Rook, I don't know if you will answer this but
Posted on: August 22, 2007 - 1:21am
Offline
Rook, I don't know if you will answer this but
How can we be certain of contradictions? I mean I was dicussing one you covered in your show about who came to the tomb first, Remember Mark 16:1, Luke 24:10, John 20:1 and Matthew 28:1, and they claimed that it wasn't a contradiction just different versions of the same story but they still claimed that there was harmony in the story. Just because they left people out. Now my other question is, where can I learn as much as you know, And what are some of the best ways to use contradictions and debate theists? because I am great with evolution but I don't know the bible quite as well as you do. I have read it numerous times but it doesn't stick as well as science does so I can't refer to it as easy.
- Login to post comments
I tried to go back and simply delete the images from the posts but so far they remain. I will try again later or just inform the mods that they need to do it.
Well, let me say this. There are about 5 of you guys asking questions and only one of me so I will do my best. I am not skipping questions, but I only have so much time and I am doing the best with the time I have.
Regarding the passage in Hosea that we have beat to death. I did not have a problem with the FACT that it says that people will die and pregnant women wil be ripped open. Here are the problems with what you guys seem to think:
1. Context - this is a huge one. You believe the "people of Samaria" is simply up to interpretation. Darth-josh believes that maybe the text is unclear. Just the same way we write about African-Americans - we are not unclear at all. We all know what that means in the context of today's time. 2800 years from now, when a historian reads what we have written, he cannot say, "well it is up for interpretation." He MUST go back and see what was the orginal intention of the term African-American. If he does not, it is not the ambiguity of the writing, but rather the laziness of the historian that is the problem. That was my point. If one is not a historian, then consult one.
2. Brian 37 asked If God is all loving, why the "wrath" angle? God's love is only one attribute of God. God is not just love, God is holy, righteous, just, jealous, etc . . . I will tell you that there are many preachers today that only talk about the love of God. They fail to mention that God is so much more than that. Does love only mean permissiveness? I love my kids, but they are not allowed to simply do what they want. It is because I love them that when they break the rules - they are punished. I would question the love of a parent that does not punish a child for disobeying. For example if a child steals - if the parent does nothing then the parent is setting the kid up for greater crimes as an adult which could lead to all kinds of consequences. Did that parent love the kid enough to see down the road and hopefully get the kid to avoid the greater dangers? I believe that God loves you so much that he is putting me in your path in life in order tell you about His love and to warn you of the dangers ahead. Just life the child - you will still choose to do what you choose to do.
As a parent, Darth-Josh (DJ) has already painted me as a bad parent and he believes that God is a bad Father. Well, lets think about that.
DJ stated that he ALWAYS explains to his kids why they are to do or not do something. I stated that I do not always have time but I DID NOT say that I never explain to my kids the reason I have rules. Do you know that after explaining to them time and time again about the danger of getting hit by a car - my kids still seem to want to find a way to get near the street and if they can - go into the street. Now maybe DJ is not only the most outstanding parent for ALWAYS explaining everything to his kids - but also his kids ALWAYS obey him, but I believe there is a great analogy here.
God does tell us what we ought to do and what we ought not to do AND he tells us why. Let's just take one example:
Sex outside of marriage. The world says it is OK and God says it is not. God says - no sex outside of marriage.
WHY DOES GOD SAY THAT: Romans 13 makes it clear that Love must be one issue when it comes to sex. Love means to value the happiness, health, and spritual growth of the other person as much as you do your own happiness, health, and spritual growth. So just to satisfy a need at a time is not the standard because that is sex for selfish reasons only.
God says to to keep sex inside the boundaries of marriage because of purity. Sex is to be enjoyed in a husband-wife relationship for precreation, spiritual unity, and for recreation. Just from a physical stand point - there is no other SAFE SEX. For you or anyone to argue this point is simply sad. You tell me, what is the damage to people because of sex outside of marriage?
God says that sex is about faithfulness. It binds two people together for a lifetime. Sex produces an emotional, physical and spritual intimacy that is for life.
Scripture speaks about all three of these things (I would be glad to give you references if you need them) as to the WHY it is good for sex to be between people who love one another, are pure so that they do not being memories of past experiences into the bedroom and disease, AND finally people who are faithful in a committed relationship as marriage. Did people in the Bible adhere to it - no and it cost them. Do people adhere to it today - no and it cost them.
We could do this all day. But you stated that a good parent gives the rules, and then explains why he gives the rules. God does that so therefore God is a good parent. You and I could not even begin to describe the pain and suffering that has occured because we have chosen to dismiss what God has said. We are just like the kids who even though we have been told why we should not go into the street - we still go.
Of course the question has been asked "where did evil come from?" DJ, one thing you and your friends at RRS are going to have to get over is that you really believe you guys are the only ones who are asking the deeper questions. You wrote that you guys have been writing papers for "leterally years." The Christian faith has been around for 2000 years. The discussion of that question would take more time than I can devote at this time. Have you ever asked, "Why is it that you are the "good" parent and you explain everything to your kids and it would seem that evolution would have figured out by know that if one would listen to their elders, they would have a better chance of survival AND YET WHAT HAPPENS - rebellion all the time. Why is it that we know that sin ALWAYS, 100% of the time, leads to pain and yet we choose it? Knowing that it will hurt others and it will hurt us? You guys love bringing up the OT, so why is it that even when we know that it would be better to AT LEAST live by the last 6 commandments (you do not believe in God so the first four you will ignore) we still rebel against them. Even if God did not tell us the consequences at all, after over 3000 years of the commandments being around we still cannot figure out that we should not lie. We still do it KNOWING that it causes pain. Why is it that we covet our neighbor's things? Even though we know it leads to debt, adultery, hate, etc. . . . Why is that. I am sure you will give me a naturalistic answer.
2. The answer to the questions above is simply we are like the kids going into the street. We attempt to get as close to sin as we can and even though we have been told not to go. Even though we know there are great consequences we go anyway.
Know this, that even as a minister, I have had a "crises of belief." Certainly, I have questioned my faith and I have questioned the very existence of God. The result of those times has left me with certainty that God does exist. Just because I am not in the place of questioning today does not mean I have never done that. When I have questioned, it has been amazing how God has proved himself to be real and true.
DJ you asked about a threat again. Is it a threat to tell my kids that if they go into the street, they will get hit by a car? I do not have the certainty of the car, but the Bible is pretty clear on the issue of hell. You believe it is a threat because you do not believe in God or heaven or hell. I see it as a warning. Perhaps if someone did not believe in cars, they would see my warning as a threat. We could argue this all day, but I am not sure what the point is.
What you do here after I am gone - I do not care. Not sure what your point is here.
Again, almost laughable. You, someone who does not believe in God. You do not believe in God's word and yet you accuse me of not living by the scripture, because I do not hate you. God even tells us in Romans:
9Let love be genuine. Abhor what is evil; hold fast to what is good. 10 Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor. 11Do not be slothful in zeal, be fervent in spirit, serve the Lord. 12Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer. 13Contribute to the needs of the saints and seek to show hospitality. 14Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. 15Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. 16Live in harmony with one another. Do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly. Never be wise in your own sight. 17Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. 18If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. 19Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord." 20To the contrary, "if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head." 21Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
That is what I attempt to do, but as I already admitted - I fail daily. Consistent with what I explained before, Romans 1 is talking about God's wrath - not a Christian's wrath.
Your example of Ruth and Naomi is not an interpretation issue. To interpret a text is to see it from another angle, not put something there that is not there. You are reading INTO the text. You are making it say something that it does not say.
Not sure what you point is concerning things happening that are not the will of God. Also, not sure what your point is concerning your neighbors. It neither proves nor disproves anything. Do I believe that there are theists who are bad parents - sure I do and I believe there are atheists that are bad parents. I am not even the positon to judge the preacher who lives next to you so I am not saying anything about him.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
I will answer later when I have more time.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Alright, im getting a bit tired of the "God is like a father" argument. Let me ask you something, when your kids play in the street, do you ground them? Or spank them? Or do you whip off your belt and beat them until they are unconscious?
"Eternal Torment" vs "You're grounded". There's a slight difference between the two.
A good father would never kick his kids out of his house simply for having a different opinion. A good father would never want to see his children tortured for ANY reason. A good father will punish his children, but not to the extent that god does.
God is not a father figure. God relies on fear to get his will done. I was never afraid of my father. I had respect for my father, and I obeyed him out of that respect, not fear.
"I may be going to hell in a rocketship, but at least I get to ride in a rocketship. You have to climb those damn stairs. " - Katie Volker
Update: I have tried every fricking function that I can think of to remove the "gore" photos and I have not found the answer. If you discover the secret to removing the photos then PM me and I will do it.
If one of the other mods or I thought they needed to come down then they would have came down the moment you posted them, ProzacDeathWish.
This is Biblical Errancy not KEWK. Your images were a representation of your thoughts on Biblical Errancy (violence vs. 'preached' love) ergo they are relevant to this tangential discussion with REVLyle that I want to maintain.
There is a cool keyboard trick included in computers for people who don't wish to see offensive things. Hold down the 'control' key and press the 'w' key. Works every time to filter those types of materials.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.
I asked about regular people, not historians. You’re correct. That passage has been ‘beat to death’. Was that pun intended?
More preaching instead of discussion.
If I were omniscient then I would know which kid was going to fuck up and when. If I did nothing to prevent the fuck-up THEN what kind of parent would I be.
(props to Epicurus)
Natural selection perhaps?
Hmmmm. Did you have sex before marriage?
Actually, a good parent asks ‘loaded’ questions and helps his kids reason the answer for themselves. Such as: “Why is it a bad idea to go into the street?”
A bad parent says, “Don’t go into the street because it is for the wicked people and you will surely die!”
Nope. We aren’t deluded into thinking that we’re asking new or ‘deeper’ questions. The truth is that such a small percentage of questions have been answered with any amount of credibility that people aren’t satisfied.
You can see for yourself in the forums how many times new people come here and ask the same old questions(atheists and theists). That would seem to say that your 2000 year old faith has done a pretty poor job of explaining itself.
Reasoning doesn’t include adherence to the teachings of elders. Any number of people with miserable upbringings can refute the idea of following their elders’ advice in every situation.
100%??? Interesting. I look at beautiful women with lust in my heart all of the time and yet I have not felt pain from doing so. (other than the occasional erection)
No No No
Let’s look at the six from Exodus 20
1.) Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land that the Lord your God is giving you.
Commandment to respect one’s parents. However, this cannot be applicable in every situation because there are far worse parents out there than you or I could imagine.
2.) You shall not murder.
It is a shame that this commandment wasn’t expounded upon by the authors of the bible since there have been so many EXCEPTIONS to it.
3.) You shall not commit adultery.
How many wonderful relationships have developed from adulterous affairs? My own wife was still legally married to her first husband when we got together 13 ½ years ago.
4.) You shall not steal.
People steal in order to provide sometimes. Our own folk stories highlight Robin Hood or The Count of Monte Cristo.
5.) You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
I like this one. Unfortunately, it also has more exceptions than applications. Recent propaganda from Iraq had it that terrorists were using suicide bombers that had Down’s syndrome to deliver the ‘packages’ instead of robust muslim men. This was debunked earlier this week, but it had a profound effect upon so many people to vilify the terrorists. The very stance of ‘pro-life’ used by so many Christians is a direct affront to this commandment by painting the opposing viewpoint as ‘anti-life’. You could argue that form of ‘bearing false witness’ is serving your alleged god’s position.
6.) You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his male servant, or his female servant, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor's.
Equating all of those things to each other as ‘possessions’ is ludicrous.
You haven’t been asked to reason it for yourself. We’ve already looked at a few ‘sins’ and found their ‘reasons’ to be called into question. The ‘great consequences’ are not apparent.
You say “Don’t run into the street because it will turn into a lake of fire!”
That has to be your answer. You’re a minister. Have you ever had a different job that provided so well?
You’re not going to get it.
Just examining how empty the promise of a rapture seems to me.
LOL. That is so humorous to me. ‘heap burning coals on his head’
I quoted Ruth. Now, let’s quote and compare some marriage vows. I’m looking for declarative ones, not instructional ones as in the ‘book of common prayer’.
“I, Jane, take you, John, to be my husband. I promise to be true to you in good times and bad, in sickness and in health. I will love you and honor you all the days of my life.”
Take out the words Jane, John, and husband, we are left with something similar to Ruth’s statement: “Do not urge me to leave you or to return from following you. For where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge. Your people shall be my people, and your God my God. Where you die I will die, and there will I be buried. May the Lord do so to me and more also if anything but death parts me from you.”
I’ll let it go. I’ve made my point, but you assert that it isn’t so. I think Rook says I’m crazy for thinking this as well because it is interpretive rather than objective.
Do things happen that are not the will of your god in your life?
I was merely stating that I already have enough theist neighbors to deal with now without having to worry about another one’s kids running into the street.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.
NO NO NO, show all GORE pictures, and naked people too .... LOOK at US !
?????? What is going on ?????? WHY ?????? Get LOUDER ....
Atheism Books.
Do you presume to know my thoughts ?
If I were to curse "God" it would be precisely because I came into existence.
If given the choice I would gladly have refused the so-called "gift of life." Your statement quoted above just makes me laugh at it's incredible naivete
I have no desire to live even a single day beyond this moment. You may perhaps think I'm being coy but if your God truly knows my thoughts I can promise that He is utterly assured of my sincerity.
Although I am completely lucid (ie, I cannot be classified as psychotic) being alive means that I am forced to endure the agony of a severe emotional disorder whose intensity only increases with time.
To have never been born is a beautiful dream that my mind literally aches for.
ps, sorry to butt back into this thread but I just had to respond to REV's assumption. Btw, God gives really shitty gifts !!!
The gift that God gave was the life of his Son and if you would only believe - you will have eternal life. You may think that this very day is a curse, but even today you can choose to follow Jesus Christ.
Eternal life with God will be completely different than the life we have now. There will be no more pain, no more suffering. You are exactly right that if this life is all that you know or believe, then what is the point.
This is what the Apostle Paul wrote:
For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us.
There are times that we may feel that to make it through the next day - why do it. When people come to know the Lord - there is purpose behind each day. There is hope for the future. There is the promise of heaven.
I am sorry for your condition even though I do not fully understand it. I will certainly pray for you.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
If it makes any difference... I'm glad you're here. Even if people consider us to be 'obnoxious' for our opinions, they should understand our sincerity at least.
Despite any other disorder, at least we're not christian. Always a good day to wake up an atheist.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.
You might want to dive into the Epicurean argument a little deeper before you begin to think that you completely understand the answer to it. I know that my kid is going to have to endure long nights, lots of reading, physical exhaustion, and times of disappointment in order to get his education - perhaps I should just keep him from school. When I go through hard times, and I do, I do not see it as God's indifference. I see it as God continuing to refine me as his child.
I think the natural selection comment was below the belt. I could say more, but I won't.
No, I did not have sex before marriage and neither did my wife. SOOOOO, now a good parent does not just give you an explanation - a good parent allows a child to figure out the best choice. Would you begin to tell me that there has been no cost for society for sex outside of marriage? You argue for me, not against me. Here we are looking at the results of sex outside of marriage. It leads to broken hearts and broken lives. It spreads disease (many organizations not tied to Christianity will attest to this). So logically, we know that it is not good for society AND yet we still promote it. When left to themselves - children will OFTEN make the wrong choice. We do not need to let our children figure it out - we need to guide our children to the right choice. Do you really believe a 3 year old understands that a car will kill them? They cannot even conceive of death.
Yes, 100% of the time. Pain is not always physical by the way. You look at women with lust and you really believe it causes no pain. You readily admit that you are married to a woman who was already in a married relationship. I wonder if lust had anything to do with that????
Even if ones parents are bad - we should honor them - plain and simple.
The Christian faith does not exist to answer every question that man has. It answers the most important ones. Who is God and why do I exist? This entire thread is from a guy who wants to know "How can I get theists on the who was at the grave issue." Just because people ask the same old questions - does not mean that the answers have not been answered fully years ago. It is that people are in different phases of life - that is all. The questions you are asking were most likely asked before and fully answered before - you just do not know it.
Reasoning would include listening to advice that would increase our chances survival and yet many times we ignore it.
Ah yes the ten commandments:
Should we honor bad parents - yes. Even if they were bad we are to honor them. As I have already stated, evidently no one can match your greatness in parenting (except you seem to be forgetting to tell your kids the truth about Jesus Christ so they might be saved). Don't worry though - hopefully they will hear the truth one day. God did not give children a way out of this one based upon the quality of the parent. I know this is tough for some, but for those that do not struggle in this area, they may struggle in another.
The Bible does not paint life on earth as heaven. That is what heaven is. Moses wrote the Torah and he was a murderer. The Bible does not make out the authors nor the people of God as some kind of super heroes that did not sin. The only one without sin was Jesus Christ.
Adultery. your happiness is not the litmus test for whether or not something is right or wrong. Adultery is wrong ALL the time. I wrote that to sin causes pain 100% of the time. Would you say that no one was hurt in the fact that you were part of breaking up a marriage? If your answer is yes - you truly do live in a fantasy.
Stealing is still sin. Again, Moses killed and he is the author of the Torah. He is the man who God used to deliver his people out of Egypt - that doesn't mean that when he murdered it was right. The rich should not use their wealth just for themselves. There is sin in selfishness and stealing from the selfish is also sin.
Bearing false witness - dude it is lying. It is always wrong. Your stories of Iran and abortion have nothing to do with this issue. It is a sin to lie. Do you think it is headline news that people use lies for their own benefit. That does not mean that lying does not bring pain. And by the way - abortion is "anti-life" and the amount of pain it has brought upon people is also indescribable. I am not getting into this issue but the idea that one has life growing in them and you can simply choose to stop the life AND then not call it murder is incredible. A man was just found guilty of aggravated murder for killing an unborn fetus. So, is it murder or not. If an abortion is not murder simply because a mother decides it, then what you are saying is that murder is based upon ownership. The mother owns the child and therefore can end the life. The man just found guilty did not own the child and therefore when he ended the life - it was murder. IF THAT IS TRUE - then let's get back to why you have a problem with God killing man.
Coveting - unbelievable. You evidently coveted your neighbors wife and took her 13 years ago. Why steal - because you want what your neighbor has. Why neglect children and spouse - so you can earn what your neighbor has. I could go on and on. To be unsatisfied with what God has given you and to desire (this is what goes on in the head which leads to action) what God has given your neighbor - it is wrong.
I have no problem showing you the affects of all the sins listed. You just need to open your eyes DJ.
My crises of belief came before I was a minister. Yes, I had another career. I was an architect and I owned my own firm. I sold it all and gave my life to the ministry. Part of this journey was going into debt month after month because I had nothing and my wife and I were trying to make ends meet.
All that happens in my life is both the will of God and the result of my choices.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Soooo, allowing you or your family to be harmed or even killed is just your god 'refining' you?
Epicurus wins.
Yeah. It was. Amazingly, I allowed it to survive the editing of the original planned post. You may think that I just do this freeform. I re-read before posting the long ones.
Earlier in the thread, ad hom for ad hom, remember?
You said 100%??? I didn't.
Did you miss the emphasis on 'loaded' questions???
Have you ever 'googled' the 'Socratic Method'? Congratulations, I just made you a little better parent for providing information in the form of a question.
Ahhh. If only the semites had access to philosophy instead of fable.
See? It sure did. Lust was and is rather rewarding.
BZZZZZT!!!! Wrong.
The answer still remains a contradiction regardless of historical relevance or ignorance pleading in the form of "We can't know therefore it must have been this way!"
You didn't receive enough information to preach this to me, preacher. Who drove to the church so that my eldest daughter could get baptized two years ago? They get to hear BOTH sides and will hopefully garner enough information to make an informed choice rather than a 'faith' choice.
As for honoring bad parents, that is just insane. Bad parents should be relegated to the bottom of the list of one's life after they are freed from the home.
So how would jesus know what sin was then? Your argument about your 'teaching' qualities is that you are/have been a sinner?
Why should one trust a moses or jesus to teach them things about their lives if they never enjoined in them enough to find the reasons for their exclusion from 'moral' behavior?
On a side note: Why would I want to take interpersonal relationship advice from someone whose alleged disciple sold him to the council? If you can't trust your own disciples then...
Her marriage was already broken and her first two children were put up for adoption before we got together in '94. We'd known each other since 5th grade.
Right now, this moment, if she called and said that she wanted to have sex with someone else then I wouldn't have a problem with it even though under your 'rules' THAT would be adultery. How asinine is that? Would she be condemned to hell even though MY permission was given?
Soooo NOT stealing and letting your family starve is righteous? We're dealing with an extreme here. I pointed out the two folk stories as an affront to your assertion because society looks at Robin Hood as a HERO. Strange that he had a friar with him too don't you think?
You covered three controversial topics in this 'paragraph' and it was tangential to lying. I was pointing to the fact that propaganda is used by both sides in the choice debate. So your side benefits from LYING every time they bring 3" long fully-formed babies to show kids what they believe a 10-week old fetus looks like. jesus camp the movie for a reference.
I filled in the missing details a moment ago.
Safer cars. Better drinking water. Good food. All of those things come about by way of coveting what someone else has.
Ditto, preacher.
Hmmm. I'm sure that there is more to that story, but I won't pry. Here's to hoping that once religion has been erased from humanity, you'll be OK.
I get to thank myself for good things. I can't figure out why someone believes thanking a god for good things THEY do is more rewarding? The "I did this because god wanted me to." idea makes no sense particularly when it goes the opposite of one's 'choice'.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.
You fail every time to answer the questions put before you:
Would you begin to tell me that there has been no cost for society for sex outside of marriage?
I asked:
Do good parents allow a child to figure out the best choice? I will add - Is this always possible and what does the good parent do when the child makes the wrong choice?
Would you say that no one was hurt in the fact that you were part of breaking up a marriage? I could speculate about the two kids but I won't. I choose not to go down the sorry path of making comments about her children. I wish you would do the same about mine.
You wrote: You didn't receive enough information to preach this to me, preacher.
Is that any different than you suggesting that I only adhere to my beliefs because I could not make it financially without being a minister. And just in case you were wondering since you believe that I am holding something back from my story of going from architect to minister - my company was going great. I had two other business partners and the company lasted for another 10 years after I left. In order to do what I am doing now it cost me money and 11 more years of school.
As far as my kids getting both sides. First, let me say that I went to public school my whole life. I went to a state university. My kids are in public school right now and they will be as far as I know. They will get indoctrinated into secular thought. My oldest already has had questions and I am sure that he will have more. My faith is my faith and he will have a choice to make his faith his. I cannot force it on him.
Just curious - why take your daughter to be baptized? Is she a believer or infant baptism?
The fact that people benefit from lying has nothing to do with the fact that lying is wrong. Why in the world do you think people lie? Let me help you with that answer - it benefits them. Look how offended you are when a lie is delivered to you. I have heard Sapient and Kelly cry about how people have lied about them. But you will insist that it does not bring pain and suffering?????
Where do you stand on partial birth abortion? Are you going to show that fully formed fetus and show it ripped apart? (please do not post pictures)
Is abortion not murder because the mother owns the child? Why is it murder for the man to kill the fetus while in the mother's womb?
Safer cars. Better drinking water. Good food - You must be pretty flexible because this is quite a stretch to say that these things have come about because of coveting.
As far as the adultery - I am sorry for you. The idea that you would gladly let another man be with your wife in that way is sad for you and for her. Would your wife have the same reaction for you - Sure have sex with anyone you want....By the way - It is not my rule - It is from God.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Hey REVLyle , thanks for caring , but fuck your simplistic rules , I am a rebel, I AM EVOLUTION <<< I AM GOD as you. I FUCK .... fix fucking problems thru science, GOD is trying but forgive god?, .... FUCK NO, .... Evolve
, don't surrender EVER .... this is god's real command, "NO surrender".
Get it ? Me either actually ! It is just the way it is ...... da da da
Yeah more girls and babys for me, that's what I really really want ! You lie REVLyle , how come ??? .....
Atheism Books.
I have aready received the gift of Christ by accepting him as my personal Lord and Saviour at age 15 right up until my early 40's when I began to see that my denomination ( Southern Baptist ) had lied about biblical inerrancy and my faith had crumbled into nothingness as a reult.
Apparently Christ thought it best for me to suffer and never help me with my affliction during all those years so why would he help now ?
I definitely do not want to live forever, whether it be in Heaven or anyplace else.
Every time or you just don't like the answers much as I can't fathom yours?
I'm not the one fond of making absolutist statements in this thread, preacher.
Yes by giving REAL reasons not fabricated commandments. If a child makes a 'wrong choice' then obviously one of two things hasn't been met for the criteria of being a good parent:
1.) Not enough information was given
2.) Parent did not place enough emphasis on reasoning the consequences.
I told you, dumbass! They were 'legally' married, but he had already failed as a husband! She had to give up two kids for adoption because they failed. Incidentally, both christians.
Don't be a bad parent and your kids might not run into the street when you COMMAND them not to do so. If yours are still going to run into the street after that then what reason other than base natural selection would there be?
So you gave up a successful career to preach and you expect me not to be incredulous????
Strange. Yet you assert that they will be 'indoctrinated into secular thought'?
One would think that a parent supporting such as an allegedly wonderful thing as christianity would be able to reason with their children to keep those pesky secular influences out of their minds. WTF? HELLO INDOCTRINATION.
She was 9 at the time. It was her idea. She professes atheism now, but I have told her that it is an uninformed decision until she finishes studying religions because she may find something. She agreed.
Her mother has directed her attention to the B.R.E.A.D. method of reading the bible. Unfortunately, Harry Potter displaced Laura Ingalls Wilder this year as favorite reading material. After I finish Pullman's 'dark materials', I will pass them on to her.
Then why do christians continue to maintain a lie?
Why do people use 'little white lies' to protect people from 'pain and suffering'???
You're making absolutist statements when there are exceptions to them. Even I have conceded that not every theist is delusional.
There are good lies and good thefts in certain situations. It's up to us to reason what those are, not some lame-ass manufactured mandate from a pack of gold-mongering, desert-wandering zealots.
If we recall, Moses ordered them to extort gold and silver after the 10th plague. (Exodus 12) all under the permissive god
Since I have never nor will ever have an abortion, then what business is it of mine?
Interesting that you should mention the pictures because I already brought up one example of deception on the part of some evangelicals.
Theodicy. Why would your god allow it? Nay even promote it with regard to the earlier text discussed?
It is up for society to decide each instance, not just one man or an alleged creator.
Not really.
"Wow. Bill's car is really good. It got a 5 star crash rating. I want one just like it for my family!"
"River city has such good drinking water. Let's hire their city manager away from them!"
"Oooh. That dish on the food network looks so good. I want to try it."
I didn't have to stretch at all.
LOL. I'm sorry for you in that you're so insecure that you worry yours wouldn't come back home. What part of 'permission' did you miss?
As for what has or has not come from god, do you have anything directly from him/her/it or are you trusting your book?
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.
so rocking RRS,
HEY REVLyle , stare into a VAGINA, taste some TIT milk , talk about important things friend .... So you want to make what kind of rules ?
Me evolution says NOT, I want to get free , No surrender .... Fuck rules , that is the great "god" message, The "fuck you" to the devil who claims surrender .... You got god all backwards ..... that damn clever devil ... oh but what a message !
I understand, we will we get thru this yet , hang on, I got some great Jesus for ya, "I am one with the father, and ye are gods, this is the kingdom". Then talented bible Paul talked his shit ....
My "Jesus" hates the Bible, wish you knew him ......
I love you poor REVLyle ....
Atheism Books.
RevLyle wrote:
First, this is your own opinion and nothing more (unless u believe u speak for every xtian alive and I'm aware this is entirely possible). Like every other religion, xtianity attempts to establish control over humans by appealing to their wants, desires and to their greatest fears, including their fear of the unknown. Each respective religion provides their own exclusive "answer" to these fears.
Most people, whether religious or not, can see the absurdity of all those "false" gods & their followers who vy for our attention. Those same persons can also clearly see how various religions all throughout history have been used to control and manipulate their followers, usually for power and profit. The ego offers the clearest of vision when not pointed internally.
The only question I have for the religious (and this certainly includes you revlyle) is why can't those same persons apply this criticism to their own faith.
It does help, revlyle... I think I now have my answer.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
George Orwell
It's a severe chemical imbalance in my brain that plunges me into unbearable anxiety and depression. I do understand what causes it, the issue is finding some sort of treatment that brings relief.
As for praying for me, based upon our prior rancorous exchanges, I doubt the sincerity of your intentions.
Besides, the God that you pray to seems to have strong sado-masochistic tendencies and I fear that any answered prayers would result in even more pain and suffering on my part.
As far as my "atheist" label is concerned, atheism is simply the automatic, default position when there is insufficient evidence regarding a diety. If I actually found a god who was unafraid to face the requirements of proof and didn't play games with mankind using the smokescreen of "faith" then I would be totally foolish to deny his / her's existence.
And if I found this diety to be the kind that expressess true compassion and empathy without toying with man's weaknesses, or degrading humanity with threats of torture then rest assured that I would not walk but run in a mad dash toward my new Protector and Provider. I would proudly discard my atheist label and seek to share my newfound knowledge with other suffering people.
I have yet to discover this diety but were I ever fortunate enough to find proof of such a kind, benevolent being then no one could ever call me an atheist again.
I'm still waiting.....
Yeaaa, prophet Prozac,
but shit , for some reason? I AM compeld to defend my atheist Jesus ????
I've read that bible story a few times and argee it's poorly done but seems to say,
Me Jesus will not do as that King would , who said "But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them, bring them here and kill them in front of me." Jesus,(Luke 19:27) ...... damn screwy Bible anyway !
cool tune btw, orgy-blue-monday_music
Atheism Books.
You wrote: I'm not the one fond of making absolutist statements in this thread, preacher.
Are you an atheist?
Welcome to the Socratic method!!!!
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Brilliant.. Now list here the tens of thousands of things you reject for lack of evidence.
Does each one make you absolutist ?
Reject Scientology ?
Reject Astrology ?
Here's yer sign !! ABSOLUTIST
That argument could use alot of work.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
George Orwell
Hey again REVLyle
"no cost" what so ever ..... are you a politician now in the name of god ?
Atheism Books.
With one fell statement you have illustrated for everyone the depth of your ignorance, preacher.
I do not assert that there is NO god. I simply lack a belief in them. For someone that has been on this site for a while, I would have thought you'd have found the position(or lack thereof) of the typical atheists on the RRS forums.
Let me clarify my position for you so that we don't spend 20 posts arguing.
I do not believe in any god(s). I lack belief in god(s). I do not assert that there most certainly CANNOT be a god.
If a god were evident then I wouldn't have to 'believe' in him/her/it and neither would you have to assert faith in yours. It would be evident.
You believe, I do not believe. I thought that you had gathered that as one of our primary differences when you were looking to be my neighbor.
Now, other than 'faith' you declare that you have a book that proves your god's existence. You declare that this book is true and does not contradict itself. We have shown you the contradictions in the doctrine you profess that are at the top of our minds.
Let me briefly elucidate why you fail before you begin when trying to 'prove' your god's existence.
The book says it's true. The book says that the book is the word of this god and he is true.
The god says the book is true because the book says the god is true.
Circular logic.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.
I'm beginning to wonder why I even bother to post in this thread, considering most of my posts have been all but ignored, but what the hell. Lets see if I get a response to this one.
REVLyle, all of your arguments are based around one thing: God is a perfect moral being. Well, he isn't. He uses ignorance and fear to control people. That makes him no better than a lot of our fictional villans, and no better than the tyrants of our time(i.e. Stalin, Hitler, Hussein, etc...). So all of these arguments are pointless because your trying to defend a being who is not as moral as your average person.
Like I've said before, this is why I left religion in the first place. Now REV, i'm honestly giving you a chance here. You're one of the few theists that Ive gotten into an argument with thats capable of coming up with a well formed argument that makes sense. But, in all of my arguments, I have never gotten an answer to this question. Why is it ok for god to use ignorance and fear to control people and not ok for anyone else?
"I may be going to hell in a rocketship, but at least I get to ride in a rocketship. You have to climb those damn stairs. " - Katie Volker
To WHITEMANRUNNING,
give me a few days to post. Life is coming at me fast and hard right now. I am sorry that I do not have time right now but I will respond by this weekend. Thanks.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Pathofreason- Get a copy of “The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy” by C. Dennis McKinsey. You can get a used one pretty cheap at ABEBooks.com. It is broken down so you can cover things by subject, book or verse. I use it for morning Bible study at church every week. Example: Our current Bible study is on the book of Joshua. I look at the back of the book and it shows most of the places in the Encyclopedia that a Bible verse relating to Joshua is quoted. I then go to that page, read the argument, double check his points to insure they are not incorrect (They have not been thus far.) or easily cast aside with a dumb reply, like the different view points excuse used for the tomb.
Along with this I would suggest, unless your just killing time, to never try to persuade a delusional person by themselves. I believe somewhere around 90% of christians have never read the Bible. If you point out the contradictions it gets them thinking and it sinks in even better when people use dumfounding logic to try explaining it away. =)
If you don’t get the encyclopedia then try Biblicalerancy.com It is a great start.
The Delusional people- The Bible is full of contradictions. Here are just a few that can only be explained away by lying:
Saul was killed by his own hands (1 Sam. 31:4), by a young Amalekite (2 Sam. 1:10), by the Philistines (2 Sam. 21:12)
Matt. 2:23 "And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene." He shall be called a Nazarene does not exist in the Old Testament. There is no such prophecy.
It is claimed that the prophesy in Isaiah 7:14 says that Immanuel will be born of a virgin. In reality the word used is “Almah” which means “Maiden” or “Young Women”. Through out the entire Hebrew culture the term “Almah” has NEVER been used to refer to a virgin (Course the Christian use it that way..... But ONLY in this one case.). In fact the Bible itself uses Almah in other cases, Gen. 24:43 for example, and it is not interpreted as “virgin” even by the deluded. The Hebrew term for Virgin is “Betulah”. One has only to contact a local Jewish temple and they will verify this.
Matthew 8:5 The Centurion came to Jesus in person. Luke 7:24 Centurion did NOT come in person but sent 2 flunkies.
Matthew 11:14 John IS Elijah. John 1:21 John is NOT Elijah. Either Jesus is lying, John is or, gasp, it’s an error in a perfect book!
Matthew 27:5 Judas hanged himself Acts 1:18 Judas died in a field. Judas dyeing in field made it the “Field of Blood” Matt. 27:6-8 called “Field of Blood” because the Priests Bought it with Judas’s money.
Christian steps for ALL flagrant errors found in the Bible? 1) Make stuff up. 2) Perpetuate previously concocted lies. 3) If the evidence is so overwhelming as to insult peoples intelligence.... refer to the first two steps.
If a reply to this post requires my attention please mail me at [email protected] I’m to busy to keep checking this post because, unlike Preachers who leach off ignorant people, I actually have to work for a living.
"Those who have stepped into the arena shall forever cherish a feeling the protected will never know."
So the other day, I sat down and watch the movie, The Last Samurai, with Tom Cruise. You will remember that at the end of the movie, Katsumoto (the last leader of an ancient line of Samurai) is shot up by the Emperor's army. Tom Cruise, Captain Nathan Algren who is at Katsumoto's side, fulfills Katsumoto's request and gives him a sword so that Katsumoto can die honorably. Katsumoto then takes the sword and shoves it into his own mid-section and dies. I was just curious . . .
Who is responsible for the death of Katsumoto? The Emperor's army shot him. Captain Nathan Algren gave him a sword in order for him to kill himself and Katsumoto is the actual one who pushed the sword into his own stomach.
The story of Saul's death is told in the last chapter of 1 Samuel 31. Saul, his sons, and the men of Israel are fighting against the Philistines. The Philistines kill three of Saul's sons and scripture then states in verse 3, "The battle pressed hard against Saul, and the archers found him, and he was badly wounded by the archers." In other words, Saul had been over taken and he had been shot by the archers. There was no escape. He was already mortally wounded and he would certainly die. This is very clear in the story by the fact that Saul turns to his armor-bearer and tells him, "Draw your sword and thrust me through with it, lest these uncircumcised come and thrust me through and mistreat me." Saul's armor-bearer is is afraid and he will not do it, therefore; Saul took his own sword and fell upon it.
So the question is . . . out of this first account of the story, "Who is responsible for the death of Saul?"
#1 - Some may simply say, "Saul did it. He killed himself." They would be right.
#2 - Some would say, "The Philistines are responsible for the death of Saul. They killed him" They would ALSO be right.
That should take care of Saul was killed by his own hands (1 Sam. 31:4), AND by the Philistines (2 Sam. 21:12).
BUT WHAT ABOUT a young Amalekite (2 Sam. 1:10)
To say that the Bible says a young Amalekite killed Saul is not exactly being honest. The Bible DOES NOT say that a young Amalekite killed Saul. The Bible says that a young Amalekite SAID that he killed Saul. The Amalekite was simply lying. This is a narrative and the story regarding the Amalekite as recorded in 2 Samuel 1:5-10 says this:
5Then David said to the young man who told him, "How do you know that Saul and his son Jonathan are dead?" 6And the young man who told him said, "By chance I happened to be on MountGilboa, and there was Saul leaning on his spear, and behold, the chariots and the horsemen were close upon him. 7And when he looked behind him, he saw me, and called to me. And I answered, 'Here I am.' 8And he said to me, 'Who are you?' I answered him, 'I am an Amalekite.' 9And he said to me 'Stand beside me and kill me, for anguish has seized me, and yet my life still lingers.' 10So I stood beside him and killed him, because I was sure that he could not live after he had fallen. And I took the crown that was on his head and the armlet that was on his arm, and I have brought them here to my lord."
I did not spend any time on this since I had already written this a year ago. You and rook ought to quit copying and pasting from the same source. I will not even spend my time with the rest - you have already proved that you did not even investigate your first "contradiction."
So - evidently you are part of the 90%. Can't wait to hear your answer on Katsumoto.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
REVLyle wrote:
My deepest condolences.
That would be the Hollywood writers who butchered a bit of history to sell this Samurai mythology to a paying public. We cant' get enough of stories reverend. They make us (by us I mean of course, our own ego) feel so good inside, appealing to the sense of "hero" in all of us. After a while the more intelligent story writers figure out the patterns that have the greatest appeal to the story loving public. They then create new characters w/ similar story lines that follow these same old patterns. Why ? Because the ego just can't get enough of them.
It's Hero Mythology, reverend. The "chosen one" or messianic pattern creeps up in the most popular of movies. (See also Lord Raglan and Joseph Campbell). I'm sure you'll take notice how many popular stories/movies mirror your bible, without ever once figuring out that those hero myths existed over a millennia before priests sat creating your biblical heroes and writing and re-writing your bible for well over a thousand years.
Clearly, it's not the stories that everyone accepts as fiction that pose a danger to us, it's the ones that are sold as "truth". For point of reference, take a good look at the "star" of the movie you just watched. History is saturated w/ humans killing other humans over nothing more than myths. Millions and millions of people blindly killing man, woman and child over a mythical story, feeling as if each drop of blood brought them closer to transforming myth into truth. Humans desperate to excuse any behavior, and justify any contradiction of their mythology by any means necessary, never once seeing the myth for what it really was. Everyone likes great stories rev, but please explain to me why humans are so fascinated w/ make-believe. I'm guessing that a study of human nature points to a 3 letter word I've already used in this post.
You'll argue against contradictions until you're blue in the face, reverend. What difference does it make? You'll follow the same course that the millions before you have followed. Myths...reverend. We're fascinated by them.
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
George Orwell
REVLyle- Your explanation is completely ridicules. First: 2 Samuel 21:12 states that the Philistines “...struck down Saul...” it does not say “wound”. In every case in the Bible, and every other writing I can think of for that matter, this term is used in reference to killing and not wounding. What you are arguing is that the Bible is WRONG on this account (Saul dying) and, in that case, you have proven my point that the Bible is errant.
Second: In 2 Samuel 10-16 David believed the Amalekites testimony was 100% true. He felt it believable enough to tear his own cloths and, as if that was not enough, have the Amalekite killed for it! It mentions nothing what so ever of punishing him for lying or any other form of deceit. Your reference to 2 Samuel 1: 5-10 as evidence is, for lack of a better word, completely stupid, . There is not one shred of proof in it that 1) strengthens your claim that anyone was lying or 2) that anyone even believed that the Amalekite was the one doing the lying.
Lastly in 1 Samuel 31:5 the armor bearer “...saw that Saul was dead...” after he (Saul) fell on the sword. All three stories are contradictory and you would think that a “perfect” book written by a “perfect” being would get his story right. But in an effort to protect your delusion you are simply referring to error step 1(Making stuff up) that I refer to in my first post.
It’s an ancient comic book man! Free your mind!
"Those who have stepped into the arena shall forever cherish a feeling the protected will never know."
You didn't answer the question!
Who is responsible for the death of Katsumoto in the movie The Last Samurai?
A. The Emperor's army
B. Captain Nathan Algren
C. Katsumoto
Come on, it is a simple question.
You either need to do more research or simply be honest. The Hebrew work used in 2 Sam. 21:12 is "nakah" and it is in the Hiphil stem. It does NOT just mean kill.
c) (Hiphil)
1) to smite, strike, beat, scourge, clap, applaud, give a thrust
2) to smite, kill, slay (man or beast)
3) to smite, attack, attack and destroy, conquer, subjugate, ravage
4) to smite, chastise, send judgment upon, punish, destroy
You suggested that I free my mind.
Perhaps you ought to subject your mind to some study OR if you already knew all of this - just be honest.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Your question was not answered because it was not pertinent.
Exodus 2:12 Moses "struck down", the egyptian and hid him in the sand. Numbers 3:13 "For all the firstborn are Mine; on the day that I struck down all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, I sanctified to Myself all the firstborn in Israel, from man to beast. They shall be Mine; I am the LORD."
Numbers 14:42
" Do not go up, or you will be struck down before your enemies, for the LORD is not among you.
Numbers 33:4
while the Egyptians were burying all their firstborn whom the LORD had struck down among them.
1 Kings 15:29
It came about as soon as he was king, he struck down all the household of Jeroboam. He did not leave to Jeroboam any persons alive
Judges 3:29
They struck down at that time about ten thousand Moabites, all robust and valiant men; and no one escaped.
1 Samuel 6:19
He struck down some of the men of Beth-shemesh because they had looked into the ark of the LORD. He struck down of all the people, 50,070 men, and the people mourned because the LORD had struck the people with a great slaughter.
2 Samuel 2:31
But the servants of David had struck down many of Benjamin and Abner's men, so that three hundred and sixty men died.
and on and on....
Show me where in the Bible "struck down" clearly did not mean dead? Especially in the context of a battle. Again I implore you to free your mind!
"Those who have stepped into the arena shall forever cherish a feeling the protected will never know."
The kind REV will try your patience. He resorts to word games and meaningless historical minutiae to rationalize the bloody behavior of his perverted God.
Bill Clinton explaining what "is" is after the Monica Lewinsky scandal will read like a bold, unequivocal statement of fact when compared to the evasive apologetics of God's righteous spokesman, the REV.
You'll need to scroll up, preacher.
I'm laying out of this thread so that you'll have more time for other questions.
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.
How do you answer to all the atrocities in the bible?
How do you answer for all the nasty things commanded to be done by your god?
All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.
Because murder isn't really murder as long as God tells you to do it.
Christian ethics rest upon a bizarre system of moral relativism that implies that as long as it reflects God's will any bloody act of barbarity, no matter how shocking and ruthless, is actually honorable and righteous. Theoretically, if God told his servants to go and take some school children and skin them alive ( yuck ! ) because they had offended God, then the Christian community would rally to the defense of these murderers just as easily as they defend God's butchering servants in the Old Testament.
There exists no level of cruelty or degree of savagery that could shock these god-whores. As long as the suffering is being inflicted in service to their God, then they are as morally indifferent as a sociopath.
If REV decides to reply to your query, prepare to be amazed at the morally corrupted reasoning of this religious fanatic. No matter how many ways you explain to him that, God or no God, these acts are morally indefensible he will posit that it is actually you who are in error.
Well, it doesnt look like im going to get an answer. Maybe he just couldnt come up with one. Oh well. Maybe I should start a new thread and ask this question.
I prepare for that every time I get into a religious argument. Most theists have a fairly twisted view of what is right and wrong.
"I may be going to hell in a rocketship, but at least I get to ride in a rocketship. You have to climb those damn stairs. " - Katie Volker
Prozac- I actually have to disagree with you. If the Old Testament said to skin children I doubt they would. It already says to stone them if they be stubborn and rebellious (Deut 21:18-21) yet not much of that goes on.
We are currently studying Joshua in Sunday morning Bible study and I’ve found that most Christians have no problems with the child slaughter/genocide that is in the Old Testament. However, they do have a problem with that kind of behavior now. Yet they claim that true morality (i.e. the morality given by their “God” ) is fixed and does not change over time. If you were to apply this kind of logic to anything else they would quickly point it out as being ridicules yet fail to apply it to their own beliefs.
One of the men in the class, and no one disagreed, stated that it was OK for them (The Israelis) to slaughter everyone because those in Jericho carried out child sacrifice. So his logic is that Jerichos listening to their priests and sacrificing children because the priests said their God’s said so was an abomination. But Israel doing the same thing at the order of Joshua because HIS God said so was perfectly legit. And this man in my class is running for the county Judgeship!
A modern day example of this would be for George Bush to give orders to kill ALL Taliban children. This clearly being justified because the Taliban frequently sacrifice their own daughters but change “sacrifice” to “honor” killings. Now I’m not saying that the President would give such an order. Quit the opposite, I think it would probably never happen. However, this is because of a SECULAR idea of what is right and not a Biblical one.
"Those who have stepped into the arena shall forever cherish a feeling the protected will never know."
Yes, these Christians are strangely blind to the fact that they are using situational ethics and moral relativism, the two ethical systems that they claim are the exclusive domain of godless atheists, secular humanists, etc.
ps, my hypothetical scenario was only meant to illustrate the principle that most Christians would endorse religious genocide no matter what century it occurred in ..... if they truly believed it was God's will.
If that condition is met then they will accept any level of brutality. My statement was made more in regard to religious psychology and not really about Old Testament vs. New Testament.
Pathofreason,
I'd recommend a work by Craig Blomberg called The Historical Reliability of the Gospels for a clear presentation of an evangelical view of the "contradictions." Chapter 4 is especially relevant as it goes through each type. Hope that helps.
Spumoni
Why should there be an "evangelical" view or a "calvinistic" view or a "fill in your favorite theological interpretation here" view?
Why should a book supposedly inspired by an omnimax God need so many varied interpretations?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Its simply a clear description. The desire was for knowing what is believed by Christians. Evangelical is just a nomenclature that incorporates a lot of Christianity in America. Do you think its a very small view of God that requires Him to be experienced in only a minute form or array? I think this minimalization is characteristic of a materialist epistemology. The approach of the scientific method to chop up and break down into the smallest parts doesn't work on God.
I can't help but think that your observations are an accurate description of the way Christians themselves view God. If theological differences regarding the nature of God were not a significant issue among Christians why the need for so many separate denominations ? If God's nature is a settled issue why the need for such time-wasting efforts as The Council of Nicaea ? or the Protestant Reformation ?
There is no such thing as a single unifying theology to be found among the many separate branches of Christianity. Even such foundational issues as the trinitarian nature of God are not accepted by all sects of Christianity.
It is Christians themselves who break God down into a "very small view" and the growing number of doctrinal schisms is the driving force that ensures that new denominations, whether liberal or conservative, will continue to be invented.
Off topic, but I like spreading this quote I recently found here at RRS,
Christianity: A disgusting middle eastern blood cult, based in human sacrifice, with sacrements of canibalism and vampirism, whose highest icon is of a near naked man hanging in torment from a device of torture.
.... kinda says it all .... yup, Xains etc worship the devil of wrong thinking .... the most powerful force of all, STUPIDITY.
Atheism Books.
Unifying theology: the Apostles Creed. Every Christian on earth agrees to this. Different expressions of faith are as numerous as personalities of people. The existence of variety doesn't preclude truth or God's ability to communicate himself. Leave it to atheists to nitpick the minutest details of the Bible looking for meaningless "contradictions."
Breaking down god? I'll leave that to the denominations.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Uh, no. Not every Christian on earth agrees to the Apostles' Creed. Every Trinitarian does.
If every Christian agreed on those words - there wouldn't be Unitarians, Binitarians, Modalism, etc all calling themselves Christians.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
...and leave it to Christians to deny even the most obvious realities regarding themselves. Yes, every Christian on Earth agrees to this, that's why all Christians get up on Sunday Morning ( except 7'th Day Adventists ) and go to their separate church services. People who completely agree with each other frequently feel the need to isolate themselves from others with whom they completely agree. Yes, it all makes sense now.
It appears to me that you get easily hung up on matters of taste within Christianity as points to deride. God is multifaceted and so are his followers. One group values liturgy and sacraments, another strict Biblical exegesis and spiritual formation. These are not contradictions but matters of preference. Do you argue with people because they like blue M&M's instead of red ones? Its arbitrary.
Love the Bible quote. Why do you get upset at such a thing? What grounds of morality do you have to base any judgement on such a statement?