God and Man

[Fisherking]

I have been amazed by the number of people who now do not accept the bible as the Word of God.
It seems that more and more are starting to believe that the Bible is flawed with time and translations.
That it is the word of man.
Does anyone still believe that the Bible is truth anymore?
Is it so far fetched to think that man could have written the Bible while under devine insperation by the Spirit of our Heavenly Father?
I dont think its so far fetched.
Some statistics show that less than half adults under 30 believe that God never existed. I hope that is exagerated.
I believe America is falling farther away from God, we have started to fall asleep, while God is saying its time to wake up.
What is our reason for being here?
Do you believe God has a purpose for mankind?
If so, what do you think that purpose is?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31788

 

[Diuretic]

I think FK would like a discussion with those of like mind. And that's fair enough. That's my only comment in this thread because I want to leave it alone.

 

[Said1]

I think FK would like a discussion with those of like mind. And that's fair enough. That's my only comment in this thread because I want to leave it alone.

You're approval of FK's intentions are noted.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I think FK would like a discussion with those of like mind. And that's fair enough. That's my only comment in this thread because I want to leave it alone.

Don't coddle the trolls, please. Thank you.

 

[Said1]

Don't coddle the trolls, please. Thank you.

Trolls are people too.

 

[Phaedrus]

Does anyone still believe that the Bible is truth anymore?

I believe this quote gets to the meat of the issue, what is truth? I don't want to wax philosophical on some endless tangent, suffice it so say the Human interpretation of "Truth" (whether it exists or not) is subjective.

A basic question you have to ask yourself IMHO, is whether the Bible is truth, or reveals truth? Are these mutually exclusive? Do other people think they are? What truth are you looking for? Does searching preclude finding?

I ask questions that follow my own line of thought because I try not to impose my own answers/beliefs on others. Hopefully a different perspective will help clarify things for you. Thats why I come to these boards at least.

 

[5stringJeff]

I have been amazed by the number of people who now do not accept the bible as the Word of God.
It seems that more and more are starting to believe that the Bible is flawed with time and translations.
That it is the word of man.
Does anyone still believe that the Bible is truth anymore?
Is it so far fetched to think that man could have written the Bible while under devine insperation by the Spirit of our Heavenly Father?
I dont think its so far fetched.
Some statistics show that less than half adults under 30 believe that God never existed. I hope that is exagerated.
I believe America is falling farther away from God, we have started to fall asleep, while God is saying its time to wake up.
What is our reason for being here?
Do you believe God has a purpose for mankind?
If so, what do you think that purpose is?

FK, I am a Bible-believing Christian, and I understand where you're coming from. But to answer the last two questions in your OP:
What is our reason for being here? "Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man." (Eccl. 12:13)

 

[Phaedrus]

Do you believe God has a purpose for mankind? If so, what do you think that purpose is?

Whether God has a purpose for mankind or not, I believe man's own purpose is inherently different. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle, contrary to popular belief, does not point to chaos ruling over all, simply to degree of ignorance mankind cannot supersede.

Whether there is actually destiny/fate or choice/free will, I know I am because I choose to. It’s an example of faith, and I’m ok with that. And because I know I am, why would I act as anybody but myself in terms of purpose? How else do you expect me to act? If this concurs with some divine plan, so be it.

That said, I will do what I choose to because I can. People all too often say they cannot, when it’s simply a question of consequences. It is far more accurate to say I will not because I fear the consequences. There are very few bounds on our existence. All too few some might say.

If you asked me God's purpose for mankind, there are two interpretations. Either to return to him or to be. In the first case, it’s question of loyalty/purity, in the second, a question of fulfillment/happiness. To go back to Plato’s age old quandary, does God’s love make something pious, or does God love it for its piety?

 

[dilloduck]

Whether God has a purpose for mankind or not, I believe man's own purpose is inherently different. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle, contrary to popular belief, does not point to chaos ruling over all, simply to degree of ignorance mankind cannot supersede.

Whether there is actually destiny/fate or choice/free will, I know I am because I choose to. It’s an example of faith, and I’m ok with that. And because I know I am, why would I act as anybody but myself in terms of purpose? How else do you expect me to act? If this concurs with some divine plan, so be it. ; )

That said, I will do what I choose to because I can. People all too often say they cannot, when it’s simply a question of consequences. It is far more accurate to say I will not because I fear the consequences. There are very few bounds on our existence. All too few some might say.

If you asked me God's purpose for mankind, there are two interpretations. Either to return to him or to be. In the first case, it’s question of loyalty/purity, in the second, a question of fulfillment/happiness. To go back to Plato’s age old quandary, does God’s love make something pious, or does God love it for its piety?

Jesus stated very plainly that mans' purpose is to be charitable.

 

[Phaedrus]

Jesus stated very plainly that mans' purpose is to be charitable.

Charity isn't a purpose, mayhap benevolance is, but that seems like the wrong word as well. Most certainley we have a duty to be charitable, but whether we embrace it or not is up to our own volition. For me, purpose implies more than duty or obligation.

"Good will towards men" seems to me the best examplar of what I think your going for. If I'm wrong please correct me, but I just don't see charity as purpose. A selfless life isn't necessarily a life without self. And if there is an independent self, there must be independent purpose.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

duty vs. purpose. this is why I hate intellectuals.

 

[Phaedrus]

w00t I'm an intellectual

 

[dilloduck]

Charity isn't a purpose, mayhap benevolance is, but that seems like the wrong word as well. Most certainley we have a duty to be charitable, but whether we embrace it or not is up to our own volition. For me, purpose implies more than duty or obligation.

"Good will towards men" seems to me the best examplar of what I think your going for. If I'm wrong please correct me, but I just don't see charity as purpose. A selfless life isn't necessarily a life without self. And if there is an independent self, there must be independent purpose.

will you accept being charitable as a purpose (without tripping over too many definintions?)

 

[Phaedrus]

No, for the reasons I stated above. Charity isn't a purpose, though it can be a by-product. You may feel obligated to aid others, but in Kantian terms, it isn't an end in itself. It doesn't pass the categorical imperative.

Looking at the examples of Mother Teresa and J.D. Rockefeller, I think I can illustrate this point. Mother Teresa gave her life aiding others, but her purpose wasn't charity, it was philanthropy. Don't confuse the two.

In the same sense, Rockefeller's dream was to give all of his money away, but his purpose IMHO was also philanthropy. I'd suggest rereading the beatitudes to see what I'm trying to get at. Perhaps I'm just arguing word choice.

Note: Rockefeller failed b/c his interest rate was too high. He was literally making money faster than the bank could make transactions to give it away.

 

[dilloduck]

No, for the reasons I stated above. Charity isn't a purpose, though it can be a by-product. You may feel obligated to aid others, but in Kantian terms, it isn't an end in itself. It doesn't pass the categorical imperative.

Looking at the examples of Mother Teresa and J.D. Rockefeller, I think I can illustrate this point. Mother Teresa gave her life aiding others, but her purpose wasn't charity, it was philanthropy. Don't confuse the two.

In the same sense, Rockefeller's dream was to give all of his money away, but his purpose IMHO was also philanthropy. I'd suggest rereading the beatitudes to see what I'm trying to get at. Perhaps I'm just arguing word choice.

Note: Rockefeller failed b/c his interest rate was too high. He was literally making money faster than the bank could make transactions to give it away.

what do you see as the difference between charity and philanthropy ?

 

[Phaedrus]

Charity is an action, philanthropy is an ideal.

 

[dilloduck]

Charity is an action, philanthropy is an ideal.

you're lost in words

 

[Phaedrus]

meh, I have fun

Words mean everything and nothing, "The difference between the almost right word and the right word is really a large matter-'tis the difference between the lightning bug and the lightning" (Mark Twain).

 

[Fisherking]

I have always viewed purpose as a means of fullfilment, and if being charitable brings that for a person, then that could be a purpose for them.
I think 5string said it best, the purpose of man is to fear God. God strongly encourages charity among believers, It is helping mankind bear the burdens of the other so nobody has to walk alone through hardships. This is a charecteristic of charity, and I believe is a purpose for mankind.