I would like to tell you a bit more about God

[steveorino 7]

Quote

A real omnipotent omniscient god would be able to inspire a much better written book than the bible.

Given what He had to work with I think He did a pretty good job.

steveOrino

[shropshire 0]

But there's no picture

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[JackC 0]

Quote

Quote

A real omnipotent omniscient god would be able to inspire a much better written book than the bible.

Given what He had to work with I think He did a pretty good job.

A bad workman always blames his tools


For an omnipotent workman, there's really no excuse.

[billvon 3,064]

> but it amazes me how many atheist and christians alike disregard
>the possible concept that the biblical writer could be writing "inspired" (that
>is a whole other implication) letters & books to his present generation
>without regard to future generations.

Yep. Christians often claim "it is divinely inspired and perfect" and atheists claim "well, this one section surely doesn't apply any more, so it's all wrong." I think the Bible is the result of a massive, well-intentioned and inspired attempt to get the teachings of God (as spoken through prophets) on paper, and they did a fairly good job. But it was still written by men, and thus contains some of their errors, prejudices and well-intended later additions.

[steveorino 7]

Quote

> but it amazes me how many atheist and christians alike disregard
>the possible concept that the biblical writer could be writing "inspired" (that
>is a whole other implication) letters & books to his present generation
>without regard to future generations.

Yep. Christians often claim "it is divinely inspired and perfect" and atheists claim "well, this one section surely doesn't apply any more, so it's all wrong." I think the Bible is the result of a massive, well-intentioned and inspired attempt to get the teachings of God (as spoken through prophets) on paper, and they did a fairly good job. But it was still written by men, and thus contains some of their errors, prejudices and well-intended later additions.

I agree

steveOrino

[beowulf 1]

I still have yet to see any evidence or reason to believe there is a god. I don't find the Bible to be all that profound.

[billvon 3,064]

>I still have yet to see any evidence or reason to believe there is a god.

And that's fine - you don't have to. Ain't it cool?

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Yep. Christians often claim "it is divinely inspired and perfect" and atheists claim "well, this one section surely doesn't apply any more, so it's all wrong." I think the Bible is the result of a massive, well-intentioned and inspired attempt to get the teachings of God (as spoken through prophets) on paper, and they did a fairly good job. But it was still written by men, and thus contains some of their errors, prejudices and well-intended later additions.

I don't really think of the Bible as being right or wrong; I just don't believe that it is the teachings of God, since I don't believe in God. I think of it as a book that men wrote, perhaps believing that they were writing down the teachings of God, or perhaps with some other motive. It's an interesting book, but I find little use for it myself (other than curiosity, since it does seem to have such a strong influence on many people).

[beowulf 1]

Quote

>I still have yet to see any evidence or reason to believe there is a god.

And that's fine - you don't have to. Ain't it cool?

That's just no fun. With out Steveorino and Pajarito who am I going to argue with? How will I fill the time while I wait for the next error to show while I am debugging the current program I am working on? You're just not religous enough Billvon. Although I am certain Pajarito disagrees with your take on God, maybe he will jump in here.

[Zenister 0]

Quote

Quote

> but it amazes me how many atheist and christians alike disregard
>the possible concept that the biblical writer could be writing "inspired" (that
>is a whole other implication) letters & books to his present generation
>without regard to future generations.

Yep. Christians often claim "it is divinely inspired and perfect" and atheists claim "well, this one section surely doesn't apply any more, so it's all wrong." I think the Bible is the result of a massive, well-intentioned and inspired attempt to get the teachings of God (as spoken through prophets) on paper, and they did a fairly good job. But it was still written by men, and thus contains some of their errors, prejudices and well-intended later additions.

I agree

as do I...

but that also illustrates it's inherent flaw... you cant claim/use the bible as the 'word of God' when it is so corrupted by the desires of Man.

which isnt a problem except for the fundamentalist who continually claim "THIS WAY ONLY!!! and no other is correct or meaningful."

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[steveorino 7]

It is amazes me how easily the Bible can be understood as "the Word of God" when you read it in the light of ...

1) The biblical writer is writing to HIS generation using HIS words and idioms most likely about events happening near or around their time.

2) That difficult passages are read in the light of clear passages

4) The ultimate purpose of the Bible is to point to JC

5) If you will resist the urge to see yourself, your denomination, your political party, your country as the sole reason certain passages were written.

6) That all truth is God's truth regardless of who on earth says it. If it is "true" it is God's truth.

7) If it clearly contradicts JCs teaching then you have misinterpreted or misapplied it.

JMO

steveOrino

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Well, properties like "omnipotent" might not seem as useful as properties like "red" if you're just doing a visual scan but it's not like you know nothing.

Yep, but if you combine omnipotence with "has its own will", it makes no sense in terms of search. Maybe my cell phone is omnipotent, and just decided to hide that fact from me, as it has its own will.

Quote

But like I said to Beowulf ~ Whenever an atheist tries to search the universe for a god (metaphorically speaking), the theist is always at an advantage because he can move the goal posts by changing what is meant by "God".

Yes, if you allow them. However if you set the goal clearly at the beginning, there will be no search. None of theists have seen the God personally, and the information they operate with does not provide them with any clues either.

Quote

Unless you can get the theist to give you a clue as to what god is, you can't do anything.

They do not have it either if you ask what their clue is based on. They actually confirm it themselves by telling us that there is no way you could see, hear or feel the God until the God wants you to. This means that everything they say could be applied to memejamba as well. Even more, they can't even tell us the God isn't memejamba!

Another problem is that they base all their beliefs on the book they believe in as well. This makes no sense from logical standpoint: they claim you need to read the Bible to believe in God. Because the Bible does not tell anything directly, they claim you need to use their "understanding" to read the Bible. At the end you are told you need to believe in the Bible to believe in God, and in this scenario the Bible has no value at all.

Quote

The Nigerian oil tycoon who needs to shift $400 million knows that he's attempting to rip you off whereas the theist actually believes there really is a memejamba in the box he's trying to sell you.

Again, some believe, some do not. Just look around - how many "Christians" you see around, whose way of life in no way resembles anything Christ teaches in the Bible? How many priests ended up being pedophiles and homosexuals?

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

[steveorino 7]

Quote

So the question is what is more consistent with the truth: that the bile was written by ignorant men and they didnt know the truth of our creation or the bible was inspired by god but he chose to get so many details of the creation wrong?

This is how I interpret two famous accounts in Genesis (a portion of one of my blogs) So vastly different than trying to make a science or history book out of Genesis

God is both creative and relational. We see God’s creativeness in the design of the universe. In this universe we see diversity and purpose. Billions and billions of stars and planets surround our world. Most of them invisible to the naked eye, yet they are part of God’s plan for our world. To me this illustrates God is creative beyond all measure. God’s creations on earth are equally diverse. Billions of bugs and animals, along with billions of people are as diverse as the stars are numerous in the skies. God made us to be unique and I believe he relishes in that fact of his creation.

As mankind’s population grew so did our knowledge and skills. We were created with the ability to make choices. It is that ability to choose our own paths that produce the dichotomy of God’s creation that grieved him. We are free to choose paths that take us away from God as well as to choose the paths that draw us closer. Mankind’s choices fractured the relation we were created for. God was seeking communion with man, but only on a level that included man’s free will. It is mankind’s free will that makes our relationship with God genuine and intimate. However, every desire of man was evil and contrary to the nature of God. God’s own free allowed him to bring destruction to his creation.

After this judgment mankind’s penchant for evil had not changed, but God’s response to man’s evil did. Man’s sin broke the relationship we had with God. In the Biblical account our sin drove God to cast man farther east from paradise, and in many ways further from God. God’s response to the descendants of Noah was different than God’s initial response to Adam’s family. Instead of moving them farther east, and farther away from himself, God began to draw man nearer to him. Through his prophets, his son, and his spirit, God worked again to restore the relationship he had with mankind from the beginning.

steveOrino

[br0k3n 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

If there really was a god don't you think he would be a little less ambiguous? Why can't he just communicate with us directly instead of through an old book that can be interpreted in many different ways?

I guess that would be a question you'd have. My questions would be a lot different.

Why would you not ask this question, as it is rather pertinent to you beliefs?

Whether or not God will perform tricks to convince me he is real is not pertinent to my belief system. Maybe yours ... not mine.

I would hardly call it “performing tricks”, I think it is a perfectly reasonable question to ask.

Your god according to his dogma wants me to believe, however seems rather unwilling to provide any reason or evidence to suggest that I should. There isn’t a single authentic record of anyone meeting him, speaking to him or even seeing him, there are no recorded pictures of him and there is no supporting evidence to suggest that the stories in the bible are correct.

He expects me to spend time and try and interpret a 2000-year-old book that is full of incontinences, factual errors hearsay evidence and is completely unverifiable. Also it is one of many holy books that make similar claims.

Now how this does not strike you as rather odd baffles me, he is supposed to be this all mighty all powerful dude yet is incapable of showing people that he is real, how hard can it be???

How would you feel if the police turned up at your front door tomorrow and told you that your neighbours had been brutally murdered and that they had a feeling that you did it, and your off to jail for the rest of your life. When you ask for some evidence they tell you they don’t have any, and there not going to look for any or ask any questions as they just believe that you did it… would you happy with that???? Of course you wouldn’t so why should I?????

Blind Faith I’m afraid is not good enough, I want proof, and I don’t think it is much to ask.

I think Stephen F. Roberts sums it up rather nicely with his quote "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours"

And also it turns out Mother Teresa questioned her faith and realised the truth

-----------------------------------------------------------
--+ There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.. --+

[maadmax 0]

but that also illustrates it's inherent flaw... you cant claim/use the bible as the 'word of God' when it is so corrupted by the desires of Man.

which isnt a problem except for the fundamentalist who continually claim "THIS WAY ONLY!!! and no other is correct or meaningful .

_______________________________________________

I agree the Bible is at times confusing and for a number of reasons can appear to be wrong. Such as translation or copying errors, editing changes by unqualified scribes, cultural & language differences, along with our own biased ignorance. As a student of the Bible I don't study it to find the apparent mistakes. I have to many other more interesting things to do with my limited time. I do spend a great deal of time studying it for what is has to offer. Why the Bible is written the way it is, I have no idea. One thing I do know is that the Wisdom resulting from the apparent chaos is mind bending and I am thankful to God for it, no matter how He choses to make it known.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Apart from a few selected passages, I don't think God dictated (spoke) anything.

Yes, that's what most Christians say.
They, however, could not agree on what exactly was dictated by God (and is The Truth), and what should be interpreted differently. I suspect you too cannot prove that only those few selected passages were dictated by God - even to another Christian from different branch.

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

[br0k3n 0]

Quote

Quote

So the question is what is more consistent with the truth: that the bile was written by ignorant men and they didnt know the truth of our creation or the bible was inspired by god but he chose to get so many details of the creation wrong?

This is how I interpret two famous accounts in Genesis (a portion of one of my blogs) So vastly different than trying to make a science or history book out of Genesis

God is both creative and relational. We see God’s creativeness in the design of the universe. In this universe we see diversity and purpose. Billions and billions of stars and planets surround our world. Most of them invisible to the naked eye, yet they are part of God’s plan for our world. To me this illustrates God is creative beyond all measure. God’s creations on earth are equally diverse. Billions of bugs and animals, along with billions of people are as diverse as the stars are numerous in the skies. God made us to be unique and I believe he relishes in that fact of his creation.

As mankind’s population grew so did our knowledge and skills. We were created with the ability to make choices. It is that ability to choose our own paths that produce the dichotomy of God’s creation that grieved him. We are free to choose paths that take us away from God as well as to choose the paths that draw us closer. Mankind’s choices fractured the relation we were created for. God was seeking communion with man, but only on a level that included man’s free will. It is mankind’s free will that makes our relationship with God genuine and intimate. However, every desire of man was evil and contrary to the nature of God. God’s own free allowed him to bring destruction to his creation.

After this judgment mankind’s penchant for evil had not changed, but God’s response to man’s evil did. Man’s sin broke the relationship we had with God. In the Biblical account our sin drove God to cast man farther east from paradise, and in many ways further from God. God’s response to the descendants of Noah was different than God’s initial response to Adam’s family. Instead of moving them farther east, and farther away from himself, God began to draw man nearer to him. Through his prophets, his son, and his spirit, God worked again to restore the relationship he had with mankind from the beginning.

Yet again all this rambling describes, is your personel feelings, still there is not a shred up evidence to support any of what you have said....

-----------------------------------------------------------
--+ There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.. --+

[Zenister 0]

Quote

Why the Bible is written the way it is, I have no idea.

that one is simple... its editors WANTED it to be written the way it is..the had outright INTENT to 'organize' their religious text in line with their beliefs to achieve their social goals..

in a large enough, complex enough textual base you can find justification for pretty much anything...cherry pick your sources and compile it along a predetermined path and you can manipulate any text to your desires..

the basic premise is lovely and contains a great deal of the collected wisdom from that region of the world.. the social engineering (aka "One True Path") is where it fails miserably into the desires of Man

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[Erroll 80]

Quote

.....book that is full of incontinences,.....

A tad harsh, don't you think?

[steveorino 7]

Quote

Yet again all this rambling describes, is your personel feelings, still there is not a shred up evidence to support any of what you have said....

Perhaps it is my rambling. My purpose wasn't to "prove" anything except ther are other ways of interpreting Genesis besides the way Fundy atheists & Christians do.

steveOrino

[br0k3n 0]

Quote

Quote

.....book that is full of incontinences,.....

A tad harsh, don't you think?

No.

-----------------------------------------------------------
--+ There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.. --+

[philh 0]

"But the eternal truths they espose are good for ANY generation. "

This is pure assertion,both that there are eternal truths and that they are good for all generations. How is the story that stars were cretaed after day and night an eternal truth? eternal pile of BS more likely.


"I know you said you went to Hebrew school. I interviewed a lot of Rabbis when I was working on my bachelor's degree. I never met a single one that thought Genesis account of creation was meant to be a science or even a history book. They, as well as my professors, saw it as ancient man's interaction with God explaining the relationship therein "

Steve you really should stop assuming that your limited expereicne is representative of the whole world. Your liberal interpreation of scriptures is not shared by all Chrsitians. I can assure you that is the same with Judaism. I went to an orthodox synagogue and school. I remember the first time I ever doubted something my Rabbi said. It was when I asked about what our year signified. We were in the hebrew year 5700 and somehting ( I cant remember the exact year now ). My dad thought it was from the time of Moses but my Rabbi said no its from the day of creation. Now,im not pretending my Rabbis are representative. Im aware my circle of experience is one of many, but so is yours. There are liberal and orthodox Rabbis just as there are liberal and orthodox priests. As I understand it, in your country, the number of Chrisitans that do not accept our scientific understanding of history out numbers those that do.

I hope that adreesses your point , perhaps you could address mine, because so far you havent answered any of the questions I posed. I hope you dont think "ancient man's interaction with God explaining the relationship therein " is any kind of explanation as to why there is so much wrong in genesis. Can you imagine my hypothetical murder wintess explaning why they got all the details of the crime wrong "Im sorry you honour Im merely interacting with the learned coucnil" such a wintess would be laughed at , so it should be with the bible.

[philh 0]

" I think the Bible is the result of a massive, well-intentioned and inspired attempt to get the teachings of God (as spoken through prophets) on paper, and they did a fairly good job."

nice assertion mate, do you have any evidence to back it up?

[philh 0]

"We see God’s creativeness in the design of the universe. "
You can see whatever you like, doesnt mean its there. Indeed human being have a tendency to see patterns when there are none, as a pyshcology student you must know that.

"In this universe we see diversity and purpose. Billions and billions of stars and planets surround our world. Most of them invisible to the naked eye, yet they are part of God’s plan for our world. To me this illustrates God is creative beyond all measure. "

this is perfectly compatible with non theistic evolution. Infact thiestic purpose is not consistent with the facts , what is the purpose of the human blind spot , when no such things exist in cephalopod eyes? what is the purpose of our broken genes to synthesise asrobic acid? Comeo onSteve you are just assuming god exists and then seeing him wherever you look. Do I need to say circular reasoning?

"God’s own free (will?)allowed him to bring destruction to his creation. "
If the republicans said vote for us or the Democrats , but if you vote for the democrats we will kill you , would you consider that a free election?

"Man’s sin broke the relationship we had with God."
which man was that? Was that Adam , a man that never existed in the first place?

[steveorino 7]

Quote

"Man’s sin broke the relationship we had with God." which man was that? Was that Adam , a man that never existed in the first place?

That doesn't sound like a question from a man who said he had years of Hebrew ...

[emphasis mine to spur your memory]

steveOrino