God and the Bible

[UNODRAGONE]

I got into a heated discussion with a friend of mines about people who believe in God and not the bible. He states the bible and God go hand and hand, but to me the bible has so many contradictions and is in my opinion man made I mean come on God himself didn't write the bible his followers/philosophers did how do we know they put God's words exactly or just their interpretation of it? I think someone can believe in anything they want to believe in including taking bits and pieces here and there. I believe in God, but not the bible, what do you guys think?

[Vendetta]

I think anyone who writes down what a "burning bush" tells him, may not be entirely too stable.

[UNODRAGONE]

I think anyone who writes down what a "burning bush" tells him, may not be entirely too stable.


Never thought of it that way, tahnks for that spin on it he's gonna love me when I tell him

[Golden Howl]

Well God has more power than we can imagine, so why would he let his followers screw up on writing the Bible? No, he wouldn't let that happen, if he is capable of bringing the dead to life, then surely he would be able to create the Bible correctly through his disciples.

[Vendetta]

Well God has more power than we can imagine, so why would he let his followers screw up on writing the Bible? No, he wouldn't let that happen, if he is capable of bringing the dead to life, then surely he would be able to create the Bible correctly through his disciples.
The problem with that is that it assumed the Bible IS the book of a god, and not the book of a bunch of crazy dudes. Also, your logic is circular, and so negates being able to argue with it.

Say for example I write what I say is the "holy" word of the Doorknob God. You refute it and say it's just a bunch of crazy ramblings of a madman. But I say, "nuh uh, the Doorknob God would NEVER let me write something wrong, ergo it MUST be true."

[Sherekhan]

I don't know how to counter, but given that what the apostle Paul said is true in 2 Timothy 3:16, where it states, "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness," and if there is a powerful and almighty God who could do miracles with a flick of a hand or something like resurrecting people and that He commanded those said "crazy men" to write the bible, I pretty much think that the bible and God is in harmony with each other. If, those premises are proven to be true.

To summarize:

If;

2Timothy 3:16 = true, there is a powerful being out there = true, said powerful being commanded these so called crazy men to write the bible = true, then said powerful being aka God is in harmony with BIBLE/HOLY BOOK = true.

[Vendetta]

I don't know how to counter, but given that what the apostle Paul said is true in 2 Timothy 3:16, where it states, "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness," and if there is a powerful and almighty God who could do miracles with a flick of a hand or something like resurrecting people and that He commanded those said "crazy men" to write the bible, I pretty much think that the bible and God is in harmony with each other. If, those premises are proven to be true.

To summarize:

If;

2Timothy 3:16 = true, there is a powerful being out there = true, said powerful being commanded these so called crazy men to write the bible = true, then said powerful being aka God is in harmony with BIBLE/HOLY BOOK = true.
That's a lot of IFs.

Also, let's be honest here, what sort of almighty diety needs a bunch of dudes (no women allowed, kthx) to write ANYTHING?

[ThrasherCub]

I too have found it interesting that God, who is all things and the source of all things and is therefore half female in essence, only ever seems to show that male side.

People often argue back against that, "Well, it's due to the pre-existing culture in the area!"

...

Then why didn't they, like, change their culture a little to better match God? They accepted his demand that they all cut off part of their penises, but can't be more balanced?

So an oddly slanted book, written by a people leaning to that direction, is going to be accepted as the absolute and literal word of God, despite you knowing this?

Religious people amaze me quite often.

[Golden Howl]

I'm doing some research before I get into this discussion.

[Sherekhan]

That's a lot of IFs.

Also, let's be honest here, what sort of almighty diety needs a bunch of dudes (no women allowed, kthx) to write ANYTHING?

Hrm... possibly because He wants humans to be part of His rule? Also, it would be weird for Him to be doing things for himself. I dunno.

[ThrasherCub]

Yes, but humans are fallible. And God knows this. Humans may interpret things wrong when they are initially told things by God, they may remember things incorrectly as they tell it to others, they may forget things over the years, they may reinterpret it for translation wrong too.

It's one thing to want to involve humans, but jeeze, that's kind of like wanting to involve your kid on those days some companies have where you can bring your kid to work. When I helped my dad, I got to deliver the letters & packages to coworkers it was NOT vital they successfully receive the next day.

You think something as important as how to live according to the Will of God and ultimately avoid eternity half-rotting in Hell would be important enough for God to want to get directly involved.

God: Willing to personally turn your ass into a pillar of salt for defying his will, but too good to personally tell you what that Will is.




Wait, what!?

[Sherekhan]

So basically, if God wanted His word to be spread all over the world, wouldn't it be logical if He'll be using the same creatures he created to live in this earth? We should also take note that angels could fall from their glory, hence the term fallen angels.

[UNODRAGONE]

So basically, if God wanted His word to be spread all over the world, wouldn't it be logical if He'll be using the same creatures he created to live in this earth? We should also take note that angels could fall from their glory, hence the term fallen angels.


I would think it would also be logical if he wanted the humans he created to spread his will, to not give them free will to go against it. How exactly does someone/soul become an angel?

[ThrasherCub]

So basically, if God wanted His word to be spread all over the world, wouldn't it be logical if He'll be using the same creatures he created to live in this earth?

No, for every reason in my post above.

How exactly does someone/soul become an angel?
They don't. Angels are their own beings according to the Christian muthos.

[UNODRAGONE]

No, for every reason in my post above.


They don't. Angels are their own beings according to the Christian muthos.

HHMM interesting this is what I found:


an·gel /ˈeɪndʒəl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[eyn-juhl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. one of a class of spiritual beings; a celestial attendant of God. In medieval angelology, angels constituted the lowest of the nine celestial orders (seraphim, cherubim, thrones, dominations or dominions, virtues, powers, principalities or princedoms, archangels, and angels).
2. a conventional representation of such a being, in human form, with wings, usually in white robes.
3. a messenger, esp. of God.
4. a person who performs a mission of God or acts as if sent by God: an angel of mercy.
5. a person having qualities generally attributed to an angel, as beauty, purity, or kindliness.
6. a person whose actions and thoughts are consistently virtuous.
7. an attendant or guardian spirit.
8. a deceased person whose soul is regarded as having been accepted into heaven.
9. Informal. a person who provides financial backing for some undertaking, as a play or political campaign.
10. an English gold coin issued from 1470 to 1634, varying in value from 6s. 8d. to 10s. and bearing on its obverse a figure of the archangel Michael killing a dragon.
11. Slang. an image on a radar screen caused by a low-flying object, as a bird.
–verb (used with object) 12. Informal. to provide financial backing for.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: bef. 950; 1890–95 for def. 9; ME a(u)ngel (< AF, OF) < LL angelus < NT Gk ángelos messenger of God, special use of Gk ángelos messenger; r. OE engel < L, as above]

[Vendetta]

Uhhh guys, WTF do angels have to do with this discussion?

[DarkHunter]

Well God has more power than we can imagine, so why would he let his followers screw up on writing the Bible? No, he wouldn't let that happen, if he is capable of bringing the dead to life, then surely he would be able to create the Bible correctly through his disciples.


Surely though, his disciples are human beings. And surely, there are going to be problems. Surely, the important part of the message is Jesus Christ's death and ressurection, but surely people have changed that and used the "word of God" that is supposedly in the Bible for their own ends. And surely powerful men will change the Bible, sometimes accidentally.

Even if God created the Bible perfectly through his disciples, whats to say that it hasn't been imperfectly edited. Not even intentionally. To the point where the word "light bearer" becomes a proper name in some translations, where its later used as a title for certain thorny crown wearing fellows.

So the Bible? Like the Epic of Gilgamesh, Beowulf, and countless other stories, is a flawed but popular book. Is it God given? Probably not. Even if it was, there's no telling that the Bible we have is even the correct one. Revelations specifically says that you shouldn't add to Scripture or take away, but then that was before anybody really knew what Scripture was. Back in the days when for some people, Scripture still included the Book of Enoch. "Scripture" was officially defined by the Council of Trent. But thats a little extreme of me isn't it. That didn't come until the Protestant Reformation.

Funny thought isn't it? A definitive canonical list wasn't devised until then. In the really early days, they had a variety of apocryphal works that were later kicked out because they were too Gnostic. But some of that influence is still in Christianity (you can find little Gnostic easter eggs in the NT if you look).

So the Bible. What Bible? What canonical list? The one set by the Catholics and Protestants? Maybe one of the other lists of canon circulating before then?

Another "faith" call.

[ThrasherCub]

Another "faith" call.
So God wants you to have faith in uncertain stuff and accept something full of internal conflict as absolute truth?

That makes God sound mildly insane.

[DarkWolf]

So God wants you to have faith in uncertain stuff and accept something full of internal conflict as absolute truth?

That makes God sound mildly insane.
I'd have said "retarded" but I guess "mildly insane" is better. :shrug:

[ThrasherCub]

Well He acts entirely differently in the old testament then He does in the new one, so if nothing else He's got a split personality. Between that, the desire to see His people cut off part of their weeners, and enjoying the smell of burning dead things it just lends to the idea that God isn't right in the head.

[DarkHunter]

I didn't say God was RIGHT in the head. I agree. Any deity that would hold the Bible as their Perfect Word has to be insane.

Course makes you wonder about the world if the Pantheists are correct.

Of course people of that particular book, whether Jewish or Christian, have to struggle with the historical indication that their God really isn't that different from the other pagan gods of the time back in his earlier days.

[UNODRAGONE]

I didn't say God was RIGHT in the head. I agree. Any deity that would hold the Bible as their Perfect Word has to be insane.

Course makes you wonder about the world if the Pantheists are correct.

Of course people of that particular book, whether Jewish or Christian, have to struggle with the historical indication that their God really isn't that different from the other pagan gods of the time back in his earlier days.


This brings me into a interesting discussion my class got into at school. Basically it's this:

We all fundamentally believe in a "God", (except atheist) the only difference is the name, the scriptures he/she wrote and how we practice but basically we all believe in him just some of us call him different names.

[Vendetta]

We all fundamentally believe in a "God", (except atheist) the only difference is the name, the scriptures he/she wrote and how we practice but basically we all believe in him just some of us call him different names.
First, you forgot polytheists, who do NOT believe in A God, but gods. Second, that's a tremendous oversimplification; beliefs and practices vary widely between even monotheistic faiths. Saying "we all worship pretty much the same dude we just call him different names" is kind of a stretch.

[UNODRAGONE]

First, you forgot polytheists, who do NOT believe in A God, but gods. Second, that's a tremendous oversimplification; beliefs and practices vary widely between even monotheistic faiths. Saying "we all worship pretty much the same dude we just call him different names" is kind of a stretch.


I agree with you, I'm not big on being labeled or my beliefs twisted in any way, I just thought it was an interesting discussion my class was having about it. However, it is not what I think just what was being discussed.

[ThrasherCub]

Saying "we all worship pretty much the same dude we just call him different names" is kind of a stretch.
Yeah. Probably the closest you could get is "We all worship pretty much the same dude, but conceptualize him as differently as can be and the stories which illustrate these conceptualizations disagree and some of them are homicidal towards the others."

[Golden Howl]

So God wants you to have faith in uncertain stuff Obiviously faith is going to come with uncertainity.


They accepted his demand that they all cut off part of their penises, but can't be more balanced?

Where in the world did you get that idea?

[Vendetta]

Obiviously faith is going to come with uncertainity.
Isn't uncertainty pretty much the opposite of faith?

Where in the world did you get that idea?
Are you SURE you've read the Bible? Circumcision as mandated by God is in the old testament. Also, JC was circumcised.

[ThrasherCub]

Where in the world did you get that idea?
Genesis 17:10-14:
10 This is My covenant, which you shall keep, between Me and you and your descendants after you: every male among you shall be circumcised.
11 And you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin, and it shall be the sign of the covenant between Me and you.
12 And every male among you who is eight days old shall be circumcised throughout your generations, a servant who is born in the house or who is bought with money from any foreigner, who is not of your descendants.
13 A servant who is born in your house or who is bought with your money shall surely be circumcised; thus shall My covenant be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
14 But an uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.

Genesis 34:14-16
14 They said to them, "We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to one who is uncircumcised, for that would be a disgrace to us.
15 "Only on this condition will we consent to you: if you will become like us, in that every male of you be circumcised,
16 then we will give our daughters to you, and we will take your daughters for ourselves, and we will live with you and become one people."

Exodus 12:48:
But if a stranger sojourns with you, and celebrates the Passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near to celebrate it; and he shall be like a native of the land. But no uncircumcised person may eat of it.

I can keep going if you like.

Obiviously faith is going to come with uncertainity.
Faith: confidence or trust in a person or thing
Uncertainty: the state of being uncertain; doubt; hesitancy

I'm pretty sure if you're doubting or hesitant about something you no longer qualify as "confident or trusting" in that thing.

[sai-fujiwara]

I think that there is one book of the bible in the old testament that was written by a person who was actually the furthest away from God I think anyone can get.

If this is true, then why is it still in the bible?

I have no idea. I don't really look at the bible to learn about God.

And you would be crazy if you tried looking for him in a bunch of dusty old pages. Some people have tried, and some have failed.

[william_wraithe]

I think anyone who writes down what a "burning bush" tells him, may not be entirely too stable.

Pardon me, I've been an ass again. I'm not a very good christian. You see I judge people and cast magic spells on them that aren't real and I try to make them feel bad about themselves. Then again I guess I've been acting like a very stereotypical christian and I apologize for being a consummate asshole.

[william_wraithe]

I think that there is one book of the bible in the old testament that was written by a person who was actually the furthest away from God I think anyone can get.

If this is true, then why is it still in the bible?

I have no idea. I don't really look at the bible to learn about God.

And you would be crazy if you tried looking for him in a bunch of dusty old pages. Some people have tried, and some have failed.
Again, I've been an asshole. I apologize. I'm a narrow minded idiot that needs to stop trying to seem superior to everyone else.

[Golden Howl]

Yes, but humans are fallible. And God knows this. Humans may interpret things wrong when they are initially told things by God, they may remember things incorrectly as they tell it to others, they may forget things over the years, they may reinterpret it for translation wrong too. There are three parts of God as everyone is aware of, The Father, The Son, and The HolySpirit.
Since the followers of God wrote the Bible, and when you're a true follower of Jesus, the HolySpirit becomes a part of you. And the HolySpirit is a part of God, so the Spirit was assisting those whom were writing the Bible. So, there couldn't have been mistakes.



It's one thing to want to involve humans, but jeeze, that's kind of like wanting to involve your kid on those days some compa Well I'm sure God involved people because he desired to use them as examples.

Are you SURE you've read the Bible? I am still learning, I did not say that I've read the whole Bible.


Genesis 17:10-14:
10 This is My covenant, which you shall keep, between Me and you and your descendants after you: every male among you shall be circumcised.
11 And you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin, and it shall be the sign of the covenant between Me and you.
12 And every male among you who is eight days old shall be circumcised throughout your generations, a servant who is born in the house or who is bought with money from any foreigner, who is not of your descendants.
13 A servant who is born in your house or who is bought with your money shall surely be circumcised; thus shall My covenant be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
14 But an uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.

Genesis 34:14-16
14 They said to them, "We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to one who is uncircumcised, for that would be a disgrace to us.
15 "Only on this condition will we consent to you: if you will become like us, in that every male of you be circumcised,
16 then we will give our daughters to you, and we will take your daughters for ourselves, and we will live with you and become one people."

Exodus 12:48:
But if a stranger sojourns with you, and celebrates the Passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near to celebrate it; and he shall be like a native of the land. But no uncircumcised person may eat of it.

This is shockingly true, I can't believe it!! :eek:
I'm going to find out why.

[ThrasherCub]

And the HolySpirit is a part of God, so the Spirit was assisting those whom were writing the Bible. So, there couldn't have been mistakes.
So then the word of God is intentionally lacking in internal consistency?

[UNODRAGONE]

So then the word of God is intentionally lacking in internal consistency?

It's all on how someone perceives it, I can read it one way and think of it a certain way and someone else can read the same thing and have a different opinion. There is no wrong or right since nothing can be proven fact.

[ThrasherCub]

1 Kings 5:16 says Solomon had 3,300 supervisors, 2 Chronicles 2:2 says he had 3,600.

Please interpret the literal word of God in such a way that it is internally consistent.


And I just use that one because it has convenient numbers. In Genesis God shows favor to Abel's offering and doesn't give a damn about Cain's, yet Acts 10:34 says "Then Peter replied, 'I see very clearly that God shows no favoritism.'"

Genesis says Noah was righteous, Job says Job was righteous, Luke says Zechariah and Elizabeth were righteous, James says that the prayers of the righteous are answered, 1 John says that Christians are/become righteous, but then Romans says no one is righteous.

In Genesis God sows discord, Proverbs says God hates people who do that.

I can keep going. For a long time, I might add.

[UNODRAGONE]

1 Kings 5:16 says Solomon had 3,300 supervisors, 2 Chronicles 2:2 says he had 3,600.

Please interpret the literal word of God in such a way that it is internally consistent.


And I just use that one because it has convenient numbers. In Genesis God shows favor to Abel's offering and doesn't give a damn about Cain's, yet Acts 10:34 says "Then Peter replied, 'I see very clearly that God shows no favoritism.'"

Genesis says Noah was righteous, Job says Job was righteous, Luke says Zechariah and Elizabeth were righteous, James says that the prayers of the righteous are answered, 1 John says that Christians are/become righteous, but then Romans says no one is righteous.

In Genesis God sows discord, Proverbs says God hates people who do that.

I can keep going. For a long time, I might add.


Strange, you said this in your other post:

Yes, but humans are fallible. And God knows this. Humans may interpret things wrong when they are initially told things by God, they may remember things incorrectly as they tell it to others, they may forget things over the years, they may reinterpret it for translation wrong too.

[jordanhitler]

I would have to say that the bible is the most wonderful piece of fiction ever written. To spice things up, its writters even went so far as to put actual historical events in it. Kudos to those writters, Seriously, how many books written today that have such a profound impact the world, on all of humanity, and, if there are any, how many of those books will still be having the same impact two thousand years later? I have great respect for those people who were able to deceive people for this long, however, that respect is less comparable to people who continue to be fooled by the writters.

No seriously, if your a christian, just... keep... doing your thing...

whatever that is

[Vendetta]

It's all on how someone perceives it, I can read it one way and think of it a certain way and someone else can read the same thing and have a different opinion. There is no wrong or right since nothing can be proven fact.
So according to that, someone could read it and say "Yeah, those Ten Commandments sound more like 'suggestions' to me, so I'm not going to follow them." That'd be cool with you?

[Golden Howl]

So according to that, someone could read it and say "Yeah, those Ten Commandments sound more like 'suggestions' to me, so I'm not going to follow them." That'd be cool with you?

God gave us free will.

[UNODRAGONE]

So according to that, someone could read it and say "Yeah, those Ten Commandments sound more like 'suggestions' to me, so I'm not going to follow them." That'd be cool with you?

It's not up to me, nor do I care, what someone believes or how someone percieves what the bible says

[sai-fujiwara]

Again, I've been an asshole. I apologize. I'm a narrow minded idiot that needs to stop trying to seem superior to everyone else.
This is a serious online discussion. Here, everyone is an asshole. ;)

*sarcasm*

[ThrasherCub]

Uno, you're missing the damn point.

I said the Bible wasn't internally consistent, your response was that in reference to interpretation and so my response was about interpretation.

Don't jump between the two arguments. You want to argue both, do it right.


IF the Bible is internally inconsistent on purpose...
Then why the hell does God make no sense and want us to blindly follow that which makes no sense.

IF the Bible is internally inconsistent because of human error...
Then why did God make room for human error in something so important?

God gave us free will.
That's not a license to disregard the laws He puts down, which is what we're discussing. Try again.

[UNODRAGONE]

I am seriously not trying to start a flame war, whether you are or not doesn't matter to me now lets review this is what I said

It's all on how someone perceives it, I can read it one way and think of it a certain way and someone else can read the same thing and have a different opinion. There is no wrong or right since nothing can be proven fact.


I said OPINION, not interpretation, I was responding to your post were you merely said this

1 Kings 5:16 says Solomon had 3,300 supervisors, 2 Chronicles 2:2 says he had 3,600.

Please interpret the literal word of God in such a way that it is internally consistent.


And I just use that one because it has convenient numbers. In Genesis God shows favor to Abel's offering and doesn't give a damn about Cain's, yet Acts 10:34 says "Then Peter replied, 'I see very clearly that God shows no favoritism.'"

Genesis says Noah was righteous, Job says Job was righteous, Luke says Zechariah and Elizabeth were righteous, James says that the prayers of the righteous are answered, 1 John says that Christians are/become righteous, but then Romans says no one is righteous.

In Genesis God sows discord, Proverbs says God hates people who do that.

I can keep going. For a long time, I might add..

In my OPINION, when the bible says "You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth," I take it as churches and jewelry that have a picture of Jesus are disobeying him, where those same people will say they are showing his suffering. See opinion. Don't get upset with me if your being hypercritical.

[J.L.R.]

1 Kings 5:16 says Solomon had 3,300 supervisors, 2 Chronicles 2:2 says he had 3,600.

Please interpret the literal word of God in such a way that it is internally consistent.


And I just use that one because it has convenient numbers. In Genesis God shows favor to Abel's offering and doesn't give a damn about Cain's, yet Acts 10:34 says "Then Peter replied, 'I see very clearly that God shows no favoritism.'"

Genesis says Noah was righteous, Job says Job was righteous, Luke says Zechariah and Elizabeth were righteous, James says that the prayers of the righteous are answered, 1 John says that Christians are/become righteous, but then Romans says no one is righteous.

In Genesis God sows discord, Proverbs says God hates people who do that.

I can keep going. For a long time, I might add.

Good try but no cookie...

1 Kings 5:16 - 3,300 Supervisors, 3,600 in 2 Chronicles 2:2

That is only a difference of 300... and as the books were written by two different people, probably spanning several centuries apart I don't see this as being a huge discrepency, because again, it is only 300. Both books Kings and Chronicles give you an extremely abbreviate account of Israel and Juda's kings. The reality is Solomon could have easily hired 3,300 and then hired 300 more supervisors as needed. Again most historians, other than the most blindest of skeptics, aren't going to toss out the Bible because a few books differ slightly from one another. As most of the books were past down through spoken word for centuries before they were ever written down, it is a wonder, really, that they're even hear...

As for the story of Cain and Abel... You might argue favoratism here, but you would have to clearly take this passage out of context to do so, but since most skeptics do anyway oh well. I will explain the two differences...

In short, Abel brought a sacrifice of blood (a lamb) and Cain brought a sacrifice of vegetibles. God accepted Abel's offering, but He did not accept Cain's. Cain, as the story goes, Cain became jelous. Now the important part of the verse is here...

6 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?

7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

These two verses shed, especially the 7th shed some very important details to this story, per say. As the verses imply, God accepted Abel's offering because it is what He wanted. Cain's was not accepted because it isn't what God wanted. Verse 7 clearly states that God opens the door for Cain to do right and get back on the right track. He isn't showing favoratism, as you state, but merely giving credit to the person, in this case Abel, who did what He wanted. This would be no difference if your father asked you and your brother and sister to do something, and you do exactly as he says, and your sister doesn't. You father would still love you both, but the reality is you're work would be accepted, and hers not.

When Peter states that God is not a respector of persons, Peter is referring to titles and geneology. If you've studied the story as a whole, Peter being a Jew, believed that if Gentiles were to become Christians (being that Christianity up to this point was mostly practiced in the Jewish circles) had to follow and practice Jewish customs. If you know the history of the church, this was a pretty huge arguement among the early Apostles. In the passage that you pulled the scripture from, A centurian, a gentile, had become a Christian and wanted to know what he needed to do. As the verse states, that God came to Peter in a dream, and showed him several different food items, that to the Jews were considered unclean (or unsafe) to eat. God commands Peter to eat. Peter refuses, and then God commands him again, and then adds:

15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

Peter realized that it didn't matter what customs you came from, whether you are Jew or Gentile, in God's eyes, if you've accepted Jesus Christ as your Savior, you are the same.

Now let us look at the Righteous... Again unfortunately taken out of context. If you've studied the stories and people above you will come to learn that righteous as used here, was a token of a person's commitment to God. The phrase, "Up right" is often used as well. These people were often followers of God even when most people were not, so the term righteous, would be correctly used. They were up right in God's eyes. People have the ability to be up right in God's eyes. To do right, however that righteousness can't not earn your place in heaven. Romans paves a clear road to salvation, and it is often called the Romans Road, for good measure, as it lays down the foundation of Christian belief. Through out the book of Romans you will find phrases such as, Not by works, lest any man should boast, for all sinned and have come short of the Glory of God, and the phrase as already quoted, for none or righeous, no not one. The point the book was to clearly define how Salvation was obtained, ergo:

Romans Chapter 10:
Romans 10
1 Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.

2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.

3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

5 For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them.

6 But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:)

7 Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.)

8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;

9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?

17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

18 But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.

19 But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.

20 But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me.

21 But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.

When the foundation of Salvation was laid, by Jesus Christ, it was important to His early followers that new would-be Christians new that it wasn't by works, self righteousness, or any other means, save the blood of Jesus Christ...

I could go on, but I don't have the time to do so, and I have much more important things to do than argue such trivial things as these. My advise is, if you're going to argue inconsistencies in the Bible, that it would do you and any one else on this board some good to read the entire Bible yourself. Hand picking verses or copying them down from Atheist web sites (be warned most have NOT studied the Bible itself either) doesn't even do the arguement justice. On this board it may make you look "cool" however that is seriously not saying much.

Secondly if the Bible is half-assed as many of you believe it is, why then even bother with the arguement? Honestly, I can find a lot better things to do with my time.... Oh well...

Signing out...

[jordanhitler]

)
Christian ranting christian ranting christian ranting...


Well... that certainly was informative. Look, if you believe in the bible then your a chrisitian, if you don't then your not, plain and simple, christianity is based off of the bible. If you just believe in god then your a spiritual person, if you believe the whole jesus is the son of god thing but you don't believe in the bible then your a complete idiot.

However, if you just believe in god and not the bible, then it really doesn't do you any good to think one way or the other, believe or dis-believe in god.

[Vendetta]

In short, Abel brought a sacrifice of blood (a lamb) and Cain brought a sacrifice of vegetibles. God accepted Abel's offering, but He did not accept Cain's. Cain, as the story goes, Cain became jelous. Now the important part of the verse is here...

6 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?

7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

These two verses shed, especially the 7th shed some very important details to this story, per say. As the verses imply, God accepted Abel's offering because it is what He wanted. Cain's was not accepted because it isn't what God wanted. Verse 7 clearly states that God opens the door for Cain to do right and get back on the right track.
You gotta admit though, God kinda comes off as a dick here. Like was Cain supposed to be a mind-reader and predict that God wanted a blood sacrifice instead of some yummy vegetables (that Cain, mind you, cared for and nutured himself, same as the stupid lamb.) I'll agree that it's not about favouritism, it's about God being a a dude that kind of expects you to do weird shit without questioning it. Don't EVEN get me started on the shit he pulled with Abraham and his kid. Faith or not, that was some pretty messed up stuff right there.

15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

Peter realized that it didn't matter what customs you came from, whether you are Jew or Gentile, in God's eyes, if you've accepted Jesus Christ as your Savior, you are the same.
Except again, that's not what God is saying here. He's saying, forget those abritrary rules I made up waaay back when, I've got some NEW rules for you.

I could go on, but I don't have the time to do so, and I have much more important things to do than argue such trivial things as these.
Wow, really? You sure seemed capable of taking a long time posting this enormous reply. And then...

Secondly if the Bible is half-assed as many of you believe it is, why then even bother with the arguement? Honestly, I can find a lot better things to do with my time.... Oh well...
Errr, again, YOU responded to this. If your faith is so strong, why reply? You apparently have better things to do with your time.

[DarkHunter]

I too have found it interesting that God, who is all things and the source of all things and is therefore half female in essence, only ever seems to show that male side.

People often argue back against that, "Well, it's due to the pre-existing culture in the area!"

...

Then why didn't they, like, change their culture a little to better match God? They accepted his demand that they all cut off part of their penises, but can't be more balanced?

So an oddly slanted book, written by a people leaning to that direction, is going to be accepted as the absolute and literal word of God, despite you knowing this?

Religious people amaze me quite often.

You would think that God being powerful enough to raise the dead could overcome the pre-existing culture.

[Golden Howl]

That's not a license to disregard the laws He puts down, which is what we're discussing. Try again.

What?

[ThrasherCub]

What?

Your response to "Someone could decide to ignore the Ten Commandments" was "God gave us free will."

That indicates the idea that having free will validates the ability to ignore the Ten Commandments.

And my response was to explain why that concept is stupid, and suggest that you try again since I'm an optimist and have chosen to doubt that what you said is what you meant to indicate.

[Golden Howl]

Your response to "Someone could decide to ignore the Ten Commandments" was "God gave us free will."

That indicates the idea that having free will validates the ability to ignore the Ten Commandments.

And my response was to explain why that concept is stupid, and suggest that you try again since I'm an optimist and have chosen to doubt that what you said is what you meant to indicate.

Some of the Ten Commandments are actual laws in today's society. So I guess it would be hard to ignore the Commandment of do not murder, because you would get punished for it by society. However the simpler ones are easier not to follow, it is entirely the individual's choice(aka free will). That's why I say God gave us free will. We have the free will to follow him or decide not to. We have the free will to love him or not. We have the free will to respect him or not. It's as simple as that, we have free will. You could be aware of the Ten Comandments and not follow them.

[BCvonRayfus]

My turn. I'll try not to take long.

God gave us free will because He loves us. He lets us make our own choices, so that He wouldn't have a bunch of robots bowing to Him and doing absolutely everything right. If you ask me, God would be more of jerk, retard, idiot, or whatever else you people have called Him, if He hadn't given us free will. God made us in His image; He has free will, so it's only fair that we get it too. However, in giving us free will, we were automatically given the ability to turn away. (Though, we wouldn't have turned away without the whole Adam and Eve thing, and I won't get into that.) Everybody seems to forget the concept that God sent Jesus to die, thus saving us from His wrath. Before Jesus died and rose again, God dealt with sinners quick and easy, and simply got rid of them. You call God a jerk for this? HE MADE US. We're HIS creation, and He doesn't have to keep us here. None of us deserve to be here alive, but we are, and that's by God's love only.

Jesus was God in a bodily form, thus making Jesus His creation like the rest of mankind. He was born of a virgin, thus making Him sinless and perfect. Mary was made pregnant by the power of God's Holy Spirit, not of another man, thus making Jesus His own son. He sent Jesus to die, thus making Jesus the perfect sacrifice to save US from our sins, so that He would nolonger pour His wrath upon us like He used to when we wouldn't follow Him. He loves US enough to send HIS son to die for us. He brought Jesus back from the dead so that we would believe in Him, and that's all the evidence of His existence He should have to give us.

God wants us to think, learn and understand for ourselves that He's there; He doesn't have to pop up whenever we ask Him to. He's GOD!!! He can do whatever the heck He WANTS!!! And if we're made in His image, then we're given His feelings and emotions. If we're given those, then as we can get bored, God can probably get bored too. If He made us all and then made us follow Him constantly and let us know every moment that He was there...life would be boring. God would probably get bored. There ya go.

The Bible? I've said it again and again. It was written thousands of years ago, and has been retranslated all over the place. It's not going to be perfect; it was written by people like us. However, no matter what translation you've got, you're going to have the basic idea. The Ten Commandments. That's what we need to follow. God was nice enough to put all His rules and laws for us into compact size like that. Argue about The Ten Commandments all you like; they're not that tough to grasp. However, God probably figured a little more explaining was needed on what we're here for, so He used His prophets to write the rest of The Bible to keep us from getting lost. It was written by imperfect people like us so that we could understand and relate to the people back then in order for us to see why we should follow God. I'm sure the first ever version of The Bible was pretty easy to understand for people back then, but give it some thousands of years worth of retranslating and the wording might be a little different here and there! So sue God for a bit of confusion caused by different translations done by us imperfect humans; the main idea is there nonetheless, and we should understand THAT just fine. I'm done.

[Tempest]

Not gonna really get into too much detail right now, as I have not read the Bible and I don't go to church. So I'm not going to blindly criticize things. But a couple of things that have bothered me.

1. Aren't we ALL the sons/daughters of God? Why is Jesus dubbed the "Son of God"? Aren't we all?

2. Why did Jesus HAVE to save us from our sins? I don't understand this concept AT ALL. I mean, is God really in that vengeful? That his own SON needs to die just for him to forgive people for sins they never even commited (eating from the Tree of Knowledge). And if he really saved us, why do we still go to Hell if we're bad?

Dunno maybe someone can clear things up for me.
And no I'm not going to go read the Bible.

[BCvonRayfus]

To Tempest

1: Jesus is dubbed THE OFFICIAL Son of God because it was by the power of His own Holy Spirit that Mary became pregnant with Jesus. Otherwise, yes technically, we are all God's children, Him being our creator.

2: God sent Jesus to die to show His love for us. Why does it seem so unfair that God simply killed off the people in The Old Testement that wouldn't follow Him? God's not short-tempered; I'd be pretty ticked too if I created an entire species and they didn't pay me respect worth crap! We share the same emotions as God, and God gets angry like us people do. But God showed us that He ultimately cares for all of us by sacrificing HIS Son for OUR punishment. And we're all sinners; no human being is perfect, but each of our sins can be forgiven now on the spot if we ask God for it sincerely. Back then, people had to give sin offerings to earn God's forgiveness. God sacrificing His Son paid for what we couldn't give back to Him, so now we're safe from God's wrath as long as we continue to follow Him. People go to Hell when they don't follow God and feel no regrets about it. You could do all kinds of bad things but still go to Heaven if you come to God for forgiveness. Those who don't bother to ask and don't care about what they've done are the ones who'll be sent to The Pit. And don't get onto me about accusing people; I'm not accusing anybody individually, I'm stating what The Bible itself says clearly. Believe what you want; it's just my job to tell people these things.

[Tempest]

2: God sent Jesus to die to show His love for us. Why does it seem so unfair that God simply killed off the people in The Old Testement that wouldn't follow Him? God's not short-tempered; I'd be pretty ticked too if I created an entire species and they didn't pay me respect worth crap! We share the same emotions as God, and God gets angry like us people do. But God showed us that He ultimately cares for all of us by sacrificing HIS Son for OUR punishment. And we're all sinners; no human being is perfect, but each of our sins can be forgiven now on the spot if we ask God for it sincerely. Back then, people had to give sin offerings to earn God's forgiveness. God sacrificing His Son paid for what we couldn't give back to Him, so now we're safe from God's wrath as long as we continue to follow Him. People go to Hell when they don't follow God and feel no regrets about it. You could do all kinds of bad things but still go to Heaven if you come to God for forgiveness. Those who don't bother to ask and don't care about what they've done are the ones who'll be sent to The Pit. And don't get onto me about accusing people; I'm not accusing anybody individually, I'm stating what The Bible itself says clearly. Believe what you want; it's just my job to tell people these things.

Yes but WHY did he have to sacrifice his own son to do this? I mean, if he wanted us all to follow him why didn't he just make a cameo appearance himself instead of sending someone down just to die? Or just make us all have epiphanies and realize that there is a God and our ways are wrong. Why did God have to send down Jesus just so that he could forgive us when we asked for forgiveness. I'm not seeing what Jesus has to do with no longer requiring sin offerings and whatnot.
Who's to say that Jesus was God's ONLY "official" son? Why haven't there been others? Why did we accept that Mary actually WAS a virgin and not some slut who didn't want to admit that she had sex before she was married (maybe I'm wrong, but didn't they like check the sheets and crap to make sure that there was blood there...that she was a virigin? i mean it was important back then right? or am i just too tired and thinking of something i read about modern Middle Eastern culture?)? Did we just take her word for it? I mean women were property back then who would really have believed her? How did they know that she was telling the truth?

Meh if I'm gonna go on like this I should probably do some research instead of clogging the site but I'm curious and tired and the questions kept coming out. I was actually baptized at the age of 13...went through years of Sunday school, and they never told me these things. :|

[YoungFang]

..We're safe from God's wrath as long as we continue to follow Him.

Wait, so we have to do exactly what he says or else? What's the point of free will then?

[Vendetta]

God gave us free will because He loves us. He lets us make our own choices, so that He wouldn't have a bunch of robots bowing to Him and doing absolutely everything right.
I was under the impression that until Adam & Eve committed "original sin" that IS pretty much what he wanted; everyone blissfully aware and obeying everything that "daddy" said.

If you ask me, God would be more of jerk, retard, idiot, or whatever else you people have called Him, if He hadn't given us free will.
Why? Wouldn't it have been better, since we're all just his "creations" according to you, to have everyone live together peacefully? You know, instead of instilling us with violence, hatred and greed, in turn causing wars and general mayhem?

Everybody seems to forget the concept that God sent Jesus to die, thus saving us from His wrath.
If God is so omniscient/-potent, why didn't he do that BEFORE, when you know, he KILLED everything on the planet (outside of a dude and some animals on a boat) in a huge flood?!

Before Jesus died and rose again, God dealt with sinners quick and easy, and simply got rid of them.
So why the change? If God made us wouldn't he have KNOWN what was going to happen? C'mon, you don't expect anyone to believe all this claptrap, do you?

You call God a jerk for this? HE MADE US. We're HIS creation, and He doesn't have to keep us here. None of us deserve to be here alive, but we are, and that's by God's love only.
So what you're saying is that God is like a spoiled petulant child? Wow, definitely doesn't inspire worship, if you ask me.

He sent Jesus to die, thus making Jesus the perfect sacrifice to save US from our sins, so that He would nolonger pour His wrath upon us like He used to when we wouldn't follow Him. He loves US enough to send HIS son to die for us. He brought Jesus back from the dead so that we would believe in Him, and that's all the evidence of His existence He should have to give us.
Man WHAT?! First either Jesus IS or ISN'T God. If he WAS God then he never HAD to worry about death. God didn't resuurect him, he WAS God. If Jesus WAS just his mortal son, then that's kind of a fucked up thing to do: kill your son without telling him what you're gonna do, just to teach mankind a lesson? Yeah, way to go there.

He doesn't have to pop up whenever we ask Him to. He's GOD!!! He can do whatever the heck He WANTS!!!
Again sounding like a spoiled child here. If God was so understanding and benevolent (I doubt he IS the latter anyway) Why couldn't he just pop in and say "Hey guys, I wish you'd stop doing that, it hurts my feelers."

And if we're made in His image, then we're given His feelings and emotions. If we're given those, then as we can get bored, God can probably get bored too. If He made us all and then made us follow Him constantly and let us know every moment that He was there...life would be boring. God would probably get bored. There ya go.

So we're just a big boredom reliever for God, is that what you're saying? Sometimes he just gets tired of the same-old same-old and decides "I know, today I have a huge tsunami kill tens of thousands of people and destroy whole regions! Woohoo, just like old times!"

Also, you said 'probably' so I'm assuming here you don't actually KNOW what God is like. If you don't know, how can you PRESUME to tell other people what he does or doesn't want.

So sue God for a bit of confusion caused by different translations done by us imperfect humans; the main idea is there nonetheless, and we should understand THAT just fine. I'm done.
Except that, being God, why didn't he make sure his "word" was PERFECT for all time by delivering it in person?

[BCvonRayfus]

I was under the impression that until Adam & Eve committed "original sin" that IS pretty much what he wanted; everyone blissfully aware and obeying everything that "daddy" said.

First, Adam and Eve weren't the first to sin ever. Satan was. Second, God gave us free will so that we wouldn't be like robots, however it says clearly in The Bible that He made us so that we would love Him. He made us so we would follow Him, but He gave us our own mind and soul like His own -only certainly not as powerful as His- but He gave us a mind and soul nonetheless, so that we could learn on our own that following Him was the best way of living.

Why? Wouldn't it have been better, since we're all just his "creations" according to you, to have everyone live together peacefully? You know, instead of instilling us with violence, hatred and greed, in turn causing wars and general mayhem?

God knew very well that mayhem was coming. Nobody can comprehend the things God knew before we were even created, but He knew. Why does He let it happen? Because He knows that in the end, we will win over evil. That, and otherwise, we wouldn't grow stronger unless we faced hardships. Any non-christian should know that we must be self-disciplined somehow to become stronger and stay alive. That's life, no matter how you try living it.

If God is so omniscient/-potent, why didn't he do that BEFORE, when you know, he KILLED everything on the planet (outside of a dude and some animals on a boat) in a huge flood?!

Because that dude happened to be the only guy following God in any way whatsoever at the time. God saved his family too, by the way. He saved the animals because...well...wha t've they done wrong? :P Have you even read the story of Noah in Genesis? The world was messed up, and it wouldn't have done any good for God to send Jesus to die and save the world from sin at the time. Noah would've been the only guy who cared.

So why the change? If God made us wouldn't he have KNOWN what was going to happen? C'mon, you don't expect anyone to believe all this claptrap, do you?

I don't expect everybody to believe it, but I know a lot of people who do...and we happen to be a very happy group of people. I like this a lot better than believing the human race was an accident! You know, this is a question even many of us Christians ask. Why did God bother to change and send Jesus to save us from sin, as opposed to punishing us directly for our bad deeds? We certainly didn't deserve the change; we all deserve death for what we've done. None of us are perfect, and it doesn't matter what bad things we've done; sin is sin. I don't see why everybody even chooses to question this, because we're alive aren't we? You complain about God killing off sinners long ago, and then He decides to send Jesus to save us from sin. Is this BAD?! Would you rather have God strike you down on the spot?! God doesn't have bad timing, if that's what you're thinking. This is THE GOD of the UNIVERSE we're talking about here. Things happen when God decides to make them happen!

So what you're saying is that God is like a spoiled petulant child? Wow, definitely doesn't inspire worship, if you ask me.

So are you implying that God SPOILS HIMSELF?! HE MADE US! We're the spoiled ones; we need to keep our eyes on the happiness we'll receive if we only follow until the end! Very few pay attention to the prize part; nobody wants to think about Heaven, they only pay attention to the fact that they'll go to Hell if they choose to not follow God. "Oh, so God'll send us to Hell is we don't do what He wants, huh? I'm not doing squat for Him!" Jesus tells us that if we just love Him, then we WILL follow Him. That's not a command, that's assurance. If we truly turn to Him and want Him, then He'll keep us that way. He'll change us; He'll FIX us. We're greedy, and we want everything to go our own way. It just HAS to be a win-win situation, right?! It's all about US, right?! God TOTALLY owes us, right?! LIFE IS SUPPOSED to be EASY, ISN'T IT?! If there was no punishment for those who did wrong, then NOBODY would do anything RIGHT! God owes us nothing. God gives us life we don't even deserve, because He loves His creation. Our problems are our cause, not His.

Man WHAT?! First either Jesus IS or ISN'T God. If he WAS God then he never HAD to worry about death. God didn't resuurect him, he WAS God. If Jesus WAS just his mortal son, then that's kind of a fucked up thing to do: kill your son without telling him what you're gonna do, just to teach mankind a lesson? Yeah, way to go there.

Jesus was God in bodily form. He was the physical Holy Trinity: God The Father, God The Son, and God The Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit caused Mary to conceive a baby even though she was a virgin. Since it was God's own Holy Spirit, and not a man that caused Mary to conceive, Jesus was THE Son of God. (However, God considers us ALL to be His children if we follow Him.) When Jesus was baptised, a voice spoke from Heaven saying "This is my beloved Son. Obey Him." That voice was God The Father. Overall, God is THE Father, because He created everything. That is The Holy Trinity, whether it makes sense to you or not.

You're completely right: God DIDN'T have to worry about death, but HE DIDN'T save Himself on the cross. He allowed Himself, in a bodily, mortal form, to be tortured so that we would be saved from our sins. He did this because He loves us. He returned from the dead because HE SAID HE WOULD. If He hadn't returned from the dead, what good would it have been for Him to die? We wouldn't have believed Him unless He had done exactly what He said He'd do. He did just that. And Jesus, being God, yet being God's Son because He was mortal flesh born by the power of The Holy Spirit, knew what He had to do, and loved us enough to do it.

Again sounding like a spoiled child here. If God was so understanding and benevolent (I doubt he IS the latter anyway) Why couldn't he just pop in and say "Hey guys, I wish you'd stop doing that, it hurts my feelers."

He spoke time and time again to the Israelites through Moses and Aaron about how He felt about what they were doing. The Israelites wouldn't listen, so they were punished. Is this not justice? They were given plenty of chances. Besides, God's presence was there anyway, if you don't remember (or if you haven't READ it.) God followed the Israelites by day as a black cloud, and as a pillar of fire by night. He was right there. Even after being right there the Israelites didn't always follow Him. It's this way for everybody; God shouldn't have to show Himself directly for us to believe He's there. He lets us choose whether or not we want Him, and those who do, get to see Him.

So we're just a big boredom reliever for God, is that what you're saying? Sometimes he just gets tired of the same-old same-old and decides "I know, today I have a huge tsunami kill tens of thousands of people and destroy whole regions! Woohoo, just like old times!"

Also, you said 'probably' so I'm assuming here you don't actually KNOW what God is like. If you don't know, how can you PRESUME to tell other people what he does or doesn't want.

Let me rephrase that. I'm not perfect, after all. Boredom may or may not actually be a problem for God, considering He's all-powerful. BUT, some things just aren't known about God! Maybe He does get bored sometimes! How would we know, and why would that matter?! We know what He has told us, and that is that He made us to love and follow Him. He showed HIS love for US by giving us free will so that we wouldn't all just be constant, bowing zombies! Maybe God WOULD get bored of that! It doesn't matter, because God gave us free will so that we wouldn't be that way! He gave us our own minds and personalities so we could each glorify Him differently. God hasn't told us everything about Himself, but He's told us enough!

Except that, being God, why didn't he make sure his "word" was PERFECT for all time by delivering it in person?

His Word WAS delivered in person. In The Old Testement, it says straight out that He spoke directly to Moses and all kinds of other people. In The New Testement, He showed up on Earth as Jesus, and spoke directly to LOTS MORE people. If that's not good enough for you, too bad. The Bible is our only way of knowing about God. It's His Word spoken through those who heard it firsthand. Without it, we'd be lost. He wrote The Ten Commandments with His own hand, but without the rest of The Bible, how would we know what to do with The Ten Commandments? How would we know how they came to be? God allowed the rest of The Bible to be written so that we could understand Him. It may sound imperfect to us at times, but it wasn't written in English first, you know! BUT, God knew in time that it would eventually be translated to the English language so that we too could learn about Him. Like I said, whether or not the wording was perfect when The Bible was retranslated, the main idea hasn't been messed with. Some figure it out, some don't.

[YoungFang]

First, Adam and Eve weren't the first to sin ever. Satan was. Second, God gave us free will so that we wouldn't be like robots, however it says clearly in The Bible that He made us so that we would love Him. He made us so we would follow Him, but He gave us our own mind and soul like His own -only certainly not as powerful as His- but He gave us a mind and soul nonetheless, so that we could learn on our own that following Him was the best way of living.

But surely the whole point of love is that it's unconditional and an emotion that you can't choose whether you feel it or not. So if you don't feel love for God you have no choice but to suffer.

He knows that in the end, we will win over evil. That, and otherwise, we wouldn't grow stronger unless we faced hardships. Any non-christian should know that we must be self-disciplined somehow to become stronger and stay alive. That's life, no matter how you try living it.

Except for those who had to die in this violence so the rest of us may learn from it.
By the way,you keep speaking of God knowing future events, i was wondering do you mean this in a 'he's intelligent therefore can predict the future way'? or a more common God knows everything that is going to happen (fate)?

Have you even read the story of Noah in Genesis? The world was messed up, and it wouldn't have done any good for God to send Jesus to die and save the world from sin at the time. Noah would've been the only guy who cared.

So everyone aside from Noah was sinful and would not change? Including children and babies at the time who haven't a chance to make a choice?

You complain about God killing off sinners long ago, and then He decides to send Jesus to save us from sin. Is this BAD?! Would you rather have God strike you down on the spot?! God doesn't have bad timing, if that's what you're thinking. This is THE GOD of the UNIVERSE we're talking about here. Things happen when God decides to make them happen!

Personally I don't think jesus died for my sins, my ancestor's sins, maybe, but i wasn't there then and who's to say if I behave like they did.

Our problems are our cause, not His.

His cause ultimately, when he created the things that allowed it.

God shouldn't have to show Himself directly for us to believe He's there. He lets us choose whether or not we want Him, and those who do, get to see Him.
It's not about wanting God it's about knowing whether he is indeed there. We all have senses and minds with which to judge, evaluate and find the truths in the world. Things that we cannot judge in such ways are obviously difficult to believe in so it's not really a choice. God knows this so why not show himself to us? Can he not be bothered? It's kind of sadistic to only prove yourself to those that already belive in you as well as a little pointless.

Let me rephrase that. I'm not perfect, after all. Boredom may or may not actually be a problem for God, considering He's all-powerful. BUT, some things just aren't known about God! Maybe He does get bored sometimes! How would we know, and why would that matter?! We know what He has told us, and that is that He made us to love and follow Him. He showed HIS love for US by giving us free will so that we wouldn't all just be constant, bowing zombies! Maybe God WOULD get bored of that! It doesn't matter, because God gave us free will so that we wouldn't be that way! He gave us our own minds and personalities so we could each glorify Him differently. God hasn't told us everything about Himself, but He's told us enough!

That's all a matter of opinion based on a book written by imperfect people thousands of years ago that's been translated and mistranslated across all that time.

His Word WAS delivered in person. In The Old Testement, it says straight out that He spoke directly to Moses and all kinds of other people. In The New Testement, He showed up on Earth as Jesus, and spoke directly to LOTS MORE people. If that's not good enough for you, too bad. The Bible is our only way of knowing about God.
Perhaps time is different for god but one book and one visit in human across all that time isn't much to show people who you are. So surely he expects not everyone to believe in this?

I like this a lot better than believing the human race was an accident!
It's easier on the mind to believe you are here for a reason and get to go to heaven. It's a lot harder to believe that you are not.

[Golden Howl]

So everyone aside from Noah was sinful and would not change? Including children and babies at the time who haven't a chance to make a choice?

Actually, it really doesn't matter, because he has no example of what's good, since he is surrounded by people like that. So the chances are, he'll be similar to the adults when he is older.



That's all a matter of opinion based on a book written by imperfect people thousands of years ago that's been translated and mistranslated across all that time.

Did you not understand? Yes, it was written by imperfect people, but they still got the message across.

[Tempest]

Actually, it really doesn't matter, because he has no example of what's good, since he is surrounded by people like that. So the chances are, he'll be similar to the adults when he is older.

So you're telling me, out of the ENTIRE world, there was not one child who would have turned out good? I'm not so sure about that. I agree that when you are a kid you generally follow your parent's lead. However once you reach adulthood you can change your outlook on things. There are people who have been raised in ghettos with crime and drugs everywhere, and they don't turn out to be criminals or drug dealers. I had to read a biography about a kid like this. To say that not a single person in that whole world would have changed is rather close minded. If nothing else, what about the indigenous tribes who had been untouched by "civilization"? Are you saying that they were all evil? Well their views have not changed because many of them are STILL untouched by Christianity and modern culture. Did they deserve to die? They were never exposed to Christianity. There was an ENTIRE other half of the world that the people who wrote the Bible had no idea about. Do these tribes go to hell because they have never heard of Jesus?

Did you not understand? Yes, it was written by imperfect people, but they still got the message across.

How about this: God comes down, says hi to a few cameras, and writes the damn book himself in all different languages (future ones too, seeing as he knows all that will happen according to you). Wouldn't this make far more sense than talking to people through bushes and telling them to write a book, which then will be subject to mass misinterpretation in the years to come? Makes more sense to me.

[DarkHunter]

An article I just read sort of summed up my disagreement and thoughts on the Abrahamic God. "We were created diseased by a despotic deity and commanded to be whole and well under pain of torture."

Doesn't get better than that.

[Golden Howl]

So you're telling me, out of the ENTIRE world, there was not one child who would have turned out good? I'm not so sure about that. I agree that when you are a kid you generally follow your parent's lead. However once you reach adulthood you can change your outlook on things. There are people who have been raised in ghettos with crime and drugs everywhere, and they don't turn out to be criminals or drug dealers. I had to read a biography about a kid like this. To say that not a single person in that whole world would have changed is rather close minded. If nothing else, what about the indigenous tribes who had been untouched by "civilization"? Are you saying that they were all evil? Well their views have not changed because many of them are STILL untouched by Christianity and modern culture. Did they deserve to die? They were never exposed to Christianity. There was an ENTIRE other half of the world that the people who wrote the Bible had no idea about. Do these tribes go to hell because they have never heard of Jesus?
No, people actually do not go to hell if they've never heard of Jesus. That would be downright wrong if they did. Sure, there are children that could've changed however they really wouldn't have made much of a difference. God loves childeren, so when they died they went to heaven. Any innocent child who dies goes to heaven.



How about this: God comes down, says hi to a few cameras, and writes the damn book himself in all different languages (future ones too, seeing as he knows all that will happen according to you). Wouldn't this make far more sense than talking to people through bushes and telling them to write a book, which then will be subject to mass misinterpretation in the years to come? Makes more sense to me. DID YOU NOT READ MY PREVIOUS POSTS? :mad: I said that God used people to write the Bible as an example for us. He wanted to show us that we could be part of the of spreading the Gospel. Plus he did come down, in human form, as Jesus.

[Golden Howl]

Genesis 17:10-14:
10 This is My covenant, which you shall keep, between Me and you and your descendants after you: every male among you shall be circumcised.
11 And you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin, and it shall be the sign of the covenant between Me and you.
12 And every male among you who is eight days old shall be circumcised throughout your generations, a servant who is born in the house or who is bought with money from any foreigner, who is not of your descendants.
13 A servant who is born in your house or who is bought with your money shall surely be circumcised; thus shall My covenant be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
14 But an uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.

Genesis 34:14-16
14 They said to them, "We cannot do this thing, to give our sister to one who is uncircumcised, for that would be a disgrace to us.
15 "Only on this condition will we consent to you: if you will become like us, in that every male of you be circumcised,
16 then we will give our daughters to you, and we will take your daughters for ourselves, and we will live with you and become one people."

Exodus 12:48:
But if a stranger sojourns with you, and celebrates the Passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, and then let him come near to celebrate it; and he shall be like a native of the land. But no uncircumcised person may eat of it.

I can keep going if you like.

Actually, it isn't as awful as it sounds, because you are creating a huge deal out of something so simple.
It was only the foreskin that was removed, and God commanded them to do it for their own good, because back then they were unaware of bacteria and infections that could be caused from improper cleansing. Guess what? We still do it today in America for the same reasons.

[Tempest]

No, people actually do not go to hell if they've never heard of Jesus. That would be downright wrong if they did. Sure, there are children that could've changed however they really wouldn't have made much of a difference. God loves childeren, so when they died they went to heaven. Any innocent child who dies goes to heaven.

So....you admit that there were kids that would have changed, but God just said "oh well hahahaha I'm gonna kill them all anyway cause they wouldn't have mattered". Woooooooooow. That sounds like a wonderful, kind, loving God that makes me want to worship him.

DID YOU NOT READ MY PREVIOUS POSTS? :mad: I said that God used people to write the Bible as an example for us. He wanted to show us that we could be part of the of spreading the Gospel. Plus he did come down, in human form, as Jesus.

Yes I did read your posts. However as I said, my idea makes a lot more sense don't you think. Sorry but some guy who may or may not have performed miracles 2000 years ago doesn't quite cut it for me. God KNEW that his own word would become tainted and yet he did what he did anyway. Yet he expects us to blindly follow a Bible that we all know is different from the original. If I'm not mistaken, entire BOOKS are left out of the Bibles we get at the bookstore. Don't give me that "it's still the same message" BS either. If God wanted to convey us a simple message he could have written a far shorter book.

[Tempest]

It was only the foreskin that was removed, and God commanded them to do it for their own good, because back then they were unaware of bacteria and infections that could be caused from improper cleansing. Guess what? We still do it today in America for the same reasons.

Riiiiight because men don't clean their dicks well enough we're gonna cut it part of it off in a brutal, painful procedure. It's ok though cause he won't remember it. Sorry but I don't quite fall for this. We do it because it's tradition, not because we are so uncleanly nowadays that we have to do it. You know there ARE uncircumsized men right? I really don't think their penis is enflamed from infections, you just learn how to clean it (omg clean??!!).

[Golden Howl]

Why? Wouldn't it have been better, since we're all just his "creations" according to you, to have everyone live together peacefully? You know, instead of instilling us with violence, hatred and greed, in turn causing wars and general mayhem?

Whoa, hold it right there. God did not instill us with violence, hatred, and greed, he made us perfect, and in his own image. However since we had free will we've choosen to do all these actions. It's mostly all our fault, with the help of Satan.




Man WHAT?! First either Jesus IS or ISN'T God. If he WAS God then he never HAD to worry about death. God didn't resuurect him, he WAS God. If Jesus WAS just his mortal son, then that's kind of a fucked up thing to do: kill your son without telling him what you're gonna do, just to teach mankind a lesson? Yeah, way to go there.?

This is hard for you people to understand, for anyone to understand. God is spilt in three, The Father, The Son, and The HolySpirit. Jesus was the Son of God, he was God in human form. Jesus did know, his destiny. Jesus did not die just only to teach us a lesson, but also because he loved us enough to save us from our sins and from the fiery pits of hell. Don't you understand that?

[J.L.R.]

So....you admit that there were kids that would have changed, but God just said "oh well hahahaha I'm gonna kill them all anyway cause they wouldn't have mattered". Woooooooooow. That sounds like a wonderful, kind, loving God that makes me want to worship him.



Yes I did read your posts. However as I said, my idea makes a lot more sense don't you think. Sorry but some guy who may or may not have performed miracles 2000 years ago doesn't quite cut it for me. God KNEW that his own word would become tainted and yet he did what he did anyway. Yet he expects us to blindly follow a Bible that we all know is different from the original. If I'm not mistaken, entire BOOKS are left out of the Bibles we get at the bookstore. Don't give me that "it's still the same message" BS either. If God wanted to convey us a simple message he could have written a far shorter book.

Actually you are quite wrong. Ignorance is bliss I guess. The only people who walk around shouting that the "Bible has been tainted... the Bible has been changed... books have been left out..." are blind skeptics who are too anti-God to think straight. The reality is, in fact I just watched a Discovery channel Program on it, called Naked History, starring some Jewish guy I've never heard of, pretty much proved that the Bible we read today can be traced back to its origins. The truth is, you are simply fooling yourself, if you believe that the Bible has been purposefully altered to suite someone else's need. You see we are very blessed to have passages, if not whole books predating 2500 years ago. The scribing methods of Jewish schalors have been scientifically put to the test.

Of course, to be fair, even if the Bible we have today is word for word as it was thousands of years ago, it is still a religious book and carries religious principles, whether you want to believe them or not. It doesn't prove the existence of God, nor that Judaism, Catholism, and Protestant Christianity are the right way, but simply that the Bible we have today has changed very little.

And what about books being left out... You must be refering to the Gnostic Texts... at any rate, most real scholars, historians, archealogists, have no qualms with those books being left out, since they were written some few hundred years after the originals, and the fact that the books shared no resemblence at all to the originals, and in fact the Gnostics were nothing more than a sex cult, who mingled Christianity, most notably Christ, into their orgies.

There were hundreds, if not thousands of Messianic cults that existed at the time of Christ. It would be foolish, if not impossible to include them into the Biblical Cannon. It would be like haveing a book about Dharma in between Matthew and Mark.

[Golden Howl]

Riiiiight because men don't clean their dicks well enough we're gonna cut it part of it off in a brutal, painful procedure. It's ok though cause he won't remember it. Sorry but I don't quite fall for this.
Doctors at one time used to not sterilize their instruments when working on their patients, such as needles, and most of the patients got diseases and some even died. If this knowledge of cleansing was this undeveloped only within a hundered years or more ago. Then just think of how limited and undeveloped their knowledge was 3000 years ago. Guess what? I had a painful procedure done to me when I was six, I had to have surgery on my foot when I was awake, they couldn't put my foot to sleep. Even though it was painful, it benefited me, and even though I still remember it, it doesn't really affect my everday life.
So, saying words like that is a really weak for a debate, so don't say things like that, because they are useless.



We do it because it's tradition, not because we are so uncleanly nowadays that we have to do it. You know there ARE uncircumsized men right? I really don't think their penis is enflamed from infections, you just learn how to clean it

Jewish do it as a tradition, I'm not sure about other religions though. Yes, I am aware there are uncircumsized men. But I am no longer continuing this debate.



So....you admit that there were kids that would have changed, but God just said "oh well hahahaha I'm gonna kill them all anyway cause they wouldn't have mattered". Woooooooooow. That sounds like a wonderful, kind, loving God that makes me want to worship him.

He saved them from the misery of being in a world like that. And what did I just say before?
Even though he killed them, the innocent ones went to heaven to live eternally with the Lord, so they didn't really get punished. That's a great gift from God, if you ask me. Plus, If you don't believe in Heaven, then I have nothing more to say to you, because this debate is pointless if you don't believe in heaven, because I won't be able to put it in words you can comprehend. Read Psalms 139 with an open mind, maybe God will speak to you and answer your questions.



If God wanted to convey us a simple message he could have written a far shorter book.
If he just wrote the Ten Commandments, it wouldn't be enough. People would still have questions about other things.

[Tempest]

The truth is, you are simply fooling yourself, if you believe that the Bible has been purposefully altered to suite someone else's need.

So, King James never translated the Hebrew word for "poisoner" and made it "witch" instead? He was a superstitious man. I'm pretty sure that this is true, perhaps I'm wrong. However to say that I'm fooling myself when I said that the Bible has been changed...how can you SERIOUSLY think that over 2000 years it has remained unchanged?

I won't comment on the part about the books being left out because I'm not sure exactly what the names of the books were, and as I've admitted I'm rather uneducated in Christian myth.

Doctors at one time used to not sterilize their instruments when working on their patients, such as needles, and most of the patients got diseases and some even died.
.....
So, saying words like that is a really weak for a debate, so don't say things like that, because they are useless.

Um you don't need to tell me this, I was refering to the fact that I don't buy that this is why we would do it TODAY. I know good and well that sanitation was not even thought of even 100 years ago.
As for circumcision benfiting lifes...there ARE negative side effects, such as loss of sexual pleasure. And the foreskin does not exist for no reason.

During intercourse, the natural penis shaft actually glides within its own shaft skin covering. This minimizes friction to the vaginal walls and opening, and to the shaft skin itself, adding immeasurably to the comfort and pleasure of both parties.

Anyway this is not a debate about circumcision, so I'll leave you with two links if you wish to read about it. Obviously these links have pictures of the nether regions (!) so no clicking if you're offending by that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreskin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision

And for the record, I don't believe in heaven, God, or any of that other religious fluff. I have 0 desire to follow Christianity and although I appreciate that you are so willing to guide me in my Path to Salvation, I'm going to go ahead and be honest and say that I'd only ever read Psalms 139 to laugh or to learn about how you people can believe in the Christian God.

[J.L.R.]

So, King James never translated the Hebrew word for "poisoner" and made it "witch" instead? He was a superstitious man. I'm pretty sure that this is true, perhaps I'm wrong. However to say that I'm fooling myself when I said that the Bible has been changed...how can you SERIOUSLY think that over 2000 years it has remained unchanged?

I won't comment on the part about the books being left out because I'm not sure exactly what the names of the books were, and as I've admitted I'm rather uneducated in Christian myth.

Actually King James did not translate anything. He hired... or I should say ordered scholars to translate the largely Aramaic and Latin Bible into English.

Do I believe that King James purposely had them change passages? No. Nor do I believe that King James was truly a devout Christian who really wanted to bring the Bible to the common folk. I think he did it as a political venture to get the people on his side, as well as create a rift between him and the Roman Catholic Church, of which use to control most of Europe with an iron fist. In reality, much of this is, guess work, but I would wager that his pursueing of an English translation of the Bible was a political venture more than spiritual.

I also think the "roughness" of this translation also lends to my polical motivation than anything else. The King James version is roughest of the translations. This of course does not mean that it isn't close. In fact it is as close as Old English can get it. English is often a very difficult language to master, as one word can mean several things. Such as love. The way you use the word love in a sentence, can certianly change the meaning of what you are saying. In Hebrew they have several words describing different froms of Love.

Did King James change poisoner to Witch... I doubt it. I'm no Aramaic scholar, but I would wager that term poisoner, depending on the context could mean witch, or more possibly, at the time witch was the closest English word to describe what was being said. Even so, Roman Catholic Priests were murdering so called "witches" long before King James, and they were using a Latin Translation.

Even so, as we do have actual copies of the Hebrew Torah and Hebrew Bible that are still printed today, of which have been painstakingly copied by hand, and then examined via computer for faster validation, we can easily compare the texts. The newer Hebrew Bibles can also then be compared to much older texts, such as the ones that are nearly 2500 years old.

If that is not enough, let's just assume that King James twisted his own version, then what about the Sheaves Bible (another English Translation), the German Bible, French Bible, Spanish Bible, and so on and so forth, all of which were translated from the Aramaic/ Latin texts, and not the King James version. So even if the King James version was tainted, there are plenty out there that aren't. However, having Christian friends from other parts of the world, I can tell you right now, that the King James version differs only the slightest since from theirs. SO there you go.

On the subject of circumcision... Firstly the Bible never mentions that circumcision was for health reasons. In reality it has nothing to do with health benefits.

Genesis 17

7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.

8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.

9 And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.

10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.

11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.

12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.

13 He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.

See here the circumcision was a token of the Hebrew commitment or covenant with their God. By doing this they separated themselves from other people around them. This made them different, set aside, for God. Again, it has nothing to do with health issues. Nor does the Bible ever says it does.

The carrying on of circumcision into Christian doctrine, was set up by the early Church. Some Jewish Christians wanted the gentile Christians to follow all Jewish customs, while others believed that this was a needless burden to place on non-Jewish believers. Eventually both parties agreed that New gentile Christians would only adhere to the circumcision as a token of their faith and a physical seperation from their old ways.

When Europe became largely "Christian" the circumcision practice became common, as "Christianity" was the only religion tolerated, as well all know. In short everybody had to be circumcised. Not really a good thing, but there you have it. Now it is just a tradition in Western culture. As Tempest stated though, not all cultures practice this though, and yes they live fully healthy lives.

Ahhh so you are uneducated in Christian histories as well as the histories surrounding the Biblical Cannon's creation, and yet you are quick to state that it is wrong, mistranslated, and purposefully corrupted? Then my arguement is this, if you don't know then why are you so quick to say the Bible is tainted?

And herein lays my complaint with Werewolf.com, and internet BBSes for the most part. The very fact that Christianity has been posted about more than any other religious topic, reveals that it hits a hard nerve for most people here on this board. I can understand complaints as there are a lot of stupid wannabe Christians who profess Christ's love, and yet are horrible mean spirited people. Then again, I believe they would be horrible mean spirited people even if they weren't Christians... Bad people are bad people regardless of what religion they profess.

However, my complaint is this, if you haven't studied the Bible (and digging info off of Atheist.com or IhateChristians.org (pun) does not count). I mean if you haven't studied the Bible, whether as literature, history, or in archealogy, then by what authority do you make your complaints. I see this time and time again. A skeptic squeals that the Bible is full of contradictions, as Thrasher so happily posted, but even a man or woman with remedial Biblical knowledge can point out that when you cut scriptures out of their relative stories and halfass paste them together, you're not proving anything, but that you have great cut/paste skills. It is no different than those zealots who took excerpts out of Harry Potter books, and stated that these various incodents, such as Harry blowing his aunt up (I would have done worse to that hag myself...but...) as a means to justify their anti-Harry Potter mantra. Was it bad no... however when you take material out of the context of its relative placing, you then warp the meaning, because the reader doesn't have the chance to understand the full concept of which is being stated.

However I guess many of you, of which I know a lot of some literature background, seem not to have a problem with this sort of reasoning. This type of understanding certianly wouldn't win a case in court, because there isn't any merit nor understanding.

Another issue I see is the quick and overly used, "The Bible has been changed countless times!" This by far is the worse arguement, not only is it completely false, and even non-religious scholars, archealogists, and historians can put this statement to rest. However, if one is so quick to state that the Bible has been changed and twisted, and if this be so, and ya'll know about it, what parts have been changed? Where has the Bible been twisted? The reality is, most of you, even most Christians for that matter, have never read the Bible from one cover to the next. Ignorance is bliss but when one wants to make an arguement it is a piss poor excuse. If you are going to argue the Bible's validity, then have information to back it.

I like a good arguement with sound basis. Most of you hear are relatively smart people, and maybe it is too much to ask a BBS and those who participate to put equal amounts of effort into their arguements and study the information for themselves before just tossing it out the window, because, "You know its wrong" type of behavior.
While LV and I rarely see eye to eye on anything, I do have to give her kudos for her endless supply of knowledge and hard study facts she brings to an argument. She doesn't know something, she looks it up, and I don't mean via google. The Library is a whole nest of knowledge. I like the quickness of the net, but there is something authoritive about books... Blue Eyes is another person I give Kudos too as well, again, she knows her stuff. And there are a few more out there as well. These people aren't overtly smart, but more or less that they take time to know their arguments instead of just arguing for the sake of arguing...

That is my complaint...

[Tempest]

I think you were misinterpreting my actions. I'm not attacking Christianity or the Bible. As I said, I went to church for most of my life, chose to be baptized, and then renounced that faith for something else. I'm not completely ignorant on the Bible. The fact that I admit that I'm not well read is at least better than most.
Many of my questions were actually because I wanted to read what you guys had to say. I've read things about the contridictions in the Bible and about why it's twisted and though I do believe that it's overexaggerated I do think that there simply HAS to be some mistranslation involved.
I do not have the amount of time it would require for me to read the very long book that is the Bible. Nor do I have any desire to. I have a long list of other topics to learn about before I'd learn about some religion that I've already decided isn't for me.
If you chose to follow a religion based on a guy and a book that are 2000 years old then that's fine. I just don't understand it.

[UNODRAGONE]

I think you were misinterpreting my actions. I'm not attacking Christianity or the Bible. As I said, I went to church for most of my life, chose to be baptized, and then renounced that faith for something else. I'm not completely ignorant on the Bible. The fact that I admit that I'm not well read is at least better than most.
Many of my questions were actually because I wanted to read what you guys had to say. I've read things about the contridictions in the Bible and about why it's twisted and though I do believe that it's overexaggerated I do think that there simply HAS to be some mistranslation involved.
I do not have the amount of time it would require for me to read the very long book that is the Bible. Nor do I have any desire to. I have a long list of other topics to learn about before I'd learn about some religion that I've already decided isn't for me.
If you chose to follow a religion based on a guy and a book that are 2000 years old then that's fine. I just don't understand it.

ok I'm confused you did or didn't read the bible which is it? Before you said this:

Not gonna really get into too much detail right now, as I have not read the Bible and I don't go to church. So I'm not going to blindly criticize things. But a couple of things that have bothered me.


But then you said you went to church school and what not so I'm a little confused on how you know information on a book you stated you didn't read besides then saying you read psalms? :confused:

[Vendetta]

Whoa, hold it right there. God did not instill us with violence, hatred, and greed, he made us perfect, and in his own image. However since we had free will we've choosen to do all these actions. It's mostly all our fault, with the help of Satan.
Uhhh God gave us free will right? Therefore he also instilled in us a sense of greed, hatred, etc. Yeah, nice try there slick.

This is hard for you people to understand, for anyone to understand. God is spilt in three, The Father, The Son, and The HolySpirit.
According to YOU. I'm going to assume you are Catholic, because Catholics are pretty much the ones who believe in the Holy Trinity. Not ALL Christians believe that (oh noes!)

Jesus was the Son of God, he was God in human form. Jesus did know, his destiny. Jesus did not die just only to teach us a lesson, but also because he loved us enough to save us from our sins and from the fiery pits of hell. Don't you understand that?
It doesn't seem to have worked, now DOES it?

[ThrasherCub]

Whoa, hold it right there. God did not instill us with violence, hatred, and greed, he made us perfect, and in his own image. However since we had free will we've choosen to do all these actions. It's mostly all our fault, with the help of Satan.
And God created everything, including violence, hatred, greed, and Satan.

And God is omniscient, so he knew that Satan would become a being of violence, hatred, and greed, and that Satan would instill this in others.

So God not only did it, but he knew what he was doing.

Saying God isn't why humans are full of violence and whatnot is like saying that if I shoot you that I didn't put a bullet in you, the GUN did. Blame the gun, not me, even though I did it and understood the consequences.

The stupidity of that statement makes me queasy.

So rather than convince anyone that God isn't the source of violence, all you did was convince everyone you're too dense and blinded by dogma to see simple logic and the obvious.

[Tempest]

ok I'm confused you did or didn't read the bible which is it? Before you said this:

Um what's the problem here? Read both posts again they both say I haven't read the Bible...

But then you said you went to church school and what not so I'm a little confused on how you know information on a book you stated you didn't read besides then saying you read psalms? :confused:

Yes I went to "church school" and church for a good part of my life, however I no longer do. They read passages from the Bible in my church, not sure about the ones you've gone to. Very long passages I might add (makes church even more torturous when you're a kid). And when did I said I read psalms? WTF read my posts don't scan them.

[Golden Howl]

And God created everything, including violence, hatred, greed, and Satan.

And God is omniscient, so he knew that Satan would become a being of violence, hatred, and greed, and that Satan would instill this in others.

So God not only did it, but he knew what he was doing.

Saying God isn't why humans are full of violence and whatnot is like saying that if I shoot you that I didn't put a bullet in you, the GUN did. Blame the gun, not me, even though I did it and understood the consequences.

The stupidity of that statement makes me queasy.

So rather than convince anyone that God isn't the source of violence, all you did was convince everyone you're too dense and blinded by dogma to see simple logic and the obvious. I am not dense. Yes, you have a clear point when saying that if God knew this was going to happen then why did he let it happen? Everything happens for a reason, it was his choice. And oh yeah, as for the gun example, nice one, but in God's situation he had good intentions, unlike in the shooting situation. I don't know how to explain it to you any further, and this debate, conversation or whatever you want to call it is getting old. You believe what you so please, and I'll stick to my beliefs and we'll live happily ever after. End of story.

And Tempest I respect the answer you gave me. Thank-you for not being defensive, and insulting.

[ThrasherCub]

Yes, you have a clear point when saying that if God knew this was going to happen then why did he let it happen?
No, not why did he let it happen, why did he make it happen?

And oh yeah, as for the gun example, nice one, but in God's situation he had good intentions, unlike in the shooting situation.
I love that good-intentioned violent hating greed.

I don't know how to explain it to you any further, and this debate, conversation or whatever you want to call it is getting old.
I agree. If everyone could starting making as much sense as Vendetta, Tempest, and myself it would run a lot smoother.

You believe what you so please, and I'll stick to my beliefs and we'll live happily ever after.
Those who think and those who follow blindly rarely coexist very well for very long, particularly on forums.

End of story.
You wish.

[Golden Howl]

No, not why did he let it happen, why did he make it happen?

I am asking myself why I even bother, but I had to say something to this one. God created him, but he did not force Satan to turn against him. It was Satan's choice to rebel, God did not command Satan to become evil. It was Satan's choice


Those who think and those who follow blindly rarely coexist very well for very long, particularly on forums

By the way I am not a blind follower, I know just where I'm going and my faith is strong. Also you know, I believe I have quite the endurance to last here on forums.

However you do not seem to be aware of when it is the proper time to end things, because as anyone can see eventually things like this become a waste of time, because no one's views are going to change. You are solid in what you believe in, and so am I, this is not going to go anywhere. We've made our ideas clear, now let's be adults and just let it be. If someone else wants to argue or debate with you than that's fine, but I am not going to continue this.

[Vendetta]

I am asking myself why I even bother, but I had to say something to this one. God created him, but he did not force Satan to turn against him. It was Satan's choice to rebel, God did not command Satan to become evil. It was Satan's choice
So you're saying God didn't KNOW Satan was going to rebel? Doesn't sound like a very omniscient god to me.

However you do not seem to be aware of when it is the proper time to end things, because as anyone can see eventually things like this become a waste of time, because no one's views are going to change.
And yet here you are still arguing this.

If someone else wants to argue or debate with you than that's fine, but I am not going to continue this.
Oh I see, moral "high" ground, gotcha. Let's see how long this lasts. The thing is if it all comes down to faith, why didn't you say that from the get-go instead of trying to prove the unprovable. Which is, of course, the ultimate convenience of all religious folk, the world over, never having to explain squat as long as it's based on "faith".

[ThrasherCub]

God created him, but he did not force Satan to turn against him.
God created him in his entirety.

That means God made Satan's personality, goals, and, because God knows the future and there is no speck of uncertainty about the outcome of anything He does, God also therefore created Satan's future, which includes him turning and becoming evil and whatnot.

Your argument only works of God doesn't know the future. You lose.

However you do not seem to be aware of when it is the proper time to end things, because as anyone can see eventually things like this become a waste of time, because no one's views are going to change.
Actually there's a good chance that people who aren't as closed minded as yourself actually will change their views somewhat, but that's actually not why I do this.

I enjoy using logic to bludgeon blind faith in the head.

[UNODRAGONE]

Um what's the problem here? Read both posts again they both say I haven't read the Bible...



Yes I went to "church school" and church for a good part of my life, however I no longer do. They read passages from the Bible in my church, not sure about the ones you've gone to. Very long passages I might add (makes church even more torturous when you're a kid). And when did I said I read psalms? WTF read my posts don't scan them.


I have read your post in detail since you have the same questions I use to pose when I was younger. And believe me I hear ya on the whole passages they read in church, when I was young I couldn't sit still for shit cause it was just too boring! But now I go to a church that has a much younger crowd and the cool thing about the priest who gives the sermon is he uses things that are going on in the world today and referencing them in the bible, so we learn about stuff in the bible, but it's actually quite interesting. I like your train of reasoning, but you did start to loose me, and maybe it's me, when you stated things from the bible but then stated you didn't read it so I only asked for clarification. Again, I thought the same way you do when I was younger so believe me I hear where your coming from and I am paying attention I just got confused in this post below and the others

And for the record, I don't believe in heaven, God, or any of that other religious fluff. I have 0 desire to follow Christianity and although I appreciate that you are so willing to guide me in my Path to Salvation, I'm going to go ahead and be honest and say that I'd only ever read Psalms 139 to laugh or to learn about how you people can believe in the Christian God.

[UNODRAGONE]

God created him in his entirety.

That means God made Satan's personality, goals, and, because God knows the future and there is no speck of uncertainty about the outcome of anything He does, God also therefore created Satan's future, which includes him turning and becoming evil and whatnot.

Your argument only works of God doesn't know the future. You lose.


Actually there's a good chance that people who aren't as closed minded as yourself actually will change their views somewhat, but that's actually not why I do this.

I enjoy using logic to bludgeon blind faith in the head.


What is your definition of being open minded? Just curious since I consider myself a pretty open minded person but at the same time I have beliefs and values that no one can change my mind on

[Vendetta]

What is your definition of being open minded? Just curious since I consider myself a pretty open minded person but at the same time I have beliefs and values that no one can change my mind on
Oxymorons ahoy!

[UNODRAGONE]

Oxymorons ahoy!

I realized that right after I submitted it :) I guess I'm open minded to a fault but then again most people are I think or else no one would really have strong convictions. I mean, lets be honest I don't think their is such a thing as a totally open minded person, and if their was, what are their beliefs? I would think those would change periodically.

[Vendetta]

I realized that right after I submitted it :) I guess I'm open minded to a fault but then again most people are I think or else no one would really have strong convictions. I mean, lets be honest I don't think their is such a thing as a totally open minded person, and if their was, what are their beliefs? I would think those would change periodically.
If you're willing to accept your beliefs being proven wrong (rather than blindly following something, regardless of evidence to the contrary) then I'd say you're open-minded. If not, well, no cookie. You can't be selectively open-minded.

And despite my strongly held opinions, I'm willing to see other sides (and often do) just so long as you can prove your point to my satisfaction.

[ThrasherCub]

I mean, lets be honest I don't think their is such a thing as a totally open minded person, and if their was, what are their beliefs? I would think those would change periodically.
I am, and they do. The only rule is that the new belief must not only make sense, but make more sense than the belief it is replacing.

Anything else in the pursuit of truth and you're saying, "Eh, this isn't right but it's close enough."

"Good enough" isn't. Keep looking.

[UNODRAGONE]

If you're willing to accept your beliefs being proven wrong (rather than blindly following something, regardless of evidence to the contrary) then I'd say you're open-minded. If not, well, no cookie. You can't be selectively open-minded.

And despite my strongly held opinions, I'm willing to see other sides (and often do) just so long as you can prove your point to my satisfaction.

Thats how I try to be for the most part, I'll accept someone showing me where my beliefs could be flawed so long as your not attacking the way I feel/think or trying to "convert" me.

[Vendetta]

Thats how I try to be for the most part, I'll accept someone showing me where my beliefs could be flawed so long as your no