Hello,
I've been debating (online) against atheism for many years, I'm very well educated in the sciences and to a lesser degree, philosophy.
However - and I know I'm not alone here - Christianity itself, the New Testament, remarkable and thought provoking as it is, and not questioning the legitimacy of the texts we have access to, I am ultimately deeply puzzled by it all.
Christ revealed some deeply profound things, completely dumbfounding prevailing Jewish beliefs and this goes in its favor, as it's sheer radicality is just not something I'd expect to simply emerge from prevailing ideas.
Yet it makes no sense at the end of the day, for example why go to all this trouble? the entire human race is in a state of anguish, confusion and beginning to collapse, why is that logically necessary as part of creation?
What exactly are humans expected to do? it is far from clear (as is evidenced by the many doctrinal arguments over the past twenty centuries).
So that's my position, I'm interested in hearing some candidate answers!
Making sense of the NT
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Savant
- Posts: 7960
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
- Has thanked: 932 times
- Been thanked: 3487 times
Re: Making sense of the NT
Post #41I'd say ypou put your finger on the Problem of evil (or one aspect) and the way it goes is either to explain away the 'evidence' ('this is all man's fault and for various reasons God can't intervene') or various stages of reliance on Faith ('God knows what He is doing even if we don't'). The other option is to conclude that it all looks very like there is no god around doing anything.theophile wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 3:01 pmI think you need to re-examine your starting point.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 11:07 amThe world is filled with misery, pain, anguish and suffering, this is what has been created.theophile wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 4:03 pmWhat doesn't make sense about a world filled with life? Do you prefer the direction we're going, i.e., a world of empty oceans and barren landscapes? (Would you rather the desolation of Mars to the fecundity of the rain forests and coral reefs of Earth?)Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 12:41 pmWhy? why are people expected to do that? what is the purpose of doing that? This is what I'm driving at, it makes no sense to me.theophile wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 12:11 pmWho said that all this mess is logically necessary? I don't recall any such mention of that in the Gen 1 creation narrative. Debatable if that's what Gen 2-3 conveys.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 11:14 am Yet it makes no sense at the end of the day, for example why go to all this trouble? the entire human race is in a state of anguish, confusion and beginning to collapse, why is that logically necessary as part of creation?
That said, I do think there are variable elements and a chaotic potential in creation. But that doesn't necessarily mean the anguish and confusion you speak of.
Per Gen 1 I'd suggest something along the lines of filling the earth with life and subduing it. Or per Gen 2, to "work and till" the garden. So from both of those references I would think of our role as something akin to a gardener. Creating the conditions for life. Creating a harmony of life. Making sure life of every kind can flourish. That kind of thing.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 11:14 am What exactly are humans expected to do? it is far from clear (as is evidenced by the many doctrinal arguments over the past twenty centuries).
But look, we are all free to choose our core values. Wealth. Power. Knowledge... In the bible that core value is life in all of its myriad expressions.
Children are abused and tortured the world over, people become sick and suffer misery and pain the world over, this is what I see, this is what has been created, but why?
You (seemingly) want to insist on an omnipotent, perfectly good God, but you can't reconcile such a God with this mess of a world.
I would 100% agree that this world is a mess. But this has led me to re-examine my assumptions about God. (The only other possibility is that the writers were idiots, but I don't think they could be simultaneously capable of such profundity and obvious conflict.)
My advice, for what it's worth, is to reconsider the nature of God's power and how God works. For instance, nowhere (in either the Old or New Testament) is God described as omnipotent. So why not let go of this later theological concept in favor of a more biblical view?
- theophile
- Guru
- Posts: 1581
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 7:09 pm
- Has thanked: 76 times
- Been thanked: 126 times
Re: Making sense of the NT
Post #42I appreciate the remark, I really do. And I genuinely think it is a pity that the world had no Abraham to challenge God's intentions in that story (per Sodom). But atheists have a tendency to cast stones without offering any alternative solutions.brunumb wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 11:25 pmPity you weren't there to advise God when he decided to drown the entire planet as the best solution to the problem of evil people.1213 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 5:39 pm If loving other has really negative effect, I don't think person really loves. And about taking others life, is that what you would like to be done to you in same situation? Or would you rather see some good reason to stay as long as it is possible? I think killing is poor solution. Better would be to help the other to use rest of his life as well as possible.
So seriously, what would you have done if, as Gen 6:5 describes, you "saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was evil"?
What would you have 'advised' God to do?
Flippant remarks don't help us resolve this historic moral dilemma. (We have encountered real instances of intractable evil in the past, and are likely to encounter it again.)
- theophile
- Guru
- Posts: 1581
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 7:09 pm
- Has thanked: 76 times
- Been thanked: 126 times
Re: Making sense of the NT
Post #43Yah, I don't have much time for arguments suggesting we just can't see how it all works out in the end. I'm with Ivan (Karamazov) on that one: if this world is based on the tears of just one innocent child, then God can take it all back.TRANSPONDER wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 6:38 amI'd say you put your finger on the Problem of evil (or one aspect) and the way it goes is either to explain away the 'evidence' ('this is all man's fault and for various reasons God can't intervene') or various stages of reliance on Faith ('God knows what He is doing even if we don't'). The other option is to conclude that it all looks very like there is no god around doing anything.theophile wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 3:01 pmI think you need to re-examine your starting point.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 11:07 amThe world is filled with misery, pain, anguish and suffering, this is what has been created.theophile wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 4:03 pmWhat doesn't make sense about a world filled with life? Do you prefer the direction we're going, i.e., a world of empty oceans and barren landscapes? (Would you rather the desolation of Mars to the fecundity of the rain forests and coral reefs of Earth?)Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 12:41 pmWhy? why are people expected to do that? what is the purpose of doing that? This is what I'm driving at, it makes no sense to me.theophile wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 12:11 pmWho said that all this mess is logically necessary? I don't recall any such mention of that in the Gen 1 creation narrative. Debatable if that's what Gen 2-3 conveys.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 11:14 am Yet it makes no sense at the end of the day, for example why go to all this trouble? the entire human race is in a state of anguish, confusion and beginning to collapse, why is that logically necessary as part of creation?
That said, I do think there are variable elements and a chaotic potential in creation. But that doesn't necessarily mean the anguish and confusion you speak of.
Per Gen 1 I'd suggest something along the lines of filling the earth with life and subduing it. Or per Gen 2, to "work and till" the garden. So from both of those references I would think of our role as something akin to a gardener. Creating the conditions for life. Creating a harmony of life. Making sure life of every kind can flourish. That kind of thing.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 11:14 am What exactly are humans expected to do? it is far from clear (as is evidenced by the many doctrinal arguments over the past twenty centuries).
But look, we are all free to choose our core values. Wealth. Power. Knowledge... In the bible that core value is life in all of its myriad expressions.
Children are abused and tortured the world over, people become sick and suffer misery and pain the world over, this is what I see, this is what has been created, but why?
You (seemingly) want to insist on an omnipotent, perfectly good God, but you can't reconcile such a God with this mess of a world.
I would 100% agree that this world is a mess. But this has led me to re-examine my assumptions about God. (The only other possibility is that the writers were idiots, but I don't think they could be simultaneously capable of such profundity and obvious conflict.)
My advice, for what it's worth, is to reconsider the nature of God's power and how God works. For instance, nowhere (in either the Old or New Testament) is God described as omnipotent. So why not let go of this later theological concept in favor of a more biblical view?
But I don't think your first and third options are mutually exclusive. I've long concluded there is no God around doing anything (I would quite rightly pass as an atheist). The difference is that this hasn't made God any less compelling to me
-
- Savant
- Posts: 7960
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
- Has thanked: 932 times
- Been thanked: 3487 times
Re: Making sense of the NT
Post #44Interesting. There are of course a Lot of sinnoffs from that and I can say that I am still culturally partial to Buddhism even though I don't believe it and have some moral and social problems with it. But given the Topic one still has to wonder whether the NT makes sense even if one happens to like stained -glass windows or whatever the Compulsion is.theophile wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 8:16 amYah, I don't have much time for arguments suggesting we just can't see how it all works out in the end. I'm with Ivan (Karamazov) on that one: if this world is based on the tears of just one innocent child, then God can take it all back.TRANSPONDER wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 6:38 amI'd say you put your finger on the Problem of evil (or one aspect) and the way it goes is either to explain away the 'evidence' ('this is all man's fault and for various reasons God can't intervene') or various stages of reliance on Faith ('God knows what He is doing even if we don't'). The other option is to conclude that it all looks very like there is no god around doing anything.theophile wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 3:01 pmI think you need to re-examine your starting point.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 11:07 amThe world is filled with misery, pain, anguish and suffering, this is what has been created.theophile wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 4:03 pmWhat doesn't make sense about a world filled with life? Do you prefer the direction we're going, i.e., a world of empty oceans and barren landscapes? (Would you rather the desolation of Mars to the fecundity of the rain forests and coral reefs of Earth?)Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 12:41 pmWhy? why are people expected to do that? what is the purpose of doing that? This is what I'm driving at, it makes no sense to me.theophile wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 12:11 pmWho said that all this mess is logically necessary? I don't recall any such mention of that in the Gen 1 creation narrative. Debatable if that's what Gen 2-3 conveys.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 11:14 am Yet it makes no sense at the end of the day, for example why go to all this trouble? the entire human race is in a state of anguish, confusion and beginning to collapse, why is that logically necessary as part of creation?
That said, I do think there are variable elements and a chaotic potential in creation. But that doesn't necessarily mean the anguish and confusion you speak of.
Per Gen 1 I'd suggest something along the lines of filling the earth with life and subduing it. Or per Gen 2, to "work and till" the garden. So from both of those references I would think of our role as something akin to a gardener. Creating the conditions for life. Creating a harmony of life. Making sure life of every kind can flourish. That kind of thing.Sherlock Holmes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 29, 2021 11:14 am What exactly are humans expected to do? it is far from clear (as is evidenced by the many doctrinal arguments over the past twenty centuries).
But look, we are all free to choose our core values. Wealth. Power. Knowledge... In the bible that core value is life in all of its myriad expressions.
Children are abused and tortured the world over, people become sick and suffer misery and pain the world over, this is what I see, this is what has been created, but why?
You (seemingly) want to insist on an omnipotent, perfectly good God, but you can't reconcile such a God with this mess of a world.
I would 100% agree that this world is a mess. But this has led me to re-examine my assumptions about God. (The only other possibility is that the writers were idiots, but I don't think they could be simultaneously capable of such profundity and obvious conflict.)
My advice, for what it's worth, is to reconsider the nature of God's power and how God works. For instance, nowhere (in either the Old or New Testament) is God described as omnipotent. So why not let go of this later theological concept in favor of a more biblical view?
But I don't think your first and third options are mutually exclusive. I've long concluded there is no God around doing anything (I would quite rightly pass as an atheist). The difference is that this hasn't made God any less compelling to me
-
- Guru
- Posts: 2284
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:40 am
- Has thanked: 1957 times
- Been thanked: 737 times
Re: Making sense of the NT
Post #45Sorry, but that's baloney. Atheists (including me on this very site) have offered lots of alternate solutions. When we do, theists will generally ridicule, downplay, or just ignore them. Because how could humans come up with better solutions than their God?theophile wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 8:03 amI appreciate the remark, I really do. And I genuinely think it is a pity that the world had no Abraham to challenge God's intentions in that story (per Sodom). But atheists have a tendency to cast stones without offering any alternative solutions.brunumb wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 11:25 pmPity you weren't there to advise God when he decided to drown the entire planet as the best solution to the problem of evil people.1213 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 5:39 pm If loving other has really negative effect, I don't think person really loves. And about taking others life, is that what you would like to be done to you in same situation? Or would you rather see some good reason to stay as long as it is possible? I think killing is poor solution. Better would be to help the other to use rest of his life as well as possible.
Different, more sensible (IMHO) solutions:
1) Directly communicate with each person being 'wicked' and explain if they don't change their ways immediately they will be removed from the planet. If the person continues their ways, they are instantly vaporized. Point this out to the next person you are confronting. "Hey, stop doing <x>. See what I just did to Bob after I warned him and he didn't listen?"
2) If God felt all warnings had already been issued and couldn't be bothered with the one on ones, just vaporize every offender. No need to kill off babies, animals, and orchestrate the entire ark adventure.
3) If killing was not in God's heart, simply sterilize the wicked. Only those who are 'righteous' will reproduce. Make it known this is what is happening.
I'm sure there are many other sensible solutions than an almighty god could use that actually make sense and actually work.
- JehovahsWitness
- Savant
- Posts: 21073
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
- Has thanked: 790 times
- Been thanked: 1114 times
- Contact:
Re: Making sense of the NT
Post #46What do we call societies where they inflict forced sterilizations? Humans had been accorded the god given right to procreate and you consider denying that right to one group over another after a sensible solution ?benchwarmer wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 10:18 am
3) If killing was not in God's heart, simply sterilize the wicked. Only those who are 'righteous' will reproduce. Make it known this is what is happening.
What about the wicked that dont want children? Besides, wickedness is not genetic, a wicked person can have a godly child, so such a strategy is mere blackmail. If a god wanted people to practice righteousness because they loved righteousness, what good would coercion and blackmail do?
JW
RELATED POSTS
WHY : What was the purpose of the flood?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 13#p874813
Why would God choose FLOODING the earth as a method of execution ?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 64#p874964
Why did God not employ the slow extermination of the wicked through sterilization?
viewtopic.php?p=1061072#p1061072
Why did God not instantly vapourize the wicked one by one instead of flood the planet?
viewtopic.php?p=1061288#p1061288
Does the global flood prove God a "baby killer"?
viewtopic.php?p=979190#p979190
Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Sun Jan 02, 2022 4:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681
"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" - Romans 14:8
-
- Guru
- Posts: 2284
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:40 am
- Has thanked: 1957 times
- Been thanked: 737 times
Re: Making sense of the NT
Post #47First, this is God we are talking about. You are ok with mass killing, but sterilization is where you draw the line?JehovahsWitness wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 10:40 amWhat do we call societies where they inflict forced sterilizations?benchwarmer wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 10:18 am
3) If killing was not in God's heart, simply sterilize the wicked. Only those who are 'righteous' will reproduce. Make it known this is what is happening.
What do we call societies that wipe out everyone they don't like?
- 1213
- Savant
- Posts: 11342
- Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
- Location: Finland
- Has thanked: 312 times
- Been thanked: 357 times
Re: Making sense of the NT
Post #48Hmmm… I think it was not the same situation as in this case. By what the Bible tells, before the flood:brunumb wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 11:25 pmPity you weren't there to advise God when he decided to drown the entire planet as the best solution to the problem of evil people.1213 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 5:39 pm If loving other has really negative effect, I don't think person really loves. And about taking others life, is that what you would like to be done to you in same situation? Or would you rather see some good reason to stay as long as it is possible? I think killing is poor solution. Better would be to help the other to use rest of his life as well as possible.
....the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually… …The earth was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.
Gen. 6:5,11
People were totally wicked, evil and violent, almost like nowadays. Yet, even if I would think someone is wicked and it would be better for all that he dies, I don’t want to kill, because I am not God, I don’t know enough to make the right judgment.
- theophile
- Guru
- Posts: 1581
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 7:09 pm
- Has thanked: 76 times
- Been thanked: 126 times
Re: Making sense of the NT
Post #49You're right, I don't mean to generalize. But there is a serious question being asked in the flood scenario. Intractable human evil. We can throw rocks at God's response, but always good if those rocks come with an alternative.benchwarmer wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 10:18 amSorry, but that's baloney. Atheists (including me on this very site) have offered lots of alternate solutions. When we do, theists will generally ridicule, downplay, or just ignore them. Because how could humans come up with better solutions than their God?theophile wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 8:03 amI appreciate the remark, I really do. And I genuinely think it is a pity that the world had no Abraham to challenge God's intentions in that story (per Sodom). But atheists have a tendency to cast stones without offering any alternative solutions.brunumb wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 11:25 pmPity you weren't there to advise God when he decided to drown the entire planet as the best solution to the problem of evil people.1213 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 30, 2021 5:39 pm If loving other has really negative effect, I don't think person really loves. And about taking others life, is that what you would like to be done to you in same situation? Or would you rather see some good reason to stay as long as it is possible? I think killing is poor solution. Better would be to help the other to use rest of his life as well as possible.
Sure. But we're talking intractable evil here. We're talking the hard-heartedness of someone like pharaoh in the exodus story. Talk to them all you want but it probably won't make a difference.benchwarmer wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 10:18 am Different, more sensible (IMHO) solutions:
1) Directly communicate with each person being 'wicked' and explain if they don't change their ways immediately they will be removed from the planet. If the person continues their ways, they are instantly vaporized. Point this out to the next person you are confronting. "Hey, stop doing <x>. See what I just did to Bob after I warned him and he didn't listen?"
Sure. But this isn't radically different from what God did. I'm sure brunumb would still have made their comment, and instead of the 'great flood' atheists would point to the 'great vaporization' as a sign of God's barbarity.benchwarmer wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 10:18 am 2) If God felt all warnings had already been issued and couldn't be bothered with the one on ones, just vaporize every offender. No need to kill off babies, animals, and orchestrate the entire ark adventure.
Ha! The great sterilization... But this option leaves evil-doers in the world, the problem being the impact this has on the rest of creation. (Like how we're currently destroying life on earth.)benchwarmer wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 10:18 am 3) If killing was not in God's heart, simply sterilize the wicked. Only those who are 'righteous' will reproduce. Make it known this is what is happening.
I appreciate the thoughts, but I'm not sure of a better answer.benchwarmer wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 10:18 am I'm sure there are many other sensible solutions than an almighty god could use that actually make sense and actually work.
If the world is so far gone. If we are so hard-hearted and relentless in our evil. If not a single one existed with the potential to redeem the rest..
What left is there to do but wash it all away?
- theophile
- Guru
- Posts: 1581
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 7:09 pm
- Has thanked: 76 times
- Been thanked: 126 times
Re: Making sense of the NT
Post #50I think the NT makes a ton of sense. Still not sure what the conflict isTRANSPONDER wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 8:33 amInteresting. There are of course a Lot of sinnoffs from that and I can say that I am still culturally partial to Buddhism even though I don't believe it and have some moral and social problems with it. But given the Topic one still has to wonder whether the NT makes sense even if one happens to like stained -glass windows or whatever the Compulsion is.theophile wrote: ↑Fri Dec 31, 2021 8:16 am Yah, I don't have much time for arguments suggesting we just can't see how it all works out in the end. I'm with Ivan (Karamazov) on that one: if this world is based on the tears of just one innocent child, then God can take it all back.
But I don't think your first and third options are mutually exclusive. I've long concluded there is no God around doing anything (I would quite rightly pass as an atheist). The difference is that this hasn't made God any less compelling to me