dzim77

This is the apparent win-win stance of the Bible skeptic. If the OT characters are flawed, they say, 'see the Bible is full of immoral, evil, and sinful hypocrites... why would you believe in this God?' If the OT characters were perfect, they would say, 'see, the characters are too perfect, they were obviously made-up to promote Hebrew nationalism.'

Again the question stands... what other Ancient Near East religion has a Bible such as this?


See Adam, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Samuel, David, etc... to understand God's personal nature of Covenant relationship in the OT.

Again, what other ANE god is like this?

Intersting assertion. How do you know this?


I agree that the Bible shows wisdom. It is important to understand that Biblical wisdom involves view the natural world and life through the lens of God's character.... or seeing life in view of God.

The foundation of this wisdom can be found in Proverbs 1:7,

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge,
but fools [a] despise wisdom and discipline.

The wisdom in the Bible is founded on reverence for God.


The point here is that God is not portrayed as a local god who desires only to bless the people of Israel... he is protrayed as the God of all nations who desires to bless all nations. His purpose is not only for Israel but for the whole world ultimately.

The following psalm is an example of this theme found throughout the OT...

Psalm 67
"1 May God be gracious to us and bless us
and make his face shine upon us,
Selah
2 that your ways may be known on earth,
your salvation among all nations.

3 May the peoples praise you, O God;
may all the peoples praise you.

4 May the nations be glad and sing for joy,
for you rule the peoples justly
and guide the nations of the earth.
Selah

5 May the peoples praise you, O God;
may all the peoples praise you.

6 Then the land will yield its harvest,
and God, our God, will bless us.

7 God will bless us,
and all the ends of the earth will fear him."


Again, what other ANE god is like this?


I feel that it is very relevant that the OT presents us with a unique, monotheistic God that claims all other gods are not gods at all but only worthless idols. This unique God created man and acts in history to carry out his redemptive plan to redeem and bless all nations who would follow him. The OT stands out above all other contemporary religions... which is why we are discussing it now i suppose.


The texts were are referring to were written long before the spread of Christianity in the West.


At first, you said God 'injected' man with sinful nature. But now you are referring to the paradox of free will vs. God's sovereignty. The resolution to this paradox lies in the nature of 'choice'. Adam made a real choice and we make real choices according to the Bible.


Finally we agree well... to some extent at least. Yes, everyday sinning is just a 'proof' that we are indeed sinful in nature. And, yes, the Bible commands us to reconcile with those we have sinned against which is in line with your opinion on the matter. But, our greatest need is to first be reconciled to God - which is where we differ.

I'm sure you will strongly disagree, but I believe you can.... if you humble yourself, ask God for truth, honestly study the scriptures (book of John is a good place to start) and really ask God to make himself real to you and reveal himself to you. You might be suprised what may happen.

We make conclusions about reality based on our senses... touch, taste, sight, smell, hearing. But what if there is a 'spiritual sense' which perceives a spiritual realm that is just as real as your other five senses? If this 'spiritual sense' were awakened and you were to perceive God in a way that was just as real to you as the floor your feet are standing on... how then could you deny that God existed? For me, personally, this is my primary and unshakable basis for faith in God. (along with others).

dzim77

if the greatest gift, gave his life as a sacrifice, that would be the greatest sacrifice as far as degree is concerned, would it not?

so, perhaps my semantics are off and i am wrong as far as semantics are concerned, but my point remains the same.

greyline

It's simply evidence that the OT was written by men. God has exactly the same moral beliefs as the people of the time. He punished the same crimes that they did. He hated all the same people as they did. He placed the same importance on obedience to priests and rituals as they did - etc. etc. If you come at the bible from the perspective of a non-believer, where is the evidence that all the gods were not created by various cultures in their own image(s)?


Because without those morals we couldn't have survived as a culture. Every successful culture has rules about killing, stealing, sex, etc. that developed because they work in maintaining a cohesive and lasting society.


I would say what wisdom there is in the Bible is founded on a reverence for one's fellow man. Making burnt offerings in reverence to God is hardly "wise" - it's a waste of time and food - except in the sense that conforming to the superstitious societal norms of the time was probably a good idea. Not killing your neighbours is wise because (among other reasons) respect for other people is beneficial for a cohesive society.


This isn't evidence against a man-made god. If that god was considered the most powerful, best god, then it makes sense his inventors would want to bring all people under the control of that god (ie. those priests).


Again, irrelevant. There are all kinds of ancient gods with all kinds of attributes. Some survived and some didn't - cultural natural selection (plus strong armies, real or mythological) figured out which ones "worked" and thus were spread across nations.

Cultures come up with ideas all the time. The ideas that work survive, the bad ideas don't.



You're simply continuing the "my god is better than your god" mantra. Try telling the average Chinaman, who's perfectly happy with his heathen beliefs, that it means anything at all. If you trace the history of monotheism to see how it evolved, the mundanity of how and why the Abrahamic god developed becomes clear. There's really no reason to assume an all-powerful supernatural entity exists when one can see how god-ideas developed without the need to resort to a supernatural explanation.

??? I was referring to the Hebrews and the alleged events of the OT.


He didn't make a real choice if he didn't understand the consequences, and he couldn't understand the consequences until he'd commited the sin (not that God explained the consequences anyway).


Don't worry, I already tried it. As did many at Infidels at some point in their lives. Reading scriptures means nothing if one doesn't trust the source. As with all "facts" presented to us, we should ask ourselves "How do I know if this is true?"


Because that same perception has natural explanations. I don't attribute supernatural/spiritual explanations to things that can be explained by nature. From what I've read on this board, and from my own experience, many have felt that "spiritual realm" as reality and have come to understand that personal perceptions often mean little in terms of getting at the truth.

Given the comfort and purpose that believing in this spiritual realm provides, it's easy to see why humans fight so hard against recognizing it for what it really is.

greyline

We haven't yet established that he "sacrificed" anything, so I don't see how this statement clarifies anything. Shuffling off one's mortal coil to eternally join one's father in paradise so that the entire species can avoid roasting in hell is certainly a huge gift (not quite as huge as it could've been, but still rather nice). Compassionate humans the world over would stand in line to give that gift, if they had it to give.

dzim77

Actually most Chinese are atheists due to the cultural revolution and religious 'reprograming' of the Chinese government, snuffing out all religious followers. Even in recent years, Christians that teach the Bible are usually put in prison.

However, in recent years Chrisitanity is still spreading in China at incredible rates... on the scale of millions and millions of converts.

There will be some big things happening in China in this arena in the next ten years or so... keep your eye on the news.

If you don't mind me asking a personal questions here. No pressure to answer - a 'no comment' will suffice, but I'm genuinely curious...

Aren't you afraid you might be wrong about God?

Why do you spend so much effort defending atheism and criticizing Christianity? If this life is all we have, then what motivates you to do this?

vfr

Yes, I agree with your points. I guess it was invented to introduce the concept of Jesus, if in fact the concept was invented.

V

greyline

Chinese beliefs have been many and varied throughout history and include, among others, Taoism, Buddhism and folk religions. My point was that just because you consider your religion to have the best god, people outside your worldview have no such concepts. They place no special meaning in a god who demands burnt offerings, condems everyone to hell, and commands his chosen people to slaughter the infidels down to the last baby. It makes sense to you because that version of god is part of your culture.


None of which is evidence for the validity of the religion.


I know I may be wrong about the existence of supernatural beings, sure. I'm not afraid of being wrong, no, because I've done and continue to do all the research I'm capable of doing in order to gather evidence to get closer to the truth. The evidence points to man creating gods in his image, and that image varies depending on the culture that created it.

The idea of bowing to God just in case he exists and will send me to hell if I don't is intellectually dishonest and entirely irrational. How do I know which god to bow to? To be on the safe side, I'm going to have to pay deference to them all! In fact, since Biblegod says I'm not allowed to worship more than one god, it would be silly of me to worship him and ignore the others. Given equal odds that each god is the true god, I should worship all the others instead - that way, odds are I'll end up worshipping a god who really does exist.

This is why the "just in case" argument (Pascall's wager) is nonsense. What matters is not that I worship biblegod out of fear, despite having no faith he's real, but that I ask How do I know if it's true? - "it" being any one of a multitude of faiths, and, ultimately, "it" being magical thinking.


I wouldn't say I expend so much effort, but the answer is that a belief in the supernatural of any kind is bad for the progression of human knowledge and bad for society at large. Magical thinking pervades everyday life in many ways. A rational world is better for humanity than superstition, so in small ways I do my part in promoting rational thinking. I'm still a beginner compared to many at IIDB but I'm slowly learning. Doing Yahzi's laundry helps.

dzim77

Perhaps not... but i was just giving an interesting side note on what's happening in China.


I agree. My advice - take it or leave it ...God will probably not be found through sheer logic. If your heart is honestly seeking truth and you persist in asking and seeking him with your heart and soul (perhaps even on a mustard-seed of faith) I am confident He will show himself to you. I'm not saying this out of arrogance in the least bit, but as someone who has found joy and fulfillment (eternally) in God and desires the same for you. (Read the book of John!! please )

Your motives are very admirable. Thanks for sharing.

greyline

I've already read the bible, and most of the gospels several times, thanks to bible study classes years ago. Reading a text that claims to be true doesn't alter the fundamental question: "How do I know it's true?"


Thanks, but as you said, logic isn't going to lead me to belief. The two are mutually exclusive. However, I appreciate that you appear to cite "joy and fulfillment" as your reasons for belief, or at least as the feedback loop that strengthens your faith. Many a Christian has appealed to logic to try and convince atheists, yet logic was never the thing that convinced the believers in the first place. Belief generally seems to come from cultural norms (ie. childhood brainwashing) or the result of a specific emotional experience that's interpreted as supernatural.

Solo

The Hebrew word kaphar, or atonement occurs 80 times from Exodus to Nehemiah.

The problem with translating Rom 5:11, as "atonement", connoting one through "sacrificial offering" is that the "sacrifice" would be God's - which runs head on against the ritual placation of God by men, which kaphar expresses. OTOH......

I do not agree with this assessment. Paul's love is grace under too much pressure. If you don't accept Paul's love, you go to hell. (The same with Jesus of the canon.) One simply cannot deny that Paul has "sacrificial offering" in mind when he preaches Jesus Christ crucified, and even though he openly says "he died for our sins" only in a passage which I believe was interpolated (1 Cr 15:3) there are other verses (Rom 8:3-4, Gal 3:11, 2 Cr 5:21) that mightily encourage the view of the scarificial lamb. So, evidently Paul not only uses that argument but lays it at the very heart of his theology ! Says James D.G. Dunn: The idea of bloody sacrifice, and of divine-human relationship being somehow dependent on it, is generally abhorrent to post-Enlightment culture, something to be consigned to a more primitive and cruder period of conceptualization of divine-human relationship. Consequently some scholars have used the fact that Paul's references are so formulaic and allusive to argue, unjustifiably, that the sacrificial imagery is not part of Paul's own distinctive theology and is secondary to it (The Theology of Paul, 1998, p. 212)

Jiri