Losing My Religion (LONG!!!)

[stingerhs]

Which bring me to another point. What makes a god worthy of worship? Their power, or how they use it? Such power is so easily abused. And what makes their followers worthy of reverence? History is filled with people twisting religious texts to suit their own ends.

 

Mind you, I'm an atheist who disagrees with the whole idea of worship, but my point is still valid.

i actually don't see your point for a single second, although i can entirely understand your reasoning. how could anybody be so powerful and not abuse that power, right?? then again, that's under the assumption that God has all of the attributes of a human, of course.

 

if we use mankind as a reference for what power does to a human, then, yes, your logic is sound. i haven't even reached the ripe age of 30, and i've seen enough with my own two eyes to convince me that a man with power is easily corrupted.

 

just consider the atheist regimes that have come to power in the 20th century such as those headed by Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. all three of those men wielded unrivaled power within their own states and were responsible for the deaths of over 20 million innocents. technically, you could say that they were responsible for even more deaths due to the number of soldiers and other military personnel that lost their lives due to their desire for more power.

 

but if God is all-powerful as he says he is, then why would he need more power? part of mankind's destructive quest for power is, in part, due to the belief that he doesn't have enough power. for a God that does indeed have everything, what does he gain from your recognition and acceptance of his power? conversely, what does he lose if you choose not to recognize or accept him? if he's already all-powerful, then your decision not to recognize or accept him does not diminish his power.

 

that said, the real issue here is what God's motivations are and why he even needs all of that power. your argument is that an all-powerful God is likely corrupt and self-serving. however, this is where your logic fails. as earlier stated, for a God that already has everything, in what way would his power be self-serving? you can't add something to everything. everything is all-inclusive, and the only way everything fails to be everything is when something is taken away from it. to take something away from an all-powerful being would be to remove its status as all-powerful.

 

if God has nothing to gain from our recognition and acceptance of his power, then what remains of his motivations? if he needs nothing from us, then its no longer a matter of power. in that case, it must be a matter of what God wants to do to us. when you move on to that, then understanding God is much more black and white. God must then either be extremely evil, extremely good, or profoundly apathetic.

 

the question then simply becomes this: what kind of god would you rather believe in? if God is extremely evil, then his power would only work towards absolute destruction. if God is profoundly apathetic, then why would he create us in the first place?

 

i think the part that's difficult to grasp is trying to accept that God is extremely good when there's so much corruption and evil in the world that he created. i just compare it to how i found my future wife. to be honest, i don't think i would be as happy and satisfied with myself if i had just simply created a woman to be my wife. to know that she chose to accept me and love me for who i am is much more satisfying on a much deeper level. i can imagine that God is much the same way. why create something to just simply love you when you can create something that has the choice to love you?

[Jadolerr]

Faithful people recorded in the bible also asked such questions. The prophet Habakkuk wrote in Habakkuk 1:3 "Why is it that you make me see what is hurtful, and you keep looking upon mere trouble? And why are despoiling and violence in front of me, and why does quarreling occur, and why is strife carried?"

 

God helped him to get a clearer understanding of matters, and God wants to do the same for us. This is because he cares for us as written in 1 Peter 5:7 "while you throw all your anxiety upon him, because he cares for you."

 

In 2 Peter 3:9 it says "Jehovah is not slow respecting his promise, as some people consider slowness, but he is patient with you because he does not desire any to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance."

 

So why is there suffering? Often the response you hear from religious leaders and teachers is that suffering is God's will and the he long ago determined everything that would ever happen, including tragic events. Many are told that God's ways are mysterious or that he brings death upon people, even children, so that he can have them in heaven with him.

 

In the bible however Jehovah God never causes what is bad. Job 34:10 "Therefore, you men of heart, listen to me. Far be it from the true God to act wickedly, And the Almighty to act unjustly!"

 

People may blame God because they think that he is the real ruler of this world. The simple but important truth the bible teaches is that Satan the Devil is the real ruler of this world. 1 John 5:19 says "We know we originate with God, but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one." The world reflects the personality of the invisible spirit creature who is misleading the entire earth. Revelation 12:9 "So down the great dragon was hurled, the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan, who is misleading the entire inhabited earth; he was hurled down to the earth, and his angels were hurled down with him."

 

This is why there is so much suffering in the world we live in today, yet what was the cause? What is the reason God allows this to take place? Why does he hold back when has the power to stop this?

[Sabretooth]

That doesn't make God worthy of worship, it makes him/her/it worthy of deposition, if you consider him/her/it real. To say that is enough to me, is essentially saying that "Might makes right" and that God can do no wrong because noone can stop Him. But if might makes right, then the greatest injustices in human history can be justified.

 

I didn't say it means God is right or that everything is justified. To worship is to love submissively and show one's utmost devotion to someone (or something). This draws the most parallels to the parent-child relation, clearly. In 9 cases out of 10, a parent loves their child unconditionally. The child however, need not have any such obligation to their parent. Therefore, they are more or less made to believe that life without their parent is impossible, and that if you love and stay devoted to your parents, you'll get everything you want.

 

The problem is, grown-up kids don't have parents to look up to and answer their questions (especially the tricky ones like "WHY THE HELL ARE LARGE SHAFTS OF LIGHT FALLING FROM THE SKY THEY SCARE THE **** OUT OF ME"). Ergo, a God is formed, the overparent, the supreme person whom you should love and respect unconditionally, because He made you and gives you everything you want (just like your parents did). He will get cross at you if you misbehave, but he still loves you.

 

The God-Worshipper relation is really a step-up from the parent-child relationship. Obviously, that doesn't stop your elder brothers from telling you "OMG you totally broke the vase! Hmm, I think Mom and Dad need to know about this... unless you give me your lunch money."

 

You can guess what happens after that.

[Qui-Gon Glenn]

People may blame God because they think that he is the real ruler of this world. The simple but important truth the bible teaches is that Satan the Devil is the real ruler of this world. 1 John 5:19 says "We know we originate with God, but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one." The world reflects the personality of the invisible spirit creature who is misleading the entire earth. Revelation 12:9 "So down the great dragon was hurled, the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan, who is misleading the entire inhabited earth; he was hurled down to the earth, and his angels were hurled down with him."

 

This is why there is so much suffering in the world we live in today, yet what was the cause? What is the reason God allows this to take place? Why does he hold back when has the power to stop this?

I am not one for quoting scripture, as there are many here more capable such as yourself, Jadolerr.

 

However, I have one for you: "I am the alpha and the omega."

 

God "made" Satan... and loved him best IIRC. Why is s/he not one in the same?

 

The fallacy of religion is that it places human conceptions on the unknowable. If God exists, how could we possibly fathom any Godly reasoning? Why would God create a world and then hand it to a liar and deceiver? Unless..... it were necessary.

 

If it is necessary, then is there really any separation between the two entities? Are they not the deepest of partners.... or just two faces of the same being?

 

Why would a creator on such a grand scale be concerned so much about any individual life, when the responsibility (again, a human conception) or the realm of liege, is the whole danged everything?

 

@GTASWC: well stated most recent post.... And quite personal.

[Jadolerr]

This all began back when Satan led Adam and Eve into disobeying Jehovah. Satan called into question Jehovah's right to rule. By calling God a liar who withholds good from his subjects, Satan charged that Jehovah is a bad ruler.

 

Genesis 3:2-5 "2 At this the woman said to the serpent: "Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat. 3 But as for eating of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'YOU must not eat from it, no, you must not touch it that YOU do not die.'" 4 At this the serpent said to the woman: "YOU positively will not die. 5 For God knows that in the very day of YOUR eating from it YOUR eyes are bound to be opened and YOU are bound to be like God, KNOWING good and bad."

 

Adam and Eve rebelled against Jehovah, in effect they said "we do not need Jehovah as our Ruler. We can decide for ourselves what is right and what is wrong."

 

How would Jehovah handle this? Why were they not simply just destroyed and just start over? Jehovah had stated his purpose to fill the world with the offspring of Adam and Eve, and he wanted them to live in an earthly paradise. In Genesis 1:28" Further, God blessed them and God said to them: "Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth and subdue it..."

 

 

Jehovah always fulfills his purposes as written in Isaiah 55:10,11 "For just as the pouring rain descends, and the snow, from the heavens and does not return to that place, unless it actually saturates the earth and makes it produce and sprout, and seed is actually given to the sower and bread to the eater, so my word that goes forth from my mouth will proves to be.; It will not return to me with out results, but it will certainly do that in which I have delighted, and it will have certain success in that for which I have sent it."

 

 

How Jehovah handles this situation is very important, it would affect not only humans but also the millions of angels who were watching since the rebels in Eden were not the only ones involved.

 

What Jehovah has done is allowed Satan to show how he would rule mankind. God has also allowed humans to govern themselves under Satan's guidance.

 

To illustrate this, picture a teacher teaching a class how to solve a difficult problem. One of the students claims that the teacher's way of solving the problem is wrong and implies that the teacher is not capable. This student insists that he knows a much better way to solve the problem. Some of the other students think he is right as well and they join him. Now if the teacher removed the student from that class, wouldn't other students perhaps believe he is right? What if they lose respect and think the teacher fears being proved wrong? Then suppose that the teacher lets this student show the class how he would solve this problem. This would be a benefit to the class if the student was allowed to prove his point. When the student fails, all honest students will see that the teacher is the only one qualified to teach the class.

 

Similarly, Jehovah knows that all honest hearted humans and angels will benefit from seeing that Satan and his fellow rebels have failed and that humans cannot govern themselves.

 

Like Jeremiah they will learn this vital truth. Jeremiah 10:23 " I well know, O Jehovah, that to earthling man his way does not belong. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step."

 

Then, you may ask, why has Jehovah allowed this to go on for so long? Also why doesn't God prevent such things like horrible crimes from happening?

[Working Class Hero]

Genesis 3:2-5 "2 At this the woman said to the serpent: "Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat. 3 But as for eating of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'YOU must not eat from it, no, you must not touch it that YOU do not die.'" 4 At this the serpent said to the woman: "YOU positively will not die. 5 For God knows that in the very day of YOUR eating from it YOUR eyes are bound to be opened and YOU are bound to be like God, KNOWING good and bad."

Are you ****ing serious right now? Genesis is the biggest joke book in the bible. It's just a mix of 2 documents, one Sumerian and one Babylonian (often just called the J and P documents, if you care)

 

If God is so omniscient, why did he give all the animals to Adam and think they would provide company? Answer: because it was written by Sumerians that believed gods were not omniscient, they were merely supermen.

 

What does it say for the reason God banished them? Oh right, because he says if humans eat from the tree they could gain immortality and become "one of us."

Does this make any sense in modern Christian theology? Nope, because once again, it was written by Sumerians who believed they could ascend to godhood.

 

Also why doesn't God prevent such things like horrible crimes from happening?

Because he either doesn't care or he's too weak to do anything. Or maybe...he doesn't exist.

[Pho3nix]

Wow you guys really take the bible literally

[jonathan7]

Hmmm, I haven't replied for a while more due to Sam posting Kierkegaard who closely represents my own views I haven't felt the need.

 

I am not one for quoting scripture, as there are many here more capable such as yourself, Jadolerr.

 

However, I have one for you: "I am the alpha and the omega."

 

God "made" Satan... and loved him best IIRC. Why is s/he not one in the same?

 

The fallacy of religion is that it places human conceptions on the unknowable. If God exists, how could we possibly fathom any Godly reasoning? Why would God create a world and then hand it to a liar and deceiver? Unless..... it were necessary.

 

It's an interesting question, I did post earlier my essay on the problem of evil, which I think partly accounts for an answer; that the freedom to choose was so important that God allowed what happened. I'd argue from a Judeo-Christian standpoint that we are created in Gods image so we can partly understand him if you believe that, however your other point also stands in that an eternal omniscient God is very far away from us, and as such may well be unfathomable, but that is different to be unknowable. Take into account say a hamster and its owner, the human is knowable to the hamster, but the owner may not be fathomable.

 

If it is necessary, then is there really any separation between the two entities? Are they not the deepest of partners.... or just two faces of the same being?

 

I'm not quite sure if I understand the point here...

 

Why would a creator on such a grand scale be concerned so much about any individual life, when the responsibility (again, a human conception) or the realm of liege, is the whole danged everything?

 

Well, I could swing the question back, why wouldn't he be? Also are you then not, going back on your own previous statement, by having stated God is so far removed from us we cannot "know" him, then how do you know he wouldn't care about us?

 

Anyways a couple of you have irked me into a reply

 

This all began back when Satan led Adam and Eve into disobeying Jehovah. Satan called into question Jehovah's right to rule. By calling God a liar who withholds good from his subjects, Satan charged that Jehovah is a bad ruler.

 

Are you even involved in this discussion? You don't seem to be replying to anyone who replies to you, and then seem to be going off on a tangent but answering only your own questions. Whats the point in asking questions if your just going to answer them?

 

To illustrate this, picture a teacher teaching a class how to solve a difficult problem. One of the students claims that the teacher's way of solving the problem is wrong and implies that the teacher is not capable. This student insists that he knows a much better way to solve the problem. Some of the other students think he is right as well and they join him. Now if the teacher removed the student from that class, wouldn't other students perhaps believe he is right? What if they lose respect and think the teacher fears being proved wrong? Then suppose that the teacher lets this student show the class how he would solve this problem. This would be a benefit to the class if the student was allowed to prove his point. When the student fails, all honest students will see that the teacher is the only one qualified to teach the class.

 

Do you have any idea how flawed this example is? I've been in classes where the teacher would admit I know more on the subject than them...

 

 

Are you ****ing serious right now? Genesis is the biggest joke book in the bible. It's just a mix of 2 documents, one Sumerian and one Babylonian (often just called the J and P documents, if you care)

 

Actually there is absolutely no scholarly consensus on who wrote Genesis, and the method it was put together. The above is a popular 20th Century theory which has since been discredited. Which I think also disproves the rest of your point about supermen Gods. However I'm happy to discuss the point further if you wish. I'm not sure if you want me to go into philosophical discourse with the regards of God, choice and time?

[adamqd]

RE: Jadolerr... Is there such thing as a Christian Spam-bot?

[Working Class Hero]

Actually there is absolutely no scholarly consensus on who wrote Genesis, and the method it was put together. The above is a popular 20th Century theory which has since been discredited. Which I think also disproves the rest of your point about supermen Gods. However I'm happy to discuss the point further if you wish. I'm not sure if you want me to go into philosophical discourse with the regards of God, choice and time?

If you can prove how it was discredited, I'd be happy to discuss it.

[Darth Avlectus]

Don't people know the bible is a sham cuz it wuz wrote buy hoomans? I demand you all to stop believing in God! Right now!!!!!!!!!!!!111!!1!!!!1!!!1!1!!!!!11

[jonathan7]

If you can prove how it was discredited, I'd be happy to discuss it.

 

Erm, the British Museum as I recall, but the issue of burden of proof resides with you my friend. I have made no claims as to who wrote Genesis, or why, or what "influenced" it. However Wikipedia that source of all useless information after my lazy 5 minute search shall do me in good enough stead

 

There is currently no consensus on the process by which Genesis came to be written. The documentary hypothesis (which sees Genesis the product of the editorial weaving of a number of originally independent and complete accounts of the same material)' date=' which did enjoy the status of a consensus among many Western scholars for most of the 20th century, no longer enjoys the support it once did, and rival theories have been advanced using fragmentary models (composition by an author from various "fragments") or supplementary models (an original text later expanded and edited), or combinations of these.[13'] An alternative approach regards perceived difficulties in the integral text as we have it as opportunities to rise to a challenge in interpretation, and admit "interpolations" or possible mis-transmissions only when every other avenue of investigation has been exhausted.[14] It is asserted that there are many anachronisms (which must often in the absence of detailed history be a matter of interpretation) and that these point to a date of reaching its "final form" in the 1st millennium B.C.[13] and the same recent proposals attempt to place it in the 5th century when, as the argument runs, the post-Exilic Jewish community was seen as trying to adapt itself to life under the Persian empire.[15]

 

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Genesis

[Working Class Hero]

but the issue of burden of proof resides with you my friend.

Nicely done. You charge me with having a bogus theory, then say that.

 

By the way, your link doesn't support your point that: "The above is a popular 20th Century theory which has since been discredited." at all. All it says is that different theories are being considered (that are very similar to the one I posted)...so I'm not sure where you were going with that.

 

My proof is the book Sir His Greatness Isaac Asimov did on his research in Genesis. If Isaac says it, therefore it is.

[jonathan7]

Nicely done. You charge me with having a bogus theory, then say that.

 

Wow, if I'm detecting your tone right, chill. Just to point out, I haven't claimed anything for who wrote Genesis or what it's influences were, however as far as my reading on the subject goes there isn't a consensus on Genesis. I wasn't really charging you with anything, merely noting that as far as I know there is no agreed reasoning on who wrote Genesis or its influences. At least as far as my limited knowledge on this particular subject goes what I know of Babalonyian Creation stories I'm sceptical of their influence (of the Babalonyian stories I recall one holds that one of the Gods ejaculated the world into being). There is of course the question as to when Genesis was originally written, and given we don't have any remaining old texts ascertaining that is difficult.

 

By the way, your link doesn't support your point that: "The above is a popular 20th Century theory which has since been discredited." at all. All it says is that different theories are being considered (that are very similar to the one I posted)...so I'm not sure where you were going with that.

 

I'm pretty sure that backs up my points

 

"There is currently no consensus on the process by which Genesis came to be written."

 

Follow my reasoning, if we have no way of ascertaining the original date of Genesis it's impossible to know what "documents" (if any) influenced it; As such if there is no consensus on the process by which Genesis came to be, how do you know that for example Genesis is not older than the aforementioned Babylonian accounts, and if there is any similarity documents how do you know it's not because the Babylonian accounts copied Genesis.

 

My proof is the book Sir His Greatness Isaac Asimov did on his research in Genesis. If Isaac says it, therefore it is.

 

I'll see if I can track down a copy, however much as I respect Asimov, I'm not aware he is of any scholarly repute within this particular field, and given the time of his death (1992) and the speed at which a field such as this can move on, how sure are you that what he says is still relevant?

[Tysyacha]

((Paragon Interrupt)) I have a question for all of you: Must all of the Bible--every story, every account, every word and syllable--be LITERALLY true in order for it to be true? I personally do not believe so. If there was no literal Noah's Ark, and if the sun did not literally stand still, I would still believe that Jesus loved me and that He wanted to pay the price for our sins. I've never believed that the Bible was meant to be a science or history textbook, even though many of the events in it did actually occur (such as the Babylonian exile). To me, the Bible was chiefly meant to inspire people to come to the Christian faith, and live out their lives in love for God and His Son.

 

Why must I think that the Earth is only a few thousand years old, as some say because they believe in the Genesis account literally, in order to come to faith (or continue in faith)? I have a point/counterpoint for you to consider:

 

1) "If all of the Bible isn't LITERALLY true, then none of it must be true."

 

-1) Some people like to compare the Bible to a math book, so I'll run with that analogy. If there is a mistake in my math book, does that make the entire text garbage? Are all of the problems mistakenly construed or wrong? Are the theories presented a bunch of hogwash? Of course not. In a math book, one "bad apple" (error) does not "spoil the whole barrel". If some of the Bible isn't literally true, that doesn't make God's love any less valid. Right?

[TKA-001]

(referring to the above post) A sensible conclusion. No Christians I know assert a literal-truth interpretation of scripture (at least, when it comes to the more famously-debated events like the flood).

[mimartin]

be LITERALLY true in order for it to be true?

Nope

 

If there is a mistake in my math book, does that make the entire text garbage?

I would say it would depend on the mistake. If it were a simple math error to a single question then it would not make the entire text garbage. If the mistake was something material that instructed the reader an incorrect way to solve math problems such as add/subtract before multiplying/dividing then it could make the entire text garbage.

 

That is about as deep as I get into a religious thread.

[Qui-Gon Glenn]

@j7 - I cannot know anything about God, and certainly cannot trust anything written about him by mere mortal men who know him no better than myself. If I am to experience and feel "God" it will have to be by direct contact. To me, that is the end of the story, but I am not everyone, and I do not wish to push my views on the forum or anyone else for that matter.

 

As to my mysterious line: If God exists, then Satan exists... But Satan works for God, not against him, as there was a necessity in allowing free choice, AND God does not make mistakes. Therefore, Satan ruling the netherworld is no mistake, and is necessary. They sit on different thrones, both doing God's work... an infinite God contains Satan.

 

This is a big run-on thought, and I need to go to sleep, so if you like I will try to give you a better and more logically sound conception. It is not easy, when talking about the Big Guy in the Sky That is a deep pool, way deeper than I am!!!

 

@adamqd: Thank you for posting the spam-bot idea... It phrased what I was thinking quite succinctly

 

@GTA:SWC - really, yeah you got the jester badge, but I think you know this isn't really the place, and you are attempting an Appeal to Ridicule in my argument, which is fine on the funny farm but not very Kavar's. That, and your point is silly, not helpful, actually in my opinion the stupidest thing you have ever posted

I am not trying to tell anyone what to believe, the point that the Bible was written by Man cannot be disputed, and is therefore a source that must be held under at least some scrutiny. And, to answer your current sig.... WHAT!!!

 

@Ty and TKA: There are big-time Priests and Pastors who are quite serious scientists, and look at a great deal of the Bible as simple storytelling. Yet they have deep faith... proof positive of my point that GTA made into a joke. Thank you for your posts!

 

@Working Class Hero: You are passionate about your position, that is commendable. Finger wagging will not help your point get across, and is needlessly disrespectful. When discussing these things, please remember that your position is in the great minority, and is less trusted in the US and most countries than newly immigrated Muslims, illegal aliens, or people of any faith. Fighting with fire can be your undoing, it is better to discuss than argue. Just something to consider, my friend.

[Darth Avlectus]

 

@GTA:SWC - really, yeah you got the jester badge, but I think you know this isn't really the place, and you are attempting an Appeal to Ridicule in my argument, which is fine on the funny farm but not very Kavar's. That, and your point is silly, not helpful, actually in my opinion the stupidest thing you have ever posted

Ok mister logical point taken. We gotta be serious business now. Hear that kids? Seriously. Serious.

 

I was actually trying to amuse everyone on WCH's point (including himself) to get him to stop and think how he sounds...but without a direct indictment. Though I suppose not helpful.

 

I couldn't resist.

 

I am not trying to tell anyone what to believe, the point that the Bible was written by Man cannot be disputed, and is therefore a source that must be held under at least some scrutiny.

True. There are multiple versions even. Though I find it interesting that while Urantia and such take information roughly circa that time period, a good portion which related to the Bible on some fronts (different views), and not only is it considered blasphemy to the highly religious Christians but also cast off as irrelevant by just about everyone else.

 

And, to answer your current sig.... WHAT!!!

I'm a jerk, and you don't have it together.

[Samuel Dravis]

As to my mysterious line: If God exists, then Satan exists... But Satan works for God, not against him, as there was a necessity in allowing free choice, AND God does not make mistakes.

Just as something interesting to read in a similar spirit, try Borges' Three Versions Of Judas. The only reason I know about it is because Sabre forced me to read one of his collections.

[Sabretooth]

((Paragon Interrupt)) I have a question for all of you: Must all of the Bible--every story, every account, every word and syllable--be LITERALLY true in order for it to be true? I personally do not believe so. If there was no literal Noah's Ark, and if the sun did not literally stand still, I would still believe that Jesus loved me and that He wanted to pay the price for our sins. I've never believed that the Bible was meant to be a science or history textbook, even though many of the events in it did actually occur (such as the Babylonian exile). To me, the Bible was chiefly meant to inspire people to come to the Christian faith, and live out their lives in love for God and His Son.

 

Why must I think that the Earth is only a few thousand years old, as some say because they believe in the Genesis account literally, in order to come to faith (or continue in faith)? I have a point/counterpoint for you to consider:

 

1) "If all of the Bible isn't LITERALLY true, then none of it must be true."

 

-1) Some people like to compare the Bible to a math book, so I'll run with that analogy. If there is a mistake in my math book, does that make the entire text garbage? Are all of the problems mistakenly construed or wrong? Are the theories presented a bunch of hogwash? Of course not. In a math book, one "bad apple" (error) does not "spoil the whole barrel". If some of the Bible isn't literally true, that doesn't make God's love any less valid. Right?

 

The Torah, and its sequel the Bible were written to inspire and teach a bunch of medieval/pre-medieval tribals, nomads and other communities about the joys of coming together under a single religion, by the means of metaphors and parables. It's only rational to believe that the book can no longer be taken seriously, or even in its whole (one might especially want to skip the genealogy bits that are liberally sprinkled in the OT).

 

Tysy, you quite frankly happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time right now, because this fundamentalist mindset seems to be gripping conservative America like... like.. whatever it is that grips things forcefully. Pack your belongings and get to Canada or Hawaii or Mexico or something. I'm sure you'll look splendid in a sombrero.

[JediMaster12]

Indeed. I've pondered the notion, posted earlier, that God allows so much human suffering because He values the power of humans to make choices: either the right ones or the wrong ones. He doesn't like to restrict human freedom because He doesn't want robots. That makes sense to me, although all the suffering in the world breaks my heart. Many times, people suffer because someone else did all the hurting beforehand (murder, rape, financial fraud, genocide).

 

God gave us free choice yes. I am paraphrasing a quote from the Bible where God says, "Let us create man in our own image" and he goes on to say something along the lines about man having dominion over the creatures of the earth. You can tell I am not a Bible student...lol.

 

Anyway, I am in a similar boat as you Tsy. I go to mass mainly out of obligation to my father and participate in his family's rosary sessions for the same reason. I began questioning things because they didn't make sense to me. One of the interesting secrets is that the current Bible is based upon a revisionist history that was written during Israel's captivity in Babylon and for the most part, the writers were inconsistent in their writing style and patterns. Plus it doesn't help that good ole Constatine's Council of Nicea just xnayed some 40 generations of writings that would probably have answered some of the great mysterys that enthusiasts have been trying to solve ie the Holy Grail, etc.

 

 

As for God's purpose for mankind? Other than "to rule and reign over all the earth," as has been mentioned before, and to worship Him for all eternity, I really don't know.

 

 

My thing is that yes there is a purpose for everyone and everything. Not knowing is part of the adventure of living. Do I believe that there is God? I like to think so. I also believe that God loves us unconditionally. If he didn't, why would he give us freedom of choice? The prodigal son tale comes to mind.

 

In your first post, you spoke of a genuine relationship with God. That may be true but also you have to consider your definition of genuine. If you truly believe that it is so, then it is so. Then agains I am probably stepping in on too much faith rather than logic but there are some things you have to fgure out for yourself.

 

Tysy, you quite frankly happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time right now, because this fundamentalist mindset seems to be gripping conservative America like... like.. whatever it is that grips things forcefully. Pack your belongings and get to Canada or Hawaii or Mexico or something. I'm sure you'll look splendid in a sombrero.

 

I agree that a fundamentalist mindset has gripped this country that I love but it takes true courage to stand up for the doubts that you have. However I wouldn't consider Mexico since besides cartels, there is an obsession with Catholicism there.

[mimartin]

@GTA:SWC - really, yeah you got the jester badge, but I think you know this isn't really the place, and you are attempting an Appeal to Ridicule in my argument, which is fine on the funny farm but not very Kavar's. [/Quote] Just want to be clear, you cannot get a Jesters Badge for a post in Kavars.

 

I have no problem with humor or trying to lighten up a subject, just remember that religion is an extremely personal subject so others may be offended by your attempt at levity. No rule against attempts at humor in posts; but please take into consideration that this is an extremely personal subject.

 

Please do not take this as a warning, this is merely a reminder that the subject matter is sensitive and to let members know that are after the Jesters Badge that they should save the best lines for other sections of the forum as they don’t count for that purpose here.

[jonathan7]

((Paragon Interrupt)) I have a question for all of you: Must all of the Bible--every story, every account, every word and syllable--be LITERALLY true in order for it to be true? I personally do not believe so. If there was no literal Noah's Ark, and if the sun did not literally stand still, I would still believe that Jesus loved me and that He wanted to pay the price for our sins. I've never believed that the Bible was meant to be a science or history textbook, even though many of the events in it did actually occur (such as the Babylonian exile). To me, the Bible was chiefly meant to inspire people to come to the Christian faith, and live out their lives in love for God and His Son.

 

Actually no Christian (unless they are reading the Greek or Aramaic) can claim to have read the "literal Bible" as translation is never 100% meaning is lost, so the English Bible (or any other translations) are never literal in any respect. You may also wish to think over this quote by the great theological scholar;

 

"There is, then, no absolute proof that our Canon is precisely the true Canon and no absolute proof that any one word of the text is exactly as God gave it. But the quest for absolute proofs, whether historical or theological, is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of history, theology and the human mind. History is at best an approximation to truth based upon incomplete induction of the facts. Theology is a fallible human attempt to co-ordinate the data of revelation. The human intellect, even when renewed by the Holy Spirit, cannot know absolute certainty. In his inmost being the Christian believer has an absolute assurance (that is, an assurance which comes from God's direct witness within him), that he has heard the voice of God and that he is a child of God. But when he puts his beliefs into his own words the absoluteness of the truth of his statements vanishes." – John Wenham

 

For me I believe all the evidence points towards in a 14-15 billion year old universe, and a 6 billion year old earth, I'm unsure on the story of Noah, I haven't done enough research on it to be able to say particularly much definitively.

 

Why must I think that the Earth is only a few thousand years old, as some say because they believe in the Genesis account literally, in order to come to faith (or continue in faith)? I have a point/counterpoint for you to consider:

 

Ty, many Christians believe in a 6 billion year old over, and any Christian claiming that the earth being 6,000 years old is of fundamental importance to the faith needs to point me exactly to where Jesus says that (hint he doesn't).

 

1) "If all of the Bible isn't LITERALLY true, then none of it must be true."

 

Thats bull-**** and utter idiocy from anyone that says it, none of Jesus parables are literally true....

 

-1) Some people like to compare the Bible to a math book, so I'll run with that analogy. If there is a mistake in my math book, does that make the entire text garbage? Are all of the problems mistakenly construed or wrong? Are the theories presented a bunch of hogwash? Of course not. In a math book, one "bad apple" (error) does not "spoil the whole barrel". If some of the Bible isn't literally true, that doesn't make God's love any less valid. Right?

 

Right, but the above argument only works if you believe the Bible is infallible, I don't believe the Bible is infallible (partly as I think that the world "infallible" is meanignless), but given the complications of translation and that humans wrote the Bible (while being inspired, if you believe what the Bible says), I think claims that the Bible are infallible are at best naive, and at worse Kavars rules means I can't call it for what it is, in any respect they involve the twisting of words.

 

@j7 - I cannot know anything about God, and certainly cannot trust anything written about him by mere mortal men who know him no better than myself.

 

How do you know they don't know God better than yourself? Just an observation, but I don't think any of us can really state how well anyone else knows God.

 

If I am to experience and feel "God" it will have to be by direct contact. To me, that is the end of the story, but I am not everyone, and I do not wish to push my views on the forum or anyone else for that matter.

 

Kavars is as much a place for the exchange of idea's so feel free, I don't think its really possible to force your ideas on others in an internet forum unless your name is Garfield.

 

The Torah, and its sequel the Bible were written to inspire and teach a bunch of medieval/pre-medieval tribals, nomads and other communities about the joys of coming together under a single religion, by the means of metaphors and parables. It's only rational to believe that the book can no longer be taken seriously, or even in its whole (one might especially want to skip the genealogy bits that are liberally sprinkled in the OT).

 

Out of interest Sabre, how much of the Bible have you read, specifically the New Testament?

[stingerhs]

((Paragon Interrupt)) I have a question for all of you: Must all of the Bible--every story, every account, every word and syllable--be LITERALLY true in order for it to be true? I personally do not believe so. If there was no literal Noah's Ark, and if the sun did not literally stand still, I would still believe that Jesus loved me and that He wanted to pay the price for our sins. I've never believed that the Bible was meant to be a science or history textbook, even though many of the events in it did actually occur (such as the Babylonian exile). To me, the Bible was chiefly meant to inspire people to come to the Christian faith, and live out their lives in love for God and His Son.

i'm actually somewhat confused. by literal, do you mean word-for-word true? if that's the case, then i doubt it as there is a lot more to the Bible than the various translations. the word "love" alone can be translated into over 4 different Greek words that actually describe multiple kinds of love (ie, the love of God vs brotherly love and so on). there's a reason why most biblical scholars and teachers recommend that you use a concordance if you're going to do an in-depth study of particular scriptures in addition to reference points for the translation that you're using.

 

of course if you're referring to specific stories like Noah's Ark, Jonah and the Whale, Daniel and the Lion's Den, etc, then i would have to say that the stories are more than just stories. if they were there for inspirational purposes only, then what possible purpose would they serve today? those stories no longer have any direct context with today's daily life, and that greatly diminishes their impact. if those stories are true, however, they then serve not only to inspire faith but also to remind us that our God is capable of much more than providing us with our next paycheck.

Why must I think that the Earth is only a few thousand years old, as some say because they believe in the Genesis account literally, in order to come to faith (or continue in faith)? I have a point/counterpoint for you to consider:

 

1) "If all of the Bible isn't LITERALLY true, then none of it must be true."

 

-1) Some people like to compare the Bible to a math book, so I'll run with that analogy. If there is a mistake in my math book, does that make the entire text garbage? Are all of the problems mistakenly construed or wrong? Are the theories presented a bunch of hogwash? Of course not. In a math book, one "bad apple" (error) does not "spoil the whole barrel". If some of the Bible isn't literally true, that doesn't make God's love any less valid. Right?

well, you're argument here relies heavily on one simple statement: if part of it isn't true, then can the rest of it be considered as reliable? to this, i have one simple counter-point: if one part of it is true, then can the rest of it be considered as reliable?

 

in both cases, i would have to argue that you can't just look at one part and immediately establish its validity (or lack thereof). given the importance of the validity of the Bible, i think that you would have to put the full text into question and look at every part. to only focus on one part and none of the others to base your argument would be foolhardy at best.