|
|
Post by WadeWilson on Feb 27, 2003 3:54:03 GMT -5
All right, maybe this will start the debate you've been hoping for. Maybe not. These are a quick compilation of some thoughts and doubts I've had about Christianity. Formerly a faithful follower, my doubts have grown to the point where I'm almost willing to renounce my Christianity. But not quite yet. Maybe someone can provide answers. Some of these are paraphrased from members.aol.com/chasklu/religion/private/question.htmlAnd I want solid, well-supported answers. Back up your arguments with specific passages when necessary. Also, Christians, don't take any offense to this. This is not so much an attack on religion as it is an attempt to understand it. 1) The main problem I've been having is this: how can God possibly be "good" and "just" considering the horrible things done in the Old Testament? How is the condoning of slavery and mass genocide actions of a righteous God? Can you justify the slaughter and mass capital punishment by saying that those people were "bad" people? But can entire cities of people ALL be deserving of death? JOSHUA 10 VERSE 40: "So Joshua subdued the entire region . . . he left no survivors. He totally destroyed all who breathed, just as the LORD, the God of Israel, had commanded." 2) Remember the story of Job? How God essentially destroyed his life to prove to Satan that Job would remain faithful? How is it justified to crush a man down to the lowest possible form, just to see if he'll still bow to you? What if I owned a large corporation and, just to see if Jenkins REALLY respects me, I burn his house to the ground, infect him with a disease, and kill his friends and family? Is that just or righteous? Here's a direct quote from James Buckner: 3.) "Why pray? If it changes God's mind then he is not sovereign. If it does not change God's mind then it is superfluous." There's more, but I don't want to ask too much in one post. If you can adequately answer these, then I thank you, and you are a credit to your religion. -WW |
|
|
|
Post by Tyler on Feb 27, 2003 13:28:58 GMT -5
sounds like wicca, the threefold thing anyway
|
|
|
|
Post by Pumpkin King on Feb 27, 2003 14:46:33 GMT -5
wow
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve M on Feb 27, 2003 17:08:57 GMT -5
1. if bad exists so does good... lets hear for choice! 2. could this be metaphorical?  3. prayers are not lists of demands |
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyRansom on Feb 27, 2003 17:15:48 GMT -5
one word of warning to you, WadeWilson...Do Not Take the Bible Literally!! it is not a biology textbook or a firsthanded recorded journal of facts and events, which would be biased anyways.
|
|
|
|
Post by holygoat0106 on Feb 27, 2003 18:19:47 GMT -5
yayy!!!!u guessed it, but im not completely immersed in it yet
|
|
|
|
Post by vanessa murder. on Feb 27, 2003 19:16:04 GMT -5
i found out who the fucks are who vandalised st. matt's.. ya know with the shit and stealing wine and stuff
|
|
|
|
Post by Tyler on Mar 3, 2003 12:50:59 GMT -5
hey holygoat, some of your posts dissapeared, like the one where you talk about your beliefs, which made my posts seem a little weird. i sure would be dissapointed to find that someone was censoring you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve M on Mar 3, 2003 13:20:56 GMT -5
wadewilson,
what else you got
those were the easiest questions ever
im under the impression that if you dont beleive its because you dont want to...
i dont want to either buddy,
but theres no plausible reason why or why not... no discussion will convert me, or change my life
|
|
|
|
Post by chad loin on Mar 3, 2003 21:25:56 GMT -5
juz in response to the "bible being metaphorical".
As far as actual manuscripted historical accounts, the bible is one of, if not the most credible accounts of middle eastern history bce. The discussion of whether or not this cannon can be accepted as truth or not shifts to a discussion on the validity or sanity of the authors (or author, if one would suggest) and if all the information in the cannon is metaphorical or if some is actually quite literal. It is quite right for a person to read the old testament and be concerned by the way a supposed loving god can, in a totally un-loving way, order and supposedly assist in the annhilation of thousands if not millions of people. If that is your understanding and in turn your question I pose this answer. Based on what knowledge we have of this time period, this region or the world in general at that time, was extremely volitile. Suppose for a minute that you were an almighty god and you had to step back and look at not only the state of the world at that time but also the state of the world to come or the world that was, and determine based on this how you would save and bless ALL of these people (because that is essentially what god intends to have done or will do as seen in the new testament john 3:16). So we must assume that god has "limited" himself (again based on the cannon, Geneis 2) to operate under the limitations of humankind. With this in mind he must ensure that His "word" (for proper biblical interpretation of word see John 1) was spread throughout the current (bce, before common era) world. The best way I (assuming "I" was god) would go about doing this is to place my blessed people (and by blessed I mean blessed among all men to bear the savior Jesus) is in between the two most powerful regions of that time, ensuring that all neccesary trade routes would run directly through the land I established for my people (the Israelites). Now in answer to your question, (not a definitive answer, juz one I've been thinking about lately) the only possible way to establish a people group or a new nation in an already occupied territory, (apart from "magical" powers already deemed useless based on operating under the limitations of humankind) would be through devastating physical force. And hense the deaths of thousands of resistant people simply protecting their territory. And what happened to all those souls who met their horrible end on that battlefield? In answer they are saved if they believe. A statement that has never and should never limit a person's decision to time period or whether or not they are dead or alive (was not death conquered by a timeless god?). A common verse to close, "For God so loved the world (no time period mentioned) that he sent his one and only son, Jesus, the whosever believe in Him (again no specific time period mentioned) should not perish, but have eternal life (the ultimate blessing to all weary souls)" John 3:16.
|
|
|
|
Post by PeetlePants on Mar 4, 2003 0:33:19 GMT -5
Chad,you really are a maze ing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve M on Mar 4, 2003 16:25:01 GMT -5
chad,
their saved if they beleive in what
arent we talkin prejesus here?
is jesus not the completion of redemption?
also,
im not so sure how many historians still use the bible as a historical manuscripts.
|
|
|
|
Post by chad loin on Mar 4, 2003 18:02:17 GMT -5
Nosey,
I understood the question was "prejesus". I was just commenting on a very "popular" verse that appears not to have a timeline. I have a hard time not reading the bible with a purely "now" thinking. Like if God says, Jesus came into the world for the world to be saved, I think he must have meant everyone after the death and ressurection of Jesus. When this could not be true.
And yes I think, from what I've learned, that Jesus is the completion of redemption. However, if you think about an almighty ETERNAL god, you can imagine that redemption isn't bound to time.
and for your last question, I didn't say that historians use the bible as a manuscript. I said that the bible is one of, if not the most MANUSCRIPTED records from that time (it's something like 64,000 ORIGINAL manuscripts).
I did not intend anything that I've said to come across as hard evidence because I agree with you nosey that these things can't be explained. So why hold things you've heard in church so closely to the fire. Our beliefs or our faith should not be so dependant on hard evidence when it is almost impossible to acutally come by any.
|
|
|
|
Post by chad loin on Mar 4, 2003 18:06:06 GMT -5
Open your head and heart up to the mystery of life...and maybe even god.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steve M on Mar 5, 2003 15:30:40 GMT -5
no, i agree
i was just wondering what ya thought. im under the impression that god is not bound to time and can thus see all of existance as now.
and lets not forget that john316 says god so loved the WORLD not just the people.... hey, why havent the environmentalists jumped on that one, thats like a call for environmentalists
isnt it weird that jesus sounds so lefty but most xians are so righty. so veird.
also, chad, its noisy not fucking nosey
and also again, i got the open head/heart blues... i wont waste 1 second of my ever so prescious(?) time worrying where im going. which is another question... why does god even HAVE a heaven or hell? i think thats my biggest beef with the big guy upstairs. dusnt that sort of dangling carrot thing totally disqualify anything any goodfaithed person ever did for anyone else. if they were so down with the j man then wouldnt they just want to do things for people for no reason or personal gain?
i dunno
|
|
