Offshoot discussion of "what religion are you" thread

[Elfhelm]

Yes, but here is what some of it really is, despite what some distort it to be. When Babylon took over Israel and there began what is known as the Babylonian Captivity, scribes of Israel collected together many great books into a single place. Some were histories, some were myths, some were prayers, some were love poems, some were collections of sayings, and some were prophetic in nature. Since then people have added and removed from that Book. The removed material is called the Apocrypha. Some people consider the Songs of Solomon to be apocryphal. Some people consider the entire New Testament to be apochryphal.

42 books that were removed from the New Testament surfaced about a hundred years ago called the Dead Sea Scrolls. We know why they were excised from the Book, because they deal with Gnostic soul-travel fantasies and were the victims of a schism between those who believed in a unitarian and those who believed in a trinitarian God. But included among them is a gospel of Thomas that coincides with many of the teachings of the gospels that are not considered apochryphal. So why was it tossed out? Because it isn't synoptic. Well I recommend that people check out the gospel of Thomas. You might be surprised to see that religious leaders from previous centuries were just as ignorant as they are in the present day.

(31) Jesus said, "No prophet is accepted in his own village; no physician heals those who know him."

hehehe so if a thing should be seen for what it is, what about what it has been? If it said not to change a word of the book, then these people did, so does that mean we should put this old weird stuff back in?

[Gwaimir Windgem]

The Babylonian Captivity was a long time BC. The Gospels couldn't have been included in that time. Nor could any of the Epistles, or Revelation.

[Rían]

Eärniel and EG - did you see my post clarifying the desert-island salvation scenario?

[MasterMothra]

i thought my posts did actually raise questions on the validity of the bible as a "perfect" way to live life. it really doesnt matter, in the end it is faith coupled with reason that allows christianity to endure. unfortunately, my faith was totally extinguished when my wife died and my prayers went unanswered. i generated two reasons for that: god heard my prayers and chose not to answer, or that there was actually no god there to hear my prayers. the latter was more acceptable to me since i could not bring myself to believe that a kind, gentle and loving god could allow a good woman, mother and wife to suffer excruciating pain for five months and then die. there could possibly be a god, i like to think there always is a possibility no matter how remote, but i think its unlikely. and if by some chance the god represented in the bible is the one true deity, then i would rather spend eternity in hell than worship a god who has made so many suffer for his own amusement.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

God always answers prayers, though the answers aren't always those we want. As to the rest of your post, if I reply no doubt I'll screw up, so I'll leave it to the more intelligent Christians.

[Rían]

Originally posted by MasterMothra
i thought my posts did actually raise questions on the validity of the bible as a "perfect" way to live life. it really doesnt matter, in the end it is faith coupled with reason that allows christianity to endure. unfortunately, my faith was totally extinguished when my wife died and my prayers went unanswered. i generated two reasons for that: god heard my prayers and chose not to answer, or that there was actually no god there to hear my prayers. the latter was more acceptable to me since i could not bring myself to believe that a kind, gentle and loving god could allow a good woman, mother and wife to suffer excruciating pain for five months and then die. there could possibly be a god, i like to think there always is a possibility no matter how remote, but i think its unlikely. and if by some chance the god represented in the bible is the one true deity, then i would rather spend eternity in hell than worship a god who has made so many suffer for his own amusement.

I know your wife died, MM - I think it's been just over a year now, IIRC - I'm so sorry, that must be so terribly hard. I tried to talk to you before about it and asked you to read a book so we could discuss it - did you ever do it? I'd like to walk alongside you a bit and try to help, because I think that there are some very good, if not easy, answers to these types of things. I'm willing to talk if you are. However, I will not say something that I think isn't true - I think honesty is best, even if it's harder at first. And I absolutely deny that the God who is revealed to us in the Bible has "made so many suffer for his own amusement" - that's bitterness speaking there. You talk about the God of the Bible - where does it say anything about God being amused by suffering? I must speak plainly and call you on inaccurate statements if I am to be of any help.

[Rían]

Originally posted by Millane
can somebody pleeeeeease explain how jesus dieing somehow saved mankind... i have asked this many times and i never get a straight answer
i am no bible scholar but there seems to be plenty here so at least one of you should be able to answer this..

Hang in there, Millane - I think I posted some pretty clear things about this earlier on, and I'll try to find the posts for you, but there's so many questions pending that it might take a bit ... can you take a scan thru the thread yourself and see if you find anything?

[MasterMothra]

i dont blame god for what happened. not because of my faith in god, but because of my faith that there is no god. if i believed there was a god then i would also believe that god allows this suffering to happen and i just dont think that would be true. if i had the power to stop people from suffering, what possible excuse could i have not to use that power. there is no reason. therefore, i dont believe in god. if there is no god then i dont blame him for her death, just as i dont credit him with her life, my life or anyones life. i overcame my grief, pain and bitterness when i realised that there was no god to blame, and that what happens in life and death is not attributable to god; its attributable to nature and circumstance. i know that no one may understand this type of reasoning, but i do, and i have given myself enough time to carefully think it through. i do not believe in your god rian, but i do believe that you are a good person, christian or not. thank you for your kind words.
i appreciate also, the debate with wayfarer. well done.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

While I'm sure I can't really know what it's been like to lose your wife, I do have some inkling, as my father passed away in 2002. Allow me to say that can honestly I feel for you.

[Rían]

Well, MM, I must say that I think you have NOT overcome your grief, pain and bitterness - it keeps coming up, doesn't it? - and I can certainly understand why you haven't. I'll ask you again - will you read that book that I mentioned? I think it might help. Only God can get all the way down into the depths of a person's heart where their deepest griefs are and heal those griefs. The wisdom of the world just provides bandaids, not healing. Grief such as yours does NOT make sense if you think it is "attributable to nature and circumstance", and I think your anger and bitterness are a natural and understandable reaction. This is rather hard to put into words, let alone typed words, but all I can say is that things make sense with God in the picture. I speak from experience - I've known tragedy, too. Again, please accept my deepest sympathy for the loss of your wife, and I hope we can talk some more.

[Earniel]

Originally posted by RÃ*an
Eärniel and EG - did you see my post clarifying the desert-island salvation scenario?

I did but this impolite lil' sea elf forgot to make a reply. Sorry.

I thank you RÃ*an, for all the time you pour in answering all our endless questions. It has been up to now a very interesting (and very friendly, much to my pleasant surprise) discussion. I think I'm starting to understand a little more of the intricate lines in christianity.

No offense meant to anyone but I'm still unconvinced that one can simply state that those of different fates go to hell. From your posts I can gather that it is not simply believing in God that will get you saved. But also putting yourself under his lordship, putting your faith in him and doing certain 'works' to express your faith. It is perhaps a little vague and I think these things can be interpreted in different ways. If so in any case, I would find that the judgement of hell is far too rash for any human to make. None of us can see the true extent of what somebody else believes. Then how can we judge it? I therefore find it still impolite and perhaps a little arrogant to say that somebody with a different faith is bound for a one way ticket into hell.

[Rían]

Originally posted by Eärniel
I thank you RÃ*an, for all the time you pour in answering all our endless questions. It has been up to now a very interesting (and very friendly, much to my pleasant surprise) discussion. I think I'm starting to understand a little more of the intricate lines in christianity.

You're very welcome - you've asked some great questions and I've enjoyed trying my best to give good answers to the best of my understanding. (BTW, I still have your evolution/creationism email, but I'll have to put it on the back burner until this thread slows down a bit, okay?)

... If so in any case, I would find that the judgement of hell is far too rash for any human to make. None of us can see the true extent of what somebody else believes. Then how can we judge it? ....

Yes, it's a good thing that it DOESN"T come down to a human's judgement in the end. You're absolutely right - none of us can see the true extent of what someone else believes. I think WF posted that verse earlier about how some that look like Christians (on the outside) aren't, and some that may not look like Christians are, in the judgement of God. And we can trust that God's judgement is just, for the Bible says that He sees into our innermost hearts. Speaking for myself (but I think it's pretty safe to say this applies to the other Christians that have posted on this thread), the only reason that I share my beliefs is that I really believe them to be true, and I've seen them be true in my life over and over. It's no MERIT at all on my part that I'm a Christian, but the fact is that I AM a Christian, and I want to help others just because I've been helped so much myself, and because I believe that it is the absolute and only complete truth, not just one truth among many. I can't just say "ok, Buddhism is ok for you, atheism is ok for you, Mormonism is ok for you, it doesn't really matter" without being intellectually dishonest, let alone unloving.

Well, whatever else you think of me, it looks like you do see that I'm doing this out of love for people, and not out of trying to look smart, or winning just for the sake of winning, or anything like that.

[Rían]

You're currently studying for a degree in theology, right? Your professors probably have a better idea of scholarly refs than I do, but I'll just take a quick scan thru my bookshelf and see what I have and what I like:

OK, the two that I use most often are - The New Unger's Bible Dictionary (Merrill F. Unger - A.B., Ph.D., Th.M, Th.D; and A Commentary (commonly called Eerdman's commentary) - 3 vols., 3 authors, various scholarly degrees. Also, there are good commentaries in the Bibles that we have.

I have probably several hundred other books on various aspects of Christianity, written by a variety of authors with a variety of "scholarly" backgrounds - from PhD's to probably those with no degree whatsoever. Typically, however, the author has at least one degree. Thankfully, I'm wise enough to not be "intellectually snobbish", and I have no problem learning from wise people of all types of backgrounds.

My favorite Christian author is C. S. Lewis - a brillant man, and from many accounts, a great Christian. I heard once about playing Scrabble at Lewis' house - ANY language, real or imaginary, was fair game (including Tolkien's languages!), as long as a person could provide the reference if the other people didn't know the word.

I'm currently going through a Bible study book called A Woman After God's Own Heart, written by Elizabeth George. I don't think she has a degree; in the acknowledgment, she mentions her husband, who has a M. Div. and a Th.M.

I've just recently read The Case for Christ and The Case for Faith by Lee Strobel, who has a law degree from Yale, and "interviews" people in his books such as Craig Blomberg, Ph.D., who is currently a seminary professor; Bruce Metzger, with 2 masters and a PhD (and multiple honorary doctorates, including one from Potchefstroom Uni in S. Africa - have you heard of it?); and Edwin Yamauchi, masters and doctoral degrees, 8 fellowships.

I have some books on evolution/creationism by various people with PhD's that I found to be really good. Various family books by PhDs, and also those w/o a PhD. Lots of them on application (as the Bible says we should be DO-ers of the Word, and not hearers only). Various autobiographies, biographies.... well, that's probably enough for now.

[Rían]

Andúril, you and I had some disagreements about the concept of omnipotence, and I'd like to discuss it some more.

I've been thinking over what you said on the subject and why I react so strongly against it, and I've come up with a few things. It might take several posts to cover, and I'll put up a 'done editing' notice when I'm done.

Part I - Andúril's so-called "strong" omnipotence
First - re the Lewis quote and the Unger's dictionary def of omnipotence - you seem to think that I don't see the two types of omnipotence that you discussed (i.e., what you call "strong" and "weak" omnipotence) contained in these quotes. You're wrong - I do. But that doesn't invalidate what those quotes say. In fact, both of those quotes bring up what YOU call "strong omnipotence" and reveal it for what it really is - something that is entirely irrelevant, can never exist in reality and is therefore meaningless to even try to apply to God. Where in the Bible does it discuss things that are syntactically possible but logically impossible? Nowhere - and why should it? As you yourself said so well back on page 4:

by Andúril
Some define "God" with incompatible attributes. In the same way that an object that is both a square and a circle cannot exist in reality, proposed deities with definitions that involve illogic cannot exist.

So why even bother to coin a term for something (i.e., "strong omnipotence") that can't even exist? And if you DO coin a term for this, then why in the world give it such a misleading name as "strong" omnipotence?? There is nothing "strong" about something that can't even exist!

I think a more correct "coinage" would be something like "illogical and unable to exist in reality and completely irrelevant to anything that exists omnipotence". The ONLY reason that I can possibly see for coining a term for this is so you can discuss how illogical it is with other people - for example, "some people say that God can do things that are completely illogical and intrinsically impossible. This concept is referred to as IAUTEIRACITATE (illogical and unable to exist in reality and completely irrelevant to anything that exists) omnipotence. Of course, this is a complete fallacy. As Mr. C. S. Lewis puts it so succinctly, 'Nonsense remains nonsense even when we talk it about God.' "

So if you want to give that concept a name, by all means let's give it a name, but an appropriate one, like "illogical omnipotence" or "irrelevant omnipotence" or "nonexistent omnipotence".


***EDIT - Now I'm done with this post, but because Entmoot was down, I couldn't finish with the other comments I was going to put up. I have to run off to a bday party with my 6 yr old now so I'll try to finish the comments later in the day. However, this post is a complete sub-topic in itself (if that makes sense) and is now open to comments.

[Wayfarer]

my faith was totally extinguished when my wife died and my prayers went unanswered. i generated two reasons for that: god heard my prayers and chose not to answer, or that there was actually no god there to hear my prayers.
if i had the power to stop people from suffering, what possible excuse could i have not to use that power. there is no reason.

Mothra, I want to first of all establish that I am really, truly hesitant to say what I'm about to say. I have a very bad track record when it comes to being sensitive of others, and I hope you realize that I in no way mean to hurt you with this. Please, if my words seem cold and hard, I'm sorry.

what makes you you think that God doesn't stop suffering?
I cannot imagine what it must have been like while you watched your wife suffer for five months before her death, but please, answer me: isn't her suffering done now? Isn't she free from death and pain? Has she not been healed in a way that she never could have been had she stayed with you on this earth?

I say this not to wound you, but with literal tears in my eyes. Do you really think that her death was a punishment? Do you not wonder for even a moment that perhaps there's some truth in the old cliche, and she really is in a better place?

I am reminded that many times, we humans will resist the good of someone we claim to love, desiring selfishly what feels better for us, rather than what will truly do the one we love good. Please hear me, understand, and remember. Often someone must give something up in order that it may be saved.

[Coney]

Originally posted by Wayfarer
Mothra, I want to first of all establish that I am really, truly hesitant to say what I'm about to say. I have a very bad track record when it comes to being sensitive of others, and I hope you realize that I in no way mean to hurt you with this. Please, if my words seem cold and hard, I'm sorry.

what makes you you think that God doesn't stop suffering?
I cannot imagine what it must have been like while you watched your wife suffer for five months before her death, but please, answer me: isn't her suffering done now? Isn't she free from death and pain? Has she not been healed in a way that she never could have been had she stayed with you on this earth?

I say this not to wound you, but with literal tears in my eyes. Do you really think that her death was a punishment? Do you not wonder for even a moment that perhaps there's some truth in the old cliche, and she really is in a better place?

I am reminded that many times, we humans will resist the good of someone we claim to love, desiring selfishly what feels better for us, rather than what will truly do the one we love good. Please hear me, understand, and remember. Often someone must give something up in order that it may be saved.

Blech........I heard that so many times (tho' when I heard it from the vicar I finally flipped, long story) when my gf died...it sounded hollow then as well

[Gwaimir Windgem]

You people just don't think we are capable of being sincere, do you?

[Coney]

Originally posted by Gwaimir Windgem
You people just don't think we are capable of being sincere, do you?

I believe wayfarer was being very sincere.....his post wasn't addressed to me. I said that when I heard similar it sounded hollow to me.

Then again.....my gf was a christian......and if her beliefs were correct.......then I'm off to hell and will never see her.

[BeardofPants]

Well, that would be because we've all been conned at some time or another, by a "sincere" "christian", who was basically so intent on recruiting victims for his/her church, that (s)he didn't really care about the potential recruitee. I wish there were more out there like Rian, then maybe I wouldn't feel so antsy about religion.

[Gwaimir Windgem]

True, good Christians like Rian are sadly a very rare breed. Strait is the way...