Biblical Flaws and Your Thoughts

Not sure if that was a joke, but it doesn't exsist :bugeye:

Edit: Never-mind you changed it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

All evidence pointed that the earth was flat until all evidence pointed otherwise. Think about it, if there is a God, anything that would point to Him would come from Him - on his terms - and would be comprehensible by everybody from the simplest earliest human to the last and wisest man on earth. But evidence isn't evidence until you recognize it.

"That, in a sense, means that you know everything. Because everything was written in that book the way it is."

That's not where everything we know comes from. The book didn't exist even after generations of believers. It points to things that were known before anybody thought to write them down. Everything we need to know is contained in love - we know how to love and experience love. We can know all there is to know about everything in the unverse, but if we don't know love we know nothing worth knowing. Sounds familiar?

You said you believe in nothing until evidence suggests it - so what evidence suggests there is something like love?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

All evidence did not point to the Earth being flat. It was just taken for granted until people started sailing in ships around the world.

So if God has done nothing, then God doesn't exist until he has done something.

Tell me, what evidence can I use to prove there is a God?

If everything you know is contained in love then you are part of the wrong religion. (cough hippie cough

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

) What do you learn from love? Will love teach you how to do basic math? Will it teach you to read and write? If everything in the universe can be learned about by love... Please tell me what is the biggest planet in the universe.

I don't understand what you are saying? Can you rephrase it?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Why did they take it for granted? Because they thought the way you think about God.

Not for us. We can only have knowledge of the things with which we have contact. If a thing never crosses any of our senses, we will remain unaware of it. The question is whether our five senses can describe everything there is to describe.

Yourself. You can't "wield" anything else that would bring you closer to knowing Him.

Not that kind of love. If you could refine love until it could apply to everything that is good and universally beneficial, you would be close to making a difference in the world. Knowledge makes no difference unless it's applied, application requires procedure, and procedure requires ethics. If you loved your parents you would not care whether they could do basic math or not. But you would learn maths quicker from someone who has patience than from someone who hates you. The biggest planet in the universe is just a name within another name within another name; the co-ordinates would not mean a thing until we find a telescope big enough to confirm it. What you want from me is a telescope strong enough to see God, when ironically your dependence on your senses is what could prevent you from seeing Him.

You said you only believe what evidence suggests. Prove to me that love exists. Or don't you think it does?

 

Teach on...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I don't take God not exsisting for granted. If I took anything for granted it would be that there was a God. I was brought up to believe in God, but I could see at once that the idea of one powerful God is not logical and against all evidence.

So if God has never crossed any of your five senses, then why do you assume he exsists.

So what can I do to bring myself close to God to prove he exsists?

You are redefining the word love to mean anything good. Hitler thought he was doing good by creating a Utopia on earth. If humans only loved they would die out of exsistence. The biggest, baddest creatures are the ones that are at the top of the food chain. So you are claiming that because nobody can sense God, that he must exsist? Please explain.

I should not be the one trying to prove anything. You are the one making claims about an omnipotent, omniescient being that exsists even though we have nothing to say that he does exsist. I will explain anyway... Love is all part of evolution. Which species would last longer? One that kills its young on sight? Or the one that cares for its young. Love is not always everything good as you defined it. If someone loves someone that dies, they may commit suicide. I'm not exactly sure what this "love" idea of yours is, but for me to comment on it, I will have to hear more about it.

 

What a wast of your time you don't have long, why would you reject someone who loves you, being christian isn't hard some of the things they did back then don't apply today some of it was their own personal beliefs God message is simple LOVE.

 

I don't have long to do what?

Who did I reject?

That's why people choose to believe fantasies over reality.

Christians still do things like that today. Priests molesting little boys? Priests shooting pro-choice believers?

Once again you confuse love with "everything good".

 

Depending on what you expect, all evidence could fit an almighty God as well. What happened is that people have become so alien to God that they assume God must be alien to everything else as well, which is simply not true. If God created nature, its laws, its dimensions - why would He have to overthrow or even manipulate it to do what He wants? Its dependence on God would be so "natural" that we wouldn't even recognize it. If everything were supernatural - how would we distinguish what was just natural?

Becuase all evidence points to the fact that who I am - my life, my thoughts, aren't just the "sum of my senses". Senses are just inputs sending information to my brain. I would still be sentient without them - although very limited. If we limit our thoughts to our sense, that's like shutting down the only sense that can come even close to experiencing God.

This is a similar question than the rich young man asked Jesus: How do I become part of the kingdom of God? The answer was Let go of everything you hold dear, and follow God. This doesn't mean go away and become a missionary, as some seem to think. It means submit everything you are - senses, thoughts, actions, property, ambition - to God. Practically, that means taking stock of your life and deciding whether you are serious about knowing God or not. Immediately God will be with you, but you might or might not realize this. It takes practise, but the result is like a veil being pulled from your eyes. It's also a bit traumatic, which is why you'll need people who love you. These people become an important point of reference.

The smallest most unexpected things become infused with meaning, and slowly you will start focussing on God and become a living representative of His existence. It happens frequently that people overcompensate, become overzealous or even self-righteous. But remember what I said above about nature: God created you as you are - He is not trying to change who you are, but educate you in knowledge of Him so that you can be true to yourself and to Him. You are already a miracle, so don't expect life to change or people to change miraculously. You will still be able to sin, but you will be more conscious of it. It is a constant struggle - and as you pointed out, priests and Christians are no less subject to corruption than anybody else. You will always have the chance to hold on to God or to let go, but even doubt becomes a learning experience. It's like pulling yourself up on a rope: there is no doubt you will fall back to where you were if you let go (to some that is a consoling thought), but soon you realize that the real doubt is not whether you are climbing, but where you are going and what you will leave behind.

You're right: "good" is not accurate enough either. The love I'm talking about is a cauldron filled with many ingredients in the right proportions, which will make you invincible like Asterix

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

You know what they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Love is not the goal, its the means. It does not prove God, its the way of getting to know Him.

I'm sure you are familiar with 1 Corinthians 13. If you're not, that's the kind of love I am talking about. Incidentally, the chapter also describes it as I described the experience of getting to know God.

That's the problem. You don't want to prove anything, therefore you can't prove that God exists. You are the only proof there will ever be - you yourself. Use it or lose it. You might be confusing the Bible's claims about God's omniscience and omnipotence with the classic Greek philosophical claims about "god". It's a common but major error. The Bible does not describe God as doing everything He is able to - only what needs to be done - or being everywhere He can be - only where He chooses to be. Likewise, whether love is part of evolution or part of you is up to you. There are many people who are good examples of love, who died under the injustice of people who were not. Natural selection favours might over right, and love is more a disadvantage in such situations than anything else. A person who loves his enemy is more likely to be killed by him than the other way around. It's really not a very efficient tool for survival, if you think about it. In fact, it's a bit "unnatural" compared to everything else.

If you love someone who died, you would have a choice between cherishing that love and keep on living it, or destroying it by killing yourself. There are many options, but they can't be isolated in a discussion like this. Generally, suicide is one of the most selfish acts a person can commit. The love I have in mind is not the selfish, instinctive possessiveness of nature - it is the kind of love that forms in a relationship with a total stranger, with sensitivity, patience and effort.

You can't prove love exists until someone loves you. If nobody loved you, it would still exist, but you would have no reason to believe in it. Even if you saw other people experience or display love, it will seem foreign, unnatural, and you might feel threatened, hostile, bitter or even jealous and sickened by them. But you will have no way of knowing it. I know the feeling, and that I can experience love from God is one of the strongest "proofs" I can think of. That is why it is called a "testimony": I can only tell you of such a love until you experience it yourself, but in the meantime it's your word against mine. The decision is up to you. The only way I or anyone could "convince" you that such a love exists is by showing it to you, but unfortunately that's not possible.

What's amazing about it, is that as you search for it you start knowing it. You know what you haven't found, and as you think about it you start to understand it and become able to have it. You never find it, and that enables you to have it. Faith in God is the same - it is a hope that you can know, give, understand and trust, even though you never find it. It is found only with God, in heaven - when the mage in the mirror becomes clear.

We have become separted from God, and He provided a way back toward getting to know Him - but it's on His terms. Read 1 Cor. 13 again and tell me if you understand me better now.

 

Re: Re: Biblical Flaws and Your Thoughts

Who said that the Bible is the Word, the Will, of, is Gods' Law,
God or Man.

Man is the Liar not God.

Anyone that has spoken to, for, in the name of God is a Liar.

Only Idolaters give names, definition to, carve, Fix, Impress Deeply into the Mind, False, make Manifest, create, Graven Images, Speak of the Material Reality, of Word, of God.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Depending on what you expect, all evidence could fit an almighty God as well. What happened is that people have become so alien to God that they assume God must be alien to everything else as well, which is simply not true. If God created nature, its laws, its dimensions - why would He have to overthrow or even manipulate it to do what He wants? Its dependence on God would be so "natural" that we wouldn't even recognize it. If everything were supernatural - how would we distinguish what was just natural?

All nature, its laws, and its dimensions could have been created without the help of a supernatural being. If we use Occam's Razor it would appear that the idea of a supernatural being creating nature and its laws is less likely to be true. It also doesn't help the case that currently no supernatural being has been proven to exist.


Becuase all evidence points to the fact that who I am - my life, my thoughts, aren't just the "sum of my senses". Senses are just inputs sending information to my brain. I would still be sentient without them - although very limited. If we limit our thoughts to our sense, that's like shutting down the only sense that can come even close to experiencing God.


If you had no taste, hearing, smell, vision, and touch, how would you still be sentient? Is communicating with God a sixth sense?

If nobody had ever told you that God existed would you be aware that there was a God?

This is a similar question than the rich young man asked Jesus: How do I become part of the kingdom of God? The answer was Let go of everything you hold dear, and follow God. This doesn't mean go away and become a missionary, as some seem to think. It means submit everything you are - senses, thoughts, actions, property, ambition - to God. Practically, that means taking stock of your life and deciding whether you are serious about knowing God or not. Immediately God will be with you, but you might or might not realize this. It takes practise, but the result is like a veil being pulled from your eyes. It's also a bit traumatic, which is why you'll need people who love you. These people become an important point of reference.

Apparently this is not true. If I am correct you need a priest (or other leader) to communicate with God. I would like to see where the Bible says that you can contact God by yourself. If you apply your "all" to any fantasy and practice it over and over again you will of course believe it is true. Why do you think people suicide-bomb? This is how deadly religion can be.

The smallest most unexpected things become infused with meaning, and slowly you will start focussing on God and become a living representative of His existence. It happens frequently that people overcompensate, become overzealous or even self-righteous. But remember what I said above about nature: God created you as you are - He is not trying to change who you are, but educate you in knowledge of Him so that you can be true to yourself and to Him. You are already a miracle, so don't expect life to change or people to change miraculously. You will still be able to sin, but you will be more conscious of it. It is a constant struggle - and as you pointed out, priests and Christians are no less subject to corruption than anybody else. You will always have the chance to hold on to God or to let go, but even doubt becomes a learning experience. It's like pulling yourself up on a rope: there is no doubt you will fall back to where you were if you let go (to some that is a consoling thought), but soon you realize that the real doubt is not whether you are climbing, but where you are going and what you will leave behind.

If I am a living representative of God, then is God an atheist? Does he consider himself a fantasy? If God created me how I am, then why am I so similar to my parents? Does God dismiss DNA? How does God try to educate me if I have never communicated with him? What will happen if I am not a devout Christian? Will I got to hell? If I don't believe in hell then does it still exist for me? Do Jews go to hell? They don't believe in hell.


You're right: "good" is not accurate enough either. The love I'm talking about is a cauldron filled with many ingredients in the right proportions, which will make you invincible like Asterix

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

You know what they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Love is not the goal, its the means. It does not prove God, its the way of getting to know Him.

I'm sure you are familiar with 1 Corinthians 13. If you're not, that's the kind of love I am talking about. Incidentally, the chapter also describes it as I described the experience of getting to know God.


1 Corinthians 13:

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

According to Corinthians, they are also using love to mean everything good. But don't worry, I get what you mean

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

That's the problem. You don't want to prove anything, therefore you can't prove that God exists. You are the only proof there will ever be - you yourself. Use it or lose it. You might be confusing the Bible's claims about God's omniscience and omnipotence with the classic Greek philosophical claims about "god". It's a common but major error. The Bible does not describe God as doing everything He is able to - only what needs to be done - or being everywhere He can be - only where He chooses to be. Likewise, whether love is part of evolution or part of you is up to you. There are many people who are good examples of love, who died under the injustice of people who were not. Natural selection favours might over right, and love is more a disadvantage in such situations than anything else. A person who loves his enemy is more likely to be killed by him than the other way around. It's really not a very efficient tool for survival, if you think about it. In fact, it's a bit "unnatural" compared to everything else.

"You don't want to prove anything, therefore you can't prove that God exists."

The problem is that the only people who can say that that God is real are the ones who are religious. If God was real then even people who aren't religious could prove that he was real. People can choose not to believe in evolution, but people who are religious can say yes it looks to be true. It's has enough backing to be considered a theory. The idea that there is a God and there is no evolution or other natural process to create living things, is bordering between fantasy/hypothesis because it has no backing or evidence.

If you love someone who died, you would have a choice between cherishing that love and keep on living it, or destroying it by killing yourself. There are many options, but they can't be isolated in a discussion like this. Generally, suicide is one of the most selfish acts a person can commit. The love I have in mind is not the selfish, instinctive possessiveness of nature - it is the kind of love that forms in a relationship with a total stranger, with sensitivity, patience and effort.

Romeo and Juliet were deeply in love. So much in love that they would kill themselves for the other. That would be non-selfish, wouldn't it?

You can't prove love exists until someone loves you. If nobody loved you, it would still exist, but you would have no reason to believe in it. Even if you saw other people experience or display love, it will seem foreign, unnatural, and you might feel threatened, hostile, bitter or even jealous and sickened by them. But you will have no way of knowing it. I know the feeling, and that I can experience love from God is one of the strongest "proofs" I can think of. That is why it is called a "testimony": I can only tell you of such a love until you experience it yourself, but in the meantime it's your word against mine. The decision is up to you. The only way I or anyone could "convince" you that such a love exists is by showing it to you, but unfortunately that's not possible.

If I can not prove love exists until I feel it, why can you prove God exists without feeling him? Love can be documented, yet God cannot.

What's amazing about it, is that as you search for it you start knowing it. You know what you haven't found, and as you think about it you start to understand it and become able to have it. You never find it, and that enables you to have it. Faith in God is the same - it is a hope that you can know, give, understand and trust, even though you never find it. It is found only with God, in heaven - when the mage in the mirror becomes clear.

I could search for God and start knowing "it", yet come back with the conclusion that there is no God.

 

What's the difference between your little practice and a self-induced delusion? One has more people wrote about it and one doesn't?

 

Father Malachi Martin Stated before he was pushed downstairs and later died, that a satanic group of people infiltrated the order to molest and give the church a bad name, how sad.

 

You don't need any intercessor other than the Spirit, who is closer to you than you are to yourself. You don't pray to a priest, you pray to God. In the Old Testament, you had to go to a temple and purify yourself before you could enter into God's presence. But Jesus established his temple in our hearts. You don't have to go anywhere or see anyone to communicate with God.

6But the righteousness that is by faith says: "Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend into heaven?' " (that is, to bring Christ down) 7"or 'Who will descend into the deep?' " (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). 8But what does it say? "The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart," that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming: 9That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. (Romans 10)

What do you think the Bible is?

 

The conflation of legend, poetry, politics, and civil law.

 

And documented experiences of God. You might not like or believe it - but it is impossible to deny.

 

Thats the whole point though, the Bible can't be proven to be true. It's like a UFO film. One third of the people who watch it are 100% positive it is real evidence of aliens visiting Earth. Another third are 100% positive it is completely fake and made up by someone. And then there is the agnostic third, the people who think it could be real, but think there could be some trickery. Of course there's people who don't give a shit either way, too..

 

We've come full circle then. Remember we talked about experiencing love and proving it? You would always be able to debate the integrity of the evidence that is given. I can easily say "everything Einstein ever wrote was false", but such a statement would be meaningless unless I was able to understand it or provide convincing evidence against him. But if you can follow it and attest to it its truth, the evidence is corroborated - you don't need to speak with Einstein to be able to know whether he was lying or not. Test the evidence yourself.

 

No, it is impossible to prove or, for that matter, rationally maintain. Whose experiences, specifically? Quoted by whom, specifically. Written when, specifically? Verified how, specifically?

 

The Jews have rationally maintained the OT as their history for hundreds of years. The authors of the recorded experiences are just as known/unknown as Plato, Philo, Josephus or any other historical author - personal acquaintance has never been a prerequisite for validity, and neither has the specific date of composition. What meta-information we have is as vague and general as for every other ancient texts, but the texts speak for themselves. With any source, you can keep on doubting its authenticity and "verifying" them until you know the type and origin of ink they were written with, or you can start exploring the territory they map and let them test your faith.

Their accuracy or historicity will not convince you of their content, so you might as well stop pretending it would.