Zone1 If God were real, you wouldn’t need a book

[BreezeWood]

That's how I know He exists.

if they are a he why is there a reason not to show themselves - in public - than by those who use false pretense to claim their presence and collectively with those that use the false pretenses for their own advantages.

the heavens would not hide behind bushes.

 

[Meriweather]

So if everything was good, why was there a tree that allowed them to change this? Who made the tree? God....

I come from a position that this doesn't make sense. This is a story written thousands of years ago by people who wanted a good story and would have people nit-picking at the details.

Now people nit-pick because there's a lot to nit-pick.

Study the elements of the story. All was good...all could remain good...but good is not all that is possible to know. Adam and Eve were faced with a choice. One aspect of the story Jews tell, since all in the garden was good, the tree of knowledge of good and evil was good. However, the fruit was not yet ready for them to eat--or possibly, they were not yet ready to partake of this fruit. In remembrance of this, some Jews to this day, do not eat the first year fruits of a young tree.

I grew up with plenty of younger brothers and sisters. This began with dressing them--until the day they announced, "I want to do it myself!" As they grew, there were many more times they announced, "I can do it myself!" I think of this sometimes when it comes to learning the knowledge of good and evil. Could mankind have chosen to learn about the knowledge of good and evil under God's protection, but instead chose to do it on their own?

I come from the position that our ancestors were intelligent beings, noted truths about themselves as humans--and humans as a whole. The truths they learned and observed, they passed on, in simple, memorable story form, to their children and grandchildren, who passed it on to future generations.

 

[hadit]

Yep, we don't know everything, in fact we don't know anything.

We make things up.

Well, the standard of morality supposedly comes from God. God tells us what to think is good and bad. The 10 commandments and all that.

Without an external source of morality, everybody just does what they think is right with no regard for anyone else.

 

[Woodznutz]

So, WW2 wasn't "really bad"?

Not bad enough for Christ to return.

If things were so bad when Noah was alive, why didn't Noah get killed by people?

Noah was righteous and God protected him.

 

[hadit]

Basically it was God setting himself up to fail.

And the alternative is the mindless robot, unable to disobey or even to consider disobeying. I ask this question all the time and don't often even get a reply, much less a cogent one. Is that preferable to you, or do you prefer the ability to decide for yourself to disobey and deal with the consequences?

He made humans and he should have understood what he made.

He gave them the choice, and they chose wrong, so later on after the inevitable, he then went and killed almost everyone.

Consequences. It sounds like you don't want God to visit the consequences of man's actions on them. I see this a lot from people basically mad at gravity because they jumped off the garage roof and broke their arm. They want the freedom to defy gravity but don't like it when they hit the ground and get hurt. The same with sin. Stay in it and deal with the consequences. The fact that the ultimate consequences happen after you die doesn't reduce them at all.

And inevitably the people he chose to survive, their inbred descendants turned into the same violent people they'd been before God killed them all.

That's what sin does, as is clearly laid out in Scripture.

Tells you where all humans' hearts are, I'd say.

Bingo. We are all born with in inclination to sin, hence the need for a savior. You are making the case for the Gospel; did you know that?

Humans wrote this story, complaining that humans are violent. They wrote this, perhaps, in an attempt at telling people not the be violent. And yet, Christianity is the most violent of religions.

It is not, by far. There are those who hijack the name of Christ for their own corrupt purposes, but Christianity itself is the antithesis of violence. Nowhere are we commanded in Scripture to "slay the infidels", and don't even attempt to use God's commands to the nation of Israel as He was placing them in their ancestral home and pretend that He wants today's Christians to do likewise.

It's the religion of free will, and that's turned into huge murder rates in Africa and the Americas.

Where are Christians causing huge murder rates? I'd like to see the sources. I am aware that Christians are being slaughtered in various places around the world.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Study the elements of the story. All was good...all could remain good...but good is not all that is possible to know. Adam and Eve were faced with a choice. One aspect of the story Jews tell, since all in the garden was good, the tree of knowledge of good and evil was good. However, the fruit was not yet ready for them to eat--or possibly, they were not yet ready to partake of this fruit. In remembrance of this, some Jews to this day, do not eat the first year fruits of a young tree.

I grew up with plenty of younger brothers and sisters. This began with dressing them--until the day they announced, "I want to do it myself!" As they grew, there were many more times they announced, "I can do it myself!" I think of this sometimes when it comes to learning the knowledge of good and evil. Could mankind have chosen to learn about the knowledge of good and evil under God's protection, but instead chose to do it on their own?

I come from the position that our ancestors were intelligent beings, noted truths about themselves as humans--and humans as a whole. The truths they learned and observed, they passed on, in simple, memorable story form, to their children and grandchildren, who passed it on to future generations.

And that's all it is, a story.

The Bible is just a story. Not real.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Without an external source of morality, everybody just does what they think is right with no regard for anyone else.

But people will always have a sense of morality. Religion didn't exist BEFORE humans. Humans made religion as a source of morality.

China, with no religion, has a source of morality.

 

[Meriweather]

And that's all it is, a story.

The Bible is just a story. Not real.

Truth is the reality.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Truth is the reality.

Yeah, it is. And the Bible isn't reality.

 

[Meriweather]

Yeah, it is. And the Bible isn't reality.

It is when studying the Bible replaces reading the Bible.

 

[frigidweirdo]

It is when studying the Bible replaces reading the Bible.

Well, as real as Harry Potter.

 

[Meriweather]

Well, as real as Harry Potter.

We've both been around this forum so long, perhaps you remember me advocating/advising, first seek and find God; then study the Bible.

A fantasy character can only be found in the pages of a book, and my favorite is Gandalf, not Harry Potter. The one thing they both have in common is no clue of my own existence.

 

[frigidweirdo]

We've both been around this forum so long, perhaps you remember me advocating/advising, first seek and find God; then study the Bible.

A fantasy character can only be found in the pages of a book, and my favorite is Gandalf, not Harry Potter. The one thing they both have in common is no clue of my own existence.

Well, maybe God can only be found in the pages of a book.

 

[Meriweather]

Well, maybe God can only be found in the pages of a book.

He can be found everywhere. The book is testimony and the witnessing of others. Outside the book, each person may seek, find--and also be a witness. As a witness, the testimony of other witnesses can be of great interest. It broadens one's own perspective/experience(s).

 

[frigidweirdo]

He can be found everywhere. The book is testimony and the witnessing of others. Outside the book, each person may seek, find--and also be a witness. As a witness, the testimony of other witnesses can be of great interest. It broadens one's own perspective/experience(s).

So can Harry Potter, if you wish to find him.

The fact is you see something and say "that's God" or "that's God's work" because that's what you want to see. Another person doesn't see God there at all.

 

[Meriweather]

So can Harry Potter, if you wish to find him.

The fact is you see something and say "that's God" or "that's God's work" because that's what you want to see. Another person doesn't see God there at all.

Harry Potter can be traced back to the imagination of JK Rowling. Not even she has had the experience of meeting up with Harry Potter. She does not tell of events she and Harry Potter faced together.

Many scientists have been saying, This (or that) is the work of a creator and explain how they reached that hypothesis. They do continue testing that theory, on the watch for other explanations.

A problem many have with Biblical stories is beginning with the wrong premise. Beginning with the wrong premise results in a wrong conclusion. That is why I find it vital to understand the original language and culture in which the story was told, and the intent of the original author to his original audience.

Wicked is not the story of The Wizard of Oz. It is another story built around a wrong premise of a story by Frank Baum. You do the same with the account of the Great Flood. You do not begin with the same premise as that author, and therefore come up with entirely different characters (though you use the same names) and a whole other story.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Harry Potter can be traced back to the imagination of JK Rowling. Not even she has had the experience of meeting up with Harry Potter. She does not tell of events she and Harry Potter faced together.

Many scientists have been saying, This (or that) is the work of a creator and explain how they reached that hypothesis. They do continue testing that theory, on the watch for other explanations.

A problem many have with Biblical stories is beginning with the wrong premise. Beginning with the wrong premise results in a wrong conclusion. That is why I find it vital to understand the original language and culture in which the story was told, and the intent of the original author to his original audience.

Wicked is not the story of The Wizard of Oz. It is another story built around a wrong premise of a story by Frank Baum. You do the same with the account of the Great Flood. You do not begin with the same premise as that author, and therefore come up with entirely different characters (though you use the same names) and a whole other story.

God can easily be traced back to humans. God is so convenient for humans.

God gave only humans souls. This means they can say "thou shalt not kill" but only mean "thou shalt not kill those with souls" and then "thou shalt not kill humans" and all because humans are "special". We literally made a God that said we're special. So convenient for is, right?

There are plenty of other examples of our specialness.

So we need to begin with the "right premise", which is what? Think as you're told to think by whoever you're talking to? Which human has the "right premise"? Me? Probably.

 

[Meriweather]

God can easily be traced back to humans. God is so convenient for humans.

All observations can also be traced back to humans. It is fact people write down what they observe. Yes, they can also write down what they imagine, but the second does not overshadow the first. What they imagine is in the midst of the observable. The Bible observes God in our midst.

So we need to begin with the "right premise", which is what? Think as you're told to think by whoever you're talking to? Which human has the "right premise"? Me? Probably.

Note I was speaking of the premise(s) of the original author(s). Without correctly beginning with the original author's premises, one ends up with incorrect conclusions.

 

[norwegen]

Funny how no scriptures had been written yet when belief in God began early in Israelite history.

Funny that people turn to Christ without having read the Bible.

Here's a clue, libs/atheists: a book is not required for God to be real.

 

[frigidweirdo]

All observations can also be traced back to humans. It is fact people write down what they observe. Yes, they can also write down what they imagine, but the second does not overshadow the first. What they imagine is in the midst of the observable. The Bible observes God in our midst.

Note I was speaking of the premise(s) of the original author(s). Without correctly beginning with the original author's premises, one ends up with incorrect conclusions.

But the Bible is stories, not observations. Harry Potter has many real world observations in it. It has people, it has houses, cars, schools, all sorts of things. But you don't say it's real.

How do you know the premise of the authors of the Bible? You don't even know who they are.