About other gods-question for theists

[FatAndFaithless]

Yes but why believe the Bible instead of the Koran? Or the Book of Morman?

A good question.

From a spiritual perspective, God has elected me, regenerated me, and given me belief. This is nothing I did on my own, nor nothing I deserve, but rather it is the work of God that no man may boast.

From a logical perspective, the Bible, the Koran, and the book of Morman all claim the Biblical God to be true. The Koran and the book of Morman then go on to deny the truth of the Biblical God. The Bible remains logically consistent with it's position, the Koran and the book of Morman do not.

So why not be a Jew?

[Jenny A]

Yes but why believe the Bible instead of the Koran? Or the Book of Morman?

A good question.

From a spiritual perspective, God has elected me, regenerated me, and given me belief. This is nothing I did on my own, nor nothing I deserve, but rather it is the work of God that no man may boast.

I think that what you have there is self delusion. Those who believe in Allah, are similarly self deluded. The point is that those who think they have found internal confirmation of god, are only seeing what they want or expect to see. That's why Muslims, Jews, Mormons, Christians, Hindus, etc. all look inside and come to such very different conclusions about god.

From a logical perspective, the Bible, the Koran, and the book of Morman all claim the Biblical God to be true. The Koran and the book of Morman then go on to deny the truth of the Biblical God. The Bible remains logically consistent with it's position, the Koran and the book of Morman do not.

This boils down to:

A says B is right.
C says B is right.
A and C are sometimes wrong.
Therefore B is right.

That's nonsense.

It's also based on a couple of false premises. First neither the Koran nor the Book of Mormon say that the Bible in inerrant, only that within certain limits it contains truth. Mormons say the Bible is right insofar as it correctly translated and preserved over time. The Koran is less kind.

Second, The Bible is full of logical contradictions. And the Old Testament is largely negated by the New, or at least so many Christians who don't want to stone rape victims tell me.

[GrandizerII]

From a logical perspective, the Bible, the Koran, and the book of Morman all claim the Biblical God to be true. The Koran and the book of Morman then go on to deny the truth of the Biblical God. The Bible remains logically consistent with it's position, the Koran and the book of Morman do not.

From a logical perspective, they're all words of men.

By the way, Muslims argue that it's their book that's logically consistent. They also boast that no one can write a book as beautiful as the Qur'an, so it must be from Allah.

[Elskidor]

Dr. Seuss was a better writer than either of those two gods. Those are some boring books, and far from beautiful.

[orangebox21]

So why not be a Jew?

The answer is found in Romans 11

---

11 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel saying,

3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.

4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.

5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.

8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear) unto this day.

9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:

10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.

11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

---

The point is that those who think they have found internal confirmation of god, are only seeing what they want or expect to see.

I never said I found internal confirmation of God. I said God did a working upon me. That's external confirmation.

From a logical perspective, the Bible, the Koran, and the book of Morman all claim the Biblical God to be true. The Koran and the book of Morman then go on to deny the truth of the Biblical God. The Bible remains logically consistent with it's position, the Koran and the book of Morman do not.

This boils down to:

A says B is right.
C says B is right.
A and C are sometimes wrong.
Therefore B is right.

No it doesn't. Your third premise appears nowhere in the argument I have made. You are misrepresenting my argument.

It's also based on a couple of false premises. First neither the Koran nor the Book of Mormon say that the Bible in inerrant,

I didn't claim they did.

Second, The Bible is full of logical contradictions.

For example....

And the Old Testament is largely negated by the New, or at least so many Christians who don't want to stone rape victims tell me.

Do Christian's live in a theocracy?

[FatAndFaithless]

So why not be a Jew?

The answer is found in Romans 11

---

11 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel saying,

3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.

4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.

5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.

8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear) unto this day.

9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:

10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.

11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.

---

The point is that those who think they have found internal confirmation of god, are only seeing what they want or expect to see.

I never said I found internal confirmation of God. I said God did a working upon me. That's external confirmation.

This boils down to:

A says B is right.
C says B is right.
A and C are sometimes wrong.
Therefore B is right.

No it doesn't. Your third premise appears nowhere in the argument I have made. You are misrepresenting my argument.

It's also based on a couple of false premises. First neither the Koran nor the Book of Mormon say that the Bible in inerrant,

I didn't claim they did.

Second, The Bible is full of logical contradictions.

For example....

And the Old Testament is largely negated by the New, or at least so many Christians who don't want to stone rape victims tell me.

Do Christian's live in a theocracy?

Judaism doesn’t give a crap what Romans says, seeing as it’s part of the NT. You said that the Bible was logically consistent internally (debatable). So is the Torah. You can’t use a part of your religion as “internally consistent” as then use it to invalidate another religion which doesn’t use that part at all. The Jews are just as (in my opinion moreso) logically consistent than your Bible.

[Jenny A]

@ Orangebox

(1) You said:

From a spiritual perspective, God has elected me, regenerated me, and given me belief. This is nothing I did on my own, nor nothing I deserve, but rather it is the work of God that no man may boast.

What external confirmation do you have of that? Being "given belief" is an internal feeling and not an external confirmation. It is exactly what believers in other religions have. So why not Islam? Surely their internal confirmation is just as valid as yours. Your choice is cultural nothing more.

(2) As for Biblical contradictions, there are whole articles devoted to that:

[email]http://infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html[/email]
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/page/b...radictions

But the biggest one that stands out to me is not an internal contradiction. It's that Jesus in the Gospels was so clearly stating that the world is ending soon and god is coming now. Didn't happen.

The second biggest contradiction is that the god of the Old Testament is such a very different character than the god in the New Testament.

Read the Gospels side-by-side sometime. You'll find they don't agree. http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/Shred...ospels.htm

(3) Christians in the U.S. don't live in a theocracy but many of them behave as if they'd like to. What does that have to do with whether the Old Testament is largely negated by the New Testament?

(4) Lets try your syllogism again:

A says there is a god and some of his truth is found in X.
B says there is a god and some of his truth is found in X.
A and B contain some internal contradictions and also sometimes contradict X.
X does not contradict itself.
Therefore X is true.

Better? It still doesn't follow logically.

[The Grand Nudger]

Dr. Seuss was a better writer than either of those two gods. Those are some boring books, and far from beautiful.

Oh, you're being unkind - a wonderful team of scribblers was assembled to put all of those fancy doodles down on paper.

@The question about whether or not christians live in a theocracy-

Fundamentally, yes. All are living under the unimpeachable rule of a divine sovereign, his agents, and his edicts. As to whether or not they are living in a theocracy with regards to reality - sometimes. A number of middle eastern countries with such governments have christian populations. Ultimately this is irrelevant, as even those theocracies are illegitimate from the point of view of total divine sovereignty. Whether or not those people conform to the edicts of their own supposed divine king would be another matter - I'd call it 50/50 myself.

[orangebox21]

Judaism doesn’t give a crap what Romans says, seeing as it’s part of the NT.

Your question was why am I not a Jew.

You said that the Bible was logically consistent internally (debatable). So is the Torah. You can’t use a part of your religion as “internally consistent” as then use it to invalidate another religion which doesn’t use that part at all.

Christianity does not invalidate Judaism, but rather fulfills it.

@ Orangebox

(1) You said:

From a spiritual perspective, God has elected me, regenerated me, and given me belief. This is nothing I did on my own, nor nothing I deserve, but rather it is the work of God that no man may boast.

What external confirmation do you have of that? Being "given belief" is an internal feeling and not an external confirmation. It is exactly what believers in other religions have. So why not Islam? Surely their internal confirmation is just as valid as yours. Your choice is cultural nothing more.

Someone giving something to me is by definition external (it is an external entity operating upon me). If I were to give something to myself, that would be internal. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your definition of 'external', please define.

(2) As for Biblical contradictions, there are whole articles devoted to that:

[email]http://infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html[/email]
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/page/b...radictions

There are whole books (Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible. Haley, John) and webslte articles (carm.org, apologeticspress.org, etc) devoted to debunking so-called Biblical contradictions.

Read the Gospels side-by-side sometime. You'll find they don't agree. http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/Shred...ospels.htm

Read: One Perfect Life by John MacArthur. You'll find they do agree.

What does that have to do with whether the Old Testament is largely negated by the New Testament?

Not negated, fulfilled.

(4) Lets try your syllogism again:

A says there is a god and some of his truth is found in X.
B says there is a god and some of his truth is found in X.
A and B contain some internal contradictions and also sometimes contradict X.
X does not contradict itself.
Therefore X is true.

Better? It still doesn't follow logically.

You continue to misrepresent my argument by adding your own philosophical bias ("contain some internal contradictions') to my argument. I did not include this proposition in my argument. Please represent my argument accurately or if you don't understand it, ask for clarification.

[Dystopia]

As a theist you believe in a god. But what about all the other gods? How can you say yours is the only true god when the fellow next to you has his own holy book or ways of worship?
How do you know there is not more than one, are maybe you are worshipping different faces of the same supernatural being who is having a laugh?
If your god is the true one, why does he allow other gods to be worshipped?

I'm an atheist but I must say being a theist doesn't equal being religious. This is something I will not get tired of correcting because both are not synonymous