the so fallible Bible

[Searching4truth]

I don't think it is fair to suggest that all Christians are hypocrites

I agree. I too know some genuine xtians that would be what I consider a 'real' xtian. I was mostly referring to the ones here that continually try to fraudulently prove their case while insulting the ones they're debating.
thanks for letting me clear that up XP

[Brakeman]

I give my time and some finances to the needy without the whole 'the lord will reward those who give to the needy' You xtians are nothing but hypocrits. I guarantee that if there is a hell, ill see you there

I don't think it is fair to suggest that all Christians are hypocrites. ..

I disagree, All christians are hypocrites. All christians start off having an emotional guilt trip in reaction to sappy songs and sermon. They are told to "talk to jesus and ask him for forgiveness and mercy." They know at that very moment there is no one answering their pleas, but they all go on to pretend differently and deride doubters. That is a dishonest, hypocritical stance.

[xpastor]

I don't think it is fair to suggest that all Christians are hypocrites

I agree. I too know some genuine xtians that would be what I consider a 'real' xtian. I was mostly referring to the ones here that continually try to fraudulently prove their case while insulting the ones they're debating.
thanks for letting me clear that up XP

Thanks. I was going to reply to the earlier post that of course hypocrisy means saying you believe what you are pretty sure is not true. However, there is room for some doubts on any position without tipping a person over into hypocrisy. Somewhere C.S. Lewis says that he sometimes had days when atheism seemed horribly probable, but earlier, when he was an atheist, he had days when Christianity seemed horribly probable. Too bad he didn't stick it out. IMO it's idiotic to claim to be either a 1 or a 7 on Dawkins scale. Total certainty is a luxury we humans do not get to enjoy.

[Brakeman]

.. IMO it's idiotic to claim to be either a 1 or a 7 on Dawkins scale. Total certainty is a luxury we humans do not get to enjoy.

I very strongly disagree. The #7 on the Dawkins scale is 100% sure that there is no god. Atheistic forum members tend to read that in a bit too philosophically a manner. They take it to mean that there are ways a god could hide in mankind's pockets of ignorance. However, the scale should be read in the common social vernacular. We should rank the #7 scale with other common claims we would day to day say that we are 100% sure of.

I would quickly tell people that I am 100% sure that my name is "Brakeman's name." However I can quickly think of several ways I could be wrong about my own name. (Birth certificate snafu, switched at birth, etc.) All of these contingent ways have a higher likelihood of being true than does the god of the christians. Thus, as is commonly understood, the "Idiotic" stances are from anyone that ranks themselves a 1 though 6.

[Airyaman]

I don't think it is fair to suggest that all Christians are hypocrites. ..

I disagree, All christians are hypocrites. All christians start off having an emotional guilt trip in reaction to sappy songs and sermon. They are told to "talk to jesus and ask him for forgiveness and mercy." They know at that very moment there is no one answering their pleas, but they all go on to pretend differently and deride doubters. That is a dishonest, hypocritical stance.

As an ex-christian, I'll have to disagree. For many years I lived relatively doubt free. My doubts were whether god would answer my prayers in a way I felt they should be answered or otherwise.

I used to do alot of my own maintenance work on the family vehicles. I can recall times where I struggled to remove something and started to get angry. I would work on it for 5-10 (or more!) minutes and just keep getting angrier. Then I would realize I had not prayed before my work for help and guidance, so I'd stop and pray. More times than not I ended up removing the part easily when I returned.

Was that god working? No, it was me calming down so I could approach my work sensibly. I mean c'mon, the god of the universe isn't sitting around waiting for me to ask for help with car work. But I did believe differently back then, so I don't think that would be hypocritical. Wrong, but not hypocritical.

[Brakeman]

As an ex-christian, I'll have to disagree. For many years I lived relatively doubt free. My doubts were whether god would answer my prayers in a way I felt they should be answered or otherwise.

No, I don't think you understood my point. Sure, later theists are fully deluded into all of that crap. But there was a first time, the first prayer, the first realization that you aren't getting anything back like you thought you should. That is what I'm talking about. soon after, cognitive dissonance sets in and you are convinced of all that BS. I'm an ex-christian too. I just remember my "Conversion prayer" too well.

[Searching4truth]

More times than not I ended up removing the part easily when I returned.
Was that god working? No, it was me calming down so I could approach my work sensibly. I mean c'mon, the god of the universe isn't sitting around waiting for me to ask for help with car work.

Agreed. In my case it was always plumbing, lol. But there are times still where I have fleeting thoughts of doubt. Even though my brain tells me thats all they are. Whats up with that and when does it go away? I know its due to 27 years of belief, indoctrination if you will, but its childish and its time to dissipate. Ive lost 'good' friends because of my evolution of beliefs. You know the ones who say you can talk to.about anything? Apparently that doesnt count with doubting your faith

[Drich]

"God did not 'create' the bible."

If this is true, Drich, why did you jump through so many loops not more than 10 days ago to integrate the story (and that is the right word) of Genesis with current scientific theories as to the creation of the universe.

If God didn't create the Bible then whoever wrote Genesis did it off the top of their own heads.

Just because God did not write the whole bible as He did with the Ten commandments with Moses, Does not mean He did not guid the hand of those who did.

The writers were certainly not there.

Are you familiar with the book of Revelation? If you read the first few verses you will note that revelation is not a book of prophesy. It is a historical account of the end of the world. God took John of patmos and placed him in a position to record all that he saw, and told him to do his best to describe the following events. John did not live at that time, yet God gave him a oppertunity to witness it.

Genesis would have happened in a similiar way.

Wouldn't it make much more sense - if all you really need is a synopsis of the gospel to simply write the whole of the creation story off as a simpler explanation for simpler times?

Need for what? Salvation? Salvation is not the finish line, it is the starting point of the 'race.'
Books like revelation and Genesis give us insight to God. With this knoweledge comes understanding, with understanding comes the oppertunity for a deeper relationship.

Your argument in this thread seems to be the Bible isn't an exact record because it doesn't have to be. All you need is the key message.

No not even close. My repeated message is that we do not need or are we required to understand the bible and everything written in it. We are
Simply held to account for what we do understand and comprehend.

That's great an'all but the scope for misinterpretation of what the key message is must be huge, judging by the number of different variations of Christianity and how quick you are to disparage them.

Diversity in Christianity is the key to understanding it. Again we are told to do our best to worship God. Because we are all different it means our worship will be done in different ways, so as to serve our unique comperhensions of God.

You do seem to have a very confused take on your own beliefs sometimes, one that isn't consistent for any period of time.

I know what I believe and it has not changed since I have been posting on this board.
Perhaps you simply do not fully understand my beliefs because you are trying to reconsile what I have stated with your personal understanding of what 'christianity' is supposed to be.

---

but they are confused because the teaching of the Bible is so self-contradictory, as I will show later.

looking forward to that.

[Searching4truth]

your kind of an ass sometimes... aren't you supposed to 'love like Jesus'?

[max-greece]

Before I start this Drich please avail yourself of a spell-checker. The mistakes are very distracting sometimes

"Just because God did not write the whole bible as He did with the Ten commandments with Moses, Does not mean He did not guid the hand of those who did."

Nor does it mean that they wrote it down exactly as he wanted. Nor does it mean that it has been subsequently translated accurately....

This might explain why Genesis is wrong. Water on the first day? Before the sky? Fruit trees before the sun? 5 days to make the earth, 1 day to make all the stars?

"Are you familiar with the book of Revelation? If you read the first few verses you will note that revelation is not a book of prophesy. It is a historical account of the end of the world. God took John of patmos and placed him in a position to record all that he saw, and told him to do his best to describe the following events. John did not live at that time, yet God gave him a oppertunity to witness it.

Genesis would have happened in a similiar way."

Revelation reads like a drug induced nightmare. That it is written from a historical perspective doesn't mean its going to be proved right. Judging by Genesis the odds against it being right are high.

"Need for what? Salvation? Salvation is not the finish line, it is the starting point of the 'race.'
Books like revelation and Genesis give us insight to God. With this knoweledge comes understanding, with understanding comes the oppertunity for a deeper relationship."

A junkie who gets all his facts muddled up? Thankfully I chose not to run.

"No not even close. My repeated message is that we do not need or are we required to understand the bible and everything written in it. We are
Simply held to account for what we do understand and comprehend."

You forgot to include the bits we are apparently entitled to add. Your argument not so long ago about the examination of Mary, for example, which was missing from the text but you felt free to incorporate.

Gotta say - its the first time I have ever seen a Christian do this. Just add bits on as the will takes them.

"Diversity in Christianity is the key to understanding it. Again we are told to do our best to worship God. Because we are all different it means our worship will be done in different ways, so as to serve our unique comperhensions of God. "

What a lovely thought but how far removed from reality. You are ever ready to disparage the interpretations of various sects of Christianity, although that's nothing. Wars are fought on interpretations.

Just go over to Northern Ireland. It won't take long for the question "So - do you kick with your left foot or your right?" to come up. They are not really asking about football. As it happens when I was asked I responded - I'm Jewish - with the choices that leaves me I think I'll be giving football a miss.

"I know what I believe and it has not changed since I have been posting on this board.
Perhaps you simply do not fully understand my beliefs because you are trying to reconsile what I have stated with your personal understanding of what 'christianity' is supposed to be."

Only a Christian would make that sound like a bad thing form the point of view of the questioner. Yes - I am trying to understand your position. You claim to be a Christian - so, yes, I am trying to fit you into the Christian framework as I have gotten to know it.

I can't see why my inability to do that reflects ill on me.