^ even the other atheists on this board are capable of presenting theological arguements. It's only you who has nothing intelligent to say, but stupid derogatory comments or memes you dig up from twitter (or wherever).
PinkPaver said:
i stopped reading half way through. (at the end of the old testament: only joking)
yes raas, I like the fact that you say that you became spiritual and became christian. It isn't provable by anyone here on earth that christianity is def the right waym but there is enough in it to make it a potentially alright way of doing stuff. we only get one shot at it here on earth unless we are hindu. they surely must be right, but then repeated life on earth could indeed be a pergotry of an existence sort of thing.
Is that.... An open mind? What are you doing posting on an internet theology thread.... open-minded person.
ok.... rest of my post...edited a bit to suit ricolnices questions:
raas said:
Problem is, God gave us a choice to ignore him... so if he's provable by physical evidence, the whole thing falls on itself, doesn't it. What's my evidence? Love of life, really. I guess I see it all around me... My friends, my family, those I love and the precious moments I've experienced with them... The love I experience in visiting amazing places. The beauty all around us. This of course is not empirical proof. It cannot be... you have to give everyone else the choice to ignore God, remember? But he used to try SOO hard to get people to stop ignoring him.. where is he now?
rickolasnice said:
And none of those things you mentioned is evidence for a God.. they really.. really aren't
Yes, of COURSE they're not. Did you even read the post? I said "This of course is not empirical proof. It cannot be..."
"God gave us a choice to ignore him... so if he's provable by physical evidence, the whole thing falls on itself, doesn't it."
This is the problem I'm having with you. You ask all these questions, I put thought into the replies and you just don't seem to assimilate any of it. Then go off repeating the same old, ignorant, arguement "The God in the OT was all vile and Jesus worshipped him".
Rickolasnice said:
Jesus talks of the God in the OT as if it was him / his dad, implying that the OT was true.
No he doesn't. You are wrong. Jesus opposes Tyrant God of the OT just like me and you do.
As demonstrated by Jesus many times in the bible, here's just one instance:
John 8: said:
The Adulterous Woman
1But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives.2Early in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people were coming to Him; and He sat down and began to teach them.3The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman caught in adultery, and having set her in the center of the court,4they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in adultery, in the very act.5“Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women; what then do You say?”6They were saying this, testing Him, so that they might have grounds for accusing Him. But Jesus stooped down and with His finger wrote on the ground.7But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.”8Again He stooped down and wrote on the ground.9When they heard it, they began to go out one by one, beginning with the older ones, and He was left alone, and the woman, where she was, in the center of the court.10Straightening up, Jesus said to her, “Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?”11She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more.”]
You are right in that the real loving God does have some influence in the OT, as Jesus said himself:
For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness.
So it seems the loving values of God do appear in the law (Example, Moses recieving the 10 commandments)... but it is intertwined with all corruption of the politcally motivated book.
Do you get this point now? There is stuff in the OT to be listened too, and stuff that shouldn't. And this is exemplified by Jesus who defies the OT in places, and fulfills it in others. Like a load of roses planted amongst thorns... you must be careful what you pick out.
Do you get it now??
Rickolasnice said:
How could a loving God simply leave us with a really old (hard to read) book that is full of mistakes and contradictions and expect people to believe in it?
Well he didn't did he!? He actually sent Jesus down, with the aid of a load of miracles, and created a whole new testament, which tells of Jesus disobeying the old law and physicaly demonstrating the love of God through sacrifice.
And, most importantly, the book works in giving us an understanding of Gods love and what he wants... as attested by millions of Christians.
raas said:
For instance, the bible says world was created in 7 days. It clearly wasn't created in 7 precise 24 hour periods. You gotta be pretty daft to deny evolution. So I think it's fair to say that the bible was not meant to be a scientific journal.
Rickolasnice said:
There we go again.. Cherry picking apart the bible.. seeing the bible as you wish to see it..
No, sir. I am not cherry picking the bible. You clearly do not understand what i am saying, and are falsely making the demeaning assumption that i am "making it up how I like".
The OT is a very symbolic book. That's how it works. I'm not cherry picking anything here.
The stories can be absurd and barbaric, but the meanings are practical for everyday faith. An example...
Let me tell you the OT story I described to Shambles earlier in the thread....
The truth behind the bible is found in the meanings of the stories. How true the actual stories are is very debatable.
Let me give you one example. David, Gods faithful servant and ruler, In the bible he makes one small sin. (He made a census of his army, counted how many men he had... which is apparantly a lack of faith in God)
Now God, being a bit of a quirky mood, rather than just tell him off - was so kind to give David a choice of three punishments - seven years of famine, three months of fleeing before his enemies, or three days of plague (apparantly there was a fourth *mystery* punishment, that never got into the bible)
Dave, rather being punished by God over man, goes for punishment number 3. A plague. Which then ends up killing 70,000 men.
Thats got to be the stupidest story i've ever read in my life. 70,000 men die because of one mans venial sin. In fact i've never read anything remotey absurd.
Yet as nonsense as it is, it's making the point that God punishes for love and to improve us (Like father to his son), rather than man who punishes out of spite. and even great servants of God can fall for pride and lack of faith. The story gives understanding of faith, and can be applied today in smaller ways.
You can draw meaning from the stupidest stories.
But it's important to differentiate between the external (The characters and what they do) and the internal (the message that is applied to a practical spiritual faith)
raas said:
Well, as the theory goes; Christiannity is a religion of truth. And inspired by God.
So I don't think God would choose a bunch of liars to write their stories on Jesus. If you believe in God, it's just common sense really.
rico said:
So the OT must be true? It's not like God would choose a bunch of liars to write their stories about him
OK, your best point and this did cross my mind as I was writing the above.
"If the OT cant be taken literally, how can the NT?" The difference between them is Jesus. It was Jesus who - with the help of a bunch of supernatural miracles - convinced the early church he was sent from God. The early church was pretty damn serious about "preaching Gods message" and corruption and misperceptions don't appear to be an issue.
--EDIT, sorry reading above the post reads as if it's a bit aggressive/argumentative. Don't mean to be a moaner, i'd edit through it all but bit pushed for time at the mo
(actually trevor francis has been genetically proven as the son of the cloven hoofed one. so they reckon anyway but they didn't tell me who they were)
