Do u beleave in God

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

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.

But the devil is, as usual, in details.
First, what is the correct way to accept Christ? Every religion has a different way, and for no religion I know it is just saying "I accept Christ".
Second, accepting Christ is a requirement, but it is not the only requirement to be saved. You also have to follow specific behavior patterns, and again they are different in any religion - and sometime even contradicting.

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

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

You argument re the supernatural act of creation is really asking us to abandon all reason.

Well, not exactly. I believe that the supernatural is beyond reason, not necessarily against reason.

Quote

. 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.

Stars are light years away from the earth, no? If God intended the stars he put in existence to be seen from the earth, wouldn't they need to be given a kind of "apparent" age at their creation?

Again we have to admit, IMO, that the basic problem with our disagreement is philosophical rather than scientific.

Quote

Quote

"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.

That one's mind is open to the possibility that even his own reasoning could be lacking is the epitome of open-mindedness. I have more confidence in God's wisdom than my own. That, to me, is being truly open-minded.

See, even our concepts of what is open-minded and what is closed-minded are incompatible. Again, due to philosophical differences.

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

[philh 0]

"I believe that the supernatural is beyond reason, not necessarily against reason. "
and what is the difference?

"Stars are light years away from the earth, no? If God intended the stars he put in existence to be seen from the earth, wouldn't they need to be given a kind of "apparent" age at their creation? "

What you are saying is that the stars appear to be billions of years old but god simply made them appear that way rather than they are that way. With this logic you could prove the universe is only 5 minutes old , yes sure the universe appears to be more than 5 mintues old but god planted that evidence so it really is juts 5 minutes old. What you are asking us to do is to abandon everything the evidence is telling us simply because it does not coorespond with what the bible says.
What you are effectivley saying is that god fakes evidence of an old universe to trick us into thinking the universe is old. Now if i were a theist i would say you are implying god is a liar.

Furthermore its not just that the light from the stars is so far way, we also know that stars came before planets becuase of our models of our solar system formation which has been very well verified by experimental data. Planets form becasue of the gravity of the stars they orbit. No stars, no planets ... simple. Now how are you going to explain the existence of water and day and night before the existence fo the sun?

"I have more confidence in God's wisdom than my own. "
and how do you know what gods wisdom is? How do you know god is wise?

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

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.

[By "accuracy and reliability" you're referring to the bible's content rather than to textual matters, right? Because I have looked a great deal into its textual credibility.]

In subjecting evidence to what God has provided as revelation (the bible), yes, I'm giving that revelation the benefit of the doubt. Unlike AiG, I'm still at the inquisitive stage. They have lots of combined experience that probably makes them impatient with the so-called contradictions that they've already reconciled.

Quote

It's really wierd.

Yes, I know it must sound quite weird to you. Unfortunately, I can't do anything about that. I wish I had the gift of persuasion--- wait, no I don't... that's not my job.

None of us should ever stop asking questions. There's always more to learn.

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

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

They have lots of combined experience that probably makes them impatient with the so-called contradictions that they've already reconciled.

No, they're just more upfront about their closed-mindedness than you are.

Quote

None of us should ever stop asking questions. There's always more to learn.

What's the point of asking when you have already decided what the answer is?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

Stars are light years away from the earth, no? If God intended the stars he put in existence to be seen from the earth, wouldn't they need to be given a kind of "apparent" age at their creation?

Of course, which is why we all had preprogrammed memories and backgrounds when the universe was created last tuesday.

You need to understand, it is not just the fact that light which appears to be billions of years old reaches our telescopes, it is what we can see in that light. We can see billions of year old stars exploding, we can see ancient galaxies colliding, we can see white dwarfs and red giants - stars close to the end of their lives. We can even see new stars forming in the wreckage of dead stars. Every single piece of evidence that we can see screams to us that the universe is ancient. If indeed the universe was only created at the same time as the earth then all that we can see through our telescopes would, in fact, be a deliberate lie.

Quote

Again we have to admit, IMO, that the basic problem with our disagreement is philosophical rather than scientific.

Yes. Our philosophy tells us that we can figure out the observable universe through evidence based reason. You, evidently, believe that any evidence you don't like can be dicounted as having been faked by God.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

That one's mind is open to the possibility that even his own reasoning could be lacking is the epitome of open-mindedness. I have more confidence in God's wisdom than my own. That, to me, is being truly open-minded.

So, you are open-minded because you discard reason in favour of trusting everything written in an old book which claims to have been inspired by god?

Yeah. That makes sense.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

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.

Do you know for sure 1) that the whole world has read the entire bible in order to determine the central message? 2) that your claim is even correct?

Quote

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.

George, you've lost me.

Quote

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?

I don't think so. But only God knows.

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

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

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 :)

Sorry, that's exactly what I want to avoid.

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

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

Quote

In Reply To
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?

Well, yes, I can actually. But that's not really necessary for coming to a conclusion on this issue, because as you say, I don't have access to the original pieces of papyrus, hide, etc. that the books which make up the bible were written on. The original documents are not available to us. Only myriads of copies, and copies of copies... all of which are quite striking in their similarity!

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

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

First, what is the correct way to accept Christ? Every religion has a different way, and for no religion I know it is just saying "I accept Christ".
Second, accepting Christ is a requirement, but it is not the only requirement to be saved. You also have to follow specific behavior patterns, and again they are different in any religion - and sometime even contradicting.

Every religion has a different way of accepting Christ??? Something tells me we're not on the same page.

In Christianity, accepting Christ as our only way to God is the central message of the gospel. Following certain specified behaviors, many of which are cultural, is where the "devil enters the details," as you put it. But a Christian is not "saved" by what he does; he is "saved" by the One to Whom he entrusts his soul. This can be expressed in many different ways; I'm trying to put it as simply as possible.

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

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

"I have more confidence in God's wisdom than my own. "
and how do you know what gods wisdom is? How do you know god is wise?

I see God's wisdom all around me-- in the laws of nature, the order and structure and design in creation, for instance.
I see God's wisdom throughout the bible in his words and his actions.
I see God's wisdom personified in His son, Jesus Christ.

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

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

Quote

They have lots of combined experience that probably makes them impatient with the so-called contradictions that they've already reconciled.

No, they're just more upfront about their closed-mindedness than you are.

Now now, Jack.

Quote

Quote

None of us should ever stop asking questions. There's always more to learn.

What's the point of asking when you have already decided what the answer is?

I agree. If you think you already know the answers, there is no point in asking, is there?

Was this last reply of yours cathartic?

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

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

You need to understand, it is not just the fact that light which appears to be billions of years old reaches our telescopes, it is what we can see in that light. We can see billions of year old stars exploding, we can see ancient galaxies colliding, we can see white dwarfs and red giants - stars close to the end of their lives. We can even see new stars forming in the wreckage of dead stars. Every single piece of evidence that we can see screams to us that the universe is ancient. If indeed the universe was only created at the same time as the earth then all that we can see through our telescopes would, in fact, be a deliberate lie.

Frankly, Jakee, I have no idea when the universe was created, and whether the bible means six 24-hr. days, or over epochs of time. Is the creation account meant to provide a scientific timeline for us, or is it written in a Hebraic sort of poetry, where not all concepts are literal, but is dramatizing the simple fact that God was the creator? I don't know! I believe that some day it will all be disclosed. But for now, I just don't have all the answers. I'm not afraid to say "I don't know."

I don't believe that what science has discovered/uncovered in the way of evidence is necessarily incorrect! I just think it hasn't all been reconciled-- brought into focus-- yet.

Quote

Our philosophy tells us that we can figure out the observable universe through evidence based reason. You, evidently, believe that any evidence you don't like can be dicounted as having been faked by God.

Yes, I think you summarized your philosophy well. You misrepresented mine, of course.

I have no dislike for evidence, because I know that it will eventually reveal something that can be traced back to God. And no, of course I don't believe God tries to "fake us out" or whatever. He doesn't need to resort to that kind of thing.

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

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

So, you are open-minded because you discard reason in favour of trusting everything written in an old book which claims to have been inspired by god?

Yeah. That makes sense.

I don't discard reason. But I do subject my reason to what God has said.

To what do you subject your reason?

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

[narcimund 0]

I beleave in spelling.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[billvon 2,426]

>No, they're just more upfront about their closed-mindedness than you are.

Your one warning.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Do you know for sure 1) that the whole world has read the entire bible in order to determine the central message? 2) that your claim is even correct?

Yes, I'm sure that there is enough people around the world know about the Bible, and have read it - not only Christians. Most atheists I know have read the entire Bible, and most have read different versions, and even compared them. And yes, my claim is correct, because I am not talking about "central message", and the claim is much broader.

Quote

I don't think so. But only God knows.

So basically you have no way to find who is Christian and who is not as soon as everyone says that they accepted Christ as their savior?

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

[philh 0]

"I see God's wisdom all around me-- in the laws of nature, the order and structure and design in creation, for instance. "
ok so why do we have a blind spot in our eyes,?a designer could do a better job than that.

"I see God's wisdom throughout the bible in his words and his actions. "

So why was it wise to plant the tree of knowledge in the garden of Eden given he knew Adam and Eve would eat it, why not just not plant it? Why was it wise to kill all the first born Egyptians when he could have just killed the Pharoh? This is not a wise god this is a blood thirsty god.

"I don't have access to the original pieces of papyrus, hide, etc. that the books which make up the bible were written on. The original documents are not available to us."

Exactly there are no orginal documents. If the bible was so important, why didnt god provide some magical papyrus that was indestructible and never faded? Furthermore, the fact there are no original manuscripts mean we dont even know what the original story was.We don't knwo what the original bible says because we don't have any original manuscripts. I believe the oldest complete bibles (correct me if Im wrong) we have date back ot the 5th century, there is a copy of part of the OT that dates back to 464Ad in the British Museum.

" is it written in a Hebraic sort of poetry, where not all concepts are literal, but is dramatizing the simple fact that God was the creator? I don't know! I believe that some day it will all be disclosed. But for now, I just don't have all the answers. I'm not afraid to say "I don't know.I don't believe that what science has discovered/uncovered in the way of evidence is necessarily incorrect! I just think it hasn't all been reconciled-- brought into focus-- yet. "

Whether the days are literal days or metaphorcial days does not help your case. Science has shown that not only is the dating in the bible incorrect, but also the order of creation in the bible is also incorrecrt. Now if the bible gets the creation story wrong then why should we trust any of it?

Let me ask you a question: what would you take as an example where a supposed historical text is wrong? just in principle, not the bible , not any partiular text, just a hypothetical example where you would be able to say this piece of historical text is demonstarated wrong by the evidence? It seems to me that there are no circumstannces when you would ever consider anything wrong, to you everything can always be reconciled even when you cant suggest how.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

The original documents are not available to us. Only myriads of copies, and copies of copies... all of which are quite striking in their similarity!

So how could you are believing in original documents which you have never seen and read?

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

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Every religion has a different way of accepting Christ??? Something tells me we're not on the same page.

Yes, they have. I don't know any religion which would teach you that all you need to do to accept the Christ is to say so. In every religion I know some actions are required, and in most cases your behaviour needs to be changed, as you are expected to follow some rules. And accepting Christ is treated as a way to be saved, and here you must follow even more rules.

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

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

No, they're just more upfront about their closed-mindedness than you are.

Quote

Now now, Jack.

Well its two sides of the same coin isn't it? They have decided that evidence that contradicts the bible should not even be considered, you have decided that evidence which appears to contradict the bible can always be reconciled even if you have to massage a square peg into a round hole. Either way, you have also discounted the possibility of any evidence ever actually contradicting the bible.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

Frankly, Jakee, I have no idea when the universe was created, and whether the bible means six 24-hr. days, or over epochs of time. Is the creation account meant to provide a scientific timeline for us, or is it written in a Hebraic sort of poetry, where not all concepts are literal, but is dramatizing the simple fact that God was the creator? I don't know!
.
.
.
I have no dislike for evidence, because I know that it will eventually reveal something that can be traced back to God. And no, of course I don't believe God tries to "fake us out" or whatever. He doesn't need to resort to that kind of thing.

Then I hope you'll avoid the "apparent age" theory from now on.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

I don't discard reason. But I do subject my reason to what God has said.

Well there's the rub. You don't subject the account of what God said to any reason. Everything else then flows from there.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[hairyjuan 0]

the real rub

we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively


wishers never choose, choosers never wish