Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Tribute Thread For the Recently Raptured Faith
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 661 of 1677 (841677)
10-18-2018 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 649 by Phat
10-17-2018 7:55 AM


Re: Understanding Belief Amongst Reality
Phat writes:
Percy writes:
Phat says that if something bad happens then it's our fault or at least we deserved it. If something good happens, God did it.
Is that how I come across?
Yes, that's how you come across, because you said, "It's never God that's the problem." This is similar to Faith's position concerning the Bible, that nothing bad described in the Bible is ever God's fault because God can only do good and so if it's God's fault then it must be good, but you have applied it to what is happening today. Hurricane Michael blasts Florida? Not God's problem, those people must have sinned, so the hurricane is a good thing. Gay people discriminated against? Not God's problem, homosexuality is a sin, so the discrimination is a good thing. Plus homosexuals should feel guilty about just being who they are, God insists on that.
I will fall back on the position that God is somewhat more complex than what we humans can understand,...
Based on what evidence?
...but I would imagine that He wants to commune with us and interact at some level...
Still no evidence, though now you're being much less declarative.
---I am not a Deist.
Quite clearly.
I may have gone off a bit harshly on Faith, but hers is not the only voice of reason and truth contained here...
There is no voice of reason and truth here, but some do do less well at achieving it than others.
God could be said to be responsible for all that happens in that He is the Creator.
I suppose it could be argued that *if* God created everything then he's responsible for everything that happened after creation, but what evidence is there that God created anything, let alone everything, or even exists? Faith applied this thinking:
These beliefs that I hold true based on my interpretation of the Bible mean the rapture will happen soon.
But though there was no rapture there was no adjustment in Faith's thinking. That's because what she believes has not emerged from a process of gathering and analyzing facts.
And yet can we humans indict Him?
You could as well indict leprechauns.
Are we not free moral agents capable of saying and doing what we choose?
Of course, and anyone that wants to indict fictional beings is free to do so.
And even if we could indict Him, how on earth (or in heaven) would we sentence Him?
Uh, the same way you'd sentence a leprechaun?
All that we can be responsible or sovereign over are our own choices and decisions.
Right again.
If something good happens, we can choose to credit God or fate and chance, though I believe that there really is no such thing---it too being a belief.
I agree. I think it's a pretty safe bet that whatever happens, good or bad, followed the laws of physics and had nothing to do with God or fate or chance (except at the quantum level).
And the same goes for if something bad happens. Blaming God may make humans feel less responsible, but we do have a degree of responsibility in every daily decision within our control...such as global warming, for example. Granted we may have a minuscule percentage of responsibility, but blaming God is similar to blaming reality....it goes nowhere.
I again agree (though not about global warming). You seem just a single step away from Letting Go of God, which is a one woman show by Julia Sweeney, apparently now available on YouTube. This one is audio only:
This one is a poor quality video (maybe that's why they haven't been forced to take it down), but I like it better:
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 649 by Phat, posted 10-17-2018 7:55 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 662 by mike the wiz, posted 10-19-2018 6:17 AM Percy has replied
 Message 663 by Phat, posted 10-19-2018 9:35 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 666 of 1677 (841694)
10-19-2018 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 662 by mike the wiz
10-19-2018 6:17 AM


Re: Understanding Belief Amongst Reality
mike the wiz writes:
First of all if something good happens, it doesn't follow that it was from God. Secondly it doesn't follow that if something bad happened it is not from God.
You're arguing with the wrong person - those are Phat's and Faith's views.
The true issue is that you are using the terms, "good," and "bad" according to an objective standard which your own ideology says does not exist. (contradiction)
Again, talk to Phat and Faith.
In fact a correct understanding of biblical theology isn't that God cannot do something that from a sinner's relative perspective, is "bad". The bible says that God is light and in Him is no darkness whatsoever. (1.John.1) This means there are no dark motives in God.
So then if God does something bad, you believe that it must follow that He is bad. But if God does something which is PERCEIVED as bad, logically it can only follow that He does it for GOOD reasons.
And now you're saying something very close to Phat's and Faith's views, that if God does it must be good.
But the problem is the secularist, the non-believer, seems to think God is working good for all people, but in fact it says God only works good from bad things for those who know and love God. His people.
His people? Like you, you mean? You've elected yourself one of God's people? You think you belong to an entity that can't even be shown to exist? Who when people try to follow his guidebook (the Bible, in case there was any doubt) they come up with wrong answers time and again, then never modify or even question their beliefs, proof that their beliefs do not derive from any facts of the real world, nor even of their supposed spiritual world.
So then when a hurricane happens, that is not caused by God, but in fact only represents His PERMISSIVE will. The results of a fallen world have been allowed to UNFOLD by God because mankind chose to go it alone without God.
This disagrees with Phat, so you'll have to settle it with him. He believes that God created everything and is responsible for everything, though he also called that belief pointless and identical to reality.
Percy writes:
Hurricane Michael blasts Florida? Not God's problem, those people must have sinned, so the hurricane is a good thing
No, Jesus said that when the tower fell in his day it was NOT because the people had some special sin worse than other people. (He implied it was random)
That would represent a GROSS DISTORTION of the Christian position. I propose this is merely how you PERCEIVE what Christians believe. That is because you can't have any concept of the spiritual because as the bible says, the natural man can't discern spiritual things.
Since "you can't have any concept of the spiritual," you've just admitted you have no idea one way or the other.
So it's not that it's "not God's problem" it's that God has chosen to not save people from the hurricane because as Jesus said, because of an unbelieving world, the world will get worse and worse, and these things will continue. So it would be a contradiction of Christ's words if all bad weather was stopped when He predicted it would continue and get worse.
You're again arguing against Phat's view. God created everything and is responsible for everything.
People died and were sick WHEN Jesus was one earth. But He did heal people, and if God is FOR sickness, then why would He heal people through Christ? (a contradiction)?
He didn't. Neither he nor his son exist.
No it's not a good thing that a hurricane happened, but if unbelievers turn to God and say "please stop this" that's hypocrisy. Humans have a long history of only turning to God when they're in trouble.
And what of all the people affected by the Hurricane who sincerely worship God everyday?
God has made His plan clear.
God has made his plan so clear that there are countless Christian sects.
So when a "bad" thing happens, there isn't necessarily any moral evil tied to it. A natural disaster is a random event, it had nothing to do with God unless He specifically claims it such as with Noah's flood.
This argues against Faith's view, which is that God can only do good, so in those cases where God does something evil because it was done in judgment it was actually good.
Also, God is "not a man" (numbers 23),...
God is not anything but an invention of man.
...meaning we cannot attach a human, relative moral system to God. Nowhere does it say that God can't kill for example. That would be absurd to say "it is immoral for the one who created all to destroy it." LOL. what a simplistic viewpoint, so typical of relative moralists, who basically think their own set of relative opinions are some type of objectively perfect standard.
You're not arguing against anything anybody has said here. You are rebutting a view you've introduced yourself
Percy writes:
Based on what evidence?
The only evidence we have for God's character is from scripture.
Your evidence is a book of myths, often with background settings and people chosen from the real world.
So then an infinite mind, with infinite imagination can't even be grasped. From Isaiah where it says, "His understanding is unsearchable" (paraphrase)
You sure seem to know a lot about this infinite mind that "can't even be grasped."
It also says in the same book. "for my ways are not your ways nor are your thoughts my thoughts, for as the heavens are higher than the earth so are my thoughts higher than your thoughts." (paraphrase).
So then it seems a pretty obvious inference that what Phat said would be true, God's motives, desires, plans and thoughts are way beyond man.
I think you've finally got something Phat believes right.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 662 by mike the wiz, posted 10-19-2018 6:17 AM mike the wiz has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 684 of 1677 (841733)
10-20-2018 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 663 by Phat
10-19-2018 9:35 AM


Re: Understanding Belief Amongst Reality
Phat writes:
Percy writes:
I think it's a pretty safe bet that whatever happens, good or bad, followed the laws of physics and had nothing to do with God or fate or chance (except at the quantum level).
That's a problem right there. Chance and Evidence are the two points of contention that I have with your take on reality.
What's your take on reality, Phat? Which of these is reality:
I have explained before how I do not believe that chance exists except as a definite probability. A finite calculation. A measurable calculation, rather than some whimsical event that occurs totally at random with no measurable quantifier.
I liked the way you expressed it earlier ("If something good happens, we can choose to credit God or fate and chance, though I believe that there really is no such thing---it too being a belief."), which is why I said I agree. Now you've reexpressed this in a way I'm not sure I can agree with because it's unclear what you mean. It's possible you've said nothing meaningful.
As for evidence, scientists keep bringing it up as if it is always available in objectively measurable ways.
No they don't. Why would you say this?
An absence of evidence does not inevitably lead to evidence of absence...
Huh? Why would you say this? How many times have people said here that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence?
...unless rational belief is not part of your tool belt.
Rational beliefs are based upon evidence from the real world. Did you listen to Letting Go of God?
In which case we will never see eye to eye on any of these discussions.
There's enough ambiguity that I can't be sure, but it's possible you haven't said anything correct or meaningful in this post, that you're closer to the "not even wrong" category.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 663 by Phat, posted 10-19-2018 9:35 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 686 by Phat, posted 10-20-2018 4:39 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 687 of 1677 (841739)
10-20-2018 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 676 by Phat
10-20-2018 2:40 PM


Re: God's Justice
This one is so out there that I'm going to reply now before reading to the end of the thread.
And yet everyone does this all the time. You can't have a scientist around trailing you with a Geiger counter everytime you pick up a rock.
Of course, but if you have no Geiger counter than you can't reach any conclusions about the radioactivity of the rock. In other words, if you have no evidence then you can reach no conclusions. If you're reaching conclusions in the absence of evidence, if you're saying to yourself, "I have no evidence but I deeply feel the need for answers and so I'm going to reach some conclusions anyway," then you're just fooling yourself.
When you drive down an unfamiliar road, you make choices on where to turn.
In some cases you are wrong.
If you made your choice with no evidence, then of course you could be wrong. Say you're trying to get to town and you come to a fork in the road and there are no signs, no compass, no hint of which way town lies. You have no evidence of which is the correct way, so no matter which choice you make of course you could be wrong. That's just common sense.
There are maps available, but not all of them are descriptive of the territory ahead...but as we live and walk through the territory, we choose which maps to use in the future. You chose a different map than I (and other believers ) chose...but it is, in the end, YOUR map...it need not be everyone's map. I have seen many maps describing the Bible...some dismiss it and others corroborate parts of it....but it is my decision which mapmakers to listen to. I indeed do validate my own perceptions and live with the decisions.
I think what you're trying to say is that there are many ways to find a path across a territory, just as there are many ways to find your way through the Bible. But for some reason you don't describe, the particular path you've chosen across either a territory or the Bible is important to you, and you disavow any others.
You can call this path your map if you like, but once someone has discovered that their chosen map doesn't lead to the rapture when they thought it did, shouldn't they update their map?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 676 by Phat, posted 10-20-2018 2:40 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 688 of 1677 (841740)
10-20-2018 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 679 by Phat
10-20-2018 3:23 PM


Re: God's Justice
Phat writes:
It is the same with the Bible. Some, such as Richard carrier, have brought forth cases that show Jesus to be a myth and the motivations for writing the Bible to be political and partisan motivated. Others disagree. Both sides have data.
Data for the existence of Jesus? I don't think so. The Bible describes Jesus causing a magnitude of unrest in the region that chroniclers of the period could not have failed to notice. That they don't mention him speaks volumes.
In the end, it is our free choice what to believe. I chose Low Carb.
A wise choice based upon evidence.
I will defend that choice against any argument.
There is a growing body of evidence that will help you defend your position.
Do I have a bias? Yes, in the sense that I try and avoid excessive medications....but also realizing that my choice involves a degree of personal responsibility and discipline.
Yes, you have a bias, but not in the way you describe. You have a bias in favor of listening to the evidence.
My point is that at this point in time, no one side can claim the final say in verifiable data nor in the results of subjective experiences.
You've just run off the rails by drawing a false equivalence between evidence-based decision making and subjective judgment.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 679 by Phat, posted 10-20-2018 3:23 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 689 of 1677 (841742)
10-20-2018 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 686 by Phat
10-20-2018 4:39 PM


Re: Understanding Belief Amongst Reality
Phat writes:
All that I mean is that chance has to be measurable...such as lottery probabilities...rather than arbitrary...
For whatever reason, you have become more declarative and specific recently, and consequently have more often been clearly wrong. Chance does not have to be measurable. There's a probability of precipitation tomorrow. That probability was not measured and is not measurable. It was estimated.
That the probability isn't accurately measurable but is only estimated does not mean it is arbitrary.
...such as "the universe occurred by chance"...which is not measurable nor quantifiable.
That the universe is the result of chance quantum fluctuations is a hypothesis. If the hypothesis proves true then the probability of this past event is likely not measurable after all this time and due to incompleteness of data (there is far more of the universe that can't be observed than can), but it's not impossible that it could be quantifiable by theoretical means. This is all very speculative, but the larger point is that you're wrong about what is measurable or quantifiable.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 686 by Phat, posted 10-20-2018 4:39 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 706 of 1677 (842344)
10-29-2018 8:26 PM
Reply to: Message 700 by Faith
10-29-2018 3:27 PM


Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
Faith writes:
Yet they were punished for not doing it:
They were punished for lying about it.
These stories are made up anyway, but could you quote the Bible passage where Ananias and Sapphira tell this lie?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 700 by Faith, posted 10-29-2018 3:27 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 711 by Faith, posted 10-30-2018 2:53 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 714 of 1677 (842394)
10-30-2018 5:18 PM
Reply to: Message 711 by Faith
10-30-2018 2:53 PM


Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
Faith writes:
They were in the wrong for keeping back part of the money too because everyone else was giving all of theirs but as Peter says in Acts 5:4 they had the right to the land and the money and had no need to lie about their choice to keep back part, they lied to make themselves look good.
Act 5:1 But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession,...etc...
I had already read the beginning of Act 5, and the end of Act 4 as well, when I asked you to quote the Bible passage where Ananias and Sapphira tell this lie. You still haven't done it, since Ananias never said a word before he "gave up the ghost." Only Sapphira lied.
I'm in effect making the same point as Ringo - people see what they want in the Bible, whether it is there or not.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Clarify.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 711 by Faith, posted 10-30-2018 2:53 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 722 by Faith, posted 10-31-2018 11:50 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 734 of 1677 (842454)
10-31-2018 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 722 by Faith
10-31-2018 11:50 AM


Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
Faith writes:
I had already read the beginning of Act 5, and the end of Act 4 as well, when I asked you to quote the Bible passage where Ananias and Sapphira tell this lie. You still haven't done it, since Ananias never said a word before he "gave up the ghost." Only Sapphira lied.
But the narrator, the writer of the Book of Acts, Luke, and Peter, both say he'd lied,...
That's like saying both Charles Dickens and Sydney Carton said, "It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done." Peter is merely a character in Luke's tale, even Luke's authorship is of questionable provenance, and you cannot quote any Bible passage where Ananias tells a lie.
...so just because Ananias himself says nothing at that point we know he lied. Unless you are calling Luke and Peter liars instead.
I'm not calling anybody anything. I'm saying that much of the Bible is a work of fiction written for religious purposes, and that you're mistakenly claiming it says something that it does not.
Besides which, he DID "give up the ghost" as punishment for lying,...
Again, then quote where he lies.
...and if he hadn't lied he wouldn't have lost his life for it.
He only lost his life in the same sense that Sydney Carton lost his.
I'm in effect making the same point as Ringo - people see what they want in the Bible, whether it is there or not.
Certainly seems to me that unbelievers do that a lot, but I can't see any motive whatever for a believer to "want" to see anything in particular in the Bible since the Bible is our source of knowledge of God.
I can't speak to the motivations of any individual Christian's interpretation, but interpretations do certainly vary else there wouldn't be so many Christian sects. The interpretational differences are so severe that you don't even believe Catholics are Christian.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 722 by Faith, posted 10-31-2018 11:50 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 739 by Faith, posted 11-02-2018 7:43 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 741 of 1677 (842581)
11-03-2018 8:18 AM
Reply to: Message 739 by Faith
11-02-2018 7:43 PM


Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
Faith writes:
People who think the Bible is fictional have no sense whatever of what it takes to write fiction, no sense of the different qualities of fiction versus reportage etc.
Thinking the Bible inerrant shows an inability to distinguish fact from fantasy.
The point we were discussing, the one you're ignoring, is that you cannot quote any Biblical passage where Ananias lies. All you can do is make up things that aren't there. Your reasoning is, "The Bible is inerrant, this passage would make no sense unless Ananias lied, so therefore he must have lied but Like chose not to mention it." But we know the Bible we have is not inerrant, and there is no evidence that the originals were free of error, either (and in any case they are not available) - that's just something you believe, or in the case of the Chicago Statement, something they affirm without evidence. Your fantasy that there's such a thing as inerrancy causes you to ignore other possibilities, such as that Ananias didn't lie and Peter was wrong to say he did, or that the author erred, or that the account is a work of fiction.
The story itself gives a horrible impression of the early church, where breaking a promise to the church community is punishable by death carried out personally by God himself. These are two reasons for not believing it: it's obviously made up to scare church members, and if there were such a thing as a loving God he wouldn't murder people, and especially not for minor transgressions. He set a pretty low bar - if the penalty for breaking a promise is death, then what greater penalty could he find for major transgressions like murder?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 739 by Faith, posted 11-02-2018 7:43 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 742 by GDR, posted 11-03-2018 1:21 PM Percy has replied
 Message 743 by Faith, posted 11-03-2018 3:46 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 749 of 1677 (842627)
11-04-2018 9:43 AM
Reply to: Message 742 by GDR
11-03-2018 1:21 PM


Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
GDR writes:
As we all agree, the writer of Acts also compiled the Gospel of Luke. He is using written documents or material from the oral tradition in order to provide an accurate account.
I agree except about Luke producing an accurate account. They is no way to confirm almost anything he says, and parts of his theology are at odds with Paul's.
The Jews at the time were clear, as some cultures still are today, that blaspheme is punishable by death.
Even if the story of Ananias and Sapphira were true, they didn't commit blasphemy.
We can see that in Saul’s part in the stoning to death of Stephen.
But Stephen was charged with blasphemy. Ananias and Sapphira were not.
It is also the main charge against Jesus that resulted in His crucifixion.
But Jesus was charged with blasphemy. Ananias and Sapphira were not.
This would have been considered as a very serious charge against Ananias and Sapphira, which deserved death.
Ananias and Sapphira were not charged with blasphemy. I really enjoyed this broken English explanation of why Ananias and Sapphira did not commit blasphemy.
They would have believed that they deserved death and so they carried out the execution believing that this was God’s will.
Your use of pronouns makes it unclear who you're talking about. Is "they" Ananias and Sapphira, or is it Paul and the other apostles? Do the two they's refer to the same people, or different people?
This would likely quickly have become an act of God that killed them, and that is how it wound up being recorded in Acts.
So I feel that part of my interpretation of what you mean is guesswork, but you seem to be saying that someone killed Ananias and Sapphira, and that the story evolved over time to become that God had killed them.
Naturally I believe you're overthinking this. In my view the story is apocryphal rather than relating an actual event.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 742 by GDR, posted 11-03-2018 1:21 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 750 by GDR, posted 11-04-2018 11:02 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 751 of 1677 (842640)
11-04-2018 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 750 by GDR
11-04-2018 11:02 AM


Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
GDR writes:
My thought isn't that they were executed and the story evolved from there, but that the apostles claimed it to be God's will that they be executed, and so it isn't that great a stretch to see it evolving to the idea that God killed them.
The apostles murdered a married couple?
Well, true or not, whatever really happened, the story paints a horrible and murderous picture of the early church.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 750 by GDR, posted 11-04-2018 11:02 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 752 by PaulK, posted 11-04-2018 12:43 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 756 by GDR, posted 11-04-2018 4:45 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 753 of 1677 (842643)
11-04-2018 12:59 PM
Reply to: Message 743 by Faith
11-03-2018 3:46 PM


Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
Faith writes:
The fact that Luke the writer of Acts says Ananias lied and that Peter is quoted saying he lied are the evidence.
Why are you having trouble understanding that Peter is just a character in Luke's story? Author and character are not two different witnesses. When Luke relates that Peter said such and so, that doesn't mean that two people affirm what Peter said. And when you say that Luke said that Peter said such and so, that doesn't mean that three people affirm what Peter said. Why is this so difficult for you?
The point we were discussing, the one you're ignoring, is that you cannot quote any Biblical passage where Ananias lies. All you can do is make up things that aren't there. Your reasoning is, "The Bible is inerrant, this passage would make no sense unless Ananias lied, so therefore he must have lied but Like chose not to mention it." But we know the Bible we have is not inerrant, and there is no evidence that the originals were free of error, either (and in any case they are not available) - that's just something you believe, or in the case of the Chicago Statement, something they affirm without evidence. Your fantasy that there's such a thing as inerrancy causes you to ignore other possibilities, such as that Ananias didn't lie and Peter was wrong to say he did, or that the author erred, or that the account is a work of fiction.
The story itself gives a horrible impression of the early church, where breaking a promise to the church community is punishable by death carried out personally by God himself. These are two reasons for not believing it: it's obviously made up to scare church members, and if there were such a thing as a loving God he wouldn't murder people, and especially not for minor transgressions. He set a pretty low bar - if the penalty for breaking a promise is death, then what greater penalty could he find for major transgressions like murder?
Lying to the Holy Spirit is no minor offense.
You can't quote a passage where Ananias lied to anyone, and Sapphira lied to Peter, not the Holy Spirit:
quote:
Matthew 5: 7About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8Peter asked her, Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?
Yes, she said, that is the price.
I affirm to the Holy Spirit that I accept Jesus Christ into my heart as Lord and Savior. Gee, I'm still here.
Every time your religious beliefs are tested in the real world, such as claiming the rapture will occur on a certain date, or that lying the Holy Spirit is a capital offense, they fail.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 743 by Faith, posted 11-03-2018 3:46 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 760 by Faith, posted 11-04-2018 4:56 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 764 of 1677 (842674)
11-04-2018 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 755 by Phat
11-04-2018 4:04 PM


Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
You're replying to Ringo's Message 754 but actually quoting and responding to his Message 283, which you already replied to twice about a month and a half ago. Way to be confusing.
Phat writes:
Phat writes:
Im just telling you that messenger and message are equally important...
ringo writes:
Think about what you're saying. The letter and the envelope are equally important?
The envelope contains the letter. The letter is from someone who put it in the envelope.
The messenger contains the message. The message is from Someone Who put It In The Messenger.
You cant simply claim that any envelope can just as easily hold your letter. One envelope addressed to YOU was sent.
One Messenger sent to "whosoever" was sent. The messenger is the message, for the messenger contains the message. Now that we have that out of the way......
Except in the case of a person speaking his message, such as in your Churchill video, or in the case of a person writing a message and then delivering it himself, the composer of the message is not also the messenger. A common saying makes the other context clear: "Don't blame me, I'm just the messenger."
Given that you're responding to a message from so long ago, I can't figure out what you're getting at.
Sounds like a club I wouldn't necessarily favor joining...kinda like joining the Navy Seals or the Marines. You claim that I want to belong to a club where I don't even accept the message. But this is not true.
I'd say it another way than Ringo. Significant parts of your religion's message are toxic for you, but you're sticking with it anyway because you can't imagine doing anything else. Imagine no religion, no heaven, no hell, no arbitrary rules of right and wrong.
I'm not as stingy as you think...I'm just selective over how I give. Granted I don't give enough. I'm scared of being broke. I don't trust that I will be taken care of.
Financial stuff is no joke. Take care of yourself first. You probably give too much, half the charities out there are probably mismanaged, and a good proportion of the ministries out there asking you to send them money are frauds. You are old enough to remember the heyday of the religious fraudsters, like Jim Bakker and Jimmy Swaggert. If you're giving away any meaningful amount of money then you're probably being played.
AbE:
If you haven't already watched this, watch it now:
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : AbE.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 755 by Phat, posted 11-04-2018 4:04 PM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 766 of 1677 (842689)
11-05-2018 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 756 by GDR
11-04-2018 4:45 PM


Re: Giving It All Up and Urging Everyone To Do Likewise
GDR writes:
Percy writes:
The apostles murdered a married couple?
I know, but I don't find it that surprising.
You don't find it surprising that the followers of Jesus murdered a married couple? I think most people, believers and non-believers alike, would think your analysis has gone off the deep end. Doesn't it make much, much more sense that the story was apocryphal and intended to serve as an object lesson about the importance of sharing the gifts of your life with the church?
We see in Acts 1 that the first apostles were still thinking that now that Jesus is back that he would lead a revolution to get rid of the Romans. As we can see all through the Gospels these guys were very slow to understand that a revolution was to be fought with entirely different weapons that what they envisioned. As I said earlier this still around the time that Saul was involved in the stoning of Stephen.
If by "involved" you mean a participant, I think it would be more accurate to say Paul was merely an approving observer.
But whatever misimpressions the apostles had of the nature of the battle for God's kingdom, murdering their fellow "soldiers" with no due process bears no resemblance to what happened to Stephen, and it is as far from Jesus's teachings as possible. His miracles restored health and life, not the opposite. The Apostles didn't need Paul's supposed letter to the Ephesians about the spiritual nature of the battle to know that murder was wrong. There might even be a commandment about it.
Percy writes:
Well, true or not, whatever really happened, the story paints a horrible and murderous picture of the early church.
Agreed
I don't see how you can feel that way and still be a member of such a religion.
I believe the story is made up. The true origins of the Christian church are buried in antiquity, including whether there was ever really a person named Jesus, let alone that he did all the things claimed.
I do think there was a person named Paul. Whatever the truth about Jesus, whether he was completely made up or was based on a real person (the Teacher of Righteousness perhaps) or was an actual person, it died with Paul.
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Grammar.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 756 by GDR, posted 11-04-2018 4:45 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 785 by GDR, posted 11-13-2018 4:27 PM Percy has replied
 Message 791 by Capt Stormfield, posted 11-13-2018 9:21 PM Percy has seen this message but 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