Preacherman

hmm...and mocking deep felt beliefs is preferable to my up front honesty? I detect a hint of hypocrisy... I could have approached this whole exchange of ideas in a more deliberate, nuanced way. Hiding the core of my beliefs and motivation for writing, only to reveal them later to the outrage that I am currently subjected to, or just put it out there now so we can move on.


Also the accusation that I'm just going to badger you with Scripture is a little overstated. yes I did include one reference, not to prove a point in my arguement, but rather to illustrate it. I am attempting to deal with ideas, and arguments, using philosophy and experience. I think that there will be times I use Scripture to defend my position because it makes up a part of my experience.

As for the whole Bible "it has been picked over and changed to suit the purpose of the early Popes"

It shows you have bought into a common perception that is not what the scholarship of today would uphold. You can argue some other things about the validity of the books in the canon, but to argue that what we have has been changed is a challenge that has been given up long ago. Consult Bruce Metzger, generally recognized as the authority on Textual Criticism (a former Prof at Princeton University)

John76

The whole kid thing makes some sense. yeah I wish my kid would clean his room (and mine while he is at it.) But I think part of the issue is we as parents guide our children, we teach them to clean their rooms. We help them see good versus evil. without any God, I don't think we would understand that reality. (This can be a whole different thread if we want to go the whole morality in a completely materialist worldview thing)

So again if my Son is cleaning his room, but I really want him and expect him to be doing his homework I'm not gonna be pleased at all. In the same way I think God communicated his plan to us. and we generally try to do what we want to do or think is best. We'd rather do our own thing than listen to what anyone has to tell us, be they our parents or creator.

debdodd. THanks for dealing with the arguements, and not just taking cheap shots at my beleifs. Also with regard to shouting I hope you see two parts to my previous post.

1) the upfront honesty that you felt was shouting. I honestly did it to be transparent. To put my intentions and motivation out there from the beginning. Seeing as I came across arrogantly and loudly, I apologize.

2) I was trying to put together a reasoned explanation of the way I see the world, how do I make sense of the fact that "good" people do "bad" things, how are we so like each other and yet some of us get so screwed up we cause a lot of pain to a lot of people and others only cause a little bit of pain to a few people.

I think Christianity provides the best solution to why that is and what can be (or has been) done about it

Finally, I can't force you to believe anything. I could force you maybe to say something or admit something, but I wouldn't because you only really believe what you will believe. Jesus said that if we confess with our mouth and believe in our heart that Jesus is Lord you will be saved. (1 John 1:9) (Again only an illustration of the point) If I try to force you to anything it won't accomplish anything so rather than force, I must reason with you all. So please, continue to reason with me. And I will seek to give you the same respect.

Thanks

john76

I'm beginning to wonder if you are actually a pastor. People that have gone to bible college are generally more adept in apologetics than the questionable responses you have given to the other posters and myself.

Preacherman

Such as?

My response to your post was just as arbitrary as your point... a random "what if" that proves nothing.

feel free to continue to attack me...

debdodd

Jeez you say it exactly the way I feel ..... if there is a God ...... then damn it show yourself! So for years and years I waited and prayed and got no answer so hence I do not believe he exists .... science and logic aside, I have wished to know but to date nada ..... I keep getting a busy signal when ever I called so I quit calling ..... and the world didn't open up and suck me straight to hell for not believing ..... my life got no better nor worse when I stopped looking for god .... until there is something other than the word of another flawed human being I choose not to believe in much .....

__________________
"Ubi dubium ibi libertas."

"We are all lone souls. It pays to know humility, lest the delusion of control, of mastery, overwhelms. And indeed, we seem a species prone to that delusion, again and ever again ....."

john76

I'm not attacking you. I have no problems with your position, but your responses would seem to suggest that you are trying to mislead people about the idea that you have a position of authority in the church that has been achieved through experience and education. I could be wrong, but that seems to be the case from what I have read. I won't respond any more, so I hope you continue to enjoy the forum; John

debdodd

it is a fact that the bible was "picked over" in the 4th century, there was a council of Nicene(sp) that determined what was to be accepted at the direction of the current pope. That only certain gospels were taken as "true" text ... the gospel of Mary is one that I know of that was left out ..... the bible has be translated so many times I honestly cannot hold its wording as an absolute. I know it has some historical significance but history is written by the victors .... had the Muslims won we would all be saying the Quran was the Holiest of Books .... I don't buy it ... mankind is corrupt and how it is written down and how history is remembered is done so by corruption, misrepresentation and the need to manipulate people.

Everyone knows that as a story is told from one person to another there are embellishments, twists and turns of the plots ..... nope, I don't believe it. Until I see a miracle or hear the words from a god I am a skeptic, an agnostic ..... I do not "demand" that god show him/herself to me or prove to me he/she exists but if he/she expects me to believe in their divine power, that they have all that power, then ante up ..... according to scripture they have shown others in the past stone tablets, angels, etc ..... then they should still retain the power to show modern day man ..... otherwise I see that any god is impotent and only wishful thinking on many a person's part.

I respect everyone's right to believe or not believe, I trust they should show me the same respect. If you can only regurgitate the same old scripture then I see no reason why coming from you it should hold any more truth than when I have read it myself, heard it in Sunday school or heard it from my pastor in the past. It is only words ..... I want to see truth not hear it from another sinner.

While I appreciate your attempts you are not telling any of us anything new, nothing profound is coming forth from you .... so once again, respectfully, why does the word of a confessed flawed man hold any credibility over another?

I think you do us a disservice, especially John, when you accuse us of attacks. If to question you is an attack then it is your ego that must be called into question.

Regards, Deb

__________________
"Ubi dubium ibi libertas."

"We are all lone souls. It pays to know humility, lest the delusion of control, of mastery, overwhelms. And indeed, we seem a species prone to that delusion, again and ever again ....."

xxkayxx

Aww, dont leave

__________________
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing

debdodd

John may have the right of it .... preacherman when questioned, presumes it as a personal attack. This leads me to believe that if one questions him or if there is not an easy answer then claim personal "attack" and refuse to deal with it .... John may have the right of this dear Kay and it might be wise for us to follow his lead .... granted not as much fun as we had with cathy but hey, you take what is presented ....

__________________
"Ubi dubium ibi libertas."

"We are all lone souls. It pays to know humility, lest the delusion of control, of mastery, overwhelms. And indeed, we seem a species prone to that delusion, again and ever again ....."

Preacherman

When people imply that I am lying I generally take that as an attack rather than an argument. If you want to deal with my responses rather than dismiss me, then I will be glad to converse. Otherwise this thread will die and nothing will be accomplished... .

...not that the chances for things being accomplished are ever very good on these forums anyway...

Debdodd

Here is an article about to textual criticism http://www.windmillministries.org/frames/CH11A.htm

I know its an evangelical site I usually try to find secular sources that have an anti evangelical bias to back up my position, but I the quote I was looking for I couldn't find on the internet, (probably because if the point that was made was the point of Metzger's article he'd be an evangelical. )

The one argument people tend to make today is why are these the books in the bible, and not really are these accurate representations of what was originally written in these books. Basically, we have a really good idea of what was originally written due to the science of textual criticism.

the question then becomes are these or the words of God and men or men alone, or who wrote the different books, or whether the words are truth. These are other things that still are being debated, but we can be pretty sure that we have something very close to what was originally written.

The argument about what books are included and why is another issue that is currently being debated. I'll just point out that the lost gospels are later in composition and rejected by the Christian Community long before any popes got involved in the process. It just so happened that when Pope Innocent 1 decided to make a formal decree

" when these bishops and councils spoke on the matter, however, they were not defining something new, but instead "were ratifying what had already become the mind of the Church."

That's from wikipedia here is the whole article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Develop...estament_canon

In this article notice this heading
The challenge posed by early Christian heresies

"Between 140 and 220, both internal and external forces caused Proto-orthodox Christianity to begin to systematize both its doctrines and its view of revelation. Much of the systemization came about as a defense against the heresies that challenged emerging Proto-Orthodoxy. The early years of this period witnessed the rise of several strong movements of faith deemed heretical by the church in Rome: Marcionism, Gnosticism and Montanism."



It was in this time that of challenge to orthodox chrisitianity that these rival texts began to be written. They contrast with established texts and only after coming to a point of political influence and unity could the church act as a whole to formally finalize what was already commonly understood.

(I would quibble with the point made that the church of Rome declared these movements heretical, the consilidation of power had yet to be established, under the roman church.)

john76

'kay - your erudite, profound, recondite response has won me back! (I hope you realize I was just joking before)

However, when you said this --> "not that the chances for things being accomplished are ever very good on these forums anyway" -- c'mon now - negative Nellies make baby Jesus cry


I do have a bible question for you, though, pastor. An Evangelical friend of mine tells me that God not only knows me in my past and present existence, but also in my future thoughts and deeds that have not yet happened. Is that right? I mean, in the story of Job, the whole point of the Devil getting God to test Job seems to imply that God doesn't know what Job will do or how he will react. I mean, after all, when God gets ticked at Job at the end of the story for failing the test of love and faith, does it really make sense that He would have gotten pissed off if He knew the outcome of the whole thing before hand? I was just wondering what the best way would be to approach this question, so when I am talking to my friend again I won't sound completely stupid; John