Why is communication with God one way?

[marco]

Communication with the Christian deity seems one directional. If we try many times to contact someone and get no answer what should we assume?
The person is annoyed with us? The person has gone or is dead? Our method of contact is faulty - maybe a wrong number?

In the case of God what is the explanation for communication being only one way?

[marco]

A book cannot be good and bad at the same time.

In what sense do you think the Bible, a compilation of books, cannot be both good and bad?

The bishop said to the nervous curate, who was dining at his house, "I'm afraid you have a bad egg." Politely the curate replied: "No, no, your Grace, it is excellent in parts."

A book that advocates murdering girls for sexual sin, or tells its readers not to "permit a witch to live", or has God demand a father kill his son is maybe good in parts (as you say) - like the curate's egg. But a bad egg is a bad egg. That was my meaning.

Of course it may be that the evil instructions are phrased in purple prose or follow a beautiful lament so there is good to be found in the Bible. Is it a good book or a bad one. The polite curate would say it is good in parts, but we need not be polite, just truthful.

[1213]

Is universality a mark of truth? The RC Church claims universality. Should we all be Catholics?

I dont claim it is a mark of truth. The point is, other gods have nothing that they want me to hear, so for me they are irrelevant/meaningless. Bible God clearly has wanted that even I hear the message, that is why he is relevant to me and I have reason to think do I accept His message or not.

Catholic Church is not loyal to Jesus and God, therefore I think they are not really Christian and also not very meaningful to me.

Or a road to death, for some. Earlier old women were drowned for being witches. Again, their condemner was the Bible. A book cannot be good and bad at the same time.

Actually, it can be, if you look at it from different point of views. For evil and unrighteous, Bible is not good, bur for righteous it is good. And I think, if one is a Christian (disciple of Jesus), he should remember this:

"Don't judge, so that you won't be judged. For with whatever judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with whatever measure you measure, it will be measured to you."
Mat. 7:1-2

[1213]

If we removed the word Hindu from your statement, it could equally apply to anyone who couldnt find meaning in ancient scriptures - whether they are from Hinduism, Islam, Christianity or anything else. What if one of the meaningful parts of its scripture is the importance of seeking the truth and persevering?

I think it is good idea to seek the truth. However, my point is, Christianity, or more precisely, God through Jesus, declares message. I dont think others do the same. Because others dont do so, other gods dont seem to think they have anything that important and therefore why should I care of them, if they dont want to declare some message to me?

Perhaps no-one deserves to be given the message if they are not yet willing to work hard to achieve it...

Perhaps and perhaps I dont see any reason to seek some message that perhaps doesnt even exist.

I would hope you agree that they are being reasonable when they do so...

Sorry, the arguments I have seen, are not very reasonable, because they are based usually on strawman arguments and lies.

You seem confident that Christianitys message is somehow very different from other religions, but when it comes to concepts such as righteousness, serving God, and emphasising the spirit over the material, you may find that the message is more or less the same. Not surprising since appropriating beliefs and concepts from other cultures is a very human thing (c.f. The Epic of Gilgamesh) and religion itself predates Christianity by a long way.

In this case it is not even about the message, but about that Bible God clearly has wanted that the message is declared.

Gilgamesh, I really dont believe it predates Christianity, if we understand that Christianity is actually continuation to Jewish tradition. I believe Gilgamesh is distorted version of Noahs story and copied from Jews or their ancestors.

And, it seems Bible God has actually influenced also to other cultures. I think that is obvious from what the Bible tells and what we can see from other cultures. Jews were in Egypt, Persia and Babylon. And the Bible God did many miraculous things that also those nations noticed. It may be possible for example that Zoroastrianism is in some way from Bible God. And it may be that all beliefs of one supreme God, or great spirit are result of Gods influence, especially if they are not in contradiction, but speak of righteousness, truth and love. If the message is truly the same, it is possible that the source is the same. But it is also possible that people have later distorted the original message, added own doctrines that are not from God, like for example Trinity.

[marco]

Catholic Church is not loyal to Jesus and God, therefore I think they are not really Christian and also not very meaningful to me.

The Catholic Church loyally preserved Christianity through dark times, her monks patiently preserving Scripture. Other faiths may claim to have truth but I think the one that has lasted 2000 years has the better claim.

Actually, it can be, if you look at it from different point of views. For evil and unrighteous, Bible is not good, bur for righteous it is good. And I think, if one is a Christian (disciple of Jesus), he should remember this:

"Don't judge, so that you won't be judged. For with whatever judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with whatever measure you measure, it will be measured to you."
Mat. 7:1-2

It is ironic that you quote Matthew who is a stranger to truth. We can usually dismiss anything he says as fiction. We are dealing with communication with God, not some Stephen King of the first century. Are you really saying that those who find Matthew funny will perish for their disbelief? I would expect them to be praised from the Judgment Seat and Matthew dismissed with the goats.

[1213]

The Catholic Church loyally preserved Christianity through dark times, her monks patiently preserving Scripture. Other faiths may claim to have truth but I think the one that has lasted 2000 years has the better claim.

I think it is great thing that Bible has been preserved. However, there is lot of unbiblical matters in Catholic church, which is why it is actually difficult to believe they have preserved it, when today they are in many things in contradiction with the Bible.

We can usually dismiss anything he says as fiction

Pease explain why you think so?

Are you really saying that those who find Matthew funny will perish for their disbelief? .

No. And I dont think Bible is saying so. Bible tells that eternal life is for righteous and death for unrighteous.

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Mat. 25:46

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:23

If you would believe that your sins are forgiven and repent, you could perhaps be counted righteous, if you are not already.

[marco]

I think it is great thing that Bible has been preserved. However, there is lot of unbiblical matters in Catholic church, which is why it is actually difficult to believe they have preserved it, when today they are in many things in contradiction with the Bible.

You mean they contradict your interpretation of what is in the bible. The RC Church takes biblical statements and acts on them; others take the same statements to mean something else. How do we decide which view is correct, if any? Had you been from Poland rather than Finland, you might have agreed with the RC Church.

In my own case when I read Matthew offering truth and tracing Jesus back to Adam I see no truth in this. You cannot possibly accept that graves opened up and corpses walked out at some point in human history, 2000 years ago. So when Matthew describes other miracles why would we believe him?

[Diagoras]

I think it is good idea to seek the truth. However, my point is, Christianity, or more precisely, God through Jesus, declares message. I dont think others do the same.

Can someone say that with 100% certainty that no other religion has a declared message? After all, we havent had a Hindu come onto the forum and agree with you.

Perhaps and perhaps I dont see any reason to seek some message that perhaps doesnt even exist.

It sounds like you arent totally willing to reject the claim that other religions have meaningful messages - just that you havent experienced them yourself. Fair enough, thanks for being honest.

Sorry, the arguments I have seen, are not very reasonable, because they are based usually on strawman arguments and lies.

<relating to people rejecting the message and becoming atheists>

Just to clarify: are you referring to any of my arguments, or of other people? Im willing to listen to claims that I use strawman arguments, as Im not an especially skilled debater - but I reject any claim of lying on this forum.

it seems Bible God has actually influenced also to other cultures. I think that is obvious from what the Bible tells and what we can see from other cultures. Jews were in Egypt, Persia and Babylon.

Indeed. The mixing of myths and cultural practices appears to have been both ways, and its fair to say that when ideas were passed on mainly orally, its very difficult to determine origins with any real accuracy. Paradise is a Persian word, and yet crops up in the New Testament. The second half of the book of Isaiah was originally written in a different language to the first half, and shows inspiration from Zoroastrianism. Creation myths abound - so much so that Genesis contains two of them. Snake cults were common to many cultures, including Eqypt, and so its not surprising to see Moses use a serpent of bronze in Numbers 21 to cure the bites of fiery serpents. What we can say with certainty is: Christianity is not the oldest religion in the world, and - like the English language - has borrowed from other religions in part.

Your last response to me does somewhat acknowledge this uncertainty, as you say possibly and it may be rather a lot. And your point: It is also possible that people have later distorted the original message is one I can definitely agree with, as in my view its true for all religions.

[PghPanther]

When you really think about it....the relation that a young child has in their belief of a supernatural Santa Claus often reflects much that is similar to Christian faith in a personal God.

In a way Christianity is Santa Claus for adults................even Christ reaffirms that you can't find your way into the after life without the faith of a child.

The difference is every child eventually grows out of such belief when the rational thought process of critical thinking begins to correlate evidence with reality. Where despite all the evidence and rational thought of an adult mind a believer must constantly reaffirm themselves that perception of reality is standing in their way in attempting to retain a childlike faith in their commitment.

All that stated there is no more communication from a personal deity than there would be from a supernatural Santa Claus, Easter Bunny or tooth fairy.

Hey if it serves a purpose and sense of emotional comfort to an adult I have no problem with that..............its just for myself I attempt to understand reality as best as I can through the rational thought process as applied to the scientific method.

[marco]

In a way Christianity is Santa Claus for adults................even Christ reaffirms that you can't find your way into the after life without the faith of a child.

A good point. Christ would want people to believe with the same intensity that children believe a beloved fiction. His task would then require no miracles, just childish faith. Maybe Jesus was more astute than the simple donkey rider who smiles into his own crucifixion.

Unwavering faith in many, or most, is admirable, very often generating acts of kindness and charity towards strangers. Obviously we can be kind and charitable without such faith. But the darker side is that unwavering faith can set a father against a son when the father chooses his God over his own flesh; it can get people who are normally reasonable, to shun those who have deserted the faith they favour; it can make people act cruelly, hanging folk for sins against their God or burning them for perceived heresies; in some places today strong faith hurls gay people from tall buildings; faith might even persuade some to blow up children to demonstrate, in some mystical fashion, that God is great.

All in all, believing absurdities is best left to children where it does no harm.

[JehovahsWitness]

The Catholic Church loyally preserved Christianity through dark times, her monks patiently preserving Scripture.

At the monastery Tischendorf saw some leaves of parchment in a waste-basket. He retrieved from the basket 129 leaves in an early Greek uncial majuscule hand, which he identified as coming from a manuscript of the Septuagint. According to his account, the monks indicated that they had already used a number of similar leaves to stoke their fires...
http://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.php?id=484

The period when the Catholic church was arguably, most powerful is often referred to as "the dark ages"


JW

What did Pope Francis apologise for?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 816#929816

Did the Catholic Church compile the bible?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 566#838566

Did the bible really fight to survive?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 878#820878