Let's Talk About Sin

[GhostVol]

Actually, you are committing a category fallacy here.
Is the written word of god perfect in the same sense as God himself? No. The written word is the revelation from God. God enlisted imperfect people just like you and me to communicate His message to humanity.
That is one reason (of many) I find the Bible so believable. If it were a fabricated document as many allege then why aren't the embarrassing and difficult parts just edited out? There isn't a glossed over presentation in any books of the bible.
I find the Bible to be divinely inspired and perfect in what it was written to accomplish. And that is to point us towards the Logos, or living Word.

Whether a "fallacy" or not I find it hard to believe that a perfect god would allow his word, the very definition of what he wants from us, to go forward having been corrupted in any way, shape, fashion or form. That simply does not follow with what I believe a god would be. For Pete's sake, he's omniscient!! He's going to know what is going to happen, allow it to happen, then punish people who have a problem with the corrupted version! How can anyone allow you access only to imperfect information, insist that you adhere to it and then eternally punish you for questioning something that doesn't make sense?

 

[GhostVol]

GV, I think there are actually few professing Christians who would genuinely feel this way. As a pastor, I'll give a general overview of the major groups I encounter:

1. The 'lukewarm' that don't care enough about the Bible to study it for themselves or allow it to define their lives. These people don't care enough to care enough about the tough questions. To them, being a Christian is a hereditary thing, and it equates to being a southern american.
2. Those who ignore the questions because they threaten their valued beliefs. In my experience, this is a relatively small group.
3. Those who don't worry about the questions because it's a matter of faith and what they know of God defines what they don't understand.
4. Those who care very much and approach people who they trust to ask pointed questions. This is a bigger group than you may think; you just may not talk to them on these subjects very much because they don't want to talk to you about it.

:hi:

I always enjoy such discussions and treasure it when I find someone with vastly differing beliefs, and who can have candid, calm conversations.

1. Is N/A.... Those people don't tell you you're going to hell because you don't believe.

2. These people WILL tell you you're going to hell regardless of what kind of person you are because you don't believe. And they were the prevalent people of the church I attended until I saw the inherent injustice of it.

3. Those people that just blindly believe because they've been told to do so. I can't do that.

4. Those people who go to the sources they "trust" to have the beliefs reinforced and told they must simply have faith. The size of this group may be surprising to you, finding apostasy because they refuse to believe the answers answers they're given.

 

[Roustabout]

The problem Roustabout is the fact that ANY pointing out of discrepancies, contradictions, ambiguities or non-sequiturs in the bible are met with automatic assumptions of "attack" and ascriptions of malignity. Christians, in my experience, don't WANT to discuss these things as it causes questions they don't want to answer.

Believe me, I gave great thought to these problems before deciding that there is no god.

The odd thing, based on the overwhelming evidence on this thread, is that what you just said would better describe the atheists on this forum.

In this thread alone I have linked multiple sources that deal with all of these things openly, honestly and thoroughly.

In one thread, an atheist was beating his chest, demanding peer reviewed research that challenged Darwinism. When I provided a source, the person said, "it was only one." The problem was that the source provided multiple citations of peer reviewed research. It was never mentioned again. If you've reviewed the thread, then you will see multiple examples of this.

We are now on page 59 of this thread and you just started contributing. That's fine, but you really out to be able see that what you accuse Christians of is epidemic among the atheists here.

 

[Orange_Crush]

4. Those people who go to the sources they "trust" to have the beliefs reinforced and told they must simply have faith. The size of this group may be surprising to you, finding apostasy because they refuse to believe the answers answers they're given.

You just put words into the mouths of two groups there. Think about it.

Edit:

Do you believe in evolution?

Do you understand everything about it?

Do you go to expertise on the subject to answer questions?

If so, have they ever told you, "You know. We don't know about that, but what we do know affirms in the face of what we don't."?

 

[GhostVol]

Please explain. It seems to me, when studying the infinitely transcendent, interpretation is vastly important, yet more work.

Why should it be? Shouldn't ultimate truth be self-evident? The sun comes up in the east. Truth.

Additionally, you've mentioned the 'perfect God' part a few times.

Is he not? Or she... Don't want to be sexist. And no, that is not meant to be dismissive or flippant.

You must remember that imperfect people are struggling with the message from a perfect God. In addition, as has ben mentioned, we're struggling to interpret books that were written in a different language, at different times, to different cultures. It adds to the complications.

:hi:

Why would a perfect god make his (we'll use his for sake of ease) message so hard to decipher? He wants us to be with him doesn't he? Why make it hard? Kind of another discrepancy there, isn't it?

And no, that is not another "If I were god I would...." question. Why must it be so dad-gum hard?

 

[Orange_Crush]

Why should it be? Shouldn't ultimate truth be self-evident? The sun comes up in the east. Truth.

If the Bible is indeed the word of God, the God said in it that the natural mind is at enmity (war) with it. He also said that it is at odds with natural wisdom.

Is he not? Or she... Don't want to be sexist. And no, that is not meant to be dismissive or flippant.

Not taken. He is. But again, I remind you. You are saying, "If I was God, I wouldn't have done it that way." It's not really an answer or a question. It's a statement of your preferences and your limited awareness of His desires and plans.

Why would a perfect god make his (we'll use his for sake of ease) message so hard to decipher? He wants us to be with him doesn't he? Why make it hard? Kind of another discrepancy there, isn't it?

He does. But He made salvation about faith, not human wisdom (1 Corinthians 1)

18For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19For it is written,
“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart.”
20 Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. 22For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, 23but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, 24but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
26For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. 27But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; 28God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, 29so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. 30And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, 31so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”

He wants everyone to be with Him, but knows that the flesh must be humbled for that to happen.

He wants everyone to be with Him, thus knew that if He made it about wisdom, salvation depends on an IQ test and many would never have opportunity.

He wants everyone to be with Him, thus made it a step of faith, at which time the wisdom of the gospel is spiritually discerned.

1 Cor 2:14The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

And no, that is not another "If I were god I would...." question. Why must it be so dad-gum hard?

It is. You that is exactly what you are saying. If God is truly perfect, He would have...

It's so hard because:

1. We have to humble ourselves to accept Him in faith.
2. It's impossible for the natural mind to comprehend the fullness of the Word.
3. It's hard to die to self, which is a continual, lifelong process.

It's not hard. My six year old grandson can verbalize the simplicity of the gospel. He can't answer the questions posed in here yet, but he doesn't need to.

 

[GhostVol]

The odd thing, based on the overwhelming evidence on this thread, is that what you just said would better describe the atheists on this forum.

In this thread alone I have linked multiple sources that deal with all of these things openly, honestly and thoroughly.

In one thread, an atheist was beating his chest, demanding peer reviewed research that challenged Darwinism. When I provided a source, the person said, "it was only one." The problem was that the source provided multiple citations of peer reviewed research. It was never mentioned again. If you've reviewed the thread, then you will see multiple examples of this.

We are now on page 59 of this thread and you just started contributing. That's fine, but you really out to be able see that what you accuse Christians of is epidemic among the atheists here.

Not all atheists are that way. True, a great many of us tend to dismiss theist arguments with a "Pssht.... that's just silly" attitude. Believe me, I'm struggling not to do that myself. Some Christians make it hard not to do that (present company excepted).

Have I clicked on every link provided? No. If you're not willing to defend your faith, say so... You must be willing to take on any and all comers regardless of how many times you've done it. I believe the bible even suggests you should do so. Pointing out "I've already addressed that" is a cop-out and the equivalent of saying "We discussed that in the meeting last week. You should have been here then."

And I've done my very best not to be dismissive or flippant of any belief system you or any other may have. I admittedly jumped your case when you committed the "fallacious attribution error", and you deserved it. I accepted your apology (thanks for that, by the way).

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

The problem with this, BOT, is that we're not talking about Shakespeare we're talking about a perfect god. Interpretation shouldn't be an issue. ALL should be able to see the point.

God gives all of us the ability to see the point, but does everyone who reads the Bible want to see the point? For example, if you are a person who doesn't know anything about God or religion for that matter and picks up the Bible and begins to read. You may be going into it with no real expectations or goals other than curiosity. Now compare that to a Christian who reads the Bible everyday to learn God's word and become closer to him. Surely both of these people would have different interpretations of the same text.

The same goes for an atheist who reads the Bible just to look for ammunition to argue against Christians. The atheist and Christian can read the same passage and not get the same interpretation from it. I really do not understand what that has to do with God being perfect. Also what do you mean when referring to the word "perfect?" In the original Hebrew perfect (tam or tamiym) means complete, whole, mature and finished.

 

[GhostVol]

You just put words into the mouths of two groups there. Think about it.

Edit:

Do you believe in evolution?

Why yes, I do.

Do you understand everything about it?

No, I do not. Further to follow.

Do you go to expertise on the subject to answer questions?

I do not. Are you fluent in Greek, Latin, Aramaic or any other Biblical language? Have you traveled to, had access to and studied all the original texts you base your beliefs on? Do YOU go to expertise in these areas?

If so, have they ever told you, "You know. We don't know about that, but what we do know affirms in the face of what we don't."?

I don't profess any expertise in the area of evolution. Just a passing interest that likely is beyond the average layperson's interest that allows me to see the logical consistency in what they propose.

That having been said I will not discuss evolution any more since that is not the subject of this thread. It's a deflection and I expect better than that.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Why yes, I do.




No, I do not. Further to follow.



I do not. Are you fluent in Greek, Latin, Aramaic or any other Biblical language? Have you traveled to, had access to and studied all the original texts you base your beliefs on? Do YOU go to expertise in these areas?



I don't profess any expertise in the area of evolution. Just a passing interest that likely is beyond the average layperson's interest that allows me to see the logical consistency in what they propose.

That having been said I will not discuss evolution any more since that is not the subject of this thread. It's a deflection and I expect better than that.

I was neither accusing nor deflecting. I was showing a parallel. You seemed to indicate it a rational failure that Christians would:

1. Trust what they don't understand in the Bible due to what they do understand.
2. Approach people that they trust on Biblical subjects when they have questions.

Neither is irrational, nor inherently fearful when the atheist does it in areas, nor are they irrational or fearful when Christians do it.

EDIT: Try to understand my point and don't be so defensive.

 

[GhostVol]

God gives all of us the ability to see the point, but does everyone who reads the Bible want to see the point? For example, if you are a person who doesn't know anything about God or religion for that matter and picks up the Bible and begins to read. You may be going into it with no real expectations or goals other than curiosity. Now compare that to a Christian who reads the Bible everyday to learn God's word and become closer to him. Surely both of these people would have different interpretations of the same text.

The same goes for an atheist who reads the Bible just to look for ammunition to argue against Christians. The atheist and Christian can read the same passage and not get the same interpretation from it. I really do not understand what that has to do with God being perfect. Also what do you mean when referring to the word "perfect?" In the original Hebrew perfect (tam or tamiym) means complete, whole, mature and finished.

Are we really going to parse the meaning of the word "perfect"? Do you think the vast majority of Christians in the world even give a second thought to the meaning of the word? To them "perfect" is absolute, meaning without fault or flaw. If you want to discuss biblical age meaning let's discuss Hebrew numerology......

 

[GhostVol]

Whether a "fallacy" or not I find it hard to believe that a perfect god would allow his word, the very definition of what he wants from us, to go forward having been corrupted in any way, shape, fashion or form. That simply does not follow with what I believe a god would be. For Pete's sake, he's omniscient!! He's going to know what is going to happen, allow it to happen, then punish people who have a problem with the corrupted version! How can anyone allow you access only to imperfect information, insist that you adhere to it and then eternally punish you for questioning something that doesn't make sense?

And the further this goes, the harder I'm finding it to believe that this hasn't been addressed......

 

[Orange_Crush]

If the Bible is indeed the word of God, the God said in it that the natural mind is at enmity (war) with it. He also said that it is at odds with natural wisdom.



Not taken. He is. But again, I remind you. You are saying, "If I was God, I wouldn't have done it that way." It's not really an answer or a question. It's a statement of your preferences and your limited awareness of His desires and plans.



He does. But He made salvation about faith, not human wisdom (1 Corinthians 1)



He wants everyone to be with Him, but knows that the flesh must be humbled for that to happen.

He wants everyone to be with Him, thus knew that if He made it about wisdom, salvation depends on an IQ test and many would never have opportunity.

He wants everyone to be with Him, thus made it a step of faith, at which time the wisdom of the gospel is spiritually discerned.





It is. You that is exactly what you are saying. If God is truly perfect, He would have...

It's so hard because:

1. We have to humble ourselves to accept Him in faith.
2. It's impossible for the natural mind to comprehend the fullness of the Word.
3. It's hard to die to self, which is a continual, lifelong process.

It's not hard. My six year old grandson can verbalize the simplicity of the gospel. He can't answer the questions posed in here yet, but he doesn't need to.

And the further this goes, the harder I'm finding it to believe that this hasn't been addressed......

Did you put me on ignore?

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

Are we really going to parse the meaning of the word "perfect"? Do you think the vast majority of Christians in the world even give a second thought to the meaning of the word? To them "perfect" is absolute, meaning without fault or flaw. If you want to discuss biblical age meaning let's discuss Hebrew numerology......

So what of my examples of different interpretations? Are they not possible? And as far as numerology I hope you are not going to bring up the young earth theory.

You don't know the vast number of Christians in the world, so you cannot use your statement. The only thing you can say is the Christians you know don't care about the true meaning of the word perfect. You seem to be very adept of committing logical fallacies.

 

[GhostVol]

Did you put me on ignore?

You got quite a bit ahead of me..... I'll do my best to catch up.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Whether a "fallacy" or not I find it hard to believe that a perfect god would allow his word, the very definition of what he wants from us, to go forward having been corrupted in any way, shape, fashion or form. That simply does not follow with what I believe a god would be. For Pete's sake, he's omniscient!! He's going to know what is going to happen, allow it to happen, then punish people who have a problem with the corrupted version! How can anyone allow you access only to imperfect information, insist that you adhere to it and then eternally punish you for questioning something that doesn't make sense?

I think you greatly exaggerate the "corruption" of the transcripts. There is a 95.5 % agreement of all original autographs, indicating the manuscripts are almost perfect representations of the originals. In areas of obvious transcription errors, we can see what was meant by cross-reference. None of them effect any major or minor doctrine.

Tell me how it's been corrupted enough to inhibit his message to humanity.

 

[Orange_Crush]

You got quite a bit ahead of me..... I'll do my best to catch up.

No worries. back to quality time with my beautiful wife. Take your time.

 

[GhostVol]

Whether a "fallacy" or not I find it hard to believe that a perfect god would allow his word, the very definition of what he wants from us, to go forward having been corrupted in any way, shape, fashion or form. That simply does not follow with what I believe a god would be. For Pete's sake, he's omniscient!! He's going to know what is going to happen, allow it to happen, then punish people who have a problem with the corrupted version! How can anyone allow you access only to imperfect information, insist that you adhere to it and then eternally punish you for questioning something that doesn't make sense?

OC, I could ask the same question of being put on ignore re: the above post about you

Edit: I see you finally got to it.....

 

[GhostVol]

I think you greatly exaggerate the "corruption" of the transcripts. There is a 95.5 % agreement of all original autographs, indicating the manuscripts are almost perfect representations of the originals. In areas of obvious transcription errors, we can see what was meant by cross-reference. None of them effect any major or minor doctrine.

Tell me how it's been corrupted enough to inhibit his message to humanity.

Tell me how you know that that isn't the case...... My contention is that ANY corruption is more than should be allowed.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Tell me how you know that that isn't the case......

Like I said, the 95.5 agreement between hundreds and thousands of manuscripts is a good start.

My contention is that ANY corruption is more than should be allowed.

Contend away. I'm not sure how to debate against opinion.

:hi:

 

[GhostVol]

He wants everyone to be with Him, but knows that the flesh must be humbled for that to happen.

What does this even mean? Should we all ascribe to self-flagellation? If so, have at it..... I ain't gonna.

He wants everyone to be with Him, thus knew that if He made it about wisdom, salvation depends on an IQ test and many would never have opportunity.

This is nothing but a non-sequitur. What does wanting all his "children" to be with him have to do with their wisdom or lack thereof?

He wants everyone to be with Him, thus made it a step of faith, at which time the wisdom of the gospel is spiritually discerned.

I have a problem with "Do as I say and THEN I'll tell you why......"

1. We have to humble ourselves to accept Him in faith.

1. 
   Again, do as I say and I'll tell you why later.
   

   [*]It's impossible for the natural mind to comprehend the fullness of the Word.

   Cop-out.
   

   [*]It's hard to die to self, which is a continual, lifelong process.

This just doesn't make any sense.

It's not hard. My six year old grandson can verbalize the simplicity of the gospel. He can't answer the questions posed in here yet, but he doesn't need to.

And thanks for implying that a 6 year old's intellectual capacity is higher than mine simply because he agrees with his ol' grand-daddy. That's helpful and not insulting at all. I'm betting the kid simply wants to make ol' grand-dad happy at this point and that involves agreeing with whatever grand-dad says. I can see your grasp of child psychology is somewhat on the same par as your grasp of evolution. Namely, none..... A child's rote parroting of doctrine and nothing more.

When you start comparing my grasp of difficult intellectual concepts with that of a 6 year old's I can tell that this conversation has reached a good quitting point. I'm off to bed.....

 

[Orange_Crush]

What does this even mean? Should we all ascribe to self-flagellation? If so, have at it..... I ain't gonna.



This is nothing but a non-sequitur. What does wanting all his "children" to be with him have to do with their wisdom or lack thereof?



I have a problem with "Do as I say and THEN I'll tell you why......"






Again, do as I say and I'll tell you why later.

Cop-out.

This just doesn't make any sense.



And thanks for implying that a 6 year old's intellectual capacity is higher than mine simply because he agrees with his ol' grand-daddy. That's helpful and not insulting at all. I'm betting the kid simply wants to make ol' grand-dad happy at this point and that involves agreeing with whatever grand-dad says. I can see your grasp of child psychology is somewhat on the same par as your grasp of evolution. Namely, none..... A child's rote parroting of doctrine and nothing more.

When you start comparing my grasp of difficult intellectual concepts with that of a 6 year old's I can tell that this conversation has reached a good quitting point. I'm off to bed.....

You seem to be getting very defensive.

I said it's not about intellect. My 6 year old gets it.

How is that comparing your intellect to that of a 6 year old. I think that's 2 posts out of my last three that you've twisted my intent and gotten offended. Perhaps it is better to part now.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

You seem to be getting very defensive.

I said it's not about intellect. My 6 year old gets it.

How is that comparing your intellect to that of a 6 year old. I think that's 2 posts out of my last three that you've twisted my intent and gotten offended. Perhaps it is better to part now.

Sounds like the little teenage girl that got her feelings hurt at the dance & things not going her way in the relationship. So he/she ends up taking his/her ball & goes home & sulks in the bedroom. Poor thing.

 

[rjd970]

Whether a "fallacy" or not I find it hard to believe that a perfect god would allow his word, the very definition of what he wants from us, to go forward having been corrupted in any way, shape, fashion or form. That simply does not follow with what I believe a god would be. For Pete's sake, he's omniscient!! He's going to know what is going to happen, allow it to happen, then punish people who have a problem with the corrupted version! How can anyone allow you access only to imperfect information, insist that you adhere to it and then eternally punish you for questioning something that doesn't make sense?

Agree with the overall point here. Bertrand Russel said it best:

Apart from the logical cogency, there is to me something a little odd about the ethical valuations of those who think that an omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent Deity, after preparing the ground by many millions of year of lifeless nebulae, would consider Himself adequately rewarded by the final emergence of Hitler, and Stalin, and the H bomb".

To me, this is an annihilating conclusion to the believers position. These are obvious inadequacies in the face of an omnipotent creator that would care at all about his creation. And I don't expect anybody who really believes to face up to this. For instance, the Jews are still around and extremely faithful to the God of Abraham, and if such a God lets 6 million of his people get systematically murdered on an industrial scale and they still believe in his omnipotence, its safe to say nothing will change their mind that an all loving God is looking out for them. I think the same can be said for most believers.

Call that callous, ignorant, whatever. But I think it is a valid observation at its core.

 

[Septic]

Agree with the overall point here. Bertrand Russel said it best:



To me, this is an annihilating conclusion to the believers position. These are obvious inadequacies in the face of an omnipotent creator that would care at all about his creation. And I don't expect anybody who really believes to face up to this. For instance, the Jews are still around and extremely faithful to the God of Abraham, and if such a God lets 6 million of his people get systematically murdered on an industrial scale and they still believe in his omnipotence, its safe to say nothing will change their mind that an all loving God is looking out for them. I think the same can be said for most believers.

Call that callous, ignorant, whatever. But I think it is a valid observation at its core.

I hear the free will card getting pulled from the tool belt.