Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,801 Year: 4,058/9,624 Month: 929/974 Week: 256/286 Day: 17/46 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Anything Divine in the Bible?
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2322 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 303 of 406 (491179)
12-12-2008 11:48 AM
Reply to: Message 302 by Dawn Bertot
12-12-2008 11:42 AM


Re: If God Were Human Would He Want a God Like Him?
Betrot writes:
Now if we were drafted and held in that status aginst our will, could we not be condidered as slaves of a sort. We could not leave without consequences correct.
No slave can leave slavery without consequences when caught.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 302 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-12-2008 11:42 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Huntard
Member (Idle past 2322 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 359 of 406 (491387)
12-15-2008 10:44 AM
Reply to: Message 358 by Dawn Bertot
12-15-2008 10:05 AM


Re: If God Were Human Would He Want a God Like Him?
Bertot, I realize your questions were adressed to DA, I'd still like to give you my input.
I will say in advance I have no children, but this is what I would do if I did have them and they were of the right age and/or experience to understand the concepts.
Bertot writes:
Will you also tell her your position on abortion and killing and eating of other species?.
I'm not sure how these two are related, but if my children would ask me for them, sure, I would give them my oppinions on the matter.
Or will you gloss over this and pretend the glaring contradiction does not exist.
What glaring contradiction?
Will you tell her that you have no way to justify any of your actions, no way to describe them as moral or immoral?
But I DO have ways to do this, they're called my standards. I do not expect my children (if I ever have them) to share the same standards as me though.
When you are telling her your opinion on the Bible, will you tell her that you dont really have a platform and that is just your opinion verses someone elses.
Of course, and I will leth them decide which one they like better.
I wish I could be a fly on the wall for that father daughter, discussion.
Why? I don't see how this discussion would be very exciting, nor interesting to hear, to an outsider.
But if I were a fly on the wall, you would probably smash it or spray it in the face with insecticide, correct?
Not necesarily, unless it "bugged" me. (yes, intended)
When she asks you why abortion is ok and why its a crime to break or eat an eagles egg, will yu tell her how immoral or subjective human behavior is, or will you gloss over it as you have in this discussion?
Once again, I fail to see how these two things are related. Which is what I'd tell them. As for why some think an eagle's eggs should not be taken for food, is because we have many alternatives to it from non threatened species. And why some people think abortion is ok is because they think people should have a choice wheter or not to have a baby, given certain circumstances.
When she asks you the question of why it is ok for humans to treat animals in a way that humans do not treat eachother, what will be your response
That animals aren't humans.
more relative nonsense.
Perhaps. I don;t see what the problem is though.
When you are explaining the Bible to her and your positions on it, will you explain why it is evil for humans to treat eachother poorly and that your reasons are simply that you are human and it appears to be evil based on your intelligence and emotions but disregardt the same behavior any where else?
I'm sure what you're trying to say here. I will explain why I think it is bad for other people to treat people poorly. Whether my children agree or not is when I can see how I raised them.
Will you explain to her that because you are more intelligent than other species, your actions are justified, for reasons of survival or simple causation?
Basically, yes.
I'll leave the military questions out, since I've never been in the military.
Or will you be man enough to say to her sweetie, I suppose I have no way to justify my contempt for the God of the Bible or my actions.
Sure I do. They're called my standards.
But then I could go on and on and on about your morality, correct?
I'm sure you could.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 358 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-15-2008 10:05 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Huntard
Member (Idle past 2322 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 376 of 406 (491461)
12-16-2008 12:38 PM
Reply to: Message 367 by Dawn Bertot
12-16-2008 2:08 AM


Re: If God Were Human Would He Want a God Like Him?
Hey Bertot, here's my reaction again.
Matters such as, subjective, objective, relative, moral, immoral, evil and the application of them against logic and logical contradictions and implied, direct and indirect implications.
I don't quite understand what you're saying here, or is that what you mean when you say my thinking is "simplistic"? For let me assure you, many thoughts have gone into my standards.
In the Warren-Matson debate, on the existence of the God of the Bible, Dr. Matson called God a logical monster, to which Dr. Warren took great offense. Dr. Matson said this was not an attack on Gods character but a direct implication of the arguments that flowed from those premises. Ofcourse he was wrong and Dr Warren soon dismissed any idea of God being illogical.
He might dismiss it, but it's true. God has these rules, and if you break them, he will send ou to a lake of fire an torture you for ever and ever and ever. But he loves you.... If that isn't illogical, I don't know what is.
But Dr Matsons implication was misunderstood perhaps. Ofcourse while he meant no offense, he like yourselves had no platform from which to make such a statement. Do you see what I am saying?
Yes, I see what you are saying. I would like to ask what your point is? So what that he didn't have a platform. Does this make his logic any less true? Does this make his opinion less valid? Why do you keep saying you need a platform to judge? As it is quite obvious that you don't need such a thing whatsoever.
For example I was not talking about eagles eggs or the military personnel directly, but using it as an example to demonstrate a logical point.
The point you made was far from logical. Eating eagle eggs as nourishment and removing some cells from a woman's womb are two entirely different things. Oh, and to make it even more complicated, I don't see the eating of eagle's eggs as wrong in all circumstances either.
You and Huntard dont seem to understand the implications of holding and having standards against a relative moral position.
Would you mind explaining what those implications are? Cause I indeed don't see any.
So be it. Jaywill is proceeding in a fine fashion as he usually does and I will be happy to let him proceed with the direct Biblical approach, from which he is so masterful.
If you want to leave DA to his discussion with Jaywill, fine by me, but would you mind answering my questions?

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 367 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-16-2008 2:08 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Huntard
Member (Idle past 2322 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 377 of 406 (491462)
12-16-2008 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 374 by jaywill
12-16-2008 12:07 PM


Re: More on Slavery...
Jaywill writes:
God created the human conscience.
Then why are not all consciences equal? If god made them, I'm sure he would make it so that it was clear to everybody what was right and wrong. This is so obviously not the case I say that god didn't make our conscience.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by jaywill, posted 12-16-2008 12:07 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 380 by jaywill, posted 12-16-2008 2:33 PM Huntard has replied
 Message 387 by iano, posted 12-16-2008 8:26 PM Huntard has replied

Huntard
Member (Idle past 2322 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 398 of 406 (491577)
12-17-2008 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 380 by jaywill
12-16-2008 2:33 PM


Re: More on Slavery...
I think the question should be: Why do some listen to their conscience and some do not?
What do you mean? Are you suggesting I suppress my conscience? I can assure you I do not. Or is it that my conscience is in perfect alignment with that of god? In which case I'd like you to answer me why he is apparently in favour of abortion? I don't suppress my conscience when it comes to this, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that abortion is justifiable. Or are you suggesting I do this subconsciously? Then how are we ever to know when we are doing it or not?
Then this is further complicated by the fact of different issues. I may be more sensative in conscience in one matter. I notice that that is no garantee that I have boasting rights over another person who may be more prone in another area to listen to his conscience than I.
Here we have the same problem. How do we know we all have the same conscience when apparently we can;t tell when we "suppress" it or not?
There is also the problem of an over sensative conscience too. That can lead to mental problems. I do not deal with that here.
Ok, neither will I then.
Now, here's what I read in the Bible.
Ok, I'll tell you what I read then as well. Just remember, without evidence, every view is equally valid, and thus not valid at all.
1.) Cain and Abel's parents told them how God needed to be worshipped.
Dammit, you made a part of genesis again, and all in vain, it never says they knew HOW to worship god, they just offer stuff to him.
2.) Abel obeyed. Cain decided to invent his own procedure.
Nowhere does it say this. You can't invent your own story to go along with what you THINK it should say.
3.) God recognized Abel's offering and rejected Cain's with an encouraging word to Cain that if he did well he too would be received.
No. God gave absolutely NO reason as to why he did bless Abel and not Cain.
4.) Cain, over come with the jealousy of rage becomes the world's first murderer. He also becomes the world's first inventor of a man made religion.
Nowhere does it say Cain established a "man made religion".
Conscience problem? Where? He lies to god, where is there an implication that he has a problem with this?
He has just murdered his brother Abel. He is totally callous about it.
Indicating he felt no such thing as a conscience.
It is not that Cain had no conscience. It is that he excecised his will power to suppress it. He shut it down. He shut it up. He refused by act of will to listen to his conscience.
Really? where does it say this is the case? You're just making stuff up now.
The problem with his conscience is really the problem in his will's choice to suppress the feeling of wrong doing in his conscience.
He DIDN'T suppress his conscience. He didn't feel bad at all! If the bible wanted to make clear he was suppressing his conscience, it could've said so, but it didn't. You're assertion that he IS doing it is just that, an assertion.
Of course God knew exactly where Abel was.
Really? then why did he ask Cain? Why not just say, "I know what you did"? Why did he need the "calling of the blood from the ground" to become aware of the situation?
God was giving Cain an opportunity to realize what he had done and to confess his sin.
Or god didn't know, and just wondered where Abel was.
The result was disappointing:
I'll say.... First, he chooses to prefer one over the other on a whim, then he is surprised the other acted as he did. I thought this fellow's supposed to be omniscient and all, doesn't seem like it.
Cain still shows no sign of remorse.
Again indicating that he didn't feel bad about it at all, which points to the fact that there is no universal conscience.
He only cares that his punishment is too harsh.
I would complain too, after being so unfairly treated.
He is scared that someone will seek vengence upon him and kill him, an act which God strictly forbids.
Well, since the only people so far are his mother and father, I'd say he'd just have to get away from them. I mean, how hard can it be t outrun two people when you've got an entire planet t hide on? Oh, and god finally sees he can;t put all the blame on Cain, so he decides to have some mercy upon him, bit late, but still.
The Bible portrays the downward current of the human race from Adam's disobedience. The next stage from entry of death is sin, murder, and the refusal to heed the God given conscience.
NOWHERE does it mention that Cain had a conscience, much less that he was suppressing it. Stop making stuff up.
Some would listen to the conscience and some would not.
There is no such thing as a universal conscience, if you have evidence to the contrary, please show it.
Now the conscience is a part of what the Bible calls the heart.
The heart is a muscle that pumps blood around a body, it has no impact on one's thoughts whatsoever. Unless, it doesn't function well, of course, that can be pretty detrimental to one's thought processes.
Psalm 33 says:
Jehovah looks down from heaven; He sees all the sons of men. From the site of His habitation He gazes at all the inhabitants of the earth, He who fashions the hearts of them all, He who discerns all their works.
This is just another way to refer to the creation story, god literally made our hearts, that's what this is saying.
God fashions the hearts of all created men.
He has to, if he didn't we'd all die.
Then God observes their lives and their works. He is watching. He is observing how each of us reacts to our conscience.
There is no universal conscience, there may be a subjective one. So, basically, god's just watching us a great big real life soap. I'll bet he's laughing his ass off.
He does not expect us to be able to carry out all of the good that we know.
We don't KNOW of ANY good. Further, the notion of what is "good" changes all the time, again pointing to the fact that there is no absolute moral right or wrong. To give an example that ties nicely into this thread, most of the "developed nations" used to think slavery was quite nifty, they don't now.
He knows that we have fallen into a sinful nature.
He should, he's responsible.
He does neither expect us to be able to resist all of the evil that we know.
We don't KNOW of ANY evil. Same argument as for the good, basically.
He knows that we have become corrupted and damaged by the poisoning of man's nature with the Satanic spirit operating in Adam's descendents.
He should, he's responsible.
He hopes that the conscience will be listened to to the point that when the Gospel comes and informs us that we have sinned we would agree.
The he should've given us all a universal conscience. Since he hasn't, he's playing a mean trick again.
When it says that Jesus had died for our sins He hopes we will believe.
Why hope, he could've made it so much easier. Oh, and hope implies he doesn't know what we'll do, so, is he Omniscient or not?
When we do and accept Jesus as our Savior and Lord there is a great peace that comes into the conscience that nothing in the world can give.
Really? how do you know? Tried everything there is have you?
There is no imitation for it.
Really? how do you know? Tried everything there is have you?
It is supernatural.
No, actually, it is quite natural, sorry. Feelings of euphoria are caused regularly by using drugs such as heroin and others. But then again, even if you tried all these things and still said that this "god experience" is so much better, it would still not be supernatural. For, you see, it's quite normal to claim the drugs you're using at this moment are the "best ever".
Yet it is quite normal.
So what is it? Supernatural, or normal?
I don't. I think he's an asshole.
We know that we are now, under the blood of Jesus, in a status AS IF WE HAD NEVER SINNED.
Uhm, no I'm not. Jesus, as described in the bible, never existed.
The conscience is restful and peaceful because, JUSTICE, has occured on our behalf in the death of Christ.
Nailing someone to a cross for telling people to get along is your idea of justice?
We have not been overlooked. We have been JUDGED. We have been judged in Christ. Justice has been imputed on our behalf in the death of Jesus the Son of God.
Really? I'd like to state here that I do not consider nailing a man to the cross for asking people to get along good justice, in fact I find it very bad justice.
On Calvary, on Christ's cross, our sins which offend our God created conscience were dealt with by Christ.
Thee is no god-created conscience. If there is, why is it not consistent?
The wrong reaction is to reason like this:
"No I am NOT a sinner. I am a pretty good person. At least I am not as bad as this guy over here. I am better than that one over there. I am better than a lot of religious people. I don't need to be saved. I don't need a Savior.
Even if I am bad I can change. Just give me one more day. I'll prove that I can change. I can live a life pleasing to God. Beside I don't want to have someone else take the penalty for me. That is not noble. That is not responsible. I will be responsible before God for my own sins. I don't want to say that I am all forgiven because of the death of Jesus."
Yes, for that is a stupid reaction. A better one would be something like this:
"I'm not a sinner, for sin is something invented by men to keep other men under their control. I'm a pretty good person, of course, I don't do everything like another person would do it, but that's because we have a different viewpoint on different things. I think, I act better then that person, but he probably thinks the same about me. I am better than a lot of religious people, at least I don't cling to false hopes and fairy tales, I look upon life through realism, not fantasy. Of course, the religions people say they're better than me, but what do you expect with everybody's morals differing. I don't need saving, that's something for the religious type. they want to believe this they can go right ahead.
I'm not bad, so why would I change? Because of the irrational fear of the religious?"
that would be much more realistic.
These kinds of reasonings are rebellion and unbelief. It is better to pray like this:
"Lord Jesus. I realize that I am a sinner. I don't promise to change myself. I don't promise I can turn over a new leaf. But I do acknowledge that I am a guilty sinner. I need your precious blood to wash away the stain of my sins before God. I receive you as my Lord and Savior."
Irrationality based in fear is never better then rationality based on reality.
That is much much wiser response to the Gospel. In fact just to confess "Lord Jesus" is most of the battle.
Confessing to an imaginary friend is what I did when I was 4, now, I talk to my real friends about my life.
This post is not meant to completely explain the Christian experience. I mean it to address the question you had on the conscience.
Pretty lengthy post and a lot of sermonizing to do that.
I also wanted to show you how the conscience can be released, made free, clean, gloriously at peace and how you can have a brand new start with a keener and ever brightening conscience.
Ok, too bad it's all fictional.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 380 by jaywill, posted 12-16-2008 2:33 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 400 by jaywill, posted 12-17-2008 4:40 PM Huntard has not replied

Huntard
Member (Idle past 2322 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 399 of 406 (491579)
12-17-2008 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 387 by iano
12-16-2008 8:26 PM


Re: More on Slavery...
jaywill has already made the point that different people will suppress their conscience in different degrees, in different areas where conscience can operate - so its very difficult to measure any degree of imbalance (given that Gods perspective on sin is the measure being applied)
And as I've said to Jaywill, I don't suppress my conscience. Or if I do, it must happen subconsciously, so we can never know if we are or are not doing it, and thus never know if we are or aren't going against this "universal conscious" you claim god put in us all.
[qs]There is also this to consider: the purpose of law giving (via conscience) is not so much to restrain us from sin as it is to convict us that we are sinners. Which means that it's imperative we sin![qs/]
I don't really feel bad about anything I do, does this mean I do not sin? When I endorse abortion, I feel fine, when I take god's name in vain (I say goddamit alot) I feel fine. Does this mean these things are not sins?
Suppressing conscience in order to sin can lead in one of two directions finally:
Since I don't do that, I guess I'm not in any of these categories.
- continued suppression, to cope with the seared conscience caused by the previous suppression. On and on and on until the last breath is drawn (or the conscience is finally extinguished).
- the will of a person, whilst suppressing conscience in order to sin isn't prepared to suppress to the bitter end. It is unwilling to fully bury/ fully excuse/ fully justify what it knows to be evil - whilst finding itself unable to stop committing evil. In the measure it doesn't suppress, it must bear the pain of a seared conscience.
Hey! I was right! Like I pointed out above, if I don't feel bad for actions I have taken in my life so far, does this mean I have never sinned? Or could it mean this conscience stuff you go on about might not actually be correct?

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 387 by iano, posted 12-16-2008 8:26 PM iano has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024