|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Faith and belief - The Almighty God revealed through his grandness | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4958 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
DevilsAdvocate writes: In John 8:3-11 Jesus blatantly ignores these previous COMMANDS BY GOD given to Moses stating that adultery will be punished by stoning and tells the Pharasees and Scribes "He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." and they all leave.But as a divine being and one of the ones who supposedly disseminated the rules in the first place, this would by considered "do as I say, not as I do" i.e. hypocricy by anyone intelligent person's rational standards. The role of the Mosaic law was to teach the isrealites that to sin, makes one worthy of death. This is why they had to offer animals as sacrifices when they sinned...it was to remind them that sin bring forth death...this is the condition passed on from Adam to all his decendents. The role of the Messiah was to save them from that cycle of sin and death.this is why when Jesus came, he showed the sort of mercy and compassion that he did. His role was to lay down his life as a final sacrifice for all so that the mosaic law would no longer be required. So Jesus was not disobeying the mosaic law...he was putting an end to it.
DevilsAdvocate writes: as God why would he disobey his own laws in the first place. is Jesus really God though? Who is this Jehovah/Yahweh who is mentioned over 7,000 times in the bible??? why would Jesus be called 'The Son of God' if he was God himself??? As much as the church's want to teach that Jesus is God, the scriptures do not agree with this idea.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2324 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Peg writes:
You haven't been paying attention have you, there are UNLIMITED other entities that could've "made" life on Earth. Not to mention the fact that it could've come about through chemistry.
if God didnt make life on earth, then it must have always been here. However we know that it hasnt always been here as Rahvin pointed out.
You certainly do, since god has also never been onserved to create life, it can't be proven, nor observed in a lab, so there is no evidence for it, yet you believe it. Don't you see you're doing EXACTLY what you're claiming we're doing? That can only lead us to Abiogenesis... which cannot be proved, cannot be replicated, cannot be observed and therefore there is no evidence for it. i love circular arguments. I hunt for the truth
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4958 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
i do see what you did there huntard
can you tell me if any scientist has been successful in creating life thru chemical reactions in the lab?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2324 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Peg writes:
I can't, nor do I claim that this is how life came about. I simply don't know. I do BELIEVE that is how it will be shown to have happened, but I entirely accept I could be very wrong there. i do see what you did there huntardcan you tell me if any scientist has been successful in creating life thru chemical reactions in the lab? Now, can you show me how god created life? I hunt for the truth
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4958 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
bluescat48 writes: Since there is very little evidence of either then we get no-where arguing the matter. The point is that searching for evidence is the proper method not simply accepting writings from the bronze age. by all means search for evidence... and when evidence is found, then by all means give us the conclusion until then, i'd be sidelining abigenesis and i hope no one minds if I continue to believe life was created
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4958 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
according to the bible, God made mad from the ground
it doesn not explain the process God used to do this and so I cannot tell you that Lets face it, we are both in the same boat... Its all about faith. you have faith in something you cannot see just as i have faith in something i cannot see
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2324 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Peg writes:
Actually, chemistry DOES exist, and I'm fully convinced through the things I've seen about it that this could be an explanation. When it comes to god, I have seen absolutely nothing that points to him even existing, let alone being capable of creating life. So no, it's not exactly the same. according to the bible, God made mad from the groundit doesn not explain the process God used to do this and so I cannot tell you that Lets face it, we are both in the same boat... Its all about faith. you have faith in something you cannot see just as i have faith in something i cannot see Let's forget about all that however, the only truly right position anyone can take right now is: "I don't know" with perhaps a note pointing to the thing that has your preference. You however say that it is true that god created it, yet when we say it is chemistry, you say we can't take that position because it has no evidence, entirely forgetting that you have no evidence either. Not even mentioning the fact that the study of abiogenesis has shown some results in at least producing the building blocks of life. As opposed to your god, who hasn't shown ANY evidence of his creative powers anywhere. I hunt for the truth
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4958 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
Huntard writes: You however say that it is true that god created it, yet when we say it is chemistry, you say we can't take that position because it has no evidence, entirely forgetting that you have no evidence either. Not even mentioning the fact that the study of abiogenesis has shown some results in at least producing the building blocks of life. As opposed to your god, who hasn't shown ANY evidence of his creative powers anywhere. well thats not quite true either we have a nation of people who claim to have had direct dealings with God.Now if you believe their word or not is not the issue...the fact is that a nation of people (jews) have a historical record of Gods intervention on their behalf a record of Gods powerful Acts on their behalf a record of Gods laws and prophecies a record of Gods own Son coming to earth and dieing on a stake the followers of Jesus have a visible history that is clearly seen in archeology, roman history, and right down to our day a continual line of evidence which leads people like myself to beleive that this God of the bible is real. so i have faith based on what i believe to be evidence. I can see the walls of Jerusalem, the ancient christain church's and manuscripts, the prophecies fulfillments...all these things are tangible evidence. i have evidence for which my faith is based on.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2324 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Peg writes:
So has Islam, or Hinduism for that matter. Do you believe their claims as well? For that matter, do you believe spiderman exists because New York is exists? well thats not quite true either we have a nation of people who claim to have had direct dealings with God.Now if you believe their word or not is not the issue...the fact is that a nation of people (jews) have a historical record of Gods intervention on their behalf a record of Gods powerful Acts on their behalf a record of Gods laws and prophecies a record of Gods own Son coming to earth and dieing on a stake the followers of Jesus have a visible history that is clearly seen in archeology, roman history, and right down to our day a continual line of evidence which leads people like myself to beleive that this God of the bible is real. so i have faith based on what i believe to be evidence. I can see the walls of Jerusalem, the ancient christain church's and manuscripts, the prophecies fulfillments...all these things are tangible evidence. i have evidence for which my faith is based on. I hunt for the truth
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peg Member (Idle past 4958 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: |
Yes i do believe their claims. Islam do indeed have an historical religion. Mohammad was a real person and their devotion to him is real.
Hindu's also have a miriad of gods whom they created. I believe this because they also have tangible evidence of such and you dont have to go too far to find evidence for it. this does not mean that my belief in them inspires faith. No, i dont believe Mohammad was sent by God, no i dont believe the many thousands of Hindu gods are actually real gods.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2324 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Peg writes:
Which is it Peg, do you or don't you believe their claims? Yes i do believe their claims.. . . No, i dont believe Mohammad was sent by God, no i dont believe the many thousands of Hindu gods are actually real gods. I hunt for the truth
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluescat48 Member (Idle past 4218 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: |
we have a nation of people who claim to have had direct dealings with God. Now if you believe their word or not is not the issue...the fact is that a nation of people (jews) have a historical record of Gods intervention on their behalf a record of Gods powerful Acts on their behalf a record of Gods laws and prophecies a record of Gods own Son coming to earth and dieing on a stake the followers of Jesus have a visible history that is clearly seen in archeology, roman history, and right down to our day a continual line of evidence which leads people like myself to beleive that this God of the bible is real. so i have faith based on what i believe to be evidence. I can see the walls of Jerusalem, the ancient christain church's and manuscripts, the prophecies fulfillments...all these things are tangible evidence. i have evidence for which my faith is based on. All hearsay nothing tangible. The prophesies? Most were years after the alleged incident. Do you know for a fact when Isaiah was written?or Daniel? Edited by bluescat48, : typ There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Wrong. Your own argument rules out God making life on earth. We've never seen God make life, and the Biblivcal description has all sorts of life coming from non-living matter which you insist is impossible.
quote: Which shows that your argument is wrong.
quote: Not in this case. All you're doing is parroting a naive argument which relies on a clear double standard. You need to think more and place far less trust in the people who feed you these arguments. They aren't interested in the truth (although they may well be interested in suppressing it).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
Would you care to respond to my post that points out that you have been caught out with special pleading?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DevilsAdvocate Member (Idle past 3130 days) Posts: 1548 Joined: |
Nice to hear from you again as well Bertot, my old arch-nemesis or should I say Barfolomew.
Bertot writes: Anywho let me address you latest comments concerning Jesus' actions that you have described as unlawful.In Matt 12:1-21 I think you will find the answers you are looking. I didn't cite Matthew 12:1-21 because I don't think this was a clear cut case in which Jesus disobeyed the Sabbath. But I will entertain your comments.
It should be remembered in this context that while Jesus was in full human form, he never ceased to be the immortal God in any respect. This seems to be the mainline Catholic and Protestant view of the trinity i.e. support the Nicene Creed. However, you are in stark disagreement with Peg and ICANT then, who seem to be anti-Trinitarian in there faith:
Peg writes: is Jesus really God though? Who is this Jehovah/Yahweh who is mentioned over 7,000 times in the bible??? why would Jesus be called 'The Son of God' if he was God himself??? As much as the church's want to teach that Jesus is God, the scriptures do not agree with this idea. I am not belittling any of you, I just brought it up to show that even Christians on this board do not even agree in there doctrine even of something as fundamentally important as the nature of God and Jesus. But that is besides the point back to the topic at hand.
In these passages he makes it very clear that God or the son of man is Lord of the Sabbath. As God he can adjust a law that he has made to to demonstrate another moral point, without contradiction. As to this point he makes it clear that he "desires mercy rather than sacrifice". In this instance he was demonstrating a higher principle Than why wait 2000+ years to amend his original commands, why did he not incorporate this philosophy of desiring mercy rather than sacrifice in his original commandments in the Pentateuch. This is hypocritical. It is like telling your child, "If someone throws a punch at you, you must fight back and kick there ass". Then when you get a call from the principle saying your child was in a fight you tell your child in the presence of the teachers and principle, "Haven't I always told you to turn the other check and walk away from fights" and then punishing them for there actions. This is the epitome of hypocrisy and inconsistent moral behavior. In my opinion, all this "God can change his mind or amend or end the OT law" crap is an attempt by early Church fathers i.e. Jerome, Augustine and the like to try to rectify the obvious moral inconsistencies between the OT and the NT resulting from merging two worldviews together, the Semitic worldview of the OT and the Hellenized worldview of the NT. You explaining that God has the right to do this does not make it less of an inconsistent.
It should be noted that these laws were made for man not God and there can be no contradiction in his actions. You saying it is so does not necessarily make it so. This is an a priori statement which has no method of being validated or falsified. It is also circular reasoning: a. God is non-contradictory in natureb. Therefore God's laws are non-contradictory c. If we examine God's laws they are non-contradictory in nature d. Therefore God is non-contradictory in nature In a will or a testament the arbitrator of the will may change or adjust that as he sees fit during his life. Hebrews 9. A person's will/testament does not kill people for being adulterers, blasphemers, talking back to your parents. It does not enslave people and make rules for this enslavement. Someone's will & testament does not condemn people to eternity in hell. Besides a will and testament is the determination of disposition of someone's personal property after his/her death, this has nothing to do with God commanding a select group of people on social morality in the OT and NT. Your analogy falls apart here.
The Old Law or testament was Gods laws and wishes in this connection and as an objective moral standard his decisions and wishes apply to man. So why did God not make Jesus teachings the Law from the beginning? Why change horses midstream. Why cause all this confusion? It is a bit too contrived.
It is true in this instance that had Jesus (God) not been present, they would have been justified in carryng out the Law. However, Jesus knowing thier hearts and that thier deisres were not to fulfill Gods wishes, he desired to point out a higher principleand to display what thier actual intentions actually were. He then reinforces the his point by stating that the Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath. In the instance in John 8, the same principle would apply. Jesus is not ignoring or disobeying the Law, he is the Lord of the laws. But he was disobeying his own law(s) in John 8. Did Jesus/God not COMMAND people to stone adulterers. Yes or No? Did Jesus/God not follow his own command. Yes or No?
To corroborate the point that only God has a right to pass judgment on man, he reinforces his point by stating "let HE that is without sin among you cast the first stone." He knew there intentions here were one of piety and not a desire to fulfill Gods law, as a result he used the situation to demonstrate a higher principle. He did it by being the author of the Law in the first place and demonstrated further his deity, over man and our perceptions of subjective moral standards. He closes the door in this situation and the one in John chapter 8 on who and what he is in this respect. Why give the Jews over 700 laws and expect them not to follow it to the T? If the most powerful entity in the Universe came down and handed one of your ancestors over 700 rules and regulations and told you to follow them OR DIE (or at least this is what was told by your ancestors). Would they not in all their human power attempt to follow them no matter what. Now let's say they pass these laws to their progeny generation after generation for a good 1000+ years. Do you not think that following these laws would become mechanical and automatic, and that they would be folded into the very nature of there culture? It is inevitable. Therefore, God with foreknowledge perpetuated this behavior of hypocrisy and mechanical adherence to the law in the first place. Either God is the most ignorant entity on matters of human psychologically and sociology or he is a mere fabrication of human religious fanatics. I would go with the latter.
What seems like a contradiction or contradictory actions is easily understandable, when it is taken in context and in its entirity. There were times when Jesus (God) corrected misunderstandings about the Sabbath, Law and Sin, then there were times he set the sentence aside to demonstrate a higher principle. But then ONLY God can do this correct, so there is no immediate contradiction or MORAL INCONSISTENCIES, correct once again? One might as well try and condemn Gods action in Cannan, concerning certain actions with some verses his mercy with others. Why wait 2000 years to correct his first fuck up? Why not instill these principles/philosophies in the first place?
He can only know what is RIGHT, MORAL AND JUST. Just because you say so, does not make it so. Keep justifying ethnocide and the murder of children and babies.
Thus, with a simple explanation and a little contextual and total scriptural perspective, your whole assertion and contention falls to the ground, like a house of cards, DA. You explained nothing I didn't already know you were going to bring up? Why, because I used to teach the same thing. You only opened up whole new cans of worms and a whole slew of inconsistencies and questions.
If a man wants to complain about the God of the Bible and his actions, atleast let him understand what the Bible has to say in its entirity about that God. You have no clue what I do or do not understand. Stop pretending you do. I understand, I just don't agree with your justification of your religious book or of your god. Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given. For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. Dr. Carl Sagan
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024