Whatever needs to be discussed - Page 3

here are some questions for christians, that I see as problems which make Christianity quite ridiculous. (And this is just a start, I've got 100s of q's).

1. Where is the evidence that shows the bible is valid non-fiction writting?
There is no evidence, only assumption by Christians, even though much of it defys all logic and science.

2. What sections of the bible do you take literally and what sections do you take symbolically?
No two people interperate the bible in the same way

3. "since god told adam and eve that they would die if they ate from the tree and satan told them they would merely understand truth and right from wrong; wouldn't that make god the liar and evil?"

4. How can you explain how adam and eve and their close offspring were able to successfully reproduce? I mean, deadly mutations would be way too common from too much inbreeding and kill everyone off! How could they have produced multiple races out of two people?

5. Why does the Old Testament teach that there is no hell, while the New Testament teaches that there is?

6. Why haven't any of the miracles recorded in the Bible been independently confirmed?

quote:

---

1. Where is the evidence that shows the bible is valid non-fiction writting?
There is no evidence, only assumption by Christians, even though much of it defys all logic and science.

---

The evidence lies in the existence of God. If God didn't exist then the Bible would be useless.

quote:

---

2. What sections of the bible do you take literally and what sections do you take symbolically?
No two people interperate the bible in the same way

---

Parts of the Bible are written as poetry and therefore may not be litteral but other parts are written as laws and commandment which are to be adhered to.

quote:

---

3. "since god told adam and eve that they would die if they ate from the tree and satan told them they would merely understand truth and right from wrong; wouldn't that make god the liar and evil?"

---

Adam and Eve did die.

quote:

---

4. How can you explain how adam and eve and their close offspring were able to successfully reproduce? I mean, deadly mutations would be way too common from too much inbreeding and kill everyone off! How could they have produced multiple races out of two people?

---

The Bible only mentions Adam and Eve at the begining but that's because that doesn't mean there were not other people created around or after that time. When Cain murderers Abel he is sentenced to wander the lands and yet he is afraid of people who would kill him. Obviously Adam and Eve and Cain were not the only ones on earth.

quote:

---

5. Why does the Old Testament teach that there is no hell, while the New Testament teaches that there is?

---

The old testament also makes no direct references to the holy Spirit but that doesn't make Him any less real

quote:

---

6. Why haven't any of the miracles recorded in the Bible been independently confirmed?

---

Who cares? Why don't you look at modern miracles?

quote:

---

The evidence lies in the existence of God. If God didn't exist then the Bible would be useless.

---

Thats not evidence. Give me evidence (only if you can).

quote:

---

Parts of the Bible are written as poetry and therefore may not be litteral but other parts are written as laws and commandment which are to be adhered to.

---

this is the problem, see. How does a christian today know what to take literally, and what to take as merely feeble poetry?

You haven't attempted to reason the question: "since god told adam and eve that they would die if they ate from the tree and satan told them they would merely understand truth and right from wrong; wouldn't that make god the liar and evil?"

quote:

---

The Bible only mentions Adam and Eve at the begining but that's because that doesn't mean there were not other people created around

---

Oh really? According to the bible, Adam and Eve were first. If they reproduced, they produced children. These children could only reproduce with each other (ie, first imbreed). This already would have caused deadly mutations. Its ridiculous!

quote:

---

Who cares? Why don't you look at modern miracles?

---

Christians apparently care about the significance of miracles today and in the past.

quote:

---

Thats not evidence. Give me evidence (only if you can).

---

The evidence is experienced based. How do you describe sight to a person who has always been blind? Some things need the experience.

quote:

---

this is the problem, see. How does a christian today know what to take literally, and what to take as merely feeble poetry?

---

It isn't hard there are literary markers throughout the Bible. If people don't take the time to know what they are reading then they are better off not reading the Bible at all.

quote:

---

"since god told adam and eve that they would die if they ate from the tree and satan told them they would merely understand truth and right from wrong; wouldn't that make god the liar and evil?"

---

God didn't lie. Adam and Eve died spiritually as soon as they ate the fruit and God also cut them off from immortality.

quote:

---

Oh really? According to the bible, Adam and Eve were first. If they reproduced, they produced children. These children could only reproduce with each other (ie, first imbreed). This already would have caused deadly mutations. Its ridiculous

---

They were first. But clearly God created other people otherwise why would Cain worry about being killed by people in foreign lands? The Bible doesn't follow the lives of everyone who existed in history.

Well said, etherealmeekie.

quote:

---

"since god told adam and eve that they would die if they ate from the tree and satan told them they would merely understand truth and right from wrong; wouldn't that make god the liar and evil?"

---

1. They died. 2. Most humans still have a bad idea of right and wrong, as is evidenced by crime, fights, wars, and tourture. How exactly is God the liar? Summit, is evidence good or not? I attempted to give you evidence and you started spouting off about how truth is relative, and evidence is unreliable. etherealmeekie beats you without evidence, and then you require it. You are truly a class-A hypocrite, but one would need to be to defend something with as little evidence as your beliefs. Remember Josephus: "And there arose about this time Jesus, a wise man, if indeed we shall call him a man, for he was a doer of marvelous deeds... for he appeared to them on the third day alive again..." Remember, Josephus hated Christians, so this wasn't propaganda. He did not write the part about marvelous deeds sarcastically, however. And Josephus died in 100 AD, which is too short for misinformation and legends to have arose. Now don't go spouting off about the unreliability of history again, because you asked for us to give you some.

as much as you may assume this as some sort of juvenile play-time, this is not a game godisnotanidea. This is a discussion where two or more opinions are discussed. The problem may seem that you as a determinist believe that all truth can be reduced down to a singular universal absolute (ie God ) when obviously people disagree. If there was only your 'God', as an universal truth then there would certainly be only one course of action open to us- which isn't the case, its impossible as differing opinions would not exist. Your disdainful claims have no more validity if evidence for all can't be shown. I don't see the 'evidence', nor do most people. Evidence for all requires logic. On the lines of evidence consider this:
"Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence." Richard Dawkins.

Whatever you say is provisional. Your context affects your perception of truth. You have a predilection for deductions where you can only justify your beliefs through non-logic thought.

"Punishing one person for the actions of another is immoral. If we use the Adam and Eve story to explain evil, suffering and death then we are saying that God is immoral and not a forgiving God. Judging Adam and Eve even when they didn't know the difference between good and evil, when they didn't know it was wrong to disobey and couldn't understand that the serpent tricked them, is also immoral. The Adam and Eve story is not a suitable moral story for children nor is it a valid theodicy to explain evil."
"Adam and Eve" by Vexen Crabtree 2002 Sep 30

quote:

---

How exactly is God the liar?

---

This can be short-cutted to say that 'God' is a human construct.

Exactly. ^^

And it can also be said that humans are a construction of the almighty's hands. Whichever way it is it doesn't matter anymore does it?..........so much arguing, when in truth if you believe then you believe and if you don't you don't.....I could say all day that the almighty is real....you could say all day that he isn't....you would stick to your beliefs and I would stick to mine and still we would end up nowhere.....Yet you live and breathe everyday and say that he doesn't exist... How are you so sure about that without your scientifical proof....it's because there is science you say there is no creator but only evolution....it's because of the creator I say there is no science and no evolution....you say science started at the big bang and I say that my creator was before all understanding and that he Is understanding...overstanding and every other standpoint. The spirit is not something that can be seen with the eyes...and it's not something that can be heard with the ears...so why are you looking to find the almighty through your own understanding and logic. Only the heart can see spiritual things..not even the mind knows the reaches of the Almighty. Then you might say that i'm passionate about my beliefs...and i'll simply reply that passion is not what I have but reality.......all this time you keep denying Love (which is what the creator consists of) and you cling to your own imaginations......how do you know he's not talking to you right now?????

You don't see the evidence because whenever someone tries to show it to you, you insist evidence doesn't matter! Then when some one proves you wrong without evidence, you ask for it! Jesus said it best-

quote:

---

Woe to you, teachers of the law and pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to. Woe to you, teachers of the law and pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are. Matthew 23:13, 15

---

People have differing opinions from Christianity because they are wrong! If I hold up a yellow ball in a dark room and someone says it is a blue box, does that mean it can be nothing? No, it just means that guy is wrong. If someone claims there is no war in Iraq, does that mean it is not true that there is a war? No! It just means that person is in denial, which fits you quite well, summit.

quote:

---

Whatever you say is provisional. Your context affects your perception of truth. You have a predilection for deductions where you can only justify your beliefs through non-logic thought.

---

Maybe it's because you refuse to accept logic! I gave up trying to use logic on you when you kept endlessly repeating that logic cannot prove anything!

quote:

---

I could say all day that the almighty is real....you could say all day that he isn't....you would stick to your beliefs and I would stick to mine and still we would end up nowhere

---

Well said. I am arguing to convince passive viewers of this thread that summit is wrong, as summit will not accept truth. I will give proof if summit agrees to not deny it after asking for it. Will you accept proof, summit, or will you just say that proof is relative because you can't accept what the proof says is true? Your choice.

quote:

---

People have differing opinions from Christianity because they are wrong!

---

Wrong to whom? You? Or just wrong in all aspects?

If they are wrong to you then what your saying pointless.
And if you are saying they ARE wrong in all aspects you are very provincial like summit said. You are ignorant to close out all other possibilities of Life.
Simply Amazing.

quote:

---

If I hold up a yellow ball in a dark room and someone says it is a blue box, does that mean it can be nothing?

---

This analogy fails to represent what you want. In other words it sucks bad. A yellow ball can be observed and proven to be round and yellow which are perceptual constructs. Christianity can't be perceptually represented but summits side can be.

quote:

---

If someone claims there is no war in Iraq, does that mean it is not true that there is a war?

---

Is it really impossible that there is no war Iraq?
Have you seen it with your own eyes?
Or have you been fed through what other tell you?
Im not saying there is no war in Iraq i'm saying anything is possible.

quote:

---

I am arguing to convince passive viewers of this thread that summit is wrong, as summit will not accept truth.

---

What truth?
Maybe you should look up the definition of "truth".
No wait here I'll do it for you.

truth ( P ) Pronunciation Key (trth)
n. pl. truths (trthz, trths)
1. Conformity to fact or actuality.

www.dictionary.com

Fact is not equal to Christianity.
Actuality is not equal to Christianity.
What Truth?
Much <3

Well stated Zato.^ ^

quote:

---

Maybe it's because you refuse to accept logic! I gave up trying to use logic on you when you kept endlessly repeating that logic cannot prove anything!

---

I have never refused logic. It is part of my individual truth.

So... You will accept logic. Alright, good.

When I said they were wrong, that didn't mean in all aspects. Summit set it up as saying that if there is truth, everyone would accept it and it would be obvious. I am simply saying that they could have differing points of view because they are wrong, not because there are two different truths.

I agree, the analogy sucked. I will accept this fact and let it die in peace.

Nice definition of truth. I'm going to run with it for a bit, so follow me here. Truth is conformity to fact or actuality. Two opposing facts cannot be true. I say truth is absolute, summit says truth is relative. They are not compatible. As to my statment about the Iraq war, fine. I could be wrong. But then you would be right. That was my main point. I could be wrong, you could be wrong, but someone is wrong! That is what I am saying about religion. At this point I am not even saying that I am right. All I am insisting is that someone is. I will accept other possibilities if someone provides more proof for them then for Christianity.

I am not ignorant, but with the total evidence that I have seen, Christianity wins. Ignorance is not knowing about other religions. I know about them, know most of their claims, but I just don't believe them. That is not ignorance.

Right now, as I said, I am simply arguing for truth's existence. I will prove Christianity is true when summit accepts that truth is not relative. The God of Christianity is sovreign over all, not just those who believe in Him. If I am to prove this, I cannot have summit insisting that truth is relative and not absolute. Whether or not there is a war in Iraq, there isn't a war going on only for some people. Just because someone doesn't believe it is real does not mean it wouldn't be happening if they went there, and vice-versa. If I didn't believe that summit existed, I would still see his posts. Just because you don't believe in something doesn't mean it ceases to exist in your personal little reality. For something to be true, it must be true about something. There must be a Reality, some thing or religion, for Truth to be about. That must be established before there can be discussion.

Universal truth is an empty abstraction. If your truth must account for all the facts, and if accounting for all the facts results in inconsistency; only the most empty abstractions can be true. Our opinions are relative. For example Christians take a stand on a given moral issue and non-christians may disagree. What this implys is that such beliefs are relative.
Watkins says, "that truth and error, right and wrong, beautiful and ugly, normal and abnormal, and a host of other judgments are determined by the individual, . . . circumstances, or . . . culture. . . . There is no transcendent God or universal natural law we can point to that can inform us about who we are, what our world is like, and how we should get along in it." Your beliefs are true to some people and not to others. Not everyone.

Being right is not righteousness. Remember, you can be as straight as a gun barrel and just as empty.

Right is not rightly related. Jesus reminded a group of folks of that very thing in Luke 13. Some were telling Jesus a story of an atrocity committed by Pilate, thinking His response would be "...why, that's awful! We need to do something..." Christ's response was a shock. He said, "...unless you repent you will all likewise perish..." Right is not rightly related. Ouch!