How I know the Bible is what it claims to be! [Archive] - Page 2 - HVAC-Talk: Heating, Air & Refrigeration Discussion

View Full Version : How I know the Bible is what it claims to be!

Pages : 1 [2]

scrogdog

07-23-2007, 12:53 PM

but He is not going to force us.

Ah, but he is all-knowing. So, he knew what would happen with the human beings that he destroyed with the flood at the moment, or even before, their creation. He knew exactly how Satan would choose to use his free will. He also knew the minute that he created my soul that I was hopeless.

It seems a little wierd to create people whom he knows will not make it, and then have to "judge" that person even though he knows every move that person will make during his life at the moment that person's soul is awakened.

Christians like to use "free will" in an attempt to absolve God of the responsibility of his creation. God is all-knowing, so even if I accept that we have free will, and I do, that is meaningless in the way that Christians use it. Either God is all knowing... or he isn't. And if he is, why did he create all of those people, with the full knowledge of how things would go, only to have to kill them with a flood?

I am quite well, thank you. I hope life finds you in a similar condition! :)

bootlen

07-23-2007, 03:20 PM

Ah, but he is all-knowing. So, he knew what would happen with the human beings that he destroyed with the flood at the moment, or even before, their creation. He knew exactly how Satan would choose to use his free will. He also knew the minute that he created my soul that I was hopeless.

We are ALL hopeless without the grace that is afforded us by the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.

It seems a little wierd to create people whom he knows will not make it, and then have to "judge" that person even though he knows every move that person will make during his life at the moment that person's soul is awakened.

Yes. True. But that is why He is God and we are not.

Christians like to use "free will" in an attempt to absolve God of the responsibility of his creation. God is all-knowing, so even if I accept that we have free will, and I do, that is meaningless in the way that Christians use it. Either God is all knowing... or he isn't. And if he is, why did he create all of those people, with the full knowledge of how things would go, only to have to kill them with a flood?

Those people knew the law. They knew the consequences. Noah took about 100 years to build the arc. You think no one asked him what in hell he was doing? Reality check time, scrog.

They made the choice to go on sacrificing children to false gods, living perverted lives, and basically presenting themselves as an abomination in God's eyes. I suspect they mocked Noah the entire time. Surely they mocked God. And "God will not be mocked".

scrogdog

07-23-2007, 03:25 PM

They made the choice to go on sacrificing children to false gods, living perverted lives, and basically presenting themselves as an abomination in God's eyes. I suspect they mocked Noah the entire time. Surely they mocked God. And "God will not be mocked".

Right. Point being that he knew that this is exactly what would happen before it even occurred. So why create beings that you KNOW will only have to be destroyed? Why create souls that have no other destiny than torture?

Doesn't that seem a little.... bad?

bootlen

07-23-2007, 03:47 PM

scrogdog

07-23-2007, 03:49 PM

That is perhaps, true.

But should not God want to make things, um, "palatable" to potential beleivers?

lhatton

07-23-2007, 04:01 PM

Right. Point being that he knew that this is exactly what would happen before it even occurred. So why create beings that you KNOW will only have to be destroyed? Why create souls that have no other destiny than torture?

Doesn't that seem a little.... bad?
This question assumes that people are victims caught in the vise of fate. But the Bible teaches that God in His goodness created a world of moral order in which Adam and Eve were free agents. By creating them in His image and likeness, God gave them a unique quality of relationship with each other and with Him. God entrusted them with freedom. This freedom included the freedom to turn away from Him, and unfortunately, that is what they did.

Even though God knew before hand what Adam and Eve would do, He granted them the capacity to do as they chose. God condems no one unjustly by causing anyone to sin. He is the judge of all the earth, and He will do right by everyone. He does not compel or coerce human creatures made in His image. Yet nothing can thwart his glory and grace.

God also shows that He is abounding in love and faithfulness (Exudus 34:6) by not leaving the human race in it's sin. In Jesus Christ, the creator graciously became the Redeemer. Through His death and resurection, the way to eternal life has been opened to all who turn away from sin to follow Him (John 14:6).

bootlen

07-23-2007, 04:11 PM

That is perhaps, true.

But should not God want to make things, um, "palatable" to potential beleivers?

Lemme see. Eternity in Paradise with a personal relationship with Almighty God, the One who took our place in death; boundless eating opportunities with no fear of high cholesterol, low cholesterol, fat, or botulism; perfectly controlled climate; absolutely no fatigue; perpetual party; the list goes freakin' on...

What could possibly be more "palatable" than that?

And if ya ain't into all that, you can do anything else that your little heart would desire.

Please, scrog, in the name of all that is right and just, tell me what could be more "palatable", hmmm?

RoBoTeq

07-23-2007, 04:20 PM

Romans 3:23. Without Jesus, we are all separated from God and on our way to hell.

I don't know what it is you are reading, but it isn't the New Testament. No where are these words written.

Romans 3:23 states "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God," which is pretty calm for Paul's epistle to the Romans.

Keeping in mind that the church in Rome was made up of mostly previously Pagan Romans who had little understanding of the Hebrew Testaments that precluded Jesus and told of the coming of the Messiah. Paul needed to take a bit of a stronger hand with the Roman Christians not only because of their Pagan background, but also because they did not have the advantage of having been taught the Messianic prophecy of the Jews.

A very interesting factor of the Roman Christians is that these people gave up undisciplined religous values that included physical pleasures such as overindulgences in eating and sex to be comforted by the more stringent ways required by Jesus Christ to live a more fulfilling life. Having led a quite liberal and somewhat wild lifestyle in my youth I can relate to the need for spiritual comfort over pleasures of the flesh. Evidentally, the Romans felt the intesity of the spiritual force that naysayers of faith in God claim does not exist but in the minds of the weak. Maybe this is what Jesus meant when he stated that the weak shall inherit the earth;)

RoBoTeq

07-23-2007, 04:24 PM

Ah, but he is all-knowing. So, he knew what would happen with the human beings that he destroyed with the flood at the moment, or even before, their creation. He knew exactly how Satan would choose to use his free will. He also knew the minute that he created my soul that I was hopeless.

It seems a little wierd to create people whom he knows will not make it, and then have to "judge" that person even though he knows every move that person will make during his life at the moment that person's soul is awakened.

Christians like to use "free will" in an attempt to absolve God of the responsibility of his creation. God is all-knowing, so even if I accept that we have free will, and I do, that is meaningless in the way that Christians use it. Either God is all knowing... or he isn't. And if he is, why did he create all of those people, with the full knowledge of how things would go, only to have to kill them with a flood?

I am quite well, thank you. I hope life finds you in a similar condition! :)

I believe this to be a flawed take on Biblical text by some fundies. Do you wish to only dismiss and criticize all of faith based on only what some believe or are you willing to discuss rationally with those of us who have other viewpoints of Biblical text and God?

scrogdog

07-23-2007, 04:26 PM

Please, scrog, in the name of all that is right and just, tell me what could be more "palatable", hmmm?

Ummm, how about a God that chooses not to create beings simply so that he can kill or torture them?

That's what I am, I guess. My only purpose to God is to show others that conformed how "correct" they were in so doing. Of course, God knew from the start that I would never conform, so I can only conclude that God gets some kind of jolly kick out of torture, since... here I am... even with the knowledge of my destiny he chose to bring me here.

What possible reason or purpose is there in creating beings that you KNOW must be destroyed? Again, that would lead one to not a very nice conclusion about God.

Strange and mysterious ways, indeed. A little too much so for my taste.

bootlen

07-23-2007, 04:41 PM

...I would never conform,...

Exactly..."WOULD NOT".

Yer catchin' on, scrog.

scrogdog

07-23-2007, 04:41 PM

Even though God knew before hand what Adam and Eve would do, He granted them the capacity to do as they chose. God condems no one unjustly by causing anyone to sin. He is the judge of all the earth, and He will do right by everyone. He does not compel or coerce human creatures made in His image. Yet nothing can thwart his glory and grace.

I am happy that this makes some sort of sense to you, but it doesn't to me. :)

If God KNEW that they would fail, why test them? If he created beings that he KNEW would fail, does it then make sense to then tell them that IF you fail you will be cast from paradise? Why even go through it? Just create a non-perfect man out of paradise to begin with. The story teaches us nothing under those conditions since the outcome was known.

God knew that they would fail, yet chose to test them anyway just so that he could punish them and all future men?

I am not sure how you guys are failing to see how this makes God not very nice. But, understand what I am saying here. Not that God doesn't exist or that he's a bad guy. Only that scenarios such as these do not seem to be very well thought out. This is exactly what I mean by the following statement; "the bible is rife with the signature flaws of man". Which is why that I have concluded that the bible was 100% created by man, 100% NOT inspired by God, and that Jesus was very likely not divine.

bootlen

07-23-2007, 04:44 PM

...I would never conform,...

Exactly."...WOULD not..." Not "...COULD not...".

Yer catchin' on, scrog.

scrogdog

07-23-2007, 04:45 PM

I believe this to be a flawed take on Biblical text by some fundies. Do you wish to only dismiss and criticize all of faith based on only what some believe or are you willing to discuss rationally with those of us who have other viewpoints of Biblical text and God?

Sure, I'll be happy to Robo. Why do you think I am throwing this stuff out there? Just to piss you off? :)

So far, none has countered my thoughts in a way that satisfies me. I understand perfectly that not all believers agree and I am not attempting to place you with all of the others. Believers like you and Andy and Ihatton are very refreshing, in fact.

Refreshing does not necessarily mean that I'll agree. :)

scrogdog

07-23-2007, 04:47 PM

Exactly."...WOULD not..." Not "...COULD not...".

Yer catchin' on, scrog.

Well, Boot, all I can do is to clue you in to the different states of mind and patterns of thought that men have. If you wish to close your ears to it that's your business. :)

BTW, I have not closed my ears to the word of God. Rather, I read the words and did not like them. That's what the "Why I Do Not Believe" topic is all about, bud.

bootlen

07-23-2007, 04:50 PM

I am happy that this makes some sort of sense to you, but it doesn't to me. :)

If God KNEW that they would fail, why test them? If he created beings that he KNEW would fail, does it then make sense to then tell them that IF you fail you will be cast from paradise? Why even go through it? Just create a non-perfect man out of paradise to begin with. The story teaches us nothing under those conditions since the outcome was known.

God knew that they would fail, yet chose to test them anyway just so that he could punish them and all future men?

I am not sure how you guys are failing to see how this makes God not very nice. But, understand what I am saying here. Not that God doesn't exist or that he's a bad guy. Only that scenarios such as these do not seem to be very well thought out. This is exactly what I mean by the following statement; "the bible is rife with the signature flaws of man". Which is why that I have concluded that the bible was 100% created by man, 100% NOT inspired by God, and that Jesus was very likely not divine.

No test...no choice. No choice...robots. Robots...no love.

He wants us to choose to love Him. In order to choose, there must be a choice, no? He just made the choice an easy one and mankind STILL makes lousy choices. THAT is what muddles MY mind.

RoBoTeq

07-23-2007, 04:51 PM

Right. Point being that he knew that this is exactly what would happen before it even occurred. So why create beings that you KNOW will only have to be destroyed? Why create souls that have no other destiny than torture?

Doesn't that seem a little.... bad?

What are you referring to as "souls"? If by souls, you mean human lives, then it would be silly just to waste them for the sake of doing so, so I don't believe that is how it went down. If you mean spiritual souls, the Bible does not state that God Created our spirituallity. It seems more that our spiritual nature is already of the entity we refer to as God.

RoBoTeq

07-23-2007, 04:52 PM

That is perhaps, true.

But should not God want to make things, um, "palatable" to potential beleivers?

God does. It's the fundies that are such downers about God's will:p

scrogdog

07-23-2007, 05:00 PM

What are you referring to as "souls"? If by souls, you mean human lives, then it would be silly just to waste them for the sake of doing so, so I don't believe that is how it went down. If you mean spiritual souls, the Bible does not state that God Created our spirituallity. It seems more that our spiritual nature is already of the entity we refer to as God.

This is an interesting thought. I need to chew on it a bit.

It would seem, then, that you say that God is not perfect? You did say (elsewhere) that God learns, right? So, that would mean that he can't be perfect.

Where am I going? Well, even if he didn't "manufacture" my spiritual soul, are you saying that God gave me free will and did (and does) NOT, in fact, know what will happen with me?

bootlen

07-23-2007, 05:00 PM

RoBoTeq

07-23-2007, 05:05 PM

Ummm, how about a God that chooses not to create beings simply so that he can kill or torture them?

That's what I am, I guess. My only purpose to God is to show others that conformed how "correct" they were in so doing. Of course, God knew from the start that I would never conform, so I can only conclude that God gets some kind of jolly kick out of torture, since... here I am... even with the knowledge of my destiny he chose to bring me here.

What possible reason or purpose is there in creating beings that you KNOW must be destroyed? Again, that would lead one to not a very nice conclusion about God.

Strange and mysterious ways, indeed. A little too much so for my taste.

Here is where I think the Deist view of God's Creation seems a bit more logical. It would seem that God Created the physical world with a set of rules of physics. If a set of circumstances occur, then a certain outcome will occur. Think about a child that is about to put its hand on a hot stove top. Dad yells out to the child; "Don't touch that, or you are going to get burned." Well, if the child disobeys the dad's command to not touch the stove and gets burned, what does the child claim? Dad just caused me to get burned!

In the same way, God, through prophets, tells us what not to do and the consequences if we do these things. Because the prophets are mortals, they tend to view God's commands as a child does a father's commands.

The commands of God and the consequences that are stated in the Bible are not God's telling us if we do things He is going to cause us pain and death, but rather that if we do things, pain and death will occur.

Just because we cannot properly understand what Biblical text is telling us does not make the text in error, it simply means that we are in error in our understanding.

RoBoTeq

07-23-2007, 05:09 PM

I am happy that this makes some sort of sense to you, but it doesn't to me. :)

If God KNEW that they would fail, why test them? If he created beings that he KNEW would fail, does it then make sense to then tell them that IF you fail you will be cast from paradise? Why even go through it? Just create a non-perfect man out of paradise to begin with. The story teaches us nothing under those conditions since the outcome was known.

God knew that they would fail, yet chose to test them anyway just so that he could punish them and all future men?

I am not sure how you guys are failing to see how this makes God not very nice. But, understand what I am saying here. Not that God doesn't exist or that he's a bad guy. Only that scenarios such as these do not seem to be very well thought out. This is exactly what I mean by the following statement; "the bible is rife with the signature flaws of man". Which is why that I have concluded that the bible was 100% created by man, 100% NOT inspired by God, and that Jesus was very likely not divine.

It don't make sense to me either. One of the great deceits that Satan has bestowed on us is that we have the intellect to understand everything. Obviously we do not understand much of what God has conveyed to our ancesters and doubtful our ancestors understood much more then we do today.

RoBoTeq

07-23-2007, 05:14 PM

Sure, I'll be happy to Robo. Why do you think I am throwing this stuff out there? Just to piss you off? :)

So far, none has countered my thoughts in a way that satisfies me. I understand perfectly that not all believers agree and I am not attempting to place you with all of the others. Believers like you and Andy and Ihatton are very refreshing, in fact.

Refreshing does not necessarily mean that I'll agree. :)

Having been where you are now, I cannot get pissed off over your frustration with trying to come to terms with your spiritual nature. All I can tell you that may help in your quest is that it was putting God on trial that brought me to the realization that God exists. Once I stopped trying to find God and realized that God cannot be detected by physical senses, I began to realize that God is everywhere. Suddenly it was like trying to see air and realizing that it is everywhere and my very being depended on it.

RoBoTeq

07-23-2007, 05:19 PM

Well, Boot, all I can do is to clue you in to the different states of mind and patterns of thought that men have. If you wish to close your ears to it that's your business. :)

BTW, I have not closed my ears to the word of God. Rather, I read the words and did not like them. That's what the "Why I Do Not Believe" topic is all about, bud.

The Biblical reference to what you are experiencing is; "have eyes yet cannot see" and "have ears yet cannot hear." Have you ever looked into a dark tinted car window only to see just your own reflection? Then, suddenly have what is on the other side of that glass appear to you? That is what "seeing" spiritually is like. Once we get past the reflection of our physical being, we can see our spiritual reality.

sysint

07-23-2007, 05:26 PM

scrogdog

07-23-2007, 05:40 PM

scrogdog

07-23-2007, 05:53 PM

The Biblical reference to what you are experiencing is; "have eyes yet cannot see" and "have ears yet cannot hear." Have you ever looked into a dark tinted car window only to see just your own reflection? Then, suddenly have what is on the other side of that glass appear to you? That is what "seeing" spiritually is like. Once we get past the reflection of our physical being, we can see our spiritual reality.

Yeah. It is going to be as difficult for me to explain my mindset to you as it is your perception of the difficulty of explaining spirituality to me. Sometimes it is very difficult to understand people who think differently than myself because I can't see "the process". I think that is true for all of us.

I can only hope that some will undertand that there are multiple processes, not just the ones that individuals have. Knowing that different states of being exist, unfortunately, does not aid in the understanding of them. I'm not sure I'll ever get a handle around the mindset that leads one to God.

But, in my opinion, at least understanding that people DO think differently will help us. If we can learn to stop thinking that "different" means flawed or bad... we get closer to the impossible ideal of the brotherhood of man.

Because perfection is impossible, should I stop trying to be the best I can be? Similarly, we need to reach a greater understanding and tolerance of our differences if this race to to progress socially, even if we reach for an impossible ideal. Right now we seem in a rut. :)

Our earthly existence has tremendous value to me. The only thing *I* am preparing to do is to make things HERE better. If there is somewhere else after death... then bring it on. Trust me, I am not scared one bit of being judged by any being. :)

scrogdog

07-23-2007, 06:12 PM

I don't know what it is you are reading, but it isn't the New Testament. No where are these words written.

Romans 3:23 states "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God," which is pretty calm for Paul's epistle to the Romans.

Keeping in mind that the church in Rome was made up of mostly previously Pagan Romans who had little understanding of the Hebrew Testaments that precluded Jesus and told of the coming of the Messiah. Paul needed to take a bit of a stronger hand with the Roman Christians not only because of their Pagan background, but also because they did not have the advantage of having been taught the Messianic prophecy of the Jews.

A very interesting factor of the Roman Christians is that these people gave up undisciplined religous values that included physical pleasures such as overindulgences in eating and sex to be comforted by the more stringent ways required by Jesus Christ to live a more fulfilling life. Having led a quite liberal and somewhat wild lifestyle in my youth I can relate to the need for spiritual comfort over pleasures of the flesh. Evidentally, the Romans felt the intesity of the spiritual force that naysayers of faith in God claim does not exist but in the minds of the weak. Maybe this is what Jesus meant when he stated that the weak shall inherit the earth;)

I stand corrected, and I also confess that I pulled that off Google somewhere. I'm not sure why I used it since I just Googled it again and what I posted was not even on the first page. lol. They all said what you said.

I do have a bible... somewhere. Looks like I'd better pull the thing out if I am going to go and use material from there. :)

sysint

07-23-2007, 10:03 PM

I am not trying to prove anything. I will, however, be honest with you, I did not figure that whether or not god was perfect and omnipotent were points of discussion among believers. I thought it was pretty much a given.

I'm just trying to get your take.

I look at it this way -- you have omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence. God isn't omnipresent according to the Bible.

As far as foretelling the future, he can choose NOT to do so. So to say he automatically knows the failures of everyone and plans things that way is not a valid conclusion.

Genesis 18:20 So the Lord told Abraham, “I have heard a great outcry from Sodom and Gomorrah, because their sin is so flagrant. 21 I am going down to see if their actions are as wicked as I have heard. If not, I want to know.” -NLT

Two things to note with this scripture; God is not omnipresent, and went to check out a situation he didn't have complete knowledge of. He wanted to know what was going on. It wasn't that he knew what was going on already.

Hebrews 9:24 For Christ entered, not into a holy place made with hands, which is a copy of the reality, but into heaven itself, now to appear before the person of God for us - NWT

No omnipresence.

What you cannot do is hide something from God should he choose to know of it. Hebrews 4:13 Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account. -NIV

geerair

07-23-2007, 10:21 PM

I'm just trying to get your take.

I look at it this way -- you have omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence. God isn't omnipresent according to the Bible.

As far as foretelling the future, he can choose NOT to do so. So to say he automatically knows the failures of everyone and plans things that way is not a valid conclusion.

Genesis 18:20 So the Lord told Abraham, “I have heard a great outcry from Sodom and Gomorrah, because their sin is so flagrant. 21 I am going down to see if their actions are as wicked as I have heard. If not, I want to know.” -NLT

Two things to note with this scripture; God is not omnipresent, and went to check out a situation he didn't have complete knowledge of. He wanted to know what was going on. It wasn't that he knew what was going on already.

Hebrews 9:24 For Christ entered, not into a holy place made with hands, which is a copy of the reality, but into heaven itself, now to appear before the person of God for us - NWT

No omnipresence.

What you cannot do is hide something from God should he choose to know of it. Hebrews 4:13 Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account. -NIVWell sys, I understand where you are coming from but scrog is working off the attributes of the usual suspect's god who is omnipresent.

bootlen

07-23-2007, 10:34 PM

I'm just trying to get your take.

I look at it this way -- you have omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence. God isn't omnipresent according to the Bible.

Really.? Where does it say that?

Genesis 18:20 So the Lord told Abraham, “I have heard a great outcry from Sodom and Gomorrah, because their sin is so flagrant. 21 I am going down to see if their actions are as wicked as I have heard. If not, I want to know.” -NLT

"If not I will know."

Two things to note with this scripture; God is not omnipresent,...

But can choose to be.

...and went to check out a situation he didn't have complete knowledge of. He wanted to know what was going on. It wasn't that he knew what was going on already.

Misrepresentation of the facts.

Hebrews 9:24 For Christ entered, not into a holy place made with hands, which is a copy of the reality, but into heaven itself, now to appear before the person of God for us - NWT

And you said you are not a JW.:rolleyes:

No omnipresence.

By His choice.

What you cannot do is hide something from God should he choose to know of it. Hebrews 4:13 Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account. -NIV

Careful now, sys. You're using a version that contradicts the NWT in fundamentals for the faith.

sline-dawg

07-23-2007, 10:41 PM

I know neither one will answer.... but, I gotta ask......

What denomination do you participate in worship...?:confused:

If you are not willing to answer, I do understand....:)

bootlen

07-23-2007, 10:47 PM

I know neither one will answer.... but, I gotta ask......

What denomination do you participate in worship...?:confused:

If you are not willing to answer, I do understand....:)

Now, see. I'm gonna surprise you. I worship at a non-denom. I've posted that here before and apparently it went right over everybody's head.

RoBoTeq

07-23-2007, 10:54 PM

I know neither one will answer.... but, I gotta ask......

What denomination do you participate in worship...?:confused:

If you are not willing to answer, I do understand....:)

I gave up on denomination due to the fact that all denominations are more hung up on their specific doctrine then on understanding the Truth.

I think I am going to start my own denomination and call it; "I don't know it all but am wanting to understand through seeking the Truth." If that is too much to remember, we can make it an acronym; IDKIABAWTUTSTT. That shouldn't be too hard to pronounce.

RoBoTeq

07-23-2007, 10:58 PM

Sys, try and understand what I am up against here.

I am one man with one vision, debating with multiple people that have multiple visions.

I am not trying to prove anything. I will, however, be honest with you, I did not figure that whether or not god was perfect and omnipotent were points of discussion among believers. I thought it was pretty much a given.

If you and Robo say no, then fine. Your words are considered. :)

Sorry scrog, but from where I sit you seem to have no vision. As a matter of fact, I am not sure I have ever encountered someone who deliberately blinds themself as much as you seem to do.

Many people of faith know God without understanding God. The understanding of God was Satan's deceit that still keeps too many from seeking the Truth because they think they already know something else.

sline-dawg

07-23-2007, 11:10 PM

I gave up on denomination due to the fact that all denominations are more hung up on their specific doctrine then on understanding the Truth.

I think I am going to start my own denomination and call it; "I don't know it all but am wanting to understand through seeking the Truth." If that is too much to remember, we can make it an acronym; IDKIABAWTUTSTT. That shouldn't be too hard to pronounce.

Been there, done that....walked away.........

Socially.

The Doctor

07-24-2007, 12:00 AM

I'm just trying to get your take.

I look at it this way -- you have omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence. God isn't omnipresent according to the Bible.

As far as foretelling the future, he can choose NOT to do so. So to say he automatically knows the failures of everyone and plans things that way is not a valid conclusion.
a variation of open theology. God's just sitting around waiting to see what we're going to do. The ramifications of which would be perilous--not the least of which would be that there was not a sacrifice once for all which was all sufficient to satisfy the justice of God. In short, the quote above is heresy.

Genesis 18:20 So the Lord told Abraham, “I have heard a great outcry from Sodom and Gomorrah, because their sin is so flagrant. 21 I am going down to see if their actions are as wicked as I have heard. If not, I want to know.” -NLT

Two things to note with this scripture; God is not omnipresent, and went to check out a situation he didn't have complete knowledge of. He wanted to know what was going on. It wasn't that he knew what was going on already.

Hebrews 9:24 For Christ entered, not into a holy place made with hands, which is a copy of the reality, but into heaven itself, now to appear before the person of God for us - NWT

No omnipresence.

What you cannot do is hide something from God should he choose to know of it. Hebrews 4:13 Nothing in all creation is hidden from God's sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account. -NIV
God's Word divides soul and spirit, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Is there anything too hard for God?

sysint

07-24-2007, 07:10 AM

a variation of open theology. God's just sitting around waiting to see what we're going to do. The ramifications of which would be perilous--not the least of which would be that there was not a sacrifice once for all which was all sufficient to satisfy the justice of God. In short, the quote above is heresy.
God's Word divides soul and spirit, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Is there anything too hard for God?

Your conclusion is unreasonable to my statements.

Genesis 18:20 So the Lord told Abraham, “I have heard a great outcry from Sodom and Gomorrah, because their sin is so flagrant. 21 I am going down to see if their actions are as wicked as I have heard. If not, I want to know.” -NLT

God states that he wanted to know if the situation was as bad as he had heard. Are you saying he is lying and that he already knew?

sysint

07-24-2007, 07:19 AM

Well sys, I understand where you are coming from but scrog is working off the attributes of the usual suspect's god who is omnipresent.

In the Bible (two cited verses already) it shows God going to check on a situation.

In the other in Hebrews 9:24 Jesus goes before the face of God, his person, or his presence. Jesus wouldn't have to go to the person of God if he was omnipresent.

I'm pointing out that there is a distinction between what these "Bible believers" say and what is actually in print in the Bible. Logically, if these are using the Bible as authority, Scrog or I can simply refer to what it states.

Some are stating omnipresence, but the Bible states otherwise. Essentially, these "bible believers" are stating their own opinion, and not what is in print.

scrogdog

07-24-2007, 07:38 AM

Sorry scrog, but from where I sit you seem to have no vision. As a matter of fact, I am not sure I have ever encountered someone who deliberately blinds themself as much as you seem to do.

Many people of faith know God without understanding God. The understanding of God was Satan's deceit that still keeps too many from seeking the Truth because they think they already know something else.

Nothing to be sorry about. I guess you just cant see the different mindset and ways of thinking thing. Well, not a lot of Christians are really willing to try, because the knowledge of it kind of ruins everything. Such as the constant Christian mantras that tell us that if you can't find it in you to believe, then there must be something wrong with you, or that there is one truth for all.

The list grows by the day in comparison to the denials, so truthfully, I find the whole excercise a little amusing. Let's see... what are we up to now? I am self-centered, selfish, believing myself to be a god, I can't have thought this thing through, I am like a spoiled child defying my parents.

Lol.

See, you will go on defense now. To me, the above is a case-closed presentation of my point. Different thinkers perhaps? Nah. Can't be true. :)

I really do not understand how someone can look at all these things that you guys have said, and then with a straight face say that, no, people do not take that which they do not understand or is different and call it flawed. People do it everyday from within this topic, to race relations in the street. Name it. If you aren't like me, you are one hell of a sorry individual. This is how we are as humans.

First, some of you will deny it, then in the next breath, you'll do it! You watch. :)

bootlen

07-24-2007, 08:09 AM

In the Bible (two cited verses already) it shows God going to check on a situation.

In the other in Hebrews 9:24 Jesus goes before the face of God, his person, or his presence. Jesus wouldn't have to go to the person of God if he was omnipresent.

I'm pointing out that there is a distinction between what these "Bible believers" say and what is actually in print in the Bible. Logically, if these are using the Bible as authority, Scrog or I can simply refer to what it states.

Some are stating omnipresence, but the Bible states otherwise. Essentially, these "bible believers" are stating their own opinion, and not what is in print.

Hmmm. Proverbs 15:3.

bootlen

07-24-2007, 08:12 AM

Genesis 18:20 If not, I want to know.[/B]” -NLT

"If not, I will know."

NLT changes the very words of original Scripture. It is not to be trusted as a source.

sysint

07-24-2007, 04:04 PM

Any other translations you want to discredit?

Genesis 18:20 Then the LORD said, "The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous 21 that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know." -NIV

20And Jehovah saith, `The cry of Sodom and Gomorrah -- because great; and their sin -- because exceeding grievous: 21I go down now, and see whether according to its cry which is coming unto Me they have done completely -- and if not -- I know;' - YLT

20And Jehovah said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great and their sin is very grievous, 21 I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come to me; and if not, I will know [it]. -DARBY

Again, God has to go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the report to him. If it is not AS BAD as the outcry, he states: "I will know." That's because IF God wants to find out about a matter, he can.

See what I'm talking about Geer? Here we go again. He so badly wants it different than it simply states.

sysint

07-24-2007, 04:23 PM

Hmmm. Proverbs 15:3.I see. No point.

Again for the S L O W people, God can be omniscient. God can also choose NOT to know something or foresee a result. He has the power to do that because he is omnipotent.

When talking to Cain he said, 6 Then the LORD said to Cain, "Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it."

God didn't determine in advance what Cain was going to do or even make an assessment that of what he would do. He simply stated the results of either course of action.

Genesis 22:11-12 11 But the angel of the LORD called out to him from heaven, "Abraham! Abraham!" "Here I am," he replied.
12 "Do not lay a hand on the boy," he said. "Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son."

lhatton

07-24-2007, 04:23 PM

lhatton

07-24-2007, 04:38 PM

I see. No point.

Again for the S L O W people, God can be omniscient. God can also choose NOT to know something or foresee a result. He has the power to do that because he is omnipotent.

When talking to Cain he said, 6 Then the LORD said to Cain, "Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it."
The point of the challenge God put to Cain was that he would have to decide what he would do. (some say the thrust of these words actually forms a question: "Will you master it"?) To overcome our sinful nature and thus master sin first requires a desire and a decision to do so by Gods grace.

God didn't determine in advance what Cain was going to do or even make an assessment that of what he would do. He simply stated the results of either course of action.

Genesis 22:11-12 11 But the angel of the LORD called out to him from heaven, "Abraham! Abraham!" "Here I am," he replied.
12 "Do not lay a hand on the boy," he said. "Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son."
I hope this helps a little

sysint

07-24-2007, 04:41 PM

"This may again be an attempt to describe the ways of God in human terms. An omniscient God does not need to go on a fact-finding mission."

The Bible does describe the ways of God in human terms. That goes without saying. The Bible isn't written for dolphins, gorillas or any other animal. The Bible indicates God is not Omnipresent, so he would actually go on a fact finding mission, or initiate a fact-finding mission. And as the Bible also states, he would be 100% successful at it.

In regards to S & G, doesn't say whether or not he only needs a day or a nano-second but he does state he had to check it out personally as the outcry, or the FEEDBACK he was getting was bad.

"An omniscient God does not need to go on a fact-finding mission." -- He can if that's the way he wants to do it. Apparently, that was the way he wanted to do it.

bootlen

07-24-2007, 04:44 PM

I see. No point.

Again for the S L O W people, God can be omniscient. God can also choose NOT to know something or foresee a result. He has the power to do that because he is omnipotent.

When talking to Cain he said, 6 Then the LORD said to Cain, "Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it."

God didn't determine in advance what Cain was going to do or even make an assessment that of what he would do. He simply stated the results of either course of action.

Genesis 22:11-12 11 But the angel of the LORD called out to him from heaven, "Abraham! Abraham!" "Here I am," he replied.
12 "Do not lay a hand on the boy," he said. "Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son."

So you are saying "the angel of the Lord" is God?

bootlen

07-24-2007, 04:45 PM

I see. No point.

Again for the S L O W people, God can be omniscient. God can also choose NOT to know something or foresee a result. He has the power to do that because he is omnipotent.

When talking to Cain he said, 6 Then the LORD said to Cain, "Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it."

God didn't determine in advance what Cain was going to do or even make an assessment that of what he would do. He simply stated the results of either course of action.

Genesis 22:11-12 11 But the angel of the LORD called out to him from heaven, "Abraham! Abraham!" "Here I am," he replied.
12 "Do not lay a hand on the boy," he said. "Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son."

I would submit to you and all who read here that any entity who CAN be omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent is already each of those things, no? I mean, they are attributes, are they not?

sysint

07-24-2007, 05:41 PM

So you are saying "the angel of the Lord" is God?
No. Absolutely not. Better read that more carefully if you want to try to assert that the angel is the one making the statements instead of delivering the statements.

sysint

07-24-2007, 05:43 PM

I would submit to you and all who read here that any entity who CAN be omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent is already each of those things, no? I mean, they are attributes, are they not?

According to the Bible:
God is omnipotent.
God can be omniscient.
God isn't omnipresent.

acmanko

07-24-2007, 06:12 PM

According to the Bible

The Solar system was created 6,800 years ago. Two wrongs do not make a right.

lhatton

07-24-2007, 06:21 PM

According to the Bible:
God is omnipotent.
God can be omniscient.
God isn't omnipresent.

I would challenge you to show me chapter and verse

lhatton

07-24-2007, 06:22 PM

According to the Bible

The Solar system was created 6,800 years ago. Two wrongs do not make a right.
I would challenge you to show me chapter and verse.

bootlen

07-24-2007, 06:33 PM

I would challenge you to show me chapter and verse

He doesn't believe the Bible.

bootlen

07-24-2007, 06:33 PM

I would challenge you to show me chapter and verse.

Neither does he.

bootlen

07-24-2007, 06:35 PM

I see. No point.

Again for the S L O W people, God can be omniscient. God can also choose NOT to know something or foresee a result. He has the power to do that because he is omnipotent.

When talking to Cain he said, 6 Then the LORD said to Cain, "Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it."

God didn't determine in advance what Cain was going to do or even make an assessment that of what he would do. He simply stated the results of either course of action.

Genesis 22:11-12 11 But the angel of the LORD called out to him from heaven, "Abraham! Abraham!" "Here I am," he replied.
12 "Do not lay a hand on the boy," he said. "Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son."

So Abe may have withheld his son from the angel?

lhatton

07-24-2007, 06:40 PM

Neither does he.

I know, it's to bad, there's some good stuff in it.

acmanko

07-24-2007, 07:02 PM

I would challenge you to show me chapter and verse.Here , deduce the lineage yourself
http://www.creation-science-prophecy.com/timelin2.htm

acmanko

07-24-2007, 07:04 PM

If God knew everything , He would not have had to ask Cain where his brother Able was.

Pagan

07-24-2007, 07:36 PM

If Jesus Didn't Belive in himself , Would this Be Blasphemy?:confused: :D

Sorry terrible joke I know. I'm now putting on my Flame retardent Suit,
you can begin nuking me now!:D

For the Record I belive in Jesus christ as my lord and savior!:)

bootlen

07-24-2007, 07:38 PM

If God knew everything , He would not have had to ask Cain where his brother Able was.

Ever been in court, ac?

Ya sure don't act like it.

acmanko

07-24-2007, 07:58 PM

Ever been in court, ac?

Ya sure don't act like it. When one lives a good christian life, court never enters the equation:D

bootlen

07-24-2007, 08:39 PM

When one lives a good christian life, court never enters the equation:D

Really? Yeah. I wouldn't want the likes of you on my client's jury either.

The point is, no lawyer ever asks a question in court that he does not already know the answer to. Same with God. When God asks a question, it is not for His benefit. It is for mankind's.

sysint

07-24-2007, 09:43 PM

I would challenge you to show me chapter and verse Show me otherwise. I have already shown to you where God is not omnipresent. I have already shown to you where God sought out to know of a situation he had not enough knowledge of. (choosing not to be omniscient)

With all due respect, you have shown nothing yet.

sysint

07-24-2007, 09:44 PM

So Abe may have withheld his son from the angel?
Better read that more carefully if you want to try to assert that the angel is the one making the statements instead of delivering the statements.

bootlen

07-24-2007, 10:07 PM

Show me otherwise. I have already shown to you where God is not omnipresent. I have already shown to you where God sought out to know of a situation he had not enough knowledge of. (choosing not to be omniscient)

With all due respect, you have shown nothing yet.

Proverbs 15:3. What'd you do...forget?

And I might remind you of Ps. 139. Seems pretty clear there, too.

bootlen

07-24-2007, 10:19 PM

Better read that more carefully if you want to try to assert that the angel is the one making the statements instead of delivering the statements.

Let's read it together...

12 "Do not lay a hand on the boy," he said. "Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son."

"He said... 'from me' ".

"He" (the angel of the Lord) "said"..."from me" (still the angel of the Lord).

I repeat...are you saying that Abe might have withheld his son from the angel of the Lord?

lhatton

07-25-2007, 12:36 AM

07-25-2007, 02:33 AM

"An omniscient God does not need to go on a fact-finding mission." -- He can if that's the way he wants to do it. Apparently, that was the way he wanted to do it.

You argue against yourself Sysint. He can, if thats the way He wanted to. Your assumtion is that since that is what he did, then it must have been because of ignorance that he did it that way. That is a fallacy, as Boot pointed out. Just because a question is asked, does not guarantee the answer is not allready known by the asker. Just because God "went down to see" does not guarantee He did not know intimately allready what the situation was. Once again, it is your assumtion of the passages that is wrong.

What it does do however, is stress to us that we best look into a situation, and be sure we are correctly understanding it before we act

The Doctor

07-25-2007, 06:41 AM

Your conclusion is unreasonable to my statements.

Genesis 18:20 So the Lord told Abraham, “I have heard a great outcry from Sodom and Gomorrah, because their sin is so flagrant. 21 I am going down to see if their actions are as wicked as I have heard. If not, I want to know.” -NLT

God states that he wanted to know if the situation was as bad as he had heard. Are you saying he is lying and that he already knew?

Re-read my conclusion to your statements:
You say God wants to know if the situation was as bad as he had heard.
I said then that your conclusion is that God is just sitting around waiting to see what we are going to do.
How is that not the logical outworking of what you are saying?

My next conclusion is that you are knowingly or unknowingly forwarding the basic tenets of open theism, or what I called open theology. " The Openness of God" and all that cal. In other words, you can avoid the harshness of Calvinism and the inconsistency of Armenianism. It leaves us open to make choices, and poor old God, He's just sitting in his armchair waiting to see what'll happen.

That would render the finished work at Calvary, and the names of those in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world rather a bit under our influence, wouldn't you say?
How does your view square with God being the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End?

I would conclude from the questions as I would most of the questions in the Bible "asked by God", or statements such as you quoted from Genesis--that God is providing them for us, so that we can view history as He has already viewed it--as His redemptive work. This work is finished, as in John 19:30.

bootlen

07-25-2007, 07:14 AM

acmanko

07-25-2007, 07:14 AM

I believe you people who study the Bible dailyare more apt to learn and find new topics by discussing Biblical topics with people who do not see the need for daily study of the Bible:confused:

bootlen

07-25-2007, 07:20 AM

I believe you people who study the Bible dailyare more apt to learn and find new topics by discussing Biblical topics with people who do not see the need for daily study of the Bible:confused:

That is not news to us, ac. I learn more from making a lesson plan to teach than I ever would doing just a personal study. Any teacher will tell you that.

acmanko

07-25-2007, 08:07 AM

That is not news to us, ac. I learn more from making a lesson plan to teach than I ever would doing just a personal study. Any teacher will tell you that.That's why I said what I said. I teach, you learn. And you happen to be one of my best students.

sysint

07-25-2007, 08:22 AM

Let's read it together...

12 "Do not lay a hand on the boy," he said. "Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son."

"He said... 'from me' ".

"He" (the angel of the Lord) "said"..."from me" (still the angel of the Lord).

I repeat...are you saying that Abe might have withheld his son from the angel of the Lord?

Better read that more carefully if you want to try to assert that the angel is the one making the statements instead of delivering the statements.

sysint

07-25-2007, 08:30 AM

You argue against yourself Sysint. He can, if thats the way He wanted to. ......

The Bible says (IN PRINT) that God wanted to go down there and check things out to see if what he heard was as it was. That is what it actually says. You guys are the ones arguing that it was something else.

When talking with Cain he gave both courses and said IF each time. God didn't know what Cain would actually do otherwise he wouldn't have wasted his time talking to him about both possibilities.

Again, it's IN PRINT and you are disagreeing with what's IN PRINT.

By contrast, my position is that God is omniscient if he chooses to be so which is not contradictory to the scriptural position of Genesis and even Proverbs or any other single scripture you "bible believers" like better.

Your position IS FAULTY because I have pointed out the contradictory scriptures.

Learn how to reason.

scrogdog

07-25-2007, 09:01 AM

Hey Boot, isn't it funny how people who study the Bible daily are being told about the Bible and its intended purpose by people who have done nothing but criticised the word of God, and probably never even picked the book up? It seems to be a waste of time chatting with these folks. You and I know the truth, these other bozos wouldn't know the truth if it hit 'em upside the head. No offense to the bozos.

With all due respect, my friend, in my world biblical conundrums are readily apparent and do not really require more than a first read to find.

Consider this. I might say to you "isn't it strange that a perfect being seems to have so much difficulty in communicating his word? God can't even get all Christians *on this forum* to agree what the words mean, forget about the whole world".

Then you might reply with "it is not God's communication that is faulty, it is man's understanding of it."

Then I might say, "well then, if it is true that the flaws of man screw up the words, how is it that God breathed his word and all men that heard took it exactly the same and all agreed what to write in the bible (or rather, the documents that became the bible)? But now, all men do not agree? How is that possible?"

If man's perception of God is so widely screwed up by men themselves, then that trashes the integrity of the bible right there. Doesn't it?

How is it that Satan can operate in this world? Well, it can only been seen as God's intent. If God is all-knowing, then he intentionally created Satan, even giving him the properties that made him what he is. God knew before hand every single thing that Satan would do and has yet to do.

Moving forward from that point, God is all knowing but can't figure out Satan's next move? God is all-powerful but can't stop Satan even though he knows exactly when and how Satan will do his work, and he is all-powerful, but he does nothing?

Satan is working as intended by God. That is, if one is to believe that the bible was inspired by something other than men.

acmanko

07-25-2007, 09:29 AM

With all due respect, my friend, in my world biblical conundrums are readily apparent and do not really require more than a first read to find.

Consider this. I might say to you "isn't it strange that a perfect being seems to have so much difficulty in communicating his word? God can't even get all Christians *on this forum* to agree what the words mean, forget about the whole world".

Then you might reply with "it is not God's communication that is faulty, it is man's understanding of it."

Then I might say, "well then, if it is true that the flaws of man screw up the words, how is it that God breathed his word and all men that heard took it exactly the same and all agreed what to write in the bible (or rather, the documents that became the bible)? But now, all men do not agree? How is that possible?"

If man's perception of God is so widely screwed up by men themselves, then that trashes the integrity of the bible right there. Doesn't it?

How is it that Satan can operate in this world? Well, it can only been seen as God's intent. If God is all-knowing, then he intentionally created Satan, even giving him the properties that made him what he is. God knew before hand every single thing that Satan would do and has yet to do.

Moving forward from that point, God is all knowing but can't figure out Satan's next move? God is all-powerful but can't stop Satan even though he knows exactly when and how Satan will do his work, and he is all-powerful, but he does nothing?

Satan is working as intended by God. That is, if one is to believe that the bible was inspired by something other than men.

Logical thinking and fundalmentist Christian thinking are an equation that cannot be solved

sysint

07-25-2007, 11:06 AM

"I might say to you "isn't it strange that a perfect being seems to have so much difficulty in communicating his word?"

Can you think of a communication method that would allow people to make their own decisions over time other than a written word?

"How is it that Satan can operate in this world? Well, it can only been seen as God's intent. If God is all-knowing, then he intentionally created Satan, even giving him the properties that made him what he is. God knew before hand every single thing that Satan would do and has yet to do."

Satan operates in the world because he is the one that initially questioned God's rightful Sovereignty. He had the free will to do that. Satan is already condemned, his judgement is fixed. God is simply working out a precedent on his rights. God didn't create Satan. The angel became Satan.

scrogdog

07-25-2007, 11:15 AM

"I might say to you "isn't it strange that a perfect being seems to have so much difficulty in communicating his word?"

Can you think of a communication method that would allow people to make their own decisions over time other than a written word?

My apologies, but I don't see how this question relates to the point that I made. The method is not at issue. The flaws of man and how it affected the bible is the issue.

Satan operates in the world because he is the one that initially questioned God's rightful Sovereignty. He had the free will to do that. Satan is already condemned, his judgement is fixed. God is simply working out a precedent on his rights. God didn't create Satan. The angel became Satan.

Giving a being free will does not absolve God from being all-knowing. I see Christians use this a lot to explain why an all-knowing God sometimes does not appear to be all-knowing. :) God gave me free will. But because he is all-knowing, he still knew the path that I would take before I knew it for myself. Whether or not God created Satan is more or less irrelevant IF God is seen to be all-powerful and all-knowing. Satan CANNOT defy God under those circumstances. So... either God is not all-powerful and all-knowing, or God is allowing Satan to do his thing.

I just don't see any other logical place to go.

geerair

07-25-2007, 11:29 AM

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/upload/2007/07/bible_truths.jpg

scrogdog

07-25-2007, 11:33 AM

I just thought of something interesting about "method".

Let's assume that some can agree that using man as a "middle man" to create the bible introduced flaws... as is unavoidable when imperfect man becomes involved.

But, wait. We have the perfect word of God without the bible. The Ten Commandments. His word - no middle man. Supposedly, anyway.

So, assuming a perfect God understands what an imperfect man will do to his message, and given the fact that God supposedly HAS directly communicated with man already, then why not just do that again? Why does not God just send us a bible that he wrote?

scrogdog

07-25-2007, 11:39 AM

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/upload/2007/07/bible_truths.jpg

Yeah, and good thing they remembered two phytoplanktons, eh? Of course, they didn't need two, just one. But God said get two, dammit.

I'm sure that the required bacteria was carried in Noah's beard.

bootlen

07-25-2007, 01:02 PM

That's why I said what I said. I teach, you learn. And you happen to be one of my best students.

Yes. I have learned 1 thing from your existance. That is that all fools ain't dead yet.:eek: :cool:

bootlen

07-25-2007, 01:03 PM

Better read that more carefully if you want to try to assert that the angel is the one making the statements instead of delivering the statements.

Okay. I see. You are unteachable.

acmanko

07-25-2007, 02:15 PM

There is one method of communication that has been around longer than the Bible. It's called sexual intercourse between a man and a woman. with the stongest man dominating the scene. without this form of communication none of us would be hear.

sysint

07-25-2007, 02:52 PM

My apologies, but I don't see how this question relates to the point that I made. The method is not at issue. The flaws of man and how it affected the bible is the issue.

Giving a being free will does not absolve God from being all-knowing. I see Christians use this a lot to explain why an all-knowing God sometimes does not appear to be all-knowing. :) God gave me free will. But because he is all-knowing, he still knew the path that I would take before I knew it for myself. Whether or not God created Satan is more or less irrelevant IF God is seen to be all-powerful and all-knowing. Satan CANNOT defy God under those circumstances. So... either God is not all-powerful and all-knowing, or God is allowing Satan to do his thing.

I just don't see any other logical place to go. I must redirect you back to your commentary.

"I might say to you "isn't it strange that a perfect being seems to have so much difficulty in communicating his word? God can't even get all Christians *on this forum* to agree what the words mean, forget about the whole world"."

No difficulty. It's written down. The people reading it have the problem. Read it honestly for what it actually says. Who says someone who calls themselves a Christian actually is one, or is a practicing one? Who says someone who calls themselves Christian actually isn't? That's alot of assumptions you have made and pin on what you call God's failure to communicate.

" But because he is all-knowing, he still knew the path that I would take before I knew it for myself." Incorrect statement. The Bible states otherwise. That premise is your own.

You still don't get it. Satan raised issue to God's right to rule, or Sovereignty. (look up the word) God decided (being just) that he would let it play out to prove his case. So, in actuality he allows Satan some movement allowed to him. (see the account about Job)

scrogdog

07-25-2007, 03:26 PM

No difficulty. It's written down. The people reading it have the problem.

I don't think you got my point quite right, so let me try again. The men who read the bible and get the message wrong, are also the same race of men who heard God breathe. So, how did they all hear the same thing? How did they all agree what to write? To introduce man to the equation introduces flaw.

Plus, one would think that God knows his creation. To me, MY own personal knowledge of the human condition says that one philosophy or truth for all mankind is a flat out impossibility. But let's say that I, John Locke, and the thousands of scientists and philosphers who have built on that work are all wrong. Let's also say that the men who recieved God's word got it exactly right (another impossibility unless God took away thier free will for a time). Ok, fine. Don't you think that God knows exactly what to say to bring everyone on board with his vision in total unity? If not, doesn't that seem a little strange for a perfect being that knows his creation?

Incorrect statement. The Bible states otherwise. That premise is your own.

Sys, you can't have your cake and eat it too in this situation. :) Either God is all-knowing, or he isn't. "All-knowing" is not a nebulous and hard to define term, it's an absolute. So, if God does not have foreknowledge of things, then he is not all-knowing. It is not about what the bible says, I accept what you say. Fine. Then God is NOT all-knowing!

I alluded to this earlier. In math, my sentence would be known as an "IF THEN ELSE" expression.

Whether or not God created Satan is more or less irrelevant IF God is seen to be all-powerful and all-knowing. Satan CANNOT defy God under those circumstances. So... either God is not all-powerful and all-knowing, or God is allowing Satan to do his thing.

Doesn't matter what the bible says. Either he is all-powerful and all-knowing or he is not. There is no such thing as being "all-powerful and all-knowing except for at certain times". :)

sysint

07-25-2007, 05:26 PM

I'll just get this right away and come back to the rest.

God is Omnipotent all the time

God can be Omniscient. God can choose not to know something if he wants to also. That is because he is all powerful. (omnipotent) There is nobody else besides himself that can prevent himself from knowing something.

braces4impact

07-25-2007, 08:53 PM

The Doctor

07-25-2007, 11:17 PM

The Bible says (IN PRINT) that God wanted to go down there and check things out to see if what he heard was as it was. That is what it actually says. You guys are the ones arguing that it was something else.

When talking with Cain he gave both courses and said IF each time. God didn't know what Cain would actually do otherwise he wouldn't have wasted his time talking to him about both possibilities.

Again, it's IN PRINT and you are disagreeing with what's IN PRINT.

By contrast, my position is that God is omniscient if he chooses to be so which is not contradictory to the scriptural position of Genesis and even Proverbs or any other single scripture you "bible believers" like better.

Your position IS FAULTY because I have pointed out the contradictory scriptures.

Learn how to reason.Learn how to stop shopping for the translations that fit your view of God. And stop taking verses out of the context of the entire view of the Bible.

God knew you before you were formed in the womb. Fight that.

scrogdog

07-26-2007, 12:01 AM

God knew you before you were formed in the womb. Fight that.

Which makes God a sadist since he knew I was doomed to burn in hell. Fight that. ;)

geerair

07-26-2007, 12:25 AM

Which makes God a sadist since he knew I was doomed to burn in hell. Fight that. ;)Don't forget my putting woes!!!!!! Tell me he doesn't know anything about that. :D :D :D

RoBoTeq

07-26-2007, 12:43 AM

Nothing to be sorry about. I guess you just cant see the different mindset and ways of thinking thing. Well, not a lot of Christians are really willing to try, because the knowledge of it kind of ruins everything. Such as the constant Christian mantras that tell us that if you can't find it in you to believe, then there must be something wrong with you, or that there is one truth for all.

The list grows by the day in comparison to the denials, so truthfully, I find the whole excercise a little amusing. Let's see... what are we up to now? I am self-centered, selfish, believing myself to be a god, I can't have thought this thing through, I am like a spoiled child defying my parents.

Lol.

See, you will go on defense now. To me, the above is a case-closed presentation of my point. Different thinkers perhaps? Nah. Can't be true. :)

I really do not understand how someone can look at all these things that you guys have said, and then with a straight face say that, no, people do not take that which they do not understand or is different and call it flawed. People do it everyday from within this topic, to race relations in the street. Name it. If you aren't like me, you are one hell of a sorry individual. This is how we are as humans.

First, some of you will deny it, then in the next breath, you'll do it! You watch. :)

Why would I feel the need to go on a defense? You are obviously just being argumentative as you know that I have already been where you are claiming to be. The difference is that I eventually broadened my vision and was able to see beyond my physical senses.

I still say your style of communication has dramatically changed from being a willing learner of what you do not understand or comprehend to being an argumentative person who posts questions that you have no desire to actually hear spiritual answers to.

No hard feelings whatsoever on my end. As always; I feel sorrow and concern for those who cannot shed the scales of the physical world from their eyes. Knowing what it took for me, I always have hope for others.

The Doctor

07-26-2007, 05:56 AM

Which makes God a sadist since he knew I was doomed to burn in hell. Fight that. ;)

How can I? Do you want someone to say, "God is love", and everybody's happy?? What, is this a beatles song?

Nah, you can fight it if you wish.

sysint

07-26-2007, 06:50 AM

Which makes God a sadist since he knew I was doomed to burn in hell. Fight that. ;)

In response to: Quote:
Originally Posted by The Doctor View Post
God knew you before you were formed in the womb. Fight that.

Scrog, by your quick and easy response you have to realize that "The Doctor" is out and that he doesn't understand what he is talking about there. What he really needs is to compare a few translations to help get the sense of it rather than condemn them all in favor of his "mystery" favorite translation.

sysint

07-26-2007, 06:54 AM

Learn how to stop shopping for the translations that fit your view of God. And stop taking verses out of the context of the entire view of the Bible.
God knew you before you were formed in the womb. Fight that.

Sheer frustration because you don't have enough experience and knowledge of the Bible. You need to do some research, not me.

"Shopping"? Just because I've done more research than you, and know more than you doesn't make it shopping. Perhaps you can just tell everyone now how much you love the KJV and that's the only translation I should use?

Let's hear it. What's your favorite?

sysint

07-26-2007, 06:57 AM

Where do we read about this part time omniscients in the bible?

Are you saying someone who is all powerful can't choose NOT to know something? Wouldn't someone who is all powerful be able to shield himself from knowing something if he wanted to?

bootlen

07-26-2007, 07:09 AM

Are you saying someone who is all powerful can't choose NOT to know something? Wouldn't someone who is all powerful be able to shield himself from knowing something if he wanted to?

Okay, this may be semantics BUT, Scripture says that when we are saved by His grace, "He casts our sins into the sea of forgetfulness and remembers them no more".

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

scrogdog

07-26-2007, 07:20 AM

Why would I feel the need to go on a defense? You are obviously just being argumentative as you know that I have already been where you are claiming to be. The difference is that I eventually broadened my vision and was able to see beyond my physical senses.

I still say your style of communication has dramatically changed from being a willing learner of what you do not understand or comprehend to being an argumentative person who posts questions that you have no desire to actually hear spiritual answers to.

No hard feelings whatsoever on my end. As always; I feel sorrow and concern for those who cannot shed the scales of the physical world from their eyes. Knowing what it took for me, I always have hope for others.

No, you are way off, Robo. In my opinion.

First, my posting style has not changed. Here is what has changed; I am no longer dealing with the issue from a scientific standpoint but rather a philosophical one. It is easier to dismiss science. And I realize that a lot of what I say is a little uncomfortable.

I am VERY willing to hear spiritual answers. Instead, I keep getting scripture and verse from a document so flawed in its premise, that it can only have been written by men.

So, I should all of a sudden forget what I think and accept the bible? Nope.

That does not mean that a form of the Christian god doesn't exist. Most myth has its basis in reality. If there is a God, then ALL of the Earthly religions have it wrong. There is just no other way to see any religion that says "just let go, Scrog... you can join us". Perhaps you don't understand that the first thing that happens when stuff like that is said is that my little Lost In Space Robot (in my head lol) starts to warn me of danger. lol :)

How many times have we seen men construct just such a message? Trust us... join us... you can be one too?

And then, to so brilliantly miss that there is more than one way to think can only lead me one way. The bible is NOT divinely inspired. That doesn't mean that I am not agnostic anymore. It means that the God descirbed in the bible has been lowered to an extremely low odds possibily... nearly impossible.

I suppose that one could say that all Earthly religions have been divinely inspired in a small way. Then they took that inspiration and modified it according to individual thought process and agenda.

Could there be a creator? Sure. He might even be a God. But the God of the bible? Sorry. That document was written and inspired by men. God could not have possibly offered up that document in my mind, because that would mean that he is as flawed as we are.

Which could also be the case, who knows? :)

Here is a document so clear that Geer and I and Braces don't even need to participate and plenty of arguing will still go on. That is the one true word? You can blame it on man's undertsanding if you wish, *I* say that if that's the best a perfect being can do, then he's not so perfect and not much close to the human idea of God.

scrogdog

07-26-2007, 07:29 AM

How can I? Do you want someone to say, "God is love", and everybody's happy?? What, is this a beatles song?

Nah, you can fight it if you wish.

Ok, so you are ok with God being a sadist?

Pardon the pun, but my God man!

bootlen

07-26-2007, 07:45 AM

No, you are way off, Robo. In my opinion.

First, my posting style has not changed. Here is what has changed; I am no longer dealing with the issue from a scientific standpoint but rather a philosophical one. It is easier to dismiss science. And I realize that a lot of what I say is a little uncomfortable.

I am VERY willing to hear spiritual answers. Instead, I keep getting scripture and verse from a document so flawed in its premise, that it can only have been written by men.

So, I should all of a sudden forget what I think and accept the bible? Nope.

That does not mean that a form of the Christian god doesn't exist. Most myth has its basis in reality. If there is a God, then ALL of the Earthly religions have it wrong. There is just no other way to see any religion that says "just let go, Scrog... you can join us". Perhaps you don't understand that the first thing that happens when stuff like that is said is that my little Lost In Space Robot (in my head lol) starts to warn me of danger. lol :)

How many times have we seen men construct just such a message? Trust us... join us... you can be one too?

And then, to so brilliantly miss that there is more than one way to think can only lead me one way. The bible is NOT divinely inspired. That doesn't mean that I am not agnostic anymore. It means that the God descirbed in the bible has been lowered to an extremely low odds possibily... nearly impossible.

I suppose that one could say that all Earthly religions have been divinely inspired in a small way. Then they took that inspiration and modified it according to individual thought process and agenda.

Could there be a creator? Sure. He might even be a God. But the God of the bible? Sorry. That document was written and inspired by men. God could not have possibly offered up that document in my mind, because that would mean that he is as flawed as we are.

Which could also be the case, who knows? :)

Here is a document so clear that Geer and I and Braces don't even need to participate and plenty of arguing will still go on. That is the one true word? You can blame it on man's undertsanding if you wish, *I* say that if that's the best a perfect being can do, then he's not so perfect and not much close to the human idea of God.

Now you are arguing with yourself. First, you want to eliminate Scripture in order to arrive at a spiritual truth.

Okay. Let's do that. After all, OT believers had no Bible. And VERY, VERY few of them conversed with God in the physical sense. So maybe we can do something with that fact.

Now, where does having no Scripture leave us? It leaves us with only a couple of ways to arrive at a spiritual truth...personal experience and a certain amount of what God has described in Romans 1 (I know...more Scripture...but it's what we're left with).

Now...how how do we know the right thing to do with experience. I mean, I know you've heard the phase, "If it feels good, do it." Okay. It would make me feel good to knock the snot out of, say, Cindy Sheehan using a baseball bat. What prevents me from doing that? Right. Man's law. But what if I were not aware of man's law that says murder (Would this be murder or garbage take-out?:eek: :D ) is a crime? What would prevent me from committing such a heinous act? I think you would refer to that as "conscience". That takes us back to Romans 1...only with extensions (and nothing wrong with extensions, BTW).

Ball's in your court.

scrogdog

07-26-2007, 08:32 AM

Boot, man's laws were created by... men. Man's morals were created by men. The source of all morality is mans ability to have empathy (which could be God-given). Scripture has nothing at all to do with it. Man was living socially in groups well before Christ or Old Testament writings.

Christianity is an attempt to control people. That said, I believe that the writers of the bible had, in a way, good intent. Maybe if you look at what was happening in the world as these documents were written, you might see why some thought that such a thing was needed. And perhaps it was.

Now you are arguing with yourself. First, you want to eliminate Scripture in order to arrive at a spiritual truth.

Since the bible was written by men, it doesn not contain spirtual truth. If such a thing even exists.

Okay. Let's do that. After all, OT believers had no Bible. And VERY, VERY few of them conversed with God in the physical sense. So maybe we can do something with that fact.

True. Maybe they "felt" God in some way. And perhaps this is the divine inspiration which drove man to construct the bible. That does not mean that the bible contains the word of God. It is the word of men, based on his inaccurate perception if what he thinks God is and wants.

Now, where does having no Scripture leave us? It leaves us with only a couple of ways to arrive at a spiritual truth...personal experience and a certain amount of what God has described in Romans 1 (I know...more Scripture...but it's what we're left with).

So? The spiritual truth that you want to achieve was created by men. Thus, it is not spiritual truth.

What prevents me from doing that? Right. Man's law. But what if I were not aware of man's law that says murder (Would this be murder or garbage take-out? ) is a crime? What would prevent me from committing such a heinous act? I think you would refer to that as "conscience". That takes us back to Romans 1...only with extensions (and nothing wrong with extensions, BTW).

If you were not aware of man's law, then other men would "fix" your awareness. If man was not yet at that point of development, then he would arrive at the conclusion that he should not kill on his own. Why? Because HE HIMSELF does not want to be murdered. So it is reasonable to say, "I will not murder you if you will not murder me."

Quite easily arrived at by perfectly normal people.

sysint

07-26-2007, 09:41 AM

"Boot, mans laws were created by... men. Mens morals were created by men. The source of all morality is man's ability to have empathy (which could be God-given). Scripture has nothing at all to do with it. Man was living socially in groups well before Christ or Old Testament writings.

Christianity is an attempt to control people. That said, I believe that the writers of the bible had, in a way, good intent. Maybe if you look at what was happening in the world as these documents were written, you might see why some thought that such a thing was needed. And perhaps it was."

God had contact with people since the beginning. The recorded events relate that. It's true in the beginning Scripture had nothing to do with things. God was dealing more directly with people at that time.

Again, I'd ask you the question. What is better than the written compiled Bible over time?

I'm not discounting that Christianity ended up as a means of population control, but that obviously isn't the way it started, of which is what IS written down in the Bible. The control came after the 1st century.

scrogdog

07-26-2007, 10:05 AM

Again, I'd ask you the question. What is better than the written compiled Bible over time?

I'm not discounting that Christianity ended up as a means of population control, but that obviously isn't the way it started, of which is what IS written down in the Bible. The control came after the 1st century.

What would be better would be a document actually written BY God. The minute man is in the picture, you have a flawed document.

Supoosedly, God has given us his perfect word with no middle-man at least once already. The Ten Commandments.

A bible inspired by man to describe God is worthless. If that leaves some kind of vacuum or void, then it does. A flawed document is NOT better than nothing.

I disagree, that is exactly the way it started. Tell me, what shape was the world in at the time of Jesus' birth? One line of thought says that is exactly why Jesus was sent at that moment. Another says that is exactly what caused men to "construct" a divine Jesus and the bible. With the signature flaws of men that are present, I can only come to one conclusion. You will likely disagree. That is because of different thought process and ways to arrive at conclusions. And since those differences do exist and they are wide-ranging, one truth for all is flatly impossible... which is just one more piece to the picture which says that the bible was 100% inspired by man.

It would be ironic indeed if the ACTUAL test that God is performing is to see who can be led from truth by a book of conflicting parables, wouldn't you say so, my friend? :)

lhatton

07-26-2007, 10:19 AM

Which makes God a sadist since he knew I was doomed to burn in hell. Fight that. ;)
Good morning Scrog. Let me throw a thought out at you, and let me know what you think. I truly believe that God knew us even from the begining. There was a point in my life that I thought the same as you, well kinda, how can God make me knowing that I will fail. My thought to you is this, you are assuming to know the outcome of your life. Are you sure you are going to go through this life without Christ. I feel that the Holy Spirit is working on you right now. I guess my point is that God does what He wants, and chooses who He wants. He may have already chosen you and He's just waiting for you to choose Him. What I am asking you to do is don't shut out that possability.

acmanko

07-26-2007, 10:20 AM

untill Gutenberg invented block type, ordinary people were denied the act of simply holding a Bible, and most , if not all could not read it even if they had it in there hands.. so there is a thousand plus years for Catholics leaders to have whatever they did or did not want handwritten as a Bible. Surely a drunk monk could have made a mistake or two.

scrogdog

07-26-2007, 10:27 AM

Good morning Scrog. Let me throw a thought out at you, and let me know what you think. I truly believe that God knew us even from the begining. There was a point in my life that I thought the same as you, well kinda, how can God make me knowing that I will fail. My thought to you is this, you are assuming to know the outcome of your life. Are you sure you are going to go through this life without Christ. I feel that the Holy Spirit is working on you right now. I guess my point is that God does what He wants, and chooses who He wants. He may have already chosen you and He's just waiting for you to choose Him. What I am asking you to do is don't shut out that possability.

Anything is possible, my friend. God knows me and knows my mind. He is perfectly aware of what it would take for me to become a believer.

Bring it on. :)

Just remember, my argument is that the bible was not divinely inspired, not that some sort of "god" doesn't exist.

bootlen

07-26-2007, 11:33 AM

Boot, man's laws were created by... men. Man's morals were created by men. The source of all morality is mans ability to have empathy (which could be God-given). Scripture has nothing at all to do with it. Man was living socially in groups well before Christ or Old Testament writings.

Assuming you are correct in the above statement, why is it that some societies of the past (and maybe smaller groups today) condoned the sacrifice of children to "gods"?

Christianity is an attempt to control people. That said, I believe that the writers of the bible had, in a way, good intent. Maybe if you look at what was happening in the world as these documents were written, you might see why some thought that such a thing was needed. And perhaps it was.

Since the bible was written by men, it doesn not contain spirtual truth. If such a thing even exists.

I thought you wanted to discount Scripture. Why do you keep bringing it up. Or are you having a difficult time presenting your arguments without it?

True. Maybe they "felt" God in some way. And perhaps this is the divine inspiration which drove man to construct the bible. That does not mean that the bible contains the word of God. It is the word of men, based on his inaccurate perception if what he thinks God is and wants.

Then please explain to me how some 40 authors, over 1500 years, from several different societies, writing in 4 different languages have come up with a compendium of works that is without contradiction?

So? The spiritual truth that you want to achieve was created by men. Thus, it is not spiritual truth.

Hey, I agree with that. All truth has its beginning with God. God IS TRUTH.

If you were not aware of man's law, then other men would "fix" your awareness. If man was not yet at that point of development, then he would arrive at the conclusion that he should not kill on his own. Why? Because HE HIMSELF does not want to be murdered. So it is reasonable to say, "I will not murder you if you will not murder me."

Then why is murder committed daily? I mean, if we are so trustworthy to know to do the right thing, why do we even have any law at all?

scrogdog

07-26-2007, 11:58 AM

Assuming you are correct in the above statement, why is it that some societies of the past (and maybe smaller groups today) condoned the sacrifice of children to "gods"?

Because all the thoughts of men evolve over time. Because not all people are alike. Might makes right... and our laws are simply a compendium of human thought and morality that has developed over time and is enforced by the majority. What happens to laws sometimes when the majority that made them is no longer the majority, hmmm? Not everyone will buy in to it because men are not lemmings, despite the Christian thought that all men think identically.

I thought you wanted to discount Scripture. Why do you keep bringing it up. Or are you having a difficult time presenting your arguments without it?

Yes, Boot, yes. I will concede that is exceedingly difficult to demonstrate how flawed the bible is without actually showing what I mean by that. :rolleyes:

Then please explain to me how some 40 authors, over 1500 years, from several different societies, writing in 4 different languages have come up with a compendium of works that is without contradiction?

Please explain to me that if things are as you say, why a group of biblical scholars had to gather, and then in a quite arbitrary fashion, decide what was divinely inspired and what was not? Imagine, flawed humans that, according to you believers, can't fully understand things, actually making that determination. This is exactly what I mean by Christians talking out of both sides of thier mouths. One minute man is too flawed to completely understand the word of God, the next, we are perfectly capable of deciding what is divinely inspired and what is not. All depends on what part of your agenda that you are trying to massage at the moment.

Hey, I agree with that. All truth has its beginning with God. God IS TRUTH.

That very well may be. Unfortuantely, the bible does not describe God, if he exists.

Then why is murder committed daily? I mean, if we are so trustworthy to know to do the right thing, why do we even have any law at all?

Because of the human condition you blind yourselves to. Again, man is not good because there is no bad within him, he is good (or not) if, during the constant inner struggle, the good consistently wins out over the bad. Even the good do not always win. Even the bad do not always lose. Man's laws are meant as a deterrant to immoral thought. Deterrants do not work 100% of the time even when the man in question is routinely good. Christians are VERY far away from understanding the state of man, and so is the bible. Some people need a constant deterrant, others never need one at all for even a single moment in thier lives.

It is quite a natural thing for men to gather in to groups comprised of those who have shared thought processes, beliefs and values, and then to look at others outside of that domain as being some combination of wrong, flawed or bad. This is the very basis for racism in all of its forms. What you guys do is quite a natural thing human-condition-wise. :) This phenomena is demonstrated in spades throughout human history.

makinmoney

07-26-2007, 12:06 PM

If the Bible is indeed true.......from the beginning of time. Why no mention of Dinosaures?

bootlen

07-26-2007, 12:07 PM

bootlen

07-26-2007, 12:22 PM

Because all the thoughts of men evolve over time. Because not all people are alike. Might makes right... and our laws are simply a compendium of human thought and morality that has developed over time and is enforced by the majority. What happens to laws sometimes when the majority that made them is no longer the majority, hmmm? Not everyone will buy in to it because men are not lemmings, despite the Christian thought that all men think identically.

Then why are we getting worse as groups of societies rather than better, or even holding our own?

Yes, Boot, yes. I will concede that is exceedingly difficult to demonstrate how flawed the bible is without actually showing what I mean by that. :rolleyes:

Thought you'd enjoy that.:cool:

Please explain to me that if things are as you say, why a group of biblical scholars had to gather, and then in a quite arbitrary fashion, decide what was divinely inspired and what was not?

It was not arbitrary. It is called the CANON of Scripture. It had to meet very specific parameters. For instance, if pre-Christ prophets were not mentioned in OT writings, they did not meet the criteria.

Imagine, flawed humans that, according to you believers, c an't fully understand things, actually making that determination. This is exactly what I mean by Christians talking out of both sides of thier mouths. One minute man is too flawed to completely understand the word of God, the next, we are perfectly capable of deciding what is divinely inspired and what is not. All depends on what part of your agenda that you are trying to massage at the moment.

I hate to be in disagreement with my broters but they are incorrect as to man's ability to understand the Word because of "flaws". Man has a difficulty understanding the Word because he chooses to not want to believe what is presented.

How do we (you and I) know the moon is not made of cheese? You been there, have you? I haven't. But others have and the tell us it is made of dust. I believe them out of (look out...cover your eyes!) faith. Nothing more than that...just faith. Very little faith but faith nonetheless. And how can I put my faith in these "flawed" men? For 2 reasons. 1)They have been there. 2)They have no reason to lie about it.

Same with Scripture. The very same.

That very well may be. Unfortuantely, the bible does not describe God, if he exists.

Well, not physically anyway. But His attributes are alid out pretty well. He has mnany names and many of His names are His attributes. From these names and attributes, we can get a pretty good picture of what He is like, at least on the surface. But in reality, He is much deeper and more profound than words can ever express.

Because of the human condition you blind yourselves to. Again, man is not good because there is no bad within him, he is good (or not) if, during the constant inner struggle, the good consistently wins out over the bad. Even the good do not always win. Even the bad do not always lose. Man's laws are meant as a deterrant to immoral thought. Deterrants do not work 100% of the time even when the man in question is routinely good. Christians are VERY far away from understanding the state of man, and so is the bible. Some people need a constant deterrant, others never need one at all for even a single moment in thier lives.

The Bible understands nothing. It is a book. Books cannot think; therefore they cannot understand. You have a point?:p

scrogdog

07-26-2007, 12:39 PM

Then why are we getting worse as groups of societies rather than better, or even holding our own?

Because you have a flawed understanding of what "evolved" means. Things do not necessarily evolve in to something better. That is also true with the evolution of species. Sometimes the evolution of species, and indeed philosophy and human values, can almost become like a game of rock, paper, scissors.

Let me give you an example. Sometime in the near future man is going to live on Mars. Babies will be born on Mars... and then they in turn will have babies. Sooner or later, a new sub-race of humans will evolve that will adapt to the conditions on Mars, meaning, among other things, less natural muscle mass. Is that an improvement? That is in the eye of the beholder - it's probably not going to be seen as any sort of improvement by an Earth-bound athlete. See what I mean?

Once upon a time, Boot, Unions were good for this country. Now they suck. This issue here is that man, with good intent, doesn't know when to stop a good thing. When enough is enough. Man still searches for himself. And we are flawed beings. So... things may or may not evolve "well" even though we may have good intent in our hearts. We'll just have to wait and see, won't we? :)

It was not arbitrary. It is called the CANON of Scripture. It had to meet very specific parameters. For instance, if pre-Christ prophets were not mentioned in OT writings, they did not meet the criteria.

Exactly. Man drummed up his own qualifications for God. You make my point for me, bud. :)

I hate to be in disagreement with my broters but they are incorrect as to man's ability to understand the Word because of "flaws". Man has a difficulty understanding the Word because he chooses to not want to believe what is presented.

No, I think *I* am the one who says that the bible is flawed. I think your brothers largely feel as you do on this point. How can I believe something is the word of God when it is so clear that it is rife with the flaws of man?

How do we (you and I) know the moon is not made of cheese? You been there, have you? I haven't. But others have and the tell us it is made of dust. I believe them out of (look out...cover your eyes!) faith. Nothing more than that...just faith. Very little faith but faith nonetheless. And how can I put my faith in these "flawed" men? For 2 reasons. 1)They have been there. 2)They have no reason to lie about it.

Boot, if you think that we had not determined that the moon was not made of cheese until 1969, it is not very useful for me to explain methodology to you . :D

Well, not physically anyway. But His attributes are alid out pretty well. He has mnany names and many of His names are His attributes. From these names and attributes, we can get a pretty good picture of what He is like, at least on the surface. But in reality, He is much deeper and more profound than words can ever express.

They are not the attributes of God. They are the attributes that man imagines that God should have.

The Bible understands nothing. It is a book. Books cannot think; therefore they cannot understand. You have a point?:p

Be as obtuse as you like, my friend. :) Very well, the *writers* of the bible had no clue about the human condition. That better?

bootlen

07-26-2007, 01:40 PM

Because you have a flawed understanding of what "evolved" means. Things do not necessarily evolve in to something better. That is also true with the evolution of species. Sometimes the evolution of species, and indeed philosophy and human values, can almost become like a game of rock, paper, scissors.

Let me give you an example. Sometime in the near future man is going to live on Mars. Babies will be born on Mars... and then they in turn will have babies. Sooner or later, a new sub-race of humans will evolve that will adapt to the conditions on Mars, meaning, among other things, less natural muscle mass. Is that an improvement? That is in the eye of the beholder - it's probably not going to be seen as any sort of improvement by an Earth-bound athlete. See what I mean?

Once upon a time, Boot, Unions were good for this country. Now they suck. This issue here is that man, with good intent, doesn't know when to stop a good thing. When enough is enough. Man still searches for himself. And we are flawed beings. So... things may or may not evolve "well" even though we may have good intent in our hearts. We'll just have to wait and see, won't we? :)

There's that "flawed" word again. But no matter. Things are worse, regardless of teh reason so it seems improvement is not in the offing for the human race. And THAT is exactly MY point.

Exactly. Man drummed up his own qualifications for God. You make my point for me, bud. :)

Well, then, maybe the Canon of Scripture should include some Marx, some Nitsche, some Abigail van Buren, and a little Dr. Phil?

I think not. Those Scriptures found in the NT are written by eyewitnesses of the earthly ministry of Christ. He is the Authority. And most of that which was written in the NT is backed up by many reliable secular historians. Why should so important a work as the Canon (canon means standard, BTW, for those of you who do not know) of Scripture yield to lesser pertinent writings which may or may not contradict if a certain standard is to be maintained?

No, I think *I* am the one who says that the bible is flawed. I think your brothers largely feel as you do on this point. How can I believe something is the word of God when it is so clear that it is rife with the flaws of man?

Give me an example, scrog. Please point out where there is a "flaw" in Scripture. I have asked you to do so before but you skirt it.

Boot, if you think that we had not determined that the moon was not made of cheese until 1969, it is not very useful for me to explain methodology to you . :D

Well, until 1969, no one had been there so it took even greater faith to believe it was made of ANYthing. For all we know, it could have been a front like those western scenes in a movie.

They are not the attributes of God. They are the attributes that man imagines that God should have.

And those attributes have meted themselves out many time.

Be as obtuse as you like, my friend. :) Very well, the *writers* of the bible had no clue about the human condition. That better?

Me? Obtuse? To the "HOLE" with you!

Not really. Didja see "The Shawshank Redemption"?

Back to the subject. Me? Obtuse? Nothing wrong with MY wit. You have me confused with geer.

scrogdog

07-26-2007, 02:08 PM

There's that "flawed" word again. But no matter. Things are worse, regardless of teh reason so it seems improvement is not in the offing for the human race. And THAT is exactly MY point.

And I have agreed with you. My point is that these things go in cycles. It is entirely possible that we'll not get out of this down cycle, who knows? There are many that believe that religion (not necessarily Christianty) is the CAUSE rather than the cure. Again... different ways of thinking.

Well, then, maybe the Canon of Scripture should include some Marx, some Nitsche, some Abigail van Buren, and a little Dr. Phil?

I think not. Those Scriptures found in the NT are written by eyewitnesses of the earthly ministry of Christ. He is the Authority. And most of that which was written in the NT is backed up by many reliable secular historians. Why should so important a work as the Canon (canon means standard, BTW, for those of you who do not know) of Scripture yield to lesser pertinent writings which may or may not contradict if a certain standard is to be maintained?

Ummm.... ok. And exactly how does this counter my argument? On one hand man can't grasp the words of God accurately, on the other, we are perfectly capable of deciding what is Canon. Well, which is it, bud?

Give me an example, scrog. Please point out where there is a "flaw" in Scripture. I have asked you to do so before but you skirt it.

You are going to get the same answer to this question regardless of how many times you ask it. It is not a matter of comparing a couple of bits of scripture, the bible is fundamentally flawed with its core premise that there is a single truth for all men. It's pretty much that simple.

There are many sub-ideas that show it as well. Such as an Orwellian God who culls the eternal herd by floods and judgement until all wrong thinkers are eliminated. Only then can paradise be true. Much more too, if you want to know all of the examples that I've used, it can be found in this and the other topic. To use concentration camps to achieve utopian society is 100% a man-made idea and history shows more than one example of it right here on Earth.

Well, until 1969, no one had been there so it took even greater faith to believe it was made of ANYthing. For all we know, it could have been a front like those western scenes in a movie.

Not quite. While we did not perhaps know accurate elemental compositions, even Newton could see that the moon was not made of cheese with his extremely modest telescope, since cheese would not eject a pattern of material around a crater when struck by an asteroid, comet or debris. It did not take any faith to make that determination.

And those attributes have meted themselves out many time.

Great! Then you won't mind showing me the studies that demonstrate this. ;)

Me? Obtuse? To the "HOLE" with you!

Yes, you. :p You know what I meant. I used a smilie as well, though.

Not really. Didja see "The Shawshank Redemption"?

Back to the subject. Me? Obtuse? Nothing wrong with MY wit. You have me confused with geer.

One of my favorite movies. :)

bootlen

07-26-2007, 02:32 PM

Ummm.... ok. And exactly how does this counter my argument? On one hand man can't grasp the words of God accurately, on the other, we are perfectly capable of deciding what is Canon. Well, which is it, bud?

I don't think God's Word cannot be grasped. I happen to know we are very able to do so.

You are going to get the same answer to this question regardless of how many times you ask it. It is not a matter of comparing a couple of bits of scripture, the bible is fundamentally flawed with its core premise that there is a single truth for all men. It's pretty much that simple.

Then what is its core premise and upon what do you base your belief that it is flawed? Or are you doing like geer and just throwing stuff out there hoping something sticks?

There are many sub-ideas that show it as well. Such as an Orwellian God who culls the eternal herd by floods and judgement until all wrong thinkers are eliminated. Only then can paradise be true. Much more too, if you want to know all of the examples that I've used, it can be found in this and the other topic. To use concentration camps to achieve utopian society is 100% a man-made idea and history shows more than one example of it right here on Earth.

Yeah. I know about that stuff. That's all it is, is stuff. Every non-believer has hios own ideas about who or what God is without ever having cracked open Scripture. And some have turned 180* from God and claim to know even more. But they are mistaken.

But I'm asking these questions of YOU, scrog. So, if you will, try to keep it to that.;)

And "Utopia" has not to do with anything Scriptural.

Not quite. While we did not perhaps know accurate elemental compositions, even Newton could see that the moon was not made of cheese with his extremely modest telescope, since cheese would not eject a pattern of material around a crater when struck by an asteroid, comet or debris. It did not take any faith to make that determination.

But Newton was "flawed" man. Why should anyone believe Newton?

Great! Then you won't mind showing me the studies that demonstrate this. ;)

Studies? You wouldn't believe them anyway. Most are in Scripture. Some are from personal experience.

One of my favorite movies. :)

Mine as well. I have the DVD. I bet I've watched it a couple dozen times.

scrogdog

07-26-2007, 03:26 PM

I don't think God's Word cannot be grasped. I happen to know we are very able to do so.

Well, maybe I'm having a bad day, but it seems to me that I hear this repeatedly from believers when shown a biblical conundrum... as in... "it is not a conundrum, you just don't get it. In fact, neither do I". :)

Then what is its core premise and upon what do you base your belief that it is flawed? Or are you doing like geer and just throwing stuff out there hoping something sticks?

No, the core premise is that all men have the ability to take things on faith. Because without that ability, you can't accept that Jesus was divine. And if you can't accept that Jesus was divine... you are doomed. :) Now, it is useless for me to repeatedly explain this concept, because to a beleiver, there is NO SUCH THING as someone who cannot take things on faith. Thus, my claim that most believers do not understand the human condition, and neither did the writers of the bible. The bible also assumes that all men have the capability to take things on faith. That is completely untrue.

Again, I have explained this many times, but I get continually asked the question, because a believer just can't get a handle around that concept. This concept is well-defined in science and philosophy, it is not just something that I personally believe. What's funny is that people continually display thier complete misunderstanding of the concept, acting as if I have yet to address the question. To me, there is nothing tentative about my stance at all. :)

Yeah. I know about that stuff. That's all it is, is stuff. Every non-believer has hios own ideas about who or what God is without ever having cracked open Scripture. And some have turned 180* from God and claim to know even more. But they are mistaken.

You are welcome to your opinion. This is perfect demonstration of you and I thinking completely differently, using different process and patterns of thought to arrive at conclusions. Yet, despite this slam-dunk (in my view), you still are going to beleive that all men have the ability to take things on faith and that they are... let's see... where's that list... self-centered, selfish, believing themselves to be a gods, people who have not read the bible or thought things through completely or acting as a spoiled brat in defiance of thier parents... if they don't. lol

The lengths you in which you will go to deny are not exactly stunning. I refer you to the evolution topics. :D

But I'm asking these questions of YOU, scrog. So, if you will, try to keep it to that.;)

And I am answering you from my own point of view.

And "Utopia" has not to do with anything Scriptural.

Sure it does. The concept of heaven is a utopia by any defintion. Strange that God would hold the same thoughts as men to achieve it, wouldn't you say?

But Newton was "flawed" man. Why should anyone believe Newton?

Because Newton's observations and experiments are repeatable.

Studies? You wouldn't believe them anyway. Most are in Scripture. Some are from personal experience.

Similarly, God, right now today, could reveal something to someone... and if it were a correction of some kind to the bible, what is your expectation of this person being believed? Let's say it is even a group of people whom under hypnosis all say that they heard the same thing. Do you beleive it?

braces4impact

07-26-2007, 06:54 PM

Are you saying someone who is all powerful can't choose NOT to know something? Wouldn't someone who is all powerful be able to shield himself from knowing something if he wanted to?

Ok let's run a thought experiment assuming what you say is true. If he stops himself from knowing where event 'x' will happen, then he is powerless from stopping event 'x' from happening. Thus if he loses a portion of knowledge rather be it voluntary or not, he loses power as far as that instance is concerned and is therefore not 'ALL' powerful.

braces4impact

07-26-2007, 06:56 PM

No, you are way off, Robo. In my opinion.

First, my posting style has not changed. Here is what has changed; I am no longer dealing with the issue from a scientific standpoint but rather a philosophical one. It is easier to dismiss science. And I realize that a lot of what I say is a little uncomfortable.

I am VERY willing to hear spiritual answers. Instead, I keep getting scripture and verse from a document so flawed in its premise, that it can only have been written by men.

So, I should all of a sudden forget what I think and accept the bible? Nope.

That does not mean that a form of the Christian god doesn't exist. Most myth has its basis in reality. If there is a God, then ALL of the Earthly religions have it wrong. There is just no other way to see any religion that says "just let go, Scrog... you can join us". Perhaps you don't understand that the first thing that happens when stuff like that is said is that my little Lost In Space Robot (in my head lol) starts to warn me of danger. lol :)

How many times have we seen men construct just such a message? Trust us... join us... you can be one too?

And then, to so brilliantly miss that there is more than one way to think can only lead me one way. The bible is NOT divinely inspired. That doesn't mean that I am not agnostic anymore. It means that the God descirbed in the bible has been lowered to an extremely low odds possibily... nearly impossible.

I suppose that one could say that all Earthly religions have been divinely inspired in a small way. Then they took that inspiration and modified it according to individual thought process and agenda.

Could there be a creator? Sure. He might even be a God. But the God of the bible? Sorry. That document was written and inspired by men. God could not have possibly offered up that document in my mind, because that would mean that he is as flawed as we are.

Which could also be the case, who knows? :)

Here is a document so clear that Geer and I and Braces don't even need to participate and plenty of arguing will still go on. That is the one true word? You can blame it on man's undertsanding if you wish, *I* say that if that's the best a perfect being can do, then he's not so perfect and not much close to the human idea of God.

anytime you you tell robo why you don't believe what he does this is his cookie cutter reply. You are just closed minded, not willing bla bla bla. he needs to look in the mirror and repeat the words he says.

bootlen

07-26-2007, 07:14 PM

Well, maybe I'm having a bad day, but it seems to me that I hear this repeatedly from believers when shown a biblical conundrum... as in... "it is not a conundrum, you just don't get it. In fact, neither do I". :)

Then I would submit that either it is a subject about which one does not "get it" is a subject/issue about which they have not studied. OR it is one of those issues about which we (anyone) are not capable of understanding fully in this life...such as the Triune God.

No, the core premise is that all men have the ability to take things on faith.

You think God is not aware of your (and many other people's) lack of faith? Did you know that I, too, lacked faith? Did you know that "with God, ALL things are possible"? Did you know that God provides all the faith one needs to believe?

Because without that ability, you can't accept that Jesus was divine.

And if you can't accept that Jesus was divine... you are doomed. :)

"Can't" has nothing to do with it. It's about the will.

Now, it is useless for me to repeatedly explain this concept, because to a beleiver, there is NO SUCH THING as someone who cannot take things on faith.

Nit true. That's why God has to provide the sufficient faith.

Thus, my claim that most believers do not understand the human condition, and neither did the writers of the bible. The bible also assumes that all men have the capability to take things on faith. That is completely untrue.

Also not true. See Ephesians 2:8,9.

Again, I have explained this many times, but I get continually asked the question, because a believer just can't get a handle around that concept. This concept is well-defined in science and philosophy, it is not just something that I personally believe. What's funny is that people continually display thier complete misunderstanding of the concept, acting as if I have yet to address the question. To me, there is nothing tentative about my stance at all. :)

Actually, the it is YOU who does not understand faith.

Did you used to believe Pluto is a planet? Sure you did. Based on what? I guess your system of why you believe failed. But the reasons I believe have never failed. Ever. Not even once.

You are welcome to your opinion. This is perfect demonstration of you and I thinking completely differently, using different process and patterns of thought to arrive at conclusions. Yet, despite this slam-dunk (in my view), you still are going to beleive that all men have the ability to take things on faith and that they are... let's see... where's that list... self-centered, selfish, believing themselves to be a gods, people who have not read the bible or thought things through completely or acting as a spoiled brat in defiance of thier parents... if they don't. lol

Yeah. Been there, done that. Didn't like it. ;) :cool:

The lengths you in which you will go to deny are not exactly stunning. I refer you to the evolution topics. :D

Go back and look. I agreed with you on your explanation of evolution, which I call adaptation. But man did not evolve from any other form of life.

And I am answering you from my own point of view.

I would hope so.

Sure it does. The concept of heaven is a utopia by any defintion. Strange that God would hold the same thoughts as men to achieve it, wouldn't you say?

Utopia is a man made place. with man having HIS own way. The truth of eternity is that GOD will have HIS way (which, BTW, man will realize it is the best way).

Because Newton's observations and experiments are repeatable.

As are my beliefs about God. You just refuse to give them a chance. ("I can't believe because I have no faith, wah, wah, w-a-a-a-h.) Suppose no one gave Newton a chance...didn't believe him enough to give his theories a try?

Similarly, God, right now today, could reveal something to someone... and if it were a correction of some kind to the bible, what is your expectation of this person being believed? Let's say it is even a group of people whom under hypnosis all say that they heard the same thing. Do you beleive it?

Why should he start contradicting Himself now after an eternity past of never doing so? That is silliness.

To answer your question, no. God has already said Himself, "I am the same yesterday, today, and forever." Remember, now, I also am going from MY perspective and I believe Scripture to be infallible, without error, and the inspired Word of God.

sysint

07-26-2007, 07:16 PM

Ok let's run a thought experiment assuming what you say is true. If he stops himself from knowing where event 'x' will happen, then he is powerless from stopping event 'x' from happening. Thus if he loses a portion of knowledge rather be it voluntary or not, he loses power as far as that instance is concerned and is therefore not 'ALL' powerful.

Not very much thought I'm afraid.

If God lets an event pass that doesn't diminish his power. He still has that power. He is also smarter than you so letting whatever event it is pass is not a big deal to him. He has ALL the possibilities worked out and simply is letting one of those outcomes play out.

Doesn't matter anyway. If he allows event X, he allows it. If he wants to stop it he stops it and nobody is more powerful.

braces4impact

07-26-2007, 11:06 PM

Not very much thought I'm afraid.

If God lets an event pass that doesn't diminish his power. He still has that power. He is also smarter than you so letting whatever event it is pass is not a big deal to him. He has ALL the possibilities worked out and simply is letting one of those outcomes play out.

Doesn't matter anyway. If he allows event X, he allows it. If he wants to stop it he stops it and nobody is more powerful.

Did you read what I said? I didn't say anything about letting events pass. I said if he restricts his knowledge as you say he can then whatever knowledge he restricted himself from he will have no control or influence over it b/c if he did that would assume he knew something about it.

07-27-2007, 02:33 AM

07-27-2007, 02:37 AM

07-27-2007, 03:00 AM

You are going to get the same answer to this question regardless of how many times you ask it. It is not a matter of comparing a couple of bits of scripture, the bible is fundamentally flawed with its core premise that there is a single truth for all men. It's pretty much that simple.

(from post #367)

You argue that it is not the case that there is a single truth for all men.

Is that a single truth for all men?

The Doctor

07-27-2007, 06:37 AM

Sheer frustration because you don't have enough experience and knowledge of the Bible. You need to do some research, not me.

"Shopping"? Just because I've done more research than you, and know more than you doesn't make it shopping. Perhaps you can just tell everyone now how much you love the KJV and that's the only translation I should use?

Let's hear it. What's your favorite?

The growing number of translations does nothing for me,but it provides interesting debates, no? BTW, I don't typically use kjv, so you don't have to be bitter about that, but suit yourself. I know others who use it, but it's almost like another language, wouldn't you say?
During a time in my life when God's Word showed itself strong to Y.H.N. personally, I was not using kjv. It seems to me that God can use any translation to speak to someone's spirit, because His word is beyond space and time. But any translation to a point.

The difference here is that emphasis on whether God is waiting around to see what we will do (as in your example in Genesis), or is God the author and finisher of faith in CHrist Jesus.
If there were a group of people (like those in Genesis 18, as you cite)whose actions were outside of God's understanding, or knowledge as you called it (I think), then He would not be able to fully make a way of escape. We may know The Way, that is, the Lord Jesus Christ. Yet it can be said that were those people's actions unknown to God, how could He provide perfect justice? He could only then, provide incomplete justice, which would be useless, if not downright contemptible. Probably worse... You may continue to argue this if you wish, but I would say that Braces just handed you your ass about choosing to know something.(see post #374 in this thread for details) You are free to twist in the wind if you wish.

Is there a mystery which you are bringing to our attention throughout all these disagreements? I'm not doubting it for one minute..
I said that God knew you before you were formed in the womb.
God also says that there are those who He never knew, and those words are spoken to people who appear to be doing "God's will". (see Matthew 7:21-ff)
Now whatever translation you use, there are two different aspects of God's knowledge. I'm not taking issue with you on that note. It looks to me as if God can't "know", or be in the presence of sin. That is vastly different from the open theism which you are knowingly, or unknowingly forwarding, IMO.

scrogdog

07-27-2007, 06:48 AM

(from post #367)

You argue that it is not the case that there is a single truth for all men.

Is that a single truth for all men?

No, it's my truth. If you can deal with it intellectually instead of with your usual smoke and mirrors, you are welcome to do so.

Boot, your reply is coming up.

sysint

07-27-2007, 07:03 AM

That's as absurd as , "...can He make a rock so big he can't pick it up?"
Shows your lack of reasoning. God is all powerful, so your analogy stinks.

Anyway, you can make a rock so big you can't pick it up. Doesn't mean you don't have the power to break it up into little pieces. It would be the method in regards to yourself.

Don't confuse method with operation.

sysint

07-27-2007, 07:06 AM

The growing number of translations does nothing for me,but it provides interesting debates, no? BTW, I don't typically use kjv, so you don't have to be bitter about that, but suit yourself. .....

The difference here is that emphasis on whether God is waiting around to see what we will do (as in your example in Genesis), or is God the author and finisher of faith in CHrist Jesus.
If there were a group of people (like those in Genesis 18, as you cite)whose actions were outside of God's understanding, or knowledge as you called it (I think), then He would not be able to fully make a way of escape. .....

... IMO. Get out the Hebrew and attempt to reconcile it differently then. I'm not here to argue with you. Septuagint should be fine also.

sysint

07-27-2007, 07:10 AM

Did you read what I said? I didn't say anything about letting events pass. I said if he restricts his knowledge as you say he can then whatever knowledge he restricted himself from he will have no control or influence over it b/c if he did that would assume he knew something about it.

You are assuming WHEN God's lets go. Anyway, it's obvious to me he lets things go right now. All sorts of evil things happen to people and God's not responsible for any of it. Doesn't diminish what he knows or not, or what he wants to know and when he wants to know it.

Perhaps you confuse the fine line between knowledge and awareness.

acmanko

07-27-2007, 07:10 AM

Shows your lack of reasoning. God is all powerful, so your analogy stinks.

Anyway, you can make a rock so big you can't pick it up. Doesn't mean you don't have the power to break it up into little pieces. It would be the method in regards to yourself.

Don't confuse method with operation. that's crazy. why make a rock so big you can't pick it up? countered with he can break it into little pieces. If I wanted a big rock, it would be for a reason and not to break it up.

sysint

07-27-2007, 07:13 AM

TB wouldn't make something so big he couldn't pick it up? How about a house? Building? Barn? Car?

In the case of God he's all powerful. His means of destruction may be different than construction. Prove it otherwise.

bootlen

07-27-2007, 07:14 AM

that's crazy. why make a rock so big you can't pick it up? countered with he can break it into little pieces. If I wanted a big rock, it would be for a reason and not to break it up.

LOL! That's great, ac. I read sys' post and couldn't believe TB's post was THAT far over his head. Your little snippet kinda made it clear it was, indeed, that far.

:D :D :D

Something tells me sys is a blond.

sysint

07-27-2007, 07:14 AM

If he stops himself from knowing where event 'x' will happen, then he is powerless from stopping event 'x' from happening.

Cite by example where this makes God less than "all-powerful".

sysint

07-27-2007, 07:15 AM

LOL! That's great, ac. I read sys' post and couldn't believe TB's post was THAT far over his head. Your little snippet kinda made it clear it was, indeed, that far.D :D :D
Something tells me sys is a blond.All you do is waste space.

scrogdog

07-27-2007, 09:26 AM

Then I would submit that either it is a subject about which one does not "get it" is a subject/issue about which they have not studied. OR it is one of those issues about which we (anyone) are not capable of understanding fully in this life...such as the Triune God.

That might be true, except for the tap dances that occur when such a conundrum arises. Next time one comes up, let’s you and I discuss the rational answer from believers. Fair enough?

You think God is not aware of your (and many other people's) lack of faith? Did you know that I, too, lacked faith? Did you know that "with God, ALL things are possible"? Did you know that God provides all the faith one needs to believe?

How can I be aware of God’s stance when all I have is the words of men?:) If he is aware of it, then he has done nothing to address it.

"Can't" has nothing to do with it. It's about the will.

What have I repeatedly said throughout this discussion? Christians not only do not understand the human condition, THEY DO NOT CARE TO. Case in point; your reply. Basically, can’t has EVERYTHING to do with it. Until you, other believers can come in to an understanding of this concept, then you do not understand the state of man. Period.

Nit true. That's why God has to provide the sufficient faith.

With all due respect my friend, I find these words to be a bit empty. You demonstrate your non-understanding of this state of man pretty much with each post you make. See above.

Also not true. See Ephesians 2:8,9

I am familiar with this passage. I don’t see how it makes your point. Ephesians is the passage that you use to show why good deeds are not your gateway to heaven. It does not address the fact that some people are incapable of faith as far as I can see. Or at least, further explanation is needed here.

Actually, the it is YOU who does not understand faith.

Did you used to believe Pluto is a planet? Sure you did. Based on what? I guess your system of why you believe failed. But the reasons I believe have never failed. Ever. Not even once.

Omg, Boot. This is like asking me if I believe in igneous rock. Igneous is a classification of rock, it is not something I believe or not. Pluto is Pluto, regardless of how science classifies it. And for your information, no, many never thought of Pluto as a planet, that’s how the whole re-classification movement came about. In any case, this mistaken analogy fails to make the point that you wish that it did. :)

Of course I don’t understand faith. I’d say that’s a given for someone incapable of it, wouldn’t you?

Go back and look. I agreed with you on your explanation of evolution, which I call adaptation. But man did not evolve from any other form of life.

Yes he did. You know, one would think that a scientific fact would be about as close to being something universal as humans can get. Science IS universal and religion is not. If you can begin to grasp what I mean by that…we might actually be going somewhere. :) So, is the fact that man evolved from ape-like creatures universally accepted? Nope. Well, there ya go. The human condition at work, able to defy and deny FACTS to suit agendas. This has to be about the most perfect illustration of my point that exists. Thanks. :)

Utopia is a man made place. with man having HIS own way. The truth of eternity is that GOD will have HIS way (which, BTW, man will realize it is the best way).

Where did you ever get that idea?

American Heritage Dictionary:

u·to·pi·a (yōō-tō'pē-ə)

n.

1.
a. An ideally perfect place, especially in its social, political, and moral aspects.
b. A work of fiction describing a utopia.

2. An impractical, idealistic scheme for social and political reform.

The definition of utopia is a universal concept. I challenge you to find another definition of the word that makes a distinction between God’s utopia and man’s. There isn’t one. Utopia is an absolute concept regardless of whose plan it is to get there. Again, the fact that God uses concentration camps and culling the herd to achieve his utopia is about the single biggest nail in the coffin of the biblical god that that exists. Because that is MAN’S plan as well. Talk about the signature flaws of man in the bible, there you go in spades.

As are my beliefs about God. You just refuse to give them a chance. ("I can't believe because I have no faith, wah, wah, w-a-a-a-h.) Suppose no one gave Newton a chance...didn't believe him enough to give his theories a try?

Totally different thing. Believers make a living out of denying things that are as much a lock as apples falling to the ground. I am incapable of denying things that can be seen for myself…unlike your average believer. If they don’t like something, they just shut it off. Certainly history shows a pretty ugly scenario when we look at how Christians deal with uncomfortable thoughts and even facts.

You *have* to give Newton a chance unless you are in the business of denying what your eyes see. I think I should stop there. Lol

Unless God can “show me the money” like Newton has, then please don’t bother with this line of reasoning.

Why should he start contradicting Himself now after an eternity past of never doing so? That is silliness.

To answer your question, no. God has already said Himself, "I am the same yesterday, today, and forever." Remember, now, I also am going from MY perspective and I believe Scripture to be infallible, without error, and the inspired Word of God.

Ok, that’s a fair point. My point actually was that in the modern age, if someone made the exact same claim that the bible has made, that God breathed on men and they came to understand, that even people who believe that occurred would NOT believe it if it happened now.

I respect you a lot, Boot, as I do others of faith on this board. Robo, Chilly, Andy, Ihatton, Royc, Sysint and many others are all good men with good intent. And I understand what you are all trying to do. I sort of feel the same way when we discuss science. I actually become sad with the thought that there is a possibility that you or your kids may never get to feel the same wonder and awe that I feel when in that realm. I want you guys to feel that too. Just as you want me to understand the wonder and awe of God and Jesus.

How can one look at that “mess” and say that men are all capable of the same patterns of thought? I am diametrically opposed to the thought process of TB. You are opposed in thought process with Sysint despite the both of you being Christian. Anyone that believes that Geer and James think alike needs to work on their observational skills in my opinion. ;)

And I know that I have managed to piss off a few people that I would have rather not have pissed off. Not you, though. At least you have never shown it except to ask me one morning if someone had pissed in my wheaties. :) Boot, you talk the talk and AND walk the walk. I admire that though we disagree… even fundamentally so, on many things.

Bravo to you, sir.

bootlen

07-27-2007, 12:42 PM

That might be true, except for the tap dances that occur when such a conundrum arises. Next time one comes up, let’s you and I discuss the rational answer from believers. Fair enough?

Sure! Absolutely. But even believers are sometimes off track beacuse they have had little, no, or incorrect teaching. And I admit I might be off as well. If it can bve shown I am wrong, I'll admit it right then and there.

Yes. Fair enough!

How can I be aware of God’s stance when all I have is the words of men?:) If he is aware of it, then he has done nothing to address it.

Finally! We got to this intersection.

"Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God." You have already condemned your self to faithlessness because you have written Scripture off as myth.

What have I repeatedly said throughout this discussion? Christians not only do not understand the human condition, THEY DO NOT CARE TO. Case in point; your reply. Basically, can’t has EVERYTHING to do with it. Until you, other believers can come in to an understanding of this concept, then you do not understand the state of man. Period.

Okay. Why can't you? What is stopping you?

You are asking to find God in big noisy things. You won't find Him there. He is found in the gentle breeze, figuratively speaking. The only time He "screams" at us is in our pain.

With all due respect my friend, I find these words to be a bit empty. You demonstrate your non-understanding of this state of man pretty much with each post you make. See above.

I am familiar with this passage. I don’t see how it makes your point. Ephesians is the passage that you use to show why good deeds are not your gateway to heaven. It does not address the fact that some people are incapable of faith as far as I can see. Or at least, further explanation is needed here.

Okay, we're getting there. Soon. Very soon.

Omg, Boot. This is like asking me if I believe in igneous rock. Igneous is a classification of rock, it is not something I believe or not. Pluto is Pluto, regardless of how science classifies it. And for your information, no, many never thought of Pluto as a planet, that’s how the whole re-classification movement came about. In any case, this mistaken analogy fails to make the point that you wish that it did. :)

My point is, we are not as smart as we would like to think we are but people still have faith in men. THAT is very dangerous.

Of course I don’t understand faith. I’d say that’s a given for someone incapable of it, wouldn’t you?

I'm glad you agree.

Yes he did. You know, one would think that a scientific fact would be about as close to being something universal as humans can get. Science IS universal and religion is not. If you can begin to grasp what I mean by that…we might actually be going somewhere. :) So, is the fact that man evolved from ape-like creatures universally accepted? Nope. Well, there ya go. The human condition at work, able to defy and deny FACTS to suit agendas. This has to be about the most perfect illustration of my point that exists. Thanks. :)

Actually, my perspective is exactly 180* out. Poorly applied science (a result of the human condition), able to defy and deny FACTS to suit agendas.

Where did you ever get that idea?

American Heritage Dictionary:

u·to·pi·a (yōō-tō'pē-ə)

n.

1.
a. An ideally perfect place, especially in its social, political, and moral aspects.
b. A work of fiction describing a utopia.

2. An impractical, idealistic scheme for social and political reform.

The definition of utopia is a universal concept. I challenge you to find another definition of the word that makes a distinction between God’s utopia and man’s. There isn’t one. Utopia is an absolute concept regardless of whose plan it is to get there. Again, the fact that God uses concentration camps and culling the herd to achieve his utopia is about the single biggest nail in the coffin of the biblical god that that exists. Because that is MAN’S plan as well. Talk about the signature flaws of man in the bible, there you go in spades.

No. Yours works perfectly. Politics are man-made. Thanks for making my point.

Totally different thing. Believers make a living out of denying things that are as much a lock as apples falling to the ground. I am incapable of denying things that can be seen for myself…unlike your average believer. If they don’t like something, they just shut it off. Certainly history shows a pretty ugly scenario when we look at how Christians deal with uncomfortable thoughts and even facts.

It's not the Christianity in them that does that, though. It is the "flaw"...the human condition. (HEY! Just like scrog! :eek: :D )

You *have* to give Newton a chance unless you are in the business of denying what your eyes see. I think I should stop there. Lol

Agreed. But shouldn't the same courtesy be extended to God? After all, He did "invent" gravity. ;)

Unless God can “show me the money” like Newton has, then please don’t bother with this line of reasoning.

"Show you the money." Hmmm. Youi mean like "invent"...oh, I don't know....GRAVITY? Yeah how about if He invents gravity? Or How about if He becomes an man, dies, is buried for 3 days, and rises from the dead. Man -o-man! THAT's a lot of "money"!

Ok, that’s a fair point. My point actually was that in the modern age, if someone made the exact same claim that the bible has made, that God breathed on men and they came to understand, that even people who believe that occurred would NOT believe it if it happened now.

I know that was your point. But I wanted to get here through these 2 posts.

That very day is coming and the NWT will be exposed for the lying sham that it is...as will ALL false doctrine.

I respect you a lot, Boot,...

Mutual, sir

...as I do others of faith on this board. Robo, Chilly, Andy, Ihatton, Royc, Sysint and many others are all good men with good intent. And I understand what you are all trying to do. I sort of feel the same way when we discuss science. I actually become sad with the thought that there is a possibility that you or your kids may never get to feel the same wonder and awe that I feel when in that realm. I want you guys to feel that too. Just as you want me to understand the wonder and awe of God and Jesus.

Actually, science doesn't hold a candle to the spiritual realm. Science fascinates me but spirituality...the things of God...blow science out of the water on the excitement scale.

How can one look at that “mess” and say that men are all capable of the same patterns of thought? I am diametrically opposed to the thought process of TB. You are opposed in thought process with Sysint despite the both of you being Christian. Anyone that believes that Geer and James think alike needs to work on their observational skills in my opinion. ;)

Actually, sys is not a Christian. And roy likely cannot define "Christian". (That oughta get the worms to the surface, huh?)

And I know that I have managed to piss off a few people that I would have rather not have pissed off. Not you, though. At least you have never shown it except to ask me one morning if someone had pissed in my wheaties. :) Boot, you talk the talk and AND walk the walk. I admire that though we disagree… even fundamentally so, on many things.

Now if I could only consistently do the 2nd part. Talk's cheap. Walk costs me my pride. I struggle with that constantly. But thanks.

Bravo to you, sir.

AND to YOU.

scrogdog

07-27-2007, 05:40 PM

Okay. Why can't you? What is stopping you?

Very well. I agree it is probably time to cut to the chase on this matter. The other points, in truth, are just a side show to this question, in my opinion. So, let's try to stay on this for now and we can return to other things later if we see a need to.

It is going to take me a bit to construct a proper reply. In it, I want to use more than just my words, but also the words of scholars and philosophers. I do this for two reasons, one is that I want to demonstrate that this is not just some obscure concept. The other is, most people that are published as either scholars or philosophers make thier points better than I do and are far more eloquent.

I will however stay away from philosphies that simply attack and do not support my point. Philosphers like Ann Rand will not be seen, nor will any idea like Marx's "opiate of the masses" comment. I hope to show a direct link between the philosophies I will use and the kind of person that I am (I think or would like to think that I am anyway :)).

braces4impact

07-27-2007, 07:22 PM

You are assuming WHEN God's lets go. Anyway, it's obvious to me he lets things go right now. All sorts of evil things happen to people and God's not responsible for any of it. Doesn't diminish what he knows or not, or what he wants to know and when he wants to know it.

Perhaps you confuse the fine line between knowledge and awareness.

In order to know something you have to be aware of it. My argument holds.

scrogdog

07-27-2007, 09:43 PM

Why I can't take things on faith.

Ok, we need to build in steps here.

The first thing that I want to introduce is what I will call "the concept of tangibility". Briefly stated it means this; if it can't be experienced in a sensory fashion... it does not exist.

Now, having said that, let me tell you something of myself. First, I am one of the most stubburn mothers you will ever meet in your life. Do you know anyone, Boot, who just doesn't listen to advice, even from people that they should trust completely? That would be me. I have to learn the lessons for myself... no one can tell me of them... much to the utter chagrine of my parents hehehe.

It is exactly this which makes me call myself agnostic rather than atheist. Geer would like me to "see what's in front of my face"... and boy... if I had a nickle for every time that I've heard that from a believer as well... I'd be in St. Lucia right now. ;)

Well I am here to tell both of you gentlemen that there is NOTHING in front of my face.

Boot you already understand the concept of tangibility you just don't realize it yet. Ready? :)

Everyone has heard this; you can't prove a negative. I don't think I've heard anyone ever on this board from any angle challenge this concept. In fact, it has been used many times by believers here. Cool... so we agree that this is true (I assume for now). An example of this would be; even if God does NOT exist, I can't prove it. So... let's consider this simple, fairly day to day and common idea.

Why can't I prove it? Well, there is nothing to go on. Isn't it really that simple?

Other examples... extraterrestrials, bigfoot, the monster at loch ness. A photo of a footprint or shadowy film clips are pretty meaningless. What would not be meaningless would be the remains... or even just a skull... of one of the creatures. That all have supposedly been around so long works against rational thought to have left no sign by now.

Myths.

Now we move on the the second important point. I like to think of myself as a free thinker. What does that mean, exactly?

Here is some opinion. Note that in all things that there is conflicting opinion. Different patterns of thought. Different philosophies. I will post a link to where I got these later, and you can feel free to explore the other philosophies from all sides that I did not use.

"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking; where it is absent, discussion is apt to become worse than useless."

-Leo Tolstoy

You tell 'em. Leo. This one is particularly important... the bolding was my doing. Now... it is not for me to judge whether or not I actually achieve "freethinking"... but it is something that I strive to do. Clearly, as a flawed human, I have prejudice and all sorts of uncomfy things that can get in the way sometimes. That's the way that it is. I am the world's biggest f-ing hypocrite for being a homophobe and then out the other side of my arse talk of how we should all reach for the brotherhood of man. I'm sorry. I can't help myself. :)

Me being a homophobe definitely affects my thought process... even though I see it as a flaw. Wierd, huh? That's just the way it is. So... I am not a freethinker in that case. I'm not sure that I even want to be... and I should feel bad or something about it but I don't.

"Do not craze yourself with thinking, but go about your business anywhere. Life is not intellectual and critical, but sturdy."

Emerson

This is an unfortunate statement about mankind... which also makes it an unfortunate truth. It explains many things though... such as why some lead and some follow. I'm not talking about the army... I am talking about everyday leaders in everyday life. Someone is not a leader when they get a badge, they are a leader when they are the one that picks up the baton from a fallen comrade and leads the new charge. Or... walk in to a team that is loose and form it in to a cohesive unit... whether that be in the workplace or whatever. People don't want to pay attention, Boot. It's too hard. That's why we have such political apathy here... stuff isn't THAT bad so it is nicer to go home... have a beer... have sex with one's wife... and watch the latest episode of 24.

I'm not saying that one should not ever do that, BTW. :D Just take the time to use your brain too. Your brain needs excercise too... did you know that? Yup, scientific fact. Hehehe.

Ok. Here we stand at... the concept of tangibilty, freethinking, and a diametrically opposed line of thinking to my own (and your own too, btw) NON-thinking.

Now, how does all this that I have said apply to whether or not I believe? Well, from a "concept of tangibility" standpoint I'd say that's pretty clear. But what about the human condition standpoint?

Glad you asked. You have heard Andy, I believe, speak of Spinoza. Here is some Spinoza for you.

"We see nearly all men parade their own ideas as God's Word, their chief aim being to compel others to think as they do, while using religion as a pretext. We see, I say, that the chief concern of theologians on the whole has been to extort from Holy Scripture their own arbitrarily invented ideas, from which they claim divine authority. In no other field do they display less scruple....than in the interpretation of Scripture...."

-Spinoza

Eherman...

"For the more I studied, the more I saw that reading a text necessarily involves interpreting a text. I suppose when I started my studies I had a rather unsophisticated view of reading: that the point of reading a text is simply to let the text "speak for itself," to uncover the meaning inherent in its words. The reality, I came to see, is that meaning is not inherent and texts do not speak for themselves. If texts could speak for themselves, then everyone honestly and openly reading a text would agree on what the text says. But interpretations of texts abound, and people in fact do not agree on what the text means. This is obviously true of the texts of scripture: simply look at the hundreds, or even thousands, of ways people interpret the book of Revelation, or consider all the different Christian denominations, filled with intelligent and well-meaning people who base their views of how the church should be organized and function on the Bible, yet all of them coming to radically different conclusions (Baptists, Pentecostals, Presbyterians, Roman Catholics, Appalachian snake-handlers, Greek Orthodox, and on and on).

Bart D. Ehrman

There is no possible explanation for this. Other than all men think differently and come to conclusions differently... it is not a matter of who is right and who is wrong. It is about the human condition, bud. BTW, there is plenty of opposing philosophy to what I just posted. Can't you see that very fact strenghthens my case here?

"The Vision of Christ that thou dost see
Is my Vision's Greatest Enemy. . . . .
Yours loves the same world that mine hates,
Thy heaven doors are my Hell Gates. . .
Both read the Bible day & night,
But thou read'st black where I read white."

Blake

The human condition. Does not matter who is right.

Finally... to wrap up... about the freethinking angle.

"But today in addition to that neglect of thought there is also prevalent mistrust of it. The organized political, social, and religious association of our time are at work to induce the individual man not to arrive at his convictions by his own thinking but to make his own such convictions as they keep ready made for him. Any man who thinks for himself and at the same time is spiritually free, is to them something inconvenient and even uncanny. He does not offer sufficient guarantee that he will merge himself in their organization in the way they wish. All corporate bodies look today for their strength not so much to the spiritual worth of the ideas which they represent and to that of the people who belong to them, as the attainment of the highest possible degree of unity and exclusiveness. It is in this that they expect to find their strongest power for offence and defense.

Hence the spirit of the age rejoices, instead of lamenting, that thinking seems to be unequal to its task, and gives it no credit for what, in spite of imperfections, it has already accomplished. It refuses to admit, what is nevertheless the fact, that all spiritual progress up to to-day has come about through the achievements of thought, or to reflect that thinking may still be able in the future to accomplish what it has not succeeded in accomplishing as yet. Of such consideration the spirit of the age takes no account. Its only concern is to discredit individual thinking in every possible way, and it deals with that on the lines of the saying: "Whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that which he hath."

Albert Schweitzer

Did you get any understanding from this, my friend? If not... you know what we can chalk it up to. :)

Unfortunately... the bible does not. The first thing that the bible wishes to do is harness free thought... tell me what I believe with no tangible evidence. Rail against it all you like, there are plenty of us, we aren't going away, and it is a natural part of the human condition.

Source for philosophy used: http://www.scholarisland.org/

RoBoTeq

07-28-2007, 12:57 AM

geerair

07-28-2007, 01:00 AM

I still don't get why so called non-believers are so intent on trying to disparage those who are believers. If you don't believe, fine. Just what exactly is it alleged non-believers are attempting to achieve with all of their rhetoric as to "why" there is no God? This is a faith issue, it cannot be proven nor disproven.Because most of the trouble in the world today is caused by Christians, Muslims and Jews.

We had rather have peace than a bunch of religious fanatics going at each other about who has the more plausible imaginary god.

scrogdog

07-28-2007, 01:27 AM

I still don't get why so called non-believers are so intent on trying to disparage those who are believers. If you don't believe, fine. Just what exactly is it alleged non-believers are attempting to achieve with all of their rhetoric as to "why" there is no God? This is a faith issue, it cannot be proven nor disproven.

Who is trying to disparage anyone, Robo? I am trying to understand how you think. Instead you get upset.

I put a lot of thought in to this... and that is your best reply? Why do you even come here? Do you want to discuss sh*t or don't you? It can't be proven or disproven is a concept that I used right here! Did you even read the damn thing?

*My* posting style has changed, eh?

07-28-2007, 03:23 AM

Did you get any understanding from this, my friend? If not... you know what we can chalk it up to. :)

Lessee if I get this straight. You choose to believe words written by men, while refuseing to believe the words of the Bible, because they were written by men.

You claim to refuse to believe the words of the Bible, because it illustrates a condition where different people have different thoughts, yet assert one thought should be had by all, and choose to believe the words of men that illustrate a condition where different people have different thoughts, it is argued against by other people with different thoughts, while the wrighters you choose to believe assert that their thoughts should be believed.

At the very least the two wrightings are on equal ground, one cannot be disqualified without disqualifying the other as well.

07-28-2007, 03:53 AM

(from post #367)

You argue that it is not the case that there is a single truth for all men.
Is that a single truth for all men?

No, it's my truth.

Then in that case, since "your truth", is not a universal truth, then any universal claimes made with it must be false...

It is not a matter of comparing a couple of bits of scripture, the bible is fundamentally flawed with its core premise that there is a single truth for all men. It's pretty much that simple.

...Therefore the claim that the Bible is fundamentally flawed, is false.

sysint

07-28-2007, 07:51 AM

In order to know something you have to be aware of it. My argument holds.

"If he stops himself from knowing where event 'x' will happen, then he is powerless from stopping event 'x' from happening. Thus if he loses a portion of knowledge rather be it voluntary or not, he loses power as far as that instance is concerned and is therefore not 'ALL' powerful."

Cite by example.

acmanko

07-28-2007, 09:02 AM

God does not care what we, as humans do. In Genesis God gave man dominion over the planet and then forgot about us and went on about his business of creating the rest of the Galaxy and the Universe as a whole.What we do , good or bad is of no concern. If we destroy the planet, its no big deal as the Universe is littered by uninhabital planets circleing millions of stars that were Gods experiments that failed

bootlen

07-28-2007, 09:14 AM

scrogdog

07-28-2007, 09:20 AM

Then in that case, since "your truth", is not a universal truth, then any universal claimes made with it must be false...

...Therefore the claim that the Bible is fundamentally flawed, is false.

Try to pay attention here, TB. There is no unversal truth. I am not claiming that my version of things is it, else I would have created a topic called "why YOU should not believe" instead of "why *I* do not beleive".

You miss the point as brilliantly as the bible does. Which, when you think about it, is not at all surprising! My contention is, after all, that Christians do not understand this well-defined state of men, NOR DO THEY CARE TO, and your post simply strengthens my position.

scrogdog

07-28-2007, 09:43 AM

Lessee if I get this straight. You choose to believe words written by men, while refuseing to believe the words of the Bible, because they were written by men.

Let me re-phrase that for you. I believe the words of men about the human condition because I am EXPERIENCING it. Please see "the concept of tangibility" in my post. The bible has offered me nothing that I have personally experienced. Thus, while the writings of men clearly are equal on a spiritual level, one concept I have seen and felt, the other I have not.

Seems like a simple choice to me. Not all men will choose the same path that I do, which again is more or less the over arching point. There is no universal truth. But then, I am not pushing my ideals on you as something that you should beleive, unlike what happens in the reverse. :) I am simply attempting to communicate understanding of this condition to those who can't see it. That's all.

acmanko

07-28-2007, 09:57 AM

You need go join AA. Only 8 in the a.m. and you're already loaded.

Well Bootlen, what I stated can be correlated in the Bible. In Genesis, the Bible states God was displeased with what he created and If not for Noah, Earth would be nothing more than a rock circling the moon, how is it that you know all the planets in the universe were not destroyed when God caused the Great Flood, or was it simply the believers at the time did not consider the writer to be loaded.Creation goes way beyond what we have here on earth.

bootlen

07-28-2007, 10:46 AM

Well Bootlen, what I stated can be correlated in the Bible. In Genesis, the Bible states God was displeased with what he created and If not for Noah, Earth would be nothing more than a rock circling the moon, how is it that you know all the planets in the universe were not destroyed when God caused the Great Flood, or was it simply the believers at the time did not consider the writer to be loaded.Creation goes way beyond what we have here on earth.

I'll be glad to provide a phone number for the chapter nearest Forney.

Or maybe you accidentally doubled up on your pain medicine. In that case, call your doc.

07-28-2007, 06:52 PM

Let me re-phrase that for you. I believe the words of men about the human condition because I am EXPERIENCING it. Please see "the concept of tangibility" in my post. The bible has offered me nothing that I have personally experienced. Thus, while the writings of men clearly are equal on a spiritual level, one concept I have seen and felt, the other I have not.You haven't experienced Pauls dilemma???

Romans 7:15
15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do.

There is no universal truth.
Is that a universal truth?