FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Biblical Criticism - 2001
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

Notices

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-24-2001, 09:56 PM   #11
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Free will without sin? The notion of free will without the possibility of sin is the same as free will without the possibility of choosing. It is a logical impossibility, it can't happen, it doesn't even make sense to talk about it happening.</font>
I completely disagree. How is "sin" logically necessary?

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">The story that Lot's wife was turned into a pillar of salt is very convincing: This is what would happen to someone caught that situation.</font>
&lt;chuckles&gt; You might need to crack a physics textbook.

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Miracles are simply events where reality did not follow its normal laws due to divine intervention.</font>
The tough part is establishing divine intervention. Also, if divine intervention is a requirement for the definition of a miracle, you can't use apparent miracles as evidence of existence of a god.
 
Old 03-25-2001, 09:36 AM   #12
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Tercel: Normally whenever the bible talks of God causing damage to humans it is because the people are doing evil and God is punishing them.

Wait a minute. Are you suggesting the biblical Yahweh drowned millions of innocent babies, small children, and animals because they were doing something "evil?" If this is your suggestion, then you speak NONSENSE.


[quote]<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">&lt;&lt;If God punishes Himself for sins, then punishment still happens and we get off.
Thus God gives himself the justice (ie Jesus) and gives us mercy/love.&gt;&gt;&gt;

This makes no sense. God created everything so he also created sin. If he did not
create sin where did it come from. If he didn't then he's not all powerful. How does
punishing yourself for something you created make it all right. The day he supposedly
created the planet he knew everything that ever was or will be.[Quote]

God created the possibility of sin by giving free will. Man exercised that possibility.

This is another piece of NONSENSE. I can conceive of an earth inhabited by billions of human beings who do not have the capacity to hate or commit violent acts against other human beings. Surely, if I can conceive of this, the biblical god could have.

Quote:
As for logical impossibilities: God turning someone into a pillar of salt; Jesus feeding a thousand with a few loafs; raising people from the dead; the plagues that are put on
Egypt; parting the red sea; fitting all the animals on the ark and feeding them; healing
the blind; manna from heaven; and so on and so on!</font>
Firstly on the pillar of salt: Sodom was located in the region that is now the dead sea area. Volcanic activity (similar to that described destroying Sodom) combined with the high amounts of salt in the rocks there has buried many trees etc under layers of salt. The story that Lot's wife was turned into a pillar of salt is very convincing: This is what would happen to someone caught that situation.

Those are not logical impossibilities, they are just miracles.


Please present evidence demonstrating the existence of miracles. For that matter, present evidence demonstrating the existence of the biblical Yahweh.

(With the exception of the animals in the ark) They make complete sense as possible events if we allow God to act. A logical impossibility is a thing which simply cannot even exist because it's descripton is inconsisant.

Are you familiar with the term "improbable?" If you wish to make sense, speak in terms of degree of probability.

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">&lt;&lt;In asking whether a logical impossibility is possible we are in fact not asking a
logical question at all.&gt;&gt;
Considering that God made everything including the laws of science and physics,
etc., and, in light of the logical impossibility of the "miracles" in the bible. It is perfectly logical to ask if God could make a circular square or any other such notion. Anything that is a "miracle" is a logical impossibility yet we are expected to accept this without evidence other than a Bible that's filled with errancy?</font>

Damn it, repeat 10 times: "Miracles are not by nature logical impossibilities".

Repeat 10 times: "Some things are so improbable, it makes no sense to even discuss them."

Miracles are simply events where reality did not follow its normal laws due to divine intervention.

This is a faith-based statement. Where is its place in rational discourse?

rodahi



 
Old 03-25-2001, 12:18 PM   #13
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Thumbs up

Thanks!

My point exactly!

-T

 
Old 03-25-2001, 02:08 PM   #14
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by schalldampfer:
God is all powerful.

So why did Jesus have to DIE to forgive our sins? Explain why an all-powerful being needs such a medium to absolve us of sin.
</font>
"...for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die..." Genesis 2
 
Old 03-25-2001, 03:38 PM   #15
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by irenaeus:
"...for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die..." Genesis 2</font>
According to the myth, they didn't die when they ate.

rodahi

 
Old 03-25-2001, 11:01 PM   #16
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by SingleDad:
I completely disagree. How is "sin" logically necessary?</font>
If you've got free will to choose to do the right thing and the wrong thing. We define sin as the choice to do the wrong thing.
Therefore free will=possibility of sin.
Thus having free will without sin is a logical contradition.

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">The story that Lot's wife was turned into a pillar of salt is very convincing: This is what would happen to someone caught that situation.

&lt;chuckles&gt; You might need to crack a physics textbook.</font>
Uh? What does physics have to do with this? You might want to investigate the salt-covered fosilised trees (assuming they're all trees rather than people) which are found in the dead sea area as a result of the volcanic eruption combined with the huge amounts of salt. Pillars of salt describe them perfectly.

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Miracles are simply events where reality did not follow its normal laws due to divine intervention.

The tough part is establishing divine intervention. Also, if divine intervention is a requirement for the definition of a miracle, you can't use apparent miracles as evidence of existence of a god.
</font>
I think you've missed the point. I was just giving the definition of miracles. The whole point is that miracles themselves are not logically inconsisant ie it makes sense to talk of a miracle but not of a circular square.
 
Old 03-25-2001, 11:07 PM   #17
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by rodahi:
Tercel: Normally whenever the bible talks of God causing damage to humans it is because the people are doing evil and God is punishing them.

Wait a minute. Are you suggesting the biblical Yahweh drowned millions of innocent babies, small children, and animals because they were doing something "evil?" If this is your suggestion, then you speak NONSENSE.
</font>
I wasn't suggesting anything of the sort. I simply meant exactly what I said, the Bible does justify most (all?) cases of God ordering/causing deaths on the basis of him destroying evil. Whether you think the Bible's justified in saying this is entirely up to you...

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Damn it, repeat 10 times: "Miracles are not by nature logical impossibilities".

Repeat 10 times: "Some things are so improbable, it makes no sense to even discuss them."</font>
I wasn't making a case for miracles. I was simply pointing out that their definition is not self-inconsisent.

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Miracles are simply events where reality did not follow its normal laws due to divine intervention.

This is a faith-based statement. Where is its place in rational discourse?</font>
Faith-based statement? Personally I thought it was a definition of miracles. But hey, apparently I've got faith in a lot of things because I believe many things to have definitions...
What place does a definition have in a rational discourse??? Hmmm, is that why it's called free thinking?
 
Old 03-25-2001, 11:21 PM   #18
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by irenaeus:
"...for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die..." Genesis 2</font>
Insufficient. They did NOT die that very day. And if God wanted to absolve us of sin, and death was a necessity, why not:

Impregnate Eve with His son.
And have him die in childbirth?

The death requirement has been met! And sin was solved much earlier. Given that time is irrelevant to such a being, why wait?

Furthermore, as an All-Powerful, All-Knowing being, he would know in advance everybody's actions, and as the Creator, he would Create them KNOWING that. Which therefor means that he made them to do such a thing. It's no different than programming a word processor. Key gets pressed, A will appear. Another key, b. Certain stimuli occurs, person reacts A. Another, b. So there really isn't free will. Not by a long shot.

Since there obviously is no free will, how can one sin?
 
Old 03-26-2001, 04:30 PM   #19
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Tercel:
Quote:
Originally posted by rodahi:
Tercel: Normally whenever the bible talks of God causing damage to humans it is because the people are doing evil and God is punishing them.

Wait a minute. Are you suggesting the biblical Yahweh drowned millions of innocent babies, small children, and animals because they were doing something "evil?" If this is your suggestion, then you speak NONSENSE.
</font>
I wasn't suggesting anything of the sort. I simply meant exactly what I said, the Bible does justify most (all?) cases of God ordering/causing deaths on the basis of him destroying evil. Whether you think the Bible's justified in saying this is entirely up to you...

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Damn it, repeat 10 times: "Miracles are not by nature logical impossibilities".

Repeat 10 times: "Some things are so improbable, it makes no sense to even discuss them."</font>
I wasn't making a case for miracles. I was simply pointing out that their definition is not self-inconsisent.

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Miracles are simply events where reality did not follow its normal laws due to divine intervention.

This is a faith-based statement. Where is its place in rational discourse?</font>
Faith-based statement? Personally I thought it was a definition of miracles. But hey, apparently I've got faith in a lot of things because I believe many things to have definitions...
What place does a definition have in a rational discourse??? Hmmm, is that why it's called free thinking?
So, Tercel, does this mean you don't believe in miracles? If you don't, why all the fuss?

rodahi

 
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:57 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.