Teflon Deity
By Doc Mike
In the wake of the tornadoes that recently ravaged the Southern US, I am once again amazed by the ability of Christians to justify and excuse their god for the evil in the world and praise him for the things that turn out positive. What's worse, they sometimes claim that their "omnipotent" god is not even responsible for the bad things!
"Thirteen were killed in Arkansas, seven in Kentucky, and five were killed in Alabama where some 500 homes were also destroyed. Tennessee was the hardest hit, with 34 killed and 230 citizens still unaccounted for in the poor, farming areas of Macon County near the Kentucky border."
Today's comic was inspired by a report on NPR, in the aftermath of the tornadoes. A woman being interviewed had survived (not in very good shape, mind you) her mobile home being destroyed around her. When the interviewer asked why she thinks she survived, she said, "God must have a plan for me." The very next question was about her husband who was killed in the storm. She replied, "Jesus took him home."
And that reminded me of a conversation I had with a christian friend right after hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans a few years ago. I asked, "How can your god kill and injure so many innocent people?" Her reply was, "You can't blame God for the weather."
Unbelievable!
Genesis 7:4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.
Deuteronomy 11:17 And [then] the LORD'S wrath be kindled against you, and he shut up the heaven, that there be no rain, and that the land yield not her fruit; and [lest] ye perish quickly from off the good land which the LORD giveth you.
Deuteronomy 28:24 The LORD shall make the rain of thy land powder and dust: from heaven shall it come down upon thee, until thou be destroyed.
1 Samuel 12:18 So Samuel called unto the LORD; and the LORD sent thunder and rain that day: and all the people greatly feared the LORD and Samuel.
Nahum 1:3 The LORD [is] slow to anger, and great in power, and will not at all acquit [the wicked]: the LORD hath his way in the whirlwind and in the storm, and the clouds [are] the dust of his feet.
Technorati Tags: humor Atheist Bible Christianity Comics disaster
In the wake of the tornadoes that recently ravaged the Southern US, I am once again amazed by the ability of Christians to justify and excuse their god for the evil in the world and praise him for the things that turn out positive. What's worse, they sometimes claim that their "omnipotent" god is not even responsible for the bad things!"Thirteen were killed in Arkansas, seven in Kentucky, and five were killed in Alabama where some 500 homes were also destroyed. Tennessee was the hardest hit, with 34 killed and 230 citizens still unaccounted for in the poor, farming areas of Macon County near the Kentucky border."
Today's comic was inspired by a report on NPR, in the aftermath of the tornadoes. A woman being interviewed had survived (not in very good shape, mind you) her mobile home being destroyed around her. When the interviewer asked why she thinks she survived, she said, "God must have a plan for me." The very next question was about her husband who was killed in the storm. She replied, "Jesus took him home."
And that reminded me of a conversation I had with a christian friend right after hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans a few years ago. I asked, "How can your god kill and injure so many innocent people?" Her reply was, "You can't blame God for the weather."
Unbelievable!
Genesis 7:4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.
Deuteronomy 11:17 And [then] the LORD'S wrath be kindled against you, and he shut up the heaven, that there be no rain, and that the land yield not her fruit; and [lest] ye perish quickly from off the good land which the LORD giveth you.
Deuteronomy 28:24 The LORD shall make the rain of thy land powder and dust: from heaven shall it come down upon thee, until thou be destroyed.
1 Samuel 12:18 So Samuel called unto the LORD; and the LORD sent thunder and rain that day: and all the people greatly feared the LORD and Samuel.
Nahum 1:3 The LORD [is] slow to anger, and great in power, and will not at all acquit [the wicked]: the LORD hath his way in the whirlwind and in the storm, and the clouds [are] the dust of his feet.
Technorati Tags: humor Atheist Bible Christianity Comics disaster
Comments
If Hitler would have sacrificed his son, would you have then worshiped him as a kind and loving dictator?
I'm hoping that helps. Just about everything God has done is for provision and protection.
I chanced upon this website, and it was most dissapointing.
How often do we encounter that opening line which is then followed by a little sermonette from someone who can't seem to grasp that whole Ex-Christian part of the blog name?
Let me explain
Yes, please do, but only after you have ironed it out with the other 30,000+ denominations of Christianity which you don't belong to. Then you can come here to Ex-Christian and explain the universally agreed upon interpretation of the Bible. Because, frankly, you guys can't seem to get your stories straight.
Gerald,
I'm hoping that helps.
Arguing that god plays favorites, including having his "elect" people commit genocide as they steal lands inhabited by others? Actually, it helps prove the author's point. Thanks for stopping by.
"Arguing that god plays favorites, including having his "elect" people commit genocide as they steal lands inhabited by others? Actually, it helps prove the author's point. Thanks for stopping by."
It sound like you reject any type of authority of morality. I suppose if "bad guys" came to your house to rob, steal, and murder, that would be ok? If the police were to stop them, that would be wrong? I believe God is the creator and the Judge.
Spirula: What is your issue with that concept?
If I had a dollar for every person that "said" they've studied the Bible...
Ortherwise, peoples's objections to the Bible since 1990. So far, I've been able to satisfy most of their questions. No one has all the answers. In a single lifetime, it would be impossible to answere every question. Having an unanswered question does not refute the authenticity of the Bible does it? You can make a strong argument that the odds of the Bible being anything other than the Word of God would be so huge, many would refer to it as a virtual impossibility. I am prepared to categorically support that statement.
Let me explain, in order to understand the Bible, the firt thing you need to understand is the difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The Old Testament is the old Covenant, or old contract. The old contract had different rules because of the sin debt. Rules related to that sin debt no longer apply. When you understand this, it will reveal why much of what is presented on this website is foolishness.
Bunk. We all 'got' it when we were brainwashed because that's one of the core teachings of the christian cult. This website is EX-cristian.net, remember? I love how christians say this like it's some kind of mind blowing revelation that we never heard of before.
Think about this: Either your god used to be a murderous, jealous, petty tyrant--according to his own scriptures--or he is and always will be that repulsive figure. Given that we were also taught that the nature of god is unchanging, maybe you should go back and actually read about your god's murderous adventures and sick pranks (the story of Job comes to mind) and see if you can really respect him anymore.
Sophia
After the fall, man was seperated from God. God was trying to bridge the gap. God could not co-exist with us to the extent that was required because of our fall so he gave instructins to the priests so they could commune with God, and teach the poople. Long story short, He was trying to teach us right from wrong, and bring us back. Along the way, there were times when he decided to kill some weeds to protect the flowers.
Is god or is he not omnipotent AND omniscient? If he was, he wouldn't need a 'plan' to save anyone. He'd have made everyone perfect and we'd all be happy to sing his praises all throughout eternity. And don't give us the 'free will' trap door to let your god off the hook by making us responsible for suffering. You do realize that animals are tormented with many of the same physical ailments and even emotions that humans have--elephants, for example, will grieve for their dead. What kind of jerk would inflict this kind of pain on innocent creatures that are, supposedly, inferior and merely 'backdrop and scenery' for humans to exploit and rule over?
Sophia
Which part? The strawman you erected concerning my views on morality, or the hypocrisy of your god commanding his people NOT to do things to each other whilst simultaneously commanding them TO DO those very things to others?
You can make a strong argument that the odds of the Bible being anything other than the Word of God would be so huge, many would refer to it as a virtual impossibility.
That is no argument at all. That is a logical fallacy, proof by assertion. No evidence. Nada.
By the way Gerald, every thing you claim about your holy book has been claimed by billions of other believers. It's just their book is the Q'uran.
"I believe God is the creator and the Judge."
Ok, let's use a modern day example. Let's say the head of your church gave you a loaded gun and told you and your buddies to go kill everyone in the neighbouring town because they allowed a strip joint be built... Heaven forbid that a place of sin be located anywhere near your family, it might ruin their chances of getting into heaven.
If you're ok with what the children of Israel did then you should be ok with the more modern example... Or are you a hypocrite?
scary....
Derrick.
Memo: An "unanswered question" is not the same as an internal, or philosophical contradiction. Fact: Many of the concepts in "Holy Bible" are riddled with the latter.
To illustrate the difference between the two, here's a question:
Who, or what, is responsible for the singularity(i.e..the first cause)? Answer: No one knows with absolute certainty, because no one was there.
Okay, the above is a legit' "unanswered question". And of course, just because no one knows for sure, doesn't necessarily make the biblical hypothesis incorrect.
Now, on the other hand, here is a philosophical contradiction in the form of a hypothetical "answer" to that question: A Supreme, atemporal, disembodied entity at one time decided to create time, and the universe. And thus, it did just that.
Contradiction: To contemplate; to "decide", are temporal acts. Thus, to exist infinitely, and/or, exist atemporally, is a conceptual impossiblity for any "personal" being, or "consciousness".
Anony'/Gerald...I have a son, and if someone threatened his life, I would probably want to remove the threat as well.
Yes, yes, of course!...common sense, right? Yup. However, not the same "sense" that biblegod would apply. No, in it's case, the "will" of the evildoer...e.g.."the threat", should not be tampered with, thus, the "will" of the evildoer trumps the safety of your child. Yet, we are to believe that biblegod is "omnibenevolent". Contradiction # 2.
That's just a few for now. Solve those, and I'll shoot you a few more = )
I just can not get over this....sin debt. Different rules. What? Every time I hear that Jesus died for us so we could get into heaven I just nearly die laughing. I did not believe that the first time I heard it, and I still think it is sad and funny at the same time that people think this is a valid concept.
Sin debt....what next?
Marty
For starters, and I'll try to summarize, lets's consider the Messianic prophecies, which are the prophecies concerning the life of Jesus. Numbering over 300, these prophecies are specific in detail. A mathematician calculated the odds of this occurring by coincidence: The odds of someone fulfilling just 8 prophecies is 1 in 10 to the 17th power. The odds of someone fulfilling 46 prophecies is 1 in 10 to the 147th power. One has to consider the fact that God told mankind all about Jesus hundreds of years before He came into the world so we would know who He was. Peter W. Stoner, Science Speaks (Chicago: Moddy Press, 1963)
The Bible is 100% accurate in its predictive prophecy in general. This means every prediction recorded in the Bible happened exactly as predicted. Of course there are unfulfilled prophecies, but these refere to end time events.
No historical writing has ever contradicted the Bible. The Bible is regarded as 100% historically accurate. Nelson Gleuck, a non Christian archaeologist stated, "No archaeological discovery has ever contraverted a biblical reference." William F. Allbright stated that archaeology has confirmed the historicity of the O.T.
The Bible was written over a 1,500 year period, using three different languages, by forty different authors, from a variety of educational and cultural backgrounds. For example, Joshua was a military general. Daniel the Prophet was a Prime Minister. Amos was a shepherd. Luke was a physician. Paul was a Rabbi. Peter and John were fishermen. Nehemiah was a court servant. The books were written on three different continents: Africa, Asia, and Europe. Yet, the Bible forms a cohesive whole, and the authors are in complete agreement. The wondrous unity of the Bible is consistent from beginning to end suggesting a single author. The Literary Test that is applied to works of antiquity rate the Bible as the most accurate book of antiquity.
You can drill down into many of these statements, and you should. Then it's easy to see how the odds of this book being anything other than extraterrestrial start to add up, exponentially. The odds get so huge, I don't believe anyone has ever attempted to calculate those odds. I refere to it a as virtual impossibility. There is more of course, someone mentioned science disproving the Bible...lol...forgive me but the Bible is not unscientific. There is much science in the Bible. In fact, most of what we know had it's origins in the Bible. But, one subject, and one bit at a time.
First one has to determine if the Bible is true. If so, the Bible explains this sin debt?
Rom 3:23 For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death...
I won't go into detail yet, one thing at a time. I'm only trying to show the Lord has shown us we can consider the Bible because He took great care in crafting it in a way that shows he authored it.
Yes, let's do this.
Gerald: "Numbering over 300, these prophecies are specific in detail."
Have you read each of these "prophecies" in their original context? How many of them are actually prophecies (in the original context)? How many of the actual prophecies are messianic? How many of them were written before the purported events? How many fulfilments are corroborated in extrabiblical sources?
Gerald: "A mathematician calculated the odds of this occurring by coincidence: The odds of someone fulfilling just 8 prophecies is 1 in 10 to the 17th power."
This is total nonsense. Show me the specific calculations, and I will show you why it is pseudo-mathematics. In a nutshell, all such calculations that I've ever seen presuppose that the prophecies are legitimate, that they were fulfilled, and that their probabilities are independent and can be estimated. All of this is bogus. What is the probability of any given prophecy having been imagined and fulfilled though a process of midrash? This is *never* accounted for in any such calculation. Nor are the possible interpretations that would lead to failed prophecies accounted for. Again, this makes the entire calculation bogus.
But, let's see some specifics, and we can go through them in minute detail.
Gerald: "The odds of someone fulfilling 46 prophecies is 1 in 10 to the 147th power."
Let's see the calculations. I guarantee it's sophomoric nonsense.
Gerald: "One has to consider the fact that God told mankind all about Jesus hundreds of years before He came into the world..."
Instead of "considering" this as "fact", let's instead ask whether this is a fact. What evidence do you have for this? It would appear that you are starting from the naive notion that the Gospel accounts are historical. If so, on what do you base that?
You cite Peter Stoner, who makes all of the errors I've outlined above (and quite a few I did not get into). Is this what you are basing your argument on? Have you read anything critical of this type of "reasoning"? I suspect not.
Um, you're kidding right? "Troy"?..is that you?
Okay, but seriously, here we go...
Anony'/Gerald asserts, "if God is omnipotent, and omniscient", then the judgment of this "God" is correct, righteous, and absolutely authoritive.[paraphrased in a nutshell]
Okay, aside from that assertion being totally circular, that's like me saying, "if circles are square and round, then.."[insert desired conclusion] In other words, it's a blatant philosophical contradiction from the get-go, which leaves the conclusion, suspect.
Once again, if biblegod - or any entity, for that matter - were "omniscient", then said entity would know, in advance, which choices it would make for a set of ALL future events/situations/dilemmas, etc. 'Follow? Okay, and thus, said entity would be powerless(impotent) to alter, change, or interfere with, those choices---for if that is not the case, said entity never knew what it would choose to begin with. 'Get it?
So, if you are a Christian who adheres to Christian doctrine, then you must pick one, or the other; "omniscience", or "omnipotence", for they are mutually incompatible.
Anony'/Gerald bleats...The Bible is 100% accurate in its predictive prophecy in general.
Okay, while I think that is categorically false, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt: So, you worship a "robot" who knows the future, but is powerless to change it. Good luck with that.
Would that be those talking snakes and donkeys? Maybe your refering to riding chariots of fire into heaven? Or is it holding up a striped staff to copulating goats so they have striped kids? Or are you refering to the classification of bats as birds? Floating axe heads? Walking on water? Raising the dead? Commanding the sun to stand still?
Yup. The bible sure is full of science.
*snickers to self*
Okay, fair enough, one bit at a time. Genesis: *Please explain the "science" in "Creation".
*Note: I implore you to NOT try to discredit the Theory of Evolution in an attempt to somehow make "Creation" the default "scientific" theory. Please, tell me you understand that. We are talking the science in "Creation"... or "I.D.", if you prefer. Thanks.
If the old rules no longer apply, why are churches so strict about that tithe rule from the old testament?
MM~
I've written about and debated the so-called prophecies many time at this site (and elsewhere). One particularly relevant post can be found here; please look at my second entry dated September 18, 2007--the one that begins "HD: 'There have been hundreds of books...'". There I more fully spell out the errors made by those who use the argument from improbability to support the assertion that Jesus was divine.
Naturally, a "mathematician" affiliated with the Moody organization would come up with this nonsense.
Speaking as a Jew, let me tell you that we deny categorically that the "prophecies" you reference are about Jesus. I could refer you to sites with counterarguments, but I know you'd simply dismiss them, which leads me to my next point - it's more than a little offensive that you people have spent the past two millenia telling us that we've misunderstood and misinterpreted texts that we wrote in the first place. It's completely inappropriate.
Also, it's presumptuous of you to assume that the people who comment here aren't already aware of all of these rationalizations, and that you're going to be the one to set them straight. I've only been coming here for a few months, and, almost without exception, every Christian who comes here comes with this attitude. They've already told you that they've studied the Bible. You don't like that answer, so you simply dismiss it, and continue to spout scripture.
You aren't trying to convince them. You're trying to convince yourself.
Okay, one issue at a time... If God is omnipotent, and omniscient, then his judgement would be righteous if he said it was.
This is circular logic. Just because an entity has unlimited knowledge and power, it doesn't make them 'righteous'. In fact, I'd say the bible does a pretty good job of showing god to be a petty tyrant.
By the way, nowhere in the bible does it actually say god is omnipotent or omniscient. Those were traits assigned to 'him' much later down the road as believers had to make up more and more fantastic conclusions to try to keep their religion relevant specifically because the bible consistently contradicted itself, science, and logic.
Speaking of prophesies...why would a book inspired by a omniscient, omnipotent god trace his sons' lineage through the MALE side when one was never sure back in ancient times who exactly the father was? And why would these lineages not even match each other in the gospels? Common sense would say that in order to fulfill the prophesy that the lineage would be determined through the matriarchal line, as was the custom, because then it would be something that could be verified through witnesses exactly who the mother was.
There are no real prophesies in the bible that have ever been verified--no mention of the invention of the airplane or World War 2 or anything that is even remotely scientific that would prove there is a god such as a quick crash course in germs and sanitation. But you can find a bunch of useless crap about leprosy or dietary restrictions no one even adheres to anymore--go figure.
Your first statement will be answered as we go, as for the second:
Yes, yes, of course!...common sense, right? Yup. However, not the same "sense" that biblegod would apply. No, in it's case, the "will" of the evildoer...e.g.."the threat", should not be tampered with, thus, the "will" of the evildoer trumps the safety of your child. Yet, we are to believe that biblegod is "omnibenevolent". Contradiction # 2.
There is no contradiction here. God is all loving, but in Deut 19 he layed out the blessing and curses. Basically, if you follow his laws, you'll receive blessing and protection. If you don't you're subject to the opposite. He may still love the murderer, but that murderer will pay for his crime. "I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse...(Genesis 12:2-3) Just as Christians are commanded to love everyone, even your enemies, this does not mean we should forego judgement, or punish those that commit crimes.
You will find the concept of tithing in both the OT and the NT. The easiest way to understand what applies from OT to NT. Since the wages of sin were paid by Jesus. That issue, or debt, no and all related to that do not apply. Stoning people, sacrificing animals, etc. which had to be done to preserve or actually atone for sins are no longer necessary. The other rules still apply. You could ignore the old contract, and just read the new one, and you would fulfill all the laws of the OT that still applied. It's really not that complicated. But most importantly, it's not morality that gets you into heaven according to the Bible.
"It seems if you had any knowledge of some of the early pagan beliefs you would see that ther god's had similarities to jesus, long before jesus supposedly existed. Coincidence...? I think not."
My friend, the Bible says Jesus is God. He created the universe and there was nothing before Him.
http://www.logosresourcepages.org/Believers/science.htm
http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml
"Is god or is he not omnipotent AND omniscient? If he was, he wouldn't need a 'plan' to save anyone. He'd have made everyone perfect and we'd all be happy to sing his praises all throughout eternity. And don't give us the 'free will' trap door to let your god off the hook by making us responsible for suffering. You do realize that animals are tormented with many of the same physical ailments and even emotions that humans have--elephants, for example, will grieve for their dead. What kind of jerk would inflict this kind of pain on innocent creatures that are, supposedly, inferior and merely 'backdrop and scenery' for humans to exploit and rule over?"
My short answer is, have you forgotten the story? He did create us perfect. There was no sickness or pain like we have today, and the world was a different place. But guess what? We decided we wanted the knowledge of good and evil. We wanted this. Why do I say "we"? Because do you think you or I would have eventually done any different? But the good news is, we can have it perfect once again. That what the whole Bible is about! The Gospel means the Good News. Right now, this is not how he wanted us to live, but how we wanted to live. As for me, I'm choose to have it perfect after I die, but the Bible has shown me how to have it pretty good here for now.
I posted the reference for the statistical odds I referenced. And this is only one part. There is much, much more. In about a week, I'll post a mp3 if you like, showing how with computers we can analyze patterns in the Bible that make a VERY strong argument that it was humanly impossible to author the Bible in very simple terms. Stay tuned...
I've answered so many questions, but if we're going to get anywhere, it's best to stick to one subject at a time. When I post again, I'll look to answer questions regarding the prophecies, and why I believe He gave us more than enough reasons to see His Word is supernatural.
"That is no argument at all. That is a logical fallacy, proof by assertion. No evidence. Nada.
By the way Gerald, every thing you claim about your holy book has been claimed by billions of other believers. It's just their book is the Q'uran."
Huge difference here. I don't wanna stay here, but the Koran is not historically accurate, nor 100% accurate in it's predictive prophecy among other issues. Either the Gospel is true, or it's not. If it is, He says he has given us proof. A way to know the difference. But for now, I will tell you that it is well known that Islam's view of history is fantasy. It is a completely different ideology created by man with man's fingerprints. But, I'd rather focus first on the Bible.
Here's a good analogy for you. Grab a dollar, (or whatever paper currency you have). Look at it. Is is a real US dollar bill? How do you know? You know because you are familiar with it. If you had never seen an authentic, US Dollar, I could place 5, 10, or 50 counterfeits in front of you, and you wouldn't know the difference. The thing is, once you KNOW the real mccoy, then, and only then, can you detect the counterfeits.
"You aren't trying to convince them. You're trying to convince yourself."
I'm not trying to convice myself friend. I have experienced Jesus in ways I never thought I would. I've faced a demon (yes, a witness was there, great story), I've seen miracles firsthand, heard the voice of Our Father, and yes, I am a spirit filled, tongue speaking charasmatic if you haven't guessed, lol. I was a regular dude, just looking for the next party, or girl to chase before the Lord decided to rock my world back in 1990. Believe me peeps...WOW...I had no idea. Life iw way different now.
Gotta run for now, I'll look to post more later but man, this is hard....too many subjects....but peeps. Don't give up on the Gospel, please. Just ask Him to reveal his Word to you. For those of you that haven't seriously read, just read the Gospel of John. It's not that long...it's a great place to start. Don't ever rely on rumors when it comes to the Gospel.
Great article by the way Doc Mike!
Click here to read a few testimonials.
Now, in your opinion, are these people lying, mistaken, exaggerating, or just hallucinating? Further, are their personal interpretations of their personal experiences correct or incorrect, in your opinion, and why do you think so?
with Gerald and all his brain dead friends. These people are brainwashed and can't see the forest for the trees.
What they write here is only useful for a hearty laugh.
Maybe some day they will suddenly do an about face and see the errors in their beliefs. But frankly, I don't see it happening too soon for this guy. He's got a cross burnt into his ass.
godsfavoritecolor
Hmmm, well, okay, if you say so...but mind you, you've posted not one; not two; not three; not four...but SEVEN posts since this one, and thus far, you haven't scratched the surface in terms of resolving the "omniscience"/"omnipotence" dilemma. Waiting on that.
Gerald continues...as for the second[contradiction]: There is no contradiction here. God is all loving, but in Deut 19 he layed out the blessing and curses. Basically, if you follow his laws, you'll receive blessing and protection. If you don't you're subject to the opposite. He may still love the murderer, but that murderer will pay for his crime. "I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse...(Genesis 12:2-3) Just as Christians are commanded to love everyone, even your enemies, this does not mean we should forego judgement, or punish those [who] commit crimes.
We shouldn't punish those who commit crimes? That's interesting. Perhaps you'd like to elaborate on that with seven more posts?
Until I hear back, you've solved NOTHING by the scripture you quote. Ultimately, either the will of man, or the will of "God", is stronger, and thus, only one of them takes precedence. Which is it, Gerald? You can't have it both ways.
In the analogy that you introduced, and the one I elaborated on, we agree to remove ANY potential threat if it is foreseen that another human being's LIFE is in harm's way. Are you still with me so far? Okay, can we further agree that biblegod can "foresee" every potential "evil" deed in advance, via it's alleged "omniscience"?
Assuming "yes" to both, again, the Christian will invariably argue that their biblegod cannot, and should not, interfere with man's "free will". If this is true, then there are serious implications, and as I mentioned, one of those implications is that if biblegod will sit idly by as a three year-old child gets sodomized nightly by his or her stepfather..i.e..an "evildoer", then clearly, man's "free will" to commit unspeakable "evil" acts takes precedence over the innocent life of it's 3 year-old victim. Do you get that? Do you also get that whether biblegod "loves" the "evildoer" or not, is NOT the issue? Unless I'm missing something, your biblegod is a sadistic, barbaric, egotistical bastard, certainly not worthy of my worship.
Of course, all of this assumes that said deity exists, as you, like all Christians, try to define your god in terms of what it "CAN'T" do, or flat-out, refuses to do. In other words, your biblegod behaves precisely as if it didn't exist. Coincidence?
Try saying all the stuff you've been posting here to your reflection in a mirror. I imagine you'll experience disbelief, incredulity and embarassment at such desperate, inane rubbish. You might even have to look away. (Like when people do the "tongues" foolishness.) Get over yourself, and please, please stop wasting everyones time with vivid demonstrations of how little you know about anything important. So silly.
See here.
So you eat kosher, right?
I see so the laws that conveniently put money in the church coffers are relevant but those nasty old stoning laws are irrelevant because they are icky and nobody likes them. *rolls eyes*
MM~
Right. The other part is all the assumptions about the meaning of the scripture (e.g. interpreting out-of-context fragments as messianic prophecies) and the "fulfillment" of said "prophecies", which is usually just taken for granted with no corroboration and no alternative hypotheses considered (such as midrashic interpolation). Even if the odds were reasonable, the assumptions are completely absurd as they basically beg the question.
Gerald: "In about a week, I'll post a mp3 if you like, showing how with computers we can analyze patterns in the Bible that make a VERY strong argument that it was humanly impossible to author the Bible in very simple terms."
Let me guess... you're going to tell us about skip codes applied to the Hebrew Bible, or that the number seven occurs at many levels (e.g. number of words, paragraphs, etc. are all congruent to 0 mod 7). Am I close? If so, don't forget to give references to the details so they can be verified.
I'm curious. When you come across such claims, how carefully do you check them out? Do you check to see if others have verified the findings, or whether anybody claims to have debunked them? Are you ever curious about the details, or about counterarguments?
MM~
Re: "speaking in tongues", wouldn't a bucket of water, or a good, sound slap be more beneficial?
Laughter makes them feel martyred, huffy, persecuted, without "dignity", and, strangely, negatively fulfilled. And that becomes their crazy justification for doing you harm. They love it! It just compounds their savage determination to be seen as special and superior. Oh! The irresponsible juvenile conceit!
Interesting analogy, Gerald. Do you mind if I sharpen it a bit so that it's a bit more apt? Let's say that you are handed a dollar bill for the first time, and you are told that it is authentic. Then somebody else hands you a different-looking dollar bill and says that it is authentic, and the other is counterfeit. Then a third person hands you a third bill. Then a fourth, and a fifth, and a sixth, all handing you different-looking bills, all claiming they are the real thing. Tell me, Gerald, how do you go about determining which, if any, are the real thing?
You see, in your analogy above, you assumed you already knew which one was real. But that's the whole point, isn't it?
Oh my dog...obviously you xtians believe that one. Just look at all the child molesters, pedophiles, rapists, murderers, thieves, liars, crooks, and other assorted criminals you admire....buybull heroes and present-day ones. (Not that there's a heaven to get into!)
If Gerald comes back and I'm not around, someone can direct him to this: http://www.wopr.com/biblecodes/TheCase.htm
It's a paper that argues against the validity of the Bible codes, written by Dr. Barry Simon, a Math and Physics professor at Cal Tech who also happens to be an Orthodox Jew.
He'll dismiss the arguments, of course, but it's good to have something to throw back up to him. I hate it when Christians try to pull the Bible codes out as some sort of trump card. It's spurious to begin with, and the Christians never really understood it in any case. There was a moron by the name of Grant Jeffries who tried a few years ago to use them to prove that Jesus was the messiah, but his "work" was dismissed by every responsible mathematician who came into contact with it. Eventually, even other Christians distanced themselves from him.
"I don't know wher Gerald is getting his information, because it is a historical fact that paganism existed before x-tianity. Whatever!? He is obviously not ready to open his eyes. And yes, this discussion is getting to be a hoot."
Christianity, as you refer to it, is the fulfillment of Judiasm. Let me explain, The old contract, or old testament was from Adam up until Jesus. Jesus initiated the new covenant. Christianity is simply the second contract. The first contract was what we now refer to as Judiasm. But as a whole, the two covenants go back to Adam. Christianity did not have it's beginnings with Jesus, but it went into affect. Jesus is the creator of the universe, he is the Word, he is also the Father according to the Bible. Before him, there was nothing. To say there was some sort of religion before Christianity is not accurate, because Christianity simply refers to the later covenant of the two.
Bible codes? That has nothing to do with the Gospel. I'm not sure what to make of the equidistant letter searching and all that, but it is interesting. That stuff is just for kicks. However, there are patterns in the Bible however that are quite astonishing, not to be confused with the hype of predicting the future and all that from Bible codes. The patterns I may have referred to are much better, and more astonishing I guarantee! More on that later.
"it's more than a little offensive that you people have spent the past two millenia telling us that we've misunderstood and misinterpreted texts that we wrote in the first place'
Dude, honestly, no offense, but this sounds like why the Saducees and Pharisees missed it. Pride. God said he came into the world first for the Jew who rejected Him. There are many Jews that agree Jesus fulfilled each and every one of the prophecies. Either he did or he didn't. Someone my friend is quite wrong. Some of these were also out of Jesus' control, like where he would be born, born of a virgin, sold for 30 silver, etc. Those that subscribe to Judiasm regard Isaiah as a Prophet that spoke from God.
Isa 9:6 For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.
The Lord Himself told us he HIMSELF would give you a sign....what more does he have to do my friend?
have you forgotten the story? He did create us perfect. There was no sickness or pain like we have today, and the world was a different place. But guess what? We decided we wanted the knowledge of good and evil. We wanted this. Why do I say "we"? Because do you think you or I would have eventually done any different?
You don't know the story; you, only know the made-up doctrine.
I suggest you take a closer look at the text of Genesis 2-3.
1. There you will find no mention of sin, let alone original sin or the first sin.
2. The serpent is never referred to as satan.
3. Satan plays no part in the garden, nor in Genesis, nor in the Pentateuch.
4. There is however a snake that god created, albeit it a talking snake, that was created as a "sneaky" snake. Depending on your translation the snake could be, sneaky or devious, but the actual Hebrew word, "aruwm", means "mentally acute", "shrewd", or "sharp-witted" -- not deceptive.
5. Nowhere in Genesis does it say the snake tempted anyone.
6. In fact, in the details of the story, the snake is not deceptive he is acutely perceptive.
7. With this perception, he tells it like it is -- the truth.
8. He tells Eve, she will not die the day she eats of the fruit and that she will gain a moral knowledge. Low and behold she didn't die and now she knows right from wrong -- What a wise and truthful, talking, snake.
9. God lied and said, the day you eat of the tree of knowledge you will surely die. The snake said no you won't.
10. Nowhere does God tell Adam and Eve, what will happen to them, nor that by disobeying him, evil would take a foothold on our planet, causing humanity to suffer in cruel and inhumane ways, which he imposed, after they partook of the fruit.
11. God does not tell them it was unacceptable -- he does not tell them why they can not eat from the tree of knowledge, he just tells them not to, but then lies and says they will surely die the day they eat of it.
12. I know what you are thinking, so I'll head you off at the pass. To save God's reputation of not being a deceiver, you will surely say, What God really meant, was they would lose their immortality. Nowhere, in the context of the story, is it ever implied, that God bestowed immortality on Adam and Eve nor that immortality would be their destiny. For you to imply such a thing, you would be embellishing the context of the story and assigning layers of interpretation. So, God, after attempting to keep his children from gaining knowledge of good and evil, now wants to keep immortality for himself and whoever he is referring to, with, "us", as the last step of protecting his divinity from Adam and Eve, and humanity.
13. Whatever you call it, "punishment" or "discipline" the consequences were neither compassionate, loving, fair, nor anything resembling constructive instruction. In fact God's action were more akin to an abusive, raging, father, who went nuts, punishing everything around him, including the snake and all snakes after that; he bestowed hatred between Adam and Eve and all their decedents, He multiplied the pain of birth, thus securing the plight for all women, and then, in a fit of misogyny and sexism, he further cursed Eve that although, "I make you hate your husband and childbirth will be excruciating, you will lust for him and he will rule over you." And then, God, with all divine obtuseness, curses the ground so that Adam and all males would suffer with endless hard labor, just to eat.
14. When delving into the story -- you claim you know -- even further one can understand that Adam and Eve were innocents in the story and because they had not eaten the fruit of the tree of knowledge they would not have known of good and evil; right from wrong. They didn't posses a moral conscience at the moment they disobeyed God and to imply they sinned and because of their choice, they allowed evil to take a foothold on our planet, causing all human-kind to suffer, is stretching and manipulating the authors original intent of the story. Again, nowhere is "sin" mentioned in the story and to extrapolate what these two ancient, innocent, people -- who without the knowledge of good and evil -- could possibly understand, that what they were doing by disobeying god, was wrong, could actually be considered a sin. It's like an innocent child, little Johnny, who, while looking at the dazzling Christmas package and with the insistence of his "cunning", older brother, can't restrain himself and opens it, even after his mom told him not to open it, after she had left the room. Now the mom comes back and curses little Johnny and declares, he will encounter pain, every time he breathes and at school he will sweat and toil and schoolwork will be extremely difficult, for the rest of his life and not only that, lil' Johnny, just unleashed evil and from now on all his relatives will suffer for what he did, they will suffer in unimaginable ways, children will be burned to death, children will suffer for years with incurable diseases, His relatives will suffer horrible disasters and will be maimed, There will be blindness and deafness, brain tumors and leukemia, rape, murder and mayhem.
What a just and merciful all-loving God; only on closer inspection your God is a jealous megalomaniac, who unjustly punishes a naive couple, because they made an uneducated, unknowing, child-like choice, allowing evil into this world, thereby, cursing the rest of God's earthly children to suffer horribly. And what is even more astonishing, you condone, these egregious actions and love him for it.
You seemed to have made assumptions based on recollection and declarations that do not come from the context of the story of Adam and Eve.
And then gerald said,
Right now, this is not how he wanted us to live, but how we wanted to live.
Really, if god wanted something, then shouldn't he have gotten what he wanted? In that one sentence you relagated your god to NOT being all-powerful and all-loving and you established he is an apathetic, negligent, no-good, piece of shit, diety, who sits by idly, while his earthly children suffer in unimaginable, sadistic, cruel and horribly egregious ways, every minute of every day, and DOES NOTHING! I only have contempt for a god like that. FUCK YOU AND FUCK YOUR GOD, YOU DELUSIONAL MOTHERFUCKER.
--S.
All you've got is a book.
A very old book of dubious heritage, some of it swiped from older Mesopotamian, Canaanite and Ugaritic myths, and some of it assembled by a committee three hundred years after the events it allegedly describes.
You may have had some sort of "spiritual" experience, but you may never get to know what really happened because you painted the experience in terms of a pre-existing religious bias.
Again, this is an ex-Christian website.
And I, personally, find the god of the Bible so disgusting and abhorrent that I wouldn't worship it even if it did exist.
"To say there was some sort of religion before Christianity is not accurate..."
Congratulations, Gerald... That is one of the most egregiously stupid things I've heard in quite some time. Seriously. Christianity is a relative latecomer on the religion scene. The roots of My own family's religion date back at least 500 years before the beginning of the Christian era. (Don't even get Me started on the Rig-Veda or the Epic of Gilgamesh. Don't even go there.)
Surely you can see that you’re presenting as one of the smuggest babblers ever! And you sound about as reliable as a travelling flim-flam man - selling lame horses, or the Brooklyn Bridge - for the hundredth time!
And as for your faux affection - "Someone my friend is quite wrong.", and, "...what more does he have to do my friend?"!!! Talk about smirky, presumptuous, know-ally and condescending. This is all about you, and how decent you think you are. You're listening to yourself, and loving it. And you're not even on an appropriate site!
Aesop, and my cat, have more to teach about unaffected truth, morals, ethics, manners, wisdom and grace than the hideously confounding collection of divisive one-upmanship contained in the bible. Or the silly, insistent fools who carry on and on and on about it . You’re buzzing like a mosquito in the night. Go away.
I'm going to let you in on something:
We. All. Have. Read. The. Bible. Before. Including. The. Gospel. John.
Some of us are ex-pastors and ex-ministers as well as EX-CHRISTIANS.
Many of us have either spoken in tongues or witnesses it in person. You can only hear someone babble "Shambala, roshambo" so many times before it gets boring.
We've been there, done that, seen it, heard it, blah blah blah. We moved on with our lives. Maybe you will too one day. One can only hope.
Gerald, "my friend", my guess is that some time around 1990 you had some kind of experience that you then decided to attribute to a god you had previously heard about but not, up to that point, taken seriously. That experience may have been personal, or it may have been a response to a preacher, or something else. But did you take the time to assess what that experience really was? And did you take the time to question the evidence for the god you attributed that experience to.
Once you attributed that first experience to the christian god, other similar ones also got attributed the same way. Basically you took a leap of faith. What was that faith based upon?
It's the pattern that I also had in 1977. I attributed a spiritual experience and a search for meaning to the god that I had been brought up with. I never questioned the existence of that god, nor the basis of the teachings about that god. That didn't happen for 27 years. And when I did start to investigate my beliefs, the whole thing collapsed - they didn't stand investigation at all. The logic to sustain them was circular.
By its very nature, faith is not based on rationality - it is a leap into the unknown. If you accept that, then you should accept that anybody who takes a leap of faith is doing so on a similarly irrational basis. What you, Gerald, are doing is basically saying that your leap of faith is more valid than other peoples', simply because your faith teaches you that anyone who hasn't made a similar leap is doomed. How arrogant.
I, for one, love it.
Really?? You can speak in tongues?! Pray and hear directly from GOD, who created the earth in a WEEK?! Really?? Life and life more abundantly?! Plans to prosper me and not to harm me????!
Really?! I can have all that? Gee, I must not have known through my nine years of leading Bible study groups, preaching, doing radio shows and leading Sunday school!
Thanks Gerald & Co. I'm convinced! Praise the Lord, hallelujah.
Dude, honestly, no offense, but this sounds like why the Saducees and Pharisees missed it. Pride.
The Sadducees and Pharisees were, in reality, nothing like the portraits painted in the NT. The Bible simply isn't historically accurate. Here is an article by a professor at Yeshiva University (again, an Orthodox Jew, not a secular scholar) in which he explains the workings of the Sanhedrin, the relationship between Pilate and the High Priest, and why both the Biblical account and Josephus are untrustworthy. I know you probably won't read it, and you'll dismiss it if you do, but I offer it anyway as a counterpoint to everything you've been taught.
Isa 9:6 For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
This was referring to a figure who came shortly after the "prophecy" was made (if one believes that it wasn't written after the fact); it was (if I remember correctly) one of the monarchs. It's being taken out of context, and, in any case, one has to be careful about the tenses in classical Hebrew. And the word translated as "God" is generally translated as "Father" in other editions.
Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.
This is one of the easiest to refute - so easy, in fact, that most Christians won't even bring it up any more. The word used, almah, doesn't mean "virgin", but "young woman". The word generally used for "virgin" is betulah.
The old contract, or old testament was from Adam up until Jesus. Jesus initiated the new covenant. Christianity is simply the second contract. The first contract was what we now refer to as Judaism. But as a whole, the two covenants go back to Adam.
A covenant, or contract, requires at least two parties. Adam was merely created; he didn't enter into a contract. In order to validate the belief system, Christianity has grafted its own mythology onto a previously existing one, to come up with meanings that were never intended.
You do realize that there are OTHER religions besides those that revolve around the Bible, right? Because if you do then you are deliberately missing what the other poster said about Pagan religions.
MM~
Yes, yes. God spoke to you. Here are some other people God spoke to.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
So, if you are a Christian who adheres to Christian doctrine, then you must pick one, or the other; "omniscience", or "omnipotence", for they are mutually incompatible.
This statement is not logical. First of all, to even debate this is purely philosophical because we cannot fathom what it would be like to be all-knowing. It would be prideful for us to think we could have done it better. I will attempt to answer however: God can be both all knowing, and all powerful. By giving us free will, he can still attempt to guide us in the right direction because ultimately, the choice is ours to make. Free will is a wonderful gift beyone comprehension. By giving us free will, God would have to accept that we would not always make the right choice. Keep in mind, we have to take the Gospel as a whole. It also tells us we have an enemy, Satan, and he has legions with him, and he has purposed himself to lie, murder, and deceive. I do not see a conflict since he tells us he will not allow us tempted beyone what we can bear. Besides that, God came here, left his Godly powers in heaven, and showed us how to walk as a man having full faith in God to show us what we're capable of. So what I see is balance, fairness, and I see that God is just. Most of all, I see that He is loving beyone what I can understand since he allowed Himself to be brutally murdered as a human to offer himself as an atonement for our sin.
There are lots of stories of people claiming to have paranormal experiences."
Sure, Jesus said many voices have gont out. He also told us there would be false prophets, even the possibility of an Angel coming from heaven with a differnt gospel, also an army that want nothing more than to destroy our chances of becoming what they cannot. Just as in life, there are opinions, and all kinds of misinformation. But, I believe in something called Truth. Jesus said, "I am the way and the light, and the truth." He also said, "Don't believe everyone you hear, but test them." Well, how do you test something if you don't have the truth to test it against? How could you possibly determine if one doctrine was true over another? How could you discern between a false spirit or a spirit from God? God is more than fair, and he gave us the measuring rod. His Word. So, my answer is, you take the information wether it be a story, a doctrine, or a paranormal expeience and you test it vs. God's Word.
"We shouldn't punish those who commit crimes? That's interesting. Perhaps you'd like to elaborate on that with seven more posts?"
You missed my point, (I see one typo I made didn't help) Here's how my statement should have read if you took it in context:
Christians are commanded to love everyone, even your enemies, this does not mean we should forget about judgement, or not punish those commit crimes.
I was explaining how God can be all loving but still support punishing those that do evil.
"Until I hear back, you've solved NOTHING by the scripture you quote. Ultimately, either the will of man, or the will of "God", is stronger, and thus, only one of them takes precedence. Which is it, Gerald? You can't have it both ways."
This statement is ilogical. Here's why. God does not impose his will on anyone. (He might impose judgement, but that's different.) You have free choice. God does not have everything His way. For example, He wants many good things for each of us, but we don't receive them because we don't always do the right thing. The will of man, and God are not mutually exclusive. There is no conflict here.
Assuming "yes" to both, again, the Christian will invariably argue that their biblegod cannot, and should not, interfere with man's "free will". If this is true, then there are serious implications, and as I mentioned, one of those implications is that if biblegod will sit idly by as a three year-old child gets sodomized nightly by his or her stepfather..i.e..an "evildoer", then clearly, man's "free will" to commit unspeakable "evil" acts takes precedence over the innocent life of it's 3 year-old victim. Do you get that? Do you also get that whether biblegod "loves" the "evildoer" or not, is NOT the issue? Unless I'm missing something, your biblegod is a sadistic, barbaric, egotistical bastard, certainly not worthy of my worship."
The Lord has insttucted us on how to avoid bad things from happening. Read Deut Ch. 19, for example. That's why we need to stay as close to Him as we can. He's always trying to warn us about harm, but things happen for many reasons. First of all, let's not forget the big thing...He's warning us that we will stay seperated from Him forever and if you don't like the bad things that happen now....you really wouldn't like living in hell forever! Besided that, bad things happen because we don't listen, sometimes because we choose to do things we shouldn't, sometimes because the enemy has come against us, and we didn't arm ourselves, all kinds of reasons. The point is, He tell us how to avoid problems, and how to overcome them if they happen.
Now, when things happen to kids, for example, it's very emotional, and let's face it, it's sad. There was most likely a way it could have been avoided, but for some reason, somewhere, we missed it. But the good news is, he can help us overcome. And most importantly, the final victory is all that matters. This life is so short compared to eternal life, and the inheritance He has promised us.
Gerald,
Try saying all the stuff you've been posting here to your reflection in a mirror. I imagine you'll experience disbelief, incredulity and embarassment at such desperate, inane rubbish. You might even have to look away. (Like when people do the "tongues" foolishness.) Get over yourself, and please, please stop wasting everyones time with vivid demonstrations of how little you know about anything important. So silly."
Stephen, I've helped lead many people to the Lord in my life. I've seen all kinds come. The Bible says:
Isa 55:11 "So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me void,But it shall accomplish what I please, And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it."
"So you eat kosher, right?"
Actually I do believe in the clean and unclean laws of the Bible. Several doctory have published on the subject. In short, the rules appear to be valid guidlines for healthy eating. Shellfish and pork for example, not only are the cause of many illnesses, but some believe they do not appear to have been designed for human consumption and are not nearly as beneficial for us as the clean foods. So, back in 1991 or so, I gave up eating the unclean foods.
"I'm curious. When you come across such claims, how carefully do you check them out? Do you check to see if others have verified the findings, or whether anybody claims to have debunked them? Are you ever curious about the details, or about counterarguments?"
I'm a zealot. I love to investigate things. I like science, Astronomy (I took Astronomy 101 when I was 13), I commonly use 4 or 5 Bibles when I study, of course Herbrew and Greek Dictionaries, and references. Most importantly, I pray for understanding and wisdom.
I'm an IT guy by day, and a somewhat successful investor.
"Interesting analogy, Gerald. Do you mind if I sharpen it a bit so that it's a bit more apt? Let's say that you are handed a dollar bill for the first time, and you are told that it is authentic. Then somebody else hands you a different-looking dollar bill and says that it is authentic, and the other is counterfeit. Then a third person hands you a third bill. Then a fourth, and a fifth, and a sixth, all handing you different-looking bills, all claiming they are the real thing. Tell me, Gerald, how do you go about determining which, if any, are the real thing?'
Simple. You could find out if the dollar was real when you tried to spend it. At that point, you'd be subject to the law. You would either end up with goods, or you would end up with a judgement. (Nice comeback, huh?)
So, in the same way we can take an opinion, philosophy, or a religion to the data bank and compare it to the truth of the God's Word. You can get to the point where you'll discern spiritually sometimes without even having to waste much of your time. He will let you know. You don't have to spend your whole life chasing every philosophy or new religion out there once you know the truth. God is fair, He tells us He has given us the Holy Spirit to give us proof. Believe me, you can know beyond the shadow of a doubt.
I believe man will put hope in whatever sounds good until the truth arrives. Once that truth from God arrives, you will drop whatever you thought you believed in because it will be like night and day.
"gerald said,
have you forgotten the story?...
You said: "1. There you will find no mention of sin, let alone original sin or the first sin.
2. The serpent is never referred to as satan.
3. Satan plays no part in the garden, nor in Genesis, nor in the Pentateuch."
The Genesis story is not just in Genesis. If you want to learn something from the Bible, you have to look up all the references to that
subject you are reading about. It's called cross referencing. You won't get a log of information unless you look up all the scriptures
related to the subject. The more scriptures you read about the subject, the more you define what God's Word is saying. I won't address each
of your points because you're not cross-referencing, but here's a few scriptures to wet your whistle, but try cross referencing all the
scriptures about man's fall in the garden, and Satan.
Is 14:12-15"How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the
nations! You said in your heart, 'I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount
of assembly, on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most
High.' But you are brought down to the grave, to the depths of the pit."
Ez 28:12-15 "Take up a lament concerning the king of Tyre and say to him: 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says: You were the model of
perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone adorned you: ruby, topaz and
emerald, chrysolite, onyx and jasper, sapphire, turquoise and beryl. Your settings and mountings were made of gold; on the day you were
created they were prepared. You were anointed as a guardian cherub, for so I ordained you. You were on the holy mount of God; you walked
among the fiery stones. You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created till wickedness was found in you.'"
Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was
cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
Gen 2:16-17 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the
knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Rom 5:12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all
sinned.
Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.
Gen 3:17-19 Then to Adam He said, “Because you have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat of it’: “ Cursed is the ground for your sake; In toil you shall eat of it All the days of your life.
That was a 100% predictable "come-back". Of course that's what you would say, and it entirely misses the point. Again your analogy falls down because you assume there is an objective means of distinguishing the counterfeits from the legitimate. This you do not have. What you have is a belief in one particular theology; one of many. Your evidence is not demonstrably better than what the other religions offer. Once you have decided which "bill" is the real one, it becomes your gold standard, and you deem all others false. Some vendors will accept your bill (those in your cult), and others will not. Others choose a different bill, and deem your choice false. We (the regulars here) look at all of you and say "not one of you has a defensible claim to legitimacy" in any meaningful sense (i.e. beyond the approval of your particular cult).
Want to try again?
You did not answer my question about cross checking claims. Looking something up in multiple Bibles might give some insight into differences in translation (I do this too, using upwards of six translations), but it sheds no light on historical accuracy, for example. To be specific, you mentioned something that sounds like skip codes in the Bible (until you supply more details, I'll assume that's what it is). My question is this: Have you checked this in any way yourself? Have you looked for corroboration from unbiased third-parties? Have you considered what skeptics have to say? Are you interested in hearing from those who claim the process is flawed? These are all very basic steps one would take if they were interested in discerning what is actually true as opposed to simply propagating unsubstantiated hearsay. Do you understand?
That's wonderful! In that case, you won't mind explaining how you determined that the Bible contained "THE TRUTH™." Was it a feeling you had? Was it a lighbulb type experience in your head? Was it a heightened sense of reality when you read the words on the page?
What possible determining factor brought you to the conclusion that a book filled with stories of flying chariots, talking plants and animals, floating tools, unicorns, satyrs, miracle workers, healers and sun-stoppers, was true? Your answer to Jim Arvo about spending the dollar was cute, but where do you spend your dollar? Or is this a "You'll find out after you die!" moment? You've injected a store into the analogy, a store that verifies which dollar is the real dollar. So who or what is verifying your choice of religion for you? Don't say it is the Bible, because you first need to explain why you have determined that the Bible contains the ultimate truth. Again, is it a feeling you have which helped you conclude your religion is correct? Was it because you were born into a Christian culture? Think about it. The webiste filled with stories by people claiming supernatural experiences have strong and genuine feelings about their experiences.
Gerald, you have strong feelings about your religion, but saying the Bible is true because God says so, and then saying God exists and cannot lie because the Bible says so... Well, that's a ridiculously circular argument.
Until you can demonstrate that your ancient book is anything other than another myth-based relgious tome, quoting the thing is pointless.
You also said, "So, in the same way we can take an opinion, philosophy, or a religion to the data bank and compare it to the truth of the God's Word. You can get to the point where you'll discern spiritually sometimes without even having to waste much of your time. He will let you know. You don't have to spend your whole life chasing every philosophy or new religion out there once you know the truth. God is fair, He tells us He has given us the Holy Spirit to give us proof. Believe me, you can know beyond the shadow of a doubt."
You know what? I used to believe something similar. Then I started reading the history of Christianity and the evolution of theological thought. And let me tell you, "The Truth&trade" has changed considerably over the last 19 centuries. If HE is leading HIS to know HIS truth, then HE is also leading lots of HIS people to have contradictory and different versions of "THE TRUTH™." Or do you merely dismiss Christians who do not share your particular doctrinal positions as "not real Christians?" It seems to me that if there were some magical infusion of knowledge going on in the minds of Christians, there wouldn't be so much ignorant disagreement between the thousands of competing versions of Christian.
Hmm, then the Apostle Paul must have been mistaken when he wrote Romans 9. Vs 18: "Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth."
Gerald quoted, Isa 55:11 "So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me void,But it shall accomplish what I please, And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it." This contradicts your previous comment, about God not imposing HIS will, but contradictions are rife in Christian thinking. Christians just rename contradictions to paradoxes, and everyone says amen.
For a child has been born to us, a son has been given to us; and the government is upon his shoulder; and his name is called A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the ruler of peace; that the government may be increased, and of peace there be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it through justice and through righteousness from henceforth even forever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts does perform this.
One source I found gives the following explanation:
Isaiah is known for the method by which he presents many of his messages through the use of prophetic names (Isaiah 7:3, 14; 8:3). In the verse under study, the prophet expounds his message by formulating a prophetic name for Hezekiah. The words of this name form a sentence expressive of God's greatness, which will become manifest in the benefits to be bestowed upon the future king in his lifetime. Thus, the name, though borne by the king, serves, in reality, as a testimonial to God.
Christian theologians argue that the name "A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the ruler of peace" refers to Jesus, who they allege combined human and divine qualities. They mistakenly believe that such a name can only be applied to God Himself. Moreover, the Christians incorrectly translate the verbs in verse 5 in the future tense, instead of the past, as the Hebrew original reads. Thus, the Christians render verse 5 as: "For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; and the government will rest on his shoulders; and his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace."
While admitting that "wonderful counselor" and "ruler of peace" can be applied to a man, Christian theologians argue that the phrases "mighty God" and "everlasting Father" cannot be incorporated as part of a man's name. Thus, they contend that Isaiah teaches that the Messiah has to be not only a man, but God as well. That this entire reasoning is incorrect may be seen from the name Elihu, "My God is He," which refers to an ordinary human being (Job 32:1, 1 Samuel 1:l, 1 Chronicles 12:21, 26:7, 27:18). A similar Christian misunderstanding of Scripture may be seen in their claims revolving around the name Immanuel, "God is with us." The simple fact is that it is quite common in the Bible for human beings to be given names that have the purpose of declaring or reflecting a particular attribute of God, e.g., Eliab, Eliada, Elzaphan, Eliakim, Elisha, Eleazar, Tavel, Gedaliah.
There is much science in the Bible. In fact, most of what we know had it's origins in the Bible.
To which I responded: Please explain the "science" in "Creation". Followed by....I implore you to NOT try to discredit the Theory of Evolution in an attempt to somehow make "Creation" the default "scientific" theory. Please, tell me you understand that. We are talking the science in "Creation"... or "I.D.", if you prefer.
Nothing yet.
(Gerald, "if" you're reading this, perhaps you can start by telling us what a "firmament" is, yes? Or maybe how biblegod didn't know that "darkness" was simply the absence of "light", and thus, the two need not be "divided". Would you like to start there? 'Listening.)
Also previously, I asked our Christian fundamentalist guest to resolve the "omniscience"/"omnipotence" dilemma that is created when those two attributes/characteristics are simultaniously assigned to any personal "being"....in this case, the Christian biblegod.
To briefly review, such a concept is a blantant philosophical contradiction. And, well, to the best of my knowledge, he hasn't resolved this dilemma yet, as he said he would do, "as we go".
Nextly, I touched on the issue of whose "will" takes precedence, and is thus, the stronger of the two. Is it man's "will", or biblegod's "will"(?)
Mind you, Gerald basically raised this issue, himself, when he gave the following analogy:
Gerald: "I have a son, and if someone threatened his life, I would probably want to remove the threat as well."
Let me try another angle....
Gerald, or any Christian, if you had knowledge that your son or daughter was in danger, say, by another human being, then why wouldn't you simply let the perpetrator "pick" which path to take, "good", or "evil"? Why would you impose YOUR "will", by intervening?
Regarding this same subject, Gerald recently said: The Lord has [instructed] us on how to avoid bad things from happening.
Really? Wow, it seems that a heck-of-a lot of people missed those specific "instructions" from "the Lord". Hmm, okay, maybe you'd like to find the specific scripture that delineates in clear, concise terms, how we can "avoid" "bad things from happening". Things like...
1) How do our children "avoid" contracting terminal diseases?(as biblegod watches and does nothing)
2) How do our children "avoid" being molested, raped, and sodimized?(as biblegod watches and does nothing)
3) How do we "avoid" alleged "acts of God", such as tornados that strike with no warning?(as biblegod watches... and again, does NOTHING)
'Listening.
Somewhere, very near to you, a cuckoo clock cuckoos incessantly.
You can't deal with the text of Genesis so you are embellishing the context of the story and assigning layers of interpretation with other verses from the Bible. That's like interpreting the Three little Pigs story as a story about bombing Japan. Not only that, but some of the verses you quote have their own meaning and context that you assign another meaning to. Honestly, have you really read the Bible for yourself? You seem to be pulling quotes from other books to support your delusional claims.
Is 14:12-15, are about god's plans for Judah, Assyria and Egypt. The verse you quote specifically is about the fate of the king of Babylon. The "morning star" description shows the proud ambition of the king of Babylon. He wanted to be as great as God in heaven. The sacred mountain far away to the north is called Zephon in northern Syria. The former inhabitants of Canaan, believed that the gods met there. The conceited king of Babylon thought that he was as great as any god. He supposed himself to be a god because he was the most important king in the world. The king of Babylon wanted complete power and went mad; he stole from his own people and killed anyone who would oppose him. But instead god sends the king of Babylon to Sheol -- a place where ancient Jews believed everyone went to after death to live in a murky existence. It has nothing to do with the Garden.
Ez 28:12-15 Again this is the judgment of the king of Tyre and just because he mentions god's Garden it has nothing to do with the context of the story of Adam and Eve. Ezekiel is describing the king of Tyre as a person at one time who was "perfect" which is one meaning given to this difficult Hebrew text. And that the king of Tyre enjoyed himself AS IF he was in the Garden of god -- a simple simile meaning he was living the fat life.God gave the king of Tyre a place to rule over, but The king of Tyre got too high faluten and considered himself a god, so god had to destroy him. Once again you use this verse out of context as a way to erroneously bolster your notions of the story of Adam and Eve.
Rev 12:9 This verse does NOT in any way prove that the snake in the Genesis story was Satan. And makes absolutely NO reference to the Story of Adam and Eve.
Rom 5:12 and Rom 5:14 Again the writer of these verses embellished and made interpretations after the fact. Too bad your god wasn't savvy enough to make his message more clear. You would have thought that if he wanted us to think that the garden of Eden was the original sin, then he would have said so in the the story or that the talking snake was satan, he would have called him by name. As it is, you have to turned the Bible into a Rubik's cube so you can come up with one perverted interpretation after another. You would think if god's "good news" was so important and he was all-powerful, then he would be able to deliver it to everyone EQUALLY and CLEARLY. As it is, Christianity only encompasses thirty percent of the world, while the other 70% are different religions or non-religious. The other 70% knows nothing of the "good news" or considers it valid. Then when you break down the thousands of christian sects and denominations, they all have differing interpretations of scripture. Everything from the Amish to Catholics to Jehovah witnesses to Mormons to the Way. Who's interpretation is the correct one; which should we choose, so we can gain an eternal paradise? If god who loves his earthly children so much and wants to get the "good news" to everyone of his children, through the Bible, then indeed, your god is doing ONE HELL OF A SHITTY JOB of it!
-- S.
My short answer is, have you forgotten the story? He did create us perfect. There was no sickness or pain like we have today, and the world was a different place. But guess what? We decided we wanted the knowledge of good and evil
Ummmmm...if Adam and Eve didn't have the knowledge of good and evil then they weren't perfect. If Adam and Eve were truly created in god's image, then it stands to reason that they too would be omniscient and they would have already possessed all the knowledge that god had. In other words, there would have been no point for them to even eat the apple because they would have already what would happen.
I have to say, I honestly don't know how anyone could swallow the story of genesis anyway. It's not logical, there's no evidence to support on jot of it, and it's obviously told from a truly ignorant, sexist point of view.
Even as a kid I remember thinking it sounded like something men made up to keep women in their place because only females (at that time) actually knew they were living on through the next generations. Males could never be sure they were the father but females could know they were the mother with 100% certainty (barring unnatural interference such as switching babies). When males could secure and control the movements of females, they could be more sure (although not entirely certain) they were passing their genes on and that they were raising their own children as opposed to a rival's.
You replied:
Stephen, I've helped lead many people to the Lord in my life. I've seen all kinds come. The Bible says:
Isa 55:11 "So shall My word be that goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me void,But it shall accomplish what I please, And it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it."
Gerald, thanks for your auto-response, though I detect no sense in it. That is, apart from your disingenuous attempt to simper-down self-congratulation as tireless service. Once again you were talking to yourself, and only you think you know what you mean.
So, face up to it, on this site you have nothing useful to share, and nothing practical to offer. In fact, every pious word you utter is time-wasting, meaningless and irrelevant, and it becomes clearer and clearer that you have only your self-aggrandizing dementia to impose. No thanks.
S.
Really, bible boy, do tell. I would love to hear about the "miracles" you witnessed first hand, and by all means let us know how god may have answered your prayers.
--S.
But you know, these debates can go on & on till the end of time. But when we come to the end of our lives & have taken our last breath, that's when EVERYONE will finally find out the real "Truth".
If Christians are wrong, then we just missed out on feeding our flesh. Oh, well.. But what does it matter if we are ALL just be dust in the wind.
If Non-Christians are wrong???
What a waste of time for all of you both christian and Non-Christian.
I wonder who wastes their time, the ones dialoging about lofty ideas of life and death, beliefs in god and what's wrong with christianity, or the one who wastes his time trolling the internet, to judge and comment about people wasting their time?
--S.
Just because someone disagrees with you or anyone else on here they are considered a troll eh? That's your opinion.
I'm not the one who sits here day and night like some of you do arguing over a debate that none of you will ever win. The facts are that no christian or atheist will ever be able to prove the other one wrong. Neither side will ever be able to come up with any credible evidence to do so.
Before you or someone else accuses me of being a christian, I just happen to be someone who does not like christianity or atheism period. One thing both Christians and Atheists do have in common is your both arrogant, and both sides think they have all of the answers. The facts are that neither christians nor atheists can come up with credible evidence for either side. The facts are that nobody knows how we got here and how it happened. All of your opinions combined from the bible to evolution is nothing more than man's attempts to try and explain the unknown. All you christians and atheists have are pure speculations and theories. I find no credibility with either side.
I am someone who has a life outside of the internet. I spend very little time online unlike most of you who spend so much time on here arguing, bitching, and moaning.
Anyone who wants to go ahead and flame me for my comments is more than welcome to do so. I'm sure that many of you will flame me because you cannot resist doing so.
However, for you people who decide to flame me I hate to tell you this, but I will not be back to read your comments. So.....you might as well just flame a brick wall.
Unlike many of you who post on here I do not participate in childish arguments. Regardless of what I say I'm sure there are still some of you who will still leave negative comments towards me even if I don't return to read them. Go ahead if it makes you feel better talking to a brick wall. So if you have nothing else better to do with your time then go ahead and waste it by replying back to me with your negative comments which I will not be back to read.
I refuse to waste mental energy arguing on the internet. Trying to win an argument on the internet is like trying to win the special olympics.
You may not be back but someone will read your post and may end up with a false impression of atheism. So, in an effort to correct your error I feel it would be in everyone's best interest to respond to your post.
Ted:"The facts are that no christian or atheist will ever be able to prove the other one wrong. Neither side will ever be able to come up with any credible evidence to do so."
Ted, Ted, Ted. I am an atheist. That means I have a lack of belief in any deity. What more credible evidence could anyone else ever hope to have, that "proves" my lack of belief in a god?
When a christian gets on here and starts making claims that they cannot back up with credible evidence and/or are illogical, I will continue to explain to them why they are not logical or credible. Why? Because it serves humanity to root out lies and misconceptions. Wouldn't you agree?
"One thing both Christians and Atheists do have in common is your both arrogant, and both sides think they have all of the answers."
No. One side(christians) thinks they have all the right answers and arrogantly foists their views on everyone else. The other side(skeptics) knows that no one has all the right answers and remains skeptical of those that claim to have them.
"All you christians and atheists have are pure speculations and theories. I find no credibility with either side."
I honestly don't think you have a clear understanding of atheism at all. You seem to think that all atheists are trying to make a positive claim about the non-existence of god(s). While some may, I feel that most won't. But that's not the point of atheism. The point of atheism is to explain that one has a lack of belief in god(s). That's it.
"I am someone who has a life outside of the internet. I spend very little time online unlike most of you who spend so much time on here arguing, bitching, and moaning."
Wow. I can hardly believe you spent your precious time giving us your faulty insights about what we(atheists) are doing on this ex-christian site. Somehow, though, I don't feel honored.
"Anyone who wants to go ahead and flame me for my comments is more than welcome to do so."
If you're wrong and I try and correct your false assumptions that's not "flameing" you.
Just because you don't want to know where you may be incorrect in your thinking doesn't mean that all people wish to do the same.
I just don't understand why so many christians and Non-Christians waste so much valuable time of their lives sitting on the internet arguing.
What a waste of time for all of you both christian and Non-Christian.
__________________________________________________________________
Bull. This is just a tactic to try to shame or denigrate people to try to silence them. Why do you care how we want to 'waste' our time?
Many ex-christians can remember past discussions with non-believers that either educated us in some way or inspired us to go look up the facts for ourselves. It's illogical to think nobody can ever influence someone else's opinion through discussion--if it never happened, we'd all hold the same exact beliefs for our entire lives.
As far as atheism being an 'arrogant' position, try looking up Douglas Adams and reading about his brief observations on that topic--it could be enlightening. It was for me, years ago, when I made the same ignorant comment to my son. Of course, that's often how we learn our best lessons; by displaying our ignorance on topics we really don't know anything about.
Sophia
-- G. Massey, Egyptologist
I am just so glad I came to my own senses and acknowledged the evidence around us.
I find that accepting the observations, the evidence, and all of the resulting experiments far easier than constantly trying to prove to myself and others that the mythology I once held on to was the truth.
Apologetics, as many here seem to be 'experts' in, is an attempt to somehow distort reality to fit the story. Most of this, as mentioned, is done by misdirection. The apologist must then 'misdirect' there own mind to help themselves believe it. This is done by an observed phenomenon called Cognitive Dissonance.
I had no less than 10 'plausible theories' as to how the creation account could have happened that did not 'go against the evidence'. However, it ignored the details that we know about. For instance, the documented advancement or 'evilution' of human technology and society. How the hell did Cain have the ability, as a second generation human, to farm? Where did he get the seeds? The tools? Those are uber-advanced things! god is silent about such matters, which caused some truly great minds to speculate and somehow 'explain' away the problems.
Now when I am reading these posts by apologists, I am fascinated at the elaborate lengths they go to in trying to justify their insanity.
Throw a fact into the mix and they will point to another's idea or perhaps even their own theory about why that fact is either invalid or somehow fits into their story.
This same thing occurs with most forms of delusional insanity. So much faith and an awe-inspiring ability to 'rationalize' it in their own mind. Many cases are not curable and many more take a lot of time and therapy to work through.
I think that this site is a beacon of hope that people can be freed from this mental handicap of the teflon god.
Ted, communication isn't a waste of time.
If the Christian culture, in many instances weren't so insular, then there would be far fewer Christians on this site. If Christianity had leaders, instead of word parrots in a pulpit, they'd go to their local church and debate and discuss matters of importance to get their answers.
However, a Christian leader's business is to keep people coming back to listen to words. They have little interest in hurting their own business, by engaging the topic of Truth, and typically stigmatize church members for even approaching the topic.
Communication is valuable because it offers the individual a means of intellectual growth. It allows many the opportunity to escape from those who would seek to bind one's mind, for their own profit.
You don't go ask a car salesman for a particular car dealership, which cars are the best in the world. You either find someone who knows a lot about different car manufacturers and can speak with facts, or you go start independent research.
In many cases, this site offers the other side of the story that isn't taught by Christian leaders. Just validating a Christian follower's suspicion and right to discover, can be done from this site.
"Just because someone disagrees with you or anyone else on here they are considered a troll eh? That's your opinion."
Wrong, you are a troll because you ramble, moving around from one site to another, jumping in and out so you can drop some inane argument, babbling about nothing and not dealing with debate or confrontation. You are a bullshitting, coward.
Then hypocrite ted said, "I am someone who has a life outside of the internet. I spend very little time online unlike most of you who spend so much time on here arguing, bitching, and moaning."
As ted said -- on the internet -- arguing and bitching and moaning.
How would you know how much time anyone has spent, on this site, arguing, unless you spent an exuberant amount of time reading the content?
And ted, I'm on to you. I know you are reading this, you troll motherfucker, sitting there with your hand on your wanker, fuming and wondering how you could possibly reply without looking like an asshole -- well too late buddy, you're nothing but a colossal gaping wound, who needs to be plugged.
But that's just my opinion.
--S.
Now what possible reason could there be for anyone to think that?
Oh, hold on -
"The God delusion"
"God: the failed hypothesis"
"Atheism: the case against God"
"The improbability of God"
"The non-existence of God: an introduction"
Etc, etc, etc.
Quote from "The non-existence of God: an introduction":
"It thus follows that not only does God not exist, he cannot exist. For ignorant agnostics who unthinkingly proclaim that it is impossible to prove or disprove the existence of God, here is a putative set of disproofs."
Anon, obviously there are some atheist evangelicals. And I appreciate them. For one, they help folks overcome fear of the unknown and help to show there is meaning in life -- mostly what you make of it. For another, when you are struggling for meaning and fulfillment, more choices is always better.
You know what is compelling? They are only asking for the cost of the book, they are not asking for 10% of your money every month.
"...I gonna drive that Cadillac, and get it dusty and dirty.. And use it for gawd!" -- preacher unknown quoted in 'Mission' by KingsX
What is in it for them? Acceptance? Perhaps they want society to move on and get busy with making our future brighter.
I might also be labeled as such.. probably a residual trace of my evangelical christian upbringing. We are all taught to spread the good news. Right now, the good news to me is that my mind and body can live freely and with more intensity now that I know that my religion is just a myth.
Do you have an actual argument against my statement?
Or will you continue to use the association fallacy, jumping to hastyt generalizations?
If you want to proffer that there are anti-theist evangelicals who happen to be atheists, then make that educated statement.
However, let's be candid here, there are anti-theist evangelicals who are also theists, so don't get your panties in a wad.
Would you like a list of books from religious groups that condemn Christianity?
I have already spent at least 15 minutes trying to get the stupid word verification to accept my post and it keeps on having me retype it over and over again. It has never done this before. It always accepts my post after I type it the first time, and I know good and well that I am typing it in correctly every single time. This is very annoying. I shouldn't have to keep on retyping it over and over again like this.
Can someone tell me what is going on? Why am I having to retype the word verification over and over again?
No such luck. The site also seems to be running slow from my end. My internet provider says there are no problems on my end that they can detect.
In response, "Anonymous" bleats..Now what possible reason could there be for anyone to think that?....
Then Anony' says...
Oh, hold on -
"The God delusion"
"God: the failed hypothesis"
"Atheism: the case against God"
"The improbability of God"
"The non-existence of God: an introduction"
Etc, etc, etc.
Oooh, I see....so, 1, 2, 3, 4, FIVE whole books published by Atheists... plus, a few "et ceteras" thrown in, somehow accounts for "all Atheists"?
___________________________________
Ted: The facts are that no christian or atheist will ever be able to prove the other one wrong. Neither side will ever be able to come up with any credible evidence to do so.
Right, and evidentally, no one "will ever be able to prove" that "God" isn't telling Shirley Phelps & Co. that it's okay to picket funerals and carry "GOD HATES FAGS" signs.
So?..... should everyone just "shut-up" on the issue?...simply because it, too, is "a waste of time" debating the issue? Wha'da ya think, there, "Mr Neutral"??
Boomslang,
I realize you will probably find this answer unacceptable, however I still must remind you and other atheists who post on here that people who carry "GOD HATES FAGS" signs are not "True Christians".
A true christian loves the homosexual, but hates the sin. I know a couple of homosexuals, and I treat them with the utmost respect, however both of them also know that God teaches that their sin is wrong, however at the same time they know that God loves them.
God hates the sinful act, but he loves the homosexual. Anyone who teaches that God hates homosexuals is teaching false doctrine.
"God hates the sinful act, but he loves the homosexual..........BUT............"
Ok Troy, go ahead and finish the rest of the sentence that you left out. Ya know the part where if you do not turn from the act of being homosexual this is what God will do to you.
The part that you so conveniently left out like the cherry picking christian that you are.
hallelujah, praise the lord we can finally wrap up all the controversy and everyone can actually know what god thinks.
You said, "God teaches that their sin is wrong, however at the same time they know that God loves them."
What school does god teach at? I can hardly believe it; can you imagine, we will never have to rely on that dumb, old, holy book, the bible, again, with all it's vague information, contradictory ideas, thousands of varying interpretations. Now we can get it straight from the big guys mouth. I for one can hardly wait to sign up for classes. Come on, troy, don't hold out on us. Let us know where the almighty teaches, so we can finally get everyone on the same page -- peace on earth, eternal bliss, the age old question; should we eat shrimp or not?
Awesome, truly awesome -- I AM WHO AM 101. taught by professor Yahweh!
--S.
You wanna know something, Troy? When this alleged 'sin' is something that feels completely natural to My being...
...And some religious nut comes along saying that they love Me but hate that one particular aspect of Me...
...The rest of their so-called 'love' becomes indistinguishable from hatred in My mind. "Hate the sin, love the sinner" is just weasel words -- Psychological abuse in a party frock.
Astreja,
Are you a lesbian? Hope you don't mind me asking.
As for Advocate, yes I know what part I left out. As for your answer let me say that I choose to focus more on the love and acceptance of Jesus Christ.
I honestly do not know if homosexuals go to hell or not. I would like to think that being homosexual is part of their personality. I think it more less depends on what a homosexual chooses to do with their sexual desires meaning if they choose to act upon them or not.
I don't think that it is wrong to be homosexual and to feel a certain way, I think it has more to do with acting on those feelings as it being wrong or not. Same thing for a straight person.
I think it is the sexual act that is wrong. That's what I think Jesus was talking about.
Like I said.........I focus on the love and acceptance of Christ.
As for Sconnor, the only school I get my lessons from is the Holy Bible. Sorry if that was not the answer you were looking for, I honestly do not know of a better lesson book to learn from.
I've got to start getting ready for church. I've got a deacon's meeting to attend to early this morning, so I hope all of you have a blessed day!!!!
This is the day that the Lord has made. I will be glad and rejoice in it.
I hope all of you do the same. :)
Já, I'm a dyke. As in one of My previous gigs as Dike, the Greek goddess of justice. :-) Plaid shirts, sensible shoes and all.
"I don't think that it is wrong to be homosexual and to feel a certain way... I think it is the sexual act that is wrong."
Sorry, laddie... That's a double standard you're setting up there. Heterosexuals are permitted to express their sexuality but homosexuals must opt for celibacy?
Serious Question: How do you define a "True Christian"?
The more I speak to Christians, the more I find that the definition of a "true christian" corresponds to what that particular person believes. I imagine that the "GOD HATES FAG" guys would sign up wholeheartedly to the Nicene Creed which was, for many hundreds of years, the statement of faith from "true christians".
Troy wrote: A true christian loves the homosexual, but hates the sin.
My experience of being on the receiving end of the "God loves you but hates what you do" message is that the "loves you but" bit quickly gets removed, and the message then gets translated into "you don't belong".
My question is that, if god made homosexual people, why did he make them in such a way that it was impossible to follow his standards (as some would define them)? Some homosexual people also have a faith and call themselves christian - so we're back to the "true christian" question.
Just to throw my 2 cents worth into this conversation.
It's been suggested that some people are predestined for hell and destruction according to the book of Romans. I can't remember which chapter, however it's either Romans Chapter 8 or 9. Some people can never be saved basically is what some people believe due to the fact that an all knowing God knows what choices we are going to make. Kind of like he has already written the chapters on our lives I guess you could say.
Take Pharoah Ramsey for example who was used by God as a tool of destruction. God purposely hardened his heart so therefore it is suggested that Pharoah Ramsey was predestined for destruction and hell and there was nothing that could be done to save him.
then:
"I don't think that it is wrong to be homosexual and to feel a certain way, I think it has more to do with acting on those feelings as it being wrong or not."
I wonder if you think that having homosexual "feelings" doesn't include thoughts of an act? It would hardly seem possible to have one without the other and if this is indeed the case YOU are the one teaching a false doctrine. For didn't jebus himself supposedly say:
"Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."
So thoughts carry "sinfulness" the same as an act does. But before I get too far ahead, explain how one can feel any sexual desire without having a lustful thought? Lust is sexual desire after all.
I've heard people try and weasle word the definition of lust to make it seem like an obsession with sex, but that is their way of making the passage more acceptable to themselves. They can't seem to come to grips with the idea of thoughts being "sinful" either.
Not that I believe any of that tripe in the bible. However if you're trying to explain it in a way that makes sense, you'll see it takes the ignoring or redefining of the context to do it.
jax,
I agree that some do believe in predestination according to biblical teachings. Which also illustrates the biblegod's questionable morality as well as the questionable morality of those that believe in it.
Lev. 20:13 - "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
Maybe I'm missing something here, but, these True Christians of the bible are slicing and dicing the homosexual and spilling their blood.
Where is this love, respect and charity; the only charitable giving here, is the giving of violence.
According to Troy, the biblical authors or the Christian concept of almighty God aren't True Christians.
This is comforting Troy, and the sentiment is mutual. As an atheist and a homosexual I have learned to love the Christian, but hate their willful arrogance, presumptuousness and ignorance. It took me years to achieve this, and it was only upon learning how to pity Christians that I was able to make the change. Pity is a difficult emotion to muster when someone feels compelled to “warn” you of everlasting torment because the warning itself is actually contains a second message; which is “I believe you are so evil, disgusting and vile that you warrant such a punishment.” (Whether or not one claims to speak for their god is irrelevant. This is what the individual believes also.) The fact that this statement is usually made with a smug smile makes it all the more difficult to ignore. However I have learned to do just that and feel pity for the Christian because they also believe that creator of universe feels the same way about them as he does me. The very notion that one can accept the Christian story is very sad and deserves my pity; to carry with you a belief system where you are seen by god as a ‘failed creature’ worthy of everlasting torment deserves nothing but my pity. I love you too Troy.
Oh, SNAP!!!1!1!!
For THE best comeback to the "love the sin but hate the sinner" nonsense that I have EVAR had the privilege to witness!
Please, get yourself a nickname and hang around a while...
It’s me, I Broke Free,
I can never figure out how to get my name to show?
I Broke Free
To Troy,
If your Bible God will allow people to be born:
Deformed
with Autism
Mental Illness
2 Heads
No Arms or feet
Blind
No hearing
Cancer
Various Diseases
A girl in India was born with 4 legs and 4 arms, then it is highly possible that people can be born with a brain that has an attraction of the opposite sex!!!
It's high time that people like Troy get their heads out of the 2000 year ass hole bible.
BTW Troy, we now know with the invention of the microscope that diseases are caused by germs, bacteria, and viruses, not evil spirits, demons and devils.
Also we now know, with the invention of the telescope that the Earth is not at the center of the universe and the Earth is not all that there is in space.
you said, "As for Sconnor, the only school I get my lessons from is the Holy Bible. Sorry if that was not the answer you were looking for, I honestly do not know of a better lesson book to learn from."
Oh, you mean the book where people learned the lessons about burning witches?
The book where christians justified the torture of thousands during the inquisitions?
The book that taught thousands and thousands on Mormons that polygamy was righteous?
The book that taught the religious people of the confederacy that slavery was right in the sight of god?
The book that taught Jehovah witnesses that it was OK to let their children suffer and die because god does not allow blood transfusions?
The book that taught if you were not christian you must be put to death in the Crusades?
The book that taught that women were beneath men and should be subservient?
The book that taught the clergy of conservative evangelicals that women can't be pastors?
The book that taught catholics that women can't be priests?
The book that justified in the minds of insane christians who blew up abortion clinics?
The book that taught the Amish to rebel against modern conveniences?
The book that taught Jews how to mutilate their baby boys penises?
The book that taught catholics their pope is infallible and he speaks the word of god?
The book that teaches about a hundred different ways on how to obtain eternal life, with an array of endless combinations?
A book where god says, Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. -- Colossians 3:13 and to forgive not seven times but forgive seventy times seven. -- Matthew 18:21-22. And yet god invented hell where the punishment and torment in the pits of fire and doom are eternal?
That's the book where you get your lessons from?
Put the cuckoo back in the cuckoo clock!
--S.
The book that inspired Mohammed to write the Koran and is therefore responsible for the world's largest religion: Islam (which is partially a responsible factor for the WTC attacks (not that it's the only factor... and not that a bunch of investment bankers dying is necessarily a bad thing...)
But nonetheless, Christians come onto this site looking for a fight. On this site, as in life, I am happy to oblige them. I don't see this as a waste of time; Christians need to be fought, on the web, on the streets, in the voting booths and in their own churches. Fighting back is never a waste of time.
Oh, you mean the book where people learned the lessons about burning witches?.........
Put the cuckoo back in the cuckoo clock!
------------
Sconnor,
Just wanted to let you know that I thought your comment here on "The Book.." listings were EXCELLENT
In fact, I might print it out and hand it to the next xtian who tries to convert me to the ways of the bible.
It would also make a great poster to, I think.
GOOD WORK !!
ATF (Who wonders if Troy is chasing down that cuckoo bird, that escaped into his mind)
Actually there is more to be written. I would love for anyone to add to it.
--S.
Specific? HAH! More like quote-mined and twisted to fit the needs of the evangelists. I still haven’t figured out how the first messianic prophecy, Genesis 3:15, can be construed as any such thing. How “specific” is a claim about men and snakes going at each other? Then there’s the Christian’s favorite prophecy, Isaiah 7:14. There was no virgin in the original Hebrew, and if read in context, cannot possibly refer to Jesus. How “specific” is a mistranslation taken out of context?
Do you know the real reason that the Jews rejected Jesus? It’s because Jesus does not fulfill any old Testament prophecies, except by torturous misreadings.
Are you familiar with the concept of Midrash?
Gerald wrote: “A mathematician calculated the odds of this occurring by coincidence: The odds of someone fulfilling just 8 prophecies is 1 in 10 to the 17th power. The odds of someone fulfilling 46 prophecies is 1 in 10 to the 147th power. One has to consider the fact that God told mankind all about Jesus hundreds of years before He came into the world so we would know who He was. Peter W. Stoner, Science Speaks (Chicago: Moddy Press, 1963)”
Of course, you can improve these odds greatly by:
1. Finding prophecies that aren’t really there. The author of Matthew was a champion at this.
2. Pretending that the numerous failed prophecies didn’t really fail. Modern apologists do this all the time.
3. Writing about the “fulfilled” prophecies knowing full well what the prophecies were in advance. The New Testament in general.
4. Making prophecies retroactively. Daniel fits in this category.
(Oh yeah, you probably think that Daniel was written during the Babylonian exile by its fictitious namesake.)
Gerald wrote: “The Bible is 100% accurate in its predictive prophecy in general. This means every prediction recorded in the Bible happened exactly as predicted. Of course there are unfulfilled prophecies, but these refere to end time events.”
You don’t seek alternative viewpoints, do you? As for end time prophecies, I categorize the Buybull with all others.
Gerald wrote: “No historical writing has ever contradicted the Bible. The Bible is regarded as 100% historically accurate.”
You don’t get out much, do you?
Gerald wrote: “Nelson Gleuck, a non Christian archaeologist stated, ‘No archaeological discovery has ever contraverted a biblical reference.’”
I keep hearing people say that. With authority. I’m wondering how much intellectual energy it must take to ignore the archaeological discoveries out there. Or do you just choose not to seek other opinions?
Gerald wrote: “William F. Allbright stated that archaeology has confirmed the historicity of the O.T.”
William Albright set out to prove the Buybull. This is an excellent way to find exactly what one is looking for. Albright’s conclusions have been thoroughly debunked be recent archaeology.
Gerald wrote: “The Bible was written over a 1,500 year period, using three different languages, by forty different authors, from a variety of educational and cultural backgrounds.”
Textual criticism indicates more like an 800 year period, by considerably more that 40 people. But that doesn’t affect your point.
Gerald wrote: “For example, Joshua was a military general. Daniel the Prophet was a Prime Minister. Amos was a shepherd. Luke was a physician. Paul was a Rabbi. Peter and John were fishermen. Nehemiah was a court servant.”
Joshua and Daniel were imaginary. I haven’t researched Nehemiah and Amos. Luke, Peter, and John didn’t pen a stroke to the Buybull. With the exception of 7 of the Pauline letters, no one know who wrote the N.T. Ironically, the one author that historians are reasonably sure of never met Jesus!
Gerald wrote: “The books were written on three different continents: Africa, Asia, and Europe. Yet, the Bible forms a cohesive whole, and the authors are in complete agreement. The wondrous unity of the Bible is consistent from beginning to end suggesting a single author. The Literary Test that is applied to works of antiquity rate the Bible as the most accurate book of antiquity.”
O RLY? Have you actually read the thing, or did you just copy and paste this from the same apologetic source that everybody else gets it from? (Um, yes, you’re not the first person i’ve heard this from. Not even close.) Just reading the first 2 chapters of Genesis it’s obvious that they were written by 2 different people—obvious, that is, unless you’ve been mentally conditioned to believe that Moses wrote it all.
Gerald wrote: “You can drill down into many of these statements, and you should.”
Don’t worry, we ex-Christians have learned—the hard way—not to take any thing for granted. Not your word, not the Buybull.
Gerald wrote: “Then it's easy to see how the odds of this book being anything other than extraterrestrial start to add up, exponentially. The odds get so huge, I don't believe anyone has ever attempted to calculate those odds. I refere to it a as virtual impossibility. There is more of course, someone mentioned science disproving the Bible...lol...forgive me but the Bible is not unscientific. There is much science in the Bible. In fact, most of what we know had it's origins in the Bible. But, one subject, and one bit at a time.”
The Buybull is entirely unscientific. Science derives tentative conclusions via observation and experiment. The Buybull derives absolute cunclusions via personal revelation. The two schools are diametrically opposite. Therefore, it shuldn’t be too surprising that the Bible contradicts science all the time. First book, first chapter, verse 6 describes a “firmament” or dome. Science knows of no such structure. Yes, the newer translations read “expanse.” Weasels. First book, first chapter. We’re not off to a great start.
Yes, you can find some words and then twist them to fit modern knowledge, and you can find the odd agreement with science in the same way that a broken clock is correct twice a day. But if the Buybull is such a great science source, why didn’t any theologians notice the scientific facts therein before the scientists discovered them? Why would a god who wants to communicate with us be so cryptic?
Sigh. I don’t know why I bother… except that idiots like Gerald bother to barge in here and preach Christianity to people who already know Christianity, and are fucking tired of hearing it.
you said, "Last I checked,He is my Creator."
Really? Where was it you checked, the library, school, grocery store, your mom's house?
Or was it where he has always been -- in your convoluted, delusional, mind?
Then doom-ass said, "Yah, I am a Christian. I COOSE God for my life and won't force Him on yours. I thank Jesus. Wow. We have choices. If you don't want to choose Him, then you don't, that is your choice--God gave us the capability of choosing..."
Hmmmmm. Let's see, god says, you can obtain eternal life if you choose me and follow a certain criteria or he will cast you down to the hell where you will be punished and tormented with the pains of fire, for an eternity.
That's not a choice; that's an ULTIMATUM, dip shit!
Then you stroke gerald's tallywacker, by delivering this flowery praise, I enjoy reading Gerald's information. Good for him trying to be so patient. Even when people attack him, he is still so composed. Yes, great site for you all.
Friend of his are you, or is this gerald, posing? Go play cuckoo somewhere else; both of you are dip shits.
--S.
The last I checked, there was not a scrap of credible evidence for such a being. Where is it that you're checking, by the way?
Anonymous continued "Refuting the Bible and carrying on about Science, which He created, does not make you as big as you think."
Who are you addressing?
Anonymous: "You will probably tell me how you are so much smarter than I am."
Why would anybody bother with such a silly ad hominem attack? No, I will simply ask you what evidence you have to support your religious beliefs. If you give me poor answers, or refuse to answer, then I may start to form an opinion about your position (and possibly even your intellectual prowess), but not until then. Does that strike you as unreasonable?
Anonymous: "If you don't want to choose Him, then you don't, that is your choice--God gave us the capability of choosing;---or was it science gave us those capabilites?"
What I "choose" to believe is what is supported by the evidence available to me. And no, "science" did not give us the ability to choose; nor do I see any evidence that a disembodied spirit did either. If you would like to rephrase that question to avoid the false dichotomy I'll be happy to give you an answer.
Anonymous: "Okay, God created science, therefore--- bla bla bla bla bla bla. Yakkety yakkety yak, Why does it seem like you wear your emotions and intellect on your sleeves?"
Hmmmm... you brushed over the first point rather quickly. Can you please provide some verifiable evidence for this being you claim created science? If it's okay with you, I'll ignore the ad hominem attacks and just respond to whatever points you attempt to make regarding your deity. Okay?
Anonymous: "Why do you get so mad if somebody else chooses God?"
I don't get mad. I have quite a few family members and friends who believe such things. I think they are badly mistaken, and we occasionally discuss it, but I think everyone has the right to reach their own conclusions. Don't you?
Anonymous: "You were so tired of Christians trying to prove to you God, Jesus, Holy Spirit, The Bible and you are spending your lifetime running your wheels to prove your standpoint to others."
Are you addressing someone in particular, or do you intend for that caricature to fit all of us? Can you please try to be more specific in your remarks? I don't think you want to be wasting your time attacking straw men, do you?
Good day.
P.S. Please use a nickname if you intend to have a discussion with us.
I have a proposal. I'd like to start a new "tradition" of naming anonymous posters. I think that as soon as an anonymous poster has obviously posted more than once, and ignored one or more requests to adopt a nickname, we ought to simply bestow one upon them. In that spirit, I deem our latest anonymous poster "Tinkerbell" unless or until he/she selects a nickname. Does that sound reasonable?
I too, am curious about how you "checked". What did you use? A 'way-back' machine? Fossil record? Sigmoidoscope?
Do tell.
Are you familiar with the concept of Midrash?
CR, I'm sure he's never heard the term. And, even if he has, no matter - Christians have completely dismissed two thousand years of rabbinic tradition. They've been kind enough to explain to us poor, benighted Jews that we missed boat. I get it now - if only we'd accepted Jesus, we'd have saved ourselves a colossal amount of time and effort. We never had God's permission to interpret in the first place! How silly of us! Thanks guys, for making us realize that we've spent the past two millennia misunderstanding and misinterpreting texts that we wrote in the first place.
New Anonymous said,
You will probably tell me how you are so much smarter than I am.
Yes, but, to be fair - it isn't much of an accomplishment.
Spirula said...
Last I checked,He is my Creator.
I too, am curious about how you "checked". What did you use? A 'way-back' machine? Fossil record? Sigmoidoscope?
LOL! Yeah, excellent suggestion! As his god exists in his mind, and his head is up his ass, it's the first place he ought to look. Makes perfect sense!
Unless you are from Holland, I suspect you probably meant, yeah, for "yes".
Disclaimer: While I fully realize that this is technically a strawman argument - in which case, it says nothing about the existence or non-existence of a "god", and instead, it attacks an irrelevant aspect - I still find it very interesting, and as well, I don't mind pointing out, that the majority of religious people who waltz in here cannot communicate effectively. You draw your own conclusion.
Annoyin'us...A lot of you like to limit God.
Oh, good grief, if you refer to the Christian biblegod, Anony', please actually think about what you are saying(if possible) Hello?..."God" is LIMITED TO THE PAGES OF THE CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. Ding dong?
For instance, practically every emotion attributed to "God", per the Christian doctrine..i.e..the "bible", is that of what we limited mortals were "created" with...e.g.. "jealousy", "anger", "rage", "vengefulness", "pridefulness", and on, and on. Another obvious instance is that "biblegod is appararently "limited" as to what he can do with "sinners". Yes, said "God" presumably has no choice in the matter, which obviously, leaves him limited.
Annoyin'us...Last I checked, He is my Creator.
Where did you "check", and what evidence can you offer to validate wherever it is that you "checked"? If you have no verifiable evidence, then you are merely speculating.
Annoyin'us...Thus, He is smarter than us.
"thus" my a$$. Again, you have nothing but a bare assertion. Waiting on evidence for a "god", please.
But even assuming such a being exists and is "smarter" than us, then why couldn't it figure out a simpler and more effective way to get people "saved"? Hmmmm?
Annoyin'us...If you don't want to choose Him, then you don't, that is your choice--
Great....so, my choice; I chose....yet, for some strange reason, Christians can't seem to shut-the-f%ck-up about "my choice".
Anony', listen closely---in concept, if your biblegod wants to make my "will" take precedence over his own, then neither he, nor anyone else, should have anything to say about it. YOU - coming here and blabbering on about it - is, in effect, an implicit attempt to influence MY "will". Remember, not even your biblegod would do that.
Oh "yah", evidently, "God" did not "create" paragraph-breaks Mon-Sat.
Ok, how come God seems to look on certain people with more favor? Why have you been touched yet some of us never have? Perhaps your God is a liar when he says he does not play favorites?
Me thinks that your so called encounter with God is all in your head.
I don't buy your Bullshit, so don't come on here pushing it on the rest of us.
If you don't like the way some of us talk, well that's just too damn bad for you, so fuck off!
PHANT---But, why would you make threats to shove your fist down my throat? No, cause & effect tells me not to lay down in the road and call on God. B/c I believe in God, does not mean that I don't possess daily common sense. I only SHARED my personal experiences about God and that I personally pursued Him ----& that is why I happened to experience Him. I experienced Him, I believe, is B/C I PURSUED HIM-----that's all. I am not trying to force Christianiy into your life. Not everyone on this site communicates like you--the reason I don't like how you communicate b/c you begin cussing with irrational anger. You are targeting me b/c you are mad at Christians. I hope I don't get any more threats. Jim Arvo, what do you think of that? I do think we live in a great land where we are able to share in conversation--we have freedom of speech. But, come on. What is the point in threatening someone's physical health b/c you're mad? And b/c you think of Christians the way that you do, you desire their ultimate death? Does anybody else see harm in this response? I don't care what our titles are or who we think we are. We also live in a land where the law exists and our laws do not tolerate physical assaults. I may not debate and argue at your "so-called" levels, but I do know when someone has crossed the line!
Like I said, I don't even agree with all Christians' perceptions. And the more I read this site, I am enlightened how exChristians respond. Thank you. I am thankful to be exposed to this and to try and understand how exChristians think and speak. But, I am not just focused on this group. I am interested in how various groups interact/communicate, etc.
BOOMSLANG: your argument re: how I spelled, "yah". Okay........so sorry I did that. Good day.
Did it ever occur to you that ex-christians DON'T believe because we pursued "him"?
Whether you are really "sorry", or not, I plainly layed out the disclaimer. If you review it, you'll see that, in essence, I was really making an observation - and I even admitted its irrelevance to the topic at hand - and that point was, while not all Christians spell like 7th graders, most of the religious people I encounter have horrible writing skills. But then again, for all I know, you may actually be a 7th grader....
...yah?
Please tell us why you think that any of us need to know your endlessly repetitive mind babble. Why? You KNOW that we’ve, (the majority of posters on this site), found the majority of faith-based texts to be self-serving, man-made nonsense. You KNOW that we’ve found them to be full of demanding, petty, cruel, capricious, confounding and contradictory dictates. You can surely see, as you read them, that they are simply reflections of base human nature, or plain lousy manners. In fact, the foggy stink of Gods bad behaviour reminds me of a spoiled, tantrum-throwing adolescent. WHERE is the appeal? The good example? Why are you vaunting this foolish, corrosive mindset to us? I think your ‘righteous conviction’, and your need to chatter here is not about us, it’s about you. It’s just narcissism, or self-love. Onan to that!
S.
You said, "I have had my own experiences, I believe, b/c I pursued God and believed.....but, how do you explain that to someone? and I honestly believe that because I have pursued God that I have experienced Him: in His divine presence and among certain people who have chosen to yield to him too."
Oh, do tell. How did you experience god? I've experienced plenty in my life and I could give details of those experiences. Why is your experience so difficult to explain? Does it sound foolish when you commit it to the written page?
Then you state,
"I believe that God can be easily distorted within human interpretation--among exChristian and Christian."
How do you know your interpretation, your experience, has not been distorted?
Then you said, "Just having actual life now is a miracle and/or realistic/concrete---however you choose to look at it. I just think that there are awesome things that happen now, that provide a "concreteness" to amazing things above and beyond."
Tell that to the mother in Cambodia, whose baby just died because of unclean water.
WHAT A MIRACLE!
Tell that to a mother in Uganda, whose child just died, from hunger.
AWESOME!
Tell that to the little girl being repeatedly raped by her pastor.
AMAZING!
Tell that to the baby that was born with it's heart on the outside of her chest, suffering for months, only to die.
ANOTHER MIRACLE OF LIFE!
Tell that to the families whose lives were ripped apart by a tornado.
Tell that to the families of children who are in the Pediatric Burn Unit.
Tell that to the families who were just told their child has an inoperable brain tumor.
Tell that to the parents who were just told their child has a rare form of cancer.
Now multiply these small examples by the millions who have endured horrendous suffering in life. The millions of individual lives, with all their hopes and dreams and loves destroyed by unimaginable pain and suffering.
WOW, WHAT A FUCKING MIRACLE OF LIFE!
This is your creator? He created this fucked up, shitty, cesspool? Being god and all, you would think he could have done a better job.
--S.
I disagree with your interpretation, La Choy. "Communicated poorly"? No. On the contrary, the posters in question are effectively communicating their anger and frustration after being preached at for the nth time.
Which is one of the reasons this site is here... To provide a place for people to work through anger related to negative experiences with the Christian religion.
"I have faith in God and I just honestly don't understand why some exChristians are so upset."
Well, I can tell you why *I* am upset.
- I consider Christianity to be barbaric, with its emphasis on feeling gratitude for the bloody death of its protagonist.
- I see the harm that it's doing to science education.
- It absolutely disgusts Me that many adult authority figures continue to cause psychological harm to young people by threatening them with hellfire. That, in My opinion, is child abuse.
- I know several non-Christians who have been harmed by Christians who learned of their unbelief.
"Our brains are a component to having been created..."
Unsupported assertion. I see no evidence of a sentient creator-being.
"If we are able to have life here in the now, what other possibilities exist for our futures (in respect to eternal life?)"
It seems odd indeed to postulate one-way "eternal life" (i.e., from birth to an infinite future, but not to an infinite past).
Personally I favour the hypothesis that "eternal life" is actually "eternal existence as matter and/or energy, but not necessarily sentient, and certainly *not* possessing the sense of 'Me' that is currently manifest in this particular human brain".
"Now, do I really want to share all of my experiences? No, perhaps, not in this place."
No, definitely not in this place. It will not be welcomed or appreciated. The best you can hope for here is "Well, that's interesting; but it never happened to me in all my years as a Christian."
If you don't like the way certain people talk to you on here, then simply don't post your rubbish about God on here. We don't appreciate having that kind of rubbish crammed down our throats.
You are not the only one who has made claims about having an experience with God. I could not tell you the number of times that I have heard people claim that they have had experiences with God or they have been touched by God, however none of you can produce any type of evidence to back up your claims so why should any of us on here believe you? Personally I think you would like to think you have had an encounter or experience with God, however I doubt that your experience was real. It was more less your active imagination.
I do not know you personally, however I will tell you that I do not like what Christians represent. I have a real problem with people who go around shoving biblical lies and propaganda down the throats of others. I also have a real problem with a group of people (Mainly Christians) who persecute those who do not subscribe to the christian belief.
All most christians know how to do is discriminate against those who choose to be their true selves. Most christians go around sticking their noses in politics and they interfere in the private lives of gays and other minorities. Most christians continuously try to push their values and beliefs on everyone else who choose to believe something different. Instead of accepting people for who they are most christians reject people who choose not to believe in the christian message. Most christians also reject and persecute others who choose to live their lives the way they see fit even if it does not line up with the "Biblical Christian Standard".
I consider christians to be a major threat to this country and many other civil liberties. Christianity and the bible have done more damage to this country than it has done this nation any good. Other nations such as Australia and Canada have done just fine without the christian belief or it's God. Matter as fact they have done better educational wise. That's for sure.
All most christians know how to do is offer people false hopes and expectations of a God who has failed to deliver his promises that he supposedly made in the bible. The bible is nothing more than pages and pages of cheap talk about how great God is and how he is going to do all of these great things. The bible is nothing more than black and red print on paper with no action to back up these false claims.
We've all heard this same big talk from christians and people like you, who had your incredible experience or encounter from God, however to us it is nothing more than talk and if God expects us to find credibility with some claim from some christian or someone like yourself who has supposedly had some incredible experience with God, well he has a lot to learn about people.
In all honesty, and to put it bluntly many of us are sick and tired of all of these ridiculous claims about God and these so called experiences that christians and people like you have supposedly had with God. Plus we are sick of hearing about what the bible has to say on the matter.
I do not, and will not allow my life to be dictated by some 2,000 year old book that was written by a bunch of Goat/Sheep Herders.
First, I have an important word of advice; literally one word. Paragraphs. They're a good idea. Use them.
You stated multiple times that you found god because you pursued him. This means that you "pursued" god before you had any concrete evidence for him, right? Have you pursued other deities as well? How about Krishna, or Buddha, or Allah, or Mithra? If you pursue them, they might reveal themselves to you as well. In fact, I strongly suspect that if you pursued them with the same vigor that you pursued Yahweh/Jesus, you would find just as much to confirm that they are real. I say this because if you LOOK for something thinking & hoping that it is there, there's a good chance you will find it--or at least you will think you've found it. We tend to see what we want to see, and this is nowhere so evident as it is in religion, where communiqués from the big guy are cleverly hidden among everyday occurrences and whispered into the ears of ardent believers.
As for the tenor of the responses that you've gotten, here's a little experiment for you to try. Look for a house that has a "No Soliciting" sign on the front door, then walk up, ring the door bell (many times), and greet the home-owner with these words: "Would you like to buy some magazines?" No matter what the person says, just launch into a long sales pitch, using every cliché you can think of. Now, tell me; would you expect a polite response? Let's further suppose that one of the family members had recently suffered a nervous breakdown because of constant harassment from sales people, hence the prominent sign on the door. Would you expect to be invited in for tea?
A more realistic analogy would be handing out free shots of whiskey at an AA meeting. Give that a try sometime. My guess is that you'll consider your reception here to have been a good bit friendlier.
I think everyone here will find it very eye-opening...
That being said, it is clear that the reason you've been able to do this is because of your security in your faith, something that I know I once viewed as a virtue. The ability to hear argument after argument and address them without having them sway you sounds like an amazing trait on paper. You're strong, you're devoted and you're committed.
The thing is, the rules of the universe just don't back you up on this one. Neither do the rules of debate, the whole of human history, or even the Bible itself.
I don't think it's smart to attempt to unravel all of the knotted arguments that you've made in this thread at once, so I'll just tackle the topics one at a time.
The first thing I want to talk about is your dollar analogy. I always find it interesting when advocates of Christianity insist on using an argument by analogy instead of debating the topic itself. The claim is that it helps to clarify a point that would otherwise be hard to understand, but usually it simply sidesteps the issue by forcing it into a different context in which you set the terms.
I'm going to do my best to address this analogy on its own terms because, even though I hate to get drawn into that particular trap, I think it can be used to illustrate my point of view as well. You claim that choosing a faith is like picking a dollar out of a pile of counterfeits. You may not recognize it at first, but when you go to spend it, you will realize which is real and which is fake.
This makes sense from the point of view of a Christian who believes in his God and his Bible with all of his heart, but it's not going to work with people who don't belong to your faith, and who haven't chosen your currency.
We can assume for a moment that you're right, and that Christianity is the only true path to salvation, while all other paths lead to damnation (I'm not sure I've ever actually seen you say this, so if this isn't the viewpoint you're advocating, I apologize). I'm saying in this case that you are correct and that in the end all other forms of "counterfeit" currency will be null and void, and only belief in the real thing will save you.
The issue is that even though your currency is the right one, everyone else is spending other types of currency and they believe that theirs is the right one. They are exchanging it, they are spending it between themselves, and only you and those who are using the real currency know that it has no true value, and that in the end they won't be able to cash it in for an eternity with God.
They believe just as strongly as you do that their currency is correct. It's not, but that hasn't convinced them otherwise.
So how do you go about convincing them that your dollar, the one they think is a counterfeit is real. Your suggestion is to disinvest yourself from the other currency and instead invest in the true currency. After all, you know it's the right one, if they just gave it a shot, they would too.
What you're forgetting is that there is no incentive to give it a shot, no reason to believe that your currency isn't the counterfeit. In fact, since this is ExChristians.net, they have already used your currency, decided it is the counterfeit, and moved on to using a different one.
I'm not sure that came across as clearly as I meant it to, that's one of the problems you run into when arguing by analogy, but my point is this: You can't argue that something is true just because it can't be disproven. Otherwise, any belief system without any inherent contradictions (flying spaghetti monster anybody?) becomes valid. People need a real reason to disinvest in their own beliefs and invest in yours. It matters not at all that you know it's right, what matters is showing them that it's right.
I see from your other arguments that you’re trying to do just that, and not badly. Still, I’m afraid that nothing you’ve said here holds water. I’ll go on to post some more (though I doubt I’ll finish another one tonight) about the historical, logical, and philosophical problems that Christianity causes, and I honestly look forward to seeing your responses to them. It’s good to know that there can be intelligent discussion on both sides of this.
I must ask---it is really considered "intelligent" to promote, as Universal Truth, concepts that are riddled with logical fallacies and internal philosophical contradictions?
For example, previously I said:
"Until I hear back[Gerald], you've solved NOTHING by the scripture you quote. Ultimately, either the will of man, or the will of 'God', is stronger, and thus, only one of them takes precedence. Which is it, Gerald? You can't have it both ways."
To which Gerald replied(and I previously overlooked):
This statement is ilogical. Here's why. God does not impose his will on anyone. (He might impose judgement, but that's different.) You have free choice. God does not have everything His way. For example, He wants many good things for each of us, but we don't receive them because we don't always do the right thing. The will of man, and God are not mutually exclusive. There is no conflict here.
Oh yes, I'm afraid the conflict is still there, and it is just as blatant as ever.
Again, no "omniscient" being - in this case, "biblegod" - can be "free" to "impose" anything, that is, if it knows, a priori, the set of ALL future events--including, how, when, and why it will "do", or decide, anything.
In other words, if "God" already knows who will, and who will not, "choose Him", then logically, said being knows, a priori, who "He" will "impose judgment" on, and how.
Simply put: "God" knows where the cards will fall. If this is true - if "God" knows the future - then it would logically follow that "God" is powerless to change the future, or else, "God" never knew how he would "act", or react, in the first place.
Gerald, you're not being intellectually honest. That doesn't seem too "intelligent", IMO.
True, I think my beliefs are right and his are wrong. I come from a VERY conservative, southern baptist family. I tried God, he didn't work for me. I personally believe that following a christian (or really any religious doctrine) is detrimental to a person's psychological health and their world view. I am an evangelical athiest, I think other people should also be athiests, or at the very least non-religous.
But as an ex-christian, I would hope that you especially would understand that these beliefs are just like facts to the people who believe them. They are putting forth an intelligent discussion following the facts that they believe to be true. You can't expect to convince them otherwise by disrespecting their beliefs, any more than you can expect to carry on an intelligent conversation with somebody who is hostile to yours.
Ill-informed as he is, Gerald shows a lot of self-restraint and calm in the face of multiple attacks on the thing that is most important to him in the world. True he asked for it by coming here to begin with, but then, that is also him doing what he believes is right. I'm glad you're not being swayed by his less than logical arguments, but he deserves respect just like the rest of us.
Understood, but would you agree that to "believe" something, isn't necessarily to know it? In other words, you're right, we won't likely get too far stating what we "believe" over and over and over. However, while you and I might "believe" that "square circles" don't exist, we also know that they cannot exist. Such a concept is impossible, regardless of how hard we "believe" it is possible, and/or, how long someone else tells us, politely, that it is. The same is true for any personal being who is claimed to be both "omniscient", and "omnipotent"...or any personal being who claimed to be both "omnipresent", and "omnibenevolent".
All I'm essentially saying, is that to have conversations while ignoring such contradictions - regardless of how diplomatically it's ignored, or circumvented - is not what I'd consider "intelligent" conversing, IMO.
Walruss...I'm glad you're not being swayed by his less than logical arguments, but he deserves respect just like the rest of us.
Here, I guess we agree to disagree. And IMO, that only helps the Atheist position, because it shows non-believers that we don't follow any "one-size-fits-all" doctrine, nor do we have such a mentality. Yes, I believe the Theist visitors deserve respect, in that he or she is allowed to give his or her opinion on a website clearly designated for recovering ex-christians. After that, it's "open season".
Peace.
Post a Comment