Jehovah's Witnesses

[Negative Sun]

I recently had a 45-minute long discussion at my door with two of these men, and it was quite an interesting experience, they left this little book called "What does the Bible really teach?" and I have a few questions I hope some people can answer:

 

It explained that God's purpose with earth was to have a paradise where everyone could live forever as long as they obeyed him, but Adam and Eve ruined that for all of us, and now Satan rules the world because God wants to prove His point that only He is fit to rule this world...

 

Why did God put that Tree of knowledge there in the first place? Wouldn't we all have been better off if he hadn't?

If God values our free will so much, why does it matter to Him whether we believe in Him or not?

And even if he did, wouldn't it be easier if he proved He did exist so people wouldn't have to have blind faith into something that may or may not exist?

The Bible says only those in tombs will be resurrected on Judgement Day, does that mean God is against cremation?

Isn't it a bit easy to say that God allows evil things to happen because Satan rules the world?

So God is responsible for everything Good, and Satan for everything Evil...Just as much as there can't be day without night etc...It doesn't explain anything IMO To me it sounds like about every other religion or moral belief in this world...

If God is so perfect, why does he need people to worship him? Is that not an incredible ego trip? Isn't God supposed to be AGAINST vanity?

My opinion is, IF he proves that he can indeed smite all Evil and turn this into an earthly paradise, everyone will worship him without a doubt, out of their own free will, so what's stopping Him?

 

I will probably come up with more questions, but that's all I can think of right now.

 

A few rules for this thread:

This is not an anti-God thread or religion vs atheism thread, please respond only if you sincerely want to answer these questions and discuss them in a friendly manner.

I myself am an atheist/agnostic and do not wish to be converted, I am just curious as to how Christian logic explains all of this, so I can have a better understanding of it.

I would appreciate it if a mod could keep an eye on off-topic stuff since these are serious questions I want answered and I don't want it to turn into another clash of ideals.

 

That's all, I'm very much looking forward to Jae and Jedimaster12's opinions on this since they have proven themselves to be coherent and understandable in our previous discussions, but anyone else feel free to join in!

[Darth InSidious]

I recently had a 45-minute long discussion at my door with two of these men, and it was quite an interesting experience, they left this little book called "What does the Bible really teach?" and I have a few questions I hope some people can answer:

I can try and answer some, but I'm by no means a theologian...

It explained that God's purpose with earth was to have a paradise where everyone could live forever as long as they obeyed him, but Adam and Eve ruined that for all of us, and now Satan rules the world because God wants to prove His point that only He is fit to rule this world...

Hmm...And where does Christ fit into all this? I'm just curious, as I've never really had much of a discussion with them...Just curious, as they aren't very active near me (we get more scientologists...)? I mean, why, if it is still true, would the death and ressurection of Christ be necessary?

Why did God put that Tree of knowledge there in the first place? Wouldn't we all have been better off if he hadn't?

I don't know about J'sWs, but I believe he gave us free will - we had to have a choice of whether to do right or wrong...

If God values our free will so much, why does it matter to Him whether we believe in Him or not?

The simplest definition of God that I know of is that 'God is Love'; presumably it would be fitting, and you could even say necessary that we show some reciprocation...? Not really sure on this one; ask me again in thirty years...

And even if he did, wouldn't it be easier if he proved He did exist so people wouldn't have to have blind faith into something that may or may not exist?

Faith isn't completely blind...At least according to Catholic theology, we know of God's existence by reason (logic drawn from the world around us) and revelation (knowledge drawn from God -dreams could be a source of this, but it could simply be something someone says to you that catches your attention, as I understand it...)

The Bible says only those in tombs will be resurrected on Judgement Day, does that mean God is against cremation?

Given the sheer numbers of people being cremated, I would imagine that some kind of bodily reconstitution will need to be involved. Come to think of it, I would imagine it would be necessary for those who were entombed as well...

Isn't it a bit easy to say that God allows evil things to happen because Satan rules the world?

I would say yes...My own argument would be that most evil is caused by humans, and that natural disasters which aren't our fault are either the work of Satan to cause us to doubt or for another aim, or are a trade-off of the way the world is designed...

So God is responsible for everything Good, and Satan for everything Evil...Just as much as there can't be day without night etc...It doesn't explain anything IMO To me it sounds like about every other religion or moral belief in this world...

Well, that's because its basically much like other Christian beliefs on good and evil...Perhaps it would be better to say that God is the *root* of all good, and Satan the *root* of all evil...?

If God is so perfect, why does he need people to worship him? Is that not an incredible ego trip? Isn't God supposed to be AGAINST vanity?

I honestly don't know.

My opinion is, IF he proves that he can indeed smite all Evil and turn this into an earthly paradise, everyone will worship him without a doubt, out of their own free will, so what's stopping Him?

They wouldn't believe though. They would *know*. Proof denies faith...And perhaps he's been revealing himself in quite blatant ways, and we've just been blind to it...?

A few rules for this thread:

This is not an anti-God thread or religion vs atheism thread, please respond only if you sincerely want to answer these questions and discuss them in a friendly manner.

I myself am an atheist/agnostic and do not wish to be converted, I am just curious as to how Christian logic explains all of this, so I can have a better understanding of it.

I would appreciate it if a mod could keep an eye on off-topic stuff since these are serious questions I want answered and I don't want it to turn into another clash of ideals.

 

That's all, I'm very much looking forward to Jae and Jedimaster12's opinions on this since they have proven themselves to be coherent and understandable in our previous discussions, but anyone else feel free to join in!

Thanks for laying down some rules, and I hope my answer helps, if only a little

[Aurora Starfire]

Those are some very deep questions. Like Darth InSidious, I am no theologian, but I have spent the last few years in a rigorous religion curriculum, so I'll do my best to answer. (I'm also going to re-order your questions a bit, so that my answers flow a bit better)

 

It explained that God's purpose with earth was to have a paradise where everyone could live forever as long as they obeyed him, but Adam and Eve ruined that for all of us, and now Satan rules the world because God wants to prove His point that only He is fit to rule this world...

Isn't it a bit easy to say that God allows evil things to happen because Satan rules the world?

I don't think that this is the state of things at all. I think that Eden was not a paradise in which man would live forever. Rather, I believe that at the appointed time, God would take each man, body as well as soul, unto Himself. There would have been no "death" as we know it, only a taking up, of which the Assumption is one of the few examples. Another thing. Christ is King, and Satan is merely an invader, a troublemaker, a would-be usurper. No one, and nothing, has ever, or could ever take the throne from God Himself. Satan is currently raiding and pillaging our world because of his free will; he chose to reject God, and so was cast out of Heaven; God is neither "allowing" Satan to rule, nor is He tolerating his presence. There is a supernatural (and sometimes physical) battle going on all around us, the prize of which is the control of each of our souls. Evil is not merely Satan running around breaking stuff, either. Man has a free will, as well, and we do not always choose to do good. God respects the free will that He gave us, and so He does not force us to do good, but rather hopes and asks that we do good, rather than evil.

 

If God is so perfect, why does he need people to worship him? Is that not an incredible ego trip? Isn't God supposed to be AGAINST vanity?

He doesn't need people to worship him. He doesn't need anyone, or anything. He created the angels and men out of Love, because He wished to give us life, and love us, and He also wished for us to love Him back. That is what true worship is, to love someone so much that you would be willing to do anything for Him.

 

Why did God put that Tree of knowledge there in the first place? Wouldn't we all have been better off if he hadn't?

As I see it, God created the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and He told Adam and Eve not to eat of its fruit. He did this because He wished for us to obey Him out of trust and love, to trust that He knew what was best for us, and to love Him enough to obey him.

 

And even if he did, wouldn't it be easier if he proved He did exist so people wouldn't have to have blind faith into something that may or may not exist?

Darth InSidious answered this very well. Everything around us cries out to the existence of God, even, and especially, you yourself. So, through reasoning, we can conclude that God exists, as well as revelation, through the Bible, and visions and dreams, and occasionally through physical experiences.

 

The Bible says only those in tombs will be resurrected on Judgement Day, does that mean God is against cremation?

Darth InSidious made a good point here, as well, but here's some more info:

The Catholic Church permits cremation provided that it does not demonstrate a denial of faith in the resurrection of the body. The Church counsels that, if the body is to be cremated, that it be done after the funeral. This gives relatives and friends the chance to view the body, express their condolences, etc. It also counsels that the cremains then be buried in blessed ground. This provides a place to visit and pray. Many cemeteries allow cremains to be buried on top of another grave, or for two or more cremains to be buried in the same cemetery plot. Entombment in a mausoleum also provides a place and many opportunities to pray and remember. As time goes by, that place to visit and remember becomes very important.

 

So God is responsible for everything Good, and Satan for everything Evil...Just as much as there can't be day without night etc...It doesn't explain anything IMO To me it sounds like about every other religion or moral belief in this world...

Darth InSidious's analogy was correct. And not every other religion or moral belief is like this. I can think of several heresies that believed that everything in the physical world was evil. This obviously isn't the case, because God does not create anything which is not inherently good. Even Satan was not evil, in the beginning.

 

My opinion is, IF he proves that he can indeed smite all Evil and turn this into an earthly paradise, everyone will worship him without a doubt, out of their own free will, so what's stopping Him?

Not everyone would. Some people enjoy things that are, in fact, evil. If God destroyed those things, I'd imagine they'd be pretty unhappy. Aside from that, we should keep in mind that we were never intended to stay on earth forever, rather we were meant to be with Him in Heaven, which is the ultimate paradise. Also, as I said before, God is showing us perfect love by respecting the free will He gave us. He isn't going to force good upon us, but rather He wants us to choose to do His will, which is always good.

 

I hope I explained it clearly enough. If you have any questions about any of my explanations, please ask.

[MTV2]

I think the real question here is:

Does God Really Exist?

 

This particular thread assumes the existence of God. Negative Sun specified that it's not an atheism/theism debate. --Jae

[Achilles]

Hi there,

 

I believe that my post is in accordance with Negative Sun's 2nd groundrule, but might be in violation of the 1st. My purpose, like his, is to better understand the logic behind these arguments, however if you feel that responding to this (if you choose to do so) will violate the first rule, then feel free to do so via PM.

 

Ok...

 

There is a supernatural (and sometimes physical) battle going on all around us, the prize of which is the control of each of our souls.

Ignoring a key component of this and assuming, for the sake of argument, that souls do exist, what evidence do we have of this battle? Anything you can do to clarify the supernatural aspects of it would be very useful, but I imagine that the physical parts are going to be a lot easier to point out (therefore, I'm very much interested in learning more about them).

 

God respects the free will that He gave us, and so He does not force us to do good, but rather hopes and asks that we do good, rather than evil.

How does this explain the passages in the Bible where God commands us to do things that would generally be considered evil today? Examples include rape, murder, slavery, and child-abuse.

 

This might go toward the "Literal Word/Inspired Word" question that I ask later in this post.

 

Darth InSidious answered this very well. Everything around us cries out to the existence of God, even, and especially, you yourself.

Isn't this relative though? I remember hearing a priest make a very similar argument during a radio interview. He said, and I'm paraphrasing, that the "magnificence of the world is obviously the work of God" (emphasis mine). But wouldn't that be a matter of opinion? I acknowledge that for him this matter is obvious, but what if someone else had a similarly "obvious" conclusion that was counter to this?

 

Wouldn't it be better to say that some evidence other than our perception would better support the argument that God created everything that we see?

 

So, through reasoning, we can conclude that God exists,

Could you please provide an example of such reasoning?

 

as well as revelation,

Can revelation be explained through some other means than God? Also, how do we determine which revelations are "really God" and which ones aren't? David Koresh and Jim Jones are both examples that most people would consider "revelation gone wrong".

 

through the Bible,

Which begs the question: Is the Bible the literal word of God or the inspired word of God?

 

Inspired word of God would better explain the contradictions, however it seems that it would have to be the literal word of God in order to support the circular logic that the Bible is evidence of God's existence.*

 

* in all fairness, you have not made this claim so this isn't directed at you, rather those that do use it.

 

and visions and dreams, and occasionally through physical experiences.

I think any response offered for my "revelation" question above would satisfy any questions I have regarding visions and dreams here.

 

However I would be interested in learning more about the physical experience (as proof of God's existence).

 

Thanks for reading and thanks in advance for your response (either here or PM).

[Mace MacLeod]

*Has flashbacks to 10 different threads in the Senate Chambers*

 

Surefire Way to Get Rid of Jehovah's Witnesses or Any Other Door-to-Door Jesus Salesmen

 

Obtain pagan books or simply memorize bits and pieces from online sources--The Golden Dawn, I-Ching, or anything by John Dee or Aleister Crowley should do nicely. Then when the guys show up with their one-bead-of-sweat-short-of-crystal-meth smiles, invite them in, let them go through their spiel for a minute or two, then start quoting from your pagan literature. If you bought one, whip out the book (pick it up second-hand so it's nice and dog-eared) in question, and show them the quoted passages. Within five minutes flat, they'll be ready to chew off their own limbs and then dive through plate glass windows to escape.

 

Alternative Method--after inviting them in, have friend walk in wearing long, black robes and severed goat's head mask and ask them if they're virgins. Bonus points if this friend then goes storming back upstairs screaming; "DAMN LYING SQUIRRELS!!!"

 

Not on topic, but too funny to delete.... --Jae

[The Source]

Why did God put that Tree of knowledge there in the first place? Wouldn't we all have been better off if he hadn't?

Some Christians believe that the "tree of knowledge" is a medifore, which explains the moment when mankind became aware. Other words, mankind went through an evolutionary procces, and Adam and Eve were at the stage of awareness. Once Adam and Eve became aware of death, sin, pain, etc... they were removed from a nieve species. Thus, paradise is a state of being. Paradise existed when mankind was nieve. Because of the evolutionary proccess. mankind became totally aware to the world around them.

 

If God values our free will so much, why does it matter to Him whether we believe in Him or not?

Since mankind rejected him by choice, I believe it was wise of him to allow mankind to make the choice in returning. If god were to force mankind to follow him, people would not have their own will. What type of god would he be if he didn't give mankind a choice. (I think I could have approached this in a different manner, but I tried my best at the question.)

 

The Bible says only those in tombs will be resurrected on Judgement Day, does that mean God is against cremation?

Through out the book of Revelation, there is more than one moment where resurrection occurs. One insodent includes the resurrection all those who were in graves. Another includes those who are old, etc... "The Great Resurrection" moment includes everyone who was left. When a person is cremated, they turn to ashes. God accepts the ashes and dust.

 

If God is so perfect, why does he need people to worship him? Is that not an incredible ego trip? Isn't God supposed to be AGAINST vanity?

According to the Bible, God created mankind. In that context, mankind belongs to God. Otherwords, the bible states that he is the father. If you had a son or daughter, how would you feel if they called someone else dad? Within the bible, God also mentions that he is a jellous god. Because of his role in the bible (as the father), you can see how he would be upset to see his children calling someone else dad.

 

I wish I can point out specific information, which would help you with these questions.

 

:: After Thought About The Bible ::

What people forget about the authors is something very primitive. I am not calling them primitive, but I am talking about something that people over see. All except for one disciple was a family man, and they were fathers themselves. If you think about the message they convey about god, one must also take into consideration that they added something about themselves. They most likely asked, "I am a father or brother, how would I feel if I was in his place." Remember, the bible was written by sinners who were inspired by god. Thus, god did not write the bible himself.

[Negative Sun]

Hmm...And where does Christ fit into all this? I'm just curious, as I've never really had much of a discussion with them...Just curious, as they aren't very active near me (we get more scientologists...)? I mean, why, if it is still true, would the death and ressurection of Christ be necessary?

From what I gather it was necessary to prove God's power to grants us all eternal life, like Christ resurrected some other guy (forgot his name) to prove His power was granted by Jehovah Himself...My main concern is, why could he do it back then, but not now?

 

I don't know about J'sWs, but I believe he gave us free will - we had to have a choice of whether to do right or wrong...

That still doesn't explain why the tree was there though, if God gave them free will why would he assume they would keep away from the tree forever, humans are curious in nature, if you assume God made us that way, wouldn't He have known it would happen sooner or later?

 

The simplest definition of God that I know of is that 'God is Love'; presumably it would be fitting, and you could even say necessary that we show some reciprocation...? Not really sure on this one; ask me again in thirty years...

But isn't true, unconditional love just that: unconditional...Having to love someone back sounds like a condition to me.

Let me put it this way, does a child HAVE to love their parent just for being their parent? Sure the parent gave the child life, but what after that? What if the parent neglects the child or doesn't care about it? I believe that is why most people lose faith in God, because if He is the Almighty and our father and so caring, why do we suffer and feel alone and miserable and all that bad stuff? Because of Satan? Give me a break... If someone would hurt my child in that way I would stand up for it and comfort it, what comfort is there in believing in God? Believing in something good is far from something ACTUALLY being good IMO...

 

Faith isn't completely blind...At least according to Catholic theology, we know of God's existence by reason (logic drawn from the world around us) and revelation (knowledge drawn from God -dreams could be a source of this, but it could simply be something someone says to you that catches your attention, as I understand it...)

But is that faith not blind when the reason is being put into question, what proves that that reason alone is the right one besides belief alone? Again that goes down to faith, which is blind in the way that proof is not 100% satisfactory, or otherwise it just couldn't be questioned now would it?

 

Given the sheer numbers of people being cremated, I would imagine that some kind of bodily reconstitution will need to be involved. Come to think of it, I would imagine it would be necessary for those who were entombed as well...

That's a good point, I was just curious about that.

 

I would say yes...My own argument would be that most evil is caused by humans, and that natural disasters which aren't our fault are either the work of Satan to cause us to doubt or for another aim, or are a trade-off of the way the world is designed...

If it indeed is a trade-off, then this world is not so perfect as the Bible claims it should be now is it? Isn't this world supposed to descend from Eden? What kind of Eden allows random disasters to kill hundreds of innocents?

If it is indeed Satan's work, we are back at the Yin/Yang analogy aren't we, it takes faith alone to determine that everything Good is Jehovah's work and everything bad is Satan's...

 

Well, that's because its basically much like other Christian beliefs on good and evil...Perhaps it would be better to say that God is the *root* of all good, and Satan the *root* of all evil...?

You mean as in the original cause of everything good and evil? Again to me it comes down to faith here doesn't it? Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to contest the existence of God, I'm just trying to understand why people believe in Him without a shadow of a doubt and find comfort in that, because I sure can't...

 

I honestly don't know.

Fair enough

 

 

They wouldn't believe though. They would *know*. Proof denies faith...And perhaps he's been revealing himself in quite blatant ways, and we've just been blind to it...?

Or perhaps there just are no revelations and it's all just fiction? Who's to say? Unless the day comes in which he actually does prove His existence beyond a shadow of a doubt (aka Judgement Day, Armageddon, etc...), His existence will always be challenged...

 

Thanks for laying down some rules, and I hope my answer helps, if only a little

Thanks for taking the time to answer them, I know they're not easy...

 

 

I don't think that this is the state of things at all. I think that Eden was not a paradise in which man would live forever. Rather, I believe that at the appointed time, God would take each man, body as well as soul, unto Himself. There would have been no "death" as we know it, only a taking up, of which the Assumption is one of the few examples. Another thing. Christ is King, and Satan is merely an invader, a troublemaker, a would-be usurper. No one, and nothing, has ever, or could ever take the throne from God Himself. Satan is currently raiding and pillaging our world because of his free will; he chose to reject God, and so was cast out of Heaven; God is neither "allowing" Satan to rule, nor is He tolerating his presence. There is a supernatural (and sometimes physical) battle going on all around us, the prize of which is the control of each of our souls. Evil is not merely Satan running around breaking stuff, either. Man has a free will, as well, and we do not always choose to do good. God respects the free will that He gave us, and so He does not force us to do good, but rather hopes and asks that we do good, rather than evil.

If God isn't allowing or tolerating Satan's presence, why is it there still? Isn't He supposed to be the Almighty? And why are there so many evil things happening then?

Could you be more specific about the supernatural battle going on around us please? I don't quite get what you mean there...

 

He doesn't need people to worship him. He doesn't need anyone, or anything. He created the angels and men out of Love, because He wished to give us life, and love us, and He also wished for us to love Him back. That is what true worship is, to love someone so much that you would be willing to do anything for Him.

Like I said before though, IMO love is unconditional, then why does He wish for us to love Him back?

 

As I see it, God created the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and He told Adam and Eve not to eat of its fruit. He did this because He wished for us to obey Him out of trust and love, to trust that He knew what was best for us, and to love Him enough to obey him.

But isn't obeying Him without questioning His motives a sign of blind faith? Did he not give us free will and the power to reason for that purpose: to use it? And to me it still didn't explain why the tree was put there in the first place if not to lead Adam and Eve into temptation?

 

Darth InSidious answered this very well. Everything around us cries out to the existence of God, even, and especially, you yourself. So, through reasoning, we can conclude that God exists, as well as revelation, through the Bible, and visions and dreams, and occasionally through physical experiences.

What kind of reasoning are we talking about here? Science? Philosophy? or something else maybe say...Faith?

 

The Catholic Church permits cremation provided that it does not demonstrate a denial of faith in the resurrection of the body. The Church counsels that, if the body is to be cremated, that it be done after the funeral. This gives relatives and friends the chance to view the body, express their condolences, etc. It also counsels that the cremains then be buried in blessed ground. This provides a place to visit and pray. Many cemeteries allow cremains to be buried on top of another grave, or for two or more cremains to be buried in the same cemetery plot. Entombment in a mausoleum also provides a place and many opportunities to pray and remember. As time goes by, that place to visit and remember becomes very important.

Thanks you for that information...

The Catholic church counsels that it should be buried in blessed ground, what defines blessed ground? If God indeed create this Earth and the Universe, is it not all blessed? Would it matter if the ashes were scattered somewhere?

 

Darth InSidious's analogy was correct. And not every other religion or moral belief is like this. I can think of several heresies that believed that everything in the physical world was evil. This obviously isn't the case, because God does not create anything which is not inherently good. Even Satan was not evil, in the beginning.

So earthquakes and Tsunami's and Hurricanes and Cancers are inherently good? Since they are a part of this world I would assume they are part of God's creation are they not?

 

Not everyone would. Some people enjoy things that are, in fact, evil. If God destroyed those things, I'd imagine they'd be pretty unhappy. Aside from that, we should keep in mind that we were never intended to stay on earth forever, rather we were meant to be with Him in Heaven, which is the ultimate paradise. Also, as I said before, God is showing us perfect love by respecting the free will He gave us. He isn't going to force good upon us, but rather He wants us to choose to do His will, which is always good.

I thought we were all supposed to live happily ever after in Eden, until A&E ruined that...

 

I hope I explained it clearly enough. If you have any questions about any of my explanations, please ask.

As you can see I still have a lot of unanswered questions, I agree that some are tough and maybe borderline fair, but I tried my best to sound reasonable...

 

Why did God put that Tree of knowledge there in the first place? Wouldn't we all have been better off if he hadn't?

Some Christians believe that the "tree of knowledge" is a medifore, which explains the moment when mankind became aware. Other words, mankind went through an evolutionary procces, and Adam and Eve were at the stage of awareness. Once Adam and Eve became aware of death, sin, pain, etc... they were removed from a nieve species. Thus, paradise is a state of being. Paradise existed when mankind was nieve. Because of the evolutionary proccess. mankind became totally aware to the world around them.

That is a very interesting way to see things, which does lead me to this question: Does this mean the Bible has more to do with symbolism than actual facts and events?

 

The Bible says only those in tombs will be resurrected on Judgement Day, does that mean God is against cremation?

Through out the book of Revelation, there is more than one moment where resurrection occurs. One insodent includes the resurrection all those who were in graves. Another includes those who are old, etc... "The Great Resurrection" moment includes everyone who was left. When a person is cremated, they turn to ashes. God accepts the ashes and dust.

It's interesting to see different perspectives on this matter, thanks.

 

If God is so perfect, why does he need people to worship him? Is that not an incredible ego trip? Isn't God supposed to be AGAINST vanity?

According to the Bible, God created mankind. In that context, mankind belongs to God. Otherwords, the bible states that he is the father. If you had a son or daughter, how would you feel if they called someone else dad? Within the bible, God also mentions that he is a jellous god. Because of his role in the bible (as the father), you can see how he would be upset to see his children calling someone else dad.

He is a jealous God? Is that what you mean? Isn't jealousy one of the 7 sins?

 

:: After Thought About The Bible ::

What people forget about the authors is something very primitive. I am not calling them primitive, but I am talking about something that people over see. All except for one disciple was a family man, and they were fathers themselves. If you think about the message they convey about god, one must also take into consideration that they added something about themselves. They most likely asked, "I am a father or brother, how would I feel if I was in his place." Remember, the bible was written by sinners who were inspired by god. Thus, god did not write the bible himself.

In that case, how is the Bible actually the word of God? And not just a bunch of different people with the same idea? (which is IMO what a religion is all about)

 

 

lol @ Mace MacLeod, I'll keep it in mind...

 

Wow that's a long post: Enjoy!

I'm off to bed

[The Source]

That is a very interesting way to see things, which does lead me to this question: Does this mean the Bible has more to do with symbolism than actual facts and events?

Well, the fundamentalists believe in the word literally. Depending on the Christian, many of the details are symbolic for other things. The book of Revelation was writen by John, and he lived around 400 A.D. Anything that John had seen about the future needed a reference, so he interpreted the vision he had with everyday life. Otherwords, he could have seen a jetfighter, and then he called it a dragon. There could have been an interest in his time, which revolved around dragon themed stories.

 

In that case, how is the Bible actually the word of God? And not just a bunch of different people with the same idea? (which is IMO what a religion is all about)

It is believed that the Bible was inspired by the word of God, but through the hand of man. Not all of the disciples talk about the birth of Jesus. Even though they are not consistant on events, they talk about morality, salvation, origins, beginnings, and endings. The Bible is not all about laws, but about mankind's struggle with existance in general.

 

The Bible is not black and white. Even within the word of God, the statement was made that mankind will never know the whole story until 'revelation'.

 

Just so you know what diety I am from: I am a Chritian, and I am not a Jehovah's Witnesses. There is nothing wrong with being a Jehovah's Witnesses, but my interpretation of God's word is different. Thats all.

 

So earthquakes and Tsunami's and Hurricanes and Cancers are inherently good? Since they are a part of this world I would assume they are part of God's creation are they not?

One would have to go beyond philosophy to answer this one. God did create the Earth, but is the Earth a living being? If the Earth is a living being, we must assume that it needs to breath, eat, and grow. In actuallity, the Earth is doing all those thing, but we gave them different designations. We as humans have blood that keeps us alive. Could Earth's blood be oil, and we are killing it? Therefore, the Earth is trying to compansate for what we are doing. If you think about it, mankind is a form of bacteria on the surface of a living being. They do not teach that in Sunday school. The reality is too cold.

[Jae Onasi]

I recently had a 45-minute long discussion at my door with two of these men, and it was quite an interesting experience, they left this little book called "What does the Bible really teach?" and I have a few questions I hope some people can answer:

 

It explained that God's purpose with earth was to have a paradise where everyone could live forever as long as they obeyed him, but Adam and Eve ruined that for all of us, and now Satan rules the world because God wants to prove His point that only He is fit to rule this world...

I think that's a little odd, but that's me. The JWs came about in the US from a man who read an English version of the Bible and made interpretations from that--I'm not sure what his educational background was, but I don't believe his background was theology before he started the JWs. Don't quote me on that--it's been something like 20 years since I heard that.

Why did God put that Tree of knowledge there in the first place? Wouldn't we all have been better off if he hadn't?

The honest answer? I don't really know. I'm guessing it was to give people the option of free will and choice.

If God values our free will so much, why does it matter to Him whether we believe in Him or not?

Because He wants a relationship with each one of us. As a parent, I can't compel my children to love me, but I want to show them my love and do what's best for them based on my knowledge and experience (which they may or may not have).

And even if he did, wouldn't it be easier if he proved He did exist so people wouldn't have to have blind faith into something that may or may not exist?

What's the level of proof required by each person? Some would be content to hear His voice. Others would be OK with seeing him. Still others would need to touch Him before being able to believe. A few more could have all the data staring them in the face and would still refuse to believe, saying it was all some elaborate ruse. There is a great deal of evidence for Christ's existence, a lot more than can be elaborated here in a short post at the moment.

The Bible says only those in tombs will be resurrected on Judgement Day, does that mean God is against cremation?

What specific verse are you (or the JWs) referring to? I've never heard that one, and while I don't have the Bible memorized, I have read the entire thing through, and have read the New Testament a number of times.

Isn't it a bit easy to say that God allows evil things to happen because Satan rules the world?

Individuals make the choices to do evil. Satan does like to draw people to him and away from God, but it's still the individual who has the responsibility for his/her own actions.

So God is responsible for everything Good, and Satan for everything Evil...Just as much as there can't be day without night etc...It doesn't explain anything IMO To me it sounds like about every other religion or moral belief in this world...

I can't speak a lot about other religions because I haven't studied them in any great deal. However, it's the individual who is responsible for doing right or wrong. God or Satan certainly can encourage someone one way or another, but each person makes the decision to act one way or another.

If God is so perfect, why does he need people to worship him? Is that not an incredible ego trip? Isn't God supposed to be AGAINST vanity?

He doesn't need any of us. However, He does want to share His love with us, and have us share ours in return.

 

My opinion is, IF he proves that he can indeed smite all Evil and turn this into an earthly paradise, everyone will worship him without a doubt, out of their own free will, so what's stopping Him?

How many children of the rich and famous have you seen who have everything in the world, are living in the perfect home, and are still ungrateful snots who expect the world to be handed to them on a platter? God could give us everything we ever wanted and make this world a paradise, but that wouldn't change our hearts. It's not perfection God is looking for, because we can't achieve that. It's a relationship that He wants with us.

 

There's a start. Probably raised more questions than it answered.

[Achilles]

There is a great deal of evidence for Christ's existence, a lot more than can be elaborated here in a short post at the moment.

Hi Jae,

 

Could you (or someone else) please elaborate more on this? Also, does this evidence also speak to his divinity (specifically being the son of the Christian God and not some other) or simply his existence as a historical figure? I look forward to your reply.

[SilentScope001]

I do not want this to be religion vs. christainy. Negative Sun, you're be better off asking a Jev. Witness than us in knowing what they believe...

 

Oh, and Jae, since I am not familar with Christian theology, could you mind explaining to me what is this Tree of Knoweldge, and where the Garden of Eden is located (I assumed it to be another name for Heaven, but a Chrisitan said it was a seperate place, which made me quite confused).

 

1. Why did God put that Tree of knowledge there in the first place? Wouldn't we all have been better off if he hadn't?

 

Since I am not familar with the Tree of Knowledge, and my religion only mentions that Adam ate an Apple and that why he fell from Heaven...well...why did God place that apple over there?

 

It's just an apple, really. Nothing special, or evil or anything terrible. If God said Adam could eat the Apple, then everything is fine. But God did not. Possibly, God decided to test Adam by giving Adam an aritfical limit, that is, "don't eat the apple". Adam decided to go against God and eat the apple, a silly sin when you realize that he could eat lots of other fruits other than that apple that got him kicked out of Heaven, and made him feel sad that he disobeyed God willingly.

 

It is a way of testing if humanity would really be loyal to God, or would it do its own thing. Adam obivously failed the test, but he asked God for forgiveness for eating the apple, and God accepted his apology. Adam was not allowed to go back to Heaven...but then again, it was already part of God's plan to have people on Earth anyway.

 

2. If God values our free will so much, why does it matter to Him whether we believe in Him or not?

 

It really does not matter to Him. God basically said that he does not need Humanity, and boasted that if all of his creation turned against him, it would not weaken him one iota...and if everyone worshipped him, it would not strengthen him one iota. God said we need him.

 

And even if he did, wouldn't it be easier if he proved He did exist so people wouldn't have to have blind faith into something that may or may not exist?

 

According to God, he did prove himself, several times, via miracles and holy books, but of course, nobody accepted that proof, so it was useless.

 

But, really, why bother? God does not want our worship, it's not up to him to pander to us humans. We have to be the ones who worship God...God does not worship us.

 

In fact, I'm thinking that the lack of proof concering God may be one way in which God is sorting off the "wheat" of humanity from the "chaff", so to say. Basically, those who believe in God without any proof whatsoever are much more humble than, say, someone who would ask for scientific evidence of everything.

 

The Bible says only those in tombs will be resurrected on Judgement Day, does that mean God is against cremation?

 

Really? Then it's a "Get out of Hell Free" card! Awesome! I'll call for a cremantion when I die.

 

According to what I believe, there is the concept of souls or minds or such. Basically, it is the Soul that gets stripped from the Body and goes to its own seperate place, to wait until the day of judgement. The body is, you know, just a body. Better to bury it, traditonal reasons...but it's not as if cremation means you won't be resurrected.

 

Not to mention that if "intact bodies" are necessary to go to the Afterlife, there will be few people in both Heaven and Hell...the worms and ants will eat up the bodies.

 

Isn't it a bit easy to say that God allows evil things to happen because Satan rules the world?

Maybe. There are other religions out there that believe in the same thing, the God of Good battling against the God of Evil in Zorastraism.

 

But just because it's "easy" doesn't mean it's wrong. It could be seen as a copt-out...but it might be the right answer.

 

So God is responsible for everything Good, and Satan for everything Evil...Just as much as there can't be day without night etc...It doesn't explain anything IMO To me it sounds like about every other religion or moral belief in this world...

Well, it's Jevonah's Witness. A religious sect. Surely, you wouldn't expect something different?

 

To me, God contorls both Good and Evil. Doesn't sound right to limit God to be only Good...God may prefer Good, but without God to create Evil,, there cannot be Good.

 

If God is so perfect, why does he need people to worship him? Is that not an incredible ego trip? Isn't God supposed to be AGAINST vanity?

As Mohammed Ali said, "It's not bragging if it's true."

 

Basically, God says he's all-mighty. God knows he's all-mighty. God is ready to use his all-mighty fist to smash you if you do not believe in him. So, best to believe in him.

 

My opinion is, IF he proves that he can indeed smite all Evil and turn this into an earthly paradise, everyone will worship him without a doubt, out of their own free will, so what's stopping Him?

 

Frankly, because he doesn't need to pander to us, we need to pander to him. I don't see why people have to see God as having to tender to our very whim and desire. He's God, and he made us. Surely that's enough pleasure?

 

God also wants to test us, to see if we would indeed believe in him through the worst of times. Surely people would worship God if there was nothing preventing him...but the true believers would worship God no matter what. So, God gives humans great hardship and great prosperity presically to see if we would sccumb to pressure and stop worshipping God. If you still worship God despite all that God has done, then you deserve his bounty.

[JohnOneOne]

I recently had a 45-minute long discussion at my door with two of these men, and it was quite an interesting experience, they left this little book called "What does the Bible really teach?" and I have a few questions I hope some people can answer:

 

It explained that God's purpose with earth was to have a paradise where everyone could live forever as long as they obeyed him, but Adam and Eve ruined that for all of us, and now Satan rules the world because God wants to prove His point that only He is fit to rule this world...

 

Why did God put that Tree of knowledge there in the first place? Wouldn't we all have been better off if he hadn't?

If God values our free will so much, why does it matter to Him whether we believe in Him or not?

And even if he did, wouldn't it be easier if he proved He did exist so people wouldn't have to have blind faith into something that may or may not exist?

The Bible says only those in tombs will be resurrected on Judgement Day, does that mean God is against cremation?

Isn't it a bit easy to say that God allows evil things to happen because Satan rules the world?

So God is responsible for everything Good, and Satan for everything Evil...Just as much as there can't be day without night etc...It doesn't explain anything IMO To me it sounds like about every other religion or moral belief in this world...

If God is so perfect, why does he need people to worship him? Is that not an incredible ego trip? Isn't God supposed to be AGAINST vanity?

My opinion is, IF he proves that he can indeed smite all Evil and turn this into an earthly paradise, everyone will worship him without a doubt, out of their own free will, so what's stopping Him?

 

I will probably come up with more questions, but that's all I can think of right now.

 

A few rules for this thread:

This is not an anti-God thread or religion vs atheism thread, please respond only if you sincerely want to answer these questions and discuss them in a friendly manner.

I myself am an atheist/agnostic and do not wish to be converted, I am just curious as to how Christian logic explains all of this, so I can have a better understanding of it.

I would appreciate it if a mod could keep an eye on off-topic stuff since these are serious questions I want answered and I don't want it to turn into another clash of ideals.

 

That's all, I'm very much looking forward to Jae and Jedimaster12's opinions on this since they have proven themselves to be coherent and understandable in our previous discussions, but anyone else feel free to join in!

 

Regarding the purpose of the 'Tree of Knowledge of Good and Bad,' the answer to your question is key to also understanding why the world is in the mess that it is, as well as why God has yet to do something about it.

 

Simply put, that "Tree" represented Jehovah's right, as Adam and Eve's Creator, Father and God, to determine for them what was in their best interests, that is, when it came to what was good/right and bad/wrong for them. And, the prohibition against eating from it was set in place as a way to afford them the opportunity to demonstrate their appreciation of the fact of God's right to provide guidance in these areas of living.

 

Interestingly, The Jerusalem Bible touched on this very issue:

 

"This knowledge is a privilege which God reserves to himself and which man, by sinning, is to lay hands on [Genesis], 3:5, 22. Hence it does not mean omniscience, which fallen man does not possess; nor is it moral discrimination, for unfallen man already had it and God could not refuse it to a rational being. It is the power of deciding for himself what is good and what is evil and of acting accordingly, a claim to complete moral independence by which man refuses to recognize his status as a created being. The first sin was an attack on God’s sovereignty, a sin of pride. This rebellion is described in concrete terms as the transgression of an express command of God for which the text used the image of a forbidden fruit."

 

Taken from: The Jerusalem Bible. Jones, Alexander (b.1906-d.?), General Editor. (Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1966), in discussion on the meaning of eating from the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil,” Genesis 2:17, footnote “h,” p. 17. BS195 .J4 1966 / 66-024278.

 

Thus, this act of "independence" on their part called into question the wisdom and rightfulness of God's way. By allowing Adam and Eve (and their off-spring), time to explore (mostly on their own) their own ideas of 'right/wrong,' 'good/bad', that is, in the way of self governance - exploring every conceivable type/form of government, religion, philosophy, moral standard, etc. - all precedents would be set, all in order to establish, beyond all doubt, that, after seeing the full results of what this produced, "mankind" was never meant to live and function without the benefit of direction that only their Creator, Father and God could provide.

 

Interestingly, this perspective fits quite well with Jesus' own stated purpose in coming, "I must declare the good news of the kingdom of God, because for this I was sent forth." (Luke 4:43). Along with other things Jesus taught, he knew full well that, in the outworking of Jehovah's purpose, things would certainly be allowed to get worse; so much so that, just prior to the intervention/end, "there will be great tribulation such as has not occurred since the world’s beginning until now, no, nor will occur again. In fact, unless those days were cut short, no flesh would be saved; but on account of the chosen ones those days will be cut short." (Matthew 24:21-22)

 

Therefore, the reason why such information about the coming Kingdom of God would be 'good news' (Matthew 24:14) is that, when Jehovah does finally usher in that Kingdom ('on earth as it is in heaven'-Matt. 6:9, 10), putting an end to all of these man-made systems, it will mean a blessing to all of those who, throughout the centuries, have been victimized by man's efforts to govern himself. Yes, the Bible tells us: ". . .And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite." (Daniel 2:44)

 

So, whereas a challenge to God's way of doing things has brought untold suffering upon the family of man, when God's Kingdom government is finally established on earth, never again will anyone ever be allowed to challenge God, mankind will finally live eternally in peace - just as God had intended, right from the very beginning.

 

Although there is more that must be explained (Where are the dead now? How will justice be meted out for the innocent? Etc., etc.), contrary to what others might suggest, the Bible does, indeed, have the answers,...and, in fulfillment of Jesus commission, Jehovah's people are doing their best to bring that "Good News" to all throughout the earth.

 

http://www.watchtower.org/

 

Agape.

[snip]

http://www.goodcompanionbooks.com

 

Mod note: Please do not post email addresses on the forum, it draws the attention of address-harvesting spam bots. ~M

[Aurora Starfire]

Ignoring a key component of this and assuming, for the sake of argument, that souls do exist, what evidence do we have of this battle? Anything you can do to clarify the supernatural aspects of it would be very useful, but I imagine that the physical parts are going to be a lot easier to point out (therefore, I'm very much interested in learning more about them).

Could you be more specific about the supernatural battle going on around us please? I don't quite get what you mean there...

The battle for souls is very difficult to describe, because very few are recorded, but I'll cite some saints who fought for souls.

 

St. Catherine of Siena cared for and visited the sick, the elderly, and the imprisoned. One of the people she visited was a young man who had been sentenced to death. He was a murderer, and had never repented of his sins. One day, Catherine asked him to go to confession, as he was soon going to be executed. The young man began to curse and swear, and said that he was going to Hell, as he had been so wicked his whole life that it was useless to ask God for forgiveness. Catherine reminded him that even if he had committed every sin in the world, God would still want him to be sorry and ask Him for forgiveness. Catherine continued for several days to talk to the young man, and offered many prayers and sacrifices for him. Then one day, he asked for a priest, and went to confession. He went to the gallows repentant, and so was saved from Hell. (story taken from Saint Catherine of Siena by Mary Fabyan Windeatt)

Eh, that was longer than I expected, so I'll limit it to that, but I can find more, if neccessary.

 

How does this explain the passages in the Bible where God commands us to do things that would generally be considered evil today? Examples include rape, murder, slavery, and child-abuse.

Er, as I mentioned before, I'm no theologian, and I haven't done a thorough study of the Bible. Could you cite some places where God commands us to do things like that?

 

Isn't this relative though? I remember hearing a priest make a very similar argument during a radio interview. He said, and I'm paraphrasing, that the "magnificence of the world is obviously the work of God" (emphasis mine). But wouldn't that be a matter of opinion? I acknowledge that for him this matter is obvious, but what if someone else had a similarly "obvious" conclusion that was counter to this?

 

Wouldn't it be better to say that some evidence other than our perception would better support the argument that God created everything that we see?

Could you please provide an example of such reasoning?

What kind of reasoning are we talking about here? Science? Philosophy? or something else maybe say...Faith?

Alright, then. I'll cite biology, believe it or not I'll use the human eye for my example.

The eye, is an intricately designed instrument. It is so complex! Despite this complexity and intricacy, the only explanation that nonbelievers (here meaning "people who do not believe that God created everything") can give is that the eye was built up through accumulation of chance changes, one at a time. But each of the aspects of the eye, (the lens, the pupil, etc.) which supposedly occurred as new additions, would be useless to man until the eye was complete enough for him to see clearly.

 

Can revelation be explained through some other means than God? Also, how do we determine which revelations are "really God" and which ones aren't? David Koresh and Jim Jones are both examples that most people would consider "revelation gone wrong".

Erm, well, I'm afraid that my answer to the second part isn't going to be very satisfactory for some of you, but here it is. The Catholic Church, after thorough study and prayer, determines the validity of such revelations.

As for the first part, well, there are visions and dreams from Satan, as well and occasionally people see/hear what they want to hear, which of course would not be a revelation, but merely a dream.

 

Or perhaps there just are no revelations and it's all just fiction? Who's to say? Unless the day comes in which he actually does prove His existence beyond a shadow of a doubt (aka Judgement Day, Armageddon, etc...), His existence will always be challenged...

Christ Himself foretold that it would be so; people did not even believe in Him during His own lifetime, even one of His own Apostles, so naturally there would be disbelievers after His Ascension.

 

Which begs the question: Is the Bible the literal word of God or the inspired word of God?

 

Inspired word of God would better explain the contradictions, however it seems that it would have to be the literal word of God in order to support the circular logic that the Bible is evidence of God's existence.*

 

* in all fairness, you have not made this claim so this isn't directed at you, rather those that do use it.

:: After Thought About The Bible ::

What people forget about the authors is something very primitive. I am not calling them primitive, but I am talking about something that people over see. All except for one disciple was a family man, and they were fathers themselves. If you think about the message they convey about god, one must also take into consideration that they added something about themselves. They most likely asked, "I am a father or brother, how would I feel if I was in his place." Remember, the bible was written by sinners who were inspired by god. Thus, god did not write the bible himself.

23 B. What do we mean when we say that the entire Bible is inspired?

When we say that the entire Bible is inspired we mean that its principal author is God, though it was written by men whom God enlightened and moved to write all those things, and only those things, that He wished to be written.

 

 

 

I think any response offered for my "revelation" question above would satisfy any questions I have regarding visions and dreams here.

 

However I would be interested in learning more about the physical experience (as proof of God's existence).

 

Ok, physical proof of God's existence. Well, here's a multifold miracle, proving Transubstantiation, God's existence, and Christ's existence all at once. The Miracle of Lanciano

 

If God isn't allowing or tolerating Satan's presence, why is it there still? Isn't He supposed to be the Almighty? And why are there so many evil things happening then?

Eh, free will, remember? Mankind, and angels, including the fallen angel, Satan, have been given by God the ability to do whatever they choose. Sometimes (often, even) men choose to do evil things. They may or may not be influenced by Satan, but they are still the ones who make that choice.

 

But isn't true, unconditional love just that: unconditional...Having to love someone back sounds like a condition to me.

Let me put it this way, does a child HAVE to love their parent just for being their parent?

Like I said before though, IMO love is unconditional, then why does He wish for us to love Him back?

You are correct, to a certain extent. God does love each of us unconditionally. He does not force us to love Him, merely requests it. Why? He created us; we are His children. Wouldn't you want your child to love you back?

 

Sure the parent gave the child life, but what after that? What if the parent neglects the child or doesn't care about it? I believe that is why most people lose faith in God, because if He is the Almighty and our father and so caring, why do we suffer and feel alone and miserable and all that bad stuff? Because of Satan? Give me a break... If someone would hurt my child in that way I would stand up for it and comfort it, what comfort is there in believing in God? Believing in something good is far from something ACTUALLY being good IMO...

Let me introduce you to the excellent poem, Footprints in the Sand

 

But is that faith not blind when the reason is being put into question, what proves that that reason alone is the right one besides belief alone? Again that goes down to faith, which is blind in the way that proof is not 100% satisfactory, or otherwise it just couldn't be questioned now would it?

You'd be surprised what some people question. I mean, there are people who say that the Holocaust never happened.

 

If it indeed is a trade-off, then this world is not so perfect as the Bible claims it should be now is it? Isn't this world supposed to descend from Eden? What kind of Eden allows random disasters to kill hundreds of innocents?

Well, nowhere in the Bible do I recall any claims that this world is perfect; perfection is reserved God alone, and Heaven, which is the true paradise. Eden was a garden, not the whole world. When Adam and Eve sinned, they lost the right to live in the wonderful garden.

Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

 

 

 

If it is indeed Satan's work, we are back at the Yin/Yang analogy aren't we, it takes faith alone to determine that everything Good is Jehovah's work and everything bad is Satan's...

So earthquakes and Tsunami's and Hurricanes and Cancers are inherently good? Since they are a part of this world I would assume they are part of God's creation are they not?

As I've mentioned before, everything was good in the beginning, even Satan. But as for natural disasters, when Adam fell everything went wrong. He was cast out of the garden, which was safe and paradisiacal, and into the dangerous, difficult world.

 

The Catholic church counsels that it should be buried in blessed ground, what defines blessed ground? If God indeed create this Earth and the Universe, is it not all blessed? Would it matter if the ashes were scattered somewhere?

Blessed ground, I believe, has been given a special blessing by a priest.

 

I thought we were all supposed to live happily ever after in Eden, until A&E ruined that...

The Baltimore Catechism states that one of the gifts that was bestowed upon Adam and Eve by God was freedom from suffering and death. Here is the further explanation of it:

There would be no sickness, weakness, weariness, or bodily discomfort. They would not have to go to the dentist, take castor oil, or go to the hospital. When they finished their time on earth they would go to heaven without dying.

 

 

As you can see I still have a lot of unanswered questions, I agree that some are tough and maybe borderline fair, but I tried my best to sound reasonable...

My apologies. I don't have all the answers, and no one does, but I've tried to explain things to the best of my abilities. Perhaps these futher answers will help to clarify things; I hope they do. (I also didn't answer all questions. Some have been previously answered, others I just don't have time right now to get to; it's really late, and I've got to sleep sometime Again, my apologies if I missed something or failed to make my points clear.)

[Achilles]

The battle for souls is very difficult to describe, because very few are recorded, but I'll cite some saints who fought for souls.

I appreciate you taking the time to type all that out but there are a few problems with this:

 

Then one day' date=' he asked for a priest, and went to confession. He went to the gallows repentant, and so was saved from Hell.[/quote']Do we have any evidence of Hell? Do we have any evidence that he was saved? Assuming that there is a Hell and that he was saved (while still assuming that there is such a thing as a soul), do we have any evidence that repenting is what saved him? This last one is a bit of stretch, but still I hope you see my point.

 

Er, as I mentioned before, I'm no theologian, and I haven't done a thorough study of the Bible. Could you cite some places where God commands us to do things like that?

Sure. In the interest of keeping it manageable, I'll only provide one example for each of the acts I referenced earlier. If you would like more, let me know. All examples are taken from English Standard Version.

 

Rape:

Behold, a day is coming for the LORD, when the spoil taken from you will be divided in your midst. For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the women raped. Half of the city shall go out into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be cut off from the city. (Zechariah 14:1-2)

 

Murder:

Cursed is he who does the work of the LORD with slackness, and cursed is he who keeps back his sword from bloodshed. (Jeremiah 48:10)

 

Slavery:

When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be avenged. But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be avenged, for the slave is his money.(Exodus 21:20-21)

 

Child Abuse:

Whoever spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is diligent to discipline him.(Proverbs 13:24)

 

Alright, then. I'll cite biology, believe it or not I'll use the human eye for my example.

The eye, is an intricately designed instrument. It is so complex! Despite this complexity and intricacy, the only explanation that nonbelievers (here meaning "people who do not believe that God created everything") can give is that the eye was built up through accumulation of chance changes, one at a time. But each of the aspects of the eye, (the lens, the pupil, etc.) which supposedly occurred as new additions, would be useless to man until the eye was complete enough for him to see clearly.

Can I summarize this as an argument for Intelligent Design without turning my response into a strawman? I think I can, but I'll leave it up to you. Assuming that it's safe to proceed, I'd like to direct you to post #4 in this thread.

 

In all fairness, all this does is poke holes in the idea that the human eye is irreducibly complex and therefore not evidence of intelligent design. I'm still willing to look at any other examples that you have that would act as evidence for Creation. I would caution against arguing from intelligent design because it is not supported by science (despite what the Discovery Institute wants you to believe ). Feel free to do whatever you want, however

 

Erm, well, I'm afraid that my answer to the second part isn't going to be very satisfactory for some of you, but here it is. The Catholic Church, after thorough study and prayer, determines the validity of such revelations.

Yep, you called that one

 

The difficulty here is that the Catholic Church has not only a bias, but a vested interest in validating "revelations" that are consistent with their gospel. This would be similar to RJ Reynolds publishing a test case where cigarette smoking actually helped to improve someone's health.

 

Is this the only way to determine the validity of revelation?

 

As for the first part, well, there are visions and dreams from Satan, as well and occasionally people see/hear what they want to hear, which of course would not be a revelation, but merely a dream.

Let's ignore the Satan part for a second, how could we distingush between revelation and dream in clearly measurable way? Acknowledging that clergy members are human and therefore fallable, how do we develop a non-bias way to identify revelations?

 

Ok, physical proof of God's existence. Well, here's a multifold miracle, proving Transubstantiation, God's existence, and Christ's existence all at once. The Miracle of Lanciano

Never heard of that one before.

 

Ok 1) The site from which that article came is a Catholic site. It is not a historical site, nor a medical site, nor a non-bias site. Therefore any information reference is (and should be) suspect. I would say the same thing if you were referencing scientific data that hadn't been peer-reviewed or published in a scientific journal, so please don't think I'm harping on religion unfairly.

 

2) The findings of Dr. Edward Linoli appear to be unpublished. Also, the study isn't even properly cited in the article (so I can't look for it). In fact a quick Google search of his name reveals that he is only referenced in one place...the article that you linked to. Surely this could be a fluke, but it may also be that his name and station were invented for the article. Considering that the readership most likely only consists of devout Catholics, it's possible that the author(s) had little need to fear that anyone would actually fact-check their article.

 

3) I tried to confirm the WHO study via EBSCOHost, but didn't get any results. On a hunch, I tried the WHO site. Sure enough they have a reseach database with articles going back to 1948. Searchs for "Linoli", "Lanciano", and "Transubstantiation" did yeild results, however none of them had anything to do with Dr. Edward Linoli, The Miracle of Lanciano, or Transubstantiation. One would think that a world-wide health organization's research database would contain any articles published by Dr. Linoli, even if they weren't related to The Miracle of Lanciano.

 

Conclusion: The evidence has no evidence.

 

I'd still be interested in reading about any other evidence you can provide.

 

I think that's where you stopped replying to my stuff, so here is where I'll bow out. I look forward to hearing back from you.

[Rabish Bini]

I'll just quickly point out some things:

 

The Tree of Knowledge I believe was placed there to test mankind's allegiance to God, Adam ate the apple and the apple made him aware to things around him, sin, hate, everything, he defied God.

 

The Bible is symbolic rather than straight to the point, where it says God created the world in 6 days and on the 7'th he rested, a teacher of Christianity said that this is symbolic, it may have taken him 7 years, meaning that most things in the Bible are symbolic most likely.

 

At one time Satan was the greatest Angel, but he thought he could be greater than God, God had no choice but to cast him out as Satan had grown rebellious.

 

There may not be such a thing as hell, some say that hell is just described as a place away from the love of God, without his warmth, you having to survive on your own rather than God looking after you.

 

The Garden of Eden is described as paradise, but it may just be symbolic. There's a Heaven, and some say that you can't have Heaven on Earth, I believe that you can to a lesser degree. If you can let go of all emotion, hate, anger, lust, greed, everything like that, and let God guide you, you shall recieve clarity and be forging to everyone and happy all the time with no evil desires.

 

I believe, and so does that Christian teacher I mentioned, that when you do evil things that is Satan working through you, but you have a choice, you can reject him and allow God to work through you, bringing happiness to your day, you have a decision, make the right one.

 

It probably doesn't exactly answer your questions Negative Sun, but I just wanted to point that out.

[Emperor Devon]

Why did God put that Tree of knowledge there in the first place? Wouldn't we all have been better off if he hadn't?

 

Now that is a question that you could debate over for years.

 

Why God created the tree of knowledge, I can't truly guess. From what his reaction towards Adam and Eve eating from it was, it would appear akin to giving a toddler a firecracker. Perhaps it was a way for Him to measure how faithful His children were? It's much easier to find out how trustworthy a child is if you leave them with something they shouldn't touch. (Because they obviously will or won't)

 

But given His omnipotence, wouldn't he have known exactly what Adam and Eve would have done from the start? Perhaps He only wanted to judge them for their actions after they had committed them.

 

But would we have been better off if we stayed within the Garden of Eden?

 

In my opinion, no.

 

This should take a fair while to explain. For starters, there are these excerpts from the Bible:

 

Genesis 2:8-9 says ' Yahweh God planted a garden in Eden, and there he put the man he had formed. Yahweh God caused to sprout every tree that is pleasing to look at and good for food, with the tree of life in the middle of the garden and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.'

 

Genesis 3:6 ' The woman saw that the tree was good for food, pleasing to the eyes, and desirable for the knowledge it could give, and she took fruit from it.'

 

Genesis 3:17-19 'To the man he said, 'You have listened to your wife, eating from the tree about which I commanded you, "Do not eat from it." Therefore, cursed is the ground because of you. In anguish you shall till it all the days of your life. It will yield you thorns and thistles. By the sweat of your face will you win your bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken. You are dust, and to dust you shall return.'

 

To connect this all together...

 

As you likely noticed, I highlighted some of the most significant parts. In essence, God planted a tree which bestowed knowledge upon those who ate from it. Adam and Eve both desired knowledge, and for their natural curiosity, they were punished (in the eyes of most people, that is).

 

No, we would not have been better staying in the garden at all. One of the prime reasons is ignorance: before Adam and Eve ate from the tree, that is what they were. They didn't even know they were naked, for crying out loud.

 

But more importantly, they had no distinction between good and evil.

 

Thus, before consuming the fruit, man was not a moral agent. Logically, a rock, a tornado, or a dog cannot be considered moral agents. Intelligence is not the prime factor for such a thing, (great geniuses and fools can make moral decisions) but the ability to realize the morality of one's own actions. If a tornado destroys a house, did it commit an immoral act? No. It isn't a moral agent. Likewise, if a man set the same house on fire, would that have been immoral? Obviously, as he possessed the knowledge to know if it was immoral or not.

 

Thus, before they ate from the tree of knowledge, Adam and Eve could not be considered fully moral, fully human beings. If you can't tell what's evil and what's good, is it possible for you to condemn immoral acts? To a dog, Stalin's brutal tortures would be equal morally to punishing someone for rape.

 

Before Adam and Eve ate from the tree of knowledge, they were little different from a dog or a rock in terms of morals. The Bible itself says they only learned the distinction between good and evil upon consuming the fruit from it. As I explained earlier, being aware of the distinction between that is essential to being a moral person.

 

So what exactly was wrong with eating from the tree? Before they did, Adam and Eve were just as moral as a rock. After it, they were able to develop at least a basic set of ethics (which have obviously been expanded on).

 

But the main thing which gets to me about that is: why did God punish them for that? Adam and Eve sought to grow wiser, and ate from the tree. They become truly human upon doing so, and were cast out of paradise. The reason? They defied God.

 

Not to get into a lengthy discussion about God's morals and perfection, but doesn't the possibility always that a parent/mentor/creator/etc can be imperfect at times? Adam and Eve had every reason to eat from the tree. The only response I ever hear is "they defied God". But what if there was a reason to defy God in that instance? They weren't harming Him at all. To any parents out there, would you ever want your child to be totally subservient to your will and to never think for themselves? Of course not. Such an act wasn't worthy of punishment - I doubt anyone here will argue that Adam and Eve becoming moral and fully human beings was a bad thing. If God made a mistake, great, let Him admit it, and have everyone be improved as a result - man in becoming moral, and God in learning you have to let children think for themselves - in other words, grow up - some of the time.

 

I've addressed this partially now. The fact that man ate from the tree was what determined whether he would stay in the garden or not. But discounting that, would man have wanted to stay in the garden at all?

 

To that I still answer 'no'.

 

The garden, from all appearances, was akin to a sort of day-care for man. Everything was in abundance, he never went hungry, he could relax as often as he willed, he never had to do any work, and the scenery was lovely.

 

This sounds like a paradise at first glance, but that is only looking at the short term. In the long term, such a utopia might not be worthy of the title.

 

The precise factor being, he never had to work.

 

But to that I ask, is working a bad thing? No! What is it that erects skyscrapers? Work, determination. What took man to the moon? His genius, the effort he put into designing the first rocket and building it. How did Aristotle and Socrates think up philosophical theories that are still discussed, and considered credible? They thought of them.

 

This is the human spirit. Work, effort, determination, thought.

 

Without these things, there is no achievement. It is the urge to create, the urge to produce, in essence, actually doing something that gets it done. It is through these qualities, through upholding the human spirit, that man went from scattered tribes of primitives to the advanced society we are today. There no exceptions to this. It was through effort and work only that our current state was reached.

 

If you simplify everything, there are two types of men: those who produce, and those who use. The former does things, thinks of things, gets things done. In other words, this type of man upholds the human spirit. It is only through men like this that mankind as a whole truly advances.

 

The later are those who use. No productivity is required on their part - they have what they want, so they have no need to invent, to create, to build. They have what they want. There is no reason for them to try to achieve anything more. As I have said, it is only through the previous type of man that things actually get done. It is only through the first type that the second type can exist - and when that does, the first is canceled out. With that, so is any form of expansion. Only stagnation can follow.

 

To connect this back to leaving the garden, Adam and Eve were the second type of (wo)men. They did nothing. They lived off the support of God, without doing anything on their own. Are there any examples that they did anything other than mindlessly bask in the sun while being unaware they were even naked? It was only through work that they could grow. It was through eating the fruit of knowledge that they changed from the second type to the first.

 

So between the two, which is preferable? A place where all needs are met, and no further expansion is required - or one where mankind actually grows, and accomplishes something? Between the two, I'd take the second any day.

 

(Wow, I sure got carried away )

 

And even if he did, wouldn't it be easier if he proved He did exist so people wouldn't have to have blind faith into something that may or may not exist?

 

Completely.

 

In the event that God exists, his views on what to show his followers are quite awkward.

 

The prime reason for this is that God seems to more concerned about whether we know He exists than what we should do upon knowing of his existence. This is unreasonable for several reasons:

 

God is denying Himself devout followers by hiding His existence. The whole 'if they are pure they believe in me' idea is quite absurd. The simple fact is, man can't be expected to truly believe in something without evidence. Why do we think the planet is round? We discovered it. Is this logical justification to say it is round? Absolutely. If someone were to doubt that fact after it was proved true, would he be a bit odd? Yes.

 

Now go back several thousand years. There was no evidence at all towards the shape of the earth. Was it reasonable then to believe it wasn't round? There was no means at all of verifying that fact, so it was open to interpretation.

 

But what of the person who, in that instance, said "actually, the earth is round."

 

Factual accuracy is one thing, the means with which you reach it is another. We all know the ends of something are important, but the means with which they are reached is even more so. Paying off a debt someone has, for example, is normally considered a charitable act, but if it was done only for the sake of a potential repayment later with interest, and no concern for the payer's welfare? Again, ends are important, but so are the means with which they are reached.

 

To go back now to the person who spoke the truth and said the earth was round, there is no disputing that such a thing would have been the truth. But the means with which he reached it would be just as much. If he'd built a rocket (unlikely back then) and saw the shape of the planet from space, would that have been justification to say the earth is round? Absolutely. But what if he simply said "I know it is," with no proof at all? What if he never even understood his own reasons, and simply said it because he thought it was so, with absolutely nothing to prove his beliefs valid? It wouldn't matter as much if he was right or wrong at that point. He would have been every bit as blind as the person who said the earth was flat.

 

Isn't it a bit easy to say that God allows evil things to happen because Satan rules the world?

 

No.

 

Supposedly, God is creator of all things, and Satan was once one of his own angels. Though the fault may be Satan's for what he did, was it his creator's fault for making an imperfect archangel in the first place? But this goes back to whole 'teacher vs. student responsiblity' debate.

 

There's also plain apathy. God supposedly possesses unlimited power, yet makes no use of it. Although there is the 'parents should let their children grow up' issue (which I brought up and supported earlier), this is a different matter. It's quite one thing to allow a child to ruin his own life, but what of when he extends that ruin to others? There's no logical explanation for why God does nothing. Saying that even then people should make their own choices (when it negatively affects others) sounds like it encourages a 'survival of the fittest' philosophy. (But albiet lesser)

 

So God is responsible for everything Good, and Satan for everything Evil...Just as much as there can't be day without night etc...It doesn't explain anything IMO To me it sounds like about every other religion or moral belief in this world...

 

At the core, it is just like every belief. If you do good things in this life, you get a great one in the next. If you do bad things in this life, you'll go to an awful one in the next. Then there's some stories to explain creation, and a set of commandments that basically says 'this religion is right'. Quite similar to most other ones, if you ask me.

 

My opinion is, IF he proves that he can indeed smite all Evil and turn this into an earthly paradise, everyone will worship him without a doubt, out of their own free will, so what's stopping Him?

 

I can't exactly say... From what I mentioned earlier, the way to get the most legitimate followers is for them to know everything about you, not to guess wildy (there are some weird interpretations out there). In conjunction with all the factors I've listed earlier, the only reason I can conclude is that He does not exist.

 

Er, as I mentioned before, I'm no theologian, and I haven't done a thorough study of the Bible. Could you cite some places where God commands us to do things like that?

 

The Bible is not a very reliable source in religious arguments. If you've read enough of it, you'll find that it lends more credence towards anti-religious arguments than pro-religious ones. Examples:

 

Deuteronomy 13:6-8

 

'If your brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife tries to secretly entice you, telling you to go and worship other gods, gods of people living near you, or far from you, or anywhere on earth, do not listen to him.'

 

'You must kill them. Show them no pity. And your hand must strike the first blow.'

 

'Then the hands of all the people. You shall stone them to death.'

 

Deuteronomy 21:10

 

'When you go to war against your enemies...'

 

'...and you take prisoners...'

 

'...put the entire male population to death.'

 

'If among the prisoners you see a beautiful woman, and you are attracted to her...'

 

'...you may take her as a wife.'

 

Deuteronomy 22:28

 

'If a man happens to meet a virgin woman who is not engaged to be married...'

 

'...And he seizes her and rapes her...'

 

'...but is caught in the act...'

 

'...the rapist must pay the girl's father fifty silver shekels.'

 

'She must marry the rapist, because he has violated her. And so long as he lives, he may not divorce her.'

 

What's even more eyebrow-raising:

 

Deuteronomy 29:19

 

'If anyone should think to himself, "I will do well enough if I follow the dictates of my heart,"...'

 

'...Yahweh will not pardon him. His wrath shall burn against him.'

 

'And all the curses written in the book will come upon him.'

 

'Yahweh will single him out for misfortune and blot out his name from under heaven.'

 

There are many other quotes I can provide if you'd like, but they're all similarly ridiculous. I don't know what your opinion is, but I think stoning one's family to death if they worship another god, being required to put all POWs to death, to have all single women marry people who rape them, and to declare not following these tenants blasphemy is nothing short of barbaric, in my opinion.

[Negative Sun]

Thanks a lot Devon, you've explained a lot there and your analogies are spot on IMO, thanks for the Bible references as well...I have to say you have totally convinced me of the suspicions I already had. And another good reason to be a stubborn atheist.

 

It takes me to another point as well, that only a select few are apt enough to interpret the Bible, or so I was told when I was growing up...Why is that? Is it not supposed to be the word of God himself? Why is it filled with stuff like what Devon just mentioned?

 

I will reply to the other comments as well when I have more time

[SilentScope001]

There are many other quotes I can provide if you'd like, but they're all similarly ridiculous. I don't know what your opinion is, but I think stoning one's family to death if they worship another god, being required to put all POWs to death, to have all single women marry people who rape them, and to declare not following these tenants blasphemy is nothing short of barbaric, in my opinion.

 

Can you interprt them to be the laws of society at that time, of how they would govern themselves?

 

After all, the future will laugh at our patheic death peantly, drug laws, tax codes, etc. but that doesn't dismiss what we have done. We did what we had to do because we felt it would help out our society, and it did. Therefore, it seem stupid to laugh at the past just because we feel we are 'better' than them. We just have different values and beliefs, but that doesn't mean one is more right or more wrong.

 

My two cents though.

[Achilles]

Can you interprt them to be the laws of society at that time, of how they would govern themselves?

 

After all, the future will laugh at our patheic death peantly, drug laws, tax codes, etc. but that doesn't dismiss what we have done. We did what we had to do because we felt it would help out our society, and it did. Therefore, it seem stupid to laugh at the past just because we feel we are 'better' than them. We just have different values and beliefs, but that doesn't mean one is more right or more wrong.

 

My two cents though.

Yes, you absolutely can. However the problem lies in the fact that these laws of society claim to be dictated to us from the Christian God. Therefore these are the laws that God wants to live by for all time. Creates quite the conundrum as we are no longer comparing apples to apples.

 

If the Code of Hammurabi made similar claims (which were vigorously supported by more than 2000 years of cult worship), I would imagine that it would be equally debated. However historians simply see it as an ancient set of laws, stand around looking duly impressed, and then move on. This is what future scholars will do with our laws. Because a preponderance of people see the Bible as source of moral and ethical truth, it should be alarming that this source advocates murder, rape, slavery, etc.

[Negative Sun]

Well, the fundamentalists believe in the word literally. Depending on the Christian, many of the details are symbolic for other things. The book of Revelation was writen by John, and he lived around 400 A.D. Anything that John had seen about the future needed a reference, so he interpreted the vision he had with everyday life. Otherwords, he could have seen a jetfighter, and then he called it a dragon. There could have been an interest in his time, which revolved around dragon themed stories.

And that is why, IMO, giving the Bible status of "word of God" is very dangerous, because there are so many different interpretations for it, and so much of it is irrational or outdated as Devon has pointed out so well...

 

It is believed that the Bible was inspired by the word of God, but through the hand of man. Not all of the disciples talk about the birth of Jesus. Even though they are not consistant on events, they talk about morality, salvation, origins, beginnings, and endings. The Bible is not all about laws, but about mankind's struggle with existance in general.

There I agree with you that the Bible is an interesting combination of several books written by different people, but that's all it is I think: a book, not the word of God, creator of the universe etc...

 

The Bible is not black and white. Even within the word of God, the statement was made that mankind will never know the whole story until 'revelation'.

Again, to me, that's what makes the Bible such a dangerous book...

 

Just so you know what diety I am from: I am a Chritian, and I am not a Jehovah's Witnesses. There is nothing wrong with being a Jehovah's Witnesses, but my interpretation of God's word is different. Thats all.

I think it's strange that one single book, which is supposed to be the word of God, can be interpreted in so many different ways, creating different religions even, but yet all of those claim their interpretation is the right one...

 

One would have to go beyond philosophy to answer this one. God did create the Earth, but is the Earth a living being? If the Earth is a living being, we must assume that it needs to breath, eat, and grow. In actuallity, the Earth is doing all those thing, but we gave them different designations. We as humans have blood that keeps us alive. Could Earth's blood be oil, and we are killing it? Therefore, the Earth is trying to compansate for what we are doing. If you think about it, mankind is a form of bacteria on the surface of a living being. They do not teach that in Sunday school. The reality is too cold.

That's a very interesting point of view.

 

Because He wants a relationship with each one of us. As a parent, I can't compel my children to love me, but I want to show them my love and do what's best for them based on my knowledge and experience (which they may or may not have).

Wouldn't that relationship manifest itself better if we knew He existed? How could your child love you Jae, if it wasn't sure you existed? Granted, the child might realize it has a mother, but is that enough for it to love that person?

 

What's the level of proof required by each person? Some would be content to hear His voice. Others would be OK with seeing him. Still others would need to touch Him before being able to believe. A few more could have all the data staring them in the face and would still refuse to believe, saying it was all some elaborate ruse. There is a great deal of evidence for Christ's existence, a lot more than can be elaborated here in a short post at the moment.

What would you consider evidence then Jae?

 

What specific verse are you (or the JWs) referring to? I've never heard that one, and while I don't have the Bible memorized, I have read the entire thing through, and have read the New Testament a number of times.

John 5:28, 29

"28Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29and come out—those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned."

 

Individuals make the choices to do evil. Satan does like to draw people to him and away from God, but it's still the individual who has the responsibility for his/her own actions.

But did God not make us imperfect in such way? What is the point in creating something and then punishing it because it acts the way it's maker has made it?

 

I can't speak a lot about other religions because I haven't studied them in any great deal. However, it's the individual who is responsible for doing right or wrong. God or Satan certainly can encourage someone one way or another, but each person makes the decision to act one way or another.

Fair enough, but that involves more of a moral code than actual faith, which is what our society stands at today...

 

He doesn't need any of us. However, He does want to share His love with us, and have us share ours in return.

Does that not make his love conditional though? He will love us ONLY if we love him in return, but is pure love not supposed to be UNconditional?

 

How many children of the rich and famous have you seen who have everything in the world, are living in the perfect home, and are still ungrateful snots who expect the world to be handed to them on a platter? God could give us everything we ever wanted and make this world a paradise, but that wouldn't change our hearts. It's not perfection God is looking for, because we can't achieve that. It's a relationship that He wants with us.

But yet again, how can one have a relationship with someone who doesn't show himself? How can you have a relationship with someone that may or may not exist? How, for example, would you describe your relationship to God?

 

 

There's a start. Probably raised more questions than it answered.

hehe you guessed it, enjoy them

Thanks for the reply btw

 

I still have others to reply to, but will do that tomorrow, mesa sleepy nowsa

[SilentScope001]

Yes, you absolutely can. However the problem lies in the fact that these laws of society claim to be dictated to us from the Christian God. Therefore these are the laws that God wants to live by for all time. Creates quite the conundrum as we are no longer comparing apples to apples.

 

Yes you can. That God can quite easily be called an invention of the Hebrews' ideals and culture and belief. Surely, whatever the Hebrews saw as virtues and values that needed to be defended, that would be what that God would say, no?

 

And, let be fair, we can interpret from our Holy Books whatever we want (or at least, a close approx. of the truth). The laws over there could easily tell us how God wants the Hebrews to run their society in an era where...well...everyone is a "barbarain" (don't say you won't go and stone idolators when you realize that idolators could very well raise an army to smash your village), but not in this civilized era where the only 'stoning' you need to fear is the stoning of Marajunia. So, basically, these are good laws, to help protect ancient society...but now that society is not ancient, we should move onto better laws, while at the same time, respect them. I am not a Christisan, so my interpretion may be flawed, but it could be possible.

 

Regardless, it's best to get off this topic, as to not derail Neg. Sun's threads.

[The Source]

And that is why, IMO, giving the Bible status of "word of God" is very dangerous, because there are so many different interpretations for it, and so much of it is irrational or outdated as Devon has pointed out so well...

Since I see truth in the Bible, I believe it is based upon the 'Word of God'.

(See below for an extension on this qeustion.)

 

There I agree with you that the Bible is an interesting combination of several books written by different people, but that's all it is I think: a book, not the word of God, creator of the universe etc...

Again, to me, that's what makes the Bible such a dangerous book...

Well, I believe any religious Bible is dangerous. Anyone can take advantage of a religion, and use it to go to war, gain wealth, or worse. I think the Bible is the innocent element in this matter, for mankind is the one manipulating the truth. It is all about the person doing the interpretation.

 

I think it's strange that one single book, which is supposed to be the word of God, can be interpreted in so many different ways, creating different religions even, but yet all of those claim their interpretation is the right one...

During the 14th and 15th century, the Catholic church fell under reformation. Since the church had anti-christian policies, at the time, several lay people broke away. Martan Luthor help create a split in the church. Some of the reasons why the church was split includes: 1. You could not obtain salvation unless you bought religious art. 2. There is only one interpretation of the BIble, and it cannot be translated in any other way. 3. Clergy men and women of power would appoint family members to office. Etc...As you have noticed, one of the reasons for the split was due to translation. Martan Luthor and others believed the Bible could be translated in multiple ways. SUddenly, there was an onslaught of new churches poping up everywhere, which claimed to be Christian in nature. Some of the churched are Christian, and others became something more complicated. To this very day people take advantage of the reformation, and they try to obtain power through money, worshipers, etc...

 

Somewhere within the Bible talks about manipulation of truths. I believe that Jesus and God had seen how mankind's hearts could be twisted. I personally believe that regardless about how much knowledge we gather, mankind will never truly know the whole context of the Bible. We will have various interpretations, but I do not believe that a single person alive can say they have it all. We keep learning more and more about the Bible, so it is only wise to look at its history and science. Even the greatest relisious leaders of the world only know what is on the surface.

 

:: EXAMPLE OF HISTORY ::

Before Noah's Arch was written, there was an older story allready established. If you were to read Noah's and Gilgamesh, you will find an interesting connection. They have the same exact story. Gilgamesh is the earliest written and recorded word that we have. The story was written several millenia before Noah.

 

Some people believe that Jesus's story came from Pantera, but was twisted to reflect a more Christian story.

[Achilles]

Yes you can. That God can quite easily be called an invention of the Hebrews' ideals and culture and belief.

SilentScope001 once again misses the point.

 

Regardless, it's best to get off this topic, as to not derail Neg. Sun's threads.

Agreed.

[Aurora Starfire]

My apologies, everyone. I'm afraid I'm going to have to bow out of the discussion, because I have to devote more time to school. I apologize for leaving some of the questions you asked unanswered, and I respect you all for raising such questions.

Again, my apologies, and may the Force be with you in your search for truth.