Do u beleave in God

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

What one should notice is that the moon is described as a light, not giving light but is a light. This is exactly the kind of mistake we would expect an ancient ignorant group of men to make.

Again, to insist that the Bible is erroneous because it calls the moon a "light" is unfair and/or indicates a lack knowledge in literary interpretation.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

Wow, do they really say that?

Yes, because they are morons.

"No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record."

To put it another way - Evidence? We don't need stinkin' evidence, we know how this shit works already!

I wonder how a typical day's research is conducted at AiG....
- Radiometric dating? That shows lots of stuff is older than 10k years, discard it!
- Genetics? Shows we're related to chimps, discard it!
- Fossil record? Shows evolution, discard it!
- Geology? Never a flood, discard it!
- Astronomy? 13.5Bn year old universe, discard it!

And what do we find? There is no longer any evidence that could possibly dispute biblical fact, objective achieved!

It would make me laugh if it wasn't so true

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[hairyjuan 0]

religion can never save mankind, becuase religion is slavery, robert green ingersol



And now a little prayer- god protect me from your followers


www.truthbeknown.com
www.jesusneverexisted.com
www.infidel.org

we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively


wishers never choose, choosers never wish

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Amazing! The arrogance! You never met me, yet you know empirically I would cave under pressure for my faith.

I haven't met you yet, but I have met one of those ex-psychiatrists :) We got several drinks, and he talked a lot about those old times, and how things worked.

Quote

Me, who would have died for my country, but wouldn't give my life for my God??

And so? That system did not target weak people - there were simpler ways. Their "customers" were the most strongest and influent people, known both in USSR and sometime around the world. And their "success rate" was close to 100%.

As a separate remark: it is much easier to die for something than, for example, become blind for the rest of your life.

Quote

Now, enough with this, I must skydive. sigh, somebody has to do it

Well, at least I do it - we spent this weeking in Perris tunnel with my wife and daughter, and I managed to made 5 skydives :P

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Again, to insist that the Bible is erroneous because it calls the moon a "light" is unfair

First, this is not the only error in the Bible. I have mentioned more in this topic; you can check them.
Second, if we admit that the Bible contains errors (even one), this means that:
- the Bible was not inspired by omniscent and onmipotent God, or His words were changed during the last 2000 years.
- you cannot build any religion based on the book, which contains errors. There may be other errors as well; how would you know where they are? What if God originally meant that you have to kill non-believers to go to Heaven?

Quote

and/or indicates a lack knowledge in literary interpretation.

There are several problems with so-called Bible "literary interpretations" as well. The most important is that if the original is ambiguous, and there are no other soures to do a cross-check, there is no way to prove your interpretation is correct. You can interpret it this way, and I can interpret it in contradicting way. Obviously our interpretation cannot be both correct, so at least one is incorrect. More important is that our interpretation could be both incorrect as well.

At the end you have to believe in the interpretation as well. This makes no sense to me.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

What I mean is, please re-read my reply. If doing so doesn't make any difference in what you understand it to be saying, then I'll try again.

Could you please try again then?
And when you try again, could you please also address questions/comments from my reply? This would save time for both of us.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

We can't express our beliefs without giving proof that they are inerrant?

You can express your beliefs.
However you must not force others to follow things you believe, unless you can prove it.

Quote

Who are "the people" you are referring to who can't agree on the central message of the Bible? Every Christian I've talked to recently knows what the central message of the Bible is.

I am talking about the whole world.
First, you may be surprised, but there are people in this world who are not Christians. In fact, less than half of the world population is Christian (according to http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm, the number is 32%). So basically most of the world didn't get what the central message of the Bible is.
Second, even between those Christians they still cannot agree on a lot of things - starting from very important things like "what to do and what not to do", where you end up after you die to the theological stuff like trinity-unitarianism, and what Jesus meant in that.

Quote

True, every religion has its own creed, which is often, if not usually, exclusive. And in the evangelical Christian religion, all denominations have creeds (usually referred to as "doctrinal statements"), all of which have relatively minor disagreements. But the central belief is held by all Christians: acceptance of Christ as one's Savior is how each of us is made right with God.

Well, this is definitely not enough. Jehowa Witnesses agree on that as well, but probably it is the only thing they agree with Christians you mentioned.

Quote

Does the moon look like a light in the night sky? Have you ever been able to read something by the light of the moon?

"Look like a light" and "is a light" are different things. As I said before, the water in my toilet bowl "looks like a light" as well.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

First, you may be surprised, but there are people in this world who are not Christians.

Do I look like i just fell off the turnip truck or something? (Never mind--- my user pic does look a little like I just fell off a turnip truck... or some kind of truck... or maybe like I forgot to flare again.) How could anyone reading this thread think we're all Christians?

Quote

In fact, less than half of the world population is Christian (according to http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm, the number is 32%). So basically most of the world didn't get what the central message of the Bible is.

Most people are non-Christians not because they don't "get" the central message of the Bible, but because they either don't believe the central message of the bible (i.e., the gospel), or they simply don't care, or they're afraid of what it might cost them... or other reasons.

Quote

Quote

But the central belief is held by all Christians: acceptance of Christ as one's Savior is how each of us is made right with God.

Well, this is definitely not enough. Jehowa Witnesses agree on that as well, but probably it is the only thing they agree with Christians you mentioned.

I think it is enough! Acceptance of Christ is at the very heart of Christianity.

By the way, Jehovah's Witnesses don't share the same gospel as evangelical Christians. (But I really don't want to get into that, if you don't mind.)

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

"No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record."

Sounds a bit extreme. If I were shown evidence that contradicts the "scriptural record," I'd see if there were any way the two actually could be reconciled (this is commonly overlooked in such contradictions), and if not, I'd study the scriptural record more deeply to see if the problem had to do with a flawed interpretation.

But that's just me.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

Could you please try again then?
And when you try again, could you please also address questions/comments from my reply? This would save time for both of us.

Well.... ok. But you go first. If I have to repeat myself (hopefully with better wording), I'll need you to re-post what I was replying to. Ya' gotta' admit, it's hard to keep up with. Ok.. well it is for me.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

First, this is not the only error in the Bible. I have mentioned more in this topic; you can check them.
Second, if we admit that the Bible contains errors (even one), this means that:
- the Bible was not inspired by omniscent and onmipotent God, or His words were changed during the last 2000 years.
- you cannot build any religion based on the book, which contains errors. There may be other errors as well; how would you know where they are? What if God originally meant that you have to kill non-believers to go to Heaven?

You may find this hard to believe, but I agree with you. I couldn't fully trust what the Bible teaches if I were to find obvious errors in it. But I haven't found any errors which have not already been dealt with and/or attributed to misunderstanding on the part of the reader.

Note: As I've said before, it's the original documents that I believe to be "inspired" (guided) by God in their writing, not the copies and copies of copies. Some, if not all, the copies do contain errors (that is, differences), BUT if I believe that God guided the authors as they wrote in order that through them He might reveal important truth to people down through the ages, I must of necessity believe that He would also preserve the message-- that is, protect the message from being distorted through all the copying and translating.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

There are several problems with so-called Bible "literary interpretations" as well. The most important is that if the original is ambiguous, and there are no other soures to do a cross-check, there is no way to prove your interpretation is correct. You can interpret it this way, and I can interpret it in contradicting way. Obviously our interpretation cannot be both correct, so at least one is incorrect. More important is that our interpretation could be both incorrect as well.

At the end you have to believe in the interpretation as well. This makes no sense to me.

I understand what you're saying. But the central message of the Bible (that is what we're still talking about, right?) contains no confusion or mystery at all: **Acceptance of Christ is the only way to be made right with God. This is its explicit message. Everything culminates in Christ.

**Waiver: I'm NOT "insisting" that you believe this; the decision to believe it or reject it is yours alone.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[philh 0]

Mockingbird, did you just read the first line of my reposnse and then ignore the rest? I did not restrict my argument to just the one fact that the bible calls the moon a light. I also included the other mistakes . I will restate them in case you missed them:
1)Stars are created after the Earth, this contradicts contradicts known evidence form astronomy
2) Stars are described as being created to light the Earth , this contradicts the fact that most stars are invisible to the naked eye
3) Plants are created before the sun, impossible becuase plants need sun light for phto synthesis
4) Water exists before the sun, impossible due to rather low temperatures that would exist in such a state
5) Day and night exist before the sun, do I need to say why this is impossible?
Now that should be more than adequate evidence that the bible contains errors. Now I might asks why you chose to ignroe these errors but I think you have revealed why already, you say

"If I were shown evidence that contradicts the "scriptural record," I'd see if there were any way the two actually could be reconciled (this is commonly overlooked in such contradictions), and if not, I'd study the scriptural record more deeply to see if the problem had to do with a flawed interpretation. "

now Ill note that you dont include even the possibility that you would consider that "scriptual record" was simply wrong. You wil consider it to be misintrepted but you wont consider it to be wrong.That perhaps gives us an insight into how closed minded religious minds are. I for example, dont have a single book that I wont change my opinion on if the evidence demands it.

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

Mockingbird, did you just read the first line of my reposnse and then ignore the rest? I did not restrict my argument to just the one fact that the bible calls the moon a light. I also included the other mistakes.

No, I read all of them. But I felt that they boiled down to the same problem: a deficiency in literary interpretation. Well, that and the fact that the supernatural [beyond the natural; transcending the natural, and thus not explainable by scientific methods] nature of the act of creation is ignored, which to my thinking makes these objections strawmen. I'm sorry; I'm not trying to be difficult. I doubt that you are either.

Our disagreement is much more basic. I believe in God, who by nature is supernatural; you believe only in what is natural, so how could you possibly make sense of the [supernatural] events of creation???

Quote

Quote

If I were shown evidence that contradicts the "scriptural record," I'd see if there were any way the two actually could be reconciled (this is commonly overlooked in such contradictions), and if not, I'd study the scriptural record more deeply to see if the problem had to do with a flawed interpretation.

now Ill note that you dont include even the possibility that you would consider that "scriptual record" was simply wrong. You wil consider it to be misintrepted but you wont consider it to be wrong.That perhaps gives us an insight into how closed minded religious minds are. I for example, dont have a single book that I wont change my opinion on if the evidence demands it.

Aaah, but do you own a book written by God?

No, I might consider the possibiility that a "scriptural record" is wrong; but that would certainly be my last resort. Then I'd whack my forehead and admit that the problem must be my own. There are some details which God simply has not disclosed in the bible. But all that is essential, He has. Science fills in a lot of the blanks. I believe that He created the laws of nature; science has discovered them.

I think I may be rambling now. It's quite late, and I feel that I've been writing all--day---long and have switched tracks a thousand times trying to keep up. From my LiveJournal to dz.com to email to deciding what services to have done on my car this week, to having several phone conversations--- too much for one day... must... get...sleepzzz

zzzzzz

zzzzzzzzz

z

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[philh 0]

Literary interpretation , am I worng to assume that water exists before the sun? Am i wrong to assume that the stars were created after the Earth?
you cant just state there are literary misinterpretations, you have to give your evidence. Where is it?

You argument re the supernatural act of creation is really asking us to abandon all reason. The evidence suggests stars were created before the Earth and the bible says stars were created after the Earth. So the evidence suggests the bible is wrong. Now if you want to ignore the evidence then of course you can come to any conclusion you like. I can conclude the entire universe was created last tuesday and that a supernatural being implanted our memories and any other evidence of the universes age. basically one can conclude absoloutley anything if one allows for supernatural agency. A reasonalable aproach would be ask what is consitent with the available evidence and what is not. The bible is not consistent with the available evidence.


"Aaah, but do you own a book written by God?"
No i don't , Im sure you believe you do but thats just your say so. Effectively what you are saying is the bible is true because it says its true.

"No, I might consider the possibiility that a "scriptural record" is wrong; but that would certainly be my last resort. Then I'd whack my forehead and admit that the problem must be my own."

You almost admitted the possibility of an open mind but before you even finished what you were typing you closed it again. just reread what you wrote , the implication is under no circumstances will you consider the bible to be in error. I cannot think of a more perfect example of closed mind than that.

[Royd 0]

Quote

you cannot build any religion based on the book, which contains errors. There may be other errors as well; how would you know where they are?

Could it be , that is why the godless religion of communism fell apart after only 70 years?

[philh 0]

Communistm fell apart for many reason but the primrary one is that it is a far inferior economic mechanism to capitalism. Im not sure that has any relevance to the debate on gods exsitence. Well actually maybe it tells us that a large complicated thing (in this case an economy) does better without a central designer(the politburo) than with one. Selection and adpatation of competing entities (in this case firms) leads to more efficients units of productions. Sounds very much like evolution works better than design to me.

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

Quote

you cannot build any religion based on the book, which contains errors. There may be other errors as well; how would you know where they are?

Could it be , that is why the godless religion of communism fell apart after only 70 years?

Communism isn't a religion, it's a political and economic philosophy. It fell apart because its ideals don't transfer into the real world.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[beowulf 1]

Quote

Quote

God's were created by men out of fear of the unknown. Not knowing where we came from. Not knowing where we are going. Not knowing why we are here. This fear caused men to look for answers. The easiest answer is God did it. I think the real answer is just that there is no answer. Not all questions have an answer.

If there is no answer to our existence, then, do you have the same derision for science?

No science doesn't pretend to have the answers to everything like religion does. Science has theories that they continue to find evidence to either support
or disprove the theory. Religion simply assigns everything they don't understand to god rather then trying to learn and understand.

[hairyjuan 0]

communism fell apart? my neighbor from czechoslavakia says this, "you americans are stupid, you can't see how communistic your own government is."






www.freedomtofascism.com

we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively


wishers never choose, choosers never wish

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

Aaah, but do you own a book written by God?

Of course not. Do you?

Quote

I might consider the possibiility that a "scriptural record" is wrong; but that would certainly be my last resort. Then I'd whack my forehead and admit that the problem must be my own.

Then you're doing the exact same thing thats AiG are doing.

You assume that the bible is God's word. Rather than examining its accuracy and reliability in light of the evidence you decide that any evidence that appears to contradict it must be either wrong, or a problem of interpretation.

It's really wierd.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Do I look like i just fell off the turnip truck or something? (Never mind--- my user pic does look a little like I just fell off a turnip truck... or some kind of truck... or maybe like I forgot to flare again.) How could anyone reading this thread think we're all Christians?

I said that more than two thousand years had passed since introduction of the Bible, but the people (around the world) still could not agree on what message it sends to us, and whether there is any message at all. Obviously I didn't mean Christians only, but you still replied that every Christian had agreed on central message in the Bible. That's the reason for this comment.

Quote

Most people are non-Christians not because they don't "get" the central message of the Bible, but because they either don't believe the central message of the bible (i.e., the gospel), or they simply don't care, or they're afraid of what it might cost them... or other reasons.

That is the part of "could not agree on what message it sends to us, and whether there is any message at all". This includes both those who believe in the Bible, but disagree with you what is central message, and those who don't care because they are not sure if there is any message at all.

Quote

I think it is enough! Acceptance of Christ is at the very heart of Christianity.

It depends on your meaning of "acceptance of Christ". Would it be enough if someone just says that he accept Christ, and continues commiting sins and ignoring the church? Could I accept Christ, Allah, Buddha and a lot of other gods/deities - just in case?

Quote

By the way, Jehovah's Witnesses don't share the same gospel as evangelical Christians.

They do. But they are still different, and their beliefs are different. So if you are Catholic or Protestant, and follow those religions, you will NOT be saved according to Jehova's Witnesses teaching. And this clearly indicates that simple acceptance of Christ is not enough.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

If I have to repeat myself (hopefully with better wording), I'll need you to re-post what I was replying to. Ya' gotta' admit, it's hard to keep up with. Ok.. well it is for me.

That's your post: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=2700132;so=ASC;sb=post_latest_reply;#2699285

And that's my reply: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=2700132;so=ASC;sb=post_latest_reply;#2700132

You'd find it in a few seconds if you just clicked on "In reply to" link at the top of a post several times :)

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Could it be , that is why the godless religion of communism fell apart after only 70 years?

No, it could not be.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

But I haven't found any errors which have not already been dealt with and/or attributed to misunderstanding on the part of the reader.

Well, the problem is that you cannot "dealt with" errors in the Bible without changing the Bible itself by using interpretations. I have mentioned problems with interpretation, but it looks like you ignored them completely.

Quote

Note: As I've said before, it's the original documents that I believe to be "inspired" (guided) by God in their writing, not the copies and copies of copies.

Are you trying to tell us that you can read Ancient Greek? That you have access to originals of the Bible? Or you just choose one of the available Bible interpretations, and believe it to be the original?

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *