(October 18, 2014 at 12:31 am)Vivalarevolution Wrote: Well I'm not reading all 19 pages of replies but I will try to answer your question.

Despite your lengthy reply, the only part of it that came close to addressing what I actually said in the OP was the parts about Biblical prophesies. Even if the prophesies are true, how does that prove that Paul's claims of divine revelation are true? How do we know that events with no witnesses happened? How do we know we can't trust Satan?

(October 18, 2014 at 12:31 am)Vivalarevolution Wrote: In a world where Child sacrifice and the likes were prevalent, man had no sense to treat everyone with respect. The world was barbaric, and to keep a country (Israel) pure and alive till the messiah arrived, it was necessary for rules to be set up so that they wouldn't do anything wrong.

Two things:
1) If this were important, why did God wait so long to establish these rules?

2) What about rules that encourage bad things like slavery or killing rape victims if they don't scream for help?

(October 18, 2014 at 12:31 am)Vivalarevolution Wrote: When the world's morality improved and people were able to understand Jesus' teachings of love and compassion (still note that this was while Romans gathered to see lions eat prisoners) god sent Jesus to explain it all to them.

Why wasn't the world ready in the first place? You'd think a wise, future-seeing God would know to set these ground rules up in human's infancy rather than wait until the situation gets really bad before stepping in to implement a very gradual fix.

(October 18, 2014 at 12:31 am)Vivalarevolution Wrote: Apart from that there are numerous prophecies in the bible which foretell the coming of Jesus. The fall of Tyre is one. The exile of the 10 tribes is another (It happened over 200 years) Read Isaiah and Eziekel
We don't believe in the Adam and eve thing and the talking donkey and all. They are just stories to explain the situation of man at that particular point of time.

Not all of the prophesies have come true. Do the wrong ones take away from the legitimacy of the Bible, or do only the good ones count? Why?

If the story of Adam and Eve aren't true, why did Almighty God allow it into the Bible to confuse people? Why not put in a "divine disclaimer" to remove all doubt?

(October 18, 2014 at 12:31 am)Vivalarevolution Wrote: It's sad how such rigid beliefs tend to alienate people from Christianity

Why does Almighty God set up the Bible to accommodate them?

(October 18, 2014 at 10:21 am)Vivalarevolution Wrote: Ps- I don't treat the bible as the word of god. Maybe exodus never happened and the hebrews just went to fight against their neighbours for petty reasons. I'm not going to imply anything affirmatively before the new testament

If you don't take the Old Testament seriously, why do you take the New Testament seriously? What makes them different, and more specifically, what makes the New Testament more reliable or accurate?

Also, if you don't believe the Bible is the word of God, why were you citing prophesies in the Old Testament earlier?

(October 20, 2014 at 10:43 am)RobbyPants Wrote:

(October 18, 2014 at 10:21 am)Vivalarevolution Wrote: Ps- I don't treat the bible as the word of god. Maybe exodus never happened and the hebrews just went to fight against their neighbours for petty reasons. I'm not going to imply anything affirmatively before the new testament

If you don't take the Old Testament seriously, why do you take the New Testament seriously? What makes them different, and more specifically, what makes the New Testament more reliable or accurate?

Also, if you don't believe the Bible is the word of God, why were you citing prophesies in the Old Testament earlier?

I'll give you an answer in some time. If you really want to know, I posted something I meant to post here but accidently posted on another thread " honest review of Christianity". I'll copy it to here later, or check it out now

---

Oh yeah . . . here it is. It's copied

I do not feel that the bible is to be taken literally and as divinely inspired.
Moreover, I think it could be potentially dangerous if you're thoughts on the subjects in the bible are rigid. What good is a rigid mind not open to acceptance of change and constructive criticism?
And even as a faithful christian I am against telling children about 6 day creation and that they're going to hell for a sin someone in the past did ( I know your reaction . . . I'll explain what my denomination believes later.)
It was okay in the past to base your understanding of the world with what was written on papyrus. The world has changed and our worldviews also need to change with it. Believing something else than what was written in the bible doesn't mean you can't be Christian.
1) the first seven books- Genesis, exodus, leviticus, numbers, deuteronomy, Joshua, judges was a set of narratives composed over centuries. I and many others do not take this to be factual. Sure some parts may really have happened, but in my opinion it's just written to explain the glory of god and what he did do for Israel.
2) Ruth, samuels, kings, chronicles may or may not be factual, but I think they are generally considered historical right? I'm going to finish reading 1 Samuel now but I don't think I'm going to make a claim whether they really happened or not.
3) writings- I'll be honest I haven't reached here yet, but from what I've seen they just seem like pieces of literature about god (Don't mention song of Solomon)
4) haven't read latter books like Daniel yet so no clue
5) gospels are just narrations of the life of jesus by various authors intended for various recipients. Matthew is more understandable for jews while luke is more apt for gentiles. To explain why I believe the gospels, would take a whole other thread.
6) apart from pauls conversion, I don't see anything in acts which could be contradicted by known history. I could be wrong though. I'm open to correction.
7) last writings- revelations and the epistles are just basically letters that have been found and compiled. Their original existence is unquestionable. Whether their content speaks truth is another issue.

So no, I don't blindly believe the bible , nor do I hold it sacred. It just provides me with the authors' insights as how they viewed god in their time. It allows me to understand what they felt about the creator and how views changed over 1500 years. There are stories which aim to put god in a picture which is suitable for the people. Doesn't mean I think they're right though. It's just that through the writings I can see the "evolution of worship. "
You know how literature is like a window to a nation's culture. Similarly, the stories of how they comprehended god serves as an insight into the culture that jesus was born in (and how his inclusion changed all that)
But the difference between new testament and old is that there is no longer a need for writings of gods witness. Jesus served as proof to the character of god witnessed by hundreds. So authors couldn't interpret god as they wished (as they could in old testament). Here there was a definite picture which had little chance of being changed or corrupted. The letters and all just magnify the greater picture that's all.

Sorry if it's too long. I just keep writing and writing Big Grin

Where to begin with noting all the apostasy in that one ?


Sheesh, heresy, blasphemy, slander, I just don't know where to start.

I renew my call to get some True Christians here, and while we're at it, lets purge the cafeteria cherry pickers, they are doing more for the atheist cause and it is bloody confusing.

(October 20, 2014 at 11:10 am)Vivalarevolution Wrote: You know how literature is like a window to a nation's culture. Similarly, the stories of how they comprehended god serves as an insight into the culture that jesus was born in (and how his inclusion changed all that)
But the difference between new testament and old is that there is no longer a need for writings of gods witness. Jesus served as proof to the character of god witnessed by hundreds. So authors couldn't interpret god as they wished (as they could in old testament). Here there was a definite picture which had little chance of being changed or corrupted. The letters and all just magnify the greater picture that's all.

Why are all those alleged eye witnesses anonymous? Not one wrote anything down. Hundreds of them and yet not a single one wrote anything down.

All we have are claims from Paul these eye witnesses even existed and he wasn't there himself.

How is that different than me claiming I know of 500 people who saw the Raelian spaceship land in the Oregon Cascades and the Raelian leader came out and made us all dinner?

(October 20, 2014 at 11:47 am)vorlon13 Wrote: Where to begin with noting all the apostasy in that one ?


Sheesh, heresy, blasphemy, slander, I just don't know where to start.

I renew my call to get some True Christians here, and while we're at it, lets purge the cafeteria cherry pickers, they are doing more for the atheist cause and it is bloody confusing.

You do know that the acronym for 'blasphemy', 'apostasy', and 'heresy' is BAH.

Those are silly words that only diseased minds take seriously.

Obviously time to run Robert Green Ingersoll up the flag pole again in response to that.

Quote:We have heard talk enough. We have listened to all the drowsy, idealess, vapid sermons that we wish to hear. We have read your Bible and the works of your best minds. We have heard your prayers, your solemn groans and your reverential amens. All these amount to less than nothing. We want one fact. We beg at the doors of your churches for just one little fact. We pass our hats along your pews and under your pulpits and implore you for just one fact. We know all about your mouldy wonders and your stale miracles. We want a this year's fact. We ask only one. Give us one fact for charity. Your miracles are too ancient. The witnesses have been dead for nearly two thousand years.
-- Robert Green Ingersoll, "The Gods" (1872)

(October 20, 2014 at 11:47 am)vorlon13 Wrote: Where to begin with noting all the apostasy in that one ?


Sheesh, heresy, blasphemy, slander, I just don't know where to start.

I renew my call to get some True Christians here, and while we're at it, lets purge the cafeteria cherry pickers, they are doing more for the atheist cause and it is bloody confusing.

Yeah If I'm wrong about this then 250 million others are also wrong.
from Wikipedia in orthodox Christian article
Scripture is understood to contain historical fact, poetry, idiom, metaphor, simile, moral fable, parable, prophecy, and wisdom literature and each bears its own consideration in its interpretation.

You really think all 2.1 billion christians believe in creationism, and believe the bible was divinely inspired? That ain't heresy. Carefully analyzing the parts of the bible for yourself isn't going to affect any christian.
Christianity is not about believing the bible word for word.

(October 20, 2014 at 12:07 pm)Vivalarevolution Wrote: Christianity is not about believing the bible word for word.

What is it about?

(October 20, 2014 at 11:55 am)JesusHChrist Wrote:

(October 20, 2014 at 11:10 am)Vivalarevolution Wrote: You know how literature is like a window to a nation's culture. Similarly, the stories of how they comprehended god serves as an insight into the culture that jesus was born in (and how his inclusion changed all that)
But the difference between new testament and old is that there is no longer a need for writings of gods witness. Jesus served as proof to the character of god witnessed by hundreds. So authors couldn't interpret god as they wished (as they could in old testament). Here there was a definite picture which had little chance of being changed or corrupted. The letters and all just magnify the greater picture that's all.

Why are all those alleged eye witnesses anonymous? Not one wrote anything down. Hundreds of them and yet not a single one wrote anything down.

All we have are claims from Paul these eye witnesses even existed and he wasn't there himself.

How is that different than me claiming I know of 500 people who saw the Raelian spaceship land in the Oregon Cascades and the Raelian leader came out and made us all dinner?

Are you sure all those people knew how to write?They were peasants in the middle east 2000 years ago
And matthew , John, Paul, peter knew how to write