You know Kathy, we’ve been fairly blunt with you today. Flippant, too. And it’s tough when people talk to/about you that way. I’m sorry for that.
If we could cut through all the rhetoric for a second, I’d like to commiserate with you. A little over 4 years ago, I was a very dedicated Christian. I had some doubts, but they weren’t about the Christian faith, just my understanding of it.
I felt like there were problems in my beliefs about the gospel. I believed in a literal Hell, and I believed a lot of people would be going there. But I had a very hard time squaring that with a loving God. I had matured enough to realize that most people were pretty decent. Not perfect, certainly, but good people who cared about others and typically wanted to do the right thing. I didn’t think such people deserved Hell. In fact, like Paul, I often thought that if God would accept it, I’d gladly go to Hell myself, if it would save my friends and family. And if everyone else could be added into that deal too, even better.
So if I felt that way, could I be more compassionate than God? Of course not. But I had a very hard time finding anything in the Bible that backed up an idea that most people, regardless of creed or belief would be saved.
I didn’t give up though. I knew about Universalists, so I decided to read up on their reasons for thinking everyone went to Heaven. It sounded good, but I just wasn’t convinced by their arguments. I just didn’t see the Bible teaching such a doctrine, and I still believed the Bible was the inerrant word of God.
I was in a state of flux.
And that’s the position I was in when I first ran across articles that pointed out flaws in the Bible. I was shocked by what the articles said, but since I didn’t have any answers against them at the moment, I got busy with research. I didn’t even comment on the articles — I just went to work. It wasn’t about winning any arguments; it was simply a search for answers.
I think that frame of mind I was in made all the difference for me. Deep down, I was already struggling. The doctrines I had long believed in, and even taught to others, didn’t fit together in my mind as well as they once had.
That’s probably the difference between you and me. I get the feeling that you question nothing about your faith. Not trying to put you down about that; just making an observation.
For me, discovering that the Bible was not the perfect book I had always thought it to be, and finding out that some of these church leaders I had always admired knew of these problems but never spoke of them, helped me make sense of a lot of things. It took time, and it wasn’t easy to come to the realizations, but everything finally fell into place for me when I realized Christianity was just another religion. For the first time, I finally understood the sentiment of that line from “Amazing Grace,” I once was blind, but now I see…
I don’t know if that’s helpful to you at all. Maybe one day it will be. Maybe one day, something will make you ask a few questions, and you’ll think back to those non- believers who were so insistent that Christianity was certainly not the only way. If that day comes, I hope you’ll find this exchange helpful and realize you’re not alone.
Finding Truth 
Not at all, you maintain that there is no such thing as infinite regression, yet you also maintain that your god created the universe, so I’m assuming that the regression would quite likely terminate with whomever created your god. Unless, of course, you are personally aware of who created THAT creator —
LikeLike
@Archaeopteryx who I shall from now on refer to as “The BIRD.”
When you click on my name in this thread it should take you to my wordpress page. It does for me but just in case it isn’t working for you, here it tis.
http://haydendlinder.wordpress.com/
In response to the light I mentioned in Gen 1, I don;t know man. The explanation seems a little iffy about there being no light but I will assume this is absolutely correct as I do not have a reason not to. Even if the light in Gen 1 came 400,000 years later it would still fall under the gen story. The story is metaphorical. My point is that from an “unbiased” standpoint, the writer did pretty damn well on accuracy.
Note: “The BIRD” said: “– wouldn’t that imply a degree of madness? That would certainly explain a lot – a god exists, but he’s insane – I like that!”
I had a friend who’s faith was based on that. He said God is really cool, Just a little loopy and forgetful.
@Carmen and @Kathy, I can’t believe I get to make one reply to the both of you. Far out.
Anyway, you both know that the God of the bible and the Allah are the same GOD of Abraham. Right?
@”The BIRD” You keep asking Mike this question so I gotta answer you honestly.
No one created the creator. But what your seeing as God is not really him and what people have tried to sell you as being God is not really him. The Lord of the OT was written about by the Nomadic Jews some 5000 years ago, yes I know you want to argue over the date and you certainly can. However when they wrote you have to remember the Jews are a race of warriors. They kill well. They, much like us, have to be reminded of mercy and compassion cause it ain’t the first thing on their list. So when you read about the God of the OT you have to remember the source. These were the predecessors of the civilians in the warsaw ghettos of WWII who held off the best infantry in the world for 45 days with stolen weapons. Their view of God is going to be a little on the “Lord make the day longer so we can kill more of our enemies!” side.
The creator on the other hand is supersweet.
LikeLike
Nate, you said:
“But Kathy, this is where you’re simply wrong. The Bible does not pass those tests. Why else do you think there are so many “liberal” Christians these days? Most of them have come to terms with the fact that the Bible has flaws. The information is easy to come by, too. In fact, several of us here have pointed you to resources that would help you learn more about them.”
Nate, there are liberal “Christians” because they want to please their will, not God’s. They call themselves Christians for what they get out of it.. it’s not about God.
And again, I don’t know of any flaws in the Bible. There are possible reasonable explanations for everything you’ve put forth.
What you call “resources”, I call biased opinions.
“First, I don’t think your 50/50 point is accurate. You’ve said that there’s either a creator, or we’re an accident. I don’t think that’s an accurate way of stating it. There’s the third possibility that given natural law, it’s a statistical possibility, maybe even likelihood, that us or something like us would eventually evolve.”
Even if you’re right, that would be a 33% chance that we are created beings.. STILL not very good odds.. would you drive in a car if that were the odds of you surviving?
But, it’s still 50/50 that we are created beings. Your argument of a statistical possibility would still fall under “accident”.. meaning, non intentional… without meaning or purpose.. as opposed to being created, with intent/ purpose.
” So many things about nature used to be described by supernatural forces: disease, lightning, the sun, the moon, eclipses, drought, flood, etc. But every one of those has been found to operate naturally. Seeing that trend, we atheists think it’s likely that everything has a natural explanation, even if we don’t always know what that explanation is. We certainly don’t find it reasonable to say that a supernatural entity caused everything, because the supernatural hasn’t been shown to even exist. ”
Why does it matter that people used to think that supernatural forces caused natural events? How does that have any bearing on what the truth is? I don’t get the connection at all.
And again, how does discovering the natural process disprove a supernatural original cause?
Yes, I get that you might be inclined to believe that natural forces will explain everything but my question is how scientific understanding disproves God. You, like Arch say it doesn’t, but then you all make comments like this:
”
“The more knowledge we gain by learning about the universe, the smaller and smaller and smaller the need becomes for your “god of the gaps.”
“God is an ever-decreasing pocket of scientific ignorance, that gets smaller and smaller as time goes by.”
~~ astrophysist, Neill Degrasse Tyson ~~ ”
This argues that science disproves God. And again, it doesn’t.. in ANY way! Science just explains HOW God did it. But going further, again, science ALSO shows that existence can’t be at all.. because 1st cause is illogical. So, a supernatural explanation is all that is left.
But, I have a question I’ve been wanting to ask atheists for awhile now..
From my own personal experience, I am convinced that “esp” is real.. I can see how some of it might be scientifically explained one day but some I just can’t see.. as one example, I had a dream/ nightmare about a horrible motorcycle accident, it happened at night and I was the only one to come upon it, there was a young couple lying in the road, it was very gory and I was horrified, running from house to house trying to get help.
It happened the very next day, in real life.. the gory part didn’t happen, but I was one of the first to come upon the accident, it was a young couple laying in the road, not moving.. someone had just run up to one of them as others were stopping to help.
And this isn’t the only dream.. I’ve had several dreams, and other intuitions, that defy logic. There is no “natural” explanation for knowing about something that hasn’t happened yet. Maybe one day science will be able to explain this.. but as of now, it’s considered “supernatural”. So, I don’t see how you can claim that it doesn’t exist. It’s something as simple as knowing when someone is looking at you and turning around to see them looking at you. It’s that six sense that everyone has experienced but there is no logical explanation for it.
LikeLike
Hayden, you said:
“@Carmen and @Kathy, I can’t believe I get to make one reply to the both of you. Far out.
Anyway, you both know that the God of the bible and the Allah are the same GOD of Abraham. Right?”
Even though this is what Muhammad claimed, when you read the Koran … it’s very clear that allah is NOT the God of the Bible… NOT the God of Abraham. The fictitious god of Islam is a god of violence and hate based on the lies of Muhammad.
LikeLike
Arch,
““HOW does knowledge disprove or ‘argue’ against the existence of God?” – Simple, it removes the knowledge gaps that you people try to cram your god into, thus making it ever more difficult to even BEGIN to supply even the slightest modicum of possibility that he/she/it might exist. ”
Sorry, that does NOT answer the question.. HOW does removing the “gaps” disprove God?? You are lying to yourself.. you’ve been brainwashed into believing it somehow does.. but.. IT DOESN’T.. in any way!
“And what does ‘need’ have to do with the truth of God’s existence??” – good question, why do you NEED to believe in one?
LOL… sorry, that’s not an answer to my question either. You’ve implied that need is pertinent to truth.. and obviously you have nothing to base that belief on.. except more liberal, anti God BRAINWASHING.
LikeLike
@Kathy “…The fictitious god of Islam is a god of violence and hate based on the lies of Muhammad.”
Now normally I would be calm and rational with you on this topic. Unfortunately I have Muslim friends so that is not an option as you just slandered them, being your brothers and sisters, and our God. ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR DAMN MIND?!
The terrorist hate mongers you equate to the teachings of Allah are no more following the Muslim teachings than the Ku Klux Klan are Christian!
LikeLike
Thoughts?
LikeLike
And this
LikeLike
Kathy,
1. are all the evils and destruction of the world caused by liberals?
2. Who exactly are you referring to when you write liberals?
3. who was tearing America apart before the liberals came?
LikeLike
LikeLike
and just to note,
those who flew two planes full of people into the Twin Towers were definitely not liberals.
So perhaps liberals aren’t the cause of all evils
LikeLike
“Not at all, you maintain that there is no such thing as infinite regression, yet you also maintain that your god created the universe, so I’m assuming that the regression would quite likely terminate with whomever created your god. Unless, of course, you are personally aware of who created THAT creator –”
Like I said everything about infinite regression and causation having an end just flew right over your head. Science has taught us that everything natural has an explanation. whatever terminates causation cannot have an explanation and therefore has a super (beyond) natural quality.
I know……
It flew right over your head again
LikeLike
This whole thread reminds me of something someone else wrote (on another Blog) this a.m. Since it’s so applicable to you, Kathy, I’ll use their words. It is obvious that you are hopelessly mired in fundamentalist thinking (and, by the way, I think you should switch to the word, ‘progressive’ as opposed to ‘liberal’ thinking) BUT as long as you are breathing you are a prospect for reason.
It’s clear that many who are commenting have this in mind. (and don’t worry, Nate – it’ll be my last ‘kick at the can’ for this thread) 🙂
LikeLike
“being your brothers and sisters, and our God. ”
Whoa there Nelly . Your theology is your own. the whole we are brothers and sisters of the same God is an unbiblical and non Christian teaching. Thats not saying anything about Muslims either – just that you badly misprepresented Christianity in your reply while assuming a premise that is UTTERLY wrong.
LikeLike
“The fictitious god of Islam is a god of violence and hate based on the lies of Muhammad.” – Whereas the fictitious god of the Bible is a god of violence and hate based on the lies of hundreds of priests. She’s right, there IS a difference. But I believe it was Mr. Spock who once said, “A difference that makes no difference, IS no difference.”
LikeLike
Here are some resources for evolutionary theory as it relates to humans. None of them are links to skeptic websites.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/275670/human-evolution
http://genome.cshlp.org/content/8/4/339.full
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evograms_07
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/search/topics.php?topic_id=14
The links I posted to Christian websites refuting the idea that Israel’s reformation is a fulfillment of prophecy is not because I believe that rot. It was simply to show that even with Christendom there is wide disagreement about whether that prophecy even applies to the current nation.
Throughout this discussion it has been bandied about that it definitely is a fulfillment of prophecy. I won’t claim to know whether or not the Bible got the year right or that it can be accurately calculated. But the reformation of Israel did happen regardless of the other details. That isn’t enough to prove that God exists or that he had anything to do with it. There are many things throughout history which have been predicted or “foretold”. We only remember the ones which come to fruition and we don’t call most of them fulfilled prophecy unless we use the word “self” in front of it. No one here is claiming that Israel is not a nation.
The Jews are quite nationalistic. Throughout the OT that is what can be seen. It was and still is important for them to keep their tribe/tribes together. So for one or a number of them to predict that, even though they might be scattered or in captivity, they would one day be a Nation again wouldn’t be all that unheard of and they had been working toward that end. They have claimed that piece of dirt for themselves as a “promised land” for thousands of years. Naturally, since they believe this is their dirt they’re going to fight for it and try to acquire it by any means necessary. They have done this throughout history starting with the Canaanites – if you believe that story is literally true. Had it not been in 1948 it would have been at some point because they were bound and determined to have it.
LikeLike
I think part of the problem is that you are viewing mercy and wrath as incompatible. But, why can’t love be expressed as either mercy or wrath given particular circumstances?” – anaivethinker
@anaivethinker,
I dont think this is really the case.
I mean, I think I agree that in certain instances something that is merciful can indeed be wrathful at times – I do not believe that justice must be at odds with either wrath or mercy.
That being said, how is killing young children merciful or just? it is wrath, I’ll give you that, but i do beieve that in certain instances, wrath is very much at odds with mercy… and justice.
LikeLike
Kathy, you poor child – and you’re not really a child anymore, are you? – if anyone has been brainwashed, it is definitely you. I understand that one of your heroes is Sarah “I can see Russia from here!” Palin.
John Cleese of “Monty Python” once remarked, “And I used to think Michael was the funny Palin!”
LikeLike
“whatever terminates causation cannot have an explanation” – Why not?
And assuming that’s true – and I’m not conceding that it is – why does it have to be your god?
LikeLike
@kathy,
thanks for taking the time.
“1) how many religions have you rally researched, and have you done so fairly?
I don’t know what you mean by “fairly” but I am aware of the basic beliefs of the major religions.. it’s enough to see that they don’t compare with Christianity.” – kathy
Fair is treating them the same, examining them the same. giving equal time and using an equitable measure for each. You tell me, is reading the entire bible and studying biblical apologetics the same as hearing a few “basic beliefs” of other religions?
“2) if you researched other religions, were you trying to prove them right, as you do the bible, or were you trying to find their errors?
You mean, was I applying objectivity? Since I have no desire to adhere to a false religion or dismiss truth, I do believe I’ve applied objectivity.” – kathy
I mean, when you read the bible, did you ever consider that it may be false, or do you just “know” that it’s from god; and when you consider the other religions, did you view them the same way at the start. If you start off assuming the bible is correct and that the others are wrong, and if you start off studying christianity and digging into the minutia if it, but dont do that with the other religions, then i suggest it is not objective or fair.
“3) what evidences lend credit to the bible, that also do not take credit from it? (history, archaeology, science – all discredit the bible as much as it may credit it, and many other religions claim the same, so how is the bible better, how do the claims in the bible trump the claims of other religions?).
William, I don’t know of any evidence that disproves the Bible.” – kathy
this is an interesting answer.
Do you know of any evidence that proves the bible?
and now I’m curious, what evidence disproves the other religions that you disagree with?
“4) Have you read these passages?
John: 13:1; 18:28, 39; 19:14, 31, 42 (before passover)
Mark: 14:12 (passover)
Matthew: 26:17 (passover)
Luke: 22:7 (passover)
after reading these, never mind telling me which day he was crucified on, just tell me whether or not you can at least understand where some people would be confused by this.
Can you tell me what the contradiction is you are referring to?” – kathy
well, John says jesus was crucified BEFORE passover (see verses listed above) while the other gospels say that jesus was crucified DURING (or after) passover. This is a contradiction.
Mike did provide a link to an article, but I’m not sure that mike even read the thing. It didnt cover all the verses I listed or all the issues this presents. But regardless, I was asking (which he still hasnt answered) whether you could admit that these looked like problems, at least to some people.
it looks like you have admitted such, thank you, but went on to say with further research and study, we can find that these really arent contradictions. Could tell me how this isnt a contradiction?
Again, John plainly says BEFORE passover, and the others clearly say DURING/AFTER passover – how is this not a contradiction?
LikeLike
“Sorry, that does NOT answer the question.. HOW does removing the “gaps” disprove God??” kathy
disprove? no, it doesn’t disprove god, it just proves that natural, not supernatural, processes or laws are actually behind our physical world in lieu of supernatural or divine intervention.
I think this line of reasoning isn’t helpful in this type of discussion because when discoveries are made and things are figured out the religious will say that god works through nature since he created it, and the atheists will say that nature happened this or that, therefore god wasn’t needed… and we’re back at square one.
so my question is, how do the “gaps” prove god?
and then the follow up is, if god or gods, then how do you know which god?
LikeLike
“The links I posted to Christian websites refuting the idea that Israel’s reformation is a fulfillment of prophecy is not because I believe that rot. It was simply to show that even with Christendom there is wide disagreement about whether that prophecy even applies to the current nation. ”
There is no biblical base for any any “wide disagreement” There are ton loads of passages in the Bible that prophecy that event. You just put up a bunch of links. Would you accept a refutation of them by me pointing to blogs that disagreed? Have some integrity in the way you reason. If you don’t know something then learn about it.
“That isn’t enough to prove that God exists or that he had anything to do with it.”
There is no added requirement of a prophecy that it has to show God had something to do with it. That’s nonsense. You are making up additional requirements to suit yourself. A prophecied event need not be a miracle. All that is required is that the event take place. No one said one prophecy proves that God exists. As usual you are trying to move the goal posts. Nate said emphatically there were no fulfilled prophecies in the Bible. I provided that as ONE EXAMPLE to refute that and any honest person would concede that Nate’s claims are utterly false even if they do not think (nor should) that the one is sufficient
“There are many things throughout history which have been predicted or “foretold”.”
yes and if there is any integrity (of which I see little here) they are analyzed for likelihood on an individual basis. There are a lot of people that say they are telling the truth about all kinds of things and are lying that does not mean that no one ever tells the truth.
“The Jews are quite nationalistic. Throughout the OT that is what can be seen. It was and still is important for them to keep their tribe/tribes together. So for one or a number of them to predict that, even though they might be scattered or in captivity, they would one day be a Nation again wouldn’t be all that unheard of and they had been working toward that end. ”
Kindly go read what you are trying to talk about. every nation is “nationalistic”. Since you claim “it wouldn’t be so unheard of” then kindly present me with all the cases that you alleged have been “heard of” where a nation and people have left their land for a thousand years or more and then returned to it and re-established their nation. Your claim is like saying the american indians reclaiming the US would be a ho hum event which is just utter nonsense
(and that isn’t even a thousand years ago).
The return of a people to their land is not dependent on their own will. it also has to do with who has the land and controls it. IN the case of Israel their fate was not in their hands the British controlled it and it was Britain that allowed for it.
“Had it not been in 1948 it would have been at some point because they were bound and determined to have it.”
what a vacuous silly argument. So any people who want a nation badly enough can just go in and take it? Do tell. I guess the Palestinians just don’t want it enough yet, or the American Indians just didn’t want their land enough to repel the colonies? Shucks any dispersed dispossessed people can just go get whatever land they want eh? All those ancient civilizations that are no more just didn’t want it bad enough. I guess they preferred to juat vanish – maybe to take a vacation on Maui. Sun and Tan who needs a nation I say.
You illustrate perfectly what this blog is about. Its not about being reasonable and discussing things. That’s a farce. You ask things of Christians for the SOLE purpose of trying to concoct some narrative to rebut what they have to say. In this case its QUITE OBVIOUS that you don’t have a clue about how Jews were granted the land. That wasn’t dependent on how much they were “bound and determined to have it” (Yeah after a few million of them died in gas chambers they were just ready to invade and take over their land…since they wanted it so bad. Nothing like being gassed Ruth. Apparently the cyanide makes you into X- men by key mutations. Did you know David Ben-Gurion made a chunk of cash towhen he sold his story to Marvel for the making of Wolverine?).
Both the UN and Britain had the major part to play. How about reading up?
They did not fight their way into the land. The 1948 war was after they were declared a nation. Please get a clue. It will at least for your part make it less obvious that you are all about debunking before you even know what you are talking about.
Meanwhile its still a fulfilled prophecy and Nate’s claim that there are none is a straight up and up lie.
LikeLike
“There is no added requirement of a prophecy that it has to show God had something to do with it. That’s nonsense.” – mike
really? so you believe prophecies and actual fulfillments occur without god?
you believe that other religions made sound and accurate prophecies?
are you a christian?
what can god do that doesn’t already happen without god, and why would we need god?
LikeLike
“Again, John plainly says BEFORE passover, and the others clearly say DURING/AFTER passover – how is this not a contradiction?”
Perhaps read the link? Show a little honesty? for once? That is explained clearly in it and its obvious you have no desire to deal with it. which is why you duck it EVERY time
LikeLike
“Perhaps read the link? Show a little honesty? for once? That is explained clearly in it and its obvious you have no desire to deal with it. which is why you duck it EVERY time” – mike
you still havent answered my question.
but your link was stupid. it didnt address all the problems or even all the verses. i suggest you read it before you post it next time.
But the parts it did talk about were lame anyway. It was more of the same ole, “well, it doesnt really mean before passover…” or “john said sabbath, so he meant sarurday and therefore ‘before passover’ meant something else…” basically he was saying, “nuh-uh.”
It’s stupid. John says “before passover” and your article says that’s not what he meant… that may solve it for you, but what contradiction cant be “explained” in such a way? really, tell me.
and passover was a sabbath… the jews had weekly sabbaths and high sabbaths – the passover being one of them.
In addition to all this, i even asked if the article perfectly expressed your views on it, to which you still havent answered that anyway. You have a habit of posting links as evidence and then claiming that you never said it was a excellent example of what you really thought when someone refutes that article – I was hoping to avoid that.
since I’m talking with you and not the author of your article I want to know whether you fully agree with his points or whether you’d like to put it in your own words before addressing those points.. and since the article’s author was clearly an idiot, I didnt really want to discuss it if i didnt have to…
“nuh-uh” isnt a good arguing point and rarely leads to convincing dialogue.
LikeLike