Discussion:
God has nothing to do with Bible
(too old to reply)
Bob
2006-06-14 03:02:52 UTC
Permalink
It gives me great peace of mind to know that God has nothing to do with
the Bible! God gave us reason, and if we use our God-given reason we
can't help but reject the manmade Bible.

Thanks, Bob
http://www.deism.com
.
B.G. Kent
2006-06-15 02:19:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
It gives me great peace of mind to know that God has nothing to do with
the Bible! God gave us reason, and if we use our God-given reason we
can't help but reject the manmade Bible.
Thanks, Bob
http://www.deism.com
B - Interesting opinion Bob. Can you prove any of it?

Bren
Pastor Dave
2006-06-15 02:19:19 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:22:42 -0500 (CDT), Bob
<***@knology.net> spake thusly:


Let me start by saying that you posted a rather
inflaming message in a Christian news group.

I did not "flame you" back, but I did respond
head on and I just want you to understand that
it was not done in anger. :)

I simply find multiple instances of hypocrisy
in your post. It's not you personally. I find this
in the posts of deists in general, since they all
have the same theme, when commenting on
Christianity.
Post by Bob
It gives me great peace of mind to know that God
has nothing to do with the Bible!
So you posted in a Christian news group, to tell people
that? Should we go to deist groups and tell you people
how wrong you are and criticize your web pages and
the books that men wrote, that you treat as if they're
your bible, such as the writings of Thomas Paine?
Hypocrisy!

And isn't it interesting that Christians are criticized
whenever they post into any other group, for trying
to win converts and yet, those same complainers
have no problem posting in Christian news groups,
to tell Christians how wrong they are for believing
in what they do. Hypocrisy. (:

You act as if you're rejecting any writing as being
a guide for truth and you call the Bible "man made",
implying that it isn't true and that men made it up
and so, it can't be trusted and then you treat the
writings of men like Thomas Paine as if they speak
"the truth" and should be followed. Where I come
from, that's called hypocrisy. (:

And yet, you call Him "God", because that's what He's
called in the Bible. But since you don't want to admit
that you're not as good as you like to think you are,
you reject the Bible, because it tells you that. So you
steal a name from the Bible and then create your own
God, which is based in part on the God described in
the Bible. Interesting.

So why do deists do this? Because if they don't,
then they have to accept that Christ calls us to
die to ourselves.

I think what's giving you peace of mind, is believing
that you are in control and that you run your own
destiny. That you don't have to submit to God.
Rather, He's just there for you, whenever you want,
for whatever you want and your definition of God,
is someone that wouldn't actually interfere with
your life. God's love, if you even believe in that much,
is Him letting you do whatever you want and He still
says you're okay with Him. Of course, deists in general
do not even believe in a personal God to begin with.
Isn't it interesting how it is that when God would
interfere with what you want to do, you just take Him
out of the way and say He doesn't get involved in our
day to day lives?

And upon what do you base the conclusion that the Bible
is not the word of God? Upon the opinions of men and
you claim that because they say so, it's true and then
claim that because a Christian says it is the word of God
that they're wrong and that it's just the opinion of men.

Again, hypocrisy.

And Robert Johnson does not give any coherent reason
to reject the Bible as divinely inspired.

The truth is, you focus on men and reject Christianity
because of what you have seen men do. Thus, you
judge God by the actions of men.

You are like the man who, when he brings his car to
a garage and the mechanic doesn't do a good job,
rejects the field of automotive repair. In other words,
you would throw away the books on how to properly
repair an automobile, because men didn't repair
your vehicle correctly, never realizing that the field
of automotive repair should not be judge by what
a specific automotive technician did.

And you call that, "thinking" and "reasoning". (:

What you don't realize, is that the field is not judged
because of the actions of the man. Rather, you know
that the actions of that specific man were bad, because
you have the written material to judge the actions of
the man by. Every automotive technician can be bad
at their job. That doesn't mean that the written
material on how to do it properly is not correct.
It means that men are failing to follow the correct
procedures.

I don't judge Christianity by the Inquisitions. Rather,
I judge the Inquisitions by what the New Testament
teaches us that Christianity is. You do the opposite.
Post by Bob
God gave us reason, and if we use our God-given
reason we can't help but reject the manmade Bible.
And He said, "Come, let us reason together".

Now why would He say that in the very Bible you reject,
if it wouldn't lead us to accept it?

You say we "can't help but reject the man made Bible".

And yet, I reason and because I reason based upon
facts, I accept it. You reject it based on ignorance
and call that "reason".

Just remember my friend, the most important place
in the Temple that God first told Moses to build was
called the "Holy of Holies". The inner sanctum. And
in it, on top of the Ark of the Covenant, which contained
the Ten Commandments, was the MERCY SEAT.

God is merciful and that includes throughout the
Old Testament. People don't tend to see that, but
it's true. They should take more time to investigate,
rather than just see the wars. They never ask, "Why?".

And the most important question of all, is; What will
you do with Jesus?

And that is a question that I am asking you now
and it is a question that I would appreciate an
answer to, please.

I also have one more question. And that question is,
from where is morality derived from?
--
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,
till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

O
/
/
<><[]()X()[]><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>><>
\
\
O

"For the word of God is sharper than any two edged sword."

"If the solar system was brought about by an accidental
collision, then the appearance of organic life on this
planet was also an accident and the whole evolution of
man was an accident too. If so, then all our thought
processes are mere accidents - the accidental
by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds
for the materialists' and astronomers' as well as for
anyone else's. But if their thoughts - i.e., of
materialism and astronomy - are merely accidental
by-products, why should we believe them to be true?
I see no reason for believing that one accident
should be able to give a correct account of all
the other accidents." - C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock
b***@juno.com
2006-06-16 02:46:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
It gives me great peace of mind to know that God has nothing to do with
the Bible! God gave us reason, and if we use our God-given reason we
can't help but reject the manmade Bible.
Thanks, Bob
http://www.deism.com
.
Although Deism is much better than Atheism, I have the following
problem with Deism.

Essentially, Deists believe that God doesn't care about Humanity enough
to actually talk to us.

According to Deists, God took all that time to invent the human body,
with its four billion protein double helix DNA, and all the other
mind-blowing/earth shattering beauty and complexity that we find in the
human body........ and then just split, never bothering to talk with us
at all.

What kind of love is that? If you refuse to speak to me, I assume you
don't love me. Likewise with God. If He has never spoken to us, never
revealed any truth to us, he must not love us.

Furthermore, the Deist must declare that God cares nothing for whether
we slaughter one another, or the 9-11 attacks, or anything we do. This
kind of apathy for His beautiful creation just does not ring true for
me.

Although I admit that the Bible has a few minor errors, this does not
disqualify it as the word of God. We don't discard a science book if it
just has a few minor errors. Neither should we discard God's Word if it
has just a few minor errors.

Universalist Christianity is the answer. Trust me. God loved us enough
to talk to us. And he helped the authors of the Bible to write it down,
more or less truthfully. The slight, miniscule errors of the Bible, are
so unimportant that they are basically negligible.

Also, the more I read the Bible, the more I know that it could never
have been invented by some clever liars. (And anyone who denies the
Bible MUST SAY that it was written by extremely clever liars. Yeah, how
likely is it that extremely clever liars would command us to never lie?
What an amazing coincidence that the very book that first told the
world that it must always tell the truth, was supposedly the greatest
lie ever told!)
d***@ntlworld.com
2006-06-16 02:46:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pastor Dave
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:22:42 -0500 (CDT), Bob
Let me start by saying that you posted a rather
inflaming message in a Christian news group.
Well here's another one: the Problem of Evil disproves the possibility
of the theistic God, at worst (or best) in logical terms or, at least,
in all probability. To atheists, this shows us that there is no God,
yet if we stand up for our position (and where better to do that than
in a Christian newsgroup), we are accused of being inflammatory. If I
deny your beliefs, and can show logically where they are wrong, how is
that inflammatory? Where is the incitement and what is it you are
afraid of?
d***@ntlworld.com
2006-06-19 16:01:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@juno.com
Although Deism is much better than Atheism, I have the following
problem with Deism.
But shouldn't atheism be the default position, until such time as one's
reason or indeed one's faith takes one into a God belief? When you say
that deism is 'better' than atheism, shouldn't you be saying that it is
simply 'different' from atheism?
Post by b***@juno.com
Essentially, Deists believe that God doesn't care about Humanity enough
to actually talk to us.
I agree that Deism throws up more questions than it resolves. However,
isn't at least one form of Deism that which views God as somehow
impersonal as in blind nature? I otherwise would have to agree with you
that it does not make sense that a personal God should not care about
humanity
Post by b***@juno.com
According to Deists, God took all that time to invent the human body,
with its four billion protein double helix DNA, and all the other
mind-blowing/earth shattering beauty and complexity that we find in the
human body........ and then just split, never bothering to talk with us
at all.
Again, I agree, unless God is not something we can relate to or
understand in the 'personal' sense. The Deism of Aristotle and Spinoza
saw it this way, whereas Voltaire and Paine saw God in a personal sense
and that is a difficult position to maintain
Post by b***@juno.com
Although I admit that the Bible has a few minor errors, this does not
disqualify it as the word of God. We don't discard a science book if it
just has a few minor errors. Neither should we discard God's Word if it
has just a few minor errors.
Hmm...not sure about that. I have heard some Christian apologetics
concede that even if one word of the Bible is in error (which they
deny) the whole house of cards would come down. That is, the premise
that God cannot make mistakes
Post by b***@juno.com
Also, the more I read the Bible, the more I know that it could never
have been invented by some clever liars. (And anyone who denies the
Bible MUST SAY that it was written by extremely clever liars.
This does not follow. It could have been written by extremely
well-meaning individuals, ones who perhaps believed that it was the
word of God. You commit the same fallacy as C S Lewis who claimed that
Jesus was either mad, a liar or telling the truth, and failing to
account for further possible options such as, for example, never
existing, or other people putting words into his mouth.

I am interested in your universalism but I keep finding faults in your
reasoning.
b***@juno.com
2006-06-19 16:01:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@ntlworld.com
Well here's another one: the Problem of Evil disproves the possibility
of the theistic God, at worst (or best) in logical terms or, at least,
in all probability. To atheists, this shows us that there is no God,
yet if we stand up for our position (and where better to do that than
in a Christian newsgroup), we are accused of being inflammatory. If I
deny your beliefs, and can show logically where they are wrong, how is
that inflammatory? Where is the incitement and what is it you are
afraid of?
The problem of evil is solved perfectly by the concept of "Universalist
heaven."

No amount of finite evil, however large, can add up to infinity. Thus
the infinite good of "all mankind going to heaven" more than
counter-balances any temporary evil we may experience on earth. In
fact, evil will be like a tiny drop in an ocean of happiness, when
compared to the infinite happiness of heaven.

The problem of evil only succeeds if hell is eternal. Otherwise, the
problem of evil vanishes in the blink of an eye.

If you ask me, why doesn't God immediately bring us all to heaven? I
respond with, why didn't Shakespeare immediately send Hamlet to heaven?


In other words, I consider God to be a creative genius who is treating
the universe like a giant stage. Luckily, this play will end up being a
comedy in the end. It will be more like A Midsummer Night's Dream. It
won't be like King Lear. And certainly not like Othello.
Matthew Johnson
2006-06-19 16:01:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@ntlworld.com
Post by Pastor Dave
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:22:42 -0500 (CDT), Bob
Let me start by saying that you posted a rather
inflaming message in a Christian news group.
Well here's another one: the Problem of Evil disproves the possibility
of the theistic God, at worst (or best) in logical terms or, at least,
in all probability.
You are right, Dave. That certainly was inflammatory. And what else could we
expect, when you make one false claim after another, repeatedly _claiming_
such-and-such is 'proved' or 'disproved', when it is clearly NEITHER.
Post by d***@ntlworld.com
To atheists, this shows us that there is no God,
And this too is inflammatory and presumptuous. It is like claiming that the
Protocols of the Elders of Zion is true, because anyone who claims to have
disproved it is himself a member of the conspiracy.
Post by d***@ntlworld.com
yet if we stand up for our position (and where better to do that than
in a Christian newsgroup), we are accused of being inflammatory.
And rightly so. For what _you_ call "standing up for our position" is standing
up for a pack of lies, and for the right to shout them at the top of your lungs
claiming proof when you have no such thing.

Some "standing up for our position"!
Post by d***@ntlworld.com
If I
deny your beliefs, and can show logically where they are wrong, how is
that inflammatory?
But you CANNOT "show logically where they are wrong". That is the false premise
that renders your question inadmissable.

[snip]
--
-------------------------------
Subducat se sibi ut haereat Deo
Quidquid boni habet tribuat illi a quo factus est
(Sanctus Aurelius Augustinus, Ser. 96)
Matthew Johnson
2006-06-19 16:01:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@juno.com
Post by Bob
It gives me great peace of mind to know that God has nothing to do with
the Bible! God gave us reason, and if we use our God-given reason we
can't help but reject the manmade Bible.
Thanks, Bob
http://www.deism.com
.
Although Deism is much better than Atheism, I have the following
problem with Deism.
Essentially, Deists believe that God doesn't care about Humanity enough
to actually talk to us.
True. But it is even worse than that. Not only does the Deist God not deign to
talk to us, he does not deign to help us in ANY way!

[snip]
Post by b***@juno.com
Universalist Christianity is the answer.
No, "universalist Christianity" is an oxymoron.
Post by b***@juno.com
Trust me.
No, don't trust you! Your beliefs were anathematized at the Fifth Ecumenical
Council for a _good_ reason.


[snip]
--
-------------------------------
Subducat se sibi ut haereat Deo
Quidquid boni habet tribuat illi a quo factus est
(Sanctus Aurelius Augustinus, Ser. 96)
B.G. Kent
2006-06-20 04:15:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by d***@ntlworld.com
I am interested in your universalism but I keep finding faults in your
reasoning.
B - What would happen to our world if we took all books as literal?
imagine.

Bren
suneejan
2006-06-21 03:20:38 UTC
Permalink
There is one book in my opinion that people can rely on that is the
Holy Bible. It is the word of God written by men for us. Read 2
Timothy 3:16. To understand fully the scriptures a person needs to be
born of God's spirit as it is written inJohn 3:1 - 21.
Post by B.G. Kent
Post by d***@ntlworld.com
I am interested in your universalism but I keep finding faults in your
reasoning.
B - What would happen to our world if we took all books as literal?
imagine.
Bren
B.G. Kent
2006-06-22 03:18:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by suneejan
There is one book in my opinion that people can rely on that is the
Holy Bible. It is the word of God written by men for us. Read 2
Timothy 3:16. To understand fully the scriptures a person needs to be
born of God's spirit as it is written inJohn 3:1 - 21.
second line....you'd have to prove.
third...why?
fourth.....again...you'd have to prove.

Is Christ there? without the Bible?

Bren

Loading...