Questioning God's Chosen Communication

[POI]

(1) Why would an omniscient God reveal to ancient societies the questions that modern scientific communities would be interested in? (2) Why would God care more about making scientific knowledge available in these texts versus addressing how He wanted humans to live?

For debate: Does the provided video below answer the above two questions sufficiently? If not, why not? If so, then I guess God is inept?

[LittleNipper]

You all may wish to regard the following article. ALL sin is punishable by eternal separation from GOD. And ALL who do not repent and turn to CHRIST for their salvation will face eternal separation from GOD. HOWEVER, ALL who repent and trust in the LORD will be saved. That said, there comes the truth that the unredeemed sinners will face different levels of eternal punishment. https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/no ... e-the-same

Jesus’ description is worse than separation from God, which He never mentions. He described fairly torturous experiences with fire and worms. Separation from God is exactly what the atheists want. I prefer to describe eternity for those who choose to do wrong as being as horrible as Jesus described, not what they’re hoping for. That’s what God chose to communicate…fire and worms that never stop, not that they will continue as they do now and enjoy an existence without Him.

What must be understood by an atheist or agnostic is that right NOW GOD is interacting with what happens around us. We are not alone. GOD has an influence. However, in HELL a person is separated from GOD's influence (because that is what the individual selected through his desire and behavior) and the influence of believers in general. The U.S. though not perfect is a country that has experienced the influence of Evangelical Christianity. It's pervasive in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. The tugging and pulling of Christian ethics and the Bible eventually led to the Civil War. It's obvious that the War of 1812 and the burning of Washington DC could have been the end of the young nation, and it wasn't terribly long afterwards that the Civil War erupted. And again, that war could have gone any number of ways for this then fledgling nation... The Great Depression was (I feel) GOD's inducement/spanking to put America (if not the world) back on track and not think so highly of itself or abilities ---- and World War II was in fact believed by many at the time to be a fight with THE Anti-Christ (though we now know that Hitler was an Anti-Christ and likely setting the stage for future events that are now developing faster and faster). I feel GOD sends out warnings in stages. One of the most godly defined eras in the U.S. was right after World War II. Churches were full, people loved Billy Graham, and the general climate was one of Family orientation with children receiving the most consideration above (I feel) any other time in U.S. history. Church Buses would pick kids for Vacation Bible School and youth groups everywhere. And bells rang every Sunday everywhere (or so it seemed) and Christmas lights appeared everywhere. Every store was decorated for the holidays... Movies, Television Shows, Magazines, Newspapers, had no foul language. And frankly, I remember when Payton Place came out on television, that the theme of the show was the issue, and not language in the least. My parents wouldn't let me watch it (not that I wanted to), I was told to do my homework. Yet, I watched and enjoyed Ed Sullivan, Drag Net, Perry Mason, Dick Van Dyke... There were still cigarette commercials, and Winston even was a sponsor of The Flintstone's. And yet I knew (as a kid) that smoking was bad and not something to desire. But I feel that this was because even as children we heard about GOOD and BAD, and such values were not exclusive to a handful of church goers. We were surrounded by values and it was much easier to note the affects of both good and evil and make as it were the "right" choice ---- most of the time...

Yes, I understand your position and a number of people prefer it to the description Jesus gave of existence after this life. “Separation from God” as a description today, atheists find appealing and christian’s don’t come as preaching hell fire. There is strong motivation not to sound so severe. Problem is, one has to deviate what Jesus actually taught and accept something he didn’t teach.

What exactly did not JESUS teach nor present through HIS disciples after HIS departure and the coming of the HOLY SPIRIT?

There’s a whole lot Jesus didn’t teach. He didn’t teach anything about accepting Him as Lord and Savior. He didn’t teach Hell is just separation from God. He didn’t teach all will eventually go to Heaven. Lots

John 12:47
If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world.

[Mae von H]

[Replying to LittleNipper in post #391]

For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.

2 Cor 5:10

[Mae von H]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #389]

The things you wrote don’t always match other things you’ve written. You’re inconsistent. That’s why I didn’t believe some statements you wrote. It’s not me, it’s you.

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #389]

The things you wrote don’t always match other things you’ve written. You’re inconsistent. That’s why I didn’t believe some statements you wrote. It’s not me, it’s you.

The Bible is one of the most inconsistent books I ever read.

If you can't see that it is not worthy of credibility just on that basis the problem is you, not we goddless.

[Mae von H]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #389]

The things you wrote don’t always match other things you’ve written. You’re inconsistent. That’s why I didn’t believe some statements you wrote. It’s not me, it’s you.

The Bible is one of the most inconsistent books I ever read.

If you can't see that it is not worthy of credibility just on that basis the problem is you, not we goddless.

The Bible is more consistent than science. Those who don’t understand it think otherwise. You, as one lone man, don’t understand it but millions have the opposite opinion and that down through the centuries.


But I heard an interesting point today. Chuck Colson came to believe the Bible and its contents true because of Watergate. He said that 12 men suffered unbelievable torture some over years rather than say it’s all a lie. He saw 12 of the most powerful men in the world unable to keep a lie secret over three weeks.

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #389]

The things you wrote don’t always match other things you’ve written. You’re inconsistent. That’s why I didn’t believe some statements you wrote. It’s not me, it’s you.

The Bible is one of the most inconsistent books I ever read.

If you can't see that it is not worthy of credibility just on that basis the problem is you, not we goddless.

The Bible is more consistent than science. Those who don’t understand it think otherwise. You, as one lone man, don’t understand it but millions have the opposite opinion and that down through the centuries.

This is a faitclaim and this a fallacy. You also ply the fallacy of numbers. It seems that your understanding oflogical reasoning is as flawed as your understanding of science and the Bible.

But I heard an interesting point today. Chuck Colson came to believe the Bible and its contents true because of Watergate. He said that 12 men suffered unbelievable torture some over years rather than say it’s all a lie. He saw 12 of the most powerful men in the world unable to keep a lie secret over three weeks.

I don't know who Chuck Colson is, but it looks to me like something I have come across so often when I have heard conversion stories - they were all for poor reasons. Whereas deconversion (for example, Rachel Slick) is more often the result of studying the Bible in order to try to settle doubts - but they got stronger and stonger and eventually - with reluctance - the belief could not be maintained.

It was not because of bad experiences with an atheist mother, a hatred of Communism or because of seeing a bunch of politicians who put humanist moral codes over loyalty to the political group.

[Clownboat]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #389]

The things you wrote don’t always match other things you’ve written. You’re inconsistent. That’s why I didn’t believe some statements you wrote. It’s not me, it’s you.

I don't think about you nor care what you believe. You're still wrong though, just too prideful to acknowledge this sadly.

Let me know if you would like to have a discussion about any of the available god concepts though. All the god concepts humans have invented throughout the years are pretty interesting, don't you think?

[Mae von H]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #389]

The things you wrote don’t always match other things you’ve written. You’re inconsistent. That’s why I didn’t believe some statements you wrote. It’s not me, it’s you.

I don't think about you nor care what you believe. You're still wrong though, just too prideful to acknowledge this sadly.

Let me know if you would like to have a discussion about any of the available god concepts though. All the god concepts humans have invented throughout the years are pretty interesting, don't you think?

Well, we found do so but I’d like a discussion at the same time on the available friend concepts that have been invented down through the years. You game?

[Clownboat]

Well, we found do so but I’d like a discussion at the same time on the available friend concepts that have been invented down through the years. You game?

That would seem like an odd thing to discuss on a debate site like this.
I am 100% certain as to what a god concept is. A friend concept, not so much, so let's see what you got. I'm game, but somehow I don't think I can take you seriously. Perhaps you will show that this feeling is misplaced?

[Mae von H]

Well, we found do so but I’d like a discussion at the same time on the available friend concepts that have been invented down through the years. You game?

That would seem like an odd thing to discuss on a debate site like this.
I am 100% certain as to what a god concept is. A friend concept, not so much, so let's see what you got. I'm game, but somehow I don't think I can take you seriously. Perhaps you will show that this feeling is misplaced?

There actually are friend concepts. Some, for example, think friendship means you’d do anything for a friend including commit a crime. That’s one concept.

Now it’s your turn to offer a “god concept” although we ought to specify which god? People have idolized or thought of clay statues as gods or rock stars. Which deity do you mean? If we don’t specify that, there are endless objects of human worship.