Posts by JosephAlward

37

Can Man See God and Live?

by JosephAlward in

the author of the book of john evidently believed that no man has seen god, while the author of exodus tells us that moses had, indeed, seen god.

either john is wrong, or exodus is; either way, the bible is in error on this point.

here is the evidence:.

JosephAlward

NotPerfect asks, "I would truly like to understand why this point is so important."

It's extremely important, Not. If one admits that there's a single error in the Bible, then one is vulnerable to the argument that there might be an error anywhere, and that perhaps the story of the resurrection is fictional.

St. Augustine (354-430) was one of the founders of the Roman Catholic Church. He well understood that Christianity was like a house of cards; if the church dared to admit to even a single error in the Bible, who could say there wasn't an error on every page? The resurrection story might then be false and everyone's hopes are in vain. This is what he said:

"The most disastrous consequences must follow upon our believing that anything false is found in the sacred books....If you [even] once admit into such a high sanctuary of authority one false statement, there will not be left a single sentence of those books, which, if appearing to anyone difficult in practice or hard to believe, may not by the same fatal rule be explained away as a statement, in which intentionally, the author declared what was not true." --St. Augustine in Epistula, p. 28.

So, you see, Not, if Pom agrees that the Exodus writers offered contradictory information, Pom would have to agree that the Bible might be in error someplace else, and that perhaps none of the Jesus stories can be believed. That's why this point is so important.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

37

Can Man See God and Live?

by JosephAlward in

the author of the book of john evidently believed that no man has seen god, while the author of exodus tells us that moses had, indeed, seen god.

either john is wrong, or exodus is; either way, the bible is in error on this point.

here is the evidence:.

JosephAlward

Deut 34:10-11
10 Since then, no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face,

Pomegranate: "FIGURES of SPEECH, Joseph...that is easy GRAMMAR. "

I think it's clear that even if there were a verse that read, "Moses looked into the face of God," Pom would claim that it was figure of speech of some sort, or if the Bible said that "Moses saw the eyes and nose on the face of God, Pom would conclude that the "face" that couldn't be seen by man was a metaphor for his "soul," or his mind, and that what really couldn't be "seen" (understood) was the mind of God. No matter what, Pom will never admit there's a error in the Bible. In fact, it may not be possible to construct a sentence about anyone seeing God's face that Pom wouldn't be able to explain away. This is standard practice for those who have to believe that the Bible is inerrant in all of its parts, that there isn't an error anywhere.

I think both Pom and and I have made the points we wished to make, so we can move on to some other topic. May I ask which Bible people use, and whether they believe it's inerrant?

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

37

Can Man See God and Live?

by JosephAlward in

the author of the book of john evidently believed that no man has seen god, while the author of exodus tells us that moses had, indeed, seen god.

either john is wrong, or exodus is; either way, the bible is in error on this point.

here is the evidence:.

JosephAlward

Logical writes,

"Joe, no man shall see Jah's FACE and live. Simple. Moses saw his back, but not his face. Its not that difficult to figure out. There is only one YHWH."

In Exodus 33 Moses saw his back, but in Exodus 24, Moses "saw" God, period, with no specification about which part of God was seen. In any case, it doesn't matter whether Moses saw the back or the front, because Exodus 33 says that no man may see God and live; the author notes that the face cannot be seen, but then emphasizes that God may not be seen, period.

All of this may seem to be, as Logical puts it, "a simple thing." I agree, it's simple, but to those who believe that the writers of the Bible were inspired by God to write his perfect message, it comes as a shock to learn that the writers were imprecise. This is just one example of imprecision and error amongs hundreds.

Now, consider this. If the Exodus author is correct in writing that no man may see God's face and live, how does Pom explain the following:

Deuteronomy 5
1 Moses summoned all Israel and said: Hear, O Israel, the decrees and laws I declare in your hearing today. Learn them and be sure to follow them.
2
The LORD our God made a covenant with us at Horeb.
3
It was not with our fathers that the LORD made this covenant, but with us, with all of us who are alive here today.
4
The LORD spoke to you FACE TO FACE out of the fire on the mountain.

Is Pom going to tell us that the Deuteronomy author didn't want us to know that Moses looked into the face of God, and God into the face of Moses? The words in Deuteronomy are clear, and they show that the author of this Deuteronomy verse didn't know that the author of Exodus thought that no man could see the face of God and live. This is just one of hundreds of inconsistencies and contradictions in the Bible.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

37

Can Man See God and Live?

by JosephAlward in

the author of the book of john evidently believed that no man has seen god, while the author of exodus tells us that moses had, indeed, seen god.

either john is wrong, or exodus is; either way, the bible is in error on this point.

here is the evidence:.

JosephAlward

Pom may have misunderstood, what I was saying in earlier posts, to I will attempt to clarify my position. It will be simpler if I summarize what I believe Pom's position is, then if I misunderstand it, he will correct it.

Pom believes that there are two YHWHs, one which is seen only under penalty of death; this is the YHWH which is responsible for creation, and is the one who never speaks to men, or interacts with them.

The other YHWH is the one who can be seen--according to Pom. Now, Pom says that the YHWH who speaks in Exodus 24 is the SAME one who speaks in Exodus 33.

Now, assuming that Pom agrees with my characterization of his beliefs, let me present my argument again.

Exodus 33 says that no man may see God, but Exodus 24 says that Moses saw God; this is a contradiction. Here is the evidence:

"And he said, Thou canst not see my FACE: for there shall no man see me and live." (Exodus 33:20)

"...they SAW the god of Israel..."(Exodus 24:1-11)

Pom tries to escape this contradiction by arguing that we should assume that the words "shall no man see me and live" actually mean, "shall no man see [my face] and live." Thus, in Pom's mind, because Exodus 24 doesn't specifically say the Moses saw God's FACE, there's no contradiction.

Pom, do you REALLY believe the Exodus author wanted his readers to believe that Moses didn't see God's face? If that's what he wanted us to believe, wouldn't he have said so? If not, why not?

Pom wants to argue that death only comes if one sees God's face, but the Bible doesn't say that. The Bible does say that if one sees God's face, death follows, but it does not say that's the ONLY way you will die; the Bible ALSO says that if anyone sees God, period, one dies. Seeing God's face is just ONE way of seeing the God, not the only way.

Moses saw God, but Moses didn't die, so the Bible is in error. Now, assuming that you don't accept the argument above, let me provide this supplementary argument:

Exodus said that Moses SAW God. Why should we assume the writer meant for us to believe that Moses didn't see his face, as well as the rest of him? In fact, the writer makes it clear that WHATEVER it was that Moses DID see, it ordinarily would have been enough to God to administer the death penalty, otherwise why would the author tell us that God chose not to lay his hand on Moses? Thus, Moses must have done something that ordinarily would have earned him the death penalty. The Exodus author seems to be telling us here that Moses is no ordinary man, and that's why God chose to spare him. Nevertheless, Exodus 24 contradicts Exodus 33. What the writer SHOULD have said is that no ordinary man can see God, but he would allow the most holy man of Old Testament times to do so. The writer didn't say this, so the writer was wrong about God killing any man who sees him.

37

Can Man See God and Live?

by JosephAlward in

the author of the book of john evidently believed that no man has seen god, while the author of exodus tells us that moses had, indeed, seen god.

either john is wrong, or exodus is; either way, the bible is in error on this point.

here is the evidence:.

JosephAlward

"And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live." (Exodus 33:20….."And ….Moses SAW THE GOD OF ISRAEL....and upon the nobles of the children of Israel he (YHWH) laid not his hand." (Exodus 24:1-11)
Pom earlier argued that there are two different YHWH’s here; one is the Father, the other the Son; the former is the one speaking in Exodus 33, the latter--the forgiving one--is the one in Exodus 24, and that therefore there is no contradiction. So, there are two different YHWHs here, according to Pom.

Unfortunately for Pom, he evidently forgot that he once (Wednesday) believed there were two different YHWHs in Exodus, because NOW (Thursday) he says that since the creation, the only God who ever spoke or interacted with man was the SAME person, Jesus YHWH! Here are Pom’s self-convicting words:

“Everytime in the OT you see God speak, the Word of God spoke, that being Christ….So with simplicity, Jesus is the Word of God, EVERYTIME God spoke, it was the Word speaking.”

So, Pom, according to you, it must have been “Jesus YHWH” who was speaking when he said, “Thou canst not see MY face,” and it was that SAME “Jesus YHWH” who allowed Moses to see him. Thus, Exodus contradicts itself, and therefore the Bible is in error.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

37

Can Man See God and Live?

by JosephAlward in

the author of the book of john evidently believed that no man has seen god, while the author of exodus tells us that moses had, indeed, seen god.

either john is wrong, or exodus is; either way, the bible is in error on this point.

here is the evidence:.

JosephAlward

Pom tells us that he knows that the "god" Moses saw was "Jesus YHWH" who allows people to see him, not the "Father YHWH" who will kill anyone who sees his face. But, Pom hasn't answered my question:

When scripture shows the tetragrammaton "YHWH," what rule do you use to decide which of the two gods it refers to? How do you know that the "YHWH" Moses saw was the forgiving one? For example, what textual or linguistic evidence do you look for, and what criteria do you apply, in order to determine which is which?

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

45

Is the Path to Salvation Clear?

by JosephAlward in

inerrantists believe that every word in the bible is literally true; to believe otherwise, they say, is to remove the foundation upon which one may have a certain understanding of how one may achieve salvation and reach the kingdom of heaven.

that makes perfect sense, on one level.

if one could indeed know that everything in the bible is true, then one would just have to turn to the part where the method of salvation is described, do what the bible says, and live forever.

JosephAlward

I'm going to violate my own rule here and respond with a short message, rather than a thoughtful rebuttal, since you've offered nothing to rebut.

The message is this: Unless you have something substantive to say, don't say anything. You waste the time of dozens of readers who will note that there's a new message on this thread, then go to the trouble to log on to read it, only to find an informationless, one-line sarcasm. Please be more considerate in the future. If you want to make sarcastic remarks, save them until you can bury them inside of more substantive comments.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

12

Did God Understand Genetics?

by JosephAlward in

the genesis writer tells the story of labans agreement to give as wages to jacob, the tender of his goats and lambs, all light-streaked goats and dark-streaked lambs born while the flocks were in his care.

to increase the birth rate of streaked animals, jacob made white stripes on brown tree branches by peeling away dark strips of bark to expose the blond wood underneath, and put these branches in the animals drinking troughs, where they came to drink when they were in heat.

after the animals had mated in front of the branches, they bore young that were streaked; the normally brown goats were streaked white, and the normally white lambs were streaked brown.. its hard to believe that this story can actually be found in the bible, but it can.

JosephAlward

Pomegranate wrote,

>>"I look at those miracles this way. If I am wrong, what do I have to lose? Absolutely nothing." look at those miracles this way. If I am wrong, what do I have to lose? Presently, I am happy and content with what I believe to the core.">>

Happy? That's a criterion you use for believing? If it feels good, believe it?

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you're interested in your salvation, having a "life" after earthly death, so it SHOULD matter to you very much whether you're right or wrong in your beliefs in the miracles described in the Bible. If you're wrong about the miracles, then perhaps you're wrong about which steps you must take to be saved; if you misunderstand the message of the "miracles," perhaps you also misunderstand other parts of the Bible as well. Being right or wrong when it comes to the Bible is extremely important, isn't it?

Is baptism necessary to be saved, or will faith in Jesus alone do it? Does one have to do good works to validate faith in Jesus, and only then be saved? How do you know? Are you just happy to pick a belief, and stick with it, or should you question your belief? Which is safer: Believing because it makes you "happy," or believing because you've carefully studied ALL of the evidence objectively and without preconceived notions? Can you afford to be wrong, even if you're happy?

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

12

Did God Understand Genetics?

by JosephAlward in

the genesis writer tells the story of labans agreement to give as wages to jacob, the tender of his goats and lambs, all light-streaked goats and dark-streaked lambs born while the flocks were in his care.

to increase the birth rate of streaked animals, jacob made white stripes on brown tree branches by peeling away dark strips of bark to expose the blond wood underneath, and put these branches in the animals drinking troughs, where they came to drink when they were in heat.

after the animals had mated in front of the branches, they bore young that were streaked; the normally brown goats were streaked white, and the normally white lambs were streaked brown.. its hard to believe that this story can actually be found in the bible, but it can.

JosephAlward

In a post from another contributor, the writer suggested that "where the animal mates and the colors around them might affect" the color of the offspring. This is ridiculous, of course.

So, if modern man can believe that looking at a particular color can affect the color of an offspring, then couldn't the writer of the Jacob story likewise have believed such a thing? Not a single university biologist in the world believes that such a thing could happen, except perhaps by a miracle of God. The point I'm making is that God allowed his Bible writers to describe an event that seemingly happened naturally--not supernaturally. We know now that the event--if it occurred--was supernatural, not natural, and that the writer probably thought it was natural, and expected his readers to believe that it was natural, too. The editors of the New American Bible seem to be admitting that such beliefs were common in Old Testament times. Here’s what they say in a footnote:

"Jacob's stratagem was based on the widespread notion among simple people that visual stimuli can have prenatal effects on the offspring of breeding animals."

Now, if God was guiding the pen of this writer, then God would have had the writer make it clear to you and me and millions of other future readers that what was happening was supernatural, otherwise he would be allowing us to hold a false belief. If contributors in this forum can hold the false beliefs we're speaking of, then surely God would have known that the far less sophisticated readers in Old Testament times would have accepted the story at face value. Since the author gave no such indication the striped offspring were generated by supernatural means, we may take this as evidence that the author believed the event was natural; thus, the author wasn't guided by God, and we cannot trust what he has written.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

12

Did God Understand Genetics?

by JosephAlward in

the genesis writer tells the story of labans agreement to give as wages to jacob, the tender of his goats and lambs, all light-streaked goats and dark-streaked lambs born while the flocks were in his care.

to increase the birth rate of streaked animals, jacob made white stripes on brown tree branches by peeling away dark strips of bark to expose the blond wood underneath, and put these branches in the animals drinking troughs, where they came to drink when they were in heat.

after the animals had mated in front of the branches, they bore young that were streaked; the normally brown goats were streaked white, and the normally white lambs were streaked brown.. its hard to believe that this story can actually be found in the bible, but it can.

JosephAlward

Pom is overlooking the most important point in my post. The writer of the story about Jacob and the prenatal influence of the striped sticks made zero effort to warn us that what was happening was truly extraordinary, that it was a miracle, and not something that the laws of nature normally permit. Why would the God Pom believes in allow millions of readers over the subsequent millennia be misled into holding a childlike notion of prenatal influences? The answer, I believe, is clear: He wouldn't. Therefore, the person who wrote that story was not guided by God, and if he wasn't guided by god, why should we believe that this this extraordinary event actually happened? The answer is, We should not. Thus, we conclude that the Bible is in error; if it's in error regarding Jacob and his goats and lambs, then could it not be in error just about anywhere?

If Pom is going to respond to this post, I hope he will explain why he doesn't think this Bible story probably led generations of unsophisticated readers to hold a false beliefs and expectations regarding reproduction.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html