Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   My Beliefs- GDR
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 256 of 1324 (700785)
06-07-2013 8:53 AM
Reply to: Message 255 by Faith
06-07-2013 7:41 AM


Re: Blackstone
Faith writes:
There are many elements of the law conceived from a Biblical perspective that also would be acceptable in a purely secular context
You have it the wrong way round. Laws against murder, theft, rape etc etc existed pre-bible and exist in all developed societies regardless of belief system. We don't need the bible to tell us that we need a law against them - we have a law because it would harm us not to.
as well as particular laws needed by a particular Christian society that perhaps don't have a clearcut Biblical basis
Please show us the laws that have a clear-cut biblical basis.
Since he was writing a commentary it would make no sense that he was imposing his own biblical perspective on a nonbiblical legal system.
And yet that is exactly what he was doing - forcing the law to fit his beliefs.
And again, at least with respect to US law, which was originally based on Blackstone, it is no longer Biblical and Blackstone no longer applies.
NO! US law was based on English Law which is secular and was only ever biblical when it dealt with extreme superstition and prejudice - allowing atrocities like the burning of witches and heretics and the criminalisation of homosexuals.
Thank god we're getting over it now.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by Faith, posted 06-07-2013 7:41 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 257 by Faith, posted 06-07-2013 9:09 AM Tangle has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 257 of 1324 (700787)
06-07-2013 9:09 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by Tangle
06-07-2013 8:53 AM


Re: Blackstone
So you've got your secular law, hooray, and so do we in the US and everybody's really happy Blackstone is out. Except some of us like me but we don't count. Blackstone's views were once admired in both countries I think, not regarded as imposing Biblical concepts without warrant, but oh well.
Anyway this all started with my comment that Blackstone could probably illuminate how the Old Testament stoning laws might apply in a modern nation, which I still suppose is the case.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Tangle, posted 06-07-2013 8:53 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by Tangle, posted 06-07-2013 10:14 AM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 258 of 1324 (700791)
06-07-2013 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 255 by Faith
06-07-2013 7:41 AM


The Bible says God is not needed.
When it comes to proper behavior, morality, laws, justice, right and wrong the Bible says that God says we don't need God or Moses or Jesus or even the Bible.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by Faith, posted 06-07-2013 7:41 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 259 by Faith, posted 06-07-2013 9:20 AM jar has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 259 of 1324 (700793)
06-07-2013 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 258 by jar
06-07-2013 9:17 AM


Re: The Bible says God is not needed.
Funny I thought the Bible said we need government because of lawbreakers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by jar, posted 06-07-2013 9:17 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by jar, posted 06-07-2013 9:24 AM Faith has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 260 of 1324 (700794)
06-07-2013 9:24 AM
Reply to: Message 259 by Faith
06-07-2013 9:20 AM


Re: The Bible says God is not needed.
What does that have to do with what I said?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by Faith, posted 06-07-2013 9:20 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by Faith, posted 06-07-2013 9:50 AM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 261 of 1324 (700798)
06-07-2013 9:50 AM
Reply to: Message 260 by jar
06-07-2013 9:24 AM


Re: The Bible says God is not needed.
Sorry, jar, I don't know what it has to do with what you said. I have no idea what I meant or you meant. I'm tired, back to bed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by jar, posted 06-07-2013 9:24 AM jar has seen this message but not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 262 of 1324 (700799)
06-07-2013 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 257 by Faith
06-07-2013 9:09 AM


Re: Blackstone
Given that he lived in the 1700s where you could get hung for looking sideways at a pork chop, he probably could.
Thank god we've progressed since then.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by Faith, posted 06-07-2013 9:09 AM Faith has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 263 of 1324 (700810)
06-07-2013 12:20 PM
Reply to: Message 250 by GDR
06-06-2013 10:03 AM


GDR writes:
IMHO it is very clear that the Gospel writers believed what they wrote.
Why does their belief have to be literally true? And why isn't it clear that the Old Testament writers believed what they wrote?
GDR writes:
I just don't see any reasonable argument that they didn't believe the essence of what they were writing about.
It also depends on what "essence" means. The essence of Robinson Crusoe isn't that the character Robinson Crusoe actually existed. Why does the essence of the gospel have to be that Jesus existed? Why can't the essence of Genesis be that the world is 6000 years old?
GDR writes:
I agree. Before you can accept the resurrection as possible you have to be willing to accept the possibility of theistic beliefs.
I do accept the possibility of theistic beliefs. I also accept the possibility of nuclear fusion as an economical energy supply. I also accept the possibility of Bigfoot. What I don't accept is the reality of any of those things - beause there is no evidence at this time that any of those things exist. If evidence for any of them is discovered, I'll be glad to accept them.
The problem is that theistic believers tend to define any possible evidence out of existence: "God can not be detected by material means." You're condemning your belief to perpetually be a belief that can never become a fact.
GDR writes:
Well for one thing the flood, young earth etc are verifiable.
Resurrection is also verifiable. If it can ignore the laws of nature, so can the flood.
GDR writes:
Also the stories of the resurrection were written from the accounts of eye witnesses at a time.
The flood account had to originate from eyewitness accounts too (unless it was inspired by God directly into Moses' brain). And eyewitness accounts are known to be the least reliable form of evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by GDR, posted 06-06-2013 10:03 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 270 by GDR, posted 06-10-2013 2:25 PM ringo has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 264 of 1324 (700870)
06-08-2013 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 250 by GDR
06-06-2013 10:03 AM


Yes there is very likely some embellishment in some of the accounts that would have grown over time.
Seems like there was embellishing in 4 of the 12 Gospels - which coincidentally were the specific 4 Gospels chosen by the Council of Nicea. That kind of ruins the story of Jesus, if in fact such a person actually existed.
There's also the blatant plagiarism. The story of "Jesus" mimics the same story of a number of other gods.
- Oni
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by GDR, posted 06-06-2013 10:03 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by Faith, posted 06-08-2013 3:47 PM onifre has replied
 Message 271 by GDR, posted 06-10-2013 2:36 PM onifre has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 265 of 1324 (700876)
06-08-2013 3:47 PM
Reply to: Message 264 by onifre
06-08-2013 1:09 PM


No, the fact is that the pagan stories mimic Jesus. The Messiah was prophesied all the way back in Eden and everybody knew the prophecy. All the pagan religions produced their own version of the Messiah that was prophesied either hoping to fulfill the prophecy or hoping to derail it one or the other. Jesus is the only one who actually met the requirements, who was God in the flesh, whose death did actually pay for sin, who did miracles only God could do.
Also the canon was chosen by men guided by the Holy Spirit, who were capable of weeding out the false writings from the true. And the writings were not merely chosen by the Councils -- and not a single Council -- every Council drew up their own list of canonical writings -- but the usage of the writings in the many churches as chosen by Holy Spirit led people was the basis for the ultimate choice.
I gotta add here: Really, you'd think that the illustrious history of Christianity which at least since the Protestant Reformation built the civilized and prosperous west, which produced great men and thinkers, you'd think they deserve a little respect and just the tiniest suspicion that maybe the religion they accepted was what they said it is and not what the latest debunker says it is.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by onifre, posted 06-08-2013 1:09 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by onifre, posted 06-09-2013 12:22 PM Faith has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


(1)
Message 266 of 1324 (700915)
06-09-2013 12:22 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by Faith
06-08-2013 3:47 PM


No, the fact is that the pagan stories mimic Jesus.
Born of a virgin, 12 deciples, died on a cross, cured the blind, rose from the dead 3 days later, are not unique to Jesus AND are in stories about gods that pre-date Jesus by a thousand years.
The Messiah was prophesied all the way back in Eden and everybody knew the prophecy.
These gods weren't Messiahs, nor were they claimed to be. They were the gods of the Greeks and the Egyptians, etc. (like the story of Gilgamesh) that were written way before the Old Testament was written. Anyone studying this can see, being that the Hebrews were slaves of these people, where the Hebrews got their stories from.
Also the canon was chosen by men guided by the Holy Spirit
Why? Because they said so?
And the writings were not merely chosen by the Councils -- and not a single Council -- every Council drew up their own list of canonical writings -- but the usage of the writings in the many churches as chosen by Holy Spirit led people was the basis for the ultimate choice.
These people had their orders, to choose the Gospels that made Jesus look like a god rather than an average man. Which wasn't the case with the other Gospels who spoke of him being a regular guy.
The ones that were chosen were chosen because Constantine needed a way to control the people - the pagans and jews and "others".
Really, you'd think that the illustrious history of Christianity which at least since the Protestant Reformation built the civilized and prosperous west, which produced great men and thinkers, you'd think they deserve a little respect and just the tiniest suspicion that maybe the religion they accepted was what they said it is and not what the latest debunker says it is.
I'm just going by the evidence. If the evidence proves them to be full of shit, as it does, then too bad.
I mean frankly, you're only placing your faith in what men have told you. You haven't seen anything! You read a book, believed what it says with zero evidence to support - forget everything else - that Jesus existed for realz, and rose from the dead? Really? Because a book says that a few people claim to have seen that? Are you serious? Sorry, but I can't take beliefs like that serious.
- Oni
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by Faith, posted 06-08-2013 3:47 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by Faith, posted 06-09-2013 9:04 PM onifre has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 267 of 1324 (700948)
06-09-2013 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 266 by onifre
06-09-2013 12:22 PM


You're not going by evidence, you're going by deep deep prejudice.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 266 by onifre, posted 06-09-2013 12:22 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by onifre, posted 06-10-2013 9:30 AM Faith has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 268 of 1324 (700981)
06-10-2013 9:30 AM
Reply to: Message 267 by Faith
06-09-2013 9:04 PM


You're not going by evidence, you're going by deep deep prejudice.
I'm just going by what is written about previous gods: all born as the "son of god" or Zeus, many born from a virgin, they share similar life stories with Buddism and Hindus, and their deaths are all quite similar - to include being judged for claiming to be the son of god. And of course we know that coming back from the grave is nothing unique to Jesus.
So, I don't know what I'm being prejudice toward. I'm simply looking at the history and evidence.
- Oni
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by Faith, posted 06-09-2013 9:04 PM Faith has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 269 of 1324 (700999)
06-10-2013 2:00 PM
Reply to: Message 252 by Faith
06-06-2013 9:11 PM


Re: murder versus justice
Faith writes:
My point is that Bible believers who believe in the Bible as entirely God's word go back 2000 years. While you will find heretics of many sorts here and there in that history, and the entire apostate RCC system as well, the "Biblical scholars" you are talking about who deny the inerrancy of the Bible are all modernists and liberals whose traditions are no more than a couple hundred years old. Even the RCC up until recently regarded the Bible as God's inerrant word, although they put their traditions on the same level of authority with it.
Firstly you apply your own definition of what it means to be a Bible believer. I'm a Bible believer but I certainly don't understand the Bible the way you do.
Go through the NT and look at how many times that Jesus, His questioners and then later on Paul refer to the wirter of their scriptures as Moses. They don't say that God told us this in the scriptures. They simply say that Moses said..... Are you saying that Moses was also inerrant?
It isn't a modernist position. Even Josephus writes that Moses wrote great metaphors.
Your definition of heretic is someone who disagrees with you. I would suggest that a heretic is someone who believes that God ordered genocide as well as ordering His followers to get together and stone people to death for minor offences.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by Faith, posted 06-06-2013 9:11 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by Faith, posted 06-10-2013 4:35 PM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 270 of 1324 (701002)
06-10-2013 2:25 PM
Reply to: Message 263 by ringo
06-07-2013 12:20 PM


GDR writes:
IMHO it is very clear that the Gospel writers believed what they wrote.
ringo writes:
Why does their belief have to be literally true? And why isn't it clear that the Old Testament writers believed what they wrote?
I see it this way. In many cases in the OT there what was written was an historical account where there was a specific political agenda at work, such as in Kings. In other cases it was a case of people, who may or may not have believed what they wrote but their understanding of God was through revelation filtered through their personal and cultural biases.
In the case of the NT they were being spoken to through a flesh and blood human being in Jesus who had His message confirmed as being directly from God as confirmed by His resurrection. That again does not mean that they got it all recorded perfectly but when it is read as a whole the message is clear and straight forward, and the one ting that it is clear that it all hangs on is the bodily resurrection of Jesus.
Faith writes:
It also depends on what "essence" means. The essence of Robinson Crusoe isn't that the character Robinson Crusoe actually existed. Why does the essence of the gospel have to be that Jesus existed? Why can't the essence of Genesis be that the world is 6000 years old?
There was never any claim that Robinson Crusoe was anything but fiction and nobody ever based their understanding of life on it. I would say that the essence of Genesis is that we are created beings and that there is a standard of behaviour that we should adhere to.
ringo writes:
I do accept the possibility of theistic beliefs. I also accept the possibility of nuclear fusion as an economical energy supply. I also accept the possibility of Bigfoot. What I don't accept is the reality of any of those things - beause there is no evidence at this time that any of those things exist. If evidence for any of them is discovered, I'll be glad to accept them.
The problem is that theistic believers tend to define any possible evidence out of existence: "God can not be detected by material means." You're condemning your belief to perpetually be a belief that can never become a fact.
There are any number of historical events that can't be proven as fact. but we believe them. Beliefs can be factual correct even if they can't be proven.
ringo writes:
Resurrection is also verifiable. If it can ignore the laws of nature, so can the flood.
How is resurrection verifiabl?. If a world-wide flood had occurred it could be proven by the geological record, even if the laws of nature had been broken to cause it.
ringo writes:
The flood account had to originate from eyewitness accounts too (unless it was inspired by God directly into Moses' brain). And eyewitness accounts are known to be the least reliable form of evidence.
Why are eyewitness accounts the least reliable. Sure you can have people argue about the details of an accident but they will all agree that an accident happened.
There probably is some basis of truth to the flood stories that as you know is in other ancient writings and it grew from there. We all have our beliefs.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 263 by ringo, posted 06-07-2013 12:20 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 334 by ringo, posted 06-13-2013 12:56 PM GDR has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024