Post-Christianity? (probably not the right title)

[Neil D]

Quote:

So, you are going to allow the bible as evidence that it talks about God's character.

This is not about adding up the good things and the bad things and seeing which is greater. As soon as you have unethical behavior by a god who claims he is perfect you have a liar and a hypocrite. Its that simple.

No, it is NOT that simple. Life is never that simple. Just because a paster is seen going into a bar, doesn't mean that he's a drunk. There are other explinations that need to be looked at....that is, if you are looking for the truth of the matter....or are you just looking to crucify a pastor? and possibly be a liar, or a gossip...or worse...

You introduced the bible as evidence that God is doing unethical behavior. And yet, when attempting to bring in other evidence of God's character, you dismiss it. If you pick and choose your evidence to support your thesis, what makes your thesis any different than a Southern Baptist who is supporting eternal torment? Unless you are willing to examine the whole crime scene, what makes you think that you are doing a thourough job of examining the crime scene?

I believe that this would make you just a culpable as that Southern Baptist. And as I recall, you were not impressed with any religionist who used appologetics to get to the reality of the situation. How did you word it...False reasoning? Hypocritical? Superficial? Yeah, I understand...but we don't want to make this about you...we want to get to the ...um..to use an Adventist phrase..."the truth" of the matter...

Are you still interested in using the bible as evidence that God is a hypocrite and a liar?

[cardw]

Quote:

No, it is NOT that simple. Life is never that simple.

You seem to conveniently forget what topic we are talking about. Did I say that life is simple? No. I stated that it is very simple to demonstrate that the Bible describes a very imperfect god who claims otherwise.

No mention of life being simple in there...

Quote:

You introduced the bible as evidence that God is doing unethical behavior. And yet, when attempting to bring in other evidence of God's character, you dismiss it.

You seem to forget that I don't believe in God. All I'm pointing out is that the god of the Bible doesn't follow his own rules and when you give reasons for his more violent actions they don't make sense because they contradict themselves ethically on the most basic levels.

This book doesn't tell us about a loving god. Its a running narrative of man made myth and superstition. That's what the evidence says.

Quote:

Unless you are willing to examine the whole crime scene, what makes you think that you are doing a thourough job of examining the crime scene?

I think I can figure out that god is nuts by simply looking at the laws of the OT. And the NT doesn't explain the actions of the OT within any ethical norm that is acceptable by rational people.

You have to demonstrate that stoning a man for gathering wood is worthy of a death penalty. You have not done that. After that I have a whole list of really cruel and stupid laws that we have to get through. I can't reconcile this with a God who claims he loves us and is just. And I haven't seen anything close to that from you.

[Neil D]

Quote:

You seem to conveniently forget what topic we are talking about. Did I say that life is simple? No. I stated that it is very simple to demonstrate that the Bible describes a very imperfect god who claims otherwise.

And you seem to forget that the bible is not just a book, but about men who deal with a Being who they say is worthy of our time to investigate ,even worship, who deal with complex issues of life, and with ethical questions. They have said it's about being on the road to a more abundant life; a life of openness; a life exploring creativity. They have said it's about experiencing joy and gratefulness and praise for the Divine. It's about asking some questions, hard questions and trusting Him to answer them in His time. They say it's about exploring a God that can’t be explained in a sentence or two. They say it's about having a life awed by the mystery of Him and exploring His interaction with us.

Quote:

You seem to forget that I don't believe in God. All I'm pointing out is that the god of the Bible doesn't follow his own rules and when you give reasons for his more violent actions they don't make sense because they contradict themselves ethically on the most basic levels.

That's because you violate basic science rules and will not allow examination of all your evidence that you have presented. You pick and chose evidence and undermine the authenticity of your own evidence when other attempt to offer possible explainations. You dont follow what Sam Harris proposes-that is examining religion using a science principles to avoid fanaticism.

And yet, you still come here to talk about God and religion...

Which makes me wonder-what the heck are you doing here? I know that you were raised SDA...are you searching for roots?

As Bravus has said origionally-

Quote:

Please try to understand that this is not about rejecting Christianity (for me at least - others' experience may be different) - but about hanging onto it with my last breath.

You have rejected the God of the Bible. But how do you know that your rejection of the evidence you have presented is worthy of rejection if it is not examined? Oh, sure, you have rejected it a while back when you were idealistic and younger, but have you really examined it? Are you sure that it is worthy of rejection since you have wiser experience? IOWs, as you have grown, are you sure that they path that you are on, is a good solid real path of life...and not some vague shallow routine path?

[Nightingale]

You seem to forget that I don't believe in God. All I'm pointing out is that the god of the Bible doesn't follow his own rules and when you give reasons for his more violent actions they don't make sense because they contradict themselves ethically on the most basic levels.

It seems obvious to me that despite your protestations that you do not believe in God, you must believe because no one devotes so much time and energy fighting something that they don't even believe exists.

I was in a car accident one time with a self-declared atheist, who worked to spread atheism by pen and voice. He was sleeping next to me in the truck when we turned over and his back was broken. When I walked over to him, he was on the ground, saying, "Do you think God is punishing us because we don't believe in Him?" Despite all his years of fighting God, it was obvious to me that my atheist friend still had a belief in God somewhere in the back of his tormented mind.

When you talk about God's not obeying His own rules, I think it's important to realize that God's laws as written are for mankind, not for God. They are designed for sinful, fallen humanity. By very definition, the God who made the physical and moral laws of the universe, is above all law. He is not a creature or created being, and therefore He is not required to obey laws made for God's creation. When humans rebelled against God, He would have been perfectly just and right if He had destroyed the whole human race. The fact that He didn't, but instead came to this earth to show us how to be saved, is not due to a moral obligation on God's part but is due entirely to His grace and mercy.

[cardw]

Quote:

That's because you violate basic science rules and will not allow examination of all your evidence that you have presented. You pick and chose evidence and undermine the authenticity of your own evidence when other attempt to offer possible explainations. You dont follow what Sam Harris proposes-that is examining religion using a science principles to avoid fanaticism.

You aren't talking about science here, but a court of law. You can't prove God from science because there is nothing to examine. You also stay in generalities and when I get specific you ignore the specifics. I have stated over and over that it only takes one flaw to disprove perfection. After you have done that it becomes evident that the Bible is far from a book written by God.

It takes a lot of mental gymnastics to support your claims. You say its because God is mysteriously complex. And yet there is nothing mysterious about Moses making up laws to establish his authority and view of how things should be.

If God did indeed order Israel to stone a man for gathering wood, then that god doesn't deserve our respect and worship. That is a deal killer.

If Moses made it up, then that negates most of the Bible from being true since its based on the myths of the 1st 5 books.

The Bible has no ethical principles that can't be found in other writings and philosophies. It has a number of ethical conclusions that clearly are inferior in regards to women, slavery, and government.

If there is evidence that this book, as a whole, presents some superior view of the world then I haven't found it. And its not from a lack of looking. I have spent thousands of hours checking this book out and its has become very clear to me that this book is simply the result of competing myths about an invisible god.

Your views appear to only be sustained by generalities. You still have not given one satisfactory reason why god would be justified in stoning a man for gathering wood on the Sabbath. There are worse things to come.

[cardw]

Quote:

It seems obvious to me that despite your protestations that you do not believe in God, you must believe because no one devotes so much time and energy fighting something that they don't even believe exists.

Its because beliefs have effects. Many Christian beliefs are based on shame and fear. These are life destroying. I'm tired of Christianity going around as if it has the best answer to life's problems when it is evident that its adherents show no more quality of behavior than other beliefs. Historically Christianity has not been that concerned with violence and to me, that is a concern. Christianity and other religions seem willing and able to use violence to forward their beliefs. I believe this is based in the myths about the violent god they worship.

Quote:

When you talk about God's not obeying His own rules, I think it's important to realize that God's laws as written are for mankind, not for God. They are designed for sinful, fallen humanity. By very definition, the God who made the physical and moral laws of the universe, is above all law.

Like I said before, then you can't tell if God is good or bad.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Many Christian beliefs are based on shame and fear.

This is true of many Christian sects, not true of Adventism. Now many Adventists are affected by what other Christian denominations teach and so there are individual Adventists that base their personal beliefs on shame and fear. However, as a denomination, the Adventist beliefs are based of faith, hope and love. Perfect love casts out all fear. For those in Christ, there is no condemnation. That is one of the beautiful things about Adventism when contrast with other Christian sects and denominations.

Philosophically, it there is no god, there is no purpose to life and no reason to live. If there is no god, why is it wrong to kill another person? It is no more wrong for me to kill another man than it is for me to kill a deer or a duck - if there is no god. A man raping a woman would be no more immoral than a male cat forcing himself on a female in heat. Child abuse would be no worse than a mother sow eating her piglets. There is no morality without God. If there is no god, eventually everything every person has done will be forgotten. The sun will burn out and the universe will go black. Nothing anyone ever did will mean anything - if there is no god.

[Taylor]

Agreed Shane. God is the answere to this world's problems and without him life has little meaning.

[cardw]

Quote:

This is true of many Christian sects, not true of Adventism. Now many Adventists are affected by what other Christian denominations teach and so there are individual Adventists that base their personal beliefs on shame and fear. However, as a denomination, the Adventist beliefs are based of faith, hope and love. Perfect love casts out all fear. For those in Christ, there is no condemnation. That is one of the beautiful things about Adventism when contrast with other Christian sects and denominations.

This is pretty much putting blinders on. One simply has to read the writings of Ellen White to find shame and fear all over the place.

Quote:

Philosophically, it there is no god, there is no purpose to life and no reason to live. If there is no god, why is it wrong to kill another person? It is no more wrong for me to kill another man than it is for me to kill a deer or a duck - if there is no god. A man raping a woman would be no more immoral than a male cat forcing himself on a female in heat

There are philosophies that don't rely on God for meaning or ethics. Jesus didn't refer to God for ethics in his most famous saying. He referred to the human self as the basis of ethics. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you is a referral to one's self.

Our instinctual ability to determine what is painful when combined with reason and empathy provide a powerful source of ethics that covers reasons for not killing, stealing, raping, and telling lies. These all cause pain.

Along this line it is interesting to note that in Norway...

Quote:

Depending on the definition of atheism, Norway thus has between 26 percent and 71 percent atheists. The Norwegian Humanist Association is the world’s largest humanist association per capita.

And what has secularism done to Norway? The Global Peace Index rates Norway the most peaceful country in the world. The Human Development Index, a comparative measure of life expectancy, literacy, education and standard of living, has ranked Norway No. 1 every year for the last five years.

Norway has the second highest GDP per capita in the world, an unemployment rate below 2 percent, and average hourly wages among the world’s highest.

[Nightingale]

Quote:

When you talk about God's not obeying His own rules, I think it's important to realize that God's laws as written are for mankind, not for God. They are designed for sinful, fallen humanity. By very definition, the God who made the physical and moral laws of the universe, is above all law.

Like I said before, then you can't tell if God is good or bad.

I can't see how anyone obvserving the universe and life on this planet can believe that God is evil. Life is good. Therefore, if life proceeds from God, God must also be good. Life itself could not have been created by an evil God. Think of the beauty in life: music, art, nature,love,joy, etc. These things, it seems to me, could scarcely have come from a God who is evil.

However, when it comes to judging which acts of God are evil and which are good, we have to realize that our view is limited and therefore inaccurate. We can't see or know all that God sees and knows. Our judgment of what is good and evil, insofar as God's actions within history are concerned, is not absolute but is conditioned by the values of the society in which we live. Our judgment of these matters also depends to a great degree on psychological factors. What people in one society may consider "good" will therefore appear "bad" to other people living in different circumstances or historical periods. Even within the same family, there is often a difference of opinion as to whether certain acts recorded in the Bible about God are good or bad. For instance, was God right or wrong to test Adam and Eve and then exile them from the Garden of Eden after the Fall? Also, should God be considered evil if He doesn't "save" everyone who's ever lived?

In each of these instances, God could well be acting out of unselfish love for the universe, yet because of our limited viewpoint, or perhaps because we are ignoring certain information, God may appear to be selfish and hateful.

[olger]

Hi Richard. Your attempt to define Norway as the enrichment & embodiment of atheism is no doubt praiseworthy, but regretfully however you fail to explain how your poster child of unbelief deals with issues of the human heart.

We were in Norway last year conducting a marriage & relationship seminar in Oslo. After the meetings we had 24-cases of counseling that people had signed up for. That took a while. Many of the dear people were struggling with depression, bitterness and moral issues.

Like anyone else, when these people came to Jesus in need He touched their lives with truth and healing. It is always inspiring to see. They could smile again.

The financial state of Norway is underwritten by their tremendous oil & gas reserves, not by some metaphysical outworking of atheism. Statoil, for instance is I believe the third largest producer of petroleum in the world.

Their current support for the errors of evolution are more the result of opulence rather than the cause of it. They still hold the Stave churches around the country in high regard, although they have become a bit of a tourist attraction.

In summary. If chance is the father of all flesh then chaos is his rainbow in the sky.

oG

All the best

[Neil D]

Quote:

That's because you violate basic science rules and will not allow examination of all your evidence that you have presented. You pick and chose evidence and undermine the authenticity of your own evidence when other attempt to offer possible explainations. You dont follow what Sam Harris proposes-that is examining religion using a science principles to avoid fanaticism.

You aren't talking about science here, but a court of law. You can't prove God from science because there is nothing to examine.

[cardw]

Quote:

I agree, it is a court of Law. But when evidence is introduced, you examine ALL possiblities...not just what YOU/Richard want. Otherwise it's called a 'strawman arguement' and you are NOT here to examine all possiblitites.

You keep changing the conditions. First you say its science, now its a court of law. There is no "straw man." I am being very specific. You want to be general. When we get specific your premise is not reasonable.

Quote:

In a court of law, if a person is charged with murder, then all evidence is examined that is introduced. If it is found that the person killed in self defense, then the murder charge is dropped.

Show me how God was acting in self defense by having a man stoned for gathering wood. You have not given one reason for God having the man stoned that has evidence or would be considered just. You keep wanting to go out in the ether with these grandiose generalizations.

There is absolutely no commentary on this act other than Moses saying that God told them to do this. What is more likely? 1)A brilliant all powerful being figured this out or 2) Moses was threatened by this and decided he needed to teach them a lesson. To me, this is the actions of a Moses who has a history of murdering people who he gets upset with.

Quote:

So, God, in your view, needs to be a simple concept to understand. Sorry, but beings of intellect tend to be much more complex than what most humans are capable of understanding...Don't ask me why, but I think it has something to do with laziness in peoples thinking.

We aren't talking about a real God here. We are talking about a book that claims it knows about God. From what IT says, I find that very unlikely. You keep mixing up the topics.

Quote:

The fact that God is a just Person, and that what you are refering to is an act of treason against God Himself, may seem harsh. My experience has been that God is very patient and very much reaching out to change a persons behavior and reasoning with him before the seeds he has sown come to fruition.

Again, this is a lot of what ifs. If God was patient then I think a simple monetary fine would suffice. Death seems rather harsh to me. There are no previous incidences and if God was directing the writing of this book I would think that He would want a little more background written on this particular incident.

Again this is just the tip of the iceberg. You have failed to provide a reasonable explanation for why God would order the Children of Israel to kill every person in the village, which is bad enough, but to keep and rape all the virgins clearly demonstrates that this is not the orders of some advanced all knowing being. There is no way that this is an adaption to their culture. There is no way, from what we know of violence and its effects on people, that this would provide a transitional lesson on development.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

There are philosophies that don't rely on God for meaning or ethics. Jesus didn't refer to God for ethics in his most famous saying. He referred to the human self as the basis of ethics. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you is a referral to one's self.

Jesus' words only have meaning because He is the Creator of all. Without His Creator status, His words are meaningless.

Let's consider it for a moment. Let's say there is no god. Mankind is just another species of animal. Why then, should man do unto others as he would have them do unto him? Should lions, fish, birds and viruses also do unto others as they would have others do unto them? After all, what is the moral difference between man and animals if there is no god?

In the animal kingdom, one male often kills another in a fight over breeding with a female. Is that immoral? If it is ok for animals then it is ok for men - if there is no god.

And what difference does it make anyway? If we are all going to die anyway, the stars will all burn out and the universe go black, why does anything any of us do make any difference?

Of course, the lack of hope and dismal future of atheism isn't reason enough to believe in God. However it does cast its own dark shadow when contrast with the religion. For all the evil done in the name of religion, atheism offers nothing better. False religion is based on fear and shame and often times is coupled with intolerance. Atheism is based on hopelessness, purposelessness and often times a hatred for religion. So atheism is a poor substitute for false religion. True religion, such as Adventism, offers hope, purpose based on faith and love.

[Neil D]

Quote:

You keep changing the conditions. First you say its science, now its a court of law. There is no "straw man." I am being very specific. You want to be general. When we get specific your premise is not reasonable.

First off, you are misquoting me. I never said that I can prove God by science.

Second, I deal with evidence...not "proof".

Third, you will not allow ALL evidence that YOU introduce to be thouroughly examined.

Fourth, When it is examined, you undermine your own evidence.

Quote:

We aren't talking about a real God here. We are talking about a book that claims it knows about God. From what IT says, I find that very unlikely. You keep mixing up the topics.

I am not mixing up topics. You are afraid of truely examining thouroughly the evidence thru scientific procedures in a court setting. And I am coming to the conclusion, from these posts that you are only here to argue, and not examine...I am not here to argue...I gave that up a long time ago...3 weeks ago to be precise [ that's a long time to one who for the last 10 years has been seeking arguements].

Quote:

Again this is just the tip of the iceberg. You have failed to provide a reasonable explanation for why God would order the Children of Israel to kill every person in the village, which is bad enough, but to keep and rape all the virgins clearly demonstrates that this is not the orders of some advanced all knowing being. There is no way that this is an adaption to their culture. There is no way, from what we know of violence and its effects on people, that this would provide a transitional lesson on development.

If this is what you are wanting to discuss, there are other's here who are much more able than I, who can discuss culture, history, interpretation, and theology better than I. They just don't do it with the flair that I have. And yes, I do have the most modesty in my family.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

You have failed to provide a reasonable explanation for why God would order the Children of Israel to kill every person in the village,

Explanation was provided and rejected. We can lead a horse to water, push its head under and hold it there but we can't make it drink.

To the carnal minded, spiritual things are foolishness. Someone with an ax to grind with the church is not likely to see truth that they have already rejected. However many lurkers are surfing here and reading threads like these so these threads are beneficial even if we cannot see the benefits first hand. They also serve to strengthen the beliefs of those within the truth. So carry on but do not become discouraged when antagonists are not persuaded.

[Nightingale]

I am wondering if you consider your parents good Christians and if you hold them in high regard as examples of Christianity?

Do you know of anyone whom you've found to be a positive Christian role model?

[cardw]

Quote:

Let's consider it for a moment. Let's say there is no god. Mankind is just another species of animal. Why then, should man do unto others as he would have them do unto him? Should lions, fish, birds and viruses also do unto others as they would have others do unto them? After all, what is the moral difference between man and animals if there is no god?

The same reason we have always felt it was wrong. Because it causes pain. Some have questioned the ethics of using animals for food for the same reason. Just because we have laws that say it is wrong to kill another human hasn't prevented it from happening anyway.

The Bible doesn't really answer these questions either, so I see no superior intelligence happening here.

Quote:

And what difference does it make anyway? If we are all going to die anyway, the stars will all burn out and the universe go black, why does anything any of us do make any difference?

Well even Solomon felt that all was vanity too. You can elevate what you are doing in your mind all you want and in the long run you don't know if it makes any difference either.

Quote:

Of course, the lack of hope and dismal future of atheism isn't reason enough to believe in God. However it does cast its own dark shadow when contrast with the religion. For all the evil done in the name of religion, atheism offers nothing better.

Atheism is simply a denial that certain gods exist. There are many ways to find meaning besides a belief in God. Many people, including myself, live rich lives filled with love, hope, curiosity, and gratitude without a belief in a particular God.

I find great satisfaction helping other people, not because I'm trying to earn anything, but simply because its a great idea and a great experience. It provides great pleasure. And that is enough for me.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Many people, including myself, live rich lives filled with love, hope, curiosity, and gratitude without a belief in a particular God.

In AA, this is what we call whistling in the dark. A man walking in the dark can't see where he is going and often times doesn't know where he is coming from. So he whistles to make himself feel good and comfort what would be a troubled mind if he were to actually consider his real situation.

So it is with the good-hearted atheist. He doesn't know where he has come from. Doesn't know where he is going. Doesn't know why he is here. However he helps others and is a good citizen and in so doing quiets what would be an otherwise disturbed conscience.

Quote:

The same reason we have always felt it was wrong. Because it causes pain.

Who says causing pain is wrong - if there is no god? If that is the case, lions eating zebras is definitely morally wrong. This should outrage us and we should do something about it. Maybe the UN should form a committee to stop lions from eating zebras.

[Bravus]

I do think this is an area of blindness (or 'myopia', to borrow Neil's term) on the part of Christians: the belief that without a supernatural guarantor, ethics are impossible. There are many ethical systems and discussions of grounds for ethics, dating back at least to Plato. The logical fallacy is "My own ethical system is under-written by my belief in God, therefore those without belief in God cannot have an ethical system." The ethics of the social contract, which in fact are summed up in 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you', are self-evidently valuable. If there is a social agreement not to rape and murder, the individual is safer from being raped or murdered, and that is a benefit. Empathy also provides a foundation for acting ethically - the ability to imagine another's pain.

I guess I'm just saying that 'no god, no ethics' is being put forward as if it's uncontestable truth, and it's really not. It at least needs to be argued for, rather than merely asserted.

[Gerr]

Quote:

It seems obvious to me that despite your protestations that you do not believe in God, you must believe because no one devotes so much time and energy fighting something that they don't even believe exists.

Its because beliefs have effects. Many Christian beliefs are based on shame and fear. These are life destroying.

Should not Ted Bundy be ashamed of raping and murdering at least 26 women? The Wichita serial killer? Without shame and the conviction of wrongdoing, then there is no need for any change in behavior.

Fear, fear of pain, fear of punishment is the greatest motivator for change in people who do not have a relationship with God. For those who have come to know God, love becomes the greatest motivating factor.

Quote:

I'm tired of Christianity going around as if it has the best answer to life's problems when it is evident that its adherents show no more quality of behavior than other beliefs.

Just because there are phony $20 bills do not negate the existence of the real thing. "Not everyone that says, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven." For me, yes, the Bible gives the best explanation of the world that I see. Without God, nothing makes sense. Your explanations would be no better than mine. We would be left with chaos, every man being a law unto himself.

Quote:

Historically Christianity has not been that concerned with violence and to me, that is a concern.

Who have been the peacemakers throughout history? God's word unequivocably declares that, "God is love". Unfortunately, there is also a devil that has smeared His name and used/uses people who claim to be His followers to prostitute the name. Jesus Himself declared that there will be those who will murder even in the name of God.

Consider this: If there is no God, or if there is a God but is impersonal and unknowable, for what purpose do you live? If you turn out to be wrong, you have no future but oblivion. If I turn out to be wrong in believing in a personal Savior, I will have lost nothing at all.

Gerry

[Gerr]

Oh, yes, it is certainly possible to come up with a system of ethics without God, but by what/whose authority? Without a higher authority, in crunch time, it is everyman for himself.

Gerry

[Dr. Shane]

If there is no god than we are all just animals. If it is acceptable for a lion to kill a zebra (or another lion) why is it wrong for me to kill another person - who is nothing more than an animal? Plato was not an atheist. Plato was polytheistic. So he had lots of gods to base morality on.

Some atheists try to distinguish humans from other animals (and thus create a code of ethics for humans that doesn't apply to animals) by the fact that humans can reason and, supposedly, animals cannot. Even if that were true, any code of ethics would be arbitrary. Friedrich Nietzsche traced the origins of morality to either class(master-morality), that is rich people deciding what is right and wrong or to religion (which he called slave-morality).

[cardw]

Quote:

I am not mixing up topics. You are afraid of truely examining thouroughly the evidence thru scientific procedures in a court setting. And I am coming to the conclusion, from these posts that you are only here to argue, and not examine...I am not here to argue...I gave that up a long time ago...3 weeks ago to be precise [ that's a long time to one who for the last 10 years has been seeking arguements].

So its scientific procedures of a court? A court room is not run by science. This is mixing methods.

Every time I put something forth to examine, like the man gathering wood being stoned to death, you say I'm not willing to examine the whole thing. We have not finished examining this one. Bring your evidence. Most of this looks like smoke and mirrors to me.

I have not denied that Jesus has some great ideas, but the issue here is whether or not the Bible has a Divine source that is just, loving, and intelligent. If you are going to take the whole Bible then we need to examine every instance for intelligence, justice, and love. If any fails to produce that then the Bible is not a perfect Divine revelation and needs to be critically examined to see if its claims are true.

If you are not willing to handle the difficult passages then there is not a commitment to honest evaluation. I admit there are some good ideas within certain passages, but there is no way that the whole Bible is something produced by an intelligent, just, and loving God. You have not provided any evidence that this is true. All you provide is a bunch of protests.

Put up your evidence and quit complaining.

[cardw]

Quote:

Who have been the peacemakers throughout history? God's word unequivocably declares that, "God is love". Unfortunately, there is also a devil that has smeared His name and used/uses people who claim to be His followers to prostitute the name. Jesus Himself declared that there will be those who will murder even in the name of God.

That's quite a claim considering that 50 million to 150 million died at the hands of the Christian church throughout the middle ages. And they did this based on theology developed by church fathers such as Augustine, Luther, Wesley, and Calvin.

Quote:

Consider this: If there is no God, or if there is a God but is impersonal and unknowable, for what purpose do you live? If you turn out to be wrong, you have no future but oblivion. If I turn out to be wrong in believing in a personal Savior, I will have lost nothing at all.

Well if I took every single belief system and applied this reasoning I would be kept pretty busy taking care of a lot of "just in case" activities. This kind of reasoning only provides more evidence that Christian core assumptions are based in fear.