Creation >> DNA Code

[August]

Originally Posted by razark

Well:

I'd call those "piles of crap", morally. And I will go so far to say that anyone that doesn't think those are morally wrong is also a "pile of crap".

Really? Well I would go so far to say that anyone who so callously dismisses an entire collection of books that have been held dear by billions of people for thousands of years as a "pile of crap" is staggeringly arrogant. By what authority do you make these claims? Why should anyone believe you?

[AngusJS]

Originally Posted by u crank

@ heartc:

First I would like to correct a quote you credit to me."But the OT doesn't count anymore" I did not say that in letter or spirit. What I said was that in the OT God was dealing with the Hebrews. Although the Old Testament has value as history and insight The Law of Moses does not apply to me or any Christian. In the verse you quote Matt.5:17 Jesus is talking to Jews and the New Testament era has not yet begun.

Heartc, I am assuming that you are an Atheist. You haven't said so but posting a video by Sam Harris is a clue. If you are not forgive me. But you are making the same mistake that other Atheists have made. You are judging the Creator of the universe as if he were a mere man. This is a fallacy. If you don't believe He exists, fine, I can respect that. But to pass judgement on a Being that is responsible for all things is a very illogical task. Whether you believe he exists or not the best you can do is apply human standards to do it. Which is exactly what you are doing. As to all this carnage that you describe, do I believe it happened? Probably. Do I rejoice over it? No, of course not. Am I suppose to? I don't think so. And most importantly do I understand it. No I do not. Not yet.

It seems very convenient that the atrocities associated with your god are either irrelevant because they happened before an arbitrary point in time, or they are mysterious, or they can't be judged.

It also seems strange that the actions of your god can't be judged, but his characteristics and his wishes for you can be determined.

He communicates very well. Some understand and some refuse to understand.

Very deep. It's good that you can judge his ability to communicate.

Was his decision to limit his message to a specific time and place, so that it will take millennia for it to spread to everyone, an example of good communication? Was his decision to allow the written record of his interaction with humanity to be subjected to editing, poor translation and flawed copying, all without the original documents, an example of good communication?

[August]

Originally Posted by AngusJS

It seems very convenient that the atrocities associated with your god are either irrelevant because they happened before an arbitrary point in time, or they are mysterious, or they can't be judged.

On the other hand it also seems very convenient to profess disbelief in something yet hold others to task for the details. Either the Bible is a "pile of crap" as Razark says or it is not, your choice, but if it is not then you also have to accept the existence of the God that it is based on.

[razark]

Originally Posted by August

Really? Well I would go so far to say that anyone who so callously dismisses an entire collection of books that have been held dear by billions of people for thousands of years as a "pile of crap" is staggeringly arrogant.

I did not dismiss the entire collection. I even said there were some good parts. I simply pointed out that parts of the collection are downright wrong, morally. I also asked how you tell the divinely inspired parts from everything else.

Originally Posted by August

By what authority do you make these claims? Why should anyone believe you?

By my authority as a human being to make moral judgments on actions I am aware of. And no one should believe me, they should examine the evidence for themselves with an open mind, and ask what they believe is right and wrong.

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

[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?

[u crank]

My original post on this thread was not to take part in a debate about the existence of God, His nature or the OP's thoughts on DNA. Those subjects have been done to death. I have actually been on both sides of the argument in some cases. What I have learned is that both sides get their licks in, nobody wins and nobody ever changes sides based on the debate. I liken it to a one way street that never ends.
My post was intended to clear up some misconceptions posted by heartc about what qualifies a persons claim to be a Christian. I may have answered to quickly and to emotionally. That I regret. I also believe I cleared up that misconception as well as I am able.

AngusJS, if you reread my post which you quoted you will see that I in no way suggested that these events were irrelevant because of when they happened or that they are a mystery. I said that the Law of Moses does not apply to me. Quite a difference. As to judging God or His actions you are free to do so. I believe I 'suggested' that our ability to do so is limited. That of course is based on who you believe He is. If he is a fictitious figure or even just a man, have at it. Heck I'll even join you. But if He is who He says He is, that's a different matter.

Lastly the Atheist Experience. I watched more than a few shows. Very uninformed callers some times being baited by these guys who seem well informed. It's entertainment I guess.

I would suggest as a change of pace some thing a little more enlightening. This is a pre debate discussion between two men I greatly admire. The late Christopher Hitchens, journalist and Atheist and John Lennox, University of Oxford Professor of Mathmatics and a Christian. The video speaks for itself. Hitchens BTW is very well behaved. He only said the f word once and appears to be sober. I really miss him.

[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.

[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 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.