A civil debate forum for people of all persuasions (Atheists, Agnostics, Deists, Christians, and adherents of any religion)

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

Reply to topic
Jolly_Penguin
First Post
PostPosted: Wed Nov 04, 2015 12:30 pm  Existence of Holy Books as Evidence Against Their Claims Reply with quote

It occurs to me that many holy books claim a God exists that is all powerful and that this God has a message he/she/it wants you to know. But it occurs to me that an all powerful God would not have any need for such a limited and primitive means of communication. An all powerful God could simply make us all know what he is there and what he expects of us*. So the books themselves are at best redundant, and almost certainly misleading.

That we do not all know and agree on what God wants, that we have battles between different religions and different sects, tells me that if an all powerful God exists, he must intend all of this confusion. Perhaps he enjoys it. This conflicts with the messages I keep reading in these holy books.

So I wonder, is the mere existence of these holy books evidence against their claim of an all powerful God with a message he wants us to know?

* - Please note that us knowing what he expects of us doesn't in any way restrict our "free will" to obey or not obey what he wants, an in fact that only with knowing what he wants can we truly make any informed choice and have "free will" on the matter.
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 11: Thu Nov 05, 2015 6:30 pm
Reply
Re: Existence of Holy Books as Evidence Against Their Claims

Like this post
ttruscott wrote:

Jolly_Penguin wrote:


...
So your position is that God only wants a few of us to understand and know him, and wants the rest of us to be confused or misled and fight between rival religions, and be damned for it, even though he made it so? He didn't intend his word and Jesus to be for all, but only for the elect few that he has decided in advance will decipher it correctly?


Gee it sounds pretty bad when you put it that way eh? But that is not what I teach at all, missed my position by quite a bit actually, putting your thoughts and assumptions onto my words.

By their free will some have destroyed their capacity to understand spiritual things. GOD did not make this happen by anything within their creation...it all happened because they chose by their free will that which they knew might cause it to happen (rejecting HIM and so becoming evil in HIS sight), but thought that it was better to put their faith for eternal happiness into rejecting HIM as a false god and HIS promise of salvation as lies.

Some sinners HE can work with and bring them back to faith in HIS reality but others chose by their free will to be outside of HIS reality forever and cannot be brought back in by anything.

As for deciphering HIS message correctly, I will remind you that the message is not the point - one must first find GOD and then accept what they are told is the truth of the message, since we are saved by faith, not understanding the message. A downs kid, full of faith with no understanding, has a lot to teach many of the supposed erudite 'religious' scholars of the world.

I will also remind that theology is a complicated and lengthy endeavour and the fact that one can see a hole in an argument does not mean we get to kick him around for trying to float a leaky boat because it may just mean that in the effort to stay focused and brief, some things were left to discuss later if anyone cared to ask about it...it is better to ask about a supposed hole than to stick a finger into it and get it caught.



Ted, I'm curious. Obviously you're persuaded by this particular view of reality. I notice you never qualify your writing with "I think" or "I believe." You sound very confident indeed. Which is fine; makes this place a spicy environment.

What I want to know is this. How sure are you you've got any of this right? Would you ballpark a percentage on your certainty? A 1-10 scale?

Or is it purely faith without an implicit reflection of it in your language?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 12: Thu Nov 05, 2015 6:41 pm
Reply
Re: Existence of Holy Books as Evidence Against Their Claims

Like this post (1): ttruscott
[Replying to post 11 by Inigo Montoya]


Ttruscott wrote:
Quote:
As for deciphering HIS message correctly, I will remind you that the message is not the point - one must first find GOD and then accept what they are told is the truth of the message, since we are saved by faith, not understanding the message. A downs kid, full of faith with no understanding, has a lot to teach many of the supposed erudite 'religious' scholars of the world.


I can't speak for ttruscott , but I can give this one a ten. No doubt about it. Our beliefs differ, but this is a valid point.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 13: Thu Nov 05, 2015 10:38 pm
Reply
Re: Existence of Holy Books as Evidence Against Their Claims

Like this post
ttruscott wrote:

Some sinners HE can work with and bring them back to faith in HIS reality but others chose by their free will to be outside of HIS reality forever and cannot be brought back in by anything.


You say Choose to be outside of his reality... as if it is a choice we make? Do you believe that those who don't believe in him CHOSE not to? I for one, made no such choice. I could lie and pretend I suppose to believe in such a being, but any real God would surely see through that, no? This brings me back to my original point. If God wanted to be known to all, he would be. No ifs, ands or buts about it. He's all powerful, no? So if he wants to be known, he'd be known. Only then could we "reject" him or disobey etc.

That he doesn't make us all know he is there... is telling, is it not? He either doesn't exist, doesn't intend us all to know him, or is playing some games for his amusement.

Which is it? And why are holy books in any way needed? A god who can beam whatever he wants us to know directly into our heads... is kind of beyond written word, no?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 14: Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:03 am
Reply
Re: Existence of Holy Books as Evidence Against Their Claims

Like this post
[Replying to post 10 by ttruscott]

Is this a good place to resume our discussion re: pointlessness of choosing from tabula rasa? Without prior desires "choosing" may as well be a flip of a coin.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 15: Fri Nov 06, 2015 10:06 am
Reply
Re: Existence of Holy Books as Evidence Against Their Claims

Like this post
ttruscott wrote:

By their free will some have destroyed their capacity to understand spiritual things. GOD did not make this happen by anything within their creation...it all happened because they chose by their free will that which they knew might cause it to happen (rejecting HIM and so becoming evil in HIS sight), but thought that it was better to put their faith for eternal happiness into rejecting HIM as a false god and HIS promise of salvation as lies.

Some sinners HE can work with and bring them back to faith in HIS reality but others chose by their free will to be outside of HIS reality forever and cannot be brought back in by anything.

Please back this with scripture

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 16: Fri Nov 06, 2015 10:31 am
Reply

Like this post
I've asked Ted multiple times for scripture that supports his pre-existence free-will decision- making pre-universe views to no avail. No idea where this comes from

I rather suspect I'm on ignore as many times as my questions go ignored about the decisions we made ..before.. we.. existed

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 17: Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:57 pm
Reply
Re: Existence of Holy Books as Evidence Against Their Claims

Like this post (2): Zzyzx, ttruscott
Faithful One wrote:


Inigo Montoya wrote:
Quote:
Ted, I'm curious. Obviously you're persuaded by this particular view of reality. I notice you never qualify your writing with "I think" or "I believe." You sound very confident indeed. Which is fine; makes this place a spicy environment.

What I want to know is this. How sure are you you've got any of this right? Would you ballpark a percentage on your certainty? A 1-10 scale?


I can't speak for ttruscott , but I can give this one a ten. No doubt about it. Our beliefs differ, but this is a valid point.

I suggest that this is not 'faith' at all. This idea of 100% certitude isn't faith, it's a proclamation. If faith is is the absolute knowledge something is true, then why would this be something God would value? Choice would not be involved.

Perhaps the most well known Biblical definition of faith comes from Hebrews 11,
Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. This is something short of certitude. It involves hoping for something unseen to be true. There is no humility in proclaiming one has no doubt.
Faith is the suspension of disbelief. It involves the humble acknowledgment one chooses to believe despite absence of absolute evidence for what one hopes is true.

It is this stubborn certitude that has produced thousands of religions at war with others; hundreds of different denominations among protestant Christianity alone. Even the early Church was divided:
Jewish Christianity
Pauline Christianity
Gnostic Christianity
From those main three branches:
Adamites
Agonoclita
Gnosticism
Bardaisanites
Basilideans
Carpocratianism
Nicolaitans
Sethianism
Simonians
Valentinianism
Ebionites
Elcesaites
Marcionism
Nazarenes
and various Christian "heresies."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations

There are even huge debates among versions of Calvinism and within Calvinism.
Quote:
In the Calvinism vs. Hyper-Calvinism vs. Arminianism debate, who is correct? Trying to study these different doctrines can be like riding a merry-go-round in circles. It is fair to note that in the diversity of the Body of Christ, there are all sorts of mixtures of Calvinism and Arminianism. There are five point Calvinists and five point Arminians, and at the same time three point Calvinists and two point Arminians. Many believers arrive at some sort of mixture of the two views.

To complicate matters further, not all Calvinists hold the same beliefs. And not all Arminians hold the same beliefs. Some Armenians believe in eternal security, others do not; but James Arminius didn't. Since Arminius was the origin of Arminianism, it seems ridiculous that someone who believes in eternal security would call them self an "Arminian."
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Doctrines/Calvinism/what_a_mess.htm

Then there is Ted's version, which as I understand it, has exactly one [1] member.
Now I agree this devisiveness does not prove there is no God. I mean, ONE of these guys out of several billion may have it right. I wonder who she is.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 18: Fri Nov 06, 2015 2:23 pm
Reply
Re: Existence of Holy Books as Evidence Against Their Claims

Like this post (1): ttruscott
[Replying to post 17 by Danmark]


I'm talking to the translation of the word and how having having faith is much more important than understanding everything in the bible and that the example of the kids faith being more powerful than all of the religious knowledge of the religious leaders in the world .

Your misunderstanding here is exhibit A, as far as not understanding where this is coming from , viewing it from a secular standpoint.

Ttrustscott and My beliefs surely vary , but we see this all of the time , whereas many atheists and agnostics cannot see it at all. This is not just coincidence.

I am not really in on whatever the ongoing argument is here . I just wanted to give that statement big ups.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 19: Fri Nov 06, 2015 3:11 pm
Reply
Re: Existence of Holy Books as Evidence Against Their Claims

Like this post
Faithful One wrote:

[Replying to post 17 by Danmark]


I'm talking to the translation of the word and how having having faith is much more important than understanding everything in the bible and that the example of the kids faith being more powerful than all of the religious knowledge of the religious leaders in the world .

Your misunderstanding here is exhibit A, as far as not understanding where this is coming from , viewing it from a secular standpoint.

What is your claim of 'misunderstanding' based on? The question posed was to rate the level of confidence from 1 to ten. You said yours was a '10.'
It appears the misunderstanding is yours.

What you and others apparently fail to realize is that many of the non theists here have a more thorough knowledge of the Bible, Christianity, Church history, doctrine and theology than most theists, including most theists who write on this forum.

Many are like me. We grew up in the church, know the Bible forward and backward, have advanced degrees on the relevant topics, or the equivalent. Some have graduated from seminaries and have been pastors and missionaries.

What we encounter here are frequently very primitive, and frankly childish concepts of Christianity put forth by those who don't understand their own religion. It is annoying to listen to an argument we heard 50 years ago, an argument most well educated Christian ministers would not make, and then be told we 'don't understand' such a simple and wrong headed idea. It is annoying to repeatedly be told by poor writers that their confused and poorly and ambiguously written words are 'misunderstood' when it is the writing that is to blame.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 20: Fri Nov 06, 2015 3:21 pm
Reply
Re: Existence of Holy Books as Evidence Against Their Claims

Like this post
Quote:


Then there is Ted's version, which as I understand it, has exactly one [1] member.


Exactly this. It shouldn't be any trouble to explain where this exceedingly bizarre and unique "interpretation" comes from.

Ted. How do you arrive at what strikes me as a view of one? How does the same Bible paint such a radically different picture for you then.. well.. everyone I've ever heard on the subject?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

Jump to:  
Facebook
Tweet

 




On The Web | Ecodia | Hymn Lyrics Apps
Facebook | Twitter

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.   Produced by Ecodia.

Igloo   |  Lo-Fi Version