One or two anomalies

[zoegirl]

Then I come across a piece of writing such as the one quoted above, and I cannot leave these ludicrous and offensive views unchallenged.

gee, mil65, I wonder where my challenge to you, my hostility comes from?!??1 YOu have essentially come here claiming that our views are ludicrous and offensive. Hmmm....and you expect us to roll out the welcome mat? so far, you have admitted quite freely that you have no interest in even examining that there is a God, so why should we bother. Sure you are welcome here, but why shouldn't we challenge you when you come here attacking our beliefs?!

Who said this is an academic study? According to christians this is the word of god we're talking about.

Ah yes, so any religious study is not academic....brilliant, brilliant. Even if you regard this as purely mythology, there are still experts in the field. The Christian scholars that are out there have spent many many years studying the texts, the history, the language. And yes,there is disagreement, why wouldn't there be....as much as we hold that this is a innerrant word, we, as humans, are fallible after all and there are some of us who view the Genesis account as showing a report on old earth and those of us who view it to be young earth.

Will someone please point out the bits to be taken literally and which are open to interpretation. Virgin birth? Rising from the dead? Water into wine?

Are you seriously asking? It sounds like you have made your mind up about our "ludicrous and offensive" views.

Please, I know you may regarde these as just more tired and stale points but humour me, I'm new here. I was brought up as an evangelical Christian, gave it up in my late teens. I know the bible pretty well, but I cannot find any reference to the BBT in Genesis.

Hey, I will galdly humor you as long I you forego the immediate judgment on our beliefs.

The absence of any mention does not negate the fact that it happened (or something along those lines). Genesis also doesn't mention photosynthesis, respiration, cells, atoms, electrons. It is not meant to be strictly taken as a "how-to" book, certainly not step by step how-to book. We were certainly given the earth and the universe to explore and examine.

I could point out the absence of dinosaurs, but I can see you reaching for that eye-rolling smilie again, and digging out the bible quotes about dragons etc. Lets save that for another post, my eyes are beginning to hurt.

Okay, no eye-rolling....but I don'tneed to desperately dig for verses to support the idea of dinosaurs. If we find evidence for them, I don't feel the need to go searching. No everything is included in scripture. The fact that perhaps there is no mention of them certainly isn't a deal breaker for me.

As for Christian philosophers isn't that a contradiction in terms? Surely Christianity is foundered on the bible, requiring faith to believe it. I don't think I have to read an exhaustive account of the mating habits of unicorns in order to verify that I don't believe in unicorns.

Okay, I so desperately want to place an eye-rolling here. You come here scorning our beliefs, then ask us to humor you. If you are confused about the bible, try reading someone who can give you a clearer understanding....they're called teachers.

If you are bound and determined to reject Christianity, then certianly be my guest, you don't *need* to examine our authors to do so. However, your *criticisms* of Christianity and your questions about pain and evil would have more credence if you bothered to read about it from actual Christians. Yes there are Chrisitan scholars and philosophers.

Of course, perhaps your idea of intellectual integrity is different then mine... You've already established that you have a preconceived notion of the stupidity and ignorance of Christians. (after all, they can't be academic, can they?)

which would you rather have....a God that give you no choices or a God that made robots to serve Him? Blame the terrorists for 9/11

[Byblos]

I notice no-one has responded about the 9/11 article written by Richard Deem. Where are you Richard? Next time you're on the line to god, ask him why, if he 'might' have made the plane to hit the Pentagon where there was repair work underway, could he not have steered the other two so they just missed the towers, and miraculously saved a few more thousand lives?

rmil65,

Would you have believed it was God's work if He did steer one of the planes away from the towers?

Would you have believed if he made the towers not collpase until 30,000 people were actually evacuated from them?

Would you have believed if the plane that hit the Pentagon had missed its initial intended target (that being the White House)?

Would you have believed if some other plane did not reach any target at all and was made to fall in a PA field somewhere?

What exactly would have convinced you of His work? Would you really have believed if you had seen Jesus alive after the resurrection and touched his wounds? After all, there are some who saw but still did not believe. Somehow I suspect you would be one of them. You would not have believed in any case, either because you're not ready or because you will never be. Only one knows and it's not you (or me).


Welcome to the board.

[B. W.]

rmil65,

Have you ever come through a scrap without injury? Survived something deemed empirically un-survivable? Somehow gotten out of a jam when you should never have?

Multitudes are in the valley of decisions! God indeed granted humanity the ability to make their-own decisions and choices. This proves God just. He remains in control because he judges with equity even when he already foreknows whatever our choices will be before we ever were born; He still lets us make them. Even the wrong ones that blame God for the all the error humanity (we all) create.

If you are looking for a scapegoat and away to beat-up, mock, and punish God for all the ills of the world. Make God feel your so-called justified rage. Look toward Jesus Christ, he been there done that — for you — for all.
-
-
-

[cslewislover]

LOVE II
by George Herbert (1593-1633)

Immortal Heat, O let thy greater flame
Attract the lesser to it: let those fires,
Which shall consume the world, first make it tame,
And kindle in our hearts such true desires,

As may consume our lusts, and make thee way.
Then shall our hearts pant [for] thee; then shall our brain
All her invention on thine Altar lay.
And there in hymns send back thy fire again.

Our eyes shall see thee, which before saw dust;
Dust blown by wit, till that they both were blind:
Thou shalt recover all thy goods in kind,
Who wert disseized by usurping lust:

All knees shall bow to thee, all wits shall rise,
And praise him who did make and mend our eyes.

[robyn hill]

Ok rmil 65-reread the article on 9-11 and I see the confusion. Can God intervene? Sure, he created us and has the power to do whatever he wants. But, look at it from a parenting perspective- God is not a parent who will jump in and make our decisions for us or save us from all mistakes we make- or the bullys of the world. What good parent would? I think you would agree that any good parent, after teaching right from wrong, would allow his children to go out in the world, make choices, and learn from consequences. A good parent would not go out and fight our battles for us. A good parent might intervene when he chooses, but not when we choose, that would simply breed spoiled children that pay little attention to their choices or consequences(if parents always intervened, there would be no consequences to learn from.) A good parent would also invite his children home regardless of the mistakes, if that is, the child has learned from his mistakes and shows respect to the parents home. But if that child seems to denounce his parent and causes harm to his brother and sisters still, never willing to learn from his mistakes, and still wants to come home? I would call that parent a fool and would worry for the other children and the would consider that parent lacking in any knowledge of justice. From a philosophical perspective on good parenting, I'd say he is doing exactly what he should.

[rmil65]

Ah yes, so any religious study is not academic....brilliant, brilliant. Even if you regard this as purely mythology, there are still experts in the field. The Christian scholars that are out there have spent many many years studying the texts, the history, the language. And yes,there is disagreement, why wouldn't there be....as much as we hold that this is a innerrant word, we, as humans, are fallible after all and there are some of us who view the Genesis account as showing a report on old earth and those of us who view it to be young earth.

rmil65 wrote: Will someone please point out the bits to be taken literally and which are open to interpretation. Virgin birth? Rising from the dead? Water into wine?



Are you seriously asking? It sounds like you have made your mind up about our "ludicrous and offensive" views.

As last now we're getting somewhere! Yes I am dead serious. Was Jesus born of a virgin birth? A straight-forward question. If yes, let's see your evidence and have it published in Scientific American. Another straight forward question. Did Jesus rise from the dead after three days in a cave having died from horrific injuries? If yes, let's see your evidence.

The absence of any mention does not negate the fact that it happened (or something along those lines)

A classic, you knew I wouldn't be able to resist picking you up on that didn't you! Not only do you use pseudo-science to explain away the things that are there, but to explain the things that aren't even mentioned. Faith again I suppose. Let's try an analogy. You say there is a pencil on the desk in front of me. I can't see a pencil, and nor can anyone else. So I, like science, assume there is no pencil until we can prove that you are right ( and we will try, that's what scientists do - search for evidence).

My remarks about ludicrous and offensive views were directed specifically at the 9/11 article, but I am beginning to find more as we go on.

However, your *criticisms* of Christianity and your questions about pain and evil would have more credence if you bothered to read about it from actual Christians.

Is Richard Deem not an actual Christian then? Because I read that right here on this website. Hang on Robyn don't reach for the reply button, here's the link: http://www.godandscience.org/apologetic ... icity.html box on the right hand side.

Would you have believed it was God's work if He did steer one of the planes away from the towers?

Would you have believed if he made the towers not collpase until 30,000 people were actually evacuated from them?

Would you have believed if the plane that hit the Pentagon had missed its initial intended target (that being the White House)?

Would you have believed if some other plane did not reach any target at all and was made to fall in a PA field somewhere?

But we'll never know will we!! The problem with this awful rationalizing after the event is that it immediately makes people ask "well how come my husband had to go?" or something similar. If god truly did intervene it all seems very arbitrary.

BW - So we're supposed to be grateful for things that he has done, things he 'might' have done, and things he chose not to do. This is what I mean about mind games.

Robyn Hill. I like the parent analogy, something I can relate to. But I would rather apply it to the human race, in that we have to learn from our mistakes. We are doing slowly, hampered by our own nature and tendancy to start wars by saying my god's better than your god (a simplicification but I think you get my point)
I hope that I have shaken a few faiths, and shown how if you dare step outside the confines of your faith, how absurd religion seems. Please be honest with yourselves. Jesus was the Ghandi of his time, with some inspiring and provocative teachings for the Jews. The mysterious gospel writers and Paul, none of whom were eye-witnesses or had even met him, wrote down the accounts they had read and heard. Fearful that their fledgling cult was going to wither away they embellished and exagerrated some of the stories, borrowed from other cultures— or maybe they didn't. Perhaps the stories had already been exagerated by the zealous followers in their oral tradition of story-telling (ie they didn't write it down)— we all know how fallible the human memory is and how susceptible it is to error. Look at more recent examples: Robin Hood, King Arthur - maybe based on factual characters but much improved with time! Saladin - undoubtably a historical character but his exploits wildly demonised or edified depending on which end of the crusaders sword you were.

And so over the centuries we have countless languages, translations, some books edited out, some bits added (names of the “Three Wise Men” for example) corruption by the Catholic Church, and we end up with something like Wikipedia, where everyone's had a go. Don't get me wrong, some of it is beautiful (Song of Solomon) some not so beautiful (Judges 19), but hardly a reliable source of facts.

I'm signing off now, but I will be back to read more of Richard Deem's pearls of wisdom.

[robyn hill]

rmil65-just a sec to respond as I am off to school. I can probably guarantee you have not "shaken" any faiths here, I applaud your attempts and passion, as I applaud our attempts to share our studies with you, but as you can see-you are dealing with people who have studied relentlessly here to reach their views. I have already heard and studied every arguement you have brought up here, I've read the atheist handbook, studied every religion out there, taken various philosophy classes in college etc. But here is where I think we differ, I have also studied the Christian theology. Zoe girl mentioned several authors including C.S. Lewis,originally a devout atheist himself, scientist, and Oxford professor. After I studied for years, I came to my beliefs about God, not through blind faith but rather through an objective mind looking at all sides. I haven't heard you refer to any studies you have done of any Christian theology,and I mean really study, not just a curtious glance to fight your cause, but really study it.I would recommend Lee Strobel as well, he was atheist, lawyer,and famous journalist- and after trying to disprove God, his studies led him in a very different direction as you can see through his literature. You seem very intelligent but I wonder if you can be objective enough to study all sides of the issue, to me, that is how wisdom differs from intellect.

[Byblos]

I'm signing off now, but I will be back to read more of Richard Deem's pearls of wisdom.

No you won't.

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

May I make a comment?

rmil65 was right when he said that atheism isn't a religion. From his point of view, it isn't a religion. Being spiritualy dead, rmil65 cannot even comprehend that he is faithful to a religion. So...why not stop using the Atheism=Religion argument? as a former atheist myself, I can tell you that it never makes an impact.

Another thing, Psalm 14:1 tells us what an atheist is, so why do some of you insist on discussing with them?

A suggestion: in order to register on this site, we could ask the prospective member if he is atheist, agnostic, Christian or non-Christian. If the atheist box is checked, there could be a toilet flushing sound and the screen would go immediately blank.

FL

[BavarianWheels]

May I make a comment?

rmil65 was right when he said that atheism isn't a religion. From his point of view, it isn't a religion. Being spiritualy dead, rmil65 cannot even comprehend that he is faithful to a religion. So...why not stop using the Atheism=Religion argument? as a former atheist myself, I can tell you that it never makes an impact.

You're right, it's not a religion, but it is a belief system. A system that is in the same boat as Christianity searching for absolute proof of which it will not find until the day Christ returns.

I like his analogy of a pen/pencil in a desk because if a scientist was to look at that, he/she would say, "The probability of a pen/pencil being in a desk is very high without even looking into the desk..."
.

[robyn hill]

Another thing, Psalm 14:1 tells us what an atheist is, so why do some of you insist on discussing with them?


I am new to this site as well and I honesly wasn't aware we weren't supposed to discuss issues with atheists. My honest view of atheists commenting on this site is that they are probably searching for answers. I figure it can't hurt to give arguments that can stand on their own, I believe that God provides them and think it could, who knows, maybe at least provide them with some things to consider and might even plant a seed that could possibly lead them to God. I guess I don't see how it could hurt? I was at least agnostic at one point and some of what I have heard other Christians say on this site are some of the ideas I heard early on in my own search and what helped lead me to my faith. Woudn't God want us to have these discussions? I agree when they start sarcastically ridiculing other authors on this site, cut them off, but aren't we supposed to be having these conversations? I certainly don't want to break the rules here for this site so maybe I need some clarification. Someone who knows this site better than I do, help!

[BavarianWheels]

I am new to this site as well and I honesly wasn't aware we weren't supposed to discuss issues with atheists.

We're not?? News to me.
.
.

[robyn hill]

May I make a comment?

rmil65 was right when he said that atheism isn't a religion. From his point of view, it isn't a religion. Being spiritualy dead, rmil65 cannot even comprehend that he is faithful to a religion. So...why not stop using the Atheism=Religion argument? as a former atheist myself, I can tell you that it never makes an impact.

Another thing, Psalm 14:1 tells us what an atheist is, so why do some of you insist on discussing with them?

A suggestion: in order to register on this site, we could ask the prospective member if he is atheist, agnostic, Christian or non-Christian. If the atheist box is checked, there could be a toilet flushing sound and the screen would go immediately blank.

FL

I might've read it wrong but that is what I gathered from above, that is why I was sincerely asking for clarification, just wondering?

[Gman]

I hope that I have shaken a few faiths, and shown how if you dare step outside the confines of your faith, how absurd religion seems.

It depends on which religion you mean... According to law, atheism is a protected "religion'' under the First Amendment.. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on the case Kaufman v McCaughtry. “A Wisconsin prison inmate tried to form an atheist discussion group. Prison authorities refused and Kaufman sued. The court ruled that Atheism is a religion for "legal purposes".

http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/LR1DZSAL.pdf

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

I am new to this site as well and I honesly wasn't aware we weren't supposed to discuss issues with atheists.

You misread me. I said,

Another thing, Psalm 14:1 tells us what an atheist is, so why do some of you insist on discussing with them?

Discuss with an atheist until you're blue in the face but know this: you will not advance the cause of Christ one millimeter; you may even be setting it back! Atheism is a disrespect of God (Ps 36:1-2) and a hatred of God (Jer 5:12). This hatred of God by the atheist is confirmed in 1Jn 2:22-23.

Another thing: an atheist who is «searching» ceases to be an atheist and becomes an agnostic. Such a cross-over atheist may not even be aware of his new status but his tone will change, as per Lk 6:45, The good man brings up the good stored in his heart...(see also Mt 12:34-35.) His tone will change because hatred has been replaced by questioning.

Have a blessed day.

FL