If you were to leave the Adventist church, where would you go?

[doug yowell]

cardw,are you implying that no God exists or are you saying that the God of the Bible is really a BIG, self-centered jerk (or worse), or are you thinking that the God revealed in the Bible does not exist but there must be Someone better suited to be God in existence somewhere?Or D)none of the above?

[cardw]

Doug,

I am an agnostic.

This means that I don't believe it is possible to know whether any god exists or not.

I am reasonably sure that the god of the Bible doesn't exist, just as you don't believe that Zeus doesn't exist. The Bible describes an iron age ethical system expressed in a god that needs to be sacrificed to.

The Bible may have some advanced ethical philosophy contained in some of the teachings of Jesus, but it is quite obvious to me that Jesus was hijacked by the orthodox version of Christianity to fit into this iron age and neo-platonic ethical system.

[Kevin H]

I have not seen the order for rape. As for the rest you are in danger of mixing the text with tradition.

First, the Canaanites had become so dangerous it was as bad if not worst than our gettos where the police are afraid to enter. Second, you had strong city states and their daughters (the unwalled area where the common people lived.) The city states tended to be oppressive of the daughters. The battles of Joshua were (and while Jeremiah, or whoever edited the Deuteronomic history, emphessised the distruction since Judah was facing distruction from Babylon, but there are Bible texts that are included but not emphessised that give a fuller story) conquring the oppressive city states and liberating and converting the daughters. There was more evangelisism going on than killing.

And we even have in the city states this one woman who was so evil that the wicked Canaanites saw her as a wicked woman. No matter how bad a Canaanite was they could look at this woman and say that at least they were not as evil and wicked as she was. She was the worst of the lot. The one woman who even the Canaanites would have agreed would have deserved any curse from God. The Canaanites gave her a name equvalant to calling someone the devil or Satan. They named her after their understanding of the devil. Her name was Rahab. God was able to save the very worst of the lot. The message is there that since God was able to save the very worst Canaanite, God would have gladly have saved the others if only they would let Him.

There was also one federation of city states, the Gibionites, yes there was the deception and not praying before, but even with deception God accpeted them. If only they came just as they were without one plea, open about their unworthyness but trusting in Yahweh's mercy they would have been accepted in full fellowship. For their changing of worshiping Baal the storm god to worshiping Yahweh, armies of other city states came to punish them. Joshua came to fight, and another came to fight. I usually write this from a middle of the road approach, but in this post I am going to come right out and upset the tradition. The sun did not stop in the sky shining all day. Joshua had first the advantage of attacking while dark , then in the rising sun where the sun was in the enemy's eye, however as the sun was climing into the sky it was making the battle field equal and if the sun were to get further west it would have been in the Hebrew's eyes giving the enemy an advantage, so Joshua asked for the sun to keep still (or be quiet) and the the sun suddenly stopped shining as it was blocked out by huge thick hail clouds and everything became dark by the hail storm. The storm god Baal shows up out of no where blocking out the sun so that the advantage of the darkness returns, and the storm sends incredibly thick hailstones down on the enemy. Here both the Gibionites and the city states attacking Gibion to punish them for changing from the worship of Baal to Yahweh instead of finding Baal coming to punish them, Baal congratulated them to worship the God who is greater than he is. Baal is pictured as the servant of Yahweh and telling the Gibionites that they were right to stop worshiping him and to turn their woship over to Yahweh, and to tell the other's "Hey, don't defend me, they are right in their change in worship, so you should stop worshiping me and worship Yahweh as well"

So the genicide was not exactly genecide, but more like if a group were to go into the gettos to distroy the oppressive gangs, including their familie members to free the common people in the gettos and to help them have a better life.

Now the slavery that we had in our early US history the Bible condems. Biblical slavery was more of an (I"m mispelling the word) but endenchered servant. This was for mostly the new converts where they were limited but learning about their new religion and leading to their or their decendent's freedom as full fledged Hebrews considered to be a decendent of Abraham as if they biologically were.

God worked with people were they were. There was a time where people would not have worshiped a god who would not have human sacrifice. God worked where they were and brought them up. In fact slaves from other countries could run to these people and automatically get their freedom. Women were treated with much more freedom than they were in other countries. God was again working where people were and bringing them up. You are reading these passages from the advantage of where God has lead us, instead of reading them in light of where we were at that time. Once again, if we were to liberate the gettos there would first have to kill off some very nasty people and for those left there would have to be some very strong rules in place and based on getto culture and use that as a starting point in giving them back their freedom and dignity.

[cardw]

Kevin,

That's a rather creative stretch of the imagination to call what the Israelites were doing good. The rape comes from god ordering them to kill everything living except the virgins which they could take as their "wives." Think about it. These virgins watched as the Israelites killed their families and then were taken and forced to "marry" the killers of their family. This is way beyond rape.

Plus you didn't address the laws to kill anyone for even the most minor infraction, Abraham being ordered to offer his son as a sacrifice, Job, and the whole jealous god routine. And the blatant classification of women in Jewish law as property.

It's just too much to account for. There are so many problems with this god, that the only way to see this god as good is with a large dose of denial.

[Kevin H]

We can look closer at these later, but as for creative streach of the imagination: this is the evidence presented by archaeologiests, theologians and linguists.

[cardw]

Kevin,

We can line up experts on all kinds of views of this time period. The fact is that we don't know exactly what happened.

What we do know is that ancient man made up a LOT of stories on how we got here, why we are here, what our purpose is, etc, etc. And most of these stories we don't believe for exactly the same reasons we shouldn't believe that the Bible is any different.

There is nothing in the Bible itself that would indicate that it was put together by some superior being and that the Bible is magically the word of the one true god. The Bible is not clear, poorly written, poorly organized, full of iron age ethics, contradictions, etc. etc.

The only reason that I can determine that the Bible has any special significance is simply because the most powerful nations on earth placed it there through the application of violence. And after a thousand years or so most people forgot where the books came from and who wrote them and why. So we are stuck with this tradition that is so embedded in our assumptions that, until relatively recently, most people didn't even realize they could actually question the validity of the Bible, because in the past anyone who questioned the validity of the Bible was soon put to death.

Even though we have secular protection, the religious of every age wants to take back the power to use force, because force has been Christianity's greatest evangelizing tool.

[doug yowell]

Great Zeus,man! Is your form of agnosticism a hybrid? A true agnostic cannot argue the nonexistence of a God or gods. Yet you not only do that but you put it in such a way that you are certain NO ONE ELSE can know this either. Are you absolutely certain that this is the case? Your comments are evidently designed to communicate your belief that there is no God (at least that's the natural implication).Is this your final answer or do you leave open the possibility that you may be wrong?

[cardw]

Doug,

My agnosticism is rather mainstream. I don't argue against some higher power or god in the general sense. I don't anthropomorphize any god or gods. And I don't state that there is absolutely no god in general.

There are a whole list of gods that we can easily dismiss because they are knowable. They have descriptions and distinctive characteristics. These are dismissed by the very fact that they are too simple. The god described in the bible is among these. And I have listed the rather simplistic and contradictory, obviously man made, characteristics of this god to make my point.

As far as the god of the Bible, I am reasonably sure that god does not exist. So as far as the god of the Bible is concerned I am an atheist, just as you are an atheist when it comes to Zeus.

[Kevin H]

God has room for questions and these are very good questions and as Seventh-day Adventists we are in a better position to look at these questions than others as we can look from the view of the Great Controversy, and even more so if you study the theam of milk and honey in the Bible and Biblical history. I'm sorry that I have not had the time to contribute to the topic of suffering, but I know that others here can turn to "Why was sin permitted" and "The orgin of Evil" and make a good start. Let's not act like Baptists trying to deal with this question. We have a foundation that we can start on.

And Cardw; the fact that you are around this discussion shows at least some interest in the topic. You are asking good questions, however I want to ask you if really want to find intellegent ways of dealing with your questions (we may not have every question answered in this life, but we have the millinium to get the more detailed answers) or do you just want to show of and congratulate yourself for having the cleaverness to come up with these questions and have a spirit of "My mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts" "I'm willing to push my questions on you, but don't try to answer my questions nor give me something else to think about beyond my point of view." spirit.

I'll try to come back and try to share what I can; granted you can dismiss like how you dismissed what I shared about the Old Testament so that you can cling on to superstitions and excuses and traditions, or you can fairly evaluate the evidence.

There are homework assignments I'd like to offer you so that you don't have to take my second hand summeries of the studies, but actually look at where I'd get my ideas from:

The first two are what I mentioned above, the chapter in Patarichs and Prophets titled "The Orgin of Evil" and the chapter in the Great Controversy "Why Was Sin Permitted" by Ellen G. White. Both cover the same topic but with a little different approach each where they have their strong and weak points and their strong and weak points complement each other. The Orgin of Evil was written very rapidly while Why Was Sin Permitted was more sophisisticated. Thus the Origin of Evil has a raw freshness that was lost in the more sophisticated Why was sin permitted. But why was sin permitted has a refinement that the orgin of evil does not have. Read them, look at the sameness and difference between them. Also add to this the chapter "It is Finished" in The Desire of Ages. The book "confrontation" is outstanding as well as articles that Mrs. White wrote around the time she wrote those chapters dealing with the same topics. But at least read the 3 chapters "The Orgin of Evil" "Why was Sin Permitted" and "It is Finished" these are probably the 3 most important chapters that Mrs. White ever wrote and I wish I could get those 3 chapters in every home on earth.

I am not asking you to read the books; only 3 chapters (and it would be wise to squeeze in the small thin book "Confrontation" but I will not add that to the top information to read.)

In addition to those 3 chapters, there are some tapes by a Methodist Archaeologest, Dr. Jim Fleming: They would be "Right Stage, Left Stage, the Geography of the Bible" "The Daughters of my people" (although he equates armegeddon with megedo, however he has a good interpatation of it, but armegeddon means the mount of the congragation) and a series he made with a Methodist pastor "The Hard Side of Life" (Now on the hard side of life it is hard to tell if the pastor believes in the dead going right to heaven when they die or not, and in the workbook he seems to get even farther away from the idea of the dead going to heaven. Another assistant pastor who was with them made a comment of the dead going to heaven which he believed at that time, however about 7 months later I heard that associate pastor talking with a woman telling the truth about heaven and how he changed his understanding from believing that the dead went right to heaven when they died, to believing that the Bible teaches death and the coming resurection day.) You can order them through Biblical Resources (go a head and google Jim Fleming and Biblical Resources), and maybe the hard side of life from the First United Methodist Chruch of Houston TX.

This next one is difficult to find, but you can at least get through interlibarary loan, or in our college libaries and maybe church libaries, but the original 1981, yellow cover with black ink "Sanctuary and the Atonement" and read three of the last four chapters "We Must All Appear: The Investigative Judgment in the writings of Ellen G. White" and "The Mighty Opposits: The Atonement in the writings of Ellen G. White" parts one and two.

So here are 6 chapters and a couple of tapes, what would only take a relaxing afternoon to spend time with and you can have evidence to build on, which would be better than any of our attempts to try to summerize the information. I'm not asking you to go out and read volume after volume or an entire book, but just dip 7 times in the water of life as presented in these 6 chapters and a couple of tapes.

[cardw]

Kevin,

I would like to give you a little background on the time I have spent exploring these topics.

I have several revisions of the Conflict Series including their first publication as Spiritual Gifts that I have read all the way through many times. When I was 9 years old I had a reading level rated at 12th grade and above. The first time I read these through was at that age. I am thoroughly familiar with almost every approach to these books. I have over 4000 pages of private research into Ellen White and the Bible.

I have looked at a LOT of evidence. There is nothing that you are presenting that I have not covered multiple times. I am very open minded, but I have thought these approaches through and I have even defended them, so I am familiar with the apologetics from many different approaches. I have even better defenses than you are presenting. There are fatal flaws in every apologetic.

I have subscribed to Biblical Archaeology for years and while Dr. Fleming has some interesting background on various ancient times, he is hardly a neutral interpreter of history. There are serious conflicts with the archaeological record and the Bible.

[Kevin H]

Good, you have dipped in the Jordan 3 of the 7 times, of course you still see the spots, but reveiw the 3 chapters together with the 3 other chapters and the Fleming tapes. And good you have some background with Bible Review, and while there are serious conflicts with the archaeological record and the Bible, there are also serious insights they can give to the Bible. Quit whining about the spots until you dip the 7 times.

[cardw]

Kevin,

All this reference to Naaman and the river Jordon really has no relevance to me reading this again. Frankly the whining about the spots comment is rather condescending and ignores the fact that I have spent enough hours going through this stuff to dip in the Jordon thousands of times.

All you have to offer is a bunch of complicated arguments based on premises that I debunked a long time ago. All you have is a bunch of circular reasoning. Believe me, you are offering nothing essentially new here.

[oldsailor29]

There are many Bible scholars of highest intelligence who do believe in Jesus Christ, and believe He is God in the flesh, and our creator and redeemer, so any claims of intelligence and scholarship when presenting an argument against Christianity are pretty much irrelevant. Also, it is my opinion that since this is a Seventh-day Adventist message board, and SDAs are within the Christian community, all of our discussion should be within the bounds of Christian thought. Arguments against Christianity should not be posted.

[Tom Wetmore]

I think strength in ones beliefs comes best at the extreme risk of having them tested and questioned most severely. Unless one truly thinks deeply about and wrestles their doubts, fears and questions to the ground, they have avoided honestly knowing what they believe. That does not necessarily mean finding all the answers... but that is where faith begins.

So as moderator of this forum I will allow it.

And I expect and appreciate the respectful and thoughtful dialog even in the face of challenging and strongly heartfelt disagreement. While broad tolerance is the hallmark of this latitudinarian philosophy, I do not tolerate ad hominem attacks here and will remove them without warning or further explanation.

To anyone who finds this frank and open discussion, or any other on the Original Thoughts forum too troubling, it would be best to not read and participate here. Just skip it. There are still many other options and opportunities available around here.

Tom

[B Humble]

I would go to a church that actually keeps the 9th commandment.

[doug yowell]

Thanks cardw, that's a little more clarifying.Your claim of gifted reading skills at age 9 is nothing compared to mine. I am long past college age and have the reading skills of a 9 year old so the descrepencies between my age and my reading level are much greater than yours!! That said,I have another question for you that would help me in our discussion so I don't jump to any premature conclusions. Do you believe that the human race (that would include you and me-----well, me anyway,I may be a little premature)was created miraculously by a Being of greater intelligence and power or did the human race (not so miraculously) create a Being of greater intelligence and power? How do you think all this "God" stuff began?

[oldsailor29]

In my opinion, it is the idea that there is no God which I wish to delete. I have never attacked anyone personally. Anyone should be allowed to post, unless they are promoting ungodliness. And when ungodliness is attacked, it is the idea that is being attacked. And when a post against the idea of atheism is deleted by the moderator, that is an attack on the person who posted it.

However, the post which I think should not be allowed does serve to illustrate where someone goes when they leave God. And even though there are many such illustrations in our world, I suppose that if we consider these things in that light, they might serve a useful purpose on this message board.

[cardw]

Hi Doug,

I don't dismiss the idea of some form of influence in terms of origin. I think there is enough evidence to dispense with the creation myth though. And don't think there is enough evidence to even begin to extrapolate who or what that origin is.

If we don't consider the creation myth as literal, I do see it as a rather brilliant explanation of the emergence of consciousness.

I think "god" stuff began from humans trying to create sense out of their environment. Historically all western religion has its source in astrology, the worship of the sun, and Egypt. The timing of astrological events was important for the regulation of planting, harvesting, and marking the passage of time. This was the science of the ancient world. It seemed to be orderly and predictable and those priests who could predict what these heavenly bodies would do, were of great importance.

In your question you have demonstrated the need for the human mind to have explanations of origin. It is possible that the universe has always been here and has no origin. We now know that many dimensions exist and since we can't observe these dimensions directly we know that there are things happening in this universe that we can't perceive on any level. We are bound by space and time. These perceptions call out for beginnings and ends.

God is a simple appeal to fill in these gaps. I understand it and have felt its appeal, but I also know that life is quite full embracing the fact that we live in a mystery. So, for me, the most honest way to see the world I live in, is to admit that I don't really know how the universe came about.

[cardw]

oldsailer,

I agree that claims of scholarship are irrelevant. And so the claim that Bible scholars of intelligence believe in Jesus Christ is also irrelevant.

I did not claim to have scholarship to prove the correctness of my view. I wanted to illustrate that I have covered the material many times over and I don't need a reading assignment.

Nor do I appreciate the implications of not dipping in the Jordon river enough times. I'm also not sure what you mean by the statement that I serve to illustrate where someone goes when they leave God.

Where have I gone that I should serve as a warning to others?

I would think that a search for what is true would be something admired.

[oldsailor29]

faith in God is the beginning of wisdom.

[John317]

You said that the Bible isn't clear, that it's poorly written, poorly organized, full of contradictions, etc.

The Bible has inspired more great literature, great music, and great painting than any other book in history. It has also influenced virtually every aspect of life in the Western world, including the governments, ethics, religions, ideals, philosophy, law, etc. If you don't have a good understanding of the Bible, you won't won't be able to fully appreciate great books such as Dostoevsky's Brother Karamazov, Crime and Punishment, Milton's Paradise Lost, Paradise Regained, Samson's Agonistics, Edmund Spenser's Faerie Queene, Dante's Divine Comedy, John Bunyun's Pilgram's Progress, the poetry and prose of John Donne, and thousands of other wonderful books. It's simply impossible to imagine what the English language would be without the influence of the Bible, and particularly the translations of William Tyndale and the KJV.

When you say the Bible is poorly written, are you talking about the original languages or the translation? If the translation, which one?

It's true that some parts of the Bible are not as well written as other parts, but there is no book on the face of the earth about which you can't say the same thing. But we don't judge a book by a few parts that are "badly written"; a book is judged as a whole. For instance, there are some parts of Hemingway's To Have and Have Not and Islands In the Stream that are poorly written, but the majority of these books are among his finest. So it is with the Bible. For instance, compare the best parts of the Bible-- the story of Joseph, the books of Isaiah, Psalms, Ruth, Esther, Job, the stories about King David, 1 Cor. 13, Luke, Acts, Hebrews-- with the worst parts such as, perhaps, Nahum, Obadiah,James, 2 Peter, and Jude. None of even the greatest books in the world are all evenly written but all of them have some parts that are superior to other parts. You will find among even these "worst parts" some sections that are among the most beautiful for style in the whole Bible.

Many of the greatest writers or poets in the English language were profoundly influenced by the King James Version, including non-believing, atheistic or agnositc writers, such as Ernest Hemingway, William Faulkner, and John Steinbeck. These writers had only praise for the Bible as a work of art. Even the non-Christians among them acknowledge the profundity of the Bible's themes and that it's a source of some of the best examples of rhetoric. When writers search for lines to quote at the beginning of their books or for titles of their works, the King James Version is the first book they look at.

It seems to me entirely possible, if not likely, that your judgment of the Bible is colored significantly by your antipathy toward its teachings and has little to do with its well-established literary quality or importance.

I took a class in The Bible as Literature at a public college where the teacher was a non-believer. He often made fun of the Bible's teachings, but he never suggested it was generally poorly written or that it was not a great book from a literary point of view.

If he had, he would have been judging himself more than he would be saying anything reliable about the Bible itself. I may not like or agree with the religious teachings found in the Iliad but I think you'd agree that I'd be revealing more about myself than about Homer if I judge it to be a poorly written book.

Your thoughts?

[Dr. Shane]

John, I had a superintendent that worked for me once who was raised unchurched. He was a Mexican national. His parents were wealthy Mexican and sent him to the best schools. He had studied in both the US and Europe. He was a very smart person - perhaps the best superintendent that ever worked for me.

Anyway, one day when on his job site I had been reading the book of Job and asked him if he had ever read it. He had never even heard of it. I read several verses to him and he was amazed at the quality of poetry. Job is one of the finest books of poetry ever written.

[John317]

How do you arrive at any sense of justice in the world apart from the existence of God?

For instance, take the case of a child who is raped, tortured for hours or even days, then murdered in the most brutal fashion. Her murderer walks free and is never caught and punished. Perhaps he may even commit the same kind of crime numerous times. Maybe he is finally shot to death, but maybe he is never caught. In the history of the world, there are no doubt millions of such cases, and worse. Where is the justice here without God? Mankind longs for justice to be done. He longs for some kind of assurance that injustices will eventually be made right.

The Bible tells us that there will be a judgment in which God will punish evil doers and reward the righteous. That seems to be the only solution. Is man's longing and hopes for justice to be eternally denied? If so, what is the source of these universal hopes and longings? How can they be accounted for in a world that resulted from coincidental processes and that has no way of one day fulfilling them?

[phkrause]

Shane interesting you should mention this about Job. Because this exact thing was brought out at early Worship today, that Job is probably the greatest if not one of the greatest pieces of poetry written in the world since the beginning of time.

pk

[John317]

Yes, I agree. All of the best universities in English speaking countries include courses in literature of the Bible, and Job is always one of the first that a student is exposed to.