NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/abs/long.htm

Here's a few good ones:

# God expels Adam and Eve from the garden before they get a chance to eat from that other tree -- the tree of life. God knows that if they do that, they well become "like one of us" and live forever. 3:22-24

# "And Cain knew his wife." That's nice, but where the hell did she come from? 4:17

# The "sons of God" copulated with the "daughters of men," and had sons who became "the mighty men of old, men of renown." 6:2-4

# Noah kills the "clean beasts" and burns their dead bodies for God. According to 7:8 this would have caused the extinction of all "clean" animals since only two of each were taken onto the ark. "And the Lord smelled a sweet savor." After this God "said in his heart" that he'd never do it again because "man's heart is evil from his youth." So God killed all living things (6:5) because humans are evil, and then promises not to do it again (8:21) because humans are evil. The mind of God is a frightening thing. 8:20-21

# God, who is planning another mass murder, is worried that Abraham might try to stop him. so he asks himself if he should hide his intentions from Abraham. 18:17

# Lot and his daughters camp out in a cave for a while. The daughters get their "just and righteous" father drunk, and have sexual intercourse with him, and each conceives and bears a son (wouldn't you know it!). Just another wholesome family values Bible story. 19:30-38



Though it shouldnt need to be stated, no flaming!

Hahaha, good stuff. :D

Excellent findings! These kinds of things really help with my aethistic crusades.

The Bible really should be banned form public libraries, our children are being subjected to violence and sexual depravity! Oh won't somebody please think of the children?!

# Lot and his daughters camp out in a cave for a while. The daughters get their "just and righteous" father drunk, and have sexual intercourse with him, and each conceives and bears a son (wouldn't you know it!). Just another wholesome family values Bible story. 19:30-38





There is Adam. There is Eve. How can 6 billion come from 2 without any incest...? :eek:

Christians, please explain this.

The Old Testament, especially the early parts, is sketchy at best. One has to remember that it is insanely old, only divinely inspired, and interpreted by simple men whose comprehension of science and such was very limited.

[quote] God expels Adam and Eve from the garden before they get a chance to eat from that other tree -- the tree of life. God knows that if they do that, they well become "like one of us" and live forever. 3:22-24
what's wrong with that one?
"And Cain knew his wife." That's nice, but where the hell did she come from? 4:17 She was his sister.


Noah kills the "clean beasts" and burns their dead bodies for God. According to 7:8 this would have caused the extinction of all "clean" animals since only two of each were taken onto the ark.
after over a year on the ark, one would assume that the animals reproduced.



Lot and his daughters camp out in a cave for a while. The daughters get their "just and righteous" father drunk, and have sexual intercourse with him, and each conceives and bears a son (wouldn't you know it!). Just another wholesome family values Bible story. 19:30-38
most Bible stories aren't wholesome at all, in fact most, like this one, are about how people make mistakes.

I especially like the part about rain being water pouring through holes in the firmament. One can really see that the writers of the bible had a clear concept of how the water cycle functions.
Really, why do people still believe this?

[QUOTE=Smunkeeville]
what's wrong with that one?
One of us? Are there multiple Gods?

She was his sister.
1. Yuck
2. What sister?


after over a year on the ark, one would assume that the animals reproduced.
Valid point

most Bible stories aren't wholesome at all, in fact most, like this one, are about how people make mistakes.
Like the mistake of having your father see your grandfather drunk and naked?

# The "just and righteous" Noah (6:9, 7:1) plants a vineyard, gets drunk, and lies around naked in his tent. His son, Ham, happens to see his father in this condition. When Noah sobers up and hears "what his young son had done unto him" (what did he do besides look at him?), he curses not Ham, who "saw the nakedness of his father," but Ham's son, Canaan. "A servant of servants shall he [Canaan] be unto his brethren." This is a typical case of biblical justice, and is one of many Bible passages that have been used to justify slavery. 9:20-25

I especially like the part about rain being water pouring through holes in the firmament. One can really see that the writers of the bible had a clear concept of how the water cycle functions.
Really, why do people still believe this?
because we can. free country and all. ;)

One of us? Are there multiple Gods?
God, Jesus, Holy Spirit, the trinity, 3 Gods in one.

She was his sister.
1. Yuck
2. What sister?
incest wasn't "wrong" until there were enough people to avoid it. Adam and Eve had many children, they didn't stop at Cain and Abel, they had Seth, and then a whole bunch of other ones, you have to get into the "begats" to figure out all of them.





Like the mistake of having your father see your grandfather drunk and naked?

# The "just and righteous" Noah (6:9, 7:1) plants a vineyard, gets drunk, and lies around naked in his tent. His son, Ham, happens to see his father in this condition. When Noah sobers up and hears "what his young son had done unto him" (what did he do besides look at him?), he curses not Ham, who "saw the nakedness of his father," but Ham's son, Canaan. "A servant of servants shall he [Canaan] be unto his brethren." This is a typical case of biblical justice, and is one of many Bible passages that have been used to justify slavery. 9:20-25

yep, or the one about the woman who nails a mans head to the ground with a tent spike while he is asleep.

because we can. free country and all. ;)

That's no reason. I can eat rice, but I don't. Most of the stuff in the bible doesn't make any sense at all.
My biggest problem: If God talked and came down to earth in ancient times, why did he stop? If he so wants us to believe, why doesn't he just show we aethiests that we're wrong?

because we can. free country and all. ;)
Hmmm...it's kinda true though. How did they manage to save so much of the message when some of the points considered absolutely central only 150 years ago have now been dismissed completely?

Are people that desperate for religion? And if they are, why don't they try one that is less easily refuted - like Buddhism? (I know I'll receive some flak for that, but it still fits better with reality than the three semitic religions)

I especially like the part about rain being water pouring through holes in the firmament. One can really see that the writers of the bible had a clear concept of how the water cycle functions.
GRAAR! I Grogg vonGrogg XXVIII! I no understand symbolism. I no understand poetic language! Everything face value!
Now go eat rocks! GRAAR!

Yes, God is a triple entity but there's only one of him... them... only one of them.

God, Jesus, Holy Spirit, the trinity, 3 Gods in one.
I believe that was in the new testament.

incest wasn't "wrong" until there were enough people to avoid it. Adam and Eve had many children, they didn't stop at Cain and Abel, they had Seth, and then a whole bunch of other ones, you have to get into the "begats" to figure out all of them.

An inbred individual is likely to possess several physical and health defects, in addition to higher incidence of inheriting a poor trait. They include:

* reduced fertility both in litter size and in sperm viability
* increased congenital defects
* fluctuating facial asymmetry
* lower birth rate
* higher neo-natal mortality
* slower growth rate
* smaller adult size, and
* loss of immune system function.

yep, or the one about the woman who nails a mans head to the ground with a tent spike while he is asleep.
How do you ... I mean ... why do I even bother?

That's no reason. I can eat rice, but I don't. Most of the stuff in the bible doesn't make any sense at all.
I don't have to justify my beliefs to you. I just believe what I believe, I can believe whatever I want, why does it matter to you?



My biggest problem: If God talked and came down to earth in ancient times, why did he stop?
maybe he does. I hear God's voice everyday, I admit it, and people think I am crazy, maybe we just don't talk about it.


If he so wants us to believe, why doesn't he just show we aethiests that we're wrong?
because he shouldn't have to, or he doesn't feel the need.

For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. Romans 1:20

I believe that was in the new testament.
and many references to it in the old, like the use of "us" in Genesis

Jesus always was, he is not a created being, He is God.

How do you ... I mean ... why do I even bother?
I have no idea, I was asking myself a similar question the other day when you and I were talking.:p

GRAAR! I Grogg vonGrogg XXVIII! I no understand symbolism. I no understand poetic language! Everything face value!
Now go eat rocks! GRAAR!

I'm a poet, you should know.
The bible is either a metaphor or true. If at least some facts are symbols, we cannot discern which are accurate, and therefore cannot rely on the bible for any factual information.

I have no idea, I was asking myself a similar question the other day when you and I were talking.:p
We were talking? About what?

I don't have to justify my beliefs to you. I just believe what I believe, I can believe whatever I want, why does it matter to you?
Isn't that what you came to this thread to do?

maybe he does. I hear God's voice everyday, I admit it, and people think I am crazy, maybe we just don't talk about it.
I'm no expert, but I believe that is called Schitzophrenia.

I don't have to justify my beliefs to you. I just believe what I believe, I can believe whatever I want, why does it matter to you?




maybe he does. I hear God's voice everyday, I admit it, and people think I am crazy, maybe we just don't talk about it.



because he shouldn't have to, or he doesn't feel the need.

For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. Romans 1:20


In that case, he can only blame himself for my disbelief.

Hmmm...it's kinda true though. How did they manage to save so much of the message when some of the points considered absolutely central only 150 years ago have now been dismissed completely?

Are people that desperate for religion? And if they are, why don't they try one that is less easily refuted - like Buddhism? (I know I'll receive some flak for that, but it still fits better with reality than the three semitic religions)
I am not desperate fo religion.

Buddhism fits with reality? aren't they the ones that don't believe in reality? how well does that fit with reality?:confused:

and many references to it in the old, like the use of "us" in Genesis

Jesus always was, he is not a created being, He is God.
Okay...do you accept that the Bible is the word of Jesus/God?

If you do, then there can't be any man-made changes, correct?
The New Testament was written something like 2000 years after the Old One.
The Old one did not have the concept of the son-who-is-the-father.

Then if the Old Testament contains references to the New Testament, it is a later man-made modification. And that means the religion (or at least this part of it) is man-made, ie secular, and carries no more value than anything else people do.

I am not desperate fo religion.
I never said you were. But some people obviously need religion so much that they don't care when such vital bits get changed by people.

Buddhism fits with reality? aren't they the ones that don't believe in reality? how well does that fit with reality?:confused:
Hmm, I'm not a theologian, but at least that what we perceive to be real according to Buddhism, and the things it says about it fit better with what we found out about the world than rain out of perforations and races born out of incest.

We were talking? About what?
same stuff, Christianity.


Isn't that what you came to this thread to do?
I am not justifying what I believe, I am explaining what the Bible says.
There is a difference.


I'm no expert, but I believe that is called Schitzophrenia.
nope. not really.

same stuff, Christianity.



I am not justifying what I believe, I am explaining what the Bible says.
There is a difference.



nope. not really.

Schizophrenics are usually not aware that they are ill.

The bible is either a metaphor or true. If at least some facts are symbols, we cannot discern which are accurate, and therefore cannot rely on the bible for any factual information.
I'm not arguing that it is true, I am simply pointing out that it is really stupid to pick apart little things to "pwn Xtians" because it jsut makes you look like an ass.
And the part about the firmanent opening up is poetic language that proves nothing one way or t'other. If a soldiers autobiography talks about the "crack of rifle fire", would you immediately throw it away as false because we both know that rifles don't really say "crack", and therefore the whole thing is wrong?
And if God refers to Himself in the First Person Singular, can't it be claimed that he is using the Royal We?
And if you don't believe in God, but spend time picking through the Bible anyway, can't it be claimed that you are wasting time?

Okay...do you accept that the Bible is the word of Jesus/God?
yes.

If you do, then there can't be any man-made changes, correct?
not true, it has been mistranslated and twisted many times.

The New Testament was written something like 2000 years after the Old One.
The Old one did not have the concept of the son-who-is-the-father. true.

Then if the Old Testament contains references to the New Testament, it is a later man-made modification. And that means the religion (or at least this part of it) is man-made, ie secular, and carries no more value than anything else people do.
nope, ever heard of prophecy?

Schizophrenics are usually not aware that they are ill.
ah, but I am mentally ill. I just don't have schizophrenia. and my psychologist agrees that my hearing God, isn't a symptom of my mental illness.

she likens it to others having a conscience.

same stuff, Christianity.
Fair enough. I generally avoid religious discussion. I didn't realise I'd recently participated.

I am not justifying what I believe, I am explaining what the Bible says.
There is a difference.
You are justifying what the bible says, which is what you believe.

nope. not really.
My mistake. It's not "schitzophrenia", it's "schizophrenia".

not true, it has been mistranslated and twisted many times.
But how can it still be the true word of god then? :confused:

nope, ever heard of prophecy?
Hmm, not in the context that you probably mean. I don't think prophecy is real, or a justifiable reason to change the word of god to the word of some guy.

But how can it still be the true word of god then? :confused: when correctly translated it is. I have seen people mistranslate it, and take things out of context to meet thier own needs, in those times they have made the word of God into thier own.


Hmm, not in the context that you probably mean. I don't think prophecy is real, or a justifiable reason to change the word of god to the word of some guy.
fair enough.

I'm not arguing that it is true, I am simply pointing out that it is really stupid to pick apart little things to "pwn Xtians" because it jsut makes you look like an ass.
And the part about the firmanent opening up is poetic language that proves nothing one way or t'other. If a soldiers autobiography talks about the "crack of rifle fire", would you immediately throw it away as false because we both know that rifles don't really say "crack", and therefore the whole thing is wrong?
And if God refers to Himself in the First Person Singular, can't it be claimed that he is using the Royal We?
And if you don't believe in God, but spend time picking through the Bible anyway, can't it be claimed that you are wasting time?

The little things form the basis of Christianity. Flaws within them equate to flaws within the religion as a whole.
I wouldn't throw away a soldier's bio with a metaphor, but I would throw away a supposedly factually accurate text that used metaphors to explain science or social history.
I never argued that God didn't use the royal we.
It cannot be claimed that I am wasting time, as the time I spend finding biblical inaccuracies is intellectually satisfying for me.

[QUOTE=Uber Awesome]

after over a year on the ark, one would assume that the animals reproduced.


Hmmm so not only did they fit 2 of every animal on that there boat

But 2 of every full grown anamal (at least old enough to reproduce) but ayears worth of food AND room for their offspring

Amazing how one little wooden boat could manage that

Hmmm so not only did they fit 2 of every animal on that there boat

But 2 of every full grown anamal (at least old enough to reproduce) but ayears worth of food AND room for their offspring

Amazing how one little wooden boat could manage that
yep, pretty miraculous.

[QUOTE=Smunkeeville]
Hmmm so not only did they fit 2 of every animal on that there boat

But 2 of every full grown anamal (at least old enough to reproduce) but ayears worth of food AND room for their offspring

Amazing how one little wooden boat could manage that

Actually, God lent Noah his spaceship. The first translator just forgot the space part.
I know because I was there.

CLICK THIS LINK, and learn something :) - subject = noahs ark http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

lets all think talkorigins again for making things clear... :)

God, Jesus, Holy Spirit, the trinity, 3 Gods in one.There is only one god - First Commandment

when correctly translated it is. I have seen people mistranslate it, and take things out of context to meet thier own needs, in those times they have made the word of God into thier own.

So if the bible can mean any number of things in context and out of it how can we know for sure who's version of it is right?

lets all thank talkorigins again for making things clear... :)
Creationist models are often criticized for being too vague to have any predictive value. A literal interpretation of the Flood story in Genesis, however, does imply certain physical consequences which can be tested against what we actually observe, and the implications of such an interpretation are investigated below.
I looooove a bit of Sarcasm. :D

There is only one god - First Commandment
One God, three natures. The trinity is a tough concept to grasp.

So if the bible can mean any number of things in context and out of it how can we know for sure who's version of it is right?
prayer?

actually, I have no idea. I suppose just figure it out for yourself and hope you are right.

prayer?

actually, I have no idea. I suppose just figure it out for yourself and hope you are right.

So your basing how you live your life and how you interact with others off of a guess?

The little things form the basis of Christianity. Flaws within them equate to flaws within the religion as a whole.
No, the overall pictures are what forms the basis of Christianity. The only way the little things will matter in any sort is if you are ready to become fluent in the original language and read the original manuscripts.
I wouldn't throw away a soldier's bio with a metaphor, but I would throw away a supposedly factually accurate text that used metaphors to explain science or social history.
It isn't explaining anyway. Its a nice way of saying "And then the water was cycled into the air, and, via a process of condensation, was transformed into liquid form. At which point it was pulled towards the Earth by gravity, at which point it encountered the ground. This event then happened for a signifigant amount of time, to the point where water covered all areas inhabited by humans."
I never argued that God didn't use the royal we.
Maybe you didn't but since the idea of God saying "us" came up, then there was the need for a response.
It cannot be claimed that I am wasting time, as the time I spend finding biblical inaccuracies is intellectually satisfying for me.
And I find pointing out NS name inaccuracies intellectually satisfying. You are invalid and don't exist because your name is "Terrorist Cakes", in spite of the fact that I have never once personally seen a baked good of any sort commit a criminal act.
Wasn't that a valuable use of our time?

So your basing how you live your life and how you interact with others off of a guess?
isn't everybody?

yep, pretty miraculous.
Yeah I would say unbelivably so

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/abs/long.htm

Here's a few good ones:

< snippage >


And your point is??? Nice job of taking an oft-revised, oft-mistranslated, written version of an ancient oral tradition and pointing out its inconsistencies. Goooood jooob! Heh! :rolleyes:

Yeah I would say unbelivably so
yep.;)

And I find pointing out NS name inaccuracies intellectually satisfying. You are invalid and don't exist because your name is "Terrorist Cakes", in spite of the fact that I have never once personally seen a baked good of any sort commit a criminal act.
Wasn't that a valuable use of our time?

Jeez dude don't get your panties in a bunch. Don't like the thread don't post in it.

isn't everybody?

No.

Jeez dude don't get your panties in a bunch. Don't like the thread don't post in it.
But I was feeling restive, and a good argument makes me feel rather cheery.
Take none of this personally, I just find this kind of bickering fun.

No.
oh, well......
yeah, I guess I am. It seems to work for me.

[QUOTE=Smunkeeville]
Hmmm so not only did they fit 2 of every animal on that there boat

But 2 of every full grown anamal (at least old enough to reproduce) but ayears worth of food AND room for their offspring

Amazing how one little wooden boat could manage that

not "little." the ark was huge. Gigantic. built of (heheh)Biblical proportions.

not "little." the ark was huge. Gigantic. built of (heheh)Biblical proportions.
No it was big ... massive for a wooden ship but nothing by todays standards

"I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth. So make yourself an ark of cypress wood; make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out. This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be 450 feet [140 meters / 300 cubits] long, 75 feet [23 meters / 50 cubits] wide and 45 feet [14 meters / 30 cubits] high. Make a roof for it and finish the ark to within 18 inches [1 cubit] of the top. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks. I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it."



Unit coversions thrown in

To put that in perspective it is less then twice the length of a 747

Big for a wood boat but miniscule by iron ship standards
And not even anywhere neer big enough to contain all the earths animals and a year worth of food

One God, three natures. The trinity is a tough concept to grasp.
That's not what was said.

And your point is??? Nice job of taking an oft-revised, oft-mistranslated, written version of an ancient oral tradition and pointing out its inconsistencies. Goooood jooob! Heh! :rolleyes:
Hey as long as people continue believing the absolute truth

And using that oft (insert all your discriptions here) text's minute details to create moral governing laws the inacuracies deserve to be pointed out ... if only to highlight why the details should not be encoded into law as absolute right

That's not what was said.
God is one and three at the same time.

He was speaking against having other things be lord over you. (like idols, or money)

Pretty much all of the bible is made up except for Revelations. Revelations has along with 3 different sources (those being the ancient Mayans, Nostradamus and modern scientists) that the apocolypse will come December 22nd, 2012. Everyone use your time wisely, you have about a month and 7 years to live.

No it was big ... massive for a wooden ship but nothing by todays standards


Unit coversions thrown in

To put that in perspective it is less then twice the length of a 747

Big for a wood boat but miniscule by iron ship standards
And not even anywhere neer big enough to contain all the earths animals and a year worth of food
I never knew the conversions. Every time i asked i was told that cubits were an ancient measurement and we didn't know the conversions. Damn you, Mom!

Pretty much all of the bible is made up except for Revelations. Revelations has along with 3 different sources (those being the ancient Mayans, Nostradamus and modern scientists) that the apocolypse will come December 22nd, 2012. Everyone use your time wisely, you have about a month and 7 years to live.
So..where exactly in Revelations does it tell us Dec. 22, 2012?

I never knew the conversions. Every time i asked i was told that cubits were an ancient measurement and we didn't know the conversions. Damn you, Mom!
Lol it it helps at all I think if the story was proven true it would make it the biggest ALL wooden ship ever recorded by a bit

Lol it it helps at all I think if the story was proven true it would make it the biggest ALL wooden ship ever recorded by a bit
One would think

So..where exactly in Revelations does it tell us Dec. 22, 2012?
Put your head between your legs, and kiss your ass good-bye.

One would think
yeah but that just adds more unbelevability to it

Not only did a man (and possibly his family) build said massive ship on their own with their limited resources (think how expensive lumber had to be in that area)

But they did it to a scale that no one has been able to duplicate without using equipment and tequniques and materials not avaliable them at that time and or location

yeah but that just adds more unbelevability to it

Not only did a man (and possibly his family) build said massive ship on their own with their limited resources (think how expensive lumber had to be in that area)

But they did it to a scale that no one has been able to duplicate without using equipment and tequniques and materials not avaliable them at that time and or location
Ah, but how much time did he have?

Put your head between your legs, and kiss your ass good-bye.

Huh..that's the first thing I do every morning, you know...just in case.

Ah, but how much time did he have?
Quite a while if I remember right (ill dig it up for you)

Best guess I have seen is 98 years

So the length of time was extensive but there are so many inferences made by biblical literalists it is laughable

Quite a while if I remember right (ill dig it up for you)

Best guess I have seen is 98 years

So the length of time was extensive but there are so many inferences made by biblical literalists it is laughable

i dunno. I wasn't noah, i wasn't chillin out with noah, i don't know.

A lot of the "Biblical Inaccuracies" I've seen are petty and BS in a big way. Like someone tried to point out that Bats were mammals, and since God refered to them as birds to people, that that was a problem with the Bible.

A lot of the "Biblical Inaccuracies" I've seen are petty and BS in a big way. Like someone tried to point out that Bats were mammals, and since God refered to them as birds to people, that that was a problem with the Bible.
Well obviously the Bible is meant to be the authoritative book on everything and there has never been even the slightest editting or translation error in the history of the Universe. If the Bible doesn't describe the process by which Adam's sperm feritilized Eve's egg with perfect accuracy, then Christianity is completely disproven.

A lot of the "Biblical Inaccuracies" I've seen are petty and BS in a big way. Like someone tried to point out that Bats were mammals, and since God refered to them as birds to people, that that was a problem with the Bible.
Having errors in a book that has no corroborating external verifyer is deffinatly a bad thing

If we have nothing to compare it too we dont know how accurate what we have nowadays is

Having errors in a book that has no corroborating external verifyer is deffinatly a bad thing

If we have nothing to compare it too we dont know how accurate what we have nowadays is
But my point is a lot of the "inaccuracies" are crap. Imean, the bats described as birds thing, someone from that time period would not have thought of a bat as a mammal. so some of the "flaws" people quote are bogus. I'm not saying that people aren't going to find flaws, or that all the problems people find are easily explained away, if they can be at all. I'm merely pointing out a lot of people get petty where they don't need to.

But my point is a lot of the "inaccuracies" are crap. Imean, the bats described as birds thing, someone from that time period would not have thought of a bat as a mammal. so some of the "flaws" people quote are bogus. I'm not saying that people aren't going to find flaws, or that all the problems people find are easily explained away, if they can be at all. I'm merely pointing out a lot of people get petty where they don't need to.
But you would figure a divinly inspired document would not have such petty issues

And that is just one of the few biblical contradictiosn


There are all kinds

Who is the father of Joseph?
MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.


You cant tell me they did not know how to record who fauthers are?

incest wasn't "wrong" until there were enough people to avoid it.
I'm entirely disturbed.

I'm not sure if anyone has answered all the points in the original post, so I'm going to go through it point by point just in case.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/abs/long.htm

Here's a few good ones:

# God expels Adam and Eve from the garden before they get a chance to eat from that other tree -- the tree of life. God knows that if they do that, they well become "like one of us" and live forever. 3:22-24

By eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil Adam and Eve brought sin down upon themselves. God's decision to keep them from obtaining immortality was an act of kindness because it gave them the opportunity die, redeemed by Jesus Christ (eventually) and live free from sin with God. As was pointed out, the word "Us" is hardly an inconsistency given the nature of God.

# "And Cain knew his wife." That's nice, but where the hell did she come from? 4:17

Adam and Eve had other sons and daughters (Genesis 5:4). Cain could have married his sister, since incest wasn’t forbidden at that time (as far as we know). Adam and Eve are commonly thought of as the most perfect (physically and otherwise) humans to ever walk the earth, which could mean that they had flawless DNA, making the physical consequences of inbreeding much less potent.

# The "sons of God" copulated with the "daughters of men," and had sons who became "the mighty men of old, men of renown." 6:2-4

Undoubtedly one of the most bizarre portions of scripture. Hardly compares to the bit about the Son of God taking human form and dying for our sins though. Did you actually expect a book about the supernatural to conform to your experience of “normality” in the natural world?

# Noah kills the "clean beasts" and burns their dead bodies for God. According to 7:8 this would have caused the extinction of all "clean" animals since only two of each were taken onto the ark. "And the Lord smelled a sweet savor." After this God "said in his heart" that he'd never do it again because "man's heart is evil from his youth." So God killed all living things (6:5) because humans are evil, and then promises not to do it again (8:21) because humans are evil. The mind of God is a frightening thing. 8:20-21

This point ought to cause some grief to anyone whose theological training extends no further than the kiddy songs taught in pre-K Sunday School. There were not two of every clean animal, there were seven of them, along with seven of every kind of bird. The only beasts to go marching two-by-two into the ark were the unclean animals (Genesis 7:2&3).

# God, who is planning another mass murder, is worried that Abraham might try to stop him. so he asks himself if he should hide his intentions from Abraham. 18:17

Reading the verse in context it doesn’t sound to me like God is worried (!) that Abraham might try to stop him. (Why would God be worried about that anyway?). Rather, it sounds like God is saying “look: Abraham is going to become a great nation, why don’t I give him the honor of knowing beforehand what I, the Lord God, am about to do.” That’s my take on it, anyway. This is the first time I’ve looked at that passage from the perspective of God being worried, so this point caught me a little off guard.

# Lot and his daughters camp out in a cave for a while. The daughters get their "just and righteous" father drunk, and have sexual intercourse with him, and each conceives and bears a son (wouldn't you know it!). Just another wholesome family values Bible story. 19:30-38

Just because someone in the Bible did something doesn’t mean that that action is condoned. So what if Lot was declared “Just and Righteous”? David was called a man after God’s own heart, but he committed adultery and killed his lover’s husband to boot. All humans are flawed and prone to sin, so even when God calls one of us “Just and Righteous” that doesn’t mean that person is perfect.

And what makes you think that the Bible is full of stories suited for kids? Did you not notice that “The Passion of the Christ” was hailed both as Biblically accurate and exceedingly gory even by Hollywood standards?

Though it shouldnt need to be stated, no flaming!

Well, I’m not usually one to flame, but this thread got me pretty angry. Most of the answers I gave (with the exception of the Abraham one) were right off the top of my head, and I’m sure that you would have been able to find answers to your points on many different websites. Could you please, please try to actually learn something about the Bible before going online and copying and pasting lame skepticism of it?

There are all kinds

Who is the father of Joseph?
Quote:
"MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli. "



You cant tell me they did not know how to record who fauthers are?

Jacob. The new testament was written almost like you would write a letter to someone. Mathew was a noted historian, so i'd go with him.

Jacob. The new testament was written almost like you would write a letter to someone. Mathew was a noted historian, so i'd go with him.
There are more then just that one as well

The sins of the father
ISA 14:21 Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities.

DEU 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.
Children guilty for the sins of their fauthers or not?

or how about the richous
Righteous live?
Ps.92:12: "The righteous shall flourish like the palm tree."

Isa.57:1: "The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart."

And lo even a misrecording of CHRISTS first speach
Jesus' first sermon plain or mount?
Matt.5:1,2: "And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying...."
Luke6:17,20: "And he came down with them, and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people...came to hear him.. And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples and said..."

There are all kinds

All of which can be explained. The Genealogy given in Luke is Mary's Genealogy (Although by convention it is a list of men only so Mary's name is replaced by Joseph's) and the Genealogy in Matthew is Joseph’s Genealogy. They are both given to show that Christ was a descended of David both physically through Mary and officially through Joseph.

You cant tell me they did not know how to record who fauthers are?
Its possible that some generations were skipped. Who really wants to keep track of millenia of begatting? Much easier just to highlight the ones who you thought were important, so Matthew (or his source) thought that Jacob was of some importance but didn't care about Joseph's Grandfather/father Heli, while Luke (or his source) thought that Heli was of some importance but didn't care about Joseph's Grandfather/father Jacob.

Its possible that some generations were skipped. Who really wants to keep track of millenia of begatting? Much easier just to highlight the ones who you thought were important, so Matthew (or his source) thought that Jacob was of some importance but didn't care about Joseph's Grandfather/father Heli, while Luke (or his source) thought that Heli was of some importance but didn't care about Joseph's Grandfather/father Jacob.
I can understand large swaths of them not being recorded but you would figure thoes directly associated to the "father" (adopted fauther whatever) of christ would be fairly important

add this to the list

The misrecording of thelast words of the most important person that differentiates christianity from all other religions

Christ


Jesus' last words
Matt.27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ...Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."

Luke23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

John19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."

There are more then just that one as well


Children guilty for the sins of their fauthers or not?

or how about the richous


And lo even a misrecording of CHRISTS first speach

Listen, You're obviously pulling stuff off of some website and pasting it here, and it seems that your ability to do so may go on long after I'm willing to answer you (especially because it's now after midnight in my part of the world and I have class tomorrow). Why don't you have a look at this site (http://www.carm.org/bible_difficulties.htm) for a while and see if any of your "absurdities" aren't answered?

I can understand large swaths of them not being recorded but you would figure thoes directly associated to the "father" (adopted fauther whatever) of christ would be fairly important
Maybe Luke was of the opinion that Jacob was a total jerk who no one would want to talk about. Never having spent time chatting with either one I can't say.
I'm going to explain any possible descrepencies by saying that Luke was a son of a bitch who didn't seem to understand that someone could be both Christian and like a good joke. Look was the one with the Four Woes right? No happiness, no money, no food, and no something else, or you go straight to Hell.
Tosser.

Listen, You're obviously pulling stuff off of some website and pasting it here, and it seems that your ability to do so may go on long after I'm willing to answer you (especially because it's now after midnight in my part of the world and I have class tomorrow). Why don't you have a look at this site (http://www.carm.org/bible_difficulties.htm) for a while and see if any of your "absurdities" aren't answered?
Yup they can be explained away (I have gone through the site before btw)

but in the end its hardly befitting of a god to have such a muttled book that is suposed to show his children the way

Remember kids you are being tested in the end on your faith and your understanding
Your very life is in the balance if you find out that the way that it is interpreted and yu believe turns out to be the wrong one

Yup they can be explained away (I have gone through the site before btw)

but in the end its hardly befitting of a god to have such a muttled book that is suposed to show his children the way

Remember kids you are being tested in the end on your faith and your understanding
Your very life is in the balance if you find out that the way that it is interpreted and yu believe turns out to be the wrong one

Well, you're kinda right. In the end, you're being tested on your faith. Regardless of how muddled the Bible may be, it comes down to faith.

Well, you're kinda right. In the end, you're being tested on your faith. Regardless of how muddled the Bible may be, it comes down to faith.
And having such a flawed muttled book is suposed to inspire faith? personaly it does the oposite

Yup they can be explained away (I have gone through the site before btw)

Then why the deuce are you posting crap that you've already seen refuted?

but in the end its hardly befitting of a god to have such a muttled book that is suposed to show his children the way

Remember kids you are being tested in the end on your faith and your understanding
Your very life is in the balance if you find out that the way that it is interpreted and yu believe turns out to be the wrong one

The way is clearly shown. The "absurdities" you have pointed out are mostly trivial and are easily explained for anyone who has the patience to read a little theology. The importand aspects of the Bible, the ones that Christians absolutely must understand in order to be saved, are clear and do not even seem to contradict.

And having such a flawed muttled book is suposed to inspire faith? personaly it does the oposite

see, that's the problem. People get so caught up and wrapped up in a lot of the details that they miss the message. Personally, i like these "flaws withthe Bible" threads and websitesand such. I am barely a christian by any means. I drink, smoke, curse, masturbate, am a homosexual, etc, so one would think that I am opposed to christianity completely. Yet everytime i see a thread or a website like this, my faith grows. Am I going to stop being a drag queen pothead? No. But do I believe I stand on spiritually firm ground? More and more.

Anyhoo...It's 1:40 in the morning and i got a lot to do. Thank you all for this experiance.
Buttsex, I'm out.

I drink, smoke, curse, masturbate, am a homosexual, etc

All can be forgiven. Besides, the first three aren't even sins per se. Greatest Bible verse ever? Possibly . . . (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=61&chapter=5&verse=23&version=31&context=verse)

Anyhoo...It's 1:40 in the morning and i got a lot to do. Thank you all for this experiance.
Buttsex, I'm out.

I've got to go too. Classes inna morning, doncha know. I'll check back in tomorrow.

Then why the deuce are you posting crap that you've already seen refuted?



The way is clearly shown. The "absurdities" you have pointed out are mostly trivial and are easily explained for anyone who has the patience to read a little theology. The importand aspects of the Bible, the ones that Christians absolutely must understand in order to be saved, are clear and do not even seem to contradict.
Just that if I were god I would fire my editor ... this is not release material fit for high schoolers much less the public release of an all powerful deity's level of work.

Just that if I were god I would fire my editor ... this is not release material fit for high schoolers much less the public release of an all powerful deity's level of work.
May God feels people need to have faith in spite of the Bible? He is pretty keen on dumping people in the lake of fire after all...

May God feels people need to have faith in spite of the Bible? He is pretty keen on dumping people in the lake of fire after all...
Dunno, it is supposedly HIS word

add this to the list

The misrecording of thelast words of the most important person that differentiates christianity from all other religions

Christ

Jesus' last words
Matt.27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ...Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."

Luke23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

John19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."
So let's review:
1. Matt records that Jesus said "My God..." and then cried again and then died.
2. Luke records that Jesus said "Father..." and then died after having said it.
3. John records that Jesus said "It is finished" and then bowed his head and died.

So the picture we get is:
Jesus, having been beaten and crucified, cries out, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" He then later cries out and says "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit. It is finished." He then bows his head and dies.

I don't know how that can be viewed as inconsistent. Sounds to me more like three different witnesses recording the words of Jesus that they most clearly remembered. Or the ones that they thought were most important. Or maybe even -GASP- the words that God wanted them to record.

Anyone else notice that this man's hebrew is incorrect?

"Eli,Eli, lema sabachthani?"

# Noah kills the "clean beasts" and burns their dead bodies for God. According to 7:8 this would have caused the extinction of all "clean" animals since only two of each were taken onto the ark. "And the Lord smelled a sweet savor." After this God "said in his heart" that he'd never do it again because "man's heart is evil from his youth." So God killed all living things (6:5) because humans are evil, and then promises not to do it again (8:21) because humans are evil. The mind of God is a frightening thing. 8:20-21


Genesis 7:2 "Take with you seven pairs of all clean animals, the male and its mate; and a pair of the animals that are not clean, the male and its mate"

While their were "two of each" of unclean animals. There were seven sets of "two of each" unclean animals. This one's first premice fails more detailed reading.

why doesn't he just show we aethiests that we're wrong?

What an "aethiests" ?

What an "aethiests" ?

Someone who doesn't believe in correct spelling.

The bible is just like a HUGE collection of different stories, hear-say, updated legends, stories from pagan religions, personal opinions... Seeing it as the word of god is ridiculous(sp?). It's more like "the word of hundreds of people who lived centuries ago and weren't really that good at translating".

Genesis 7:2 "Take with you seven pairs of all clean animals, the male and its mate; and a pair of the animals that are not clean, the male and its mate"

While their were "two of each" of unclean animals. There were seven sets of "two of each" unclean animals. This one's first premice fails more detailed reading.
Hmmm Which makes the overcrowding even worse, are things like elephants rhinos hippo's and the like clean or unclean?

Oh come on! Anyone who's read The Da Vinci Code knows that it was decided at the Council of Niceae that Jesus would be the "Son of God" among other so-called "facts" of the Christian faith.

/End Sarcasm

Which is sad because that book makes more sense then the Christian doctrine ever has. Imagine 2000 years from now people could be holding that book to the same standards as the Bible today.

Dan Brown "Son of God" Ver. 2.0

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to mock the Christian faith. I just believe The Bible has been taken so far out of context that it's getting absurd. I bet the writers of this book never expected it to have such control over people thousands of years after being written, because that's all the book is; a form of control. A way to control the masses and still to this day it has that affect.

Do I believe Jesus was a real person? Yes
Son of God? No

Do I believe many of the stories in the bible are based on some sort of fact? Yes
Word of God? No

I had a discussion with my Christian Studies teacher (Fr. Campbell) on the subject last semester and we came to the conclusion that the Bible should be taken with a grain of salt. A nice philosphy on how you should lead your life, an inspiration when trying to get through the tough times, but not solid fact.

Again I will say this as to not cause confusion. I am a religious person, I just don't hold the Bible to the same standards as many people and I don't believe God expects that of any of us.

Hosea 1
1 The LORD gave these messages to Hosea son of Beeri during the years when Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah were kings of Judah, and Jeroboam son of Jehoash[a] was king of Israel.

2 When the LORD first began speaking to Israel through Hosea, he said to him, "Go and marry a prostitute,[b] so some of her children will be born to you from other men. This will illustrate the way my people have been untrue to me, openly committing adultery against the LORD by worshiping other gods."

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/abs/long.htm

Here's a few good ones:

# God expels Adam and Eve from the garden before they get a chance to eat from that other tree -- the tree of life. God knows that if they do that, they well become "like one of us" and live forever. 3:22-24

# "And Cain knew his wife." That's nice, but where the hell did she come from? 4:17

# The "sons of God" copulated with the "daughters of men," and had sons who became "the mighty men of old, men of renown." 6:2-4

# Noah kills the "clean beasts" and burns their dead bodies for God. According to 7:8 this would have caused the extinction of all "clean" animals since only two of each were taken onto the ark. "And the Lord smelled a sweet savor." After this God "said in his heart" that he'd never do it again because "man's heart is evil from his youth." So God killed all living things (6:5) because humans are evil, and then promises not to do it again (8:21) because humans are evil. The mind of God is a frightening thing. 8:20-21

# God, who is planning another mass murder, is worried that Abraham might try to stop him. so he asks himself if he should hide his intentions from Abraham. 18:17

# Lot and his daughters camp out in a cave for a while. The daughters get their "just and righteous" father drunk, and have sexual intercourse with him, and each conceives and bears a son (wouldn't you know it!). Just another wholesome family values Bible story. 19:30-38



Though it shouldnt need to be stated, no flaming!


Let's see where do I start? Cains wife would have been one of his sisters. Yes that seems weird to us now and God did eventually forbid it. However Cains genetics would have been superior to ours Adam and eve would have all the genetic posibilities. Now if you were to marry your sister you would not have enough genetics to have a healthy child. The closer you get to the beginning the less of a problem genetics would have been, it's science.
The sons of god were those who believed in God and followed his commandments the daughters of man were those would lived by they're own rules and ignored God they did achieve great fame but were judged by God for they're wickedness.
As for Noah read the story again there were 2 off every unclean animal but clean animals God comanded Noah to take more for that very purpose it says it right in the text read it again I believe it is in chapter 7.
How can you say God murdered? He created life all life so it is His choice when to end it.
As for the actions of Lot and his family the Bible does not praise these actions, they are an example of how far he let his family slip from what they should have been like. When the Bible calls him (lot) rightous (in the new testement) it is because he believed in God. God forgave him of these sins Because Lot believed. The Bible says of abraham that "he believed and it was counted to him as rightousness" mean God add His (God's) rightousness to Abrahams account. In the same way God offers to every person the same forgivness The Bible also says to you and me "If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord you shall be saved" and "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begoten son (Jesus) That whoever believes in him shall not perish but have everlasting life". God is offering a relationship as a Father to mankind But he gives us the freedom not to obey.

I hope this clarifies some of this for you

IVAN

The bible is just like a HUGE collection of different stories, hear-say, updated legends, stories from pagan religions, personal opinions... Seeing it as the word of god is ridiculous(sp?). It's more like "the word of hundreds of people who lived centuries ago and weren't really that good at translating".

The Bible was writen over thousands of years ago yet it contains no errors. There are things writen in the Bible that science would not understand for another 1000 years give or take. It is 100% accurate and way ahead of its time what other book is that true of????

One God, three natures. The trinity is a tough concept to grasp.
Not so hard to grasp. I played Morrowind, too, yaknow! ;)

what the hells a clean beast?

and that site is just great for my teacher-baiting plans - we are currently trying to prove happyness is a sin.

An animal that took a bath before getting on the Ark.

# Noah kills the "clean beasts" and burns their dead bodies for God. According to 7:8 this would have caused the extinction of all "clean" animals since only two of each were taken onto the ark.

I usually can't be arsed to reply to these sort of posts, but this was just too ignorant to let pass. Read the Bible. There were 7 of each clean animal taken on the ark anyway. It was only the unclean ones which were taken on '2 by 2'.

Apologies if someone's already said as much - I really can't be arsed with a reading through 8 pages of people going 'hurr hurr. Christians are stoopid'. :rolleyes:

However Cains genetics would have been superior to ours Adam and eve would have all the genetic posibilities. Now if you were to marry your sister you would not have enough genetics to have a healthy child. The closer you get to the beginning the less of a problem genetics would have been, it's science.
Hmm... I think you're confusing the word 'science' with the compound word 'hand-waving'. :)

what the hells a clean beast?

and that site is just great for my teacher-baiting plans - we are currently trying to prove happyness is a sin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_animal#List_of_clean_animals

http://www.nwcreation.net/wiki/index.php?title=Clean_and_unclean_animals

I have a lot of fun picking this sort of inconsistency out.

The one that has me stumped is:
Judas betrayed Jesus. But in order for Jesus to accomplish what he was sent here to do, he had to suffer and die so that he could be resurected. So why did Judas hang himself? Seems like he was just trying to help us all out (in context of course.) and have a little walking around money in coin purse.
[edit:The whole thing is convoluted. The Trinity especially makes no sense unless there's a gap in logic that needs to be filled.]

There are a lot of consistencies in the Bible as well that I like. For instance whenever anyone goes through water (leaving Egypt, Jesus being baptised [or anyone else for that matter], when Jesus came to the disciples on the water [they began to believe again]), they are transformed into something else. After the Red Sea parted, they Hebrews were a people (as opposed to slaves).
Also, in any sort of battle or bargain that is struck, the younger sibling always gets the better of the older. Cain killed his older brother, Isaac got the birthright of Ishmael (Abraham's oldest), etc.

I also like to read Song of Solomon (sometimes called Song of Songs) because it is beautiful love poetry. Some say it is a metaphor of the love between God and his people but I find that very unconvincing after reading it. There is a line that states when the man sees his beloved's breast it is like the head of a fawn. Not saying his wife's boobs look like deer heads but that when he sees them he feels the way people feel when they look at a fawn. The whole thing is like that, very beautiful work.

snip

I also like to read Song of Solomon (sometimes called Song of Songs) because it is beautiful love poetry. Some say it is a metaphor of the love between God and his people but I find that very unconvincing after reading it. There is a line that states when the man sees his beloved's breast it is like the head of a fawn. Not saying his wife's boobs look like deer heads but that when he sees them he feels the way people feel when they look at a fawn. The whole thing is like that, very beautiful work.


It deffinatly is an errotic thrilliar

Is it wrong to masturbate to reading the bible?

I also like 2 books in particular because they are so different than the others that they really stand apart. Job and Ecclesiastes are very comforting to me. I read them whenever life comes along and screws up my plan.

Job answers the problem of duality in the Bible. Job asks God why he's picking on him and God says, basically, because I can and who do you think you are to question me. But see, God isn't wrong or right, he is beyond the duality of this world. God just is and does God stuff so deal with and don't try to figure it out.

Ecclesiastes is great because it's about a king (mistaken as Solomon) who at first pursues earthly pleasures (feasting, orgies, wine) and discovers after a while that that is a total waste of time.
Then he sets out to gain as much wealth as he can until it dawns on him that he can't take it with him and he'll probably be leaving it all to someone who won't appreciate what he had to go through to get it.
Then he sets out to learn all that he can but finds that is folly because the more he learns, the more questions he has.
So, he says, basically, love your friends and family, hump your wife regularly, and worship the one who made it all. Enjoy the world by bringing everything back to simple uncomplicated terms, the important stuff.

God, Jesus, Holy Spirit, the trinity, 3 Gods in one.

Jesus was a god and the son of god? And what the hell is the holy spirit? (these are the questions that got me kicked out of 8th grade CCD).

I think when he says "One of us" he actually means him (god), the angels, cherubim, and other immortals. Not Jesus, since Jesus is post Adam and Eve.

Is it wrong to masturbate to reading the bible?

Yes. It's also weird.

[QUOTE=Uber Awesome]over a year on the ark, one would assume that the animals reproduced.

Wasn't the Ark supposed to have been set sail for 40 days and 40 nights or something similar, not a year?

I have a lot of fun picking this sort of inconsistency out.

The one that has me stumped is:
Judas betrayed Jesus. But in order for Jesus to accomplish what he was sent here to do, he had to suffer and die so that he could be resurected. So why did Judas hang himself? Seems like he was just trying to help us all out (in context of course.) and have a little walking around money in coin purse.

They had to make suicide a sin somehow. Make the bad guy do it, instant sin.

There are a lot of consistencies in the Bible as well that I like. For instance whenever anyone goes through water (leaving Egypt, Jesus being baptised [or anyone else for that matter], when Jesus came to the disciples on the water [they began to believe again]), they are transformed into something else. After the Red Sea parted, they Hebrews were a people (as opposed to slaves).

*snip*

As far as the Red sea parting, many historians believed that if such an event took place (and there is no evidence for it), it is more likely that Moses went through an area of the Nile Delta known as the Reed Sea, which one would merely need a machete (not a miracle) to part.

Just a point of interest.

Yes. It's also weird.
Too bad it feels so good

Wasn't the Ark supposed to have been set sail for 40 days and 40 nights or something similar, not a year?
Actually, it rained for 40 days and 40 nights. Then they had to sit around and wait for the floodwaters to recede.

Olara']
Actually, it rained for 40 days and 40 nights. Then they had to sit around and wait for the floodwaters to recede.
Not to mention if I remember there was some reason to believe 40 = 'a large number'
And there was some translation issues

But I dont rember for sure

Olara']Actually, it rained for 40 days and 40 nights. Then they had to sit around and wait for the floodwaters to recede.

In reality, trusting to any number presented by the bible isn't realistic. I say this as an atheist but even many theologians believe that the numbers presented are too catastrophically unbelieveable to be considered accurate.

Then again, many theologians also agree that a majority of the stories in the old testament are parables, not truisms. They are meant to present an example, not be true stories of what really happened.

Whatever happened to that Ark anyway...boat that size can't just dissappear...

They had to make suicide a sin somehow. Make the bad guy do it, instant sin.
I always assumed that Judas hanged himself because he didn't understand what was going on, and he was distraught that he had betrayed his teacher and friend to the authorities. Regret led to his actions.


As far as the Red sea parting, many historians believed that if such an event took place (and there is no evidence for it), it is more likely that Moses went through an area of the Nile Delta known as the Reed Sea, which one would merely need a machete (not a miracle) to part.

Just a point of interest.
I've heard this as well. It's also interesting to note that a strong wind like the one talked about in Exodus could have parted the Reed Sea. Which would have made it much quicker to cross and therefore much easier to get away from Pharoah.

In reality, trusting to any number presented by the bible isn't realistic. I say this as an atheist but even many theologians believe that the numbers presented are too catastrophically unbelieveable to be considered accurate.

Then again, many theologians also agree that a majority of the stories in the old testament are parables, not truisms. They are meant to present an example, not be true stories of what really happened.

Whatever happened to that Ark anyway...boat that size can't just dissappear...
Well, as another poster said, to my knowledge, "40" was the ancient Middle Eastern all-purpose number for "a lot," so I'm not dogmatic about it actually having rained for exactly 40 days and exactly 40 nights. Point is that there was a lot of rain.

And as for the ark disappearing, maybe they scavenged wood from it to build houses. Or maybe wood+uberdamp environment=rapid decomposition.

Olara']I always assumed that Judas hanged himself because he didn't understand what was going on, and he was distraught that he had betrayed his teacher and friend to the authorities. Regret led to his actions.

True...but what was the point of including him in the story after the betrayal? There has to be some lesson. Part of that lesson is don't be a selfish jerk and get your friends killed. The other part, is don't kill yourself, you'll go to hell.



Olara']I've heard this as well. It's also interesting to note that a strong wind like the one talked about in Exodus could have parted the Reed Sea. Which would have made it much quicker to cross and therefore much easier to get away from Pharoah.

The hole in the "wind" theory is that it would blow for the Pharoah as well, and therefore they could follow. It's less likely.

Olara']Well, as another poster said, to my knowledge, "40" was the ancient Middle Eastern all-purpose number for "a lot," so I'm not dogmatic about it actually having rained for exactly 40 days and exactly 40 nights. Point is that there was a lot of rain.

And as for the ark disappearing, maybe they scavenged wood from it to build houses. Or maybe wood+uber-damp environment=rapid decomposition.

Possibly. I still don't buy that story though. It would have to be one hell of a ship. Not to mention that recreating the world with 6 adults...not genetically possible...

Possibly. I still don't buy that story though. It would have to be one hell of a ship. Not to mention that recreating the world with 6 adults...not genetically possible...
And the low number of animals as well ... they are suseptable to imbreading as well

There is Adam. There is Eve. How can 6 billion come from 2 without any incest...? :eek:

Christians, please explain this.

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qincest.html

Hope that helps

True...but what was the point of including him in the story after the betrayal? There has to be some lesson. Part of that lesson is don't be a selfish jerk and get your friends killed. The other part, is don't kill yourself, you'll go to hell.
So? What's wrong with teaching people that life is worth living and suicide is not a good way out?

The hole in the "wind" theory is that it would blow for the Pharoah as well, and therefore they could follow. It's less likely.
True, but Exodus also tells of a "pillar of cloud" that stood between the Egyptians and the Hebrews. Thick fog, maybe? Wouldn't want to send your army into that lest they start killing each other? I don't know.

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qincest.html

Hope that helps

Wow...that has to be the most scientifically devoid explanation I hav ever heard. Totally pure? Water Canopy? Thermal Blanket?

Actually...there is no valid explanation, unless you want to get more and more devine. It isn't possible between Adam and Eve, and it isn't possible after the Flood.

Possibly. I still don't buy that story though. It would have to be one hell of a ship. Not to mention that recreating the world with 6 adults...not genetically possible...
Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible."
You probably won't buy it, but it works for me.

Olara']So? What's wrong with teaching people that life is worth living and suicide is not a good way out?

What's wrong with letting people decide for themselves whether or not life is worth living?


Olara']True, but Exodus also tells of a "pillar of cloud" that stood between the Egyptians and the Hebrews. Thick fog, maybe? Wouldn't want to send your army into that lest they start killing each other? I don't know.

True, there is the pillar of cloud, which is likely to be fog in that sort of tropical environment, and does lend more to the Reed Sea concept, than the Red Sea.

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qincest.html

Hope that helps


"water canopy/thermal blanket was destroyed in the Flood"

WTF is a water canopy?

What's wrong with letting people decide for themselves whether or not life is worth living?
Because in my experience, people who are suicidal usually aren't thinking as clearly as they normally do. It is precisely when people are suicidal that they need help the most. And in a book such as the Bible, which has as one of its purposes helping people figure out the meaning to their life, a teaching or two against suicide would be a relevant thing.

Olara']Because in my experience, people who are suicidal usually aren't thinking as clearly as they normally do. It is precisely when people are suicidal that they need help the most. And in a book such as the Bible, which has as one of its purposes helping people figure out the meaning to their life, a teaching or two against suicide would be a relevant thing.

I hate to be saying it like this...however...

Who said there had to be a meaning to life?

Did you know that many people are suicidal because in their youth they were taught religion and in so being taught were lead to believe that there is meaning to life?

Olara']Because in my experience, people who are suicidal usually aren't thinking as clearly as they normally do. It is precisely when people are suicidal that they need help the most. And in a book such as the Bible, which has as one of its purposes helping people figure out the meaning to their life, a teaching or two against suicide would be a relevant thing.
In my experience people who are in love usualy arnt thinking as clearly as they normaly do. it is precisely when people are in love they need help the most ...

You know how many stupid decisions have been made more out of "love" I bet it is in the same neighborhood as thoes that are depressed

Does that mean we should restrict people in love from making life long commitments too?

"water canopy/thermal blanket was destroyed in the Flood"

WTF is a water canopy?

I have an electric thermal blanket.

I don't remember those two things specifically stated in the bible either.

I hate to be saying it like this...however...

Who said there had to be a meaning to life?

Did you know that many people are suicidal because in their youth they were taught religion and in so being taught were lead to believe that there is meaning to life?
Absolutly you know how much better my life got when I finaly understood the fact that things dont have to have meanings or plans

it taught me to live life

Having to force a meaning on everything was a drag (that and the whole priest molestation thing)

I hate to be saying it like this...however...

Who said there had to be a meaning to life?

Did you know that many people are suicidal because in their youth they were taught religion and in so being taught were lead to believe that there is meaning to life?
How many people?

It has been my experience that people commit suicide when they believe their life has no meaning.

Religion is for people who need false hope in their meaningless lives.

I have a lot of fun picking this sort of inconsistency out.

The one that has me stumped is:
Judas betrayed Jesus. But in order for Jesus to accomplish what he was sent here to do, he had to suffer and die so that he could be resurected. So why did Judas hang himself? Seems like he was just trying to help us all out (in context of course.) and have a little walking around money in coin purse.
[edit:The whole thing is convoluted. The Trinity especially makes no sense unless there's a gap in logic that needs to be filled.]

There are a lot of consistencies in the Bible as well that I like. For instance whenever anyone goes through water (leaving Egypt, Jesus being baptised [or anyone else for that matter], when Jesus came to the disciples on the water [they began to believe again]), they are transformed into something else. After the Red Sea parted, they Hebrews were a people (as opposed to slaves).
Also, in any sort of battle or bargain that is struck, the younger sibling always gets the better of the older. Cain killed his older brother, Isaac got the birthright of Ishmael (Abraham's oldest), etc.

I also like to read Song of Solomon (sometimes called Song of Songs) because it is beautiful love poetry. Some say it is a metaphor of the love between God and his people but I find that very unconvincing after reading it. There is a line that states when the man sees his beloved's breast it is like the head of a fawn. Not saying his wife's boobs look like deer heads but that when he sees them he feels the way people feel when they look at a fawn. The whole thing is like that, very beautiful work.

Actually, Cain was older than Abel. See Gen 4:1.

In my experience people who are in love usualy arnt thinking as clearly as they normaly do. it is precisely when people are in love they need help the most ...

You know how many stupid decisions have been made more out of "love" I bet it is in the same neighborhood as thoes that are depressed

Does that mean we should restrict people in love from making life long commitments too?
Actually, I do think people would be better off if they would not make life-long commitments based on an emotion. Emotions pass; love is a verb. It's a decision that no matter how you feel you are going to do your best to act a certain way toward someone. This is something that the Bible also teaches.

I still think it's a good thing to teach people not to off themselves when the going gets tough.

Olara']How many people?

It has been my experience that people commit suicide when they believe their life has no meaning.

It has been my experience that people whose life loses its meaning that consider suicide. Literally, that was my experience.

Religion is for people who need false hope in their meaningless lives.
Like Marx in a few less words, eh?

I see neither my hope as false nor my life as meaningless. Contrast this to my pre-Christ days, when I had no hope and saw no meaning to my existence.

It has been my experience that people whose life loses its meaning that consider suicide. Literally, that was my experience.
Meaning you attempted suicide? I must say that I am glad you did not kill yourself. And your point is my point: I, too, contemplated suicide when I thought my life was meaningless. For some this involves never seeing a meaning in their life, for others it involves seeing one and then losing it.

Wasn't the Ark supposed to have been set sail for 40 days and 40 nights or something similar, not a year?
it rained for 40 days, he was actually in the ark for almost 2 years.

Olara']How many people?

It has been my experience that people commit suicide when they believe their life has no meaning.

Yes...but why is that upsetting unless you think life is supposed to have meaning?

Yes...but why is that upsetting unless you think life is supposed to have meaning?
Alright, I see the point you were trying to make.

Because I think we are all born with a sense that our lives should have purpose, that everything has meaning. Otherwise, the inquisitive nature of children wouldn't be so inquisitive. No reason to ask "Why?" if you don't have an innate sense that everything has a purpose for being the way it is.

Yes...but why is that upsetting unless you think life is supposed to have meaning?

Because action without purpose is empty. Emptiness is generally upsetting.

At first, religion was a burden for me. If I could have believed that there was no God, then I would have had no problem "offing myself", so to speak. If we simply go through life aimlessly, and it requires more effort than pleasure, then why bother?

Even if you're helping out the needy, what good does it do them if you've just given them more time to do more labour? Even if your own destruction would depress and make life difficult for others, why should they even be bothering to go on if there's nothing at the end except more work until you collapse? Why not just get it over with? No harm, no foul.

For a while, it was the fear of Hell that kept me going, even if Hell was nothing more than living life forever and ever with no end. But, now that my faith has developed, I can see purpose to all this life. I can see a love that just wouldn't be here in a secular world.

And I think it's true that most religious folk enjoy life more than most secular ones. A while back, there was a thread on the NSGeneral board asking why Christians et al were so obsessed with there being an afterlife. The thread starter believed that, when his/her life was over, he/she would be content to just enjoy nothingness and not have to mess with any of it again.

Well, without Christ, I would certainly feel the same way. But now I can enjoy life.

I'm not sure life has a meaning or purpose. Pretending it does to deceive yourself sounds like a bad idea to me.

Olara']Meaning you attempted suicide? I must say that I am glad you did not kill yourself. And your point is my point: I, too, contemplated suicide when I thought my life was meaningless. For some this involves never seeing a meaning in their life, for others it involves seeing one and then losing it.

I considered it, once I lost my faith in christianity. Took me a while to figure out that I could give my life some meaning that didn't involve pleasing a big guy in the sky to reap some reward.

I'm not sure life has a meaning or purpose.

It does; I guarantee you it does. :)


Pretending it does to deceive yourself sounds like a bad idea to me.

And I agree with this completely. I'd also assert that living life that is meaningless is, by definition, meaningless.

I considered it, once I lost my faith in christianity. Took me a while to figure out that I could give my life some meaning that didn't involve pleasing a big guy in the sky to reap some reward.

It's not about "pleasing a big guy in the sky". It's that the "big guy" loves you through self-sacrifice, and we should love each other with our own sacrifices. This brings us joy, hence the reaping of a reward. It also pleases the big guy. And we continue doing so forever, with Christ as both our tool and example.

I considered it, once I lost my faith in christianity. Took me a while to figure out that I could give my life some meaning that didn't involve pleasing a big guy in the sky to reap some reward.
What reward, exactly, were you trying to reap? Admission into heaven? I'm not Catholic, and I'm assuming that since you're from Brazil (or at least your location is listed as Brazil) that you were raised in the Catholic Church. I don't know what exactly you were taught, but you don't have to "please a big guy in the sky" to get into heaven. If that's why you lost your faith in Christianity, I would urge you to reconsider. And again, I'm glad you didn't end up taking your own life.

It's not about "pleasing a big guy in the sky". It's that the "big guy" loves you through self-sacrifice, and we should love each other with our own sacrifices. This brings us joy, hence the reaping of a reward. It also pleases the big guy. And we continue doing so forever, with Christ as both our tool and example.

And if we don't follow what he says we burn in hell for all eternity. What a guy. :rolleyes:

Olara']Alright, I see the point you were trying to make.

Because I think we are all born with a sense that our lives should have purpose, that everything has meaning. Otherwise, the inquisitive nature of children wouldn't be so inquisitive. No reason to ask "Why?" if you don't have an innate sense that everything has a purpose for being the way it is.

I disagree with this on various levels, but to boil it down, we aren't born with anything. The only instinct we have at birth is find food. Children ask why in the years after they have been taught that reason and purpose exist. Generally, if they keep up the why, we run out of reasons or purposes, and tell them "That's just the way it is." Which is never sufficient for a child. Why are they more inquisitive than we are?

I guess we should ask why we stop asking "Why?" and why we begin to simply accept things.

You guys are funny. Arguing and making fun of Christians. Im going to say this now, and hopefully all smart christians will follow me.

The Old Testament is bull crap.

Its all made up, all of it, save for maybe some little consistencies. Now lets move on the good part of the bible. The NEW testament.

Because action without purpose is empty. Emptiness is generally upsetting.

Tell that to Buddha.

At first, religion was a burden for me. If I could have believed that there was no God, then I would have had no problem "offing myself", so to speak. If we simply go through life aimlessly, and it requires more effort than pleasure, then why bother?

I go through life aimlessly so to speak. My only goal is to make myself and my family safe and happy. I need no god for that. And I'm pretty happy.

Even if you're helping out the needy, what good does it do them if you've just given them more time to do more labour? Even if your own destruction would depress and make life difficult for others, why should they even be bothering to go on if there's nothing at the end except more work until you collapse? Why not just get it over with? No harm, no foul.

For a while, it was the fear of Hell that kept me going, even if Hell was nothing more than living life forever and ever with no end. But, now that my faith has developed, I can see purpose to all this life. I can see a love that just wouldn't be here in a secular world.

So tell me...what is the purpose to life?

As far as love in the secular world, religion is responsible for more trials and tribulations than any secular issue.

And I think it's true that most religious folk enjoy life more than most secular ones. A while back, there was a thread on the NSGeneral board asking why Christians et al were so obsessed with there being an afterlife. The thread starter believed that, when his/her life was over, he/she would be content to just enjoy nothingness and not have to mess with any of it again.

I've seen religious folk that live horrid lives wondering why god doesn't help them for their faith. I've seen atheists and agnostics living happy as clams. I don't think either is better, it is person dependent.

Well, without Christ, I would certainly feel the same way. But now I can enjoy life.[/QUOTE]

And if we don't follow what he says we burn in hell for all eternity. What a guy. :rolleyes:
If we decide to sin, we get only what we deserve. Yet he gave us a way out, one where we would end up with much better than what we deserve. Yeah, what a guy.

You guys are funny. Arguing and making fun of Christians. Im going to say this now, and hopefully all smart christians will follow me.

The Old Testament is bull crap.

Its all made up, all of it, save for maybe some little consistencies. Now lets move on the good part of the bible. The NEW testament.

I'm pretty sure every Jewish person disagrees with you on that statement.:rolleyes:

Olara']If we decide to sin, we get only what we deserve. Yet he gave us a way out, one where we would end up with much better than what we deserve. Yeah, what a guy.
Yes because we all know if we don't do as we are told in our lives we deserve to burn for eternity. :rolleyes:

I'm pretty sure every Jewish person disagrees with you on that statement.:rolleyes:
And every Christian.

Olara']And every Christian.

Yea I was supprised at that too. I know that quite a few christians regard certain stories in the OT in a non literal sense but they also believe that many parts of it did happen.

Yes because we all know if we don't do as we are told in our lives we deserve to burn for eternity. :rolleyes:
So when a dad tells his kid not to stick his hand in the fire, and the kid sticks his hand in the fire, the kid doesn't deserve to be punished? Now take that temporal example and apply it to the spiritual realm. Spiritual actions have spiritual consequences, and these consequences, much like the spirit realm itself, will last forever.

Yea I was supprised at that too. I know that quite a few christians regard certain stories in the OT in a non literal sense but they also believe that many parts of it did happen.
Well, and not just stories, many of which can be seen as allegory. The OT is full of prophesy about the Messiah (ie, Jesus). If the OT is all "made up" and "bull crap," then there is no reason to consider Jesus the savior of the world.

The biggest problem that seems to bring these questions out, is a cultural pedjudice. Westerners think their culture is the only valid culture. We see this today in a demanding that Mid east women no longer cover themselves. Interesting since western women were required to cover themselves less than 100 years ago.

This predjudice makes it impossible to understand much of what is in the Bible. And it also teaches things that aren't in the Bible. For instance, if you ask most western Christians what the Bible says about multiple wives, they assume the Bible says you can have only one. In actuallity, only bishops are required to have one wife, everyone else can have as many as they want.

As far as "Cain's Wife", it is interesting that a basic of evolution is interbreeding. A new genetic trait needs to be isolated and the way to do that is interbreeding. This is the way new breeds of animals are produced today. Look at all the "new" breeds of dogs. They were produced by finding one dog with the genes the breeder wanted to isolate, then interbreeding them until the offspring were consistant.

Most of the teachings of the Bible can be explained by studying the culture of the people at the time the Bible book was written, NOT by filtering it through western culture.

I also feel that most of the OT as well as the NT is parable. God doesn't change so if he taught in parable in the NT, why wouldn't he teach that way in the OT?

All things go through an evolutionary development. Why not the understanding of God? If you read the Bible with an acceptance of evolutionary development of ideas, and cultural understanding, it will be consistant.

Olara']So when a dad tells his kid not to stick his hand in the fire, and the kid sticks his hand in the fire, the kid doesn't deserve to be punished? Now take that temporal example and apply it to the spiritual realm. Spiritual actions have spiritual consequences, and these consequences, much like the spirit realm itself, will last forever.

1. Depends on the dad.
2. Depends on the mindset of the kid.
3. Depends on the punishment. The kid may deserve to be grounded but he certainly doesn't deserve to get the shit kicked out of him. The punishment needs to fit the crime. And being sent to eternal damnation for something that could have had punishment already done or is not all that bad but is considered a sin does not fit.

It's not about "pleasing a big guy in the sky". It's that the "big guy" loves you through self-sacrifice, and we should love each other with our own sacrifices. This brings us joy, hence the reaping of a reward. It also pleases the big guy. And we continue doing so forever, with Christ as both our tool and example.

If that works for you, knock yourself out.

Olara']So when a dad tells his kid not to stick his hand in the fire, and the kid sticks his hand in the fire, the kid doesn't deserve to be punished? Now take that temporal example and apply it to the spiritual realm. Spiritual actions have spiritual consequences, and these consequences, much like the spirit realm itself, will last forever.

Isn't the natural consequence of burning your hand punishment enough? Why add more?

Olara']What reward, exactly, were you trying to reap? Admission into heaven? I'm not Catholic, and I'm assuming that since you're from Brazil (or at least your location is listed as Brazil) that you were raised in the Catholic Church. I don't know what exactly you were taught, but you don't have to "please a big guy in the sky" to get into heaven. If that's why you lost your faith in Christianity, I would urge you to reconsider. And again, I'm glad you didn't end up taking your own life.

I was raised catholic, yeah. But I've already searched for meaning in spiritism, evangelicism and in jehovah's witnesses, and all I've seen were people looking for rewards. Heaven, blessings, better lives in other incarnations, living forever, or at least some fantasy on which to base their self-righteousness. No religion I've seen can give someone's life any meaning.

And yeah, I'm glad I didn't take my own life too. No thanks to christianity.

3. Depends on the punishment. The kid may deserve to be grounded but he certainly doesn't deserve to get the shit kicked out of him. The punishment needs to fit the crime. And being sent to eternal damnation for something that could have had punishment already done or is not all that bad but is considered a sin does not fit.
But see, sin is incompatible with God. Based on who God is, sin can't coexist with him. So when you sin, and sin becomes a part of you, you can't exist with God. Therefore, either your sin must be taken away for eternity or you can't coexist with God for eternity. The "punishment," then, does fit the crime.

Isn't the natural consequence of burning your hand punishment enough? Why add more?
Well, and the natural consequence of sin is death (in the spiritual sense). God adds nothing more, and we call it "hell."

Olara']But see, sin is incompatible with God. Based on who God is, sin can't coexist with him. So when you sin, and sin becomes a part of you, you can't exist with God. Therefore, either your sin must be taken away for eternity or you can't coexist with God for eternity. The "punishment," then, does fit the crime.

So an all-knowing, all-loving god can also be unforgiving and dole out retribution?

I was raised catholic, yeah. But I've already searched for meaning in spiritism, evangelicism and in jehovah's witnesses, and all I've seen were people looking for rewards. Heaven, blessings, better lives in other incarnations, living forever, or at least some fantasy on which to base their self-righteousness. No religion I've seen can give someone's life any meaning.

And yeah, I'm glad I didn't take my own life either. No thanks to christianity.
Well, what exactly were you looking for while you were going around trying all these faiths? If you were looking for some reward yourself (meaning, maybe?), then I'm not surprised that you saw all these faiths as full of nothing more than people looking for rewards.

Olara']Well, and the natural consequence of sin is death (in the spiritual sense). God adds nothing more, and we call it "hell."

If god created all, that includes hell...and the concept od punishment for that matter. And who decides on the scale of sin?

If a generally pious person gets hit by a truck and just before dying says "goddamnit", this being their only sin, do they go to hell?

Does a person who cheats on a test go to the same hell?

One was a constant cheater, but that isn't a commandment (#11, Thou shalt not look at others answers during a test), but the first one is a commandment.

So an all-knowing, all-loving god can also be unforgiving and dole out retribution?
But God is forgiving. He wants to forgive everyone. He wants it so much that 2,000 years ago he sent his son to die so we wouldn't have to. The only thing he won't do is force you to accept a forgiveness you don't want. I find this ironic; one of the things that most atheists/agnostics hold against God ("he doesn't forgive") is part of him doing what they want most (keeping out of their lives).

Olara']But see, sin is incompatible with God. Based on who God is, sin can't coexist with him. So when you sin, and sin becomes a part of you, you can't exist with God. Therefore, either your sin must be taken away for eternity or you can't coexist with God for eternity. The "punishment," then, does fit the crime.

And yet we are all born with original sin so does this technically mean we are born incompatible with god? Also couldn't god make us so that if we do sin it doesn't become a part of us? I mean we've got an all powerful deity here and your telling me that he can't just forgive everybody, remove their sins from them, and let them into heaven?

Olara']But God is forgiving. He wants to forgive everyone. He wants it so much that 2,000 years ago he sent his son to die so we wouldn't have to. The only thing he won't do is force you to accept a forgiveness you don't want. I find this ironic; one of the things that most atheists/agnostics hold against God ("he doesn't forgive") is part of him doing what they want most (keeping out of their lives).

I think you misinterpret what I say. God being forgiving and sending people to hell is a contradiction. There is no irony there. I don't want god to do anything, accept go away as it is just a distraction.

As far as sending his "only son" aren't we all god's children in that system of belief? and why play favorites and bring his son to his right hand and not all of us? Did Jesus never sin?

Tell that to Buddha.

I'm not fresh on my Buddhism. Did Siddhartha believe life was meaningless?

I go through life aimlessly so to speak. My only goal is to make myself and my family safe and happy. I need no god for that. And I'm pretty happy.

You take joy in pleasing your loved ones. You might find that there's even more joy in pleasing strangers, along with your loved ones.

But if you're only making them happy so they can continually labour until a long-awaited eternal rest, then what good are you doing them?

So tell me...what is the purpose to life?

I find most of it summed in this quote, which I put on that other "purpose" board:

Let love be sincere; hate what is evil, hold on to what is good; love one another with mutual affection; anticipate one another in showing honor. Do not grow slack in zeal, be fervent in spirit, serve the Lord.
Rejoice in hope, endure in affliction, persevere in prayer. Contribute to the needs of the holy ones, exercise hospitality. Bless those who persecute you, bless and do not curse them.
Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. Have the same regard for one another; do not be haughty but associate with the lowly; do not be wise in your own estimation.

As far as love in the secular world, religion is responsible for more trials and tribulations than any secular issue.

Because religion has historically been the dominant belief. Even lack of belief is a belief in itself. Whenever someone causes suffering, they will come up with a reason for doing so. That's why we have the horrors of Nazism and Stalinism... neither of which are religious in nature.

If god created all, that includes hell...and the concept od punishment for that matter. And who decides on the scale of sin?

Hell is a lack of God. Atheists may not believe that God has any influence on their lives right now, but we believe that He is even now calling to each of you, as He calls to us. In Hell, this ceases. Just like someone here pointed out that the Biblical flood was caused when God removed the firmament that had been holding the waters back since the beginning of time.

If god created all, that includes hell...and the concept od punishment for that matter. And who decides on the scale of sin?

If a generally pious person gets hit by a truck and just before dying says "goddamnit", this being their only sin, do they go to hell?

Does a person who cheats on a test go to the same hell?

One was a constant cheater, but that isn't a commandment (#11, Thou shalt not look at others answers during a test), but the first one is a commandment.
Well, first of all, since "Thou shalt not steal" is a commandment, and since cheating is stealing answers... But that's of secondary importance.

I would say that if the person who is hit by the truck has accepted Jesus' sacrifice as the atonement for their sin, then they will go to heaven. If, however, by "generally pious" you mean "was more or less nice to everyone," but they never accepted Jesus' sacrifice when given the chance, then this person would instead go to hell.

As for whether they go to "the same hell," that's a theological question too deep for me to answer given my current level of preparedness. It's my general understanding that different people will get different rewards in heaven, so I could imagine their being different torments in hell, but whether that is the case or not, I don't know. Eternity without God is torment enough, if you ask me.

add this to the list

The misrecording of thelast words of the most important person that differentiates christianity from all other religions

Christ
Jesus fucking Christ. They couldn't even get his last words right. :rolleyes:

And yet we are all born with original sin so does this technically mean we are born incompatible with god? Also couldn't god make us so that if we do sin it doesn't become a part of us? I mean we've got an all powerful deity here and your telling me that he can't just forgive everybody, remove their sins from them, and let them into heaven?

Another inconsistency...why can't the all-powerful ones look the other way?

And your point is??? Nice job of taking an oft-revised, oft-mistranslated, written version of an ancient oral tradition and pointing out its inconsistencies. Goooood jooob! Heh! :rolleyes:

Point? This thread is purely for amusement. After all, people actually believe this stuff.

And yet we are all born with original sin so does this technically mean we are born incompatible with god? Also couldn't god make us so that if we do sin it doesn't become a part of us? I mean we've got an all powerful deity here and your telling me that he can't just forgive everybody, remove their sins from them, and let them into heaven?
My understanding of original sin is that it is the propensity to sin that we inherited from the fall. And as I've said, God wants it to be our choice whether to spend eternity with him or not.

Olara']Well, first of all, since "Thou shalt not steal" is a commandment, and since cheating is stealing answers... But that's of secondary importance.

I will concede that point to you.

Olara']I would say that if the person who is hit by the truck has accepted Jesus' sacrifice as the atonement for their sin, then they will go to heaven. If, however, by "generally pious" you mean "was more or less nice to everyone," but they never accepted Jesus' sacrifice when given the chance, then this person would instead go to hell.

In saying pious I left an interpretation. Assume he was a super christian that had not sinned his entire life. The point is, Moses said that if you break a commandment you go to hell. This guy got ripped-off. A whole life of worship and all out the window in 1.3 seconds (the time is took to say goddamnit). That is a gyp and I wouldn't go for a god that makes strict rules like that.

Olara']As for whether they go to "the same hell," that's a theological question too deep for me to answer given my current level of preparedness. It's my general understanding that different people will get different rewards in heaven, so I could imagine their being different torments in hell, but whether that is the case or not, I don't know. Eternity without God is torment enough, if you ask me.

I would assume most Christians go for Dante's versions of heaven and hell. Since neither was ever truly defined in the bible, there isn't any more information on the subject.

Olara']I would say that if the person who is hit by the truck has accepted Jesus' sacrifice as the atonement for their sin, then they will go to heaven. If, however, by "generally pious" you mean "was more or less nice to everyone," but they never accepted Jesus' sacrifice when given the chance, then this person would instead go to hell.

So, Ghandi's in Hell, while the people that killed over 10 million people in North and South America are in heaven. Anyone else find that to be fucking warped?

I'm not fresh on my Buddhism. Did Siddhartha believe life was meaningless?
Pretty much. Life is suffering, and it's a very undesirable state. That's why we laugh at the idea of an infallible creator who punished us all for a bitch eating an apple. If there was a God, he sucks as at Godhood, and should be "fired" from the job. This is a shit world, and it's his invention (it's his fault, not his creation's).

So yes, in Buddhism, life is meaningless suffering and the goal is to stop living, permanently (Nirvana).

Olara']Well, what exactly were you looking for while you were going around trying all these faiths? If you were looking for some reward yourself (meaning, maybe?), then I'm not surprised that you saw all these faiths as full of nothing more than people looking for rewards.

I was looking for meaning, yes. An explanation to why I exist. Ultimately, all christianity did was mess with my head and make me wish I never had existed in the first place.

Olara']But God is forgiving. He wants to forgive everyone. He wants it so much that 2,000 years ago he sent his son to die so we wouldn't have to. The only thing he won't do is force you to accept a forgiveness you don't want. I find this ironic; one of the things that most atheists/agnostics hold against God ("he doesn't forgive") is part of him doing what they want most (keeping out of their lives).

If he wants to forgive, why doesn't he?

And yet we are all born with original sin so does this technically mean we are born incompatible with god? Also couldn't god make us so that if we do sin it doesn't become a part of us? I mean we've got an all powerful deity here and your telling me that he can't just forgive everybody, remove their sins from them, and let them into heaven?

To the first question: we may have been born with original sin, but we are also born with the need to seek God and have this sin removed so as to attain our ultimate fulfillment.
To the second question: I may not fully understand it, but there's something about giving us the option to be forgived. Clearly, a lot of people in the world don't even want it. It distinguishes those who do.

I think you misinterpret what I say. God being forgiving and sending people to hell is a contradiction. There is no irony there. I don't want god to do anything, accept go away as it is just a distraction.

God only sends people to Hell in the sense that he allows them to be without him. In Hell, it's too late:

Yes, days are coming, says the Lord GOD,
when I will send a famine upon the land:
Not a famine of bread, or thirst for water,
but for hearing the word of the LORD.
Then shall they wander from sea to sea
and rove from the north to the east
In search of the word of the LORD,
but they shall not find it.

Or, who knows? Maybe anyone in Hell has the power to turn away from the flames to God but just simply will not. I have no idea.

As far as sending his "only son" aren't we all god's children in that system of belief? and why play favorites and bring his son to his right hand and not all of us? Did Jesus never sin?

We believe Jesus never sinned. Hence the popularity of the "WWJD" craze. :)

And part of this is that Jesus is both God's son and God. Yeah, Trinity paradox and all that. But, most Christians believe that the bridegroom and bride referred to in Revelation are Jesus/God and His church. Therefore, we are destined to be brought directly into communion with God, if we allow it.

I think you misinterpret what I say. God being forgiving and sending people to hell is a contradiction. There is no irony there. I don't want god to do anything, accept go away as it is just a distraction.
Which is what I'm saying. You want God to go away and leave you alone. So he leaves, doesn't force you to accept a forgiveness you don't want, and you call him unforgiving.

As far as sending his "only son" aren't we all god's children in that system of belief? and why play favorites and bring his son to his right hand and not all of us? Did Jesus never sin?
No, Jesus never sinned. And Jesus is referred to as "God's only son" because other than Adam, who was formed out of the ground, Jesus is the only person referred to in the Bible who doesn't have a human father.

So, Ghandi's in Hell, while the people that killed over 10 million people in North and South America are in heaven. Anyone else find that to be fucking warped?

<raises hand>

So, Ghandi's in Hell, while the people that killed over 10 million people in North and South America are in heaven. Anyone else find that to be fucking warped?
I can't say where Ghandi or anyone else is for eternity. That's between them and God. Is it possible Ghandi is in hell? Yes, but it's possible that anyone is in hell. It's equally as possible for Ghandi to be in heaven. As I said, I don't know where he is.

Pretty much. Life is suffering, and it's a very undesirable state. That's why we laugh at the idea of an infallible creator who punished us all for a bitch eating an apple. If there was a God, he sucks as at Godhood, and should be "fired" from the job. This is a shit world, and it's his invention (it's his fault, not his creation's).

So yes, in Buddhism, life is meaningless suffering and the goal is to stop living, permanently (Nirvana).

That sounds scary to me! "I'm in a terrible life. I can't kill myself, or I'll just come back in some other form. I'd better be good, or else!"

How would Nirvana work? Disappearing out of the blue?

And, does this have anything to do with respect for fellow man? I thought that was one of Siddartha's things...

I was looking for meaning, yes. An explanation to why I exist. Ultimately, all christianity did was mess with my head and make me wish I never had existed in the first place.
Why? I'm just curious, as my experience has been quite different.

If he wants to forgive, why doesn't he?
He does. I'm forgiven. You can be, too. God won't force you to accept it, though. He wants you to want it.

That sounds scary to me! "I'm in a terrible life. I can't kill myself, or I'll just come back in some other form. I'd better be good, or else!"

How would Nirvana work? Disappearing out of the blue?

And, does this have anything to do with respect for fellow man? I thought that was one of Siddartha's things...

Actually Buddhism says that suffering comes from desire. I.e. wanting reality to be different to how it is. Eliminate this desire and you will not suffer. And Nirvana would probably be described as a state of being that can occur during life, not an afterlife. I'm not an expert though.

Olara']Which is what I'm saying. You want God to go away and leave you alone. So he leaves, doesn't force you to accept a forgiveness you don't want, and you call him unforgiving.

Sure...I'm not looking for forgiveness. Many who are won't meet those strict standards and will consequently be sent to hell.


Olara']No, Jesus never sinned. And Jesus is referred to as "God's only son" because other than Adam, who was formed out of the ground, Jesus is the only person referred to in the Bible who doesn't have a human father.

If Jesus never sinned, when the woman was to be stoned and he said, "Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.", then as people wandered away said to the woman, "Not even I can cast a stone against you, for I too have sinned"...Umm...there is a contradiction there...he says he did, but you say he didn't.

As far as this Human father stuff...what was the point of Joseph? Ever think maybe he knocked up a 14 year-old rich girl and they concocted the whole-holy-one/son-of-god story?

Seems more logical and likely to me...

Olara']I can't say where Ghandi or anyone else is for eternity. That's between them and God. Is it possible Ghandi is in hell? Yes, but it's possible that anyone is in hell. It's equally as possible for Ghandi to be in heaven. As I said, I don't know where he is.

You were just quoted making a statment saying if you were pious but didn't believe in Jesus you'd go to hell. Now your backing away from it and saying we'll I really don't know what happens?

In saying pious I left an interpretation. Assume he was a super christian that had not sinned his entire life. The point is, Moses said that if you break a commandment you go to hell. This guy got ripped-off. A whole life of worship and all out the window in 1.3 seconds (the time is took to say goddamnit). That is a gyp and I wouldn't go for a god that makes strict rules like that.
I agree, and as I said, I don't think that's the case.

You were just quoted making a statment saying if you were pious but didn't believe in Jesus you'd go to hell. Now your backing away from it and saying we'll I really don't know what happens?
No, I'm saying I can't comment as to Ghandi's spiritual condition when he died. Nor anyone else's, for that matter.

when correctly translated it is. I have seen people mistranslate it, and take things out of context to meet thier own needs, in those times they have made the word of God into thier own.


Isn't that what you're doing?

If Jesus never sinned, when the woman was to be stoned and he said, "Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.", then as people wandered away said to the woman, "Not even I can cast a stone against you, for I too have sinned"...Umm...there is a contradiction there...he says he did, but you say he didn't.
At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?"

"No one, sir," she said.
"Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin."
John 8:9-11

I don't see anywhere in there where Jesus says he sinned.

Sure...I'm not looking for forgiveness. Many who are won't meet those strict standards and will consequently be sent to hell.
What strict standards? Accept the gift of forgiveness? Yeah, what a jerk.

As far as this Human father stuff...what was the point of Joseph? Ever think maybe he knocked up a 14 year-old rich girl and they concocted the whole-holy-one/son-of-god story?

Seems more logical and likely to me...
A bastard son who could die and come back to life again in three days? Wow, this Joseph dude must be a whole lot more powerful than I thought.

Olara']I don't see anywhere in there where Jesus says he sinned.


My fault...apparently I read a poorly translated version.

Olara']Why? I'm just curious, as my experience has been quite different.

Because christianity requires people to somehow conciliate the ideas of a loving, almighty god with his allowing human suffering. Don't give me that bs of how this is somehow justice because of what a couple of morons did thousands and thousands of years ago. He could've stopped the sickness and the dying and the pain and he hasn't. And you still think it's alright that he should punish people for doing what's in their nature to do? That he allowed, if not made this way?

Schizophrenics are usually not aware that they are ill.

I have to correct you there. I've got a cousin who's a diagnosed schizophrenic, and she's fully aware of it.

Olara']He does. I'm forgiven. You can be, too. God won't force you to accept it, though. He wants you to want it.

I don't know about your life, but in mine, when I want to forgive someone who's done me wrong, I just forgive them and stop holding them to blame. They don't have to do anything. Sure, saying "sorry" helps, but it's not a necessary condition for forgiveness, and "accepting forgiveness" definitely has nothing to with it. You want to forgive someone, you stop being angry at them, stop punishing them and forgive. It doesn't take any action from their part.

Because christianity requires people to somehow conciliate the ideas of a loving, almighty god with his allowing human suffering. Don't give me that bs of how this is somehow justice because of what a couple of morons did thousands and thousands of years ago. He could've stopped the sickness and the dying and the pain and he hasn't. And you still think it's alright that he should punish people for doing what's in their nature to do? That he allowed, if not made this way?
But humans chose disobedience. The consequence of this is that we're born with a disobedient nature. That's not God's fault.

As for disease, etc., the Bible says that the wages of sin is death. Maybe this means that physical death was a consequence of the fall, too. I don't think so. I think it has more to do with the stain that sin has left on God's creation. It's imperfect, and that's something that humanity chose, so humanity is going to have to deal with it.

I don't know about your life, but in mine, when I want to forgive someone who's done me wrong, I just forgive them and stop holding them to blame. They don't have to do anything. Sure, saying "sorry" helps, but it's not a necessary condition for forgiveness, and "accepting forgiveness" definitely has nothing to with it. You want to forgive someone, you stop being angry at them, stop punishing them and forgive. It doesn't take any action from their part.
But if they don't accept it, then the relationship is at best damaged and at worst nonexistent. Being in heaven involves a relationship with God, and a refusal to accept forgiveness means that one's relationship with God is broken or nonexistent. Ergo, no heaven. If you don't want a relationship, he won't force you to be with him.

If Jesus never sinned, when the woman was to be stoned and he said, "Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.", then as people wandered away said to the woman, "Not even I can cast a stone against you, for I too have sinned"...Umm...there is a contradiction there...he says he did, but you say he didn't.

Double-you tee eff??

Olara']No, I'm saying I can't comment as to Ghandi's spiritual condition when he died. Nor anyone else's, for that matter.

So what you're saying is that you don't know if he "accepted christ" on his deathbed, but if he didn't, he's screwed?

Olara']I agree, and as I said, I don't think that's the case.

But according to scriptural interpretation it is. Breaking a commandment is the ultimate in sinliness (except maybe killing god, oddly not on the list).

Olara']What strict standards? Accept the gift of forgiveness? Yeah, what a jerk.

Sure comes with a lot of strings attached, this gift.

So what you're saying is that you don't know if he "accepted christ" on his deathbed, but if he didn't, he's screwed?
My beliefs are a bit more complex than that. In a nutshell, if anyone, including you, me, Mother Teresa, and Ghandi, is told the gospel (that is, told of Jesus' death for their sins on the cross) and knowingly rejects it, then they won't be in heaven unless they later accept it. So again, I don't know Ghandi's full life history, and I don't know his spiritual condition when he died. I do know that nothing he did, even though he did some great things, will earn him a spot in heaven. Same goes for you and me and everyone else.

Olara']But humans chose disobedience. The consequence of this is that we're born with a disobedient nature. That's not God's fault.

Yes, it is. Why the hell do we have to inherit that? I wasn't in the garden. I didn't choose anything. If disobedience is genetic, it's because god made it that way.

As for disease, etc., the Bible says that the wages of sin is death. Maybe this means that physical death was a consequence of the fall, too. I don't think so. I think it has more to do with the stain that sin has left on God's creation. It's imperfect, and that's something that humanity chose, so humanity is going to have to deal with it.

Humanity didn't choose anything! Supposedly, these 2 persons chose it. The rest of us got nothing to do with the story, yet we're still paying for that "sin".

But according to scriptural interpretation it is. Breaking a commandment is the ultimate in sinliness (except maybe killing god, oddly not on the list).
But if your sin is covered then you've got nothing to worry about.

1 John 2:1
My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One.

Isn't that what you're doing?
how so?





If Jesus never sinned, when the woman was to be stoned and he said, "Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.", then as people wandered away said to the woman, "Not even I can cast a stone against you, for I too have sinned"...Umm...there is a contradiction there...he says he did, but you say he didn't.

the scripture you are 'quoting' from
John 8:6-11
.....But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?"

"No one, sir," she said.
"Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin."

Humanity didn't choose anything! Supposedly, these 2 persons chose it. The rest of us got nothing to do with the story, yet we're still paying for that "sin".
no, you are paying for your sin.

Olara']But if your sin is covered then you've got nothing to worry about.

1 John 2:1

So Jesus is the sin lawyer? This is getting less and less sensical.

the scripture you are 'quoting' from
John 8:6-11
.....But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?"

"No one, sir," she said.
"Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin."

Thanks, Smunkee...it was already covered. I still hear it different in the lating interpretation I was taught as a kid.

Olara']But if they don't accept it, then the relationship is at best damaged and at worst nonexistent. Being in heaven involves a relationship with God, and a refusal to accept forgiveness means that one's relationship with God is broken or nonexistent. Ergo, no heaven. If you don't want a relationship, he won't force you to be with him.

Forgiveness isn't "accepted". An apology is accepted or not, forgiveness is given. Plus, it's not our fault the relationship got damaged, there is nothing to forgive.

It just occurred to me that maybe christianity has it wrong. Maybe god isn't so much forgiving you as asking for forgiveness for all the harm he's done. That's what you have to accept, the apology.

Yes, it is. Why the hell do we have to inherit that? I wasn't in the garden. I didn't choose anything. If disobedience is genetic, it's because god made it that way.

Humanity didn't choose anything! Supposedly, these 2 persons chose it. The rest of us got nothing to do with the story, yet we're still paying for that "sin".
Because if the fall involves a stain on creation, then there's nothing we can do about it. And God will make creation new again, he just hasn't yet. Why? I don't know. Only he does.

So Jesus is the sin lawyer? This is getting less and less sensical.
I dunno, makes pretty good sense if you need a "sin lawyer," which we all do. At least we got the best.

Olara']My beliefs are a bit more complex than that. In a nutshell, if anyone, including you, me, Mother Teresa, and Ghandi, is told the gospel (that is, told of Jesus' death for their sins on the cross) and knowingly rejects it, then they won't be in heaven unless they later accept it. So again, I don't know Ghandi's full life history, and I don't know his spiritual condition when he died. I do know that nothing he did, even though he did some great things, will earn him a spot in heaven. Same goes for you and me and everyone else.

Sorry that doesn't have the same effect on me as you'd think, what with having been a jw with earthly hope for half a decade. What exactly "earns a spot in heaven", would you say?

Forgiveness isn't "accepted". An apology is accepted or not, forgiveness is given. Plus, it's not our fault the relationship got damaged, there is nothing to forgive.

It just occurred to me that maybe christianity has it wrong. Maybe god isn't so much forgiving you as asking for forgiveness for all the harm he's done. That's what you have to accept, the apology.
But God didn't break the relationship, humanity did. And that works in the specific sense, too (ie, we've all broken our relationship with God at one time or another). God's got nothing to apologize for.

Sorry that doesn't have the same effect on me as you'd think, what with having been a jw with earthly hope for half a decade. What exactly "earns a spot in heaven", would you say?
Well, I don't agree with JW teaching, so I won't attempt to defend it.

Nothing we do earns a spot in heaven, that's the point. Only Jesus' sacrifice can allow us to enter heaven.

no, you are paying for your sin.

What sin? Being born? Because, as far as I know, every human "sins" (except jesus, who isn't exactly human, so he doesn't count anyway), because it's their nature to do so. It can't be helped. It's not my fault if god made this crazy rule that because a pair of humans sinned, all their progeny would be sinful by nature. So I'm paying for being a descendant of theirs: for their sin. It's not even remotely fair.

Olara']Because if the fall involves a stain on creation, then there's nothing we can do about it. And God will make creation new again, he just hasn't yet. Why? I don't know. Only he does.

Meanwhile, he's sitting on his ass watching billions of people suffer. Nice guy.

Well, friends, I'm out of things to scan, so I'll be leaving the computer and this thread for a while. Perhaps if I get my english paper done earlier than I think, I'll be on again later. No promises, though. It's been fun and challenging for me; thank you all.

Olara']But God didn't break the relationship, humanity did. And that works in the specific sense, too (ie, we've all broken our relationship with God at one time or another). God's got nothing to apologize for.

"Humanity" didn't break the relationship. A pair of humans did. Because of those two, all the rest of us are doomed to sin at some point, there's no escaping it. Why? Because god decreed it so. You don't think he owes us an apology?

What sin? Being born? Because, as far as I know, every human "sins" (except jesus, who isn't exactly human, so he doesn't count anyway), because it's their nature to do so. It can't be helped. It's not my fault if god made this crazy rule that because a pair of humans sinned, all their progeny would be sinful by nature. So I'm paying for being a descendant of theirs: for their sin. It's not even remotely fair.
Worse yet, if you are an atheist you are paying for nature's sin.

Sorry that doesn't have the same effect on me as you'd think, what with having been a jw with earthly hope for half a decade. What exactly "earns a spot in heaven", would you say?

According to the Bible, nothing any human can do will "earn a spot in heaven", otherwise Jesus would not have had to die...(paraphrasing from memory)

As far as I can tell, our problem as human beings with free choice, is that we really really hate to think that there is anything we cannot do, especially that we cannot work to get into heaven. So what do we do? We choose to disobey the One who is in charge of heaven.

Kind of like, disobeying your boss at work in hopes of getting a raise, or disobeying your parents in hopes of getting that great birthday present.

And the grounds we use to justify our disobedience? Hey God, your book is flawed! Hey God, who thought up all the laws governing every process in the universe, you are too stupid to tell me what to do! You have no right to tell your creation what to do! I can earn the right to be by your side forever, by disobeying your every commandment! I can do what I want, with no consequences!

And when our strategy backfires, we say God is not fair.

If he was fair, I would have disappeared in a puff of fiery smoke long ago...

Thankfully, he is not fair! He offers me, and you, and everyone else the gift of eternal life, for free! And that is so very not fair, but I will take it gladly! And I hope that someday, you do too!

Love,
Michael:)

Olara']Well, I don't agree with JW teaching, so I won't attempt to defend it.

Nothing we do earns a spot in heaven, that's the point. Only Jesus' sacrifice can allow us to enter heaven.

Why do we need that sacrifice? Can't god just forgive us and let us in? Not that it matters, since the sacrifice is already made, anyhow. So, does that mean we're all in, then?

As far as I can tell, our problem as human beings with free choice, is that we really really hate to think that there is anything we cannot do, especially that we cannot work to get into heaven. So what do we do? We choose to disobey the One who is in charge of heaven.

Kind of like, disobeying your boss at work in hopes of getting a raise, or disobeying your parents in hopes of getting that great birthday present.
But we have no choice about disobedience; we are descendents of Adam and Eve. What we do have the choice about is obedience, not disobedience.

Worse yet, if you are an atheist you are paying for nature's sin.

Huh? I didn't think atheists believed in "sin".

Meanwhile, he's sitting on his ass watching billions of people suffer. Nice guy.

Not sitting on his ass. He has no ass. God is spirit.

Anyway, he is working really hard on getting you to believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of those who seek him.

Every second this universe goes on, is another second when someone can make the choice to come to him. So if you think him being patient is bad, wait till you see what happens when he comes. Then, you'll wish he had waited a bit longer...;)

Huh? I didn't think atheists believed in "sin".
Belief has nothing to do with it.

(Which, I believe, is the atheist's point.)

But we have no choice about disobedience; we are descendents of Adam and Eve. What we do have the choice about is obedience, not disobedience.

Right, so that's why he made it so that your eternal fate is not hanging on us obeying him all day, every day---it is contingent on us believing in him, and calling on him for salvation.

Whoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Jesus is Lord. Jesus will save you. Not because of obedience. Because you trust him with your life.:)

According to the Bible, nothing any human can do will "earn a spot in heaven", otherwise Jesus would not have had to die...(paraphrasing from memory)

As far as I can tell, our problem as human beings with free choice, is that we really really hate to think that there is anything we cannot do, especially that we cannot work to get into heaven. So what do we do? We choose to disobey the One who is in charge of heaven.

Kind of like, disobeying your boss at work in hopes of getting a raise, or disobeying your parents in hopes of getting that great birthday present.

That makes no sense whatsoever.

And the grounds we use to justify our disobedience? Hey God, your book is flawed! Hey God, who thought up all the laws governing every process in the universe, you are too stupid to tell me what to do! You have no right to tell your creation what to do! I can earn the right to be by your side forever, by disobeying your every commandment! I can do what I want, with no consequences!

I think the point of atheism is that you don't believe god exists at all, so you really wouldn't be talking to him.

And when our strategy backfires, we say God is not fair.

If he was fair, I would have disappeared in a puff of fiery smoke long ago...

Thankfully, he is not fair! He offers me, and you, and everyone else the gift of eternal life, for free! And that is so very not fair, but I will take it gladly! And I hope that someday, you do too!

Love,
Michael:)

You make no sense.

Right, so that's why he made it so that your eternal fate is not hanging on us obeying him all day, every day---it is contingent on us believing in him, and calling on him for salvation.

Whoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Jesus is Lord. Jesus will save you. Not because of obedience. Because you trust him with your life.:)
Alright; but you admit you were wrong, and we don't "choose to disobey the One who is in charge of heaven."

Not sitting on his ass. He has no ass. God is spirit.

Anyway, he is working really hard on getting you to believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of those who seek him.

Every second this universe goes on, is another second when someone can make the choice to come to him. So if you think him being patient is bad, wait till you see what happens when he comes. Then, you'll wish he had waited a bit longer...;)

Because he's gonna bring even more pain to the wretched creatures he couldn't be bothered to help? What a surprise.

prayer?

actually, I have no idea. I suppose just figure it out for yourself and hope you are right.

Seriously, why do you bother? It's not like anyone in this thread is actually trying to have a conversation with you or understand your faith. They are here to attack it and make fun of you like school children and call it 'intellectually satisifying'. Schoolyard bullies were intellectually satisfied with their apparent proof of their superiority. I was always unimpressed. Amazing how the parallel holds.

Seriously, why do you bother? It's not like anyone in this thread is actually trying to have a conversation with you or understand your faith. They are here to attack it and make fun of you like school children and call it 'intellectually satisifying'. Schoolyard bullies were intellectually satisfied with their apparent proof of their superiority. I was always unimpressed. Amazing how the parallel holds.
Thank you for insulting my participation

Like always what I enjoy is a good debate and byplay

Ofent I learn from it ... I know I have learned from you and smuckville

You compare my probing and discussion and questioning, bullying ... Im disapointed in you

Thank you for insulting my participation

Like always what I enjoy is a good debate and byplay

Ofent I learn from it ... I know I have learned from you and smuckville

You compare my probing and discussion and questioning, bullying ... Im disapointed in you

Actually, I didn't read the whole thread and I wasn't talking about everyone. The 'intellectually satisfying" part was taken from a specific poster who was calling Smunkee names and insulting her. The entire thread is trolling obviously. It was never meant to spark serious debate or you know I would be jumping in to participate. It's a place for some of the more rude atheists to attack our faith and then pat themselves on the back for insulting others. My comments were not, in fact, aimed at you.

Actually, I didn't read the whole thread and I wasn't talking about everyone. The 'intellectually satisfying" part was taken from a specific poster who was calling Smunkee names and insulting her. The entire thread is trolling obviously. It was never meant to spark serious debate or you know I would be jumping in to participate. It's a place for some of the more rude atheists to attack our faith and then pat themselves on the back for insulting others. My comments were not, in fact, aimed at you.
Thank you :) I was confused I thought you liked me :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle:

Thank you :) I was confused I thought you liked me :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle:

of course we like you, it is fun to debate someone who won't lower themselves to the point of having to insult the competition. ;)

besides, you make me think, and that is always a good thing.:p

The 'intellectually satisfying" part was taken from a specific poster who was calling Smunkee names and insulting her
someone called me a name? I missed that. :( I haven't been called a name on here before, it's kinda funny.:p

oh well........

Olara']My beliefs are a bit more complex than that. In a nutshell, if anyone, including you, me, Mother Teresa, and Ghandi, is told the gospel (that is, told of Jesus' death for their sins on the cross) and knowingly rejects it, then they won't be in heaven unless they later accept it. So again, I don't know Ghandi's full life history, and I don't know his spiritual condition when he died. I do know that nothing he did, even though he did some great things, will earn him a spot in heaven. Same goes for you and me and everyone else.

Actually, people who are in the darkest forest. Totally isolated fom "Christians" are eligible for heaven. Several verses indicate that since everyone can see nature, and Jesus was the creator part of God,---By looking at nature (creation) and recognizing there is a creator---and following the laws that creator put in their nature--they are elligible. Of course if they go against the laws put in their heart they are in the same fix as one who hears then rejects.

It seems to be hard for "Christians" to understand that Jesus didn't just live for 30 years, 2000 years ago. He was literally "in the beginning". So the man Jesus isn't really important. It is the spirit Jesus that has lived forever that is important. Before the "birth" people were saved as much as after the "death".

Rom 1:19-20 2:14-16
John 15:22
Col 1:15

Olara']So what you're saying is that you don't know if he "accepted christ" on his deathbed, but if he didn't, he's screwed?
My beliefs are a bit more complex than that. In a nutshell, if anyone, including you, me, Mother Teresa, and Ghandi, is told the gospel (that is, told of Jesus' death for their sins on the cross) and knowingly rejects it, then they won't be in heaven unless they later accept it.

I agree with NSOlara, though perhaps my direction in interpreting "complex" is slightly different. :)
Jesus does say that the only way to the Father is through Jesus, but I think this still leaves open the possibility of people who follow Jesus' way without acknowledging it.

Then the king will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.' Then the righteous will answer him and say, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?' And the king will say to them in reply, 'Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.'

It is really, really hard to understand Jesus' true Gospel and reject it outright. That being said, many do.

someone called me a name? I missed that. :( I haven't been called a name on here before, it's kinda funny.:p

oh well........

How's this: you're a human! That's pretty harsh, but it's only in jest.

How's this: you're a human! That's pretty harsh, but it's only in jest.

:: points index finger in the air as if counting something:: That's... almost... confusing.