Sa2ne

Joined 19 years ago

Posts by Sa2ne

posted

18
Misquoting Jesus
by SickofLies in
1. watchtower
2. bible
19 years ago
book review: the popular perception of the bible as a divinely perfect book receives scant support from ehrman, who sees in holy writ ample evidence of human fallibility and ecclesiastical politics.

though himself schooled in evangelical literalism, ehrman has come to regard his earlier faith in the inerrant inspiration of the bible as misguided, given that the original texts have disappeared and that the extant texts available do not agree with one another.

most of the textual discrepancies, ehrman acknowledges, matter little, but some do profoundly affect religious doctrine.
19 years ago
Sa2ne 19 years ago

A review of the book:
http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=3452

Link
35
my favorite apologist theory....
by theinfamousone in
1. jw
2. experiences
19 years ago
have you ever gotteni nto an argument with a j-dub, or basically any hardcore bible thumper???

have you ever brought up the fact that if he were so loving, god would not allow all the suffering we see on a day to day basis, never mind what the hungry children around the world are suffering?

have u ever noticed what their responce will invariably be?.
19 years ago
Sa2ne 19 years ago

sa2ne... i like you man... this is the first time ive, and probably many of the ppl on this board, have been able to hold a conversation with a creationist without it becoming an insult-fest... ; so thank you my friend...

Well, I too am very refreshed by a civilized discussion. So, my thanks to you as well.
now, back to the topic at hand.... youre right, i did hold my question to the realm of the "christian god"... this is for a few reasons.... first of all, it is the only god i knwo... so this is the god i can discuss... ; if you know of a better description of god, please share it.... i am very willing to hear, fo r i know not exactly what i think right now... i cannot say i am atheist to a tee, but i am agnostic... this god we believe in, or hear of, cannot be the god, or the only god... he is either far too cruel, or just lost in his own little world...
I personally don't have a better way to express God than the Christian way, because I am a Christian. So, I'm perfectly happy using that perspective of God. As regards your position, whether atheist or agnostic, I can understand not being sure. I went through a period of time after leaving the borg that I wasn't sure where to go. Ultimately, I decided that I owed it to myself to fully research what mainstream Christianity had to say about God before making my decision. I have read and studied many apologetic books, articles, etc... I have also heard many of the typical atheistic arguments. In the end, I believe there is sufficient evidence for the existence of God. I believe there is sufficient evidence for the existence of Jesus, and for believing that He is God. But I guess we all get to make that decision for ourselves. Back to that free will thing. One thing I will tell you about my beliefs relating to a previous statement of yours is this:
fuck free will... if he will fix everything, end the suffering, id rather have no free will than see children die every day of hunger, cancer, aids and so many other torturous ways of dying.. it isnt fair
I believe that he will fix everything and end the suffering. And He will do so without compromising free will. That's my 2 cents.
when speaking to a relionist (i made a word up didnt i?) we tend to get that exact same treatment.... ive been pitied, called stupid/losy/moronic/sinner and so many other names just for not believing in the god thatis presented to me... so, we are defensive, just as you are... it is a two way street that we both seem to be going the wrong way on... maybe its time to just listen and be nice...
This is true. I have to say, I am ashamed when those professing to be Christian resort to insults when they have no answers. Especially when I believe there are plenty of answers out there. I do wish we could all have more civilized discussions. I imagine there would be a little less anxiety in the world. Anyway, thanks for being patient with me. It's been good talking to you.

Link
35
my favorite apologist theory....
by theinfamousone in
1. jw
2. experiences
19 years ago
have you ever gotteni nto an argument with a j-dub, or basically any hardcore bible thumper???

have you ever brought up the fact that if he were so loving, god would not allow all the suffering we see on a day to day basis, never mind what the hungry children around the world are suffering?

have u ever noticed what their responce will invariably be?.
19 years ago
Sa2ne 19 years ago
First, define what is sin?

sin 1 n.
1. A transgression of a religious or moral law, especially when deliberate.
2. Theology.
3. Deliberate disobedience to the known will of God.
4. A condition of estrangement from God resulting from such disobedience.
Something regarded as being shameful, deplorable, or utterly wrong.

Who decides what sin is?

God

I would call it "evil" so right off the bat your metaphysical argument is based upon an erroneous a priori assumption based on pre-established cultural biases.

You are assuming that the "bias" is based on a pre-established human culture and not a divine moral law. Your premise is flawed. "Good and Evil" are not simply established by human cultures, or there would be no absolutes. Everything would be acceptable everywhere. The fact that so many of the moral laws are cross cultural lends to the fact that there must be an absolute moral law. For there to be an absolute moral law, there must be an absolute moral law-maker, i.e., God.

The original post is not limiting the argument to the mythical fairy tale of the garden of eden.

I never stated that it was. The original post did, however, limit the argument to the Christian realm:

have you ever gotteni nto an argument with a J-Dub, or basically any HARDCORE bible thumper???

JW's consider themselves Christians, and the only large religious group that can be affiliated with the bible is Christianity. Therefore, my arguments were based within a Christian perspective.

If god is responsible for the universe and all reality within it, he is responsible for the consequences of this "creation". By this rationale, "sin" was the creation of your god, just as was satan, free will, evil, good ,etc etc.

God created everything in the universe. Sin and evil are the absence of God. You cannot create cold. It is simply the absence of heat.

Second, define perfection?

per·fect
adj.

Lacking nothing essential to the whole; complete of its nature or kind.
Being without defect or blemish: a perfect specimen.
Thoroughly skilled or talented in a certain field or area; proficient.
Completely suited for a particular purpose or situation: She was the perfect actress for the part.
Completely corresponding to a description, standard, or type: a perfect circle; a perfect gentleman.
Accurately reproducing an original: a perfect copy of the painting.

Complete; thorough; utter: a perfect fool.
Pure; undiluted; unmixed: perfect red.
Excellent and delightful in all respects: a perfect day.

This is just a circular argument that has no logical conclusion or premise save for the circumscribed cultural mythos espoused by the bible you appear to accept as factual.

This statement made no sense. All you said was that I accept the bible as fact and you don't. Where else would you expect me to draw a premise and conclusion regarding Christianity and God except FROM the bible that I accept as factual?

This entire response is exactly what I came to expect the last time I regularly posted on this forum. It displays complete and utter hatred for Christianity and God, and the outlet for that hatred is a tone of condescension. I am fed up with many (although not all) Atheists and Agnostics who strut around on high horses pretending to be enlightened and far superior to the stupid believers who ignore science and reason. It's a position spoken from ignorance and completely unfounded. If any of you reading this are Atheists who do not hold to that MO, then kudos to you. I have met few.

Nonetheless, I respect your right to believe whatever you like.

Link

my favorite apologist theory....

by theinfamousone in

have you ever gotteni nto an argument with a j-dub, or basically any hardcore bible thumper???

have you ever brought up the fact that if he were so loving, god would not allow all the suffering we see on a day to day basis, never mind what the hungry children around the world are suffering?

have u ever noticed what their responce will invariably be?.

Sa2ne

I'm not insulted. It's difficult to break away from some of lingo and speech patterns drilled into me for 21 years. It's understandable.

Link

my favorite apologist theory....

by theinfamousone in

have you ever gotteni nto an argument with a j-dub, or basically any hardcore bible thumper???

have you ever brought up the fact that if he were so loving, god would not allow all the suffering we see on a day to day basis, never mind what the hungry children around the world are suffering?

have u ever noticed what their responce will invariably be?.

Sa2ne

It seems we're at a point where we know what it is that we don't agree on, which is a good stopping point. You feel that this decision on God's part -- allow total free will to the point of action that brings far-reaching consequences -- was righteous on his part. I could not agree with that. But there's not much more to be learned on it, it's just a matter of opinion. In my opinion. :-)

I think that's a fair assessment. This has been, by far, the most civilized debate I've ever had on this board. So, thanks for your time and attention. I appreciate it.

Link

my favorite apologist theory....

by theinfamousone in

have you ever gotteni nto an argument with a j-dub, or basically any hardcore bible thumper???

have you ever brought up the fact that if he were so loving, god would not allow all the suffering we see on a day to day basis, never mind what the hungry children around the world are suffering?

have u ever noticed what their responce will invariably be?.

Sa2ne

Serendipity & jwfacts -

Thanks for the welcome. I'm actually not new here. I joined in 2001 under the s/n "sunstarr", but I haven't signed on in a while and I forgot my password. I used to come to this site often, but I just got disgusted with the anti-God (specifically anti-Christian) mentality that was so prevalent on this board. I consider myself a Christian, as I have given my life to Christ and consider Him my Lord/God/Savior. I also believe in the Trinity, although I would choose the word "Tri-unity" to better fit my beliefs. I only really posted in this case because I stumbled across this thread and felt compelled.

Again, thanks for the welcome.

Link

my favorite apologist theory....

by theinfamousone in

have you ever gotteni nto an argument with a j-dub, or basically any hardcore bible thumper???

have you ever brought up the fact that if he were so loving, god would not allow all the suffering we see on a day to day basis, never mind what the hungry children around the world are suffering?

have u ever noticed what their responce will invariably be?.

Sa2ne

This seems like such a leap of logic. To say that God MUST control a person's thoughts if he wants to take control of their actions. Can you explain why you believe those two things are linked?

I guess I link the action to sin. Sin would be that which is the opposite of perfection. If God is preventing a person's actions, He is preventing the sin. However, according to the bible, even the thoughts are subject to sin. So, the thought and the action are linked in nature on the plane of sin. If God should exercise his power to control one sin, He MUST, by nature (perfection) exercise His power to control all sin (including thoughts that qualify as sin).

Perhaps I misunderstood the original poster. I thought it was more of a "why do people use this as an argument for God?" type of thread, with the "Bible thumper" label more-or-less loosely applying to anyone with a similar type of god-belief. I could easily be wrong, but that was the impression I was under.

And maybe I was mistaken. If so, my apologies. However, my argument (coming from a Christian point of view) centers around the Bible.

On the free will point: I still don't see how your free will is impinged if God stops you from doing something you're not allowed to do. You've "willed" to do it, you've planned it out, you've done everything in the process except the actual doing it. I could see accusing God of impinging on your "free action" -- but he's certainly never claimed you were free to act in anyway you like. It would seem that in the scenario I describe, your free will would still be intact. Do you disagree, and if so, why?

Again, I think we need to define some terms:

will 1 n.

The mental faculty by which one deliberately chooses or decides upon a course of action: championed freedom of will against a doctrine of predetermination.
The act of exercising the will.

I compare the term "free will" to that which was displayed in the Garden of Eden. It wasn't just the will of thought that brought about sin. It was also the action of taking and eating the fruit. It wasn't until after the fruit had been eaten that they original couple were cast from the garden. I see that God did claim that Adam and Eve were free to act in anyway they liked. Directly relating to the tree he said they would die in the day they ate from the tree. That implies that they were free to eat from it, but that there would be consequences.

Link

my favorite apologist theory....

by theinfamousone in

have you ever gotteni nto an argument with a j-dub, or basically any hardcore bible thumper???

have you ever brought up the fact that if he were so loving, god would not allow all the suffering we see on a day to day basis, never mind what the hungry children around the world are suffering?

have u ever noticed what their responce will invariably be?.

Sa2ne

We're not free to do what we want. We're constricted in every way. We can't fly unaided. We can't expand to 30 times our size. And in civilized societies we can't decide to kill someone and then go do it. We're not "free" to plot murder, so long as we understand we'll get punished for it. We simply can't do it. The only reason some people manage to do it anyway is because our crime prevention isn't good enough to detect the act in progress and stop it. God could, but he doesn't. When our technology allows us to stop people BEFORE they commit crimes, we will. (Oops, anyone thinking "minority report"?)

Your argument is faulty in its terms. "Free will" assumes that the "will" exists inside reality. Of course we can't "will" ourselves to fly unaided or grow 30 times our size. That's not reality. Otherwise there wouldn't be such a term as "free will" because it would be redundant if compared against fantasy. Unless we could accomplish anything and everything, we couldn't attain "free will."

According to the American Heritage Dictionary:

free will
n.

The ability or discretion to choose

Clearly, we are not able to choose that which is impossible.

Your last point is a classic all-or-nothing bit. No, stopping a rapist doesn't in any way require me to also inhibit a person's thoughts. "Boy, I'd like to have sex with her" and actually planning to rape a woman are two very different things. (Regardless of what the Bible may say about it.) God could allow anyone to think anything, and only intervene when their actions impinged on another person's rights. Where do you draw the line? I don't, but then, I'm not God. Presumably, he would know where to draw the line.

Again, the debate was set within the realm of the bible by the originator of this topic. Whether you care about what the bible says is irrelevant to my argument. A person's thoughts are subject to sin according to the bible. In order to submit to perfect justice, it IS an all or nothing. Otherwise, God would be accused of showing partiality in His justice, which would be less than perfect.

Link

my favorite apologist theory....

by theinfamousone in

have you ever gotteni nto an argument with a j-dub, or basically any hardcore bible thumper???

have you ever brought up the fact that if he were so loving, god would not allow all the suffering we see on a day to day basis, never mind what the hungry children around the world are suffering?

have u ever noticed what their responce will invariably be?.

Sa2ne

AlmostAtheist -

It is indeed protecting a child. But it is also a violation of free will. In your example we do have free will today. You can plot to blow up a building. No one can stop you from plotting to do that. However, if you're caught, you are punished. I understand that some freedoms can be taken away. In that sense we don't have free will today. Neither do we practice perfect justice. Which is why a child rapist can get away with a six week jail sentence after being convicted.

Free will is either "free" or it is not. If we are not "free" to do whatever we want, we do not have free will.

Nonetheless, your example is still in conflict with point 1. If you stop a rapist from raping, you must also inhibit a person's thoughts when they desire another man's wife (a sin according to the bible).

Link

my favorite apologist theory....

by theinfamousone in

have you ever gotteni nto an argument with a j-dub, or basically any hardcore bible thumper???

have you ever brought up the fact that if he were so loving, god would not allow all the suffering we see on a day to day basis, never mind what the hungry children around the world are suffering?

have u ever noticed what their responce will invariably be?.

Sa2ne

theinfamousone -

I've seen or heard this argument a million times. But I've never really heard a good solution to the bigger problem at hand. That is: What would you have God do? Keeping in mind two points:

1. God is perfect in all things (including justice). As Paul writes, if you're guilty of one sin, you're guilty of all in God's eyes. So, how would you justify God destroying Hitler and not your neighbor who stole something from your back yard? On an even bigger scale, is there anyone who is guilt-free having never sinned? Should God destroy the whole world?

2. We have free will. How could God "throw a blanket of love" (as I saw posted on another thread on this board) on all evil people without being in conflict with our freedom to choose what we do?

If I understand you correctly, you don't believe in any God, god, etc... But working within the framework of the bible (which you established as the framework in your question: "bible-thumper"), what would you ask God to do without conflicting with the previous two points?

Link

Sa2ne

Posts by Sa2ne

Sa2ne 19 years ago

Sa2ne 19 years ago

Sa2ne 19 years ago