The Long and the Short of it.

[Watson]

I believe, and I still ask questions. I'm not assuming you never believed, I just wonder if you understood that belief at the time. Just like if you didn't understand what was going on when you were high or drunk, you couldn't be cnsidered an expert on the subject; it's as if you never were at all.

I agree, the Bible discussion probably wont get us anywhere but a load of circles...but I think this whole topic poses an interesting, and possibly enlightening question.

[fr0d0]

There are other sources of stories with relevant morals to the tales and, I dare say, some of them have better stories that depict human nature even more strongly. Belief in god has nothing to do with seeing the meaning behind a metaphor or the moral of a fable. I see them in the bible, but I do not see how them being there leads to believing the claim that god is real.

And round and round we go. Heheh! I think we have found the sticking point. Belief. When it comes to the existence of god, I don't have it and you do. The question of why must remain unanswered, it seems.

I agree there are many other sources that are helpful in understanding the nature of God. How you construct your own viewpoint is influenced by many things. I don't dismiss anything out of hand. Fables have great messages to convey. I see them as all important.

The point of the bible isn't to prove that God is real, but to clearly set out his nature. If it did prove it to you either way, it'd be contradictory... because the bible says you must have faith to believe.

The question is easily answered IMO : you (personally) don't see reasoning in the biblical message where I do. You have the information, but you don't give that information intellectual assent. Even if you did, you still wouldn't believe, because after assent comes acting on the knowledge. That's where us that believe stand.

[Godscreated]

Paul Watson and fr0d0 have both given answers that are common among believers and are valid to us. Watson has said that experience comes from belief and belief from faith and when you start with faith, and you must, there is no evidence. This is the point where freewill comes in and you are either going to accept what you have read and heard or you are not. With acceptance you believe and with out acceptance you do not believe and this is where the road splits the first time and some go on looking for their life in other things and others start there search for who God is. Now at this point there will be those who find they dislike who they percieve God to be (controlling tyrant, uncaring, murderer and ect.) and there faith is lost and there goes their belief. This may take several years or even a decade or so before it happens but for some it will and IMO it's because they never reached out to experience God. So now the road has split again and they also become nonbelievers. Now for those of us who decided to look for God and have an actual relationship with Him come to a point of experiencal belief that is so strong no one can shake us loose from God and this is a promise made by God. He gives us the resolve to carry on no matter what may come into our lives.
fr0d0 stated that the Bible does not try to prove God and it does not. This is where so many make the assumtion they can find proof of His existance, they want facts, evidience or what ever to believe and it's not there. The Bible is written from the view that God has always existed and this is why I believe it's from God if man alone had written the Bible it would be stuffed full of supposed truths, facts and evidience. Mankind would have a need to prove a god and if man had penned the Bible on his own accord that is what you would see. God on the other hand has no desire to prove Himself as a reality just as you and I (or at least me) find no need to prove our reality. Like God we want people to know who we are and we know that experience is the best way for another to learn who we are. Like fr0d0 and Watson said this is why we have the Bible to guide us into that experience with God.

[Minimalist]

I believe what fr0do was suggesting, and correct me if I am wrong fr0do, is that the Bible presents certain life lessons and observations in the form of stories to teach about God.

Yet, reality and human nature suggest that this stuff was written by priests who were mainly looking to solidify their own position within society.

Sorry, boys, but if it is a choice between magic and human nature I'm going to have to go with human nature every time.

You see, human nature exists.

[Watson]

I agree whole-heartedly with you Minimalist.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

So you see? Different conclusions. Why is that?

Because he's Frodo, a committed theist. He's far too invested in his personal superstitions to be swayed by anything as prosaic as reason.

Religious beliefs are usually inculcated into small children,who accept them uncritically as they believe anything an adult tells them. Neither reason nor evidence are involved in the process.

give me the child until the age of 6 and I care not who has the man. (Augustine of Hippo (354-430CE) )

Augustine understood that few people ever abandon the beliefs and values of childhood. The parts of us in which reason played no part in forming can rarely be undone by reason alone. Perhaps that's one reason atheists (so far) remain in the minority in most countries.

Having said that,I am not arguing atheists as a group are more rational than theists. I agree with Carl Jung,who argued* that our strongest beliefs and values are the result of direct experience,that emotion is more important than reason. That is why belief is not a choice We can and do rationalise any position.[as a species]

Frodo has no more choice in his theism than do I in my atheism.

If you could reason with religious people there wouldn't be any. (Greg House)

[Minimalist]

I agree whole-heartedly with you Minimalist.

Your testament is no better, Watson. As Bart Ehrman has pointed out, successfully, establishing the right of the bishops to call the shots was a primary goal of the redactors of the NT.

Power trumps morality.

[Watson]

And I have acknowledged that that was so when it comes to the NT, Min. But morality trumps power every time, and there are some morals within the Bible that are good and not any more out-of-date than a cell phone is. They still hold true, and can still be applied to every day life.

[Minimalist]

There is NOTHING in the NT that the church did not want there.

Now ask yourself who is the likely beneficiary of that.[/b]

[Watson]

The Bible was written by many different authors, though. Those authors slipped in exactly what they wanted in there, and some of what they put in was good. A lot of what they put in was good. The church definitely benefited from a lot of the bad things in the NT that it demanded be put in there, but they also probably benefitted from a lot of the good things it demanded put in there.