Lets talk about God - Page 5

[boyne]

boyne, I am sorry, but you keep on answering as if the Bible and Christianity is the only true religion out there?

:)

Perfectly correct.. it is for me! At least the part of Christianity that I believe is the only true religion! So how can I possible answer on behalf of other religions/denominations except to say that my belief system explains what the future is for those other religions/denominations. And it's not going to be a good outcome if my beliefs are correct, hence the information I'm offering in this thread.

It is said that ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law. So if individuals choose not to find out what the (true religious) laws are, and then make an effort to keep from breaking them, any retribution is just, according to those laws.

A common thought is that there is only one god and many ways - sometimes ALL ways - of worshipping that god. Fine.. if it's a correct assumption. It comes back to individuals worshipping or not worshipping as they please. The difference with me is that I have deliberately set out to establish what God requires of me (and everybody) rather than impose my idea of worship on Him as most other religions do!

If you don't like my explanations I'm sorry.. it's the best I'm able to do under the circumstances. Usually I discuss these matters over a period of about six months with interested persons. Not in a potted, quick fire session like this..:)

[Kraai]

Not a question if I like or dislike your explanations, rather a question of how do you know that you are correct and all others are wrong? What makes your god superior to all others who claim the same things you do? Do you believe everything in the Bible, and if so, do you believe it literally/historically? What would you believed if you were born and grew up in a different country?

[boyne]

Why does he need to exercise "authority" if he created in the first place, and why only on "earth" what about the rest of all the space around "earth"?

Because God gave us a free will rather than make us robots. And where has our free will led us to in our day?.. polluting ourselves out of existence, killing each other, starving millions of fellow humans, and otherwise damaging human life on what is a beautiful planet. So God will exercise his "authority" to clean up the mess his tennants have made of the beautiful home we live on. Rev 11:18

It was established long ago that the earth is not the centre of the universe.. the 'kingdom' that the Bible speaks of (part of the Bible's theme) relates specifically to us and our planet home. The rest of the space is well cared for and doing nicely.

[crunchie]

If one follows a certain belief, then you either believe it all, or believe none of it.
If you choose to believe only some of it, then you do not truly believe, imo.

[Kraai]

Because God gave us a free will rather than make us robots.

Will there be free will one day in your "heaven"?

The rest of the space is well cared for and doing nicely.

And how do you know this?

[boyne]

Not a question if I like or dislike your explanations, rather a question of how do you know that you are correct and all others are wrong? What makes your god superior to all others who claim the same things you do? Do you believe everything in the Bible, and if so, do you believe it literally/historically? What would you believed if you were born and grew up in a different country?

I can boast of a High School (Grammar School, UK) religious knowledge exam mark of 5%. That was the level of interest I had in all things religious.

Blinded by prejudice and a hearty dislike of the pomp and ceremony of church services, and the illogical teachings and cruelty of other church teachings, I was able to dismiss and denigrate religion quite capably.

That was until I accidentally found myself in a situation with a staunch Bible believer. Confident of my own reasoning ability I set out to dismantle his beliefs. Sound familiar? He was able to show me from the Bible a number of things that surprised me.

1)Many teachings of the Christian churches are contrary to scripture.
2)God has a good purpose for mankind
3)The Bible contains many prophesies that have come true and are verifiable historically
4)The Bible is a sound and practical guide book for any generation
5)Most people would chose to ignore what the Bible has to say
6)Etc.

I checked the religion sections of a major library and didn't come up with anything better than the explanations I had just received. Most other religions had doctrines and beliefs you could shoot peas through.. many beliefs similar to those inside and outside of Christendom.

So from that point I embarked on a Bible course to find the flaws in what I was being told. I couldn't find any despite other religious groups trying to sway me their way.

If I could achieve that, then there is nothing to stop anyone else doing the same.. if they want to. This is in fact happening regularly in 236 lands around the globe.. many not overtly Christian.

Finally, yes I do believe everything in the Bible as being scientifically correct when in that area, historically correct - proven time and time again, and the writings are a mixture of literal accounts and also visions, and also include verbal teaching illustrations.

People are quick to decry the accuracy and veracity of the Bible.. but as with all worthwhile ventures it takes effort to get the sense of the writings. Some never do, and others don't want to make that effort.

[boyne]

Will there be free will one day in your "heaven"?

And how do you know this?

You ask me questions that can only be answered by quoting a biblical reference.. i.e. part of by beliefs. Answers to questions such as these have been sitting on shelves since the codex was invented, and before that, in scrolls.

There has always been free will in heaven, just as there has been on earth since man has been here. I believe my destiny is to live on earth, not go to 'heaven'.

[abelLazm]

They are secular. They judge the breaking of rules made by society in order to live an organized life. They do not have religion or a god attached to them and have nothing to do with any "holy rules" in any modern democratic country.

Where do you think the secular courts know the rules? the punishment for breaking those rules. Religion is the set of rules to spend an organized life Kraai.... The religion I believe tell me these rules and laws and believing in GOD is your own decision No one can drill his believes into your mind and The major thing is if you want to believe then you can find many proofs but if you don't want to believe then you will not trust even if you see GOD....

[Kraai]

Finally, yes I do believe everything in the Bible as being scientifically correct when in that area, historically correct - proven time and time again, and the writings are a mixture of literal accounts and also visions, and also include verbal teaching illustrations.

To understand your belief in the Bible better, would you say, from how you read and believe in the Bible, that, for example, the story of Noah and the Ark realy happened?

I am not out here to discredit your believe at all, and will not use this thread to point out any "flaws" that I can make out in your religion, as it is not my purpose to do on this thread and surely is not the purpose of this thread, I am only asking the above question to understand how you see/believe the bible better. And BTW if your way of believing in your god makes you a good person, by all means, that is what counts!

[boyne]

Where do you think the secular courts know the rules? the punishment for breaking those rules. Religion is the set of rules to spend an organized life Kraai.... The religion I believe tell me these rules and laws and believing in GOD is your own decision No one can drill his believes into your mind and The major thing is if you want to believe then you can find many proofs but if you don't want to believe then you will not trust even if you see GOD....

Very true.. one only has to scratch the surface and a religious influence pops up and interferes in government. USA, UK, Russia, EU, Middle East; Asia.. the religious harlot of Revelation is alive and well.. for now!

Yes, abelLazm.. it's merely an excuse for those not prepared to put in the effort to just state.. 'if I could see God then I would believe'.. who are they kidding?

[Kraai]

Where do you think the secular courts know the rules? the punishment for breaking those rules. Religion is the set of rules to spend an organized life Kraai.... The religion I believe tell me these rules and laws and believing in GOD is your own decision No one can drill his believes into your mind and The major thing is if you want to believe then you can find many proofs but if you don't want to believe then you will not trust even if you see GOD....

It is true, that in some countries, religion made up the rules the courts are upholding, as well as the punishment, but surely, not in all countries. I know the exact history of where the law comes from in the country I am living in, and nothing of it is based on any religion and no punishment of it is based on any religion. It is wrong to assume that religion established rules to organize life, because, organized life was there long before religion.

[boyne]

To understand your belief in the Bible better, would you say, from how you read and believe in the Bible, that, for example, the story of Noah and the Ark realy happened?

The definitive answer to Noah and the Ark is yes I believe the account is factual and accurate. I believe that because I have built my trust in the accuracy of the Bible over the past 38 years.

However.. to be reasonable we need to find some acceptable proof from other sources for those who don't have the same trust in the Bible.

There is geological evidence of a global flood.
There are traditions from many nations of an ancient global flood
There is genetic evidence that mankind comes from a common starting point
There is ample evidence that the animals on earth today could result from those in the ark
The later Bible writers and Jesus are recorded as talking of the flood.. if false why was that belief not challenged by historians of the day?
And the Bible gives the reason why the flood was necessary from God's reasoning

[jingda]

This thread had starting to turn into a debate....

[jon.kiparsky]

However.. to be reasonable we need to find some acceptable proof from other sources for those who don't have the same trust in the Bible.

Your other "reasons" don't even bear responding to, since again none of them deal with anything outside of the body of knowledge they're meant to confirm, but these two show a remarkable ignorance of biology and geology.

1) "There is genetic evidence that mankind comes from a common starting point"

yes, there is convincing evidence that mankind comes from a common starting point. That common starting point is some form of proto-life not dreamed of in your bible, and it's further back than your bible allows by a factor of about 10 to the 6th - that is, you could fit your entire bible story into the history of life as determined by all the evidence outside of that bible, about a million times. And you'd still have a billion years before that when the earth existed without any life that we can find evidence for. If you want to be a bit more anthropocentric, we can say that mankind's last divergence from non-human species is more recent than that, but still it's not open to sensible dispute that humankind has been wandering around on the earth long enough to act out your whole story ten times, or thereabouts. So no, the evidence of mankind's common origins doesn't really support your ark story at all.

2) "There is ample evidence that the animals on earth today could result from those in the ark"

This is nonsense on stilts. What on earth could you be talking about? All animals on earth make their earliest appearance in the fossil record in the vicinity of Mount Ararat a few thousand years ago and radiate out from there, dividing the world among them so that the guinea pigs somehow swim the Atlantic, cross the rain forest, and climb the Andes to wind up in the bioregion where they were discovered by Europeans a few hundred years ago?
What evidence do you have to support the claim that guinea pigs migrated over land and sea, of their own accord, moving in one direction and one direction only until they came to the ocean and presumably built little guinea pig boats with their little guinea pig hammers and saws, or possibly hitched a ride on the back of a whale, because all the mammals were friends back then, and then continued walking in a straight line, one little guinea pig step at a time, until they climbed the bloody Andes, and then spread out across the top of this mountain range and said, okay, gang, this is it, we're here. Now let's be eaten by the local people, because god wants it that way!
There's something dreadfully wrong with a theology that depends crucially on the ability of a guinea pig to walk in a straight line, and for the entire species of guinea pigs to carry on in a straight line for generations. But assuming that such a thing might have happened, we would naturally expect a trail of guinea pig carcasses starting at Mount Ararat and leading to the Andes - or, if you want to suppose a different sort of miracle, expanding out from Mount Ararat and petering out in all directions except for the path to Ecuador and Peru and thereabouts.

So, the fossil record reflects this? All known animals appear clustered at Mount Ararat in the years immediately following the flood and then distribute themselves in the modern patterns thereafter?

Nonsense, I say, on stilts. That you could even consider such a thing plausible is sad enough, but it's your life. If you want to ignore the world and dive into your bible, that's your choice. That you ask anyone else to believe it is insulting. Why do you waste anyone's time with such patent twaddle? We're not talking about unverifiable philosophical mumbo-jumbo now. As I say, the god hypothesis is unfalsifiable, therefore it's consistent with anything we observe, therefore it's devoid of explanatory power and there's no way to make it mean anything in the real world, but you're free to assert it without fear of contradiction. (although anyone with any sense will ask, "why your god and not others", and you won't have an answer). But when you start making assertions about the physical world, then you have to deal in facts - the sort of facts that other people can see, not just the ones that only special people see.
And there are no facts to support your claim and you know it. The claim is simply false, and it flies in the face of everything that is known about the world, and you know that too. So let's go back to the "nature of god" stuff, which is at least a little less embarassing to read. This, this is terrible. If you're not ashamed, I'm at least ashamed on your behalf.

Nice thread. Someone said you have to believe EVERYTHING as part of the religion to truly believe it.

I guess this follows on logically. But I don't agree with blanket statements. That's what makes us human. Being self aware and making our own conclusions.

[boyne]

Why do you waste anyone's time with such patent twaddle?So let's go back to the "nature of god" stuff, which is at least a little less embarassing to read. This, this is terrible. If you're not ashamed, I'm at least ashamed on your behalf.

Hahahaha! Jon, thank you for your generous contribution to my 'twaddle' and perhaps you can use the old sackcloth and ashes routine to show your shame on my behalf. :)

The 'God Theory' exists alongside the 'Evolution Theory'.. so good hunting for your missing link(s) and the ape ancestor who contributed to your current existence.. if that's the only option you have to believing in God. Please don't feel obliged to read any more of my insulting comments.. although you may care to let others express themselves rather than assume that right on their behalf.

The poll figures are about even for theists and atheists.. so you have a few more believers to target if they stick their heads up. Keep smiling Jon.. only one of us is correct and I don't fancy your chances!

[Kraai]

Many floods occurs regulary on different parts of the world, we know it, yes, the evidence and history is there. Latest big one was the Tsunami in Japan, so yes, floods happens, we see it, we observe it.

My personal feeling is, that if the story of Noah realy happens, one must see it as a mith carried over from generation to generartion, based on a flood that might have happened some those years ago, in an isolated area, same like we see floods today, and not flooding of the entire world. I mean, just take the measurements of the Ark and build it to scale to see if it can be possible to fit two two of every species in it, plus the food they suppose to eat for 40 days.

[boyne]

My personal feeling is, that if the story of Noah realy happens, one must see it as a mith carried over from generation to generartion, based on a flood that might have happened some those years ago, in an isolated area, same like we see floods today, and not flooding of the entire world. I mean, just take the measurements of the Ark and build it to scale to see if it can be possible to fit two two of every species in it, plus the food they suppose to eat for 40 days.

The account of Noahs' Ark can't have really happened and also be a myth! You may be interested this Dutch enthusiast and his version of the Ark. I'm not endorsing his design but you will get an idea of the size of this thing. Remember too, that it didn't sail anywhere.. it merely had to float, so didn't need a pointed bow and stern. It was a box-like structure built for a singular purpose, and did it's job well according to the account.

http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/02/15/modern-day-noah-dutch-man-builds-ark-of-biblical-proportions/

[jon.kiparsky]

The 'God Theory' exists alongside the 'Evolution Theory'.. so good hunting for your missing link(s) and the ape ancestor who contributed to your current existence

You actually don't have any idea what you're talking about, do you? Not even the vaguest clue of what is claimed by the theory you're rubbishing out of hand, just because it disagrees with your dogma. Quick, what are the basic claims of Darwinian evolution, either as laid out by Darwin (and Wallace, if you like) or the contemporary consensus?
If you don't trust me to score your answer, I can write to some biologists and ask them to let us know how you did.

Shall we assume from your amused response that you don't actually intend to provide any of the evidence you promised? Would it be fair to assume that this is because you haven't got any, and you know there's no such evidence to offer, and you know it?

Come on, there's no fun in an argument if you're going to fold as soon as someone pokes at you. If you can show me a distribution of animals in their contemporary forms radiating from the spot where that drunken sailor crashed his dinghy into the only available piece of rock, then you've got a case to make. If not, you can quit claiming that there's anything to support your claims of literal truth in the bible, because every time you do, you will be lying, and you will know you are lying, and you know that your god doesn't want you to lie on his behalf. Or does he?

[jon.kiparsky]

The account of Noahs' Ark can't have really happened and also be a myth!

This much, at least, is true.

[Kraai]

The account of Noahs' Ark can't have really happened and also be a myth! You may be interested this Dutch enthusiast and his version of the Ark. I'm not endorsing his design but you will get an idea of the size of this thing. Remember too, that it didn't sail anywhere.. it merely had to float, so didn't need a pointed bow and stern. It was a box-like structure built for a singular purpose, and did it's job well according to the account.

The myth is in the story you read today. The reality may be in a flood that happened in an isolated area of the world where people lived. Keep in mind, that world was flat, not round, and stood on 4 pillars. The koala bear from Aus did not make it unto the Ark. The design as per your link is not bad, it is just the tipped roof on top that is out of place for those era. Now, imagine yourself to fit two of each species plus their food and drink into that box.

[jon.kiparsky]

Keep in mind, that world was flat, not round, and stood on 4 pillars.

Piffle. It's flat as a board, until I'm told otherwise. Oh, it's round now? Nevermind.

The koala bear from Aus did not make it unto the Ark.

No, you've got it the wrong way around. The koala originated in Mesopotamia (somewhere in the vicinity of Basra, if I'm not mistaken) and it was only after the flood that it decided, for reasons of its own, or maybe because it was god's will, to relocate to Australia. And, yes, there was eucalyptus in Mesopotamia back then. And everywhere between there and Australia, so the koalas were able to eat on their long journey.

That makes so much more sense than anything those biologists come up with - who would believe them, anyway, with all their sciency evidence stuff?

[Kraai]

No, you've got it the wrong way around. The koala originated in Mesopotamia (somewhere in the vicinity of Basra, if I'm not mistaken) and it was only after the flood that it decided, for reasons of its own, or maybe because it was god's will, to relocate to Australia. And, yes, there was eucalyptus in Mesopotamia back then. And everywhere between there and Australia, so the koalas were able to eat on their long journey.

That makes so much more sense than anything those biologists come up with - who would believe them, anyway, with all their sciency evidence stuff?

Thanks for correcting me on the origin of the koala! :) :)

[crunchie]

Thanks for keeping it impersonal guys. Thread closed.