
I'm still not seeing it as written by three separate people by any means.
Recruiting for East Realm
Also recruiting for Sc2 on both EU and NA servers
Bod home Page
Hey hey hey, I have read other books too. And the authors of those books even stated that they believe Dawkins isn't always right, and that he's a little too ferocious at times. But Dawkins just explains things so well.
Already corrected myself by saying Christianity.
Great debate Nektu and Don.
I believe you two are too focused on the Bible. I really want people to look at the cores of the religion, not if the Bible is completely fact or not. (Edit: Maybe just focus less on if the Bible contradicts itself)
Here is one great example which should prove that evolution exists which would completely disagree with the Bible in a whole.
The DNA of a gorilla is only different by one (Yes singular) nucleotide. This is such an incredibly small difference. Why else would the DNA of two similar animals be nearly the exact same other than the fact of evolution.
And if one can agree that evolution does in fact exist then you are also forced to believe that "God" did not create man, and that nature did.
Therefore, one can infer that the Bible does in fact contain at least some in-factual information. To come back to your guys' debate.
Debate guys. This is way too funny. Couldn't watch it to the end though because it also happens to be...hmm....oh well whatever.
[spoil][/spoil]
At least Hell is gonna have some sexy women. Good to know. Won't be too lonely.
Edit- Screw the vid. It's way too ridiculous anyway.
I have a question- does the bible mention anything about homosexuality?
I just watched a bbc documentary...about how homosexuality was inborn rather than a choice...something I always suspected all along.
Well what about it? Does the bible mention anything on the subject or any religion for that matter?
It's good to know I'm discussing this with someone who has come to their own conclusion and not just taken everything they read about something and keep it as their own beliefs. To me, it's a sign of not being able to think for one self.
I view multiple books or even commentaries on a subject to be one person's opinion, and there are a lot of opinions on the same subjects.
I agree that men make mistakes. Be it in translation or other. And I cannot argue that you have come to your own conclusions and I mine and we both feel differently about it being the same/different writers. But, the credibility must be there in some way if all four have been canonized. Correct? So, would that then make the ones who canonized it wrong or right?
I'll try and answer these the best that I can in order.
1) No one created God. When Moses asked "who should I say has sent me?", God's response was "I am who I am." Exodus 3:13-15. "I am" is self existence. No beginning, no end. For anyone to use this phrase is to say that they weren't created by anything or anyone and they will never die. Numbers have no beginning or end. Same as God has neither. Which leads me to the next question.....
2) I refer to Deuteronomy 32:39-Here God states that there is no other God. Yes the Bible talks about Baal worship and Ashira poles to one god or another. But they were man made. A god carved out of stone or wood is man made. There are formed into an image in which man sees them as being. I refer to Exodus 20:3-4. This was in the Ten Commandments. Not to do make images of gods out of anything. Because then they would be worshiping the creation rather than the creator. If this is true about the Christian God, that He is just man made, where are the figures or statues of Him? Why has no one ever made any? Ever?
3) Kind of silly in a way. Jewish tradition was to wash your feet before you ate a meal. They walked around in sandles all day, it was dusty and in the summer it was hot. So their feet were dirty. Also, the sanitary conditions at the time, no big concern. We are more germaphobic now than they were when I was a kid. We kill off more helpful bacteria than we know and we wonder why people are getting sicker. That is were I stand on that.
Google Romans 1:21-32.
Recruiting for East Realm
Also recruiting for Sc2 on both EU and NA servers
Bod home Page
"Likewise also the men, leaving the natural function of the woman, burned in their lust toward one another, men doing what is inappropriate with men, and receiving in themselves the due penalty of their error."
"who, knowing the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but also approve of those who practice them."
I wonder what chunk of the bible this was written in...
Incest is a sin. Says so in Leviticus. Many many times. Adam and Eve were the first two humans..right? Their kids had kids. Then those kids had kids. So on and so forth. Everyone you've ever slept with is somehow related to you. According to the Bible we're all going to hell for incest.
Most religious folk I know (not all, mind you) believe in creation and spurn evolution. Back to Adam and Eve - if they were really the first humans that would mean they were Neanderthals, and coexisted with the dinosaurs - unless you're going to tell me fossils were planted by Satan to trick us into sin like my friends mother tells me? "Dinosaurs didn't exist," she says. "Their 'bones' were planted here to lead you from the path by Satan!" What are the chances of two people, tossed out of the Garden of Eden into the wilderness with no food and no clothes, surviving? What hunting skills did God implant into Adam's mind? Did God teach Eve to cook over a fire (which probably hadn't been discovered yet?) Also, they did speak with God, right? What language? The Bible was written in Hebrew first, right? So they spoke a language that hadn't been invented (for lack of a better word) for hundreds (thousands?) of years, then promptly forgot it when leaving the Garden.
Don't get me started on that dude who lived in the fish for three days. And the talking mule.
Googled and read something about people deserving to die and stuff...
Man, the guy who wrote it at the time must have been really furious.
Is it possible that he really wanted to get it on with a woman...who happened to be a lesbian?
He was so angry that he wrote his feelings in the bible.
The only sensible explanation I can find.
So is Christianity a religion only for heterosexuals or at least anybody pretending to be a heterosexual?
Oh am a heterosexual too(just to avoid confusion.lol) but supposing science is able to prove sexual orientation is genetically determined, how would people explain that part of the bible?
God created 'defective' creatures and punish them afterward? Makes no sense.
Of course this point relies on the assumption that a link is found between genes and sexual preference.
Let's assume that there is no such link. According to the bible gay people must be an abomination of some sort- which is to say the least pretty much pathetic.
I think it's time the bible is rewritten. I doubt it will change anything though. Most religions have become antiquated and beyond saving.
The way I see it, the creator was met and interpreted by different people of the world in various ways, and they wrote what he said with their own bias, possibly in an attempt to manipulate/control the population, for better or for worse. Look, for instance, at the gender bias in the book, it's historical more than anything. This nullifies the Bible (or any other scripture) as a source of anything absolute. The Bible is not god. It's, after all, just a book. Perhaps written with the help of something greater than humans but it didn't take.
I believe in creation but... not of just two people. Lol.
In order to get the full context of Romans, you should read the whole thing. It was a letter to Roman Christians that Paul wrote.
He had every right to be. They were adding in temple prostitution along with the worship. It was pretty common. He was also upset at the Jewish religious leaders who were telling Gentiles(non-Jews) that they needed to be circumcised first in accordance with Jewish Law to be Christians.
Actually, Paul chose a life of celibacy. He explains that in a letter he wrote to a different Church.
How can a person claim to be redeemed of sin if they are still living a life of sexual immorality, which the Bible calls sin?
This falls under free will. Not a will that was created in us. I'll get into that a bit down below.
But if it is rewritten, would it then cease to be the Word of God? Yes.
The creator is not responsible for the creation. I'll say it again, free will. We have the free will to choose to do whatever it is that we wish. Would some of it go against the will of a creator? Absolutely. So, a person who thumbs his/her nose at a creator because it is their choice, doesn't deserve some sort of punishment from that creator? I'm very deserving of a punishment for some of the things I've done in my life. You cannot force a person to love you. God as a creator cannot and will not force anyone, nor stop them, from doing what they really want to do. Free will.
If you look at the time when it was written, to write about women was rare, if at all because that was they way it was. There are quite a few women written about, even a few books named after women, and there are a few women who had key roles in the New Testament. If they didn't they wouldn't have been mentioned and that would add to disprove the Bible as the Word of God.
I agree that the Bible is not God. And as far as it not taking, then why are there over 25,000 original ancient New Testament manuscripts archived with at least 5,600 of which are copies and fragments in the original Greek? And there is only 40-60 years between the original autographs to the earliest existing fragment. Julius Caesar's Gallic Wars, there are only 10 original manuscripts and the earliest one is dated 1,000 years after the autograph. Yet Christianity flourishes and the Bible is translated into more languages than most other books. So much for it not taking.
Recruiting for East Realm
Also recruiting for Sc2 on both EU and NA servers
Bod home Page
A big example of the dilemma I have can be summed up into the flood legends. As many others I find it absolutely amazing how many cultures have this idea of the great flood. So, just looking at the flood stories alone what would lead me to believe the tale of Noah over the Sumerian tale which is in fact older, or even the tale of Gilgamesh. Either way, there is no question in my mind that there was indeed a flood, but why should I believe one over another?
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Recruiting for East Realm
Also recruiting for Sc2 on both EU and NA servers
Bod home Page
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Assuming the creator is not a total dumbass, he'd be able to accurately predict what his creations would do and those probabilities. If very simple human psychologists can do it, the creator certainly can. Thus, he knows what will happen, and the only way it could possible happen is if he created us.
If you program a robot with artificial intelligence and it goes on a rampage it's all your fault. Not the robot's fault. THAT is preposterous.
I do not believe in free will. This is a discussion for another time, but you really need to realize that not everyone agrees with your perception of reality.
I don't know, should the program be punished if the programmer has gotten a bug somewhere? Should the robot be tortured because he ended up killing people because when you programmed the given robot you put in a trigger that's likely to lead to the killing of people?
And how did you come to that conclusion?
You don't have to, it's called unconditional love.
I don't know what god can or cannot do. I do not know the extent of his power. I will not ask him to punish himself for what we do. I'll merely ask him not to punish us for something he is the cause of.
Which to the all knowing creator should be rather irrelevant. In fact, the bible, if it was really written by the creator to any decent degree, would be extremely different from anything humans have in their heads, because it would be written with all the knowledge humans lack to make proper analysis.
And I'm not talking about specific names. I'm takling about the constant "men, men, men". Men do this, men do that, and when women are mentioned it's usually something about how they're dirty during their periods or talk to snakes whatever.
This has nothing to do with what I said and I am not sure what you're trying to say.
Christianity has nothing to do with god. It did not take.
Yes, you heard me.
Noah had his family, and after the waters receded, lived for sometime. It rained for 40 days and nights. A bit more believable in my opinion. God saw the wickedness in man and the unrepentiveness. Not that it was a lost cause. How many chances did they get before it was flooded? Since Adam and Eve I would suppose.
Babylonian, the main person was seeking out immortality. Strange way to have it granted and why are no others getting it?
Muslim, the only difference is that Noah's son and his wife don't go into the Ark.
Basically, the main theme of there being a flood, even from China's "account", had to have happened if so many wrote about it. I believe the Jewish account, because God went to Noah, it wasn't Noah going to God. Noah wasn't granted anything special for doing this, except to just live. And the most amazing thing that makes it more believable, Noah was a drunk! Why would God use a drunk? Kind of humbling don't you think?
Recruiting for East Realm
Also recruiting for Sc2 on both EU and NA servers
Bod home Page
Equinox, about the whole creator and creation side, a point in your favor is that according to the bible man was created in the image of God. Therefore, there would be no reason to not be able to predict the actions of the human. Not to mention that he is Omnipotent. Does that not make God accountable?
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
Yeah, he was pretty upset, but not just at the homosexual thing. That is why I said read the whole thing. I've read what Christians have to say about homosexuality. And that type of judgmental stance, instead of "love your neighbor as yourself" gives Christians a bad name.
Yes. I believe God can predict and has predicted everything before hand. If I created a robot and it did that it would be my fault. But you are comparing the fallible; created, with the infallible; creator. So of course the fallible wouldn't be perfect in "creating" something.
Free will and reality are two completely different things.
Again, comparing the fallible with the infallible.
How is this any of your business?
God has unconditional love for His creation, but does His creation have unconditional love for Him? Are we forced to, or can we chose to?
So, if we push ourselves away from God, is he the cause of that? Or was that our choice to distance ourselves from Him? If we are asked to live a certain way by God and do not, wouldn't that be our fault and in turn we would be the cause of that?
So you don't think that God could hand down what He wanted passed along and oversee it being written down?
And the woman who hid the Jewish spies, the ones that are mentioned in the lineage of Jesus, the whore who wept on Jesus' feet and washed them with her hair and whom Jesus said that her sins were forgiven, and the ones that first saw the empty tomb.
I was making a point of the validity of the Bible.
the whole of Christianity is centered on God and His Son Jesus. So it has everything to do with God. And if it didn't take why has it been around for so long? Why are there so many different denominations of Christianity. Why is it one of the largest faiths, along with Muslim. If it didn't take, why do people feel the need to discuss it and try to disprove it yet they will not and do not with any other faith? Ever?
Recruiting for East Realm
Also recruiting for Sc2 on both EU and NA servers
Bod home Page
To be fair to everyone, how can someone push themselves away from somebody they don't believe in? It's not like God is satisfying our senses. Maybe we have a 6th sense that tells us god is real, that could be why so many believe. However it is clear that some are not in touch with such a sense if it exists.
Now if I just confused you, I'll elaborate on my ideas: During my philosophy courses through the past few years every time we talk about the philosophy of the physical world and how we perceive things it leads me to a thought about some theological stuff. What if we had a sense or senses pertaining to the non physical world. It doesn't seem far fetched after reading all that stuff from Locke and Descarte but I don't have the time to explain all that lol so I'll hope you understand. We take for granted how mysterious it is that we are able to perceive the physical world if you take science out of the equation that explains it. I mean, our ears pick up on these bizarre things called radio waves that are invisible. The same way our eyes read these light waves, this completely intangible thing to what we know naturally. What I mean by that is, without science, if you told someone they are not seeing a desk or a tree but rather the light reflecting off of it in the form of these things called light waves you would call them crazy. Now what if we had another sense that we have not been able to study with science? What if that sense was something that, like the other senses perceived something we are completely unable to see. What if that sense was why we have so many religions? Theres a reason I thought of this. I can't tell you how many times people have quoted Einstein from when he said that the idea of a god or gods was a natural psychological occurrence to try to explain life. Honestly I just feel this is a cop out so I pondered upon a better idea.
(that whole thing was just to make sure you kept on track with my thought process, hopefully it worked)
So, that idea in the forefront, I present to you my next thought. The only way God should not be held accountable for our actions would be if we all naturally had such a sense of his existence.
(Both scenarios under the idea that a god exists)
Scenario 1, with the sense I described: If we had that sense, then nobody would have an excuse to believe that their actions were not going to reap divine and eternal consequences. The lack of belief could be given to being mislead by Lucifer.
Scenario 2, without the sense: Now there are only 5 senses. We use these to discover and identify the world and everything else around us. Some people read holy texts and choose to believe in god. Those people are saved. Other people choose to follow what their senses give them. Senses only lead to one conclusion: the absence of God. Those people are sent to an eternal grave ( I don't believe in a burning Hell, it says right in the bible that once we die we are conscious of nothing).
Of course there is the case that some will try to make that God is all around us and we can see it through examining the bible and then seeing the events of the world unfold and the wondrous works from his holiness. Well, obviously some people don't see it that way and are referring to primary evidence that appeals to the senses directly. If this is the case, an Omnipotent God would know our logical thought process and know we could come to such conclusions. Who is responsible in that situation? The human?
Lets say somebody presents the argument in retort to that saying "Well, Satan deceived those people and that is why it's not the fault of God, after all, this whole bout between God and Satan is to see who Satan can turn against God." Well, if Satan deceived us with his ancient and super natural understanding of the universe how can we be held accountable with merely our physical understanding? Why would it be the fault of the human for not perceiving God because he was deceived by an infinitely smarter being? Unless of course there is a sixth sense. That is the only reasoning I can come up with as to why God would not be accountable.
-Equinox
"We're like the downtown of the Diablo related internet lol"
-Winged
- assume god is infallible. Well, I have way too many issues with this. For one, man was created in his image, apparently. Man is very fallible. So that means god is also. Secondly, if god is infallible, why was he unable to create a perfect human being? Why do humans have all this baggage? Why do humans feel anger and hate and lust, things that have been labeled as bad by Christians?
If god is infallible, than humans are exactly as he intended them to be. Being his creations, they'd also be infallible. They'd be perfect the way they are, in all their good, in all their evil, because an infallible creator can create precisely what he wants, and an infallible creator will have absolute understanding of what he has done, of what humans do, why they do it, etc.
Free will is a part of reality. Just as everything else.
No, comparing a creator to a creator. It's the only comparison I can possibly make. I can't compare the infallible to something else because that's illogical. If I can't compare it, I can't discuss it, and neither can you.
If you bring something in a discussion, it will be scrutinized and clarification may be requested. If you do not wish to clarify what you've said, do not bring it into the discussion.
I don't know what you were talking about but I was talking about god's attitude towards people.
God is the cause of humans. Thus, everything a human ever does has been caused by god. God should have predicted, as all other things, that human nature would turn away from him in certain forums. So basically god decided that "x amount of humans will turn away from me and I'll punish those". Makes no sense. No, it's not our fault. Our ability to turn from the creator is something he put into us, somehow. It's called wanting freedom.
I don't think we know what god wanted passed along or written down.
As I've stated in that quote I was not talking about specific women. I was talking about how the words used had a patriarchal hint about them.
God said love and understanding. Christianity said hate and judgement. All I see from religious people is how they judge everyone, think everyone should be punished, everyone deserves this, deserves that, gays should die, etc. The amount of Christians that are TRUE Christians, the ones that love their fellow human, is so low that it's not even significant. I say yet again: it didn't take!
Because...
"A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider to be God-fearing and pious." - Aristotle
"Religion is the opium of the masses." - Karl Marx
I disproved all sorts of faiths don't generalize please. If I lived in the Middle East I'd never shut up about Islam. There's a lot more Christians here so that's what I oppose.