The Anti-theist Thread

[Cirdan]

Biblical inconsistencies:

In Aduril's bible:

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

In my bible:

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create calamity: I the Lord do all these things.

Editorial license??? Now why would anyone change the immutable text of the bible?

Thanks for the title, Afro-Elf. I shall do my best to cover the lands with lava and rend the ground with terrible shaking to smite the un-unbelievers!

Don't forget JerseyDevil's title. Lord of Scathing Dialog. The anti-spin doctor, perhaps.

*Bwah-bwah, bwah-bwah, bwah, bang, bang, bang*

[BeardofPants]

<nanu nanu>

And being the Godess of the People, aka of the Stinky Feet, my first act will be to cause all the infidels to suddenly be silenced, as if there was a great disturbance in the force... as if a thousand foots stopped smelling, all at once.

[Andúril]

The variations in translation must be seen as a dilemma for God, surely. We must ask the question: would God have wanted the world to have varying translations of "His Word" in existence, which would promote an additional element of misinterpretation (additional to that caused by the vague, metaphorical/literal confusion, and arbitrarily non-applicable nonsensical dream-speech)? No. I can't see any way for that to be compatible with his will.

Therefore, if it was not his will that caused the varying translations, whose will was it? Man's. The randomness of Man has caused the Bible to have more than one translation. This was an obvious thing that would happen, if something like "free will" was connected to the translating and scribing of documents.

Did God know this? Yes. He is omniscient. He knew before he created the universe that Cirdan (and many, many others) would note the comparitive differences between Bibles.

But he went and inspired the first one anyway...

[Twilight]

Don't just look at one section without taking into acount the rest of the Bible. There are other places stating that for any temptation to happen by Satan, God has to allow it. 1 Corinthians 10:13 And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. That shows God's direct control over temptations. Satan is powerless without God giving permission to do something. Look at the begining of Job. Satan couldn't toutch Job until God gives permission.

The direct cause is that Satan is causes the temptation for David. The cause behind that is that God needed to allow for that to happen. It isn't an inacuracy because that is what happens. Just because you don't believe something doesn't make it inacurate.

Why would God want unhindered free will? He didn't create us and then just set us free to live completaly independant of him. He wants us to choose to have a relationship with him. He does things to aid us into that. That is why he allowed for Satan to implant the idea into David. He knew that David would eventually see what he did, and that is where the free will exsists. David can choose to repent and draw closer to God, or to turn his back and continue on sinning.

[Andúril]

There are other places stating that for any temptation to happen by Satan, God has to allow it.

Who mentioned anything about a temptation? Stop diverting the issue. Lets have another look:

2 Samuel 24:1

And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.

Unfortunately, there is absolutely zero mention of Satan in the text, and zero mention of temptation.

The majority of your last reply is directed at explaining temptation, for no reason applicable to this discussion.

Why would God want unhindered free will?

Well, if it wasn't unhindered, it would be hindered, which is not free, which renders the concept free will meaningless.

He does things to aid us into that.

Which essentialy affects our free will in a way that benefits himself. This impacts on the authentic choice of humans - did (a) choose (b) solely because he wanted to, or because (c) "aided" (a)?

That is why he allowed for Satan to implant the idea into David. He knew that David would eventually see what he did, and that is where the free will exsists. David can choose to repent and draw closer to God, or to turn his back and continue on sinning.

You're explaining the reason for the actions performed - once again, this is not what I was asking about. I couldn't care less why God does things (unless of course these actions show contradictory behaviour...)

[Cirdan]

The point of the biblical reference was no the silliness of the content, but the alteration of the text by man to change the impression of the text.

Oh, God's worderful gift of "free will". This is a favorite. Why, if we have free will, are we constrained by heredity and environment? Why was I born with cancer? Sin or mucked up DNA? Yes, I am the product of genetic mutation. I was saved by science in the form of doctors. The obvious theist response would be that the doctors were created by god or working on HIS behalf, yadda, yadda, yadda. Why the did he not give them the sophisticated tools that exist today? Instead they blasted me with radiation until I was golden brown; this left my body to grow deformed and twisted. I bear the brunt of any sin that I was born with. I'd take three days on a cross over decades of continuous pain. Ask those little Ethiopian babies, staving and covered with flies, what was their sin.

[Andúril]

AE, make that:

Anduril : Lord of the Logical Assault (Destroyer of non-sequitur statements, a priori declarations, and nonsensical ad hoc fallacies (+ all those who make them)).

Huzzah!

[Cirdan]

On the new testatment:

Why was it written way after Christ died? Why was the "son of god" illiterate? Surely this skill would have been easier to aquire than the healing of lepers. Would he have been considered an elitist or academic posing by sophistry as the messiah?

The stories of the birth and the resurrection are considered by some theologians to be "allegorical", sionce they were not directly attributed to christ in his teachings. A very good lesson here; always good to document your your work to avoid confusion and plagarism.

Those palestinians that are holed up in bethlehem; the church is built on the site of christ's birthplace... IN A CAVE??? Were did that come from? Christ was a caveman?

Away in a cave, no club for his mamoth...

[afro-elf]

Don't forget JerseyDevil's title. Lord of Scathing Dialog. The anti-spin doctor, perhaps.

sorry hadn't seen his post in awhile

and mirrile the goddess of subtle defense

as if there was a great disturbance in the force... as if a thousand foots stopped smelling, all at once.

lol

[afro-elf]

Originally posted by Anduril
AE, make that:

Anduril : Lord of the Logical Assault (Destroyer of non-sequitur statements, a priori declarations, and nonsensical ad hoc fallacies (+ all those who make them)).

Huzzah!

what DO you DO ?


Cirdan shocking revelations. That bit of info really kind of hit me.

IF you don't wanna answer no problem. Was it only your skin that was affected. You use the word body to grow deformed and twisted.

My heart felt sympathy to you

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by afro-elf
Cirdan shocking revelations. That bit of info really kind of hit me.

My heart felt sympathy to you

Yes, I didn't want to say anything, cos it sounds kind of personal, BUT, sympathies to you, Cirdan.

[Andúril]

AE, I'm an information technologist....

...which is a glorified label for a network administrator, specialist IT support, type person.

I administer a network. Of 150 pcs. Life sucks. But end-users suck even more...

[Cirdan]

Originally posted by afro-elf



what DO you DO ?


Cirdan shocking revelations. That bit of info really kind of hit me.

IF you don't wanna answer no problem. Was it only your skin that was affected. You use the word body to grow deformed and twisted.

My heart felt sympathy to you

Well, I don't usually resort to bringing it up, but the moment hit me. I was diagnosed with with Wilm's Tumor at 5 months old. My spine is deformed, the side that received the radiation grow less than the other side. I also have diabetes, arthritis, and my "swimmers" are few and far between. All of these can be attributed to my treatment because of the early onset and the lack of history for these ailments in my family tree.

I want to be clear that my illnesses have nothing to do with my religious beliefs, or lack thereof. I went through periods of believing deeply, but the rational mind won out over the mystical and irrational.

Surviving an almost certain death gives one much more freedom from the fear of death. Only this aspect of my illness may effect my beliefs. Most people, as they get closer to the end of life, become more religious due to the fear of death. I am on the "free game" of life!

[Twilight]

Temptation is relevent. That is another place where free will comes into place. David is only tempted into taking the census. It is his free will to actually go ahead and do it, even thogh he knows that God doesn't want it to happen. That is why temptation is relevant. It is his decision to sin, which is why it is temptation.

Yes, the Lord did incite David to do it. Putting the two scriptures together, God and Satan both had a role in inciting David into taking the census. Inciting is differant from forcing. The choise is still Davids to make. God wants for David to make the right choise. He knows what will happen though. Just because he knows what will happen doesn't mean that the choise isn't David's to make.

The two acounts aren't contradictory. They have to be looked at together, not just taking one and saying that is everything. They tell the whole story when put together. Both God and Satan are involved with the tempting process.

I don't think my thoughts on free will are fully put together, so I won't argue on that. Another believer can pick up on my weak areas.

[Cirdan]

Originally posted by Anduril
AE, I'm an information technologist....

...which is a glorified label for a network administrator, specialist IT support, type person.

I administer a network. Of 150 pcs. Life sucks. But end-users suck even more...

That was my last job description. Burn out comes eventually. I had 18 servers, 150pcs, 10 web sites, sql database, and an exchange server. People calling for passwords, "my email didn't get delivered to bolivia", AAARRRGGHH!!! Consulting is much better, even though it is less secure. No teaching people over and over how to sync their pda. I have many horror stories.

[afro-elf]

Cirdan what is your age?

[Cirdan]

Originally posted by afro-elf
Cirdan what is your age?

*wheeze, groan, grunt... Cirdan stands*

43

*oof.. Cirdan sits again*

edit: Yes we mustn't forget mirrelle goddess of concise brevity.

damn typos!

[Andúril]

even thogh he knows that God doesn't want it to happen.

Once again, let me state that I am not interested in any sin, or temptation, or anything else. I am interested in the identity of the entity that provoked David into performing the census. One author states one thing, the other author states another thing. These are exclusive documents. When verifying a possible contradiction between two texts, one cannot say that they have to be looked at together, because that defeats the point of the enquiry - one then assumes a priori that the two texts are non-contradictory, and there is nothing to discuss.

Temptation is an action. Provocation is an action. Moving is an action. I don't care about the action itself - I am interested in the identify performing the action.

If you say that Satan tempted David (in Chronicles), then why do you not say that God tempted David (in Samuel)? It is a contradiction one way or the other. One account does not have more information than the other, one account does not claim more than the other - BUT they cannot both be true.

Either it was God, or it was Satan.

Inciting is differant from forcing. The choise is still Davids to make. God wants for David to make the right choise. He knows what will happen though. Just because he knows what will happen doesn't mean that the choise isn't David's to make.

Okay, now I'm thinking that you're relying on your bible commentary for answers, because it started off with addressing the action (at the start), and just keeps addressing that issue. Does the commentary include anything about the problem: Who "incited", "provoked", "tempted", "moved", "whatevered" David to perform the cencus?

Just take another look. This is the last time I will post the verses:

1 Chronicles 21:1

And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

2 Samuel 24:1

And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.

If you insist on bringing up temptation, then you must conclude that in Chronicles it was Satan who tempted David, and in Samuel it was God who tempted David. Still contradictory.

...not just taking one and saying that is everything. They tell the whole story when put together

Once again, these are exclusive documents, written by different authors, inspired by the same god. You are trying to make one account fill a gap in the other. You have assumed that there is a gap in the first place.

Both God and Satan are involved with the tempting process.

Not according to Chronicles, and also not according to Samuel. If the Bible were accurate, as many claim, and if the story goes by the way you explain it, then why were massively important details left out in both accounts, about the same thing? It makes one of these accounts contradictory.

[Lelondul]

The fact is Anduril, that there are contradictions in the Bible that can't be explained. No one is denying that. But the flip side is that your scientific methods are far from error-free.

Maybe I am a simpleton, but I need not know the indentity of what temps me - that is uneccessary hair-splitting. God uses sin to strengthen us and teach us of our own sinful ways - and how great the glory of redemption is through him (as Twilight so eloquently said). The explanation is that God (whom is omnipotent, and at times wrathful) allows Satan to temp us and use painful experiences to grow and to learn.

Why wouldn't an omnipotent creator also be wrathful or want to us to prove our mettle? In the end, it is how we handle such tests (not who they come from) that is important.

Also, the anti-theists seem so angry that god could allow such suffering and darkness in the world. But taking such suffering at face value misses the point that it can all be resolved in a manner more beautiful than you can imagine. This is where the faith part of the equation enters (and that is where we may forever be divided): that an omnipotent creator has a plan, and even though said suffering is horrible and greiving, it is part of a plan that is greater than we as humans can imagine. Nature's complexity has already proved baffling to us, why then do you strive against understaning the mind of a holy, imnipotent being? The simple fact is we can't - nor can we ever hope to.

Through science we can, in whatever small way, continue to learnn the hows of the small rock we live on, but it will never tell us the whys

emplynx is right, your are very bright and intellectual, and these debates are great excercise for the mind and spirit - thank you for that!

I don't have my sources for the Bible's historical accuracy with me at the moment, I will post them later. The fact that you deny the Bible's accuracy seriously brings into question your own historical knowledge. And that I will continue to doubt until you see my sources (who are from times both ancient, and modern), and can unequivocally disprove them.

regards,
- Lelond

[Cirdan]

An excellent example of subjective and flawed logic leading to a flawed subjective truth. But, this one is Anduril's to slice and dice.

*sails away in fabulous elven ship...*

Hey, it's in a book!