B.H. - A question for you

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (marc @ Dec. 17 2002,12:48)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]Yep, all those crazies around.  Once they know your age they can steal your identity.   :sarcasim:

Hee Hee Hee.  Go look again marc.[/quote]
Hee Hee Hee.  Go look again marc.

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--][!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]1.  He would have to objectively and absolutely prove his words were HIS words, and not some evil entity or person.

2.  Any inspired texts would have to be free from corruptions and not rely on "how-it-could-have-been-scenarios" to explain away contradictions.

3.  He would have to tell us how to solve all the problems of this world in the here in now.

4. He would have to personally impale Foy Wallace, Gus Nichols, and other COC preachers with a musical instrument used in worship at First Christian Church.  Just Kidding!

4. (for real) He would have to make his religion clear and concise, with its adherents not needing a professional trained clergy to teach them what their religion and texts really say.
There will be no need for commentaries, ect. that men can lie with.

5.  Those who follow the deity's will are the ones that should be blessed (in this life) while those who do not should be utterly destroyed (in this life).[/quote]

Although I would argue that he's done number 4 but man has put up obstructions, as far as the rest goes I would simly ask:  "why?"  How do you determine what God should be like?  I've visited athiest sites in the past and frankly found too many "if God is real why don't I ever see him down at the 7-11" type arguments.  I've found the thinking on a different level, a level that assumes that we, as humans, get to make up the rules.[/quote]
Which goes back to the question "Who owes god anything?  I did not ask to be created?"

Besides Janine asked the question and I answered as honestly as I could.  You Christians do the same thing without realizing it.  You say "This tree over here is pretty therefore God had to have made it" and infer he exists.  Why should YOU make the rules regarding what proves God's existence?

[spurly]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (B. H. @ Dec. 17 2002,1:07)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]Which goes back to the question "Who owes god anything?  I did not ask to be created?"

Besides Janine asked the question and I answered as honestly as I could.  You Christians do the same thing without realizing it.  You say "This tree over here is pretty therefore God had to have made it" and infer he exists.  Why should YOU make the rules regarding what proves God's existence?[/quote]
It's the beauty of the Christian faith that you don't owe God anything.  You're right, you didn't ask to be created.  However, God loved you enough, he wanted you to enjoy everything he had in store for you.  (I'm sure you have heard that many times before).

I didn't ask to be created either.  But I count it a privilege to know that my God loved me enough that he wanted me to enjoy a full life so he created me.

But even then, he gave me a choice.  He desparately wants a relationship with me, but he will not force himself on me, or anyone else.

Yes, when I look at the world, and I honestly try to reason where it came from, I have to say that something must have created it.  Something can not come from nothing (I know the question some people ask is "Where did God come from then?  He was the starting point, the energy behind everything else.  Other than that, I honestly can not answer the question where he came from.  From looking at the world, I just have to believe someone created it, and my best answer as to whom is the God of the Bible.)

It's tough to prove the existence of God.  Very tough.  Impossible.  Maybe God wants it that way.  He wants us to have to think, and choose based on faith and love.  Maybe, like a good teacher, he doesn't want to hand us everything on a silver platter.

[kebecer1]

B.H.  While I find the c of C--in its harder accretions, which, apparently, you've known up close and person--to be hard to palate, I'm neither alien nor unfriendly to your quest for God.

The above has it right:  You would seem to be on a quest for God.  In fact, reading your story reminds me a lot of Flannery O'Connor's "Revelation".  Mrs Turpin felt her views/perceptions of God perish--to have a revelation of God, that was at once deeper, more charitable, more resonant to the truth.

In my congregations, I have had ex-LDS, ex-atheists, ex-everything...even ex-independents and c of C's...all of 'em were questing for something other.   Many professed atheism, but kept coming to church, until a still, small voice poked a hole in their assumptions.

B/f this sounds like a sappy sermon, here's my point.  You are intellectually looking for a "better God"--or, as Tillich would put it "the God beyond God".  The God who isn't c of C--rigid and mean, as you have known him.

In fact, some of the atheists it has been my pleasure to have known have been some of the most rigorous persons of faith whom I have ever met.  They rightly point to the Crusades, and the "Sky Diety" a lot of we Christians believe in, and confess "That isn't God."

Faith, B.H., can be a fall "up" as well as a fall "down".  You are questing, and--in fact, by passionately interacting here, you are seeking--God.

I'm sure that you'll object.  And, that's cool.   :p

God allowed Saul to reject, and die to his God-image.  In this season of the Incarnation, we all need to die to our particular false god-images, too--myself, included--to stand under the love of the One whose final name is ineffable, mysterious, and always seductive.  

The mystery?  I know God in Jesus Christ.  And yet:  I don't know him.

Your postings remind me, B.H., of Francis Thompson's poem, "The Hound of Heaven."  Perhaps you know that little jem of insight.  God is always the questing lover and questing Love.

I am sorry that you've been wounded. I respect the rigor you take in professing your non-faith, even though I find that a faith position.  It's just no accident that you are questing here; of course, it's no accident that I'm questing, too.

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (spurly @ Dec. 18 2002,9:57)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--][/quote]
"Many of the corruptions and discrepencies you referred to were discussed in our theology and Bible classes.  The professors didn't gloss over them, they admitted they were there and tried to give their reasoning as to how they could be explained."

Bh:  That is good.  At least the professors at your Bible college did not try ot cover them up.  What kind of discrepancies did you discuss?

I went to a website one time that purported to have 600 so called Biblical discrepencies, most of them could be explained very easily, although some of them, I admit, could not.  What do I do with the ones that cannot be explained?  Continue to study.  Continue to dig.  Why?  Because I have faith that God's word is true.

BH:  What kind of discrepancies did you see there?

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (spurly @ Dec. 18 2002,9:57)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--][/quote]
"Many of the Biblical discrepencies that scholars of the early 18th century through the early 19th century have since been harmonized by archeology and new discoveries like the dead sea scrolls."  

BH:  I must disagree here.  It is true that over 5,000 fragments and manuscripts have been discovered containing verse and other parts of the Bible.  However, what I have read indicates that most of that 5,000 is just fragments of just a few verses at a time.  The whole manuscripts we seem to have (or partially complete ones) are very few and far imbetween.  There is plenty of room to say we do not know just what the Bible said when it was first written and just how much we see today is in fact later additions.


"Any time you would like to PM me some of those that you have, that would be great.  However, other people might be better at untangling certain mysteries than myself.  If you want to let the whole board see some of those, we might all learn from them."

BH:

Okay, I will post them here if you wish.

We are all aware that the Catholic Church has several books in their Bible that Protestant books do not.  That is pretty much a given.  The Ethiopic Church contains many books in their canon not found in either Catholic or Protestant Churches.  The Syriac Church as it exists today also has a different text.

In addition to the above, we have:

1. Four or Five different endings to Mark, consisting of many verses.

2. The story of the adulterous woman is in some versions of John, some it is not.  Some versions of Luke contain the story.

3.  The book of Exodus in some manuscripts has whole chapters  that are not in other manuscripts.

4. The Septuagint and Qumran versions of Isaiah are 1/4th  shorter than the Masoretic text versions.

5. There are variants to the book of Daniel.

6. We have missing books of the Bible--admitted in the Bible ex. Laoadiceans, Corinthians IIA

7. Cases where one verse says one thing in one manuscript of a book but says the exact opposite in another manuscript of the same book.  I'll have too look around for examples in my personal library.  One example (and this is going by my memory here and I could be wrong) is found in Romans where it says "We are saved by faith" and in another manuscript of Romans it says "We are NOT saved by faith."


"It took me a while to figure out what you were referring to with the illusion to demonic forces.  I want to make sure I understand you right.  Are you saying that we can not know for sure that it was the Holy Spirit who inspired certain parts of Scripture, and it may well have been evil spirits?  And how do we know who inspired what?"

BH:  You are correct.  I don't believe in evil spirits but you do. I do believe people added stuff to the BIble to suite their fancy though.  How can you prove absolutely, objectively, and empirically just what belonged in the original Bible?  For all you know, additions may have been written in only to have the orginals perish, thus giving the false impression there is no addition.

"I, like you, wish we could find every original manuscript.  Maybe one of these days the Pauline Corpus or something like that might be found."

BH:  Perhaps one day we will.  Let us look forward to that day.

Sorry, double post.

[janine]

He already said elsewhere that he cannot prove God does not exist.

Can one prove a negative?

What is this thing you have about "winning" and "being right", BH?

Oh, I forgot.  You're Church of Christ, born/bred/blood/bone.

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (Guest @ Dec. 21 2002,08:52)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]"There is room for everyone here.  Christian conservatives, Christian moderates, Christian liberals, and ex-Christians turned atheists.  Everyone has a stake in the discussion."
Kevin

You may be right, but if so then the purpose and description of the forum should be changed to reflect that purpose. The purpose of GCM forum in that case is not to "edify" or build up the faith of one "escaping legalism to accept grace" as the name implies, but rather it is an apologetics forum that fosters arguments to prove or disprove the existence of God.  Weak Christians tend to fall by the wayside when the latter is the case even though the faith of "strong" Christians may be made stronger by such discussions.  Which is better...to defend the existence of God against atheism or to encourage those who already have faith?  It all depends on the purpose of the forum. And, no, I do not believe there is room for both on a regular basis.  A good way to measure the effectiveness of either approach is to look at the members who used to post, but no longer do.  Has the forum lost members who used to post regularly?  If so, there is a reason; something about the forum has ceased to maintain their interest.  Also, look at the growth of new members.  Are members joining and staying on a regular basis?  Is keeping discussions about atheism worth losing potential members who might otherwise find a place to strengthen their faith here?  Maybe, I don't know the answer to that.  Personally, I do not care one way or the other, but a forum should have a specific goal in mind. I agree with Charles.[/quote]
I have tried to respect the spirit and intent of this board.  Since I have been allowed back on, I refrain from posting as much as I used to out of respect for the other members.

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (spurly @ Dec. 21 2002,10:06)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--][!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]"There is room for everyone here.  Christian conservatives, Christian moderates, Christian liberals, and ex-Christians turned atheists.  Everyone has a stake in the discussion."
Kevin

You may be right, but if so then the purpose and description of the forum should be changed to reflect that purpose. The purpose of GCM forum in that case is not to "edify" or build up the faith of one "escaping legalism to accept grace" as the name implies, but rather it is an apologetics forum that fosters arguments to prove or disprove the existence of God.  Weak Christians tend to fall by the wayside when the latter is the case even though the faith of "strong" Christians may be made stronger by such discussions.  Which is better...to defend the existence of God against atheism or to encourage those who already have faith?  It all depends on the purpose of the forum. And, no, I do not believe there is room for both on a regular basis.  A good way to measure the effectiveness of either approach is to look at the members who used to post, but no longer do.  Has the forum lost members who used to post regularly?  If so, there is a reason; something about the forum has ceased to maintain their interest.  Also, look at the growth of new members.  Are members joining and staying on a regular basis?  Is keeping discussions about atheism worth losing potential members who might otherwise find a place to strengthen their faith here?  Maybe, I don't know the answer to that.  Personally, I do not care one way or the other, but a forum should have a specific goal in mind. I agree with Charles.[/quote]
One thing I find interesting is that by the post you made above, you seem to be someone who has been around this forum a long time.  Yet, you have chosen to remain anonymous in this post and just have "guest" show up next to your name.  

I was just curious as to why.

Kevin[/quote]
Funny spurly that you should say that-- for I felt the same thing when I first read it.  I think I know who it is too but will not say.  He is just trying to swithch the discussion off course, that is all.  Seen it attempted a million times before.

[spurly]

B.H.

I realize that you are the resident atheist on the GCM message board, but it also seems like you are somewhat familiar with scripture and may have a had a background in the church.  

So here is my question:  What led you to turn away from God and turn away from the church to try to find truth in other places?  What was your journey toward atheism like?  Would you consider yourself a strong atheist today, or an atheist who recognizes a god might exist, but doesn't want to submit your life to him?

Just curious.  I am praying for you.

Kevin

[WileyClarkson]

B.H.

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--] In other words I see no practical reason to put faith in a god regardless of whether one exists or not. [/quote]

My student dictionary(has simple difinitions that my weak brain can understand :0 )  defines agnostic as a person who believes it is impossible to know whether there is a god or not and it defines atheist as a person who believes there is no god.  Going by what you just told us, you are actually somewhere between an agnostic and an atheist, since you acknowledge that there may be a god but you just don't have a reason to put faith in that god.

I have known some hardline atheists and you have never struck me as having made it to that point.  Thanks for the clarification.  It helps us understand you better.

Now, if this is not too personal, would you mind telling us your age.  One of these days we will probably meet and I don't want it to be too much of a culture shock to me.
My heart might not be able to stand the stress :D

[marc]

? ? ? ?

[marc]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]1.  He would have to objectively and absolutely prove his words were HIS words, and not some evil entity or person.

2.  Any inspired texts would have to be free from corruptions and not rely on "how-it-could-have-been-scenarios" to explain away contradictions.

3.  He would have to tell us how to solve all the problems of this world in the here in now.

4. He would have to personally impale Foy Wallace, Gus Nichols, and other COC preachers with a musical instrument used in worship at First Christian Church.  Just Kidding!

4. (for real) He would have to make his religion clear and concise, with its adherents not needing a professional trained clergy to teach them what their religion and texts really say.
There will be no need for commentaries, ect. that men can lie with.

5.  Those who follow the deity's will are the ones that should be blessed (in this life) while those who do not should be utterly destroyed (in this life).[/quote]

Although I would argue that he's done number 4 but man has put up obstructions, as far as the rest goes I would simly ask:  "why?"  How do you determine what God should be like?  I've visited athiest sites in the past and frankly found too many "if God is real why don't I ever see him down at the 7-11" type arguments.  I've found the thinking on a different level, a level that assumes that we, as humans, get to make up the rules.

[marc]

To clarify, you are saying, if I'm understanding this right, that you do not believe in God because He is not what you would expect Him to be.  I'm not arguing what type of evidence is required to believe in God (the original question), but rather the validity of our putting expectations on God (an offshoot of your answer).

[marc]

Then you have never read Lovecraft?  Early twentieth century horror/science fiction.  Cthulthu was one of the elder gods. Big guy with tentacles.

Determining whether a specific Deity exists in order to determine whether God exists is like trying to find a particular speceis of spotted owl in order to prove that birds exist.  The existence of birds must be assumed before it can be determined whether a particular bird exists.  In the same way the existence of God must be decided on before one decides whether a particular Deity exists.

And I know this sounds like a cop out to many (I had a class once where I was told such thoughts were invalid), but each individual must determine for himself whether there is a God.  And part of what tells me there is a God (one thing amony many) is that my own inadequacies point to a higher standard I cannot reach. This realization helps determine the starting point that leads to faith in the Christian God.  This is a general-to-specific process.

[spurly]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (marc @ Dec. 17 2002,1:09)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--][!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]Why should YOU make the rules regarding what proves God's existence?[/quote]

Ummm, no, that's not what I said.  I was saying who are we to say what God should be like.  Quite a different question.[/quote]
Marc,

That is a good statement.  I don't think that we, because we are finite, can determine the rules to make up what God is supposed to be like.  We have to let him do that.  The question I think B.H. is asking is how do we know which rules are correct, if any rules - we have to use our human minds (which you and I believe were given to us by God).  

Kevin

Kevin,

I have read over your material and will respond to it sometime tomorrow.  I got home late and wish to rest before I reply.

[Eric]

I have enjoyed greatly the discussion going on here.  Too often people will not let the other person speak and be heard.  

I did want to mention that I have found a Foy Wallace book of sermons in my personal library.  I have heard of the name and I cringe to hear him cited in anything.  One thing I believe which I disagree with BH on is the heart of the preachers.  I did not know Mr Wallace but I know many CofC preachers (myself included) and this is not a fair representation.

"BH:  This was a joke against CoC preachers.  I think most of them are dishonest worthless men."

This sounds like there was a great deal more hurt than you were willing to write.  I remember you said something about not being outgoing enough to be supported to go to school.  Is this a reference to "charismatic" or "persuasive" (used car salesman comes to mind)?  I know that I do not fit that description either.

Keep the discussion going, as I said, I am learning from it.
Eric

[spurly]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (B. H. @ Dec. 18 2002,2:44)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]"For me he has satisfied that question in the following ways:
1 - Prophecies all through scripture, spoken years before the actual events took place, and then came true.  How could this happen?  A God who sits outside of time and is not subject to time so he can see from the beginning to the end, allowed a prophet to know something far in advance and then used that prophet for a mouthpiece.  There are too many fulfilled prophecies for me to believe it was just conincidence."

BH:  You have just assumed those were inspired prophesies by God.  For all you and I really know those prophesies were written down later and portrayed as such by priests taking advantage of a gullible public.  Secondly, remember how the Bible teaches there is a Satan and demons?  How do you know that an evil entity did not inspire those prophesies?  Last, though you will disagree obviously, I think there are plenty of cases where a prophesy was made and they failed.  Many supposed prophesies when later claimed to be fulfilled in the Bible, when looked at in the original context, had nothing  to do with the event that "fulfilled" it.

If I can show you cases where prophesies had been fulfilled in the Koran, would you give up Christianity and become a Muslim?  [/quote]
Even some of the most liberal Bible Scholars date the prophecies of the Old Testament at least one hundred to one hundred and fifty years before the birth of Christ.

I tend to believe the more conservative scholars who put the last old testament prophetic book about 350-400 years before Christ.  But even if the liberal scholars were right, it would still be amazing to me that the events were foretold 100-150 years before his birth.

I am hopeful that the older texts we find, the further back we will be able to push the dates of the prophecies.  The dead sea scrolls pushed them back some.  Maybe we will find something else soon that will date Isaiah to 700 BC.  If that were the case, would that go very far in helping you believe?

I don't think you can ascribe prophecy to demonic spirits or the devil himself.  Here's why.  Unlike God, these beings are created beings.  So, unlike God, they are locked into time and space.  They don't sit outside of time, they are involved in literal time and space.  So they can't forsee the future and tell it like God can.  Just my personal opinion.

If you know of prophecies in the Koran, please let me know them.  I can look up the Koran on the net.

Kevin

[spurly]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]BH said:  
He would have to tell us how to solve all the problems of this world in the here in now.


SPURLY said:  
If this is an expectation you have before you will believe in the existence of a god, I can see why you are an atheist.  By my question is, why would a god have to do that?  If he were God, why would he want to tell us exactly how to solve every problem we have.  Why wouldn't he want us to use the wisdom and common sense he gave us to help us understand, limited though that understanding may be, our messed up world.  If that were the case, and we never had any problems, why would we need a god?"

BH:  
Why would he have to do that?  Because it would be something no other God has done that has been worshiped by humanity in the past.  As far as you asking about needing god if our problems are solved I respond that we don't need him because he won't help us solve our problems.
[/quote]

Here's a question.  How do we determine the guidelines for determining if a god exists, much less the God of the Bible?  Each one of us seems to have different guidelines, how do we know which set of standards to follow?  You seem to think God would do this, because it would prove him to be God.  

I seem to think that if God did this, he would take all of the fun and creativity and mystery out of living and the life that he created would just be boring.

He created life to be complex, beause he is complex.  But then again, that is my subjective opinion.

Kevin

Spurly,

If you don't mind let me respond to your posts before you respond to my replies.  I have poor eyesight and it is very hard for me to read the boards.

Kevin[/quote]
""Here's a question.  How do we determine the guidelines for determining if a god exists, much less the God of the Bible?  Each one of us seems to have different guidelines, how do we know which set of standards to follow?  You seem to think God would do this, because it would prove him to be God.  ""

BH:   Every holy book presents its own proof for its God.  The answer simply speaking is that there is no way for you to prove god exists, much less which particular one.


"""I seem to think that if God did this, he would take all of the fun and creativity and mystery out of living and the life that he created would just be boring.

He created life to be complex, beause he is complex.  But then again, that is my subjective opinion."""

BH: Hmm.

[spurly]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--][!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--][/quote] Spurly Said:
"Here's another question I have for you.  You mentioned a couple of times that we needed to be able to compare Scripture to an absolute moral standard that exists seperate and apart from God.  If this world was created by a God, doesn't it make sense that the absolute moral standard that exists in our world could not be seperated from the one who created it?  I know that sounds like a circular argument, but I think it is true.  What holes do you see in it?"

BH:  As a believer (and this was true of me at one time too) you are conditioned to believe "God said it, so it is right {scientifically, morally, ect}and that is the end of the matter."  Some evil person or entity like Satan would want to take advantage of your faith that "God is right, end of question" to get to you believe false and erroneous doctrines morally, spiritually, and scientifically.  The Devil (or just tricky men) once they brainwash you to believe something came from God, know that you would do whatever they wanted you to do or believe as long as you thought God willed it.

The only way you can know what is truly God's will as compared to evil men forging a doctrine in the Bible and presenting it as  God's will  is to subject God to an absolute objective standard seperate from his own will.  This idea does not detract from the idea of God being all powerful.[/quote]
BH,

I don't have a lot of time right now.  I have to go pick up some Jr. High students.  But this thought keeps occuring to me and I would like to get your take on it, since you have been on both sides of the fence - in the church and out of it.

If there were an absolute moral standard that existed apart from God and God was judged by that standard, wouldn't it make that absolute moral standard God as it places the standard above God himself.  You said that this absolute standard would not detract from God's omnipotence, but I don't see how that can be the case.

Anytime you try to measure the infinite God by something that we can standardize, we diminsh God.  God is incredibly larger than any of our finite minds could ever begin to comprehend.  Not that we are all stupid, it's just that he is so much wiser that when you compare our wisdom to his wisdom, ours comes out looking like foolishness.

For God to be God, he has to be above and beyond.  But what's amazing about the God of the Bible is that he is not only above and beyond, but he came, in the form of the Son, to show us a little bit of what that above and beyond God is like.

Your thoughts?

Kevin

I'll post more later tonight.

[spurly]

I'vek been mulling over something you mentioned earlier in this discussion.   I hope you forgive me, but sometimes it takes my mind a while to digest thoughts.  I have to bring them up over and over again and look at it from many different angles before I can really respond.  I guess I'm like a cow.  

Anyway, here is what you said that I have been ruminating on.  You said that if God does exist, in your mind the following has to be true:
[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]5.  Those who follow the deity's will are the ones that should be blessed (in this life) while those who do not should be utterly destroyed (in this life). [/quote]

Here are my thoughts.

If a god did exist, and the primary reason he created the universe was to have a relationship with people whom he loved, he would want those people to have a choice.  He would want them to be able to choose to love him or to choose not to love him.  (I know Calvinists don't believe in free will, but I don't want to go there right now.  That is another subject for another time.  Back to the topic at hand).

If God wanted us to choose to love him, then what you described above would really negate any choice.  Everybody would choose to have a relationship with him, and many people would choose to have that relationship for the wrong reasons.  Either they would choose to have a relationship out of fear of being destroyed, or cursed, in this life (with disease, depression, poverty, pain, etc.), or they would choose to follow him for the blessings that they could get out of it.  Like God was some big politician doling out goodies to his cronies.

But God wants us to choose to have a relationship with him for altogether different reasons.  He wants us to choose to have a relationship with him because we love him.  Plain and simple.

The requirement you are putting on god to prove that he exists would negate that for many people.

Kevin

[spurly]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (janine @ Dec. 20 2002,12:05)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]He already said elsewhere that he cannot prove God does not exist.

Can one prove a negative?

What is this thing you have about "winning" and "being right", BH?

Oh, I forgot.  You're Church of Christ, born/bred/blood/bone.[/quote]
I do remember him saying that.  But I was just wanting to see what his response would be to that question.

Janine, your comment about church of Christ always wanting to be right, to win, was funny in a sad sort of way.   :doh:

Kevin

Kevin[/quote]
""""""I will readily admit that through the ages some things have been taught by Christians that did not come from God.  And those teachings had devastating effects.  I hope and pray that I do not do that, but because my mind can not get a full grasp on the infinite mind of God, I am sure I do it unknowingly at times.  I just hope the effects aren't devastating.""""""

BH:  You problem goes way beyond what  erroneous ideas Christians may have had individually in the past.  Your problem is that YOUR TEXT is erroneous due to the fact it has been added to and taken away from throughout the past due to man (or devils :p)  the problem, spurly, if I may be so bold, is not your lack of understanding of the will of "god", but the lack of understanding that the very foundation of your faith is corrupt--the Bible. You are locked in a certain mindset regarding the Bible and cannot break free from it.  If you could do so, and I think with more study you will, the fallacies I see in religion will become more apparent and clear to you.

""""I can see that God could have created a world the way you mentioned above, if he chose to.  But what you described is sort of like a parent saying, you can choose to love me, or walk away from me, you can choose to respect me or disrespect me, and whatever you choose there are no consequences for your action.  Any parent knows that to raise a child like that is not really raising them in love at all."""

BH:  God could have created the universe where we have free will, yet always choose to do what he wants and love him.  Why would there be a need for consequences anyway?  We supposedly cannot harm God, and he could have created the world to where even if we could choose to disobey him, we could not harm ourselves or each other through that disobedience.  I think you are just rationalizing the world as it is (value wise) while trying to justify God's not fixing the world.

""""The argument I used above may be based on how the world is today.  However, the world may be that way, because that's the way that it was designed by God.  Which, again is a circular argument.  I keep hitting myself coming and going  :doh:""""

BH: Maybe.  Prove it.

""""I guess what it comes down to more than anything else is this.  I cannot prove beyond a shadow of doubt that God exists.  I can tell you about answered prayer, prophecies that came true, intelligent design in the universe and other arguments from creation, archeological evidence, etc.  But in the end there are refutations for most of that from rational people on the other side of the fence.  (Yes I believe that many atheists and agnostics are rational, even when they deny the existence of God.  Sometimes they are too rational for their own good :crackup: ) """'

BH:  Thank you for the compliment Kevin.

"""And on the other side, you can not prove that God does not exist.""""

BH:  Which I freely admit.  

"""""So I guess it comes down to faith, and which "theory" makes the most sense?  And that is something we have to determine based on our view of the evidence."""""


BH:  But everyone examines the evidence and come to different conclusions.  Some see no God, some see Jehovah, some see Allah, some the "deist" god, ect.


""""I am also trying to figure out why bringing up the whole free will/calvinism debate is like taking a manhole cover off of an abyss that I could fall into."""""

BH:  Don't worry, I told you I would let you back track if you need to.  When I taught school I told my students to at least  try a project assigned them and it was okay to make a mistake.  We could always work together later to find the right answer.  

""""The only thing I can come up with is trying to balance the sovereignty of God, with the free will of man.  Is that what you were referring to?""""

BH:  Not really, I just want to know so far whether Old Scratch or just plain old con have decieved you with fake doctrines forged into the Bible.

[spurly]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]:p My opinion is that faith is where the rubber meets the road.The bible is clear that we believe by faith.We are christians because we choose to believe and atheist choose not to believe.No need to prove either side.

However,we come to these forums for encouragement to our faith,that's what church is all about.I don't believe that atheism and Christianity  belong together on a forum.Kindness,good manners,and love can prevail on both sides and that's good,but belief and unbelief are not compatable.

When we have some who pledge allegiance to the bible and some who deny Gen1:1,there is no room for compatability.

Just my thoughts on a very early morning.God bless,Charles[/quote]
Charles,

I couldn't disagree with you more.   :(  When Paul held a forum on Mars Hill, was everybody there a believer?  No.  When he went to Ephesus, was everybody there a believe?  Of course not - they tried to throw him out of town.  But he still wanted to go into the "forum" where the riot was taking place and discuss the matter with them.

There is room for everyone here.  Christian conservatives, Christian moderates, Christian liberals, and ex-Christians turned atheists.  Everyone has a stake in the discussion.

Kevin

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]My only comment would be that I don't see the forum being dominated by discussions about atheism.  We have a couple of topics here and there, but for the most part (If I hadn't just read the Santa Claus thread I wouldn't have had to qualify that) BH doesn't inject the atheistic viewpoint into other discussions.  If he did, I would agree; that is the problem I have seen on other boards  (a discussion on baptism goes nowhere, for instance, because a poster keeps interrupting with "none of this matters, the Bible's not true").  But generally he doesn't disrupt other topics and keeps his (supposedly) atheistic viewpoints limited to a few threads on that topic.[/quote]
Give credit where credit is due, please.  Before I got banned I DEFENDED the idea that the Bible teaches one must be baptized to have his sins washed away and "be in Christ."  In fact, I got a lot of pm's thanking me for doing so and asking me not to go brag that I as an atheist, was defending a basic Bible doctrine to Christians.  I did not run off to II and brag to the people there (many are ex-CoC's, CC's, DoC's and RC's who would have mocked to scorn) about my defense of baptism and shame the folks on this board.  

I'm not THAT BAD! ;)

[marc]

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]Quote  
My only comment would be that I don't see the forum being dominated by discussions about atheism.  We have a couple of topics here and there, but for the most part (If I hadn't just read the Santa Claus thread I wouldn't have had to qualify that) BH doesn't inject the atheistic viewpoint into other discussions.  If he did, I would agree; that is the problem I have seen on other boards  (a discussion on baptism goes nowhere, for instance, because a poster keeps interrupting with "none of this matters, the Bible's not true").  But generally he doesn't disrupt other topics and keeps his (supposedly) atheistic viewpoints limited to a few threads on that topic.

Give credit where credit is due, please.  Before I got banned I DEFENDED the idea that the Bible teaches one must be baptized to have his sins washed away and "be in Christ."  In fact, I got a lot of pm's thanking me for doing so and asking me not to go brag that I as an atheist, was defending a basic Bible doctrine to Christians.  I did not run off to II and brag to the people there (many are ex-CoC's, CC's, DoC's and RC's who would have mocked to scorn) about my defense of baptism and shame the folks on this board.  

I'm not THAT BAD!  [/quote]

I don't get the connection between what I said and your post.  At all.  I am at a total loss.  

It is my impression that the "guest" feature is there for a purpose.  When one chooses to be a guest, then that is their perogative for whatever reason they choose.  If it is something that is "frowned upon", then the feature should be removed. Explanations should not be necessary and implications should not be made as to why one is doing it. I am following all the rules. Are you saying that because I disagreed with you, that I should let my identity be known?  Why?  What difference does it make?  I have not "chosen sides" nor have I suggested anyone leave the forum; I simply gave an opinion, which the last time I looked, one is still allowed to do on here.  I did not even say that I am a Christian. Like BH, I simply gave facts and engaged in an intellectual exercise.

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (spurly @ Dec. 16 2002,11:35)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--][/quote]
"I realize that you are the resident atheist on the GCM message board, but it also seems like you are somewhat familiar with scripture and may have a had a background in the church."  

BH:

I was raised in the Church of Christ--10 years among the non-class brethren and 12 years among the "mainliners".  I have had very close dealings with "one cup" and "non-institutional"  people as well.  My grandmother was a member of the local Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) at one time.  So, yes, I have firsthand experiences with the so-called Restoration Movement.

One time I had one gospel and around ten epistles memorized with the intent of starting preaching school one day.  However, I could not get sponsored by the preacher(s) at my church so did not get to go.  They did not deem me socialite enough to be a preacher (too introverted), though they felt I would have made a good researcher for the faith behind the scenes after completing the necessary Biblical, Greek, Hebrew, ect. studies.  

Got only as far as a B.S. in History with a minor in Political Science.  I started graduate school but illness and lack of $$$$ kept me from finishing.  My goal now is to develop what I can of a career in retail and SO earn my living honestly.  I would really like to learn more  Greek and  start Hebrew  so as to know when a preacher is lying to me about what the Bible actually says.

"So here is my question:  What led you to turn away from God and turn away from the church to try to find truth in other places?"  

BH:

Really, I just outgrew my religion.  I realized that religion does not have the solutions to my (or the world's) problems and therefore was no longer worthy of my consideration.   By "solutions" I mean fixing the here and now and not having to wait till some afterlife.

"What was your journey toward atheism like?"

BH:

It was gradual and took a couple of years to complete.  A few friends of mine asked me to go over to Internet Infidels and whip on them in the name of the faith.  When I started reading a lot of their arguments (not the jesting and play)  and corresponding with Farrell Till I realized I was wrong.  

"Would you consider yourself a strong atheist today, or an atheist who recognizes a god might exist, but doesn't want to submit your life to him?"

BH:

To me, an atheist is one who has no faith in a god or set of gods. By faith I do not necessarily mean belief in the existence of deity(s) but having trust,love, loyalty, ect. for a said deity.  In other words I see no practical reason to put faith in a god regardless of whether one exists or not.  He/she/it/them has not given me any reason to place any faith,trust, love, ect. in them and therefore from a practical perspective do not exist.

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]B.H.

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--] In other words I see no practical reason to put faith in a god regardless of whether one exists or not. [/quote]

My student dictionary(has simple difinitions that my weak brain can understand :0 )  defines agnostic as a person who believes it is impossible to know whether there is a god or not and it defines atheist as a person who believes there is no god.  Going by what you just told us, you are actually somewhere between an agnostic and an atheist, since you acknowledge that there may be a god but you just don't have a reason to put faith in that god.

I have known some hardline atheists and you have never struck me as having made it to that point.  Thanks for the clarification.  It helps us understand you better.

Now, if this is not too personal, would you mind telling us your age.  One of these days we will probably meet and I don't want it to be too much of a culture shock to me.
My heart might not be able to stand the stress :D[/quote]
I guess you can call me a "weak" atheist.  I personally do not believe there is a deity, but I admit I can't prove it 100%.

I do not wish to reveal my age, address, serial number ect. too many crazies around! :D  Actually I am close to thirty.

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (marc @ Dec. 17 2002,12:55)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]? ? ? ?[/quote]
I am close to thirty, marc, and I will leave it at that.  I don't want you stealing my identity!

[!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote (marc @ Dec. 17 2002,1:09)[/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--][!--QuoteBegin--][/span][table border=\"0\" align=\"center\" width=\"95%\" cellpadding=\"3\" cellspacing=\"1\"][tr][td]Quote [/td][/tr][tr][td id=\"QUOTE\"][!--QuoteEBegin--]Why should YOU make the rules regarding what proves God's existence?[/quote]

Ummm, no, that's not what I said.  I was saying who are we to say what God should be like.  Quite a different question.[/quote]
How else can one decide whether a concious deity exists then?

Remember, there are many views as to what a deity is or whether there are several deities.

How could you decide which is the right position to hold?  Is it Baal, Chemosh, Allah, Cthlthu, Quezlacolatl (sp?), Jehovah, aliens-like Von Daaniken theorizes, ect.?