Biblical Creationism

I put great faith into the Bible. I would gladly attempt to defend any supposed descrepancies in it.
General

Your quote: "And I'm not trying to be a "smart-ass" with this post, I really do like the idea that since I don't believe in God I just continue to exist on Earth as I am now, forever."Clear up some confusion for me if you would. Your theory seems mistaken in this: When you die, you dont get to exist as you did now because right now you dont believe in God. But after you die I believe you will know there is a God. So I dont feel it will be quite the same as it is on earth.
Also seperation is not the only thing hell is.General

quote:

---

I believe that because God made us fre, all people make the decision while alive whether or not to follow God.

---

A dodge. I'll ask again: What about people who were never exposed to teachings about God (especially your particular set of teachings)? What about people who were only minimally exposed to them? What about people with learning disabilities who couldn't understand them? What about people with learning disabilities who could only minimally understand them?If a person isn't exposed to the possibility, how can they make a choice? If a person is only minimally exposed, how can they make an informed choice? If a child was born to an atheist nomadic herder from a remote region in the Himilayas, do they get sent to hell? What about a baby, too young to understand? What about a toddler, who is not fully grasping what their parents are saying? Partially grasping what they're saying? Etc. I want specific answers, please.

quote:

---

... and I think that those who search him out do find him. Let us leave the 4000 year old words of a nomadic desert shepherd out of it for now because it is not central to this topic.

---

So, in short, a child raised atheist in the middle of the Himalayas would be expected to not only come up with the notion of God, but even Jesus and all of the other teachings that you believe? An infant who dies at age 6mo? What about age 1yr? 1 1/2 yr? 2 yrs. 3 yrs. 4 yrs. 5 yrs. Etc. I want an answer to these questions. Not a dodge.

quote:

---

With regards to your last question I responds quite simply with this.

---

No, you don't get off that easily. Address the questions that I posed, please. Why does God put on this "not knowing what is going on" skit? Why did God punish snakes for what Satan did? When was eve told (off camera? Isn't this a little important)? Why did Satan tell the truth, and God lie, and then later change the rules of the game so that he would be telling the truth? Why does God state to Eve that "though her desire will be for her husband (or "to control her husband" - the Hebrew is ambiguous), he will be "her master." (and don't go NIV on me here ). I want answers to all of these.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

Discrepencies in which version?"The Bible" is actually sourced upon multiple texts. Not only are the texts internally contradicting, but they contradict each other. For example, who killed Goliath? Well, everyone knows that in 1 Samuel, David kills Goliath. However, in 2 Samuel 21:19, some texts state that Elhanan, son of Jaare-Oregim killed Goliath. In other versions of the same text, this is changed to "Elhanan, son of Jair killed Lahmi, the brother of Goliath". These sorts of inter-text errors aren't rare - read a bible like New Living which points out when different texts are in conflict. Sometimes the errors are almost amusing, such as mathematics errors (hey, scribes aren't very good at math!). Sometimes a section is flooded with errors. For example, Ezra and Nehmiah contain pages apon pages of figures which contradict each other in the original texts about the rebuilding of the temple, what was involved, who was involved, etc ("Friendly" bibles like NIV love to cover these contradictions up, but they're quite real. NIV also softens language that is quite harsh in the Hebrew, "irons out" contradictions by changing the original language, etc. KJV doesn't generally do any "ironing-out", although it does do a bit of playing around with which original text to select from, and there are some poor translations in places.).Now go enjoy your fire breathing crocodiles (Job 41) and your flat earth (Job 38).------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."[This message has been edited by Rei, 09-16-2003]

Sorry.....I actually wasnt trying to dodge. I will attempt to answer your questions but may only sucseed in angering you with my answers.
In the Bible Jesus makes it clear that he is the only was to God; that he is the only was into heaven. (Does that mean that those who do not accept him in this lifetime are left out?) No it only means that when one enters heaven it is because of Jesus.
Infants, aborted babies, mentally challenged people and scores of others all are most definately in heaven. While none of these have made a verbal commitment to accept Jesus, there would be no God of mercy if he damned a 5 month old child, or a person incapable of thinking properly, or mentally challenged people, or those who never come across the Bible.
However most people do get to decide. Some don't and they still enter heaven. Is that a dodge? I'll deal with Bible descrepencies later.
General

quote:

---

Infants, aborted babies, mentally challenged people and scores of others all are most definately in heaven. While none of these have made a verbal commitment to accept Jesus, there would be no God of mercy if he damned a 5 month old child, or a person incapable of thinking properly, or mentally challenged people, or those who never come across the Bible.

---

I hope you understand that your answer, while kind and compassionate, is wholly unsatisfying and pretty unscriptural. Of course, I got used to hearing it when I was growing up in church, and I accepted it (because there is no real alternative that doesn't make God into a complete monster) but he never promises it in the Bible... never even suggests it.

quote:

---

However most people do get to decide. Some don't and they still enter heaven. Is that a dodge? I'll deal with Bible descrepencies later.

---

So what is the minimum age? What is the minimum IQ? I guess my answer to your question (yes, I know, you weren't asking me specifically) is yes, it looks like a shameless dodge to an "outsider," even one who has formerly understood and accepted the reasoning. Intelligence is a continuum (actually several of them, according to modern knowledge) and so is age. There is no clear dividing line, and the only way to appear compassionate is to excuse everyone who appears to qualify. Hence the blanket redemption of babies, the disabled, the ignorant, and so forth. Of course, there are the people who believe that hundreds of generations of unfortunate pagans are all writhing in agony as I type because they dared to be born across the sea from the birthplace of Christianity. Predestination, they say. God's will. The older I get, the more I live, the less either of these pronunciations appeal to my sense of reason.

quote:

---

Infants, aborted babies, mentally challenged people and scores of others all are most definately in heaven. While none of these have made a verbal commitment to accept Jesus, there would be no God of mercy if he damned a 5 month old child, or a person incapable of thinking properly, or mentally challenged people, or those who never come across the Bible.

---

This also undercuts the doctrine of original sin, which is fundamental to christianity, dating, as the doctrine does, all the way back to the beginning of Genesis. We are all born guilty. Why should we not therefore all be punished?------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

You do realise that many Christian groups and denominations don't hold to the doctrine of original sin, don't you?

You've got my attention. I thought it was fundamental to all branches of Christianity.--Percy

I'm not too sure of the details, but I know none of the churchs I went to ever held to it. We tended to view it as a freaky Catholic thing. That was a Baptist church, but I don't know whether it was a general Baptist belief, or just the church I went to - but I assume that's one of the reasons they don't practice infant baptism. My mother's an ordained priest in the Church of England, and she doesn't believe it either. But the CoE's exceedingly broad in the range of beliefs it will accept, so again I don't know whether it is a core belief or not.The view I was raised with was that no-one is without sin because humans are incapable of leading perfect lives, not because they are born that way.

General In Joshua 10:12-13 how do explain the lack of devestation that would occur to the whole of planet Earth if the sun actually did stop its movement in the sky? What is it about this passage that I am misinterpreting?[This message has been edited by sidelined, 09-19-2003]

I don't see how it can NOT be a part of Christianity. For example, Romans 5:12.Luther and Calvin accepted it, so it isn't just Catholic weirdness. Augustine accepted it. Tertullian alluded to it. Origen taught it...------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

Not all Christians hold the bible to be complete and literal truth. I'm not saying it's not part of Christianity, I'm saying not all Christians believe it. I'm just telling you what we thought. It is certainly not a fundemental part of all Christianity, although some may hold it as such.

My old church, which I have come to regard as very fundamentalist, didn't really believe in Original Sin. What they believed was that Adam's sin introduced sin into the world, and that all humans are sinful, but it's not like we all have to pay the price for Adam's specific sin - we've got enough of our own already.Does that help, at all?

But had Adam not let sin into the world, there would be no sin. I don't see how you can get around that. Thus, your sins are the result of Adam's original sin.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com