EPTYou bring up the point Never Post that because that portion is wrong, all of it must face the same scrutiny. Yeah, it is almost impossible if you admit that some parts might have external influences to say that the Bible is believeable at all. I suppose that is where something called "faith" comes in :D
[Christian topic] Greg Laurie - Page 8
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
TheOvermind77
United States923 Posts
You bring up the point Never Post that because that portion is wrong, all of it must face the same scrutiny. Yeah, it is almost impossible if you admit that some parts might have external influences to say that the Bible is believeable at all. I suppose that is where something called "faith" comes in :D | ||
|
0z
Luxembourg877 Posts
On April 18 2007 14:01 Annor[BbG] wrote: How is it sex slavery? Exodus 21 10 If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and [b]martial rights. feeding and fucking someone doesn't mean he isn't your slave | ||
|
Annor[BbG]
United States55 Posts
On April 18 2007 14:02 0z wrote: feeding and fucking someone doesn't mean he isn't your slave Do you want me to even respond in earnest to that? | ||
|
TheOvermind77
United States923 Posts
On April 18 2007 13:48 Annor[BbG] wrote: So when Jesus said that the Old Testament was accurate, he was actually lying? Well, I don't know about that. You really think if he knew there were things with external influences he would have said "Well, except for Chapters 6-7 of Leviticus, verses 28-30 of this chapter and this blah blah..."...Nah, I don't think so. The entire meaning and purpose of the Old Testament is what he is referring to, I believe...in that we believe in one God, etc. Also, it is important that we realize that the Bible has been altered in an incredible amount of ways since it was written. Chapters have been removed, books have been removed, books have been added, passages have been re-translated, etc...there are so many factors to consider. I still believe in its overall purpose and I believe in God, but I admit there are some things in there that are definitely not the words that God has spoken... The monumental task of discerning which are the words of God and which are the words of a Human is why we have so many denominations today. | ||
|
0z
Luxembourg877 Posts
On April 18 2007 14:07 Annor[BbG] wrote: Do you want me to even respond in earnest to that? well its just an observation, not a question, but if you have anything to say, you are welcome | ||
|
Never Post
United Kingdom503 Posts
On April 18 2007 14:02 TheOvermind77 wrote: You bring up the point Never Post that because that portion is wrong, all of it must face the same scrutiny. Yeah, it is almost impossible if you admit that some parts might have external influences to say that the Bible is believeable at all. I suppose that is where something called "faith" comes in :D Yes that's the point I'm making. However I think 'faith' is wrongly interpreted as a virtue. If a child really believes in Santa Claus despite all the adults knowing better, that only creates something imaginary in his own mind. Adults know there is no Santa Claus whether a child believes in him or not, little do they realize many of them face the same situation with their 'faith' in god. If someone still holds illogical beliefs in the face of strong evidence, most would say they're just being idiotic. 'Faith' encourages one to do this, therefore it is (at least partly) idiotic. | ||
|
littleboy
Canada6 Posts
| ||
|
TheOvermind77
United States923 Posts
On April 18 2007 14:10 Never Post wrote: Yes that's the point I'm making. However I think 'faith' is wrongly interpreted as a virtue. If a child really believes in Santa Claus despite all the adults knowing better, that only creates something imaginary in his own mind. Adults know there is no Santa Claus whether a child believes in him or not, little do they realize many of them face the same situation with their 'faith' in god. Well, the thing is, it is impossible to determine with any sort of proof whether God exists OR doesn't exist...hence the problem. No athiest can prove that God is definitely not in existence, and no Christian can prove to him that God does, in fact, exist. If there were such indisputable proof, more people would certainly be one or the other. Sure, hypothetically a person could even create a religion about Santa Claus. He could twist it and turn it so that it is impossible to prove wrong. If you are interested in that, please see the Scientology thread.  The difference between that and Christianity is its length of existence, its amount of supporting documents (relating to the faith over a LARGE period of time), and its number of believers. Religion is faith. You can't prove it either way. So that is what I mean when I say it comes down to faith...no one can prove me wrong! Go ahead, try to prove to me God doesn't exist! Then again, if you ask me to prove that he exists, I am in a similar predicament. Ah, I love deep discussions like this. | ||
|
Never Post
United Kingdom503 Posts
On April 18 2007 14:11 littleboy wrote: Whole sections of the Bible are taken up with the idea of sacrifices. God told his people in the Old Testament (the early part of the Bible) that they had to bring animal sacrifices, sheep and cows, and kill them in a ritual way in order to be forgiven their sins. The sacrifice reminded the people of the seriousness of their sins. It had consequences for the sinner, who had to pay for the animal he brought - there was cost involved. It cost the animal its life. The animal had to be perfect, without any defect - you could not satisfy God with just any old deformed creature taken from your herd or bought cheaply in the market. It had to be the best. Oh, so natural bodily functions are sinful and must be repented. Animal Genocide here I come! | ||
|
Never Post
United Kingdom503 Posts
On April 18 2007 14:16 TheOvermind77 wrote: Well, the thing is, it is impossible to determine with any sort of proof whether God exists OR doesn't exist...hence the problem. No athiest can prove that God is definitely not in existence, and no Christian can prove to him that God does, in fact, exist. If there were such indisputable proof, more people would certainly be one or the other. Sure, hypothetically a person could even create a religion about Santa Claus. He could twist it and turn it so that it is impossible to prove wrong. If you are interested in that, please see the Scientology thread. The difference between that and Christianity is its length of existence, its amount of supporting documents (relating to the faith over a LARGE period of time), and its number of believers. Religion is faith. You can't prove it either way. So that is what I mean when I say it comes down to faith...no one can prove me wrong! Go ahead, try to prove to me God doesn't exist! Then again, if you ask me to prove that he exists, I am in a similar predicament. Ah, I love deep discussions like this. I like how you retreat behind your 'faith' barrier, it reminds me of a primary school child covering their ears and shouting "I'm not listening LALALALALA!" No wait - I don't like it at all, it's cowardly. Supporting documents were written by people. Believers are people. So people created god? Shouldn't it be the other way round? Also, just because a lot of people have thought one thing for a long time doesn't mean you shouldn't argue against it. It wouldn't be of much use to us if we all still believed the Earth was flat. I don't want to get into does god exist or not because eventually you'll just redefine god as something abstract enough to avoid logical arguments. | ||
|
Annor[BbG]
United States55 Posts
[QUOTE]On April 18 2007 13:48 Annor[BbG] wrote: So when Jesus said that the Old Testament was accurate, he was actually lying?[/QUOTE] Also, it is important that we realize that the Bible has been altered in an incredible amount of ways since it was written. Chapters have been removed, books have been removed, books have been added, passages have been re-translated, etc...there are so many factors to consider. I still believe in its overall purpose and I believe in God, but I admit there are some things in there that are definitely not the words that God has spoken.../QUOTE] Please inform me of which chapters were removed, which books were added after the Council, and which books were removed after the Council. The Bible has been translated, but not re-translated. I also don't understand how you can believe that God is a limited being without superior powers. If God wanted a book written exactly the way he wanted it written are you saying that is beyond the scope of God's powers? If so, some God that is. | ||
|
[jOyO]
United States920 Posts
Poll: Did Jesus really exist (Vote): Of course he did (Vote): No, it was a number of people that were generally good people (Vote): No he didn't (Vote): Cant say for sure | ||
|
[jOyO]
United States920 Posts
| ||
|
TheOvermind77
United States923 Posts
On April 18 2007 14:24 Never Post wrote: I like how you retreat behind your 'faith' barrier, it reminds me of a primary school child covering their ears and shouting "I'm not listening LALALALALA!" No wait - I don't like it at all, it's cowardly. Supporting documents were written by people. Believers are people. So people created god? Shouldn't it be the other way round? Also, just because a lot of people have thought one thing for a long time doesn't mean you shouldn't argue against it. It wouldn't be of much use to us if we all still believed the Earth was flat. I don't want to get into does god exist or not because eventually you'll just redefine god as something abstract enough to avoid logical arguments. Cowardly? I really wasn't trying to invoke such a cruel response...I was more interested in a thought-provoking one. The problem is that you say humans created God. I say that God created humans. You know we won't get very far in arguing this. I'm not trying to convince you that a God exists. I'm not trying to attack your beliefs. I'm just saying that any person who has seen this whole thread of arguments before will know that it will end with no one proving anything. The problem is, you can't create a LOGICAL argument to argue against OR for God. As I said before, if there was such argument, there would be quite a bit of news on it. I mean, here is an example: Me: God exists. You: No he doesn't. I can't see him. I have no proof. Me: Well he is so powerful and stuff that you can't see him. You: But maybe he doesn't exist then. If it isn't observable or quantifiable...why should I believe it? You have no proof. Me: Well he could exist but you just can't tell because of human limitations. You: You're wrong. Me: You're wrong. I know where you live. You: Let's take it outside. Me: I'll beat you down, sucka. You: I got my brass knuckles so don't even think it. Me: Your mom had brass knuckles. You: That was lame. Me: That's what she said. And this continues ONTO INFINITY! So how about we do this instead: Me: I believe God exists. You: I believe that there is no God. Me: Well, you are free to believe what you will, I have no way of proving to you otherwise. You: Same for your beliefs. Let's go to White Castle and get a Crave Case. Me: Sweet. I like that ending much better :D | ||
|
Annor[BbG]
United States55 Posts
On April 18 2007 14:24 Never Post wrote: I like how you retreat behind your 'faith' barrier, it reminds me of a primary school child covering their ears and shouting "I'm not listening LALALALALA!" No wait - I don't like it at all, it's cowardly. Supporting documents were written by people. Believers are people. So people created god? Shouldn't it be the other way round? Also, just because a lot of people have thought one thing for a long time doesn't mean you shouldn't argue against it. It wouldn't be of much use to us if we all still believed the Earth was flat. I don't want to get into does god exist or not because eventually you'll just redefine god as something abstract enough to avoid logical arguments. Atheists show a different cowardice than Christians but it still can be served to the same end. Anytime a Christian asks you to prove God doesn't exist, you hurl the question right back in the opposite way asking us to prove he does. Although the Bible was written by the hand of man, it doesn't even remotely indicate that people created God. I love with Atheists use the 'world is flat' example, lol it shows how determined they are to stick to what they think and not what is proven. The Bible said the world was round long before any European confirmed it. Isaiah 40:22 (King James Version) 22It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in. You want to debate logically? I think the only way you can make us unable to logically prove God's existence is by dwindling logic down so far that it is too abstract for US to prove it. | ||
|
0z
Luxembourg877 Posts
[QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:07 TheOvermind77 wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 13:48 Annor[BbG] wrote: So when Jesus said that the Old Testament was accurate, he was actually lying?[/QUOTE] Also, it is important that we realize that the Bible has been altered in an incredible amount of ways since it was written. Chapters have been removed, books have been removed, books have been added, passages have been re-translated, etc...there are so many factors to consider. I still believe in its overall purpose and I believe in God, but I admit there are some things in there that are definitely not the words that God has spoken.../QUOTE] Please inform me of which chapters were removed, which books were added after the Council, and which books were removed after the Council. [/QUOTE] which council do you mean? [QUOTE] I also don't understand how you can believe that God is a limited being without superior powers. If God wanted a book written exactly the way he wanted it written are you saying that is beyond the scope of God's powers? If so, some God that is.[/QUOTE] As far as I get it he doesn't believe that god as a being with whatever powers exists at all, so trying to convcice him with "God wanted the book that way, thats why it is that way" won't get you too far | ||
|
TheOvermind77
United States923 Posts
[QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:07 TheOvermind77 wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 13:48 Annor[BbG] wrote: So when Jesus said that the Old Testament was accurate, he was actually lying?[/QUOTE] Also, it is important that we realize that the Bible has been altered in an incredible amount of ways since it was written. Chapters have been removed, books have been removed, books have been added, passages have been re-translated, etc...there are so many factors to consider. I still believe in its overall purpose and I believe in God, but I admit there are some things in there that are definitely not the words that God has spoken.../QUOTE] Please inform me of which chapters were removed, which books were added after the Council, and which books were removed after the Council. The Bible has been translated, but not re-translated. I also don't understand how you can believe that God is a limited being without superior powers. If God wanted a book written exactly the way he wanted it written are you saying that is beyond the scope of God's powers? If so, some God that is.[/QUOTE] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English_Bible_translations]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English_Bible_translations[/url] Go there and see for yourself the ridiculous amount of translations and versions. It is amazing!!! I don't think God is limited. God made humans with free will, allowing us to sin or not sin, to believe or not. If he revealed himself fully in an entirely indisputable manner, where would this free will go? Just my thoughts. | ||
|
Never Post
United Kingdom503 Posts
On April 18 2007 14:33 TheOvermind77 wrote: Cowardly? I really wasn't trying to invoke such a cruel response...I was more interested in a thought-provoking one. The problem is that you say humans created God. I say that God created humans. You know we won't get very far in arguing this. I'm not trying to convince you that a God exists. I'm not trying to attack your beliefs. I'm just saying that any person who has seen this whole thread of arguments before will know that it will end with no one proving anything. The problem is, you can't create a LOGICAL argument to argue against OR for God. As I said before, if there was such argument, there would be quite a bit of news on it. I mean, here is an example: Me: God exists. You: No he doesn't. I can't see him. I have no proof. Me: Well he is so powerful and stuff that you can't see him. You: But maybe he doesn't exist then. If it isn't observable or quantifiable...why should I believe it? You have no proof. Me: Well he could exist but you just can't tell because of human limitations. You: You're wrong. Me: You're wrong. I know where you live. You: Let's take it outside. Me: I'll beat you down, sucka. You: I got my brass knuckles so don't even think it. Me: Your mom had brass knuckles. You: That was lame. Me: That's what she said. And this continues ONTO INFINITY! So how about we do this instead: Me: I believe God exists. You: I believe that there is no God. Me: Well, you are free to believe what you will, I have no way of proving to you otherwise. You: Same for your beliefs. Let's go to White Castle and get a Crave Case. Me: Sweet. I like that ending much better :D I would have no problem with that were it not with the problem that belief in god limits one person's thinking. No longer will you want to explain the mysteries of the universe or the origins of ourselves, since it's a one word answer: god. They teach you simpler models of the way electrons work at secondary school, then tell you it's all wrong at sixth form and was just taught to hide the real complexities. This seems exactly like religion, a simple explanation when you don't really understand much. However if one were to simply accept the 'god' explanations they would never unveil the truth, or even want to. In this way I believe that faith is limitting and not helping humanity advance. | ||
|
Never Post
United Kingdom503 Posts
On April 18 2007 14:36 Annor[BbG] wrote: Atheists show a different cowardice than Christians but it still can be served to the same end. Anytime a Christian asks you to prove God doesn't exist, you hurl the question right back in the opposite way asking us to prove he does. Actually that's not the only counter-argument, but it's the lazy atheists' approach. I don't really want to explain other reasons because I don't see how this one isn't an equal and sufficient reply. Although the Bible was written by the hand of man, it doesn't even remotely indicate that people created God. I wasn't talking about what the Bible says about god, I think that's obvious. I love with Atheists use the 'world is flat' example, lol it shows how determined they are to stick to what they think and not what is proven. The Bible said the world was round long before any European confirmed it. What are you talking about? I was just making an example of false mass-beliefs, not necessarily religion-related. But if you do want a religious one, how about when the Church convicted those who believed the Earth was not at the centre of the universe? You want to debate logically? I think the only way you can make us unable to logically prove God's existence is by dwindling logic down so far that it is too abstract for US to prove it. That doesn't really make sense. What I meant is if I attempt to disprove 'a god', you'll just turn around and say that's not 'your god'. | ||
|
TheOvermind77
United States923 Posts
On April 18 2007 14:43 Never Post wrote: I would have no problem with that were it not with the problem that belief in god limits one person's thinking. No longer will you want to explain the mysteries of the universe or the origins of ourselves, since it's a one word answer: god. They teach you simpler models of the way electrons work at secondary school, then tell you it's all wrong at sixth form and was just taught to hide the real complexities. This seems exactly like religion, a simple explanation when you don't really understand much. However if one were to simply accept the 'god' explanations they would never unveil the truth, or even want to. In this way I believe that faith is limitting and not helping humanity advance. I don't think I'm missing out on anything. I mean, what am I limiting myself to? I love astronomy and the cosmos...the Big Bang, relativity, black holes, etc....and science. I love hearing about evolution, genetics, origin of life, life on other planets...I really don't know what you mean by telling me that I am limiting myself to anything. Remember, I am not a Biblical literalist. I believe in the Big Bang and God (O NOES!). I believe in Evolution and God. I am entering a highly scientific field for my masters and an engineer and I follow all new scientific developments. Where are my limitations again? I want us to keep searching to the answers for the mysteries of life. Find out where it originated! Find out what caused us to spring into existence! Solve the cosmos! That stuff is the only stuff I like reading about in Popular Science, anyways :D. What caused the Big Bang? What created that event? What created the event that cause THAT event? I can ask that into oblivion. The answer is either God or something else. Since no one knows right now and no one can scientifically prove otherwise, I'll go with God. Religion does limit the thinking of some people, however. The hardcore right-winged uber-conservative Christians that have very closed minds and go on those rallies with signs that say "God hates fags" are severly limited in their mental capacity. That is where I think people take religion too far...when they start perverting it or something of the like. Those people piss me off. Plus going to White Castle, as I said before, is clearly the best answer. | ||
| ||
