Just a Christian with some honest questions
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
If your claim to be curious is sincere, I recommend that before you try to rationalize or explain the content of the Bible, research the construction (creation) of the Bible. I don't suggest you take on the complexities of the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Ecumenical Councils just yet. Instead, just find credible references and read the information available with an open mind. Since you are a Christian, begin with the New Testament.
Some important elements to include in your search are:
-King James: his "contributions" to The Bible
-The Gospels; (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) Were they eye witnesses to what they report? Were the gospels actually written by them?
-The "evolution" of The Bible; changes, rewrites, interpolations, apocrypha, and the many "versions" (NSRV, NIV, Douay, RSV, King James, ASV, etc.
-Who wrote most of the New Testament? (the Epistles)
These are all rudimentary topics but compelling enough to motivate and warrant further investigation. I predict that you will be quite surprised to discover the answers to these questions and I hope it leads you to question and evaluate the book as a whole.
I wonder how much you have read on the King James Bible by people who actually know the Bible and how to study it. You should research Hermeneutics, and an excellent book is "In Awe Of Thy Word", it's not a book that you have to read from cover to cover, but each chapter is on a different subject. So you can look at the context and decide what you want to learn about first.
The post above is to MsStaciF.
"People who actually know The Bible"
Lets exclude everyone with an agenda....like the author of "In Awe of They Word" by Gail Anne Riplinger, a Christian who is known as a staunch advocate of the "King James Only" movement. Not to mention that her book was annihilated for errors, lies, omissions, plagiarism, misrepresentation, etc. Her education consists of a B.A. in interior design, an M.A. in home economics, and an M.F.A. in art.
On the other hand, we have Dr. Bart D. Ehrman, the James A. Gray (distinguished) professor of Religious Studies at Chapel Hill, who also writes about The Bible. His educational background includes a Ph.D., (magna cum laude), and a a Master of Divinity from Princeton Theological Seminary.
Who do you think is more credible?
The one's that God gives wisdom to. A PhD means nothing to God, especially if it is someone trying to prove His word to be wrong. No one ever has, and no one ever will, except in the minds of those who don't want to believe it. I have heard people claim they have studied the Bible and grew up in church claim this and that, yet I've heard 9 year olds that have been saved speek of things of what God showed them that was much more impressive than anything out of the mouths of those bragging about their knowledge. God gives wisdom, but people don't have to accept it, yet their denying won't stop nor change truth.
So you are the absolute authority on who can interpret The Bible and who can't? How convenient.
While we are self-proclaiming, I pronounce myself to be the absolute authority on ice cream and chocolate is the best. I have seen people who prefer vanilla and strawberry but those people are foolish. They can deny chocolate is the best ice cream flavor but their denying won't change the fact that chocolate ice cream is the best.
As a chocolate ice cream eater myself, I also know I'll be rewarded after I die for eschewing strawberry and vanilla. The eaters of the latter two flavors, of course, will be punished by having to spend eternity in a freezing ice cream maker, swirling and freezing forever. PBU Chocolate Ice Cream's name!
That to me sounds much worse than hell.
Wet in my post did I claim to be the authority. I believe I give that position to God.
What you don't understand, as I didn't before I got saved, is that to truly understand the Bible, you must be born again. You must be saved. Though you may not believe that, that is the way God designed it. You see the Bible KJB is the living word. When you read the Bible, it reads you. That's the reason most people don't like it.
God is able to do it His way. He is far smarter than our ability to comprehend.
Submit to Jesus and the blinders of the Devil will come off.
(When in my post) B:)
You said The Bible can ONLY be interpreted by people who know how to read it. You said the King James Bible is the ONLY credible bible. You said God doesn't care about a PhD.
Since you are speaking FOR God and YOU profess to know who has the correct understanding of The Bible, you suggest that you are the authority.
Your words, not mine.
Right, God's design, God's way, God's word, God's plan, God's children, God's giving, God's ability.
Any more questions?
You haven't answered a single one yet, why would I continue to ask? Like the flawed bible that you protect, you have no real substance so you compensate by demanding blind allegiance.
AND.....just so we are clear (you should write this down)....
YOU are NOT an authority on The Bible.
I have answered, you just don't like my answers. I didn't have to declare God's word. He already did a very long time ago, in His word. Whether you believe it or not.
I study God's word, rightly dividing it, keeping it in it's context, of which most people don't. They like to take this verse and that one to claim it says something that has nothing to do with what they say within context.
Hey Chuck Rogers
I admire the way you have faith in God…But don’t submit to Jesus, peace be upon him. Say Submit to GOD, THE CREATOR OF UNIVERSE, and THE CREATOR OF ENTIRE CREATION. Because we cannot submit 2 creation.
Jesus, peace be upon him was the creation of God. He is the messenger of God.
The messenger of God who came to deliver us a message.The same message of MOSES, NOAH, LOT, SOLOMON, DAVID, JACOB, JOSEPH , ISAAC AND ABRAHAM, PEACE BE UPON THEM
Sorry you have it wrong. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost are one God. The Trinity. God is one God and we worship Him not the creation. You have true Christians confused with all that call themselves Christians.
Dont you see the trinity is laughable, that an omnipotent omniscient god could think of no way to forgive us for a sin he created other than to rape a virgin be born and die. Come on where is the sacrifice of a god going back to being god he didnt actually die.
Ofcourse none of that matters as you have no proof that any of the trinity exists.
His truth is His word.
But I have said before, believing in God is by faith.
But believing in evolution takes much, much more faith.
Apparently you didn't read the Bible very well. The angle told Mary she was chosen and she agreed and was blessed by the gift.
God is able to put His seed in her womb without touching her flesh.
God the Father, God the son.... How it is possible..???
Say, "He is God , [who is] One,
God , the Eternal Refuge.
He neither begets nor is born,
Nor is there to Him any equivalent." [Quran 112: 1-4]
Look I'm the true follower of Jesus, peace be upon him.. Infact all the Muslims Respect and follow the teachings of Jesus, peace be upon hi
“And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be cloven footed, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you”.
“Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcass shall ye not touch, they are unclean to you. [Leviticus 11:7-8]
Pork is also prohibited in the Bible in the book of Deuteronomy
“And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you. Ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcass. [Deuteronomy 14:8]
A similar prohibition is repeated in the Bible in the book of Isaiah chapter 65 verse 2-5.
But almost Christians enjoy pork even though they follow Jesus, peace be upon him
MsStaciF - "I have seen people who prefer vanilla and strawberry but those people are foolish. They can deny chocolate is the best ice cream flavor but their denying won't change the fact that chocolate ice cream is the best. "
If god wanted us to eat only chocolate, why did he create vanilla and strawberry in his own image?!? Clearly god wanted us to eat Neapolitan ice cream. You only support this “chocolate only” heretical interpretation because you want to sin. Why do you secretly hate vanilla so much?
Hey, chuckster, is your gawd omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent?
If your gawd is omnipotent, could it make itself nonexistent?
Doesn't make sense.
How does the question not makes sense?
actually he successfully did that lol, He is nonexistent :P
A more old version of it:
If god can do everything,
Can god create a stone that he cannot lift?
If he is omniscient and knows everything,
Can god know the feeling of not being able to know something?
and don't be stupid and say it makes no sens because it is a valid argument that shows haw ridiculous claims of absolutes are.
Can an omnipotent being create a stone that is so heavy the being cannot lift it?
If he cannot create it, then isn't that a flaw in his omnipotence?
If he can create it, but cannot lift it, then isn't that a flaw in his omnipotence?
The answer is very simple: "Yes he can create it; and no it's not a flaw that he cannot lift it.". The problem is choice again. An omnipotent being surely has the potential to lift any stone, but also the potential to wave his own potential by choice! So the reason he cannot lift the stone then is not because the being was never capable of lifting it, but because he chose to forfeit his ability to lift it while creating the stone.
Of course philosophers could make a variation to the question to bypass my counter-argument. A situation where the reason for not being able to lift it is better speculated. More precisely, so the characteristics of the stone is not linked directly to the creator, like: Can one omnipotent being create something that is to heavy for another omnipotent being to lift?
Here the question is unreasonable, the characteristics of the stone are contradicting.
He is asking if omnipotence can make the impossible possible. He might just as well have asked, can an omnipotent being create water that isn't wet, or squared circles. At best, the only thing this question could illustrate is that the existence of two different omnipotent beings is problematic since the omnipotence of one would include limiting the other's omnipotence and vice versa.
I Picked up above answer from an Atheist who reverted 2 Islam because He better knows how Atheism is brainwashed. Go through this link http://seemyparadigm.webs.com/
I never said God can do everything. In fact there are a couple of things He can't do.
He can't sin for He is Holy.
And He can't learn because He knows everything including knowing that you don't, nor does another but Him alone.
Surely God upholds the entire universe - every possible quantity of energy in existence. How on earth is it plausible for a silly question to be utilised? Is this the arsenal of atheists these days?
God's omniscience means he knows of 'nothing' - something your mind couldn't begin to comprehend. Try thinking about what nothing is - you can't even begin. Hence you are just a creature existing in the universe, and God exists beyond your comprehension - not your doing btw, but His omnipotent divine will.
Don't waste your existence peeps.
There is nothing to prove here. There is no proof that God exists. All we have is books writen by men, that make outlandish claims. There is no arguing with anyone who actually believes such crap as virgin births, talking animals, demons, jinns, prophets who ride flying donkeys, or people who hear spirits. People who believe this shit have clearly left logic and reason to die a slow death in the shadow of a fantasy universe.
The only thing anyone should ask themselves to maintain sanity in the face of the ludicrous beleifs of Islam and Christianity, is "If there is a God who has complete control of the universe to do anything he wants, but what he wants is a personal relationship with me, then why has he not made contact?"
And when I say contact, I mean contact. Not this crappy process of dealing with emotions and life experiences that the religious call "spiritualism", that belief that emotions are some how "God speaking to my heart"... how lame is that shit anyway? You believe in a god who can fuck a virgin, multiply food insantaneously, molecularly change water into alchohol, control the weather, directly communicate with people as a flaming bush, win battles, call angels to his aid, crack the earth, move mountains... and you become content with a 2000 year old book. Or in the case of muslims, a 500 year old book. When all we see around us is men who, who weirdly enough are capable of writing books. And we'really just suppose to accept that?
That's your all powerful gods proof of existence, Christians and Muslims alike. Your god left you a lousy ass, easily admissable book as his proof of existence. Books that are full of cultural and political idealogy, from laws and traditions, all the way to cultural courtesies. Because he's that powerful. That all he was able to produce was a book of his past works. Fuck keeping up with the program of miracles. No, a book for all you good, gullible little Christians and Muslims. Now go brain yourselves with it.