Creation >> DNA Code

[August]

Originally Posted by razark

So let me ask you:
Is slavery ever morally right?

Not by my standards. How about yours?

I also asked how you tell the divinely inspired parts from everything else.

Because I am not blind but i'm not going to give you a point by point review of the merits of every verse in a book that I see as only as one general guide to life out of many.

What Bible verses in particular do you object to and can you explain how you know that they haven't been added or modified in one of the many translations since the event they describe occurred?

[razark]

Originally Posted by August

Not by my standards. How about yours?

Not by my standards either. I just wanted to make sure we could agree that there was something in the book that we could agree was morally wrong.

Originally Posted by August

What Bible verses in particular do you object to and can you explain how you know that they haven't been added or modified in one of the many translations since the event they describe occurred?

There's the slavery, and the genocide, stories of god directing conquest, and a few other things that I'm just not interested in hunting down right now.

[August]

Originally Posted by razark

Not by my standards either. I just wanted to make sure we could agree that there was something in the book that we could agree was morally wrong.

By our standards. I would not presume to judge the morals and motives of people long since dead.

There's the slavery, and the genocide, stories of god directing conquest, and a few other things that I'm just not interested in hunting down right now.

So these passages you can't actually recall in any detail you assign them as much religious weight as the 10 Commandments? How about the pages and pages of "begats"? You believe that Noah for instance lived several centuries? If not then why do you believe the darker bible stories?

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by razark

I also asked how you tell the divinely inspired parts from everything else.

Originally Posted by August

Because I am not blind but i'm not going to give you a point by point review of the merits of every verse in a book that I see as only as one general guide to life out of many.

That is an intriguing question, though. If one believes the Bible to be absolutely true, how does one ignore the parts where God orders the death of thousands, or perpetrates those deaths himself.

If, on the other hand, one only claims to believe certain parts, how does one tell the true parts from the false ones.

Then again, if the Bible is just a good guide for living one's life, we're right back to ignoring the parts we don't like. Also the Ten Commandments are very specific on the worship of the one God. Not exactly just a guidepost for living, but very singular in their demands.

This complication is one of the reasons I no longer believe in the Bible. There is too much contradiction for me to ignore, and more than one person gave the same guidelines without demanding absolute servitude, and did it long before Jesus.

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

That is an intriguing question, though. If one believes the Bible to be absolutely true, how does one ignore the parts where God orders the death of thousands, or perpetrates those deaths himself.

If, on the other hand, one only claims to believe certain parts, how does one tell the true parts from the false ones.

Then again, if the Bible is just a good guide for living one's life, we're right back to ignoring the parts we don't like. Also the Ten Commandments are very specific on the worship of the one God. Not exactly just a guidepost for living, but very singular in their demands.

This complication is one of the reasons I no longer believe in the Bible. There is too much contradiction for me to ignore, and more than one person gave the same guidelines without demanding absolute servitude, and did it long before Jesus.

It is a good question. If God is a loving God why were other nations destroyed? Well, if you look at the biblical accounts they were pagan nations. By pagan I mean those who disregarded His Torah. For example they sacrificed human children to Molech, others participated in omophagia, others practiced sexual sacrifice. All these things God does not want for His own. Even when some of Israel fell into disobedience they met the same consequences as the pagan nations.

But everyone has a choice. One can continue to disregard what the King commands and face the consequences or they can obey the kings commandments and live. But many live in a day and age when the will of the people prevails and do not bow down to kings.

[August]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

If, on the other hand, one only claims to believe certain parts, how does one tell the true parts from the false ones.

I'll tell you. Which part do you have in mind?

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

It is a good question. If God is a loving God why were other nations destroyed? Well, if you look at the biblical accounts they were pagan nations. By pagan I mean those who disregarded His Torah. For example they sacrificed human children to Molech, others participated in omophagia, others practiced sexual sacrifice. All these things God does not want for His own. Even when some of Israel fell into disobedience they met the same consequences as the pagan nations.

I can understand hating the human sacrifice part, but not believing the same law? If that's the case do you believe that one side or the other of the medieval religious wars was right, and that the other deserved death? I don't see any difference between the Hebrews destroying the Philistines and the Catholics destroying the Protestants. Both committed mass murder in the name of their God. I'm not saying this is God's fault - I don't know. I'm told there is an old Hindu saying that goes "No god should be judged by the sort of people who claim to worship him." That said, I have to question whether any god who orders murder is to be trusted, or whether any book which makes those sorts of claims is to be believed.

But everyone has a choice. One can continue to disregard what the King commands and face the consequences or they can obey the kings commandments and live. But many live in a day and age when the will of the people prevails and do not bow down to kings.

Yes, we all have a choice. Some choose to believe blindly, and some choose to question everything, especially stories in which people are commanded to slaughter everything in sight in one text and love their enemies in another.

Me? I'm still looking for some evidence.

Originally Posted by August

I'll tell you. Which part do you have in mind?

I have no particular part in mind. My question was "How?" This is a problem I have living where I do. The major local religion insists they believe the King James Bible to be true, except for the parts where it's translated incorrectly. Interestingly the parts that are "incorrect" are the ones that disagree with their doctrine. This can be taken either way, so it can be true or it can be convenient.

So, how does one tell?

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I can understand hating the human sacrifice part, but not believing the same law? If that's the case do you believe that one side or the other of the medieval religious wars was right, and that the other deserved death? I don't see any difference between the Hebrews destroying the Philistines and the Catholics destroying the Protestants. Both committed mass murder in the name of their God. I'm not saying this is God's fault - I don't know. I'm told there is an old Hindu saying that goes "No god should be judged by the sort of people who claim to worship him." That said, I have to question whether any god who orders murder is to be trusted, or whether any book which makes those sorts of claims is to be believed.

Having read most of commandments, of which I can assure you I have failed miserably to keep, I find nothing in them morally henious. As far as I can tell there is no commandment to murder either. But like I said, like any laws given by a king there is benifit when they are followed and no benefit when they are not.

Yes, we all have a choice. Some choose to believe blindly, and some choose to question everything, especially stories in which people are commanded to slaughter everything in sight in one text and love their enemies in another.

In a nutshell best I can explain the destruction of certain nations were for the purpose of giving the land to Israel, and to rid that land of pagan activity and influence. Also, too the nation of Israel included those who sojourned with them and followed Torah. Keep in mind Torah was given as a light unto the gentile nations too. It is there for everyone to see and to live by.

Me? I'm still looking for some evidence.

I have no particular part in mind. My question was "How?" This is a problem I have living where I do. The major local religion insists they believe the King James Bible to be true, except for the parts where it's translated incorrectly. Interestingly the parts that are "incorrect" are the ones that disagree with their doctrine. This can be taken either way, so it can be true or it can be convenient.

So, how does one tell?

For me I stopped sitting and listening to the christian colledge educated masters of divinity and started reading things for myself. Personally I have a 1611 ed and a Koren hebrew/english bible and I found the Nsrv pretty good for that thing called the new testement. I also found others online to study with who could help with the hebrew part. Since then one thing I learned right away was not to be so blasted dogmatic 'you must believe 'this' or burn in hell'. Especially since reading the Tanakh in bibllical Hebrew I came to the conclusion there is no constantinian hell ruled over by some dude with horns and a pitchfork. But is the bible evidence of that? Well, thats for you to decide.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

In a nutshell best I can explain the destruction of certain nations were for the purpose of giving the land to Israel, and to rid that land of pagan activity and influence. Also, too the nation of Israel included those who sojourned with them and followed Torah. Keep in mind Torah was given as a light unto the gentile nations too. It is there for everyone to see and to live by.

That sounds very much like the justification for both sides of The Crusades. The simple fact is that God ordered the Hebrews to exterminate the existing populations. The reasons, to a reasonable mind, are unreasonable. On the other hand it could just as easily be an after-the-fact justification for the campaigns they waged. People are more likely to accept orders without questioning them if they think some deity wants it. It plays both ways.

[August]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

So, how does one tell?

I don't pretend to be an expert in the theology of other religions but a little common sense does go a long way. The parts that the Mormons disagree with are they significant?

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by August

I don't pretend to be an expert in the theology of other religions but a little common sense does go a long way. The parts that the Mormons disagree with are they significant?

They have a completely unique theology based on writings "discovered" in the early nineteenth century. These have nothing to do with traditional Christianity except where they are made to tie in with the Bible. My point wasn't to divert this discussion to the Mormons, but to raise the question of how anyone is to tell what to accept from a "Holy Scripture" and what to dismiss.

Thomas Jefferson believed that Jesus was the greatest "human teacher" of all time, but that his followers altered and added things, introducing the supernatural to the story. Jefferson even produced his own edited version, keeping the gist of the story but cutting out anything miraculous. When I read this I had to ask the question "How does Jefferson know that any of it is true?" If the disciples added in the miracles, how does he know that the teachings are really those of Jesus, or of any one man? How does he know any of it is true, if he can pick and choose?

And that's my question to you. In answering Razark you said you weren't going to give a point-by-point review. He didn't ask for that, and neither did I. The question wasn't "which ones", but "how do you make that judgement?" By common sense? Do you only choose parts that agree with your philosophy? Some of the Ten Commandments are commands to follow the One God. Others are good sense and good law, but they are still presented as Commandments, and you can pick some that you like and dismiss others but they are presented as a whole.

So did Jesus rise from the dead? Did he perform miracles? Was he just a great teacher? Is any of it true? I don't disbelieve, I just don't know, and despite all claims and what I used to think I knew, the fact is that I don't know. And no one I've seen can show any proof that he does know, just that he believes. So how does one decide exactly?

[Skybird]

Claims mean little - what we do, how we behave, defines what we are and what our honourable quality is.

Honour: to me that is the attitude in which we meet life, and live our life.

The value of teachings lies in their content, not in the person that is claimed to be the originator. That also means that a worthless teaching remains to be worthless, no matter how respectable the author is claimed to be.

Authenticity. Well. You learn something but assimilating it in your mind. It then is no longer a separate thing emebedded in yourself, but it is part of yourself. This is true knoweldge, true competence, true expertise. No true mastery of arts without assimilation having made competence a part of you. But after assimilating knowedge and "it" having become "yourself" - what's left of authenticity, then?

It does not matter whether I truly and in full assimilated conclusions from the sermon on the mount, or reached to similiar conclusions all by myselves, or by assimilating inpiut from other sources. The person of Jesus has no value from then on anymore, can just be an object of academic, historic curiosity. Truth remains to be truth, it cannot be endlessly twisted and turned and relativised without its essence going amiss. But it can be approached and reached from different directions.

Problem in modern time is thnat we live in an era of dilettantism. The wish to be something, surpasses the need of shpowing competence to match that desired status. We claim to be judged by what we want to be, not by what we can be, in the meaning of our abilities, skill, experience. Similiarly, we claim to be already respectable for knowledge we would like to be flattered for, but do not have. And so we have a culture where painters must not have any painting skill at all. American Idol singers without voice and technical skill. Politicians without political brain. Academics without academic capacity. Bestselling writers without literaric competence and without having anything to say. And believers without a proper understanding of what they believe - and why, how they were made to believe this and not that. Religious fundamentalism to me is a form of dilletantism, too.

More appearance than substance, more illusion than reality. This is what modern culture, modern intellectuality, and fundamentalist religion are all about. Or in brief: dilletantism.

[August]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

So how does one decide exactly?

By not deciding Steve, by having faith. Our species seems to want to quantify and categorize everything. The Bible is merely an example of such an attempt, the Koran another. Even those who want to complain about the relative morality of the various stories and passages are doing it as well.

But God (imo of course) being a supreme being that we barely comprehend let alone understand does not fit into the neat mental compartments we crave and that seems to drive some people crazy on both sides of the believer divide. God is mysterious and undefinable, and that includes doing things that we may not understand.

Sorry if that's not much of an answer but seriously, if you really want to know which parts of the Bible, the Mormon bible, the Koran, Torah, etc are correct and which parts are not then just use your head, but just as importantly, use your heart.

[Nicolas]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

So did Jesus rise from the dead? Did he perform miracles? Was he just a great teacher? Is any of it true? I don't disbelieve, I just don't know, and despite all claims and what I used to think I knew, the fact is that I don't know. And no one I've seen can show any proof that he does know, just that he believes. So how does one decide exactly?

God can manifest to your life if you do what his word asks.
Read Romans chapter 10, versicle 8 until 11. Speaking to God, do what versicle 9 and 10 say, then it will happen what says in John 1:12 and 13.

Please later read the following words, to a better understanding:

Jhon 3:16, Jhon 6:37, Jhon 14:23, Jhon 17:3, Acts 16:31 [I particulary like this one].

It's only necessary to do exactly what the word of God says, simple as that.

Every day talk to Jesus as a personal friend and the Holy Spirit will manifest his presence to you. It's only by believing in God words.

Different versions of the Bible, online:
www.biblegateway.com/

[Skybird]

"A discovery in science, or a new theory, even when it appears most unitary and most all-embracing, deals with some immediate element of novelty or paradox within the framework of far vaster, unanalysed, unarticulated reserves of knowledge, experience, faith, and presupposition. Our progress is narrow; it takes a vast world unchallenged and for granted. This is one reason why, however great the novelty or scope of new discovery, we neither can, nor need, rebuild the house of the mind very rapidly. This is one reason why science, for all its revolutions, is conservative. This is why we will have to accept the fact that no one of us really will ever know very much. This is why we shall have to find comfort in the fact that, taken together, we know more and more." - J.R. Oppenheimer


Science is the great antidote to the poison of enthusiasm and superstition. - Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations


Science does not know its debt to imagination. - Ralph Waldo Emerson