Question for Christians

[steen]

Just when Muslim bashing time starts, let me remind you that these men were religious fanatics, just like the Christian Phalangists who murdered Muslims in that massacre in Lebanon.

Indeed. Christians tend to forget to see the log in our own eyes:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/5195/victims.html

 

[kal-el]

Hehe. You have listened to much to fundie literalists.

God is a message to us about why and how to live our lives. Actual events, or even a physical existence of God is irrelevant to the message. The reason for worshipping God is to live the message. So literal issues such as "omnipotence," physical existence in emotions and such are not even my concern.

Whether God build the Universe in 6 days or it came through per the Big banfg is irrelevant to the message. The bible is there for us to get the message of our lives. Jesus is the way the message is driven home (Ignoring the coup d'etas of the interloper paul who used the new religion for his own punitive, hate mongering purposes).

To me, asking if God is omnipotent enough to create the universe is as irrelevant as most of the creationists claims regarding the sciences. God is not about the physical world at all.

(So you can see why I find the fundie literalists' arguments about religion to be irrelevant and the non-Christian arguments as an argument against the literalists rather than against God. That's probably why I get so well along with Atheists a.o. Most of the time, I agree with them )

Wow, I think many Christians would disagree with you, you should go public with your rant!:lol: But seriously, if you say actual events are irrelevant, do you think the events in the bible are truthful? Obviously some tales are straight up fabrications. I.E the sun stood still, a big fish swallowed Jonah, etc.

 

[Axismaster]

Wow, I think many Christians would disagree with you, you should go public with your rant!:lol: But seriously, if you say actual events are irrelevant, do you think the events in the bible are truthful? Obviously some tales are straight up fabrications. I.E the sun stood still, a big fish swallowed Jonah, etc.

Indeed, some tales may be made up or at least made up in part, but remember that their purpose is meant to convey a very true message about God.

 

[steen]

Wow, I think many Christians would disagree with you, you should go public with your rant!:lol: But seriously, if you say actual events are irrelevant, do you think the events in the bible are truthful?

The point of the Bible is not whether it is truthful, but rather whether it helps us get along, whether it allows us to see reason, love your neighbor etc.

Of course, many people have tried to hijack Christianity for their political goals, such as fundies, Pat Robertson, and paul

Obviously some tales are straight up fabrications. I.E the sun stood still, a big fish swallowed Jonah, etc.

Sure. Did Aesop lie or did his stories carry a message? You have again listened to the literalists.

 

[kal-el]

Indeed, some tales may be made up or at least made up in part, but remember that their purpose is meant to convey a very true message about God.

Yes, that message that he is a pshcyo, mass murder, imbecile of a diety?:lol:

Originally posted by steen
You have again listened to the literalists.

Well, don't the majority of Christians tend to take the bible literally? In the bible, there is alot of contradictions and scientific errors, I guess that's expected when fallible men put together alot of books from ancient times.:lol:

 

[steen]

Well, don't the majority of Christians tend to take the bible literally?

Not really. They listen to the message, the words of Jesus, his parables.

Again, don't get confused by silly American literalists

 

[CaliNORML]

There is a closer origin to Christianity that those mentioned, the Greek gods.

In fact Bachaus is portrayed on a cross in the same manner as Jesus was 300 years before Jesus was born.

The story of Jonah and the whale is there as well in the Greek Posidion, a fisher of men.

In these rituals of Bachaus the wine was his blood and the grains of wheat were his flesh.

A roman conquerer mocked this ritual, yet the culmination of the Catholic Communion is to eat a wheat cracker and drink the wine.

Dr. Joseph Campbell did a very interesting seminar on this very subject which I viewed not so long ago.

The last disc of his series MYTHOS deals with this in detail. In it he shows a picture hanging in the Vatican, a Lady seated with Moses on one side, and Mercury on the other, the message was said to be take it metaphoricaly, or literaly and historicaly, it all comes from one place.

His others including Hero's Journey and The Power of Myth are most educational as well.

KMS

 

[kal-el]

Not really. They listen to the message, the words of Jesus, his parables.

Again, don't get confused by silly American literalists

Haha, steen that is a good user title, too bad I didn't think of it first!

 

[Axismaster]

Haha, steen that is a good user title, too bad I didn't think of it first!

What is steen supposed to mean anyway?

 

[Stace]

What is steen supposed to mean anyway?

I think kal-el was talking more about what it says under Steen's name....Lie Detector....

 

[kal-el]

I think kal-el was talking more about what it says under Steen's name....Lie Detector....

Exactly. What did that ignoramus think I was referring to, steen's name?

 

[Stace]

Exactly. What did that ignoramus think I was referring to, steen's name?

It would appear that way.....

 

[steen]

Haha, steen that is a good user title, too bad I didn't think of it first!

I found it fitting :lol:

 

[steen]

What is steen supposed to mean anyway?

That would be my first-name. Relatively common in Denmark

 

[Thorgasm]

What I don't understand is why people think that King James' version of the bible is infallible when the bible itself says, "18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in the book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." -- Revelation, chapter 22

Sounds like it's not so infallible.

 

[kal-el]

What I don't understand is why people think that King James' version of the bible is infallible when the bible itself says, "18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in the book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." -- Revelation, chapter 22

Uhh, those verses are in every bible. King James is simply a word-for-word translation of the bible, it's good for looking at the meanings of certain words, hence it is sometimes referred to "study translations".

Sounds like it's not so infallible.

I agree, but not because of that. No matter which translation you are talking about (god's word, New american standard, king james, new century version, new international, new king james, new living translation, the living bible, new revised standard, and the message, I might have forgot a few) they are all basically the same. They're all thought for thought, or word for word.

 

[Thorgasm]

Uhh, those verses are in every bible. King James is simply a word-for-word translation of the bible, it's good for looking at the meanings of certain words, hence it is sometimes referred to "study translations".



I agree, but not because of that. No matter which translation you are talking about (god's word, New american standard, king james, new century version, new international, new king james, new living translation, the living bible, new revised standard, and the message, I might have forgot a few) they are all basically the same. They're all thought for thought, or word for word.

Actually I quoted the King James version. I find it funny that people don't call the bible God's version. King James has nothing to do with the word of god. That is why I used that version. I didn't mean to single out a version as you perceived.

 

[kal-el]

Actually I quoted the King James version.

Actaully, I have the New International Version directly on my lap, and it states the same thing:

Genesis 22:18-19
I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophesy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophesy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

The only things that are different, In the King james version, there are thee's and thou's.

I find it funny that people don't call the bible God's version.

Yes, so according to scripture, this loving god, adds plagues to anyone who distorts his words, wow!

King James has nothing to do with the word of god.

Yes, that is your opinion, and mine as well. I don't think any of it is "god's word".

That is why I used that version. I didn't mean to single out a version as you perceived.

O, ok.:2razz:

 

[Busta]

What is steen supposed to mean anyway?

Het Steen, Antwerp, Belgium
Het Steen is a historic medieval castle in the old city center of Antwerp, Belgium, one of Europe's biggest ports. Built in 1200 - 1225, Het Steen is Antwerp's oldest building.

Previously known as Antwerp Castle, Het Steen gained its current name in around 1520, after significant rebuilding under Charles V. The rebuilding led to it being known first as "'s Heeren Steen" (the King's Stone), and later simply as "Het Steen" (The Stone). The Dutch word "Steen" means "stone", and is used for "castle" or "fortress", as in the "Gravensteen" in Ghent, Belgium.

The castle made it possible to control the access to the Schelde, the river that flows through Antwerp. It was also used as a prison between 1303 and 1827. Part of the castle was later demolished to make the roads to connect the south and the north part of the port. The remaining building contains a shipping museum, with outside on displayed on the quay, some real old canal barges.---Wikipedia

Quite befitting, I think.

And no, kel-el, as a "fundi", I say that steen has a very good point:

Not really. They listen to the message, the words of Jesus, his parables.
Again, don't get confused by silly American literalists.

Take the book of Job, for example. A parable completely.
If God made the world over billions of years instead of 6 days, I really have no problem with that (though I take issue with evolution as an origin of life, as it has been scientifically stood on it's head......but that's a different thread.)

 

[Engimo]

Take the book of Job, for example. A parable completely.
If God made the world over billions of years instead of 6 days, I really have no problem with that (though I take issue with evolution as an origin of life, as it has been scientifically stood on it's head......but that's a different thread.)

And your credentials in the field of biology are...?

Sorry, I'll take the words of tens of thousands of people with Ph.D.'s in Biology over your's.

 

[Busta]

I don't think any of it is "god's word".

It is not the book, or the ink within it, which is God's word.
Those are just the drapings.
Rather by quotation or "inspired" perable, it is the message which is God's word.

 

[kal-el]

Originally posted by Busta
Take the book of Job, for example. A parable completely.

How do you know it's a parable? If that's a parable, what's to say that anything contained in the bible isn't a parable? You are making excuses when the bible is shown to have errors. I'd say the next logical step would be to conclude that there isn't a way to use the bible to say if god exists. If you say Job is a parable, than any story can be one also. Until you provide a clear distinction between fiction and non-fiction, I'd say it's totally illogical to assume any of it is true.

If God made the world over billions of years instead of 6 days, I really have no problem with that (though I take issue with evolution as an origin of life, as it has been scientifically stood on it's head......but that's a different thread.)

Uhh, where does it say that? Please do all of us a favor, and be truthful with us, thanks.

It is not the book, or the ink within it, which is God's word.
Those are just the drapings.
Rather by quotation or "inspired" perable, it is the message which is God's word

Well if he is perfect, then why leave his word to be misconstrued by perverts?

 

[Busta]

And your credentials in the field of biology are...?

Sorry, I'll take the words of tens of thousands of people with Ph.D.'s in Biology over your's.

Ah, see there, that's what steen likes to do as well: change he subject with an Appeal to Authority or attacking one's character, instead of addressing the information.

You could look to Jonathan Wells for one example of a scientifically sollid critique of Darwin and evolution.

 

[Engimo]

Ah, see there, that's what steen likes to do as well: change he subject with an Appeal to Authority or attacking one's character, instead of addressing the information.

You could look to Jonathan Wells for one example of a scientifically sollid critique of Darwin and evolution.

Sigh. Except an Appeal to Authority in this case is entirely valid. The criteria for the validity of an Appeal to Authority:

Any argument should ideally be based solely on direct evidence, not on the authority of the messenger. However, it is rarely possible in common discourse to provide all the direct evidence, so an "appeal to authority" is often used as a shortcut:
The authority must have competence in an area, not just glamour, prestige, rank or popularity. A sports or entertainment figure making claims about foreign policy is an example of how this rule is frequently violated.
The judgment must be within the authority's field of competence. Linus Pauling won a Nobel Prize for chemistry, then later made claims that massive quantities of vitamin C would prevent cancer in humans. This claim was in the field of medicine and thus outside his field of competence.
The authority must be interpreted correctly.This is particularly a problem in religion; where the Koran, Bible, Torah, etc., have been interpreted with varying and contradictory results.
Direct evidence must be available, at least in principle.
The expert should be reasonably unbiased (not unduly influenced by other factors, such as money, political considerations, or religious beliefs). This is why appealing to one's own authority is always illegitimate. The Pope claiming that the Sun revolved around the Earth was an example of an authority making a false claim biased by their religious beliefs.
The judgment must be representative of expert opinions on the issue (as opposed to an unrepresentative sample). Lawyers sometimes find a non-representative "expert" to offer a theory which is not generally accepted (such as a so-called Twinkie defense) in hopes of winning their case.
A technique is needed to adjudicate disagreements among equally qualified authorities. If scientific testing of the claim is not possible, then the majority of expert opinions is sometimes used to develop a consensus.

My Appeal to Authority meets those criteria. The scientific community of biologists is more than equipped to serve as an expert source for information on biology.

Wells has been debunked, I hate to say it. The National Organization for Science Education, a non-partisan, unbiased source, goes to great lengths to point this out:

In conclusion, the scholarship of Icons is substandard and the conclusions of the book are unsupported. In fact, despite his touted scientific credentials, Wells doesn't produce a single piece of original research to support his position. Instead, Wells parasitizes on other scientists' legitimate work. He could not have written the "Haeckel's embryos" chapter without the work of Richardson et al. (1997, 1998), or the "peppered moths" chapter without Coyne (1998) and Majerus (1998), or the "Archaeopteryx" chapter without Shipman (1998). Even then, Wells's discussions are rife with inaccuracies and out-of-date information. Wells seems to think that scientific theories are supported by certain "keystone" pieces of evidence, removal of which causes the theory to collapse. Paradigms in science work when they provide solutions and further research; their health is not tied to single examples. The paradigm of evolution is not tied to a single piece of evidence.

The entire book has systematically been refuted. I'm sorry, it's just wrong - there is no debate in the biological community about the validity of Evolutionary Theory, it's pretty much the foundation of modern biology.

 

[Busta]

How do you know it's a parable? If that's a parable, what's to say that anything contained in the bible isn't a parable? You are making excuses when the bible is shown to have errors. I'd say the next logical step would be to conclude that there isn't a way to use the bible to say if god exists. If you say Job is a parable, than any story can be one also. Until you provide a clear distinction between fiction and non-fiction, I'd say it's totally illogical to assume any of it is true.

You have to look to who wrote what. Different scribes had different writing styles. What are the origins of the text in question? In what context is it presented?

Uhh, where does it say that? Please do all of us a favor, and be truthful with us, thanks.

Jumping on the illogical change-the-subject-by-Attacking the Person-wagon, I see.

I meant to include my view of evolution as a side note, not to claim this thread in the name of Allah.
See the work of my afore referenced author, the rest we should leave for an evolution thread.

Well if he is perfect, then why leave his word to be misconstrued by perverts?

God didn't leave His word here so that it could be perverted, He left it here so that we would know it.

Perverts misconstrue God's word because they are perverts, not because God left it here.

Truth and knowledge can not hide from the human mind. All one needs to do is seek it out, and not even the fallen Morning Star can keep it from us.