How Much Do You Know About Christianity?

Greedy how?

Fair enough regarding holding God to our standards. As I stated when I first posted the question, that’s the most common answer I’ve gotten over the years.

But just for fun, if you did hold him to the standards that you hold your children to, what would you think of the way he has had children that he knew he would destroy?

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Basically, you put me down while you avoided directly addressing the issues I brought up. Instead, you implied that you can’t question your god because he is omniscent and that I’m a cheeky little girl for trying to hold him to the same standards that I would hold the most developmentally challenged human.

Sorry you felt that way, “put down”.

You are asking a lot to have me discourse on omniscience, omnipotence, and free will. Good grief, look at my post count. Just today.

You are not a cheeky little girl but greedy might be an accurate adjective.

:wink:

I will say this though. You and I have no right whatsoever to hold Him to standards. You and I aint in the “standard holding business” when it comes to Almighty God. That borders on an arrogance that I’m not willing to have or display. You do whatever you want, however.

[/quote]

So you wont even imagine holding god to the same standard as you hold yourself? If your standard is so lowly, wouldn’t he compare very favorably to it?

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Oleena wrote:

Fair enough regarding holding God to our standards. As I stated when I first posted the question, that’s the most common answer I’ve gotten over the years.

But just for fun, if you did hold him to the standards that you hold your children to, what would you think of the way he has had children that he knew he would destroy?

First of all, we have to accept that He is Almighty God. We are His creation not the other way around. He’s the bossman. We owe Him.

That’s why so many atheists and agnostics get their panties in a bunch. They want to be their own gods. They don’t want any Higher Being getting in the way of their preeminence. Incidentally, if you read the accounts of Lucifer’s fall you’ll notice some similarities.

I can’t conceive of the idea of holding him to the standards that I hold my children to. I am the child. He is the Father.[/quote]

Actually, I don’t want a jealous, selfish God telling me not to be jealous, selfish, or hypocritical.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Oleena wrote:

Fair enough regarding holding God to our standards. As I stated when I first posted the question, that’s the most common answer I’ve gotten over the years.

But just for fun, if you did hold him to the standards that you hold your children to, what would you think of the way he has had children that he knew he would destroy?

First of all, we have to accept that He is Almighty God. We are His creation not the other way around. He’s the bossman. We owe Him.

That’s why so many atheists and agnostics get their panties in a bunch. They want to be their own gods. They don’t want any Higher Being getting in the way of their preeminence. Incidentally, if you read the accounts of Lucifer’s fall you’ll notice some similarities.

I can’t conceive of the idea of holding him to the standards that I hold my children to. I am the child. He is the Father.[/quote]

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Actually, I don’t want a jealous, selfish God telling me not to be jealous, selfish, or hypocritical.

C’mon Olee, you say you have some reasonable knowledge of Christianity and then you try and play this hand of cards? Stop it.

When God said he was a jealous God he meant he didn’t want His people worshiping other gods. C’mon, girl! Get with the program.

[/quote]

Of course. But undeniably in 1 corinthians 14 he outlines that love is not jealous, proud, easily angered, keeps no record of wrongs.

John 4:16 “god is love…”

“Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them:
for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the
iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and
fourth generation of them that hate me;”
Exodus 20:5, (note that here he apparently is keeping record of wrongs and punshing the children of those who committed them. Even if the children themselves did not commit wrong, they will still be punished)

Refrain from anger and turn from wrath; do not fret-it leads only to evil (Psalm 37:8).

A fool shows his annoyance at once, but a prudent man overlooks an insult (Proverbs 12:16).

And yet:

Psalm 2:12 (New International Version)

12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry
and you be destroyed in your way,
for his wrath can flare up in a moment.
Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

It is sad when you cannot hold the omnipotent, omniscient creator to the same standards he apparently hold you to BECAUSE HE WOULD FAIL.

Okay, please explain the contexts of the below verses to me and how they do not contradict each other, even when taken in various contexts.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Oleena wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Actually, I don’t want a jealous, selfish God telling me not to be jealous, selfish, or hypocritical.

C’mon Olee, you say you have some reasonable knowledge of Christianity and then you try and play this hand of cards? Stop it.

When God said he was a jealous God he meant he didn’t want His people worshiping other gods. C’mon, girl! Get with the program.

Of course. But undeniably in 1 corinthians 14 he outlines that love is not jealous, proud, easily angered, keeps no record of wrongs.

John 4:16 “god is love…”

“Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them:
for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the
iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and
fourth generation of them that hate me;”
Exodus 20:5, (note that here he apparently is keeping record of wrongs and punshing the children of those who committed them. Even if the children themselves did not commit wrong, they will still be punished)

Refrain from anger and turn from wrath; do not fret-it leads only to evil (Psalm 37:8).

A fool shows his annoyance at once, but a prudent man overlooks an insult (Proverbs 12:16).

And yet:

Psalm 2:12 (New International Version)

12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry
and you be destroyed in your way,
for his wrath can flare up in a moment.
Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

It is sad when you cannot hold the omnipotent, omniscient creator to the same standards he apparently hold you to BECAUSE HE WOULD FAIL.

Olee, ‘fore you went traipsin’ off the reservation, do remember learning anything about reading the Bible in context?

Do you recall IrishSteel’s example of “And Judas went and hung himself…Go thou and do likewise…?”

I’ll have to get back to you. I’ve been wrasslin you and Senhora Berry all day long. You girls are tough on me. But I appreciate you messin’ with me here and forgive me if I have been unduly harsh with you anywhere.

[/quote]

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
pookie wrote:

Would you read the Torah to better understand Jesus?

Why not? [/quote]

Allow me to elaborate: Given limited reading time, do you believe that reading the Torah would be the best bet for getting to know Jesus, or might more recent works have a better time spent to knowledge gained ratio?

[quote]pookie wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
^^ this is your dogma. You BELIEVE it - and you’ll hold onto that belief for dear life. And yet you have no proof for it. And you have no proof, nor reason to believe, that you will ever have proof for it. It is your Orthodoxy. Should anyone questions it, you’ll unleash the “Holy Office of the Secular Inquisition” on the unbeliever.

First of all, is isn’t dogma. If someone manages to prove that sentience cannot be explained just from the material brain and can back it up, I’ll accept it. [/quote]

Nice try. This commitment of yours is precisely an example of dogma. Fervent belief PLUS the total absence of proof = dogma.

I am merely pointing out that you seem to have one set of set of evidentiary standards for religious concepts, and another set for concepts that are dear to you, such as sentience. The fact that it’s amusing is not intentional. Yes, though, I suppose exposing hypocrisy can be rather amusing :wink:

[quote]The claim that sentience is a function of the material brain is a pretty run-of-the-mill one. There’s a concept we call sentience, and we know that thinking and such occurs in the brain, which is composed of matter. To conclude that sentience comes from that same material brain requires no big leap.
[/quote]
Suppose ^^ that paragraph read this way:

The claim that soul is a gift of God is a pretty run-of-the-mill one. There’s a concept we call soul, and we know that soul and flesh are in a mutual embrace, and that soul is a bit of divinity. To conclude that soul comes from that same divinity requires no big leap.

…sounds a little different to your ears now doesn’t it? Too bad there’s no more proof for your paragraph than mine.

[quote]
It’s the opposite view - that sentience somehow transcends the brain and comes from some supernatural source - that requires faith and that most likely will never be able to show evidence because - guess what - as far as all the evidence we have tells us, Nature is all there is.[/quote]

Who told you that grace doesn’t and cannot operate through nature?

And YOU have need of the concept “sentience” - a concept you fervently believe in and moreover assert is a function of matter. These are commitments you hold in the absence of a single shred of evidence. I am simply holding up a mirror to your self-deception. I am sorry if that is the cause of your cognitive dissonance.

If you don’t see magic and wonder and mystery in the existence of sentience, then you haven’t thought about it enough.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Greedy how?

By wanting to me to post more than I already have!! Sheesh! I’m 'bout wore out! You and the Berry…yes, how stupid can one guy be wanting to argue with two women at the same time? Good thing I have some kind of experience with two women at the same time; builds up endurance, I guess!

[/quote]

Thy legendary stamina hath trotted into the realm of historically observable fact.

[quote]Oleena wrote:
So at least we both agree that the way things are spelled out for a lot of people in the Bible sucks.

IrishSteel wrote:

So much for an honest and open discussion . . . if you are not willing to actually listen to what I said - then what is the point of talking with you about this?

[/quote]

??? - ummm, wow . . .I guess I am not in this conversation at all . . . Push, Katz, good luck with this one . . . I’m going to go mess with Lixy again since I am not needed here. . .

[quote]Buff HardBack wrote:
pat wrote:
Buff HardBack wrote:
pat wrote:
Why are you seeking to mock Christianity? A bible quiz from an atheist website, really? Seems a transparent effort to bash religious folk. I guess if you need to do so to feel better about yourself, go ahead. I will not play.

You can look up every freaking verse from that “atheist website” and…wait for it…ITS ALL TRUE. Its not a transparent effort to bash religion. I find it more along the lines of ‘how in the hell can people believe this’. I for one pray to the flying spagetti monster, or the one eyed one horned flying purple people eater. They seem nicer than the vengeful god described in that book.

I hope that works out for you.

Im thinking it will. God has chosen not to “speak to me” and correct me in my flawed ways so ill go this route.[/quote]

Maybe cause you act like a know it all asshole who won’t listen.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Have you tried seeking fellowship in the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints?

Their version of Christianity is much different than the fire-n-brimstone, medieval barbarism most of us grew up with – with a few strict difficult lifestyle choices that are not a part of Christianity.

For one, you don’t get to burn in hell you just get ostracized and then you are left out of the Kingdom of God – which to them is their own form of hell.

I think the Polygamy aspect of it is great…as a man.

:)[/quote]

Mormons do have a more generous view of heaven, since Joseph Smith said even the lowest degree of glory is something a man would kill himself for in order to enter. However, they do believe in fire and brimstone, via Satan, his followers, and the sons of perdition that are sent to Outer Darkness. They also believe that people who don’t accept the atonement of Christ must ultimately suffer for their own sins. Not exactly a generous afterlife, in that sense.

OOOO, let me try!!!
Pook, are thoughts not immaterial as well, what about love? What about concepts and premonitions? Are not all these things immaterial, yet they can all have an influence on how we behave.
There’s more to as well, what are the electrons, neutrons and protons made of? What guides their behaviour and how did these rules get set in place. What give matter mass, and how come most matter doesnâ??t have it? If atoms are the substance of the universe what is a black-hole made of since it is so dense, no atom can survive it.
Science is always more questions than answers.
Empiricism is intrinsically weak as can do no more that show correlation not cause and effect. Since you cannot test all cases of all events science will remain for ever flawed. It is useful and interesting as hell mind you, but it can only tell you a part of the universe.

As far a scrambling a persons brain to change them what does that have to do with a soul? You are assigning it properties it does not necessarily have. You assume it controls thought and behaviour and it obviously does not. I canâ??t define it exactly, but I see it as more like â??the forceâ??. It binds us to everything else and ultimately the muse from which it came. It is also what makes us â??aliveâ?? which is more than a series of chemical reactions. It is what separates us from the non-alive entities of the universe.

[quote]Oleena wrote:
An atheist is defined as someone who does not believe in the existance of deities. I originally started asking this question when I did believe in a mono god, and now I would decribe my spiritual outlook as Taoist. However, because taoism is considered a philosophy dealing with patterns and no god, and because I have yet to see convincing evidence of a soul, I would have to describe my outlook on deities as atheist.

In the Bible there are numerous examples of god destroying many, banishing them to hell, so that one or a few, could live (Sodom and Gomorrah, Noah and the Ark, many of the enemy armies of the Israelites, and in Revelations it goes so far as to say that only 144,000 will be sealed from God’s wrath and be admitted into heaven).

But this actually isn’t my problem with christianity. My problem is that god KNEW the numbers. And if you or I were faced with those same numbers, we would decide not to have all those children. Why would I follow someone who makes more selfish decisions than I do?

pat wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Pushme and IrishSteel, I am going to give you a chance to convert me back to Christianity right now. I swear to you that I am being serious, and if there is a good answer to this that does not involve the following, I will return to Christianity (when I was a Christian, I loved being a Christian) 1. Saying God is anything less than all knowing, because that’s been clearly stated in the Bible or 2. You cannot hold God to the same standards as men, because in this case the grievance is enormous and I would not want to follow someone who was this petty/selfish/unethical according to the most basic parenting standards. In other words, as a parent, it is your responsibility to look out for the well being of your offspring. Not 1% or less of them, but all of them.

First of all, as I mentioned, it’s stated that God is all knowing (Psalm 139:2-6; Isaiah 40:13-14)

In Revelations it states that most of the earth will be destroyed in the endtime, and only a very small percentage of all of humanity that ever existed will make it into the kingdom of Heaven.

Now I ask you- if you were going to have 10 children, and you knew from far before the moment that you conceived them that 9 of them were going to CHOOSE TO BURN IN HELL, would you have 10 children?

Think carefully on this answer as not to be hypocritical. If you support or use birthcontrol in any manner, you are choosing in the opposite direction that God did.

I cannot ethically follow a God who plays games with his children, the end result of which is far more than 99% burning in hell.

Ahhh, your not atheist at all. You pissed off because of the ‘problem of evil’. You can’t know who is going to hell and who is not, why in the world would you think it is 99%? That’s just silly. I wouldn’t be religious if I thought that either.
You don’t deny God’s existence, you’re just pissed…“How could a loving God allow so much evil.” It is an age old problem, probably the biggest.
You aren’t going to be converted on a forumn, in a coffee shop or anywhere else. Each person’s journey is unique…Hell, I have friend of mine that turned the corner after a profound acid trip. He just saw things differently and it finally made some sense to him.

I can argue for the existence of God and you can argue against, and we can get pretty far into the discussion, but there is a lot we cannot know. WE can argue from the scientific perspective, at the quantum level, from the mathematical perspective, at the physical level, metaphysical level, and on and on.
Why don’t you ask God? You can ask push, and he is strong like bull, but he ain’t God and he cannot communicate to you like the Good Lord Himself.

As far as the bible many people read it and a lot just simply do not understand it. You can mine it and make it sound bad. Hell, I could mine “Chicken Soup for the soul” and make is sound like a tyrannical, murderous, violent composition, that’s the easy part.

[/quote]

So you’re a spiritual atheist? Man, that’s problematic stance. Anything metaphysical, much less spiritual, is a generally a nightmare for atheists because traditionally they are pure empiricists. I am not sure how you are reconciling that, tapping into the â??spiritual realm" usually leads to experience the source of the spirituality, hence God. You could call it energy, or it, or mother, or what ever, but it’s still just plain old God in the end.

I am not sure what school of thought of Christianity you came from, it is obviously a strict literal interpretation. These are very ancient texts especially in the case of old testament. Many of these things are stories to tell us about some aspect of God. â??He loves us so much he will kill of our enemies for us." â??He hates sin so much that he will destroy city for it" , etc. Those were the messages to come across.
Most of these stories are from an oral tradition and handed down. If you check the audience for which it was intended, they needed intrigue to keep them interested as they lived in a world of brutal routine. It more of the story of the Jewish people, it’s part story part history there’s really a lot to it.
Revelations also says there will be dragons with 7 heads and 10 horns and yada yada. I don’t get revelations and it’s really not important to me to do so. But I would worry myself about the 144,000. If that’s the case we’re done already.

But in the end is still sounds like your just mad at God for being a big meany. It sometimes bothers me too, but sometimes I get a glimpse of the purpose and order of it all. It’s a tiny glimpse but I admit I need it to keep goingâ?¦

[quote]pookie wrote:
pushharder wrote:
I have some ideas but I’m worried to fuckin death to discuss them because I’m scared half out of my mind you’ll dismiss me as one who lacks scientific standing.

If you would put half the fucking effort towards an actual discussion as you do bullshitting, dodging and attempting lame gags that are no doubt highly amusing to you, this thread would be so much more interesting.

What are you afraid of?[/quote]

I’ll take you on…

[quote]pookie wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
pookie wrote:

Would you read the Torah to better understand Jesus?

Why not?

Allow me to elaborate: Given limited reading time, do you believe that reading the Torah would be the best bet for getting to know Jesus, or might more recent works have a better time spent to knowledge gained ratio?
[/quote]

Genesis is a handy book for that. I cannot say the book of Numbers is though…boooooring.