Monday, September 24, 2007

Welcome!

Welcome to my first-time effort at this blog thing. I am planning on exploring the evidence for the existence of the Christian God of the Bible. I will also explore the need for a god in society, and the many gods of the various religions- but will focus mainly on the Christian God of the Bible (aka God.)

I am sure there will be some heated discussions and the possibility of name calling. I may moderate comments that I deem inappropriate. I welcome all religious and non religious types to discuss their views (for now.)

I was raised Christian and I am having major doubts. I will give more of my story in a later post. I feel that using this blog as a tool for discussions on the positive/negative and good/bad may help me to find the truth.

68 comments:

Dani said...

Hello Mr. Nads - Welcome to the exciting and addictive world of bloggerville.

In your heading you said, "A look for evidence for the existence of the Christian God of the Bible. I am currently on the fence. Try to sway me."

Well, if this is true and your mind remains somewhat open to the Truth, undoubtedly your eyes will be open as well. Your comment on my blog seemed a bit hostile and characteristic of many atheists who are already set in their world view, but if you are truly seeking evidence for the existence of the Christian God of the Bible, I will take my best shot.

Here is a post (that has nothing to do with the Bible) that I wrote last year => Is There Proof for God?

Check it out and let me know what you think. I'll be checking back here, but feel free to stop by my blog anytime.

Harry Nads said...

If that is your best shot, then you may as well leave now because you will not be able to give me any credible, verifiable, physical evidence.

Your logic in that post is so flawed I don't know where to begin. If you do find something non-theoristic (I know that's not a word, but it conveys my thought)and concrete, please share with me.

Lui said...

If you haven't read "The God Delusion", I would suggest you do so (of course, you should also read any criticisms of it to make a proper assessment, as well as see how the author counters them).

The book is aimed at people who are sort of on the fence as you seem to be.

Dani said...

If my logic in that post is so flawed, care to at least point out why? It seems to me that you are not "on the fence" but rather convinced that God cannot exists simply because you don't want Him to exists, therefore you are going to be closed-minded, combative and hardened to any argument given.

But just for fun, here are a few other "non-theoristic" reasons why God does exist for you to ponder over:

First, there is the ontological argument. The most popular form of the ontological argument basically uses the concept of God to prove God’s existence. It begins with the definition of God as “that than which no greater can be conceived.” It is then argued that to exist is greater than to not exist, and therefore the greatest conceivable being must exist. If God did not exist then God would not be the greatest conceivable being - but that would contradict God's very definition.

A second is the teleological argument. The teleological argument is that since the universe displays such an amazing design, there must have been a Divine designer. For example, if earth were even a few hundred miles closer or further away from the sun, it would not be capable of supporting much of the life it currently does. If the elements in our atmosphere were even a few percentage points different, every living thing on earth would die. The odds of a single protein molecule forming by chance is 1 in 10243 (that is a 10 followed by 243 0’s). A single cell is comprised of millions of protein molecules.

A third logical argument for God’s existence is called the cosmological argument . Every effect must have a cause. This universe and everything in it is an effect. There must be something that caused everything to come into existence. Ultimately, there must be something “un-caused” in order to cause everything else to come into existence. That “un-caused” something is God.

A fourth argument is known as the moral argument. Every culture throughout history has had some form of law. Everyone has a sense of right and wrong. Murder, lying, stealing, and immorality are almost universally rejected. Where did this sense of right and wrong come from if not from a holy God?

People claim to not believe in God because it is “not scientific” or “because there is no proof.” The true reason is that once people admit that there is a God, they also must realize that they are responsible to God and in need of forgiveness from God. If God exists, then we are accountable for our actions to Him. If God does not exist, then we can do whatever we want without having to worry about God judging us.

Harry Nads said...

First of all, I know for a fact that dealing with Fundies like you are very irritating and frustrating because you apparently have no logical thought based on valid scientific evidence. You use you God and Bible as proof of itself which it not logical at all. If you can't understand why that is not logical, then there is no point in continuing.

But I will anyway...

First, there is the ontological argument. The most popular form of the ontological argument basically uses the concept of God to prove God’s existence.

Ok, that is exactly what I am talking about. It makes no sense whatsoever.

It begins with the definition of God as “that than which no greater can be conceived.”

WHo gave this that meaning? Is it because that is the only statement that could be used that fits its circular reasoning to prove itself?

It is then argued that to exist is greater than to not exist, and therefore the greatest conceivable being must exist.

Exist > Not Exist?
This is not math we are talking about here. And to assume you are talking about logic is hilarious in itself.

If God did not exist then God would not be the greatest conceivable being - but that would contradict God's very definition.

Exactly my point. They are using circular logic to prove itself. But I do agree with "If God did not exist then God would not be the greatest conceivable being."

A second is the teleological argument. The teleological argument is that since the universe displays such an amazing design, there must have been a Divine designer.

We only know what the universe is because of our experiences with it. We also know that it could be much better than it is. If there was a Divine Designer, then I would think it would have made a much better universe and even Earth itself. Why create a planet with the extremes of the hot desert and the nearly unlivable antarctic? Why not have the entire planet at a balmy 72 degrees all the time?

For example, if earth were even a few hundred miles closer or further away from the sun, it would not be capable of supporting much of the life it currently does.

I agree with that statement.

If the elements in our atmosphere were even a few percentage points different, every living thing on earth would die.

No, every living thing on earth would adapt or die. And other organisms would evolve- something that would be able to tolerate the way the atmosphere was comprised.

The odds of a single protein molecule forming by chance is 1 in 10243 (that is a 10 followed by 243 0’s). A single cell is comprised of millions of protein molecules.

OK, I'll run with that without doing any fact finding. But there is a chance. It is very high odds against it, but not if you have an infinite amount of time for it to occur. You are talking about odds in our current time-space mold. If you have an infinite amount of time (ie. billions of years) then the chances of it happening turn in to "eventual" rather than "impossible".

A third logical argument for God’s existence is called the cosmological argument . Every effect must have a cause. This universe and everything in it is an effect. There must be something that caused everything to come into existence.

Ok, so using your logic, was caused God?

Ultimately, there must be something “un-caused” in order to cause everything else to come into existence. That “un-caused” something is God.

Typical. You use the supernatural to explain something. And why couldn't the "un-caused" be the origin of the universe itself, rather than a supernatural being?

A fourth argument is known as the moral argument. Every culture throughout history has had some form of law.

Prove it.

Everyone has a sense of right and wrong. Murder, lying, stealing, and immorality are almost universally rejected. Where did this sense of right and wrong come from if not from a holy God?

There are many great discussions about this and I know I will never be able to sway someone of your beliefs to understand how morality can exists with out Vishnu. Oops, I mean Thor. No wait, I meant Zeus.

People naturally create a god belief to explain the things they don't understand. How do you explain how other animals are "moral" besides just humans? Did God supernaturally stamp his "gift of morality" to some animals also? They don't read, so they couldn't have learned it from the Bible.

People claim to not believe in God because it is “not scientific” or “because there is no proof.”

Yes, some do. Most logical, intelligent human beings usually want some type of proof of evidence before they believe in something (especially if it is supernatural.)

The true reason is that once people admit that there is a God, they also must realize that they are responsible to God and in need of forgiveness from God. If God exists, then we are accountable for our actions to Him. If God does not exist, then we can do whatever we want without having to worry about God judging us.

Here lies the discussion about morality again. Just because someone does not believe in God, it doesn't mean that they are going to be immoral, thieving, murdering, greedy people (most Christians are in that category than atheists or agnostics, by the way.) If you think that, it is because of issues with your own reason to need a God- not others'.

Harry Nads said...

Dani,

It is people like you that make me move further away from God, rather than to it. That is why I will some like an extreme atheist when replying to Fundies.

Fiery said...

BWHAHAHAHAA Ah David, you're very first fundy! Ohhhhhhhh and how precious that it is little Dani, the first fundy who crashed my blog. She was the first of 3 on mine.

Ahhhhhhhhhh, the mememories. Long pointless arguments leading no where. Her cutting and pasting from various crap she's collected over the years, not reading a thing you say in return.

But- she can claim to generate traffic on your blog and leave tail held high.

*snerk*

A book I would highly recommend is Atheism: The Case Against God by George H. Smith. That one is a fantastic, logically presented book that defeated my fundy neighbor in 41 pages.

Omg. Still Laughing. Dani is still capitalizing Truth. *double snerk* Ahhhh fundies, they never change.

Harry Nads said...

Fiery,
Thanks for visiting. I have read Dani's blog a little and I know how she can be. I also know that I won't be able to sway her opinions, and that is not what I am trying to do here. But she has such an extremist view of the Bible that I can't help but be sucked in (it's like watching a train accident in slow motion.) :)

I like your blog - I am a long time lurker. I don't always agree with everything you blog about, but it is thought provoking and enjoyable to read. I hope I can learn to write as well as you and Tommy (Exercise in Futility.)

My current research on atheist and Christian blogs definitely leads me to believe that intelligence seems to breed doubt.

Fiery said...

For shame, lurking and not disagreeing openly.

tsk, tsk

Silence presumes consent, pop up and call, "bullshit!" on the odd occassion. How else to learn?

Reg Golb said...

So, I was right in my analysis, you are a liar.

Fiery said...

golb what the hell are you talking about?

Reg Golb said...

Hey Fiery,

I am talking about comment that Harry deleted.

I accused Harry of misstating his being a semi-Christian, which does not exist.

I said he is either a searcher or a liar.

When he deleted my blog I came to the conclusion that I was right, he had been lying. After I found his comment at a few of these commenters blogs, I am now certain of it.

That is what I am talking about.

Fiery said...

My apologies for assuming you were talkig about me. I will retract on my blog as well.

Fiery said...

Ya know reg, I've been thinking about what you said here and on my blog. Is not Harry exactly the kind of person you've wanted to find? Someone who is pretty sure there isn't a god, but still willing to entertain and yes even demand evidence of his existence????

He obviously isn't swayed by the light weight stuff (aka Dani) he wants real walk up and smack him in the kisser evidence that there is a higher being.

Harry Nads said...

Sorry it took so long to get back on here, but I was fighting an illness. I guess I could have been back a hell of a lot sooner if I just prayed to God to make my illness go away, but I went the scientific route and got some antibiotics prescribed for me. Those take 48 hours to kick in and get rid of the illness. God could have been instant gratification.

Reg,
I agreed with you in that maybe there is no such thing as a semi-Christian, so I changed my post. And I deleted you rude-ass comment. Be thankful I didn't delete the rest. Starting out posting on someone's blog by calling them names is not a great way to set a fine example. But, it just goes to show that I was not a liar on Fiery's blog about you being an asshole. :)

I grew up Christian, but I have major doubts. I find it hard to give up completely on God right now, but the more "life experience" I gain, the more I get pushed towards the atheist views. My shot above at praying is but a small part of all the bullshit I seem to dig up about God.

I will give you a clean slate and stop the name calling (unless you give reason from here on out.) Please feel free to help show me my way back to God. Help me find the evidence I need. It is hard to give up on the possibility of eternal life (even if it is eternal torture- another bullshit topic for a later date) and the forgiveness of sins.

Tommy said...

Reg, get a friggin life!

Hey Harry. Thanks for stopping by Exercise in Futility.

Yes, there is a bizarre fascination with reading Dani's blog. She is quite the hellcat!

Welcome to the blogosphere!

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

Harry,
I just wanted to ask you a question. Is your intention to totally discredit the God of Christianity, to make people forget about Him? I ask this because i think that your work is going to be futile. I don't say this to be insulting, that is not my intention. But a lot of Christians (myself included) live their lives based on the supernatural change that God has made in their lives. And no amount of science is going to make them forget the very tangible change that occured.

What i do think can happen is more of a round table discussion. A talk between the church and the world to try to live civilly. Now of course, us christians are going to hope and pray that someone sees things are way and changes their life, but anyone with an opinion on anything would desire that.

For example, those books i suggessted to you would be a good place to start, The Case for Christ and The Case for Faith by Lee Strobel. He presents biblical and non biblical evidence.

I am new to this blogging thing and will be starting my own very soon, based on my "tangible experience" in Christ. Hope you are enjoying the blogging world.
Be blessed

Harry Nads said...

Garrett,

What supernatural change did God make in your life? I have asked several Christians why they believe so ardently with all the evidence against it, but I never get an answer. They always say something to the effect that "it was personal." Well, please let me know... I would like to see what kind of evidence was presented to keep that belief. I wish I could have my own personal "miracle" that could not be explained.

I am reading those titles you mentioned and will give a small review in an upcoming post.

Tommy said...

Garrett, my life as an atheist is much better than the life I had as a believing Christian. I realized that I was in control of my destiny, and that it did not depend upon making some deity in the heavens happy with me. So, if you believe your religious faith has made a positive difference in your life, my abandonment of religious faith made a positive difference in my life.

What Harry is doing is embarking on a journey, and this blog is part of it.

Now Harry wrote in his post that he is on the fence. Personally, I don't see it as my goal to sway him to become an atheist. I want Harry to make the choice that is right for him.

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

Harry,
The "personal"experiences that you speak of that christians talk about more than often are things that are out of control in their lives. For me, it was my homosexual attractions.
Now i already know that you are going to go into the whole aspect of promiscuity and the like being something that I could have changed and not had to attribute it to some "God", but like i said on Dani's blog, I tried very, very hard to live a monogamous, std free, no partying, committed to one man homosexual life and i still was not happy.
I am sorry if i cannot explain to you what God did in my life but i will say that when i got to the end of my rope, when i could no longer control my life and let Him give it a go, it worked out for my good. And when i did so, believe me, i was skeptical that it would work. I did not have much faith in supernatural changes but when things changed, i began to believe more. It is something that cannot be explained when something you prayed for, something totally out of reach, becomes tangible after giving God a chance.

Nads, i am not asking you to spill all your business but i want to ask you something? Have you honestly never had anything that was so outside of your control? I may be wrong(and please correct me if i am) but it seems like some atheists think that everything in the world is under their control.

The reason those christians couldn't give you an answer was because the definition of "faith" lies in the fact that it is something you cannot see, touch or smell. When something inside of you changes and it is contrary to what goes on around you, and yet you still hold onto the fact that that change was real and a result of your God, thats faith.

In my personal opinion, everyone has to come to that place where what you need outweighs the logic around you to even begin to understand faith.

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

Tommy,
thats wonderful that you found whatever you needed. I have my personal opinions about things, but my goal on these blogs and things are not to try to convert every person i come across. If you want to be an atheist, that is your freewill right.

The problem i have is when people don't allow christianity to be a valid option. I write to those people who may want to become christians, who may see something of value in Christ. He said Himself that not everyone was going to accept Him. And thats fine if thats what they want. He just wanted them to know that if they wanted to be in fellowship with Him, they could. If not, well, thats their choice too.

I also think that as humans, we all have opinions. And if Harry was to become an Atheist, inside you would be rejoicing. Its the same with christians. I want harry to choose christianity for himself IF HE WANTS. It would be pointless to make him to do it. If he did do it on his own, YES i would be happy, the same way a buddhist would be happy if he chose buddhism.

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

Harry,
Last thing, i promise.

It is not that the miracle can't be explained. It is how He did it that is unexplainable.

He raised Lazarus from the dead. Thats clear enough in terms of explanation. HOW He did it is another story.
Be blessed

Tommy said...

Garrett, while your question was addressed to Harry, I hope you do not mind if I take a crack at it.

Atheists do not believe that EVERYTHING is under our control. I can lead an exemplary and responsible life and then get hit by a drunk driver running a red light in an intersection one night and end up as a quadrapalegic. Or a tornado can rip through my house and destroy it.

What I meant about being in control of one's destiny is that you decide what you want, what changes or plans you have to make to get what you want, and then implementing it. Of course, what you want has to make sense and how you go about getting it should be done ethically.

Of course I will be happier if Harry decides to be an atheist rather than a Christian, but it isn't about me, it's about him.

As for you, I am saddened that you have had some difficulty in your life, though I can assure you we all do. It's no secret that the things that attract us do not always make us happy and in fact can make us downright miserable.

For people like you, I readily admit that belief in a personal deity is a powerful force for change. But it is the belief itself that motivates the change, not the thing believed in. Some people believe that Jesus Christ changed their lives for the better, while others will credit their belief in Allah and the Quran. But Jesus Christ did not change your life for the better, you did. Your mind created its own rationale for doing so.

Fiery said...

Garrett said...In my personal opinion, everyone has to come to that place where what you need outweighs the logic around you to even begin to understand faith.

So emotions overwhelm the rational mind and you have a charismatic experience?

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

Hey Tommy,
I don't mind at all that you answered the post to harry. I will try my best to give you an answer.

Or actually, pose you a question? You said that if there is something in your life that needs changing, you do it. Actually, that is correct. We do make the changes in our lives, if we can figure out the method of change to use.

But what happens when you have no idea what that method is? I think that the majority of Christians accept the fact that Christ changed their lives because they could not figure out how to do it on their own. Have you ever come to a decision in your life that in which you had no idea in which road to take? That is the decision i think most christians attribute to Christ.

I think i should clarify that Christ does not make us change our lives. He doesn't stuff anything down our throats or make us do anything that we do not want to do. What He does is present an option. Another course of action, if you will.

Christ's role in the life of a christian does not lie in being robotically controlled. It is more of a lordship over ther life. When i say lordship, i mean that because we find that He has the answer to anything we need, we recognize that His directions for driving will be better than our own. And that the changes He suggests are eternal. They last. They aren't like the decisions we as humans make that often than not change with any given gust of wind.

Let me ask you something else. If you had to sum up the quintessential message of Christianity, what would it be?

I also want to challenge you that not alot of people outside of the Church know what the bible really presents. Actually for that matter, there are a lot of Christians that don't know what the bible presents. They go on what they heard and attribute it to Christ.

There have been a lot of things that have been done in the name of God that are not godly. And alot has been done in the name of Christ that He would not have endorsed. Martin Luther coined the phrase " Sola Scriptura" which is latin for "scripture only". I would suggest to you that if you really want to know the real meaning in christianity, read the book of John. It will more than likely show you a message that a lot of christians are not preaching.

get back to me
Be blessed

Harry Nads said...

"Have you ever come to a decision in your life that in which you had no idea in which road to take? That is the decision i think most christians attribute to Christ.

No, they only attribute it to Christ if it ends up being a positive or good choice/decision. The negatives are never attributed to Christ making the person make the decision, unless they write it off (as they usually do) to "God works in mysterious ways" or "it must have been God's plan."

Harry Nads said...

"I think i should clarify that Christ does not make us change our lives. He doesn't stuff anything down our throats or make us do anything that we do not want to do."

Yes, if he could then everyone would be perfect, right? But what about the people who murder their children because Jesus or God told them to? I would say that they are crazy. But what is the difference between that and Pat Robertson having "conversations with God"? I think he is just as crazy.

Harry Nads said...

"I also want to challenge you that not alot of people outside of the Church know what the bible really presents. Actually for that matter, there are a lot of Christians that don't know what the bible presents. They go on what they heard and attribute it to Christ.

Exactly. That is why I read the Bible myself... which led me to my doubts. Do you know what the Bible presents? Have you read the Bible on your own without a "guide"? Apparently you don't mind the "evils" that the God of the Bible commits and commands. I have problems with those.

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

Harry,

You said "The negatives are never attributed to Christ making the person make the decision, unless they write it off (as they usually do) to "God works in mysterious ways" or "it must have been God's plan."
I think that you are under the assumption that once again Christ is pressuring the person to make a decision, regardless of what that choice is. Thats just not true.

The bible says that "every good and perfect gift comes down from the father above" and that " Let no man say that when he is tempted, he is tempted by God, for God cannot be tempted by evil and He Himself does not temot anyone but each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust".

This means that God is not the author of the negative aspects of life. He does not desire harm for us. The negative choices we make are a product of our OWN lust, not His. Who would serve a god who desires negativity for us?

And because of this i would agree with you that those people who murder their children and kill in the name of God are crazy. This is not what the bible talks about and is when of those cases of people attributing to God things that are not in His nature.
I don't know much about Pat Robertson's "Conversations" but i would defend the practice of prayer. If this is what he is talking about, their is the aspect of christianity where you can have a conversation with God through prayer and where through His spirit, He communicates things back to you. As far as a voice sounding out of heaven, i would be skeptical of that. But God does speak to us through gentle nudgings of the spirit, often through the conscience if it is somethiing not in line with Him or through His Word, the bible. That is the work of the Holy Spirit after Jesus' assent. To help "guide us into all truth"

Yes, i have read the bible from cover to cover without any guides. No commentaries, etc. And those evils that you talk about i would say are mainly in the Old Testament. One of the things that a lot of people don't understand is that the Old Testament was a period of time very different from the period we now live in, in regards to how God interacts with the world.

The OT was the period of the Law and with the introduction of Jesus, we entered into the period of Grace. There were blood sacrifices and such, other things that we would look at as atrocities in our modern view, in the OT that were required because God had created a standard for a people that were living in a fallen state, (the Law is much more than the 10 commandments;it is basically the entire torah, first five books of the bible starting at the middle/end of Genesis) so man was required to keep these laws in order to be able to approach God. He needed the shedding of blood to atone for sins.

But the introduction of Jesus ushered in a new time. We now live in a time where we don't have to kill goats and such because Jesus's death paid the cost of us being disobedient to God from original sin.(which by the way, nobody knows if it was an apple or whatever, simply that it was a fruit that God told us not to eat but we ate anyway. It was the act of disobedience, not some mythical apple that broke our relationship w/ him).

God recognized from the begining that man alone could not repair the breach that was caused and that eventually, a permanant sacrifice would need to be made. this is Jesus.

But before all this, to even accept any of this, a person needs to acknowledge the premise that God created them and that somewhere along the way, because of His gift of freewill and wanting reciprocated love, we broke our relationship with Him through disobedience and that somewhere along the road, we should want to repair that.

Before understanding the plan of redemption, this needs to be accepted.

I think that a lot of the time, we have problems with the harder parts of the bible because we want to think that we are the center of the world. In my opinion, we're not. I think that we are highly favored and loved by God but that we were not created simply to be catered to. I have no problem thinking that it is the other way around and that we reap enumerable (is that how you spell that?) blessings from that.

Good discussion.
Be Blessed

Harry Nads said...

Garrett,

First you say this:
"I think that the majority of Christians accept the fact that Christ changed their lives because they could not figure out how to do it on their own. Have you ever come to a decision in your life that in which you had no idea in which road to take? That is the decision i think most christians attribute to Christ."

And then this:
"I think that you are under the assumption that once again Christ is pressuring the person to make a decision, regardless of what that choice is. Thats just not true."

These seem to contradict each other. You are confusing. :)

Harry Nads said...

"The bible says that "every good and perfect gift comes down from the father above" and that " Let no man say that when he is tempted, he is tempted by God, for God cannot be tempted by evil and He Himself does not temot anyone but each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust"."

So God did not tempt Abraham?

Harry Nads said...

"This means that God is not the author of the negative aspects of life. He does not desire harm for us. The negative choices we make are a product of our OWN lust, not His. Who would serve a god who desires negativity for us?"

So when God commands genocide, murder, and pillaging against other humans... this is not desiring harm for us?!

Harry Nads said...

"I don't know much about Pat Robertson's "Conversations" but i would defend the practice of prayer."

Pat Robertson claims to have conversations with God. And God tells him about things that will happen (which never seem to come true- funny, huh?.) He says he hears God's voice. That is pure craziness. Yet many Christians believe him.

Harry Nads said...

"But God does speak to us through gentle nudgings of the spirit, often through the conscience if it is somethiing not in line with Him or through His Word, the bible. That is the work of the Holy Spirit after Jesus' assent. To help "guide us into all truth"

Oh no, now you are starting to get into Dani's territory. please don't go there. :)

Harry Nads said...

"Yes, i have read the bible from cover to cover without any guides. No commentaries, etc. And those evils that you talk about i would say are mainly in the Old Testament. One of the things that a lot of people don't understand is that the Old Testament was a period of time very different from the period we now live in, in regards to how God interacts with the world.

The OT was the period of the Law and with the introduction of Jesus, we entered into the period of Grace. There were blood sacrifices and such, other things that we would look at as atrocities in our modern view, in the OT that were required because God had created a standard for a people that were living in a fallen state, (the Law is much more than the 10 commandments;it is basically the entire torah, first five books of the bible starting at the middle/end of Genesis) so man was required to keep these laws in order to be able to approach God. He needed the shedding of blood to atone for sins.

But the introduction of Jesus ushered in a new time. We now live in a time where we don't have to kill goats and such because Jesus's death paid the cost of us being disobedient to God from original sin."


The following is from another person:

I am so tired of Christians manipulating the scriptures so that they can assign a kinder nature to their God, that I have assembled a BRIEF list of verses which clearly show that the Old Testament is not to be ignored. Its laws should indeed be adhered to, for the New Testament demands it!

1) “For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV) Clearly the Old Testament is to be abided by until the end of human existence itself. None other then Jesus said so.

2) All of the vicious Old Testament laws will be binding forever. "It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)

3) Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn’t the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." (Matthew 5:17 NAB)

3b) "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB)

3c) "Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God." (2 Peter 20-21 NAB)

4) Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law. Mark.7:9-13 "Whoever curses father or mother shall die" (Mark 7:10 NAB)

5) Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: “He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.” (Matthew 15:4-7)

6) Jesus has a punishment even worse than his father concerning adultery: God said the act of adultery was punishable by death. Jesus says looking with lust is the same thing and you should gouge your eye out, better a part, than the whole. The punishment under Jesus is an eternity in Hell. (Matthew 5:27)

7) Peter says that all slaves should “be subject to [their] masters with all fear,” to the bad and cruel as well as the “good and gentle.” This is merely an echo of the same slavery commands in the Old Testament. 1 Peter 2:18

8) “Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law" (John7:19) and “For the law was given by Moses,..." (John 1:17).

9) “...the scripture cannot be broken.” --Jesus Christ, John 10:35

Harry Nads said...

"I think that a lot of the time, we have problems with the harder parts of the bible because we want to think that we are the center of the world."

That has nothing to do with it. Murdering in the name of God (as God commands in several parts of the Bible) is just evil.

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

Harry,
Actually those two statements do not contradict each other. but maybe i should clear the vernacular up for you. Christ changing a person does not mean that he actually physically wiped away something. It means that He was the vehicle for change. its as if i say that a teacher changed my life because of a suggestion she gave me in what direction to go in my career

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

Harry,
God did not tempt Abraham. The word used in Genesis can be translated from the Hebrew to mean TEST. There is a difference. A temptation is trying to entice someone to go in a certain direction. A test is to see what choice will be made, what solution you will come up, whether one way or another

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

Harry,
I am going to answer 2 of your posts with this one answer.

Once again, the OT is a different time period. The book of Romans says so. But it does not say that it is to be ignored and i hope that at no time i said that it was. Like one of your scriptures said, Jesus came to fulfill the Law not destroy it. So that means we are to take away THE ESSENCE of what the Law was trying to do. We no longer have to kill an actual goat but we do have to make a spiritual sacrifice with our lives. Like abraham, we don't have to sacrifice our son but we do have to be willing to walk away from anything to serve God.

The Genocides and killings you speak of were lessons that we today need to take. We are not to actually kill anymore but the idea of owning the Land, remaining in the world but not of the world, those principles are what we are suppossed to glean.

I will say that anyone who is killing today in the name of God is not serving God. They are serving their own agenda

By the way, whoever created that list is taking scripture wildly out of context. They are ignoring principles of Biblical hermeneutics and pulling scripture to fit their own interpretation.

If you want, I am in biblical hermeneutics and can give you the context and reality behind each of those scriptures but it will take me a day or so to get it on paper. Let me know

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

Harry,
Once again, i do have to defend prayer. all through the bible you see that it, as well as the role of the holy spirit, gives access to God. But this is not something you have to accept. A non believer wouldn't get it.:)

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

Harry,
Lastly, you said you were raised in a christian household. While i am not insulting your family, the term christian household is subjective nowadays. But I wanted to ask you, did you ever feel a need to connect to christianity? Outside of intellectual reasoning? On an emotional level. Have you ever felt the need for something greater than yourself?

I am not trying to be insulting, but you don't really sound like your on the fence. You sound like you've made a choice already. And that choice sounds like you think that the idea of God in general is stupid. Even if He met up to YOUR ideals, would you serve him then? It doesn't sound like you would serve any god at all.

Tommy said...

Garrett, why would a supreme being require people to sacrifice animals to it? Why would a supreme being even require us to worship it? And don't tell me what the Bible says, please tell me what you personally think.

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

Tommy,
When an artist paints a picture, he has a purpose. When an author writes a book, he has a message to get across. He is trying to say something specific. The reader may take poetic license and interpret it as he may, but that it is not fair to the author. the reader should be true to the actual meaning of the story. The book also shouldn't be acting like anything but a book.

I think that it is the same way with God. If we accept the fact that a higher power made us, who are we to not portray its intended purpose in doing so? A Artist has the right to interpret and do with its creation what it may. That is the nature of the Creator/Creation concept.

Now, if you accept the Christian idea of God, you need to look at the fact that we do not always meet up to the creators expectation of portraying him right and worshipping him because he is the creator,not us. Then, we see that there would need to be a way for us to get back to the original purpose. Redemption if you will.

But because you don't want to use the bible as a reference, i can't explain to you the reason behind the christian need of blood sacrifice. (Even though i will say he no longer requires it). But this is the general concept i hold to of why we need to obey and worship our creator, if we accept him as such

Harry Nads said...

I say I am on the fence because I still have reason to believe there may be a "higher power" in the universe, and I don't want to abandon the possibility of everlasting life. I just don't think that "higher power" is the God of the Bible. I would consider myself to be a Jedi rather than a Christian. :)

More issues with the Bible:

We are told that the Bible has no scientific errors and is utterly perfect/protected, yet it says the bat is a bird (Leviticus 11:13 & 19), hares chew the cud (Leviticus 11:5-6), and some fowl (Leviticus 11:20-21) and insects (Leviticus 11:22-23) have four legs. You would think that the all-knowing and powerful God would be aware of this. It just shows you that man made up the stories in the Bible.

If God created everything, (Colossians 1:16, Ephesians 3:9, Revelation 4:11 & John 1:3), then he did create the world’s evil (Isaiah 45:7, Lamentations 3:38). Thus, he is responsible.

And don't throw the "free will" defense in there. It is written that I was given free will with which to choose if I will go to hell or not. How can you possibly deem something free when you must fear consequences? That completely conflicts with the definition of free. If I were to hold a gun to your head and say “you have free will to not give me your wallet, but if you attempt to defy me I will kill you.” Does it really feel as if you have a choice in the matter? Of course not. Free means to give or receive something with out an expectation of return. The whole free will concept is self defeating. Call it Circumstantial Will, for that is what it truly is.

For justice to exist, punishment must fit the crime. No matter how many bad deeds one commits in this world, there is a limit. Yet, hell’s punishment is infinitely greater. It’s eternal. Shouldn’t a sinner suffer until remorse is felt and the crime is atoned for? What “justice” is there in infinite damnation?

Except those of biased Christian writers, there isn’t one writing outside the Bible in all of ancient history that clearly refers to Jesus of Nazareth.

Surely you can try Mark 16:17-1 8 which says believers can drink “any deadly thing” and “it shall not hurt” them. But I don’t think you would be naive enough to drink any arsenic offered.

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

harry,
On the statement that there are not any non christian writers of antiquity that mention Jesus of Nazareth, you are wrong. The Historian Josephus of roman citizenship was not a christian and his histories give coorborative evidence that Jesus existed. Even the Jesus Seminar (an organization meant to discredit the Jesus of Faith) agrees that he did exist.

And who is qualified enough to tell God what the limit to justice is? We as humans can't even decide on capital punishment. In his eyes, the wages of sin are death. Luckily he provides for that so we don't have to die spiritually.

I read somewhere that there is scientific evidence that the body is not meant to die. That looking at the makeup of our biological systems, it should work indefinitely but somehow overtime it begins to wear down when it shouldn't. This would explain original sin and why we have to die but i am big enough to say i don't remember where i read this but i will look it up.

You said that something is not free if you fear consequences. But isn't any "choice" the precursor of consequences, either good or bad? You can't make a decision without consequences coming out of it.
The concept of evil is an interesting topic, because i don't believe in free will the same way you do. Even if we use your definition of God being the author of evil, free will in my eyes is not being free from any choice but is the ability to look at two courses of action, weighing the options of both in your own mind and making a choice which one to choose. Even if one of those choices is hell and damnation, that is not the same as your gun scenario. In that scenario, you have no way out, no route of redemption. In christianity you do.

Who would you say created evil? If it is human beings, then doesn't that mean that there is something in us that is evil? and if so, if you had the option of killing that which is evil inside of you, wouldn't you want to take that option?

Now personally, i am probably going to make some christians mad but the bible says that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was in the garden of eden before adam and eve ate of it. So that means that God had to have the knowledge that it was there. In my eyes, i think he knew what he was doing when he put it there,that we would eat of it.

If i did not see a reason for that in the bible, i would have a problem with that. But I see in other parts of the bible that God desired a race of beings that would be able to look evil in the face and freely "choose" him. If you accept the fact that He is the creator, we the created and that he has the right to present us with this knowing that we might fail, then i have no problem with this. But if you see yourself as not belonging to Him, I would have a problem with that too. But i am His so i don't.

You should also look deeper into the biblical explanations for some of the scientific "inerrancy" in the bible. I have no problem admitting when i am not educated in an area but I am in bible college and have a professor who is a scholar in that arena. I would be glad to point you towards him. I think he has a site that i will get the name of so that you can visit.

Harry, what kind of christian home did you grow up in, if you don't mind me asking. was it very legalistic? It doesn't sound like you have heard a lot about the concept of Grace. You sound very jewish. As christians, we have to take the bible in its entirety, not just the OT and not just the NT, but as a unit.

Harry Nads said...

"Harry, what kind of christian home did you grow up in, if you don't mind me asking. was it very legalistic? It doesn't sound like you have heard a lot about the concept of Grace. You sound very jewish. As christians, we have to take the bible in its entirety, not just the OT and not just the NT, but as a unit."

Catholic. And I am glad to hear that you are now no longer discounting the O.T.

I feel that I am of a higher morality than the God of the Bible. And that is what leads me to believe that the God of the Bible is not the ultimate being.

And even when the evil God wishes to wipe out a race or town, He calls on His followers to do it. Yet that flies in the face of the commandment of "Thou shall not kill (or murder)". If He is all-powerful, why doesn't He do it Himself?

Harry Nads said...

Things to make you go "Hmmm...": *

What did God do during that eternity before he created everything? If God was all that existed back then, what disturbed the eternal equilibrium and compelled him to create? Was he bored? Was he lonely? God is supposed to be perfect. If something is perfect, it is complete--it needs nothing else. We humans engage in activities because we are pursuing that elusive perfection, because there is disequilibrium caused by a difference between what we are and what we want to be. If God is perfect, there can be no disequilibrium. There is nothing he needs, nothing he desires, and nothing he must or will do. A God who is perfect does nothing except exist. A perfect creator God is impossible.

But, for the sake of argument, let's continue. Let us suppose that this perfect God did create the universe. Humans were the crown of his creation, since they were created in God's image and have the ability to make decisions. However, these humans spoiled the original perfection by choosing to disobey God.

What!? If something is perfect, nothing imperfect can come from it. Someone once said that bad fruit cannot come from a good tree, and yet this "perfect" God created a "perfect" universe which was rendered imperfect by the "perfect" humans. The ultimate source of imperfection is God. What is perfect cannot become imperfect, so humans must have been created imperfect. What is perfect cannot create anything imperfect, so God must be imperfect to have created these imperfect humans. A perfect God who creates imperfect humans is impossible.

The Christians' objection to this argument involves freewill. They say that a being must have freewill to be happy. The omnibenevolent God did not wish to create robots, so he gave humans freewill to enable them to experience love and happiness. But the humans used this freewill to choose evil, and introduced imperfection into God's originally perfect universe. God had no control over this decision, so the blame for our imperfect universe is on the humans, not God.

Here is why the argument is weak. First, if God is omnipotent, then the assumption that freewill is necessary for happiness is false. If God could make it a rule that only beings with freewill may experience happiness, then he could just as easily have made it a rule that only robots may experience happiness. The latter option is clearly superior, since perfect robots will never make decisions which could render them or their creator unhappy, whereas beings with freewill could. A perfect and omnipotent God who creates beings capable of ruining their own happiness is impossible.

Second, even if we were to allow the necessity of freewill for happiness, God could have created humans with freewill who did not have the ability to choose evil, but to choose between several good options.

Third, God supposedly has freewill, and yet he does not make imperfect decisions. If humans are miniature images of God, our decisions should likewise be perfect. Also, the occupants of heaven, who presumably must have freewill to be happy, will never use that freewill to make imperfect decisions. Why would the originally perfect humans do differently?

The point remains: the presence of imperfections in the universe disproves the supposed perfection of its creator.

God is omniscient. When he created the universe, he saw the sufferings which humans would endure as a result of the sin of those original humans. He heard the screams of the damned. Surely he would have known that it would have been better for those humans to never have been born (in fact, the Bible says this very thing), and surely this all-compassionate deity would have foregone the creation of a universe destined to imperfection in which many of the humans were doomed to eternal suffering. A perfectly compassionate being who creates beings which he knows are doomed to suffer is impossible.

God is perfectly just, and yet he sentences the imperfect humans he created to infinite suffering in hell for finite sins. Clearly, a limited offense does not warrant unlimited punishment. God's sentencing of the imperfect humans to an eternity in hell for a mere mortal lifetime of sin is infinitely more unjust than this punishment. The absurd injustice of this infinite punishment is even greater when we consider that the ultimate source of human imperfection is the God who created them. A perfectly just God who sentences his imperfect creation to infinite punishment for finite sins is impossible.

Consider all of the people who live in the remote regions of the world who have never even heard the "gospel" of Jesus Christ. Consider the people who have naturally adhered to the religion of their parents and nation as they had been taught to do since birth. If we are to believe the Christians, all of these people will perish in the eternal fire for not believing in Jesus. It does not matter how just, kind, and generous they have been with their fellow humans during their lifetime: if they do not accept the gospel of Jesus, they are condemned. No just God would ever judge a man by his beliefs rather than his actions.

The Bible is supposedly God's perfect Word. It contains instructions to humankind for avoiding the eternal fires of hell. How wonderful and kind of this God to provide us with this means of overcoming the problems for which he is ultimately responsible! The all-powerful God could have, by a mere act of will, eliminated all of the problems we humans must endure, but instead, in his infinite wisdom, he has opted to offer this indecipherable amalgam of books which is the Bible as a means for avoiding the hell which he has prepared for us. The perfect God has decided to reveal his wishes in this imperfect work, written in the imperfect language of imperfect man, translated, copied, interpreted, voted on, and related by imperfect man.

No two men will ever agree what this perfect word of God is supposed to mean, since much of it is either self- contradictory, or obscured by enigmatic symbols. And yet the perfect God expects us imperfect humans to understand this paradoxical riddle using the imperfect minds with which he has equipped us. Surely the all-wise and all-powerful God would have known that it would have been better to reveal his perfect will directly to each of us, rather than to allow it to be debased and perverted by the imperfect language and botched interpretations of man.

One need look to no source other than the Bible to discover its imperfections, for it contradicts itself and thus exposes its own imperfection. It contradicts itself on matters of justice, for the same just God who assures his people that sons shall not be punished for the sins of their fathers turns around and destroys an entire household for the sin of one man (he had stolen some of Yahweh's war loot). It was this same Yahweh who afflicted thousands of his innocent people with plague and death to punish their evil king David for taking a census (?!). It was this same Yahweh who allowed the humans to slaughter his son because the perfect Yahweh had botched his own creation. Consider how many have been stoned, burned, slaughtered, raped, and enslaved because of Yahweh's skewed sense of justice. The blood of innocent babies is on the perfect, just, compassionate hands of Yahweh.

The Bible contradicts itself on matters of history. A person who reads and compares the contents of the Bible will be confused about exactly who Esau's wives were, whether Timnah was a concubine or a son, and whether Jesus' earthly lineage is through Solomon or his brother Nathan. These are but a few of hundreds of documented historical contradictions. If the Bible cannot confirm itself in mundane earthly matters, how are we to trust it on moral and spiritual matters?

The Bible misinterprets its own prophecies. Read Isaiah 7 and compare it to Matthew 1 to find but one of many misinterpreted prophecies of which Christians are either passively or willfully ignorant. The fulfillment of prophecy in the Bible is cited as proof of its divine inspiration, and yet here is but one major example of a prophecy whose intended meaning has been and continues to be twisted to support subsequent absurd and false doctrines. There are no ends to which the credulous will not go to support their feeble beliefs in the face of compelling evidence against them.

The Bible is imperfect. It only takes one imperfection to destroy the supposed perfection of this alleged Word of God. Many have been found. A perfect God who reveals his perfect will in an imperfect book is impossible.

A God who knows the future is powerless to change it. An omniscient God who is all-powerful and freewilled is impossible.

A God who knows everything cannot have emotions. The Bible says that God experiences all of the emotions of humans, including anger, sadness, and happiness. We humans experience emotions as a result of new knowledge. A man who had formerly been ignorant of his wife's infidelity will experience the emotions of anger and sadness only after he has learned what had previously been hidden. In contrast, the omniscient God is ignorant of nothing. Nothing is hidden from him, nothing new may be revealed to him, so there is no gained knowledge to which he may emotively react.

We humans experience anger and frustration when something is wrong which we cannot fix. The perfect, omnipotent God, however, can fix anything. Humans experience longing for things we lack. The perfect God lacks nothing. An omniscient, omnipotent, and perfect God who experiences emotion is impossible.

* These are not my writings, but I believe they have merit.

Tommy said...

The god of the Bible is like a deranged kid who wants to play with army men and conduct big battles filled with slaughter. Only, instead of playing with plastic army men, it decided to make real people with which to play its game.

Harry Nads said...

At least I didn't make my army men worship me. Therefore, another reason I am better than the God of the Bible. :)

Harry Nads said...

"The concept of evil is an interesting topic, because i don't believe in free will the same way you do. Even if we use your definition of God being the author of evil, free will in my eyes is not being free from any choice but is the ability to look at two courses of action, weighing the options of both in your own mind and making a choice which one to choose. Even if one of those choices is hell and damnation, that is not the same as your gun scenario. In that scenario, you have no way out, no route of redemption. In christianity you do.

Yes there is a way out in the gun scenario. Give the person your money/wallet and you do not get shot.

Harry Nads said...

"Who would you say created evil? If it is human beings, then doesn't that mean that there is something in us that is evil? and if so, if you had the option of killing that which is evil inside of you, wouldn't you want to take that option?"

According to the Bible, God created evil, because He is omnipotent, omniscient, and He created everything. If you choose to believe humans created evil, then I still say it originated with the God of the Bible because He created man. But if you read the Bible you would know that evil came before man. Satan was an angel who became evil. Did God not create Satan (and all of the angels)? If He was omniscient like the Bible claims, he would know that the angel would become evil and become Satan. Yet he created him anyway? And He would know how many million (billions) of His children He would be condemning to eternal damnation before they are ever born.

Harry Nads said...

"If you want, I am in biblical hermeneutics and can give you the context and reality behind each of those scriptures but it will take me a day or so to get it on paper. Let me know"

Please do. I am sure you can give the context, but the reality will be debatable I'm sure. :)

Harry Nads said...

"Harry,
Once again, i do have to defend prayer. all through the bible you see that it, as well as the role of the holy spirit, gives access to God. But this is not something you have to accept. A non believer wouldn't get it.:)"


Ahh, great lead in to my next post!

Fiery said...

Harry! Where did you get that marvelous "things that make you go hmmmm"??? I spent the whole comment thinking you had written. It is remarkable. Do you happen to have a foot note? WOW!!!!!!!!

Fiery said...

OH NO!!!! It's been 3 days. Garret hasn't come back!!! I wonder if he is having a crisis of faith?

Garret!!! Did you pray about this stuff? Did god reveal his wisdom to you to share with Harry? I am eagerly awaiting as well.

I would normally consider myself firmly on the atheist side of the fence, but if you answered Harry's "hmmmmm" points, I think I would be catapulted to the other side.


*wait* *wait*

Harry Nads said...

"Harry! Where did you get that marvelous "things that make you go hmmmm"??? I spent the whole comment thinking you had written. It is remarkable. Do you happen to have a foot note? WOW!!!!!!!!"

It was taken from the EvilBible.com website under the "God is Impossible" section on the left hand navigation area.

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

Hello all,
Sorry, i did not have a crisis of faith, and yes i am praying about all that i say on this site. It is simply that i was out of town for a couple days.

I will be sure to try to answer the hmmmm.... questions very, very soon.
The wait will be over then
Blessings

Fiery said...

EvilBible.com. Now that is a tremendous site. That site helped me get over my guilt of disbelief. I think the biggest reason it made such a profound impact on me, was the novelty of the information. All in one place, people pointing out that my own sense of morality is greater than that exhibited by the god of the old testament. I was shocked, SHOCKED, to see things pointed out that were blatantly skipped, ignored, or worse- rationalized! in the name of god.

For a long time I actually felt guilty (as a man who grew up catholic, for me luthera you should know allllllllll about guilt) for no longer even trying to believe in god.

Strangely enough, I am eagerly awaiting Garret's reply to Hmmmmmmm.

Harry Nads said...

"Strangely enough, I am eagerly awaiting Garret's reply to Hmmmmmmm."

I am, too!

Protium said...

What a great half hour I just had catching up with this.

This has to be the best oppurtunity for our theist friends to sway our "fence sitting" Harry, who is obviously a very rational smart person, with logical arguments...

I think if Harry converts to theism I just might as well... Ooh is that pig's trotters tapping on the window?

Sorry to talk of you in the third person Harry...

Great blog mate...

Harry Nads said...

Thanks, Protium. And welcome! :)

Fiery said...

OH NO! Garrett is gone again!! It's been FOUR WHOLE DAYS!!! RATS!!!!

Come back Garrett! We want to hear the response to Hmmmmmm!!!!

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

Hi Harry,
Sorry it has been so long but i am back. I am finishing up my answers to your hmmmm questions but thers been others who are a little more open than you that needed help.
The answers will be up in the next day or so.

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

I did leave a comment on your prayer post though

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

THE WAIT IS OVER….

Harry,
Here’s my answer. I am glad you didn’t write this because you are much smarter than this. A large part of it, for lack of a better phrase, sucks.

What did God do during that eternity before he created everything? If God was all that existed back then, what disturbed the eternal equilibrium and compelled him to create? Was he bored? Was he lonely? God is supposed to be perfect. If something is perfect, it is complete--it needs nothing else. We humans engage in activities because we are pursuing that elusive perfection, because there is disequilibrium caused by a difference between what we are and what we want to be. If God is perfect, there can be no disequilibrium. There is nothing he needs, nothing he desires, and nothing he must or will do. A God who is perfect does nothing except exist. A perfect creator God is impossible.

The bible never says God needs us and I would beg to disagree that just because you are perfect/complete that means that you don’t desire anything. I was a complete person without my wife but that doesn’t mean I didn’t desire her.
I also don’t have a problem with God having feelings. It just shows that we are more like Him than we think, that it is okay to be emotional.

But, for the sake of argument, let's continue. Let us suppose that this perfect God did create the universe. Humans were the crown of his creation, since they were created in God's image and have the ability to make decisions. However, these humans spoiled the original perfection by choosing to disobey God.

What!? If something is perfect, nothing imperfect can come from it. Someone once said that bad fruit cannot come from a good tree, and yet this "perfect" God created a "perfect" universe which was rendered imperfect by the "perfect" humans. The ultimate source of imperfection is God. What is perfect cannot become imperfect, so humans must have been created imperfect. What is perfect cannot create anything imperfect, so God must be imperfect to have created these imperfect humans. A perfect God who creates imperfect humans is impossible.

But what is possible is a Perfect God creating humans who were created in a state to remain perfect or to become imperfect. At the point of creation, this does not take away from the fact that they were created in His likeness.

Genesis talks about God creating man in His image, meaning with personality and being triune, body, soul and spirit. But then He also talks about a point where, if they ate of the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil, they would become more like Him. Knowing good and evil. This shows that they were innocent at the point of creation but while they were perfect and “good” in His sight, they were going to be faced with the choice to either stay that way or not. Simply because the highest form of love comes from wanting to love someone, not from not having the choice not to.

The Christians' objection to this argument involves freewill. They say that a being must have freewill to be happy. The omnibenevolent God did not wish to create robots, so he gave humans freewill to enable them to experience love and happiness. But the humans used this freewill to choose evil, and introduced imperfection into God's originally perfect universe. God had no control over this decision, so the blame for our imperfect universe is on the humans, not God.

Here is why the argument is weak. First, if God is omnipotent, then the assumption that freewill is necessary for happiness is false. If God could make it a rule that only beings with freewill may experience happiness, then he could just as easily have made it a rule that only robots may experience happiness. The latter option is clearly superior, since perfect robots will never make decisions which could render them or their creator unhappy, whereas beings with freewill could. A perfect and omnipotent God who creates beings capable of ruining their own happiness is impossible.

I don’t know where this rule came from but I have never heard it before and to be quite honest, its false. Adam and Eve were happy before they fell. And God creating beings capable of ruining their own happiness, choosing Him in the face of evil is not impossible. In fact, it is not far from a human father wanting his son to love him because he wants to love him, not because he has to.

Second, even if we were to allow the necessity of freewill for happiness, God could have created humans with freewill who did not have the ability to choose evil, but to choose between several good options.

What kinda choice is that?! That’s not a real, substance filled choice. I would rather my kids look at a table of vegetables and cookies and for supper choose the vegetables than to look at a table full of 3 varieties of cookies and choose cookies. OOOOOH, what a choice

Third, God supposedly has freewill, and yet he does not make imperfect decisions. If humans are miniature images of God, our decisions should likewise be perfect. Also, the occupants of heaven, who presumably must have freewill to be happy, will never use that freewill to make imperfect decisions. Why would the originally perfect humans do differently?

The point remains: the presence of imperfections in the universe disproves the supposed perfection of its creator.
No it does not. Its presence proves that real love comes in the face of adversity, not endless perfection.

God is omniscient. When he created the universe, he saw the sufferings which humans would endure as a result of the sin of those original humans. He heard the screams of the damned. Surely he would have known that it would have been better for those humans to never have been born (in fact, the Bible says this very thing), and surely this all-compassionate deity would have foregone the creation of a universe destined to imperfection in which many of the humans were doomed to eternal suffering. A perfectly compassionate being who creates beings which he knows are doomed to suffer is impossible.

They are doomed to suffer not because He wants them to suffer but because adversity creates appreciation and gratitude. A doctor doesn’t want you to suffer but he knows that in order to allow your leg to heal correctly, he may have to break a few bones and cause a little more pain before the process can really begin

God is perfectly just, and yet he sentences the imperfect humans he created to infinite suffering in hell for finite sins. Clearly, a limited offense does not warrant unlimited punishment. God's sentencing of the imperfect humans to an eternity in hell for a mere mortal lifetime of sin is infinitely more unjust than this punishment. The absurd injustice of this infinite punishment is even greater when we consider that the ultimate source of human imperfection is the God who created them. A perfectly just God who sentences his imperfect creation to infinite punishment for finite sins is impossible.

Whoever wrote this needs to watch out because they are placing a definition of what they think that is enough punishment for an offense in front of THE CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE. Who are they to define justice when they are the ones committing the crime? They are not the victim so they can’t define the punishment.

Consider all of the people who live in the remote regions of the world who have never even heard the "gospel" of Jesus Christ. Consider the people who have naturally adhered to the religion of their parents and nation as they had been taught to do since birth. If we are to believe the Christians, all of these people will perish in the eternal fire for not believing in Jesus. It does not matter how just, kind, and generous they have been with their fellow humans during their lifetime: if they do not accept the gospel of Jesus, they are condemned. No just God would ever judge a man by his beliefs rather than his actions.

The bible clearly teaches a two part answer to this question. The first part is that God works on both the levels of “nation” and of “individual”. Revelations talks about the fact that God will not begin the end time events until every nation has had an opportunity to hear the gospel. So they won’t have an excuse. The second part is that in regards to individuals, there are also two parts. 1 is that this is the reason for evangelism and the great commission. It is the job of the Christian to present, not force, the gospel to everyone they meet. 2nd, for those who don’t hear, the bible talks about the conscience bearing witness of God and this being the standard by which he will judge those who came before the time of Jesus,(the OT), those who die without hearing the gospel and those left on the earth after the rapture of the Church.

The Bible is supposedly God's perfect Word. It contains instructions to humankind for avoiding the eternal fires of hell. How wonderful and kind of this God to provide us with this means of overcoming the problems for which he is ultimately responsible! The all-powerful God could have, by a mere act of will, eliminated all of the problems we humans must endure, but instead, in his infinite wisdom, he has opted to offer this indecipherable amalgam of books which is the Bible as a means for avoiding the hell which he has prepared for us. The perfect God has decided to reveal his wishes in this imperfect work, written in the imperfect language of imperfect man, translated, copied, interpreted, voted on, and related by imperfect man.

Once again, this is going on the presumption that the fallen state of this world is God’s fault, which I think I made clear I don’t agree with.

But I will say that God chose to make the bible a book that would be inspired by God and written/influenced by men for the reason that our intellect and experience need both deity and humanity in order to work the way He created it to.

No two men will ever agree what this perfect word of God is supposed to mean, since much of it is either self- contradictory, or obscured by enigmatic symbols. And yet the perfect God expects us imperfect humans to understand this paradoxical riddle using the imperfect minds with which he has equipped us. Surely the all-wise and all-powerful God would have known that it would have been better to reveal his perfect will directly to each of us, rather than to allow it to be debased and perverted by the imperfect language and botched interpretations of man.

There is a world wide community of both scholarship (secular and theological) that agree upon what the bible says. There are a vast amount of Christians in community that agree also (with exceptions). There are even leaders and members of OTHER RELIGIONS who can look at the bible and agree on interpretation, regardless of whether they accept it as true or not.

It is so aggravating that there is a world of scholarship out there that answers all of these supposed contradictions in the bible but because people don’t want to really be open minded, they only search for what supports their bias. Now I am not a scholar and don’t have all of the answer but there are those who are scholarly. If you really want to know, REALLY WANT TO KNOW, search harder than just a blog where people with doctorates in theology, archaelogy and the like rarely visit.

One need look to no source other than the Bible to discover its imperfections, for it contradicts itself and thus exposes its own imperfection. It contradicts itself on matters of justice, for the same just God who assures his people that sons shall not be punished for the sins of their fathers turns around and destroys an entire household for the sin of one man (he had stolen some of Yahweh's war loot). It was this same Yahweh who afflicted thousands of his innocent people with plague and death to punish their evil king David for taking a census (?!). It was this same Yahweh who allowed the humans to slaughter his son because the perfect Yahweh had botched his own creation. Consider how many have been stoned, burned, slaughtered, raped, and enslaved because of Yahweh's skewed sense of justice. The blood of innocent babies is on the perfect, just, compassionate hands of Yahweh.

The Bible contradicts itself on matters of history. A person who reads and compares the contents of the Bible will be confused about exactly who Esau's wives were, whether Timnah was a concubine or a son, and whether Jesus' earthly lineage is through Solomon or his brother Nathan. These are but a few of hundreds of documented historical contradictions. If the Bible cannot confirm itself in mundane earthly matters, how are we to trust it on moral and spiritual matters?

The Bible misinterprets its own prophecies. Read Isaiah 7 and compare it to Matthew 1 to find but one of many misinterpreted prophecies of which Christians are either passively or willfully ignorant. The fulfillment of prophecy in the Bible is cited as proof of its divine inspiration, and yet here is but one major example of a prophecy whose intended meaning has been and continues to be twisted to support subsequent absurd and false doctrines. There are no ends to which the credulous will not go to support their feeble beliefs in the face of compelling evidence against them.

The Bible is imperfect. It only takes one imperfection to destroy the supposed perfection of this alleged Word of God. Many have been found. A perfect God who reveals his perfect will in an imperfect book is impossible.

Many of these” imperfections” have also been misconstrued, misinterpreted and misdirected. And they have also been answered by men who have the answers. Scholarship has come a long way. Secular society needs to accept the fact that there is more evidence for this than they think.

A God who knows the future is powerless to change it. An omniscient God who is all-powerful and freewilled is impossible.
This point is stupid. Freewill by definition states that you are “free” to do anything. Even place yourself under limitation if you see fit. And just because you set something in motion that allows people to make choices and you can see what happens to them in the future doesn’t mean its your fault. It means they had a choice.

A God who knows everything cannot have emotions. The Bible says that God experiences all of the emotions of humans, including anger, sadness, and happiness. We humans experience emotions as a result of new knowledge. A man who had formerly been ignorant of his wife's infidelity will experience the emotions of anger and sadness only after he has learned what had previously been hidden. In contrast, the omniscient God is ignorant of nothing. Nothing is hidden from him, nothing new may be revealed to him, so there is no gained knowledge to which he may emotively react.

Where is this person coming up with their rules? Just pulling it out of thin air? Having knowledge does not limit how you feel about it. In contrast, the more you know about something, the more of an emotional attachment you have to it.

We humans experience anger and frustration when something is wrong which we cannot fix. The perfect, omnipotent God, however, can fix anything. Humans experience longing for things we lack. The perfect God lacks nothing. An omniscient, omnipotent, and perfect God who experiences emotion is impossible.

So the only time we are emotional is when we are in need? What about the times when things go right. We don’t get emotional then? This person needs to stop making broad statements because as I have said before, they are all stupid.

What you think?

Garrett Drew Ellis said...

Hey all,

Sorry about the last post, i don't know how to make what i am responding to italic, or my response bold. can someone help the ignorant christian? :)
thanks

Harry Nads said...

"can someone help the ignorant christian? :)"

At least you can admit it! :)

Harry Nads said...

Seriously, though... if you want to italicize something, you just put a "less than" sign followed by an "i" an then a "greater than sign". It looks like this: < i > (without the spaces before and after the i.)

After you are done with the part you want to italicize, you then do the same thing, but with a "/" in front of the "i". Like this: < /i > (again without the spaces.)

If you want bold , then use a "b" instead of an "i".

I am going to repost your comment as a post with the proper italics, etc. because I know there will be plenty of comments.