God's Plan?

[POI]

For Debate: Why didn't God directly author the Bible himself? Why instead give his instruction(s) to fallible and sinful humans to write down his wishes to paper, which then makes it quite easy for skeptics to conclude that such writings were not from any higher power at all?

[Mae von H]

Your debate question assumes facts not in evidence.

No, it doesn't. Here is the part in bold. "which then makes it quite easy for skeptics to conclude that such writings were not from any higher power at all?". The conclusion of "no higher power at all" is actually more rationale.

No, billions have read these pieces and believed. Skeptics have read this book and believed. It’s true.

These things contained in those writings were written such that men can read and believe.

The exact same argument can be made about any competing collection of claimed works from "above."

Like what? Please give examples. Let’s examine them.

If the argument is not distinctive to your set of beliefs, then we cannot rule out any of the other collection of claims, using the same argument.

Same, what others?

For this purpose they are sufficient

Negative, as expressed above.

There are followers of Jesus the Christ literally all over the world.

The same goes for other religions, for which you deny. So?

Please provide historical examples of martyrs of other religions who could have lived by recanting.

So the fact that many would find any excuse to deny the inspiration of those works most likely because they do not want to do what is contained within them, is not to be avoided no matter what God did. You can read what T wrote of when he left Christianity. He felt a freedom. Of course he did. He was not longer restrained by the moral code of treating others as you would like to be treated. He was under no moral code at all.

I'm finding it more and more difficult to ignore your strawman arguments of myself and others. However, I'll let Transponder respond to this, if he so chooses.

I’m finding it difficult that you make up religious books and martyrs where none exist.

Can you see what it is preferable to deny the existence of the deity behind it and the coming judgement of the deeds of one's life after death? Can you see the freedom those who deny both feel? One can behave as badly as one wishes to anyone without any fear of consequences from God. Man might give consequences depending upon how powerful the perpetrator is, but without a Divine Judge, one feels free.

My prior point is that God could reveal himself to all, in a way in which no one could deny his mere existence.

He’s not interested in proving His existence to any one. There is a way to know He is there and the man himself MUST do his part. This lazy way you suggest He won’t do.

Apparently, he did that plenty way-back-when, conveniently before we had the means to demonstrate it.

Sigh!! Another false claim…when did He ever do this??

My point is that we still have the freewill to reject him. However, as it stands for me, I "reject" him because I do not believe he even exists. If he did, maybe I would be waging forward with a lot of the same Christian apologetics you are providing.

So God has made his presence known/proven to millions of people and really over time, billions. The atheists are a very tiny minority in human history and the rest of mankind, were they around to vote, would simply know they are ignorant...at least for now.

I would agree atheists are the extreme minority. I have a hypothesis as to why: http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 4&start=60

That state will change. Of that we have no doubt.

I won't hold my breath.

Probably good because in your present demands, by the time the day comes, it will be too late.

I can picture the atheist saying, “Hey God. I finally believe you’re there. Aren’t you happy?”

“No,” responds the Lord,”I wanted you to believe when you could treat others as you wanted them to treat you instead of the way you did. Now it no longer matters.”

[POI]

Mae Being charmed by a living man is not the same as seeing God inspiring an old book.

POI Many believers of Scientology never met Mr. Hubbard. They believe others, who preach it, and the claims from the book(s). So yes, they are quite the same.

Mae Did millions believe and lay down their lives for such? Do you really think this is the same?

POI Scientology has only been around for a few decades. Give it a couple of thousand years. However, does martyrdom equal truth? Do people ever sacrifice themselves for something that, in reality, is actually false? I believe they do, all the time.

Mae They are so valid that the people were deeply convinced. The claims are valid for me as well, but not for you so how do we measure this?

POI I do not question your convictions. I know you believe wholeheartedly. The question remains, why?

Mae What is your standard of measure?

POI Great question. But I'm afraid I cannot answer this question precisely. What exactly would convince you of something you for which you currently deem imaginary? But God would know, and he chooses to remain silent. Nor has he given any apologist the tools to change my mind either.

Mae Relationship. He wants relationship. We walk with Him, not merely serve.

POI Makes no sense. He can have relationships with all, individually, at will, and also at any time of his choosing. But his instructions are given by fallible humans who mucked them up, which now require endless apologetics, hermeneutics, and also having to navigate multiple denominations of direct conflict

Mae That’s too bad. Many believers aren’t well educated on these things.

POI Many of them are, and this is exactly what they say.

Mae Billions have read these things and believed.

POI Irrelevant. Pretty soon, more may believe in the Quran than the NT.

Mae Here we ought to talk because nothing could be further from the truth. I’ve read the ancient creation accounts, for example, and they’re nothing at all like Genesis. The oldest book Job, describes the water cycle, and other geological systems that are more advanced than Europe in the middle ages. The concepts in the Bible are way beyond what man knew.

POI You are setting your bar pretty dang low. Your argument, at best, is that (of all the ones available <of the time>, the Bible was the best one).

Mae Why do you then exchange posts with us if you don’t enjoy it?

POI I like to debate. I like to keep my brain sharp. Debating religion broaches on countless other subjects. It's entertaining. Etc...

[TRANSPONDER]

Mae von H wrote: ↑Fri Mar 29, 2024 4:37 am
So the fact that many would find any excuse to deny the inspiration of those works most likely because they do not want to do what is contained within them, is not to be avoided no matter what God did. You can read what T wrote of when he left Christianity. He felt a freedom. Of course he did. He was not longer restrained by the moral code of treating others as you would like to be treated. He was under no moral code at all.

(Poi) I'm finding it more and more difficult to ignore your strawman arguments of myself and others. However, I'll let Transponder respond to this, if he so chooses.

Minor correction. I didn't leave Christianity as I had done with it - at all - when I stopped with the local church choir in my teens. I had never been a believer.

The 'deconversion' was a puzzle for me as I was already an atheist. I think what happened was I had been looking at all religions, looking for the one to experiencing whatever the divine contact was - as i knew people experienced that. I think it was realising that Christianity had no more claim to be true than any other religion.

As to Mae's comment about no longer being under a moral code, the golden rule is not a Christian invention; it was known before that in many cultures and in fact I see the NT code as a perversion of it, instead of not doing to them what they don't want, you do to them what you think they should have - in fact, it is a busybody's charter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule

While looking for this, i noted that 'Christianity' is added onto the simple search term. Just another small example of Christian interference in a search for information.

[POI]

Mae Please provide historical examples of martyrs of other religions who could have lived by recanting.

POI Well, since you did not respond, a much better question would be, do people ever martyr themselves for an incorrect belief? A simple (yes or no) will suffice.

Mae He’s not interested in proving His existence to any one.

POI Not even to Saul or Tarsus?

Mae There is a way to know He is there and the man himself MUST do his part. This lazy way you suggest He won’t do.

POI I did my part, for 30 (plus) years. He did not do his.

Mae Sigh!! Another false claim…when did He ever do this??

POI So he never proved himself to anyone?

[Mae von H]

Mae Please provide historical examples of martyrs of other religions who could have lived by recanting.

POI Well, since you did not respond, a much better question would be, do people ever martyr themselves for an incorrect belief? A simple (yes or no) will suffice.

No, that’s about the opposite. Since you claim other religions also have believers are martyred rather than recant, you need to provide examples. The christian’s suffered horrible painful deaths rather than deny Jesus. Blowing yourself up (totally painless and essentially committing suicide) isn’t even close. So where are these martyrs in Hinduism you claim are there? And it has to be such that they escape death by recanting, not some bigoted group hating their group.

Mae He’s not interested in proving His existence to any one.

POI Not even to Saul or Tarsus?

No, Paul wasn’t an atheist.

Mae There is a way to know He is there and the man himself MUST do his part. This lazy way you suggest He won’t do.

POI I did my part, for 30 (plus) years. He did not do his.

Pardon if I ask, but what did you do?

Mae Sigh!! Another false claim…when did He ever do this??

POI So he never proved himself to anyone?

He proved his character for sure, I cannot recall Him proving His existence to unbelievers in scripture. Has He done this in human history? Yes, but there had to be a certain kind of heart in the man seeking. Defiant, judging, proud will exclude a man, for example. Humility is a must, for example. And seeking an experience like an amusement park ride will definitely keep Him away. Would you like someone who just wants to “experience you!”

[TRANSPONDER]

Mae Please provide historical examples of martyrs of other religions who could have lived by recanting.

POI Well, since you did not respond, a much better question would be, do people ever martyr themselves for an incorrect belief? A simple (yes or no) will suffice.

No, that’s about the opposite. Since you claim other religions also have believers are martyred rather than recant, you need to provide examples. The christian’s suffered horrible painful deaths rather than deny Jesus. Blowing yourself up (totally painless and essentially committing suicide) isn’t even close. So where are these martyrs in Hinduism you claim are there? And it has to be such that they escape death by recanting, not some bigoted group hating their group.

Mae He’s not interested in proving His existence to any one.

POI Not even to Saul or Tarsus?

No, Paul wasn’t an atheist.

Mae There is a way to know He is there and the man himself MUST do his part. This lazy way you suggest He won’t do.

POI I did my part, for 30 (plus) years. He did not do his.

Pardon if I ask, but what did you do?

Mae Sigh!! Another false claim…when did He ever do this??

POI So he never proved himself to anyone?

He proved his character for sure, I cannot recall Him proving His existence to unbelievers in scripture. Has He done this in human history? Yes, but there had to be a certain kind of heart in the man seeking. Defiant, judging, proud will exclude a man, for example. Humility is a must, for example. And seeking an experience like an amusement park ride will definitely keep Him away. Would you like someone who just wants to “experience you!”

In Islam, Martyrdom is part and parcel of dying for the faith. From Janissaries falling in windrows at the assault on Rhodes to Iranian suicide grenaders taking out Iraqui tanks in the 90's, Martyrdom in not a purely Christian thing, and of course there are Christians martyred by other kinds of Christians, as we saw in the 30 years war. No, Martyrs validate nothing whatsoever, even if the tales are true, and I know of no early maryrdom tales that have any real validity.

As to the rest, the 'proof' seems to be entirely on the believer brainwashing themselves into faith and that is all the validation that Jesusgod and Christianity needs.

I can only reiterate that the idea of the Bible apologists that they win if they make a lot of invalid claims and deny everything else is just more self - delusion.

The way it works is, those still open to logical reasoning will see who has at least an equally valid counter - hypothesis (never mind a far better one) and will realise that the Christian apologist has nothing better, let alone far worse.

That is the way it works - logic and evidence, not Faithclaims and denial.

[Mae von H]

Mae Please provide historical examples of martyrs of other religions who could have lived by recanting.

POI Well, since you did not respond, a much better question would be, do people ever martyr themselves for an incorrect belief? A simple (yes or no) will suffice.

No, that’s about the opposite. Since you claim other religions also have believers are martyred rather than recant, you need to provide examples. The christian’s suffered horrible painful deaths rather than deny Jesus. Blowing yourself up (totally painless and essentially committing suicide) isn’t even close. So where are these martyrs in Hinduism you claim are there? And it has to be such that they escape death by recanting, not some bigoted group hating their group.

Mae He’s not interested in proving His existence to any one.

POI Not even to Saul or Tarsus?

No, Paul wasn’t an atheist.

Mae There is a way to know He is there and the man himself MUST do his part. This lazy way you suggest He won’t do.

POI I did my part, for 30 (plus) years. He did not do his.

Pardon if I ask, but what did you do?

Mae Sigh!! Another false claim…when did He ever do this??

POI So he never proved himself to anyone?

He proved his character for sure, I cannot recall Him proving His existence to unbelievers in scripture. Has He done this in human history? Yes, but there had to be a certain kind of heart in the man seeking. Defiant, judging, proud will exclude a man, for example. Humility is a must, for example. And seeking an experience like an amusement park ride will definitely keep Him away. Would you like someone who just wants to “experience you!”

In Islam, Martyrdom is part and parcel of dying for the faith. From Janissaries falling in windrows at the assault on Rhodes to Iranian suicide grenaders taking out Iraqui tanks in the 90's, Martyrdom in not a purely Christian thing, and of course there are Christians martyred by other kinds of Christians, as we saw in the 30 years war. No, Martyrs validate nothing whatsoever, even if the tales are true, and I know of no early maryrdom tales that have any real validity.

You need to come up with martyrs not terrorists. Do you know the difference? I’ve heard of dozens of suicidal muslim terrorists who murder others in their acts. Those are NOT martyrs. But please let POI answer as he might know the difference. I assume you know of no Muslims who died under torture they could have avoided by converting. Only Christians have a history of suffering martyrdom killing no one in the process and loving their tormentors to the end.

As to the rest, the 'proof' seems to be entirely on the believer brainwashing themselves into faith and that is all the validation that Jesusgod and Christianity needs.

Actually, the believer who murders a crowd so he can get sex with beautiful women in eternity is brainwashed.

I can only reiterate that the idea of the Bible apologists that they win if they make a lot of invalid claims and deny everything else is just more self - delusion.

Since I’m not the one deluded to think terrorists are martyrs…

The way it works is, those still open to logical reasoning will see who has at least an equally valid counter - hypothesis (never mind a far better one) and will realise that the Christian apologist has nothing better, let alone far worse.

That is rich..

That is the way it works - logic and evidence, not Faithclaims and denial.

You believe Muslim terrorists are noble martyrs. That’s a faith position at best.

A martyr is “a person killed (by others) for their faith.” Suicide bombers are by definition NOT martyrs. They kill themselves.

[POI]

Mae No, that’s about the opposite. Since you claim other religions also have believers are martyred rather than recant, you need to provide examples. The christian’s suffered horrible painful deaths rather than deny Jesus. Blowing yourself up (totally painless and essentially committing suicide) isn’t even close. So where are these martyrs in Hinduism you claim are there? And it has to be such that they escape death by recanting, not some bigoted group hating their group.

POI Allow me to tell you why this argument carries no weight, and Christian apologists should stop using it...

1) If I were to give you examples of such Hindus, would you then seriously consider becoming a Hindu? I doubt it.
2) (yes or no). Has anyone ever been tortured and died for a belief which is false in reality? I'm sure we agree here the answer is (yes), without having to "google" it.
3) How do you know these folks never actually recanted? Dictators/emperors/etc are known to not be very forgiving. By the time they were in the middle of being tortured, they may have very well recanted, but it is already too late. They are going to die as a traitor regardless.
4) In the search for the truth of a claim, do you ever ask yourself if anyone has ever martyred themselves for the veracity of the claim? I reckon you instead follow the evidence. Martyrdom does not really qualify.
5) The claims to martyrdom come from the same collection of sources which also make the truth claim. But even if we have external sources, would it really matter? Not really....
6) People recant, to save their skin, when they know they are right about things.

Mae No, Paul wasn’t an atheist.

POI Being a believer does not mean he believed in a postmortem Jesus. Did Jesus bother to prove his postmortem existence to Saul, or not?

Mae Pardon if I ask, but what did you do?

POI What didn't I do? Likely all the same things you did and do. So why did/does he skip me?

Mae He proved his character for sure

POI Then you just demonstrated my point. Character follows existence. You cannot have a character without having the existence.

[1213]

If I were to get myself some slaves (let's pretend they comport to YOUR understanding of slavery in the Bible and they voluntarily became my slaves), which type of rod should I use to strike them with so I can be in harmony with both of the following passages of scripture? Should I have the slaves live a certain distance from my home so they are not technically my neighbor or something?

Why would you want to hit your slaves? I don't think you would need any rod, if you would follow the teachings of the Bible. In Biblical point of view, anyone who is near to you, is your neighbor.

See above. Only the naive would think that virgin girls taken as spoils of war won't be raped (where rape is defined as forced to have sex with the captor in case that isn't clear).

I don't think righteous people would rape anyone.

And I don't think Bible supports incest either.

Umm, are you not one of the Christians who thinks the creation story in Genesis is real?

Adam and Eve had children. Now what?

How does Adam and Eve having children mean God supports incest?

Bible also tells:

But I tell you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who mistreat you and persecute you, that you may be children of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust.
Matt. 5:44-45

In my opinion that is against war.

Cool, you are discovering contradictions all on your own! Nice!!

God incites war:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ion=NRSVUE

War against Midian
31 The Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 2 “Avenge the Israelites on the Midianites; afterward you shall be gathered to your people.” 3 So Moses spoke to the people, saying, “Arm some of your number for the war, so that they may go against Midian, to execute the Lord’s vengeance on Midian.

If other nations attack other nation, I think they have right to defend themselves as Jews did. That does not necessary mean person is not against war.

[1213]

You are clearly in denial about Slavery. The 'voluntary slavery' in not the same thing as buying from foreigners, they are your property for life.

Bible tells, if person was kidnapped, the kidnapper should have been killed. This leads to conclusion that one cannot be a slave against his will, a kidnapper could not sell anyone, because he would be dead, if Bible would be followed.

Anyone who kidnaps someone and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.
Exod. 21:16