Freethought & Rationalism Archive

sonofone · 01-07-2008, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chidori

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonofone

See this is the problem if you will I have with people of faith,Christians included.Faith places you in a role of submission.That is you are asked to deny what is rational in favor of the irrational.Now I get why a person who is agnostic,or atheist would remain such on this basis.

Yet I have less tolerance for a person of faith,refusing to believe things that defy there own sense of right and wrong.Either you submit yourself by faith,or you don't.If you do,then you take the good with the bad.You don't get to pick and choose what you believe and don't or else just remain an atheist or agnostic.

To take on Christ and experience God however short the duration and then turn your back on him because you saw some things that did not make sense,makes no sense to me.Either you have genuine faith or you don't.

This for me is the answer to the riddle I put forth concerning Adams disobedience. There sin was the absence of faith.Faith is the thing you have when you lack the facts or evidence.Adam lacked the facts that one choice was better than the other,but he was given a command with consequences certain.

If he had faith he would have remained obedient by simply believing if God said don't do it,I will not do it.

Just the like the bumper sticker which says God said it and that settles it whether you believe it or not.Whatever is not of faith is sin.So the moment your reasoning elevates itself beyond what God states you leave faith and enter into sin.

I'll take reason over faith any day of the week. My faith in God placed me in the position of believing there was something wrong with me simply because I am human, much less female. Deconverting felt a bit like leaving an abusive relationship, from my point of view.

Now I'm glad to have heard you say this,yet sad as I feel like I have one less sibling to interact with.I am of course in the exact opposite camp from you.I choose faith over reasoning any day as reasoning is far more flawed than the bible.

Johnny Skeptic · 01-07-2008, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonofone

Punishment is bad just as reward is good. Adam was a mental incompetent when it came to his awareness of good vs evil. So if I tell a person such as this that something bad will happen if you do it how can they be place any value on this statement, without context?

It seems we are asking Adam to do the impossible, that is make a good choice by remaining obedient to God and do not make a bad choice by being disobedient when he has no concept of good or evil.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnySkeptic

First of all, it is impossible to reasonably verify that Adam and Eve existed. Second of all, the claims that God is merciful, and plans to send skeptics to hell of eternity without parole, are contradictory. The claims cannot both be true unless we redefine the word "merciful." Even if the Bible did not claim that God is merciful, I would never accept a God who plans to send skeptics to hell for eternity without parole. In my opinion, nothing could be more detestible than eternal vengeance without parole.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonofone

Hey Johnnie I was trying to return to the original purpose of your post, which was discussing Bible inerrancy and you seem hell bent on taking every opportunity you can at knocking down God.

I get that you are not God's biggest fan or the Bible. But what do you think of the question I raise? Humor me would you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnySkeptic

What does the story of Adam and Eve have to do with inerrancy and divine inspiration of the Bible? You have already admitted that you do not believe that the Bible is inerrant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonofone

Johnny, I guess I misunderstood the purpose of the op and should not have posted to begin with.I read would any fundamentalist Christians like to discuss inerrancy,as an invitation to do just that.

I wasn't aware that a simple admission that the Bible does contain errors would kill or disqualify me from discussing the point any further. I am sort of thick headed so maybe that's why I made this mistake.

I thought discussing some potential flaws was the intent of the op, which is the reason I asked about the Adam question, as this for me represents one of the potential flaws I admit to the Bible having.

This thread is about whether not the Bible is inerrant? Do you wish to claim that God inspired the story of Adam and Eve, and that the story has not been changed? If not, then your question does not concern this thread.

The claims that God is merciful, and that he will send skeptics to hell for eternity without parole, are contradictory. Both statements cannot be true. In my opinion, that is good evidence that the God of the Bible does not exists, or that if he does exist, he is a liar, and he is immoral.

sonofone · 01-07-2008, 11:49 AM

John answer me the question I asked you several times now without an answer from you.If the universalist are right in God saving all,does that change your view of God? I hardly think so.

For whatever your reasons are you simply don't like God.why not just say this and put a period after it instead of bolstering reasons why you don't like God?

Is there anything at this point that could cause you to believe in God?

Also to your question concerning Adam,yes I am stating this story comes from God as it is in the bible which I believe comes from God.So my question to you is does this story itself represent one more biblical verse that has a fundamental flaw?

Not even you can claim that the whole bible is full of flaws,your point is that if just one flaw exist than the whole thing must be dismissed,to which I say is your right.

Chidori · 01-07-2008, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonofone

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chidori

I'll take reason over faith any day of the week. My faith in God placed me in the position of believing there was something wrong with me simply because I am human, much less female. Deconverting felt a bit like leaving an abusive relationship, from my point of view.

Now I'm glad to have heard you say this,yet sad as I feel like I have one less sibling to interact with.I am of course in the exact opposite camp from you.I choose faith over reasoning any day as reasoning is far more flawed than the bible.

Well, I guess I read a different Bible than you. I don't think mass murder, genocide, and slavery, and God sanctioned rape, are flaws - they're vile; antithesis to love and compassion.

It reminds me of an abused spouse in hospital because their SO decided to use them as a punching bag, trying to tell them "this person is no good for you", and they come back with... "well....sure he/she is flawed...." It's heartbreaking.

Chris Johnston · 01-07-2008, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Byers

The Eurprates river and eden is a pre-flood geography issue.
In facy it makes our case that the authors wee saying indeed the rivers out of eden were not like the present world.
Assyrian/Persian kings is beyond me but if the bible and other sources conflict then presume the bible is more accurate and the others screwed up or distored things for human motives.
Rob Byers

I am disappointed the thread went so far afield. I do like the circular reasoning Rob gives us whereby he tells us that the Bible is inerrant because secular material bears it all out. Then he tells us that if those secular sources DON'T bear it out, then we must presume the Bible is inerrant.

WTF?:huh:
_______________________________
Faith in Action Blog

Sashi-no-eda Bonsai Blog

Sashi-eda Bonsai.com

Dogfish · 01-07-2008, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

If God plans to send non-Christians to hell for eternity without parole, I would never be able to accept a God like that....

Why not? God has said that a person can spend eternity with Him in heaven or outside heaven in what is called hell. If a person says that he does not want to spend an eternity in heaven with God and would prefer to stay outside, why would you object to that? Do you really want to spend an eternity in heaven with a God that you despise?? As bad as hell might be, it would not be as bad as the oppression you would incur in heaven with God, would it? In hell you will be free from God. Isn't that your desire? Shouldn't you be pleased that God will give you that which you desire?

How about because, according to the Babble, it's a place of eternal torment? Why would I be pleased, after hearing, "god is love" and other tripe, and making his will as clear as mud, these were the only 2 options I had?

rhutchin · 01-07-2008, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dogfish

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Why not? God has said that a person can spend eternity with Him in heaven or outside heaven in what is called hell. If a person says that he does not want to spend an eternity in heaven with God and would prefer to stay outside, why would you object to that? Do you really want to spend an eternity in heaven with a God that you despise?? As bad as hell might be, it would not be as bad as the oppression you would incur in heaven with God, would it? In hell you will be free from God. Isn't that your desire? Shouldn't you be pleased that God will give you that which you desire?

How about because, according to the Babble, it's a place of eternal torment? Why would I be pleased, after hearing, "god is love" and other tripe, and making his will as clear as mud, these were the only 2 options I had?

You can always act in your self-interest even with just two choices, neither of which is what you want.

makerowner · 01-07-2008, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhutchin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dogfish

How about because, according to the Babble, it's a place of eternal torment? Why would I be pleased, after hearing, "god is love" and other tripe, and making his will as clear as mud, these were the only 2 options I had?

You can always act in your self-interest even with just two choices, neither of which is what you want.

God is supposed to be omnipotent and omnibenevolent, yet the only two choices he can muster up are an eternity of torment and an eternity of worship? The Mormons at least have a better afterlife: they get to be Gods of a new world after they die.

biblethumping · 01-07-2008, 06:08 PM

The gospel messages are post-Babel and can't be relied upon 100% because they are CONFOUNED. People will just have to have faith that parts of it are correct and others are not.

Johnny Skeptic · 01-07-2008, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonofone

John answer me the question I asked you several times now without an answer from you. If the universalist are right in God saving all, does that change your view of God? I hardly think so.

For whatever your reasons are you simply don't like God. Why not just say this and put a period after it instead of bolstering reasons why you don't like God?

Is there anything at this point that could cause you to believe in God?

Also to your question concerning Adam, yes I am stating this story comes from God as it is in the Bible which I believe comes from God. So my question to you is does this story itself represent one more biblical verse that has a fundamental flaw?

Not even you can claim that the whole Bible is full of flaws? Your point is that if just one flaw exist than the whole thing must be dismissed, to which I say is your right.

I will be happy to discuss any or all of that with you at the General Religious Discussions Forum. If you wish, you can start a new thread at that forum with any or all of those comments. For purposes of this thread, I started it to oppose inerrancy. You said that you are not an inerrantist, so why are you making posts in this thread? None of what you said has anything to do with inerrancy.

Regarding "Is there anything at this point that could cause you to believe in God?," if you wish, you can start a new topic at the GRD Forum with that question. If you do, I will ask you if anything would convince you to give up Christianity?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-07-2008, 11:49 AM	#73
sonofone Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: southeast Posts: 60	John answer me the question I asked you several times now without an answer from you.If the universalist are right in God saving all,does that change your view of God? I hardly think so. For whatever your reasons are you simply don't like God.why not just say this and put a period after it instead of bolstering reasons why you don't like God? Is there anything at this point that could cause you to believe in God? Also to your question concerning Adam,yes I am stating this story comes from God as it is in the bible which I believe comes from God.So my question to you is does this story itself represent one more biblical verse that has a fundamental flaw? Not even you can claim that the whole bible is full of flaws,your point is that if just one flaw exist than the whole thing must be dismissed,to which I say is your right.

01-07-2008, 06:08 PM	#79
biblethumping Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Tower of Babel Posts: 557	The gospel messages are post-Babel and can't be relied upon 100% because they are CONFOUNED. People will just have to have faith that parts of it are correct and others are not.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.